this needs to be made clear to everyone regarding Denver and the GE

[ElsewheresDaughter]

from one smart post from last week http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5653831

re-cap of delegates in Primary vs Caucus


Hillary +12 delegates in PA, Obama +143 delegates in sham undemocratic caucuses

Let's look at the delegate margins Obama has assembled in the caucus format.

Wyoming Caucus - +2 Obama
Texas Caucus - +9 Obama
Hawaii Caucus - +8 Obama
Maine Caucus - +6 Obama
Washington Caucus - +26 Obama
Nebraska Caucus - +8 Obama
North Dakota Caucus - +3 Obama
Minnesota Caucus - +24 Obama
Kansas Caucus - +14 Obama
Idaho Caucus - +12 Obama
Colorado Caucus +15 Obama
American Somoa Caucus - -1 Obama
Alaska Caucus - +5 Obma
Nevada Caucus - +1 Obama
Iowa Caucus - +11 Obama


From that list, we can determine that Obama has gained 143 more delegates from the caucus format than Hillary. The final delegate count for Pennsylvania is still being counted, but let's for the sake of argument say she came out of Pennsylvania
with a +12 delegates over Obama, which seems like a likely middle ground for what will happen..

Now, let's evaluate the final voter data in Pennsylvania, based on yesterday's primary:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/stat...
Clinton: 1,260,208 votes
Obama: 1,045,444 votes.

2,305,652 voters in PA showed up at the polls to vote in the Democratic primary. Hillary received 214,764 more voters than Obama in Pennsylvania.

As I said above, let's assume Hillary won 12 delegates. Now let's see how many votes Hillary earned per delegate. She received 214,764 more votes and she received 12 more delegates. Using that calculation, for every 17897 additional votes she receieved, she received an additional delegate more than Obama.

--------------------------------------

Now let's look over the data in the caucuses:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/popul...
Obama 754,959
Clinton 453,649

1,208,608 estimated voters total have showed up at 15 caucuses. That is a little more than half of how many voters showed up at one primary, in Pennsylvania!

Yet Obama receives +143 more delegates than Hillary due to the caucus format. Let's do the math. Let's look at how many more voters Obama has received in the caucuses. 301310 more voters have voted for Obama than Hillary in these caucuses. And Obama has earned 143 additional delegates from those 301,310 additional voters. Using these calculations, for every 2107 additional voters Obama received in these caucuses, he received an additional delegate.

more at link

[AllentownJake]

1. It's over

Your hurting the democratic nominee and you should stop.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

2. you're funny

[dchill]

23. "sham undemocratic caucuses"

Sham post. As always.

[Texas Hill Country]

57. they are intentionally undemocratic and were set up that way... if you knew anything about electoral

history, you would know that

[dchill]

71. What I DO know about "electoral history" is...

that the winner is always the one that has a campaign strategy to win under the rules and demographics of a given state. Caucuses are not the reason for Clinton's losses, and you know it. Obama ran a much better organized campaign. If all the caucuses had been primaries, Obama would have run a better campaign based on that fact. How hard is that to understand?

[lojasmo]

8. Agreed. EOM

[Symarip]

3. Man...

He just really drop out already.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zachstar]

9. That was very unneeded and flamebait ingac70

[ingac70]

34. Calling caucus contests undemocratic is flamebait to. n/t

[DemVet]

52. Nope, it's simply opinion.....well, fact actually.

[JVS]

38. what's a "haint"?

[MaineDem]

45. Doesn't sound like something I'd want to be called

That post sounds very rude.

[polmaven]

70. Sure does...

I think I'm glad i didn't see it....:scared:

[ingac70]

78. ....

Haint

noun

1. A hateful bitch.

2. A truly heinous she-devil so brutal that anachronistic and unusual colloquial slang is called for.

[scheming daemons]

You're in denial.

Caucuses have been part of the process for over 100 years... only THIS year are they considered "shams".



Your candidate fought hard. She lost. It's over. Deep down, you know it.



Go have a beer or something... relax.... come to grips with it.


It's done.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. no ...deep down youy know that what is posted here is the TRUTH and the FACTS

[scheming daemons]

12. ooo-kay. Whatever. Hillary still won't be on the ticket... either end.....

you'd better get to work on protecting her NY senate seat.

[Zachstar]

15. I looked deep down and no nothing changed.

EWD you seriously need to just focus on upcoming contests rather than trying to say Obama won unfairly. I invite you to encourage the party to get away from Caucus systems in the future but for now they stand.

Move on EWD. There is upcoming contests you can support instead

[dionysus]

73. banky will make it better;

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. Yes, let's make things perfectly clear.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5158952&mesg_id=5160056

[Zachstar]

6. Look you arent going to do anything here. If you truely think Clinton can win then give some money

Otherwise you need to realize that this continued mess is only going to harm us come november.

How about talking about how Clinton is going to beat Obama in all upcoming states? It will be more interesting.

[theboss]

7. So...abolish caucuses

You lead the charge.

[cali]

11. in your eyes the caucus delegates are not legitimate. Too damn bad for you

that's just your lame spin. He's won. It won't go to the convention and hill is still toast. get used to it.

[Faygo Kid]

13. "Sham caucuses" = the rules

I have this vision of Obama walking out on stage in Denver to give his nomination acceptance speech with Hillary wrapping her arms tightly around his ankles saying "It's Mine! It's Mine"

Posts like this are what give me that image, I guess.

[islandmkl]

14. my team scored more than your team....

but if you take all the statistics, rearrange them, do some dividing & multiplying & some fucking algebra...

VOILA!!...your team wins...

ain't happenin', voodoo math or not......

[evlbstrd]

16. And yet...

Caucuses were just fine for every other primary season?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

36. no they are not

[DangerousRhythm]

49. They were only acceptable up until Silly Season '08.

Caucuses are clearly unsuitable anymore because they resulted in mathematics some people don't like. Hell, we should question and possibly overturn the results of every prior nomination and election caucuses have been a part of if they're so undemocratic. Everything's been a huge lie!

:tinfoilhat:

[Cali_Democrat]

17. Look at that Washington Caucus!!! +26 for Obama

Now that's sexy.

Why didn't Hillary supporters complain about caucuses before Iowa? :eyes:

[EmeraldCityGrl]

31. I wish you all could have been here...

His supporters showed up in droves at caucus. For most it was the first caucus they had ever attended.
Interestingly, when debating issue for issue many Clinton supporters changed their votes at final tally.
For this reason I think Democrats need to be fully educated and prepared to campaign on the issues,
in person with their neighbors in the coming months. There's just no time for anymore of this silliness.

The Clinton's had their time to change the world. For the sake of all of us it's time to move forward.

[Jersey Devil]

18. Did Hillary object to caucuses before the Primaries began?

No, but once she started losing them because her idiot advisors thought they weren't important being that she'd have the nomination wrapped up by Super Tuesday, suddenly they were very, very unfair.

Same as Hillary agreeing and signing her name to documents agreeing not to participate in MI and Florida, then deciding later that it was unfair not to count them.

Fight to change the rules for next time if you think they are unfair. But you are not going to change them in the middle of the game, or in this case, at the end of the game.

She lost. Get over it.

[NeedleCast]

19. Caucuses Count

Sorry your girl doesn't know how to win them. We both know you'd be singing a different tune if Hillary had won the majority of the caucuses. This is exactly what I expect in the 11th hour from camp Hillary...further attempts to find areas where Obama is strong that shouldn't count.

Obama is winning the popular vote.
Obama is winning the delegate count.

All this whining about caucuses wont change it.

[Jawja]

20. It's Over.

:hi:

[HuffleClaw]

21. and THAT is the dirty little secret obama's camp does NOT want known

one more reason why obama won't win the GE

[ElsewheresDaughter]

27. exactly

[featherman]

22. I heard that a "convention" of only 4500 people was going to nominate

the Democratic Party's nominee... for the whole country...how undemocratic is that?

[Kittycat]

24. Sorry, you lost me when you threw multiple states under the bus

:shrug:

[Alexander]

25. Bitter, party of one, your table is ready.

:nopity:

Would you like to look at our whine list?

[SoxFan]

26. Sorry, but...

[Condem]

28. Hey,elsewhere

Ever been to a caucus?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

51. yes while visiting friends in Vegas

[rateyes]

29. And, if you are truthful with yourself, you know that if the situation

was reversed, and Hillary was winning in the caucuses, you wouldn't have one complaint about them.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

39. and how pray tell do you know that?

because I would

[rateyes]

59. I can recognize partisans.

[yewberry]

30. So tell us what you want us to take from your post.

Do you think that Clinton would have done better in those states if they'd had primaries instead of caucuses?

Are you suggesting that caucuses shouldn't count in this nominating process?

Are you advocating for the abolishment of caucuses?

Are you suggesting that caucus-state votes will somehow be worth less than primary-state votes in the GE?

Yes, having a mix of primary and caucus states is a headache. But that's nothing new and it's not something that we can change--those things are decided by individual states.

So please, come out and say what you want to say. Don't just post numbers that you think are leading somewhere.

[Warren Stupidity]

32. I guess Clinton fucked up big time.

She has been planning her run since 2000 and she couldn't figure out that there were lots of delegates to be picked up by organizing ground operations in the caucus states. Instead she just assumed that she could outspend and run over anyone else in a few key big states and wrap the whole thing up by super tuesday. Bad plan. She lost two months ago. She lost again when she failed to win Texas and failed to win big in Pennsylvania. She lost a third time yesterday. She knows that she has lost. Its over. Its been over for a long time. Get over it. Obama wasn't my first choice either, but he is our choice now.

[Gore1FL]

33. from several smart posts from the last few weeks (by me...)

Delegates do not work that way. Delegates are derived by taking the Democratic vote over the last 3 presidential elections.

Here is how they are allocated: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/D-Alloc.phtml

What you are doing makes no sense.

Say I bought 2 tickets to watch the Cardinals play the Cubs on Successive days. The tickets cost $60 a piece for the seat for each game..

The first game The Cardinals blow out the Cubs 10-0. The second day, the Cardinals win in a squeaker 1-0. (Go Cardinals--but I digress)

Now, did I pay $6 a run the first game and $60 a run the second? Hell I was really ripped off in that second game,right?
Well of course I wasn't. I didn't pay on a per run basis. I paid on a per game basis.

You are doing the same thing with your logic. You are trying to measure allocated delegates in a way they were not intended to be measured. You try to make them represent things no one ever said they represented.

Why don't we talk instead about how unfair it is that Obama won 3-1 in states that had the letter U in their name? (5-1 if you count Guam and U.S. Virgin Islands) It makes about as much sense.

[kdpeters]

35. In other words, Hillary lost.

[tekisui]

37. Wow. Sham Caucuses. Caucus Democrats Don't Count!!!!

[WeDidIt]

40. Why didn't you bring up this issue in 2006

when the rules of the process were set by the Democratic National Committee?

[mmonk]

41. Why were caucuses never a problem before this election when

Obama started to win many of them?

[tekisui]

43. The Clinton's were blind-sided by his organizing ability.

They have to call them "Sham's" because they were ill-prepared to put the boots on the ground. Pathetic.

[skipos]

42. Yes, we should change the rules so Hillary wins.

Great idea!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

50. no we should change the rule so that it is representative of a real democratic system

[skipos]

56. And at what time did Hillary start fighting for these rules to be changed?

When did she start fighting for MI and FL not to be penalized?

I just want to make sure that you and Hillary aren't advocating changing the rules in the middle of the game just so you can win.

[roseBudd]

69. And you in your important opinion are advocating a retroactive rule change?

I'm sorry I didn't realize you were in charge.

[fishwax]

44. so?

Using the rules that everyone agreed upon, Obama has more delegates and more popular votes.

:shrug:

[theboss]

46. Why can't Democrats ever accept the rules?

In 2000, we all decided that we hated the electoral college.
Now, we've decided that we hate the caucus system.

[Ganja Ninja]

47. Why can't Hillary win the caucuses?

Look, a delegate is a delegate is a delegate. How many rules do we have to change for Hillary anyway? First she wants to change the rules regarding FL & MI now you want us to throw out the caucus delegates. Any other rules else you want to change for Hillary's sake?

[ProSense]

48. Obama has won 16 primaries, Hillary has won 16 states. n/t

[DemVet]

53. Yeah, just the big states.

[Quixote1818]

54. Thank you for posting that. I was looking for that number. nt

[Avalux]

55. So what exactly needs to be made clear?

You put a lot of work into your funny math but I'm sorry, it doesn't mean anything. The race is over.

[TheDoorbellRang]

58. This needs to be made clear -- primaries are not perfect if they don't represent the voters

All this whining about caucuses overlooks the little detail that the primaries do not always apportion the delegates by popular vote, ie, the "will of the people."

Just two examples, but there's more:

In Alabama with 52 PD's available, Obama received 55.96% of the popular vote vs. Clinton with 41.58%. 55.96% of 52 is 29.10, or 29 delegates. Fair apportionment in Alabama should have been 29-23. Guess what? It's 27-25.

In Indiana with 72 PD's available, Clinton received 50.57% of the popular vote vs. Obama with 49.43%. 50.57% of 72 is 36.41, or 36 delegates. Fair apportionment in Indiana should have been 36-36. Guess what? It's 38-34.

That's four delegates -- a net gain of eight for Clinton -- in just these two contests that Clinton got instead of Obama, if we want to whine about FAIR. And those aren't the only examples in the oh-so-wonderfully-fair primaries.

The interesting FACT about all this is we haven't heard ONE WHINE from the Obama campaign about this inequity. OTOH, that's all we get from Clinton with her "sham caucus" echo chamber in here. She can't win by the rules as they are, so it's constant whining when they don't favor her. Great role model for women everywhere -- NOT.

[namahage]

60. Ooh, ooh, I want to play too! Let's apply this math to a primary that Barack won

Since we're going to apply the "vote difference divided by delegate difference" for one of Hillary's states (compared to the aggregate of the caucus states Barack won, since, of course, they're all shams and all alike anyway)...

How about the Alabama primary (not one of those "sham" caucuses)?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914/

Obama 302,684 56% 27
Clinton 226,454 42% 25

So in AL, Obama nets +2 delegates. What's the vote differential? Let's see...hmm, carry the the 1...76,250...and that divided by 2 is...

WOW...

Obama had to get 38,125 votes to net ONE delegate! Over TWICE as much as Hillary's count in PA!

Makes sense to me!

[last1standing]

61. OK, let's just say your right and Obama's win comes from sham caucuses.

So what do you propose happens now? Do we disenfranchise every caucus state? Do we make them all organize and rerun primaries that you approve of?

Seriously! What do you want us to do about it NOW?

This nomination is over. You can rant about it, you can cry about it, you can make up "facts" to support your candidate, but it's still over. I'm honestly sorry this hurts you so much but it is. Really.

If you hate the caucus process this much, please work on getting the system changed for next time, but there's no realistic way that anything is going to change this time.

Please consider this as a friendly word because that is how it's meant.

But the only fact that remains after all is that Obama has wrapped this nomination up. It's now your choice whether you decide to support him or not.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

62. of course not but the superdelgates have to take them into serious consideration

[last1standing]

63. The super delegates aren't going to give it to Hillary at this point.

I think you know that as well as I do. They will continue to move to Obama because he has the majority of the pledged delegates and there just aren't that many left to fight over. I know you think that's not right but it is happening as we speak. It may be an unfair system and you can consider the politician who jump on Obama's wagon at this point cowards but it's still happening.

Obama is our nominee, now. It may not be official but it is the reality. Hillary will negotiate the terms of concession and I hope she gets her health care plan in there as that will be seen as the biggest win possible for her now. Perhaps she can even get someone like Wes Clark in as VP. I hope so.

I'll make you a deal, though. If you feel this strongly about the caucus system, get a non-profit or a 527 up to change it and I'll promise a donation. Seriously. It won't be enough to float the project alone but I'll give what I can.

[cyberswede]

76. Do you honestly think

superdelegates from caucus states will disregard their own voters because you think caucuses are undemocratic? Really?

I live in a caucus state, and the Obama campaign had TONS of people on the ground rounding up support. We received lots of phone calls, people coming to the door, and invitations to events from the Obama people. Not so much from the Hillary campaign - only a couple phone calls. THAT is what makes a difference.

By the way, I'm not an Obama supporter.

[democrattotheend]

64. Doesn't Obama still lead in the popular vote, even with Florida and Michigan?

And if so, isn't your whole post a moot point?

[Occam Bandage]

65. But yet not one little Hillbot complained about the caucus format before she lost them all.

[HughBeaumont]

66. Pack. It. IN!

MAN. She's killing us DAILY with this shit.

[Buzz Clik]

67. So ... you don't like the caucus format? Work to get it eliminated for 2012.

[mdmc]

68. Clinton made 5 big mistakes my friend

1. Not running for the long haul (thought it would be over after NH or Super Tuesday).
2. Staffers didn't know the game ("We would already be the nominee if we ran our elections like the Republicans do.")
3. They failed to see the importance of the caucus states, including Texas
4. They ran as "insiders" or "experienced". The primary voters wanted CHANGE!
5. They relied on old cash, and failed to understand the internets...

[dionysus]

72. shillbot, it's OVER.... SHE LOST

the fridge door's closed, the lights are off, and the butter's gettin' hard...

[dogday]

74. Since I don't have a candidate, I am going to look at the facts

and figures and reference being presented here.. I am not looking through my candidates rose-colored glasses....


It does seem rather off balance that one candidate gets more votes than the other but the delegates total are totally skewed...

[dana_b]

75. were you this concerned about the Dem Primary rules BEFORE this all started?

Or only since Hillary has lost?

[truebrit71]

77. "sham undemocratic caucuses" I needed to read no further in the OP to know it was complete horseshit

...thanks for the early heads-up on your denial post...

[mdmc]

79. Regarding the idea that the caucus system is a "sham"

The party gets to make its our rules and bi-laws.
In NYS we decided that only registered democrats can vote in our primary. If a GOP or Independence (Or Green, Socialist, Right to Life, Pot Reform, Working Families, or Conservative Party members wish to vote in the Democratic Party, then need to do it one year prior to the vote.
The rules protect the party.
I am on our County Committee. We use a "caucus" convention system to nominate our candidates. This endorsement can be overturned in a primary, if the loser decides to challenge the convention's caucus result. The party uses these rules to keep control of the party.
In other states, like Texas or Iowa, a caucus system is preferred. That is how the party bosses keep control of the party.

One of Hillary's biggest mistakes was thinking in old power terms. Since the party bosses control the caucus systems, they would support the Powerful Clinton machine that seemed "inevitable".
The Obamabots got out a Dean-like grassroots effort to participate in the caucus system. The party leaders saw this coming, and embraced all the new excitement and activity (just like they did for Dean, prior to his scream). Get out of the way if you can't lend a hand, cause the times they are a changin'.

The big question that a Clinton supporter must ask is why the campaign didn't retool after Iowa to fight for the caucus states.
One reason is they didn't understand the DNC rules. The Clinton's planned their campaign around an inevitable win by Super Tuesday. They never planned on a long haul primary.
By the time they realized their mistake, it was too late.

All they can do now is say that they would have already won if they were playing by the GOP system (which is true).
Now they need to hope Obama implodes alla Elliot Spitzer. Short of an assassination or Fall from Grace, Hillary cannot win the nomination.

I really don't know how the Clintons got beat. They really didn't seem to understand how the primary system operated. Odd, being that they are so brilliant.

ps- Why isn't our Senator fighting for legislation to give us a gas tax holiday over this summer? (I think it is a stupid idea) This is something that she could do right now as our Senator. If she really thinks this is a good idea, then she should do what she really can do to make it happen. All her talk of a gas holiday when she is president is just that - talk.