Hillary needs to win by 25% tommorrow

[gabeana]

It is amusing to read post from Hill supporters about how she is going to catch up in the pop vote but doesn't look like she unless something extrodinary happens

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aLDu9y9lW3EY&refer=politics

"To overtake Barack Obama in the nationwide popular vote, Hillary Clinton needs a bigger win in tomorrow's Pennsylvania primary than she has had in any major contest so far. And that's just for starters."

"Clinton would need a 25-point victory in Pennsylvania, plus 20-point wins in later contests in West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico. Even that scenario assumes Clinton, 60, would break even in Indiana, North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana and Oregon -- a prospect that's not at all certain."

" More than just big margins, Clinton would need record voter turnout too. In Pennsylvania, she would need a turnout of 2 million, about half the state's registered Democrats; in the 2004 primary, about 800,000 voted. She would also need turnout to almost double in other states where she leads, and reach some 1 million in Puerto Rico, which is about how many Democratic- leaning voters went to the polls in a 2004 gubernatorial election. The territory, known for its high turnout, didn't have a presidential primary that year"

"To shrink Obama's 800,000 popular-vote margin, the Clinton campaign argues for the inclusion of votes cast in Michigan and Florida. Those two states lost their right to send delegates to the convention by scheduling their contests earlier in the year than party rules allowed.
Clinton and Obama agreed not to campaign in the two states, and Obama took his name off the ballot in Michigan. Clinton won both uncontested races, and now says they should count in the nationwide popular-vote calculations."

[XemaSab]

1. OH NOES!

Facts! :scared:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

6. !

:rofl:

[papau]

36. Facts - but missing the point - If loss of PA then Obama can't win in large blue in general

[Leftist Agitator]

38. "If loss of PA then Obama can't win in large blue in general"

What are you saying here?

Wanna try again without sounding like an idiot?

:shrug:

[XemaSab]

41. You seem to be missing some words, so I'm going to paraphrase what I think you're saying

and then respond to that, okay?

"Everything in the OP is technically correct, but if Obama loses Pennsylvania then it will be very difficult for him to win Pennsylvania in November. Obama needs to win most of the large swing states as well as hold on to consistantly blue states such as New York and California (which Hillary won) in order to get enough electoral votes to defeat McCain. If Hillary wins Pennsylvania tomorrow then she will have a better chance of winning Pennsylvania in the general election."

Is this about what you were trying to say?

I think in some ways this is a fair argument, but in some ways it's not such a great argument.

I've seen some Hillary supporters argue that she should be our nominee because she won New York and California. I don't think this argument carries any water. I think Obama is likely to win all of our consistently blue states handily. I think Hillary would probably also take these states if she were the nominee. Do you agree that Obama is, barring a freakish derailing of his campaign, likely to carry New York, California, and pretty much all the other states Gore and Kerry won in the general election? :shrug:

The real point of disagreement here seems to be about swing states, and how primary results influence swing states in the general election. One big caveat with this sort of crystal-ball gazing that I have to put up front is the fact that in the last several elections, the primary has been pretty much over from the outset. Clinton in '96, Gore in '00, and Kerry in '04 didn't have to compete in more than a few states, at most.

In 1992 Tom Harkin was running, so he carried Iowa, then Tsongas (from Massachusetts) got New Hampshire. Clinton didn't break out of the pack until fairly late in the game. Yes, Clinton carried some important swing states, such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, but would he have lost those states in the general election? Who is to say? :shrug:

Right now I suspect that both Obama and Hillary are drawing the votes of moderate democrats, both for different reasons. Where the votes of those moderates will be in the general election nobody can say.

I think it's entirely possible that if the GE were today, Hillary might do better than Obama against McCain in Pennsylvania, but neither of our candidates has begun to run against him yet. Maybe Obama will fold like a cheap lawn chair... but maybe Hillary would do the same.

I think Obama is more likely than Hillary to take the fight to marginal states... he's got a 50-state machine going that she doesn't seem to believe in, and I think Obama can, at minimum, make the republicans spend money in places like Virginia and Kansas.... places that would ordinarily be solidly red. Hillary seems more than willing to campaign on a 50+1 strategy, which is the same strategy that has gotten our clocks cleaned for the last few years (yeah, I know there was election fraud, but both Gore and Kerry should have been able to beat GW in EVERY state.)

All I know is that in most states, I think the people who vote democratic in the primary are likely to vote for the democrat in the GE.

Finally, I worry about trying to vote for the most "electable" candidate... we've gotten some winners in the past, but we've also gotten some stinkers too.

Any questions?

[roguevalley]

43. because Obama loses in penn doesn't mean him not winning the GE or

he can't win in larger blue states. what the hell? there is no logic here. You are assuming that the dems that might have voted for her in the larger states will not vote for the dem candidate in the General election. That is preposterous. The people will vote for whomever is going to be the candidate in the GE because they always have and always will. WIth Obama, they will do so more easily. The deadenders in camp hillary might stay home but they are who they are. to assume he loses in this race in the GE, where he closed the gap by anywhere from 10-16 points is just a statement without fact. As for the 15 state plan that has worked so well for Hillary so far I might add :sarcasm:, that is out. it no longer works. Winning with a 50 state strategy- something that has done a good job for Obama is the way to go now. Don't ignore (or insult everyone in the world that doesn't vote for you) and expect to win anything.

[WA98070]

2. Any idea about whose doing exit polls?

[tritsofme]

3. No reason not to include FL in popular vote calculations

There was a huge turnout.

Using the popular vote as a variable is not about clinging to arcane party rules that determine delegate allocation, it is about determining the will of the People.

[Hugabear]

5. If you think Florida's record turnout was because of Hillary, you're dreaming

There was a very crucial constitutional amendment on the ballot, regarding property taxes. If you know anything about Florida, you'd know that is a HUGE topic in this state. There was quite a bit of campaigning by folks on both sides of the property tax issue.

Don't kid yourself into thinking that our record turnout was a reflection on the presidential race.

[tritsofme]

9. Democrats were out to the polls voting.

You can speculate as to reasons if you wish.

There is no good reason to disenfranchise these voters when trying to determine the popular will of Democratic primary voters.

[Hugabear]

17. Speculate? I live here

Everyone I know knew that our vote for the Democratic primary didn't really count. Trust me, the property tax was THE primary reason that just about everyone I know went to the polls that day.

[Zachstar]

22. That excuse is so old nobody is buying it.

There is a damn good reason. They let their state gov try to force the hand of the democratic party.

And yes I have no fear about "OH NOES FL will go RED!!!" Well with McCain.. FL is going red period.

#1 Both Candidates are not great for Space. McCain will be viewed as holding the NASA workforce.

#2 The demographics heavily favor McCain.

#3 If the delegates were seated as is or they were given an apology there would still be a big opening for Republicans to use.

It aint happening. FL is going red.

[stillcool]

29. I am confused about the 'massive turnout'

in Florida. This fist article from August 2007 has the Florida Democratic Committee Chairman stating that there are over 4 million Democrats in Florida. The second article states that 1.7 million Democrats voted in the Primary. What happened to the other 2.3 million plus voters?

DNC Moves to Stop Primary Frontloading
Posted: August 27, 2007 6:05 PM ET
The Democratic National Committee moved over the weekend to penalize Florida for moving up its primary date to Jan. 29 -- a violation of DNC rules that prohibit states from holding nominating polls before Feb. 5.
The committee said the Sunshine State would be stripped of its delegation at the party's National Convention in 2008 if the state does not reschedule its primary in the next 30 days.

As the nation's fourth-most-populous state, Florida has 210 delegates and has played a major role in recent presidential elections. Florida's decision to advance its primary follows the increasing trend of states pushing up their contests in order to gain relevance in the election.

"Rules are rules. California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos," said Garry Shays, a DNC member from California. California -- with its 441 delegates -- moved its primary to Feb. 5, along with more than a dozen other states.
-----------------------------------------

The DNC gave Florida the option of holding a Jan. 29 contest but with nonbinding results, and the delegates would be awarded at a later official date.

Florida Democratic Committee Chairwoman Karen Thurman said this option would be expensive -- as much as $8 million -- and potentially undoable. Another option would be to challenge the ruling in court.

"We do represent, standing here, a lot of Democrats in the state of Florida -- over 4 million," Thurman said, according to the New York Times. "This is emotional for Florida. And it should be."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/politics/july-dec07/florida_08-27.html

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[gabeana]

8. simple reason not to include it

Obama did not campaign in Florida by campaigning in penn he has dwindled her wide lead
and before a Hill person brings up that ad on CNN
It was a national buy and he recieved permission from the DNC to make sure he was not breaking any rules

[tritsofme]

11. Neither did Hillary.

Most voters don't go to rallies or actually see candidates, they get their news from the tv, newspaper, or internet.

We all get the same news and information in the end.

They played on the same field, and the voice of these people should be heard.

[gabeana]

18. No they shouldn't

they both knew they were not going to count,
Hillary had name recognition (at the time a lot more than Obama)
Hillary was someone they knew, they did not know Obama
We know from the results even in the states Clinton wins the final numbers are a lot closer than initially set
While in many of the states Obama won the final numbers are larger than predicted

bottom line Florida broke the rules Clinton agreed to it, now she regrets it because she thougt she was going to wrap it up on Super Tuesday

[tritsofme]

24. If you didn't know Obama before the FL primary, then your head was in the sand.

Obama has been on the national stage since 2004.

Especially after IA, there is no reasonable argument for a name recognition argument.

Florida broke the rules, fine take their delegates, but in determining the popular will of Democratic voters, they should be included.

[gabeana]

27. Then I guess a lot of people had their head in the sand

you said it earlier most people get their information from the TV
so everyone who vote watches the news regulary, reads the newspaper?
if there is not a full fleged campaign going on the news coverage is not going to be heavy on it
you are just stretching and you did not even respond to the fact (yes the fact that when Obama campaigns) even if he still loses the contest it is a lot closer than the original poll line began.

California, Ohio, Texas, for example

[stillcool]

32. oops...I replied to the wrong poster...

I have a question about that "huge turnout". This fist article from August 2007 has the Florida Democratic Committee Chairman stating that there are over 4 million Democrats in Florida. The second article states that 1.7 million Democrats voted in the Primary. What happened to the other 2.3 million plus voters?

DNC Moves to Stop Primary Frontloading
Posted: August 27, 2007 6:05 PM ET
The Democratic National Committee moved over the weekend to penalize Florida for moving up its primary date to Jan. 29 -- a violation of DNC rules that prohibit states from holding nominating polls before Feb. 5.
The committee said the Sunshine State would be stripped of its delegation at the party's National Convention in 2008 if the state does not reschedule its primary in the next 30 days.

As the nation's fourth-most-populous state, Florida has 210 delegates and has played a major role in recent presidential elections. Florida's decision to advance its primary follows the increasing trend of states pushing up their contests in order to gain relevance in the election.

"Rules are rules. California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos," said Garry Shays, a DNC member from California. California -- with its 441 delegates -- moved its primary to Feb. 5, along with more than a dozen other states.
-----------------------------------------

The DNC gave Florida the option of holding a Jan. 29 contest but with nonbinding results, and the delegates would be awarded at a later official date.

Florida Democratic Committee Chairwoman Karen Thurman said this option would be expensive -- as much as $8 million -- and potentially undoable. Another option would be to challenge the ruling in court.

"We do represent, standing here, a lot of Democrats in the state of Florida -- over 4 million," Thurman said, according to the New York Times. "This is emotional for Florida. And it should be."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/politics/july-dec07/florida_08-27.html

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[kmsarvis]

45. But ,to get an accurate assesment of the "will of the people".......

the popular vote totals in caucus states would have to be weighted.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. She sure does.

Everyone knows it.

[PBS Poll-435]

7. Why did they include her age in this piece...seems strange...

They are throwing all sorts of numbers at you ....25, 20, 2 million, 1 million, 800,000, 60

[Hamlette]

10. You forgot Poland....I mean Michigan

Hillary thinks she should get to count Michigan and Florida. I think an argument can be made for counting Florida (I don't buy it but it passes the laugh test). There is no argument for counting Michigan.

[Orsino]

12. No need to move the goalposts.

All she really needs is a win big enough to convince supporters to stick with her. I'm not sure what that amount would be. If it plays like a win on TV, that may be enough.

Of course, she'd then have to count on a forty-percent win in Indiana, or something.

[melody]

That seems to be the talking point today -- she wins "the popular vote"

I've seen it crop up a number of times today.

[WA98070]

13. Chris Matthews just said the over/under number is 8. Less than 8 and Hilary should drop out.

[DerekJ]

19. By tomorrow it will be: if Obama didn't win PA he should drop out.

[XemaSab]

21. If she won by .8% (like she did in New Mexico)

she would declare it a hugh victory and fight on.

[rniel]

14. Not if

Florida and Michigan count and Hillary personally waterboards all the superdelegates.

Sounds fair. :sarcasm:

[Zachstar]

15. You know we have had all sorts of Math before PA. How about we just chill and let PA decide

I'm sure by the 23rd we will have a much clearer picture of what is upcoming.

[cali]

16. bullshit. If she wins by, say, 15 points, she gets a huge boost and

it brings up all kinds of questions about Obama's weaknesses. If you don't think SDs will be looking at that, you're flat wrong. And if she goes on to win big in WV and KY and makes it close in Oregon and NC, the SDs may very well go to her.

[kwenu]

33. What are you calling a huge boost and where is it coming from?

[cali]

34. a huge boost is winning by 15 points or so in PA

and then making it close in NC, winning decisively in Indiana, blowing him out of the water in KY and WV. Where does it come from? The voters.

[kwenu]

35. That's just sad and touching. I hope you don't put yourself through that kind of stress.

Hillary can't blow out a candle at this point.

[cali]

44. grab a clue, ducky, I'm as strong an Obama supporter as you'll

find on this board. I'm also a realist.

[SoCalDem]

20. Hillary needs to pack up her shit and GO HOME..

she's got about 5 hometowns/states to pick from..or just go back to DC and start the whisper campaign against Patterson, so her goons can get him to quit..so she can be Governor of NY..

Does ANYONE think that she really enjoys being the junior senator for NY, ...one of a hundred?? She only put up with it because it was her pathway to the WH.. The bread crumbs have all blown away, and I cannot see her looking forward to continuing with the drudgery of the senate ..

[rinsd]

23. The popular vote totals are a rationale not bound by rules.

I think you can make the case for FL as a straw poll and include those results if one is using popular vote totals.

MI you cannot make the case for since you cannot just assign Obama "Uncommited" since Edwards voters were also instructed to vote that way.

[terrell9584]

25. Not at all

She needs probably 9% or better in PA, because that would be a margin of several hundred thousand, but you have to realize, Kentucky and West Virginia are going to provide huge margins for her. I can honestly see her winning 70% or more in both primaries. They just aren't states for Obama. And I believe North Carolina will be closer than everyone expects. Everyone who mentions Obama's great lead there fails to mention that the undecided vote in that state is usually larger than 15%. North Carolina has been built up so high that if it is a single digit lead it will count as a loss for him, because it has been played as an "in the tank, 20 point" etal state.

I am real interested to see where the Edwards support goes, especially considering that his main base area is the one area of the state where you would expect Obama to do well with white voters.

If Clinton gets the popular vote within the range where the Florida vote total would put her over the top, that's when it becomes a debate and that is when the shit hits the fan. An important note about North Carolina is that North Carolina also contains many Sheriff Democrat kinds of voters (voters who vote in Democratic primaries because it is their only way to get a vote counted for their local offices). I am interested on where these voters will be going, especially in rural counties.

Note that Florida has the same pattern, most rural counties in Florida, especially east of Walton Co., are still controlled on the courthouse level by Democrats and so residents of these counties all register as Democrats so that their vote will count in the primaries that determine their sheriff. In most of these counties that had low numbers of blacks, the winner was either Clinton or Edwards. I would expect most rural Edwards voters to swing to Clinton in Florida. I'm not so sure about North Carolina though.

[Lucinda]

26. No...she really doesn't.

Losing would be bad. Anything else is good for Hillary and not so god for O.

[gabeana]

28. Again someone who can't understand math

[Lucinda]

37. What part of "Obama cant win without the supers either" are you having trouble with?

[gabeana]

40. Who needs more SD Obama or Clinton to get the magic number?

you know the number Obama needs 30% of the remaining and since its math Clinton needs 70%

again it is about the math

[gabeana]

30. This post does not even account for her dire money problems

I mean her campaign is in the red

[gabeana]

31. Plus from what I understand his lead is a lot larger

because caucus states don't go into the popular vote total.
Correct me if I'm wrong on that
I did see somewhere don't know where but counting caucus tally his lead could be in the millions

[tellmewhen]

39. I predict Obama by 1%

Very high turnout by the young, and African American will give Obama a narrow victory.

[quantass]

42. k