Hillary + WON = 44
By Fleaflicker on March 15, 2008 at 5:32 PM in Barack Obama, Electoral College, Hillary Clinton
Much has been made about Obama’s “impressive” wins in 26 states. He himself brags on the campaign trail that he has won more states, received more votes and has more pledged delegates than Hillary. And yes, if that is all you look at it does look impressive. But like much of what Obama says, the words sound wonderful but the facts beneath them tell a completely different story.
The baseline measurement of any Democratic candidate is their ability to win in November. Many things factor into this but most important of all is the ability to get out the vote. And this is where the claims by Obama begin to fade away. A recent poll Quarter of Clinton supporters would vote McCain over Obama by Pew Research (a very highly respected organization) found that 25% of Hillary supporters said that they will defect from the party and vote for McCain in November should Obama become the nominee. Whereas 10% of Obama supporters stated that they would vote for McCain should Hillary get the nomination. So with this fact in mind let us examine the real prize in November, the Electoral College.
Obama does indeed have a large cache of victories. To date he has won in 26 states. And comparatively speaking, on this measurement alone Hillary comes up quite short with current wins in only 16 states. But, you might ask, if Obama has this great lead of wins why is the delegate count so close? And that is the crux of all of this. Using 2008 Democratic Convention Watch as a source for the current delegate count Delegate Totals we see that Senator Obama has 1390 pledged delegates and 208 superdelegates for a total of 1598. Hillary on the other hand has 1248 pledged delegates and 244 superdelegates for a total of 1492. So at this juncture there are a total of 106 delegates separating the candidates. NOTE: Hillary’s wins in Michigan and Florida have not to date yielded her any delegates even though she won both states with double digit leads. So despite the fact that Obama has won 10 more states than Hillary, at present he is only leading her by 106 delegates, approximately 10 delegates for each additional state won.
The magic delegate number to gain the Democratic nomination is 2025. A total of 844 superdelegates exist (counting Michigan and Florida) of which 452 of them are already pledged to a candidate. That leaves a total of 392 superdelegates up for grabs. If the convention were held today neither candidate would have enough delegates to clinch the nomination. Even if one candidate were to gain all of the outstanding superdelegates before the convention began they would both fall short of the number necessary to gain the nomination by regular party rules. Under this scenario Obama would have 1990 delegates. And Hillary would have 1884 delegates. But you notice I said regular party rules.
Ah, this is where it gets a lot more interesting.
The invention of the superdelegates was in response to a few major blowouts at the hands of the Republicans. Our selected candidates during these landslides did indeed have the popular support of the majority of Democratic voters going into the convention but as it turned out they just didn’t have what it took to win nationwide. Two of the most important tasks that the superdelegates were given to remedy future embarrassments were: 1) To nominate a candidate who can win and 2) To check against a plurality, factional candidate who does not reflect the prevailing sentiment of the electorate. Now these two duties might be interpreted in a number of ways but essentially it means that their responsibility is to ensure that the Democratic nominee doesn’t just have the majority of Democratic support but has the broad based appeal to win in important states that will allow our party to arrive at the true magic number in November: 270
So in light of this evidence let us examine the popular support of the two candidates.
In the Presidential election of 2004, John Kerry managed to gain 252 votes in the Electoral college, 18 votes shy of victory. Kerry lost for a number of reasons that will not be discussed in this diary. But the fact is that he lost. Using Kerry’s wins as a starting point as something to build upon toward victory in November we need to examine the strength of our two candidates in securing those “Kerry” votes.
Senator Obama has managed to secure a total of 86 of the Kerry votes. Voters in VT, MD, IL, WI, DC, CT, DE, HI, WA, MN and ME supported both Senator Kerry and Senator Obama. So Senator Obama has secured 11 of the states that are necessary to meet our baseline Kerry votes threshold.
Hillary on the other hand has managed to secure 134 of the Kerry votes. Voters in CA, NY, MA, NJ ,MI and NH. So Hillary has secured 6 of the states that are necessary to meet our baseline Kerry votes threshold.
On the face of it this information seems to demonstrate that Senator Obama has a strong advantage. He has secured 11 of the Kerry states while Hillary has only secured 6 of them. It appears as if Senator Obama has a 5 state lead over Hillary and thus has bragging rights as the front runner in this nomination process. But look a little deeper and you will notice that Hillary has a 48 electoral vote total advantage over Senator Obama. In fact the difference between them is as if the Obama states of VT, MD, WI, DC, CT, DE, HI and ME didn’t exist because the difference between Hillary’s 6 Kerry states (134 votes) and Senator Obama’s 11 Kerry states (86 votes) is greater than these 8 Kerry states combined (44 votes).
And if we look deeper into the wins of each candidate we learn even more about the viability of each of them.
Of Senator Obama’s impressive 26 state wins 12 of those wins are in red states where the possibility of a Democratic win in the general election is far fetched and highly speculative at best. Those states are: MS, GA, AL, LA, UT, SC, WY, NE, AK, ID, KS and ND. These are not widely recognized as Democratic strongholds.
Conversely Hillary has won in 3 “red” states: TX, AZ, and OK. Not exactly an impressive total. But all is not lost. You see, we haven’t even begun discussing what will win an election. As neither candidate has achieved the necessary delegates to assure the nomination we need to look deeper and see just where the candidates stand in meeting the all important 270 vote threshold.
If we take the most generous look at the current results we will give Senator Obama a total of 202 electoral votes. It is generous because, as has already been stated, 12 of those wins are in red states that we have VERY little chance of winning in November. And let us be equally generous to Hillary. When we add the electoral votes from the 16 states she has won the total is 263. So the difference separating the two candidates is 61 electoral votes. Put another way Hillary has a 61 electoral vote advantage over Senator Obama.
But as with all things political we must look even deeper into the results to grasp the real meaning, the hidden calculus toward victory.
Most important in this election are the “swing” states. States that either have a history of going one way or the other or states that have changed their legislative makeup significantly since the last election.
Of Senator Obama’s 26 states he has won in a total of 4 swing states: VA, MO, CO and IA. The electoral votes in these swing states total 40. Supposing that Senator Obama was able to win in each of these states he would gain a total of 40 electoral votes. And if we add the previous total of Kerry state electoral votes of 86 to 40 from these swing state electoral votes Senator Obama receives a grand total of 126 electoral college votes, leaving him 144 electoral votes shy of victory.
Of Hillary’s 16 states she has won in a total of 6 swing states: OH, TN, NM, AR, FL, and NV. The electoral votes in these swing states total 74. Supposing that Hillary was able to win in each of these states she would gain a total of 74 electoral votes. And if we add the previous total of Kerry state electoral votes of 134 to 74 from these swing state electoral votes Hillary receives a grand total of 208 electoral college votes, or 62 electoral votes shy of wrapping this thing up.
To sum up, according to a broad look at how well both of our candidates would do in the general election it seems that Hillary has a 82 electoral vote lead over Senator Obama. Quite astounding since he has a 10 state advantage. But politics is a funny sport and what matters more than anything is who can achieve that magic number 270.
So while the primaries are not over and almost everyone has been writing Hillary off, a careful examination of the facts leads one to understand that Hillary is not only winning this thing but that she is positioned best to win in November.
I do hope that the superdelegates are paying attention and that they take their responsibilities very seriously. Because their most important responsibility is to make certain that we nominate a candidate that can win. And as this synopsis has proven, Hillary is already winning.
And she will win in November.
Best analysis I have seen so far! Thanks Fleaflicker!
Now if we can only get people to see the truth about Obama…
None are so blind as those who will not see!
Brother Simon..
“They Have Eyes..But they do not See…
and Ears…But They do Not Hear”…
They are being sent a Strong Illusion..That They may Believe a Lie..
Thanks Tricia!
Brilliant analysis. The idea that Obama is “more electable” than Hillary is an absolute sham. The praise of Obama for being able to win Independent and Republican votes in states like the Dakotas, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Kansas, Nebraska, South Carolina and Mississippi is an outright joke. And the argument that “any Democrat can win the states that Hillary has won” is insulting and hubris at it’s worst.
If the superdelegates do their duty to the party, and what is best for the American people as a whole, they must in all good conscience vote for Hillary at the convention. Voting for Obama might give them a fleeting warm, fuzzy feeling, but it will also condemn us to four years of President McCain and thousands more dead in Iraq- and, probably, Iran as well.
I totally agree, but someone needs to knock Nancy Pelosi (our “neutral” Speaker of the House, and Chair at the Convention) over the head with this information. She is going to be on “This Week with George Stephanopolous” tomorrow, proclaiming that whomever has the delegate lead at the end of the primary season–even if the other candidate wins the popular vote–should win the superdelegates support. This is neutrality?! And it’s even more ridiculous, because most of Obama’s delegates have come from the highly suspect caucus system, which disenfranchises large segments of the Democratic base (elderly, disabled, working parents, shift workers etc.). They are not at all representative of the party or the general election. 3 million people voted in the Texas primary, and 100,000 voted in the caucus. How can delegates be awarded equally in these completely distorted processes?! It’s such a sham. Write Pelosi and tell her to keep her opinions to herself. The Superdelegates, hopefully, are paying attention to November.
If you can get this info to Stepsalotonhis or Pelosi before tomorrow’s show please do. i have lost all respect for Pelosi.
If the superdelegates do their duty to the party
If!
Yes, that myth is nonsense, especially since, um, Obama couldn’t.
hillary’s been running the whole time with the finish line- the electoral college- in mind. she’s done things that cost her in the primary season, but are crucial to have to win the general election. obama, on the other hand, is running for the nomination as if the general election didn’t exist - “democrat for a day”, etc. it’s a sure recipe for defeat in november to give him the monimation- that’s why he gets a lot of republican support in the primaries. they’re all going to vote for john mccain, and they don’t want to be running against hillary.
Even my own fav candidate Kucinich is using this “democrat for a day” thing, and he tipped his hat towards Obama. Sad.
I’m glad he called for impeachment, but it might explain why Dennis cannot gain traction. Singing to the choir is masturbatory at best.
Strangely the Obama campaign appears to have the party elders hoodwinked too.
hillary’s been running the whole time with the finish line- the electoral college- in mind. she’s done things that cost her in the primary season, but are crucial to have to win the general election. obama, on the other hand, is running for the nomination as if the general election didn’t exist - “democrat for a day”, etc. it’s a sure recipe for defeat in november to give him the nomimation- that’s why he gets a lot of republican support in the primaries. they’re all going to vote for john mccain, and they don’t want to be running against hillary.
This blog has become an Obama bashing site. I started reading for Larry’s insightful comments about security and international relations, not to read spewing vitriol about our own side. It seems that SusanUnPC and FleaFlicker would rather have McCain than Obama. Though I support Obama, I would DEFINITELY support Hillary. Are you people crazy? STOP THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD!
That said, it bugged me that flea said that Hillary won Michigan by double digits. SHE WAS THE ONLY ONE ON THE BALLOT! Nobody campaigned in Florida. Get a grip.
Oh, gosh, I don’t know how to tell you this, but the Presidential election IS ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY.
Right?
Obama’s connections to Rezko, Bush and Obama’s connections to Talot Othman?
Right?
We do have international reach, how does it all play together in the post modern intertextual world?
The presidency doesn’t matter, it’s OK to have an intellectual lightweight, highly corrupt hater incompetent in the oval office?
NO thanks, we’ve all been there, done that, keep America safe, honestly vet the Presidential candidates, OK?
Yeah, it’s a dirty, unthankful job. But somebody on the Dem side has to do it.
I would. God BLESS America.
It sure beats being shot in the back by your “friends”. At least you’ve got a fighting chance.
Why did the Obama Camp urge supporters to vote for “Other”?
Obama did. He spent millions on cable TV ads geared toward Florida time slots.
Yeah, it’s a dirty, unthankful job. But somebody on the Dem side has to do it.
Truer words. It is NOT fun. I get no charge out of it. But since the MSM mostly covers for, apologizes for, explains away all of Obama’s serious problems as well as his light record, a few of us have to do it. Before it is too late.
great, thoughtful analysis! it makes sense that a larger proportion of hilary’s base of support would go for mccain if obama wins the nomination than obama’s base if hilary becomes the nominee.
question: i thought hilary won arkansas on super tuesday? maybe i’m wrong but just want to reconfirm it.
Yes, she won Arkansas. And Oklahoma.
Who cares if the candidates didn’t campaign in Florida? Since when has the legitimacy of an election depended on how much candidates spend on campaign ads and how many speeches they give?
Florida had an election. Two million Floridians took it seriously and voted. Only Randi Rhodes has the audacity to say things like “nobody showed up to vote” in Florida.
But then again, the Obama campaign motto might as well be “who are you going to believe, Barack or your lying eyes?”
John,
you are right. Randi Rhodes is doing the old propoganda two step.
Everything negative about Obama is overlooked, or rationalized. We all know the turnout was huge. Also, Hillary or Obama did not campaign, BUT…Obama ran commercials in Florida, and Hillary did not.
Howard Dean has created this situation from his incompetence,bias,and notion that small states can carry this election. Nonesense. Yes, in midterms some progress can be made, but for the general this does not have any significance. it’s just spin and the “rules” that Dean punished two major states for is absolutely suicide for the party should their votes be excluded from the convention.
I swear , the psychology is the same as the abused woman who says “well, when we were dating he came after me with a baseball bat about twice a month, and continually told me I was stupid, but I never thought he’d actually beat me up…”
Fascinating to see how “leaders” ignore and compartmentalize, immediately, from Cheney and Iraq, to the democrats and Obama. It’s as if the Obama information goes straight to the SPAM filter, with this group…” They see it, and immediately delete, without any consideration, it’s too frightening.
Both R and D, treat politics with the same depth of thought they gave to the Beatles, really, as teenagers. Maybe it’s just traumatized boomers, and pop culture, the presidency just another pop event, as opposed to a serious office.
How else can you ignore Obama’s criminality, HIS LACK?
Well put. It describes the phenomenon eloquently.
You analysis is spot on PMS.
The Obama campaign is, and always has been, a two-headed monster. One head bleats “Unity! Unity! Keep it Civil! Keep it Clean!” while the other sends out missionaries among the media to smear Hillary.
“Stop the circular firing squad!” In other words, “stop fighting back against the smears!”
No thanks. God I hate the hypocricy of the Obamabots.
John: AMEN!!
After listening to Obama’s Reverend and friend ranting and spewing of hate and black power entwined with anti-gay,anti-semitism, and everything frightening imaginable that manipulates victims into becoming stealth agents of Black Power and crazed loonies.
Just watch the Black Panther Power salute on these videos that remind us of Hitler,….who by the way Farrakhan loved. Farrakhan felt Hitler did the world a favor. For this, Jeremiah Wright bestowed a distinguished humanitarian award on Farrakhan as an outstanding humanitarian in 2007. Why didn’t Mr. Unity and Democracy leave his church right then?
When a candidate for President of the United States [and his wife] have aligned themselves for 20 years with this kind of toxic destructiveness, then I do not believe his judgement can be trusted, nor can I believe he leaves most Americans with a secure feeling about his intentions. There is no way I could possibly vote for him. I am an activist Democrat for over 50 years.
Does that tell you anything?
A very good question. If there were more examples this would make an excellent diary.
Chris you are not accurate. Obama did campaign in Florida–he ran millions of dollars in ads for 2 weeks before the election. Yes, I know, they were part of an “ad. package.” But if he really honored the pledge not to campaign, he would have found a way to eliminate them. Also, he chose to take his name off the Michigan ballot to pander to Iowa and new Hampshire voters. That was a tactic at the time. Furthermore, when it became apparent that Michigan might be in play, his supporters mounted an aggressive campaign to get people to vote “uncommitted” for him. Fl & MI voters are going to be very angry if they are not included in some way. And even now, Clinton has agreed to a re-vote in both states, and others have stepped forward to pay for it, and STILL Obama is blocking it. It’s all political posturing–not giving everyone a voice. You protest about “Obama bashing.” Welcome to our world. We’ve watched as our candidate has been raked over the coals but relentlessly vicious bloggers, the media, the Republicans, and even our party leaders. Now, you want our support? It might be too late. The Pew poll that Larry mentions is accurate. Clinton supporters are very hurt and alienated. Count me among them. Hillary is not a “monster.” She has spent almost 4 decades working her butt off for health care, education, human and women’s rights etc. To see her reviled and abused is unforgivable. Especially by fellow Dems.
No. I do not expect you to support Obama. You have every right to support the candidate you think is best qualified, even if that is McCain. However, I don’t understand how a Clinton supporter goes to McCain. I think it is caused by sheer ignorance of McCain’s positions and record.
I respect Hillary a great deal, and would be thrilled to have her as President. Same for Obama. I want them both fully vetted, and am not an “Obamabot.” However, I do not want any more Scalias, Thomases, Alitos or Roberts, though that is exactly what McCain wants. I don’t want 100 years in Iraq (even if nobody is being killed), though McCain says that is fine. I don’t want McCain’s lobbyist friends running the White House.
I don’t like the negative campaigning by either side, but both of them had better get ready for that and worse by the Republicans.
I understand your point Chris, and I am not endorsing McCain. I have a big problem with many of his positions, but he is an adult with a track record. Obama is an opportunist, who changes positions and alliances based on his own advancement. And his hypocrisy regarding race-baiting, negative tactics, etc. is a dealbreaker. I don’t know how I will vote if Hillary is not the nominee–I might write her in, or conscientiously object by not voting, which I hate to do, but I do know one thing: I WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA.
Yes, Obama ran ads in Florida and he held a press conference there. And used the excuse that he was “doing folks a favor” by holding it.
Please at least be fair. This diary is not an Obama bashing one. It is a fair unbiased examination of the facts. If to you that means it is an Obama bashing diary then your opinion means very little to me.
Great analysis, the point to me is responsibility. Obama has cosponsored legislation to bring private armies under the rule of law and Hillary has cosponsored legislation to outlaw private armies and take back the privatization of government that has gone unchecked under Bush. He promises to bring the troops home, she promises that and to cancel the no-bid contracts and open them to international investment, and bring home Americans and bring back those Iraqis who’ve put their lives on the line for us. I think we need to get all the way out. i think we need to reverse Bush’s policies. I think we need professional in charge of agencies. the simple fact is that she’s laid out her plans so we can look at them, while he’s being more cautious about telling us what he plans to do. That’s another reason why we need super-delegates, who have some idea of the challenges our next president will face. That 3:00 call could be the head of FEMA quitting and an urgent need for a great replacement.
Except Bush and Cheney opened a Pandora’s box, without understanding underlying cause and effect.
You cannot run a war by math, and they do, and they lost, flat out, they have no clue what to do.
Flea’s analysis is wonderful, making a very cogent argument as to why Hillary should be elected.
Math gives you a picture, but it’s art, or creativity, that provides the map, art and empathy.
Everything in life is a relation, we define our reality through relations, and unfortunately many stop thinking at the math equivalents, the simple ratios.
You have to go one step beyond.
Bill Clinton was a natural, an empathetic man, Hillary is also empathetic, their inborn gifts allow them to better understand the electoral process. But it goes beyond to identifying and respecting the voters as people, as equals, which the Clinton’s instinctively do. If you’re a fucked up mathematician, you will project your baggage onto your work, and make bad calls regarding predicted behavior, you simply cannot escape your own psychology. So game theory, and numbers are polluted, only as good as the mathematician is psychologically healthy. Remember “biology is destiny?” Freud projected, and women suffered. The same with Obama’s methods, where did they fit the truth about Obama’s Wright and Rezko in the numbers? They ignored it, the limits of the statisticians. They looked at the numbers, and said go! But what did they miss?
If I am an unchecked bigot, I will make my numbers correspond to my beliefs, or I will offer explanations that conform to my own bias, even within the mathematical context. If I expect Farrakhan to be hateful, I will see it in any given situation, even if it isn’t there, and that can be critical. If I expect Iraqis to be morons, well, same thing, I will make my math conform.
So any set of numbers tells me more about the statistician than it does about the situation, numbers being open to interpretation.
At some point, math became a sterile, uncreative religion, and the country suffered for it.
IMO it is the humanities, and inherent creativity, that allow behavioral predictions.
Far superior to game theory in predicting human action.
Thank you. And Ii agree, I need a President I can trust in to do the job responsibly. That ain’t Obama.
Thanks anna. The notion of using mercenaries to fight our wars is repulsive. And yes, Obama supports doing just that.
FLEAFLICKER..
Great Job..Interesting data..
Yes..Hillary will Win..Best Cadidate..
Best Choice..All you Guys here are great..
Larry couldn’t put a better team together
at the CIA..if He Tried..
KUDOS..
FISH & CHIPS For Everyone..!!
Thanks.
OH…and a good Lager to chase it with..
That works.
Mr. Obama would have us believe that he has a mandate from the American people when he has anything but.
Let’s looks at his associates (Jerimiah Wright, Samantha Power, Tony Resko)
The Obama people would have us all believe that he is the squeaky clean Senator, who hatched from the head of Zeus and is still protectively sealed in his own dry cleaning bag marked “free from corruption.” Now, if the above associates were really my friends and mentors, regardless of what they said I would stand by them. But, we all know these people were not friends but rather a means to an end; an end whose shape Senator Obama has no knowledge of. See, he is what you want him to be; just as Sheldon Steele said months ago on Bill Moyers. He has no confirmed ideology or philosophy. He wants power and position for its’ own sake, rather than a means to achieve certain core aims. He is just as dismissive and egotistical as the current Commander in Chief, and that is what makes him so dangerous. When a friend gets into trouble, Obama, like St Peter says “who…I don’t know that person?” Well, Mr. Obama, I am beginning to hear the cock crow!!
Yes, and to add that Obama has Zbigniew Brezynsky as his foreign policy advisor. Zbig, the anti-semitic wonder of the failed Carter administration who is a retread professsor wonk who hates Israel, and has enough bellicosity in his uncharming nature to sink any diplomacy as fast as he did when he failed doing anything about the hostage crisis,
From Power please turn left and go to Susan Rice, another policy advisor formerly of Clinton admin. in Kenya who was jr. part of diplomatic team and did NOTHING. Add to this sterling array of untalented and clumsy incompetents Mr. Jerk who is his economic advisor who screwed up bnig time in Canada about NAFTA with his wink wink it’l be ok after he’s elected. Then Obama denies it’s true…..but ooooooops, the memo shows up proving his economic ambassodor is a jerk. And that Obama is a liar.
Don’t forget Billy Ayers.
Sorry to bring some depressing new developments….
7 of the 14 delegates that were allocated to Edwards in the Iowa caucuses have just now switched to Obama.
So much for Wright, Rezko, and eramarks. These people give a d— ; they switched this afternoon despite the
mess. I can only conclude they agree at some level with Wright’s hate-speech.
Thought that Iowa was part of “the heart of America”….
No surprise here. Elizabeth Edwards hates Hillary and Edwards hasn’t shown the best judgement.
Also something he wants was promised to him, without a doubt.Edwards is not a great politician and does not know how to resonate more than one message.
I know Andy…I just don’t get it. ARE THESE PEOPLE PAYING ATTENTION?! How could they endorse him right after this news hit this week? It’s incomprehensible. Someone, please make it stop!!!
Doesn’t bother me in the least.
PS: oops my post went up three times…Could someone erase the first two ?
(they had typos was trying to fix before sending but I guess I failed miserably). My apologies.
Andy..
You are Stuttering..
Dinners Ready..!!
Fresh Tomatoes on the side..
Sorry…you are right Patrick. Last two days been very very upset w/the political landscape.
Will go have dinner…and some wine on the side
Wine. YES!
Fellow Winos..
Have You tried Yellow Tail..?? The Shiraz is very good..
No I haven’t tried it since it first came out. now that it has been around for a few years perhaps they have a wine that has aged a few years. But I will gladly give it another try. Australians make such good Shiraz.
Has anyone removed Republican and Independent votes from each candidate’s vote tally to see what Dems want? That would be interesting to know. It would also be interesting to know the vote total of Republicans and Independents in this election.
I’m gonna go do me some googling.
also I’m sure the black vote will be gone or go to McCain as a spite vote.
Hillary I believe still comes out ahead in the big states where the electoral votes roll.
so subtract 80% of black votes from your math….interesting.
My guess is the Black Vote will be about the same as it has been. The new voters that Barack has brought out in the primaries will stay away, but they won’t be going over to McCain. This isn’t taking the Black vote for granted, by no means. Had Huckabee been the GOP nominee, there could have been some defections, for even though McCain’s a moderate, I don’t see much empathy for the AA community… unless Colin Powell is his VP candidate.
I haven’t but would be quite interested in your results.
That sound like firecrackers going off?
That’s the ‘noted pollsters…’ who belong to the ‘Boys on the Blogs’ head’s exploding.
Who would have thought that the electoral college’s roll would be so hard to understand….
Guess you needed to study a little history and math to ‘get it….’
Damn fine job. Excellent analysis.
Thank you. Wow!
Have you sent this to Dean’s office?? They sure haven’t thought this out as well, I bet!
Actually Ed Rendell should get a copy of this…he seems to be one of the few savvy, realistic people that are allowed out there….
Gloria is right fleaflicker: send this to Dean and Pelosi (their emails are on their pages). To Pelosi
send it to her address as speaker of the house
(she has a different one for constituents).
It is brillant and you have nothing to lose by doing so… who knows?
My understanding is that emails being sent to Pelosi are being returned as undeliverable. And Dean, well he can kiss my ass before I wash it. I called his office to protest Shuster saying Hillary was pimping out Chelsea and was assured he would be issuing a statement. That statement never came.
Ed Rendell is a realist and a pro.
He understands the importance of electoral votes and where and how they are counted.
I’m now listening to Obama lie and stumble about never hearing anything problematical?
He’s going to get caught in his lies that he NEVER HEARD in all of the 20 years in Wright’s church any trash or bigot talk, or as Obama says, “inappropriate language”.
After he decided to run he tells us “he heard one or two inappropriate remarks, amd told Rev Wright they were unacceptable.” And it was then that he says he decided to distance himself.
Obama….you didn’t distance yourself enough.
You’re playing us all for suckers, but your story is absurd. Your close friend and mentor Jeremiah calls you the new Jesus. Certainly you knew his views very well. Do you take us all for fools?
It will be proven that you heard him spray venom and hate on more than one occasion. How could any UNITER who thinks he can be leader of the free world and represent all Americans even think it possible that we will believe this rot?
Any decent person would not be a member of this kind of church. As President he would be part of a church who has said, “GODDAMNED AMERICA”?
norrismorris: but they voted for him today in Iowa…why don’t they see what is so obvious to us? How can they believe these lame excuses and obfuscations? very frustrating…
Funny thing about Rendell. He spoke about some of the people in his state that would not vote for a black man. He spoke the truth and he was labeled as a race-baiter by the Obama folks. But in Obama land it’s fine for people like Michele to say crap like “The black people are going to wake up and see what’s happening” or Wright in his many heinous statements gets a pass with a written response from Obama. NONE of the Obama supporters went out of their way to condemn Wright. None of them.
And we should be very afraid of someone labeling a politian the new Jesus. That would be right out of the book of Revelations and that would be very scary….
No, I haven’t sent it anywhere. If you would like to do so please feel free. You have my permission. Absolutely.
I would like to see Mr. Dean..
Replaced by Wes Clark and see some real Leadership
that will get the DEMOCRAT Party together..and ORGANIZED..
Clark vs McCain..
To many People and the media are making fun of the Democrats now..and how its seld Destructing AGAIN..
If Obama wasn’t running…Hillary would have the Delegates by now..and the Party would be United..
Its going to take serious Leadership to sort the Problems Out now..The worst thing that can happen is for people to start going over to McCain ..
I don’t think Dean has it..not in this fight with McCain and his tough talking message..
Hillary should show Leadership too..
This Election is not about White Power…Black Power..Brown Power..or getting even..
Its About PEOPLE..All of Us..WE..The PEOPLE..
Its about Healing..Its about Fixing Problems..Hillary
can do that..Look at all the Index’s during the Clinton Administartion..Our Dollar Index has gone Straight down since Bush Came to Office…Our dollar is only worth HALF of what it was when Clinton ran the government..
Hillary is the Most Qualifed..Most Moderate..and Most balanced..The One who Cares Most about Domestic Issues..yet Understands You can’t have Security without a Strong Military and a Good National Security Policy too..
I believe HRC has the best formation to win GE. Her campaign focus on the middle class bread & butter. Every middle class, republican or democrat, are hardly hit by Bush government. They need healthcare, they face foreclosure, they are afraid of losing job. And middle class is the largest group of demographic. they are the largest base for government taxes income.
If HRC can mobilize middle class, both republican & democrat, and independent, she can defend against right wing voters. Her policies appeal to the largest group of demographic. She is running with her eyes on GE.
Agreed!
Excellent work. Work on your concision.
The superdelegates have been doing this analysis all along. Governor Rendell of Pennsylvania said it more succinctly on Meet The Press in casting Clinton as the likely Democrat Candidate.
What else are the pols using in their calculations that were left out of your analysis?
So what is Pelosi’s agenda in coming out publicly supporting the delegate count as a determinant? According to all party professionals, the superdelegates were created to use their judgment as Larry described. Why is Pelosi pushing the literal delegate count post-primary so hard? It’s really irritating me. She’s been weak in Congress, and is now interfering with this process. She is supposed to be neutral, and is clearly steering superdelegates toward Obama.
The Lady is campaigning to be BO’s VP…Sick thought. She will do anything to make sure no other woman is higher than she is. She really should lose her next election. Along with Dean. Who elects people to the head of the DNC. That is not voted on by the people so who does it.
“So what is Pelosi’s agenda in coming out publicly supporting the delegate count as a determinant?”
Unlike some Dems, Pelosi actually wants to WIN in November. She wants the strongest candidate to win, not the one there on nepotism. Go figure . . . .
She is much more left wing liberal than either Obama or Clinton, realistically on a par with Boxer. Therefore she may actually believe that a simple plurality of the delegate count should determine the party’s nominee despite the effect of strategic Republican primary voters pissing in the Democrat pie.
On the other hand, she may be playing the long game, figuring that Clinton will sweep Pennsylvania and the possibly resurrected Florida and Michigan primaries.
It does not matter either way.
The superdelegates were created for the very reason that they are being used now, to resolve a difficult situation. This party structure is very much like the bicameral structure of the legislative branch with the superdelegates being the Senate.
Then, kiddidpoos, there is always the wild card that the “pledged” delegates do not really have to vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged.
I am one of the Hillary supporters that will defect and not vote for Obama if he is the Democratic candidate. My allegiance is to America, not to the Democratic Party. I want the best person for the job and Obama does not qualify for the position. The Democratic Party never should have allowed him to get this far.
I agree with your last sentence completely.
I replied to this at another site, and my comment was gone.. OH well..
I thing you got it spot on. I too hope the Super Delegates think about what is right for the country. HIllary Clinton is right for the country.
I would take into condsideration the flag officers who are behind her. Her knowlege of the military and foreign affairs, is so much more than Obama’s.
HIs pastor is a little too disrepectfu