Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary WON Iowa in a landslide

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:03 AM
Original message
Hillary WON Iowa in a landslide
Saw this article at Common Dreams by Katrina Van deheuvel (sp) of The Nation:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/05/6189/

And now that Iowans have spoken - the first citizens in the nation to do so - here’s the Democratic delegate count for the top three candidates (2,025 delegates are needed to secure the nomination):

Clinton - 169

Obama - 66

Edwards - 47

I'd imagine -- and imagine this has been posted somewhere here, but I couldn't find it.

democracy ... alive and well in the Democratic Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thesubstanceofdreams Donating Member (625 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. Huh?

That count includes unelected superdelegates (they were NOT chosen in Iowa), who can change their preference at any time before the convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. And WILL change their preference like rats from a sinking ship...
if they think they've picked a loser. Dean started out with a ton of superdelegates in 2004. At the convention, he had almost none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZinZen Donating Member (599 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
25. Exactly!
Superdelegates are notoriously fickle. If Obama keeps winning, they will dump Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gaiilonfong Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. BWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
I want some of that Kool-Aid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. hey that experience thing is a winner!
when does Obama start bragging about his husband?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. It is this plus insuring that Kucinich isn't in the debates,or on the ballot in Texas makes you
wonder just how Democratic the Democratic party is

It is disgusting, and it won't change either. Just like the electoral college or insuring that everyones vote counts

That is why it is imperative AFTER we win in 2008 we start to vote replace those in the Democratic party that want the status quo with new progressive people, who have fresh ideas
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. agreed
Edited on Sun Jan-06-08 09:24 AM by eablair3
I was amazed to see this delegate count. 40% of the delegates are picked by the party establishment and can support anyone they choose? So, I guess actual voters only have a 60% say.

It's not 1 person, 1 vote.

It's 1 person, 0.6 of a vote in the Democratic Party.

I, too, am amazed and disgusted to see this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. just shaking my head right now /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
23. most superdelegates are elected officials
so they have been picked by actual voters at one point

It's not a pretty or straightforward process by any means. But, them's the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
6. Iowa exposed Hillary, disposed Hillary and hung her out to dry.
New Hampshire folks are no fools, they'll figure out why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
7. If Obama wins the primaries and Hillary gets the nomination,
I'll be gone from the Democratic party faster than you can say "dirty politics."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Me too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. has this been talked about in the corporate mass media/tv?
has this delegate count been talked about on CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC ??? Other news outlets -- NYT, WashPost?

I don't watch these news outlets that much, but was wondering if they have even covered this? (I usually just turn those sources on to see what spin and lies they are telling the masses.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
20. Me three. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigdarryl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
31. this kind of bullshit is one reason why i am neither a rethug or dem
instead i choose to stay a independent. both parties play this PROTECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
End Of The Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
10. Thank you!
Everybody should read the link. Forty percent (!) of the delegates needed to win the democratic nomination do not have to follow the will of the people. Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
11. Yeah, it has been posted twice before but needs to be posted again; link
Edited on Sun Jan-06-08 09:35 AM by EV_Ares
to show this kind of crap in the Dem party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3958592
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
13. Kinda dumb and kinda misleading title for the thread
Attention getting yes, but also misleading. The Iowa vote didn't determine the superdelegate counts and those counts can and almost certainly will change.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. aren't those the delegate totals for Iowa?
do you think that Vanden Huevel had the delegate totals wrong?

aren't delegate totals the real thing that matters -- 2,025 needed to win the nomination.

So, 40 percent of the delegates get to vote for whomever they want and can change their vote whenever they want? Is that a system you endorse? Sounds like corruption to the nth degree, to me. And, people are concerned about electronic voting machines with no paper trail?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Rule #1: Have the slightest clue what you're talking about
No, those are not delegate counts from Iowa. The delegate count from Iowa is 16 for Obama, 15 for Clinton, and 14 for Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. source?
so, you're saying Venden huevel is wrong?

"here’s the Democratic delegate count for the top three candidates (2,025 delegates are needed to secure the nomination):

Clinton - 169

Obama - 66

Edwards - 47"

that's from the article.

If it's not correct, why is it wrong and what's your source or authority for your totals. You've posted nothing so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. You are totally confused
You are confusing the Party's superdelegates with the Iowa delegates. Here's an explanation that might help you understand this basic point:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/04/america/Democrats-Delegates.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Here
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=266130
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. Here is a link to explain:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=266130
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
book_worm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. if your going to post something at least understand what your posting
those are overall delegates including "Super Delegates" which are elective officials who have prior to Iowa jumped on the Hillary bandwagon when they thought she was "invincible" and now are probably shitting their pants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slick8790 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
24. Do you have the slightest idea what you're talking about? I don't think so. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
26. Why all the astoundings? It's a political party dance....
We dance to their music or we find another ball room.

All part of what has been intended since the beginning - a few handfuls of individuals control all the elections.

Don't like it? For starters, push for a national primary with fair and just enrollments and eliminations of candidates.

It can happen but it won't. People are all wrapped up in their hero worships and are ignoring the dangers to and the corruptions of their elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
27. I Don't Get It
In the final analysis the candidate who gets the most votes will win... The convention is not going to give the nomination to a candidate who got smoked in every primary or caucus... It doesn't happen that way...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joe1991 Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
28. Super-delegates is a Super-stupid idea
Can you imagine if Obama or Edwards won most of the primaries, but the convention nominated Hillary?
That'd be a sure-fire way to kill the party and keep us out of the WH for the next 20 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorekerrydreamticket Donating Member (422 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Yep, a throwback to the smoky back-room politics stuff....n/m
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-06-08 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
30. How iron-clad is the commitment of these delegates?
A lot of the endorsements the Clinton has gotten were based on the fact that she seemed to be the one who was going to get the nomination. If she keeps losing elections, she isn't fulfilling her part of the deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC