Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

#1 McCain targets Obama - Republicans, as has been noted so emphatically and frequently on MyDD, are shrewd with their own money.  The fact that McCain and the Republican machine has begun to attack Obama can only mean that they believe he will inevitably get the nomination.

#2 It's the delegates, stupid -  Obama has a 150 point delegate lead.  PA was Hillary's last chance to make a dent in this lead and she only netted 10-12 delegates.  With just over 300 supers left and no other large winnable primaries, Hillary cannot score enough of the remaining delegates to catch up.

#3 Obama targets McCain - Obama no longer sees Hillary as a threat.  He understands that the nomination is just a waiting game at this point, so why waste time and money arguing with Hillary about his pastor, when he could be arguing with McCain about the economy, ending the war... and his pastor.  

If anyone has a realistic path to nomination for Hillary that doesn't involve destroying the Democratic party, please post it.


Tags: Barack Obama, clinton, Democratic, Hillary, lost, nomination, obama, president, Presidential (all tags)




by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-23 05:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

You're right, it is the delegate count. Superdelegates have already said they will look at all possible measure including popular vote total.

Clinton is likely to win big in KY, WV and PR. She could pull of a win in IN. These states can give her that lead, even with Obama winning NC, OR, MT and SD. I do think Clinton has a fighting chance in OR and SD (closed primary) though.

by RJEvans 2008-04-23 05:24PM | 0 recs
The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

.... as it would undervalue the voters of the caucus states.  The supers are probably smart enough to see through this contrived argument.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-23 05:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

Additionally, I don't think a Popular Vote that is marginal at best, and made that way due to Puerto Rico (which doesn't even get a vote in the general election), will motivate the Super Delegates to overturn the massive pledged delegate winner.

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-04-23 05:44PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

If Texas shows us anything, it is that Clinton might have won some of those caucus states if primaries, rather than caucuses, had been held there. So your argument that Obama would have won more votes because votes are underrepresented in these states is ridiculous.

by Inky 2008-04-23 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

Here we go again. CALL the SoS office of these caucus states and they will happily give you the popular vote total. All except IA, WA, NV and ME. They ARE available.

BTW, the Democratic Party is already undervaluing 2.2 million. Potentially 5.7 million people.

by RJEvans 2008-04-23 06:37PM | 0 recs
More bs from RJ.

Obama holds a huge popular vote lead over Hillary.  Fl and Mi never had a primary OR caucus, because their elected governments failed to schedule them properly.  Nice how you all of a sudden care now that it happens to help the candidate you like.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-23 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: More bs from RJ.

This might be surprising for you, but some of us have actually always held the value of one person, one vote above anything else.  I have been involved in this issue since long before this primary began.  And I would never suggest ignoring certain voters just for the sake of one politician's ambition.

As for Hillary, she has been speaking out on this issue since early October of 2007.

by bobbank 2008-04-23 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: More bs from RJ.

Unless it means counting the people that showed up for caucuses? Include those, she still is losing. That's truly why you undervalue them.

Mourning's 1st stage: denial.

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 08:54PM | 0 recs
Re: More bs from RJ.

Please indicate for me a single place where I have ever said that caucuses do not count.

If you cannot support your personal attack with citation, please apologize and admit your error.

by bobbank 2008-04-23 10:05PM | 0 recs
Re: More bs from RJ.

The count the Clinton campaign is using doesn't include caucus attendees. They refuse to include them.

by IowaMike 2008-05-07 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

Absolutely right!  Without all those excited caucus goers the Democrat would stand NO CHANCE in the November General Caucus.  McCain would go home a winner.

by SuperCameron 2008-04-23 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

Is someone spinning out of control here?

Suddenly caucus states aren't getting a fair say in the process...!?

We're talking about states that decided to erect arbitrary barriers to voter participation, leaving only diehards to gather and skew results substantially and suspiciously in favor of Barack Obama.  And now they're not helping Obama enough.  

Seriously, sometimes it seems the Obama fan base would rather this whole election be decided by a seven-person caucus in Fargo, North Dakota rather than anything remotely resembling a democracy.  

by BPK80 2008-04-23 09:12PM | 0 recs
Re: The 'popular vote' argument is bogus....

Please explain what this means,"would skew the results substantialyy and SUSPICIOUSLY in favor of Obama".

What exactly are you implying by "SUSPICIOUSLY"?

by feliks 2008-04-24 02:58AM | 0 recs
I think that the GOP

Rightly or wrongly, sees Obama as the stronger candidate in the general because they are already doing ad buys in Indiana aimed directly at Obama.  If they thought that Clinton would be the stronger candidate, I think they would have shot a few rounds over her bow as well...don't you?

by Sychotic1 2008-04-23 05:28PM | 0 recs
Re: I think that the GOP

It doesn`t have anything to do with Obama being a stronger candidate but with him having basically locked the nomination.

by Gabbo 2008-04-23 05:42PM | 0 recs
The Republicans will regret

their underestimation of Hillary but once, and that will be continuously.

by Beltway Dem 2008-04-23 05:31PM | 0 recs
It's pretty much over.

There are three reasonably large voter pools remaining in NC (134), IN (85) and OR (65). He's ahead in all three. All the others, including MT and SD where he also leads, are too small to make a difference. Hillary can expect to win KY (60) and WV (39).

That leaves the popular vote, where he's 600,000+ ahead after PA with no large Clinton states left. He's probably going to largely retain that number.

The one wild card is Puerto Rico.

by MBNYC 2008-04-23 05:39PM | 0 recs
Re: It's pretty much over.

I can't wait for the mydd crowd to argue that winning Puerto Rico means you're best able to win the presidency.

by Skaje 2008-04-23 05:53PM | 0 recs
I am still waiting for HRC supporters

to realize that by getting what currently is a 9.2 lead she actually just lost about 5% points in how many pledged delegates she needs to win in the upcoming contests.

Before she needed 65 now she needs 71.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-23 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: It's pretty much over.

Yeah cause PR is a battle ground mind.

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 08:55PM | 0 recs
Re: It's pretty much over.

yeah, we should count every voter, unless you were so dedicated you sat through a caucus. I mean, who cares if you went to a caucus. You shouldn't count!

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 09:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

The math is really quite simple.  Obama has 1494 pledged delegates, and 233 superdelegates, putting him at 1727 total delegates.  Obama will get at least another 35 add-on delegates due to them coming from states he won.  Obama will get at least 65 delegates in North Carolina, 32 delegates in Indiana, 2 delegates in Guam, 11 in West Virginia,  18 in Kentucky, 26 in Oregon, 20 in Puerto Rico, 9 in Montana, 8 in South Dakota.

Adds up to 1953.  Just another 70 to hit 2024.  As long as he keeps getting a superdelegate a day, regardless of how many endorse Clinton, he's going to be nipping at the magic number by June.

by Skaje 2008-04-23 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

The magic numbers won't be 2,025. Considering Dead said FL and MI will be seated in some shape or form, the magic number will be higher. The magic number will likely be around 2,116 with FL and MI seated at half a vote.

by RJEvans 2008-04-23 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

That's probably true, but I guarantee they won't be seated until a nominee is chosen.  So, for all intents and purposes, it is 2024.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-04-23 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

Getting a little worried, eh?

by johnnygunn 2008-04-23 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

That we are are destroying the party for Donna Quixoti? Yeah!

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 08:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

by johnnygunn 2008-04-23 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

"#2 It's the delegates, stupid"

Insulting Clinton supporters will get you everywhere - except the White House.  It would be much, much nicer to play nice.

by aggieric 2008-04-23 06:50PM | 0 recs
It's a (Bill) Clinton line, stupid. (kidding)

This isn't an insult but rather a reference to Bill Clinton's oft quoted line "It's the economy, stupid'.  

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-04-23 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

Don't get satire, stupid?

May be not all supporters, just those who don't see the popular reference or are too biased to get a joke.

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 08:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

There are states that have not voted. Let them have a say.

by observer5 2008-04-23 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Top 3 Clues Hillary Has Already Lost.

Denial isn't a river in Egypt.

by IowaMike 2008-04-23 08:58PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads