Important!!! Poll Excited and Math Challenged Hillary Supporters Read This!

[KansasVoter]

If you are an Obama supporter you don’t need to read this post. You already know that Obama cannot lose the delegate count. You can go back to reading books and other things.

If you are a Hillary supporter who also knows that Hillary cannot win the delegate count you can stop reading also. I hope this is most of you!

But if you are a Hillary supporter who actually thinks Hillary still has a shot at the nomination and is posting poll results showing Hillary leading in the upcoming primaries you need to read this. I will try to make it really simple for you. It does involve math so try to keep up.

Let’s give Hillary a 14 point win in PA. This is the poll you math challenged Hillary supporters keep posting about today. That is the highest poll that is currently out there. Even after a 14 point win in PA Hillary is 142 delegates behind. If this is confusing just reread this paragraph until it makes sense.

Then let’s give Hillary a 20 point lead in Guam. No delegate gain for Hillary there.

After Guam is Indiana and North Carolina. Let’s give Hillary a 16 point win in Indiana. That is once again a poll you Math Challenged Hillary supporters are talking about today. A 16 point win in Indiana still puts Hillary 132 delegates behind Obama. Yes, 132 delegates. I know math is hard but if you read this over and over again it will make sense to you. Don’t get frustrated. I know it is confusing.

Then let’s say Hillary wins North Carolina even though every poll shows him winning that state. I want to give you math challenged Hillary supporters all the advantage I can. Let’s say Hillary wins NC by 10 points. That still puts Hillary 121 delegates behind! Yes 121 delegates behind. That is a big number. It is what you get if you add 100 and 21 together.

I know you Hillary supporters may have a headache at this point so I will speed up the rest of the remaining 8 elections. If Hillary wins ALL of the remaining 8 elections, and this is including Florida and Michigan because I know you Hillary supporters whine about those daily, if she wins all 8 by 16 points she is STILL 47 delegates behind. I want to make sure you understand that she is 47 delegates BEHIND not ahead. She is still losing at this point!

And I promise there are no remaining states left. That is it. Hillary can win every remaining state by 16 points and North Carolina by 10 points and Hillary is still 50 delegates down. Yes, Obama wins the elected delegate count. And remember, Hillary only won Ohio, which was "HER STATE" by 9 points!

Please read the above 7 paragraphs over and over again until you realize that polls don’t matter. Hillary cannot beat Obama in the primaries. If this is still confusing please locate an Obama supporter and they will explain it to you!

Now, you Hillary supporters are hoping special delegates called “Super Delegates” might give Hillary the nomination. Well I am sad to report that there is no way they will take a 50 delegate lead away from Obama. A 50 delegate lead means Obama WON the primaries based on the DNC rules. And popular vote will not matter because the race was based on delegates and caucus states don’t have actual popular vote counts added to Obama which if they did, would give Obama a popular vote lead. Besides, Obama ran his campaign to win Delegates and not popular vote and the DNC and Super Delegates know this.

And Obama is raising twice the money Hillary is. The Super Delegates will not take a 50 delegate lead away from a candidate who is raising more money than Hillary. They know that the party could not survive the nomination being stolen from Obama! Especially when National Polls show Obama leading ot tied with Hillary.

So I hope this math lesson will help you. I know the poll numbers excite you but I just want you to be realistic and not get your hopes up. Even with huge wins, Hillary will go into Denver 50 delegates down and the Super Delegates will nominate Obama.

Once again, if this is too confusing please seek out an Obama supporter. We would be happy to explain it to you!

[BumRushDaShow]

1. Sadly, you'll be talking to a bunch of brick walls in denial.

Their only hope is for every remaining SD to throw their weight behind her AND for previously pledged delegates, elected by the voters, to switch allegiance to her.

What continues to boggle my mind is why the media continues to concoct outlandish scenarios for her to have some opportunity to win. I guarantee you that if the results were reversed, they would have called for Obama's head and demanded that Dean force him out.

[mythyc]

32. maybe you should give them the brick wall dish cloth to wipe that chagrin off with

[KansasVoter]

68. Love it! (eom)

[Voice for Peace]

81. Me too... well done! Sorry, I had to read all the way through it.

[K Gardner]

2. Very nice breakdown. But your target audience is here solely to DISRUPT and DISINFORM.. not here

to learn, as evidenced by inability to read and comprehend :-)

:hi:

[Greyskye]

3. math is hard

:kick:

[Symarip]

4. By the third or fourth paragraph

You were dead to them.

[nichomachus]

5. And this is the absolute best-case scenario! n/t

[azmouse]

6. Maybe if you used morse code by banging pots and pans together

you could spell out a message that would get through to them.

They seem to like pots and pans. :)

[K Gardner]

9. LOL !!

[JackBeck]

11. I know. I just snarfed some Cabernet.

And before you go and start calling me elitist, the glass has about 15 ice cubes in it. I can't stand warm red wine.

[K Gardner]

15. I'll do you one better. You've just inspired me to open a Louis Jadot

Beaujolais. I usually drink Cab but I'm out.

Elitist !!

[MattBaggins]

25. You can put the bottle or the glass in the freezer you know?

You could also put a stainless steel spoon in the freezer to help chill the wine if you are in such a hurry.

[Yael]

14. !!

:rofl:

[crispini]

7. After Hillary runs out of states, she'll make up some.

State of North Pennsylvania
East Ohio
West Michigan (with extra bonus imaginary delegates!)
and, of course

State of Denial!

:rofl:

[Voice for Peace]

84. LOL! Guamachusetts, North Indiavania, District of COLOMBIA

:rofl:
:rofl:
:applause:

:yourock:

[ourbluenation]

8. the thing I can't understand is that you know Sen. Clinton knows this too.

it's so puzzling what she's doing. hanging on and such.

[Life Long Dem]

10. The thing is. Hillary and her supporters are no longer in this to win anything.

They are in it to give their support to McSame.

[Leftist Agitator]

12. Interesting that no ignored Hillarites have shown up yet.

I wonder if any will...

[K Gardner]

16. The OP Title had the word "read" in it. It'll be a no show.

[CK_John]

13. You are making an assumption that the convention will only have two candidates to vote

for. If someone removes themselves or someone re-instates themselves all your math goes out the window. Any old time ward boss knows this is how you rattle a convention or hold it hostage.

[KansasVoter]

18. Who would it be??(eom)

[CK_John]

60. That would make it to easy for you, but I'm sure that about 400 SD are trying to get

someone to make such a move. This of course would get them of the hook and claim that it's up to the delegates to choose. The M$M of course are having wet dreams about a 3way convention, think of the ratings.

[Voice for Peace]

82. Thanks for the laughs Kansas, I love posts like this that are so heartening

when I spend a lot of time on DU and start getting crazy from seeing postings about how Hillary's polls have gone through the roof and thousands of mayors are endorsing her, and bitter people in the stix resent Obama, and so many people who've been on DU for years are still believing she can win, even though I don't, I need posts like yours to end my day.. simply the best. Double K&R

[Arugula Latte]

95. Also, the OP makes the assumption that a unicorn WON'T trample Obama and spear him w/ his unihorn

Any old-time leprechaun, fairy, pixie or brownie knows unicorns can be unpredictable political conventions. The balloons and confetti tend to rile them up, and they can snap.

I guess Mr. Smartypants I-Can-Do-Math OP-Poster didn't think of THAT scenario, huh? If the Unicorn Scenario happens, then all bets are off for the nomination.

[The Doctor.]

17. Wow! Even I have trouble being that condecending... and I'm a Master!

They deserved every harsh note. I really enjoyed reading this post even though I'm not a MCHS. :evilgrin:

[StevieM]

19. The rules specifically contradict you. Winning the most PD doesn't get you the nomination

You need an outright majority and I don't think SDs are required to regard PDs as representing the will of the people, especially if Hillary leads in elected delegates but caucus states put Barack over the top. But in the end some SDs may look at it that way--and they will vote for Obama. Others will not and they may not vote for him. In the end, he needs a majority of the delegates. That is how you win the nomination. If he gets them then he wins--right now he doesn't have them.

Steve

[KansasVoter]

20. You honestly think the SDs will go against a guy with a 50 delegate lead and $40 million a month???

[StevieM]

21. If 160 of them are from caucuses then they might evaluate whether caucuses accurately reflect

the sentiments of the people of a given state. I'm not saying that he doesn't get the delegates--but that only matters if the who thing is one big fight for all the delegates to the convention. It doesn't speak to being "the choice of the people."

Steve

[KansasVoter]

22. I think......

that there will be a riot in Denver if Obama goes in to Denverwith a 50 delegate lead and they nominate Hillary.

I think Obama leaves the convention. I think his supporters leave also.

Makes for bad TV.

[CreekDog]

58. so to address the fear that caucuses were not democratic

a few thousand delegates, mostly all from other states will determine what people in a caucus state really wanted?

so that's more democratic than a caucus?

have you really thought this through? what you are proposing stinks to high heaven --and I'm someone who thinks we should have only primaries, not caucuses. Nevertheless, if you had a caucus in 2008, it's more democratic than having a floorful of delegates decide what the state *really* wanted on their behalf. that's :puke:

[Voltaire]

92. Oh I call bullshit on that

A pledged delegate is a pledged delegate, chosen by the rules of the state that they come from. Don't try to pull this shit that an elected pledged delegate is worth more than one selected in a caucus. If THAT was a problem then THAT should have been taken care of by all parties concerned BEFORE the primaries started. After you find yourself behind in an election that everyone said was yours for the taking is NOT the time to whine about how you don't like the rules. Don't like how states pick their delegates...TOUGH SHIT!

Damn I get tired of explaining that.

[PM7nj]

65. Then what is the point of this process?

Why don't we just let the freaking superdelegates decide!

:sarcasm:

[Independent-Voter]

90. No kidding. This "Superdelegate" process makes the Democrats look idiotic

[aaaaaa5a]

23. But Wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hillary could win all ten remaining contests (including a huge upset in North Carolina) and then convince the Super-delegates that only she can win the general election!

The Super-delegates will have no problem telling the first viable African American presidential candidate IN THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY that even though HE WON the nomination, he will have to step aside for Hillary Clinton.

The Super-delegates will have little difficulty turning away a man who has inspired more young people AND RAISED MORE MONEY than any candidate IN THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTRY. It's a done deal!

And of course, the most reliable, loyal voters to the Democratic Party (African Americans) will agree 100% with the Super-Delegates and strongly back Hillary Clinton in the general election. Yep, this will be noooooooooo problem at all!!! I think a great inspiring candidate like Hillary Clinton will easily be able to hold the party together under these circumstances!

I personally don't see any controversy here what-so-ever. In fact I'm shocked the majority of the remaining Super-Delegates haven't made the move towards Clinton already.

Of course it won't matter anyway. We all know a great Presidential candidate like Hillary Clinton won't need a strong turnout among African Americans or young people to win in the fall. And those smart, educated, professional,liberal "big city folks" you know, the NON-REAGAN democrats that ACTUALLY WENT TO COLLEGE AND DON'T HAVE TO PROVE THEIR MANHOOD BY SHOOTING RABBITS ON THE WEEKEND, she doesn't need them either.

I think it's a perfect scenario. Hillary's plan to win the nomination is as flawless as her "post Super Tuesday" election strategy.

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG!

[KansasVoter]

24. Excellent point! I admit I was wrong in the Original Post!!! (eom)

[Zhade]

27. I wish I could rec this reply.

So awesome.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. But if he doesn't have 2025 delegates

he will not have won the nomination.

[aaaaaa5a]

43. Here's a sports analogy......

True he doesn't have 2024, but here is a perfect analogy of where the two candidates are.

In the press a lot has been made that this primary race is like a basketball game where one team is trailing another team. (say 100-85) But there are still 2 minutes left on the clock for an amazing last minute comeback. However this premises is DEAD WRONG because it assumes that the trailing team has a mathematical chance to comeback and win.

These are two sports analogies are more accurate.

Say you are playing golf. Obama finishes 18 holes and goes to the clubhouse with a 4 shot lead. Clinton is still playing the course. She goes to the 18th tee trailing by 4 shots. The problem? The 18th hole is a par 3. Even if she gets a "hole in one" she still loses. You see, it doesn't matter what happens on the 18th whole. She has no chance of winning. That is what's going on now. Obama is "in the clubhouse" with a delegate lead, and Clinton doesn't have enough holes left on the course to catch up.

Here's an even better sports analogy the media should use to describe this contest.

Say you are at the Indy 500.

You have the Obama Car and the Clinton Car.

The two cars go around the track. But the Obama Car is always two laps ahead. And no matter what happens, even if the Obama Car crashes, runs out of gas or gets a flat tire, the Obama Car will STILL BE racing two laps ahead.

Now in fairness, the Obama car can't cross the finish line to officially end the contest. So the race continues with the two cars endlessly going around the track, (seemingly forever) but with the Obama car always ahead by two laps.

And it doesn't matter if the "checkered flag" is waived today, tomorrow, or 3 months from now. When the race is called, the Obama Car will still be leading by 2 laps.

The only way the Clinton car can win the race is for a racing official to determine that even though the Obama Car was ahead by two laps when the race was stopped, that the Clinton Car still raced faster and further.

And that is unlikely.

That car analogy is EXACTLY what's going on now. The two "cars" are running through all of these contests when at the end... Barack Obama will still be 2 laps up on Hillary Clinton. And no matter how fast the Clinton car goes... it can't catch up.

[MonkeyFunk]

64. all those words

just mean you're arguing that whoever is leading should win. That's just not how it works.

[aaaaaa5a]

70. You are right!

Why would I use something like "who has the most points" to determine who the better team is.

[MonkeyFunk]

87. because that's not the rule

If the rule is whoever has the most pledged delegates by a certain date, you'd be right. But that's not the rule.

it's whoever has 2025 delegates. It looks like NEITHER candidate will achieve that without the help of superdelegates, and superdelegates are free to use any criteria they choose in making their decision. So being ahead doesn't mean diddly, according to the rules.

[guyanakoolaid]

88. But the most important criteria superdelegates should use is Rev. Wright's tirade, right?

right, right?

:sarcasm:

[MonkeyFunk]

94. Why bring that up?

I said nothing of the sort.

Do you want to respond with anything of substance?

[guyanakoolaid]

99. Because that's the angle being pushed by Clinton to the superdelegates. Wake up.

At least stay on message: the Clinton manifesto is that delegates don't really matter and that superdelegates should look at a candidate's pastor as the true measure of what kind of President they would be, not repeated pro-war votes in the past. Also: deflect Clinton's membership in the Fellowship with rhetoric. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[MonkeyFunk]

101. I'm wide awake

and I haven't seen Clinton push the Wright angle to superdelegates. I think you're imagining things.

[guyanakoolaid]

103. Oh, please keep responding after reading this

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/ickes_confirms_hes_been_pushin.php

"In an interview with me this morning, senior Hillary adviser Harold Ickes confirmed that Reverend Jeremiah Wright is a key topic in discussions with uncommitted super-delegates over whether Obama is electable in a general election."

[TheDoorbellRang]

63. Of course he'll have them

By the end of the primary season, assuming no additional SD's have endorsed by then, he will be at about 1920 PD's and SD's total. All he needs is about one third of the remaining super D's to quietly trickle in between now and then, and he's over 2025.

Remember all the news sources are already including both candidates' SD's in with their totals. If 100 SD's oh-so-casually slip into Obama's column between now and the end, it will be perceived that a primary win puts him over the top, rather than the super delegates. Watch for the trickle to resume after the PA primary. He's already closed the gap to 223-249, and Clinton is hardly any more ahead in super D's than she was back on Super Tuesday. And I doubt her scorched earth policy will win many fans among the remaining super D's -- many have their own elections to worry about this fall.

[Voice for Peace]

83. great post! this is a wonderful thread.

[BzaDem]

26. Nope. False premise.

All but 4 caucus states report popular vote totals. The other 4 are estimated by turnout * percentage of state delegates, which benefits Obama since he was the winner (and the rules for state delegate calculations favor the winner).

Thus, there is a popular vote. And if Clinton is ahead in the popular vote, but Obama is ahead in a count that gives voters in Wyoming 25 times more voting power than voters in TX, they will vote Clinton in. You can cry "wahhhh rules rules rules rules" till the cows come home, but most people outside this board will see it as the Super-Ds saving the day, in a way we couldn't do for Gore.

Keep running and hiding from the popular vote, and pretending it doesn't exist (as if people can't add). It'll just make it easier for Clinton to win.

[ihelpu2see]

29. If all the caucus states properly reported proportioned popular vote totals

Obama would have an even larger popular vote lead....

[KansasVoter]

30. You are a fool......

My state, kansas, only had 75,000 people vote in the caucus and we have millions of voters. You need to allocate those voters for popular vote reasons. That is why popular vote will not matter.

Also, Obama ran on delegates being the rules. Because those are the rules.

If you think the SDs will give Hillary the nod when she is 50 delegates down and raising half the money of Obama you are drunk!!!

[BzaDem]

35. Bullshit.

Guess what. 75,000 people voted in Kansas. If you don't like that, that's too bad. Cry me a river. Next time, get more people to work on organizing. We don't weight votes in America. We don't weight votes for people who make more money, we don't weight votes for education, and we don't weight votes because too few people turned out.

You want to know what the rules are? They allow superdelegates to give the nomination to the popular vote winner. Obama knew that going in, and he knows it now.

You can keep pretending the popular vote doesn't matter, or that it has to be weighted to favor your candidate. But I have never seen ONE elected official supporting Obama even mention that rediculous weighting idea.

[CreekDog]

61. why should you decide to overrule what Kansas did

and where were you last year to change it then?

[IsItJustMe]

75. Are you ignorant. The whole damn system is based on winning deleages. That must be some good shit

your smoking there Manard.

[tritsofme]

36. Maybe Kansas should have chosen a more representative system for allocating delegates?

If you count heads and Hillary is the choice of the People, while Obama is the choice of arcane delegate selection processes, I think I know which variable I find more valuable.

Show me the rule that says a lead in pledged equals an automatic nomination.

[quantass]

28. That hit the spot!

[msallied]

33. This is the most beautiful post ever written

And I say this with no hyperbole. Massive K&R.

[tritsofme]

34. Here's some math for a smart-ass Obama supporter. 4048 total delegates/2=2024

You need 2024 to win the nomination.

If Obama has earned 2024 by the end of the primaries he is the presumptive nominee, otherwise its up to SDs.

If Clinton wins the popular vote throughout the primaries, she has the strongest moral claim to the nomination.

A nominal lead in pledged delegates is one variable, of many, that SDs will consider in Denver.

[apocalypsehow]

37. I see you're having a problem with either math or reading plain English.

Or is it both?

:shrug:

Did you even bother to read past the title of the OP?

:eyes:

[tritsofme]

39. Pledged delegates are an arbitrary variable.

If SDs have to choose between the choice of the People and the choice of arcane delegate selection rules, I think they will go with the People.

[apocalypsehow]

41. *snort*

You didn't read past the title of the OP, just as I suspected.

Ah, it's nice to be back in GD: P, where the HRC boosters hide behind snatches of opaque verbiage, and pretend like they've made some kind of profound philosophical point.

You said: "If SDs have to choose between the choice of the People and the choice of arcane delegate selection rules, I think they will go with the People."

Precisely - and that is why Senator Obama will be our nominee.

[tritsofme]

44. And if Obama leads the popular vote, I'll agree with you.

But I don't think that is going to happen.

I looked through your OP and didn't see anything new or profound.

[apocalypsehow]

49. "I looked through your OP and didn't see anything new or profound"

Then you need some new contact lenses. Or maybe some new eyes. I didn't post the OP, genius.

:eyes:

[BzaDem]

40. You're the one saying pledged delegates are dispositive. You're the one who can't read the rules.

[apocalypsehow]

42. LOL! "Look ma! I know how to use the word dispositive in a sentence! And lay out a big old fat

stinking non-sequitur while I'm at it!"

Pleeze. I have not said any such thing. :eyes:

You said: "You're the one who can't read the rules."

And you simply don't seem capable of reading the words on the screen in front of you.

[BzaDem]

46. Um, whatever you said. Everything I said was true.

You keep posting that Hillary can't win under the metric of pledged delegates, and this somehow mathematically eliminates her. Newsflash: we know she can't win in pledged delegates. She might win in the popular vote. Therefore, the superdelegates might give the nomination to her for winning more votes. Your post keeps pretending that only pledged delegates matter, and the only people who actually believe that are Obama supporters.

[apocalypsehow]

48. Um, yeah "whatever" I said - not a word you posted had a scrap of honesty in it.

Please try again.

[BzaDem]

51. Name me one thing that I said that wasn't honest, with a link to evidence.

[apocalypsehow]

54. It isn't my job to feed your pablum back to you - go take a stroll down memory lane with your

offered dribblings on your own.

[BzaDem]

57. That's what I thought. You don't like what I said, but you can't name one thing untrue about it.

[apocalypsehow]

59. Then you need to think harder. Or better. Or something.

:eyes:

[DemVet]

45. You and the original poster...

...obviously don't know how the game is played so you need to get off the field. Go back to sitting on the bench, you guys are probably used to it.

As condescending as this idiot was, he is simply wrong when he says, "Yes, Obama wins the elected delegate count."

No, actually he doesn't. Being ahead after all the primaries means NOTHING.

Neither candidate wins the delegate count until they reach the magical number of 2025, which won't be until the convention...in August. That's right, even ole Barry won't be the candidate until August, if then.

He'll also need superdelegates to reach that magic number...if he does reach it. Guess what? Superdelegates don't vote until the convention...in August. These tallies of who they are supposedly going to vote for mean NOTHING until they actually vote...in August, at the convention. That's right...if Hillary doesn't quit, this mud-slinging between Barry and Hillary will go on several more months, culminating with a floor fight at the convention. Then Hillary will get a chance to "steal" the Nomination. Isn't that cool?

[apocalypsehow]

47. "Yada - yada - yada -blah blah blah I won a debate on the internets! Snarfle, glug glug."

That pretty much sums up the barely coherent content of that absurd post.

[BzaDem]

50. Wow, this takes the cake for irony.

Your post really is the most incoherent one I've seen all night. The person you replied to correctly described our process, which you happen not to like. And YOU are telling them that THEY are incoherent?

[apocalypsehow]

52. Wow, and you take the cake for not being able to keep up.

You said: "and YOU are telling them that THEY are incoherent?"

Boy, you catch on fast, don't you? Now go cry me a river.

:cry:

[DemVet]

55. You're a joke. Not a funny one, though.

[apocalypsehow]

56. Man oh man - I may never recover.

:eyes:

[DemVet]

53. Oh, you got your butt kicked and now you're angry?

Don't bring it if you can't back it up.

[apocalypsehow]

62. LOL! This is more fun than a trip to the circus.

"Don't bring it if you can't back it up"

You don't read so well, do you?

:rofl:

[Voice for Peace]

85. aw come on you guys are ruining the thread, I'm getting cranky again

[KansasVoter]

66. Only a Hillary desperate suporter would think it was cool!!! LOL!

[nxylas]

71. The popular vote that Obama currently leads in by over 700,000?

Or does Clinton Math feature another popular vote?

[tritsofme]

72. It is not at all unlikely that the primaries will end with Hillary leading in popular votes.

Play around with this:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/chooseyourown.html

Its an interesting tool.

[apocalypsehow]

73. More make believe. The % likelihood that HRC will even get close in the popular vote

by the time the last primary ballots are totaled is approaching zero.

"Its an interesting tool"

I've noticed tha-...Oh, wait, I see we're talking about two different things...

[tritsofme]

74. If you say so it must be true...

:eyes:

There are plenty of reasonable scenarios that leave Clinton as popular vote leader, you can live in pretend-land if you wish.

[KansasVoter]

77. And no comments from the SDs that popular vote would matter at all!

[nxylas]

91. The default values show Hillary picking up 435,221 net votes

Which still leaves Obama ahead by 282,055 votes.

[cooolandrew]

38. That was class. K&R

[KansasVoter]

89. Thanks! (eom)

[Imagevision]

67. Nice piece, I and my family can't wait for Hillary to get fu*king lost already!!!

[KansasVoter]

69. I 100% agree with you!!! (eom)

[Beacool]

76. Math? Couldn't care less.

Hillary will stay until the end, because millions of her supporters wish her to do so. Obama hasn't been fully vetted and who knows what we may find out about him?

Besides, what makes you think that if Hillary is shoved aside he would win the election????

[KansasVoter]

80. Hillary is only worried about Hillary. Not the party. Typical! (eom)

[MercutioATC]

86. I'm not sugesting she drop out, but she stays in to what end?

I just want to be clear about this. You realize that there is no way she can win more pledged delegates than him, you're just betting on some horrible scandal that would kill his candidacy?

[KansasVoter]

93. Yes. They are so ego driven that that is all they worry about! (eom)

[Dawgs]

106. Many of us don't know if he can win, but we do know that...

If Obama is leading in pledged delegates and the SDs give it to Hillary then she loses and so does America. AA's and the youth would stay home.

[quakerboy]

78. But what if we

Annex Canada and give them primary delegates? And... Mexico too. And Colombia. What does that do to your math then, eh? HILLARY WINS. Poo on your "facts"

[goclark]

79. Let's drink to that post!

:toast:

[snooper2]

96. I tried this before...

They don't do math...

They are waiting for Obama to say something like, "Allah will destroy America or something"

Hillary's already toast...they are clinging on to false hope, similar to Nader supporters in past races.

You have better luck doing this :)

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Arugula Latte]

97. Barbie says: "Math is hard."

[wowimthere]

98. K&R of course they will not listen to you. They will listen to the stupid Pundits.

[Egnever]

100. Well done I get it now!

Well I got it before but I still think your post was well done and deserves a kick.

[Scurrilous]

102. K & R

:thumbsup:

[pompano]

104. It's a shame....

Thats it. I'll never count using Arabic numbers again. They are not accurate and the numbers themselves are sexist. Even the number “two” has three letters in it and “seven” has five. This new number system was devised by people 2 quadrillion years ago to cost Hillary her chance at the Presidency. You know it, I know it, the world knows it...even Olberman knows it.

OK, I have had it. The only fair way to do this would be to go to Romanian numbers from now on!!!!

Start using nonsexist numbers like XLMV!!!!

But you know the Obama-ites would be crying foul...they always do.

So, here is a BIG raspberry for the obsolete number system we use just to cost Hillary the nomination...Shame of these numbers, shame!!! :sarcasm:

[PBS Poll-435]

105. "Math" - Don't Care

Thanks for your concern.




Edited to add required "Smug Alert" photo.