Jonathan Alter's lack of brain problem
by Jerome Armstrong, Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 01:07:07 PM EST
It amazes me how many inaccurate articles and blog posts state that Clinton 'just can't win' the pledged-delegate battle. Well guess what? Neither can Obama! It takes a deep level of self-deception to believe that Obama, or Clinton, having a lead in the overall total of pledged delegates, despite failing to get to the level of the number needed to secure the nomination, is secure the nomination. For Obama especially, who could wind up with 50 more delegates than Clinton. So what! That means he wins despite falling short? What nonsense.
In particular, Those like Jonathan Alter stand out. Clinton, he dreams, could win 16 states in a row, from here on out, and she still won't win. Alter has really become an village idiot for Obama; he needs to just stop-- somone put him out to pasture. Where have I overlooked the nominating rules that state that the pledged delegate lead is enough to secure the nomination? We all know that the selection of the delegates, in many of these states, is highly undemocratic and at times, downright offensive in its methodology of exclusive politics.
As far as the rules go, there is no indication at all that a pledged delegate lead should mean anything more than a bunch of other quasi-measurements that could be used to secure the nomination via super-delegates. Why not the popular vote? Why not who won the most votes among Democrats alone? Hell, why not just opt for the Electoral Vote?!?! I don't know, but I am sick of reading from idiots that say they do, and can't want to tell.
Who knows how this will wind up, but I'll tell you this much, the ones who say its finished are the ones who are kidding themselves and trying to pull a big lie on everyone else.
Here's my predictions:
Ohio: Clinton wins by double-digits in Ohio, +12. This is huge, and out on a limb. You cannot lose Ohio as a Democrat and expect to win the White House in 2008. If Obama is not able to garner more than 40% of the white vote in Ohio, it means he's got big electability problems. Delegate-wise, Clinton gets more but so what.
Rhode Island: Clinton wins easily, + 9. RI is a lot like MA, and we know how that turned out. Clinton would need to turn in a 20% route to gain an extra delegate, she won't.
Vermont: Obama +12. I love that socialist state, best skiing in the land. If he can make it +13, he'll gain an extra delegate.
Texas: Clinton +2. I wish I didn't have to predict this state. I'm going on a hunch that the latino vote is higher than that black vote. If that turns out to be the opposite, than it's Obama who's likely going to win the state. Delegate-wise, Obama still should come out with a handful of a lead.
The skinny on it all is if Clinton wins TX and OH, it further solidifies the notion that the super-delegates are going to glue these two candidates together for the general election.