Obama's May 20 Strategy

The Politico reports that an Obama aide has confirmed the Obama campaign's plans to declare victory on May 20th, the date on which they expect to have won a majority of pledged delegates.

Their math goes like this:

According to DemConWatch, Obama has thus far won 1590.5 pledged delegates. Per the Obama projection spreadsheet, by May 20, they expect to win 13 of West Virginia's 28 pledged delegates, 23 of Kentucky's 51 and 28 of Oregon's 52 giving him a new total of 1654.5, putting him over the 1627 pledged delegate majority threshold.

Problem is, 1627 is only a majority if one assumes the total number of pledged delegates in play is 3,253, which is only the number if you don't count Michigan and Florida. The Clinton campaign, of course, rejects this number and instead insists the number of total delegates needed to win is 2,209, which would make the majority of pledged delegates threshold 1,784 (assuming a total universe of 3,566 pledged delegates including Michigan and Florida.) If the remaining contests go according to the Obama projection spreadsheet, Obama will fall well short of this number, maxing out at around 1700.

Does the Clinton campaign have an argument here? The Politico doesn't seem to think so. Look how they frame the Obama position:

The Obama campaign agrees with the Democratic National Committee, which pegs a winning majority at 2,025 pledged delegates and superdelegates--a figure that excludes the penalized Florida and Michigan delegations. The Clinton campaign, on the other hand, insists the winner will need 2,209 to cinch the nomination--a tally that includes Florida and Michigan.

But Howard Dean, chairman and mouthpiece of the DNC, had this exchange with Keith on MSNBC the other night:

Keith Olbermann: Isn't it still 2,025 according to all the rules?

Howard Dean: There's going to be a Rules Committee Meeting on the 31st of May where we're going to take up the issue of Florida and Michigan and how to deal with them. [...]

So, there's going to be some kind of a compromise is what I would predict. I can't tell you what's in it but right now the number is 2,025. On May 31st, we'll find out what the Rules Committee does and how they plan to work out seating a delegation from Michigan and Florida.

In other words, he qualified the 2025 number, allowing that the mere fact that the Rules Committee is meeting on May 31st to determine the outcome of Florida and Michigan makes the question of how many delegates it takes to win actually sort of ambiguous. This shouldn't come as much of a surprise as Dean has long rhetorically erred on the side of Michigan and Florida inclusion so as not to alienate those states' voters but in the process he may give Clinton the winning argument as Obama tries to spin a win on May 20th.

Either way, though, there's no getting around the fact that declaring victory with simply a majority of pledged delegates qualifies as moving the goal posts and changing the rules in the middle of the game, something Obama supporters have long chided the Clinton campaign for doing. So, while the Obama campaign will try to end it after Oregon and Kentucky vote on May 20, I suspect this thing will only end when Senator Clinton says it does.



Display:


Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

"Either way, though, there's no getting around the fact that declaring victory with simply a majority of pledged delegates qualifies as moving the goal posts and changing the rules in the middle of the game, something Obama supporters have long chided the Clinton campaign for doing."

It's a pretty decent claim though.  "We've won the majority of delegates from all DNC sanctioned elections," puts a very high burden on the SDs to flip it.

Even with a compromise with MI/FL, Obama would have a 27 delegate buffer with that projection to absorb a little damage.  


Beat McCain!
by thezzyzx on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:11:37 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Oh, for the record, my problem wasn't as much Clinton moving the goalposts as moving them in bizarre directions.  The popular vote argument would have a case.  The popular vote argument with FL has less of one.  Throw in MI too, giving Obama 0 votes, and it gets really bizarre.  

There's nothing wrong with spinning, but I want my intelligence to be a least somewhat respected by the spinsters.


Beat McCain!
by thezzyzx on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:14:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Considering they kept says 2025 for months and... well not surprised.


by MNPundit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:29:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

SD's are ready to Terminate Hillary's Campaign! (none / 0)

Any fantasy that Hillary may have of stringing this out until the Convention in Denver is going by the way-side in early June, no matter what Bubba may be telling her. You will see her recognize this inescapable fact and bow out in early June.

The Supers simply don't want to wait 3 months while John McCain piles up an insurmountable lead, simply so that Hillary can have one last savage run up the mountain, rolling that stone uphill for all she's worth.

They are ready to end it and they will end it by moving to Obama in massive numbers by the end of June at the latest. A lot of them are only waiting until May 20 to have some political cover to come out for Obama.

Meanwhile the negative publicity on Hillary in the press and among party members would be astronomical if Hillary tries to tough it out. If she thinks things are hot NOW this is NOTHING to what the incoming fire from every angle will be like by July 1, if she just goes to ground in the bunker and tries to stave off the storming of Berlin. The press, just for starters, will be absolutely merciless.

You are seeing the hand-writing on the wall when George McGovern defects.

The hand-writing says: "Mene, Mene, Tekel" BTW:
"You have been judged and found wanting."


by Cugel on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Even with Michigan and Florida... (none / 0)

According to DemConWatch's numbers, Obama has 1712.5 delegates right now (if Obama gets Michigan's 55 uncommitted delegates and the 67 he won in Florida's primary)  That's gotta be Hillary's best case scenario (unless she really thinks that Obama won't get any of Michigan's uncommitted delegates).

Thus, if Obama's predictions stand he will have 1776.5 by May 20.  (I do think he's a bit too optimistic in KY and WV, though).  That leaves him just 7.5 delegates short of your standard of 1784 pledged delegates.  So in Hillary's best-case scenario (and accepting Obama's predictions), Obama will clinch the nomination either on May 31 (if the Committee accepts any solution other than Hillary's best case) or on June 1 when Obama will surely win the 7.5 delegates he needs to get to 1784.

I think the best you can argue is that Obama will call the race too early by 1.5 weeks because he's short 7.5 delegates.  That's a little nit-picky, dontcha think?


by umcpgreg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:45:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Good comment, but one quibble: I think the popular vote metric is fatally flawed because it dramatically undercuts support coming from caucus states.  Minnesota, to pick one example, is a big state with a lot of delegates, but if you go by Obama's popular vote margin there, Minnesota's power to help select a nominee is slashed.  That's not fair to Minnesota.

We should all remember that, so long as they thought they were going to win on pledged delegates, the Clinton campaign repeatedly emphasized that this was a contest over delegates.  And they used the number 2025, over and over, for months.

When a metric turns against them, they switch.  That's why you won't hear much about the popular vote--not after NC.  Instead, they're trying to forestall the inevitable.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:12:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And on May 20 (none / 0)

according to the rules that will be in place at that point in time, he will have garnered more than half the available pledged delegates.


by bookish on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:35:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The rules say all 2025 (none / 0)

You need all the delegates. A majority is like calling the game at third quarter.

If no candidate has 2,025 it goes to a second convention ballot.

This is so tortoise-and-hare of him, and it will backfire. He will even make a good hare in a political cartoon. He is crazy for doing this!


by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:59:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The rules say all 2025 (none / 0)

I couldn't disagree with you more.  In fact, if Obama didn't declare victory, the media would jump on him about letting Clinton control the message and the framing.  Then we'd get more insinuations about how she's the one who's the real fighter in this race.  And Carville would up the ante by claiming that she actually has cojones all over her body, like some bizarrely hermaphroditic fertility god/dess.  Mark my words.

When he does this, he will frame it as the voters having spoken.  And it's true.  It's also true that the SD's could counter the voice of the voters, but he'll point out how undemocratic that would be.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:16:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's talk again on May 21 (none / 0)

Then you can rub it in how bad it backfired.


by bookish on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:23:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tone deaf - Tip O'Niel learned this lesson (none / 0)

You have to earn it - read "Speaker of the House" by Tip O'Niel. Voters want to be asked for their votes. He's got it in the bag, why must he do this? Because he wants a vacation? If he's too tired to clinch the nomination, he doesn't have the stamina to be president.

Very unbecoming of him.

Voters resented Hillary when she was "inevitable" and him moving the bar up to 1,600 nullifies his criticism of Hillary.

Tone deaf.


by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:27:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Like I said (none / 0)

no point playing like either of us can see into the future, so let's just revisit it when you've been proved right.


by bookish on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:30:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Let him declare whatever he wants.  All that counts as facts/numbers/math/the winning margin in the end is Who Actually Produces the Legal Magic Number at the roll call of the states here in Denver in late August.  (My goodness, I can't even remember 4 months ago...I wonder what the facts on the ground will actually be 4 months hence.)


by christinep on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

So basically you want to leave a mere 2 months for the actual campaign against the Republicans. Just September and October.

While throughout Summer, the Republicans alongside Hillary will both be attacking the man you KNOW will be our nominee. You KNOW it'll be Obama.

Of course at this point making Obama lose has become Clinton's goal, just so she has a chance at 2012.


by Aris Katsaris on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:17:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope he doesn't do it (2.00 / 0)


   but at the same time, it's a sound strategic move. The more inevitable he seems, the more money flows to him and less to Clinton. The more superdelegates endorse him and leave Clinton.

  It's not moving the goalposts...it's declaring victory before the final whistle with a nearly insurmountable lead.

  Probably best to wait, but politically, it's a smart move! If Hillary wants to insist that she still has a chance, despite the obvious, then Obama certainly has the right to insist that he's won!


by southernman on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:12:11 PM EST

But wait.... (2.00 / 1)

Since when is the number 2209?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OsYnegoV 28

What happened?


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:12:56 PM EST

Re: But wait.... (none / 0)

This is a fantastic clip.  I love it when the truth is revealed.  It is so very refreshing.


by oliver cromwell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:25:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But wait.... (none / 0)

Yeah... I am wondering when it will start getting a little more airtime. Keith O. actually mentioned it off-hand on Tuesday night and I wwas lucky enough to find the clip.


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:32:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Clintons haven't quite acclimated (none / 0)

to new media, yet.

Nice catch, though I'm sure there are literally thousands of clips like that just waiting to show up on Meet the Press this Sunday.


by bookish on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:37:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Clintons haven't quite acclimated (none / 0)

I figured it deserved a diary...so I posted one!


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:59:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But wait.... (none / 0)

Excellent find.  And, youtube rocks!


by soccerandpolitics on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:50:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But wait.... (none / 0)

I figured it deserved a diary...so I posted one!


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:59:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

he can declare himself J.Christ right now (1.50 / 2)

more funny shit he will do less chances he will have.
I want him to produce as much of this BS as he can - it will be very useful for Hillary.
Welcome to a Landslide
by engels on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:13:16 PM EST

Re: he can declare himself J.Christ right now (none / 0)

I'm sorry -- suddenly changing the number from the established 2025 because you're about to lose by that number is the bullshit. Textbook.

Going by the number that everyone agreed to, that were the rules of the game, only counts as bullshit in bizarroClintonworld. By the very nature of bizarroClintonworld, bullshit is the food that sustains you all.


We have a stake in one another ... what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart.... -- BARACK OBAMA
by Lettuce on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:43:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: he can declare himself J.Christ right now (none / 0)

Exactly.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:18:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope he does declare victory early. It (2.00 / 1)

sure has a similar ring to it.


I proudly support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States!
by Rumarhazzit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:13:32 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (2.00 / 0)

As an Obama supporter, I agree with your conclusion. It will end when Hillary pulls out. That said, how many delegates in total will Obama have by the 20th? He's added one more super today, Miller of NC. Will he add 5, 10, 50 more by the 20th? How many of Hillary's will switch by the 20th? How much pressure from her own supporters, Feinstein and others, will she get for "good reason" to continue what is increasingly appearing like a hopeless battle?

Just this morning a rules committee member, whose name I don't remember but he's a Hillary supporter, said she's not likely to get much sympathy from the rules committee on the 30th. These are the people who set the rules that Florida and Michigan broke and be they supporters of Hillary, Obama or still undeclared, they are not prepared to change the rules at this point.

It's over and Hillary appears to be the only one yet unaware of this simple fact. The date that it becomes official is a mere formality.


by vermontprog on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:13:34 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (2.00 / 1)

I am not sure that declaring victory before the other side is willing to concede is how one furthers the cause of unity.

I'm also not sure why there's even a need to declare victory, as the media seems to be quite willing to do it for them.  But really, what strategist decided that this would be a great time to twist the knife?  There is another election in November.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:16:06 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (2.00 / 2)

My guess is its an attempt to downplay the Puerto Rico results, that could give a popular vote count to Clinton, and influence the DNC decision.


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:18:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (2.00 / 3)

I don't like to say it, but the strategy of declaring victory simply as a means of influencing the narrative is very Bush 2000.  On a gut level, it strikes the wrong chord with me.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Absolutely. I am one of those people who is (none / 0)

always, ALWAYS, hearalding the importance of coming together as a party behind the eventual nominee. I have always said I will proudly get behind Obama if he is the nominee, and that he would make a fantastic President. But I happen to believe very strongly that Hillary is more electable against McCain and that this process needs to play out. If Obama comes out and declares himself the winner before Hillary concedes or any delegates have cast actual votes, I will be totally turned off to him. Completely. And that's putting it mildly. Take all the nasty things some of the more "colorful" Obama supporters say about Hillary around here and multiply that times 10 and that's how I would feel.  I would probably hold my nose and pull that lever in Nov., but that's it. I would bow out after that and wait for 2012.


I proudly support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States!
by Rumarhazzit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:30:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Absolutely. I am one of those people who is (none / 0)

The problem with waiting until Clinton concedes or delegates cast votes, is that that means we could be sniping until late August.  How would that be good for our chances in November?  


Beat McCain!
by thezzyzx on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:36:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

really though? (none / 0)

if he hits the 2025 mark (the mark that everybody has been touting as the mark and was only changed Tuesday), you think that he shouldn't get to celebrate a little?  What is he hits the 2209 mark assuming he gets some of those MI delegates (what the compromise was) and his allocation of the FL delegates?  Is that not fair game?


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:39:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can't argue with that. If he reaches 2209 (2.00 / 1)

combining his elected delegates with SD's who have declared, then absolutely, he is the winner. But not until. Unless Hillary concedes, which I don't forsee. If he declares himself the winner before he IS the winner, he is doing exactly what Todd suggests:

moving the goal posts and changing the rules in the middle of the game, something Obama supporters have long chided the Clinton campaign for doing


I proudly support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States!
by Rumarhazzit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:46:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Absolutely. I am one of those people who is (2.00 / 1)

Wait a second...since when are nominations determined by when the other candidates concede? This has gotten utterly ridiculous. By that logic, I guess John McCain has a lot of damn nerve pretending to be the nominee when Ron Paul never conceded.

It's that kind of pretzel logic that produces gems like this:

So, while the Obama campaign will try to end it after Oregon and Kentucky vote on May 20, I suspect this thing will only end when Senator Clinton says it does.

No, it ends when Obama has enough delegates to be the nominee. That's how these things work.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Comparing Hillary to Ron Paul when it (none / 0)

comes to chances of winning their respective primaries really has me laughing loudly all by myself in my home office. Yea, right.


I proudly support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States!
by Rumarhazzit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:49:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Comparing Hillary to Ron Paul when it (2.00 / 1)

At this point, their chances are awfully similar.


by ChrisKaty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:54:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Absolutely. I am one of those people who is (none / 0)

Look, if you don't care about unifying the party, if you don't care about alienating potential Obama voters for November, then celebrate whenever the fuck you want.  You're completely missing the point.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:51:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Absolutely. I am one of those people who is (none / 0)

I'm not celebrating anything, and I have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't posted a single comment rubbing anything in anyone's face, so back off.

I find it absurd that now people are arguing that Obama is only allowed to consider himself the winner if Hillary concedes. So if indeed he ends the primary season with more pledged delegates, popular votes, superdelegates, states won, etc., he still needs Hillary's permission before he can be the nominee?

That's exactly why I mentioned Ron Paul--by the same logic exhibited in Todd's post and many of the comments, McCain is being undemocratic/illegitimate/unfair/whateve r by acting like he's the nominee when Paul never really conceded.

I'm not suggesting we should gloat about Obama's likely victory, but it's equally asinine in the other direction to demand that we all humor her and pretend she has a real shot at winning. She wants to stay in? Fine. But don't get angry at us if people no longer consider her candidacy to be viable.

(And as far as unifying the party, that's a two-way street. The Obama-bashing has been ceaseless, and to no surprise, those rants still rocket to the top of the rec list.)


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:24:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

I don't think Obama is concerned about the popular vote metric because it's becoming clear that most of the superdelegates don't care about it, either.  


by ProfessorReo on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:23:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Nor should they. This was always a delegate race. If the popular vote had been the metric, Obama would have run his campaign differently. He ran a campaign to get more delegates than his opponent, and he succeeded.

Saying that the popular vote matters now is like a football team that just lost a game 31-12 saying they should win after all because they kicked more field goals than their opponents.


by Angry White Democrat on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:27:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Of course Obama can announce victory based on the 2025 number. He may not even reach it on May 20th, but I sense that when he passes the halfway point in pledged delegates, the supers will come in large numbers.

There are two aspects of the delegates that always seem to be ignored. Nearly 20% of the supers haven't been selected yet. The still unselected add-ons for Obama states number 30 and for Clinton, it's 18. It is virtually guaranteed that 20 of Obama's add-ons will pick him, since that is a big reason why they are selected.

If you count 20 of his add-ons, 8 from the Pelosi club, give him 103 PDs for the next 3 states (compared to Clinton's 114), and then throw 26 supers to announce before 5/20 or on 5/21, Clinton would need more than 100% of the remaining supers.

Yes, Obama SHOULD declare victory on 5/20.


by PatrickBradish on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:44:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

I think its a smart move to supercede any tendency by the DNC or the superdels to move to the popular vote consideration. It is and has been a delegate race and therefore clearly defining it as such and defining the place where you can say you have won a majority of elected delegates is a smart, strategically sound move.


by wasder on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:38:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

The number is 2025.

Delegates. Not votes. Not monkeys. 2025 is not the year that Hillary can keep campaigning to.

It's the delegates.

Popular vote count DOES NOT count. Delegates count. Popular vote is interesting parlor discussion designed to give David Broder something to talk about. Electability isn't a metric. Winning the remaining small states -- the electoral equivilent of scrub time -- does not help the cause of anything other than the cause of giving those who are sick and tired of Clinton and her White Hard Working American power claims all the more reason to wonder what happened to her.

Because triangulating is one thing, and I recall it served them well in the past. But triangulating on matters of race is the opposite of what a hurting country needs.


We have a stake in one another ... what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart.... -- BARACK OBAMA
by Lettuce on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:52:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

This is how you plan to unify the party?  By talking about Hillary Clinton's "White Power" claims?  Honest to God, I could live a million years and not share a party with a bigger bunch of fucking morons.

YOU WON THE ELECTION.  THERE IS ANOTHER ELECTION IN NOVEMBER.  QUIT CALLING THE OTHER GUY'S CANDIDATE A RACIST ALREADY, NOTHING MATTERS EXCEPT GETTING HIS VOTE.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:55:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Why is it Obama supporters have to kiss Clinton supporters' ass? I think whatever the period of time, it ended when she made that horrible comment.

I could live a million years and be happy to see the Democratic Party lose every election if it meant having a party immune to the racial triangulation so preferred by Hillary this cycle.


We have a stake in one another ... what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart.... -- BARACK OBAMA
by Lettuce on Fri May 09, 2008 at 11:24:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

She will not get her popular vote up from Puerto Rico.

It would be cool if people could actually know what the political landscape is on the island before taking talking points as fact.

Hillary and her team are dreaming.

Just yesterday her main backer on the island went on a little rant and attacked people from his own party because things are not looking good for a high turnout. Many groups (for a variety of reasons) are calling for a boycott on top of that.

Here is a link to his rant in the biggest local newspaper :

http://www.elnuevodia.com/diario/noticia /politica/noticias/populares_contra_popu lares/401965

Prats culpa a algunos alcaldes rojos de la posible baja participación en las primarias demócratas en la Isla.

Translates to :

Prats blames some local mayors for the possible low turnout
in the Democratic primary on the island


by cherrygarcia on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:00:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Love this little nugget in his rant :

"Yo apoyo a Hillary Clinton", dijo inicialmente. "Yo las canto como las veo y veo un movimiento en unas áreas de Puerto Rico donde alcaldes, quieren desligarse del proceso"

Translates to :

"I back Hillary Clinton", he said. "I call them as I see them and I see a movement in some areas of Puerto Rico in which mayors, want nothing to do with the process"


by cherrygarcia on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:07:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

What makes you think Hillary Clinton is EVER going to concede?

What guarantees she'll even concede at Denver, let alone in June?


by Aris Katsaris on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:20:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

If you're not concerned about alienating people, go nuts.  Obviously many of you aren't.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:56:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

It's up to the supers now and they seem to be favoring Obama and growing eager for this battle to end.

Given that Obama has more delegates and presumably more power in the party now, there is no reason to suggest that Hillary will be able to change the rules to her preference.

Instead of finding a way for Hillary to beat the party and gain the nomination at the expense of the party, let's put our energy into uniting the party and beating McCain.


We shall overcome. Yes we can.
by Sam Wise Gingy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:17:30 PM EST

afraid to finish the math (none / 0)

fill in reasonable totals that will come out of the MI/FL compromise.  Won't he still get to the majority?  


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:18:01 PM EST

Re: afraid to finish the math (none / 0)

Yes.  Even if one unreasonably gives him 0 delegates out of Michigan.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:22:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

I disagree with you Todd.  Dean said that Michigan and Florida's delegates would be seated, but since they broke the rules they do not count on how many delegates are needed to win the nomination.  The DNC says that Florida and Michigan will not count.  Letting the delegates be seated is another matter and the delegates will not be counted until there is a nominee in place.  This is what the DN said when Florida and Michigan broke the rules, and has been the DNC rules all along.  The Clintons are the ones who are trying to change the rules in the middle of the game.


by Spanky on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:18:27 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

First of all, Dean did not invalidate the number 2023, he merely stated that it is the number until the Rules Committee meets on May 30. So 1627 will be a valid number when Obama declares victory on May 20.

Secondly, I think it is imperative that the Obama articulate their position on when they have won. God knows the Clinton folks are throwing new rationales around every day. This is a smart move to establish an alternative narrative, and one with more factual and reality-based backing, to the ones that are being put out their by the Clinton camp.


by wasder on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:03 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Hillary Clinton will win! How dare Obama undermine the will of the people. The popular vote has given Hillary Clinton a win. If we were under Republican vote rules Hillary Clinton would have won already. Hillary Clinton should be the winner! I want to see Lenny Davis as the next DNC chair. That would rock! Howard Dean has messed up this race.


by Hillarywillwin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:26 PM EST

If you want to follow Republican rules... (none / 0)

then she should have run for the Republican nomination then.....
by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You forgot to mention... (none / 0)

... she's actually 700,000 behind in the popular vote.


by kraant on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:22:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You forgot to mention... (none / 0)

not with MI and FLA counted


by Hillarywillwin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:46:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

If we were the Republicans, she'd be doing flower arrangements or something. That's the beauty of being a democrat. A woman like Hillary can rise. So can a man like Obama.

The downside? We have a fairer system of picking a nominee.

If you or she would prefer to be a Republican though, I'm happy to point out the door.


We have a stake in one another ... what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart.... -- BARACK OBAMA
by Lettuce on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:54:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

The system isn't fair! It stole Hillary win away from her! The system isn't right.


by Hillarywillwin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:58:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

No it didn't.  Hillary hired an asshat that didn't even know the rules to run her campaign.  And as pointed out this morning if the rules would have been different Barack would have ran a far different campaign.  You guys got beat fair and square by a better ran campaign, it is just that simple.


Let's make love and listen to Death From Above.
by kasjogren on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:08:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Unless your clever irony extends all the way to your UID, you're loony.  And wrong about the popular vote.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:25:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Todd, this is wrong (2.00 / 1)

because as things stand right now, it's 2025.  So, accord to the current rules of the game, Obama will win a majority of pledged delegates on May 20th, as specified.  Now, if the Rules Committee changes the rules of the game on May 31, then Obama may no longer be the official winner.

But to accuse the Obama campaign of moving the goalposts is false, because he's declaring victory (in the pledged delegate count, at any rate) according to the rules now on the table.  If the goalposts move around him on May 31st, then that's not his fault, because he didn't move them.


by hekebolos on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:41 PM EST

Re: Todd, this is wrong (none / 0)

Well the rules says a candidate is the victor at 2025, not 1627. So, yeah, he is moving the goalpost.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:26:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that's not the argument (none / 0)

The argument here is whether 1627 actually represents a majority of pledged delegates or not.  Todd is saying that by saying that 1627 is a majority, Obama's moving the goalposts.  I'm disagreeing with him by stating that if 1627 isn't the pledged delegate majority come May 31st, then it will be the goalposts that moved around him, instead of him moving the goalposts, so it's wrong to accuse Obama of moving the goalposts.

None of this says anything about the 2025 needed to win the nomination.


by hekebolos on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:44:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Todd, this is wrong (none / 0)

The DNC said that Florida and Michigan's delegates will not be seated until there is a nominee.  This is what the DNC has said all along.  So, even if the DNC was to say they wanted to seat the delegates of Florida and Michigan the DNC will say they will be seated after the primaries are over and the nominee has won.  So, either way, Michigan and Florida will not count.


by Spanky on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:26:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (2.00 / 1)

The Clinton campaign just makes itself look more desperate by any insistence that the number needed to nominate is 2209. Until the DNC rules otherwise 2025 is the number. You can say you think it should be 2209, you can say you think the Michigan and Florida delegations should be sat in full and their superdelegates restored, but until the DNC makes it so it's simply not true and just gets you ridiculed.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:21:24 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

And thirdly, it is for all intents and purposes over right now, as you yourself pointed out the other night Todd.

It will be officially over when Clinton drops out but the realities are that the nomination has been decided.


by wasder on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:21:41 PM EST

If a dead horse could feel pain, (none / 0)

I'd feel sorry for this poor overbeaten one....

Problem is, 1627 is only a majority if one assumes the total number of pledged delegates in play is 3,253, which is only the number if you don't count Michigan and Florida. The Clinton campaign, of course, rejects this number...

Clinton , having fewer delegates, is and will be in no position to determine anything about FL and MI. Whatever she winds up with will be solely due to the good graces of the nominee, Obama.

This is like debating how the Civil War would have turned out if Lee had won at Gettysburg. He didn't. Hopefully it won't take some people more than a century to get over Hillary's defeat and quit dreaming of her rising again.

As for Howard Dean's comment regarding 2025, he's just what the Clintons' shill Terry McAuliffe never was -- a scrupulously impartial DNC Chair.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:22:23 PM EST

Popular vote (none / 0)

Isn't it possible that Obama could end up with more votes than Hillary even if you include Florida and Michigan?  Right now, he would be ahead almost 90,000 even if you include those two states, almost 200,000 if you take into consideration estimates from the four missing caucus numbers.


by Blazers Edge on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:22:25 PM EST

Re: Popular vote (none / 0)

He is, even if you do.  The NC victory put him firmly back in the lead in that pointless metric.


by deminva on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:27:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

2209 (none / 0)

Of all the ridiculous moves of the goalposts to come out of this primary this one has to take the cake. How many times has the Clinton campaign repeated that 2025 is the number to have up until the last few days?


"Mom, baseball, apple pie, and a unified Democratic juggernaut."
by Purplepeople on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:22:27 PM EST

Re: 2209 (none / 0)

Well, it used to be 2209, until the DNC decided to disenfranchise FL and MI.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:26:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 2209 (none / 0)

as if it's the first time a state has been penalized.


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:30:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 2209 (none / 0)

You mean, until Florida and Michigan decided to disenfranchise themselves by breaking the DNC rules.


by Angry White Democrat on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:30:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That isn't the point (none / 0)

The point is that the Clinton campaign has been using the number 2025 consistently throughout this campaign up until the last week or so. Are they really asking people to believe that they only just now realized that they've been wrong all this time and 2209 is the correct number?

2025 is the number that they and Obama have both been shooting for this entire time. The only reason to be lobbying for a larger number now is because he is about to hit the lower one. Which they are free to do, they just shouldn't try to pretend they are making a stand on some great point of principle.


"Mom, baseball, apple pie, and a unified Democratic juggernaut."
by Purplepeople on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:35:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Wow, bad move by Obama. He really ought to postpone any coronation until after his nomination is a mathematical certainty.


by wolff109 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:23:03 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

...I mean when he has 2,025 all in.


by wolff109 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:24:01 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

Dig beyond the Politico headline and you find "... the nature of that declaration of victory is "still developing," in the advisor's words..."

Or to put it another way, the Obama campaign contends that the winner of a majority of pledged delegates should be the party nominee, Senator Clinton's campaign disagrees.

Perhaps not so much an attempt to steal the crown, more a case of a trench warfare of definitions in which Clinton is, will be, a combatant.


by My Ob on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:24:41 PM EST

Another super today (none / 0)

http://thepage.time.com/2008/05/08/obama -picks-up-north-carolina-superdelegate/

Don't know if this was posted elsewhere today.  Hadn't seen it.


by mady on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:25:03 PM EST

really though (none / 0)

I don't want him to declare on May 20 but I think if at that point he has enough Supers and enough Pledged delegates that will put him over the 2025 mark, he should be allowed to.  Those other delegates might eventually get seated, but they won't change the math too much given that there will be some sort of compromise anyway.  

He's ahead by 160 pledged delegates now.  at best, hillary can come out of KY/WV/OR +7 or 8.  You give Hillary +15 for MI and +20 from FL (one of the compromises I've seen from FL), and obama still gets the majority of pledged delegates.  Even if you add in Hillary's +10 from supers (so far), and Obama is still ahead.  

I just don't see what plausible scenario nets Hillary a lead at all


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:28:39 PM EST

Re: Obama's May 20 Strategy (none / 0)

This is getting really dumb. Florida and Michigan don't count as it stands. If you think they should fine, but then something will have to be changed.

Talk about moving goal posts, if Clinton was the one who would hit that number on May 20, she would declare victory and no one would dare say a word.

Sure, the rules committee has to meet to officially determine the number, but by that logic, then McCain isn't the nominee and Obama could never declare victory until the convention, because technically, pledged delegates arn't pledged and supers can switch yada yada yada.


by BlueGAinDC on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:31:09 PM EST

May 20 2008 (1.25 / 12)


Give it up for Hillary - Donate
Hillary's Bloggers
by NewHampster on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:31:52 PM EST

this is exactly what we need (none / 0)

way to be a good democrat


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this is exactly what we need (none / 0)

it's good for Barack to be mocked before he makes a fool of himself?  I think it's helpful.  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:03:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow (none / 0)

I really, truly don't believe you went there.


"Mom, baseball, apple pie, and a unified Democratic juggernaut."
by Purplepeople on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:36:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wow (none / 0)

any humor left?  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:04:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Plenty (none / 0)

This just wasn't funny. Nor do I believe it was intended to be.


"Mom, baseball, apple pie, and a unified Democratic juggernaut."
by Purplepeople on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:18:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plenty (none / 0)

course it was, exposing arrogance is always funny.  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:56:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plenty (none / 0)

Like Hillary still not accepting the fact that it wasn't "her turn" and that she just doesn't get to have the thing handed to her.


Let's make love and listen to Death From Above.
by kasjogren on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:13:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Plenty (none / 0)

You're a kid, right?  how about her trying to deny Barack his destiny, do you think that's a little amazing?  But he doesn't say it, it's his supporters.  It's the columnists who claim she thinks it's her turn, not her. Some women think it's our turn to have a female president, but it's also black American's turn, so that's a wash.  What we want is a fair election, so that whoever wins it will have a chance of getting the support of the loser. what we don't want is a race that belittles any group of Americans, who may feel angry and not vote.  In this case it's Florida and Michigan voters who have the right to petition to be seated at the convention, and have the right to do a revote once the convention gets started, without having to bend to Barack's or Hillary's plans.  We may act like a nation of bullies but that's pugs, we're Democrats. We'll shoot ourselves in the foot to be fair. And I like it like that.  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:58:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: May 20 2008 (none / 0)

It appears you've already "given it up" for Hillary. Any sense of Democratic ethics.

Poor losing is not the same as winning. You can argue the monopoly game can continue till you're out of money, but the fact Obama's got all the hotels means all you're doing is boring the other players.


We have a stake in one another ... what binds us together is greater than what drives us apart.... -- BARACK OBAMA
by Lettuce on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:57:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: May 20 2008 (none / 0)

no one's won yet?  I guess laughing isn't an option, we have to dress in funeral?  Look, she's not giving up, and it's offensive for Barack to encourage bullying. If he does plan to announce Mission Accomplished, this won't be the only photo mocking him.  Does he really want to lose the GE? Does he really have to declare himself the winner?  Has that every happened before, that some guy tries to close it down by 'declaring' it over. It's a bad idea, tell him?  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:10:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: May 20 2008 (2.00 / 1)

This player is not bored.  I leave monopoly to the kids.  I play Texas Hold'em with some very tough, experienced people.  Even when short stacked, the experieced 9 out of 10 times defeats the young all-in- on- anything hotshots.

Love your creativity, Hamp.  


by Tolstoy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:14:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: May 20 2008 (1.50 / 2)

Mojo for sheer. hilarious. moxy.


by kyle in philly on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:58:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ain't this the truth! (none / 0)

Nice job.


by izarradar on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:09:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're Wrong (none / 0)

Todd says, "I suspect this thing will only end when Senator Clinton says it does."

That's overstating Clinton's power. This thing will end when super delegates want in to end, not when Clinton drops out, which she herself tacitly acknowledged by saying she's going to run "until there's a nominee."


by AC4508 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:32:28 PM EST

But I heard a rumor (none / 0)

That they can't vote until the convention.

In the meantime they can change like snakes anytime they want.


Give it up for Hillary - Donate
Hillary's Bloggers
by NewHampster on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:34:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why would they want to (none / 0)

and you really think hillary should hold out hope that they do until August?  you think that is good for the party, her chances in November?


by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:35:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's the 8th inning of a 9 inning game (none / 0)

Obama has brought in the closer.

You think Hillary should just pack up and leave before the game ends?  Lose by defaulting?

Automatic Delegates do not vote until the convention. Period.  Anything they say now is only talk and can be changed.

She is protecting the party from what we don't yet know about him.  And yes, there may be nothing and he very well may go on to Denver to be anointed but until then there is no way she should quit.


Give it up for Hillary - Donate
Hillary's Bloggers
by NewHampster on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:57:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the 8th inning of a 9 inning game (none / 0)

So, you believe that after one candidate has secured enough delegates to clinch the nomination, other candiates should refuse to concede until the convention just to "protect the party" against "what we don't yet know"?

Has this been your position in every presidential election cycle, or did you just come up with this idea when you realized Obama was going to win the delegate race?


by Frood on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:23:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He has not clinched enough delegates yet (none / 0)

The supers votes don't count as part of "clinching".

If he passes the magical number that includes Fla. and Mich. than I think he's golden.


Give it up for Hillary - Donate
Hillary's Bloggers
by NewHampster on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:29:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But I heard a rumor (none / 0)

Change like snakes?  Support Obama in the general or not, but what is happening to any regard for being a Democrat.  Those are our rules.  This is our process.  That's not our battleship.  What is going on here?


by mady on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:42:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But I heard a rumor (none / 0)

rules say the nominee is chosen in the convention, and can only be the presumed nominee, like McCain is now, if everyone else drops out. That's the rules.  There is not rule that says the one ahead in pledged delegates wins, or the one ahead in popular votes. If it's between pledged delegates and popular votes, most of us would say the one with the most votes has the fairer claim, but even then the rules say the delegates can change like snakes, or words to that effect.  The Michigan Florida thing isn't over until the convention, when they get to petition. They also can hold a revote without the party's approval once the convention starts, and do it anyway they choose. They can accept mail in ballots, which is the most Democratic way to do it.  It's simply not yet over, and in no one's interest to force it to a conclusion, not Barack's, not the Party's, and not Hillary's.  but maybe you were saying that too?  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:15:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No victory till Rules comitee's decision (none / 0)

His vitory would be as illegitimate as Bush's victory in 2000.


by indydem99 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:36:41 PM EST

Rules committee ain't on her side. (none / 0)

Clinton is quickly running out of friends from whom to call favors in from.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:38:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rules committee ain't on her side. (none / 0)

You mean those of us who have voted or intend to vote for her? She's doing us a favor, and Barack a favor. She's making this race about issues, he's had to copy her plans and solutions, and that's a good thing for him. the longer this goes on the more people get involved, but the end has to feel legitimate to all of us, that's why we need a resolution on Florida and Michigan and why we need to let the process play itself out.  You want him to lose to McCain? Or do you want her supporters to want to want to vote for him if he wins the popular vote including Florida and Michigan?  There is more at stake than this primary win, for the party, and for the GE.  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:20:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rules committee ain't on her side. (none / 0)

OMG she might be doing a lot of things but she is most definitely NOT making this race about issues.  She doing the exact opposite, in fact the whole "rational" behind her staying in it her HOPING something bad happens to Obama that has nothing to do with issues.

Hillary Clinton thinks she is more important than the democrat party is what is happening.  Making it about the issues, that is some funny shit.


Let's make love and listen to Death From Above.
by kasjogren on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:18:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rules committee ain't on her side. (none / 0)

so you say, but she's not in charge of what gets reported, or how it is.  She sticks to the issues, but who cares.  I doubt there has been any candidate who posts as many clear position papers, you know just where she stands, what she'd do, and who'd be helping her. We know everything about her.  Inform yourself?  


by anna shane on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:45:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'd like to point out (none / 0)

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/3/14613 /72103

I knew this was going to happen on April 3 (though my math was off by 1 pledged delegate).

My suspicion is that just enough supers will be endorsing him before then so that the delegates from KY/OR put him over 2024.  He will then justifiably declare victory under the rules as they stand.

On May 31, the rules committee will quietly sort out the problem states via a method that lets him retain victory.  We all move on with our lives.

It's been a fun game, but remember that it's a game.  Who do you like playing with more?  The gracious winner and expert player that you can learn from, or the rules-lawyer who challenges every action and holds up gameplay?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:37:44 PM EST

Re: I'd like to point out (none / 0)

Random thought...

When you were a kid, did you ever play Monopoly with someone who insisted on being the "banker" and then kept changing the house rules as the game went on?  You know, "the banker always gets an extra $100 at the beginning of the game" etc.

When someone keeps changing the rules (delegates -> big states -> primary states -> only states that favor my demographics -> only MI if I get to set the terms of the deal), it gets a little tiresome trying to play with them.  


by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]