This is clearly a plus for Obama. He, not she, brings in new people.

with some D.C. advisers saying:
Don't KO Hillary yet, you need her voters!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9375.html

[ 05 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

[ 22 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats in primary states choose their nominee on the basis of a convoluted system of proportional distribution of delegates that varies from state to state and that obtains in neither congressional nor presidential elections. It is this eccentric system that has given Obama his lead in the delegate count. If the Democrats heeded the "winner takes all" democracy that prevails in American politics, and that determines the president, Clinton would be comfortably in front.

In a popular-vote winner-take-all system, Clinton would now have 1,743 pledged delegates to Obama's 1,257. If she splits the 10 remaining contests with Obama, as seems plausible, with Clinton taking Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana and Puerto Rico, and Obama winning North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon and Guam, she'd pick up another 364 pledged delegates. She'd have 2,107 before a single superdelegate was wooed.

You need 2,024 to be the Democratic nominee. Game over. No more blogospheric ranting about Clinton "stealing" the nomination by kidnapping superdelegates or cutting deals at a brokered convention.

[ 07 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
It would be good to stick a nail in the coffin of the political careers of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:

Yeah, it's not like she has a safe Senate seat to fall back on or anything

---

She'll be a lot less prominent after losing a presidential action.

quote:

---

In a popular-vote winner-take-all system, Clinton would now have 1,743 pledged delegates to Obama's 1,257. If she splits the 10 remaining contests with Obama, as seems plausible, with Clinton taking Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana and Puerto Rico, and Obama winning North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana, Oregon and Guam, she'd pick up another 364 pledged delegates. She'd have 2,107 before a single superdelegate was wooed.

---

Actually, that's (What's the word I'm looking for? Oh yeah!) bullshit.

If the campaign had been run on different rules, all the candidates would have run their campaigns differently, which would have created entirely different campaign dynamics and at least some change in voting outcomes.

I suspect that a winner take all system likely would have worked to Clinton's advantage, but it is (what's the word?) moronic to pretend that she would necessarily have won (or lost) all the same states.

The author decries this "eccentric" system. But consider the effects of the "rational" system he proposes.

Come the fall, it is highly unlikely that any presidential campaign will visit Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Massachusetts as these states will not be "in play." If there are any visits at all, they will be token appearances.

Major states (in terms of population) are likely to be ignored. Why would either candidate campaign in California if the polls show a significant Obama lead? Why would either go to Texas if polls suggest a McCain blow-out?

Florida will get a lot of attention. Likewise Ohio. Pennsylvania.

No, Hillary Clinton shouldn't be winning

quote:

---

Sean Wilentz is a Yankees fan. I am a Red Sox fan. Perhaps Sean Wilentz could write that the American League championship should go to the team with the most hits instead of the most wins, which would have made the Yankees rather than the Red Sox the real champions last year. After all, isn't the real point of baseball to hit the ball and get on base? That's why it's called baseball, and not run-ball or win-ball, right? I would not find that argument convincing. Wilentz's winner-take-all gambit is a talking point, not an argument: "If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a bus" is rarely a persuasive line of reasoning. If the rules for winning delegates and the nomination had been different, the candidates would have run different campaigns and put their resources into different places and different proportions.

---

[ 12 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

1. Jack Nicholson endorsed Hillary, saying, "Real men vote Hillary"

quote:

---

Hillary was giving a speech really attacking Anerican industries that fold up and outsource from China.

---

COUGH * Wal-Mart Board of Directors * COUGH

[ 12 April 2008: Message edited by: Scott Piatkowski ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by St. Paul's Progressive:
Pennsylvania is supposed to be strong turf for Hillary - a working class "rust belt" state - so if Obama even comes close, I think she is finished.

---

In order to win a lead in pledged delegates, Hillary Clinton would need to win about 60% of all the remaining delegates. Given that several of the states are much closer to the demographics of those where Obama has previously won, she'd therefore have to win states like Pennsylvania by an even larger margin.

For Obama, "close" in Pennsylvania will almost guarantee the nomination.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:
1. Jack Nicholson endorsed Hillary, saying, "Real men vote Hillary"

---

Does that mean Jack can't handle the truth?

I watched some of the CNN special on faith and politics tonite, and almost felt sorry for Sen Clinton when the panel made her stay a second longer while they introduced their next guest, Sen Obama to enthusiastic applause and a rousing welcome from the studio audience.

options for "belling Hillary", esp. should PA go badly for her:
http://tinyurl.com/66rcdx

After Pennsylvania
Possible outcomes of the crucial Democrat primary of April 22.

1. Clinton wins big

A win of 20 points or more over Obama in Pennsylvania would keep Clinton's campaign alive. She would also have to replicate this result in the nine states still to vote, narrowing the gap with her rival and convincing the all-important party superdelegates to choose her as nominee.

2. Clinton wins small

A victory in single digits, in a state where Clinton was once 20 points ahead, would make little difference to Obama's lead. Yet a win is a win, and she would be likely to try to stay in the race until June, unless superdelegates stepped in.

3. Obama wins small

A single figure victory on Clinton's 'home turf' would cement Obama's claim to the nomination. Superdelegates would be likely to declare him the nominee before June.

4. Convincing win for Obama

A double-digit Obama victory would be the shock of the primary contest. It would be followed by a stampede of superdelegates rushing to be front of the queue to embrace him.

[ 14 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

It's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," he said.

FOCUS ON PENNSYLVANIA

The furor could threaten Obama's chances in Pennsylvania, which votes on April 22, the next big showdown in his fight with Clinton for the Democratic nomination to face McCain in November's presidential election.

Clinton once enjoyed a big lead in Pennsylvania polls but that has dwindled to about 4 to 6 points in a state that has struggled from job losses and has a large number of the blue-collar voters who have been Clinton's biggest backers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Piatkowski:
COUGH * Wal-Mart Board of Directors * COUGH

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Actually, Obama may lose Pennsylvania, after his "bitter" remark at the end of last week. It seems they are pretty upset about it there, and they were wearing patches and carrying signs stating "Not bitter"

---

1) People seem to get really upset whenever a politician (or one of their supporters) actually speaks the truth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/14/need-headline_n_96578.html

I'm hoping this is a sign that real working-class Pennsylvanians see this issue for what it really is - just a distraction.

[ 14 April 2008: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by martin dufresne:
Heckling as as a criterion on Babble...?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Piatkowski:
The irony of Hillary Clinton supporters adopting the mantle of the "not bitter" is way off the Alanis Morisette scale.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MCunningBC:

Does that mean Jack can't handle the truth?

I watched some of the CNN special on faith and politics tonite, and almost felt sorry for Sen Clinton when the panel made her stay a second longer while they introduced their next guest, Sen Obama to enthusiastic applause and a rousing welcome from the studio audience.

During the interview with Obama I was surprised when he stated that he thought some kind of common ground could be had with pro-lifers, and that a respectful difference of opinion was possible on this issue. I thought to myself, "I wonder what would happen at an NDP convention if any candidate, but especially a male candidate for party leader gave an answer like that?"

---

1) re: jack nicholson ...

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Actually, Obama may lose Pennsylvania, after his "bitter" remark at the end of last week. It seems they are pretty upset about it there, and they were wearing patches and carrying signs stating "Not bitter"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boom Boom:

LOL! I had forgotten about that. I wonder why Obama hasn't attacked Clinton over this particular bit of history - or has he?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard of Socialism:
I know beating up on Wal-Mart is a popular thing these days by those of us who can afford it. But there are a lot of single moms with little kids out there who depend on Wal-Mart to make their dollar go just a little farther, so the kids can have milk instead of tapwater. Being poor doesn't automatically make one a redneck. I've joined a co-operative that has a local organic farmer take care of everything. Organic vegetables, free-range chickens, hormone free beef - the whole deal. But I pay a premium for that, and I know it's beyond the means of a lot of people. I don't begrudge the poor three dollar a gallon milk because their kids deserve calcium and vitamin d as much as anyone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard of Socialism:
I know beating up on Wal-Mart is a popular thing these days by those of us who can afford it. But there are a lot of single moms with little kids out there who depend on Wal-Mart to make their dollar go just a little farther, so the kids can have milk instead of tapwater. Being poor doesn't automatically make one a redneck. I've joined a co-operative that has a local organic farmer take care of everything. Organic vegetables, free-range chickens, hormone free beef - the whole deal. But I pay a premium for that, and I know it's beyond the means of a lot of people. I don't begrudge the poor three dollar a gallon milk because their kids deserve calcium and vitamin d as much as anyone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard of Socialism:
It's nice you can afford to take that point of view. I can too, but I choose not to. There are so many hungry kids here in Regina, that it just seems terribly inappropriate. You need to walk down fifth avenue sometime and get a picture of the suffering they endure, right in our own backyard.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard of Socialism:
Hey buddy, I'm not looking for a war here. I just want poor kids to have milk.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
2) re: NDP Canada and the USA are different countries. Abortion rights are a political battleground down there, and are sacred up here. That's called the difference between a very Christian culture and a secular culture.

---

I have seen figures showing that church attendance is much higher in the US, about 40% compared to 20% in Canada. At the start of WWII, both countries were at 40%, but in Canada it has declined, in America it didn't. I suppose a fair bit of the Canadian decline has to do with the Quiet Revolution in Quebec, but perhaps not all of it.

Still, political scientists maintain that their analysis of polling data reveals that religion is still a major determinant of Canadian voting patterns.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
NDP Canada and the USA are different countries. Abortion rights are a political battleground down there, and are sacred up here. That's called the difference between a very Christian culture and a secular culture.

---

No actually, that difference is called understanding human rights in the areas of equality rights, and freedom of conscience.

And btw abortion is not sacred, human rights are, and freedom of choice.

The "bitter" incident serves one real purpose for Clinton: It strengthens her case to superdelegates. Clinton has already been painting a potential Obama nomination as a disaster scenario. This flap gives her fresh buckets and a new brush. Among her plausible arguments: Obama just lost Pennsylvania in the general. He alienated Reagan Democrats across the country. He squandered a major advantage over the less-religious McCain.

His "bitter" comments—and the attitudes they represent—are just the tip of an iceberg of vulnerabilities. Clinton even compared him to John Kerry and Al Gore (so much for that endorsement), who voters thought "did not really understand, or relate to, or respect their ways of life." An Obama nomination, she can now argue, would be the worst kind of disaster—a repeat.

[ 15 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
No actually, that difference is called understanding human rights in the areas of equality rights, and freedom of conscience.

And btw abortion is not sacred, human rights are, and freedom of choice.

And please do not bother to respond to me, as you are continually trying to back door feminist forum discussions into the open forums.

---

quote:

---

So you don't give a shit about the poor First Nations kids living in third world conditions i

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
... b) if you don't want someone to respond to you, then don't address them in the first place - you don't get to get in your jabs and then tell someone not to respond to you, ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Okay, a) he can respond to your posts if he likes, b) if you don't want someone to respond to you, then don't address them in the first place - you don't get to get in your jabs and then tell someone not to respond to you, and c) there is nothing wrong with what he wrote - it's on topic, not anti-choice, and well within bounds of this discussion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard of Socialism:
I buy my videogames there because EB Games is a rip-off. Grand Theft Auto 4 comes out two weeks from today! Woo-Woo!!! I've been waiting since October for this. I bought my 360 specifically to play this one game. I've been playing Saint's Row to tide me over, but it's like drinking diet soda. Unsatisfying and a little flat.

---

[ 15 April 2008: Message edited by: Jabberwock ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jabberwock:
Surely, one can vilify Walmart without vilifying the poor of Regina and other urban centres who cannot afford to shop elsewhere. The fact that Walmart and its ilk can be held to a large degree responsible for both the suffering of the working class in N. America and those in free trade zones world wide is not a condemnation of those who cannot afford to pay the prices of more ethically responsible producers.
Anyway, it was news to me that Hillary was on the Walmart board of directors and was involved in union busting- but I knew she was a hypocrite anyway.

[ 15 April 2008: Message edited by: Jabberwock ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

Okay, a) he can respond to your posts if he likes, b) if you don't want someone to respond to you, then don't address them in the first place - you don't get to get in your jabs and then tell someone not to respond to you, and c) there is nothing wrong with what he wrote - it's on topic, not anti-choice, and well within bounds of this discussion.

---

Michelle, thanks for intervening, as that woman is coming off as a hateful lunatic.

I was not speaking to her at all, I was speaking to CunningBC, and she stepped in to make a ridiculous, paranoid and ignorant comment, and she had the audacity to demand I not respond. She does this frequently, follows me around the forums. I have politely asked her to stop but she does not. I'd estimate around 50% of my participations on any given topic gets a hateful response from her. It wouldn't be surprising if she were to actively search for my name in threads just to add in her invective. If you remember the thread last year where I mentioned personal problems, she came in and suggested I have schizophrenia. I find her obsessive stalking to be disturbing. She also displays distorted perception, as can be seen above with her absurd implied insinuation that my post was misogynist, when in fact it was an obviously religious observation to anyone of sound mind.

[ 16 April 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:

Michelle, thanks for intervening, as that woman is coming off as a hateful lunatic.

I was not speaking to her at all, I was speaking to CunningBC, and she stepped in to make a ridiculous, paranoid and ignorant comment, and she had the audacity to demand I not respond. She does this frequently, follows me around the forums. I have politely asked her to stop but she does not. I'd estimate around 50% of my participations on any given topic gets a hateful response from her. It wouldn't be surprising if she were to actively search for my name in threads just to add in her invective. If you remember the thread last year where I mentioned personal problems, she came in and suggested I have schizophrenia. I find her obsessive stalking to be disturbing. She also displays distorted perception, as can be seen above with her absurd implied insinuation that my post was misogynist, when in fact it was an obviously religious observation to anyone of sound mind.

[ 16 April 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

---

quote:

---

hateful lunatic

---

quote:

---

ridiculous, paranoid and ignorant comment

---

quote:

---

obsessive stalking

---

quote:

---

anyone of sound mind

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
stop your whining like a little child.

---

You're a lot like remind. Full of hatred and with stalk tendencies. Are you going to call me road apples again? Are you also going to argue Nazi Germany was not a plausible medium-term nuclear threat in 1939?

quote:

---

this is helpful dialogue?

---

Look at my posts I post on any topic I feel like and it certainly doesn't have to do with stalking you but you are right I sometimes get a little rude with people I consider to be right wing trolls.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:

Michelle, thanks for intervening, as that woman is coming off as a hateful lunatic.

I was not speaking to her at all, I was speaking to CunningBC, and she stepped in to make a ridiculous, paranoid and ignorant comment, and she had the audacity to demand I not respond. She does this frequently, follows me around the forums. I have politely asked her to stop but she does not. I'd estimate around 50% of my participations on any given topic gets a hateful response from her. It wouldn't be surprising if she were to actively search for my name in threads just to add in her invective. If you remember the thread last year where I mentioned personal problems, she came in and suggested I have schizophrenia. I find her obsessive stalking to be disturbing. She also displays distorted perception, as can be seen above with her absurd implied insinuation that my post was misogynist, when in fact it was an obviously religious observation to anyone of sound mind.

[ 16 April 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:

never heard of a wal-mart on any reserve. Anyone else heard of this????

---

I think he means First Nations and Metis people living in third world conditions in urban areas.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Geneva:
back to the thread topic: Obama and PA primary

anyone see the debate last evening? I did not, and hard to judge from TV news soundbites and excerpts:
http://www.slate.com/id/2189273/

---

I caught most of it. I was struck by how aggressive the questions were - Charles Gibson in particular was a bit of a pit bull.

I thought Clinton came across as smoother, but she also hit Obama a lot harder, taking the oppty to reinforce that it would have been "intolerable" for her to remain in a church after its pastor dissed America after 911. Obama on the other hand declined to pound Clinton again on the Tuzla thing (although the mods did).

Apparently Clinton's negative stuff is not yet working in Pennsylvania even though every single ad buy she has now is taking a shot at him. I believe polls show Obama within 5%. Which, really, is astounding given the last few weeks he's had (he is spending gobs of money there though).

Couple of things that both candidates did:

*made explicit promises not to raise taxes on the some entity called the middle class (Clinton seems to include anyone under $250K)
*committed to ordering the military to draw up withdrawal plans for Iraq and stressed that they would persist in that decision on matter what "the generals" thought.

Neither really issued a knock-out punch.

The current scuttlebut is that Clinton is now determined to bloody Obama so badly he'll actually fail in the general, so that she's the presumptive nominee for 2012.

[ 17 April 2008: Message edited by: pookie ]

quote:

---

The latest flare-up between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton shows how inane their battles-about-nothing have become - the inevitable result when there's no substantive difference between the contestants. Much of Obama's campaign has been tailored to appeal to "Reagan Democrats," the kind of "white people who vote for Republicans when it is clearly not in their interest to do so." This time, however, he appeared to be criticizing the narrowness of small town white folks' worldviews, giving Clinton and Republican John McCain all the ammunition they needed to attack him from the Right. As hard as he tries, Obama seems not to understand how and where to kiss a redneck.

---

http://tinyurl.com/4zggse

"Voters want more from Senator Obama. He’s given a series of wonderful speeches, but he has to add more meat to those rhetorical bones. He needs to be clear about where he wants to lead this country and how he plans to do it. That’s how a candidate defines himself or herself.

Instead, Mr. Obama is allowing the Clintons and the news media to craft a damaging persona of him as some kind of weak-kneed brother from another planet, out of touch with mainstream America, and perhaps a loser.

Wednesday night’s debate in Philadelphia may have been a sorry exercise in journalism, but even many of Senator Obama’s own supporters were disappointed with his lackluster performance.

The big issues of our time are being left behind as pettiness and mean-spirited partisanship carry the day."

[ 19 April 2008: Message edited by: Erik Redburn ]

Beginning with the debacle of 1968, every Democratic campaign for four decades has followed pretty much the same template, even if the labels have shifted with the tide. The quadrennial conflict between liberals and moderates, outsiders and insiders, let's-win-an-election realists and let's-save-our-party dreamers -- supply your own dichotomy here -- reflects the fatal uncertainty of a political party that lacks any clear constituency or ideological focus. Even as the Democratic Party encompasses the views of a plausible majority of the population, its unresolved internal struggles have time and again undermined its ability to win elections or (when it happens to stumble to victory) to govern effectively.

[ 21 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

quote:

---

Nicklas Lidstrom bounced in a short-handed goal over goaltender Dan Ellis in the second period and the Red Wings closed out their opening series with 3-0 victory over Nashville yesterday

"I'm just trying to float one in there," Lidstrom said. "I took some off the shot just to see if I could land in front of him, just go for a bounce or just create something in front of him."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by josh:
Had Jack and Bobby's lives not been cut short, or had Teddy not driven across that bridge at Chappaquidick, the history of the Democratic part the last 40-50 years would have been quite different.

---

http://tinyurl.com/66jwt4

Pennsylvania has become a major battleground in the fight for the Democratic presidential nomination, with the future of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign most likely resting on the outcome. Even a wide victory by her would not overcome her deficit in pledged delegates or in the popular vote of states that have held nominating contests, but it would ensure that the race moved on to contests in Indiana and North Carolina in two weeks, on May 6.

[ 22 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

Lehigh had a very right wing dem as their congressman. Paul McHale is now deputy secretary of Homeland Security for the repubs. It will be interesting to see who wins this blue collar area.

-- CNN projects a Clinton win. --

[ 22 April 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

To catch up to Obama she needed to win 65% of the remaining pledged delegates. In Pennsylvania, a big state where she lead by 20 points no more than a month ago, she got 55%. So the biggest state left, where she had the best chance to gain some ground back, she didn't get close to what she needed.

Going into the Pennsylvania primary, Obama was up 171 pledged (elected) delegates. It will take some time to get the actual delegate counts, but Clinton did not win big today and she'll get about a dozen more delegates than Obama. He'll still have a lead of at least 160 pledged delegates.

Clinton will need to get 2/3 of the remaining delegates. It's just not going to happen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by miles:
i will be watching 2 areas. the first is Lehigh Valley -- Easton, Bethlehem and Allantown area and Scranton.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aka Mycroft:
And by 10 points. I'm starting to think Clinton will get the nomination after all.

---

quote:

---

There was little indication Obama was winning over constituencies he may have offended when he said at a fundraising event that small-town people were bitter and clung to guns and religion as a result. Gun owners, people who attend church at least weekly, and rural residents were all supporting Clinton by margins of about six in 10.

---

Yahoo news

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
I could not believe that Pittsburgh took out Ottawa in four straight.

---

but take the spread; Obama could easily beat the Flyers, despite his recent W-L record in Pennsylvania ...

[ 23 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

Before they devour themselves once more, perhaps the Democrats will take a cue from Dr. Seuss’s “Marvin K. Mooney Will You Please Go Now!” (The writer once mischievously redid it for his friend Art Buchwald as “Richard M. Nixon Will You Please Go Now!”) They could sing:

“The time has come. The time has come. The time is now. Just go. ... I don’t care how. You can go by foot. You can go by cow. Hillary R. Clinton, will you please go now! You can go on skates. You can go on skis. ... You can go in an old blue shoe.

Just go, go, GO!”

[ 23 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

Not newsworthy? A family member says she has never heard Hillary say that before.

One of her supporters has: Let's see the inspiration in being able to show our daughters that there is nothing they can't do, nothing they can't achieve in this new century of ours. And by the way, this is a great article:

quote:

---

if you want to know what Hillary Clinton believes in, what she stands for, and what's in her heart, then look at what she's been fighting for her whole life: she's been fighting for people who need help.

Here's a woman who, when she graduated, went to work for the Children's Defense Fund, rather than for a fancy law firm with a big salary. Here is a woman who introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage because she believes that if America's working people don't deserve a raise, neither do their elected officials. . .

Extending health care to those without it, to the young, the vulnerable, and the poor has been the great passion of her public life. . .

. . . for our mothers and grandmothers who couldn't even vote - let's fight for the chance to say the words "Madam President" to someone who we know can be relied on to get things done.

---

[ 23 April 2008: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]

quote:

---

if you want to know what Hillary Clinton believes in, what she stands for, and what's in her heart, then look at what she's been fighting for her whole life: she's been fighting for people who need help.

---

quote:

---

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton replied. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate[ them."

---

[ 23 April 2008: Message edited by: Jingles ]

quote:

---

Partial quote originally posted by Jingles:
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton replied.

---

quote:

---

Interviewed on ABC's Good Morning America program, Clinton was asked what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton replied.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
In Pennsylvania it was a closed primary meaning that only registered Democrats could vote.
*Pennsylvania has the dubious distinction of having the oldest average of any state after Florida - something like 30% of the people voting in the Democratic primary there were senior citizens - and for some reason Hillary does well with the old geezers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
I mean people actually "self-identify" as gun owners, as the most sailent social aspect of themselves.

---

If the pollster asks "do you own firearms?" the two main choices are "yes" and "no."

The AP margin is the narrowest one I've come across - thus the most favourable to Clinton. So let's use that.

Pledged (includes projections)

Obama 1488
Clinton 1333

Superdelegates

Obama 235
Clinton 259

Totals

Obama 1723
Clinton 1592

Total delegates: 4049
Total allocated above: 3315
Remaining to be allocated: 734
Remaining pledged: 408
Remaining superdelegates: 326

In order to beat Obama in the pledged delegate count, Clinton need to win 156 more delegates than Obama, meaning a margin of 282 - 126. That means averaging 69% in the remaining contests. No one can possibly believe that is possible - especially with polls showing a substantial Obama lead in North Carolina.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Clinton manages to play Obama to a draw in North Carolina and proceeds to win every other primary with an average of 60% (certainly a long shot all round), that would give Clinton a net gain of 58 delegates, giving us:

Pledged - Obama 1663, Clinton 1566
Superdelegates - Obama 235, Clinton 259

Total - Obama 1898, Clinton 1825 - Margin 73.

Therefore, even in this incredibly optimistic Clinton scenario, Clinton would need to beat Obama by a margin of 76 among uncommitted superdelegates - a count of 201 - 125 (62%)

This assumes, of course, that the superdelegates are willing to face the shitstorm of criticism that would inevitably follow a decision to overturn the delegate results based on party members votes in primaries and caucusses - a scenario I consider unlikely off the top.

This doesn't even take into account the fact that several of the remaining primaries in addition to North Carolina are likely more favourable to Obama than to Clinton. Of the nine, five (North Carolina, Kentucky, Oregon, Montana and South Dakota) are demographically similar to the states that Obama has largely swept to date. These five constitute 249 of the remaining 408 pledged delegates (61%).

If Obama simply breaks even across those five states and Clinton wins the remainder with a wildly optimistic 65% of the vote, you end up with a tally (including pledged delegates and already committed superdelegates) of: Obama 1903, Clinton 1820, and Clinton needs to win 205 of the remaining 326 uncommitted superdelegates (63%).

These scenarios presume "perfect storm" conditions for Hillary Clinton - and they still make winning the nomination a long shot prospect. More realistic projections (ie, Obama winning the five 55%-45% and Clinton the remainder by a similar margin) require Clinton to win an increasingly unrealistic margin among the remaining superdelegates. (That scenario leads to Obama 1931, Clinton 1792 and Clinton needing 233 or more than 71% of the remaining superdelegates.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm French, APR:
This assumes, of course, that the superdelegates are willing to face the shitstorm of criticism that would inevitably follow a decision to overturn the delegate results based on party members votes in primaries and caucuses ....

---

and the potential alienation of the absolutely critical black American constituency...
what if those voters stayed home?

people forget that, until 1964 or so, black Americans generally voted Republican; nothing eternal there

anyways, the Hillary argument/tactics to come;
http://www.slate.com/id/2189690/

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: Geneva ]

"In the final days in Pennsylvania, [Obama] dutifully logged time at diners and force-fed himself waffles, pancakes, sausage and a Philly cheese steak. He split the pancakes with Michelle, left some of the waffle and sausage behind, and gave away the French fries that came with the cheese steak."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel_Goldenberg:
From the above posted Dowd column:

"In the final days in Pennsylvania, [Obama] dutifully logged time at diners and force-fed himself waffles, pancakes, sausage and a Philly cheese steak. He split the pancakes with Michelle, left some of the waffle and sausage behind, and gave away the French fries that came with the cheese steak."

Good for him! Why should the man head towards a heart attack?

---

Thread drift: I used to vacation in Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Virginia, and Ohio (as well as all the New England states) - and ate some of the most artery-clogging food you can imagine (including chicken fried steak and biscuits with gravy at Cracker Barrel outlets in Ohio). I used to love Denny's which served up an eight-page menu of the most disgusting food on the planet - but it was all
delicious disgusting food.