It seems pretty fishy to me CNN has the vote count listed for the Republican caucuses of Utah and Idaho but not the Democratic caucuses of Idaho and Utah. In Idaho Sanders got 18,640 votes to Clintons's 5,065 votes and in Utah Sanders got 61,333 votes to Clintons 15,666 votes, so it's clearly not caused by not haveing actual vote count.
Hears two screen shots from CNN's website of the Utah cacus results, you can clearly see the Republican results has vote count listed where the Democratic results does not.
What's even more fishy is CNN has the Vote count for Arizona which Clinton won last night.
Most Helpful Girl
Because CNN is biased and sucks.1
Most Helpful Guy
Most likely because CNN belongs to the type of billionaires who would absolutely hate to see Sanders win. In fact, the whole corporate media works that way. People say Fox news is right-wing and MSNBC is left-wing and CNN is center. In reality, they're all the same shit in different colors. There's really not that much difference between them (not as much as people believe there is). Not only CNN but all the corporate media systematically makes Bernie Sanders look weaker than he is while they make Hillary look stronger. It's a very subtle type of propaganda that millions of people who don't care so much about politics don't notice. One great example for this is the delegate number. The people at CNN know exactly that super delegates don't mean much. Should Sanders suddenly win more normal delegates, the super delegates would switch to his side, as they did with Obama in 2008 (and with all other candidates in all other previous presidential campaigns). And yet, CNN stubbornly keeps listing Hillary's number of delegates as approximately 1,650 vs. Sanders' 900 delegates. This is evidently wrong. It's a lie and it makes Sanders look very weak. It makes it look as though Hillary was almost twice as strong as Sanders. In reality however, 450 of Hillary's 1,650 delegates are super delegates. So the factual count is 1,200 vs. 900. That's already A LOT closer.
The people who own CNN want Hillary as president because they would not benefit from Sanders' policies. They're the type extremely wealthy, power hungry folks that he criticizes. And because they can't say that openly, they have to play dirty tricks and hope that the American people are gullible enough to believe these tricks.
With younger voters, this kind of crap doesn't really work because young voters use the internet and it's easy for them to get different, independent sources. But with many older folks this kind of stuff works really great and it's a tragedy. It makes me sad to see elderly Democrats vote for Hillary simply because they believe Sanders to be bad based on the lies of cable TV stations.2