Proof That Obama Is The Better Candidate

[Max_powers94]

1,978 Obama

1,780 Clinton

[FrenchieCat]

1. I believe that it is now 1980 to 1780.....

and yes. The proof is in the pudding.

success lies in winning.

[Max_powers94]

2. thanks for the update

[Cheap_Trick]

9. mmmmm pudding

[Perry Logan]

3. It proves nothing of the sort.

[lojasmo]

5. That he has won the primary? Yes it does.

A primary win makes one the defacto better candidate.

[ProSense]

4. More proof

Hillary's new hero/savior:

[NJSecularist]

6. That is not proof of anything.

Obama has assembled that delegate difference entirely through low-turnout caucuses.

[Max_powers94]

7. Hillary ignored caucuses!!!!!!!

[ProSense]

8. "Obama has assembled that delegate difference entirely through low-turnout caucuses." Complete BS

While You Were Sleeping

May 27, 2008 2:56 PM

Sen. Barack Obama's seemingly insurmountable lead definitively was built up in February, whilst Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, was busy lending her campaign money, saying goodbye to her campaign manager, and otherwise running a not-so-hot campaign.

Talal Alkhatib of the ABC News Political Unit crunched the numbers, and here's the breakdown.

February 9:

Louisiana primary - Obama nets 12 pledged delegates over Clinton.

Nebraska caucuses - Obama nets eight.

Washington caucuses - Obama nets 26.

Virgin Islands caucuses - Obama nets three.

February 10:

Maine caucuses - Obama nets six.

February 12, Potomac Primaries:

Maryland primary - Obama nets 14.

Virginia primary - Obama nets 25.

Washington DC primary - Obama nets nine.

February 19:

Hawaii caucuses - Obama nets eight.

Wisconsin primary - Obama nets 10.

February contests gave Obama net 121 delegates over Clinton.

She currently trails him by 159 pledged delegates, and 203 delegates total.

Who knows where we'd be today if Clinton had had a post-Super Tuesday strategy.

Ready on Day 67.

(emphasis added)

Notice the equal number of primaries and caucuses?

Contest won: Obama 33, Hillary 18

She lost!

[GoesTo11]

10. February doesn't count

It's not Hillary's fault she took a hiatus after Super Tuesday.

[NJSecularist]

11. Notice how all the February 5th caucuses were left out?

Certainly not a coincidence, right? :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[ProSense]

12. Are you pretending to be ignorant? Contests Obama won Feb 5

Primaries:

Connecticut
Delaware
Illinois
Georgia
Alabama
Missouri
Utah

Caucuses:
Alaska
Colorado
Idaho
Kansas
Minnesota
North Dakota

Primary or caucus, doesn't matter: Obama won.

[NJSecularist]

13. Sherlock, look at how many caucus delegates he received on Feb 5 as compared to Hillary.

It really isn't that hard to understand.

Obama has a 200 delegate lead because of low-turnout caucuses. Period. End of story.

[ProSense]

14. Holmes, There is a word for that:

winning.

No matter how you spin it:

Obama has won 16 caucuses and 17 primaries, a total of 33.

Hillary has won only 16 primaries and 2 caucuses.

[NJSecularist]

15. Tell me how many more delegates Obama has won due to low-turnout caucuses.

Not just after February 5th.


Total.

[ProSense]

16. Your point is stupid. His total is based on all the contests won: all 33.

Hillary lost, give up the stupid arguments.

[NJSecularist]

17. Why are you avoiding my question?

[ProSense]

18. Why are you avoiding reality? n/t

[NJSecularist]

19. Tell me how many more delegates Obama has won due to low-turnout caucuses.

Not just after February 5th.

Total.

[ProSense]

20. Here:

Obama: 1980

Hillary: 1780

You do the math.

Now, is Hillary winning or losing?

[NJSecularist]

21. Tell me how many more delegates Obama has won due to low-turnout caucuses.

Care not to dodge my question?

[Occam Bandage]

22. Tons. Guess Hillary should have contested them. Dumb politicians don't get the White House.

[habitual]

23. hahaha, i guess Hillary had no idea these 'low turnout' caucuses

were important????

jeeez. she blew it.

[Bensthename]

24. So Hillary ignored caucuses, that shows bad leadership and judgment..

Similar instances happen in the real world, she cant say well, I didn't plan for that so that doesn't count..

[Bensthename]

25. .

duper

[ProSense]

27. Here:

Obama: 1980

Hillary: 1780

You do the math.

Now, is Hillary winning or losing?


Your point is stupid. There is no such thing as "low-turnout caucuses." About one million people participated in the Texas caucuses (that's three times the number of people who voted in the WV primary) and nearly 240K (nearly 60K more than the Rhode Island primary) in the Iowa caucuses.

Shall we continue?

[NJSecularist]

28. Tell me how many more delegates Obama has won due to caucuses.

Iowa and Texas are two exceptions. The rest of the caucuses have been remarkably low-turnout.

Please answer my question instead of dodging it. Thanks.

[ProSense]

29. "Iowa and Texas are two exceptions" LOL! "The rest of the caucuses have been remarkably low-turnout"

Link(s)?

[NJSecularist]

30. Here

http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2008_Primaries.htm

Look at Alaska, Nebraska, Colorado, Minnesota and others for the truth.

Now how about answering my question instead of dodging it?

[ProSense]

32. Colorado had 120K and Minnesota 206K (more than the RI primary)

Your argument is stupid. The caucuses, even by those numbers, represent millions of people, and their numbers are not factored into Hillary's bogus popular vote argument.

On the strength of primaries, Obama is ahead in every metric, including the only one that counts: delegates.

[NJSecularist]

33. Look at the turnout %.

Rhode Island is a much smaller state than both of the states you listed.

Now how about answering my question instead of dodging it? Could you be any more dishonest?

[ProSense]

34. Hillary has based her argument on a spectacular showing in WV.

If she wants to argue number of people, count them all. Who cares about the size of the state?

This is a delegate battle, and Hillary lost. Get used to it.

[NJSecularist]

35. Tell me how many more delegates Obama has won due to low-turnout caucuses.

Care to answer my question that I've asked you for the 51st time?

[PseudoIntellect]

31. That cheater! He planned for the caucuses!

I think we know which candidate has the better campaign put together for the fall.

[Secret_Society]

26. Terrible point

There are plenty of electability arguments for Obama (though I don't buy them), but the delegate count does not.

1) The GE does not have caucus because they are ridiculous (I believe, 95% of Obama's delegate lead cam from low turnout caucuses)
2) The GE does not weight certain districts differently because of had they voted in the past
3) The GE has 51 winner take all contests, no proportionality

As Gallup explored today, Hillary's claims of electability based on the primaries popular vote and electoral distribution is much more cogent.