Pennsylvania

[moistie]

When do people think Clinton will receive the tap on the shoulder?

 

[moistie]

At 84% it's still 55% Clinton, 45% Obama but the delegate lead has tightened to 40 Clinton, 37 Obama. Everything but a landslide.

 

[Lionel Lyon]

When do people think Clinton will receive the tap on the shoulder?

Even if someone tapped her on the shoulder, she could just ignore it, and, I think, not without some justification. Each candidate should be allowed to go as far as the rules allow him/her to. Otherwise, there will always be lingering doubts about the eventual winner's legitimacy.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

When do people think Clinton will receive the tap on the shoulder?

I agree with Lionel: she's within her rights to keep running till the bitter end. The people who'll be tapped on the shoulder are superdelegates. A brokered convention would be a disaster for the party, and they won't allow it to happen IMO. Superdelegates will be pressured to declare their hands so that delegate counts can be calculated and a presumptive nominee declared in early June at the latest.

 

[Qsaint]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/us/politics/22text-obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Obama has changed tack and is now back at McCain

Sort of congrats to Hillary but your irrelevant

 

[moistie]

I agree with Lionel: she's within her rights to keep running till the bitter end. The people who'll be tapped on the shoulder are superdelegates. A brokered convention would be a disaster for the party, and they won't allow it to happen IMO. Superdelegates will be pressured to declare their hands so that delegate counts can be calculated and a presumptive nominee declared in early June at the latest.

That was more what I was getting at. When do you think the uncommited Superdelegates will be forced to declare? Essentially once they do that, it will be the tap on the shoulder for Hillary, as there will be no way she can win the nomination.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I am only an occasional watcher of this process and do not pretend to know how it all works. I know Obama will win on delegates, have no idea about super delegates, and I believe that Clinton is winning the primary vote.

From what I can gather from this board, delegates can change prior to the democrat convention, is that right?

At the convention they take into account who is more likely to win an election against McCain, take into account primary votes, states won etc?

The Pennsylvania exit polls show that 43% of Clinton voters will either vote McCain or stay home if Obama is the candidate. 29% of Obama voters say the same in regards to Clinton.

Am I to understand that after all this, they can head off to a convention and the candidate is chosen based on a range of factors, and delegates are only one part of the equation looked at ... is that right?

 

[Mr Q]

Re: Superdelegates Will Move Back to Clinton

No, she said today that she is attempting to have the delegates seated in accordance with the January results. There are a number of ways that this can occur.

Hypocricy and skullduggery come to mind immediately...

 

[achancely]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

She absolutely can! A 10% margin in PA is decisive, and a fantastic result and continues to show that Obama is flawed.

It's only decisive when it's in your favour, and does the huge amount of Clinton losses show she is more flawed then?

 

[KissStephanie]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

She doesn't appear to think so. She's got a new campaign chant Yes we WILL!

She absolutely can! A 10% margin in PA is decisive, and a fantastic result and continues to show that Obama is flawed. I think she will head into IN with a lead in the polls there. Now if FL is added to her votes she would will be close enough to attract enough superdelegates. It will be interesting to see how she does in NC with Elizabeth Edwards campaigning with her, although I'm sure Obama will win there because he does well in states that the Republicans are going to win in November.

She has won all but one of the big, critical Democratic and swing states for November, and I'm sure that the majority of superdelegates are realising she is the most electable. Her voter base is critical to the Democratic Party, and she wins the important primaries when Democrats actually vote and have their say. If it wasn't for the ridiculous undemocratic caucus format, that clearly suits his demographic and prevents older voters from participating as proven in TX, then she would have wrapped this nomination up tonight.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

I am only an occasional watcher of this process and do not pretend to know how it all works. I know Obama will win on delegates, have no idea about super delegates, and I believe that Clinton is winning the primary vote.

Obama leads by approx 150 pledged delegates. Superdelegates are Democratic members of congress, Democratic governors, and party officials. They can choose to vote for whomever they choose. I can't remember the stats, but there are about 700 superdelegates.

As for the popular vote, Obama leads on popular vote and is almost certain to remain in front. There are, however, different ways of calculating the popular vote (Do you count Florida? Michigan? How do you add caucus figures to primary figures?), so there are a few different totals.

From what I can gather from this board, delegates can change prior to the democrat convention, is that right?

Superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose for whatever reason they choose. The delegates that Obama and Clinton earn via primaries and caucuses (ie, pledged delegates) can technically vote for whomever they choose too. However, the reality is that each campaign will vet their pledged delegates to ensure that their vote is secure, so the likelihood of pledged delegates changing their vote is very small.

At the convention they take into account who is more likely to win an election against McCain, take into account primary votes, states won etc?

I doubt very much that the nomination will still be up for grabs come the convention in August. As we were saying in this thread, undeclared superdelegates (and both candidates need some of the undeclared superdelegates to get a majority) will be encouraged to declare their voting intention. In fact, Howard Dean, chairman of the DNC, has already begun to do this. And this will mean, IMO, that a presumptive nominee will be established no later than June. The convention will then simply be a matter of ratifying what has already been established informally.

The Pennsylvania exit polls show that 43% of Clinton voters will either vote McCain or stay home if Obama is the candidate. 29% of Obama voters say the same in regards to Clinton.

A lot of that is bluster. At the end of the day, most Democrats will vote for the Democratic candidate. Just as so many of the conservatives who were vehemently anti-McCain have been quietly lining up behind him since he became the presumptive nominee.

Am I to understand that after all this, they can head off to a convention and the candidate is chosen based on a range of factors, and delegates are only one part of the equation looked at ... is that right?

It's possible that there will be a brokered convention, ie the nomination will be up for grabs until its finally decided at the convention in August. The actual nomination is achieved via a majority of delegates, so the number of pledged delegates you have accumulated is still highly relevant, because they will form the bulk of each candidate's delegate total.

If it goes to the convention, pledged delegates will almost certainly stick with the candidate they're 'pledged' to. Superdelegates, however, will no doubt consider any criteria they consider relevant before casting their votes.

The far, far more likely scenario is the one I outline above: undeclared superdelegates will be pressured into choosing over the next few weeks, and one of the two candidates will achieve a delegate majority long before the convention.

The winner will almost certainly be Obama. Today's result hasn't changed the dynamics of the race, though there will be those who insist that it has (you know who you are).

 

[meltiger]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

If it wasn't for the ridiculous undemocratic caucus format, that clearly suits his demographic and prevents older voters from participating as proven in TX, then she would have wrapped this nomination up tonight.

You're forgetting those who work

 

[Qsaint]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

She absolutely can! A 10% margin in PA is decisive, and a fantastic result and continues to show that Obama is flawed. I.

Its worth 6 delegates so far, thats not decisive

It also show old white, union member, women by 5% prefer Clinton, the demographics were appaling for Obama and clinton could just get over the line

 

[Qsaint]

A lot of that is bluster. At the end of the day, most Democrats will vote for the Democratic candidate. Just as so many of the conservatives who were vehemently anti-McCain have been quietly lining up behind him since he became the presumptive nominee.



.

Given that Clinton is getting 2 to 1 Democratic hard core members I would say its a negative for Clinton

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

She absolutely can! A 10% margin in PA is decisive

It currently stands at 8.6%.

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

It will be interesting to see how she does in NC with Elizabeth Edwards campaigning with her.

When did Elizabeth Edwards say she'd campaign with Hillary Clinton? Do you have a link?

She has won all but one of the big, critical Democratic and swing states for November, and I'm sure that the majority of superdelegates are realising she is the most electable.

How many times does it have to be explained to you? Whoever the Dems nominate will win big blue states like NY, IL, CA, and probably NJ in a canter. And in fact, Obama does better head-to-head against McCain in Michigan as well -- so there's another big state down.

If this thing were simply gonna be determined by who won the most big states by the biggest margins, Obama wouldn't have bothered spending so much time campaigning in Iowa or New Hampshire, and nor would Clinton.

Fact is, Obama enjoys a large delegate lead because he campaigned more intelligently, not expending huge resources primarily on big states, but spreading round the money and the on-the-ground organisation that enabled him to win caucuses in places such as Alaska. The Dems don't run a winner-takes-all system, so it doesn't make sense to focus on the big states to the exclusion of everything else. Obama and his team realised that; Clinton and her team didn't, or arrogantly disregarded it on the assumption that they'd blow Obama out of the water on Super Tuesday.

Obama's tactics early on were to expend enough time and resources to hold down Clinton's margins in the big states, then run up huge margins of his own in the other states. This big-stake theory that you've been spruiking at every opportunity for two months now is garbage. I doubt his campaign's strategy was ever premised on winning most of the big states. That's a feature not a bug.

Her voter base is critical to the Democratic Party, and she wins the important primaries when Democrats actually vote and have their say. If it wasn't for the ridiculous undemocratic caucus format, that clearly suits his demographic and prevents older voters from participating as proven in TX, then she would have wrapped this nomination up tonight.

Both of their voter bases are critical to the Democratic Party. FFS. How do you think she'll go without young people, professionals, and African Americans in November?

As per usual, no one heard a squeak out of Hillary about the nature of caucuses till she started losing them. Always wanting to move the goalposts halfway through the game.

 

[KissStephanie]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

Given that Clinton is getting 2 to 1 Democratic hard core members I would say its a negative for Clinton

Of course you would. In the real world though, not even the pro-Obama media have said that this is anything less than a decisive victory for Clinton, and more than the Obama campaign had anticipated.

It currently stands at 8.6%.

What does? Her 55%-45% lead after 99% of votes counted?

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

What does? Her 55%-45% lead after 99% of votes counted?

Clinton 54.3
Obama 45.8

Vote counted 99.07%. Margin down to 8.5%. Info from the Pennsylvania Dept of State.

 

[Elle]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

When did Elizabeth Edwards say she'd campaign with Hillary Clinton? Do you have a link?

Elizabeth didn't. KS is getting that rumor from Howard Fineman on MSNBC, who said:

"I'm told not to be surprised if in North Carolina, Elizabeth Edwards shows up at Hillary Clinton events -- with Hillary and maybe even without Hillary. I don't think John Edwards is going to endorse, but I think Elizabeth Edwards sentiments are going to be made even more clear, and that matters in North Carolina."

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

Elizabeth didn't. KS is getting that rumor from Howard Fineman on MSNBC, who said:

"I'm told not to be surprised if in North Carolina, Elizabeth Edwards shows up at Hillary Clinton events -- with Hillary and maybe even without Hillary. I don't think John Edwards is going to endorse, but I think Elizabeth Edwards sentiments are going to be made even more clear, and that matters in North Carolina."

Thanks Elle.

 

[KissStephanie]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

Clinton 54.3
Obama 45.8

That seems slightly older. It says that Clinton is 1,234,547 to Obama's 1,041,036. CNN though has Clinton ahead by 1,258,245 to Obama's 1,042,297, so it seems that the 10% margin is more accurate...

CNN Election Centre: PA

 

[Palmer Stoat]

Re: Pennsylvania the Path to the Democratic Nomination

That seems slightly older. It says that Clinton is 1,234,547 to Obama's 1,041,036. CNN though has Clinton ahead by 1,258,245 to Obama's 1,042,297, so it seems that the 10% margin is more accurate...

CNN Election Centre: PA

Yes, it looks like the PA Dept of State's numbers are dodgy.

 

[GuruJane]

Wilting Over Waffles

By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: April 23, 2008

He’s never going to shake her off.

The very fact that he can’t shake her off has become her best argument against him. “Why can’t he close the deal?” Hillary taunted at a polling place on Tuesday.

She’s been running ads about it, suggesting he doesn’t have “what it takes” to run the country. Her message is unapologetically emasculating: If he does not have the gumption to put me in my place, when superdelegates are deserting me, money is drying up, he’s outspending me 2-to-1 on TV ads, my husband’s going crackers and party leaders are sick of me, how can he be trusted to totally obliterate Iran and stop Osama?

Now that Hillary has won Pennsylvania, it will take a village to help Obama escape from the suffocating embrace of his rival. Certainly Howard Dean will be of no use steering her to the exit. It’s like Micronesia telling Russia to denuke.

“You know, some people counted me out and said to drop out,” said a glowing Hillary at her Philadelphia victory party, with Bill and Chelsea by her side. “Well, the American people don’t quit. And they deserve a president who doesn’t quit, either.”

The Democrats are growing ever more desperate about the Attack of the 50 Foot Woman. With gas prices out of control, with the comically oblivious President Bush shimmying around New Orleans — the city he let drown — and Condi sneaking into Baghdad as rockets and mortars hail down on the Green Zone, beating the Republicans should be a cinch.

But the Democrats watch in horror as Hillary continues to scratch up the once silvery sheen on Obama, and as John McCain not only consolidates his own party but encroaches on theirs by boldly venturing into Selma, Ala., on Monday to woo black voters.

They also cringe as Bill continues his honey-crusted-nut-bar meltdown. With his usual exquisite timing, just as Pennsylvanians were about to vote, Hillary’s husband became the first person ever to play the Caucasian Card. First, he blurted out to a radio interviewer that the Obama camp had played the race card against him after he compared Obama’s strength in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson’s. And then, with a Brobdingnagian finger-wagging on the screen, he denied it to an NBC News reporter.

“You always follow me around and play these little games, and I’m not going to play your games today,” he said, accusing the reporter of looking for “another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us.”

If there’s one person who knows about crass diversions, it’s Bill. But even for him, it was an embarrassing explosion, capped with some blue language to an aide that was caught on air.

The Democrats are eager to move on to an Obama-McCain race. But they can’t because no one seems to be able to show Hillary the door. Despite all his incandescent gifts, Obama has missed several opportunities to smash the ball over the net and end the game. Again and again, he has seemed stuck at deuce. He complains about the politics of scoring points, but to win, you’ve got to score points.

He knew he tanked in the Philadelphia debate, but he was so irritated by the moderators — and by having to stand next to Hillary again — that he couldn’t summon a single merry dart.

Is he skittish around her because he knows that she detests him and he’s used to charming everyone? Or does he feel guilty that he cut in line ahead of her? As the husband of Michelle, does he know better than to defy the will of a strong woman? Or is he simply scared of Hillary because she’s scary?

He is frantic to get away from her because he can’t keep carbo-loading to relate to the common people.

In the final days in Pennsylvania, he 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.

But this is clearly a man who can’t wait to get back to his organic scrambled egg whites. That was made plain with his cri de coeur at the Glider Diner in Scranton when a reporter asked him about Jimmy Carter and Hamas.

“Why” he pleaded, sounding a bit, dare we say, bitter, “can’t I just eat my waffle?”

His subtext was obvious: Why can’t I just be president? Why do I have to keep eating these gooey waffles and answering these gotcha questions and debating this gonzo woman?

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!”

Be afraid, QSaint, be very afraid.

 

[evo]

Hehe funny article. I can't help barracking for Hilary now.

 

[GuruJane]

Hehe funny article. I can't help barracking for Hilary now.

I have been asking the question as to whether Obama is susceptible to pussy whipping for some time? Trust Maureen Dowd to pick it.