I wouldn't have known, it's very granular and not for the faint of heart (or technically limited.) Just what OP asked for!
Hominine
This looks to be an excellent tool, thanks for sharing and have a good one.
This right here, so glad I dodged that bullet.
Hey I know the feeling and voted for the guy; it's a damn shame Clinton doubled his vote share here.
I did read your links, they reflect the reality that Bernie didn't have enough votes, particularly in red states. Conspiracy theories and upset delegates simply cannot paper over that.
They did vote for him
Certainly not in numbers that got him nominated. And of course the DNC boogyman that is fronted here had nothing to do with that turn out whatsoever. The superdelegates didn't even matter his numbers were so low and she beat him by a factor of two in Texas. So much for the canard of progressiveness in red states.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html
And yet they would not turn out to nominate Bernie... Talk about lazy.
Wow, the echo-chamber vibes are strong on this one.
Then it is on you to engage with the replies to your comment instead of whinging into the void.
The only "territory" that deliberately manipulating a title comes with is that of misinformation. For what other reason would another application be wedged in? Why are other grants left out? It's all very plain.
Excellent read, thanks!
Awesome, I love seeing specialized communities come online.