Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Election Percentage Results - To Date

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
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:32 AM
Original message
Election Percentage Results - To Date
Per CNN:


  • IA - Clinton 29% - Edwards 30% - Obama 38%
  • NH - Clinton 39% - Edwards 17% - Obama 37%
  • NV - Clinton 51% - Edwards 04% - Obama 45%
  • MI - Clinton 55% - Uncommitted 40%
  • SC - Clinton 27% - Edwards 18% - Obama 55%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. Popular vote doesn't matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Everything matters. Until it's time to count the delegates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Popular vote is irrelevant. Delegates only count.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I'm a little slow tonight!
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 02:43 AM by wlucinda
:hi: I've been avoiding the lovefest here. I forgot to put on my "DU translator" hat. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. It's OK, I forgot the 'sarcasm' tag in my first comment.
I'm a secret fan of yours. ;P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Awwwww......that's sweet! I should have caught it though.
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 03:36 AM by wlucinda
I had been trying to get the silly little columns lined up, and avoid the BS here tonight, and I zoned out. We've been chatting for days now. I just wasn't thinking.
I know you're not a
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeatleBoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
5. Definitely shows a trend.
Doesn't it?

Michigan will go Dem if it's Hillary or Edwards, it will be a toss up otherwise.

Just a prediction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Michigan had almost 600k turnout to vote, and thats without
anyone (except for DK for a few days) campaigning. I think thats pretty great.

Bigger Rep turnout, of course...but I think it in play for the GE. As long as they don't get too mad if we dont seat their delegates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeatleBoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Here's the Delegate count per CNN
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#val=D

Clinton: 230

Obama: 152

Edwards: 61

This includes Super Delegates (which I've discovered tonight from the Obama lemmings that super delegates are "bullshit" and "without merit" - to put it nicely)


realclearpolitics has it this way (link is at a previous post):

Clinton: 246

Obama: 173

Edwards: 52


Last time I checked, Super Delegates counted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUyellow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #10
40. "Last time I checked, Super Delegates counted." they can change also, that is why some people say...
at this moment that super delegates are not a big deal. Look at your own post, you have two different set of numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. We're Electing Delegates
You can post the percentages ten times a day for the next 9 days. Obama has won the delegates in 3 states and tied another.

Obama has won 400,000 votes

Hillary has won 254,000 votes

Individual votes are not the official tally in caucus states.

Obama is winning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. See post #1.
LOL, awesome reply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. You can ignore the 593,837 Michigan voters
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 04:02 AM by wlucinda
But i'm not going to. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:52 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Some don't mind cheating, I won't condone it n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. So you're for not disenfranchising millions of voters?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:59 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. I'm for abiding by the rules
Hillary manipulating Michigan and Florida is as low as trying to disenfranchise the LV culinary workers. I don't know what kind of person ignores their unethical behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:00 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Well, the rules have a harsh punishment for millions of eligible voters.
Don't think that those disenfranchised voters won't lash back some GE if they're not represented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Against the Clintons and the DLC
I'd just sit it out if they got away with manipulating the convention like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. Actually, if there was a clear majority I'm sure you wouldn't mind those delegates being seated.
It's only in the event those delegates actually matter that you would not want them seated. Well, since they're not going for "your guy," anyway.

It's a double standard of epic proportions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. When there is a clear winner -- in August
I'm sure the delegates will be seated. And that will be fine. Until then, Hillary hasn't won anything and it's unethical to say she has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. No one says those delegates count at the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Then what are you arguing with me about n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Where exactly in the rules does it say to remove their name from the ballot?
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 04:06 AM by wlucinda
And why didn't they do it in Florida?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:11 AM
Response to Reply #21
30. The rules that the delegates aren't seated
And pretending she's won something in these two states when she knows it's a big bunch of bull. It's against the rules, cheating, unethical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #30
38. NONE of them were required to remove their name. The primaries were NOT cancelled.
Voters were supposed to vote. They did.

They are ALL on the ballot in Florida. Are they ALL cheating in Florida too?

There is no way the the party is willing to piss off MI and Florida before a general election. They have very likley always planned on seating the delegates. It would be crazy not to.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:32 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. Claiming these elections count for anything is cheating
Condone it if you want, I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUyellow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #15
42. you sound like sean hannity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:58 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. She didn't campaign there. And that was all that was required.
It's one of the very few mistakes that I think JE has made. It simply wasn't necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. And she didn't win anything
because there aren't any delegates to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:05 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. Actually, they allocated delegates in MI.
It just depends on whether nor not the DNC will allow them to be seated. They probably will on grounds of fairness. Otherwise those delegates will go home very angry, and may boycott the elections come the GE very badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:08 AM
Response to Reply #22
26. They probably will -- in August -- to the winner
like they always do at the convention.

Barack Obama will get Michigan's and Florida's delegates -- in August.

Right now? Nobody has them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Yeah, but if Hillary wins (or it's close) you'll complain because they're seating the delegates.
And "breaking the rules."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. No it won't be, they'll ALL go to the winner in August
It happens that way every time. A clear winner emerges and all the delegates pledge to that winner. When that happens, Michigan and Florida will be seated. They will not contribute to the win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. If there's not a "clear winner" I'm saying.
Their delegates will be contested hotly if there's not a clear winner. I do NOT want this to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. I don't think that will happen
I think we'll have a good sense of a winner on the 5th and the remaining states will swing one way or the other. People are too herd-like these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. I hope you're right.
As much as I'm enjoying these primaries, I do not want to go into a tight brokered convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:05 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Tell that to the 328,151 people who voted for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:07 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. I'm sure they know
and the honest ones wouldn't want someone to have their votes counted unethically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #25
31. The honest ones would feel slighted that they had no control over their state party.
And that they were disenfranchised for no reason whatsoever. But you agree with me that their delegates will be seated, so we're on the same page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:15 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. They should know rules are rules
When you break them, there are consequences. This is a Party election and they are less regulated than elections to office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #35
39. The voters didn't break those rules. In fact, the GOP is who did it.
They basically had zero, absolutely zero control over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:31 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. No, Michigan Dems moved theirs
All by their little selves.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/08/AR2007100801511.html

And all the Dems in Florida voted to move theirs too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:36 AM
Response to Reply #41
45. I read differently, but I cannot find the link, and I must sleep. In any case, the voters can't...
...fairly held responsible for something their state party does. What did you expect them to do, march on the state party headquarters and stop them from doing it?

There's more to it than that link implies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:42 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. Uh, yes I do expect them to
Either get involved with your party or don't bitch when your party screws up. No, there isn't more to it than the link implies. This was a power move by some establishment Dems, they lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:32 AM
Response to Original message
44. Horrible showing for Clinton
She lost twice badly. She has only two narrow victories in states she was supposed to have won by a wide margin. What a disaster her campaign has turned out to be.
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 Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:02 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