Not nearly enough Sen. Obama not nearly enough.

[grantcart]

Not nearly enough Sen. Obama not nearly enough.

1) Have the most delegates. Not enough Senator, not enough.

Obama 1360 Clinton 1240 (AP numbers) http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

2) Have the most votes? Not enough Senator, not enough

Obama 12,992,769 Clinton 12,406,988 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

3) Have the most Senators endorsing? Not enough Senator, not enough.

Obama 15 Clinton 13 http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

4) Have the most Govenors endorsing? Not enough Senator, not enough

Obama 11 Clinton 10 http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

5) Run a highly professional campaign and defeat a field of 6 outstanding candidates while your closest opponent is mired in staff infighting? Not enough Senator, not enough.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503621_pf.html

6) Raise more money? Not enough Senator Obama, not enough.

7) Have more donors? Not enough Senator Obama not enough

8) Win more Primaries? Not enough Senator Obama not enough

35 to 13 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_2008

Now we all know that with proportional primaries that you are going to go to the convention with more delegates and all of the above still intact. But Senator its just not enough. Maybe Clinton, maybe Gore, maybe Edwards will come back.

Now if you were Clinton, Edwards, Biden, Kucinich, Dodd, Richardson it would have been enough. But for you Senator its not. We need to see if you might stumble and fall right before the finish line. We need to investigate a little bit more. We just can’t be sure. The reason Senator? Ah well the reason is that ah well er ah the reason Senator is that . . . . .

[mahina]

1. K&R, thank you Grantcart.

[Tropics_Dude83]

2. Yep

We ALL know the ansawer to your last question indeed. Shameful.

[grantcart]

12. few will acknowledge it.

[Bake]

67. Really? What IS the answer? Go ahead and put it in print.

Bake

[Bake]

79. Enlighten us. Please. What IS the answer to that question?

Please tell us. In writing.

Bake

[lastliberalintexas]

155. That his conservative religiosity turns this agnostic off?

Yep, then you're right about the answer.


I will vote for the Dem nominee even though I personally don't like either, but some of you people have lost your freaking minds. Obama will likely win the nomination, but he hasn't yet. There's this pesky little thing called democracy and letting people actually vote before a nomination is decided- what we used to consider a good thing in this party. Let the process play out, we'll all be ok in the end. And whichever candidate we end up with will be a good one and each would be fairly good presidents as well. Get your primary blinders off, go the park for the day, read a book- anything to ignore politics for just a short time.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

177. his "conservative" religiosity?

care to elaborate on that? What does "liberal" religiosity look like?

[grantcart]

191. And for that you think it is appropriate to establish a double standard?

[leftofcool]

3. The reason is...........

you are asking us to trust you, asking for the highest seat in our land. I want to be sure.

[grantcart]

10. try again. If any of the other candidates had that resume

you would have been fine. Think a little deeper this time.

[leftofcool]

21. Uh no, I wouldn't

I want to be sure I am voting for the right person pretty much the same way I have since my first election back in the 60's

[grantcart]

34. right and if (place your favorite candidate here) were at this point

you would say nope not enough. Right. Yup. Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

[leftofcool]

147. No fav candidate

I support which ever Dem is nominated, even though I think they both suck raw eggs. Neither is fit to be president and since my chosen candidate (Edwards) is not on the ticket, I will be forced to vote for one piece of trash or the other.

[Bake]

80. Still waiting ... tell us, what IS the answer to that question?

I've been waiting for it all day now.

Bake

[Ken Burch]

120. You know what it is...and you know it's ugly....and you know it's beneath this party

n/t.

[Bake]

180. I just want to hear it out loud.

Put it out there for the world to see.

But you won't do that. Because you know it's bullshit.

Bake

[Voice for Peace]

164. Here it is: the reason is fear. Fear of change, fear of the unknown. nt

[Bake]

187. Somehow, I don't think that's what the posters had in mind.

But nice try.

Bake

[JackORoses]

47. but you're already sure about Hillary, why should she have to explain her qualifications?

Her husband was President, shouldn't that be enough.
:sarcasm:

[lastliberalintexas]

158. You wrongly assume that anyone critical of Obama is a Clinton fan

I've had that accusation thrown at me even thoough it's incorrect, and you've also been shown wrong here from this poster's comments that they both suck raw eggs (LOL, kind of my feelings too). Yet both that poster and I will vote for EITHER in Nov. Will you?

[TwilightGardener]

4. Excellent. You have perfectly summed up my thoughts. The race will continue

so that Obama can be torn down and Hillary can be rigged to win, eventually, at the very end. That's the game plan.

[Inuca]

46. I don't think that hillary will win, BUT

I am afraid that Obama may be torn down and be damaged come the GE. I pray that I am wrong (on the 2nd point, of course).

[KittyWampus]

5. Hillary Supporters are too stupid to realize she's LOST her Super Delegates while Obama has gained

big time.

If this goes to the Convention, she will NOT get those Super Delegates back.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

16. I wouldn't call Hillary's supporters "stupid", just deceived by Hillary herself . . .

And they call Obama's campagin a cult. Not even close.

[Bluerthanblue]

6. so much for 'Equality' eh?

excellent post-


peace~

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

7. Great post pointing out the different standards used for different candidates.

[TwilightGardener]

9. Obama's goalposts are always moved further away, Hillary's are always moved closer.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

15. SO TRUE, but what I love is that Obama doesn't play the race card . . .

the way Hillary would cry sexism if the shoe was on the other foot. I think this is what I find most appealing about Obama.

[ecstatic]

39. He can't. The moment he does he's finished

He has to quietly accept the double standards, as many before him have.

[Recursion]

102. Agreed. That was the point of the "Jesse Jackson" comment from Bill

And it's why it made so many Obama supporters go ballistic (and, frankly, it's probably an angle a lot of Clinton supporters don't "see", given where they come from).

[Bake]

83. I think both Obama and his supporters have thrown the race card on more than a few occasions

He does it subtly; his supporters ... not so much (see upthread).

Bake

[mrreowwr_kittty]

24. I just love how the media is supposedly so biased against Clinton

When they were still treating her with the utmost respect as a frontrunner even after she lost 11 races in a row.

Can you just imagine how they'd be treating Obama in the same situation? He'd be portrayed as a laughingstock and a pathetic deluded loser, much like Huckabee.

[That Guy 888]

40. And they love Senator Obama

From the "alternative" weekly San Antonio Current, in San Antonio, Texas on 2/27/08

The Mashup - Obama talks substance; media yawns

"...For the most part, Obama spent the roundtable listening, intensely concentrating as Rebecca De Zavala, a 57-year-old registered nurse threatened with foreclosure, talked about her lending institution losing her payments, and asking Teresa Molina, a 50-year-old parent to six foster children, whether mortgage pressures had limited her ability to continue purchasing needed medication. (He referenced Molina at his Austin debate with Clinton two days later.)

This Obama was not the rousing messiah of hope who so fascinates political analysts and befuddles Clinton strategists. He was a low-voltage, nuts-and-bolts policy wonk, carefully outlining a comprehensive plan of legislative attack: a $10 billion foreclosure-prevention fund, a home-score system to help borrowers decide if they can afford a home, penalties for predatory lenders, tax credits for struggling homeowners, etc.

A few minutes after the roundtable ended, with an exuberant crowd waiting for the town-hall gathering, one photographer turned to another and said: “That was boring as hell. I was waiting for some excitement and thought, ‘That’s it?’”

It might not be fair to attach one jaded photographer’s sentiments to the actions of the national media, but it doesn’t take long on the campaign trail before you realize that the same members of the press who raise concerns about a lack of substance swiftly grow bored with policy minutiae and prefer to dwell on the horse race. To the credit of the Town Hall audience, however, every single question directed at Obama dealt with policy, without a single boxers-or-briefs distraction." ...article continues



Since I'm too new to post this on it's own, hopefully someone can put this in the Barak Obama group or Politics/campaigns

[mrreowwr_kittty]

43. Welcome to DU!

Thanks for posting that. It's funny how Obama was accused of being too wonkish and dull when he began his campaign. So when he stuck to more general themes and an inspiring message, he got tagged with being "empty".

[That Guy 888]

49. Thanks for the welcome!

When I read that article it made me think about all of the Senator Clinton supporters who say he has no substance.

I'm not surprised that lazy reporters follow the heard on Senator Obama's campaign. It seems that for every good or great reporter, there are fifty who "stay connected" by checking Drudge's site every morning.

[grantcart]

52. I understand but I am a little less critical of them than you are - taking

into effect a human element. I was originally an Edward supporter and heard his stump speech over and over again and frankly after a while got bored with it. I don't know how the candidates do it and make it look fresh. I have heard Obama's alot but his still is funny and he changes it a little here and there.

Add in all of the traveling and everything and I think after a week that it would be extremely boring and I would be spacing out and only looking for something new.

Again welcome.

[grantcart]

45. good catch

you can post it on the Obama daily thread

are you new to DU or are you returning?

How many posts do you have to have before you can start an OP?

[Barack_America]

66. Could you post this as an OP?

Don't worry, we'll fend off any flame attacks! ;)

[Beartracks]

101. That's MSM simplicity at work...

The Dem primaries are not about winning or losing entire states, but winning as many delegates as possible within those states. The MSM tells you that Clinton "lost" 11 states in a row, or that Obama "won" 11 states in a row. But that's simply not the way it works.

Clinton is not a loser of "11 states", but rather a winner of "ALMOST as many delegates as Obama". I read a lot of posts where Obama's supporters have used the same "loser" meme that gets bandied about by the MSM who thinks Americans are too stupid to understand nuance. But it's the GOP does the all-or-nothing approach, not the Dems.

[Psst_Im_Not_Here]

132. A Good analogy, use football

Counting how many states won instead of the delegates, is like counting the number of yards gained rather that the score. It's not the yardage, it's the points.

[dbmk]

141. Thats true

But it still doesn't change that if the situation was the opposite way around, Obama would have been laughed out after the 7 or 8th win in a row if not before. The media has been extremely nice to Hillary in that regard. Probably because they like this little race.

[my2sense]

8. Thanks k & r

This is what I was afraid of at the start.

[jillan]

11. Howard Dean has said that it is up to the voters to decide, and there are many states left.

So keep your pants on.

[Barack_America]

64. There are some states left...but not enough.

Hillary will never take the pledged delegate lead.

[grantcart]

190. Pants are in and the math is out there are no mathematical scenarios that has Hillary winning

It is quite clear that there are no reasonable scenarios where Senator Clinton will reverse the delegate lead going into the convention. Their campaign has admitted this. Sen Schumer admits this and has for some time.


http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoid...
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it


The reason for this is that delegates are not awarded on a state by state basis but on district by district basis. Even numbered delegate districts that have 2 or 4 delegates will almost always split 1-1 or 2-2. Districts that have 3 or 5 delegates will always go 2-1 and 3-2 because you would have to reach 80% to take a district 4-1.

That leaves districts that have 6,7,8 delegates in them. There are very few left (there were only 3 in Texas) if any. Those districts tend to be urban districts with heavy AA populations and ususall split to Obama's advantage. In last Tuesday's big victories Sen Clinton picked up 8 delegates. Sen. Obama picked up 4 in California the same day because recounting showed that he did get the splits mentioned above in a few borderline districts.

All of the national pundits have agreeed with this assessment.

None of them agree with yours. I challenge you to spend the rest of the day to find a single pundit who lays out a mathematical scenario where Hillary can make up 100 delegate lead. Oh and the Superdelegates? 80% have gone for Obama since Super Tuesday. Oops since I wrote this Obama just picked up another delegate.
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/su...




But none of this is relevent to the OP. Go back and read it again. The point of the OP is that Senator Obama is being held to a different standard than any other candidate- now why could that be?

Are you seriously suggesting that if Hillary had those numbers that there wouldn't be cacophony of voices closing out the race?

Seriously?

[Alamom]

13. With the numbers this close, would you have Obama to step down if it were reversed?

Honestly, this is a little more than ridiculous. I understand it's not fun for you to watch this play out but I don't remember anyone ever leaving the contest with it this close.

Being good enough and a close race is very different.

[grantcart]

19. The numbers are not close.

On Hillary's biggest day Tuesday she gained between 4-8 delegates what you have either not been informed on or are too obtuse to comprehend is that once you are behind in a proportional delegate distribution race it is almost impossible to catch up unless you are registering landslide elections.

There are a hundred links but here is two

From a PA newspaper
PA http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20080306_Editorial__Pennsylvanias_Turn.html
Even if Clinton wins most of the remaining states (including Pennsylvania) by big margins, it's nearly impossible for her to overtake Obama in the number of pledged delegates.


From Newsweek
http://www.newsweek.com/id/119010
To beat Barack Obama among pledged delegates, Clinton now needs even bigger margins in the 12 remaining primaries than she needed when I ran the numbers on Monday—an average of 23 points, which is more than double what she received in Ohio.

From the Clinton Campaign
http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama
"The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it."



From the Obama campaign
Our projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183.

That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted.

For comparison, that's less than half our net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than our net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than our net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia.


The Clinton campaign admits that they will go into the convention 100 delegates behind.

Oh and the super delegates:




So please give up the pretense of not knowing that Obama is going to win the delegate count going into the convention. Be truthful, that's all right we understand. We have seen it all of our lives. This time we beat it.

[Alamom]

23. You didn't answer the question. nm

[grantcart]

29. If any candidate had finished Mar 5 with a 100 delegate advantage I would

have agreed with Gov Richardson and said that it is now impossible to change the outcome.

Actually it was pretty much settled a month ago. But the fact that Clinton picked up 10 delegates or less sealed the deal. We all understand you. Its ok. Its nothing new.

[Cha]

33. And if Obama were running a dirty campaign

like the laughing hilary would you be asking him to get the fuck out like I'm asking hilary?

[grantcart]

36. at this point it really isn't about electing Hillary anymore its about stopping

Obama. Its already started with the please Al Gore come back or the John Edwards will return. It actually is very revealing.

[Cha]

38. I know grant, but do they? And what's this about

Al Gore and John Edwards? Who's doing that?

[grantcart]

179. Sorry didn't see your reply earlier

There were threads in GD:P begging for Gore to come back and one for us to rush to get Sen. Edwards back. As a supporter for Edwards for over a year it literally made me want to vomit. As soon as the first African American candidate approaches the nomination (magic number now 461) they want to take it away from him. It makes me sick.

[Inuca]

48. Or rather

destroying Obama. 2012 does not seem so far away, 2016 on the other hand...

[murbley40]

178. Destroying Obama?

He will do that himself in time.

[krawhitham]

35. Yes

[Voice for Peace]

162. I would have him step down if he were extolling the experience of McCain. nt

[truebrit71]

14. Excellent post!

If HRC politicks her way to the nom she will split the party...

[AtomicKitten]

17. The goalposts keep moving as this race moves forward and

regardless of the outcome, I think the Democrats vis a vis the Clintons are systematically turning voters off with their nonstop efforts to create chaos and division within the party. Clinton's endorsement of the GOP nominee over her Democratic opponent in the primary was a pivotal moment in the history of American politics and one that Democrats aren't likely to forget and/or let slide.

[grantcart]

22. She could just save everyone some time and pain and just go down and

cut McCain's ad in the studio. They would be happy to provide a script too.

[AtomicKitten]

26. No worries. She will have plenty of guest appearances in the McCain ads this fall.

And Democrats will finally fathom in their face the damage she is inflicting on this party.

[City Lights]

18. You nailed it, grantcart!

Thank you. :applause:

[goclark]

98. Nailed it K and R

[dchill]

20. You had me there for a second...

K&R. :)

[MyNameGoesHere]

25. Nor enough for either at this point. No not enough. 2025 that is enough

But then that detail you gloss over for your own version of the 3:00 AM call. America is so.... See it's 3:00 AM and America is ra.... See not enough.

[grantcart]

27. Well to begin with the number is 2024

and the point is that you are using this standard for Obama and you wouldn't for anyone else and we all know why.

It doesn't matter. With the rate of superdelegate endorsements it will be over around the time of Indiana.

[MyNameGoesHere]

28. Well there you guys go again

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_delegates_are_needed_to_win_the_democratic_nominee



Sorry we have no parting gifts for you.

[grantcart]

30. There was a correction about a month ago

The old number was actually 2024.5 (.5 from DA).

These guys are considered by just about everyone the gold standard so you can argue with them if you want - or you can correct Wikipedia - or you can continue to look superficially informed.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

[MyNameGoesHere]

31. Oh my god. well let that half a person vote soon ok? n/t

[grantcart]

32. So I am waiting for some authoritative source that supports your point

In the meantime everyone understands that you have one set of indicators for the other presidential candidates and another for Senator Obama.

[MyNameGoesHere]

44. Changing the wording still gets NEITHER candidate to the 2024.5

<Oh brother> needed. So i could say all the same things about HRC and call it sexism. That would be stupid and you and i know it. And you would blast me or others out of the water for saying it. So please do keep talking about those indicators....

[grantcart]

50. The number has in fact been altered from 2024.5 to 2024

if all those same factors had applied to Hillary and she didn't get the nomination it would be sexism, there wouldn't be any doubt about it, and everyone but a few neaderthrals would agree to it. But of course it would not have ever gotten to that point, and that really is the point.

Now you can imagine that you have a completely set of objectives that you would apply to all the candidates (in all frankness most people here will not believe that), Let us put your own personal purely objective matrix aside. Do you think that the millions of people who experience these very types of double standards in their own personal lives whether as a subject, observer, or an advocate of them, will look at the list above and think that the Democratic Party is applying a strictly neutral standard to Obama that would have applied to any other candidate. Or are they thinking that it was done for some other reason?

[MyNameGoesHere]

55. Yes they were. Right here on DU.

Shrub won the popular vote
He won more states.
He won the delegate count.

EVERYONE here said he didn't win or cheated. (myself included because i hate him) So yes. Whoever is not popular here is obviously a liar, cheat, or a vile witch. Instead of letting that half person vote and wait till Obama gets the nomination his supporters are claiming theft, racism, and a whole host of other things. BOTTOM LINE and this is what was agreed upon, Get the 2024 and a half of a person to vote for you and you are the delegate. No more, No less.

[grantcart]

62. Well its kind of embarrassing to have to put such a fine point to it

But this has absolutely nothing to do with DU or you.

It has to do with the tens of millions of people who have heard that what they have done is not enough and a double standard is being applied to them.

They will soon begin to see that it is being applied to Obama, if they already haven't. No one here so far is suggesting that if another candidate had these credentials that the overwhelming numbers of folks in the media, in the party and in the country would be saying its a done deal.

Don't worry Obama is going to get the 2024 ( the number was changed). There is now no reasonable mathematical equation that could be applied to take it away from him.

For that reason the superdelegates are going to be voicing their opinion. Since I posted this Obama has picked up 2 more superdelegates. This may be over before Pennsylvania.

[MyNameGoesHere]

65. Not likely over, and facts are facts even if they are ugly.

I don't think he will get there before PA. So just sit back and watch a great convention. I am truly looking forward to it. When a candidate comes out of this mess they will have earned it beyond anything i can put them to. I think it will make whoever it is, a stronger candidate and that's what i need to keep me hoping.

[grantcart]

68. Again your not responding to anything I said which has to do with

how a double standard is obviously being applied to Sen. Obama and how this will be percieved in the minority communities.

No one has any idea what your reference to 'ugly' facts are - and I am not really interested because I do not think that they are relevent to the OP.

Here is one fact since Feb 10 Sen Obama has picked up the endorsements of 105 superdelegates. If that trend continues he will have enough so that even if he loses in PA he will have an absolute numerical lock on the nomination. His magic number today is about 450. He has picked up 11 super delegates so far this week.

[MyNameGoesHere]

76. Not really i choose what game i want to play

and supposed racism issues is not the game i choose to play. Just like i will not choose to play the supposed sexist issue. So there. Moot point to me. When either one of them gets to 2024 and a 1/2 of a person then get back to me. Cheers.

[grantcart]

85. The issue is not supposed racism

The simple issue is the same standard being applied to all candidates. It clearly is not. Go ahead and start an OP showing clearly how the race is still wide open that anyone can win. You persistence in maintaining the wrong number after it has been clearly explained that there was a revision 3 weeks ago leads me to wonder if you have serious reading comprehension problems.

And yet again you have not answered the fundamental point which has nothing to do with your decision making process but the process that the community of Democrats having different criteria requirements for different candidates.

No one is going to be getting back to you. You are far to obtuse to carry on thoughtful discussion.

[MyNameGoesHere]

152. Over and over again i have used the correct

delegate count as 2024 and a half of a person <delegate> so that is just your incomprehension. You have not proved your salient point at all why should i comment on it? As far as i can see both candidates are being applied by the same set of rules as no one has won or lost yet. However if you mean the coronation has been delayed by all means cry foul then. However us obtuse people like to wait until the real nomination is over before we adorn anyone the victor.

[grantcart]

197. There was a change in the formula about 3 weeks ago

Go here for the most respected numbers if you go down the blogs they explaing the change

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html



There is no "proof" to the point without going to an alternative universe and running an alternative history. If you think that there is only one standard and that it is evenly being applied then please start an OP on that premise and subject it to the peers here.

So far with 100 recommends and the comments listed you may not get much agreement on such a vacuous premise.


The question isn't about you adorning anyone. But you expose such an aggrssive narcissism it is a wonder why you participate in a political party.

The point is whether given the same standards, had they been applied to other candidates would the media, the party and the country have said (not you repeat not you - did you get it, its not about you or your perception - to repeat so that you are clear its not about when you think its ok - not you)that is it you are the nominee.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

188. grantcart

As I've been reading this thread, it does start to sound like you are the one who is racist.

and the point is that you are using this standard for Obama and you wouldn't for anyone else and we all know why.

[grantcart]

198. lol really that is rich a question?

do you really think that if any other candidate had achieved what he had that there wouldn't be a strong movement in the party to close it up?

[Gore1FL]

60. Not enough without super delegates

But to overcome the likely 100-175 Obama lead in Pledged delegates at the Denver convention is means she has to convince a vast majority of super delegates to overturn 6 months of voting to achieve a pyrrhic victory. Thats a hard nut to crack.

[grantcart]

86. In the last month 80% of the superdelegates went to him 66-16

[Gore1FL]

96. exactly

Everything needs to break her way, and as it continues not to, she becomes more and more Huckalree.

[ecstatic]

37. This same story plays out every single day, in boardrooms across America nt

[grantcart]

41. that is so observant about how close the democratic party has evolved to

mirror a board room. And yet another compelling reason for Senator Obama to take us into another direction.

[lastliberalintexas]

160. Yes, to both African Americans AND women

To think that racism exist but sexism is long dead is just as silly as thinking that racism is dead but sexism still lives. They are both alive and well within certain demographics of this country.

But here's a newflash for you- the vast majority of people who would vote based on gender or race aren't voting Dem anyway. :shrug:

[Nia Zuri]

42. If he were white, Hillary would have closed up shop long ago...

Guess what I always heard growing up is true. If you're black you have to be twice as good to get half as much....

[Catherine Vincent]

51. That doesn't work in Obama's case. nt

[HCE SuiGeneris]

53. The undercurrent is incredibly disturbing.

Great post.

[grantcart]

89. tks

[Mme. Defarge]

54. From Aesop & de la Fontaine

The Oak and the Reed

The Oak spoke one day to the Reed
"You have good reason to complain;
A Wren for you is a load indeed;
The smallest wind bends you in twain.
You are forced to bend your head;
While my crown faces the plains
And not content to block the sun
Braves the efforts of the rains.
What for you is a North Wind is for me but a zephyr.
Were you to grow within my shade
Which covers the whole neighbourhood
You'd have no reason to be afraid
For I would keep you from the storm.
Instead you usually grow
In places humid, where the winds doth blow.
Nature to thee hath been unkind."
"Your compassion", replied the Reed
"Shows a noble character indeed;
But do not worry: the winds for me
Are much less dangerous than for thee;
I bend, not break. You have 'til now
Resisted their great force unbowed,
But beware.
As he said these very words
A violent angry storm arose.
The tree held strong; the Reed he bent.
The wind redoubled and did not relent,
Until finally it uprooted the poor Oak
Whose head had been in the heavens
And roots among the dead folk.

Jean de la Fontaine
Translation by Michael Star
le Chêne et le Roseau

Le Chêne un jour dit au Roseau :
"Vous avez bien sujet d'accuser la Nature ;
Un Roitelet pour vous est un pesant fardeau.
Le moindre vent, qui d'aventure
Fait rider la face de l'eau,
Vous oblige à baisser la tête :
Cependant que mon front, au Caucase pareil,
Non content d'arrêter les rayons du soleil,
Brave l'effort de la tempête.
Tout vous est Aquilon, tout me semble Zéphyr.
Encor si vous naissiez à l'abri du feuillage
Dont je couvre le voisinage,
Vous n'auriez pas tant à souffrir :
Je vous défendrais de l'orage ;
Mais vous naissez le plus souvent
Sur les humides bords des Royaumes du vent.
La nature envers vous me semble bien injuste.
- Votre compassion, lui répondit l'Arbuste,
Part d'un bon naturel ; mais quittez ce souci.
Les vents me sont moins qu'à vous redoutables.
Je plie, et ne romps pas. Vous avez jusqu'ici
Contre leurs coups épouvantables
Résisté sans courber le dos ;
Mais attendons la fin. "Comme il disait ces mots,
Du bout de l'horizon accourt avec furie
Le plus terrible des enfants
Que le Nord eût portés jusque-là dans ses flancs.
L'Arbre tient bon ; le Roseau plie.
Le vent redouble ses efforts,
Et fait si bien qu'il déracine
Celui de qui la tête au Ciel était voisine
Et dont les pieds touchaient à l'Empire des Morts.

Taken from The Fables of Jean de La Fontaine in English and French
at the Aesop's Fables site

[grantcart]

106. Thank you for the poem

[grantcart]

56. $ 55 million in one month - not enough Senator - not enough

[Kaylee]

57. Pretty depressing when you spell it all out like that.

[mculator]

58. Dream Ticket Solutions

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4927930

[grantcart]

59. Help me out

what are we trying to solve - are you saying that Obama has not reached enough critical mass for support and he needs Clinton to legitimize his campaign?

Or are you saying that Obama should stand aside for Senator Clinton for some reason?

[theboss]

73. Have you been reading bartcop?

He is mad at Obama for having the audacity to run...even though he is winning.

The overall theme is, "How dare you enter a contest you can win?"

[grantcart]

189. lol no missed it lol

[bigbrother05]

61. Great write-up again

[grantcart]

63. thanks

[bigbrother05]

87. No, thank you

[high density]

69. I think some Clinton people want a "loser take all" system

That's all I can assume based on their comments.

[grantcart]

77. that very rich lol

[thoughtcrime1984]

70. THE STATUS QUO DOES NOT GO AWAY EASILY

The status quo is what has gotten our nation in such a precarious, terrible position. It is time for a new approach, some transparency. There'll be no transparency in a Hillary Presidency, and all of the BushCo criminals will go free, just like the last time a "Clinton cleaned up after a Bush". Bush and Clinton- covering each other's asses very well!

[grantcart]

78. Its sad when our status quo looks so much like a GOP status quo

but actually that's not fair either Super delegates are turning to Obama in huge numbers, and I think many that signed on with Hillary now wished that they had been a little slower to the draw.

[underpants]

173. EXACLTY! and Hillary is running a DC status quo FEAR campaign

Well said

[txaslftist]

71. For a candidate running on "ready on day one"

She sure wasn't ready for the Texas Caucuses...

Obama's ground game beat the socks off of her.

[grantcart]

81. He may gain more in Mississippi than she did on Tuesday

its hard to tell - is he, and his campaign, that good or is her campaign that bad.

And as a party we are waiting to decide because . . . ?

[IsItJustMe]

72. Brilliant twist. K&R just for that reason alone.

[grantcart]

93. tks

[SoCalDem]

157. you got that right.. twisted.. totally

[tekisui]

74. K&R! And just before the Covention, a re-vote in two big states,

going against established rules, because it isn't enough.

[grantcart]

88. tks

[RoadRage]

75. The reason.. is that he's.. err.. uhh.. NOT HILLARY!

If Clinton had done the exact same things that Obama had done, she'd have this nomination right now. But, because of who she is, who she knows, who she has favors owed on, and who she's probably blackmailing (nope, i have no links.. just intuition), she gets to stay in this race when anyone else would have been pressured to get out.

But, it's the name of the political game.. so play on!

[David Zephyr]

82. Keep publishing the facts. The math is overwhelming. She can not win.

Kick.

[grantcart]

84. It's not about winning anymore its about how much shame are we going to

endure for the party because a small number of people who feel they are entitled are going to maintain a completely ridiculous double standard?

[thevoiceofreason]

90. And it looks like they are close to agreeing to caucus Michigan!

Hahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

See your Ohio and raise you Mississippi.

[grantcart]

92. Well the beauty of caucusing in Michigan is that it takes Florida off

the table: If a caucus is good enough for Michigan why not Florida???

There are some really smart people running this chess match and its just fun to sit and watch. How great is it to have Dean there making sure that Obama gets a fair deal. Can you imagine these two working at full speed - maybe we can amp up some leadership changes in congress and get things really going.

[thevoiceofreason]

91. Grant I agree

It's bullshit to send memos and press releases and spew talking points saying be nice to me, play nice, don't hurt the girl, when all she has been doing is attacking in that namby-pamby passive aggressive way "Oh, I take him at his word" and "You'll need to ask him about ____".

But if he says "let's talk about New Square or your freakin tax returns," he's being a bully?? That's crap.

In all fairness, I reserve the right to revise my condemnation of her if it proves out that Penn and Wolfson and that gang of liars were the ones up to this. At that point, I fault her on what is her most glaring weakness -- her absolute lack of executive and management experience -- letting the kids run around unsupervised.

[bigbrother05]

94. Penn and Ickes

are now arguing about who gets credit for Tuesday's popular vote
Each of them saying F... You to each other.
Appears the children are not getting along so well

[ourbluenation]

95. This man is the best thing thats come along in ages. We'd be stupid to not nominate him.

He's bringing new people, young people, and those who've gotten lost along the way, back to the fold. He's not the perfect candidate...no one is, but he's pretty damn close. I really hope I don't see the day when he has to concede. So many people will just walk away from this process for years, if not forever. And know that I really like Senator Clinton but she's just not this exciting.

The world is watching.

[goclark]

97. As Michelle Obama says, "they keep raising the bar and raising

the bar" and changing the rules.

Why is that I wonder? :sarcasm:

Hopefully one day we will all be judged by the content of our character.

Congratulations Billary for assuring America and the world that you know exactly how to change the rules and raise the bar for Obama.

Funny how you didn't start this mess until it was just you and Obama.

You even sunk so low to the ground that you would say " I have experience and McCain (the Republican) has experience but Obama had a speech."

:sarcasm:

[jlake]

110. It's called politics. Clearly the Obamas are too naive to participate.

[Ken Burch]

128. Why are you ok with your candidate getting a pyrrhic victory?

Why is winning ugly acceptable to you?

[jlake]

131. Are you trying to play the naivete card?

Do you think Obama should be handed the nom because he presents himself as a pristine nice guy?

[Ken Burch]

135. Not for that reason alone. But is there anything wrong with nominating someone

Who fights a positive campaign?

Why does if offend so many HRC supporters that Obama's campaign, whatever else you can say about the man, hasn't been particularly vicious?

Isn't it going to be a lot easier to bring the party together behind a nominee whose been chosen on positive appeal than it would to unite us behind somebody who wins Mike Ditka-style?

Some of us actually want to WIN this election, y'know. That requires both candidates treating each other and each other's supporters as equally qualified, equally popular and deserving of equal respect. The "Step aside, It's MY turn" approach can't get us elected in November.

[RainDog]

184. It's not naive to look at reality

Clinton has so many negatives in both the republican and democratic party that all she is doing at this point is harming the democratic party. Her attack on Obama re: the McCain and she are ready is REPULSIVE. NO OTHER DEMOCRAT HAS EVER DONE THAT TO ANOTHER ONE.

it's not naive to acknowledge this fact about Clinton. It's seeing her for what she is... and she is not someone who makes me feel anything other than nauseous to think of the DLC back in the White House.

Can't you understand? Can't you get it? Hillary is about the past. She is about rolling around in the Rove pigpen. Of course Obama will be attacked. And of course he and his supporters will fight back. Why do you try to label Obama as naive when he is a man who maintains composure?

I'm supposed to be Hillary's base. I'm a middle-aged white female. The thought of voting for her gives me the sensation of fingernails on a chalk board. I want to get out of the current dynastic politics. She cannot do that because she is that. My take on this is not unusual.

She jumped the shark this week in her attacks on a member of her own party.. I had said up until now that I would vote for whoever wins. Now I don't want to do that... I feel coerced if Hillary changes the rules and somehow pulls the nomination out of her behind. I am sick of being fucked over by the democrats on issue after issue. If she wants to play dirty... well, let me join her.

I wonder why Bill has been palling around with Poppy? Maybe making some deal about how to shape elections for this decade and the next too? Maybe Hillary is willing to make a deal to exempt Bush, etc. for their crimes.

Tell me, if Pelosi and Reed refused to honor the majority desire of their own party to impeach, what do any of these dems offer? No hope, that's for sure. They offer a reason to stay home and tell the party to go fuck itself.

[DWilliamsamh]

149. And YET...

He has a mathematical lock on the nomination. Imagine that.

Just think what this would look like if he "knew how to play the game?" They would have to implement a mercy rule in that case ... you know like in little league when a team is up ten runs after 5 innings? They call the game so as not to add more embarrassment to the losing team.


But since they don't know how to play the game, he is only putting a medium sized woopin' on her, and the only hope she has of winning is if all four umpires on the field declare her the winner after all the plays have gone down and the teams are already sitting on the benches waiting for the trophy presentation.


BWAAAA HAAAWWWWW HAAWWWWW.

[jlake]

182. No, he does not.

Anything can happen and a few big wins For Hilly will put her ahead.

[DWilliamsamh]

193. So all the journalists who have crunched the numbers

and come up with the reality that she would have to win at least 70% of all the remaining primaries to go to the convention with a delegate lead are just wrong? How do you figure? And this time you might want to relay on something a little more substantial than you "gut."

[jlake]

194. Your own post shows that it is not a mathematical lock for Obama.

Who says Hilly can't win PA with 80% of the vote and net 90 delegates?

[DWilliamsamh]

201. Tell you what - I live in PA

I will bet you a plane ticket here for a visit vs. the same to your local that says that is not going to happen. Logic says. She hasn't won 70% of any contested primary or caucus. What logic says she has a chance to do that? I suppose the same logic that says the earth and moon will collide the day after the PA primary. No. f'ing. Way. That. Happens.

Talk about grasping at straws.

And by the way I really wouldn't care if Senator Clinton stayed in the race until the convention if she wasn't employing the slash and burn school of campaigns. If she kept it on real differences and not scare tactics and machiavellian tactics that are obviously aimed to bring about a McCain win, and another run for her in 20012, it would be a good exercise. But as it stands she is hurting her party. We can't afford another 4 years (much less eight) of Republican Presidency. How many Supreme Court justices do you suppose will be appointed by a President McCain in the next four years? There is a bigger picture.

[jlake]

202. I'm in PA - so I don't need a plane ticket.

I have my eyes and ears open.... and sense a HUGE win for Hilly!

[DWilliamsamh]

204. Well then put your money where your "sense" is

Name your terms? A bottle of PA Wine? I am in Philly, tour of the City? Trip to AC? (i'm not a gambler so I'll take Ocean City)? Lets see how good your spider senses are.

And by the way, your assertion being based on your "sense of things" was exactly what I was urging you to try to get past and maybe come with some facts. There is no reason beyond grasping at straws for some justification of what you want to happen, to believe that your sense of things has any relation to reality. Why am I so reality based? Because I believe that this nation is at a pivotal moment. The reality is that all the signs are there. The laws, the social pressures the suppressive tactics on open voting. We are literally on the cusp of becoming a nation that is antithetical to what we stood for for the first 231 years of our history. We are on the cusp of becoming a strong man democracy where the president uses his "commander in chief powers" to suppress political dissent. We are on the verge of becoming a state that imprisons, without recourse, those who dissent from the government approved view. The law is already there, but so far it has been a gradual march to totalitarianism. So far it has been the "other" (Hamdi and Padilla) but those test cases were a SUCCESS! We are at a tipping point. It is absolutely essential that the next President draw us away from the edge and that will only happen if there is a Democrat in the White House and a vast Democratic majority in both houses.

THAT is the danger of Senator Clinton's "tear Barack Obama a new asshole" campaign. She does enough damage to him (with no realistic chance of winning), supports McCain and the rethug taking points, to hand the White House to the Republicans again, and then the SCOTUS gets a supper majority of justices like Scalia, and Alito, and speak no evil Thomas... and it is all set to be "legal: and unassailable.

Job one is to win back the White House and what Senator Clinton is doing is endangering us all.

And just a note: I was a Dodd supporter, I was then an Edwards supporter. I came at the last two standing with an open mind. It was only the Clinton campaign's tactics that flipped the switch for me. I think that has happened to a LOT of Democrats and independents all across the country, PA is no different. If Clinton wins PA (and I think there is enough campaign time left that Obama's demonstrated ability to overcome her institutional advantage will certainly come into play) it will be by less than ten points.

[Laelth]

99. Well said.

I had seen enough to vote for Senator Obama on Super Tuesday here in Georgia.

I have seen enough to vote for him in November.

:patriot:

-Laelth

[Tatiana]

100. Thanks for saying what needed to be said.

I'm sure a lot of people have thought those thoughts, but feared putting those thoughts into words.

It looks very ugly in print.

That being said, I feel really proud of the way Sen. Obama has conducted himself. It would have been so easy to just lie down and romp in the mud too, since it was getting slung his way from all directions. But he didn't. He's putting his faith in the people. That's confidence and that's a belief that essentially, most Americans are honest, fair-minded people.

This whole thing has been a net plus for his campaign, IMO. Clinton really didn't net more than 5 pledged delegates. Think about what this whole saga has accomplished? The Canadian government has been exposed as meddlers in our election and in collusion with Republican interests. That's good to know.

But more importantly, the growing restlessness of the elected superdelegates has turned into a groundswell of indignation and disgust with Clinton and the way she has conducted her campaign. I don't think a significant number of the undecided superdelegates will support her after this. Watching all of this unfold, I thought about that poor Democratic former governor of Alabama. How Rove decided to go after him and when the charges didn't stick, really set his sights on destroying the man because... he had the audacity to run for election again!

This isn't so much about winning as it is about utterly destroying someone.

I, for one, am hoping that the remaining primary voters repudiate this insidious brand of politics.

I am also hoping that Clinton will be held accountable by her peers and constituents for the way she has conducted herself in this campaign.

[grantcart]

144. thank you

well with her warm words for McCain she has lost the activist core of the party

[berni_mccoy]

103. Bravo! K&R!

[akbacchus_BC]

104. Thank you grantcart, thank you ... your post brought tears to my eyes ...

What else can he do to get the nomination? The rules always change, so pathetic! For once we have two great front runners, not really, I was rooting for Kuckinich and Richardson! But we got what we got and for one to throw the other under the bus, is pretty pathetic. I cannot even type what I think on here. But do not be disheartened, two great runners were thrown under the bus ... Gore and Kerry. What else is new? Americans have to take back America and stop pounding the keyboard, we Canadians have your back! Peace

[grantcart]

105. your very kind

[akbacchus_BC]

108. I have always admired you and your posts make a lot of sense...

GO OBAMA. There, now you know whom I support, but unfortunately, am in Canada, I can only give you guys moral support and will do that to the end.

[grantcart]

115. where in Canada?

[akbacchus_BC]

124. grantcart, am in BC and am backing Senator Obama 100%. We got this little assfuck Harper here too.

We got to get rid of him soon, but Dion is not really talking to me!

[grantcart]

139. originally fm Spokane

[casus belli]

107. I'm going to hit you with this hammer.

It's not because I hate you, it's because we must be sure that when THEY hit you with the hammer, you've been hit by a hammer before. Because, well, that's important.

[grantcart]

142. thank you oh hitter with the hammer

[jlake]

109. If Obama is so fucking spectacular why doesn't he have the 2025 delegates needed to win?

[akbacchus_BC]

111. He will, pretty soon. Don't lose any sleep over it though ...n't

[jlake]

112. How?

[akbacchus_BC]

113. Just wait and see. No need to get so flustered. Senator Obama will be the nominee...eom

[jlake]

114. But you don't know his path to the nomination?

I hear that almost 100 SDs have secretly pledged for Hillary, so those are off the table... almost all of the remaining states look strong for her too........

[akbacchus_BC]

116. You arguing with me? Listen, Senator Obama will get the nomation...

Deal with it!

[jlake]

118. I know that he won't, but I just wondered what your rationale was for thinking he would...

[akbacchus_BC]

122. He will win the nomination. Deal with it! No matter how long the party stretch this out, Obama ..

is the winner. And I do not have a horse in this race. Just us people want someone with creds in the white house. Your girls is not going to be the nominee, sorry!

Edit ... take away the 's' from your girl

[jamesinca]

168. Oh lets come back in August

I want both of you to read this in August. Somebody will have the oven mitts and serving up the plate of crow to the other. What do you think akbacchus, you think they should book mark this thread and come back? I do.

[akbacchus_BC]

119. Wishful thinking ... keep on wishing! Obama is winner in pledged and super delegates!

[jlake]

121. No, he's not.... www.realclearpolitics.com

[akbacchus_BC]

126. yeah, rely on those websites and ignore his supporters. What a crock?

[jlake]

129. Yeah... IGNORE THE FACTS!!! LISTEN TO THE OBAMA PARTISANS!!!11!!!!

[akbacchus_BC]

134. Get a grip, Obama is the next President of the US. Deal with it!

[grantcart]

130. I would join in but I have no idea who you are even talking with lol

[akbacchus_BC]

136. Guess he/she on your iggy list. You not missing anything. Just a clown spouting off why he/it ...

dislike Obama!

[akbacchus_BC]

137. OOps, am a newbie on here, replied to the wrong person. Well..

I already got my ass kicked as a noob, but I really like all the Obama supporters except the ones who go over board. Guess they are noobs too like me, but am rational. I so want Obama to win. Guess I have to donate again. By the way, our Globe and Mail editorial opined two months ago that if Obama got elected, relations between Canada and the US will improve immensely. Am all for that! Go OBAMA!

[lligrd]

117. K & R nt

[boppers]

123. LOL, Obama's secret weapon.

He's dealt with moving goalposts all his freaking life.

Candidates used to self-entitlement, OTOH, are entering a new world...

[akbacchus_BC]

127. And he is still dealing with the goal post! Sorry to say that he has to work

twice as hard to get the nomination and bye the way, I love his speeches. I dislike the warmongerers, i.e. Clinton. She will do anything to get back in the White House. And please, Senator Obama, do not be her VP, you will be annihilated. She got Bill!

[SwampG8r]

125. amen

and they will line up to say it aint so

[grantcart]

195. and you are right they did so in this thread

[ginnyinWI]

133. Exactly so. k&r n/t

[akbacchus_BC]

138. Beautiful family, I love it. Thanks for that pic!

[noac7]

140. Kicked!

But not enough posts to recommend :(

[grantcart]

143. come back when you got them lol

[JTFrog]

145. K&R n/t

[aquarius dawning]

146. Not over yet Grantcart, not nearly over yet.

With the vote split almost perfectly in half, what sense would it make to quit before the rest of the country has offered their input? It will be over when it's over and then we'll know if it was enough or not. We will not know before then.

[grantcart]

175. Your ignorance is rather stunning

It is quite clear that there are no reasonable scenarios where Senator Clinton will reverse the delegate lead going into the convention. Their campaign has admitted this. Sen Schumer admits this and has for some time.


http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it


The reason for this is that delegates are not awarded on a state by state basis but on district by district basis. Even numbered delegate districts that have 2 or 4 delegates will almost always split 1-1 or 2-2. Districts that have 3 or 5 delegates will always go 2-1 and 3-2 because you would have to reach 80% to take a district 4-1.

That leaves districts that have 6,7,8 delegates in them. There are very few left (there were only 3 in Texas) if any. Those districts tend to be urban districts with heavy AA populations and ususall split to Obama's advantage. In last Tuesday's big victories Sen Clinton picked up 8 delegates. Sen. Obama picked up 4 in California the same day because recounting showed that he did get the splits mentioned above in a few borderline districts.

All of the national pundits have agreeed with this assessment.

None of them agree with yours. I challenge you to spend the rest of the day to find a single pundit who lays out a mathematical scenario where Hillary can make up 100 delegate lead. Oh and the Superdelegates? 80% have gone for Obama since Super Tuesday. Oops since I wrote this Obama just picked up another delegate.
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html




But none of this is relevent to the OP. Go back and read it again. The point of the OP is that Senator Obama is being held to a different standard than any other candidate- now why could that be?

[RBInMaine]

148. You can't do math, and you are basically full of it.

[grantcart]

199. pls see 175 and send me your response

[No Blood for Hubris]

150. Let's not forget about the "Monster" comment from the Obama camp.

Thanks a lot for your party loyalty, Barry.


http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Inside-US-poll-battle-as.3854371.jp

[Orsino]

151. Yeah. We should not rest until he's punished for his victories.

:eyes:

[grantcart]

207. now more punishment

[GeorgeGist]

153. not enough experience ...

at losing.

[beezlebum]

154. k and r

most excellent.

[ACanadianLiberal]

156. You are playing this arm-twisting job, nice work

Imagine how many people have been alienated from O's camp just simply by observing this kind of bully behavior. I believe I am one of them at least.

Why don't you just let the process play out itself?

This is the politics, it is not a school yard bully business. Right?

[joeybee12]

159. How stupid...the point is the race isn't over...it's still very close...

...you people act like the whole world has voted for BO and no one has voted for Hilary...you are coming unhinged.

[grantcart]

200. It is not close at all

is quite clear that there are no reasonable scenarios where Senator Clinton will reverse the delegate lead going into the convention. Their campaign has admitted this. Sen Schumer admits this and has for some time.


http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-dest...
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it


The reason for this is that delegates are not awarded on a state by state basis but on district by district basis. Even numbered delegate districts that have 2 or 4 delegates will almost always split 1-1 or 2-2. Districts that have 3 or 5 delegates will always go 2-1 and 3-2 because you would have to reach 80% to take a district 4-1.

That leaves districts that have 6,7,8 delegates in them. There are very few left (there were only 3 in Texas) if any. Those districts tend to be urban districts with heavy AA populations and ususall split to Obama's advantage. In last Tuesday's big victories Sen Clinton picked up 8 delegates. Sen. Obama picked up 4 in California the same day because recounting showed that he did get the splits mentioned above in a few borderline districts.

All of the national pundits have agreeed with this assessment.

None of them agree with yours. I challenge you to spend the rest of the day to find a single pundit who lays out a mathematical scenario where Hillary can make up 100 delegate lead. Oh and the Superdelegates? 80% have gone for Obama since Super Tuesday. Oops since I wrote this Obama just picked up another delegate.
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-l...




But none of this is relevent to the OP. Go back and read it again. The point of the OP is that Senator Obama is being held to a different standard than any other candidate- now why could that be?

[WillyT]

161. Yup... Big K & R !!!

:kick:

[eagleswing963]

163. And your solution is what cathcart?

Lets face it:

1) With the press in this country, a 3rd party candidate has NO CHANCE of being elected!
It is as simple as that.

2) John McCain is a certified nut job who will run this country worse then Bush!! We will be at
war with Iran before Sept 11, 2009 (anyone care to bet me??) if that guy gets in office!!!
It is as simple as that!

3) I am not impressed with Hillary, but I would rather have her then McCain!

4) Even Obama is better then McCain!!

It is as simple as that!!!!!

[Name removed]

165. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theredpen]

166. But... but... he's secretly a...

leftist!

Oh wait, that's not a secret! Go left!

[whatchamacallit]

167. oops

[Maxdee55]

169. Arrogant Obama Supporters Think Everyone Else Is Stupid

While either reading the blogs or listening to liberal radio I come away feeling that the Obama supporters have this condecending view of the Clinton supporters as if we are all ignorant. Their arrogance spews out in their words, and their elitest attitude is based on the assumption that we just don't get it, or maybe a better word is we're just not smart enough to get it. While I admit I don't get the facination with Obama, I am firm in my thinking that its not a lack of intelligence. What I do believe is Obama's supporters especially his young ones are enamored with his charismatic oratory, and his revival type rallies that are more style than substance. Obama who has basically received a free ride from the press, has finally had to answer some tough questions lets just say he did not distinguish himself, yesterday the Obama campaign called Hillary a "monster", clearly they do not like to be challenged, signs are Obama will not respond very well when the Republicans start in on him. The young starry eyed Obama supporter is under the impression that an Obama Presidency will end poverty, corruption, and all war, these are just words, and those of us not smart enough to be engulfed with Obama mania understand that. Realistically, none of us want a Republican administration come January, it then comes down to who you think will make the best President, I believe that to be Hillary Clinton, but maybe I'm just not smart enough.

[Major Hogwash]

170. Wow.

War is hell.

[grantcart]

174. Your ignorance is rather stunning

It is quite clear that there are no reasonable scenarios where Senator Clinton will reverse the delegate lead going into the convention. Their campaign has admitted this. Sen Schumer admits this and has for some time.


http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it


The reason for this is that delegates are not awarded on a state by state basis but on district by district basis. Even numbered delegate districts that have 2 or 4 delegates will almost always split 1-1 or 2-2. Districts that have 3 or 5 delegates will always go 2-1 and 3-2 because you would have to reach 80% to take a district 4-1.

That leaves districts that have 6,7,8 delegates in them. There are very few left (there were only 3 in Texas) if any. Those districts tend to be urban districts with heavy AA populations and ususall split to Obama's advantage. In last Tuesday's big victories Sen Clinton picked up 8 delegates. Sen. Obama picked up 4 in California the same day because recounting showed that he did get the splits mentioned above in a few borderline districts.

All of the national pundits have agreeed with this assessment.

None of them agree with yours. I challenge you to spend the rest of the day to find a single pundit who lays out a mathematical scenario where Hillary can make up 100 delegate lead. Oh and the Superdelegates? 80% have gone for Obama since Super Tuesday. Oops since I wrote this Obama just picked up another delegate.
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html




But none of this is relevent to the OP. Go back and read it again. The point of the OP is that Senator Obama is being held to a different standard than any other candidate- now why could that be?

[swishyfeet]

183. Called her a Monster?

It's not exactly the most vicious attack... unless 5 year olds are voting.

And that person already apologized and resigned.

[marshall]

171. But Hillary's willing to make him her VP!

She thinks he should be satisfied with that and withdraw now.

[PerpetuallyDazed]

172. It was fixed from the start.

...Obama, the new guy, was never let in on that dirty little secret.

[grantcart]

176. Its about to become unfixed Obama picks up another SD

his magic number is now 461

[bigbrother05]

181. Tom Daschel SD joined Obama last night

[grantcart]

192. Actually Daschel has been working full time for Obama for some time

He specifically is in charge of Obama's superdelegate campaign. I have always liked Tom a lot

[bigbrother05]

196. Thanks

I learn something new everyday.

[Scurrilous]

185. Kick

:kick:

[Danieljay]

186. The country lowered the bar for Bush, and now raise it for Obama. Wonder why?

[grantcart]

203. a simple mystery

[Recursion]

205. If we mentioned the "r" word a tenth as often as the Clinton supporters mentioned gender...

...we would be laughed out of the political arena as race-baiters.

Race is still a third rail in America, which is why Obama has to run on the "I'm an outsider who wants to change Washington" template and, oh, by the way, he happens to be black.

[grantcart]

206. so that means you are a sexist lol