Ohio and Texas prediction contest

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Truth.

Even if he is disgracefully ignorant of foreign leaders.

The President of Canada?

*grumble...*

Ah, so that's why you Canadians sabotaged him with the NAFTAgate!

 

[SezMe]

TAM, a couple of pieces of good news for you from today to raise your spirits. First, as expected, Obama won Wyoming, incrementally increasing his delegate lead and popular vote lead. Not by much, but every bit helps and, more importantly, makes the delegate/vote mathematics all the more difficult for Clinton. Turn out was as much as 10 times(!) greater than had ever turned out for the Dems in that state.

Secondly, a Dem won Dennis Hastart's seat in Illinois in a special election. This district is strongly demographically Repulican and the seat has been held by a Republican since Jesus was in swaddling clothes. Obama helped with a TV ad for the Dem and BOTH Hastart and McCain helped on the Republican side...to no avail.

 

[T.A.M.]

SezMe:

Yes he won by a substantial margin as well...61% to 38% if I recall. We will see what happens in Mississippi.

What rots me, is this argument that because she wins in states the DEMS must carry, she is the better choice. Follow that argument, and you must then assert that this is true because if Obama is Pres, the DEMS who voted for Hillary in these states will not vote for him in November...which is complete garbage.

To me, the more important issue, is who can sway the independents and mild to moderate republicans in November, to cross over and vote for the DEM. That person, by a mile, is Obama.

My spirits are fine. I often get too involved in things. I have always had an interest in American politics, at least the general election, but this is the first time I have had such an interest at the primary level. It is a combination of liking the message of one candidate, and despising the attitude and sense of self-entitlement of the other.

TAM

 

[BPSCG]

This meme that Obama is light on details is a myth. Go to Hillary's site or Obama's site and you will see quite similar levels of policy detail on a wide range of issues.

I did, a couple of months ago - went to the sites of every serious candidate still in the race (included Giuliani and Romney). I was interested to see what their takes on national security and fighting terrorists were. Obama had a lot of talk about how we can bob and weave and keep them from hitting us, but not a word about how we should hit back. If Obama had been Muhammad Ali's trainer, he'd have told Ali, "Just float like a butterfly - never mind that 'sting like a bee' business."

I saw a lot of Ali's fights on the TV and I noticed something interesting: As much as a defensive genius Ali was, he never once won a fight without hitting the other guy (okay, there was the second Liston fight, but Sonny took a dive in that one...).

FWIW, Romney had the most coherent policy in that regard. Seemed to be the only candidate from either party who recognized that the fight against terrorists is not just our fight, and that we have to get not just the support, but the active participation of the rest of the world if we're going to win. He had some rough outlines in that regard, and they didn't involve the feckless United Nations. Not perfect, by a long shot, but nobody else even mentioned it. Particularly Obama.

 

[Bododio]

There are 599 pledged delegates remaining in the state contests yet to be run. According to the AP, at present Obama is ahead of Clinton by 110 delegates. For Clinton to catch up (not counting the impact, if any, of Florida and Michigan), she'll need approximately 409, or about 68 percent of the 599 remaining.

Let's suppose the polls are correct and Obama wins Mississippi, and they split the delegates 20-13 in favor of Obama. That would make the totals somewhere around 1598-1471, giving Obama a 117 delegate lead with 566 up for grabs. Clinton would have to snag 400 of them to pull even with Obama, or about 70 percent. I don't see this happening.

Unless the sky falls, or the impact of Florida and Michigan is massively in favor of Clinton, Obama will go to the convention with a considerable delegate lead.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

There are 599 pledged delegates remaining in the state contests yet to be run. According to the AP, at present Obama is ahead of Clinton by 110 delegates. For Clinton to catch up (not counting the impact, if any, of Florida and Michigan), she'll need approximately 409, or about 68 percent of the 599 remaining.

Let's suppose the polls are correct and Obama wins Mississippi, and they split the delegates 20-13 in favor of Obama. That would make the totals somewhere around 1598-1471, giving Obama a 117 delegate lead with 566 up for grabs. Clinton would have to snag 400 of them to pull even with Obama, or about 70 percent. I don't see this happening.

Unless the sky falls, or the impact of Florida and Michigan is massively in favor of Clinton, Obama will go to the convention with a considerable delegate lead.

Think you need to check your sums. If he is ahead by 110 and there are 599 remaining, she needs 355 to catch up (355 - 244 = 111), not 409.

Still don't see her getting anywhere close though.

 

[Bododio]

Think you need to check your sums. If he is ahead by 110 and there are 599 remaining, she needs 355 to catch up (355 - 244 = 111), not 409.

Still don't see her getting anywhere close though.

I see where I went wrong. Thanks for the correction. Math was never my strong suit. I think my calculation is correct that 355 comes up to not quite 60 percent of the remaining pledged delegates Clinton would need to catch Obama.

And if Obama wins MS 20-13 as I postulated, she'd then need about 342 to catch up, a little over 60 percent of the remaining delegates. Still a tall order.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Think you need to check your sums. If he is ahead by 110 and there are 599 remaining, she needs 355 to catch up (355 - 244 = 111), not 409.

Still don't see her getting anywhere close though.

Ah, but will she win the popular vote though? That could prove to be problematic.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Ah, but will she win the popular vote though? That could prove to be problematic.

Possibly. If she doesn't, then I don't see any possibility of the supers backing her.

If she does, then she has a legitimate argument to make. Probably depends how far behind she is on the pledged delegates as to whether it makes a difference - well below 100 and she might have a chance.

 

[T.A.M.]

now, apparently, she has further divided the delegates into...

pledged, super, and caucus...lol

TAM