Clinton's claim to winning the popular vote is debatable.

[not_too_L8]

Clinton's claim to winning the popular vote is debatable. Including the results from Clinton’s big win in Puerto Rico, she can only be considered the popular vote winner if the results from Michigan (where Obama was not on the ballot) are counted for her and Obama is awarded no votes from that state. But 237,762 voted "uncommitted" in that contest and the Obama campaign argues many of them were supporters of the Illinois senator.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[RoadRage]

1. It also includes NONE of the votes cast in the NE & ID caucuses..

both states went to Obama by about 70% - 30%.

[jsamuel]

11. it includes those caucuses

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

[sfam]

2. Debatable? Um, no, its just not factually accurate. nt

[greguganus]

3. How is a flat out lie debatable? n/t

[truebrit71]

4. Well duh....she's had a problem with fuzzy math ever since she wasn't coronated on Super Tuesday...

...and the longer it goes on the more pathetic she looks...

[patrice]

5. Since she WAS on the ballot in MI, if any of those 237,762 wanted to vote HC, they could have.

[Apollo11]

6. Obama needs at least 82% of those "uncommitted" votes to overtake Hillary

If you include Florida and Michigan, then Hillary has at least 17,692,901 certified votes.

For Obama to beat Hillary in the popular vote you have to do 3 things:

1. Include estimates from the caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine (which did not release popular vote totals). The estimate from these four Caucus states increases Obama’s popular vote margin by 110,224.

2. Make sure you use estimates from the Washington caucuses on February 9th - NOT the results of the Washington primary on February 19th.

3. Make sure you take all (or at least 82%) of the 238,168 "uncommitted" votes from the Michigan primary on January 15th, and add them to the Obama column.

If you do all 3 of these things - then Obama comes out in the lead -- by less than 45,000 votes.

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

[Douglas Carpenter]

13. it is either patently disingenuous or downright nutty to include Florida and Michigan

And no one in their right mind could possibly argue that a primary in which the Michigan and Florida electorate and indeed the whole world was told repeatedly would not count and this was repeated constantly by the media on the eve of and the day of the primary - and this was done according to the rules Sen. Clinton and all other candidates agreed to. and ONLY the Clinton campaign wanted to change the rules after the fact - that such a primary and in the case of Michigan without Sen. Obama on the ballot , that this was an accurate representation of the will of registered Michigan Democrats and Florida Democrats. To believe this, one would have to believe that Sen. Obama had not even one single supporter in the state of Michigan.

Absurd would be the polite word that comes to mind.

In principle they shouldn't have seated the Michigan and Floriday delegation...however the DNC, and Sen. Obama's campaign felt it best to make a major concession which was supported by both the Florida and Michigan delegations even though it involved a major give-away to the Clinton campaign that they were certainly not entitled to.

It was VERY big give-away on the part of Sen. Obama to agree to it. Since Sen. Clinton was trying to change the rules she had previously agreed to.

But when all is said and done it was best to make this concession to help with the general election, support the Florida and Michigan state organizations and for the sake of party unity.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

7. Popular vote doesn't even matter within a single state

Delegates are appointed to precincts according to how they have voted in the past. Precincts that have voted Democratic receive more delegates than precincts that have voted Republican. That is why you see situations like Nevada, where Clinton won the popular vote but received fewer delegates.

[Heather MC]

8. in her speech in PR she said Obama has a "slight lead in delegates"

:rofl:
over 200 is a slight lead ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Tragically, she is trying to get her die hard supporters to believe they took this from her
so they will not vote for Obama. and she can run again in 2012
She is scum

[Adelante]

9. Not debatable at all

It doesn't exist. It's a complete fabrication. Anybody who falls for it is being played for a sucker.

[Hepburn]

10. What you said! n/t

[MattBaggins]

12. I still maintain that in the spirit of fairness

that if you can't say "uncommitteds" were for Obama; you can say they were against Hillary. Deduct them from her total. Hillary followers might not like the idea that some people voted against her; but if we are to count ALL votes, that must include those who chose not to flip a lever with her name. Why should they be punished and disenfranchised for something that was not their fault? The party leaders caused this mess and they should not be tossed aside just because of other peoples actions.

[casus belli]

14. If by "debatable" you mean "fictitious", then yes. n/t