I, for one, think it’s awesome that the vote margin according to CNN (it’s the one I check every day) has been steadily increasing for Obama, even though there haven’t been any votes cast since Tuesday.
Revisions in NY, mostly. He won more than was reported.
Wow, I wonder if they will find foul play…
{{looks up}}} please, please, please, please
As of now they’re not claiming foul play, simply human error. It is rather odd that that particular error only seems to have caused Obama to get zero votes and not the other way around.
But truthfully, I don’t care, so long as he gets the delegates he’s entitled to and she never, ever becomes our President.
For a cite, by the way.
More on the anxiety of even Clinton supporters of her comittment to take this all the way no matter how ugly it gets.
I stand by my analysis … if Obama does win Wisconsin with a decent margin Tuesday then insider supers will start to declare for him to help jump to the happy ending and to ensure that the ugliness that HRC sees as “fun” doesn’t have a chance to occur.
We’re finally starting to get head-to-head polling in general election battleground states. Right now, it looks very good for Obama. He is beating McCain, and Hillary is losing to McCain, in PA, OR, NH, and CO. Obama and Clinton are tied versus McCain in OH and FL (despite her large leads in those states among Democrats). Recall that Gore wouldn’t have need FL or OH if he’d won CO or NH. [All info courtesy of realclearpolitics.com]
I don’t think polls are the ultimate predictor, but as I’ve said before, I think they are one important data point if we want to make a decision based on getting a Dem in the White House.
The New York Times posted a great grid today, showing how the superdelegates stack up as to those who’ve come out in support of a candidate who won their state or district and those who support the losing candidate.
It’s almost neck and neck among elected officials, with Hillary only enjoying a slight lead among those Governors (3 vs 2) and Senators (3 vs 2) who are endorsing her in states she didn’t win, though her lead with Congressional Representatives is slightly wider (16 vs 10), but still relatively close.
Where it takes a stark divergence is with the DNC party leaders. Hillary has a VAST and ENORMOUS lead in the number of party leaders who are endorsing her, even though Obama won the state they “represent.”
And that is utterly despicable. We can’t fire those jokers! We can’t hold their feet to the fire in any way.
I get the concept that they’re free to vote their conscience, but that doesn’t make it palatable to me that those are the people who may get to choose our Presidential nominee.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/02/17/us/20080217_DELEGATES_1_GRAPHIC.html
I just read this on Yahoo news:
The fact that HRC is having ‘fun’ makes me highly suspect of what she may know that us commoners don’t. I have to admit Shayna I don’t like the looks of that grid too much. However, I do understand that it is representative of who is voting for who from a state where that candidate didn’t win. In all, Obama is currently holding a modest lead with sups and normal delegates. When he takes WI, and HI Tuesday it’ll begin to look a lot better
Obama’s moved into a clear lead (7% yesterday, 5% today) in Gallup’s (national) daily tracking poll. He’s also up by 3% in the Rasmussen tracker.