Brass Tacks.

Here we are.  Hillary with a solid, undeniable lead in the popular vote. Barack with a minimal "pledged" delegate lead.  It'll come down to the Supers.

And, who of the Super Delegates know and owe Hillary, and who know and owe Obama?  It's realpolitik time. Experience counts, yet again.  We all know what's coming.  Either Barack is VP, or he's the most-loved loser since Goldwater.  

We'll see.  And, I'm sure Obama will buck at it at first.  He believes his own press, and thinks he can win.  But, when his options start shrinking (and Hillary's patience thins), he'll make the right choice. He'll still be a young man in 2012, and he'll have paid his dues.  

Or, in the alternative, he can go back home and let Evan Bayh be VP.  It's Obama's choice, really.  He's earned it, if he wants it.  It's up to him.

If you're going to rend your garments, wail, or knash your teeth -- save it.  I've seen it all.  If you're into grown-up politics, please comment on what you think might happen going forward.  Carrots, sticks and all.

•  Hillary

  and whomever she wants / '08.

  by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:48:36 PM PDT

  •  Terry McAulliffe would

    be a perfect match for her.

    by ratador on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:26 PM PDT

    •  And

      Terry Randall would be a perfect match for Obama.

      by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:59:24 PM PDT

      •  that doesn't even make sense

        at the last debate where the candidates were asked what vote/action they wished they could take back; Obama said allowing the Unanimous consent on Terry Schiavo to go forward

        by josephk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:10:27 PM PDT

    •  Never heard of the fellow (n/t)

      by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:26:36 PM PDT

  •  We all know what's coming.

    The arrogance of it all is a funny thing to behold.

    For at least two days now, you've been using fuzzy math to falsely claim that HRC is leading the popular vote.

    She's not.  Get it?  She's not...

    That's been pointed out to you before - but your Clinton-colored glasses prevent you from accepting that simple truth.

    Harv - this thing is effectively OVER.  It only remains to be seen how much class your candidate exhibits in winding down her campaign.

    And, no, we won't accept her as VP.

    So now, even YOU know what's coming.

    by brentmack on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:58:18 PM PDT

    •  Hillary

      kicked ass in Ohio, and won Texas by enough.

      Deal with it.

      And I'm being generous by entertaining the notion of Obama as VP.  As if you'd appreciate it.

      by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:39 PM PDT

      •  i wouldn't appreciate it

        if Clinton is the Nominee, the last thing i want for Obama is to have the Clinton albatross strung around his neck for the rest of his political career

        by josephk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:12:19 PM PDT

      •  It's been posted several times here now

        that Obama is ahead in the popular vote. Yet I notice that your diary still asserts otherwise.

        But at least anyone who read this can now determine how seriously to take your commitment to, like, accuracy.

        by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:31:28 PM PDT

        •  It doesn't matter

          Like the speed of light, the inevitability of Hillary is the same in all frames of reference.  She is inevitable no matter what happens with voting.  It is paradigmatic.

          by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:55:06 PM PDT

      •  Actually, Obama came out ahead in Texas

        Maybe you didn't check today?

        by kate mckinnon on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:07:22 PM PDT

        •  The inevitability block this from mattering

          Hillary's inevitability is a global optimum in Democratic politics.  Anything else would weaken the party.  Even after she loses, Hillary will remain inevitable.

          by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:09:45 PM PDT

      •  Are you Hillary?

        I mean, you don't get to pick her VP when she wins, and nobody other than Barack Obama would get to appreciate the notional offer.

        I don't get this post at all.

        by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:08:12 PM PDT

      •  Oops! Deal With This, Harv

        Hillary... won Texas by enough.

        Deal with it.

        It looks like your lady may have LOST the delegate count in Texas.

        The damn Caucus-Monster reared its ugly head again and took a big bite out of your candidate's fading hopes.

        Deal with that, Mr. Milk!

        http://www.statesman.com/...

        by brentmack on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:27:15 PM PDT

  •  Obama leads

    in the popular vote. Might want to update the diary.

    Hillary’s New Math Problem

    Hillary Clinton won big victories Tuesday night in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. But she's now even further behind in the race for the Democratic nomination. How could that be? Math. It's relentless.

    To beat Barack Obama among pledged delegates, Clinton now needs even bigger margins in the 12 remaining primaries than she needed when I ran the numbers on Monday—an average of 23 points, which is more than double what she received in Ohio. [...]

    Clinton's only hope lies in the popular vote—a yardstick on which she now trails Obama by about 600,000 votes. Should she end the primary season in June with a lead in popular votes, she could get a hearing from uncommitted superdelegates for all the other arguments that she would make a stronger nominee (wins the big states, etc.). If she loses both the pledged delegate count and the popular vote, no argument will cause the superdelegates to disenfranchise millions of Democratic voters. It will be over.

    Sorry. You lose.

    by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:08 PM PDT

•  I'll take knashing for $400, please

  by condoleaser on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:19 PM PDT

•  

  by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:54 PM PDT

  •  Or alternatively, what are you smoking?

    Even counting Michigan and Florida, Obama's still ahead in the popular vote.

    by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:13 PM PDT

    •  Yup.

      Do a Google search on Obama, popular vote.

      Here's one result.

      The presidential nominating contests in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont on Tuesday were anything but decisive for the Democratic candidates, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

      Clinton took the night's largest prizes — the delegate-rich states of Ohio and Texas — in addition to Rhode Island; Obama won Vermont.

      Obama remains ahead in the number of pledged delegates; he has won 1,564 to Clinton's 1,463. He also leads in the popular vote, winning 51 percent of all votes cast so far, versus 49 percent for Clinton.

      maybe Harvey doesn't know better, maybe he does. But, hey, it's Harvey.

      by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:21:30 PM PDT

  •  

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    by leonard145b on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:44 PM PDT

    •  

      by indiemcemopants on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:27:10 PM PDT

  •  

    by canoeist on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:19:28 PM PDT

•  I think

  you have to include FL and MI for Hillary to be ahead in the popular vote.  Even then it's not "solid."

  by chikindolfin on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:51:22 PM PDT

•  Wailing for $500 please.

  What a stupid diary.

  by huckleberry on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:51:25 PM PDT

•  Oh, please.

  HRC is toast.  She does not have the pledged delegates and Obama is still ahead in the popular vote.

  And tomorrow, or soon, a whole slew of supers are behind Obama.

  It is OVA...but she just has not got the memo, yet.

  by icebergslim on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:37 PM PDT

  •  It's VP

    or 1 of 100 for Obama.  That's what reality says.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:02 PM PDT

    •  Hillary is inevitable

      It has always been over and will always be over.  No matter what happens, the inevitability is a constant.

      by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:11 PM PDT

•  you have problems with your

  math and your facts.

  Obama leads in popular vote. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...
  there is zero chance clinton gets to the convention with more pledged delegates.

  ok, this is where you spin...

  by ratador on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:47 PM PDT

  •  Democratic voters say different (n/t).

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:46 PM PDT

    •  Are you high? Has the prospect of a non-white

      president driven you insane?

      by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:45 PM PDT

      •  No.

        I believe in democracy.

        by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:56:16 PM PDT

        •  Only the absolute most convoluted view of

          the popular vote has Hillary with a "solid, undeniable lead" in the popular vote.

          Specifically, it involves

          a) not counting caucusgoers (Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine didn't release totals and Obama clearly won three of those 4]
          b) counting the irrelevant primary in Florida and the even more irrelevant primary in Michigan
          c) not counting the also irrelevant Washington primary

          If you do all that, Clinton is up 13,452,647 to
          13,240,974

          or in the two-person race, she has 50.4% of the popular vote.

          But Obama has 51.6% of the total delegate [counting the supers] vote at this point, and you clearly think she's got a larger margin in the popular vote than he does in the delegate count.

          But wait, it's you, so you're probably counting the black vote at 3/5.

          If you do that, Clinton probably does have a fairly solid lead in the popular vote.

          by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:12:53 PM PDT

          •  I met fabooj at Yearly Kos.

            Really liked her, too.

            Geez, don't know why that name suddenly comes to mind.

            by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:34:49 PM PDT

            •  fabooj is a wonderful person, such a good heart

              and mind.

              So I know why she comes to your mind.

              I am sorry she felt compelled to leave because of this DOLT HarveyMilk and the non support of the admins here.

              His diaries S U C K.

              This one is typical.

              I wish I had met you, MBNYC at YearlyKos.  

              YOu could have been in my photo diary.

              If Harvey lives in the Bay Area perhaps I can meet him...I would like to...

              by navajo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:06:21 PM PDT

              •  Heh.

                I'm in two of your photos, at the very edge. I won't say which ones :-)

                by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:30:19 PM PDT

                •  OMG. Give me a fricking clue!

                  color of your shirt...
                  hair color...
                  gender...
                  other peeps in teh photo...

                  something...

                  toss me a bone!

                  by navajo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:33:50 PM PDT

                  •  It's a group shot

                    two, actually. Just out of the picture is the big truck at the Teamster's BBQ. I'm sitting at the very edge, closest to the truck. I think I was also just out of frame when Brian signed your book, because I was sitting with him and am at the time, I think.

                    by MBNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:38:17 PM PDT

                    •  Ahhh...yes, the teamster BBQ!

                      "Markos and the teamsters :: the GOP's worst nightmare" as quoted from Malacandra.

                      Ok.  I am going to go look for you.

                      If you see me at Austin please introduce yourself.

                      You deserve your own portrait, even tho' I am not Mona Brooks.

                      by navajo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:44:00 PM PDT

                    •  Ok. I see you I think, in the

                      NYBri photo but there are a bunch of truck photos and I can't "vet" you in those.

                      Oh well..........

                      More comments than HarveyMilk deserves in his lame diary so...

                      see you in another thread.

                      or I hope, in Austin.

                      by navajo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:54:07 PM PDT

              •  Oh, I just saw those photos for the first time!

                How wonderful to put some faces with names.  I have a new outlook on some of the people posting here.  It's great.  Thanks, navajo.  It looks like so much fun, I'd better go to the next one!

                by kate mckinnon on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:35:24 PM PDT

                •  I've been to both and they are so much fun!!

                  When the registration opened for Austin I bet I was in the top 10.

                  Can't wait.  My pic is in my profile, if you attend look for me and introduce yourself.

                  You are a prominent poster and I would love to post your photo.

                  I'll be there, just look for turquoise jewelry.

                  by navajo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:39:03 PM PDT

                  •  I just checked the dates

                    and I'm otherwise engaged.   Drat!   I won't let it happen next time.
                    Photos in profiles are a great idea, I think I'll do that too.   It really makes for more of a connection.

                    Looking forward to meeting you in '09, hopefully with a shiny new Dem President.

                    by kate mckinnon on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:26:09 PM PDT

      •  I guess no chocolate milk for Harvey!

        by Hope08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:57:06 PM PDT

        •  No, chocolate milk is delicious,

          but democracy trumps.

          by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:58:30 PM PDT

          •  democracy mixed with a little

            racist elistism.  sooooo gooooood.

            by Hope08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:54 PM PDT

            •  You would know (n/t)

              by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:07 PM PDT

              •  I would. As a AA I can spot it real quick.

                survival is dependent on it.

                by Hope08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:27:28 PM PDT

                •  I hope you survive.

                  Jesus.  Look up "hyperbole."

                  by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:38:34 PM PDT

                  •  ignorance is bliss.

                    by Hope08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:41:53 PM PDT

                    •  You must be very content (n/t)

                      by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:43:21 PM PDT

                      •  History has told me for Black people

                        the battle is long, the dogs will come out and bite, water hoses will sting your back, the naysayers will plea for patience and say "wait your turn" and "America is not ready", so predictable.

                        This song's been in my head all day:

                        The only thing we did was right
                        Was the day we started to fight
                        Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on

                        Hold on, hold on
                        Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on

                        I hope Hillary, Bill and Howard are ready.  Like Obama said yesterday, "The world is watching".  

                        by Hope08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:10:15 PM PDT

    •  I Thought This Was A "Reality-Based Community"

      It's those superdelegates who "know" HRC who are going to be wielding the long knives.

      Your side will finally find out who your friends are, and aren't.  

      In short, she hasn't got a chance!

      by brentmack on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:12 PM PDT

    •  Harvey,

      I am a Democratic voter.  In fact I voted for clinton twice way back in that other century.  oh, thats right this is a NEW century.  why are you trying to build a bridge back to the 20th century?

      by ratador on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:24:59 PM PDT

•  Grasping at straws for $800 please. n/t

  by MTmofo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:03 PM PDT

•  Popular vote

  ...in sanctioned votes:

  Obama 12,920,961
  Clinton 12,322,695

  by BarbinMD on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:59:23 PM PDT

  •  Source?

    Hillary has won the popular vote.  Of course, if you except the states that she's won, then she's lost.  But by every real count, she's won.

    Convincingly.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:04:21 PM PDT

    •  link

      or proof, please.

      by bsmcneil on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:37 PM PDT

    •  Like it or not

      ...the votes from FL don't count, so no, she hasn't won.  She's behind both in popular votes and pledged delegates.  

      by BarbinMD on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:40 PM PDT

      •  Of course,

        if you accept the 5-4 pro-Rove position of the SCOTUS circa 2000, then 2 million Floridian votes don't matter.  

        Cheers!

        by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:08:55 PM PDT

        •  Harvey. The NYT even said that

          Gore would have lost a full recount.  Please.

          by SpamNunn on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:11:21 PM PDT

          •  Yes.

            You sound more and more like the MSM every day.

            Do you think 8,600 Jews in West Palm Beach voted for Pat Buchanan?

            You would swear so, if it suited your purpose. Hell, you might as well.

            by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:07 PM PDT

          •  no they didn't

            the indication was that a recount based on the initial request of the Gore campaign for select districts would have resulted in a Gore loss, whereas a FULL Statewide recount would have led to a Gore Win

            by josephk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:53 PM PDT

          •  Get over it

            by SpamNunn on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:20:24 PM PDT

            •  Thanks, Rush! (n/t)

              by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:34:16 PM PDT

        •  Yes

          ...that's what I'm doing.

          Enjoy.

          by BarbinMD on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:13:31 PM PDT

      •  She's behind counting FL and MI anyway

        (since if you count those, you have to count the Washington state primary numbers as well [no caucus numbers were released so that would be the sole measure ]) and his margin in that primary was enough to still keep him ahead.

        (Assuming that Iowa and Maine combined are enough to counteract Nevada)

        by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:39:45 PM PDT

•  Ummm

  Here we are.  Hillary with a solid, undeniable lead in the popular vote.

  If by "lead" you mean she has more, then not so much on the solid and undeniable.

  by Mia Dolan on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:38 PM PDT

  •  I challenge

    your contention.  Hillary has won the popular vote.  Period.  And it will only increase.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:02:25 PM PDT

    •  OK

      The votes to date are:

      Obama 12,920,961
      Clinton 12,322,695

      Do you see the first number after "Obama"?  That one is bigger.  That means that Obama has more.

      by Mia Dolan on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:38 PM PDT

      •  That's bullshit.

        And you know it.  I used to hate to agree with you.  Now, I hate to disagree with you.  But I will.

        Hillary has dominated in the popular vote, and you know it.

        by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:17 PM PDT

        •  OK Harvey

          What is your source?  Because you are seriously the only person I have seen make this claim.

          by Mia Dolan on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:08:55 PM PDT

          •  My source?

            Raw vote totals.

            by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:09:46 PM PDT

            •  I understand that

              How about a link.

              by Mia Dolan on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:10:38 PM PDT

            •  Hey Milk? Anybody Home?

              by leonard145b on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:11:19 PM PDT

•  Buzz...Buzz...Ring...Ring...It's the daily double

  And what's your choice Harv, my boy?

  Ah...excellent choice...Bull-shitters.

  and your clue is...

  When her earrings clang-together they play Stormy Weather and lies comes out of her ass...

  by Persiflage on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:25 PM PDT

  •  Make an argument, would you? (n/t)

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:47:45 PM PDT

    •  Dude

      Put that donut away.  

      by Mia Dolan on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:56:33 PM PDT

    •  Why would anyone want to argue

      with someone so clearly dedicated to their own cast-in-concrete opinions?   So...ridicule is all that's left.  And you are ridiculous.

      by Persiflage on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:02:19 AM PDT

•  asdf

  Here we are.  Hillary with a solid, undeniable lead in the popular vote

  You are deliberately peddling something you know to be false therefore you are a liar.

  by stevej on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:30 PM PDT

  •  Not Only Is He A Liar, He's Fucking Boring n/t

    by brentmack on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:12:07 PM PDT

  •  Bulltshit.

    It's an undeniable fact.  When it's one-vote, one-person, Hillary wins.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:12:32 PM PDT

    •  What are you smoking? Can I have some? nt

      by otheruser on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:45 PM PDT

•  This diary is a perfect example

  of how to fail to achieve you're objective. The thought of a Clinton/Obama ticket is something you could have gotten people on board with had you not tried to do it by insulting Obama supporters. I'm not calling you out, because Lord knows it's a prevelant practice these days. Maybe it's too soon to declaring Obama's demise. He appears to be in a pretty good position. I have some ideas about a C/O or O/C ticket, but it seems premature.

  by Maine Impact on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:10:55 PM PDT

•  Grasping at straws?

  Seriously, the Clinton supporters are truly grasping at straws at this point.  Trying to count the rule-breaking primary voters in Fl and MI in the vote totals?  Dissmissing Obama's delegate lead and suddenly acting like overturning the popular candidate preference is just great?

  And what makes you so sure Clinton will win against McCain?  Every indicator seems to indicate her negatives are much higher than Obamas, even now.  I see matchups showing Hillary tied and Obama ahead.  Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather go into the fall with a lead, rather than tied.

  And let's not forget, if Hillary gets the nomination, the 50-state party-building, the reconstruction of the party from the grassroots, that's all over.  The DNC will go back to being a ATM machine and nothing more.

  I just wanna know one thing: what has Obama done to offend you so?

  by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:01 PM PDT

  •  Well, thank goodness

    you're not "calling me out."  I don't know what I'd do! (/snark)  

    I'm talking about realpolitik here, not what someone said about someone else in second period geometry.

    There is no way for Hillary or Obama to win enough pledged delegates.  This diary is about what will happen going forward, within that reality.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:50:50 PM PDT

    •  I guess we see realpolitik differently

      I see it as "Obama gets nomination, pie-in-the-sky dreams of Clinton notwithstanding."

      And do you really think Clinton will be stronger against McCain than Obama?  If so, why?

      by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:13:55 PM PDT

    •  And you didn't answer my question

      What has Obama done to piss you off so much?

      by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:19:05 PM PDT

•  If you ever go to Houston,

  If you ever go to Houston,
  boy, you better walk right,
  and ya better not squaable,
  and ya better not fight,
  Sherrif Rocko will arrest you,
  Eddie Boon'll take you down,
  you can bet your bottom dollar,
  that you're Sugarland bound.

  Leadbelly

  by otheruser on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:05 PM PDT

  •  I can't think

    of a good reason to ever set foot in Houston.  Really.

    Now, do you care to address the substance of this diary?  Or not.

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:54:54 PM PDT

•  Well

  One thing I will say. A lot of the Obama supporters are whining about the Superdelegates. But if the situation were reversed I think they'd strongly support the Superdelegagtes if it meant stopping Hillary.

  by oceanstar17 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:05 PM PDT

  •  When Obama leads in supers

    What will you say?

    by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:37 PM PDT

    •  He doesn't.

      And he won't.

      by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:06 PM PDT

      •  I bow to the inevitability

        It is a force of nature.  It cannot be stopped.  It has always been here, and it always will be here.  Before there was Obama, Hillary was inevitable.  Hillary will still be inevitable after he becomes the nominee.  Even after Hillary achieves the state of pure energy and moves to another plane of existence, she will remain inevitable.

        by theran on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:51:39 PM PDT

  •  I wouldn't

    If Obama were behind to the degree that it was mathematically impossible to win the majority of elected delegates I'd tell him to pack it in, since any winning of the nomination mwould basically be against the will of the primary voters, which it seems to me was not the intent of the McGovern-Frasier rules changes.

    The fact that Clinton is the one insurmountably behind has nothing to do with my opinion on this matter.  The nominee should not be the one with fewer elected delegates.  As the ghost of Hubert Humphrey how much that enhances you chances.

    by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:19:25 PM PDT

•  Popular vote lead? Bullshit.

  Why is it nobody counts caucus states when we discuss popular vote?

  It's a ridiculous fucking notion to think Clinton has the popular vote lead.

  Further, Michigan and Florida don't count.

  OBAMA has the popular vote lead by a wide margin.

  by broui on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:21:42 PM PDT

  •  well he's counting FL and MI

    Apparently on the grounds that since Bush v. Gore court rulings don't really have the force of law anymore.  As if this was even a matter for the courts.

    by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:23:19 PM PDT

    •  Obama is NOT counting those states.

      He has stated over and over that he intends to abide by the rules.

      IF they revote, the DNC will recognize them and those states will count.  Short of that, it ain't happening.  Obama agreed to the ruling of the DNC on this.

      by broui on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:56:34 PM PDT

      •  I mean HarveyMilk is counting them

        which he shouldn't be, since as you point out they won't count, ahving broken the rules and all

        by Harkov311 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:12:24 PM PDT

  •  i don't consider 2% either way a "wide margin"

    i think the reason we're having this discussion is that neither candidate

    has the popular vote lead by a wide margin.

    i understand you love obama. but maintain a friendly relationship with reality too.

    by dead letter office on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:03:23 PM PDT

    •  Here's my "friendly relationship" with reality.

      Ballpark of a 150 Pledged Delegate lead.

      This is insurmountable.

      Now what part of that don't you understand?

      by broui on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:08:44 PM PDT

      •  like i said, this part:

        OBAMA has the popular vote lead by a wide margin.

        by dead letter office on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:54:12 PM PDT

•  There won't be a Clinton-Obama ticket, period

  Her Entitledness can't bear the idea of a running mate who might upstage her and Bill--and that puts the kibosh on Obama.

  If she's the nominee, expect her to put Evan Bayh (DLC-Indiana) on the ticket. He's a milquetoast, a card-carrying hawk, and so boring a public speaker that audiences have to be warned against driving or operating heavy machinery afterward.

  by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:28:42 PM PDT

  •  I think she'd prefer

    Bayh on her ticket.  Yet I also think she'd consider offering VP to Obama in order to acknowledge his campaign.  But she'll beg no one.  

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:33:00 PM PDT

•  This is right wing arguing

  It's pretty hilarious.  

  The way that wingers debate issues is to just make a statement and never back down from the statement, regardless of what facts are presented.  

  It's classic.  And, it's why I ignore them.

  by otto on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:32:11 PM PDT

  •  Of course,

    because I do not support Obama and I see reality plastered on the wall, I'm a right-winger.

    Welcome to the new Daily Kos reality...

    by HarveyMilk on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:36:39 PM PDT

    •  I Left A Little Bad News For You Upthread

      Looks like you lost the delegate race in Texas.

      Now I KNOW you'll try to spin that into a victory.  

      But 21st Century Democrats aren't into all of that "we create our own reality" stuff that HRC's campaign team borrowed from BushCo.

      by brentmack on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:39:06 PM PDT

    •  No, not a right winger

      I just said that's why I ignore them.  

      Lucky you.  

      by otto on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:39:20 AM PDT