obama claiming a win in nevada is pretty absurd

[ignu]

just because he won more delegates.

that'd be like george bush claiming he won the 2000 election just because he had more electoral votes.

[MNDemNY]

1. Are you saying that BHO cheated, too?

[JackORoses]

17. no, he's saying he won the number that counts...Delegates

[MNDemNY]

28. How many of the ZERO was he awarded on Saturday?

National Delegates?

[JackORoses]

29. based on Saturday's results, he will receive 13 National Delegates

no matter how you attempt to muddy the waters,
the fact is that National Delegates are awarded based on Caucus results. This is why the Caucus is held.

Based on those results, Obama wins 13 delegates.

Sure, if he drops out by April, those delegates would go to Hillary.
But if he is still in it, they count toward his 2025 needed to clinch the nomination.

[MNDemNY]

32. Such assumptions.

[JackORoses]

36. it's not an assumption when it's based on the actual Caucus results

and the known formula NV uses to assign delegates.

The only assumption is that Obama is still in the race.

You are basing your whole argument around the idea that he won't be. This seems to be the more unlikely assumption.

[opihimoimoi]

2. Desperation does odd things....trying to stem the bleeding

[AX10]

3. Obama is like the Bush of 2000.

[madrchsod]

15. elaborate please

i would like to read your justification for stating barrack is like george bush of 2000

[Cha]

30. They have no elaboration..

the locksteppers find a crumb to pick on Obama and they think it's feast.

They're really quite boring with their pre-k mentality.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

4. If Bush had truly, honestly won Florida in 2000

he COULD claim he won the 2000 election while losing the popular vote, because that's how the rules are.

Getting delegates IS the whole point of the primaries. Deal with it.

[MadBadger]

5. Who got the WH????? Gore or Bush?

Gore won, but it was a technical win by BUsh.

[sufrommich]

9. I wish you Obama supporters would just cut to the chase

and explain which right wing meme you are not willing to embrace to defend your Great Bringer Of Hope And Change .Obama left Nevada in a petulant hissy fit with nary a word to his supporters or the obligatory nod to the winner.No class at all.

[midnight]

10. The choice of word ,technical, can have some bearing hear,

because diebold changed the way we view election fraud. Also the Sumpreme Court stopped the re-count, and selected George may constitute for tecnical manuvers. But for those of us that know George stole the election it doesn't matter what word you use. Gore Won!

[William769]

And whats even more absurd, the actual delegates are not awarded till April 19.

2 1/2 Months late for Obama.

[JackORoses]

19. no delegates from any state have officially been awarded yet,

your argument is a Red Herring.

Based on the Caucus result, which has already happened, Obama wins 13 delegates from NV.

[William769]

25. So then what part of my statement is false?

[JackORoses]

26. your statement implied that the Caucus results don't directly effect the delegate count

That is false.

Just because delegates haven't been officially awarded, does not mean that the delegate counts cannot be calculated from the existing Caucus results.

That is how we know the numbers for IA and NH. They are not official, but they are valid.

Just like Nevada's... Obama-13 Hill-12

[William769]

31. SO once again my statement is not false.

Your panties are just in a wad for some reason.

[JackORoses]

33. but your statement's implication is false

Caucus results do directly effect the awarding of Delegates.

Why else is the Caucus held?

Just because the delegates aren't officially awarded,
does not mean that you can't tell who will receive them based on the known Caucus results.

I think you can comprehend this.

[sandnsea]

6. Or that the Nov 2 election was hypothetical

because the actual electoral college hadn't voted yet.

:crazy:

[Fridays Child]

7. Did you forget the sarcasm tag?

[ignu]

11. uhm

i assumed i didn't need it.

but yes, it was obviously sarcasm.

in that the goal of these contests is to win delegates, and obama won the most, well i don't see how he didn't win.

and people who went off about florida shenanigans can't see the forest for the trees. the point is, despite bush losing the popular vote, he won the electoral vote and that was... uh... the only part of the election that mattered.

[Fridays Child]

14. I thought you were being sarcastic but, from some of the responses here...

...apparently, not everyone got it.

[CTLawGuy]

8. isn't the point of participating in primaries

winning delegates?

[ignu]

12. apparently clinton doesn't think so...

but i'd be happy if obama kept "losing" like this all the way to the convention, where he'd win the nomination!

[CTLawGuy]

16. well

I hope personally he wins big in SC just in time for super Tuesday.

[SaveElmer]

13. He didn't win any delegates...neither did...

They won't be apportioned until later and the results Saturday are not binding...

It is ridiculous spin from Obamanation

[JackORoses]

20. They are binding if the candidates remain the same.

The Hillarite spin is that she will already be the nominee by then, so the delegates will all go to her.

That is very, very misleading.

Because if Obama is still in the race, those 13 NV delegates will be counted towards his 2025 needed to clench the nomination.

[MH1]

18. But Bush DID NOT win more electoral votes.

Get a grip, people. If Bush had ACTUALLY WON more electoral votes - instead of STEALING FLORIDA'S - then YES he would have been the ELECTED PRESIDENT.

I hope our education system starts doing a better job educating kids how the electoral system works in this country!!!

[JackORoses]

21. yet Obama did win more delegates, and he did it fair and square

[MH1]

23. EXACTLY. That's what makes the comparison specious.

But this is only minor speciousness next to some of the poo being flung around these days.

[JackORoses]

27. even though bush cheated, the comparison is valid

Delegates, like Electoral votes, count more towards deciding a winner than the popular vote. This is a fact.

So if Obama receives more of NV's delegates, then technically, he is the winner.

[Renew Deal]

22. Who got to be president in 2000?

[Kucinich4America]

24. What number determines the winner of the nomination

That's right. Delegates. Obama didn't make the rules in Nevada. But, according to those rules, he has one more delegate than Hillary.

The comparison to Chimpy is ridiculous, because even the electoral votes in Florida were based on Cruella Harris' early certification, and never reflected a REAL number of votes, as the Felonious Five Bush Crime Family appointees on the Supreme Court stopped the recount.

[Adelante]

34. I claim Clinton won in Nevada

There is a point to be made about delegates. In the earliest two races it was about winning momentum. That didn't happen for either candidate in a significant way. As the race remains fairly close, it's about winning delegates. However, personally, I say Clinton won Nevada, because it only made three contests at that point. Claiming a win for Clinton in Michigan, which I've seen on DU, by any measure, is absurd. Anyhow, George Bush did claim he won the 2000 election and look where we are today.

[no name no slogan]

35. The nom isn't decided by popular vote-- it's decided by delegates

Obama appears to have won more delegates than HRC-- using the same rules HRC's campaign agreed to when they decided to run in Nevada.

Technically speaking, that's a victory.