-
What agreement are we discussing?
-
If the convention is willing to seat them, how is Clinton the one who is reneging?
As RickJay mentioned, he is ahead, he doesn’t need to change a thing.
And if he did go negative in the way you suggest, he would look like a biggest two-faced fake that ever ran for POTUS.
The agreement to play by the rules the DNC outlines when the primaries started.
Because they would only due that after she sent a fleet of lawyers in to bully them into doing so.
Dr. Deth once again, as linked and cited before, the Florida Democrats overwhelmingly voted for the primary move as well and refused to work with the DNC on coming up with an alternate plan. Your are repeating an untrue statement when you state that the Pubbies did this to the the Dems in FL.
Also see my post above for similar calculations but pay attention to the fact that HRC would need to get 400% more of the remaining superdelegates as Obama in your scenario to win whereas Obama would need only 42% more than her to garner the nomination. Or to put it another way, if it goes as you estimate and he picks up just 69 more supers along the way (and the rumor is that fifty are waiting in the wings) then her ability to win is blocked. Unless some jump ships. Always a possibility. Or there is a FL do-over that she wins. Or …
To me, Hillary Clinton is like the eye of the hurricane. She’s perfectly fine, but the intense storm of controversy that swirls around her is driving me bananas. If the only way for it to go away is for her to go away, then so be it.
They did. True, I admit the Fla Dem Assemblemen etc are dumber than a bag of hammers and let the GoP pull a fast one on them. But so? Why does this mean that the people of the State don’t get their votes counted? The people didn’t agree to this.
Overall, Hillary has more popular votes than Obama has. Obama is only ahead ue to the odd way delegates are apportioned (Caucuses, small states getting more delegates than their population would normally account for, etc), not due to his popular support with “the people”.
Sure, Obama needs less SuperDelegates, and that’s right there in my numbers. But even CNN did the math- neither Candidate, neither Clinton OR Obama can win outright without SuperDelegates now. In other words, if Hillary can only win by “cheating” then that’s the only way Obama can win too. NEITHER CANDIDATE CAN WIN NOW WITHOUT SUPERDELEGATES.
Who called getting superdelegates cheating?
The cheating allegations are based on HRC trying to get MI/FL delegates seated after the rules clearly stated that they wouldn’t be.
It sure is. Question: Why is Washington state the only one colored white? And I’m assuming that, despite being shaded for Clinton, Florida and Michigan aren’t included in the totals?
DrDeth y’know, I didn’t personally vote on any of the laws that Congress has passed. Why should I have to follow them? Why should I be punished?
Clinton is still behind in the popular vote even counting Florida. She only inches ahead if you add in Michigan, the state that she was the only one on the ballot and would be behind even then if you count the "uncommitted"s as votes for Obama.
And no superdelegates are not cheating. And both need them. Clinton just needs a lot more of them. And it would indeed be “legit” for them to go overwhelmingly for her by a four to one margin or more and give her the nod. But doing that would very likely have significant consequences for the party’s future even if the rooms are smoke free. It would be hard to convince at least half the party that it wasn’t done because of favors instead a considered analysis of which option is the best choice.
Because looking at the raw data would suggest that the best choice option is Obama. I’m cool with that!
I had every reason to interpret Martin Hyde’s statements as saying voters are stupid and not qualified to choose a nominee - not that they are merely ignorant about political strategy.
Those are his words. Let him eat them if he wants.
No, but the people were informed that the Dem primary was meaningless. If they chose to vote anyway, they did it of their own volition. Nothing was done after the fact to dispense with their votes. Nobody punished them.
Well, I was all set to gripe that no one had answered my question (post 36) about how many delegates Obama would have to take to be guaranteed a first-ballot nomination. But DrDeth’s numbers above pretty much show the situation. Let me restate them to make my point (viz., that this is going to the convention, and thus Hillary is not “done”, technically):
With 600 delegates up for grabs, Clinton would have to take 94% of them to pull even with Obama. Ain’t gonna happen.
Obama would have to get 76% of the remaining delegates to be assured the nomination. If you think that’s possible, I got some Arizona swampland I’d love to sell you.
Ergo, this game ain’t over 'til the fat lady sings “Happy Days Are Here Again”.
On edit: I just remembered something that might be a factor in the present discussion of how the superdelegates might break - how many delegates is John Edwards sitting on?
I think it’s 26. He’s not going to clinch it or sink it for either of them.
If Clinton had protested making the MI/FL votes count before the results came out, I wouldn’t care. Hell, I might even have supported her in it. But there is currently no way she can honorably advocate for “making the people’s voice heard” without her intentions being tainted by the results.
No, but it comes down to a floor fight every delegate will matter, especially to she who needs many more of them to pull it off, and that makes his endorsing one over the other actually something that might matter a little after all. A good point, BJ.
Realize that if you counted Florida as it stands you are looking at not too many more - maybe a net of 35. These are numbers big enough to get her close enough to have a moderate super delegate swing do it for her.
So if the numbers at RealClear Politics are accurate, Hillary has gained maybe 11 delegates on Obama as a result of Tuesday night.
It seems to me that Mississippi (33 total delegates) and Wyoming (12 delegates) could easily make up for that loss.
As an Obama supporter I think I could live with counting Florida, but in no way could I accept counting Michigan.
The argument that the voters of Florida shouldn’t suffer because of their Assemblymen and women doesn’t really hold. This is a representative democracy and the people voted for these folks, they live with the consequences.
What this did do is make a bunch of supers who would’ve come out for Obama this week with a clear popular vote win for him Texas hold their fire. Those rumored 50 in the wings (and the daily delegate or two that were consistently coming over) are going to wait a bit longer now. So netting only 11 pledged or less, but defending against 50 plus supers declaring for Obama, at least for now. That counts as a good day. She aint winning, her odds are poor, but she now has a small chance. There is a long shot path if all goes just right. If she hadn’t won Texas, or hadn’t won Ohio well, well there wouldn’t have been one at all, really.
Off subject, I’ve been hearing some spin about how this prolongation could be a good thing for the Dems, keeping them in the news cycle and McCain out of the publicity. I gotta say I think that’s crap. This is like Risk and he’s in Australia building up armies while the other two are killing each other across Asia and Europe. (Yes, I’m a nerd.) The longer this goes from here, the uglier it gets, the more likely it is to see a President McCain.
Especially given that MS is a state that goes 60-40 GOP in national elections, and it’s 38% black, it could eclipse Hillary’s Tuesday night delegate gains all by itself.
Wonder if Mississippi is one of those states that don’t count? 