MyDD :: Confessions Of An Outlier

Confessions Of An Outlier

by Todd Beeton, Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:30:56 AM EST

In the end, Zogby and Suffolk U both had Clinton by 10% and therefore win the PA poll sweepstakes. As for PPP, whose turnout model resulted in an Obama lead of 3% as recently as this weekend, tonight they're the ones who get to eat their words and swallow their pride. And I have to say, they do so with wit and integrity over at their blog (really, every pollster should have one.)

First off, please do not call us or e-mail us and tell us we suck! We are well aware, and it does not feel good.

It's pretty easy, based on the exit polls, to see where we went wrong. We had the black vote at 18% when it turned out to be 14-15%, and we had the under 45 vote at 41% when it turned out to be 31%.

I reweighted the results from our final Pennsylvania poll to those figures for race and age, and the result of our poll was flipped- Hillary leading 49-46. Assume she pulled 60% of the undecideds and that gives her the 52-48 lead that the extrapolation from the original exit polls does.

Now, this may have been written before Hillary's lead was revealed to be as large as 10% so I'm still curious to see how they explain a 13 point differential but as Tom Jensen writes, PPP has actually been quite good overall this cycle and this result should not give the outfit a black eye. I assume they'll do far better in NC, which is PPP's home turf. Of course, if they wanted to blend in with the crowd there they haven't done a very good job. Their latest poll has Barack Obama up 25% in NC, a lead that is 10% greater than RCP's 4-poll Ave. and 16% larger than Survey USA's latest.

Tags: 2008 presidential election, democratic nomination, pennsylvania primary, public policy polling (all tags)

Permalink :: 63 Comments :: Post a Comment

Zogby still has a black eye as far as (none / 0)

I am concerned. They biffed the 2004 election big time. I will still bash them every chance I get.

However I will no longer regard PPP as right either. I got burned by them...

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:33:24 AM EST

She Now has the Lead in the Popular Vote! /nt (none / 0)

by internetstar on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 07:30:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary's lead is only 9% (none / 0)

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

CNN's numbers don't match the actual report from PABOE.

1% is trivial in the long run, but from a narrative and superdel perspective, its not what Clinton needed.

by beermeister on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:34:23 AM EST

Using the most recent CNN results (none / 0)

the race is 9.404%

using a vote total of 2296691
with Obama getting 1040312
and Clinton 1256379

Let us be precise...

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:37:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think the PA State Dept. (none / 0)

trumps CNN.

Depending on how that last 1% of the vote comes in, this could be an 8 point margin when it's all said and done.

by Angry White Democrat on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:39:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think the PA State Dept. (none / 0)

Most of the remaining votes are in Philly and its suburbs, which will close a gap a little, but not enouch to get it to 8% (going by the present results reported by the state, not CNN). There just aren't that many votes remaining. Still, there's some comfort to be had in the fact that Clinton's victory will not be double-digits (although very close).

by DPW on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:47:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Interestingly (none / 0)

The votes that are still out are in Obama counties, Philadelphia 3% of precincts (county went 65.18%-34.82% [if the outstanding precincts are perfectly inline with the results Obama gains 4034 on the margin and 13294 votes to the total]), Chester 9% of precincts (county went 55.39%-44.61% [if the outstanding precincts are prefectly inline with the results seen Obama gains 740 votes on the margin and 6861 votes are added to the total]) and Delaware 3% of precincts (county went 55.38%-44.62% [if the outstanding precincts are inline with the results Obama gains 308 votes on the margin and the total increases 2862).

Thus based on these predictions...

The total difference would be: 210,985
Out of a total of: 2,319,708

The percentage of the margin would be: 9.10%

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:05:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

99.07% in now per the State Dept website (none / 0)

Clinton 1,234,547 54.3%
Omaba 1,041,136 45.8%

That's an 8.5% margin, all Obama has to do is net a few more votes and it rounds down to 8.

by Angry White Democrat on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:10:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh they updated (none / 0)

I was using CNN as they say where the outstanding precincts are.

I do like my math model though.

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:25:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Also going by how the media rounds numbers (none / 0)

that is an 8% win as they round each candidates number to the nearest integer. So according to the media that would be 8%.

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:28:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's lead is only 9% (none / 0)

But, with corporate news, what really happens in the end doesn't matter, just whatever their initial narrative was.

Two hundred thousand uncounted votes for Obama could turn up tomorrow and they'd still call it a double digit win for Hillary.

Like Bush and Hillary, were they to ever admit a mistake their crepe paper credibility would become wet tissue paper.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:06:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Confessions Of An Outlier (none / 0)

Thank goodness that's over, on to NC and Indiana.

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:39:59 AM EST

NC is why MSM is starting up the Race (none / 0)

thing with Bill again.
Obama is so lucky to have them do a large amount
of his shit.

by internetstar on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:39:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Confessions Of An Outlier (none / 0)

I wonder how much Rush's operation Chaos will have an effect in NC. Apparently, Republicans had to re-register by April 11th to be allowed to vote.

by LordMike on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:42:48 AM EST

Undeniably True (none / 0)

Tonight, Hillary Clinton lost her last, best chance to make significant inroads in the pledged delegate count.

The only surprising result from Pennsylvania is that in a state considered tailor-made for Hillary Clinton that she was expected to win, Barack Obama was able to improve his standing among key voter groups since the Ohio primary. For example, among white voters, Obama narrowed the gap with Clinton by six points. Among voters over 60, he nearly cut the gap in half, from 41 points to 24 points. And Independent voters - the group that will decide the general election and a group Obama is particularly strong with - were not able to vote in Not surprisingly, she led by as much as 25 points in the weeks leading up to the election.

As he has done in every state, Barack Obama campaigned hard to pick up as much support and as many delegates as possible and was able to stave off Clinton from achieving a significant pledged delegate gain from Pennsylvania.

The bottom line is that the Pennsylvania outcome does not change dynamic of this lengthy primary. While there were 158 delegates at stake there, there are fully 157 up for grabs in the Indiana and North Carolina primaries on May 6.

PS...It's estimated Clinton gained on Obama only 8-11 delegates in PA. Not much for 6 weeks hard work.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:43:05 AM EST

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Not much for 6 weeks of hard work? Funny, cause it's a lot more than your candidate got with the same 6 weeks and a lot more money.

by LakersFan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:46:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (2.00 / 1)

You're right. This is great news for Clinton. She only needs 15 more Pennsylvanias to catch Obama in pledged delegates.

by Angry White Democrat on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:51:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (2.00 / 0)

That's just it. It's not a lot more. It's a pittance of what Hillary needs. And it's from a big state she had a monstrous lead in 6 weeks ago when the narrative was that she needed to win by 20-30% in order to gain enough delegates for it to matter.

It's win alright, but just a cosmetic one which will be erased in two weeks after NC and IN. At which point Obama will be another 200 delegates closer to the nomination with Hillary still treading water.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:57:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A football analogy... (2.00 / 0)

Its the 4th Q with 4:00 to go, Hillary is down by 21 and racking up the passing yards but she's scoring FGs instead of TDs...

...and the Obama campaign has Tom Brady...

by beermeister on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:18:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A football analogy... (none / 0)

Or basketball... Hillary's down by 3 baskets with 21 secs left. Every time she scores Obama gets the ball back and she must then send him to the line. Her only hope is that he misses every free throw.

Or bowling....they're both throwing gutter balls. But he's ahead by 31 pins with 1 frame left.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:51:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

I love how Obama supporters try to spin their losses.

by LakersFan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:25:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Hillary's been spinning ever since she lost 11 in a row -- and the nomination with them.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:53:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

No one has won the nomination yet. Maybe you didn't hear that there was a hotly contested Democratic primary in Pennsylvania today.

by LakersFan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:07:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

And now Clinton only needs to win by 71% to 29% in each of the remaining contests to take the pledged delegate lead. I'd be surprised if she wins by that margin in a single state, and her chance of averaging that much of a win overall is zilch. There was a hotly contested election yesterday, in which Clinton needed to actually close the deal and increase her lead in an election, something she doesn't seem capable of doing anywhere. Instead, she drops 6% over 6 weeks and took a handful of delegates. Obama will probably pick up as many new super delegates before the NC and IN election as Clinton gained in pledged delegates tonight, and then he'll wipe out the advantage again in pledged delegated in NC and IN.

Clinton has no chance of taking it at this point, unless something horrible happens to Obama. Clinton is going to make a good fight of it, and good on her for doing so, but she isn't going to be the Dem nominee.

by alephnul on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 06:23:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Okay, so you agree with me that no one has won the nomination yet. That was my entire point.

How about not counting your superdelegates before they hatch? These types of rumors have gotten really old this primary season.

And Obama is not going to win IN.

by LakersFan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:10:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Eh, they're tied in IN at the moment, and if Clinton takes it, it will be the first state that I can think of where she has not performed worse than the polls 2 weeks out. She gets a bump at the end, but I don't think it makes up for what she loses in the weeks before.

One way or the other, IN won't go by more than a few points. The only interesting question will be who has the better distribution in each district and even that will be worth only a few delegates. Clinton might win IN, but there is no way she will win it by enough to counter balance Obama's win in NC. Even if she ekes out a win in IN, Obama will pick up enough in NC to erase (eh, I be conservative) most of Cliton's gain from PA. I'll be flat out shocked if PA + NC + IN net Clinton anything more than 2 delegates total.

On the SDs, I'm just going off of the on-going trend, not the silly rumors.

by alephnul on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:12:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (2.00 / 1)

It's not contested. Hillary won. She won by bleeding 15 points. Who's spinning?

by MuddyWaters on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 06:58:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

8.5 points.

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:09:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Hillary gained 12 delegates on Obama in the largest remaning state. She'll never catch up , and she's in the red. She's so done there's a fork in her back.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:09:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

You keep saying that, yet she's still running.

by LakersFan on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:04:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Yeah. She's still running....on a treadmill.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:17:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

We're just not sure why...

by alephnul on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:13:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Are you really Dick Morris?

Your tagline reminds me of something he'd drag out there.

by reggie44pride on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 06:48:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Only if you're really Karl Rove.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:06:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (2.00 / 1)

And yet Obama couldn't win -- yet again -- in a state. He spent records amount of money which proves -- yet again -- that money is not an ultimate factor. Thankfully pledged delegates are no longer the deciding issue in this race.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 07:31:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Undeniably True (none / 0)

Remember back when Clinton couldn't "win -- yet again," 11 times in a row?

That what decided Obama will be the nominee. Since then it's been a sad and bad game with no realistic hope for Hillary.

And she's about to run out of other people's money to keep playing it.

Face it, Hillary. It's over.

by dback on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:05:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Confessions Of An Outlier (none / 0)

If it's 54-46...

IA, SV, and Quinnipiac all had the margin at 7. They win!

by Jonmac on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:17:06 AM EST

PPP, twice an outlier (none / 0)

They were the Clinton +26 poll on 3/15, which was probably crap.

Then Obama +3 at the end, when no other poll had him leading.

How is it possible to be an outlier, for each candidate, within 4-5 weeks?

Now everyone will probably try to dismiss them in North Carolina, which is perhaps unfair.

by reggie44pride on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:39:29 AM EST

PA Dept of State numbers (none / 0)

PA DOS

* 9,177 out of 9,263 Districts (99.07%) Reporting Statewide *

CLINTON, HILLARY (DEM)
1,234,547 54.3%
OBAMA, BARACK (DEM)
1,041,136 45.8%

still missing some Philly returns

looks like 8.5 to me.

Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity

by NeciVelez on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 07:29:24 AM EST

Is there a difference? (2.00 / 1)

Margin at this point is irrelevant; Clinton did what she needed to -- Obama doesn't get the 4-6% 'win' (read: LOSS) that he so desperately needed. I guess those tens of millions of dollars did little good.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 07:33:16 AM EST

Why margin is not irrelevant (none / 0)

Each state isn't just its own little election. You have to win a majority of something overall.

Yes, of course, he lost Pennsylvania. But he won a bunch of other states.

Unless you think the supers are going to crown her even if she loses the pledged delegates and the popular vote.

by TL on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:23:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why margin is not irrelevant (none / 0)

You're right, margin is not irrelevant. She netted over 215K votes in the state.

The superdelegates will be wondering exactly how it is that Obama will win this election on the backs of upscale liberals and African Americans.

The demos that will be lusted after in the general are Obama's weakest groups.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:15:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why margin is not irrelevant (none / 0)

Conversely, demos will wonder how Clinton can win an election without those groups. The Dems never win via the white vote. Whites vote more for the GOP than they do for Dems.

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:29:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why margin is not irrelevant (none / 0)

Demos = demographics. And I can pretty much guarantee you that she will carry the groups that Obama is carrying. The same can't be said vice versa with Obama.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:43:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why margin is not irrelevant (none / 0)

Um. Why?

Because white working-class women just love John McCain's war-forever platform and his opposition to abortion rights?

As for white working class men - you're quite sure they prefer Hillary to McCain? Because? Because they think she's better qualified to pick up the phone at 3 a.m.?

And if you think Obama has unloaded all the oppo research that's available on the Clintons' post-2000 behavior, you're inhaling too deeply from the bong. Recall - Obama did not bring up the Weathermen pardons - you probably never even heard of them - until Hill brought up Williams Ayers. There is a lot more where that came from - and it would not be fun to see Hill and Bill try their "we're jes' plain folks' routine when the GOP unloads the Marc Rich pardon, the fees that Davos Bill collects to lobby for policies that his wife says she opposes. God knows whether he's kept himself out of another affair the last 8 years. And finally - Hill's negatives are already awfully high. Five more months of this and who knows where they go.

The idea that Hill is a stronger candidate in the general is ... speculative at best.

by TL on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 05:39:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

What she needed to do was get a blow out by double digits (8.5 ain't that) so she could eat into his delegate lead. Now her gains will be erased in a couple of weeks and she's back to square 1.

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:07:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (2.00 / 1)

What she 'needed' to do was get at least a 200K popular vote margin, and she got at least 215K. Percentage margin is irrelevant.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:14:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

The popular vote isn't the measure. It's the delegates. Some states don't count the pop vote. I believe that the DNC is aware of this.

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:32:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (2.00 / 1)

Pledged delegates, once again, will be just one of many metrics that superdelegates may decide their decisions on. Popular vote is another. For those caucus states that don't count the popular vote, state-provided estimates are available.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:49:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

They're not going to look at the pop vote. I'm sorry that you think they will though. It's going to hurt when they Obama is the nominee I imagine.

Will you vote for McCain should that happen?

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:51:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (2.00 / 1)

Of course they will look at the popular vote. I'm sorry if you think they won't, though.

And I'm not engaging in pretty obvious taunting or baiting of you, so please refrain from doing the same to me.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5huRF3 cWlHcz5si9CnwBUQ6S-Ff5QD905NNH81

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:11:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

Sorry. They're not going to base their decision on that. To do so would be to tell the next candidates to simply camp out in the big states and rack up numbers rather than paying attention to small states. They're simply waiting until June so that it can be said that all the states have voted.

All I did was ask a question. Wasn't meant to bait or taunt you. Sorry about that.

My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!

by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:28:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

Well, the superdelegates themselves are saying that it's going to be one of the factors. If you don't take it from them, then I guess I have no hope with you.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:41:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

Well, no.

She needed more like 600,000.

She's going to give a lot of that back on May 5. And the rest of the way is pretty much a wash.

Net - even if you count Florida - a state that Hillary promised the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire she would not, when that was to her benefit - she'll be well behind.

by TL on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 05:42:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is there a difference? (none / 0)

No, she needed to at least 200K to be on track to get the popular vote. KY, WV, PR are not going to be a wash, I assure you.

Net, if you could all the votes, she is actually ahead. But I don't think Michigan should count, in which case she's only behind by around 300K.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 12:04:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

Don't Oregon, South Dakota and Montana count?

Before dismissing them as small states, check the numbers. Oregon has as many delegates as Kentucky. MT and SD together have as many as WV.

And that's why it's a wash the rest of the way.

One point I will concede you is Puerto Rico. Hillary Clinton will win Puerto Rico - and I'll even let you count those votes even though those folks don't send anyone to the electoral college come November.

She's still behind.

by TL on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 01:27:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

I didn't dismiss them I was making the case that the states that I listed will have a net popular vote for Clinton, which is the point that I was making.

And it's not the end of the primary season, so please don't assume that it is.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 01:59:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

I don't get it.

Of course those states will give Clinton more votes. That was assumed by my original comment. The point is there are other states you didn't mention that will give Obama more votes and balance these out. Thus, a wash.

As for the comment - "it's not the end of the primary season" - that I really don't follow. The primaries aren't over today, that's true. There are more on the schedule - and those are the ones we've counted above.

What primaries are you expecting after June 3?

by TL on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 02:16:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

I was referring to the fact that THOSE STATES won't be a wash for her. That's all I said.

And it's not the end of the primary season so you shouldn't be presupposing vote totals based on how you believe the states will play out.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 02:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

So I shouldn't presuppose the vote totals in the states where the demographics favor Obama, but it's OK to presuppose the totals in states where they favor Clinton?

Not so much.

Barring a reversal of some very clear and very reliable trends, these states will vote the way we both expect - making it exceedingly unlikely that Clinton will do much better than break even. The odds of her catching up are vanishingly small.

Whether that means Clinton should drop out obviously depends on your point of view. I think she should - she's run a good, hard race, but I think the results are already in.

I do understand that she will carry on at least through the end of the primaries, to see whether she can change the equation. That, at least, I could tolerate, even if I disagree. What I really dread is June 4, when the goalposts will move again and Mark Penn will explain to us all that Hillary won the nomination even though she earned fewer pledged delegates and fewer votes.

by TL on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 03:15:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More states that don't count, apparently (none / 0)

I'm not presupposing totals, I'm presupposing general margins. We don't know the final vote totals and that's the point that I was trying to make.

I have a feeling this will be over on June 4 whether she wants it over or not.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 03:24:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]