Skip to main content

View Diary: Another Inconvenient Finding for Barack Obama (147 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama is ahead in the popular vote by 600K+ votes (0+ / 0-)

    Add another 50-100K for caucuses that didn't release popular vote tallies.

    •  Pennsylvania has not yet voted (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AnnieM, CanadaWest, dskinner

      Her margin there will be enormous. Haven't you guys learned your lesson with writing her obituary? Strictly hilarious.

      •  Plus re-votes in MI and FL (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AnnieM, CanadaWest, heineken1717

        This isn't over yet, not by a longshot.

        Together, we will turn promises into action, words into solutions and hope into reality. Hillary Clinton for President

        by psychodrew on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:04:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  She would need 58% of the remaining pledged (2+ / 0-)

          delegates even if you factor in FL and MI. 62% w/o a revote.

          •  as I noted before (0+ / 0-)

            pledged delegates are complete bullshit. She didn't win the pledged delegates despite winning the most votes in several states, and her big state wins resulted in delegate margins canceled out by tiny state losses. The pledged delegates have been rendered meaningless by these instances of ridiculous allocation that subverts the will of those states' voters.

        •  exactly (0+ / 0-)

          Throw in PA, MI, and FL, and I see Hillary as the odds-on favorite to win the popular vote. And if she does, she's a lock on the nomination, there's no way in hell the superdelegates wouldn't select her when she wins all the big states (minus uncontested Illinois) AND the popular vote AND the electoral vote (based on states won). She's already got the big states locked up. She's extremely likely to end up with the lead in electoral votes (and that is, after all, how we pick our President). I think those 2 items are probably enough on their own to justifiably sway the superdelegates, but throw in the popular vote and you can take it to the bank.

          •  delegates decide the race. pledged delegates (0+ / 0-)

            are elected by the people according to preset rules. Super delegates better not overturn a pledged delegate win (either way, C or O).

            Had Clinton been doing better on PDs and poorly on the popular vote, I bet you'd be shilling contrary to what you're saying. That's the kind of rank hypocrisy that wingnuts are famous for. We're better than that.

            Gore didn't win the 2000 election because he won the popular vote. He likely won it because had the supreme court no intervened, the FLSC ordered recount would've shown that he won FL.

            •  "preset rules" (0+ / 0-)

              if you're going to obsess over "preset rules", you need to be consistent and acknowledge that superdelegates voting however they want to are also "preset rules." Clearly YOU are the one being hypocritical, loving the preset rules that favor your candidate (pledged delegate allocation that thwarts the will of the voters) and hating the preset rules that favor his opponent (superdelegates with freedom to choose anyone).

              I like how you assume I'd be a hypocrite, with no evidence at all, while I have PROOF that you in fact are a hypocrite.

              I suggest you tread lightly before you bring up Gore's loss despite winning the popular vote. He lost because of the electoral college (technically), which Hillary is leading.

            •  If one candidate wins the most popular votes (0+ / 0-)

              and the other wins the most pledged delegates, the majority of voters want the nomination to go to the winner of the most popular votes.

              I wrote on this Sunday.

              If it went the other way, especially when Obama has won so many delegates from caucuses that disenfranchise so many voters, it would be undemocratic.

              Together, we will turn promises into action, words into solutions and hope into reality. Hillary Clinton for President

              by psychodrew on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 06:19:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Clinton is behind by 700K in pop vote (0+ / 0-)

                (when we count the caucuses IA, NV etc) and is trailing by 155 pledged delegates. Since Obama will win or do well in some of the remaining contests, even with PA, MI and FL, HRC would still need double digit wins in ALL of them and needs 7 million+ voter turn in those states combined. Even then they'd be nearly tied in popular vote.

                So, don't assume she will pull ahead in the popular vote. That's also a tall enough order for her.

                If Obama is ahead by 50-100 PDs and the popular vote is close, of course he should be the nominee by any justifiable reasoning.

              •  Enough with this nonsense about caucuses (0+ / 0-)

                Clinton had the opportunity to object to caucuses in 2007. I didn't hear her complaining about them, then. Frankly, I thought that the caucuses would go for her, since they're historically dominated by political insiders, who Clinton had a lot of support from. But then, a funny thing happened. Obama, the ultimate organizer, realized how caucuses work and realized that he could get big wins by getting more people to show up at caucuses. For whatever reason, Clinton chose not to do this, despite having the money to get tons of people to caucuses and educate them about the process, as Obama did. Why should we penalize Obama for understanding the rules and building grassroots support?

                And anyway, Obama has won more primaries than Clinton.

      •  I never really wrote an HRC obituary, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Same As It Ever Was

        because I know she's tenacious.

        I know exactly what happened in OH and TX. Her fear-mongering and negative attacks worked while Obama was caught in a situation of being the perceived front-runner coming under simultaneous attacks from the Clinton camp, McCain, wingnuts and to some degree Nader. His team wasn't prepared for it, but he learns fast, and so they're catching up to deal with things. Still, he managed to stay close in TX (but lost by the same margin he was in OH when the race shifted to TX and OH).

        Hillary Clinton started this race 15-25% in the front (a good part from the Clinton brand name recognition). She trails on all important counts now.

        In order to win pledged delegate lead, she needs to win 58-62% of the remaining plegded delegates, which is a very high hurdle. If Obama wins the pledged delegate count and is denied the nomination (for no good reason other than Clintons' personal ambition), the party will pay for it for a couple of generations.

      •  Yes.... (0+ / 0-)

        ....but there are also elections in Oregon, Mississippi, Indiana, etc. where Obama will certainly increase his margin. Look at the math and it becomes clear that Clinton will probably not overtake Obama on ANY level, short of mass defections of superdelagates.

        •  What about the popular vote? (0+ / 0-)

          I've seen projections that put a popular vote lead within reach.

          Together, we will turn promises into action, words into solutions and hope into reality. Hillary Clinton for President

          by psychodrew on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 07:20:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've seen others (0+ / 0-)

            Clinton would have to win by a larger than expected majority in Pennsylvania and cut into Obama's margins in states where he's expected to win fairly significantly, iirc. And, apart from Oklahoma, Rhode Island, New York, and Arkansas, Clinton hasn't had many blowout wins. Obama, even in states where he loses, keeps it pretty close. This makes it tough for Clinton to close the gap in the popular vote and nearly impossible to close the delegate gap.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site