Obama Gains 14 More Delegates

[Hawkamania!]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/15/AR2008031502431.html

Obama gained eight of the 14 delegates won in the Jan. 3 caucuses by former senator John Edwards, who has since dropped out of the Democratic presidential race, along with one won by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to the Obama campaign. Caucus-night projections showed Obama getting 16 delegates and Clinton 15.

With the other six Edwards delegates standing firm, Obama's camp claimed 25 delegates from Iowa, compared with 14 for Clinton. The Associated Press reported late Saturday that, in final counts from California's Feb. 5 primary, Clinton picked up two more pledged delegates and Obama gained five.

Although the numbers for Iowa don't add up. The article mentions that out of Edward's 14 delegates, Obama picked up 8, Clinton 1 and 6 still not committed.

At Real Clear Politics, they have given Obama 9 of Edward's Iowa delegates and Clinton 0.

 

[suliman]

If Clinton gets the nomination, I'll eat my laptop. Obama is kicking her *** all over the US.

 

[KissStephanie]

If Clinton gets the nomination, I'll eat my laptop. Obama is kicking her *** all over the US.

Would you like tomato sauce with that? I hope it's not an Apple MacBook Pro because that aluminium case is going to be very bloody hard to get your teeth into.

I was quite sure that Clinton would win the nomination if she was able to win in TX and OH, and I still feel that way. He's beating her all over the US you say? I suppose that means you're overlooking the most crucial states to the Democrats of CA, IL, FL, MA, MI, NJ, NY, OH, and PA. Obama has only won one of those states and that is not enough.

If she claims yet another crucial state PA next month, along with the FL delegates which she will get reinstated, then I'll be positive she'll win the nomination. She leads in the national Democratic polls against Obama released today, and she has a greater lead against McCain in the national Presidential election polls released today, and the superdelegates are aware of this I'm sure. A win in PA along with the FL delegates reinstated will seal the deal.

 

[GuruJane]

Would you like tomato sauce with that? I hope it's not an Apple MacBook Pro because that aluminium case is going to be very bloody hard to get your teeth into.

I was quite sure that Clinton would win the nomination if she was able to win in TX and OH, and I still feel that way. He's beating her all over the US you say? I suppose that means you're overlooking the most crucial states to the Democrats of CA, IL, FL, MA, MI, NJ, NY, OH, and PA. Obama has only won one of those states and that is not enough.

If she claims yet another crucial state PA next month, along with the FL delegates which she will get reinstated, then I'll be positive she'll win the nomination. She leads in the national Democratic polls against Obama released today, and she has a greater lead against McCain in the national Presidential election polls released today, and the superdelegates are aware of this I'm sure. A win in PA along with the FL delegates reinstated will seal the deal.

Hi Kiss! Are you one of the DailyKos Hillary posters who's gone on strike? It's hilarious!

FWIW I think the super delegates would be crazy not to back Clinton now Obama is looking so naiive re the very Rev Wright. McCain might end up eating him in some of those Dem states?

 

[waspy]

Would you like tomato sauce with that? I hope it's not an Apple MacBook Pro because that aluminium case is going to be very bloody hard to get your teeth into.

I was quite sure that Clinton would win the nomination if she was able to win in TX and OH, and I still feel that way. He's beating her all over the US you say? I suppose that means you're overlooking the most crucial states to the Democrats of CA, IL, FL, MA, MI, NJ, NY, OH, and PA. Obama has only won one of those states and that is not enough.

If she claims yet another crucial state PA next month, along with the FL delegates which she will get reinstated, then I'll be positive she'll win the nomination. She leads in the national Democratic polls against Obama released today, and she has a greater lead against McCain in the national Presidential election polls released today, and the superdelegates are aware of this I'm sure. A win in PA along with the FL delegates reinstated will seal the deal.

I don't know how you can possibly believe what you are saying. Let's look at the pledged delegate situation first. Clinton needs to be within probably 20 delegates for a superdelegate overule to be even slightly palatable. Estimates place her roughly 160 behind at the moment, but some estimates are closer to 150 so we'll use that figure.

First of all, Florida. There will be no revote, so the best Hillary can hope for is to have 100% of delegates seated. This closes the margin by around 38 (I can't imagine the Edwards' 13 giving Clinton a futher advantage, they'll either split or go towards Obama like in Iowa).

Michigan. There looks like being a revote for June 3 (final day of primaries). Hypothetically let's presume the delegates are allocated as they were in the original primary. Clinton closes in by another 18.

PA: A dream run here for Hillary would give her ~94 delegates to Obama ~64.

Indiana: It's possible that some PA momentum could close this one up to roughly even.

NC: Should be a strong Obama win, but again momentum might push it fairly close.

Kentucky: A small Clinton win here perhaps, 30-21 being a friendly estimate. The lead has been reduced by 95 now to around 55. Very Clinton biased estimates i stress.

Oregon: Will be fairly close if Clinton has momentum.

Puerto Rico: Some seem to think Hillary will win here. Let's give it to her 30-25.

Montana: Should be an Obama win, but lets say 8 delegates each.

South Dakota: Small state, MAYBE a one delegate win to Clinton.

In summary....I've been extremely generous to Clinton in the estimates and she still sits about 50 pledged delegates behind. The only way she can win is if she somehow sits her Michigan delegates and Obama gets none of the uncommitteds (this would be a bizarre decision) or if the as-yet-undecided Supers give her a strong majority of their votes. This would again be suicide as the vast majority of new Dem voters will jump right off after their votes were effectively considered meaningless to the decision. Remember, all these estimates were hugely Clinton biased.

The reality is that Michigan and/or Florida delegates will not count (or maybe be halved), and that more and more Supers will move to Obama. The trend shows that he will be virtually tied within a few weeks. Hillary's wins in TX and OH really did nothing to stop the trend and neither will PA. Don't forget the Add-ons who will more or less reflect their states votes and give Obama more Supers (these tend to be disproportionately weighted towards small states where Obama dominated). There are still around 70 of these to be allocted, mainly over May/June. I'd guess at least 45 of these will go to Obama based on the states they come from.

 

[midorigreenwood]

Hi Kiss! Are you one of the DailyKos Hillary posters who's gone on strike? It's hilarious!

When has Dailykos been a hotbed of Billary supporters?

It would be like a conservative poster whining to Today Tonight that they're going on strike because BigFooty is full of latte sippers who keep on picking on John Howard.

Its a lame publicity stunt.

 

[KissStephanie]

I don't know how you can possibly believe what you are saying.

Because of superdelegates of course. If she can get within about 75 pledged delegates which is a conservative estimate if the delegates of FL are reinstated, and I'm sure they will be, then I expect the majority of superdelegates to support the candidate that has won the majority of the crucial important states of CA, IL, FL, MA, MI, NJ, NY, OH, and PA. The Democrats need to win these states in November, and Obama is a huge risk, particularly according to today's Gallup poll where he trails McCain in a number of them, while the same polls shows that Clinton is much stronger in those states.

In summary....I've been extremely generous to Clinton in the estimates and she still sits about 50 pledged delegates behind.

If she gets as close as 50 pledged delegates then that would be even better! That would certainly be close enough for the superdelegates to support her in large enough numbers based on her victories in the key states to push her over the top. I would then expect an offer to be made for a Clinton/Obama ticket to settle the matter. Clinton has a lot of pull with those superdelegates, as anybody should expect with her husband being a former president, and when push comes to shove, I expect them to provide her with the nomination if she can get that close.

I expect her to get close enough for that if she wins in PA and if she gets the FL delegates reinstated, and they have to be. If the Florida delegates are not reinstated, then much of Clinton's support within the retired and Latino demographic will most definitely support McCain in a Presidential election, and the Democratic party cannot afford that. Any chance of a win in FL in November for the Democrats depends on those delegates being reinstated.

Hillary's wins in TX and OH really did nothing to stop the trend and neither will PA.

What? Of course they did. The brakes have definitely been applied on the superdelegate support for Obama since then. I have been looking at those totals in the week leading up to her wins in OH and TX in comparison to the last week or so, and the trend has definitely been altered. His wins that followed in MS and WI may have attracted some support, but not in the numbers that it was leading up to OH and TX, and she leads Obama and is stronger against McCain in today's Gallup poll.

Neither were the case prior to those wins. If Clinton wins in PA then I expect it to change even more, and for many unpledged superdelegates to support her, and some to even switch to her because they will understand how important wins in those states are, and how risky it is to nominate a candidate that considers Jerimiah Wright as a spiritual mentor and role model.

Hi Kiss! Are you one of the DailyKos Hillary posters who's gone on strike? It's hilarious!

G'day Jane. I have only posted a few times there, so not enough to go on strike.

FWIW I think the super delegates would be crazy not to back Clinton now Obama is looking so naiive re the very Rev Wright. McCain might end up eating him in some of those Dem states?

I completely agree. I think that many superdelegates are just waiting to see what happens in PA, and if she wins there, then the support for her will follow in massive numbers. Obama is a huge risk now, and McCain will beat him in FL, OH and PA, and that would be the end of any hopes for the Democrats, and the superdelegates know it too.

 

[waspy]

What? Of course they did. The brakes have definitely been applied on the superdelegate support for Obama since then. I have been looking at those totals in the week leading up to her wins in OH and TX in comparison to the last week or so, and the trend has definitely been altered. His wins that followed in MS and WI may have attracted some support, but not in the numbers that it was leading up to OH and TX, and she leads Obama and is stronger against McCain in today's Gallup poll.

demconwatch.blogspot.com has the tally at 14-4 from March 4th to now. Most of those for Obama were between March 4th and 8th. Of course it was going to be difficult to keep up the exact same pace as he was going at.....in 3 weeks we saw the lead drop by 19.5, 13.5 and 17. That change of 50 in 3 weeks was always going to be tough to maintain considering there have been fewer primaries taking place recently.

Speaking of recent polls, Rasmussens recent Presidential polls are fairly strong for Obama. Obama is actually doing better than Clinton in Florida (although McCain is leading both of them), both are safe in NY (BO even slightly safer!), BO leads by 12 in Connecticut but Clinton leads by just 3, California has Obama ahead by 15 and Clinton ahead by 7, and in PA Obama is in a statistical tie with Clinton when both matched against McCain.

http://rasmussenreports.com/older_content/home/most_recent_articles/most_recent_articles

Don't even consider for a second that Hillary will be able to overcome a 50 delegate lead with the Supers. It just WILL NOT HAPPEN. The Supers know that there will be backlash if they overturn the pledged lead, and many of the Obama voters will jump straight off. There might be a slight easing of BO's Superdelegate momentum over the next month or so....but when we hit May it will head straight back to Obama and my prediction is he'll be leading by May 10 at the latest, just after he romps in a NC win. Don't forget the Add-ons either. Clinton will get a decent share of the first 20 or so given out, but from May 3rd to 31st there are Add-ons from LA, SC, IL, UT, MA, OH, CO, KS, NV, CA, AK, GA, WY, HI, ME, MS totalling 25. These tend to go to the state winner in small states and are spread a bit in bigger states, so Hillary will be lucky to scrounge any more than 5 out of that lot. That represents a 15 delegate swing to BO.

 

[GuruJane]

I completely agree. I think that many superdelegates are just waiting to see what happens in PA, and if she wins there, then the support for her will follow in massive numbers. Obama is a huge risk now, and McCain will beat him in FL, OH and PA, and that would be the end of any hopes for the Democrats, and the superdelegates know it too.

Risk is the word. The Dems have a safe alternative in Clinton to put up as nominee. If they go for Obama then mainstream voters will have a safe alternative in McCain come November. The Dem choice seems pretty clear now.

btw Would very much doubt if the truly ghastly Rev Wright clips are going down well with African Americans either.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Because of superdelegates of course. If she can get within about 75 pledged delegates which is a conservative estimate if the delegates of FL are reinstated, and I'm sure they will be, then I expect the majority of superdelegates to support the candidate that has won the majority of the crucial important states of CA, IL, FL, MA, MI, NJ, NY, OH, and PA.

Sigh.

The Democrats need to win these states in November, and Obama is a huge risk, particularly according to today's Gallup poll where he trails McCain in a number of them, while the same polls shows that Clinton is much stronger in those states.

Most polls show that Obama, not Hillary, is a stronger general election candidate.

If she gets as close as 50 pledged delegates then that would be even better! That would certainly be close enough for the superdelegates to support her in large enough numbers based on her victories in the key states to push her over the top. I would then expect an offer to be made for a Clinton/Obama ticket to settle the matter.

Obama leads on pledged delegates and popular vote. If superdelegates overturn these leads and give the nomination to Clinton, it'll be an electoral disaster.

I doubt Obama would want Hillary as his VP.

Clinton has a lot of pull with those superdelegates, as anybody should expect with her husband being a former president, and when push comes to shove, I expect them to provide her with the nomination if she can get that close.

Which is why Clinton hasn't declared a single superdelegate endorsement since March 4 (correction: since Feb 5), while Obama has gained 47 over the same time period. Yeah, she's got a lotta pull with superdelegates...

I expect her to get close enough for that if she wins in PA and if she gets the FL delegates reinstated, and they have to be.

No, they don't have to be. But it's looking increasingly likely that there will be a Florida delegation (though perhaps with only 50% voting weight), because Obama has pretty much got this thing in the bag, and so can afford to be magnanimous.

If the Florida delegates are not reinstated, then much of Clinton's support within the retired and Latino demographic will most definitely support McCain in a Presidential election, and the Democratic party cannot afford that. Any chance of a win in FL in November for the Democrats depends on those delegates being reinstated.

Any evidence for these assertions of yours. Or are you just, you know, pulling them out of your arse as per usual?

What? Of course they did. The brakes have definitely been applied on the superdelegate support for Obama since then.

See above. As usual, you are spectacularly wrong.

Neither were the case prior to those wins. If Clinton wins in PA then I expect it to change even more, and for many unpledged superdelegates to support her, and some to even switch to her because they will understand how important wins in those states are, and how risky it is to nominate a candidate that considers Jerimiah Wright as a spiritual mentor and role model.

Keep whipping that big-state argument, Stephanie. It's bullshit, but it's all you've got.

And that'd be the same Jeremiah Wright that Obama has already said he disagrees with? Breathtakingly cynical, Stephanie. Luckily, Hillary Clinton is a paragon of all that's moral. Hold on...

I think that many superdelegates are just waiting to see what happens in PA, and if she wins there, then the support for her will follow in massive numbers. Obama is a huge risk now, and McCain will beat him in FL, OH and PA, and that would be the end of any hopes for the Democrats, and the superdelegates know it too.

According to Rasmussen, the poll linked to above, Obama is closer to McCain in Pennsylvania and Florida and the same margin behind in Ohio. I mean, anyone can cherrypick favourable polls. For McCain, for Obama, for Clinton... The trends, though, have clearly been favouring Obama.

Obama is too far in front for Pennsylvania to swing anything Clinton's way. She needed a massive win on March 4, and she just didn't get it. He has more pledged delegates, more primary wins, more caucus wins, more states, a greater popular vote, more money, and is a stronger general election candidate.

Clinton can't trump that.

 

[waspy]

Palmer Stoat: Just clarifying your 47 vs 0 stat, its actually from Super Tuesday until now, and its more like 80 vs 20. But basically they both illustrate the huge landslide which hasn't stopped (in % terms anyway).

Didn't want KS to chuck a tantrum about incorrect statistics.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Palmer Stoat: Just clarifying your 47 vs 0 stat, its actually from Super Tuesday until now, and its more like 80 vs 20. But basically they both illustrates the huge landslide which hasn't stopped (in % terms anyway).

Didn't want KS to chuck a tantrum about incorrect statistics.

Ah thanks, Waspy. You're absolutely right.

BTW, Stephanie, nice to see you posting again. It's become apparent that this board needs your particular flavour of crazy in order to tick over.

EDIT: Actually, by Chuck Todd's count, since Feb 5 it's +47 Obama and -7 Clinton. There are, of course, a stack of different superdelegate counts, none of which agree with each other. But Todd is generally thought to be one of the more reliable vote counters. I won't link; I'll just quote it here:

Clinton’s super problem: By our count, the Clinton campaign hasn’t publicly announced the support of a new superdelegate since just after February 5. Indeed, since Super Tuesday, Obama has gained 47 new superdelegates, while Clinton has lost seven (including Eliot Spitzer). Does Clinton have a bigger problem on the superdelegate front than folks realize? Why do we think party leaders -- who saw the Democrats lose governorships, state legislatures, and the control of Congress during the Clinton years -- suddenly jump on board the Clinton campaign? Isn't this the reason the Clinton campaign has only been able to keep uncommitted supers from climbing board Obama's bandwagon but they haven't been able to woo a new super to their side in a month? ? Isn't this also an explanation for why the Clinton campaign has done so poorly in the caucuses? The caucuses are made up of the activists who follow this stuff closer and think about things like electability and who can help the party keep Congress, etc. If Clinton's not winning over caucus activists, why should we believe she'll win over a large enough chunk of superdelegates to overcome Obama's pledged delegate lead? Ultimately, her best chance is to convince supers that Obama is completely unelectable on par with McGovern, an argument that might have been helped a tad by Rev. Wright.

 

[GuruJane]

BTW, Stephanie, nice to see you posting again. It's become apparent that this board needs your particular flavour of crazy in order to tick over.

The thing about Steff is that she's been tapping into the Dem talking points -for-web-dissemination and now she's doing it for the Clinton campaign, which is a fantastic antidote to all you Obama luvvies. She is the only one putting the Clinton view and we are getting reams of their political thinking. It's great. I just wish there was some one here equally connnected to the Obama campaign because a line into how they are thinking/operating would be fantastic.

Palmer, have to put to you this to and fro about the delegate count is a bit academic. Why? Because what you can be sure of is that Hillary Clinton will fight this out every inch until Obama achieves a majority. She will not quit before then, and why would she? This is almost certainly her last chance for the nomination, ergo her last chance to be President of the United States of America. Ergo. Stakes. High. Supremely.

And ... she knows the political game backwards ... for eg how many more Rev Wright shocks may be in store between now and August to turn fortune further to her favour?

 

[Mr Q]

It was probably the last chance for quite a few of the other candidates as well Jane, and they pulled out before the numbers said it was impossible for them.

People see through attempts to smear them with a third party associate as anyone that just watched the last Australian election should know - after all, the Liberals went all out to smear Rudd with associations with Brian Burke (not to mention Strippergate), and got absolutely nowhere with it. The only traction Obama's pastor's going to have is with exactly the same people who go "Look! His middle name is Hussein! He must be evil!" I reckon you can pretty well assume they weren't going to vote Democrat no matter who their candidate was.

KS is just nuts now. Clinton isn't going to win, it's over. All she can do now is fight dirty, which only helps the Republicans out. I guess it comes down to where her loyalties lie - the Democrats or herself. In the end KS will back whoever wins the Democratic Party nomination.... especially given Obama seems closer to her politically than Clinton anyway.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

The thing about Steff is that she's been tapping into the Dem talking points -for-web-dissemination and now she's doing it for the Clinton campaign, which is a fantastic antidote to all you Obama luvvies. She is the only one putting the Clinton view and we are getting reams of their political thinking. It's great. I just wish there was some one here equally connnected to the Obama campaign because a line into how they are thinking/operating would be fantastic.

Yes, a contrary point of view is always good. Nobody likes an echo chamber, and it's noticeable that tumbleweeds blow through this site when Steph isn't here posting her screeds. I respect her resilience.

I'm not an Obama luvvy, btw. I prefer him to Clinton, it's true. But given that we're down to two that's not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Obama is, at best, my fourth choice, and it was only after other candidates who I preferred chose not to step in or dropped out that I settled on him. The reason I'm always arguing his case is because Steph provokes me with her propaganda, not because I worship at the altar of Barack Obama.

Palmer, have to put to you this to and fro about the delegate count is a bit academic. Why? Because what you can be sure of is that Hillary Clinton will fight this out every inch until Obama achieves a majority. She will not quit before then, and why would she? This is almost certainly her last chance for the nomination, ergo her last chance to be President of the United States of America. Ergo. Stakes. High. Supremely.

I agreed with you before when you said she was within her rights to fight this right down to the end. That's democracy, and that's her right. But that doesn't mean that superdelegates will aid and abet her determination to take the nomination via the convention.

Personally, I'd be astonished if the Dems don't have a presumptive nominee long before the convention in August. It will, at some point in April or May, become clear that Clinton, no matter what Florida or Michigan permutations you posit, won't overtake Obama in pledged delegates or popular vote. Superdelegates will then swing behind Obama because it's not in the party's interests to unnecessarily prolong the process, particularly when one candidate's chances of winning are remote and can only be achieved at the cost of a convention bloodbath.

Now, sure, in some dusty corner of cyberspace Stephanie and co are chanting 'superdelegatessuperdelegatessuperdelegatessuperdelegates', and it's true that Clinton can still try to sway superdelegates her way and can even try to poach pledged delegates. And mathematically, if you pile one unlikelihood on top of another, she could still do it.

But in the real world, superdelegates will swing behind Obama because they know -- and Stephanie keeps ignoring this point -- that to use their votes to give the nomination to the candidate with fewer pledged delegates and fewer popular votes will be a calamity. It. Just. Won't. Happen.

I realise that superdelegates can vote for whoever they want. But these are elected figures and party officials. They're not gonna voluntarily split their party asunder. Let me present two scenarios.

One: superdelegates swing behind Obama en masse some time in May when it becomes clear to even the most mathematically challenged that he has an unbridgeable delegate and popular vote lead. Clinton supporters may not be happy because their candidate didn't get up, but nobody can dispute the legitimacy of Obama's win.

Two: superdelegates swing behind Clinton en masse despite the fact that she trails on both criteria, saying, 'Hey, we're superdelegates and the rules say we can vote for whoever we want'. All hell breaks loose. Yes, Clinton will have achieved her victory within the rules, but many, many voters won't see her victory as legitimate. The rancour this will cause will make it very difficult for them to win in November, and may well haunt the party for years. Under this scenario even when Clinton wins, she loses, as does the party. And that's why it won't happen.

And ... she knows the political game backwards ... for eg how many more Rev Wright shocks may be in store between now and August to turn fortune further to her favour?

Yes, Bill and Hillary are canny political operators. But a year ago Hillary was a prohibitive favourite to take the nomination, had the lion's share of establishment support, had oceans of money. If with all their canniness and all their built-in advantages, they couldn't manage to beat Obama up till now, why would anyone expect them to do so later when the odds are stacked against them?

And it's not as if controversies only go one way -- who knows, for example, why Clinton has been so reticent about releasing her tax returns.

Unless he gets caught blowing Stephen Colbert or holding up a liquor store, the nomination is Obama's.

 

[Hawkamania!]

Risk is the word. The Dems have a safe alternative in Clinton to put up as nominee. If they go for Obama then mainstream voters will have a safe alternative in McCain come November. The Dem choice seems pretty clear now.

btw Would very much doubt if the truly ghastly Rev Wright clips are going down well with African Americans either.

Clinton still has a higher voter core opposition than McCain or Obama. Also, one of Clinton's strong core groups (elderly) is also one of McCain's core groups. If Clinton gets the nod the dems can kiss a lot of young people, African-Americans and unaffiliated voters goodbye. Those unaffiliated voters would be more inclined towards McCain than Clinton.

Of course you can just put your fingers in your ears and sing la-la-la along with KS while ignoring voter sentiments in the US.

 

[KissStephanie]

demconwatch.blogspot.com has the tally at 14-4 from March 4th to now. Most of those for Obama were between March 4th and 8th. Of course it was going to be difficult to keep up the exact same pace as he was going at.

So you agree with me then that the brakes were applied after Clinton's wins in OH and TX? I expect superdelegates to support Clinton in large numbers if she can win in PA and others to switch their support.

Speaking of recent polls, Rasmussens recent Presidential polls are fairly strong for Obama. Obama is actually doing better than Clinton in Florida

That's completely flawed then isn't it? Not only did Clinton win the state by 17% in January, but the most recent Rasmussen poll for that state has Clinton 16% ahead of Obama. The unpledged superdelegates are not silly enough to not realise that any chance of winning in FL depends on reinstating those delegates. Obama has no chance of beating McCain there. Clinton has a good chance of beating McCain there.

both are safe in NY (BO even slightly safer!), BO leads by 12 in Connecticut but Clinton leads by just 3, California has Obama ahead by 15 and Clinton ahead by 7, and in PA Obama is in a statistical tie with Clinton when both matched against McCain.

Come on now, CT is worth 7 electoral votes, and Clinton is actually ahead there, while you conveniently left out that McCain leads Obama in NJ, while Clinton is 11% ahead, and that state is worth 15 electoral votes. As for PA, to suggest that Obama has an equal chance of beating McCain despite trailing her by about 17% overall is ridiculous. Obama has little chance of beating McCain in PA, and any hope of claiming that state rests with winner of the primary there next month.

Also, Clinton won OH right across the state, yet in a presidential match-up, both are considered an equal chance there against McCain. The Democrats chance of winning there also rests with Clinton, as I'm sure McCain would beat Obama there as well at this stage. Not only did Clinton win in both CA and NY, so the polls there are irrelevant because I'm sure that the unpledged delegates are aware that they are both safe states, but you're basing this from yesterday's Rasmussen polls which had Obama 2% stronger than Clinton against McCain. However, the Rasmussen polls released today shows that Clinton and Obama are both equal against McCain which changes your examples. She is also currently stronger against McCain overall.

Don't even consider for a second that Hillary will be able to overcome a 50 delegate lead with the Supers.

Not only will I choose to consider it for longer than a second, but I have no doubt that she will overcome a 50 pledged delegate deficit if she wins in PA and has the FL delegates reinstated.

It just WILL NOT HAPPEN. The Supers know that there will be backlash if they overturn the pledged lead, and many of the Obama voters will jump straight off.

IT WILL HAPPEN in my opinion. The superdelegates are aware that Obama cannot beat McCain in FL, OH and PA in November and those states are crucial. After the Rev. Wright views were released, the superdelegates must be aware that Obama has further established himself as a completely unknown quantity that makes the poor judgement of conducting business deals with Tony Rezko. I expect the Obama supporters that may jump off to be the first-time voters, that are unreliable anyway, while many of the African-American's will remember how the Clinton administration fought for them in the 90's, while polls have also shown that less Clinton supporters will vote for Obama in a general election

There might be a slight easing of BO's Superdelegate momentum over the next month or so....but when we hit May it will head straight back to Obama and my prediction is he'll be leading by May 10 at the latest, just after he romps in a NC win.

Romps in a NC win??? He currently has an overall 6% lead there which is not a "romp" at all, and that will change significantly if Clinton wins in PA. I would be totally surprised if Obama "romps' in a win there, and if you're basing your prediction by calling that a "romp" then how far off are you with the rest of what you say?

Don't forget the Add-ons either.

I haven't, but nor will they make any significant difference.

That represents a 15 delegate swing to BO.

No it doesn't. It represents maybe a 10 delegate swing to Barack Obama which will still not push him to the 2024 delegate total needed to become the nomination. If Barack Obama cannot reach that figure when all states are completed, which he won't, then this definitely favours Clinton with the superdelegates in my opinion. The longer this goes, the more likely she is to win.

Risk is the word. The Dems have a safe alternative in Clinton to put up as nominee. If they go for Obama then mainstream voters will have a safe alternative in McCain come November. The Dem choice seems pretty clear now.

It certainly does, and the longer this goes, the more clear it becomes in my opinion. Both Democratic candidates will need the support of the superdelegates to win, and I expect sense to prevail and a deal to be reached by Democratic party leaders to secure the nomination for the safer choice, which is definitely Hillary Clinton.

 

[achancely]

Hillary safer choice?

Tell her she's dreamin'!

 

[GuruJane]

It was probably the last chance for quite a few of the other candidates as well Jane, and they pulled out before the numbers said it was impossible for them.

I would be interested if you could name one candidate who pulled out "before the numbers said it was impossible for them?"

 

[bradrowe#32]

There won't be another Florida primary, according to this: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/17/florida.primary.decision/index.html

 

[KissStephanie]

Brack Obama is Unelectable

I would be interested if you could name one candidate who pulled out "before the numbers said it was impossible for them?"

I know that I can't think of any, and I don't expect that to change with Hillary Clinton either. She will stay to the very end, particularly now because I'm sure that she understands that Barack Obama is completely unelectable.

I saw his speech today, and as much as it may cause some to give him a second look after writing him off yesterday, it was not enough. The Republican's have the attack ads all lined up if Obama becomes the nomination such as his support for the Rev. Wright showing footage of him damning America and laying blame for 9/11 and AIDS, and Michelle Obama's claim that she has only recently become a proud American only because her husband is running for President. I am an Australian, but I have more pride in this country than she has for goodness sake! Karl Rove will come out of retirement to assist the McCain campaign for this one.

The more that Obama goes on about race being an unimportant factor, the more important it becomes to the voters, and there is nothing that is more divisive to many people. Obama flip-flopped and admitted that he had in fact heard these sermons from Wright before, but he claimed in his speech that he did not always agree with the views of Wright, and that many churchgoers often disagree with a priest or minister, but aren't they likely to confront the priest or find another church? Obama had done neither of these two things in more than 20 years of this hate-filled preaching until now. Why didn't he do it earlier? It's because his political ambition is on the line now.

This is not going to go away either. The conservatives online will continue to push his relationship with Wright and his views, and Obama's failure to account for an inflammatory, racist, repugnant hate-monger. The conservatives on the radio will never let it go. The conservatives on the telly won't either and it will filter through to the Democrats. The division that this has caused makes Hillary Clinton look like a uniting option.

 

[GuruJane]

Re: Brack Obama is Unelectable

I know that I can't think of any, and I don't expect that to change with Hillary Clinton either. She will stay to the very end, particularly now because I'm sure that she understands that Barack Obama is completely unelectable.

I saw his speech today, and as much as it may cause some to give him a second look after writing him off yesterday, it was not enough.

Yes I watched it live early am here. It was a ground-breaking speech in so many ways and took me back to Bobby Kennedy.

But I can't see it playing in mainstream America where the election will be decided; the grotesque Rev Wright clips are just too powerful and the message too intellectual.

The Republican's have the attack ads all lined up if Obama becomes the nomination such as his support for the Rev. Wright showing footage of him damning America and laying blame for 9/11 and AIDS, and Michelle Obama's claim that she has only recently become a proud American only because her husband is running for President. I am an Australian, but I have more pride in this country than she has for goodness sake!

Michelle Obama is not helping Barack at all. She's clearly much more radical than he is representing himself as being.

Karl Rove will come out of retirement to assist the McCain campaign for this one.

You are so right about that! Rove is now a Fox contributor and his appearances are like masterclasses in political analysis. He leaves that fat, sleazebag Morris for dead.

And if the Rev Wright clips can't turn out the 2004 republican evangelical vote nothing would!

The more that Obama goes on about race being an unimportant factor, the more important it becomes to the voters, and there is nothing that is more divisive to many people.

Juan Williams was making the same point today.

Obama flip-flopped and admitted that he had in fact heard these sermons from Wright before, but he claimed in his speech that he did not always agree with the views of Wright, and that many churchgoers often disagree with a priest or minister, but aren't they likely to confront the priest or find another church? Obama had done neither of these two things in more than 20 years of this hate-filled preaching until now. Why didn't he do it earlier? It's because his political ambition is on the line now.

He was in a vice, because saying he hadn't heard the sermons begged the question as to whether someone that naiivive could be c in c.

The division that this has caused makes Hillary Clinton look like a uniting option.

Seems to be the way it's heading.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Brack Obama is Unelectable

I know that I can't think of any, and I don't expect that to change with Hillary Clinton either. She will stay to the very end, particularly now because I'm sure that she understands that Barack Obama is completely unelectable.

You don't even try to back up the rubbish you spew these days.

I saw his speech today, and as much as it may cause some to give him a second look after writing him off yesterday, it was not enough. The Republican's have the attack ads all lined up if Obama becomes the nomination such as his support for the Rev. Wright showing footage of him damning America and laying blame for 9/11 and AIDS, and Michelle Obama's claim that she has only recently become a proud American only because her husband is running for President.

Republicans will have attack ads lined up for either Hillary or Obama. That's what Republicans do. You're living in a fantasy land if you think this is a hurdle only Obama will have to clear.

Besides, if the Republicans want to hit Obama with Wright, they can expect counter-ads about McCain's association with lovely chaps like Hagee and Parsley, just to name a couple.

Obama flip-flopped and admitted that he had in fact heard these sermons from Wright before, but he claimed in his speech that he did not always agree with the views of Wright, and that many churchgoers often disagree with a priest or minister, but aren't they likely to confront the priest or find another church?

No, he didn't flip-flop. He denied hearing the 'goddamn America' remarks that originally sparked this flap. He was very specific about this: 'I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue.' And: 'The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation.'

In his speech he says he had heard Wright make other controversial remarks:

OBAMA: I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

There is no contradiction or equivocating here.

Obama had done neither of these two things in more than 20 years of this hate-filled preaching until now. Why didn't he do it earlier? It's because his political ambition is on the line now.

Hate-filled preaching? So you cherrypick comments from a pastor who's been preaching for decades and then conclude his preaching is 'hate-filled'? As you're becoming more desperate, your arguments are becoming more low-rent, Stephanie.

If you did in fact watch Obama's speech, you'll also recall the laundry list of good things that Wright has done for his church and his community, not to mention the positive impact that Wright has had on Obama's life, and Obama's personal affection for the man. These things put Obama's position in Wright's congregation in context.

And so what, his pastor said some controversial things. Let's start combing through the associates, family, friends, and colleagues of everyone who runs for public office, see if we can find something controversial, then make the candidate responsible for things someone else said. If that's the criteria you apply, no one will be eligible for public office. Certainly not Hillary or McCain. FFS.

This is not going to go away either. The conservatives online will continue to push his relationship with Wright and his views, and Obama's failure to account for an inflammatory, racist, repugnant hate-monger.

What? Wright said some controversial things and now he's an 'inflammatory, racist, repugnant hatemonger'? Jesus, you're pretty anxious about racial discourse now for someone who didn't bat an eyelid when Bill Shaheen and Geraldine Ferraro were casting about racial slurs against Obama. What's the difference? Why this change of heart? Could it be -- surely, surely not! -- the patented Stephanie double-standard?

The conservatives on the radio will never let it go. The conservatives on the telly won't either and it will filter through to the Democrats.

Yes, I'm sure the 'conservatives' will be wearing out their keyboards hysterically posting about Wright the 'inflammatory, racist, repugnant hatemonger'. Those 'conservatives' are shameless peddlers of hate and cynicism, aren't they?

The division that this has caused makes Hillary Clinton look like a uniting option.

Hillary a uniting option? Now I've heard it all. Really. Nothing you say can surprise me after that.

Look, at this point I have to ask: are you some kind of avant-garde comedian? Is this whole rabid Clinton lockstep thing you've got going just some kind of elaborate political joke?

 

[midorigreenwood]

Unless he gets caught blowing Stephen Colbert or holding up a liquor store, the nomination is Obama's.

The things they do for the Colbert Bump.... ;;

 

[GuruJane]

Re: Brack Obama is Unelectable

If you did in fact watch Obama's speech, you'll also recall the laundry list of good things that Wright has done for his church and his community, not to mention the positive impact that Wright has had on Obama's life, and Obama's personal affection for the man. These things put Obama's position in Wright's congregation in context.

Palmer, of all the Rev Wright clips the most visually repugnant is the one where Wright bellows about Bill Clinton "riding" Monica Lewinsky as he pumps his hips to demonstrate - infront of his huge congregation.

The very thought of anyone, let alone Obama, adopting this man as a spiritual advisor and having "personal affection" for him .... well turn off the dial!

If you think Obama's laundry list of the "good things" in defence of this man will wash with mainstream Democrat and Independent voters or even a lot of African Americans ... you are deluding yourself ...