Ohio and Texas prediction contest

Call it the cynic in me, but I think the Clinton's are playing the dirtiest of pool, and I think that in the end, it will result in her victory at all costs...

TAM:)
 
By RCP's count Hillary picked up a grand total of 11 delegates more than Barack yesterday. Meh.

Here's the problem: It's starting to look like Florida and Michigan will have some sort of new contest, such as caucuses, and that the DNC will allow those delegates to be seated. Michigan is a rust-belt state like Ohio and Florida skews older and more Latino. So it's likely that if there was another primary, Hillary would win. In the case of caucuses, I don't know. But these are states that would seem to favor Clinton.

Statement issued today by Howard Dean
We're glad to hear that the Governors of Michigan and Florida are willing to lend their weight to help resolve this issue. As we've said all along, we strongly encourage the Michigan and Florida state parties to follow the rules, so today's public overtures are good news. The rules, which were agreed to by the full DNC including representatives from Florida and Michigan over 18 months ago, allow for two options. First, either state can choose to resubmit a plan and run a party process to select delegates to the convention; second, they can wait until this summer and appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which determines and resolves any outstanding questions about the seating of delegates. We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time. The Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.
Click to expand...
 
Florida and Michigan will get there primaries, and given the momentum shift, and their demographics, they will fall to Hillary.

Like I said, as sad as it is to say, this is the beginning of the end for the "Hope" campaign. Welcome to the "Fear" campaign.

It will comeback to bite her in the General election though, mark my words.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
Florida and Michigan will get there primaries, and given the momentum shift, and their demographics, they will fall to Hillary.

Like I said, as sad as it is to say, this is the beginning of the end for the "Hope" campaign. Welcome to the "Fear" campaign.

It will comeback to bite her in the General election though, mark my words.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

I'd vote for McCain over Clinton.

I think he could wipe the floor with her.
 
It'll come down to the super delegates, as neither candidate will have the primary/caucus delegates.

This kinda puts the super delegates on the spot.

What happens if Obama shows he has feet of clay between now and August? He's built himself up as a different kind of politician, one you can believe (in), full of hope and inspiration. What happens if he's revealed to be just a smooth-talking creation of the Chicago political machine? What happens if a bunch of embarrassing fallout comes out of the Rezko trial? What happens when, as with the NAFTA business, he faces charges of talking out of both sides of his mouth? Will people decide he's just another politician? Does he lose his mystical allure?

OTOH, if he goes into the convention with, say, a 100-vote margin over Clinton, won't there be a lot of presure on the supers to vote for him? "He won the popular vote and the primaries - what kind of racist are you that you won't vote for him?"

I think that might be why the supers don't seem to be in a rush to commit. Nothing to be gained by doing so, and a lot to lose.
 
BPSCG said:
It'll come down to the super delegates, as neither candidate will have the primary/caucus delegates.

This kinda puts the super delegates on the spot.

What happens if Obama shows he has feet of clay between now and August? He's built himself up as a different kind of politician, one you can believe (in), full of hope and inspiration. What happens if he's revealed to be just a smooth-talking creation of the Chicago political machine? What happens if a bunch of embarrassing fallout comes out of the Rezko trial? What happens when, as with the NAFTA business, he faces charges of talking out of both sides of his mouth? Will people decide he's just another politician? Does he lose his mystical allure?

OTOH, if he goes into the convention with, say, a 100-vote margin over Clinton, won't there be a lot of presure on the supers to vote for him? "He won the popular vote and the primaries - what kind of racist are you that you won't vote for him?"

I think that might be why the supers don't seem to be in a rush to commit. Nothing to be gained by doing so, and a lot to lose.
Click to expand...

Disagree that there is nothing to be gained. There are benefits to ending the contest early (fundraising for the election, not the primary; start attacking the Republicans, not each other etc).

Question is whether those benefits are sufficient to take the risk that Obama has feet of clay, that this fact is revealed between now and the convention and that these feet of clay are sufficiently heavy that there is minimal fall out from the supers overturning the pledged delegates / popular vote at the time of the convention). That is a judgement call.
 
Going back to the Texas Caucus for a sec, according to CNN, it appears to be leaning towards Obama (56/44) with 67 delegates in the balance. I don't suppose it is as easy as winner take all like most caucuses are, is it?

Is there a way to estimate how these 67 will be allocated?
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
Disagree that there is nothing to be gained. There are benefits to ending the contest early (fundraising for the election, not the primary; start attacking the Republicans, not each other etc).

Question is whether those benefits are sufficient to take the risk that Obama has feet of clay, that this fact is revealed between now and the convention and that these feet of clay are sufficiently heavy that there is minimal fall out from the supers overturning the pledged delegates / popular vote at the time of the convention). That is a judgement call.
Click to expand...
You're right; I meant there was nothing to be gained for the super delegates. Unless they were going to commit in large numbers now for one candidate or the other, the campaign will still go to the convention, where pledges will be made, deals struck, cushy jobs promised, and principles compromised, all in pursuit of those votes. Why should the super sell his vote cheaply today, especially when the issue will remain in doubt until August? Why give your vote away when you can sell it for an ambassadorship in Paris?

I know, this makes the super delegates sound like a conniving, calculating, tawdry bunch.

:popcorn1
 
BPSCG said:
You're right; I meant there was nothing to be gained for the super delegates. Unless they were going to commit in large numbers now for one candidate or the other, the campaign will still go to the convention, where pledges will be made, deals struck, cushy jobs promised, and principles compromised, all in pursuit of those votes. Why should the super sell his vote cheaply today, especially when the issue will remain in doubt until August? Why give your vote away when you can sell it for an ambassadorship in Paris?

I know, this makes the super delegates sound like a conniving, calculating, tawdry bunch.

:popcorn1
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Of course you only get to be Paris ambassador if the person you sell it to is in a position to make the appointment. Hold on too long and you might get a great promise, but that promise might be worth hee haw.

Of course if a block of them got together and trotted along to see Obama with a "100 votes for the the following 100 jobs" deal, then they might be able to end it now and extract a decent price.
 
If Dean gets his wish for Michigan and Florida, this might actually be good for Obama. Provided he maintains a healthy lead of about 100 delegates, even if Hillary wins a minor victory in both states (as she did in Ohio and Texas this week) the fact that there are more overall delegates to win might give Barack enough to clinch the nomination before the convention.
 
delphi_ote said:
If Dean gets his wish for Michigan and Florida, this might actually be good for Obama. Provided he maintains a healthy lead of about 100 delegates, even if Hillary wins a minor victory in both states (as she did in Ohio and Texas this week) the fact that there are more overall delegates to win might give Barack enough to clinch the nomination before the convention.
Click to expand...

I think the current target is based on their being no delegates from Michigan/Florida. Adding them in just moves the number needed to win.
 
delphi_ote said:
If Dean gets his wish for Michigan and Florida, this might actually be good for Obama. Provided he maintains a healthy lead of about 100 delegates, even if Hillary wins a minor victory in both states (as she did in Ohio and Texas this week) the fact that there are more overall delegates to win might give Barack enough to clinch the nomination before the convention.
Click to expand...

Until November,when the decision to basically disenfrachise Florida and Michigan will come back to haunt the Democrats,with Florida in particular.
 
Dean to Florida: Drop dead.

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) warned the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Thursday that it is facing the “biggest train wreck you’ve ever seen” if a standoff is not resolved over his state’s pledged delegates to the party’s presidential nominating convention.

Nelson sent a letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean Thursday asking the committee to either accept the Jan. 29 results of the primary election or pay for a redo of the elections, which could cost in the range of $20 million. He sent the letter after Dean did not return his telephone call Wednesday.


“If they go to the Democratic Convention and stiff-arm the Florida delegations, how in the world do you think Floridians are going to support the Democratic nominee on Nov. 4?” Nelson told reporters Thursday. “It’s in everybody’s interest to find a solution to this problem.”

However, earlier in the day, Dean said the party would not pay for any do-over.
“We can’t afford to do that,” Dean stated on CBS’s “Early Show.” “That’s not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race.”
Click to expand...
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
I think the current target is based on their being no delegates from Michigan/Florida. Adding them in just moves the number needed to win.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Everything I've read says the number needed to win is 2,024, which is half the total number of delegates including Florida and Michigan. I haven't seen anything citing a different number, or suggesting that 2,024 is the number only if Florida and Michigan are counted.

Might be interesting to see what the DNC's rulebook says. If it's ambiguous on the topic, then we'll need a lot of popcorn.
 
Here's the problem with letting Florida and Michigan back in. They moved their primaries up so they could have a voice in the nominating process. The DNC threatened them with loss of voice if they did and the states went ahead anyway in order to wield power.

If the Dems do ANYTHING to reawaken their voice, then future Dem control of the primary process is completely gone. And these two states, who broke the rules to get power would be rewarded with even MORE power this late in this contested primary. The scenario of letting these two states back in has the potential to create havoc and schisms within the party even worse than the BHO/HRC battle.
 
Last edited:
BPSCG said:
I don't think so. Everything I've read says the number needed to win is 2,024, which is half the total number of delegates including Florida and Michigan. I haven't seen anything citing a different number, or suggesting that 2,024 is the number only if Florida and Michigan are counted.
Click to expand...
I think Beeps is right here. In fact, one possible scenario which seems simple and (somewhat) noncontroversial would be simply reduce the number of needed votes by the Florida and Michigan delegates.

Of course, HRC doesn't like that scenario because she claims to have won those states...a claim which any reasonable person sees as ludicrous.
 
T.A.M. said:
Florida and Michigan will get there primaries, and given the momentum shift, and their demographics, they will fall to Hillary.
Click to expand...
Buck up, T.A.M. Obama is going to win the next three states which will renew some of the luster and make him competitive in Pennsylvania. The other contests will be close no matter who wins. Your candidate still stands in a good position...don't give up on him.
 
SezMe said:
I think Beeps is right here. In fact, one possible scenario which seems simple and (somewhat) noncontroversial would be simply reduce the number of needed votes by the Florida and Michigan delegates.
Click to expand...
This is where the lawyers start calculating their billable hours...

I need to look up the 1860 Democratic convention again. As you doubtless recall (yeah, sure you do), the Dems were unable to settle on a nominee. The southern Democrats walked out and nominated John C. Breckinridge as their candidate. The remainder of the Democratic party reconvened a few weeks later and nominated Stephen A. Douglas, while a third (or fourth?) party, the Constitutional Union Party, nominated John Bell. Meanwhile, the Republicans nominated Abraham Lincoln.

I'm a little curious now what rules the re-convened Dems used to nominate Douglas. Of course, this was a long time ago, back in the days when the nominees were selected by party big shots in smoke-filled rooms.
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
I think the current target is based on their being no delegates from Michigan/Florida. Adding them in just moves the number needed to win.
Click to expand...
Really? I thought the required number of delegates to get the nomination was always the same. The system you outline makes a lot more sense, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom