Most amazingly pathetic excuse of all: All Hillary got was "a statistical tie"

[Seabiscuit]

As noted, that's like calling a hurricane a cloudy day:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4903584&mesg_id=4903954

[Kittycat]

1. That's exactly what it was.

What is your point? Last night was a draw. obama still leads in Pop Vote, States Won and Delegates -a nd that margin will only increase after Saturday & Tuesday. :shrug:

You just can't spin that.

[papau]

3. where did you see that Obama leads in Pop vote via state by state list?

[thewiseguy]

4. You can look that stuff up on realclearpolitics.com

[Kittycat]

6. link

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

[Window]

15. ..

[Upton]

7. Right here

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

[bigtree]

8. MSNBC said she has a slight lead in the popular vote total

if you include those who voted for her in Michigan and Florida.

[Kittycat]

12. You can't include them, they're invalid.

And if you do try... he wasn't even on the ballot in MI. Get real, obey the rules they all agreed to going in. I'm all for a revote if they all agree, but you cannot take the votes as they stand.

[bigtree]

14. pop votes won't count in any official way anyhow

but they ARE a representation of voter support.

[casus belli]

23. Not in this case...

Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan.

[Kittycat]

Not only that, but countless voters stayed home

After being told their vote wouldn't count.

[Coexist]

45. and I wrote them an email about that

if you look at the vote totals at the link above, you will see that if you include MI, Obama's totals don't even go up one person with MI added - the exact same number. The only way she wins the popular vote, is if you include a state where his name was not on the ballot.

[pnwmom]

25. It wasn't a poll, with a certain margin of error. It was an election.

The vote was the vote, and she was slightly ahead in Texas, and considerably ahead in Ohio.

[Kittycat]

31. That still doesn't change the fact that she's losing.

In popular vote, states won & pledged delegates. Where is the disconnect?

[pnwmom]

43. And the fact that he's ahead doesn't change the fact

that it's likely neither one of them will have the super-majority required to win the nomination.

Which means we're looking at a brokered convention, at which anything could happen.

Even Al Gore.

[jefferson_dem]

2. She'll come out of last night with a net gain of 7-12 pledged delegates.

Actually, it was worse than a statisical tie for Hillary since she needed to seriously chip away at his lead. She did not do that and now those opportunities are gone. In terms of delegate counts, she is worse off today than she was on Monday.

[HooptieWagon]

9. In football terms

5 minutes left in the fourth quarter, hillary is down by 2 TDs and has the ball, and Obama makes her settle for a FG after a 13 play, 4 minute drive.

[sandnsea]

5. That's all she can get from here on out

She can't win. We've been saying this for a while now. She'll have to use MI & FL, and the superdelegates, to beat him.

[John Q. Citizen]

10. All Hill won was the chance to further smear the eventual nominee. She trails in popular vote,

in states won, and most importantly, by a long way in delegates.

[pnwmom]

28. But she doesn't trail in popular support. Not in any national polls,

which I trust more than these stupid caucuses. (Been there, done that, they're a zoo.)

Unfortunately, the mixed caucus-primary system is giving us a very skewed view of a candidate's ability to draw votes in the general election. For example, my state had both caucuses, and a much more accessible, more democratic primary. In the primary, Obama barely beat Clinton. But in the caucus, he trounced her by more than 2 to 1. But even though the voters of our state approved a referendum giving us a primary (instead of a caucus), the powers-that-be insisted on retaining the caucus system, and allocating 100% of the delegates according to the caucus, rather than the primary. So Obama ends up with delegates far out of proportion to his real support in the state.

[John Q. Citizen]

36. She's a point up today? Is she up reletive to McCain? No, she;s down. Because as she's

forced to slime Obama to eek out a win, she drives her own negatives up.

And she's been trailing in the national Dem voter polls for a couple of weeks.

She got a bump. A fix.

Where were you, or Hillary, last year complaining and fighting about the caucus sytem? No where to be found. It only became unjust in the last few weeks, remember?

She trail's in the popular vote. Say it: "Hillary trails in the popular vote."

Do you trust the polls more than the popular vote? If you trust the polls, you must realize that they say she's going to lose big time in Mississippi and that she's going to lose the WY caucus which only became unfair to you a few weeks ago, ever since Hill lost big in Iowa, where the polls had her a shoo-in, the polls you apparently trust more.

If Hillary has to continue to throw the kitchen sink she also will continue to sink against McCain in the polls.

[pnwmom]

42. When did you start following me around like the FBI?

"Where were you, or Hillary, last year complaining and fighting about the caucus system? No where to be found. " So you were looking for me, huh? And couldn't find me? You weren't looking very hard then.

I have been fighting the caucus system in WA since I went to my first caucus thirty years ago. I was heavily involved in the state referendum -- which passed -- to REPLACE the caucuses with a primary. But state Democratic officials ignored it.

I am not speaking as a Hillary supporter. Except for a period of time when I was leaning Obama, I have been officially out of this fray -- all the candidates being infinitely superior to Bush.

So I'll say it again -- caucuses are little more than the old "smoke-filled room" except that more people can participate. They're anti-democratic and have no place in our society today.

[John Q. Citizen]

46. I'm not sure how you reckon I'm following you since you replied first to my OP

pointing out that all Hill won last night is the right to smear Obama some more.

I'm with no law enforcement agency, but if I were, and I was following someone, I'd love to know how to get them to post to my OPs. It would make it a lot simpler I suppose.:P

I imagine that political parties set their own rules as to how the choose the nominees from their own party.

The state sets how actual elections are held that install officers.

Here in Montana, the Repos had their caucus on Super Tues. It was a closed caucus, that is the party chose who could be invited to caucus and then they met and decided who the Repo party was supporting as their candidates.

It pissed the crap out of a lot of long time Repos who couldn't attend because they weren't pre-selected.

We Dems vote on Jun 3rd in a primary.
Obama will win and probably pretty handily. There are a lot of people here who don't like Hillary much, for whatever reason. And we have a very high number of independent voters.

[yourguide]

11. Ha! ROFL

um not for nothing...when all is said and done you guys will net probably 2 or 3 delegates.


enough with the big speeches and rallies, get out your calculator. you lose.

[Mass]

13. Well, it is a stretch to call yesterday an upset for Hillary Clinton

She was widely expected to win these 3 states by a landslide. She did it for OH and RI, but Obama came close in TX and while there is no such thing as a statistical tie in vote results, she probably did not win more than a handful delegates in this operation.

So, it will change the narrative for a few days, but it is definitively not an upset.

[barb162]

16. She had a BLOWOUT win yesterday. And she has the momentum!

[TeamJordan23]

17. So lets see if she wins WY and Miss with that momentum. nm

[jakem]

18. not a blowout + joementum = enjoy it while it lasts!

[truebrit71]

22. "blowout"....where?

....Hmmm...better look at those numbers again...

[barb162]

29. Ohio, RI I love looking at those numbers!

[truebrit71]

30. I prefer VT...and I see no blowout in either TX or OH....

...more fuzzy math...

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

33. Blowout?

Obama won as many delegates from Wisconsin as Hillary did yesterday... hardly a blowout.

[redqueen]

19. A hurricane?

Sorry, but those wins for her were predicted months ago by the Obama campaign. Not news at all, not surprising in the least.

[RememberWellstone]

20. A win is a win.

You can spin your hope that somewhere over the rainbow, Obama just waltzes to the WH..it ain't gonna happen. This is a race not a speech contest, and experience is now meaning something.

[truebrit71]

21. ..and being married to a former president gives her what experience exactly?

..I mean, OTHER than being cuckolded in the Oval Office...?? I shook Sammy Sosa's hand once, does that mean I can hit over 60 homers this year?

[rodeodance]

26. you are very UNeducated as to her record or you would not post such FOOLISHNESS!!

[truebrit71]

27. ...so you agree that her claim to experience organizing tea-parties doesn't quite equate to...

...Commander-in-chief experience then...right?

[Capn Sunshine]

35. I've been waiting for over twelve months for someone to post Hillary's '92-2000 "record"

what was it exactly?

besides being on boards of organizations?

[rodeodance]

24. They have an excuse for everything--just like their leader.

[Seabiscuit]

37. Indeed - calling results showing a total 327K vote advantage in 4 states a

"statistical tie" is about as lame as it gets. Yeah, let's just pretend we can disenfranchise all 327K American voters and wipe the slate clean so we can call it a "statistical tie".

[THUNDER HANDS]

32. if yesterday was a blowout, then Februrary was Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the clinton campaign

a 12-point win is not exactly what i would call a blowout. a solid win, yes, but not a blowout.

When she starts winning by 20, 30 points, then call me and talk about blowouts.

[AX10]

34. She stopped Obama's momentum.

[Seabiscuit]

38. By now it's clear: at worst, Clinton can deny Obama the number of delegates he needs to win

the nomination at the Convention, where it seems to me the candidate with the most momentum is going to be favored by both the party and the delegates present, who will ultimately shift sides to declare a winner.

All joking and poking fun aside, the only really important thing is for Democrats to be united and strong heading into the general election. Maybe a Clinton/Obama ticket or an Obama/Clinton ticket would do the trick.

[Gore1FL]

39. It's pathetic, but not in the way you imply.

She has to win each future contest 65%-35% to get a lead in pledged delegates.

[Seabiscuit]

40. She could lose every future contest and still deny Obama the number of

delegates needed to win the nomination.

[Gore1FL]

41. Only with a sweep of Super delegates

two candidates left. when the delegates are divided in two categories, one will inherently get the amount needed on some ballot. If Edwards 26 are released, it'll be the first ballot.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. You're probably thinking it's winner takes all.

Sorry, no.

Clinton only put a slight dent in Obama's large delegate margin.

It's a statistical tie.

I suggest dealing with it.