by alex100, Fri May 23, 2008 at 09:22:31 AM EDT
+3 for Obama and -1 for Clinton.
Plus, Obama picked up two more pledged delegates from Edward's batch.
that leaves Obama 5 delegates closer to the nomination and Clinton further away then she was yesterday.
tick. tock. tick. tock...
by oregonkcg, Fri May 23, 2008 at 06:57:32 AM EDT
[Cross-posted on my blog]
Thanks to everyone that made the petition I started to stop Hillary Clinton from stealing the nomination by seating the Florida and Michigan delegations a roaring success. Only by word of mouth, and without any kind of mainstream exposure whatsoever, the petition has garnered over 4,500 signatures from people all across this great country of ours in a few short months.
Now that the time is upon us, I am printing out the 400 pages that all of these intrepid signers (and their commentary) take up and am sending them out in a package to Howard Dean, the DNC, and the Rules and Bylaws Committee of the DNC.
If you haven't signed the petition, do so NOW! I will send off an addendum next week with everyone that signs in the next 7 or so days.
Make your voice heard! Don't let Hillary Clinton bludgeon her way to some measure of power in this race! Down with the Washington politics of the last 16+ years!
If you want to see the 400-page petition, with the commentary of 4,500 signers across our great land, click here.
If you want to do a bit of data dissection on where everyone comes from and the comments they left, check out the .CSV file by clicking here.
by Mitchell A, Thu May 22, 2008 at 08:34:12 PM EDT
I have grown increasingly frustrated as the day has worn on. I keep seeing supporters, especially of Senator Clinton, referring to recent polls as evidence that she is more electable. The fact is that we don't know who is more electable right now because there are simply too many variables, including what the months ahead have in store. One thing is fairly certain, given the mixed and changing results in snapshot state and national polls, the Democrats would be foolish to select a candidate based on them.
Further, in spite of what we hear from the Clinton people, there is no such thing as a national popular vote. http://msa4.wordpress.com/ Too many apples and oranges. There are caucus and non-caucus states. There are states that have included independents and those that haven't. Some have allowed party cross-overs and some have not. These election results can't be combined into one figure, and especially not into a figure that will satisfy everyone. Bottom Line: if the Democrats back off from using the delegate count in nominating their candidate, and try to substitute a bogus national popular vote, they will be courting calamity. (Few believe that such a substitution will actually take place. But as long as people keep talking about a popular vote, it pushes closure off into the horizon.)
If you really must have some numbers at this time, the odds are that the results from Intrade are probably more accurate than any one set of polls. Of course Intrade isn't always accurate and its traders change their minds. But it has a pretty good record. Interestingly, in the face of all of the current polls, as of 12:00 AM, May 23rd, the traders think Obama is going to beat McCain. http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contr
Notice that there have been hundreds of thousands of trades, that is, "bets."
The figures in order refer to:
Contract Bid Ask Last Vol Chge
Barack Obama to win 2008 US Presidential Election M Trade 57.3 57.4 57.3 157381 +0.9
John McCain to win 2008 US Presidential Election M Trade 38.1 38.3 38.2 202761 -1.8
Hillary Clinton to win 2008 US Presidential Election M Trade 5.8 6.7 6.8 294285 +1.0
by irish09, Thu May 22, 2008 at 08:04:52 PM EDT
Before I start, for the sake of full disclosure, I am an Obama supporter. However, I want to make it clear that I am more interested in the future of our Democratic Party than any particular candidate. It is out of this concern for the party that I am writting this diary.
Much attention has been paid to the delegate situations in Michigan and Florida. I want to provide some background for these states' decisions to schedule their contests in violation of party rules and some clarification regarding party rules.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties create a nomination contest "window." Both parties in 2008 set the date as February 5th. For the GOP, if a state scheduled their contest before that, then half of their delegates are removed from the convention. So, for the GOP, Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, Nevada, and Florida were only allocated half of their normal share of delegates. They have their punishment for early states already built into the rules.
The Democrats, meanwhile, don't have an established rule for how to handle states with contests outside of the window. The official 2008 rules only allow exemptions for Iowa and New Hampshire, due to their "traditional" status, and South Carolina and Nevada, which both applied for special exemptions and were provided them because of their large black and Hispanic populations, respectively. As we know, this year the party's rules and bylaws committee, which included 12 (out of 30)Clinton supporters, voted to strip Florida and Michigan of all of their delegates. The party also barred any candidates from campaigning in those two states and they also called on the candidates to even refuse to participate. The DNC placed the impetus to prevent the violation of party rules on not only its own enforcement mechanisms, but also on the candidates themselves.
by Mitchell A, Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:28:46 PM EDT
Here are many of the latest poll results as compiled by RealClear Politics.
It should be noted,
- It's notoriously difficult this far out from November to make predictions based on current polls.
- Knowing #1, how could anyone look at these polls and use them to determine who should win the Democratic Contest?
The fact is that Obama has played by the rules and is winning in the delegate count. In addition, the national popular vote is a myth. It is a bogus metric. And the media has done the country a disservice by not explaining this adequately.
See, "The Myth of the Popular Vote (or why caucuses may be hazardous to your representation)" and "A New Game: The Metrics Game" http://msa4.wordpress.com/
Democratic Presidential Nomination Gallup Tracking Obama 53, Clinton 42 Obama +11.0
California: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 35, Clinton 54 Clinton +19.0
California: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 38, Obama 52 Obama +14.0
Democratic Presidential Nomination Rasmussen Tracking Obama 50, Clinton 42 Obama +8.0
Virginia: McCain vs. Obama SurveyUSA McCain 42, Obama 49 Obama +7.0
Pennsylvania: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac McCain 37, Clinton 50 Clinton +13.0
Pennsylvania: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 40, Obama 46 Obama +6.0
Ohio: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac McCain 41, Clinton 48 Clinton +7.0
Ohio: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 44, Obama 40 McCain +4.0
Florida: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac McCain 41, Clinton 48 Clinton +7.0
Florida: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 45, Obama 41 McCain +4.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Clinton 44, McCain 39 Clinton +5.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama IBD/TIPP Obama 48, McCain 37 Obama +11.0
California: McCain vs. Clinton PPIC McCain 39, Clinton 51 Clinton +12.0
California: McCain vs. Obama PPIC McCain 37, Obama 54 Obama +17.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Battleground Clinton 43, McCain 51 McCain +8.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Battleground Obama 49, McCain 47 Obama +2.0