Bad news for Obama supporters: It may not be simple math after all.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Saturday, March 8, 2008

It is possible that the Primary season could end with one candidate winning a majority of the pledged delegates and another candidate winning a majority of the popular vote. If that happens, 57% believe the nomination should go to the candidate with a majority of the popular vote. Adding to the confusion, there may be different winners of the popular vote depending upon what happens with the contested delegates in Florida and Michigan. If there are “do-over” Primaries in those states, Hillary Clinton begins with a big lead in the Sunshine State and it is tied in Michigan.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

----

This could really be an issue. I've heard this talked about by Hillary's supporters and pretty much dismissed it up to now. I've focused on delegates, delegates, delegates and dismissed the popular vote as irrelevant in the same way that it's irrelevant in the General Election.

But it's not irrelevant, because the superdelegates can use any rationale they see fit to use, and since pretty much everyone agrees that neither candidate will win the nomination without the help of some of the still-uncommitted supers out there, it in fact becomes VERY relevant.

If 57% of those polled believe the nomination should go to the winner of the popular vote, and that turns out to be Hillary, then it's quite possible that 57% or MORE of the undecided superdelegates may feel the same way. We're not playing by the same rules as the GE where the one who gets more electoral votes wins, period.

So basically, this is not good news for Obama supporters. The bar has been raised for him; he must win the pledged delegate race AND the popular vote race -- possibly including FL and MI -- to be certain that the superdelegates will not overturn his PD win.

----

Them's the breaks folks. And don't forget that the superdelegates who have currently committed to him could change their minds if Clinton gets close enough on PD's and wins the popular vote. The DU backlash would be horrific, but the mainstream America backlash may be very minor - especially if Clinton wins and offers the VP slot to Obama.

----

At this point I'd like to ask: Who has some good links to the popular vote count, and knows whose numbers are more credible?

[AtomicKitten]

1. Bad news for Clinton supporters: Barack Obama is winning!

[NJSecularist]

2. There is very little chance for Hillary to overtake Obama in the popular vote

if Michigan and Florida's pre-existing totals are not seated.

[Ravy]

39. Seating them has nothing to do with popular vote. Superdelegates

will want to hear from Fla and MI, and will probably count them in the popular vote totals.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

129. In NYC alone the population is equal to 9 of Obama's red state combined polulations

[rodeodance]

130. aye:-)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. Told Ya So.

:P

[FlyingSquirrel]

97. Was that all you wanted to contribute to this thread?

Just curiously

:P

[Tellurian]

126. Happy, you are finally seeing the light!

Thanks for posting this information.

[Joe the Revelator]

4. The bar has NOT been raised. Nothing matters but delegates. Its the way the system is set up

Just more Hillbot rule changing as the game goes on.

[FlyingSquirrel]

5. I'm an Obama supporter just for the record,

And you're right that nothing matters but the delegates. However, there are two kinds of delegates. The winner does not need a majority of pledged delegates, he/she needs a majority of TOTAL delegates.

The superdelegates may in fact side with the popular vote winner; and considering that a majority of Americans seems to be fine with that, many of the superdelegates may be willing to do so.

The DU backlash would be horrific, but the mainstream America backlash may be minor.

[jefferson_dem]

11. The beauty is that delegates will be the ones to set the rules at the convention.

Hillary will not be able to grab enough who say "popular vote wins" when Obama goes in with a 100+ advantage. That is supposing the Supers break evenly for the two of them from here on out.

[FlyingSquirrel]

22. That may be true. MI and FL are still big wild cards though and could

reduce his advantage to somewhere between 30 and 50 delegates. That may not be enough to persuade the uncommitted supers if the popular vote goes her way.

Also there may be a core group of Supers who will not endorse either one until the convention or at least until June. Superdelegate endorsements seem to be slowing down, from what I can tell. Some are switching from supporting Clinton to being uncommitted, rather than just moving straight over to Obama.

[pampango]

72. In most states Obama seems to start out down 20 points, but with campaigning

comes back to make it competitive or win.

In Michigan the polls show him in a tie now, I believe, and in Florida he is down 16. Who knows what will happen, but he could well win Michigan and make it close in Florida, so that similar to Texas and Ohio neither of them may win many net delegates.

Of course the popular vote ignores caucus states. We will never know how Clinton and Obama would have done if the caucus states had held primaries instead. The number voting would have been larger. He may have conducted his campaign differently if all states had primaries, as might she.

At the beginning of the campaign they each knew which states had open primaries, which had closed primaries, and which had caucuses. Each had the goal of winning as many pledged delegates as possible and getting the support of as many superdelegates as possible.

[FlyingSquirrel]

101. There's no doubt that Obama is an incredible campaigner with a great

campaign staff. They went into this knowing that they were the underdog and so they tried a lot harder than Hillary and there's really just no way to overemphasize what an amazing feat they accomplished. They took everyone by surprise. It was a blitzkrieg.

But Hillary has regained her footing and although she is too far behind to win the pledged delegate race, she is not too far behind to win the race of public opinion and the overall popular vote. DU will go nuts, but the general public will be satisfied with a Clinton/Obama ticket.

With the ground game Obama's supporters have, Hillary would be crazy not to include him on the ticket if she won. Think of that ticket, it truly is the dream ticket. And if she assures everyone that he will be on her ticket if she wins the nomination, that will sway a lot of the superdelegates who might otherwise be voting for Obama. Meanwhile, Obama cannot offer the same reassurance to those torn between himself and Hillary.

---

An old adage to keep in mind: Youth and skill are no match for old age and treachery.

[NDambi]

127. "general public will be satisfied with a Clinton/Obama ticket."

Not in my neighborhood..and not in the neighborhood of any other folks I know.

Sorry.

[roseBudd]

135. I agree, people don't like pushy arrogant people, especially annoying ones

[roseBudd]

136. "Youth and skill are no match for old age and treachery" all the more reason to reject Hill

I can't wait to see tall suave, unflappable Obama debate McInsane

[Justice Is Comin]

155. I have to give you credit for being honest enough

to say that it is quickly shifting to this foregone conclusion outcome.

The supers don't have allegiance to anybody. They can switch at the blink of an eye. When the states that matter in the whopping electoral vote numbers are in Hillary's column, the super deciders are going to place their chips on the lady.

Obama got a free ride on the press loves me express in the early going. But it's not so sweet anymore. Pennsylvania will start to nail it shut.

You're one of few here now not living in a la la la la--I can't hear you--- world anymore.

[Seeker30]

7. Keep believing that crap

If it makes ya feel better.

[greyghost]

23. Crap? That's the way it is like it or not.

[Horse with no Name]

50. Delegates don't matter one fucking bit after the primary

The voters however, do. Go ahead and piss on all the big states that Hillary won in. I fucking dare you.

[scheming daemons]

79. Obama will win those same states... give it up....

Obama will win NY, CA, NJ, and MA... .just as Hillary would.

[Horse with no Name]

80. Doubtful.

But dare to dream.

[thoughtcrime1984]

150. I don't doubt it

It's not some sort of stretch that one would have to dream about for it to happen.

[JoFerret]

123. That would be a nightmare

(I miss Edwards)

[pnwmom]

95. But the super-delegates are free to vote however they wish.

That's the way the system is set up.

No one's changing the rules here, except for Obama supporters who are trying to pretend there are additional unwritten rules that no one has ever followed before.

[Straight Shooter]

6. I would be content with the popular vote, whichever candidate it is.

I think people are finally beginning to realize what a screwy system we actually have when it comes to choosing nominees. Now if we can only do something about that horrid electoral system, too.

One more thing: Mail-in paper ballots for all states, just like Oregon.

[FlyingSquirrel]

8. We ARE doing something about the electoral system.

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/index.php

[Straight Shooter]

9. Thanks!

I've bookmarked that site on my Favorites.

This is one reason I visit GDP, because once in a while there's a diamond in the dung. :D

edit a furtive smilie that snuck in

[ProgressiveEconomist]

20. IMO, the most thorough popular vote and delegate data, including Congressional District

popular vote data, are at thegreenpapers.com.

Use this template, substituting for, say MI, the two-letter postal abbreviation of any other state or jurisdiction:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/MI-D.phtml ;

or use the 57 jurisdictional links (including Democrats Abroad, Virgin Islands, etc) in the state summary table at

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/D-PU.phtml .

[FlyingSquirrel]

64. Bookmarked, thanks very much.

:hi:

[jefferson_dem]

14. The ones complaining about the system are the ones who are losing under it.

It's always been a race for delegates.

No more whining, eh.

[Az_lefty]

10. OMG it's over, over I tell you...the sky's falling, run like HELL!!!!!!!!

[Alhena]

12. Bad news for Hillary- there will be a million Obama supporters in Denver

if they think the election is about to be taken from him. We're just talking about raw power here- Hillary has raw power among superdelegates, but Obama has raw power on the street, from the people. And the superdelegates will not want to see riots follow their decision to overrule the pledged delegates.

[BzaDem]

15. Most voters don't even know what a pledged delegate is. They know what the popular vote is.

The only ones that will be in Denver will be the people posting on DU.

[tridim]

21. I'm 5 miles from the Pepsi Center

and I'll be there defending the rules in the name of the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Methinks you may be correct.

So I will be paying serious attention to the popular vote as well as delegates from here on out.

[Seeker30]

86. If their moms will let them

[juajen]

37. This is the way the republicans behave, and you wonder

why we are down on Obama's supporters. Don't threaten us. Bullying will not work this time, as we can get as many people out as you can. However, I believe that the party will take care of security. Also, gotta tell ya, threatening the superdelegates is not cool.

Picture this: Six hundred little old ladies in wheelchairs being beaten by a mob of angry Obama supporters. There is strength in frailty and unbelievable bravery.

[Horse with no Name]

53. What you are talking about is inciting his base to race riots

and I am fucking sick of the threats. It is as vile as your candidate is for his race baiting.

[WTyler]

98. Race?

White male here, and I'll be in Denver if I have to be.

[Horse with no Name]

99. What is so amazing is

that a MILLION "Democrats" wouldn't get off their asses to fight against George Bush but they will get off their ass to fight against Hillary Clinton.
What a sack of unadulterated horse shit.

[Adelante]

113. Race riots?

Who is talking about race riots? Nobody.

[aquarius dawning]

117. I'm voting for McCain if that shit happens. EOM

[bhikkhu]

13. Raise the bar as high as you would like...

As long as it is not a matter of smoke-filled back-rooms, dirty deals and secret handshakes, there is one candidate that is ahead on all counts and likely to stay ahead as the rigorously tested and chosen by the people of this country Democratic selection.

[FlyingSquirrel]

27. I am hoping you are correct.

:thumbsup:

[spag68]

93. that freemason handshake with the forefinger wiggle seems so

juvenile,but they think they are very special,scares me almost as skull and bones NOT

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. The popular vote is a meaningless concept, yet strangely compelling

On the one hand, since states do not have uniform elections the popular vote idea is nuts. Relatively few people show up for caucuses. If California had a caucus system it would probably produce fewer votes than an Illinois primary... it's arbitrary to try to combine them in one broad category.

So the popular vote concept isn't fair to candidates, or to states.

On the other hand... there's something strangely compelling about saying: "Thirty million Americans actually acted affirmatively to register their choice, and the majority of them picked candidate A. It doesn't matter which state they're in... we are supposed to represent people, not map coordinates."

After 2000, the Democratic party is in a funny position on conflicts between aggregate votes versus arcane systems of apportionment. We are, as a party, wedded to "the will of the people" as meaning the will of the people in aggregate.

If I was a super-delegate I would do some soul-searching if presented with such an eventuality.

A super-delegate should give some weight to the popular will, but there is no reason whatsoever for a super-delegate to give special credence to pledged delegates as the definition of the popular will. 90% of the time someone wins by a lot and pledged delegates will be in line with every other conceivable measure of support. But in rare cases where there are different ways of looking at the popular will, the super-delegates job is to weigh everything by her best lights.

[DeadElephant_ORG]

17. AT WHAT COST for GOD'S SAKE ?

do you really believe the party can survive Hillary's scorched-earth strategy - that the damage will be limited to DU ? That's insane. We'll be lucky to make it two weeks at the rate the damage is building right now.

[FlyingSquirrel]

30. You're thinking that the majority of Dems are like DU'ers.

They're actually a lot more laid back than you might think. I bet my mom, who's a Hillary supporter, hasn't even heard about her McCain comment and might agree with it if she had. Or not think it's a big deal.

[greyghost]

32. You don't seem to get it so I'll explain it as succinctly as...

possible. The rest of the party will recover quite nicely especially if she makes Obama her VP. Which she will.

Hillary will get the nomination. TPTB have already decided that Obama isn't tough enough to take the old man.

But hey, don't worry, he'll get his chance in eight years.

[FlyingSquirrel]

34. The powers that be may have decided it, but if Obama gets the popular

vote, there will be no basis for the supers to overturn both a Pledged Delegate lead and a Popular Vote lead.

But it'll have to be a significant lead, 'cause this could turn out just like the GE in 2000 where people have differing opinions on who the popular vote winner really was, and Clinton has already made it clear that she intends to contest many of the delegates that some are taking for granted.

[greyghost]

42. True, it very well could.

[juajen]

43. Bullshit! What makes your opinion worth more?

NT

[ingac70]

18. None of the numbers are credible because...

Some of the caucus states do not release popular vote totals, just state delegate totals.

[FlyingSquirrel]

33. Interesting if true.

That would put Obama at a disadvantage in the popular vote - and people just watching tv would be likely to miss this point, or buy into Clinton's argument that caucuses are 'not democratic' and that therefore it should be ignored that Obama won the popular vote in caucus states because they didn't even bother to count the popular vote.

[ingac70]

60. ...

http://www.observer.com/2008/popular-vote-count-excludes-caucuses

Clinton's argument is a lie....

"Under Democratic rules, each vote isn't tallied at caucuses. The caucuses serve only to award delegates to go to a state convention (which then elects the national delegates). The results from caucus states reflect the number of convention delegates to the state convention won by each candidate."

[PerfectSage]

19. But why would the Super Dees vote against the best meal ticket?

Obama gets out the vote, raises cash and has wide coattails.

"We have lost the South for a generation," LBJ after signing the civil rights act in 1964
Obama, The Next Generation.

[Usrename]

31. haha

That's what bugs all these old folks about Obama. He's the next generation.

[juajen]

63. Without these "old folks" sonny, you wouldn't be here.

Shut your trap and don't pick on old people. Isn't seemly, you know. Sorta tells someone a lot about your upbringing.

[girl gone mad]

65. I think so.

I sense that a lot of people in the Clinton's generation are starting to take a good, hard look at their legacy and they aren't ready to hand over the reigns yet.

[emilyg]

108. You have problems with Mommie and Daddy?

[MindMatter]

24. What does "popular vote" even mean?

considering that many of the states elect to make their choices using caucuses. You cannot possibly compare the caucus attendees to the poll voters. It is apples and oranges. The poll elections naturally draw more participation because it is a 10 minute commitment of time. The caucuses require a major commitment -- maybe 5 hours in some cases. That makes the numbers incomparable.

[Horse with no Name]

61. and it allows for massive voter intimidation

that doesn't have any checks and balances.
It leaves a lot of room for the thugs to bully voters who simply wanted to be part of the process but didn't sign up to endanger their lives.

[MindMatter]

131. I'd prefer primaries for those reasons

But caucuses have been allowed. Those are the rules. We must live by them. We can't allow the loser to throw out the rules she doesn't like.

[zulchzulu]

25. The Democratic Nominee is decided on Delegate Votes

To get the nomination at the convention, the candidate must receive at least 2,024 votes from delegates. The popular vote is in no way part of the selection process.

Rules are rules:
http://www.democrats.org/a/convention_2008/delegate/

[FlyingSquirrel]

36. It's not an official part of the process, but you're missing the point

(perhaps on purpose?) Which is, the superdelegates may take anything they wish into consideration when deciding which candidate to vote for. Popular vote will be one of the things that many take into consideration (especially if it differs from the delegate lead) and this is within their rights to do, even under "the rules".

[JackORoses]

26. This is a Red Herring. Total Popular Vote doesn't include many Caucus states

This will not be used as a basis for determining the nominee.

I would bet that 57% of the public doesn't even know how a Caucus works.
I know that 99% of the Hillarites here can't tell the difference between a popular vote and a county delegate count.

[Quixote1818]

28. Thanks for making that point. I was wondering how Caucus states would calculate

into a popular vote. I don't think there is a cut and dry way to do it.

[FlyingSquirrel]

38. See above discussion

It doesn't much matter. If Hillary wins the popular vote among votes that are actually counted, your average tv viewer might completely miss the point that caucusgoers' votes were not included in those totals. And if it were pointed out to them, they might not care. They might buy Hillary's argument that caucuses aren't very democratic since so few people participate, and she could easily point to Washington State where Obama won the caucus by a MUCH wider margin than the non-binding primary. Therefore the popular vote in caucus states would be a moot point, and they'd be swayed by the overall popular vote that WAS counted.

[JackORoses]

40. your average TV viewer is not going to be making the call

That is what you are overlooking.

It is the Superdelegates who will make this decision.

They know how the system works. They know that the Popular Vote total doesn't include Caucuses.
They know that Pledged Delegates are what counts.

Give them some credit.

[greyghost]

47. The Super delegates are there to ensure that the person...

nominated can win the GE. PERIOD

TPTB have already decided that Obama can't take the old man.

Clinton/Obama 2008

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FlyingSquirrel]

69. Saying "FU" to a fellow DU'er is against the rules.

Do not hurl insults at other individual members of this message board. Do not tell someone, "shut up," "screw you," "fuck off," "in your face," or some other insult.

There are no exceptions to these civility rules. You cannot attack someone because they attacked you first, or because that person "deserved it," or because you think someone is a disruptor. We consider it a personal attack to call a liar a liar, to call a moron a moron, or to call a jerk a jerk.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

[Zhade]

73. How about "fuck your delusional nonsense, Clinton already lost"?

NT!

[FlyingSquirrel]

76. Probably acceptable, barely.

[greyghost]

81. Hillary has only lost in your dreams...

She is no were near being mathematically eliminated.

Best to hold your tongue, and your temper, or your posts are going to disappear.

No one gives a rats ass about your personal feelings on HRC and myself.

This is about taking the WH, nothing more.

Obama will do as he's told by the party elite, or nothing at all.

Clinton/Obama 2008

[JackORoses]

88. thank god you are not one of the Party elite

They are smart enough to actually know what is best for the Democratic Party, and that is not Hillary Clinton.

Your arrogance is quite Hillarite, though. She would be proud.

Sucks when your candidate has lost and all that's left to do is grovel for crumbs, huh?

[greyghost]

89. Actually Edwards was my man...

and I'd vote for Obama if they gave him the nomination, but they won't.

You see I've been around since McGovern. So I guess I am part of the party elite in that I know how the game is played.

Hillary is no were near losing, you are very naive for thinking it. If this were the Super Bowl, we're far from the two minute warning.

Clinton/Obama 2008

[JackORoses]

91. Then you realize what a major fuckup McGovern was and that it will never happen again

I'm interested to know how Hillary catches up in your fantasy world.

Even with MI and FL, she would still have to win every state left with 60% of the delegates.
If you live in a world where pledged delegates count for nothing, then don't even bother responding.

[FlyingSquirrel]

96. You can't win an argument with a fool... because a fool is certain he is right.

eom

[JackORoses]

102. or perhaps I just am right and you are entertaining faulty logic.

You look at the delegate math and see an unwinnable situation, so you are forced to try to make it about something other than the delegates.

It's simple enough to see what you are doing. That doesn't make it valid.

[FlyingSquirrel]

104. You win.

:hi:

[JackORoses]

106. You can't play Devil's Advocate or Neutral Switzerland in every case.

Sometimes you have to stand up for what is right.

[FlyingSquirrel]

111. Point taken and I do understand your point of view.

[FlyingSquirrel]

59. I don't share your certainty, but I think you could be right about TPTB

Especially when it's clear that an Obama/Clinton doesn't work NEARLY as well as a Clinton/Obama ticket (and that Hillary probably wouldn't accept second billing.)

Not to mention the fact that if Clinton wins the nomination, they'll have Obama waiting in the wings in 8 years - still plenty young enough to be president - whereas Clinton as VP helps us not at all in 8 years.

[greyghost]

75. Indeed, a run of 16 years would be quite nice. :)

[FlyingSquirrel]

55. I know that. I'm saying that the superdelegates who make their decision

could agree that the popular vote in caucus states would be a lot closer, and could justify their vote to the folks back home knowing that they were clueless that the popular vote in caucus states didn't count. If they wanted to vote for Hillary, as opposed to being truly uncommitted, they may decide to do so if they can find anything at all to justify it - and believe that their constituents would accept their justification.

Hey, I'm not saying this should happen. I agree that delegates won should really be what counts. But I don't want to be blindsided and I can see it going the other way.

[JackORoses]

66. SDs will make there decision based on who is best for the Party

They will choose Obama for many reasons:

- He has great crossover appeal
- He draws millions of new voters.
- He polls better against McCain
- He has won the Pledged Delegate race
- He is a step away from the old politics of divisiveness and Swing States into a new realm of possibility.
- He offers the greatest potential coattails and the chance of a working majority.

[FlyingSquirrel]

74. They may choose Hillary for the following reason:

(Aside from popular vote if she wins it)

Her "experience" ad WORKED. She may be stronger against McCain, Rasmussen polls notwithstanding. Obama will almost certainly accept a VP spot if she wins and offers it to him, creating a "dream ticket" which shores up her support among the black community. Also, in 8 years we could have the next president (Obama) waiting in the wings for us - yes, they could be thinking that far ahead. Whereas, Clinton would probably not accept a VP slot if offered; and there are no other female possibilities that improve Obama's security credentials. Therefore, without Clinton on the ticket a huge demographic - women - that could have been ours would be lost.

And even if Clinton WERE on the ticket as VP, she helps us not one iota in 8 years because she probably would be too old to run for president.

[JackORoses]

90. There is no proof that ad worked except the Hillarite claims it did.

She barely took the Texas primary after leading by 20+ just a few weeks prior.

You really have bought into the bullshit, haven't you?

Your 16 years argument is trash. Hillary doesn't deserve anything just because she is a woman and will be too old in 8 years.

We should elect the best President. Period.
We should elect Barack Obama.

All the rest of this is just fallout from the collapse of the Clinton 20 year plan.

[FlyingSquirrel]

94. I haven't bought into anything.

I'm just examining things with an open mind.

Try it sometime.

[JackORoses]

100. there is no point trying to be objective about Hillarite spin

It is intended for only one purpose, to further the ambitions of the Clintons.
It is not meant to benefit anyone else.

[FlyingSquirrel]

103. Ok, have a nice day.

:hi:

[juajen]

48. On the other hand, caucus states represent a very, very small

portion of the democratic party, and in this case, probably represents as many republicans as democrats, and it's an election for the purpose of electing a president who is a democrat. After this election I hope we all get busy ridding our party of open caucuses and primaries; if we have a country left.

[TheDoorbellRang]

29. Real Clear Politics has a running tally of the popular vote

Obama Clinton
Popular Vote Total - - 13,006,033 12,415,016

Popular Vote (w/FL) - - 13,582,247 13,286,002

Popular Vote (w/FL & MI)* - - 13,582,247 13,614,311


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Including Wyoming, Obama leads Clinton in the popular vote by 591,017. Note that he's still ahead when you add in Florida, but falls behind when Michigan is added in because his name was not on the ballot and consequently received none of the vote. Also note that this popular vote total does not include four caucus states: IA, NV, WA, and ME, because these states never provided those figures. So if TPTB decided to go by popular vote, how do they intend to get those figures from those four states? A do-over like MI and FL?

I'd like to see the math -- seriously -- that shows how the popular vote and pledged delegate count could skew apart so far as to produce that result. Have you seen anywhere where someone's actually shown how this could happen? The Texas two-step was the only one of the contests where this skewing could occur, because of its duality, so far as I know. Anyone done any figuring on this?

[backscatter712]

35. Clinton only gets a popular vote lead when Soviet-style elections are included.

Like Michigan, where only Clinton was on the ballot.

Hardly a fair competition there, don't you think

[FlyingSquirrel]

41. True. However, Clinton was popular in MI and could have actually taken

55% of the vote on her own with the rest being split between Obama and Edwards. It's somewhat insulting to Michigan voters to say that they only voted for her because her name was the only one on the ballot - it's like saying they didn't have the intelligence to vote uncommitted if they didn't favor her. Or like saying they were so ignorant they didn't realize anyone else was running.

[backscatter712]

57. Some of them voted uncommitted, others stayed home, others...

voted in the Republican primary (you thought it was just Freepers who raid the other party's elections, didn't you... :evilgrin: )

The point is that comparing what happened in Michigan to a normal primary with every candidate on the ballot, where the voters aren't told their votes don't count, and where the candidates get to do full campaigns, is like comparing apples to hammers.

[juajen]

67. I don't believe that the repuglicans have ANY open primaries or

caucuses. This was what I heard on CNN, I believe, since I don't watch MSNBC anymore.

[FlyingSquirrel]

45. Interesting numbers. And since the Superdelegates can take whatever

they want into consideration, they would be able to take MI and FL into consideration even if they were not seated. I could see a situation where they might be saying, "Well their delegates aren't getting seated but the people who voted in those states should have SOME representation and if Hillary has won the popular vote when MI and FL are included, then I have a good reason to vote for her -- it makes up for the fact that they didn't get represented in any other way at the convention."

[TheDoorbellRang]

139. But note RCP popular vote count adding MI has 0 added for Obama

The people in MI who wanted to vote for someone besides those who left their names on the ballot could only vote "Uncommitted." That's around 45% of the participants. How many favored Obama? Right now, the popular count says Zero. Also, going with the popular vote would also have to somehow factor in the popular vote in IA, NV, WA, and ME, which these four states never provided per RCP. IA and NV might not change things much, but finding and providing the popular vote in WA and ME would add even more to Obama's column.

[FlyingSquirrel]

144. Good point, those "uncommitted" voters have to be added somehow

to Obama's total popular vote. Since there's no way to know how many would go to him, the only fair way is to either not count MI since Clinton was the only one on the ballot, or give Obama all the uncommitted votes.

[Ravy]

49. The numbers are that way right now, if you count MI and FL.

Clinton is leading the popular vote, and Obama is leading the delegate count. That could hold or increase.

[BenDavid]

44. we had this election won till obama decided to "unite us."

and see how that has turned out? Pretty damn awful.....

I say lets do what Carville suggests. Get the DNC to okay a fund be set up that people can donate too and irregardless of the total amount limited lets raise about 30 million and have florida and michigan vote on the same day on june 3 or the 10th.....if the states says they cannot set up the voting machines then lets go back to a paper ballot and have hillary clinton and barack obama on the ballot and you can either place a check by the name, draw a circle around the name and lets vote and lets count..

If the dems do not count florida and michigan the democrat will lose becasue so many folks will just walk away and they will say, "McCain ain't so bad".

[FlyingSquirrel]

46. This Obama supporter thinks MI and FL need to be represented somehow.

I don't know how, but it needs to happen.

[TwilightGardener]

54. Why? Had this primary season gone as expected, it would have

all been over by Super Tuesday, and later states (like mine) would have not had a contest that mattered--why are FL and MI special?

[FlyingSquirrel]

82. I don't think they should get away with violating the rules.

But the remedy perhaps should not be as drastic as complete lack of representation. I'm not saying FL and MI are special. I'm saying they should be represented somehow.

Perhaps the easiest way would be to just penalize them half the amount of the delegates they would have received - it would avoid having to hold additional elections / caucuses and the inevitable can of worms that would bring up, (and the cost).

This would reduce the amount of delegates Clinton would pick up to somewhere around 27-28, thereby causing MI/FL to be a smaller factor in the decision, but without causing them to be completely unrepresented (something that would really give the "Democratic" Party a black eye).

It would greatly reduce the chance that there could be a different pledged delegate winner by including MI & FL - thereby satisfying both camps (or making both camps equally displeased, which probably means it's the right answer).

[greyghost]

52. There is no way that MI and FL are going to be left out.

[TheDoorbellRang]

154. Yes. "Damn you, America and Obama, for not accepting the inevitable one!"

How cheeky of us.

[TwilightGardener]

51. There's a reason the delegate system exists--different areas/precincts of states

are weighted differently, caucuses vs. primaries, etc.--there's no fair way to just scrap it all and say, "popular vote". It doesn't matter what the people think. Or Al Gore would be finishing up his second term.

[Ravy]

56. But there aren't "free electors" in the Electoral College who can

vote however they want.

I think that national pledged delegates is the last thing that they would go on, since that is already figured into the delegate total.

They might put their support for the national popular vote winner, or the popular vote winner of their state or congressional district as well.

Personally, I think they are holding out for an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket.

[Political Heretic]

62. I would suppport nominating the one who has the popular vote, after re-dos in MI and FL

If one candidate has most pledged delegates and popular vote, that should win no question.

If there's a split between pledged delegates and popular vote, I'd support nominating the one with the popular vote after a MI and FL re-do, even if that was Clinton.

....yeah, I think I've thought that through....

[FlyingSquirrel]

83. I'm an O supporter also and I'm starting to agree, mainly for this reason:

As distasteful as the "red phone" ad was, it clearly worked. Also, the youth vote is NOT a reliable demographic. They did not show up for Kerry in the GE. The senior vote, conversely, is much more reliable and is clearly in favor of Hillary.

She may be able to overcome her negatives. There may be a large number of women who will come out to vote for her that may otherwise not have voted, perhaps enough to offset her negative numbers.

And a Clinton/Obama ticket gives us somebody in 8 years who is ready to be next in line campaigning for president, this time a known quantity and with better national security credentials. Plus it shores up Hillary's support with the black community.

Obama/Clinton does not help us nearly as much. For these reasons I'm starting to grudgingly come to the point of being willing to accept Clinton as the nominee.

With clothespin still attached to nose, of course.

[milkyway]

68. I would love to hear a super try to tell the public that although throughout this campaign, and

every other nominating campaign, we have used delegate totals to show who is leading and who has won, we are now going to use the popular vote total instead to determine who we should "crown" as the nominee.

I was also a bit taken aback by this poll when I saw it earlier tonight, but I think it's because most people don't yet understand the mixing of apples and oranges that happens when you try to determine the aggregate popular vote by treating primaries and caucuses as the same thing.

Nominations in contemporary politics have always been a race for delegates, and the momentum that would lead to winning more delegates. That is understood by all. McCain celebrated on Tuesday as the presumptive nominee because he won the 1191 delegates needed for the nomination. Do you know by how much he won the overall popular vote? Neither does anyone else.

[TwilightGardener]

71. You raise a good point. Candidates craft their entire campaigns

on targeting and winning the areas where they have the most favorable chance of getting delegates. You can't just change this system now.

[FlyingSquirrel]

85. The system would not be changed.

The system remains the same: The supers have the right to base their decision on whatever they want. Some of them will doubtless base it on the candidate who won the most pledged delegates. They have that right and it is perfectly reasonable. Others will base it on the fact that they have committed to their candidate from the beginning and it's purely a loyalty thing. They also have that right and it is also perfectly reasonable.

And, yes, there will be some who have yet to commit, who will decide that the popular vote-getter should be the one they vote for. Still perfectly reasonable and still within the system because they can use whatever reasoning they want. That's why they're a superdelegate, they're not a rubber stamp for the popular delegate winner, they get to use their own brain.

[Zhade]

70. Since Obama is pretty far ahead in the popular vote, your worry is unfounded.

NT!

[FlyingSquirrel]

87. When you include FL and MI (which the superdelegates are free to do)

she is very close in the popular vote. Even if they never get seated the superdelegates can still take those votes into consideration. That is permitted, since they can take whatever they want into consideration.

And they may do so just to show MI and FL that their votes at least were counted by SOMEONE.

Not counting them at all in any way, shape or form will give the Democratic party a huge black eye.

[NMMatt]

77. If If If If If is about all Clinton has at this point

If MI and FL count, which they don't, but IF somehow she's able to convince people to accept a politburo style election in Michigan as legitamate.

If the super delegates top supporting Obama in greater numbers and start to go with the losing candidate.

If she somehow is able to over come a 700,000 popular vote deficit with only one large state with demographics that favor her yet to weigh in.

If this popular vote margin that she somehow miraculously will get but still leaves out the votes from a number of Obama supporting states like Iowa and Washington actually appears as legitimate in the eyes of super delegates.

If Obama makes a critical error large enough for the super delegates to over turn the perceived will of the people in order to save the party's chances this fall.

If the super delegates are willing to tell the African American community who is absolutely critical to Democratic chances this fall: screw the first black candidate to actually win the most votes in the primary season, we're going to back the white one because she's more "electable" (never mind the fact that if she were electable she'd be winning elections) in our mind.

That's a lot of ifs.

Obama just needs to keep winning more delegates. So yes... math does matter.

[FlyingSquirrel]

107. Just think of this, though:

The superdelegates don't want to tell the African American community, "screw the black candidate."

But they also don't want to tell women (a much larger demographic which also includes many Republican women who may be willing to cross over), "screw the female candidate."

If they choose Obama, they'll have to say, "screw the female candidate." There's no female equivalent to Clinton that Obama can put on his ticket, that would shore up his foreign policy creds.

But if they choose Clinton, they don't have to say, "screw the black candidate" because he will CERTAINLY be on the ticket. They get to have their cake and eat it too, and as a bonus in 8 years they have their next presidential candidate, still plenty young and now well-seasoned.

All they need is a plausible rationale. That rationale is the popular vote, if Clinton can win it.

[adoraz]

78. we all know this

its a matter of having a decent delegate lead. if we do, we should get the nomination no problem.

[Gore1FL]

84. It still is simple math though

If Obama comes in with a pledged delegate lead of the following numbers, Clinton will have to make up the same in Supers, plus win the other half + 1:

75 is about 9.5% of the Super Delegates. Which would mean she would need almost 60% of the Super delegates.

100 is about 12.6% of the Super delegates. Which would mean she would need almost 63% of the super delegates

125 is about 15.7% of the Super Delegates. Which would mean she would need almost 66% of the Super Delegates

150 is about 18.8% of the Super Delegates. Which means she would need almost 69% of the Super Delegates

175 is about 22% of the Super delegates. Which means she would need almost 72% of the Super Delegates.


But lets look at where the super delegates stand, now. That should give Clinton an advantage right? Obama has 210 to Clinton's 242 with 344 remaining

Obama will probably head to the convention with a net lead of 100-175 pledged delegates:

If Obama comes in with a pledged delegate lead of:

75 Subtracting Clinton's 32 Super delegate lead = 43. 43 is 12.5% of the remaining super delegates. This means she would need 63.5% of the remaining Super Delegates.

100 Subtracting Clinton's 32 Super delegate lead = 68. 68 is 19.8% of the remaining super delegates. This means she would need 69.8% of the remaining Super Delegates.

125 Subtracting Clinton's 32 Super delegate lead = 93. 93 is 27% of the remaining super delegates. This means she would need 77% of the remaining Super Delegates.

150 Subtracting Clinton's 32 Super delegate lead = 118. 118 is 34.3% of the remaining super delegates. This means she would need 84.3% of the remaining Super Delegates.

175 Subtracting Clinton's 32 Super delegate lead = 143. 143 is of the remaining super delegates. This means she would need 91.6% of the remaining Super Delegates.


As you can see, even 75 (3/4 of my low end estimate) is still pretty bad. In fact it is pretty dismal. It is pretty hard to believe that 60% or more of the Super Delegates are going to vote against the pledged delegate counts. I have yet to see a realistic scenario in when she comes to Denver with less than a 100 delegate deficit, and I have yet to hear an argument compelling enough to make up the 20%+ margin of super delegates needed to give the second place candidate the nomination.

If anyone would like to try to create one, start here:

http://www.slate.com/features/delegatecounter /

The come up with a believable argument that garners the remaining super delegates. I'll listen. I sure can't find one and wold be interested if anyone else can.

[FlyingSquirrel]

92. Ok, here's one.

MI and FL will be included in this process one way or another. They will be penalized in some fashion - perhaps a compromise where only half their delegates are seated - but the Democratic Party cannot afford to alienate these voters. We only won Michigan 51% to 48% in 2004, making the state vulnerable to a Republican challenge this year if Democratic voters are sufficiently disillusioned. The state has 17 Electoral Votes. Florida, obviously, with its 27 EV's and the history of 2000 is still very much on our minds. Therefore, both states will in some fashion be included in our nominating process - to do otherwise would give the "Democratic" party a huge black eye as well.

Clinton is slightly ahead in the popular vote when MI and FL are included. Pennsylvania will add to this and may overshadow the smaller states that Obama will pick up.

Many of the superdelegates who are uncommitted, would probably like to vote for Clinton if given ANY rationale at all. If she wins the popular vote including MI and FL this could give them that rationale.

On to Pledged Delegates. If half of MI and FL's delegates are seated, that nets Hillary another 27-28. Or some other type of resolution, holding new primaries or caucuses could net her nearly as many. She plans to contest every delegate possible and may succeed in many cases.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4955900&mesg_id=4955900

She clearly plans to stay in through PA and could take that momentum (if she wins) and do well enough in the remaining states to come within about 50-60 delegates of Obama including the ones she will be contesting. And she could possibly win the popular vote, that cannot be ruled out at this point.

Finally, there is a good rationale for the supers to choose her if they have the popular vote to point to. That rationale is, we need both the female and black vote to beat McCain and she has more experience at the top of the ticket. She is favored by seniors who form a more consistent voting bloc - the youth vote didn't materialize for Kerry. An Obama/Clinton ticket doesn't work. A Clinton/Obama ticket does. And in 8 years (if she wins) we have Obama waiting in the wings.

That's a strong rationale, and many of the Obama supers may be persuaded to change their vote based on it.

[Gore1FL]

119. Let s do the math...

Many of the superdelegates who are uncommitted, would probably like to vote for Clinton if given ANY rationale at all.

Why, specifically? Many come from districts and states which are strongly by Obama. I think this is sort of optimistic, but "many could mean a lot of things and I'll let you come to your own conclusions at the end of the math.

On to Pledged Delegates. If half of MI and FL's delegates are seated, that nets Hillary another 27-28.

OK

She clearly plans to stay in through PA and could take that momentum (if she wins) and do well enough in the remaining states to come within about 50-60 delegates of Obama

Using the slate calculator, I gave her 56% in every remaining contest ended up with 1641 to 1568.

Assuming your scenario with (128+185)/2 or 156.5 (lets call it 156 to favor Hillary) total delegates from MI and FL in your scenario, Hillary gets 92 Obama gets 64

The new totals are Clinton 1568 + 92 = 1670 Obama 1641 + 64 = 1704. thats only 34 behid, but when we add the current totals of "committed" super delegates we get

1902 for Hillary, and 1914 for Obama.

She's in the ballpark then.

The additional 156 delegates makes the "needed to win" amount 2025 + (156/2) = 2103

You didn't specify wheather or not the FL and MI supers would be added at 1/2. Doing so is in Clinton's favor.

That totals 27. That makes the total supers = 822 and pushes need to win to 2103 + 27/2 = 2117.

of those supers,we already gave out 452 so 822-452 = 370

Hillary would need 2117 - 1902 = 215 or 58%

Obama would need 2117 - 1914 = 203 or 54%

Which means somewhere my math is hosed up as the totals should equal 100% and a smidge. I am missing delegates somewhere, but the overall proportion favors Clinton if we drop it down to meet that, because it's too freaking late to check my work and my sources...

Clinton needs rouchly 52% of the Supers in this scenario, and Obama needs 48%...

She is in range, except Obama still has the delegate advantage, and I am not convinced people are waiting for an excuse to join her. I am not sure that 56% wins in all the remaininng contests is in the bounds of even optimistic reality. (if you take only the states she has won and averaged the percentages you get:

54.875%

This gets especially hairy when you consider Obama leads considerably in MS which holds it's primary Tuesday, well before any PA bump. His leads in NC (the second biggest delegate state on the list) are pretty daunting as well--even taking a big PA bump in consideration. Even OR, MT, and SD could present a challenge in the wake of a bump.

I do appreciate the scenario. You took a crack at it. Despite it being pretty overly optomisti in many assumptions, (as I think I demonstrated) You at least came up with soemthing that put it in the ball park. for that I thank you.

For now, I am going to bed.

[writes3000]

105. This is a Clinton talking point and wishful thinking

But it's not going to happen. And if by some small chance, it does. Obama will not be her VP. He will not endorse that kind of inherently corrupt process.

And if he's not on the ticket, if the American people believe that the Clintons stole the election, I wish the Hillary "I'll do anything" Clinton and the Dem party all the luck in the world. It still won't be enough.

[emilyg]

109. He'll be glad to be on her ticket.

[writes3000]

112. No, he won't. Although the Dems and Clinton would be desperate to have him.

He's not going to be her VP.

And I gotta say. I don't blame him one bit. Not with the way she's behaved.

If the Dem party wants her, they can have her. But he will sit this one out.

PS - Obama will be the Dem party nominee. If there's a stalemate, he has the numbers to back him up. And the SDs can point to those to explain their decision. The SDs have never overturned the winner of the delegates and the popular vote and they won't do so now.

[FlyingSquirrel]

110. I'm an Obama supporter but I'm starting to think this is really going to happen

And I won't be heartbroken if it does. It really would be the dream ticket. I think Hillary can overcome her negatives, given enough time between now and the GE, and I think a Hillary/Obama ticket would reunify our party which is important. It puts Obama in position to take over in 8 years. And I highly doubt he would refuse that offer. This is politics, it's a dirty business and he understands that. He would not refuse the offer out of some kind of high-minded idealism.

As stated in the OP, 57% of Americans would buy the argument that the nomination should go to the popular vote-getter as opposed to the winner of the pledged delegate count. Just like the majority of Americans want to do away with the electoral college. So they would not see it as her "stealing" the election, though many here on DU would.

I think it's more than just wishful thinking. I think it may happen.

[writes3000]

114. Obama won't be her VP.

I'd bet my bank account on it.

He doesn't want it and Michelle doesn't want it. And no amount of begging is going to change their minds.

He will become the new post-2000 Al Gore - who is far more influential than VP Al Gore.

And by the way, Hillary will refuse to be Obama's VP as well.

[FlyingSquirrel]

115. I agree that Hillary would refuse to be Obama's VP. Don't agree that

Obama would refuse to be Hillary's though. And I think that Obama is nowhere near to the position right now where he could be more influential than Al Gore.

[writes3000]

116. By staying away from Presidential politics, Al Gore has put himself above it.

And I see Obama doing the same thing, if he feels the election has been stolen from him.

I'm not saying he'll be more influential than Gore. He will simply be in a similar position. People would clamor for him to run again but he probably wouldn't.

Lastly, Obama is a man of integrity. And I don't think he's going to compromise that integrity for the sake of a party whose leadership has forsaken him. It's not going to happen. And he's already stated it won't happen.

[FlyingSquirrel]

118. Losing the nomination is not like losing the election.

The difference is, when you lose the general election there's a chance you may never be in position again to even try. Plus the kind of smears and all-out war that you go through in the general election is enough to make anyone think twice about going through it again. Not necessarily so with a battle for the nomination. Finally, Obama has to know that if he somehow loses this nomination in spite of everything, then his best shot at the Presidency is to take the VP slot. Otherwise he must stay in the Senate for at least 4 and possibly 8 years, accumulating a voting record that can be distorted and attacked no matter how he votes. Edwards got out of the Senate for that reason, because he wanted to be President and knew that if he stayed in the Senate too long it would never happen. Look where it got him - nowhere.

Obama will accept the spot if offered, should Hillary win the nomination. No matter how she wins it.

[writes3000]

140. You are so incorrect.

And by the way, I was making your same point six weeks ago.

That was before Hillary took the axe to Obama and before it became CLEAR that she cannot win based on any fair measure.

Obama will not endorse the theft of the process. He will not.

But keep wishing for it if you want to. It won't make it happen.

[NDambi]

128. He'll refuse...and I say Hallelujah...she and Bill are poison..he should stay far away

[mmonk]

120. I believe they will look at the map and say

"What big blue state that gave her the popular vote will go for McCain?" if that be the case and determine there's more to it (like states) and/or electoral map.

[Skidmore]

121. I have one question.

Where's Bullwinkle?

[Perky]

122. It tightens only if you include Michigan and Flirda. A do-over would be interesting.

At that point I think you have to have a unity ticket and the delegate leaders would win. Why? because they control the nominating process at the convention and under the rules they "should win"

[not_too_L8]

124. Sorry, Obama is winning in popular vote.

Now what?

[NDambi]

125. I hate to break it people on the popular vote thingie...but..she isn't going to catch him and...

the SD's and Democratic party isn't going to risk alienating their faithful base of black voters to install Hillary as Queen.

Sorry, it ain't gonna happpen, unless they want to fracture the party for years to come...

[MindMatter]

132. It would alienate a lot more than black voters

It would alienate almost all of the 55%+ who support Obama.

[NDambi]

133. I agree wholeheartedly...was just speaking from my "black" persepective and my conversations with

other "black" folk...

[Barack_America]

137. Absolutely. The entire city of Philadelphia will stay home and let PA go Red.

Without a doubt.

I've been spending a lot of time out registering and talking to folks. I'm hearing this everywhere.

[NDambi]

138. I'm in NJ..and its no different amongst black voters here..and I've registered a few too..I also

belong to a local Dem club...and the grumblings are growing louder with each passing day...many are talking about gearing up to organize protests and demonstrations in the street that will rival the "immigration" protest in 2006!


The Supers and the Dem party want to risk alienation and fracture...they will if they pull bullshit.

[MindMatter]

142. They will not do that

I haven't seen a single interview with an uncommitted superdelegate that indicates a single one of them would do that. That is why they are uncommitted, after all. The ones who have strong allegiance to the Clintons have already committed and a lot of those commitments are soft -- friends of Clinton covering their asses. Most of them committed early on when they assumed it would be an easy victory for Clinton. They wanted to be first in line for the gravy train. A lot of them are probably hoping they can find a graceful way out.

The only easy way out for them, of course, is if Clinton concedes. Clinton seems intent on taking this to the bitter end.

[Frumious B]

134. I would still like to know how in Hillaryworld Obama is Veep material?

She's all ready declared him manifestly unfit for the Presidency. How is he fit to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? Can Hillary really afford to take the risk to our national security and to the safety of our children and our children's children that making Obama her Veep would necessitate? More to the point, can Murka afford to take that risk? What if the phone rings at 3AM and Obama's the only one around?

[FlyingSquirrel]

148. So you think she's lying?

Kerry at one point was talking about how Edwards was "still in diapers" when he was in the Senate... but he picked Edwards in the end.

[FlyingSquirrel]

147. I completely agree that if both popular and pledged delegate vote are in Obama's

favor, the superdelegates will not overturn it.

There could be a lot of disagreement over who won the popular vote, however. It could depend on what you count - for example, Michigan - should Clinton's 55% be counted but the 45% uncommitted not be all awarded to Obama? If there's a re-vote, should only the re-vote count and not the original vote? Or should they both be counted?

If Hillary gets the popular vote in any scenario, there will be some who will accept that and some who won't.

[dansolo]

141. There is a big flaw with the popular vote argument

First off, some people factor in MI and FL in the popular vote count. You could argue considering FL, but in MI, Obama wasn't even on the ballot. Anyone who uses the number from MI to bolster their argument for the popular vote is being disingenuous. The other problem is that Obama's margins from his caucus victories are underrepresented because they don't tally the actual number of participants.

[FlyingSquirrel]

149. If MI is included then the only fair thing is to give all the uncommitted votes to Obama.

IMO

[krkaufman]

143. When the election is supposed to be about delegates ...

... how can using the popular vote to decide a race considered fair when some states conducted primaries and others caucuses. Exactly how do caucuses enter into the "popular vote"?

(this reeks a bit of changing the rules of the game, late in the 4th quarter with one team behind)

[FlyingSquirrel]

151. Because it's part of the system. It's about delegates AND superdelegates

and the superdelegates are not there to rubberstamp the results of the pledged delegate race. They're there to make the tough decision if someone can't get a majority of the total delegates needed (in this case, currently 2,024) which will happen this time around.

[krkaufman]

156. Right. You'll get no argument regarding the mechanics of the process...

candidate pledged delegates + candidate superdelegates = candidate delegates

(candidate delegates >= 2024) == nominee

simple math.


But my question related to why should the "popular vote" be the deciding factor, given it's skewed (I'm assuming) towards primary states, over caucuses. *Some* analysis will be required, but a measure such as "most popular votes" would seem to be overly simplistic. I think the superdelegates will take a great deal more into consideration.

[Johnny__Motown]

145. Popular vote is not how we do things, sorry. try ancient Greece

[Levgreee]

146. The delegate vote is pretty closely linked to the popular vote, so she's gonna have to gain lots of

ground anyways

[FlyingSquirrel]

153. True, she has some ground to make up.

I'd still prefer just to make a clean break from the Clinton era, to be perfectly honest. But I am not comfortable leaving women out in the cold when it comes to the nomination.

And what happens if McCain chooses a woman to be his running mate? If Obama does not follow suit, where does that leave the Democratic Party? And yet Obama, unlike McCain, needs foreign policy credibility. Where's he gonna get that? Name a female VP possibility that gives him what he would need. Other than Clinton who will likely not accept even if he offered it.

[Milo_Bloom]

152. 57% doesn't cut it.

She needs to get 75% of the remaining super delegates to be put over the top.

Obama will only need 36%

[ORDem]

157. Popular vote, Schmopular vote. This is Clinton garbage.

FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) is all these people know. Once and for all, the pledged delegates ARE the popular vote. Caucus states have lower turnout than go-to-the-polling-place primaries, thus the pledged delegates adjust for that proportionally in caucus states. The pledged delegate allocations in caucus states is a scaling factor if you will. If you instead scaled up the caucus votes to other primaries (which is what pledged delegate allocations are doing) then Obama's lead in the popular vote would be huge.

:kick:

[FlyingSquirrel]

158. You have a point about scaling up caucus votes.

Thanks for one of the more coherent responses to this thread.

I just got done putting numbers from thegreenpapers.com into a spreadsheet.

So far Obama leads in popular votes any way you slice it, UNLESS you award 327,419 votes to Clinton and 0 votes to Obama in Michigan. I still think that some superdelegates could use popular vote as an excuse to overturn the pledged delegate count - perhaps as many as 60% of the undecided superdelegates. I don't agree that this is just "Clinton garbage" because it came from Rasmussen Reports which is not known for being biased toward Clinton or any candidates, really.

I'm not saying this SHOULD happen, just that it could. I'm pretty sure, though, that Clinton would need an incontrovertable lead in the popular vote for 60% of them to go her way. So, for example, if all the voting was done and over with today, not many would be willing to use Clinton's popular-vote lead of 13,732,016 to 13,567,588 (46.7% to 46.1%) to overturn Obama's popular-delegate lead when Obama would probably have gotten at least 35% of the Michigan vote.

Even if you were to give Obama just 27.8% of the overall Michigan vote he would still be leading right now in total popular votes.

I guess my main point is, Hillary probably would have to be leading Obama by at least 1% in the popular vote total not counting MI, or including MI with all the uncommitted vote in MI going to Obama, for them to seriously consider overturning the pledged delegate result.