Interesting......"In Pennsylvania, vote totals aren't everything"

[cboy4]

Several factors will decide whether the state's Democratic primary helps end the nomination fight.

By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 22, 2008

WASHINGTON — Today in Pennsylvania's hard-fought Democratic presidential primary, there will be a winner and a loser. But the winner might not be the one with the most votes.

With neither Hillary Rodham Clinton nor Barack Obama able to secure the nomination without support from the so-called superdelegates who will cast decisive votes, many dynamics are at work beyond who comes out on top in one day of balloting.

In what may seem like a paradox, the Clinton victory predicted by nearly all public opinion polls might actually turn out to be a loss if she doesn't win by a significant margin. And if Obama keeps the results closer than some surveys suggest, he could be considered victorious -- unless it appears that Clinton's campaign has succeeded in casting doubt on his credentials to be commander in chief or his ability to win support in the fall from white, working-class voters.

"The margin of the vote is equally as important" as who posts the highest vote total, said former Colorado Gov. Roy Romer, one of the nearly 800 party activists and leaders whose votes as superdelegates will put the winning nominee over the top at this summer's party convention.

About 300 of the superdelegates are still uncommitted, including Romer, and many of them will pore over the finer details of today's results to gauge how each candidate might fare in the fall and, as a result, which one deserves the nomination.


More-----------------------------> http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-pennsylvania22apr22,0,6842509.story

[WinkyDink]

1. What's your point? We all know it's about the margin of victory. You post like there's voting

shenanigans going on.

[cboy4]

4. Jesus, I'm reading the Los Angeles Times online, and this is

the fricken front page story.

I thought I'd share the news article with everyone, since it affects everyone.

Can't even post a newspaper article around here anymore without getting jumped on.

Ha WinkyDink.

[WinkyDink]

13. It's your excessively large type that suggests OMG!! SOMETHING ODD!!!!

[Arkansas Granny]

6. I believe the point the OP is trying to make is how the SDs are going to look at

the results of this primary, not that any shenanigans are going on.

More from the LA Times article:

The spread: Clinton needs to win by at least 10 percentage points -- the margin she posted over Obama in Ohio's March 4 primary -- to show that she has not lost her touch in the industrial Rust Belt, several uncommitted superdelegates said.

If she is successful, she will be able to point superdelegates to the fact that she trounced Obama despite being severely outspent on television and radio advertisements in Pennsylvania by a more than 2-to-1 margin.

If Obama can keep the race to within 10 percentage points, or even win, he would claim that he has shown surprising strength in a state that is Clinton's demographic home turf, with many of the lower-income Democrats who have supported her in earlier primaries. That kind of result would give Obama momentum heading toward the May 6 contests in Indiana and North Carolina, where a sweep would make a Clinton nomination feel all the more unrealistic.

[Hutzpa]

2. Is there something we need to know about

voting irregularities, are the Clinton camp about to hijack the primaries?

Whats your point.......



:shrug:

[cboy4]

5. You mean like the Obama fans have hijacked this forum?

:sarcasm:

Why don't you read the article before you start stomping your feet?

It's really pathetic.

[Hutzpa]

15. ooops upside your head

oooopps upside your head ah say ooopps upside the head.....


http://youtube.com/watch?v=SLZZ30AE7-g

Peace!!!

:hi:

[zanne]

3. Can somebody answer this question?

From what I understand, Pennsylvania is not a "winner take all" state as far as regular delegates are concerned. Why isn't anybody talking about the number of regular delegates each candidate needs?

[Zodiak]

7. Because such a discussion doesn't favor Clinton

If we discussed matters in terms of delegates, it would be clear that Hillary doesn't have a chance.

This is all about her sales pitch to superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters. It is where the new goalposts are. Nevermind that last ten positions of the goalposts.

[TheDoorbellRang]

9. At this point, the number of delegates needed is more subjective than anything

And by subjective I mean how the super delegates will view it.

In reality, Clinton cannot catch up to Obama unless she wins 65% of the vote in all the remaining contests; chances of that happening are slim to none.

If she wins by 10 points or more, however, the public perception would be that she is still viable and the super delegates will probably not move.

If she wins by 5 points or less, it looks better for Obama. They can declare it a psychological "win," pointing out that he was 26 points behind in March. The super delegates will be able to move without the public scratching their heads as to why. Clinton will still probably stay in the race.

If Obama beats her, Clinton will really have no reason to stay in, as this was her last, "best" chance for making headway. The super delegates can declare and we can finally start the fight against McCain.

[GoldieAZ49]

8. and winning by a large margin will change the game

from math to psychological

[zanne]

10. But how many regular delegates are up for grabs in Penn.?

I don't mean super delegates. I mean delegates by vote percentage.

[GoldieAZ49]

11. This site shows 188

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/votes/index.html

it may include SD's, not sure, the news will cover the breakdown

[zanne]

12. Thanks, Goldie!

I did a search but it was pretty complicated. It seemed like different sites were tabulating delegates differently.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. 188