Guam Update

Obama and Clinton each picked up 2 pledged delgates in Guam this weekend. Obama now has 1,493 pledged delegates. Clinton has 1,334 pledged delegates. Of the remaining 404 delegates yet to be pledged, Clinton would need to win 282 of them to beat Obama. That's a victory of 70 percent to 30 percent. There is not a single political reporter in the country who considers that a remote possibility, and yet every media outlet covers this "race" as if either candidate could win.

On Tuesday, voters in North Carolina will dole out another 115 delegates, possibly handing roughly 63 to Obama and 52 to Clinton, and Indiana will provide another 72 delegates, possibly 36 to each candidate. Should that happen, Obama would have 1,592 pledged delegates, and Clinton 1,422, with 217 remaining to be pledged. Of those 217, Clinton would need to win 194 to beat Obama, or a victory of 89 percent to 11 percent. Not even Rupert Murdoch imagines that could happen.

Will Clinton finally drop out on Wednesday? Will she wait another week for West Virginia, or yet another week for Kentucky and Oregon? Will she hang in there until June to make sure Puerto Rico doesn't win it for her, or Montana and South Dakota? And will people dumb enough to still watch television have to endure this crap all summer?

These numbers are based on leaving out Florida and Michigan, which are being left out, and also do not include 19 delegates pledged to John Edwards.

These numbers do not include Super Delegates.

But these are the indisputable numbers of delegates assigned to candidates by actual voters and caucus-goers.

Clinton cannot win. Period. She can only hope for an anti-democratic coup by Super Delegates that would destroy the Democratic Party.

So, why does the corporate media behave as if it's still a contest, and why does the independent media obediently fall into line? Presumably those two questions have two different answers.

When has any other candidate been kept on life-support by media corporations in this way? Hasn't the standard for dropping out always been - for every other candidate - the impossibility of winning, not actually having lost?

What can Clinton hope to gain from staying in other than hurting Obama's chances in order to avoid his running as an incumbent in 4 years?

And why is it so difficult for people to think for themselves and let the media and the Super Delegates and the Democratic Party know that WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH?

Don't believe me? Don't know how to do addition? Don't own a calculator? Here's a video of Chris Matthews admitting the media's role in this farce:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/32937

Here's how you can contact the DNC: 877-336-7200 or
http://www.democrats.org/contact.html

It's flat-out impossible, and they still refuse to say so.

But, someday....


I'm thinking after Indy/NC. Clinton will only far further behind.

getting really old, and damaging the party. Why won't the powers-that-be see that and do something?

And the idiots dont realize that if enough of them endorsed Obama they wouldnt have to fear them ever again.

primary season and of course the Clintons.... If I never hear of or see another Clinton again it will be far to soon.

Is it to continue assailing Obama without impunity, so there's a greater chance he'll lose againat McCain, and Clinton has another shot in 2012? Even in my most cynical moments I find that hard to believe.

Is it just foolish blind optimism and ignorance of cold, hard facts? Hope that Rev. Wright will make some more inflammatory comments?

It really is puzzling.

Word.

It's time people wake up and demand the media tell the truth.

Party must give the nomination to Obama even if there is a good
chance he will lose. I am not saying he is going to lose. I am saying
that many of you make it sound that way. There is a reality and the
SD have to consider more than just the number of Delegates.

Think again.

but prefer the wisdom of the Party?

is loads of people have registered and GOTV because of Obama and who he is. What if the Dem party went against that? What do you think would happen? And here's some good reading I'd love to hear you dispute:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5801243

...when she IS the WEAKER candidate against ANY Republican (and many of them are voting for her in open primaries for JUST THAT REASON).

Narcissism duJour.

The delusion that there's still some 'toss-up' has undoubtedly (imho) led SOME 'Democratic' supporters, when POLLED, to proclaim an intention to vote for McCain when matched hypothetically against the other candidate. To whatever degree this occurs on EACH side of the race, it depresses the head-to-head mathcups.

I think 'Democrats' rationalize this continued farce at their peril. Just IMHO.

contests are over. Most people have simply moved on. They will continue, however, as long as it is profitable.

**SARCASM!!!!!!!**

Who cares about Guam. Just remember that Hillary won the important states.

If Obama is the nom. in Nov, he will get stepped on.

Kerry said he could win Ohio, PA and FL to.....looks like that worked out well for him! We can't win if we only focus on those states. Obama will make McCain spend money in places like Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Missouri, Iowa, N.C. and Virginia as well as Ohio, PA and FL!!!!

That to me sounds like a better plan of action!

I see this as a lot more than an election. It's been coming to a head for awhile now so it doesn't surprise me. And it is frustrating and hard to watch. But hopefully over soon.