Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Neither candidate wins the pledged candidate race

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
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:02 AM
Original message
Neither candidate wins the pledged candidate race
It will not happen. Period.

So, it is up to super delegates to decide. If you look at the popular vote of all states that have voted thus far, Clinton leads by a mere 35,000. It's that close! A case can be made by both camps of their candidates viability. Neither has a runaway, and it appears they will not get one, so it's really up in the air to the very end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
1. Does your popular vote include Florida and Michigan?
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 07:12 AM by yourout
Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan.

<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/... >

Here are the popular vote totals.

Without Michigan and Florida.
Obama - 13,000,655 Clinton - 12,411,705

With Michigan and Florida.
Obama - 13,576,869 Clinton - 13,611,000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. That was not Clinton's fault
It was his choice, and one that may do him in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. The party
is not counting FL & MI in any totals at this point and it is disingenuous for folks to continue to spin those states' results into post after post.

Mrs. Clinton is losing the popular vote, losing the delegate allocation count, and has lost more states to her contender Mr. Obama. Those are the facts to date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Wrong
Only the delegates are not being counted. I have seen nothing stating the vote of the people does not count toward the popular vote.
And their votes should count. Their vote is just as significant as yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. They're talking revote...
those primaries, by DNC rules, never happened. There were no valid elections in either Florida or Michigan. The votes don't count. It's that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. That, too, is factually incorrect
The DNC has only stated their delegates will not be seated. There was no language referring to the popular vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. If there are to be new primaries and/or caucuses in both states...
it is fairly obvious that the 'popular vote' totals of the INVALID ELECTIONS do NOT count. They can't count twice. This is simple logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BumRushDaShow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
55. Wrong
These 2 states broke the rules and according to the rules, did not make a best effort to thwart the repuke legislatures that moved the dates. They had the option to have separate contests on a different date where delegates would actually count (and not count for the illegal early date, regardless of what the repukes did on that date), but they chose not to do it and call Dean's bluff.

I am in PA and haven't voted yet and would have loved to have had our state move to at least Super Tuesday to get a say. But because that didn't happen, once again, the candidate that I would have wanted (in this case, Dennis Kucinich) is now out of the race and so I HAVE lost my vote. Sadly, this has been the price paid by those of us in states with late primaries.

I agree in principle with what FL & MI did but I also know that change of this magnitude can't happen as quickly as I would have liked it to. The fact that 4 supposed "representative" states were allowed an early say (2 beyond NH & IA) was an interesting interim solution and one that will hopefully be modified further after this election cycle. However for the time being, we are beyond 3/4 of this primary cycle and it's time to move on.

Mrs. Clinton cannot continue to overtly cheat to change the reality of the delegate math and it is time for her to concede and step down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
48. It doesn't matter whose fault Point is, MI and FL do not count, as agreed to by ALL candidates.
Don't you get it? In Nevada, the Clintons were in favor of extra polling places for the casino areas. Then when it seemed it wouldn't favor them a year afterwards, they changed their position and said they'd sue over it (except it ended up benefiting them, so no lawsuit).

Then in MI and FL, the Clintons joined the other candidates in rubber stamping the Dem. Party's decision not to count those states, since they intentionally flouted the Party's rules. But a year later, the Clintons changed position, since she "won," and so it would benefit them.

Then in TX, the Clintons threatened to sue the state over its primary-caucus form of election, but since the Clintons won the primary part at least, they have dropped their threats of a lawsuit.

There is a pattern here. The Clintons are in it to win it, even if it means winning unfairly or going against the Dem. Party's voting process, or going against who the voters choose, independent of that process.

If MI and FL are counted "as is," it may split the party, and it may cost the Dems the election in November. If a voter's vote didn't count in the nomination process, why would they go to vote in November for the person who disenfranchised them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. The only way Clinton gets the popular vote win...
Is by including the votes from Michigan's Soviet-style election where Clinton was the only one on the ballot.

Yeah, reeeeeeeeal democratic there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Obama made a grave error in judgement....
...by leaving his name off the ballot. You have to give credit to the Clinton camp for keeping her name on it. The vote was very democratic in that every one had a chance to vote. If you feel disenfranchised because your candidate refused to put his name on the ballot, take that up with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Obama, unlike Clinton,
honored the rules of the DNC by taking his name off the ballot.

Hillary also agreed to abide by the rules of the DNC, but oops, her submission to Michigan to remove her name from the state's ballot was "late."

Funny how things like that happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. Oh, I'm sorry
...show me where the DNC said candidates had to remove their names from the ballot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Typical of Clinton.
Always looking for ways to game the system.

Why should Michigan be seated? They chose to break DNC rules by holding their primary early. If Michigan's voters don't like it, they can take it up with their legislature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Learn how to read
No one said the delegates should be seated. Were you one of those children left behind?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #16
50. They all agreed not to campaign or "participate" in those primaries.
It all depends on your definition of "participate". Some would consider having your name on the ballot as "participating". Others obviously believe that you can agree not to "participate" and still seek to be awarded the delegates from the "not participated in" primary.

(I am now considering not participating in the state lottery, but then claiming after the drawing that the winning numbers were the ones I would have chosen. I wonder if they will award me the 20 million dollars based on my non-participation?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #50
56. Except Hillary when asked why she didn't take her name off
the ballot in MI said loudly and clearly that "MI didn't count for anything"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #56
68. Maybe she added "until after the votes are counted, if I win" and the rest of the quote
has just never been discovered.

She may lucky that no one asked her the same question about Florida before the Iowa caucus occurred. She probably would have said the same thing about Florida.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. how do you think your boy got to where he is today???
Only guy on the ticket...he sued! fact...go look it UP!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
49. It's not ONLY that she was only one on the ticket. It's also that the others didn't campaign there.
We all know that Clinton was the one with the highest nationally recognized name. She was the best known. It was obvious that she would win both MI and FL, if the other, lesser known candidates didn't campaign heavily there (or anywhere).

So even in FL, where Obama was on the ticket, a Clinton win doesn't really mean a Clinton win, unless all the candidates campaigned there, and unless ALL the voters knew their votes would mean something.

Besides Obama not campaigning there, which would've virtually guaranteed a huge Clinton win, I am certain that a lot of voters didn't even vote, given the knowledge that their votes were not going to count. I have heard there was a large turnout. So imagine what the turnout would've been, if the voters there had thought their votes would count.

I would add that even in a re-vote, I think Clinton would win FL, given the large hispanic and New York population there. But if Obama had campaigned there, he could have, and would have, cut her sizeable win down to a more marginal one....and we all know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
4. I think we may head into the Convention with this scenario?
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 07:22 AM by kentuck
Hillary wins popular vote. Obama wins the most pledged delegates. Neither has the nomination. I think if that happens, the entire Convention, including the Super delegates, should vote by secret ballot to determine the nominee. Why a secret ballot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. That's it
I feel confident that that is exactly what will happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. A secret ballot is a horrible idea
Do you want to guarantee a walkout? That's the way to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. Well...
To know that your fellow Senator has voted against you in a public setting would be even worse, in my opinion. What if Chuck Shumer voted against Hillary? How would that go over in NY? Secret ballot would be preferable, in my opinion, because there can be no political arm twisting before choosing the nominee. One could say they were voting one way and then vote their conscience without fear of political retaliation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #19
52. A secret ballot would suck. There would be no point to that, except to commit fraud. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GalleryGod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:35 AM
Response to Original message
14. Weekend Reading?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. I don't read propaganda.
I suggest you get your information elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Whatever, you are posting mindless spin...including MI...have you no pride?
Obama leads in delegates, states won, and the popular vote. If one of those gets overturned, then we can talk about a brokered convention. HRC supporters all want the "all bets are off" option because they are losing according to the rules puts forth.

You could help her more by getting on a phone bank somewhere, but if you do, try to be less transparent about parroting talking points or people will just hang up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. Delegates don't matter
Read the title of this thread! Obama is losing the popular vote at this point. Super delegates make their decision on their own., and I hope they look at the will of the people. Are you all illiterate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Why would they have caucuses if delegates do not matter?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Neither can win with pledged delegates now
That is why they no longer are relevant. They are only relevant if the SDs think they are more important than the will of the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #26
32. listen to yourself.
If Hillary had 2024 pledged delegates going into the convention, and BO had hundreds less, would you be saying the delegates don't matter because neither has enough pledged delegates. No, you would be saying the supers cannot overrule the process and rules laid out in advance.

This reasoning is so transparently bad it makes you look really partisan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #32
36. You don't know what I would say
...and I am partisan. You are, too! Rules are rules. If you don't get enough pledged delegates, the SDs decide. What about that do you not understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. well then, what would you say? Would you say delegates don't matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #41
47. I would say....
.....go by the rules set forth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #47
58. and would you be upset if the super delegates reversed HRCs large lead in pledged delegates...
or would you be fine, and say, rules are rules, democracy lives on

(and by the way, I can tell you are spinning by the way I have to extract all this)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #22
27. More spin. Watch, the delegates do matter...
Look at your own posts, btw. To you, it seems more likely that everyone here is illiterate. A more parsimonious explanation is that you are just spinning and we're noy buying. "The delegates don't matter"...good god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
35. You just write it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mculator Donating Member (658 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
23. Joint ticket is the only way
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
25. The latest bogus Hillary Camp spin: Neither side has enough.
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 08:13 AM by jefferson_dem
While true that both sides will need Superdelegate support, the question is which candidate has more pledged delegates at the time the Supers spring into action. Will they award the nomination to the choice of rank-in-file Democratic voters and caucus-goers or will they install someonoe different? They damn well better do it right. Whatevet they do, it will have effects that go well beyond the particulars of this election cycle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. If they go with
the choice of rank and file Democrats, then Clinton wins.

She gets more Democratic votes than Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. This is the old, don't trust the actual polls, the exit polls show us that HRC won the dems...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. So now even the election results themselves "don't count"...
First small states, then caucus states, then "red" states, .... now votes don't count.

Geesh. What's next?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. We do not know that.
The state Democratic parties implemented election systems and invited voters and caucusers to participate in them. Those are the results. Exit polls are fun but they do not decide electoral outcomes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #25
31. So....
....you think the SDs should chose the pledged delegate count over the popular vote. That's your opinion, but not necessarily that of the SDs. They are not bound by pledged delegate counts or the popular vote. And I hope they chose the will of the people for once.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. If the popular vote and delegate count are split, we can talk...
but don't include FLA and MI unless a fair campaign is run in those states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. Fla and MI delegates don't count
...but there is absolutley nothing that says their popular votes are not to be considered. If I am wrong, please direct me to those rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. Obama was not on the ballot in MI! You actually think that head count is fair?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #31
37. It's always been a race for delegates. Mark Penn even said that after IA.
Those results reflect the will of the people. Don't change the rules and definitions now because your girl needs a boost.

This distinction will likely become moot because Obama will win both the PD delegate count and the popular vote. What will you say then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. That was before Iowa
They were relevant then. Now that no one can win by pledged delegates, it's up to the SDs.

If Obama wins the popular vote, I say he should be elected president. The people will have spoken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #40
51. ...
:thumbsup:

Points well-taken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #37
45. The next bastion is that most "DEMS" favor HRC, i am already seeing this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zarath Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
39. Popular vote means nothing
I'm sorry, but the nationwide popular affects nothing other than maybe perceptions (which HRC is great at manipulating.)

When it comes to selecting the nominee, here's a list of things that actually do matter.

Hope this helps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
43. Someone on TV said that Obama has more raw votes to date. Quite a few more, actually.
Not true? True? How do we find out for sure?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. Here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #44
59. Stop spamming this spin all over the board.
And at least be up front that your 35K lead not only counts FLA and MI, but relies on the fact that Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine Have Not Released Popular Vote Totals
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. Hey
You are not authorized to tell me what to do. I merely stated facts that I found. The fact that you don't like those numbers is of no consequence to me. Chew on that a while!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #61
62. you are misrepresenting the facts.
Your totals include two states that do not count and exclude several others that do. Does that fact not interest you? If your facts are incorrect, are you not interested in that? If my facts are incorrect, I would be interested, and would like to hear what you have to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. You are mistaken
Only the delegates from MI and Fla do not count. I have said that several times. I have also asked you to show me the rules where their popular votes are not to be considered. You haven't. The fact that there are three states who have not reported their popular vote totals is something I cannot control. As soon as they do, we can take them into consideration. That is fact, not spin.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #63
65. Incorrect...
You cited the following page, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/... .

Scroll to the bottom to see that Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine Have Not Released Popular Vote Totals. All but Nevada were won by Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #65
70. I posted the link....
...for people to see that. The fact that they have not released their totals is not my fault, and neither you or I can say what those totals are. I merely quoted what the page says. You seem to want MI and Fla popular votes not to count because they do not favor your candidate. As soon as these other states release their numbers, the totals will change. I think anyone can reasonably ascertain that fact.

To find out what the popular vote was, I Googled "presidential popular vote". That was the first link to come up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #70
71. So then you do not in fact know whether HRC leads in the vote or not...just trying to be clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #44
64. Ha! "Real clear politics" as a valid source of complicated numbers? Ha. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #64
66. Pardon me, but....
....I have yet to see your numbers. Where are they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
46. Well, we've still got a few states to go, and a lot can happen
between now and then.

I don't think we're at that point yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
53. Maybe it's up in the air until the end. Maybe not. Looks like SDs
are none too happy with hilly and her tactics and comments. She's received no new SD endorsements of late. Obama has received quite a few.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adoraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
54. obviously, but it matters
who is in the lead at the end. that will be who the supers go to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elizm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
57. Even in your scenario Obama would still have 2 out of 3...
Wins the pledged delegates and the most states. The superdelegates will not overturn the will of the voters...They know better. FL and MI do NOT count now and they will NOT count in the end without a do-er. I'd say you are grasping at straws here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. Uh....
....the will of the people is expressed by their individual vote. If that is grasping at straws....so be it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #60
67. Obama has almost 600,000 more raw votes, it seems (not counting MI and FL which don't count).
So...them's the numbers. Oh, and he also has more pledged delegates (the two things - raw votes and pledged delegates - go hand in hand, often).

Clinton, OTOH, has three and a half large states (CA, OH, NY - her home state, and half of TX).

Obama has a few large states of his own, Missouri and Wisconsin being two, and half of TX).

Obama has also won most of the remaining states, all of which are in the northwest, midwest, northeast, southeast, south, and southwest. In every region of the country.

clinton will probably win PA. Obama will probably win most of the remaining states, but not all.

Now we can see just WHY the Clintons are wanting MI and FL "as is." They desperately need them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #67
73. nor are Maine, Iowa, Nevada or Washington included...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigervalentine Donating Member (129 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
69. Those totals are incomplete.
Totals for Nevada, Washington State, and Maine have been left out. And Obama won two of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #69
72. and Iowa...i have been trying tell the OP this, but he/she is incredibly evasive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
74. If the super delegates break the way they are breaking now...
Obama wins easy.

He is winning the popular vote
The pledged delegates

and behind in the super delegates 53/47


Clinton would have to win nearly 70% of the remaining super delegates to win.

Not gonna happen.


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 Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 03:29 PM
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