Unfortunately for Hillary, the math isn't fuzzy. KO? no, but TKO is looming.

[polticalpout]

Give Hillary Florida and Michigan and she stills trails, on top of that give her wins in the states remaining that favor her by a margine of 60% to 40% and she still trails.
~~~~~
...

the March 4 results have not changed Obama's strongest talking point (and reality point) for why Clinton should exit the Democratic race: Math. It appears numerically impossible for her to overtake his lead among elected delegates.
...
Clinton lives to run for another seven weeks. But if you believe in the power of numbers, the candidate of inevitability is Barack Obama.


http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1719614,00.html?cnn=yes

[BzaDem]

1. No, because "pledged delegates" don't decide everything according to the "rules."

If one candidate gets the pledged delegate majority, and the other one gets the popular vote majority, which one do you vote for? The rules don't say either. Do you vote for the system that makes caucusgoers in Idaho worth 25 times more than voters in Texas? Or the one that gives each voter equal weight? The rules don't say. It is up to the superdelegates.

[Spider Jerusalem]

3. It's not ABOUT the 'popular vote', it's about the most delegates...

considering that a significant number of delegates are awarded through caucuses, which have a releatively LOWER voter turnout than primary elections, the 'popular vote' argument effectively says those votes don't count (since Obama won more of them than Clinton). But you just can't ignore that that's part of the way the process works; this brain-damaged nonsense about 'popular vote' is nothing more or less than an attempt b y Clinton and her surrogates and supporters to do an end run around the system we have in place.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. Wrong

it's about whatever the superdelegates want it to be about. If they're smart, it will be about the popular vote AND which candidate is best positioned to win.

[anigbrowl]

8. That would be Obama then.

:-)

He is winning the popular vote, you know.

[flyarm]

22. dupe having hard time posting tonight..eom

[flyarm]

24. he has lost all the biggest states..he has won mostly small conserv states!

Obama out spent Hillary 2:1 in Ohio and Texas...

he has lost all the biggest states..he has won mostly small conserv states!

i can tell you this..he will not win Florida..no way no how!

Hillary can.

fly

[lapfog_1]

34. The polling data says you are wrong...

Neither is going to win Florida.

If we want to win the White House, we need to find a different way to win than Florida and Ohio.

[BearSquirrel2]

66. And yet ...

And yet when you look at the county maps, Hillaries support is coming from the areas in which Republicans do the best in general elections. Read: the Republican nomination is over and the dittoheads are crossing over for a little fun!!!

[MonkeyFunk]

27. If you count FL and MI

he's not.

[Spider Jerusalem]

28. Except you can't count Florida and Michigan because they don't count.

Don't even try to make that argument. Precedent in the form of a Supreme Court ruling; DNC vs Wisconsin, 1981 (look it up); the national party gets to make the ground rules for participation of delegates in the convention, The state party can change the rules of its primary if it wants to; that does not obligate the national party to seat delegates from a contest deemed illegitimate under the rules of the national party.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. Nobody said the popular vote wouldn't count

the other debate is about whether the delegates count.

But superdelegates would be smart to include MI and FL in their decision-making process.

[lapfog_1]

38. And just how does Michigan figure the popular vote..

oh, I know, YOU would give all of Hillary's Michigan vote to Hillary... and all of the other votes to... well, not Obama.

Right?

That's how we are going to figure out the popular vote issue?

Those two primaries don't count, not in delegates and not in votes. They never happened.

You want them to count, then make MI and FL have a do-over.

[MonkeyFunk]

41. No

give 55% to her, the other 45% go in uncommitted.

No need for do-overs. Florida was a fine election, and Obama made a purposeful decision to take his name off the MI ballot - nobody made him do it. Therefore, he didn't get any votes.

But this isn't about delegates - it's about the popular vote. Clinton is leading in the popular vote. If she maintains that lead going into the convention, the superdelegates should certainly make that a big factor.

[lapfog_1]

43. Oh, please TRY to make this argument at the convention.

I just want to see it in action. I'm sure the memo came down from Hillary HQ already that this would be the talking point.

It will split the party.

I say again, if Obama goes to the convention with more pledged delegates than Hillary (not including the illegal Florida and Michigan delegates)... and he isn't the nominee, you can write it down now... it will split the party.

I don't give a DAMN if she wins the popular vote by over 1 million.

If she wins the pledged delegates (not including FL or MI)... even if she doesn't have enough to win nomination, I will publicly state that Obama should withdraw.

[MonkeyFunk]

50. I don't see why pledged delegates

are more "democratic" than the popular vote.

[lapfog_1]

71. Because if it was by popular vote, then they wouldn't bother with the delegates.

but we don't live in a Democracy! We live in a Representational Republic.

We elect representatives to go and do our bidding so we don't have to be bothered with every procedural vote and every little detail of Robert's Rules of Order.

Almost every facet of our society is structured this way. We elect representatives to DC, representatives to our state capitals... all the way down to representatives to our School Boards and city councils. And we elect representatives (delegates) to our party conventions.

Again, you don't like the rules, you are certainly welcome to join the party, run for office and change them if you get enough support.

For now, this is the way it's done.

So no, they really CAN'T take the popular vote into account. What does the popular vote MEAN anyway. It certainly doesn't ensure them that the candidate they are picking on that basis is the best candidate to run in the General Election. Not to mention that a number of states would feel that they are losing influence and will be taken for granted if you count is the raw votes. That's why small states have disproportionate representation. And they will jealously guard that "right" that they have... and maybe that's right too. Who knows?

[NDambi]

62. Split party oh yeah and many will stay home or not vote for Hillary...and I'm one of them

[Spider Jerusalem]

40. The popular vote from those states doesn't count either.

Under DNC rules, there WERE no valid primaries in those states.

And Clinton was the only candidate still in the race who was on the ballot in Michigan.

I'm sorry, but the idea that some deus ex machina in the form of superdelegate intervention is going to hand Hillary the nomination is just badly out of touch with reality.

[NDambi]

61. Doesn't mean they will....sorry

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. Pfft...

you mean the superdelegates Clinton has been bleeding at a rate of 2 a day so far as it's become increasingly clear she has no hope whatever of catching up in pledged delegate totals, right? THOSE superdelegates? I don't think I'd put any money on them going to her corner, if I were you.

[JeanGrey]

26. And that wouldn't be Hillary.

Look, if the SD's were to go against their constituents, it will tear this party up. Stand back and watch us lose if it's Hillary.

[lapfog_1]

32. Which, btw, will be Obama - n/t

[NDambi]

60. lol..

[pnwmom]

39. "Brain damaged nonsense"? Yeah, right.

Who cares that we could end up nominating someone who only had the support of a minority of Democrats, while a majority preferred the "loser"? You'd have to be brain-damaged to care about that, right?


:sarcasm:


The system we have now is anti-democratic and the caucuses lead to bullying. It's time to replace this broken system with a national or with regional primaries.

[Spider Jerusalem]

42. It'sd the system we have now.

And you don't get to change the rules in the middle of the game because your team is doing poorly.

[pnwmom]

52. The system we have now allows super-delegates to vote however they wish --

-- even if that means going against the majority of the regular delegates and FOR the majority of the people.

You don't get to change the rules in the middle of the game either.

[Spider Jerusalem]

55. Except...

the superdelegates have already indicated they will line up behind the candidate with a plurality of pledged delegates at the convention; and Obama apparently has a further fifty superdelegates lined up (which will effectively nullify Hillary's lead in superdelegate endorsements). You don't get to ignore reality because you don't like it, either.

[pnwmom]

56. They have already "indicated"? There hasn't been any vote on that and even

if there had been, it wouldn't be binding on any individual superdelegate and any of them could change their minds at any time.

And Obama "apparently" has 50 more lined up. You're right. "Apparently" is the operative word.

I've been watching these contests for too many years to think that any of this is predictable. Brokered convention, here we come.

[Spider Jerusalem]

57. If it goes that far...

and both candidates continue to batter one another...you can say hello to President McCain in November. The GOP have their nominee. For the process to continue to drag on on the Democratic side doesn't really do any good for the party's chances in November regardless of who wins the nomination, especially not with the increasingly nasty turn the campaign has taken.

[pnwmom]

59. I don't think it will be as important this year.

The Iraq war, the economy, and many other factors will probably matter more. If the anti-Bush feeling is strong enough, then McCain isn't a shoe-in by any means, because he's tied Bush around his neck till he's about to strangle himself.

What concerns me more than anything else is election fraud.

[NDambi]

63. Amen !!!!

[anigbrowl]

7. I hate to tell you this, but he's still winning the popular vote.

By around 700,000 or so, if memory serves me right. I'll check the exact # in the morning when all the totals are in.

[tritsofme]

16. Put FL in the mix and the margin is down to 300k.

nt

[Buve]

19. + Michigan

If you trend out michigan its then just about even... hrm..

even if you only trend it based on Ohio

[pnwmom]

53. And yet she's always been ahead in the national polls.

Given the craziness of the caucuses, especially, I think the polls are a more accurate barometer of public opinion than the stupid system we have in place.

[BearSquirrel2]

68. She's always have better name recognition ...

The network knighted her as heir apparent quite a long time ago. The Hillary crowd is looking at Texas as an upset. The truth is that Hillary had a big lead there that Obama narrowed once on the ground, same goes for Ohio. This has been the pattern in every state. Hillary is presumed to win then Obama comes in and gives them an alternative.

The idea that the non-races in Florida and Michigan should count comes from a deep need to have Hillary at any cost. You folks know damn well that the scoreboard would have been different if there actually would have been a campaign. And Hillary very cynically stood for the pictures of her Pyhrric victories while putting this issue in her pocket in case she needed it.

Lets please have caucuses in Florida and Michigan. Heck the Florida governor even said he would be willing to do another primary. We can trust revotes and seat an ELECTED slate of delegates, not the Hillary referendum delegates.

[pnwmom]

69. I'm not "you folks" if by that you mean a Hillary person.

But I'm for fairness, and I don't see much fairness here with regard to Hillary. And I think the caucuses are an undemocratic system where Dems try to bully each other into voting for their preferred candidates and I wish we'd replace them with primaries everywhere.

There was a point to caucuses back in the old, pre-mass-transportation days. No more.

[mattclearing]

10. You really think the Democratic Party establishment will rule the first black nominee unsuitable?

You think they might fracture the Democratic coalition, and put black America off politics for good?

[David__77]

36. No, they won't overturn a pledged delegate lead.

No way. To do that would mean that it would become accepted fact that the Democratic establishment stole the nomination from a popular Black man who amassed a movement of millions.

[NDambi]

64. You got that right...from all the other black people I've spoken to..if such a thing occurs..

count them out in November...

[polticalpout]

12. If the Supers put in Hillary over Obama the Black vote will be gone for the Dems.

You think Black America would stand for that? "Oh, let's see Obama has more delegates elected to him by the people but let's give our support to Hillary so she wins." The Black Vote would be gone. There is no way Dean let's it get all the way to the superdelegates so they decide this election, no way in hell.

[Buve]

20. 25:1

And he gets those delegates stoopidly cheap.

You think blue colar workers/hispanics are going to give their support to obama because caucus goers in small states get a 25:1 voter to delegate advantage

[polticalpout]

23. I don't think that's an issue to many people

No one is really complaning about the caucus system except a few Hillary supporters who are doing so just today, but right or wrong it really isn't a big issue. You can bet the farm though if the Supers decide to back Hillary over Obama and he has the lead in delegates there will be hell to pay.

Again, No way Dean lets the super delegates decide this election, he already said he wouldn't.

[David__77]

37. Yes.

They will. It's not the same, and if you think so, you don't understand the political dynamics.

[GreenTea]

2. Math? It'll come down to PA...up next...no doubt!

[polticalpout]

6. Not really, the state is split and thus so are the delegates

It's not going to shift the #'s much one way or another. Hillary nor Obama will dominate there.

[GreenTea]

18. But...IF Clinton wins PA....another BIG state , the BIG wins will look awfully attractive....

to the Dems...CA, TX, OH, NY, PA, NJ, MI, FL, even AZ, (McCains home state) along with the smaller states that she has won...

But...

PA is now the key, for both.

IF she wins PA, she's got a lock...even if tied with Obama.

It's now on to PA.............

[polticalpout]

31. "IF she wins PA, she's got a lock"... that's funny

I don't think so. Let's put up Hillary verse McCain in every state and Obama verse McCain in every state and see who wins.

Hillary would energize a lackluster Republican base and lose independents to McCain while Obama can grab independents from McCain, won't turn on the Republican base like Hill does, and can actually grab some wavier Republicans.

The fact is Republicans loath Hillary (I'm sure partly because she is a woman with power) and will do everything it takes to beat her. They see Obama as a lesson they can use to teach the party for giving them a canidiate they didn't want.

[jgraz]

49. Those goalposts just keep moving, don't they?

:crazy:

[jgraz]

48. Once again, she didn't "win" Florida or Michigan

And once the delegates are tallied, she won't have won Texas either.

[Gore1FL]

15. You do realize she needds 100% of PA,right?

[Diane R]

4. Fabulous news. Thank goodness she blew off all the states after Feb. 5th.

[Bluebear]

11. So what would be fortanent?

:silly:

[polticalpout]

13. Thank you, I need a full time proofreader, honestly! /nm

nm

[Bluebear]

14. :)

[Apollo11]

17. "Give Hillary Florida and Michigan"? Good idea!

Let's have all 50 States involved in this decision. B-)

[Buve]

21. make them count

or make them meaningful through a revote (even though BO had ads in FL before the primary)

[polticalpout]

25. In Michigan Obama and Edwards weren't on the ballet

and Hillary got 55% and Uncommitted got 40%. 40%! People came out to vote Uncommitted! Lets have a re-vote!

[BringBigDogBack]

30. K&R

[pnwmom]

33. But Obama trails too -- he's not going to be able to get the supermajority

that is required, either.

And that is why we'll probably have a brokered convention.

[Ravy]

35. Superdelegates probably won't look at national pledged delegates, despite

what the media is saying.

I think if they go off of national figures, they will look at the popular vote total, or the popular vote of people who are Democrats.

If they go off of pledged delegates, it is more likely that they will go off of their state totals or their district's totals.

[speedbird]

44. the delegate haul from Texas is ???

haven't seen any delegate totals

[Kitty Herder]

45. K&R

[dbmk]

46. Someone on dKos did the math

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/4/162042/3056/80/468751

I learned a few details there - and it basically shows that Hillary is ready for the fork.

[Gore1FL]

47. I did the math too here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4881834

It showed the race to be unwinnable for her, but gave her way more delegates than she got tonight.

She is Huckalree Rondpaulm Clinton at this point.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. Did Huckabee

Did Huckabee clown McCain in the six post populous states in the nation?

[pnwmom]

67. It doesn't really matter how many delegates Obama leads by UNLESS

he gets the supermajority required to win the nomination. Otherwise, he's in the same position she is, depending on the mercy of the superdelegates -- who could change their minds about who to support at any time and for any reason.

[dbmk]

70. Yes, ANY reason

....or maybe not. Its wishful thinking in its purest form.

All, or almost all at least, of the superdelegates will know or be reminded that overruling the majority of the pledged delegate will be a kick in the face of voters, of which a not insignificant group that will subsequently feel enourmously disenfranchised and be lost not only for this GE, but the next many primaries and GEs also. At a time where it looks as if the opposite is happening.

Why go vote if you get overruled anyway? Given the many first time voters that has apparently surfaced, that could be a devastating blow to the partys future.

Yes, the rules are what they are, and people can be expected to know this can happen. But that won't make the reality of it any less. And the superdelegates will know this.
Dean and Co. will make sure they know whats at stake.

[pnwmom]

72. It's not necessarily a kick in the face to Democratic voters, if the majority

of Democrats still support Hillary over Barack at the end of this process -- as they do now, in all the national polls.

People who voted for Barack in January might not be supporting him still in June, depending on the circumstances. And the people who chose him in the caucuses might not be representative of who would have been chosen in the more democratic process of a primary. For example, here in Washington state, Barack's caucus vote exceeded Hillary's by a margin of greater than two to one. But in the primary contest a little later (which didn't allot any delegates), he only got 3% more than she did. Why shouldn't the superdelegates in WA allocate their votes proportionately on the basis of the primary (in which case Barack and Hillary would split the votes almost down the middle) rather than on the skewed results of the less representative, less democratic caucuses?

[barack the house]

Yep, Barack won this 2 weeks ago. Guess we just got to be patient.

[barack the house]

51. ...

[johnnydrama]

54. the worst thing is

She blew off 10 straight states, where Obama got 20% wins to haul a huge amount of delegates. All to concentrate on Ohio & Texas, where she may net 2 delegates.

Kind of makes you wonder how bad her strategy would be in the GE.

[Scurrilous]

58. K & R

:thumbsup: