We Are Electing DELEGATES

[sandnsea]

Texas did not split. There is no popular vote. You can't make up a popular vote. You can't get the same kind of popular vote from a caucus as you can a primary. There's no popular vote to count.

I don't care if you don't like it. Those are the rules. You cannot change the rules after the election is over.

Please stop letting the media play games with our democracy. Stop letting the Clintons play games with our democracy.

If you have an ounce of integrity in you - please stop talking about anything but delegates. That is what we're doing and what we've always been doing.

If you want the super delegates to overturn the pledged delegates - that's your business. But you can't make the argument on popular vote because that is not what this election has been about.

[NashVegas]

1. Then Let's Just Eliminate Primaries Altogether, OK?

And have 50 states of caucuses.

[sandnsea]

3. If that's the rules going in, that's the rules

What the fuck is so goddamn hard to comprehend about that? You can't change them after the game is over.

[high density]

14. I'd just as soon have the caucuses eliminated

But this is the system we have and the rules we have. The fact is that some states have caucuses and caucuses do not report a "popular vote." They report delegates.

[sandnsea]

44. All states report delegates

Some are elected through the caucus system, some are elected through a primary election system. Some districts get bonus delegates to reward districts that have high Dem turn-out. We're electing delegates. It's beyond the pale for Hillary to lie about what the process is.

[TahitiNut]

2. Funny how people can't get that simple fact through their heads, isn't it?

Reality Check

[DemVet]

4. But the superdelegates...

...will be looking at the "popular vote" as to one factor of how they cast their vote, whether you like it or not.

[sandnsea]

7. No they won't because they're not stupid

And they know we've been electing DELEGATES. They know the popular vote can't accurately count caucuses, so they won't consider it. Whether you like it or not.

[DemVet]

50. I feel bad for you if you honestly believe your statement.

It's idiotic.

Yes, delegates are the goal, but when neither candidate reaches the magical 2025, superdelegates will need a litmus test on who to cast their vote for.

You think they are going to go by who's ahead in pledged delegates? No way.

They are going to look at the popular vote and certain demographics (such as Obama can't win the white, working class vote) to make their decision.

You're naive if you think otherwise.

[wileedog]

51. Of course they are going to be looking at pledged delegates

That's how the race was set up to be run, that's the measuring stick.

Judging by popular vote is like deciding who won a football game by who gained the most yards instead of points.

If the measuring stick were popular vote to begin with, both candidates would have campaigned very differently - They wouldn't have left California for a month.

Anyone who starts spinning popular vote is just looking for a reason to support Clinton - that's it. Its NOT a viable measure unless there is a virtual tie in PDs.

[DemVet]

52. No, pledged delegates are not the ALMIGHTY measuring stick.

Sorry, it's not true.

When neither candidate reaches 2025, superdelegates will go with a gut feeling on who to vote for.

You think popular vote won't matter?

You think they'll go with whoever is ahead in delegates and use that basis alone?

You think demographics won't play into this?

[Zhade]

17. Keep dreaming, Obama will be the nominee once you wake up.

NT!

[DemVet]

53. Maybe he will, but...

...we'll be getting our butts kicked in the GE once again if he is.

[aquart]

5. So you'd rather NOT run the candidate most voters prefer?

Well, that seems sensible.

[sandnsea]

6. That's what the delegates decide

Don't like it, change it next time. This time, we're electing delegates and I know you aren't so stupid or uninformed that you don't understand it.

[OzarkDem]

11. Delegates are only pledged for the first ballot

Its in the rules, read them.

[sandnsea]

13. Then let's skip the elections altogether

Have the supers decide and save our hard earned money and go on vacation.

[Liberal Veteran]

15. So, how would you feel if your delegate was pledged to Clinton and flipped to Obama?

Or if YOU were a pledged Clinton delegate, and you got into an accident and your alternate flipped to Obama?

Is that the kind of party you want? I want my delegates to keep their word. If people elect a delegate to represent them, doesn't that person have a moral obligation to live up to his end of the bargain?

[OzarkDem]

20. Its the rules of the party

and the rules exist for a reason, to allow discussion and debate when the primary is a draw.

If you ask me, I'm for debate and discussion.

And if I were from a caucus state, I would say I have no right to ask for more.

[Liberal Veteran]

30. If you wish to surrender your vote, do so. Keep your grubby hands off my vote however.

You are saying it's fine with you if someone betrays your trust and nullifies your vote by going against the will of the people who put the delegate in that position.

[Liberal Veteran]

9. But how do you know when some states are caucuses and others primaries?

That's the problem.

Let's say Iowa goes for Obama and Kansas goes for Clinton. Both are caucus states, so how many votes can you allocate? How do decide that?

[mopinko]

36. no- YOU are the ones trying to not run the candidate most voters prefer.

that is why you are talking about metrics that don't count in the pitiful hope that you can find a way to STEAL IT.

[Donna Zen]

40. My state didn't get to vote

We were told that the nomination would be based on delegates and so we decided to have a caucus.

No one from your side told us that only primaries counted.

Now we will not have a chance to have our people counted.

The least you could have done was warned us....given us a chance to be counted.

Our party spent a lot of time and money to organize the caucus. We could have had a primary for free.

So...you'd rather take away the votes of many Dems. by changing the rules after you made them? Playing by the rules now ends with a kick in the head. Thanks.

[madfloridian]

8. And she won't get many delegates from PA

From DCW...

"Note on DCW Projections: We've made some very conservative baseline delegate assignments even before the voting has started. These are a minimum level of delegates that each candidate will receive unless the polling is really, really bad. Statewide, the average of the current polls is Clinton +6 - we've converted that to a 53-47 Clinton lead, then subtracted 13% from each side, to find a vote level that each candidate will not miss. For Clinton it's 40%, and for Obama it's 34%, which gives Clinton an initial 22 state-wide delegates and Obama 19 state-wide delegates.

For the CDs, those with 5 or less delegates we've given each candidate 1 delegate each, and those with 6 or more we've given each candidate 2 delegates each. Except as follows: CD-1 (7 total delegates available): 3-2 for Obama. CD-2 (9 dels available): 4-2 for Obama. CD-11, 12 and 16 (5 dels available each): 2-1 for Clinton. Giving a total CD delegate count of 29-29. Which gives a complete delegate initial baseline estimate of 51-48 for Clinton. So 63% of the total delegates are essentially spoken for already. Which leaves 59 delegates left.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/04/pennsylvania-primary-results.html

[OzarkDem]

10. We're electing a candidate who can win the GE

Winning the GE is ALL that matters.

Winning the popular vote and the electoral vote is ALL that matters.

Winning in battleground states is ALL that matters.

[sandnsea]

12. Then why do you want to bother with the rest of the elections?

Why doesn't Hillary just tell the supers to give it to her now, if the elections don't matter.

[OzarkDem]

23. Go back and read a little history

of the Democratic Party's presidential nomination process.

We've only been in the business of using conventions to crown a candidate for the last few elections. The norm has been choosing candidates at Conventions.

And yes, that is what matters most, winning the GE.

[sandnsea]

28. So you're supporting doing away with elections?

Is that what you're saying?

And if what matters most is winning the GE, believe me, Hillary is not the candidate. The majority of the western US hates her fucking guts. And all these rural areas where she's winning votes now, don't think they're going to vote for her in the GE, they aren't. All they have to do is play snipergate 24 hours a day and she is finished. She's easy pickings.

[Zhade]

18. Keep dreaming, Obama will be the nominee once you wake up.

NT!

[Liberal Veteran]

19. You are living in the past. ALL states are battleground states.

Writing off a shitload of states without even trying is why out of the last 40 years, we've had a republican president 70% of that time frame.

That's the politics of yesterday.

[OzarkDem]

25. Sorry, but you're wrong

If a Dem candidate can't carry key electoral states in the GE, they won't win. Its a plain and simple fact.

Yes all states count, including the ones that Clinton can carry.

[sandnsea]

32. Women are not going to vote for McCain

Not going to happen. The only reason Hillary is still in this is a bunch of old women who refuse to give up their dream of a female President. That's it, that's all. If they handed these women a list of the shit Hillary has pulled in this nomination, and didn't tell them who had done it all, they'd recoil in horror.

[Liberal Veteran]

33. So let me get this straight: Your theory is McCain wins NY if Clinton is not the nominee?

Are you high? Insane? Delusional?

That is nonsensical. Are YOU going to vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee? Cause that's basically what you are saying about everyone else.

[bigbrother05]

34. Battleground states are important

We need the candidate that can build the party and move the voters. Obama has come from way behind since the beginning. He built a grassroots organizatin that will work all the way through til Nov. He spent a lot in each state to build name and party recognition. Sure sometimes he came up short where he had been 20 or more points behind, but he didn't burn any bridges. Does anyone really think either Dem candidate will lose in CA, NY, NJ, or MA?

The growth in the party, increased registration and turnout, has added to the number of battleground states. It's not just FL and OH that can swing the election this go round. We just need to get this thing done without a circular firing squad.

[JBoy]

16. Popular_Vote_Count is a feature of DemocraticPrimary v2.0

Scheduled for release in fall 2011.

Not a currently supported feature of DemocraticPrimary v1.0

[OzarkDem]

26. Winning the popular vote is required

to win the GE.

Maybe you can explain to us how Obama can win the GE without the popular vote.

[JBoy]

27. I'm sorry, are you familiar with the Electoral College?

[chascarrillo]

31. Uh, the Electoral Fucking College?

Jesus.

[Hansel]

41. Gore won the popular vote.

[Generator]

21. Please.

Let's just make it easy on everyone and only have candidates that are related to former presidents. It's what makes America great.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

22. yes we are delegates

[H2O Man]

24. Right.

Exactly.

Nominated.

[tritsofme]

29. If it is all about pledged delegates, declare it over now, Hillary can't win

The SDs should have ended it weeks ago.

It is mathematically impossible for Hillary to end the primaries leading in pledged delegates.

If the SDs weren't warm to hearing about other election variables such as the popular vote, they would have called it a game a long time ago.

[mopinko]

37. well, i am hopeful for tomorrow.

when all the votes are counted, and the math is clear, hopefully the supers will jump.

[otohara]

35. Thank You Thomas Jefferson

sandnsea! Clinton will bloody TJ up too, fucking founding father!

[sandnsea]

38. kick

Apparently there are people who still think we're voting for an Electoral College - instead of Democratic Party Delegates.

[Condem]

39. On Kos

Only a three delegate lead for Clinton in PA?

[azmouse]

42. kick

[grizmaster]

43. Funny, I thought we were electing a candidate

[kid a]

45. k

[guyanakoolaid]

46. K&R

I don't like caucuses, we should get rid of those rules. But not in the middle of an election.

[MrCTLib]

47. ...

The Super Delegates don't decide by who has the most pledged delegates. They look at the whole picture including electability, popular vote which Hillary is leading 100,000+ id you add in Florida and Michigan etc....

[guyanakoolaid]

48. I doubt they'll consider the myth of "popular vote"

And since I doubt you're a SD, you don't know what they decide on. I would venture a guess that they would be far less likely to overturn the pledged delegate win for Obama than to decide caucusing states don't matter any more.

[Adelante]

49. k

:kick:

[Tom Rinaldo]

54. Overturn is a subjectively laden term

If you strip away all concept of who is more popular, of who has the most support, of whether the manner by which delgates get proportioned in states is democratic or fair, of whether the wishs of voters in Florida should be taken into account, you are left with simply following the rules. I accept following the rules. A majority of Super Delegates disagreeing with a majority of pledged delegates is no more "overturning" their decision than the majority of Texas Caucus goers disagreeing with the the majority of Texas Primary voters was "overturning" their decision.

Overturn implies a decision being reversed, but that implies a decision being made in the first place. You say there is no popular vote, but there is data out there, votes that can be tallied and compared. What you really mean is that the popular vote has no official standing in determining who becomes our nominee. Well neither does a majority of pledged delegates. Only a majority of all elegates has an official standing. There is no decision made that could be overturned until a majority of Democratic delgates agree on a candidate.