WV Erases Obama's PV (Update) Nebraska Dead Heat

by BPK80, Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:35:52 PM EST

Popular Vote Totals

There was a lot of talk this week about how West Virginia "wouldn't matter" and I even heard some predictions that she might only net a "few thousand" votes from West Virginia.

Surprise surprise, SUSA was right.  And with the huge turnout, Hillary is on track to earn approximately 120,000 votes from West Virginia.  With all 50 states counted, by the end of the night she will have received more votes in her name than any other candidate in the contest, and significantly, more votes than any single nominee in the history of the Democratic Party.  

To compare, Hillary's landslide victory in West Virginia is netting her more popular votes than her equally high profile lead in TEXAS.  

More bad news for Obama:

I encourage everyone to check out the County by County map of West Virginia.  Obama is doing a little bit better in the northeast counties that border Pennsylvania.  But he's losing by as much as 75% (85 to 10!!!) in counties bordering Kentucky.

West Virginia has a little over 600,000 registered Democrats.  Kentucky has 1.6 million.  The huge spread we've seen in West Virginia coupled with that type of turnout realistically predicts a huge popular vote boost for Clinton, offset by whatever narrow loss she experiences in Oregon, a smaller state with far fewer registered Dems.  

Obama lost every county in the state of West Virginia.  To date, that has not happened in any primary contest held thus far.  He is likely to lose every single county in Kentucky as well, although the counties containing Louisville and Lexington may be close or marginally competitive.  

It is likely at this rate that by next week, Obama will be losing the popular vote, even if one were to use their imagination give him all of the "Uncommitted" votes in Michigan, a state where he received zero votes by choice.

Last week things felt awful as a Hillary supporter.  But with the poaching of pledged delegates now starting in Maryland, that metric means even less and less.  Once again the tide may be turning.  The media which made it seem so miserable for Hillary (after she closed a huge gap in NC and won the "tiebreaker" Indiana) is now saying she made strong arguments, gave a great speech, and are talking about Michigan/Florida all of the time.  The only one I see who can't be objective is Obama shill Donna Brazile.  I wish CNN would label her as such because she's decidedly partisan.    

Update [2008-5-14 0:39:2 by BPK80]: The earlier optimistic prediction of 120,000 votes has been exceeded. She's winning by 137,000 with 7% of the vote left to report. I don't think anyone expected the popular vote victory would be this enormous, a product of both precipitous large margins and very high turnout. Given that Kentucky has almost three times as many registered Democrats and another landslide victory (probably more like 30% than the 41% in WV) is on its way, Hillary will further cement her growing popular vote lead. Also, Nebraska held a "beauty contest" primary today. With 80% of the vote in, Obama and Clinton have swapped the lead numerous times tonight, with Obama now ahead by 4%. To compare, Obama beat Clinton by 35% in the February Nebraska caucus: *Nebraska* 02/09 BHO 26,126 HRC 12,445 Obama +13,681 +35.4% *Nebraska* 05/13 BHO 45,106 HRC 42,282 Obama +4% The primary is not official, but more people voted in the primary. Again, we see the combination of factors at play here, giving rise to many questions. If caucuses are true indicators of Democratic will, why would Obama have fallen into disfavor by 31% since February? Or, if they're not true indicators of people's will, why do we give them any credit in the first place? Nebraska now joins Texas and Washington as states that have held both primaries and caucuses, each one showing a perverse skew in favor of Obama in the caucus. The skew is so pronounced that it ipso facto should give rise to a very strong suspicions. With the commencement of poaching pledged delegates in Maryland, Hillary has a strong argument that pledged delegates in caucus states should align themselves more congruently with the state's will.  

Update [2008-5-14 2:5:56 by BPK80]: Obama won the Nebraska primary by 2%. That's a whopping *33.5* decline from his February numbers in the Nebraska caucus. For those who think the primary had reduced turnout, it had more than twice as many voters as the caucus because it was scheduled along with a Senate race. Nebraska's caucus was attended by 40,000 people. Nebraska's primary was attended by 95,000.  

Update [2008-5-14 2:5:56 by BPK80]:  

Hillary has a 144,500 lead in West Virginia with 98% reporting. Based on a cursory analysis of which counties have left to report, it looks like she will pick up another 1,500 votes for a 146,000 vote lead. This shocks me because I expected her big prizes to be only Kentucky and Puerto Rico. Both are significantly more populated. West Virginia becomes Hillary's 8th biggest PV state, passing even the huge margins she put up in Arkansas and New Jersey. In order, they are: California, Michigan, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Massachusetts, *WEST VIRGINIA* This was totally unexpected by me. I knew she would win and fairly big but didn't expect turnout this big nor did I predict this 41% spread which is an embarrassment to Barack Obama. It's an outright rejection of Obama and an outright rejection of the media's attempt to push this radical candidate down our throats.


Tags: West Virginia, WV, Hillary (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 240 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (1.93 / 15)

No it doesn't.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:37:26 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

No?

I guess you'll have to wait until the full results of West Virginia are in to see the obvious and inevitable finale for the trajectory.  Fair enough, I'll give you until 1 AM Eastern Time.  ;-)


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:52:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

exactly no (none / 0)

you see when its beauty contests people are not motivated as much to come out and vote.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:55:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: exactly no (none / 0)

With all due respect, your comment has nothing to do with what I just said.  I'm not even sure what you're trying to say.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:27:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

RCP has BHO up about 596,400ish, including WV.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/democratic_vote_count.htm l


Capitalization is the difference between "I had to help my uncle Jack off a horse..." and "I had to help my uncle jack off a horse..."
by igottheblues on Wed May 14, 2008 at 07:08:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Newsflash: 2.3 million people voted in Michigan and Florida.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:40:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

You mean she didn't win by 800,000 votes in WV?  No way!!!


by Pragmatic Left on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:38:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama outspends HRC 2:1 in WV! (none / 0)

Obama outspends HRC 3:1 in PA!

Now there's an incredible trend, in and of itself!

People spend so much time talking about how Obama wrote off WV! Yet he outspent Clinton 2:1 there?!?!?

I mean, come on! I have to hear this from Lanny Davis for the first time tonight on CNN, because nobody else thinks it's newsworthy?

You must be freakin' kidding me?


by bobswern on Wed May 14, 2008 at 03:14:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It gets worse for Obama! (none / 0)

Not only did he outspend Hillary in West Virginia over 2 to 1, he had more than twice as manhy ground forces brought in AND he had opened twice as many campaign offices around the state.  Also there was a huge cell phone out of state call in effort to convince voters among other effort to shock Hillary with a much lowered margin of victory.

Worked great.

He moved out and away to states who had already voted to try to convince his media buddies that he only lost because he didn't contest.  His campaign had actually predicted single digits!

By the way, they are trying much harder in Kentucky and expect the have deployed the resources to really shock Hillary in Kentucky.  And, of course there is the self-coronation ploy scheduled for that night to keep the talking heads from noticing that the voters were rapidly moving toward Hillary from his core groups (excepts Blacks; but they had disappointed him with turnout in Pennsylvania and last week, too.

Hillary is winning young people, very liberal, educated, higher income, men, non-religious and religious.and Independents!  As long as the talking heads are distracted, nobody is noticing the big shift in voters.


by itsadryheat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 03:57:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Incredible (2.00 / 1)

Kentucky and Oregon combined will make Obama's anticipated Mission Accomplished speech the laughing stock of the country.

I heard he wants to give his performance from a Yacht outside of Portland.

That's going to help him connect with middle/working class voters?

Maybe he'll give Part II of the Cling-to-Guns speech to go along with the elitist atmosphere he's creating for himself.

A yacht.

Seriously, WTF.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 04:54:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent Point (2.00 / 1)

I remember people talking about "County Conventions" in West Virginia and how Obama supporters thought he would do better than expected.

I thought the media coronation might suppress turnout in WV but instead, it seems it has only fired up Hillary's base.  

Now the media is setting us up for the "Oh my God, they're really going to count Florida and Michigan!" storyline.  With the "Oh my God, our fake delegate counters were wrong all along!" narrative.

It's how they make news I guess.  They build Obama up knowing that the higher they raise him the bigger the story will be when they crush him.

That's what happens when you have a candidate who is more celebrity than subtance.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 04:51:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He outspends her because... (none / 0)

she has no money.

I predict you'll see him outspend her by 8 or 9 times in Oregon, because, and I think I said this, she has no money.

She's presently collecting your hard earned dollars to help retire her whopping campaign debt before it's too late.


John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.
by Travis Stark on Wed May 14, 2008 at 08:19:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

41% loss (2.00 / 1)

Well, the saddest part about Obama having all that money is the fact that it doesn't seem to help him win elections.

If he's our nominee, given that preferences in this race have essentially harened along race and class lines, it would probably be wise for Obama to simply donate all of his funds to downticket Democrats who might actually benefit from the investment.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:39:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 8)

oh oh are you counting FL popular vote, and MI yet NOT giving anything to Obama in MI and NOT counting the caucus states?

because thats how it works right? fight to count every vote, cept for the caucus states, we aren't Americans in the caucus states to you.


Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."
by TruthMatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:38:26 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

I'm counting totals reported by all Secretaries of State in the 50 states, and yes, I do include the overseas territories that were favorable to Obama.

You're asking if I count the 1.7 million votes from Florida?  The answer is: of course.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:54:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Translation (1.50 / 2)

"No, I'm not counting Iowa, Nevada, Washington, or Maine."


Support Regina Thomas, GA-12
by Drew on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:38:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Translation (none / 0)

Those states didn't release vote totals.

I'm talking specifically about actual votes cast, not imaginary votes.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:50:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Like I said. (2.00 / 1)

You aren't counting them.

That said, I'm sure that Iowa, Nevada, Washington, and Maine will be glad to know that Clinton considers their votes to have been "imaginary."


Support Regina Thomas, GA-12
by Drew on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:57:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Like I said. (none / 0)

Clinton won the Nevada caucus, barely lose the Maine caucus, lost narrowly in Iowa and no one knows how many people voted in the Washington caucus.  Obama won the primary in Washington by 5%.  In February.  

From week to week, her popular vote lead grows.  I know it bothers many Obama supporters who want a clear cut incontrovertible clean victory.  But it's not going to end up that way.

As I've said before, I won't vote for the GOP, but this nomination, if Obama cinches it, looks set to end up on a Florida 2000 note.  Obama wins more delegates from the dubious allocation system and Clinton earns more votes.

After Kentucky and Puerto Rico weigh in with only marginal, if any, offsets from Oregon, South Dakota, and Montana, this will be more clear.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:49:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Indeed, Clinton won Nevada (2.00 / 1)

And as a reward, her supporters pretend it doesn't exist.  Nice of you, but given the Clintons' history of chucking supporters when they become inconvenient (witness NAFTA, welfare reform, and DOMA), not a surprise.

Look, I'm not gonna pretend that the will of the people isn't a bit vague in this contest, but calling contests that do count - like the Iowa, Nevada, Washington, and Maine caucuses - "imaginary" is simply bullshit.


Support Regina Thomas, GA-12
by Drew on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:09:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Indeed, Clinton won Nevada (none / 0)

They're not imaginary and I didn't mean to imply that.  But the states didn't release vote totals, so all we can do is "imagine" what the vote totals may have been.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 02:16:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's called an estimate. (none / 0)

And your estimate of zero is bullshit.


Support Regina Thomas, GA-12
by Drew on Wed May 14, 2008 at 11:44:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"Barely lost?" (none / 0)

Hillary lost the Maine caucus by 20 points. That's "barely" losing?


by Angry White Democrat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:28:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Barely lost?" (none / 0)

In terms of popular vote, a small caucus in a small state with a 19% spread isn't going to yield much.

I concede I may have used improper terminology.  By "barely lost" I should have explicitly said I was referring to the disparite in votes cast (a few thousand) vis-a-vis the national popular vote tally which includes over 34,000,000 people.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 02:15:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Translation (none / 0)

Really? There were NO votes cast in Iowa, Nevada, Washington, and Maine? The results of all four of those contests were zero-zero ties?

Wow. You'd better pass this information along to the DNC, because their delegate allocations are WAY off.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:20:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Translation (2.00 / 1)

Wow, I feel like Schrodinger's Cat?

I am an imaginary voter, unless Hillary's supporter look and see me!

Jumping up and down and waving hands?

Hey, I voted!  In WA state? In a Caucus?

Obama won big!

I'm real, not imaginary...(really, I am!)


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:23:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

You can count from the Land of Nod if you want but the DNC does not.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:40:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL (1.90 / 10)

Is this one of those cosmic popular vote counts that gives Obama zero votes in Michigan and doesn't count any of the people who showed up to caucus? Yeah, that's convincing.


by elrod on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:38:40 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 8)

huh? obama was ahead in the popular vote by 700,000 votes before tonight.   After tonight he'll be ahead by 600,000 or so...


by soros on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:39:06 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 14)

Make sure to email all the SD's.  They love being treated like idiots.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:39:41 PM EST

ha, you win (2.00 / 3)

The first six comments here were all great, sarcastic slams at the absurdity of the diarist's "popular vote" calculations, but yours was definitely the funniest.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:44:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

this is such BS (1.85 / 7)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:40:18 PM EST

Re: this is such BS (2.00 / 1)

Hey Michelle... cancel that order for new drapes.


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:43:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

pardon? (none / 0)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:47:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Troll Rated (none / 0)

For levying a bald insult without contributing anything substantial to the discussion.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:33:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama Lost EVERY Category in West Virginia (2.00 / 2)

Based on CNN's Exit Polls:

Clinton won Women 71/27

Men 59/37

Every Age Group

Every Income Group, Including Over $100,000 by 51/45

Every Educational Level

Even Those for Whom Iraq is the Top Issue 56/41

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primari es/results/epolls/#WVDEM


by phoenixdreamz on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:41:00 PM EST

Re: Obama Lost EVERY Category in West Virginia (2.00 / 2)

As goes West Virgina, so goes the nation.


by Brannon on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:35:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

They seem to be hell bent on taking it to the convention. The problem is, when there is a convention fight, we lose.

Doesn't matter who the nominee is at that point. We lose.

She does that, the Clinton legacy is tarnished forever. It will only re-emphasize how we lost seats under Bill.


by IowaMike on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:41:15 PM EST

Clinton grows stronger (2.00 / 1)

Obama weakens as people get to know him.  Even after Time magazine and media declarations that the race was "over" and Obama "won," every single county in West Virginia delivered a margin of victory for Hillary Clinton that is so large, frankly even I am surprised.

Check out the county map near the Kentucky border.  Barack Obama can barely muster 15% of the vote.  There have been polls showing him losing Eastern Kentucky by 90%/10%.  I believe them now after seeing the actual returns.  

HUGE win for Clinton.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:57:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (2.00 / 1)

And very expected. Personally I predicted a 40 point margin. Poblamo seems to have nailed it again - and he does it purely on demographics and other objective criteria - no gut instinct or anything like that.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

not true. You always focus on the handful of states she wins and ignore the tens of states she lost in your analysis. Not valid.


by IowaMike on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:39:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (2.00 / 2)

BTW, how do you define a trend? Because the picture from PA to IN and NC to WV doesn't look anything like a linear relationship.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:03:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

The trend is evident in states sharing similar demographics.

For instance,

Early in the race: Virginia +28, Georgia +35, South Carolina +29

Later in the race: North Carolina +13 (factoring in the 15,000 votes Obama lost due to doublecount)

Early in the race: Wisconsin +18

Later in the race: Ohio -8, Pennsylvania -9

Early in the race: Connecticut +4

Later in the race: Rhode Island -18

The Obamamania of February has subsided and in similarly demographically composed states, he's running between 20 and 30 points behind his February margins.  

Another interesting comparison materializes shows the rift between caucuses and primaries.  Nebraska's primary tonight is a dead heat, while Obama won the caucus there by over +30%.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:57:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

Since you've provided no demographic information, you haven't established anything.  


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:27:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

Check the census.  It's not my job to tell you universally understood facts like "the sky is blue," "grass is green," and "North Carolina is approx. 22% black."  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:43:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (2.00 / 2)

Not true.

In PA, OH, TX, Obama was down huge to lose by a lot less.

He didn't spend any time in WV. The polling didn't change because of that.

Not to mention, Appalachia white America is different demographically then the rest of "White America."

And you are still hoping that the SD overturn the reg dels in a super caucus.


by IowaMike on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:24:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (2.00 / 1)

an analysis based on opinion rather than facts.


by IowaMike on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:38:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

Correct.  That one post you were responding to specifically was my opinion, considering the facts of course of Obama's tremendous decline since February.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:59:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

A turn to Appalachian states where she has demographic advantages and he still has ensured the regular delegate win.

My daughter had a track meet yesterday. In an 800, she was behind by about 40 meters in the last 150. she started to sprint, she almost caught the other girl, but the girl sensed her and picked it up. She lost by 5m.

She made no excuses. Getting close doesn't mean you would have won. There is no fair way to determine that. She lost because she made mistakes, or the other person just is better.

Clinton could learn from my daughter.


by IowaMike on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:10:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton grows stronger (none / 0)

The story about your daughter is touching, but if I'm not mistaken, you've recited it three or four times in this thread alone.  

Since February, Clinton has closed huge gaps and won states both in and out of Appalachia: Indiana, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Texas, and even the parts of Ohio and Pennsylvania that are not part of Appalachia: like the crucial Philadelphia suburbs that Barack Obama shockingly could not carry, despite expectations he would do well there.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 05:47:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 4)

I really encourage you to read the media coverage of this. No one, and I mean no one in the press thinks the tide is turning.  

Hillary Clinton's advisers continue to insist that the candidate's prospects are very much alive, but the press isn't buying it. Exhibit A: There are two press buses waiting at the hotel here for Clinton's trip to her victory rally in West Virginia, but the entire press contingent doesn't quite fill one. It isn't until the entourage arrives at Dulles Airport that Clinton aides learn that the second bus is still idling, empty, at the hotel.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/05/13/AR2008051302862. html?hpid=topnews

And the special election win tonight undermines the argument that Obama on the ballot will hurt down-ballot races.  That's a huge plus for him on a night where Clinton did so very well in WV.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:41:30 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

Ooh! That stings.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:43:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

These are the same MSM idiots that thought the war was a good idea.


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:45:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

According to the transitive property, (2.00 / 6)

you just called Clinton an idiot.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:46:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wow that had to hurt (2.00 / 2)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:53:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Milbank (none / 0)

Is just a bit brilliant, isn't he?


I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com
by LtWorf on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:53:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Math is like hard man, it hurts my head. (2.00 / 3)


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:41:37 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 5)

Congratulations to  Hillary in taking the lead in popular vote that doesn't include a lot of people that voted in sanctioned contests but does include people who voted not only in unsanctioned contests but also unsanctioned contests in which only one of the two candidates left in the race was on the ballot and not including all those people who still decided to go through the trouble of going to the polls to cast votes for uncommitted and then report to exit pollsters that their vote would have gone to Obama!


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:44:45 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

actaully if you count caucuses and FL and MI he leads by approx 50,000 votes


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:45:49 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

389,000 votes

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/democratic_vote_count.htm l


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:00:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

um 150,178 or 0.43% minus the votes from tonight. roughly around another 100,000 right?


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:03:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

That is without giving him ANY votes from Michigan...


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:16:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

According to the Michigan Secretary of State, Barack Obama received exactly ZERO votes there.

How many magic wands must we wave to give Obama votes he didn't receive because he consciously and voluntarily forfeited them?

You can't take your name off of the ballot in states you're expected to lose and then turn around and say "Give me half the votes! And half of the delegates too!" after the fact.

rolls eyes


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:04:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

You can't take your name off of the ballot in states you're expected to lose and then turn around and say "Give me half the votes! And half of the delegates too!" after the fact.

You also can't agree that states won't count, agree they won't count, and then, after you suffer a shocking loss on Super Tuesday, suddenly wake up to the idea that not counting them is "disenfranchisement" and demand they count.

The popular vote is totally irrelevant. It counts for nothing. If you think it should sway supers, that's fine - but if you expect them to ignore the fact that 40% of Michiganders (on top of those Dems who voted for Mitt to play havoc on McCain) slogged through the snow to vote "uncommitted" means we should only count the +Clinton votes, then you take the supers for pretty big idiots. Likewise, if you expect them to ignore the vote in 4 states just because they didn't report popular vote totals, you likewise give them very little credit.


by mattw on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:19:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

I'm not arguing to superdelegates.

And as we've seen with the first poaching of a pledged delegate from Clinton to Obama, every pledged delegate is essentially a superdelegate.  

That said, I've already acknowledged Hillary has a hard time with the media hostility from North Carolina/Indiana.  The popular vote will be her moral victory and a living testament to the outrageousness of this system.  If Obama wins, it will be a Florida 2000 style decision.  "Stop counting the votes and the loser of the nationwide popular vote wins."


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:53:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Are you fucking kidding me? Do you honestly think that everyone on Earth is a moron? Because you are sure treating them that way.

How's that been working out for you?


by Brannon on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:40:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

I'm raising arguments that have been kept out of the spotlight for a while now.

It has become convenient to forget that forfeiting Michigan was a strategic boon for Obama that more than paid off for him.

1. He won Iowa, as a result of his pandering.
2. He was able to temporarily deligitimize the expected loss in Michigan, enabling it to not blunt his momentum as much as it would have had he kept his name on the ballot.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:32:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

Hmmm.  I think that she pretty much has to win Oregon to have a shot at the nomination.  A popular vote win would definitely give that claim some credibility, but she would probably have to beat him without Michigan for people to take it seriously, or at the very least, beat him even when he gets the uncommited votes and caucus estimates.  If she could overcome that 460,000 or so popular vote lead, things could get a little dicey for Obama.

That being said, she's running out of time.  A lot of supers are coming out for Obama.  We've seen how difficult it is for a super to switch (a lot of Clinton's supers may have wished they would have waited about a month ago).  I just don't any of the primary results changing any super's minds unless she wins Oregon.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:47:00 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

The supers are frozen after this smashing victory.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:52:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

highly doubt it (2.00 / 1)

they are frozen after this one? How about 11 consecutive Obama victories with some of them by bigger margins then this.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:54:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (2.00 / 1)

Breaking News form CNN: SMASHING VICTORY FOR CLINTON, WINNING EVERY COUNTY. REPORTS COMING OUT AM TOMORROW THAT THE SUPERDELEGATE MOVEMENT WILL ONCE AGAIN BE FROZEN, BY HER SMASHING VICTORY.

CLINTON AHEAD 66 TO 27%. Same old question being asked, why can't Obama close the deal,? Why can't Obama win over the White working class voters,? Why can't Obama win over Women,? Why can't Obama win over Senior Citizens? Why can't Obama win over Hispanics,? Why Can't Obama win Swing States?


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:05:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

yeah, thats not happening (2.00 / 1)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:10:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (2.00 / 1)

Is that an exclusive from sky news media? LOL


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:14:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (2.00 / 1)

Watch my headlines tomorrow.....HA HA!


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (2.00 / 1)

At least the Clinton campaign appreciates my reports, since they placed one of MYDD dairy's on her main website.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:40:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (none / 0)

Will I have to wear a tin foil hat.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:44:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: highly doubt it (none / 0)

Your prediction record is not strong, to say the least.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:41:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

Eh, but not really.  No one who knows anything about politics expected anything less than utter domination for Hillary in West Virginia AND Kentucky.  Do you think that all those supers who went for Obama after Indi and NC didn't know that she would crush him in WV?  Very unlikely.

Great victory for her, but completely expected.  Nothing will change the minds of the super delegates except a victory in Oregon.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:56:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

Just like his win in NC was expected. Correct?
Nothing will change their minds? You don't know politics very well do you!

BTW: Nobody had expected this large of a thumping in WV, but it is astonishing, she is winning every region of the state and every voting group. This is utterly amazing. What a remarkable woman this is.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:11:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

You're absolutely wrong. I predicted 40% and Poblamo predicted 39% I believe. The Page set a figure that would change the narrative that clinton didn't meet.

You can say no one expected this, but we actually read lots of sources and know it's now true.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:44:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Who cares what you or your co heart predicted. What did the media predict? Certainly not 40+ percent.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:05:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Yes there were plenty of stories with those sorts of margins.  


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:15:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

yes his win in (none / 0)

NC was expected. And so was her is WV.

Of course she is still behind in every metric.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:48:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Haha! You're a peach, Stevie.

Let's recap how you brilliantly rebutted my comment:

Just like his win in NC was expected. Correct?

Incorrect, Stevie, my boy!  Here is what was expected in WV (and in Kentucky, as I'm sure you might forget this by the time Kentucky votes):
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/democratic_upcoming_state s.html

True, at one time, people thought Obama would win NC by double digits, but the polls indicated it was much much closer.  Word from Clinton's camp suggested she could win it.  Here is the RCP average.  Compare to the final results to see why NC was a minor, but significant game changer for Obama:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/nc/north_carolina_democra tic_primary-275.html

For the sake of correcting your ignorance on the subject, let's include Indiana as well:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/in/indiana_democratic_pri mary-639.html

Nothing will change their minds? You don't know politics very well do you!

Cute little insult there, Stevie baby! I reassert my position: nothing will change the minds of the super delegates until Oregon, where if she won, it might actually give them pause (however slight).  Go ahead and find a graph of Hillary's support in Kentucky and West Virgina.  She's owned these two states.  The supers knew this would happen when they all started coming toward Obama, hence, this changes nothing.

BTW: Nobody had expected this large of a thumping in WV, but it is astonishing, she is winning every region of the state and every voting group. This is utterly amazing.

Wow every region in WV?  If only someone could have predicted a 40 point win!  Oh wait.  Everyone did.  Please see the first link again.

What a remarkable woman this is.

We're agreed there.  She is an amazing candidate and a great politician and leader.  Steven, please, do her the honor of not posting intellectually dishonest and insulting posts in her name.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:58:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

All spring, North Carolina was expected to be a blowout loss for Clinton.  Personally, I thought it would be a Georgia/Virginia style smashing on par with the 28% and 35% troucnings she got there.  I thought Barack would come away from North Carolina with 350,000 extra votes in his pocket.  Likewise, I was worried Clinton would lose Indiana.

Only in the very last week going into the contests did expectations raise unrealistically for Hillary.  She exceeded her long-term expectations for the state but fell short of the expectation boom that occurred right before the votes.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:10:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Hmmm, sort of like all 2007 this nomination was supposed to be a blowout for Hillary?  Yeah, perhaps.  Expectations change.  IN the two weeks before NC, Obama had terrible press.  Clinton thought she might be able to win there.  RCP had him at an 8 point average and falling.

So yes, a double digit win, when viewed from the context of February, was expected; when viewed from the context immediately preceding the election, big surprise.  Pretty similar with Indiana.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:23:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Not really.

North Carolina had been voting for weeks before election day.  I don't recall the exact figures, but Hillary won day-of voters in both Indiana and North Carolina.  It wasn't nearly enough to offset her deficit in NC early voting.  

Plus, it's impossible to win a state when you have 40% of the primary electorate block-voting against you.  Hillary did really well considering the challenges she was up against in North Carolina.

Obviously, she can compete more effectively on Obama's turf (NC) than he can on hers (WV).  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:00:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your comment is ludicrous (none / 0)

Everyone? OH you must mean those on MYDD, which I take with a grain of salt. You are cherry picking at best with your use of Real Clear Politics as your lone argument. As far as your ignorance goes, Hillary came from behind to win Indiana. Obama had boasted for months that he would win the state by at least 7% points, and had even predicted a win on his spread sheets. Seems you not up on you facts. Want to go tit for tat, bring it on. But please stop with your snobbish,insulting and ludicrous remarks. Ok Minnesota boy.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:14:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your comment is ludicrous (none / 0)

No he didn't. Find one quote - one - where Obama predicted he'd win by 7 points in IN.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:16:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your comment is ludicrous (none / 0)

Oh gosh, you're right: Wwo uses RCP averages as data?  Oh, that's right.  Everyone from the internet, printed, television, and radio media.  Forgive me for using such a widely credited and respected metric to illustrate my point.

even predicted a win on his spread sheets.

I'm not really sure why, but the "spread sheets" part really cracked me up.  Am I crazy, or is that really funny to imagine?


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:26:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your comment is ludicrous (none / 0)

It's not imaginary.  Obama's camp released a compilation of predictions a few months back where they saw Indiana as very favorable territory.  Obama also called it a "tie-breaker."  But the night that Hillary won Indiana, she was asked to curtsy and exit the race.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:03:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Thank you Nostradamus, did you use the same crystal ball you used for this prophecy?

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/6/14 443/98891/4#4


by Brannon on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:46:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

It is a new day for Hillary Clinton. No longer are the pundits telling her to get out! She has once again proven them wrong, making them all look like the fools they are. Her landslide ++++ Victory in WV, is a turning point in this campaign. Obama's premature speech in Missouri, in which he totally wrote off WV may come back to haunt him considerably. After Puerto Rico votes on June 1st, Hillary will be ahead in the popular vote, and will have won all the swing states that are needed to win the GE. The argument still holds, and is as potent as it was earlier.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:50:13 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 2)

The "Hillary should leave" story is so two weeks ago.  No one has been saying that since Pennsylvania.  All the press talks about it how important it is for the democratic party (and Obama) that she stay in, how 60% of the party wants her to stay in, etc etc.

I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't want her to get out before Kentucky.  That being said, I don't think she should do anything to hurt Obama's chances if he becomes the nominee, but she has every right to stay in as long as she pleases.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:54:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

Your right she does and she will, and will have her day before the credentials committee to argue her case.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:13:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

My right and she does?  Interesting.  Please clarify your position here, as it's one I haven't actually heard before.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:59:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (none / 0)

Ooooh, sorry I understand what you meant now.  "You're right and she does".  Okay yeah, that makes much more sense :)

Fortunately for the democratic party, she won't go to the convention still arguing for the nomination unless Obama doesn't have enough delegates, including Michigan and Florida.  As I've said, unless she somehow wins Oregon (it would require an amazing amazing amazing bit of campaigning on her part to do this without being so negative as to destroy the democratic party, and even then she'd still probably lose), she's out.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:02:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

Does not anyone take into account Obama never even campaigned there?  This is a way to let Clinton have her "moment in the sun" and get more donations from supporters to pay off their debt...I believe this was all in the works between Obama and Clinton...


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:02:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Double the money, people, offices all for 26%? (none / 0)

How can you pretend he didn't compete?


by itsadryheat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 04:36:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I see (2.00 / 1)

of course I've heard make this prediction over and over and yet somehow Obama is still winning


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:06:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see (none / 0)

STILL WINNING? CLINTON 68%-OBAMA 27% . AND YOU CALL THAT WINNING? LOL LOL THE PRESUMPTIVE NOMINEE! WHAT A JOKE!


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:43:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see (2.00 / 1)

After tonight he'll need about 23 pledged delegates to win a majority of pledged delegates.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:45:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Can't be nominee on promises to vote! (none / 0)

Either she drops out or he has to wait fot the delegates' actual votes in August before he becomes the nominee, no matter the math before then.  The rules!


by itsadryheat on Wed May 14, 2008 at 04:38:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

totally (2.00 / 2)

forget the other states that voted. WV alone will decide.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Tue May 13, 2008 at 11:47:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see (none / 0)

Your caps lock is broken btw.


I CAN HAZ BAHROCK DONASCHON?
by kasjogren on Wed May 14, 2008 at 12:17:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 1)

As a kid, I always did enjoy reading fantasy, so this was a nice trip down memory lane.


No way. No how. No McCain.
by freedom78 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:50:26 PM EST

Re: WV Erases Obama's Popular Vote Lead (2.00 / 4)

If you believe that the 600,000 number is accurate, you believe that the actions of Democratic party bigwigs are more important than the votes of voters.  It is really that simple.

The DNC's death sentence would have been determined by any reasonable observer as "cruel and unusual."  This decision was rooted in the egotistical reactions of DNC officials to two states who dare stand against them.  They went ABOVE and BEYOND the rules written in the charter, which would have had each primary held at half pledged delegates, full super delegates, and allowed campaigns in the states.

The damage that has already been done to these two state Democratic parties as a result cannot be understated.  I've only lived in Florida and Michigan in my entire lifetime.  These two critical swing states missed out on a chance to get to know the Democratic candidates the way other states did.  They missed out on being truly counted in the Democratic primary.  The kind of party-building and enthusiasm effects that the campaign has generated nationwide was aborted in Michigan and Florida by the DNC before the campaign even began.

The Democratic Party cannot afford to set itself at a disadvantage in MI and FL like the Obama campaign would like to by disrespecting these voters.  The Obama campaign already tainted the Michigan election in a concerted effort with the Richardson and Edwards campaign to undercut a forseen Clinton victory there, depress turnout, and carry favor with IA and NH delegates.  To say that this now is justification for giving him elected delegates in MI despite his not getting any votes there is offensive.  If Barack Obama wanted elected delegates in Michigan, he should have respected his Michigan supporters by letting them vote for them.  He made a calculated decision NOT to.

Everyone on TV has been counting out myself, my friends, my loved ones as not being valid voters.  We are 2.5 million Democrats strong.  The Byzantine workings of the DNC primary calendar and the slash-and-burn campaign tactics of Barack Obama are not more important than o