our fighter will win. Yes we will! I think PA will be back to 20+ points for her soon, NC will be close and IN will be a small gain for her, but than she will win big in WV & KY.
If Obama wins North Carolina and Indiana, will you acknowledge he is rightfully the Dem nominee? Or does he have to got through a superdelegate fight too?
I think that Hill will win PA by 10+ pts, Indiana is a toss up but the entire clinton family have made multiple stops there over the last 2 wks and her turnout has been great. I believe that obama has only been there 1 xs.
If she wins PA by 10pts, that will spill over to IN. I'm tipping iN to Hill and giving NC to Obama.
KY.WV to Hill. Montana to Obama, and probably Oregon but Bill has really mean making a stay in OR>
Okay, let's look at what's a certainly plausible scenario, along the lines of what you're suggesting here.
Hillary wins PA by 10. Obama takes NC by 16. Hillary takes IN by 2. Obama takes OR by 10. Hillary takes WV and KY by 24. Hillary takes PR by 8. Obama takes MT and SD by 18. Guam splits.
So, this is, on the whole, about what you'd project right now, shading a little toward Hillary. Unallocated Add-Ons should split 41-35 for Obama, under this scenario. Using the Forbes tracker, I count the results of this to be: Obama 1950 - Clinton 1824 under this scenario with 250 uncommitted supers.
Obama would need 75 of the 250 to ratify his delegate lead to secure victory: 30%. Clinton would need 201 of the 250 to vote to overturn the delegate lead: 80%.
is that the MSM and both camps of her opposition NEVER FAIL to underestimate, trivialize and attempt to marginalize both Hillary Clinton AND her support.
If you look at the predictions, and then what has actually happened..
I'm sorry... is this relevant in any way to what I wrote?
no IN for you, sorry - see today's SurveyUSA. i think it will be tie in pledged delegates after June
"A tie in pledged delegates"?
Please calculate the percentage of victories Clinton will need in each contest to pull this off. Arrange it in the most likely scenario.
Before you get snippy like in the other thread, I've already done my homework on this, I know exactly what it will take.
Clinton will not win the pledged delegates. This Clinton supporter knows so. HOWEVER, she is well in the realm of possibility of winning the popular vote. I think people remember a little election between a man named Gore and a man named Bush. Do Democrats really want to do to their own what the Republicans did to Gore?
"HOWEVER, she is well in the realm of possibility of winning the popular vote."
The problem with this is that it will help lead to civil war in the party, if it hasn't already. Let's say you are right (and I do not have any numbers at my finger tips to verify your claim that she even can do this at this point -- it seems unlikely, but I will concede the point). So, Obama wins in pledged delegates, Hillary wins the popular vote. How do you count the popular vote? Does it include the caucuses, which are not included in the current popular vote totals? Hillary then argues that she "won" the popular vote, even though Obama won the delegate race (which has been the only barometer of winning the nomination in the past). What happens then? Do the supers go with her? What happens to Obama's constituents if this happens? Even if you like Hillary and want her to win, do you think this would be good for the party? I just don't think this is good for any of us (regardless of the candidate any of us supports). I honestly think we need to heal from all of this, not create greater division.
The problem is there's a reason why both parties use delegates and not popular votes to determine the nominee:
EVERY STATE HAS DIFFERENT VOTING PROCEDURES.
Some have same day registration. Some have open primaries. Some have close primaries. Some have semi-open primaries. Some have early voting. Some don't. Some begin voting a month prior. Some a week.
This means that some states' voters become more important because more of them are allowed to vote in certain circumstances. - e.g. new voters in same day registration states will have an easier time voting than non-same day registration states. - States with fully open primaries will have more voters than closed primaries. Why should open states have more votes than a closed state just because of state party procedures?
That's the reason they use delegates. Because it's based off percentages of the votes in each state. Thus keeps it a more uniformed process than by judging off popular vote.
Exactly. The biggest thing of the whole situation to remember is that the primary season is NOT an election. It's a process by which the party picks its candidate. And using various methods of voter eligibility and various types of contests gives more detailed and useful information than any blanket election would.
That's why there are democrat-only primaries and open caucuses and everything in between. They all are a measure of a candidate's strength, just not all the same way. And the delegate distribution also plays a part in weighting that as well as weighting the electoral picture.
This system isn't perfect, but it didn't come about by accident. Why not use what it can tell us instead of cursing it for not being what it isn't: an election.
Wow. Way to completely bypass the point of what I wrote.
Can you acknowledge that while the primary contest is not an election, that there is a reason that it's not an election and it gives a richer assessment of candidate strengths than the other does?
Now, past that point you can make the case that the only consideration for the party's selection of its candidate should be the breadth of low-commitment support from party-registered voters only without significant impact from campaigning. Because that's what you're implicitly doing here.
And I don't think that's an easy sell.
SurveyUSA just said C52-O43, so IN goes to Hillary to.
Five weeks out?
Oh yeah. Obama's never come back from a 9 point deficit with five weeks to go.
I will acknowledge him as the nominee when either one of the two things happen:
1. He gets enough delegates to clinch the nomination 2. HRC drops out
Sparing either of these, he is not our nominee
I had posted a dKos diary about this. Click on the link.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/1/1 32052/3217
browser blocks the daily kooks, sorry. If you have a sane blog, get back to us on that.
