Obama Wins 55% to 45% At the Nevada Party Convention!!!

[slinkerwink]

Obama flips Clinton's Nevada win; captures more national delegates

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama succeeded in driving more supporters to the Nevada state convention than his opponent U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, who had won the state in the Jan. 19 caucuses. Obama essentially reversed Clinton's lead from the caucuses, capturing 55 percent of the state delegates to Clinton's 45 percent.

The heavy turnout earned Obama one more delegate to the national convention, than previously expected based on the caucus results.

The final tally: Obama won 14 national delegates and Clinton won 11 national delegates. Under the caucus results, Obama was expected to win 13 national delegates to Clinton's 12. Although Clinton won the caucuses, Obama out-performed her in rural Nevada and Washoe County.

link: http://blogs.rgj.com/inside-nevada-politics/2008/05/obama-flips-clintons-nevada-win.html

[anonymous171]

1. Awesome!

:kick:

[BlooInBloo]

2. Woot!

[cali]

3. Excellent.

yet another delegate.

[slinkerwink]

4. he just keeps on gaining these delegates!

[MissWaverly]

5. over and over again, he's run a better campaign

if you can't run a campaign then you don't have the leadership skills to be prez

[slinkerwink]

8. and that is precisely the reason why he's winning, and will be the nominee.

[MissWaverly]

14. yes, that's my opinion as well

[rug]

6. It looks like the Convention decided it.

[ellisonz]

7. GOBAMA!

[Occam Bandage]

9. Hey, Hillary guys? This is called "running an effective campaign." Might want to try it.

[slinkerwink]

11. Organization is the key here

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[slinkerwink]

12. Great snark!

[anonymous171]

13. Delegates are how you win.

[RazBerryBeret]

15. hey, I thought delegates were what mattered,

at least that's what Clinton said a few months ago....hmmm...

[K Gardner]

49. Silly, you missed the Conference Call last night !

[RazBerryBeret]

86. guess so...

it changes so much it makes my head spin.

[jgraz]

16. Now winning by the rules is "back-door" politics

Remind me again: WHY are we supposed to respect Hillary supporters?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[anonymous171]

20. Well, maybe the FL state party should've followed the rules.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[anonymous171]

48. gb2hillaryclintonforum. You are beyond reasoning.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

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

[sniffa]

66. They'll be forced there soon enough

Good fucking riddance.

[Occam Bandage]

64. ...it's racist to suggest parties should follow the rules they agreed to?

:wtf:

[TLM]

76. Tell us all how EXACTLY the situation in FL is like 2000?

Aside from it being a state party nomination election and not a federal presidential election, which means different rules and laws apply... please tell us exactly how they are the same.

[avenger64]

81. Disenfrachised democratic voters in a key and populous state.

n/t

[TLM]

83. So just like Kevin James, you can spew talking points....

but have no fucking clue about the details of the subject. Just scream the buzz word over and over like a parrot.


Thanks for proving my point.... and feel free to actually try to provide an answer.

We can all use a good laugh.

[anonymous171]

85. HE WAS AN APPEASER!

:rofl:

[Zhade]

97. Try learning the most basic political facts - it's not disenfranchisement.

NT!

[roguevalley]

they cheated and broke the rules. they will get seated after suitable

punishment. you don't reward people for breaking the rules. as for shillery, she wants all the votes for those two states even though obama played by the rules and took his name off both. she only did one. she is a cheat and you are sad.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

54. North Carolina followed the rules and we're glad we did

and I can bet that all Obama supporters are glad!

And we had a PRIMARY ELECTION, not a CAUCUS.

[TLM]

70. "just like the GOP did in 2000." BZZZZZTTTT Pathetic and wrong....

Did the GOP move Florida's 2000 elections ahead of the rest of the country in direct violation of the rules, causing their votes not to be included in the results? If not, then you're lying when you claim they are the same situations.

This meme from the Hillary followers is pitiful and shows how weak and desperate she, and they, are.

Hillary supported... read it again HILLARY SUPPORTED FL and MI having their delegates rejected when she thought she could win without them.

She, and her followers, only changed their tune when it was clear she was losing.

But hey feel free to prove me wrong by linking to hillary or her supporters ranting about how unfair and wrong the DNC was not to include MI and FL, before super tuesday.

[avenger64]

77. They saw themselves as more significant than friggin' ...

... South Carolina (where I am at the moment, and I still agree), and wanted to impress that point on the Democratic Party, probably never dreaming that Dean and the DNC would go so harsh as to disenfranchise them. Especially in light of Florida 2000. And so the Democrats decide that a southern state that they have no prayer of winning in November is more important than Florida, 4th most populous state and key swing state as well.

But it's not done - Obama then actually uses overwhelmingly Republican SC as a springboard! And of course this is going to happen, as 50 percent of the democratic electorate there is black.

What a scam. Nader!

[TLM]

82. So you feel south carolina shouldn't be counted.... gotcha...

Southern states that go for Obama don't count.

"probably never dreaming that Dean and the DNC would go so harsh as to disenfranchise them."

So in other words, they thought they would get away with breaking the rules... and they were wrong.

"as 50 percent of the democratic electorate there is black. "

OK so hillary followers don't think votes from black dems should count.... how very honest of you.

[avenger64]

91. We don't do so good with logic do we?

South Carolina shouldn't be more important than a larger state - I never in anyway inferred that their votes shouldn't count at all. Nice try, if you were trying something that slick on purpose, but I have a (darker) feeling that maybe you are just suffering from reading miscomprehension.

"they thought they would get away with breaking the rules" - this is the last time I address this. Rules should be flexible - our party and country got screwed in 2000 by an overly stringent (and flat dishonest) application of electoral rules.

"OK so hillary followers don't think votes from black dems should count." When did I say they shouldn't count? I didn't, as that would make no damned sense since in point of fact they did.

Take logic 101 if you ever make it to college - they'll teach you about the various forms of implication - converse, contrapositive, inverse, and obverse. They don't all have equivalent truth values. Your post is scary for it's illogic.

[RazBerryBeret]

93. the had ample warning of exactly what

Dean and the DNC would do. they had it in writing. They chose to gamble on it---they were trying to get away with it.
check out this clip if you have any doubts....FL Sen. Steven Geller makes it clear that he know what is going on....and acts like a petulant child.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs-SAYaJKN4

[pnorman]

87. "disenfranchising Democratic voters in FL, just like the GOP did in 2000."

WTF??? Do you really mean that???? How much of that issue do you actually comprehend? And can we judge anything else you may have to offer here on DU by that ridiculous assertion?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31074-2005Jan23.html

pnorman

[avenger64]

98. Great picture - just like the swarms of Obama supporters who ...

... back him no matter what - Florida 2008, Florida 2000 - the more things change, the more they stay the same.

[pnorman]

101. Are you REALLY that clueless???

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

pnorman
PS:
On edit: Here's something else to chew on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gq7L_snl9ig

[Zhade]

96. I don't respect them. Anyone who supports a proven liar like her can go fuck themselves.

NT!

[K Gardner]

18. Elementary Civics. This is the principle on which our REPUBLIC was founded. Proportional

representation. Study up !

[cali]

22. bullshit. He's won more primaries and more of the popular vote

queen hilly and more pledged delegates. He ran an effective campaign. She ran a disasterous one. He played by the rules and beat Madame Entitled. Deal with it instead of making crap up.

[jgraz]

23. How many more weeks of this do we have?

Seriously, this is just depressing. I thought Democrats were supposed to be smarter than this.

[cali]

37. your ketchup recipe turned out great.

but I lost it, can you give it to me again? Oh, and we have a little over 2 more weeks of this to go and yeah, it looks like dems can be mighty stupid.

[jgraz]

67. Here 'tis. I put it in my journal if you ever need to find it again.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/jgraz/81

[dchill]

38. Democrats ARE smarter that this...

The object of your scorn (avenger64) is rooting for Nader. Since, you know, Hillary can't win. avenger64 is a spoiler.

[avenger64]

43. Here you go, half-wit:

When you include Michigan and Florida, and take the popular vote from primaries, Clinton is ahead:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Popular Vote (w/FL & MI)** 16,680,827 47.6% 16,710,298 47.7% Clinton +29,471 +0.08%

As to whether he's won more primaries, no one was arguing that, half-wit II. The point is, she won all of the big blue states except Illinois, and he's won a bunch of less populous states, many or which (e.g. Deep South) he has absolutely no chance of winning in November.

[anonymous171]

45. And if you ignore caucuses. Oh, and finangle the MI numbers.

[avenger64]

63. That's 'finagle', there school-boy.

n/t

[jgraz]

I love it when a mathtard corrects someone's typing.

:rofl:

[tammywammy]

51. And you're ignoring caucus voters!

They do count you know.

[avenger64]

56. Take your ritalin and look closely at my original post,

... I noted she is ahead in the popular vote in the primaries. My objection was that Obama did the end-run on direct election by making deals with party insiders, instead of proving himself in primaries, where she leads.

That was what was in contention.

[tammywammy]

75. I'm perfectly fine, no need to assume I need ritalin

I haven't demeaned you in any way and I would appreciate it if you didn't attack me like that again in the future.


So what if she's ahead in your scenario of the "popular vote." I don't think an accurate picture of the popular vote would completely leave out all caucus states. Obama shouldn't be punished in your scenario because Hillary was unable to get her supporters out to caucus.

[TLM]

80. she is ahead in the popular vote in the primaries.... just not in THE COUNTRY

so now only primaries count, so disenfranchise all the caucus states, that followed thw rules, so Queen Hilly can win.

Pathetic.

[Lerkfish]

105. um, you do realize you're being clobbered by logic and math, right?

none of us have to say anything, really.

[jgraz]

62. Jeez, if we're half-wits, what does that make you? Do they make fractions that small?

I'll be generous and round you up to, let's say, a 17th-wit. And a 100% bullshit artist.

Here's the whole story you're either pretending not to know about or are too stupid to comprehend:

If you count all valid contests and include estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 16,438,697 / Clinton 15,734,865 = Obama +703,832 +2.1%

--

If you count all valid contests but exclude the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 16,104,613 / Clinton 15,511,003 = Obama +593,610 +1.8%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the State of Florida, and include estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 17,014,911 / Clinton 16,605,851 = Obama +409,060 +1.2%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the State of Florida, but exclude estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 16,680,827 / Clinton 16,381,989 = Obama +298,838 +0.8%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the States of Florida and Michigan (giving Obama the uncommitted vote) and include estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 17,253,079 / Clinton 16,934,160 = Obama +318,919 +0.9%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the States of Florida and Michigan (giving Obama the uncommitted vote) but exclude estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 16,918,995 / Clinton 16,710,298 = Obama +208,697 +0.6%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the States of Florida and Michigan (giving Hillary all her votes but Obama zero votes) and include estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 17,014,911 / Clinton 16,934,160 = Obama +80,751 +0.22%

--

If you count all valid contests AND the States of Florida and Michigan (giving Hillary all her votes but Obama zero votes) but exclude estimates of the caucuses that don't reveal popular vote totals (IA, NV, ME, WA):

Obama 16,680,827 / Clinton 16,710,298 = Clinton +29,471 +0.08%

--

Ah ha! Found one!! So, clearly Clinton is the popular vote winner. Of course, only if you go wildly out of your way to construct a counting scenario that excludes some states and distorts voter intent in others.

Oh yeah, and one other little detail: none of this matters at all. Because the race is, and always has been, about delegates. Clinton and her campaign have said so over and over again -- there are hundreds of clips of "this is about delegates" floating on the interwebs. If this had been about the popular vote, the campaign would have been different. The candidates would only have spent time in big states. They would have tried to rack up their popular vote totals.

There's a great response by Brad G. on MyDD today:

Who the hell cares about the popular vote? As Charlie Cook is fond of saying, "I doubt Al Gore takes much solace in winning the popular vote in 2000. Many times a football team gains more yards than its opponent, yet loses on an important technicality called points scored."

If yards gained were the metric used to determine the winner of a football game, then obviously a football team would think differently about what to do on fourth down (and the other downs). Similarly, if total votes were used to determine the winner of a primary, the candidates would have spent more time in more populous states such as CA, NY, IL, etc.

Right on, and no shit. I can't even begin to comprehend the amount of intellectual dishonesty it takes to push this Hillary-Popular-Vote lie. But, we have to counter it, because some in the press are buying it, and not many people are going to take the time to look up the numbers I posted here.

Of course, if Hillary's camp really wants to make a big deal out of this, then Obama and his campaign have one logical, and just as well-supported, response:

Obama leads the popular vote by 703,832.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/17/112814/315/246/517409

[avenger64]

That's because, as I made clear in the original post, ...

.... caucuses are the 'back-door' - where Obama doesn't have to submit to a direct election. The primary more closely reflects the GE - see, that was the point, school-boy. And don't forget how many of those surplus votes he picked up in places like NC, SC, and the rest of the deep South, where he has no prayer of winning in November. Meanwhile she stomped him in California, New York, New Jersey, MA, FL (where both were on the ballot), and Ohio - the biggest blue states and the key swing states.

[jgraz]

Once again, your selective memory is failing you

I'm not going to even bother pointing out all the convenient cherry picking you're doing. You either know full well that you're bullshitting us or you're too dumb to understand a rational counter-argument. So I'll just say this:

Obama won more states
Obama won more primaries
Obama won more caucuses
Obama won more red states
Obama won more blue states
Obama won more swing states
Obama won more votes
Obama won more delegates

Obama will be our nominee. Get used to it or go away and let the adults talk.

[Melissa G]

99. Excellent post and excellent summation.

:rofl: Hard to be clearer after such exhaustive set up yet, I imagine... as I scroll down... some folks might still be willingly confused about these facts, just as they appear to be confused and or misinformed about the dynamics of the 2000 sElection.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

110. actually i'll disagree with you 'slightly' since she has run a good campaign

Only in the wrong style, i think an article about Obama's fundraising explained it the best

What’s amazing,” says Peter Leyden of the New Politics Institute, “is that Hillary built the best campaign that has ever been done in Democratic politics on the old model—she raised more money than anyone before her, she locked down all the party stalwarts, she assembled an all-star team of consultants, and she really mastered this top-down, command-and-control type of outfit. And yet, she’s getting beaten by this political start-up that is essentially a totally different model of the new politics.”

Her overall behavior tho have been disasterous, and the above started falling apart after Super Tuesday

[roguevalley]

34. amazing how someone does things by the rules and wins and then

people say he cheated. feh!

[TLM]

39. caucuses don't count....

because hillary isn't winning them, they are unfair.

[TheDoorbellRang]

44. Better to come thru the back door than break in thru a window

That seems to be Hillary's M.O.

[Cha]

50. You're so full of lies and misinformation..you must

be a whining hilary, bitter dead ender. Your mistake was believing a known liar or are you just a sponge?

[avenger64]

57. Where's the lie?

Point to it.

[TLM]

88. You said it was just like the 2000 GOP disenfranchisement of Florida....

That's an obvious and blatant lie. The two situations are nothing alike, beyond taking place in the same state.

[Maria Wr]

109. This is possibly a repug troll, looking to sow seeds of

hatred and division. That's what they do best, look at the mess Iraq is in.

[SoxFan]

65. The Patriots were "virtually even" with the Giants

How'd that work out?

[Beacool]

92. Yep, that's how it was done.

Nader, write-in her name or simply not vote for the top of the ticket, sounds fine with me.

[GoesTo11]

102. Sore loser.

[Liberal Gramma]

103. Have you signed up for remedial math yet

Looks like you could use some extra tuition.

[Aloha Spirit]

17. Man. He also picked up the Kansas add-on (as expected). On fire.

[Maribelle]

21. Ha ha ha - - How long ago was it when Obama's followers were screaming Hillary better not ...

try stealing Obama's delegates?

All those screaming hissyfits for nothing.

[slick8790]

24. Obama didn't "steal" anything.

More of his state delegates showed up to the state convention. Somehow it's obama's fault that hillary's state delegates don't show up when it matters?

[Maribelle]

26. I didn't say he did. What I said was his supporters were screaming that Hillary was planning this.

Here we go again with an Obama follower twisting what I said.

[slick8790]

31. There is a difference between what Team Hillary was proposing and this.

This is the simple result of Hillary's state delegates not caring enough to show up. What Hillary and her ilk were suggesting was a campaign to try and take Obama's pledged delegates to the convention won in contests. If you were not aware, no pledged delegates were sent to the convention from Nevada before the state convention. It's very different, and if you choose not to admit that, you're being disingenuous.

[roguevalley]

41. her ass team didn't get it that you only get part delegates. penn

said they get all of california if they win. he was too stupid and arrogant to even know the rules. and, which genius hired him?

[Maribelle]

52. erm - - I have posted over and over that Nevada tried to tell MSM since the first caucus ...

the delegates would not be 'pledged' until the state convention.

Nevada told us MSM was reporting the delegates incorrectly.

Nevada told us Navada's delegates would remain 'soft' until the state convention.

And this is true of other caucus states as well, that their delegates are not 'pledged' until the state convention. Take Texas, for instance. Their caucus delegates still remain 'soft' not 'pledged'.

[TLM]

90. Nevada told us MSM was reporting the delegates incorrectly.

yeah turns out the numbers were even better for Obama.... how devious of the MSM to prop hillary up like that.

[anonymous171]

32. No. People were worried about Hillary POACHING Obama's delegates.

Her delegates just didn't show up.

[Maribelle]

55. Poaching????? Horse hockey. Hillary was extremely clear about caucus delegates.

[Aloha Spirit]

72. Hill wasn't talking about caucus delegates.

April 4, 2008

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is unlikely to catch rival Barack Obama in pledged delegates, hinted Thursday that she hoped to persuade a few to back her instead of him.

"There is no such thing as a pledged delegate," Clinton said in California, where she has been fundraising.

Both Clinton and Obama planned to address the state convention of the North Dakota Democratic Party on Friday, where delegates to this summer's national convention will be allocated. Obama crushed Clinton in the state's Feb. 5 presidential caucuses, 61 percent to 36 percent.

The former first lady said she was traveling to North Dakota to thank her supporters and delegates -- and wooing Obama supporters was fair game.

While the DNC has no rules requiring pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses to vote for the candidate, the people who serve as pledged delegates are selected by the campaigns who won them and loyalty is a key qualification.

Obama currently leads in the delegate count, 1,634-1,500, according to The Associated Press.

[TLM]

89. You really do have problems with reality.....

"What I said was his supporters were screaming that Hillary was planning this."


No, Hill was saying pledge delegates can change their votes at the convention... they can switch sides after the fact. She said nothing about having more of her supporters turn up at state caucuses than Obama in order to get more delegates in the first place.

Do try to keep up.

[cali]

25. sour, sour grapes.

too bad. He beat the queen fair and square. She sucks at leadership.

[Maribelle]

30. I think you've misread the 'Ha ha ha'.

Not surprising one bit, however. :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[dsc]

29. yes I have vivid memories of screaming fits about the Clinton campaign

when they might do the very same thing. Over and over we heard that it would be an evil plot. Now apparently it is perfectly fine.

[Maribelle]

35. Exactly.

[anonymous171]

40. The HRC campaign was talking about POACHING DELEGATES

In this case, her delegates just didn't show up for the convention.

[Maribelle]

59. Wrong again.Hillary was extremely clear about caucus delegates. Y'all freakin didn't want to listen

[anonymous171]

71. But we weren't freaking out about Obama's delegates not showing up.

[tammywammy]

58. There's a clear difference between poaching delegates and delegates just not showing up

[Occam Bandage]

68. There's a big difference between poaching pledged delegates

and actually making sure your delegates show up to the convention.

[dsc]

78. no they were talking about exactly this

and we heard chapter and verse about how evil it was.

[TLM]

94. So it should be easy to provide a link....

show me a link to someone ranting about hillary getting more supporters to show up at state caucuses, and not ranting about her trying to get established delegates to switch sides after the fact.

I'll wait.....

[Occam Bandage]

104. So let's see a link then. I don't recall seeing anyone say, "OMG what if Hillary has her delegates

show up to the convention and Obama doesn't?"

[MattBaggins]

108. Little teeny tiny difference

Hillary camp was talking about trying to get Obama delegates to switch. In this case her delegates just decided to hit the snooze button and sleep in. I really would have thought that those "hard working white Americans" would have gotten out of bed if they feel so strongly about supporting her.

[Scurrilous]

27. Great news.

:thumbsup:

[dchill]

28. To the victor...

go the spoils. :)

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[featherman]

36. I like our chances in NV this year - Obama was very strong throughout the state

Usually Dems have to win Clark county big to overcome the GOP advantage in the rest of the state. Obama will perform better than Gore or Kerry both in Clark and around the state this time. Bank it!

[Cha]

42. OBAMA WON NEVADA!!

Go Democratic Caucus Goers!! :bounce: :patriot: :kick: :party: :patriot:

[MaineDem]

46. It's all about who shows up! Congrats to the Obama people for doing a better job.

We'll know in two weeks how much better Obama will do in Maine. I bet he picks up a few more delegates from the results of our convention.

[NatBurner]

53. texas is next month

and i'm austin bound-
so far, i'm LOVING being a first-time delegate

good news tho

[Zachstar]

61. Hell yes!!!

[sniffa]

69. K&R

I love the delusional Hillbots on this thread.

Yeah, suck on it!

[Beregond2]

73. Those damn

latte-drinking rural Nevadans!

[Oilwellian]

84. ROFL...the visual of your post made me bust out laughing

So sweet....so succinct. :D

[Zachstar]

74. Clinton Can't even hold onto her own wins, The campaign is DEEP in debt, etc...

ITS OVER!!!

[medeak]

79. glad it was in Reno

not certain of outcome if in Vegas...and Vegas was so unorganized anyway.

[Zhade]

95. Yep, she's toast.

Sweeeet.

[Zachstar]

100. Very Much So!

[crankychatter]

106. Wow.... that's way cool - k/r - n/t

.

[Colobo]

107. Gobamaaaaa!