- 12,015
- 2,315
its all relative of course. one of my old teachers, a traditional hindu yogi, always took it as a great compliment to be compared to a monkey, since hanuman the monkey god, was his favorite deity and a great warrior.
jimmysnyder said:delegate distribution is by population, whereas in the electoral college it is not. Clinton has a strong case here, but she needs to see it.
Did you give Texas to Clinton or Obama?jimmysnyder said:I did a quick calculation and found the following. Take the states and D.C. that have voted already (excluding Florigan) and give to Clinton the electoral college votes from the states that she won, and give to Obama the electoral college votes from the states that he won. I get:
Clinton 256
Obama 207
I worked very fast and I might have slipped up somewhere, but if not, then perhaps the delegate distribution is by population, whereas in the electoral college it is not.
There is no case here. The primary season is decided by delegates, and if it were based on something else, the campaigns would have changed strategies accordingly.Clinton has a strong case here, but she needs to see it.
I gave it to Clinton because that's how the popular vote went. I was trying to emulate the general election. But no matter. If you give Texas to Obama, then present the same argument in Obama's favor.Gokul43201 said:Did you give Texas to Clinton or Obama?
There is no case here. The primary season is decided by delegates, and if it were based on something else, the campaigns would have changed strategies accordingly.
jimmysnyder said:I did a quick calculation and found the following. Take the states and D.C. that have voted already (excluding Florigan) and give to Clinton the electoral college votes from the states that she won, and give to Obama the electoral college votes from the states that he won. I get:
Clinton 256
Obama 207
I worked very fast and I might have slipped up somewhere, but if not, then perhaps the delegate distribution is by population, whereas in the electoral college it is not. Clinton has a strong case here, but she needs to see it.
Yes, Clinton is trying the same change-the-rules-in-the-middle-of-the-game approach that Gore supporters used to use when he "won the popular vote" against Bush in 2000. If they want to change it for next time, fine, but to circumvent their own rules now would be a very bad thing.Gokul43201 said:There is no case here. The primary season is decided by delegates, and if it were based on something else, the campaigns would have changed strategies accordingly.
I can see it now:russ_watters said:to circumvent their own rules now would be a very bad thing.
Ivan Seeking said:72,000 people showed up to see Obama in Oregon yesterday.
lisab said:I saw that on the news - the crowd was crazy-huge! Did you go, Ivan?
Ivan Seeking said:Here is an interesting twist: Most pundits say that a terrorist attack will help McCain, but I think not. If we don't see an attack, it helps Obama because it helps to focus the race on the economy. And since the terrorists know this, and attack must mean that they want McCain to win, so an attack helps Obama as well. Of course it doesn't really matter because Obama showed today that he can blow-out McCain on foreign policy as well.
chemisttree said:An attack could also be construed as yet another Republican failure. Of course the non-attack could be seen to help the Republicans. Obama could blow-out McCain on foriegn policy if only he could somehow negotiate a peace accord with some particularly nasty terrorists, say like Hamas. Yeah, that's it! He could have someone close to him negotiating with Hamas and spring the peace deal on the public in late October. Quite an October surprise that would be.
Boy, let's hope that if someone close to Obama is negotiating with Hamas, that it doesn't leak out!![]()
You forgot global warming and polar bear angst.Ivan Seeking said:I was talking about his list of Republican failures, which shows that the current approach of cowboy diplomacy doesn't work and has made Iran stronger, Al Qaeda stronger, created Al Qaeda in Iraq, weakened our own military to near the breaking point. A policy that has put unprecedented demands on our soldiers, decimated an entire country, lead to endless miscalculations and alienation with no WMDs, with no end in sight, no end of spending in sight, the price of oil skyrocketing, and a much more dangerous world than we had when we started.
lol btw hasn't she only until the end of the primary season to reclaim the money she lent to her campaign? IIRC after that she can only get back a max of $250K. I wonder will that push her to concede after tonight's results. Obama may then have the majority of pledged delegates which might be the push she needs to bow out in return for a deal with Obama to help her pay off her campaign debts including the money owed to herself.jimmysnyder said:The sub-prime crisis has a new victim in its sights. Another borrower that took advantage of easy credit and loaded up with no hope of paying back. Now the percentages have changed for the worse and the bill is coming due. Poor Hillary.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080520/pl_bloomberg/apgmlt95lhwi;_ylt=AqqNpC9K_8P7J4yWpxXDNF9snwcFMay 20 (Bloomberg) -- Democrat Barack Obama is poised to hit a new milestone on his path to the presidential nomination in today's Oregon and Kentucky primaries by securing a majority of all the pledged delegates to the party's convention.
Both campaigns say they expect a split decision from today's round of voting. Clinton leads polls in Kentucky, which has 51 pledged delegates at stake, while Obama is ahead in Oregon, with 52 delegates apportioned based on the vote.
The way the delegates are awarded will give Obama more than the 15 he needs to surpass 50 percent of all the 3,646 pledged delegates awarded in Democratic primaries and caucuses beginning Jan. 3 in Iowa and ending June 3 in Montana and South Dakota.
turbo-1 said:Well, Clinton was the only major candidate on the ballot in MI and she managed to beat "undecided" and crows about what a great victory it was and how those votes MUST be counted. There's a lot of spin in this primary - most of it from the Clinton camp who keep re-defining the metrics by which she is "winning" the nomination. She has lost in pledged delegates, states won, popular vote, and the super-delegates are steadily breaking for Obama so her last gasp is a not-so-thinly-disguised appeal to race, as she and her surrogates make the case that Obama is unelectable.
Any friend that doesn't support her nomination over Obama's is stabbing her in the back?chemisttree said:I think she is actually staying into make her friends either support her or stab her in the back.
The headline in the link says:chemisttree said:This rift in the Democrat base will have consequences that will be felt for a generation, especially if http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/clinton-argue-1.html"
ABC News said:Clinton Argues That Obama Can't Beat McCain
But there is nothing in the story that supports these two statements. Well actually, she did hold a fundraiser.ABC News said:ABC News' Eloise Harper reports: Sen. Hillary Clinton held a fundraiser in Ft. Mitchell, Ky., tonight and went a bit further than she's gone before in explaining why she believes Sen. Barack Obama cannot win in the fall.