Hillary wins Democratic vote by 700,000 votes.

[NJSecularist]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660890/
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/

There have been 26,513,899 total voters so far who have voted in Democratic primaries. Over those 26+ million, 75% are Democrats, 20% are Independents and 5% are Republicans. Using that data, we can infer the following:

Total Democratic Voters voting in the Democratic Primary: 20,034,925 voters

Total Republican Voters voting in the Democratic Primary: 1,322,409 voters

Total Independent Voters voting in the Democratic Primary: 5,003,725 voters

Now, the percentage of the electorate per state that is Democratic:

New Hampshire: 54
South Carolina: 73%
Alaska: 82%
Arizona: 78%
Arkansas: 78%
California: 80%
Connecticut: 80%

Delaware: 83%
Georgia: 77%
Illinois: 79%
Missouri: 73%
New Jersey: 78%
New Mexico: 87%
New York: 87%

Oklahoma: 78%
Tennessee: 76%
Utah: 63%
Louisiana: 83%
Maryland: 84%

Virginia: 70%
Wisconsin: 62%
Ohio: 69%
Rhode Island: 64%

Texas: 66%
Vermont: 55%
Mississippi: 71%
Pennsylvania: 82%

Next, let's break down the Democratic vote by state:

New Hampshire - Clinton: 45, Obama: 34
South Carolina - Clinton: 28, Obama: 57
Alabama - Clinton - Clinton 40, Obama: 58
Arizona - Clinton: 52, Obama: 42
Arkansas - Clinton: 74 Obama: 25
California - Clinton: 57, Obama: 38
Connecticut - Clinton: 50, Obama: 48

Delaware - Clinton: 42, Obama: 54
Georgia - Clinton: 32, Obama: 67
Illinois - Clinton: 36, Obama: 63
Missouri - Clinton: 50, Obama: 47
New Jersey - Clinton: 56, Obama: 42
New Mexico - Obama: 51, Clinton: 47
New York - Clinton: 60, Obama: 37

Oklahoma - Clinton: 58, Obama: 30
Tennessee - Clinton:57, Obama: 39
Utah - Clinton: 48, Obama: 48
Louisiana - Clinton: 38, Obama: 57
Maryland - Clinton: 40, Obama: 59

Virginia - Clinton: 38, Obama: 62
Wisconsin - Clinton: 46, Obama: 52
Ohio - Clinton: 56, Obama: 42
Rhode Island - Clinton: 37, Obama: 62

Texas - Clinton: 53, Obama: 46
Vermont - Clinton: 40, Obama: 57
Mississippi - Clinton: 30, Obama: 67
Pennsylvania - Clinton: 56, Obama: 44

Using this data, we can infer that Hillary Clinton has won 10,080,316 Democratic votes, while Barack Obama has won 9,391,932 Democratic voters. That is a difference of 688,384 votes. Obama's popular vote total has been inflated by indies and Rethugs, the indies likely to vote for McCain in the general, especially after Bittergate, and the Rethugs almost certainly likely to vote for McCain in the general.

The nomination should go to the nominee that has won more Democratic votes, not Rethug votes.

[anigbrowl]

1. Why not just count Clinton votes? Then she could say she won unanimously

Sorry, complaints about the delegate allocation method etc. should have been ironed out before the primary. You missed the boat, and saying the rules are unfair after the contest has taken place is strictly for weenies.

[TahitiNut]

50. I'm waiting for black votes to be counted at 3/5ths of a white vote.

That's where the Hillbigots are headed.

:puke:

[Solomon]

66. OMG. Killing me.

:applause:

[krkaufman]

89. Ok, I was laughing at the first comment. But yours has me howling.

Too true!

[ScarletSniper]

101. LMAO!!! that's next..

[peoli]

2. you should ask her to pass new legislation when she returns to the senate.

[billyoc]

87. Returns?! She's been campaigning for President since 2000. nt

[pinkpops]

3. Lets elect her dogcatcher

[Hepburn]

105. That elected office IMO is too good for Hillary. n/t

[mythyc]

137. how about sanitation commisioner?

the garbage man can, because she's hillary clinton man...



:rofl:

[RBInMaine]

4. SPIN SPIN SPIN SPIN SPIN....

[SwampG8r]

80. from this data we can infer

that the OP is full of horseshit

[groovytang]

5. is this how you spent your saturday night

[angie_love]

17. sad isn't it?

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. The nomination goes to whoever's gotten the most votes, period.

Some states have open primaries. Don't like it, change the rules for the next election, not this one. And, honestly, you are a brain-damaged fuckwit if you think that it's a bad thing to have a candidate for whom independents and disaffected Republicans will vote. You do like to win elections, don't you?

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

59. deleted

[ORDem]

76. Actually, to whomever gets the most delegates. nt

[WeDidIt]

7. Completely meaningless, every bit of it.

It means not a single thing. You cannot prove your numbers are 100% accurate.

It's speculation, nothing more.

[NJSecularist]

10. Sorry, the data is correct. Check for yourself. I have a spreadsheet here that verifies all my data.

[WeDidIt]

16. No, the data is at best an estimate

and completely meaningless.

The only way you'd know would be if there was no secret ballot.

Exit polling data is simply not accurate enough for you to make thse sorts of conclusions.

[NJSecularist]

21. Hillary leading among Democrats is not an estimate.

It is a fact. Look at the data.

[Zhade]

29. Except she's not leading, she's losing.

Your lies don't change that fact, and the nomination will proceed as the rules allow, which means she's done.

[NJSecularist]

30. Hillary is leading among Democratic voters.

She certainly isn't losing among our core constituency... you know, Democrats.

[WeDidIt]

42. You cannot demonstrate that conclusively

700,000 is 2.8% of the total. That's squarely within the margin of error.

It's every bit as likely that Clinton is losing amongst Democrats by 700,000 given the data.

[WeDidIt]

33. When you can produce preciese records

showing the vote of each and every one of those 25 million voters, it won't be an estimate.

Until then, your data is an estimate at best, and is most likely erroneous. 700,000 is less than 3% of the total voters and thus falls within the margin of error statistically.

[earthside]

47. So what?

This is why old Hill is losing the nomination: put out selective information, then stick to it no matter if it has any relevance or not.

It is called being DENSE.

It is a loser's game.

It is also very Bush-like ... you know, faith-based reality.

[RiverStone]

107. How do you know every Dem vote is a real Dem vote? Per the Rush effect in TX for example?

[jgraz]

123. If exit polling is that accurate, then Obama won New Hampshire.

It is a fact. Look at the data.

[MadBadger]

22. Who the hell cares if your data is correct?

You changed support based on electability. Having a candidate who can get Independents and Republicans vote for them is very important.

[mudesi]

43. Even if the data was correct

There is no way to arrive at that number based on the information given. That the OP doesn't show the calculations might mean something.

[MadBadger]

46. I dont doubt the info, though an exit poll would measure self-identified dems.

Its how somebody indentifies themself, even though they may not actually be a registered dem.

[mckeown1128]

57. Check it where...

votes are unanimous. You don't know who voted... and for whom.

[rurallib]

70. You have a spreadsheet that you made that verifies your data?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You work for Fux?

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. a) where's Washington?

b) It may be possible to infer the percentage of independents and Republicans which voted for each candidate based on exit polls, but your post does not make your logic clear.

[NJSecularist]

79. Washington did not have any exit polls.

b) I did my own calculations for independents and republicans using the same methods as I used for this... I just didn't post them.

[Hepburn]

106. And who the fuck make YOU the spreadsheet god?

:rofl:

[Condem]

8. Fuck, NJ

What is this bullshit?

[bigtree]

48. this is the way supporters here would run their campaign

fuck this and that person who contradicts them . . . inspiring.

[yourguide]

53. It's better than

"fuck facts" and "fuck math" oh and "fuck the will of the voters" which is what HRC, her surrogates, and many of her supporters are using as their current mantras.

[JustinL]

9. Yet another attempt to change the rules halfway (actually, 87%) into the game. Pathetic.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

11. thats right, caucus states don't count, fly over states don't count, little states

any state that hillary lost in doesn't count.

[goldcanyonaz]

12. Great work, NJ!

[mac2]

18. And his Faith Based Funding agenda...

and his stated refusal to investigate 911.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

13. the rules are like her vote for the Iraq war - she can't undo them/it

n/t

[MadBadger]

14. See making this argument is why people think you are a phony.

This is Why people think you never were an Obama supporter in the first place. When this argument was originally suggested, I never saw you embrace it.

[AZBlue]

15. You should be embarassed to post this.

I'm embarassed FOR you!

[yourguide]

19. I've debunked this once...

but you cant base this garbage on exit polls. The exit polling sample sizes are around 2000 voters per state. Therefore your TOTAL sample size based on approximately 2000 people per state in exit polls is around 70,000 out of 26 MILLION, your sample size is ONE QUARTER OF ONE PERCENT. Not even 1 percent, not even one half a percent.

So all of that work you just did??? Based on bad data.

Fail.

[Thickasabrick]

60. Nice work.....and thank you for the debunk. The pic scared me

a little.:scared:

[Zynx]

102. You didn't ever take a statistics class did you?

Sample size is irrelevant after a certain point. It's actually possible for a sample of 100,000 in a population of 200,000,000 to be less accurate than a sample of 2,000 from the same population. Granted a sample size of 10 is no good, but start getting into the hundreds with random sampling and you're in good shape.

[yourguide]

103. I did take a statistics class

And the truth is, you would need a sampling from every district in proportion to the size of the population.

So for argument's sake... let's say there are 200 districts in a state and approximately 2 million folks voted in the state averaging out to around 10,000 people per district. That means you sampled 10 voters for 10,000. You need 100s per district for an accurate sample. 1/4 of 1 percent is not going to be an accurate sample size for 26,000,000 people.

If the sample data was accurate then the exit polls would have been correct. Most haven't been.

Bad data.

[Zynx]

119. That is complete garbage.

You evidently did not pay attention then. Sample size does not need to be anywhere as large as you are suggesting. .25% is more than sufficient for any statistical method when we are talking about thousands of samples. It won't be precise, but it will give you a range that you can work with and have significant confidence in its result.

[NJSecularist]

120. You are 100% correct.

[yourguide]

129. Ok....say what you want but it's incorrect.

[Condem]

20. A lotta work for nothing,NJ

[Raine]

23. LOL...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[GoldieAZ49]

24. DU prefers the indies and repubs choose the party nominee

since they haven't done so well in the past few elections I guess.

:shrug:

They shouldn't be surprised that so many dems will not vote for Obama in the GE.

[wellstone dem]

25. But I'm in Minnesota--doesn't my vote count?

[Diane R]

26. Very inferior work. You've conveniently left out all voters in caucus states. Why disenfranchise us?

[NJSecularist]

28. If we add caucuses, Hillary still leads by 350,000 Democratic votes

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/popular-vote-estimates-includi-1.php

Caucuses Estimate:
Clinton 453,649 (34.7%)
Obama 754,959 (57.8%)
Obama lead 301,310

[yourguide]

40. You are still basing all of your assumptions

on a sampling of less than 1/2 of 1 percent of total voters. Therefore if your sample is bad (too small) then the rest of your extrapolations based on the data is incorrect.

Sorry...FAIL.

[WeDidIt]

77. More estimates

erroneous conclusions based upon flawed reasoning.

I would suggest a basic statistics course.

[mudesi]

81. What work?

I'm still trying to figure out how the OP arrived at the final answer. It's not possible given the data presented.

[quickesst]

27. Obama supporters....

tell us that the number of states is what counts, and not the people. For some unfathomable reason, or obalogic, a million votes in one state, equates with two million in another, and that small groups, namely caucuses, are more important than the individual vote of Americans. Since this happens to be the system that favors Obama, obalogic tells us that your facts, are not facts at all, because they are based upon an unimportant premise. That every individual's vote should count. Can't have democracy running rampant around here now. Thanks.
quickesst

[alcibiades_mystery]

63. You're replying to an OP that delegitimates 25% of the legitimate voters!

And you're complaining about Obama supporters not wanting to count people!

Jesus, the irony gene is truly lacking in the Hillarians!

[cliffordu]

31. I'm thinking the obvious:

This post has numbers that are not in the realm of possibility.

[1776Forever]

32. Your right - Hillary has won the most votes for being the most negative candidate on record!

http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1063a3The08Race.pdf

Take a look at the document link and tell me that she is ahead in popular votes and can win the General Election!

NOT!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Maine-ah]

34. are you only counting primaries and not caucases?

'cause I didn't see Maine on your list.

[davidthegnome]

44. Being a fellow Mainiac

I happened to notice that myself.

[MaineDem]

97. I noticed that right off. Iowa's not there either. I'm sure others are missing.

Totally irrational logic.

[anonymous171]

35. Odd because 42% of her voters plan on voting for McCain.

[AJH032]

126. ?

based on what?

[mudesi]

36. CLINTON SUPPORTERS CAN'T DO MATH!!!!!!!!!

How did you arrive at your final number? Because you can't arrive at it with only the information you presented. It's not possible.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I'd be interested to know the details of your calculations!

[MadBadger]

37. The Newsweek Poll is evidence that goes against your final claim about indies.

In the latest poll, they both lead McCain by 3. Obama leads McCain 75-16 among Dems, loses 86-10 among Repukes, and WINS Independents 45-43. Hillary leads McCain 81-13 among Dems, loses 89-7 among Repukes, and loses Indies 45-44.

[jefferson_dem]

38. LOL! So actual votes don't count but exit polls do.

Dude. :spray:

Government of, by, and for the ... "National Election Pool."

[MadBadger]

41. NJS is a phony. She was on the right side of this issue not long ago,now there is a sudden change?

[lisa58]

39. so what?

[msallied]

45. I hereby recommend you for a nomination

to the dunce club.

[Diamonique]

49. You actually created a spreadsheet to come up with this crap?

First it was the delegates that counted.

Then it was the primaries and not the caucuses (except the Nevada caucus.. that one counts).

Then it was the big states, but not the smaller states. And if a big state has both a primary and a caucus, the caucus doesn't count.

Then it was the popular vote, but not the delegates.

Then it was momentum.

Then it was perception.

Now we're back to the popular vote, but only certain popular votes. The votes of Independents and Republicans who voted in open primaries don't count; but the votes of Democrats in illegal primaries (FL and MI) do.

If this wasn't so important, I'd be laughing.

Hillary's campaign has twisted itself into so many knots trying to spin a win it's ridiculous. And the really sad thing is that they have turned otherwise intelligent voters into pretzel-minded twits right along with them.

This thing is over. By all the rules in place when we started (which are the only rules that count), Barack has won this thing. Everybody knows its over... except Hillary.

Hillary needs to congratulate Barack and take some time off so she can go in search of the mind she lost somewhere along the campaign trail.

[sellitman]

58. What you said!

:toast:

[alcibiades_mystery]

65. "The votes of Independents and Republicans who voted in open primaries don't count;

but the votes of Democrats in illegal primaries (FL and MI) do."

Hill-arious! :rofl:

[BklnDem75]

67. I approve this message

Wish I could REC this post

[PseudoIntellect]

51. FOX News and neo-cons continue to attack Obama more than Hillary, what does that tell us?

[libbygurl]

109. No one else is saying some inconvenient truths about BO?

Truths can be gleaned even from questionable sources.

If FOX said, 'the sun rises in the east and sets in the west', would you disagree with that?

[bigbrother05]

52. Mark? Terry? Is that you? Guys?

[anonymous171]

54. Too bad this is a race for delegates. Wolfson says so.

[undeterred]

55. Ah, the tortuous mental and mathematical gymnastics of Hillary voters.

The rest of the world doesn't care, so stop wasting your time.

[TheDoorbellRang]

56. That's Right!11!!1!11 Because 13 caucus states don't count!111!

All that work, but I don't see

Iowa
Nevada
Alaska
Colorado
Idaho
Kansas
Minnesota
North Dakota
Nebraska
Washington
Maine
Hawaii
Wyoming

Come to think of it, I also don't see

Washington, D.C.
Virgin Islands
American Samoa
Democrats Abroad

But hey! You've got yourself a brand new parameter to run with -- as long as you don't include any of the above!

:rofl:

[libbygurl]

110. That's right - 'cuz most of these states had 'Dems for a day' voters - temporary

Dems who were registered as such to vote in the caucus, then also given registration forms to return to being Repubs for the GE. You have to be in denial or very naive to think that all those caucus voters will also vote for BO in the GE - and why even let them register back as GOPers after the caucus vote?

Most of these states are never carried by the Dem nominee in the GE, too. Winning a clearly red state by questionable means in the Dem primary means little. Meanwhile, in the truly Dem and blue states, Hillary wins.

[jgraz]

124. Yeah, cuz that NEVER happened with Hillary.

You guys are beyond ridiculous.

[jenmito]

61. Were you ever REALLY an Obama supporter?????

[Gore1FL]

62. Not exactly. That isn't how it works.

I posted this on another thread, but I guess I need to explain how delegatews work here too.

Caucuses votes do not equal primary votes 1:1. Some caucuses don't even have official records of who cast what vote.

Delegates is the system in place. If you want to talk votes represented in those standards (the way it was designed) then lets start here:

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

1. State's Democratic Vote (SDV): The jurisdiction's popular vote for the Democratic candidate for President in the last three Presidential Elections (1996, 2000, and 2004).
2. Total Democratic Vote (TDV): The total popular vote for the Democratic candidate for President in the last three Presidential Elections (1996, 2000, and 2004).
3. The state's Electoral Vote (SEV).
4. The total Electoral Vote of all jurisdictions (538).

The formula for determining a jurisdiction's Allocation Factor is:

Allocation Factor = ½ × ( ( SDV ÷ TDV ) + ( SEV ÷ 538 ) )


In addition:


Bonus delegates are awarded to states holding their First Determining Step (start their delegate allocation process) later in the cycle. The bonus is awarded as a percentage of the base allocation of pledged delegates and applies to the district and at-large delegates. The bonus does NOT apply to the Pledged PLEO and Unpledged delegates.

The Presidential nomination cycle is divided into 3 Stages: Stage I for January, February, or March; Stage II for April; and Stage III for May or June.

If a state began their 2004 process in January, February, or March and begins their 2008 process in

* April: 15% bonus (Base × 0.15)
* May or June: 30% bonus (Base × 0.3)

If a state began their 2004 process in April and begins their 2008 process in

* April: 5% bonus (Base × 0.05)
* May or June: 30% bonus (Base × 0.3)

If a state began their 2004 process in May or June and begins their 2008 process in

* May or June: 10% bonus (Base × 0.1)

Bonus votes are allocated to jurisdictions as district and at-large delegates.

* Bonus At-Large Delegate Votes = <5%, 10%, 15%, 30%> Bonus Base × 0.25. (Fractions 0.5 and above are rounded to the next highest integer. The number of Bonus At-Large Delegate Votes must be at least 1. If the rounding results in 0 Bonus At-Large Delegate Votes, the number of Bonus At-Large Delegate Votes becomes 1.)
* Bonus District Delegate Votes = <5%, 10%, 15%, 30%> Bonus Base - Bonus At-Large Delegate Votes. (The number of Bonus District delegates plus the number of Bonus At-Large delegates must equal the Bonus Base. Hence, the rounding favors the statewide At-Large allocation.)


This gives later contests slightly more weight.


Roughly speaking though...

1 Delegate = (1996 Dem voters + 2000 Dem Voters + 2004 Dem Voters)/4048

Including MI and FL, 1 delegate = (157,430,363/4048)/3 = 38890.9/3 = 12963.6 voters represented per delegate.
Or if you prefer...

Not including MI an FL 1 delegate = (141748442/4048)/3 = 35016.9/3 = 11672.3 voters represented per delegate.

Hence:

Obama's PLEDGED delegates represent 11672.3 * 1489 = 17,380,054.7 Voters

Clinton's PLEDGED delegates represent 11672.3 * 1333 = 15,559,175.9 Voters

17,380,054.7 - 15,559,175.9 = 1,820,878.8

So in terms of what these contest actually represent in terms of historical Democratic voters is a difference of 1,820,878.8 Democrats that she is behind.

But on the bright side for Hillary, the supers represent Historic democratic voters too, and she is 22 ahead there.

22 * 11672.3 = 256790.6

1,820,878.8 - 256790.6 = 1564088.2

So really she just needs to pick up an additional 1,564,088.2 Democratic voters worth of delegates on top of what ever Obama gets to secure the nomination....

That's how it works.

[mtnsnake]

64. It doesn't look good for Obama any which way you look at it, does it

He's lost all the momentum to the Goddess of Peace, just as I predicted 2 days before the tide actually turned.

Oh well, Barack gave it a go and came up a little short. There's always 2016 to think about.

[TK421]

68. Shhhhhh!!!!!!! Don't wake them !

In their minds they have their nominee!

[Bensthename]

69. No No.. She has one by 100 BILLION votes...

If you count all the ghost walking the eaarth that voted and out of galaxie alien write ins.

Don't tell me you are giving her money with that bull..

[libbygurl]

112. What does 'one by 100 BILLION votes' mean? 1 x 100 billion? That's a really big number.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

71. precisely

[BlueJac]

72. I see the Hillary dirty dozen recommended this post......

I just can't quit laughing that it is so over and you people are dreaming!! I love it. The cry babies will kick and scream to the bitter end, no matter the cost to the democratic party!

[Skittles]

73. as opposed to

the Obama dirty 75? WTF!!!!!!!!!

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

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

[mudesi]

78. Can you PLEASE show your work?

I'm still waiting to see just how you calculated your result from the data you presented.

Because it's not possible. Maybe you can explain it to me.

[NJSecularist]

83. Here.

It's in XLS format:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/mldq8a

[yourguide]

92. Your root data is still bad.

You are basing your projections off a sample size of around 70,000 total for 26,000,000 voters.

[bobbert]

82. I think pulling indy voters to vote Dem is a good thing

Nobody wins an election with ONLY democratic voters. You need to appeal to independents and moderates who lean slightly to the republican base. The fact that he's having an impact on their voted on something as simple as the primary is a great thing for the party.

[kwenu]

84. Good for her. She can take comfort in that while watching Obama trounce McCain in the GE.

[NJSecularist]

86. Trounce what? n/t

[VolcanoJen]

85. If it were "Backwards Day," she'd have more pledged delegates, too!!

So we should all go home now, I think.

:eyes:

[johnnydrama]

88. take the caucus states

look up those states in the state polls, mccain vs obama & mccain vs clinton.

Obama leads Clinton vs mccain in about 95% of those states.

Therefore, since Obama is much more liked in the caucus states vs the primary states, we can easily figure out that he would have gained hundreds of thousands, if not more than a million more votes from the caucus states.

His pledged delegate lead would be lower, but his popular lead much much bigger.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

90. Um, caucuses? nt

[simmonsj811]

91. kicking to the top!

:wtf: :crazy: :spank:

[CatsDogsBabies]

93. I am an independent

and there is no likelihood that I will vote for McCain. I support Obama all the way. Why brush of Independents - our votes are going to count too. And, the generalization that Independents will vote for McCain because Obama attended Trinity Church of Christ makes no sense to me.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

94. You know how necessity is the mother of inventions?

Well desperation is the mother of spin.

[zulchzulu]

95. BREAKING: Home runs to left field are now equal to 20 runs, right field home runs are equal to 5

Since we're changing rules in the middle of the game, that's the new plan.

Oh, let's make foul balls toward the opposing teams dugout make the home team lose a run.

:hi:

Your preposterous suggestion to change how voters vote is pretty much how your canDUDate, now tht she's lost, wants to change the rules so she can "win"...

[MaineDem]

96. And a long foul counts as half a run

The logic in the OP is preposterous.

First of all, it doesn't count all the votes.

[yellowcanine]

100. Heh, Good analogy. And we need to change the record books. Because all of those "home runs"

into the short rightfield porch in Yankee stadium were at best doubles off the wall in every other ball park so we have to recalculate all the scores and wins that occured because of balls that just cleared the right field fence in Yankee Stadium. Then we have to look to Fenway before the Green Monster was erected. Oh the humanity!

[jgraz]

125. Are you kidding? Hillary wants to count her batting practice.

[grantcart]

133. even better - when our team gets ahead the game is over.

[dbredes]

98. Caucus States Worthless Again

And once again...we hear the Clinton campaign...totally ignoring the caucus states.

In this little analysis...we don't exist at all..

So...Hillary...you've denounced and denigrated the caucus states..

Therefore you should immediately

Give Back the Delegates and the Votes

Then let's see what your little spreadsheet says!

[yellowcanine]

99. This is particularly important since of course only Democratic votes count in November.

:sarcasm:

Get real and quit trying to change the rules and shift the goalposts.
Everyone knew what the rules were going in, including all of the candidates AND Florida and Michigan. They knew that some states were caucuses and it took a different strategy to win them. Clinton deliberately chose a "big state primary" strategy, hoping to score a knockout blow by Super Tuesday. Obama chose instead to use a 50 state strategy and he respected the decision of the DNC on Florida and Michigan. When it was clear after Super Tuesday that Clinton's strategy was failing, her campaign began to shift the goal posts. All of a sudden it was only the big states that mattered or it was only the blue states that mattered or it was only the primary states that mattered, whatever. Well guess what, they ALL matter and her strategy failed. If we stick with the original rules that everyone agreed to before the campaign started - and she continued to agree to until she started losing - Obama in all likelihood is going to win. Clinton and her supporters should just suck it up and accept it when it happens instead of deploying all of these "change the rules" arguments. It is unseemly and it is dishonest. You can "infer" all you want, those are the facts.

[Hepburn]

104. The OP is total unmitigated bullshit....

...and I apologize to bullshit for comparing it to this kind of trash.

JMHO

[libbygurl]

114. No counter-arguments to offer, so just resort to ad hominem attacks. Smart move.

:sarcasm: <-- in case some don't get it.

[npincus]

108. Independent voters and African Americans will NOT vote for HRC.

She will get creamed in the GE.

[libbygurl]

111. Thanks for this post, NJS! Pretty clear to me, these nos. nt

[NJSecularist]

130. No problem. The rethugs are picking our nominee. n/t

[libbygurl]

113. That's not even including FL and MI votes. nt

[Life Long Dem]

115. Why are Clinton's side always trying to change the rules? Will you tell me that?

Your just contributing to dividing our party.

Should have, should of, would've, could have...when the rules are set won't help. It shows your desperation.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

116. Only by changing the rules can they even have the most minuscule chance. n/t

[MadHound]

117. Hallucinigens are taking the place of actual math over at the Clinton camp

Following the lead of their Hillary, her supporters are trying to twist the electoral math into some sort of shape that while impossible to do, gives Hillary the lead in popular vote.

Question for you, how do you determine which voters are actually Republicans? You're believing exit polls, the same sort of exit polls that have screwed us over time and again? All so that you can, after the insanity of '00 and '04, disenfranchise voters? Damn, step back and take a look what you're saying, have far around the bend you've gone, advocating a belief in exit polls and voter disenfranchisement. How sad, that a supposed Democrat is now advocating this sort of shit, all in order to somehow, by any means necessary, get their candidate the nomination.

Perhaps you should take a giant step back from politics at this point, since it is obviously warping your psyche and morality. Advocating a belief in exit polls, and advocating disenfranchising voters is certainly not a Democratic principle.

[nyccitizen]

118. Great News for Hillary -- If Dems were the only ones Allowed to Vote in the GE

Unfortunately for her, Republicans and Independants not only get to vote in the GE but the latter will make the difference in selecting the president. And Barack does better among both groups.

[libbygurl]

121. He does better in both groups in the CAUCUSES and Primaries. GE a different matter altogether.

How did he do that? By offering forms to them to 'register as a Dem for a day', and THEN giving them forms to register back as Repub or Indy. How helpful is that in the GE?

So you have faith that these same caucus cross-over voters will vote for him in the GE, too? Dream on. Sounds like a dishonest way to win the primary nomination ONLY.

And he wins in states in the primaries/caucuses that overwhelmingly go RED in the GE.

[onenote]

122. I'm curious where you got your data for, say, Virginia - where there is no party registration

I have lived in, and voted in, Virginia, almost all of my life and there is no registration by party. So I'm not sure how you made your calculations for Virginia. Which calls into question how you made your calculations generally.

However, if your data -dubious as it may be - shows anything, it is that Obama is the stronger candidate since he attracts more indies than HRC and attracting indies is the key to winning the election.

[jgraz]

127. Oh sweet jesus. Somebody wake me up when this horseshit is over

Preferably after the pizzas have been delivered.

[Lochloosa]

128. Infer all the fuck you want.

How many DELEGATES does Hillary have?

Just asking.

[undeterred]

131. How many Rush Limbaugh votes did she get in PA and TX?

A few million... But who's counting?

[NJSecularist]

132. Obama has gotten Rush Limbaugh votes all primary season. n/t

[undeterred]

136. Never heard of Limbaugh telling people to vote for anyone but Clinton.

[Kittycat]

134. Only if you throw the rules out of the window and make up your own.

:crazy:

[lojasmo]

135. Where's Minnesota? My vote doesn't count? EOM