Did Hillary Clinton reach 55% in PA?

[Guaranteed]

Poll question: Did Hillary Clinton reach 55% in PA?

Cuz if she didn't, she didn't get a double-digit win.

[seriousstan]

1. Is there something I don't know?

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Are you going to "phone a friend" next?

[Skip Intro]

3. CNN sez 55-45. With 99% reporting. Guess they're all screwed up too.

[Guaranteed]

4. So, is that a yes? She ACTUALLY broke, in real numbers, 55%?

Or, are you relying on some kind of bullshit to meet the goal that was quite generous to Clinton to begin with?

[bobbert]

9. 54.51% to 45.49% rounds to 55-45 even though it's a 9 point win

what if it was 54.49% to 45.51%, would you claim an 8 point or 9 point win? Let's use real numbers not rounded bullshit.

[Guaranteed]

12. Right. In other words, she has to break 55% for a double-digit win.

Whether she did that or not should be plenty clear for everyone.

[bobbert]

16. I guess Hillary supporters are giving us new math lessons

Once we figure out what goes on inside their heads we will see how she can win

[chknltl]

5. Nope, not according to PA

http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/

[Guaranteed]

7. Not even close. That margin is 8.6%.

Even if it's wrong, it's not wrong enough to bring her up to 55%.

She lost.

[chknltl]

21. Yep, Nope, agreed:

Yep, not even close.
Nope, She did win in PA, according to PA
agreed: Mission: Not Accomplished by Senator HRC.

btw: Brad Blog is keeping track of electronic voting machine shenanigans in PA. (Who'd-a-thought!!!) Would those shenanigans have changed anything EITHER WAY???? Who knows. Also: How many repukes registered and voted for Senator Clinton with the sole purpose of screwing up the Democratic nomination??? There have been quite a few who have done this in other states, many even bragged about doing so. I call it the Limbaugh/Bruha strategy. I feel it is being used exactly as druggie limbaugh wanted it to be used and it is accomplishing the purpose he intended.

[Raine]

11. THANKS

for that link, interesting.

[chknltl]

23. Actually, thanks to fellow DUer JMDEM

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5637207
(credit where credit is due)

[Raine]

39. :-)

:thumbsup:

[BzaDem]

6. Whine whine whine my candidate didn't win whine whine whine

[Guaranteed]

8. The numbers don't lie. Clinton can't win. nt

[Aloha Spirit]

13. the state numbers lie a little, but I concur with point #2

:party:

[Guaranteed]

14. Whether they are incorrect or not, she didn't hit 55%.

Which is, if we're using REAL math, required for a double-digit win in a two-person race.

[Traction311]

40. And Obama can? nt

[Raine]

15. Don't let those cold hard numbers

that show Hillary didn't get what she needed get in the way of believing what you want to believe. :eyes:

[MrSlayer]

10. No, only a fool would think so.

By the time all is said and done it will be an 8 point victory max.

[boppers]

17. At 54.3% now.

http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/

[William769]

18. At least you all are consistent.

:rofl:

[Guaranteed]

26. Damned straight. Clinton at 55% = 10 points.

One and the same.

Fucking consistent is right.

[Skip Intro]

19. Fuck your stupid poll. "She did even though she didn't" - She DID!

[Guaranteed]

22. Where? Show me the HARD numbers that she hit 55%. nt

[MercutioATC]

24. ...and math be damned!!!

I'm accepting the media's dumbed-down version because it makes me feel happier :)


:eyes:

[Aloha Spirit]

20. it'll end up 54-46, about 100 precincts to go, all from Obama districts.....

edit--MOSTly from Obama districts.

To quote MikeMinCT from DKos,
3% of the precincts in Philly (Obama 65-35) and small chunks of Chester and Delaware counties (Obama by narrow margins) make up the 1.1% statewide that is still out. Even if those precincts come in 50-50, that'll bring Hillary down below 54.5% and get an 8-point final result.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/18018274.html

[bobbert]

29. According to that link Obama did win the Pittsburgh congressional district

Their county must include a lot of subarbs and smaller towns.

[johnnydrama]

25. CNN never uses odd numbers.

So they'll never show 54.5 - 45.5.

But 54.5 - 45.5 is 9, not 10 in anybody's math book.

[depakid]

27. Looks as though, with 99% reporting, she did

Not that it matters one way or another.

The only thing that matters is winning the election in November.

[Guaranteed]

28. Are you using the CNN dummy version, or are you saying she

actually broke 55% in real numbers?

If she actually broke it, let's see it, the >55% numbers.

[depakid]

34. Why does it matter? Why quibble over a percentage point?

Bottom line is that there's a bit of trouble in the details here for November.

Am I the only one left who actually gives a shit about getting Republicans out of the White House?

Seems that way sometimes.

[Guaranteed]

35. A double-digit win was the goal. Not hitting 55% is not reaching that goal.

And there is lying with numbers going on here.


And, yeah, we need to win in November. That's why it would be nice if Clinton faced reality and let this go instead of making everyone else waste resources on her to force her out.

[depakid]

38. Whatever

It's a primary election- and the devil's in the details, not in some ephemeral percentage point.

I'd have said the exact same thing looking at the constituencies if she'd won by 6% or 15%.

Looks to many rational people like Obama is going to be unable to carry key precincts in November. That's just how it is- and it doesn't matter much whether I like him or Hillary.

[backscatter712]

30. She didn't solve her math problem.

She needed far more than a ten point lead in Pennsylvania. She needed at least 20, preferably 30 just to put a significant dent in Obama's delegate lead.

That didn't happen. Obama kept it close, and that's all he needed to do in Pennsylvania.

Hillary's still on a sinking ship.

[Guaranteed]

31. And she didn't even get the 10. nt

[kmsarvis]

37. Yep! This certainly wasn't the "game changer" she needed.

Only a 9.4% victory after being up in the polls by 20%+ a month ago. Her numbers should have gone up after Wright and bittergate.:shrug:

[TragedyandHope]

32. Yes she did

By my rough calculations (at 99% reporting), I get 54.6 which rounds up to 55 in all mathematics I know, if we're counting whole points. (Unless the numbers change tomorrow when that last 1% reports in.)

[Guaranteed]

33. No, she didn't. She didn't actually break 55%.

To get a double-digit win, she has to have actually broken 55%, in real numbers, without rounding.

[TragedyandHope]

41. And also

I looked at a few more sites and see conflicting results which show Hillary with only 54.3%. So in that case...

SINGLE DIGITS, Woo hoo!

[krispos42]

36. I'm getting about 8.5% above Obama

If I was to do it to seven significant digits...

As of 2:30am CDT, April 23, 2008, there are 2,275,683 total votes

of which

Clinton has 1,234,547
Obama has 1,041,136

Clinton: 1,234,547 ÷ 2,275,683 = 54.24952%
Obama: 1,041,136 ÷ 2,275,683 = 45.75048%

54.24952 - 45.75048 = 8.49904%

So there you have it. A lot less than double-digits.

[davidpdx]

42. 1:45am PST Clinton 54.3, Obama 45.8

8.5 does not equal 10

It will be interesting to see when the provisional ballots are counted tomorrow.

[Skittles]

43. I have to say

the spinning in this thread is absolutely MIND-BOGGLING :o