Quote :

"Obama clearly has a "popular vote" advantage over Hillary. If he goes in there a single pledged delegate ahead, there is little chance Hillary can win."

win what, the nomination?? how do you figure that? the potential issue of "ghost delegates" aside, she's only playing by the rules up to this point.

the nomination isnt determined by popular votes, it's determined by *delegate votes*. and there are 825 "super" delegates who can vote for whoever they want to, and can make or change their decision anytime between now and the voting. then they can change their votes in the second and subsequent rounds. even the ones that have publicly claimed their support for one candidate or the other can still change their minds at any time.

the fact is, these 825 superdelegates are largely democratic party and washingon insiders. most have not formally made any commitment, but you can be sure the advantage is to clinton.

these are the rules of the game. the fact that one candidate or another has a plurality of pledged delegates, means absolutely nothing in these rules.




[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 2:45 PM. Reason : ]

3/5/2008 2:41:58 PM

sorry joe. As Ive stated, republicans werent calling for a new vote. Which by def, is changing the rules after the fact.

Joe, who do you think will get the nom?

[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 2:45 PM. Reason : .]

3/5/2008 2:44:44 PM

I didn't say she can't. I'm saying it would be suicide for the party if she won while Obama clearly had greater popularity. Thus, if those superdelegates had a brain (or any interest in dems winning) they probably shouldn't put her in for the nom.

Otherwise people will see her as a rulebook thumping bureaucrat like JoeSchmoe.

3/5/2008 2:47:12 PM

Re-read the rest of his post:

Quote :

"Consider the alternative. She's already seen as the "insider". We'll finish the convention with the less popular candidate, who got it by wheeling and dealing. A powerful candidate for the general election? I don't think so, sounds more like suicide by the democratic party. "

The rules of the game allow for washington insiders to go against the will of the primary voters and hand the nomination to Hillary. But as Mr Frog (and many top democrats) stated, it would be party suicide. The backlash would be so incredible that it could potentially fracture the party in 2.

3/5/2008 2:47:22 PM

Quote :

"eyedrb : sorry joe. As Ive stated, republicans werent calling for a new vote. Which by def, is changing the rules after the fact."

tell me where the Democratic Party is calling for a "new" vote.

they arent.

some disaffected supporters of one candidate or another may be, but that's their problem, because its not going to happen.

now, your republicans have enough imbeciles throughout and all the way to the top... i KNOW you dont want me to start pulling individual examples of sheer idiocy from your rank-and-file and using that to broad brush the whole GOP.




[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 2:55 PM. Reason : ]

3/5/2008 2:47:57 PM

Quote :

"mrfrog : I didn't say she can't. I'm saying it would be suicide for the party if she won while Obama clearly had greater popularity."

okay, i get your point. and to an extent, i agree.

but the problem is, I'm not sure it's all that clear how much greater the popular vote is for Obama. we're not keeping track of popular vote. the fact that there are caucuses mixed in with the primaries, makes an accurate count near impossible

Quote :

"Thus, if those superdelegates had a brain (or any interest in dems winning) they probably shouldn't put her in for the nom."

again, i agree with you -- in theory, but you speak as if you think the superdelegates are all of one mind, and one agenda.

wouldn't that be nice.

wouldnt it be nice if the Democratic party wasnt a fractured bunch of various interests that can't seem to work together for the common good, leading to things like the 2000 and 2004 elections.

Quote :

"Otherwise people will see her as a rulebook thumping bureaucrat like JoeSchmoe."

oh. i get it. you're chastising me. you think that I like this system, and that I'm defending it. I don't have anything to do with how this is set up, it was apparently decided to be this way in 1984. Certainly it was known and understood by all parties before the start of this season's primaries and caucuses.

but now i see what eyedrb is getting at... it almost seems as if you want to change the rules after the game has started.

of course, thats not the case, now is it?





[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 3:02 PM. Reason : ]

3/5/2008 2:54:29 PM

Clinton campaign manager Terry MacAullife was talking about his candidate's victories last night he "referred to the possibility of a re-vote in Michigan and Florida as part of the Clinton plan for victory in the primaries."

3/5/2008 3:41:17 PM

maybe, I don't know if those 2 states would really change anything...
(and I don't know the technicalities of recounts)

What about the John Edwards factor? Who does his existence help? Did he take votes away from Obama? Can he "give" his delegates to other candidates? And does anyone even realize Mike Gravel is still running?

I have some friends who are big into this (like helping with stuff for the NC primaries). It's complicated... but to most americans it's already a dead horse.

3/5/2008 4:11:07 PM

just got this from the obama campaign people:

Quote :

"Our projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183. That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted. For comparison, that's less than half our net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than our net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than our net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia. The task for the Clinton campaign yesterday was clear. In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead. They failed. It's clear, though, that Senator Clinton wants to continue an increasingly desperate, increasingly negative -- and increasingly expensive -- campaign to tear us down."

(it continues on about john mccain and other things)

i'm curious if this projection is accurate or if it's just wishful thinking on the obama campaign's part.

3/5/2008 4:11:13 PM

Obama:
Pledged - 1,343 52%
Super - 196 45%
Total - 1,539 51%

Hillary:
pledged - 1,206 47%
super - 240 55%
total - 1,446 48%

Anyway, if Hillary wants to win this, she's going to have to sport some serious delegates in the final states.

3/5/2008 4:14:17 PM

Well if she only narrowly wins all of the contests from here out she could probably only hope to catch up with his delegate count. The fact that he's expected to win several upcoming states means that her chances of overcoming him in a pure delegate (not including superdelegates) race are very slim. I think she realizes this and is hoping for something drastic to happen to offset his lead.

3/5/2008 4:14:33 PM

someone did some math before yesterday saying that the number to watch for last night was hillary winning 57% of the pledged delegates for every upcoming race. she needs to do that for every contest to catch up (barring FL and/or MI counting). she fell short of that 57% by somewhere around 35 delegates or more, which means she has to have BIGGER victories in the remaining states to have a chance at pulling ahead in pledged delegates (if that actually means much)

3/5/2008 4:20:03 PM

Hillary Clinton failed to do anything significant last night but give John McCain some more Ammo with her Obama attacks. She keeps on saying that both her and McCain have the experience... and Obama only has 1 speech. What the fuck is she doing?

When will Howard Dean shut that fucking bitch up?

3/5/2008 4:23:08 PM

Here's one guy's take on things:

Quote :

"It doesn't get any better for Clinton after Tuesday. Just for kicks, pencil the New York senator in for landslide victories in Wyoming, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Kentucky plus narrow victories in Guam, Indiana, North Carolina, Montana and South Dakota ? scenarios that give her a hefty benefit of the doubt and then some. And what happens? She still trails Obama."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080305/ap_ca/on_deadline_clinton

3/5/2008 4:24:56 PM

Quote :

"Clinton campaign manager Terry MacAullife was talking about his candidate's victories last night he "referred to the possibility of a re-vote in Michigan and Florida as part of the Clinton plan for victory in the primaries.""

last i checked, "Terry MacAullife" does not represent the "Democratic Party".

and this is not a "democrat" thing.... it is the strategy of a desperate campaign.

the problem is, they have the will and the ability to take this to court. it's unprecedented, so if they do, it will have to be ruled upon.

you can be damn sure that if a republican candidate came down to having to make the choice between "concession" and launching an unprecedented fight for the RNC's own disputed delegates, theyd damn sure think long and hard.

3/5/2008 4:25:13 PM

^^
and

Quote :

"Consider that a shot across the bow to the Clinton campaign because Brazile ? like many other superdelegates ? worries that Clinton's only hope for victory is tearing down Obama and dividing the party. Party chairman Howard Dean recently told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that he was concerned about the possible impact of a nominating campaign that stretched through the end of the primaries in early June. Some superdelegates are bracing themselves to intervene on Obama's behalf if necessary. "If these attacks are contrasts based on policy differences, there is no need to stop the race or halt the debate," Brazile said. "But, if this is more division, more diversion from the issues and more of the same politics of personal destruction, chairman Dean and other should be on standby." "

3/5/2008 4:31:03 PM

haha, ok joe. THis one better?

The Democratic National Committee is pressuring Michigan and Florida to hold Democratic presidential caucuses so the delegates they’ve lost for holding January primaries can be seated at the national convention, a top Michigan Democrat said today.

3/5/2008 4:46:15 PM

Good news for Obama supporters I suppose.

3/5/2008 5:07:52 PM

This isn't good news for Hillary Clinton.

This isn't good news for Barack Obama.

This isn't good news for the Democratic party

However...

This is excellent news for John McCain.

This is excellent news for George W. Bush.

This is excellent news for the Republican Party.

3/5/2008 6:45:58 PM

i dont think women are gonna settle for anything less than hillary for pres....she'll have to pick obama

3/5/2008 6:50:22 PM

you make a different ridiculous prediction every couple days.

3/5/2008 6:52:10 PM

yesterday was a pretty important day

3/5/2008 6:52:45 PM

doesn't make your prediction any better

3/5/2008 6:55:10 PM

Quote :

"The Democratic National Committee is pressuring Michigan and Florida "

serious??


cite pls.

i'd google it, but ive got to go to a mtg.

3/5/2008 6:58:52 PM

Here you go joe. Its seems the states dont want to, but is getting pressured to. I assume price is the main concern for the states.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/780898,prim020608.article

3/5/2008 7:16:54 PM

this is fucked up.

3/5/2008 7:43:57 PM

yep, typical huh. Even as a republican, this is BS(but amusing). You should never change the rules after the fact. Just another reason to shake your head.

DNC just released a statement.

Howard Dean will not bend the party rules to grandfather in the disputed delegates from Michigan and Florida, the Democratic party chairman said in a statement today.

Instead, he put the state parties on notice: either they can wait and allow the credentials committee to decide whether to seat their delegates, or submit to a re-vote sanctioned under DNC rules. "We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time," he said in the statement.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/dnc_encouraging_florida_and_mi.php

3/5/2008 7:55:42 PM

woah.

i certainly don't think it would be good for the party or the country to take the primary process to court...

But stronger than that desire, I'm all for a good political BRAWL!

Black man vs. rich old hag, GO GO GO!

3/5/2008 7:55:54 PM

Quote :

"Total Votes Counted (including Michigan and Florida) Obama: 13,889,742 Clinton: 13,886,387 "

Thats ridiculous.

3/5/2008 8:34:05 PM

I swear to God, something like 10% of the population must just vote for whoever is loosing, or else elections could not numerically be as close as this.

Same for the 2000 election.

I have friends who pride themselves in never voting for the winning candidate. Maybe that's what we're seeing here.

[Edited on March 5, 2008 at 9:37 PM. Reason : ]

3/5/2008 9:36:42 PM

It's a good thing Gov. Crist is demanding the DNC fix the problem he created.

3/6/2008 6:07:11 AM

ahaha, I know right. That guy is the biggest douche

3/6/2008 8:54:06 AM

Florida demonstrators at DNC haunted by 2000

Quote :

"A few hundred Florida Democrats endured 18-hour bus rides to come to Washington this morning to demand that their state's presidential primary votes be counted. 'Count our votes!' they chanted outside their party's national headquarters. It was an odd demonstration, motivated largely by anger from the 2000 election that brought George W. Bush to the White House. It wasn't always clear whether the Floridians were directing their anger at Bush, at the national party, at the ghosts of 2000 or all of the above. Their main mission was to urge the national party to seat the state's delegates at the nominating convention in August. The party has stripped Florida of delegates as punishment for holding a Jan. 29 primary against party rules. Today's rally, led by the League of United Latin American Citizens, took place on the same spot where party chairman Howard Dean vowed early this month to make every effort to seat Florida delegates. Dean, while trying to make peace with the biggest swing state in the election, said any arrangement for seating delegates would have be fair to candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. DNC workers handed out bottles of water and flyers to the demonstrators. Leaders of the rally were invited to come inside afterwards to meet with party staff. 'This is family,' remarked DNC spokesman Luis Miranda, who hails from Broward County. 'Howard Dean promised that we would be counted, and we hope that will be correct,' said Yvonne Linsinbigler, age 69, who came all the way from Greenacres in Palm Beach County. 'Florida has had enough humiliation in our past,' she said. 'We don't need more.' Seating Florida based on the Jan. 29 results would favor Clinton, who won the primary with 50 percent of the vote. But demonstrators said this was not a Clinton rally.' 'We're not here to favor one candidate over another,' Linsinbigler said. 'It's just making sure Florida's votes are counted, this time as well as in the future.'"

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/dcblog/2008/04/florida_demonstrators_at_dnc_h.html

5/1/2008 1:16:16 PM

their delegates aren't going to be seated unless the nominee is already decided and/or they have another primary (which seems pretty unlikely at this point)

5/1/2008 2:52:43 PM

Don't tase me bro!

5/2/2008 2:20:06 AM

from what its been sounding like on cnn/fox news lately...after june 3 the superdelegates are gonna have about a 2 week window to start picking

5/2/2008 3:41:46 AM

^^^ You have a firm grasp of the obvious.

ANGRY FLORIDIANS

Quote :

"WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A small but very fired up group of Floridians rallied in the street outside the Democratic National Committee's headquarters here today, demanding that their primary votes be counted and threatening to literally block the doors of the Democratic Convention if they aren't. 'We will shut down the convention!' exclaimed Rep. Corrine Brown. 'If we are not seated, then nobody is going to be seated!'"

Quote :

"But others were adamant that this was about right and wrong, not Obama and Clinton. 'We've been robbed. I didn't get a say,' said Glenda O'Laughlin of Clearwater. 'This is a betrayal of our rights as citizens,' added Branford Fambro, also of Clearwater. Protesters eventually turned their ire on Howard Dean, literally calling him out with taunting chants of, 'Be a man, Howard!' and 'Where is Howard!?' After organizers went inside to meet with DNC officials, who they got outside to address the crowd was not Dean but Luis Miranda, deputy communications director for regional and specialty media. His promise of Florida representation in Denver was greeted with shouts of 'When?' and 'How?' He had no details to offer. Meanwhile, Clinton campaign official Harold Ickes made a closed-door appearance this morning before Clinton supers in Congress, where he told them that HRC would end up winning the popular vote by 300,000, according to a Democrat in attendance. He also told the group the Obama was 'writing off Florida' and that the only hope to win the state in November was with a Clinton nomination. Ickes comes up regularly for these outreach sessions."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/30/963364.aspx

More chaos. At this point, the Democrats don't look like they can hit their ass with both hands, and this situation may eventually get very ugly.

This scenario really couldn't be much better for the Republican candidate. Looks like the Democrats may fuck up an almost certain presidential win--hey, just like they have failed in Congress, am I right? GG!

5/2/2008 5:27:08 AM

i mean it COULD be better for republicans. they could have a sitting president who wasn't at 70+ disapproval rating.

5/2/2008 7:45:01 AM

^ Still with the sour grapes over those two terms, huh?

BTW, BUSH IS LEAVING, YOU DERANGED COCK MONKEY. THERE WILL BE "CHANGE" NO MATTER WHO IS ELECTED, OKAY?! OKAY?!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=C5O4ZGbWKaM

[Edited on May 2, 2008 at 8:12 AM. Reason : .]

5/2/2008 8:11:38 AM

Florida voters are reaping the fruits of their own stupidity. The protesters could have saved themselves the 18 hour bus ride and taken it to Tallahassee, that actually created the problem. Elections are run at the state level. If they keep sending bums to Tallahassee, they are going to keep having their elections screwed up.

5/2/2008 9:46:22 AM

^^ you said it "couldn't get much better for the republican candidate"

well believe it or not, yes it could.

they could have a sitting president that their candidate didn't have to avoid at all costs. and not to mention, a war that their candidate supports that most of the country doesn't.

5/2/2008 10:49:52 AM

^ You can read, right, sillyjewels? Or does your Bush derangement syndrome also affect that--in addition to your brain?

Quote :

"This scenario. . . ."

Meaning, the scenario of the Democrats apparent inability to pick a nominee. You know, the scenario that has you so bitchy.

And you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. McCain sure as hell didn't seem to be avoiding Bush's endorsement:

Bush endorses John McCain for president
March. 5, 2008

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23481178/

Quote :

"REPORTER: Senator McCain, given President Bush's low approval ratings, will this be a negative or a positive for you? And how much do you hope that he'll campaign for you on the trail? SENATOR MCCAIN: I hope that he'll campaign for me as much as is keeping with his busy schedule. I'll be pleased to have him with me both from raising money and the much need finances for the campaign to addressing the challenging issues that face this country."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=X5bsLS9yZ48





[Edited on May 2, 2008 at 11:25 AM. Reason : .]

5/2/2008 11:21:58 AM

yep. the one requisite appearance, and then there will be one more at the convention.

when, if he was a popular president, he could appear all the time and not worry about making mccain look bad. and let's see. who's bitchy? the one who's pointing out disagreements in an argument or the one feels the need to post pictures of the president flicking off a camera?

[Edited on May 2, 2008 at 11:39 AM. Reason : .]

5/2/2008 11:35:54 AM

^

Quote :

"REPORTER: Senator McCain, given President Bush's low approval ratings, will this be a negative or a positive for you? And how much do you hope that he'll campaign for you on the trail? SENATOR MCCAIN: I hope that he'll campaign for me as much as is keeping with his busy schedule. I'll be pleased to have him with me both from raising money and the much need finances for the campaign to addressing the challenging issues that face this country."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=X5bsLS9yZ48

Candidates always have to separate themselves to a degree from the sitting president. If you don't know this, then you're a bigger fool than I thought.

Quote :

"In that race, Mr. Gore's first job was to differentiate himself from his father, former Senator Albert Gore, who had suffered a bitter defeat six years earlier. In the same way, the vice president must in this campaign separate himself from another political force of nature, Bill Clinton."

http://tinyurl.com/4a4c4e

STFU.

5/2/2008 11:56:05 AM