Diff between O and Hillary - 69 delegates. Both need 700+ more to win. Why the hell should she quit?

Really, wtf is that argument? We're basically tied at this point - yet many are screaming she's destroying the party and should step aside immediately. Obama even said he'd have dropped out by this point were he in her shoes.

wtf is that all about?

why are Obama and his happy, unifying, hopefilled gang pushing the "she should drop out now" angle? Is it a fear of democracy, or something?


link: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/

The most up to date chart has her behind 99 including the Supers.

A lot of places like CNN still have yet to finish adding delegates in some states even from Super Tuesday.

INCLUDING every BO delegate if he happens to get swiftboated before July.

I was just saying the more updated counts have him more ahead.

and then see what happens.

Its good training practice for either candidate.

11 in a row already and would be 15 out of 16, if he wins either Texas or Ohio.

Obama would have all the momentum.. all the delegates.. all the polls .. all the money

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/money/dems.html :donut: :hangover:

I guess it was all good before Super Tuesday

"not including the $5 million personal loan she gave to her campaign in the run-up to the critical Super Tuesday elections, according to financial reports released Wednesday."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/20/clinton-ended-january-wit_n_87710.html?load=1&page=3

And creditors are suing her in small claims court:

"It was just $2,492.63, a pittance, really, alongside million-dollar television buys and direct mail drops.

But with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination enduring a rough patch, Peter Semetis, the owner of a deli and catering business in Lower Manhattan, had been following the news and growing increasingly worried that he was not going to be paid for the assorted breakfast trays, coffee, tea and orange juice he had provided the campaign for an event in mid-December.

“I’m afraid of her dropping out of the campaign and me becoming a casualty,” Mr. Semetis said.

So on Thursday, he went to small claims court and filed suit. Mr. Semetis, 53, said he was hardly a political pundit but like others across the country, he had become caught up in the election in the last year and was able to offer some analysis. “There is potential for her to lose Texas,” he said — an assessment not at odds with the polls — “which would pretty much force her to quit.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/nyregion/23owe.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=login

I think his lead among pledged delegates is much bigger. Superdelegates can change their minds, so they shouldn't be included in the count.

every last pledged delegate may vote how they choose. something could happen to BO or HRC that would turn off the electorate that voted for them in which case they could write their delegates and ask for a switch. there are no real binding rules here, it's the convention that actually matters in the long run.

If afterwards our elected delegates can do as their please?
Are you basically saying, screw the will of the American people?

delegates CAN do whatever they please.

The rules do not explicitly rule out pledged delegates crossing over, but it's unthinkable in practice, and if it happened it would be doom for dems in the GE anyway.

They have to vote the way they are pledged on the first ballot. Then they are free to switch. But it's unlikely to go to a second ballot, since there are only two candidates.

Including supers, it's around 100, depending on the source, buy definitely more than 69. For example check here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ .

Because of the way allocation of delegates allocation works, making it very difficult for either candidate to pick up more delegates than the other, this is actually a huge difference very difficult to make up, absent blowouts in the remaining big states.

There are some posts which examine the math more closely, you can try to look for those.

"If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee. If you don't deliver for her, I don't think she can be."

delegates are split.

She can't catch up. Add to that the fact that her victories have all been fairly small compared to Barack's margins.


She can't do it, this is over.


The only hope is super delegates overturning the decision reached by the voters. If that happens our party will be in turmoil and we will lose the GE. Not that she cares about damaging our party, she is a Clinton.

That is the problem. That is what you are not factoring into your equation.

Those superdelegates are moving to Obama more and more by the day.

link

Superdelegates are moving and will continue to do so.

My God, what a rout.

It is 5.5%, not 0.055%. Your math is off by a factor of 100!!!
Given the way delegates are allocated, 5.5% is a HUGE difference.

Particularly since there are three large states left and it's unlikely either will enter the Convention with a majority.

She is not going to gain any delegates at anything less than 65%: Delegates are not divided up by results in a state - in fact in

Texas there isn't even a bonus for winning the state as there is in some states


Here are some examples
If you win a 2 delegate congressional district you would have to get 70% to get both delegates 51 or 69% are still going to mean a split

IN a 3 delegate district if somebody gets 51 or 70% you would still split 2-1

In a 4 delegate district at 65% you get a 3-1 split

and so on and that's why they say you really have to get 65% in a congressional district to make up big numbers

and I don't know the exact percentages but you get the point. That is why once it gets to two person race and one person is ahead it is almost impossible for anyone to catch up.

In the meantime the superdelegates are going against Hillary


And this means she has to do even better than before


And finally in Texas (which is 1/3 caucus, 1/2 primary) the congressional districts get bonuses for how many democratic votes in the last election. Those districts that have high African American turn out for example are going to get a much higher percentage of delegates than a Hispanic district because they supported the democratic nominee while the Hispanic districts were more for Bush.

For these reasons many people say that the numbers mean that Hillary cannot win and do not understand why people want to push the campaign beyond the point of no return.

Clinton supporters on the other hand look at the numbers and see that it seems like a small difference and anything can happen.

I hate to bear bad news for you but I think that the above explanation will help you atleast understand why Obama supporters now feel that it is a foregone conclusion.

she loses Texas and Ohio by 12 points or more.

FL was overwhelmingly Clinton and, though she won in MI, I don't remember the margin.

Gee, he's so far ahead, why is he fighting so much for these measly states, huh? Let me see, he's got the momentum, the delegates and the money.

The dem party was not complicit in the FL decision to hold the primary. As I remember, this early voting was decided by the pug legislature. So the dems should not be punished for something they didn't even instigate. Punish them another way that makes more sense then disenfranchising the voters and their delegates. BTW, the FL voters would not countenance a caucus, and a primary would easily be won by FL again, since they resent hell out of Obama trying to keep them from being seated. We are only hurting ourselves in this, as FL really looks as if it was going blue this year, but certainly will not if their votes and delegates are taken away. Same with MI.

If you don't believe me check this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4714596

No matter how hard I try. Nothing gets through.

the public to Obama. That's a good reason!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4729804

check that out if you would like. the lead really is quite big, Hillary basically needs to pull off double digits in all the states, and we know that will be nearly impossible.

but you are correct by saying it isn't over

And realistically, she can't win the pledged delegates.

But really, after today, none of this is going to matter. Obama's going to take TX by 30 points, Ohio by 25.

If Obama eeks out wins in either it will be a great night.

But, I don't think that's going to be the case. My prediction is he'll take both states by more than 20 points.

I am really sick of the pugs picking our nominee, aren't ya'll, or are you still under the disillusion that they will vote for Obama in November?

I personally know several Republicans who are now Obama supporters. Their story seems to jibe with the national trend.

delegates are the important thing here and obama is far ahead and the only way for her to catch up is to win by blowouts which is very, very rare for her...she has only won one contest by by a margin of 20 points...while Obama's avg win is by a margin of 33 points which is insane...i believe hilary (if she can ever win again) tends to only win by small single digit margins which is something she cant afford to do with delegate rich states (only 3 major ones remaining).

Someone on DU posted some very objective analysis on the math to her unlikely chance of winning...it doesnt look good for her...and after that debate recently she hasnt changed that momentum at all. She needs to do sometihng quick and her doing that gimmic on tv today is sometihng she needs to do more even if it hurts the party as a whole and makes her look silly again.

and resources to Texas and Ohio, so she owes it to the people that are working for her there and supplying her with money there to see it through those two states. After that she can evaluate the situation, and if she doesn't do well enough I'm sure many of her financial backers will take a serious look at how they are allocating their money to her. That's how many campaigns come to an end - when the money stops coming in in the quantities needed to succeed. If that happens to Hillary I'm sure she will pull out rather than be embarrassed.

That said - I think your delegate count is a bit misleading. In order for people to get a clear picture of what is happening with the delegate count they need to see the pledged delegates, the super-delegates, and the sum of the two.

CNN breaks it down as follows:

Hillary Clinton
Pledged:1,016
Superdelegates:234
Total:1,250

Barack Obama
Pledged:1,158
Superdelegates:161
Total:1,319

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

The Washington Post breaks it down as follows:

Hillary Clinton
Pledged:1,025
Superdelegates:241
Total:1,266

Barack Obama
Pledged:1,181
Superdelegates:181
Total:1,362

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/primaries/

The math does indicate that it is becoming very difficult Hillary to overtake Obama in terms of pledged delegates. That said, the super-delegates still count (regardless of what many may think of that) and as of now the super-delegates are keeping Hillary in the race and the math from becoming overwhelming for her - though it is doubtful that the super-delegates will over turn the pledged delegate totals.

She can beat McCain with her hands tied behind her. WOW, the pugs really want their man, Obama, in, don't they?

It's really remarkable she has done so well when Obama is being helped by the pugs all the way, except when they have to vote for him in November. This is getting out folks. Republicans are talking, it's just too juicy not to talk about.

:sarcasm:

It is fear of democracy.