There is no popular vote

[mudesi]

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


If I repeat it enough times, will you deluded ignoramuses get it?

[sfam]

1. But Hillary's leading in the popular vote!!!

In a word, no. You can repeat it as many times as possible and they will not get it.

[MonkeyFunk]

2. The argument is that

pledged delegates don't accurately reflect the will of democratic voters. That's undeniable.

There's all sorts of arguments to be made that indicate Clinton is the preferred candidate of a majority of democrats, and there's nothing wrong with making those arguments.

[DearAbby]

3. Repeat PRN

There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.


There is no popular vote.

Caucus states don't have a popular vote.

[Occam Bandage]

5. And those 'all sorts of arguments' completely discount four states, and all Obama supporters in MI.

If you'd like to know who the preferred candidate of a majority of dems would be at the moment, look at the opinion polling. Obama's opening up a pretty wide lead. Sure, we don't nominate on opinion polling--but we don't nominate on hacked-up "popular vote" metrics either.

[roguevalley]

33. amazing how they warble on about FL and MICH but want to toss

out the voters in four states. amazing.

[slinkerwink]

6. those arguments are wrong because they disenfranchise four states

and take out the uncommitted total in Michigan, thus giving the rest of the votes to Clinton. It's a false argument and intellectually dishonest.

[Texas Hill Country]

7. agreed.

[SoonerPride]

8. I'd deny it.

You are wrong.

There is no popular vote.

[MonkeyFunk]

28. You don't read well

I said there's no denying that caucuses don't accurately reflect the will of democrats. A quick look at the disparity between the primary and the caucus in TX demonstrates that.

[SoonerPride]

32. You wrote "pledged delegates don't accurately reflect the will of democratic voters" Wrong again.

You can't even keep your own lies straight. Your post didn't even have the word caucus in it.

Pledged delegates come from both primaries (like mine here in Oklahoma) or caucuses (like in Maine).

Pledged delegates DO reflect the will of the people, as they are selected by the people.

You said it was undeniable.

I deny your assertion as false.

[MonkeyFunk]

34. Yes, sorry

the pledged delegate count, including the delegates from caucuses, do NOT accurately reflect the will of voters.

Look at TX. The voters preferred Clinton, but Obama got more delegates - therefore, the delegate count doesn't reflect the will of the voters.

[Occam Bandage]

35. Texas demonstrates absolutely nothing, save that

Hillary Clinton put more effort into winning the primary, and Barack Obama put more effort into winning the caucus.

[GoesTo11]

39. Don't forget Limbaugh factor

It looks like the caucus votes represented real preferences, and the primary votes were in about the same proportion as the caucus votes, except that Limbaugh operation chaos pranksters voted for HRC in the primary but didn't go to caucuses.

[cliffordu]

9. Sorry. Wrong. bad intel.

[mkultra]

13. there is something wrong with assuming that popular vote should effect THIS nomination

If you really think the rules aren't working, i suggest you call for change before the next election. The problem is that its only now that shes losing that its an issue.

Things are working exactly as they are suppose to. FL and MI are out because they tried to bully their way into an early spot.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. I'm not changing any rules

you guys are. You guys are adding a rule that the pledged delegate leader should get the nomination. That's not the rule now.

[Occam Bandage]

36. That's no more "adding a rule" than what you are doing.

Both are attempting to sell a certain measuring stick to the superdelegates.

[mkultra]

48. actually, it will be he person with 2025 delegates

made up of pledged and supers. We just think that once Obama hits the pledged delgate majority mark, the supers will break in his direction. If they dont, so be it.

[FSogol]

14. Its not undeniable. When I voted in my primary, I knew I was voting for a delegate.

Changing the rules mid-race is a bad precedent.

Popular vote from Democratic Convention Watch:

"Any superdelegate who uses the leader in "popular vote" as a basis for their vote is not eligible for membership in the Pelosi Club. Counting the popular vote this year has turned out to be a subjective measure, not an objective measure, and is therefore worthless for definitively determining how a superdelegate will vote."

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/03/superdelegates-pledging-to-back.html

[sfaprog]

15. So what DOES "accurately reflect the will of democratic voters"???

Could it be our nomination system, set up by the party the candidates belong to and agreed to by all candidates??? Naaaaaaaw.

Could it be DU or the blogosphere, gauging the winds of internet opinion??? Naaaaaaaw.

Could it be a mythical popular vote? Naaaaaaaaw, Obama wins that one, too.

Could it be a single Rasmussen poll today showing Obama losing favorability rating to Clinton in Ohio? DING DING DING

:eyes:

[grantcart]

27. there is no calculation that you can make to project what the popular vote is because we

don't have a system of poplular vote.

What is the popular vote for Obama in Iowa where the originally won by 38% but will take 70% of the delegates at the state convention.

Whatever arguments are attempted on popular vote are not supported by the polls











Her campaign has shown no success in expanding beyond the base she had in the fourth quarter of last year.

She did have a temporary success in driving up Obama's negatives but that has subsided.

There is no argument that she is polling better than Obama.

[hokies4ever]

42. I'd like to argue that the IRS tax rules are unfair

but rules are the rules, so deal with them. Hillary's campaign was poorly planned and executed a losing strategy. Obama and Hillary are both great candidates. However, Obama had a great campaign, whereas Hillary's campaign has tried to sandbag her nomination too many times this primary season.

[MattBaggins]

46. It is deniable

You forgot to say "period" at the end of that statement to make it really true.

You are correct in asserting that you can make all kinds of arguments. Obama supporters and super delegates will have every right to laugh at them as well.

[Texas Hill Country]

4. the follow up primaries show how distorted the caucuses are... NE for example

and also, the Super Delegates can use whatever measuring stick they like. And the will of the people is a pretty good one.

[slinkerwink]

10. The Nebraska primary was a 'beauty' primary. Most Obama supporters

in that state didn't show up to vote because they knew it didn't matter.

[Occam Bandage]

11. They show nothing. They took place at different times, and the candidates put

differing amounts of effort into them. HRC supporters had a reason to go out and vote in primaries; they wanted to register protest against the caucuses. Obama supporters, on the other hand, could comfortably stay at home, knowing they had already won.

[roguevalley]

37. They didn't even know the primary caucus rules. Penn thought he

would get all of California's just by winning. they were incompetent. they were stupid. they are losing and now I wish they would find some shred of dignity and leave.

[Lucky 13]

12. oh they get it, but intellectual dishonesty is their forte.

Everyone sees right through their bullshit. The media is barely even covering HIllary and her antics anymore. Why? Because she is fast becoming irrelevant.

I hope that tomorrow's predicts Obama win in Oregon is the final Final FINAL nail in Hillary's coffin and that all of these arguments: popular vote, caucus fairness, blah blah blah will be put to rest.

[Indydem]

16. You've just shown the falacy of your argument!

Obama gets the delegates from many of the caucus states; a process that does not mesh well with the average democratic voter. Most people can't take off a whole day to go caucus, and if they could, its doubtful that Obama would have fared so well.

Your argument that says "caucus states don't have a popular vote" directly reflects that if they HAD a popular vote, Senator Clinton would have fared much better and Obama much worse, thus adjusting the delegate count.

The idea that any delegates are awarded for the caucus are offensive, because it gives the votes of those who can afford to caucus a much higher weight than those who only have 10 minutes to vote in a primary.

[Occam Bandage]

17. The only reason Clinton lost caucus states is that she didn't invest any time or money there.

In the two caucus states she contested--IA and NV--the final results were in line with pre-caucus polling. After all, before this year, caucuses historically favored the elderly, women, and longtime party activists. All are groups favoring Clinton.

[Arugula Latte]

18. Why didn't Hillary raise a stink about it BEFORE the voting started?

[The Ghost]

20. Caucuses take place at night, they dont take the whole day.

My friend in Colorado went to one, was in and out in one hour.

[high density]

22. So because I spent 4.5 hours in a caucus, my vote should count for less, or not at all?

I hate the caucus system, but right NOW is not the time to change it. Clinton knew rules going in.

[TeamsterDem]

23. "if they had ..."

Maybe. And if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a wagon. What's your point? The system is the way it is, and your candidate lost under the system as it was constructed far prior to her running. Enough is truly enough. We can "if" all day long. Point is she is where she is under the rules of the road.

I'm damn glad the cops can't change the rules midstream like some of Hillary's supporters would like to do. Otherwise I'd get a ticket for doing 35 mph in what 1/2 a block ago was a 35 mph zone but was changed *AFTER* I passed the speed limit sign to 25 mph.

[mudesi]

30. I'm not making an argument

I'm stating a fact.

What is with you Clinton people? You realize that whenever she says she's ahead in the popular vote she is lying, right?

[roguevalley]

38. lots of assumptions. you can also say that if they had time off,

Obama would have gotten more votes. you can make any sand castle you want. But he won.

[shraby]

41. If popular vote was the measure of winning, Obama

would have instituted a whole different strategy to win. Face it! Obama is our nominee.

[MattBaggins]

47. good thing for your arguement

that all caucuses are "all day" events and none of them allow absentee or sign and go voting options. I bet some people took longer to vote in Primary waiting lines than did in some Caucuses.

[high density]

19. But it works out better for Clinton if we forget the caucus states and count FL and MI instead!

Obviously the people that spent hours in a caucus are not important to her.

[kentuck]

21. Then, how do they determine who wins the caucuses?

Flip a coin?

[high density]

25. In Maine, caucuses elect delegates to the state convention based on the votes

Hands get counted to determine the proportion of delegates that are given to the candidates, but that count is not recorded. The number of hands is plugged into a math equation to generate the delegate counts. At the end of the process the candidates have state delegates but they don't have individual votes. I can't speak if it works the same way in other states, but I'm betting it's the same idea.

[kentuck]

26. But, in most states, they also nominate a secretary...

to keep track of the events in each precinct. I don't think it is impossible to find out how many people voted in the caucus.

[high density]

31. We might know how many participated, but we don't know the vote totals for the candidates

There is just no lasting record of it in our system. You can estimate these counts, which people have done, but they are not a "popular vote" by any means.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

24. What is important is whatever metric favors Clinton

The only fair metrics are the ones that Clinton wins. Obviously if she loses by a certain metric, that metric is biased in some way.

If you really want to be fair, this election should be decided based on popular vote in the states won by Clinton. The other states are clearly biased towards Obama and therefore shouldn't count.

[demokatgurrl]

40. So sad, but so true. If there were...

We would be voting this year for Al Gore's vice predident to succeed him.

[Toucano]

43. Thank you for pointing out why caucuses should be eliminated.

Can you imagine trying to run the general election that way?

[Occam Bandage]

44. That's an argument for 2012.

[Toucano]

45. Indeed. n-t