Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well ifyou want to get technical, he has all the votes cast for him in the caucus states if you are counting votes, but guess what, no one counted them because votes do not matter, only delegates, but if you are happy taking votes that mean nothing because they were not lawful, then go ahead, break the laws and keep the votes, but in the end, they do not mean anything.
Well ifyou want to get technical, he has all the votes cast for him in the caucus states if you are counting votes, but guess what, no one counted them because votes do not matter, only delegates, but if you are happy taking votes that mean nothing because they were not lawful, then go ahead, break the laws and keep the votes, but in the end, they do not mean anything.
Now you get into the caucus process - a process in which Obama did quite well but one that is unique to primaries and not reflective of a general election voting booth. Another primary process favorable to Obama that won't carry over to the general election.
Now you get into the caucus process - a process in which Obama did quite well but one that is unique to primaries and not reflective of a general election voting booth. Another primary process favorable to Obama that won't carry over to the general election.
No different than trying to count FL and Mich.
The rule says Obama (and Clinton for that matter)can't count those caucus votes towards the popular vote.
The rule says Clinton (and Obama for that matter) can't count FL and Mich because they moved there primaries.
Let me ask you a question...
Do you think Hillary would trade places (vote count, deligate count etc) with Obama, WOULD SHE?
Let me ask you a question...
Do you think Hillary would trade places (vote count, deligate count etc) with Obama, WOULD SHE?
That's an interesting question! Given these two realistic choices, what would a candidate want going into the election:
- Having tied the majority of the popular vote but being behind 100 delegates with 300 uncommitted. Momentum of last six months on your side; many recent issues with opponent. Opponent not winning key states.
- Being ahead in the delegate count by 100 but tied in the popular vote count with 300 delegates uncommitted. You haven't won a major state in six months; and none of the key states necessary for winning the general election.
Of course there are other scenarios but the above are quite possible. What would a convention wanting a winner pick? I think clearly the first scenario.
Face it, if Hillary wins Indiana (very likely) and comes close to Obama in NC her odds of getting the nomination are better than 50/50.
Should Hillary campaign hard and win NC it is over for Obama. A stretch to be sure but this thing is really that close.
That's an interesting question! Given these two realistic choices, what would a candidate want going into the election:
- Having tied the majority of the popular vote but being behind 100 delegates with 300 uncommitted. Momentum of last six months on your side; many recent issues with opponent. Opponent not winning key states.
- Being ahead in the delegate count by 100 but tied in the popular vote count with 300 delegates uncommitted. You haven't won a major state in six months; and none of the key states necessary for winning the general election.
Of course there are other scenarios but the above are quite possible. What would a convention wanting a winner pick? I think clearly the first scenario.
Face it, if Hillary wins Indiana (very likely) and comes close to Obama in NC her odds of getting the nomination are better than 50/50.
Should Hillary campaign hard and win NC it is over for Obama. A stretch to be sure but this thing is really that close.
Last time i checked this was a delegate race until the Clintons turned it into the popular vote. Just Al Gore, popular votes don't matter anymore and even if they did, Hillary is so far away from catching up to Obama with only 9 contests left.
That's an interesting question! Given these two realistic choices, what would a candidate want going into the election:
- Having tied the majority of the popular vote but being behind 100 delegates with 300 uncommitted. Momentum of last six months on your side; many recent issues with opponent. Opponent not winning key states.
- Being ahead in the delegate count by 100 but tied in the popular vote count with 300 delegates uncommitted. You haven't won a major state in six months; and none of the key states necessary for winning the general election.
Of course there are other scenarios but the above are quite possible. What would a convention wanting a winner pick? I think clearly the first scenario.
Face it, if Hillary wins Indiana (very likely) and comes close to Obama in NC her odds of getting the nomination are better than 50/50.
Should Hillary campaign hard and win NC it is over for Obama. A stretch to be sure but this thing is really that close.
Technically popular vote go hand in hand with delegate count and it shows as Obama is ahead on both counts ; system works
In order to even the popular vote and the delegate count, Hillary needs to in 68% remaining contests, when she reached that only once
Last time i checked this was a delegate race until the Clintons turned it into the popular vote. Just Al Gore, popular votes don't matter anymore and even if they did, Hillary is so far away from catching up to Obama with only 9 contests left.
Oh, I agree it is. But it isn't a majority wins situation. Neither side will have the 2025 needed for the nomination. So there will be votes and re-votes and re-votes. Some delegates will have to change for anyone to reach 2025. If the goal of the delegates is to present the best candidate to fight McCain; anything goes. If you go into the convention without closing the deal and are slipping, you're going to be in big trouble.
Again 300 supers have not yet committed under great pressure to do so. The best reason for not doing so is that they're leaning toward Clinton and want her to provide a reason for bucking the media darling.
Oh, I agree it is. But it isn't a majority wins situation. Neither side will have the 2025 needed for the nomination. So there will be votes and re-votes and re-votes. Some delegates will have to change for anyone to reach 2025. If the goal of the delegates is to present the best candidate to fight McCain; anything goes. If you go into the convention without closing the deal and are slipping, you're going to be in big trouble.
Again 300 supers have not yet committed under great pressure to do so. The best reason for not doing so is that they're leaning toward Clinton and want her to provide a reason for bucking the media darling.
Obama only needs 100 of those delegate to make it, it will come after NC
As far as what states will go dem/rep that's the $64K question. Exit polling from PA shows that Obama is losing, quickly losing, the core voting block he needs. Also keep in mind that these close numbers were, in most cases, prior to Rev Wright and bittergate. The more people learn of the O-man the more he slips.
The more he slips? LOL.........prior to Rev. Wright and Bittergate Hillary was up by 20+% in Pa. To me that indicates he has GAINED 10+% of that core voting block.
And the truth, not spin, about the real popular vote:
Stumper : The Popular Vote Fallacy (http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/04/23/the-popular-vote-fallacy.aspx - broken link)
The more he slips? LOL.........prior to Rev. Wright and Bittergate Hillary was up by 20+% in Pa. To me that indicates he has GAINED 10+% of that core voting block.
And the truth, not spin, about the real popular vote:
Stumper : The Popular Vote Fallacy (http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/04/23/the-popular-vote-fallacy.aspx - broken link)
Prior to bittergate he was pulling virtually even and lost nearly 10% in the closing week. But more important was the exit polling and where he's losing support. . . . and I don't think he's won a major state since Feb. It's all Hillary. And while Obama is outspending her 2-3x. He's in trouble. Ducking further debates shows he at least acknowledges the fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
