Please wait, your request is processed...

indie17

Recent comments by this user

Durbin On Clinton Camp Raising Wright: Try Your Best

Yep, I agree. posted 04/02/2008 at 16:06:47

Jesse Ventura Unloads: The Parties, The Chickenhawks, And His Revolution

Well, there are a few other differences as well. Maybe people would like to extend this string of comments.

I'll point out that Bush was a C/D student, and Obama was one of the best and brightest. posted 04/02/2008 at 01:55:17

This really did make me laugh out loud. posted 04/02/2008 at 01:52:24

Enjoyed your post. posted 04/02/2008 at 01:47:40

Clinton's Push For Popular Vote Win May Not Persuade Superdelegates

No, the Republican districts went for Clinton. I live in TX. We know the Republicans voted for Hillary here -- that's why she edged out the popular vote. The Republicans didn't caucus, and Obama took the caucus votes easily.

Here's an article that gives some background and facts on this.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/ posted 04/02/2008 at 15:04:16

Swoosie1 says, "Superdelegates are clearly worried about the Obama drag on the party and many feel he will not be elected this year if nominated. I suggest that they are correct in this assessment and I think that the "other half" of the voters..those for Hillary, are going to ensure his loss."

Well, those of you that want to ensure Obama's loss would rather have the blood of thousands of war victims on your hands. Enjoy rotting in hell. posted 04/02/2008 at 14:57:44

Correct. Obama winning percentages: VI 90%, ID 80%, HI 76%, DC 75%, AK 74%, KS 74%, NE 68%, WA 68%, CO 67%, GA 67%, MN 67%, IL 65%, Democrats Abroad 65%, VA 64%, ND 61%, WY 61%, MS 61%, ME 59%, MD 59%, VT 59%, WI 58%, UT 57%, LA 57%, AL 56%, SC 55%, DE 53%, CT 51%, MO 49%, IA 38%.

Conclusion -- there are only two wins by Obama where Clinton was within 5 points: CT and MO. posted 04/02/2008 at 14:41:35

The price of beef would go 'sky high'. posted 04/02/2008 at 14:07:50

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/ posted 04/02/2008 at 14:06:59

Current polls show Obama and Clinton both beating McCain in OH and PA. FL is a possibility for Clinton, but Obama would take Colorado, Iowa, and Washington to offset a potential loss in Florida. (You know that Florida has only voted Democratic twice since 1950, right?)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html posted 04/02/2008 at 14:03:04

Yes, I did, and totally agree with you.

One problem with using delegates (in the future) has been brought to light in this election.

Districts that have an even number of delegates vs districts that have an odd number of delegates -- this scenario creates an unfair voting advantage for the 'odd-numbered' districts. Therefore, it gives more weight to the voters in these districts.

Here's why. A candidate has to achieve 67% of the vote to get an extra delegate in the even-numbered delegate districts. Anything less than that, and the delegates are simply split. Whereas, in an odd-numbered delegate district, a candidate can achieve 50.01% of the vote, and receive the extra 'odd' delegate for it.

This needs to be fixed. posted 04/02/2008 at 13:45:51

No, Obama leads by 6.34% in voted (pledged) delegates, and by 3% in the popular vote.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

There is an article from yesterday about Florida (on Huffpo), and all the issues around that are covered in the comments. I suggest you go there for information. posted 04/02/2008 at 13:37:08

Hillary has over 20 more supers that have cast differently than their states. The supers will use their best judgment and make a choice. Some will go with their personal allegiance, some will go with their district, some with their state, other with the overall delegate count, others may use popular vote.

As the article points out, most are using some weighted combination of all factors. posted 04/02/2008 at 12:47:49

That's a cute game with no basis in reality. By the way, in your game, put TX in Obama's column and he's the winner.

You could use your skills to do a real look at which candidate has the best chance against McCain in each state.

Still, that's a prediction game. So all we have to go on are current primary results, and the candidate that has won the most delegates. posted 04/02/2008 at 12:37:46

I think we may see 'married filing separately...' posted 04/02/2008 at 12:28:19

How Did Obama Hijack HillaryClinton.Com?

Don't let them give you hell, Blake. Everybody's an expert on computers today, LOL!

I became a software engineer before there was such a thing as a PC, and have taught a great many people things from simple to very complex about computers. There is always more to learn.

I think your article is interesting, by the way. Brings up aspects of marketing and ethos. Reminds me of a course I took in 76 called, "Values, Technology, and Society". We got to explore such diverse topics as cable television, particle accelerators, and the programs they used at SRI for 'remote viewing'.

Anyway, as an Obama supporter, I really wonder if his campaign is getting his money's worth from this tactic. :-) posted 04/02/2008 at 00:44:04

Oliver Stone's Bush Movie Depicts Daddy Issues, War Lust And Hard-Partying Youth

Yep. Think Oliver should have waiting a few more years to make this. posted 04/02/2008 at 18:47:13

Born on the 4th of July=gold. posted 04/02/2008 at 18:43:08

Top Clinton Aide: Wright Is Key Issue In My Talks With Superdels

Okay, I'll play.

If you take away the 650,304 popular vote gain for Obama in Illinois, and he currently has an 827,308 lead (source: Real Clear Politics), then he leads by 177,004.

Now what was the point of that again?

Let's take NY away from Clinton (her lead was 317,477.) Wow, now Obama leads by 1,144,785. Let's take Arkansas away from her too -- that's 137,660 votes. Now Obama leads by 1,282,445.

Why are we doing this again?

I'll take your bet on Michigan any day of the week. Michigan will vote Democratic.

As for Florida, it's only gone Democratic twice since 1950.

Now, as for Clinton still being able to 'take this', we don't use popular vote as our barometer anyway. We use delegates. posted 04/01/2008 at 21:29:19

Have you read Obama's speech about race? Your attitudes are exactly part of the problem. posted 04/01/2008 at 21:15:37

That's AFTER they moved these priests around, secretly, from parish to parish. And AFTER they were sued for huge sums by victims. This went on, knowingly, for years.

Of course, I also consider the anti-birth control stance of the Catholic Church to be immoral. posted 04/01/2008 at 20:55:26

Find another line of work, maybe snake venom tester? posted 04/01/2008 at 20:52:48

So, this article says of Clinton's campaign advisor Ickes, "Ickes also said that it was possible that Hillary supporters on the Convention Credentials Committee would bring a "minority report" to force a floor vote if the committee's solution on Florida and Michigan wasn't to the campaign's liking."

Florida and Michigan, huh? Ickes voted in August to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates as a sitting member of the Rules and Bylaws Commission.

And as reported on Feb 16, "Ickes acknowledged today on the call, while trying to convince members of the media, that Florida"s and Michigan"s delegations should not only be seated at the convention, but should also have full voting rights and that delegates should be allocated based on voting that took place in those states -- even though in Michigan, Obama"s name did not even appear on the ballot and uncommitted got 41% of the vote to Clinton"s 55%."

Ickes -- totally immoral. What is this guy doing sitting on any rules commission? Get rid of the corruption in this party. posted 04/01/2008 at 16:30:55

Hillary Clinton Challenges Obama To Bowl Off

It was for 7 frames, the 37. Still not good, but not as bad as it sounds. posted 04/01/2008 at 15:09:15

Clinton Rationale for Electability Doesn't Hold Water: History Proves the Ability to Win a State Primary Is Unrelated to General Election Success

Latest matchups in CA and NY:

California: McCain vs. Obama PPIC McCain 40, Obama 49, Und 7, Obama +9
California: McCain vs. Clinton PPIC McCain 43, Clinton 46, Und 7, Clinton +3

New York: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 38, Obama 49, Und 8, Obama +11
New York: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac McCain 40, Clinton 50, Und 6, Clinton +10 posted 04/02/2008 at 01:32:23

Good post, Moon, and all true by my stats. I think Obama's best chances at opening up the map are in Colorado, Virginia, and pick one -- some red state. Oregon is a no-brainer, and I think Washington too (against McCain.) Clinton loses Iowa badly in the matchups, and Obama wins easily.

And his super performance in the states you mentioned should be talked about more, I totally agree! posted 04/02/2008 at 01:23:29

Actually, Obama's elected (pledged) delegate lead is 6.34% -- not trivial in an allocated delegate race. And it's 3% in the popular vote.

source: realclearpolitics.com posted 04/02/2008 at 01:16:20

I agree with you, 23000Days -- the differences between the parties are very significant to me. I also agree think that LeftLeanWing's post is extraordinary.

I think that there truly is a movement afoot. I had to calm my mother the past 7 years, telling her that the horror of W's administration would reap rewards. This is what the mass psyche of the U.S. had chosen, and now we would see it play out. But in the end, it would serve to unite people against the kinds of actions that W's regime would make blatantly obvious. People are awakened, and they are amassing to move forward in ways that only the idealistic among us could have hoped for. posted 04/02/2008 at 01:10:17

Things will dial down once the Democrats can unite against the Rethugliecons.

I'll support whomever is on the ticket, although I am an avid Obama supporter. I think, and hope, that most of us will. posted 04/02/2008 at 01:01:36

I really wish you would quit calling Obama a 'boy', and I'm sure you understand what I mean. He's a 46 year old man. He'll be Mr. President to you soon, hopefully. posted 04/02/2008 at 00:56:35

Did you read the article? "There are many reasons why this argument is fallacious, including the fact that, in the general election, Obama would place many marginal states into play that Hillary would have no chance to win."

For example, Obama wins Washington, Colorado, and Iowa. Clinton loses these. That's 27 electoral college delegates versus 20 for Ohio.

There are other scenarios, but I think you can see what I am getting at.

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-clinton-276-mccain-262/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html posted 04/02/2008 at 00:43:37

Ho hum. Top 12 biggest states in the Democratic primary (by delegate count) and their winner below. Score: Clinton 5, Obama 7.

Not that this has anything to do with the article, since he is stating that primary wins do not necessarily mean general election wins.

By the way, the most recent polls shows Obama matches up better against McCain than Clinton in CA and NY -- the two biggest states. How about them apples?

California -- Clinton
New York -- Clinton
Texas -- Obama
Illinois -- Obama
Ohio -- Clinton
New Jersey -- Clinton
Massachusetts -- Clinton
Georgia -- Obama
Virgina -- Obama
Washington -- Obama
Wisconsin -- Obama
Minnesota -- Obama posted 04/02/2008 at 00:31:04

I've seen some folks debunk the 'electoral college' argument that the Clinton camp tried recently. I think it was on MSNBC. (It's very dangerous how bad TV news has become, in general.)

Anyway, I agree, it's good to see someone put the facts together for us in this article. You can always count on Creamer for some intelligent insight. posted 04/01/2008 at 22:28:02

Poll: Clinton Pennsylvania Lead Shrinks To 5 Points

Both are listed. The Rasmussen is more recent, in that it takes only yesterday into consideration. posted 04/01/2008 at 15:28:12

Thanks so much AustinDemocrat! I've been looking for the final Texas numbers the past few days. This is great news, as Obama won more than had beenestimated for him in the past few weeks.

Real Clear Politics does have the updated numbers for both TX and MS.

Currently they show totals of: Obama 1417 to Clinton 1248 in pledged delegates. That means his lead has increased a bit, to 6.34% over her. posted 04/01/2008 at 12:41:15

Yes, unfortunately one article a few days ago showed evidence (again) of the Rush factor. It worked in Texas. Maybe Bill Clinton will appear on Rush the day of the primary, like he did for us here in Texas. posted 04/01/2008 at 12:24:09

1) The questionnaire was from 1996, 12 years ago.
2) On the Kennedy matter, from the Washington Post article: "Even though Obama Sr. arrived the previous year, he and other members of the 1959 cohort benefited indirectly from Kennedy family support." posted 04/01/2008 at 12:22:51

Clinton Says Obama Wants to Stop Votes

I think your crystal ball is a bit foggy. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:32:23

It was nice that the Rush Republicans didn't show at the caucuses. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:30:07

There are many ways to portray truth in words. Everyone has their own style. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:27:12

That couldn't be a lie now, could it? posted 04/01/2008 at 11:48:06

The statement speaks for itself. Use your critical thinking skills. posted 04/01/2008 at 11:40:47

"My take on it is a lot of Senator Obama's supporters want to end this race because they don't want people to keep voting," she told CBS affiliate KTVQ in Billings, Mont. "That's just the opposite of what I believe. We want people to vote. I want the people of Montana to vote, don't you?"

My take is that Clinton is obviously and blatently trying to mislead the voter, obfuscate the truth, and abuse her position to take advantage of the uninformed or ignorant. posted 04/01/2008 at 11:34:55

Beth Founy, let's try to be a little more accurate with our reporting. You report above, "Clinton almost certainly will end the primary season narrowly trailing Obama in the popular vote and among pledged delegates unless the nullified primaries in Florida and Michigan are counted _ an unlikely scenario at best. But Obama is unlikely to end the race with the 2,024 pledged delegates needed to win outright either, meaning the nominee will be determined by roughly 800 superdelegates."

1) Even if you count the nullified primaries in Floirida and Michigan, Clinton will 'almost certainly' still be trailing in pledged delegates. You make it sound as if counting these races would make Clinton win.
2) A 6.2% pledged delegate lead is not 'narrow'.
3) It is impossible, not unlikely, for Obama (or anyone) to end the race with 2024 pledged delegates. There aren't enough left in the entire contest.

We readers deserve accuracy in reporting. posted 04/01/2008 at 11:28:39

Pennsylvania Voters Dismiss Obama's Momentum

Did you read the entire article? There are favorable things said about Obama too. I thought it was well-written, for the most part. The headline is misleading, however. posted 04/01/2008 at 17:42:48

I think he accidentally posted to the wrong article. Why get so smart-ass about it? posted 04/01/2008 at 17:39:31

First of all, Obama quit smoking over a year ago. Good for him!

You can see why the 'youth gravitate to him'. Can you see why 51 year old Southern white women like me do?

I wish there was no for-profit industry built up around our healthcare system, and we could go to single-payer. But that is simply not reasonable at this time. Obama's plan is the most reasonable, and actually has a chance at being implemented. Furthermore, his energy plan is the best out there.

Energy will be the next economic boom for America. Just like computers in the 80s, which showed their efficiency in the 90s economic boom, new energy sources and devices will be the technological boom in the coming years that will again make America great. There is a whole world in need of improved energy technology. That is one of Obama's strongest suits.

Austin, TX mayor Will Wynn chairs the Energy Committee of the U.S. Conference of Mayors and worked on energy-efficiency grant legislation. "For too long, we've allowed old divisions to hold us back," Wynn said. "Recently, I've had conversations about energy policy with presidential candidates from both parties, and I believe Sen. Obama is the only person who can move us forward on this critical issue." posted 04/01/2008 at 17:03:09

Lou Dobbs Says Anti-Clinton Media Bias "Worsening"

Thank God I live in a country where there is still separation of church and state. posted 04/01/2008 at 01:06:00

Kristol: McCain's Biography Can't Win Him The Election

Does Kristol wear makeup? posted 04/01/2008 at 01:36:26

Chelsea Clinton Asked About Monica Lewinsky Again, Watch Video

Cindy McCain does have an interesting history. (See link below.) Be sure to read the section on 'prescription drug addiction and theft'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_mccain posted 03/31/2008 at 16:06:36

Florida Moves Ahead Despite DNC Threat

And another thing Tommy, I wish Florida would go blue in November. But it's only gone Democratic twice since 1950: in 1964 for LBJ, and in 1996 for Bill Clinton. That's unless you count the 2000 election for Gore... posted 04/01/2008 at 20:32:16

Tommy, look. I am sure most folks would agree that we wish none of this BS with Florida being denied its delegation had ever happened.

Personally, it would not bother me a bit if they seat the delegates and give Hillary her 37 delegate lead from it (previously estimated to be 42 by greenpapers, by the way.)

But there are issues.

How about the fact that this sets a precedence for the DNC -- "it's okay to break the rules"? If you turn around and seat a 'non-legitimate' primary, what do you think will happen next time?

How about the fact that all candidates agreed to these rules before the primary season?

How about the fact that the Floridians that did NOT go to vote (since the vote wasn't going to count) are disenfranchised if you count the vote of the illegitimate primary?

How about the fact that campaigning wasn't allowed?

See, it's not simple.

I think they should seat the delegates, and most everyone agrees with that. But to let them affect the outcome in any way -- that sets a precedent that it's okay to disobey the DNC. This is a primary, and the DNC owns the right to set the rules for its party and how votes are counted. By far the easiest solution is simply to seat the delegates and divide the votes evenly. posted 04/01/2008 at 20:24:20

I did not say that I would "cede Florida to the Republicans".
I did not say that "it doesn't matter to me".
I did not say that "Florida does not matter in the general."

Why don't you reread what I actually wrote, and take your emotion out of it. posted 04/01/2008 at 19:56:18

No, the general election does not revolve around Florida. There are plenty of scenarios where Florida is not key. You are aware that Bill Clinton won the white house WITHOUT Florida in 1992, aren't you?

Even if Florida is not counted in the Democratic primary, that does not mean that the average voter will change his vote to Republican.

Why does it matter so much to you personally that the votes are counted? How about a seating with a 50/50 split?

I think Florida is likely going Republican in the GE, and would have anyway, just like it did last time. posted 04/01/2008 at 18:37:12

How about the fact that this sets a precedence for the DNC -- it's okay to break the rules?

How about the fact that all candidates agreed to these rules before the primary season?

How about the fact that the people that did NOT go to vote (since the vote wasn't going to count) are now disenfranchised?

How about the fact that campaigning wasn't allowed?

See, it's not simple. posted 04/01/2008 at 18:31:50

From the Washington Post, January 30th:

Clinton announced plans for the Florida celebration on Sunday (January 27th, before the Florida primary), the same day she held a trio of fundraisers in Florida and accepted the endorsement of the Miami mayor while pressing some flesh for the cameras. On Monday, her campaign claimed the endorsement of Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, while pro-Clinton unions continued sending out mailings in her support.

All of this sounded suspiciously like campaigning. But aides said they were merely trying to protect the people of Florida who, despite the campaign's "scrupulous" refusal to campaign in the state, showed up to vote for Clinton anyway. posted 04/01/2008 at 18:26:27

Obama's Alliance With McCain, And How It All Fell Apart

Chinaskee is just a neocon punk that gets his jollies harrassing Democrats. posted 04/01/2008 at 03:58:47

Hey ginnypoo. I read your profile. All of your posts are full of vitriol, anger, and hatred. I see you go around calling Obama a liar and a racist as much as possible.

Why not stop with the slander, and take a look inside yourself to figure out what is really going on? posted 04/01/2008 at 03:55:16

Is this the new Clinton strategy? Go around saying good things about McCain, and how you won't vote for Obama, and hope that scares people into voting for HIllary? posted 04/01/2008 at 03:38:21

C-Span will be glad to carry them. You will see. posted 04/01/2008 at 03:36:37

Guess you dumbed-down Obama's comments to a level that you thought you could understand.

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein posted 04/01/2008 at 02:03:21

Truth is the First Casualty. Logic is the Second. The Democratic Party is the Third.

Nynick, you say, "Obama can't win states with mixed democraphics, the southern states that basically provide the bulk of his lead among pledged delegates are not going to go blue."

Here are the states where Obama has the 'bulk of his lead among pledged delegates':
Illinois, 104 delegates, blue state
Texas, 98 delegates, red state
Georgia, 61 delegates, red state
Virginia, 54 delegates, red state (a swing state for this year's election.)
Washington, 53 delegates, blue state
Minnesota, 48 delegaets, blue state
Wisconsin, 42 delegates, blue state
Maryland, 42 delegates, blue state

So, that's 5 blue states, and three red. Note that most of these are not 'southern states'. The 'bulk' are blue states. Furthermore, the 'bulk' of Clinton's delegates come from NY and CA. Obama holds up better in both NY and CA against McCain in recent polls.

Your argument does not hold water.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html posted 04/01/2008 at 00:51:45

Architect Of Vast Right Wing Conspiracy "Reassesses" Hillary

It's just more of Rush's "Operation Chaos" to help the Rethugliecons win. posted 03/31/2008 at 12:10:39

Obama's Handwriting Found On Survey He Said His Staff Filled Out

Klon, I have taken each of the things you list, evaluated them, used my critical thinking skills, and determined that they are not issues for me. I evaluate the meaning and importance of each one, the context, and compare them to everything else I know about Obama. My conclusion is that Obama is a man of great character and ability, and is the best candidate for President.

None of these things rise to the level of concern for me, and for many others. posted 04/01/2008 at 01:56:41

I found this statement from the article very telling: "After Politico"s story on the first questionnaire, Clinton aides seized on the handgun-ban answer in particular, which a campaign press release asserted called into question Obama"s electability."

So, the Clinton strategy here is to take a questionnaire written 12 years ago, and attack Obama in a way that gives fodder to the Republicans?

I guess this is in line with Clinton's cosponsorship of a bill to criminalize flag-burning, her vote for Kyl-Lieberman, her vote to allow cluster-bombs, etc. I gather she thinks you need to vote like Republicans, and state your issues like Republicans in order to win.

Yeah, that's the ticket. posted 04/01/2008 at 01:28:52

Well, pat yourself on the back while thousands more die in the Iraq war, then. I despise Hillary due to her tactics in this race, and I never thought she would make a good President. She has always been last on my list since the beginning of this primary. But if she is on the Democratic ticket in November, I will vote for her. Our country is too important. We must end war, we must correct the economy, we must have affordable health care, etc. You know the issues. posted 04/01/2008 at 01:13:53

Hillary's Bruce Willis Syndrome

As quoted from another comment, I think this sums it up pretty well.

If there weren't a cost to HRC staying in the race, I'd say, sure, why not? But there are costs:

1) Every week, the Dems negatives go up while McCain's positives go up.
2) The tens of millions of dollars being spent on the primary could go to the general election. I know I don't have unlimited funds, and I'll bet there are lots of people who will feel tapped out by the time the primaries wrap up.
3) The intra-party divide increases each week; the tension is real and the bad blood won't entirely go away. The more time to heal, the better.

There are numerous precedents for wrapping up the nomination before all the states have voted. There's no precedent for the superdelegates to overturn the votes of the voters. posted 03/31/2008 at 15:32:56

AnninCA, you say, "Finally, I support her candidacy because Hillary is the candidate of registered Democrats."

Let's see if you can follow this logic. Obama has won more states. In those states, more registered Democrats voted for him than for Hillary, according to the exit polls. Now, if you have some info that negates this, please provide a link, I'd like to see it. posted 03/31/2008 at 13:33:18

It's been talked about over and over, but here is a concise explanation by nazgul:

If there weren't a cost to HRC staying in the race, I'd say, sure, why not? But there are costs:

1) Every week, the Dems negatives go up while McCain's positives go up.
2) The tens of millions of dollars being spent on the primary could go to the general election. I know I don't have unlimited funds, and I'll bet there are lots of people who will feel tapped out by the time the primaries wrap up.
3) The intra-party divide increases each week; the tension is real and the bad blood won't entirely go away. The more time to heal, the better.

There are numerous precedents for wrapping up the nomination before all the states have voted. There's no precedent for the superdelegates to overturn the votes of the voters. posted 03/31/2008 at 13:28:42

Your 12% statements are inaccurate. A candidate remains on the ballot if he has 12% behind him, but then the votes are counted and apportioned according to the whole.

Obama has won more primary contests than Clinton. Delegates are already apportioned by Democratic population size per state, so state 'size' is not an outside factor. It's already 'factored into' the results.

Obama Primary Wins equals 14 states: Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Missouri, Utah, South Carolina, Louisiana, Maryland, Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin,and Mississippi, plus the Virgin Islands, Democrats Abroad, and D.C. (the last 3 are not included in the total.)

Obama Caucus wins equals 13 states: Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Washington, Maine, Iowa, Hawaii, Texas, and Wyoming.

Clinton Primary Wins equals 12 states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, New Hampshire, Texas, Rhode Island,and Ohio.

Clinton Caucus wins equals 2 states: Nevada and New Mexico, plus American Samoa. posted 03/31/2008 at 13:14:49

Could the Republicans Pick the Democratic Nominee? -- The Untold Story of How the GOP Rigged Florida and Michigan

Lied, stole, and cheated, huh? Over-active imagination or something?

By the way, from the Washington Post, January 30th:

Clinton announced plans for the Florida celebration on Sunday [January 27th, before the Floriday primary], the same day she held a trio of fundraisers in Florida and accepted the endorsement of the Miami mayor while pressing some flesh for the cameras. On Monday, her campaign claimed the endorsement of Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, while pro-Clinton unions continued sending out mailings in her support.

All of this sounded suspiciously like campaigning. But aides said they were merely trying to protect the people of Florida who, despite the campaign's "scrupulous" refusal to campaign in the state, showed up to vote for Clinton anyway. posted 03/31/2008 at 11:49:44

I think Michigan will go Democratic in the general, and Florida will go Republican -- and that's the same result we would have had without all of this mess.

Oh, and if we give Hillary the 42 delegates gain from Florida, and the 70 'free' delegates from Michigan. She's still behind in elected (pledged) delegates. posted 03/31/2008 at 11:21:43

Obama Win Appears Big In Texas Delegate Battle

Tensions flared around noon over how to handle precinct caucus results that were challenged. There were 87 challenges from Senate District 12; the majority of the challenges came from the Clinton campaign.

Rather than waiting for a credentials committee to make recommendations on each challenge, convention leaders suggested splitting the challenged precincts evenly for Obama and Clinton.

The crowd roared a definitive "no" at the initial suggestion. A second vote on the idea failed. Organizers warned that the caucus could go until midnight if each challenge had to be heard individually. Several Obama supporters suggested that the effort was an attempt by the Clinton campaign to steal delegates.

"We will caucus until midnight to get our man in office," said Obama supporter Mindy Barton of Fort Worth.

Around 3 p.m., the delegates addressed all 87 challenges in one vote, accepting the recommendations of the credentials committee. posted 03/30/2008 at 21:34:24

WaPo's Kornblut: Clinton Camp Has 'Managed To Alienate Most Of The Press Corps'

Using the FL and MI contests do not put Clinton ahead in any way. She is still behind in delegates and popular vote. posted 03/30/2008 at 21:54:30

Obama Bowls for Pennsylvania Voters

Your rubber room misses you -- time to go back now. posted 03/30/2008 at 22:45:04

Op-Ed: Obama Was The First To Play Race Card

Well, education teaches you critical thinking skills, the ability to understand, read, and write language. Most people on this planet agree that education is critical in helping solve the world's problems. Here are the 'facts' you requested about voter education level:

CNN exit polls show the below. (No exit polls available for RI, NH, NV.)

First percentage is those with no high school education, second percentage is those with only high school, third percentage is those with some college, but no college degree.

TX, Hillary 71%, 58%, 57%, total voters with less than a college degree is 57%.
CA Hillary 80%, 60%, 57%, total voters with less than a college degree is 53%.
TN Hillary 64%, 62%, 58%, total voters with less than a college degree is 65%.
AR HIllary 78%, 76%, 72%, total voters with less than a college degree is 61%.
NY Hillary, NA, 69%, 61%, total voters with less than a college degree is 39%.
NJ Hillary, NA, 66%, 59%, total voters with less than a college degree is 46%.
OK Hillary, NA, 60%, 67%, total voters with less than a college degree is 60%.
AZ Hillary, NA, NA, 63%, total voters with less than a college degree is 22%.
OH Hillary, NA, 65%, 58%, total voters with less than a college degree is 62%.
MA Hillary, NA, 67%, 64%, total voters with less than a college degree is 39%.
NM Hillary, NA, 66%, 61%, total voters with less than a college degree is 44%. posted 03/30/2008 at 21:11:58

Please, provide examples of what 'it' is. posted 03/30/2008 at 20:43:08

Cash Strapped Clinton Fails To Pay Bills

I think Hillary did not recognize how many of us never wanted her to be our nominee, from the very beginning. I couldn't even understand how she ever thought she would be the best person for president, and how she thought she would have a chance with all of her negatives.

We are all very fortunate that Obama decided to run this time. Thank goodness, thank the gods, and thank you Obama! posted 03/31/2008 at 00:33:40

Clinton Vows To Stay In Race Until Convention

It is the highest probability. posted 03/30/2008 at 01:22:29

No, it's 32%. That's according to the newest poll, the Wall Street Journal poll. Care to tell where you are getting your numbers?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJ-20080326-poll.pdf posted 03/30/2008 at 01:20:05

Hardy har har. Tell some more black jokes, please. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:59:59

I really do believe that the Iraq war, the economy, the 'bomb, bomb Iran' video, McCain's age and history of irrationality makes it a done deal for Obama to beat him. Yes, I do. I think there is a paradigm shift going on, a movement, and I think it will be a landslide in Obama's favor. President Obama. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:58:09

That is correct, sir. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:53:36

Another neocon with a wet dream. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:40:29

It is a fact that Obama is ahead by 6.2% in voted (pledged) delegates. You very clearly stated that Obama only has a 1% 'lead'. Are you willing to concede that your statement was false? posted 03/30/2008 at 00:39:45

You are aware that Clinton has lost to Obama in each month so far, total count by month, aren't you? You are aware that we have already held 44 contests, right?

Here's a link to help you come to grips.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_democratic_primary posted 03/30/2008 at 00:35:52

I'll take that bet, and raise you 10. Can't wait to see you again after November. Hope you enjoy paying your losses. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:32:04

The only way she can steal the nomination is to overturn the voted delegate count. Answer as to how that supports her concern about every vote counting. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:28:43

Please explain where you get your 1% number. Obama leads by 6.2% in pledged delegates.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html posted 03/30/2008 at 00:25:09

It's kind of sad but true (don't steal that -- my brother's book title, lol). So many of the Clinton supporters seem to be math-challenged, literally. "They're only 1% apart" is one stat I often see. Obama leads by 6.2% in pledged delegates, and that's in an allocated delegate race. I don't think they realize how substantial this really is.

And if you relay the truth, over and over, that Hillary really does have to win more than 65% of the vote in ALL of the remaining contests, they seem to just think you are lying to them. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:15:58

This really is the big, relevant question. posted 03/30/2008 at 00:11:18

Obama: Clinton Can Run "As Long As She Wants"

Who is Miss Pokes? posted 03/30/2008 at 10:56:28

I see you don't understand what a lobbyist is. posted 03/30/2008 at 10:55:56

Barack Obama refused Saturday to go along with other Democrats who are calling for Hillary Rodham Clinton to step away from the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

"My attitude is Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants," Obama said.

So flyguy, what fault do you see here? You aren't trying to read something into Obama's statement that's not there, are you? posted 03/30/2008 at 10:45:48

Why Is Edwards Still Sitting On The Fence?

Why don't you give a link to prove your statement? Because you can't, right? posted 03/29/2008 at 23:37:32

Yes, I have noticed that this is not a FIFO system; appears to be a LIFO system -- which is odd. (That's 'first in, first out, versus last in, first out.)

Most of the times my more recent comments appear first. posted 03/29/2008 at 23:28:17

That's it, keep calling the majority of the Democratic party demeaning and childish names. That'll get you somewhere. posted 03/29/2008 at 23:21:33

Oh, I think it's more because he's running against an ex POTUS and his wife, and Bill and Hillary are corrupted by power and influence. posted 03/29/2008 at 23:20:00

Clinton: Stick It Out or Withdraw?

Abbie, Obama is ahead by 3% in the popular vote. I wish your scenario could come true, with Hillary as VP. I guess it still could. But I really do think her negatives would hurt our chances, and that there are better choices to ensure that the Dems win in November.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html posted 03/30/2008 at 23:50:40

Have you added up the electoral votes yourself?

The states Hillary has won have a few more electoral college votes. That is, if you give her Texas. As of today, officially, Texas went for Obama. OBAMA IS AHEAD IN ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES.

The guys on the news apparently never even bothered to add the numbers up themselves -- just took them from the Clinton talking points. Add them up.

A primary win does not mean the winner would fare better in the general election in that state.

Case in point, Obama matches up better with McCain in the GE, even in CA and NY, according to recent polls.

California: McCain vs. Obama, PPIC, McCain 40, Obama 49, Und 7, Obama +9
California: McCain vs. Clinton, PPIC, McCain 43, Clinton 46, Und 7, Clinton +3
New York: McCain vs. Obama, Quinnipiac, McCain 38, Obama 49, Und 8, Obama +11
New York: McCain vs. Clinton, Quinnipiac, McCain 40, Clinton 50, Und 6, Clinton +10 posted 03/30/2008 at 23:41:22