Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:08 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:

FL and MI will not count, so don't bother counting them.

Think about it in terms of delegates, Finn. This weekend's races and today's races combined for about 235 or so delegates. Obama won the weekend with an average of more then 60% of the vote and probably will get somewhere around there today as well.

Ohio and Texas combine for 224 or so delegates. If Clinton wins both of those states, she still can't make up the delegate deficit that she lost in February! And that's not counting WI and Hawaii which probably will go to Obama as well.

In fact, TX is 1/3 caucus; Hillary could win the popular vote by 5% and still get less delegates due to the nature of the contest there.

The point is that it probably isn't going to reach the convention. There's a 6-week gap between March 4th contests and Pennsylvannia. There will be tremendous pressure for whoever is behind on March 5th to drop out of the race. The super-delegates will likely exert much of this pressure by backing the winning candidate.

I have a news flash for ya - Clinton's campaign is doing terrible and she isn't going to win TX or OH by much, if at all. She won't be able to make up the deficit.

Cycloptichorn


Let's make a bet on Michigan and Florida delegates

If, as you suggest, Michigan and Florida delegates don't come into play I will start a thread on A2K that's titled Do You Know Why Cycloptichorn Knows More About Politics Than Finn?

And if Michigan and Florida delegates do come into play you will start a thread on A2K titled Do You Know Why Finn Knows More About Politics Than Cycloptichorn?

In any case, Florida delegates don't have to count (although they will in one fasion or another). That she won in a key state over Florida will count for something with super delegates who are seeking to cast their vote for the most electable candidate (that's what they're supposed to do after all).

Of course if Obama cleans Hillary's clock from here on in the FL and MI delgates will be moot as will the super delegates. This is your prediction I assume.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:19 pm
Quote:
The Democratic Party had earlier sanctioned Michigan and Florida for leapfrogging ahead of other early voting states in the primary calendar by stripping them of their convention delegates, and each of the major candidates pledged not to campaign in those states.

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean was quoted by the St. Petersburg Times in June 2007 saying: "Their primary essentially won't count...Anybody who campaigns in Florida is ineligible for delegates."


Source

Naturally the Clinton campaign wants to take these delagates, however,
after Howard Dean made his decision, Edwards and Obama withdrew their names from the ballots. It would not be fair to them, giving Clinton the delegates.

If anything, they should hold caucuses in MI and FL
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:24 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
I don't think you're in the majority with your opinion that Hillary must win large. What she needs to do is put the brakes on his momentum and defeating him in Texas and Ohio will do that. She won't even need Texas if she can get Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Well, Cyclo got some Hillary insiders on his side in his analysis:

    [size=14][b][url=http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/02/12/the-clinton-campaign-sets-expectations-very-high.aspx]The Clinton Campaign Sets Expectations Very High[/url][/b][/size] "[O]ne thing in that big [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/us/politics/12clinton.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin]Times story[/url] on the Clinton campaign today seemed worth noting: [list]"She has to win both Ohio and Texas comfortably, or she's out," said one superdelegate who has endorsed Mrs. Clinton, and who spoke on condition of anonymity to share a candid assessment. "The campaign is starting to come to terms with that." Campaign advisers, also speaking privately in order to speak plainly, confirmed this view.

The key word here is "comfortably." Why is the campaign saying this, even anonymously? If they win both states narrowly I don't see why they are finished (unless those wacky delegate allocations in Texas put them at an almost impossible disadvantage)."[/list]Meanwhile,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Just compare the states in which each of them have won.

Clinton
New York
New Jersey
California
Florida
Michigan (however suspect)

Obama
Illinois
Missouri
Georgia

These are the big prizes for each - which looks more impressive?

One might argue that Obama needs to win Ohio and Pennsylvania to have a chance.

Um. Since when is it just up to the bigger states, in the end? Whoever gets the most delegates, wins - and whether you get 500 delegates from three big states or from eight small ones doesnt matter, its still 500 delegates. I mean, obviously you cant get to the victory without winning any big states, but you dont have to win the more impressive list of 'em, if you can make up the missing numbers from smaller states.

I mean -- if the logic of "you dont have a chance of winning if you dont win the more impressive list of big states" held up in American elections, Bush would never have been President... just compile the lists of big states for 2000 and see which one "looks more impressive". Doesnt matter. If a bunch of small states for Obama together yield more delegates than a couple of big states for Hillary, then Obama wins.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:47 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
Quote:
The Democratic Party had earlier sanctioned Michigan and Florida for leapfrogging ahead of other early voting states in the primary calendar by stripping them of their convention delegates, and each of the major candidates pledged not to campaign in those states.

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean was quoted by the St. Petersburg Times in June 2007 saying: "Their primary essentially won't count...Anybody who campaigns in Florida is ineligible for delegates."


Source

Naturally the Clinton campaign wants to take these delagates, however,
after Howard Dean made his decision, Edwards and Obama withdrew their names from the ballots. It would not be fair to them, giving Clinton the delegates.

If anything, they should hold caucuses in MI and FL


"fair" in this case is what the party defines it to be. At the convention the party is mostly concerned with winning the election, and historically they have been very reluctant to offend any state organization. There have been issues like this before and usuallly the delegates were seated.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:50 pm
Once again, I'm really appreciating Finn and georgeob1's comments and analysis.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 03:55 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:

FL and MI will not count, so don't bother counting them.

Think about it in terms of delegates, Finn. This weekend's races and today's races combined for about 235 or so delegates. Obama won the weekend with an average of more then 60% of the vote and probably will get somewhere around there today as well.

Ohio and Texas combine for 224 or so delegates. If Clinton wins both of those states, she still can't make up the delegate deficit that she lost in February! And that's not counting WI and Hawaii which probably will go to Obama as well.

In fact, TX is 1/3 caucus; Hillary could win the popular vote by 5% and still get less delegates due to the nature of the contest there.

The point is that it probably isn't going to reach the convention. There's a 6-week gap between March 4th contests and Pennsylvannia. There will be tremendous pressure for whoever is behind on March 5th to drop out of the race. The super-delegates will likely exert much of this pressure by backing the winning candidate.

I have a news flash for ya - Clinton's campaign is doing terrible and she isn't going to win TX or OH by much, if at all. She won't be able to make up the deficit.

Cycloptichorn


Let's make a bet on Michigan and Florida delegates

If, as you suggest, Michigan and Florida delegates don't come into play I will start a thread on A2K that's titled Do You Know Why Cycloptichorn Knows More About Politics Than Finn?

And if Michigan and Florida delegates do come into play you will start a thread on A2K titled Do You Know Why Finn Knows More About Politics Than Cycloptichorn?

In any case, Florida delegates don't have to count (although they will in one fasion or another). That she won in a key state over Florida will count for something with super delegates who are seeking to cast their vote for the most electable candidate (that's what they're supposed to do after all).

Of course if Obama cleans Hillary's clock from here on in the FL and MI delgates will be moot as will the super delegates. This is your prediction I assume.


If we set the parameters of 'don't count' to, 'the nomination is decided prior to a decision on the FL and MI primaries,' the I accept. Gladly.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 04:14 pm
georgeob1 wrote:
CalamityJane wrote:
Quote:
The Democratic Party had earlier sanctioned Michigan and Florida for leapfrogging ahead of other early voting states in the primary calendar by stripping them of their convention delegates, and each of the major candidates pledged not to campaign in those states.

Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean was quoted by the St. Petersburg Times in June 2007 saying: "Their primary essentially won't count...Anybody who campaigns in Florida is ineligible for delegates."


Source

Naturally the Clinton campaign wants to take these delagates, however,
after Howard Dean made his decision, Edwards and Obama withdrew their names from the ballots. It would not be fair to them, giving Clinton the delegates.

If anything, they should hold caucuses in MI and FL


"fair" in this case is what the party defines it to be. At the convention the party is mostly concerned with winning the election, and historically they have been very reluctant to offend any state organization. There have been issues like this before and usuallly the delegates were seated.


I guess you're right George. I forgot that politics is a dirty business,
very dirty indeed.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 04:24 pm


The Candidates on the Economy

The Candidates on Iraq

The Candidates on Health Care

The Candidates on Immigration

The Candidates on Climate Change
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 04:30 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
I guess you're right George. I forgot that politics is a dirty business,
very dirty indeed.


I think it is simply a case of different actors in the game each trying to have his/her own way and optimize their outcomes. More stupid vanity & hubris than dirty.

The national party functionaries (who believe they are more important than their state counterparts) wrote the "rules" for state organizations - rules which included penalties for state party organizations that don't comply. The state governments, which under the constitution are sovereign, and not at all beholden to the functionaries of any party organizations, determine election rules and dates, though the state party organizations do have a voice in the process.

In the case at hand, some states chose dates that "violated" the "rules" set down by national party organizations that have no authority whatever over the state governments - in effect the states told them to piss off. The national party organization can only retaliate against the state party, and to do so involves cutting off its nose to spite its face.

The real problem in my view was the hubris of the national party organizations that presumed they had the power to make the rules for everyone. They don't. The candidates are just along for the ride, but are each trying to make the best of it for themselves.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 05:03 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
If they both reach the convention with only a nominal difference in their delegate counts, the super delegates who, for whatever reason, don't want to break for Obama will be using electability for cover.

Just compare the states in which each of them have won.

Clinton
New York
New Jersey
California
Florida
Michigan (however suspect)

Obama
Illinois
Missouri
Georgia

These are the big prizes for each - which looks more impressive?

One might argue that Obama needs to win Ohio and Pennsylvania to have a chance.


I agree that they might use electability as a cover but I disagree with your presumption of the electability criteria. On the one hand you have someone who won the biggest states and on the other hand you have someone who won the most states in a primary. Which of those is the better indicator of electability? Personally, I think neither is iron-clad, but after 2004 I'd be looking for someone with widespread appeal if I were a Democrat.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 05:17 pm
I have a problem with the whole archaic concept of delegates to a convention. It is all one big infomercial that incestuously feeds upon itself year after year until someone finally belches from indigestion. Then the rules change for the next generation of partiers and the feasting begins all over again.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 05:37 pm
People are free to create their political parties as they wish, and the parties are free to make their rules. However those rules are binding only on party members who wish to abide by them.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 05:56 pm
Guys, is this the right place to ask if Mrs. Clinton supports "Think Pink"? Does Obama? Anyway, I'm hoping Cycl will attend the event and update all the rest of us:

Quote:
protesters supporting the original council statement are also gearing up for the 7 p.m. meeting., when the Berkeley council will meet and is scheduled to revisit the council's Jan. 29 approval of a resolution calling the U.S. Marines' recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue "uninvited and unwelcome intruders." The vote was 6-3 in favor.

The action touched off a firestorm of protest from all over the nation. Two council members have proposed rescinding part - but not all of the statement.

Hundreds of people have been gathered near the old City Hall all day long. Code Pink - a women's peace organization - is facing off against Move America Forward - a military support group.

http://origin.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8239736
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 05:59 pm
High Seas wrote:
Guys, is this the right place to ask if Mrs. Clinton supports "Think Pink"? Does Obama? Anyway, I'm hoping Cycl will attend the event and update all the rest of us:

Quote:
protesters supporting the original council statement are also gearing up for the 7 p.m. meeting., when the Berkeley council will meet and is scheduled to revisit the council's Jan. 29 approval of a resolution calling the U.S. Marines' recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue "uninvited and unwelcome intruders." The vote was 6-3 in favor.

The action touched off a firestorm of protest from all over the nation. Two council members have proposed rescinding part - but not all of the statement.

Hundreds of people have been gathered near the old City Hall all day long. Code Pink - a women's peace organization - is facing off against Move America Forward - a military support group.

http://origin.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8239736


Shrug. I have no opinion either way on the subject, and better things to do tonight, like watch polling results!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:02 pm
Obama wins Virginia!

Called as soon as the polls closed. = big win for Obama.

OBAMARAMA LIVES ON

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:06 pm
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein8feb08,1,5490469.column?ctrack=1&cset=true

From the Los Angeles Times
He's got Obamaphilia
It's embarrassing to be among the fanatics of a relatively mainstream presidential candidate.
Joel Stein

February 8, 2008

You are embarrassing yourselves. With your "Yes We Can" music video, your "Fired Up, Ready to Go" song, your endless chatter about how he's the first one to inspire you, to make you really feel something -- it's as if you're tacking photos of Barack Obama to your locker, secretly slipping him little notes that read, "Do you like me? Check yes or no." Some of you even cry at his speeches. If I were Obama, and you voted for me, I would so never call you again.

Obamaphilia has gotten creepy. I couldn't figure out if the two canvassers who came to my door Sunday had taken Ecstasy or were just fantasizing about an Obama presidency, but I feared they were going to hug me. Scarlett Johansson called me twice, asking me to vote for him. She'd never even called me once about anything else. Not even to see "The Island."

What the Cult of Obama doesn't realize is that he's a politician. Not a brave one taking risky positions like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich, but a mainst ream one. He has not been firing up the Senate with stirring Cross-of-Gold-type speeches to end the war. He's a politician so soft and safe, Oprah likes him. There's talk about his charisma and good looks, but I know a nerd when I see one. The dude is Urkel with a better tailor.

All of this is clear to me, and yet I have fallen victim. I was at an Obama rally in Las Vegas last month, hanging at the rope line afterward in the cold night desert air, just to see him up close, to make sure he was real. I'd never heard a politician talk so bluntly, calling U.S. immigration policy "scapegoating" and "demagoguery." I'd never had even a history teacher argue that our nation's history is a series of brave people changing others' minds when things were on the verge of collapse. I want the man to hope all over me.

Still, I can't help but feel incredibly embarrassed about my feelings. In the "Yes We Can" music video that will.i.am made of Obama's Jan. 8 speech, I spotted E ric Christian Olsen, a very smart actor I know. (His line is "Yes we can.") I called to see if he had gone all bobby-soxer for Obama, or if he was just shrewdly taking a part in a project that upped his Q rating.

Turns out Olsen not only contributed money, he volunteered in Iowa and California and made hundreds of calls. He also sent out a mass e-mail to his friends that contained these lines: "Nothing is more fundamentally powerful than how I felt when I met him. I stood, my hand embraced in his, and ... I felt something ... something that I can only describe as an overpowering sense of Hope." That's the gayest e-mail I've ever read, and I get notes from guys who've seen me on E!

When I started to make fun of Olsen, he said: "I get that it's a movement. But it's not like a movement for Nickelback. For the first time, we should feel justified in our passion. You don't have to feel embarrassed about it, buddy." It was a convincing argument until he told me he cried during an Obama speech. That did not help me feel less lame.

So to de-Romeo-ize, I called someone immune to Obama's hottie dreaminess: a white suburban feminist baby boomer. To get two things done at once, I called my mother.

My mom, a passionate Hillary Clinton supporter, immediately attacked Obamamania. "Some part of me wants to say, 'People wake up. He has no plans.' I get frustrated listening to his speeches after awhile," she said. She also said that the new vacation house in Key West is really great and her vertigo hasn't been acting up.

I started to feel a little more grounded again. Did I want to be some dreamer hippie loser, or a person who understands that change emerges from hard work and conflict? "People are projecting an awful lot onto him," Mom said. "Almost like what was that movie with, oh, the movie, oh God. That English actor, he practically said nothing. Oh shoot. He was the butler and everybody loved him and what he was thinking and feeling. Do you know the movie I'm talking about? You don't." Hers, of course, is the demographic most likely to vote.

But she's right. Obama is Peter Sellers in "Being There." As a therapist, she's seen the danger of ungrounded expectations. "You feel young again. You feel like everything is possible. He helps you feel that way and you want to feel that way; it's a great marriage. Unfortunately, the divorce will happen very quickly." Mom is the kind of realistic tough-talker who isn't afraid to make divorce analogies to a child of divorce.

"We want what he represents," she said. "A young, idealistic person who really believes it. And he believes it. He believes he can change the world. I just don't think he can."

Thing is, I've watched too many movies and read too many novels; I can't root against a person who believes he can change the world. The best we Obamaphiles can do is to refrain from embarrassing ourselves. And I do believe that we can resist making more "We Are the World"-type videos. We can resist crying jags. We can resist, in every dinner argument and every e-mail, the word "inspiration." Yes, we can.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:12 pm
Quote:
If Obama sweeps Feb. contests, where does that leave Clinton?Posted: 02:18 PM ET

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

"Suddenly, against all odds, the once-mighty Clinton campaign is beginning to feel like the last days of Pompeii."

That's the lead sentence in a terrific piece by Thomas DeFrank in today's New York Daily News.

Although he insists it's too early to write off the Clintons, DeFrank writes about "a growing sense of doom and dread" surrounding Hillary's campaign, adding that their insistence that things will turn around in Ohio and Texas sounds eerily like Rudy Giuliani's disastrous wait-until Florida turnaround strategy.

The New York Times also reports today how Clinton has been boxed into a must-win position in those two March 4th races. However, even though the candidate herself is reassuring anxious donors and superdelegates that the nomination isn't slipping away from her, some aren't convinced.

Several Clinton superdelegates say they're wavering because of Barack Obama's momentum after his weekend victories. Some say they might end up "going with the flow" and supporting whichever candidate appears to show the most strength.

Here's the thing: Obama's momentum doesn't show any signs of slowing down. On the contrary, polls suggest he has a commanding lead in today's Potomac Primaries in Maryland, Virginia and D.C. Polls also show him gaining strength in both Wisconsin and Hawaii, states that vote next Tuesday.

The Clinton camp says, "There is no evidence that voters are voting based on momentum - in fact the evidence is to the contrary." They point out that Obama's victory in Iowa didn't translate to a win for him in New Hampshire.


http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/12/if-obama-sweeps-feb-contests-where-does-that-leave-clinton/


Interesting take on what the NY papers are saying.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:17 pm
I have the same or similar problem re delegates, butrflynet. Dys reminded me it's part of the constitution...
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:30 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:

FL and MI will not count, so don't bother counting them.

Think about it in terms of delegates, Finn. This weekend's races and today's races combined for about 235 or so delegates. Obama won the weekend with an average of more then 60% of the vote and probably will get somewhere around there today as well.

Ohio and Texas combine for 224 or so delegates. If Clinton wins both of those states, she still can't make up the delegate deficit that she lost in February! And that's not counting WI and Hawaii which probably will go to Obama as well.

In fact, TX is 1/3 caucus; Hillary could win the popular vote by 5% and still get less delegates due to the nature of the contest there.

The point is that it probably isn't going to reach the convention. There's a 6-week gap between March 4th contests and Pennsylvannia. There will be tremendous pressure for whoever is behind on March 5th to drop out of the race. The super-delegates will likely exert much of this pressure by backing the winning candidate.

I have a news flash for ya - Clinton's campaign is doing terrible and she isn't going to win TX or OH by much, if at all. She won't be able to make up the deficit.

Cycloptichorn


Let's make a bet on Michigan and Florida delegates

If, as you suggest, Michigan and Florida delegates don't come into play I will start a thread on A2K that's titled Do You Know Why Cycloptichorn Knows More About Politics Than Finn?

And if Michigan and Florida delegates do come into play you will start a thread on A2K titled Do You Know Why Finn Knows More About Politics Than Cycloptichorn?




Michigan and Florida won't come into play. Hillary got the votes she got based solely on name recognition. You don't change the results of the World Series because of what happened in the Grapefruit League. Candidates were told not to campaign there. To go back and try to make the results binding proportionately would be unconscionable. Regardless, if something weird occurs and Cyc is wrong. It won't change the fact that he understands politics a lot better than you do.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Tue 12 Feb, 2008 06:32 pm
Obama carried white men in Virginia. Hillary should concede. The Fat Lady has sung.

Raw vote has Obama almost TWO to ONE!!!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 486
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.21 seconds on 06/28/2025 at 05:02:30