I heard a report earlier today on NPR that said that these Democratic parimaries still give out delegates proportionally, so unless Clinton had some blowouts, after tonight Obama would still hold the lead in pledged delegates because he was ahead before tonight's elecitons, and would still get enough from coming in a close second to maintain his lead. That means its all up to the superdelegates again to decide the race and from what they're saying, Obama still has the lead in those as well. The lead is closing however. It seems like this will go down to the wire.
Obama has never had a lead among the superdelegates. He has been gaining ground for the last month or so, to where it's now relatively close on that front.
How likely is a Clinton P, Obama VP ticket? To me, that'd be the only way the Democratic party could get away with having the superdelegates going against the current popular vote.
Some people I've spoken to think it'd be an even worse death wish than Clinton/anyone since it'd give sexist AND racist bigots a ticket to shit all over. Other folks seem to think it's the only way Clinton will ever ascend to the presidency against McCain.
Its very likely if she wins, but contrary to j paycheck, the chances of her winning are not very strong. She pretty much has no shot at winning the electorate, barring a new primary in mich and florida, and even then it would be difficult.
I would ride for a hillary-obama ticket either way (him as vp or vice versa). The reality is that if she pulls a miraculous comeback - she almost has no choice but to select Barack. However, if he wins, there is a lot less pressure to choose her as the VP because, as has been said many times, her voters will support him, but she will not get his youth vote.
Its very likely if she wins, but contrary to j paycheck, the chances of her winning are not very strong. She pretty much has no shot at winning the electorate, barring a new primary in mich and florida, and even then it would be difficult.
I would ride for a hillary-obama ticket either way (him as vp or vice versa). The reality is that if she pulls a miraculous comeback - she almost has no choice but to select Barack. However, if he wins, there is a lot less pressure to choose her as the VP because, as has been said many times, her voters will support him, but she will not get his youth vote.
Actually one of the interesting notes from exit polling last night was that a lot of Clinton supporters - particularly middle aged women - were really angry at Obama's campaign.
One, quoted in the Times, went so far as to say after the last week of bickering, "now I hate him!"
Clinton's waging class, sex, and educational warfare.... it will get worse. Hardcore Clinton supporters will end up viewing Obama's movement as a bunch of idealistic college students and cynical latte sippers. Sad but true.
I really do think that she will have a strong case to make at the end of all this, and the Democratic Party will find it convenient to "unite the party" around a split ticket.
It doesn't really suit Obama to hang his hat on the delegate count, if he keeps dropping big states... kind of contradicts his message.
Clinton's waging class, sex, and educational warfare.... it will get worse. Hardcore Clinton supporters will end up viewing Obama's movement as a bunch of idealistic college students and cynical latte sippers. Sad but true.
I don't see them NOT voting for him the general election though. Depending on how Clinton plays this out - especially with all the negativity - I could see Obama supporters becoming disillusioned enough to sit out or vote 3rd party, especially first-time voters who've been galvanized by his campaign.
To add: I can't remember, in recent memory, an election where the camps behind two intra-party candidates disliked each other so passionately. It's kind of amazing.
Actually one of the interesting notes from exit polling last night was that a lot of Clinton supporters - particularly middle aged women - were really angry at Obama's campaign.
One, quoted in the Times, went so far as to say after the last week of bickering, "now I hate him!"
You got that from Maureen Dowd's op-ed, right? She definitely pulled a Templeton in that article. Talkin' about polls but not citing them and then quoting some unnamed dude at the end with that witty line about Bill and Monica.
I'm not saying that there isn't a small slice of hillary supporters who won't vote for Obama - they fall in the "morons" category. But come on - the notion that there are MORE hillary supporters who won't be pulling for obama if he wins (than the other way around) is laughable.
Its very likely if she wins, but contrary to j paycheck, the chances of her winning are not very strong. She pretty much has no shot at winning the electorate, barring a new primary in mich and florida, and even then it would be difficult.
I would ride for a hillary-obama ticket either way (him as vp or vice versa). The reality is that if she pulls a miraculous comeback - she almost has no choice but to select Barack. However, if he wins, there is a lot less pressure to choose her as the VP because, as has been said many times, her voters will support him, but she will not get his youth vote.
Actually one of the interesting notes from exit polling last night was that a lot of Clinton supporters - particularly middle aged women - were really angry at Obama's campaign.
One, quoted in the Times, went so far as to say after the last week of bickering, "now I hate him!"
Clinton's waging class, sex, and educational warfare.... it will get worse. Hardcore Clinton supporters will end up viewing Obama's movement as a bunch of idealistic college students and cynical latte sippers. Sad but true.
I really do think that she will have a strong case to make at the end of all this, and the Democratic Party will find it convenient to "unite the party" around a split ticket.
It doesn't really suit Obama to hang his hat on the delegate count, if he keeps dropping big states... kind of contradicts his message.
Bottom line is that both are going to the super-delegates this week to try and shut this down for the sake of the Party. Obama's argument is pretty straightforward. More states, more delegates and more of the popular vote. Hillary's is more convoluted. More big states and swing states. I'm not sure which is more valid. The more I try to learn about this process, the more confused I become.
One thing for certain: Clinton could have easily won these without going negative. But she did and that was a really bad look. We'll see if Obama goes negative back at her. He certainly has the cash. Either way the Dems are saving McCain a lot of time and money.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
Somewhere in that argument (which I agree with) a theme jumps out. Do you see it? (Hint: It has something to do with a certain person's sense of entitlement.)
Actually one of the interesting notes from exit polling last night was that a lot of Clinton supporters - particularly middle aged women - were really angry at Obama's campaign.
One, quoted in the Times, went so far as to say after the last week of bickering, "now I hate him!"
You got that from Maureen Dowd's op-ed, right? She definitely pulled a Templeton in that article. Talkin' about polls but not citing them and then quoting some unnamed dude at the end with that witty line about Bill and Monica.
I'm not saying that there isn't a small slice of hillary supporters who won't vote for Obama - they fall in the "morons" category. But come on - the notion that there are MORE hillary supporters who won't be pulling for obama if he wins (than the other way around) is laughable.
I don't know about Dowd "pulling a Templeton" but it's common knowledge that the lower-middle class female vote redoubled for Hillary (after waning a little bit in Wisconsin). The exit polls last night all showed that a greater percentage of Obama's vote would also vote for Clinton than the other way around.
Here's the quote:
Three Hillary volunteers, older women from Boston, approached a New York Times reporter in an Austin, Tex., parking lot on Tuesday to vent that Hillary hasn???t gotten a fair shake from the press. They said that they used to like Obama but now can???t stand him because they think he has been cocky and disrespectful to Hillary.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
And that's not a risky ticket with no white dude? (Or a Southerner)?
One thing for certain: Clinton could have easily won these without going negative. But she did and that was a really bad look. We'll see if Obama goes negative back at her. He certainly has the cash. Either way the Dems are saving McCain a lot of time and money.
If we start hearing the name Larry Sinclar over the next few weeks you'll know this shit has hit a new low.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
I agree with this; but it could go both ways. The Party could say, here's the candidate that is winning our vote, will Obama continue to get Republican and Independent votes come November? That's a long time and the press is already picking him apart.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
And that's not a risky ticket with no white dude? (Or a Southerner)?
no. look at the turnout among dems commpared to the gop. dems will have record numbers at the polls in november. conservatives don't even like mccain and i wouldn't worry about southerners considering how they came out for obama in the primaries. if the two of them are on the same ticket i think it will be one of the biggest blowouts in presidential history....or at least it should be. having a woman and a black guy on the same ticket and winning? that would repair a lot of the damage bush has done to the US' reputation over the past 7 years.
i'd like to see obama supporters put the pressure on him to select her as the VP. she was on msnbc this morning and, imo, pretty much acknowledged that he is the top choice for her.
On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
why would a young upstart want to be a VP in an administration with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At best you'd be relegated to doing international work with countries in Africa, but most likely you just fall asleep every day sitting in Congress.
Talk about having no voice.
I think Gerald Ford said "No one wants to be VP until the day you get that call".
While I think it would be good for party cohesion, I would be shocked if Obama took the VP nod (or vice versa). Especially if these two keep getting nastier with their ads and speeches.
On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
why would a young upstart want to be a VP in an administration with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At best you'd be relegated to doing international work with countries in Africa, but most likely you just fall asleep every day sitting in Congress.
Talk about having no voice.
I think Gerald Ford said "No one wants to be VP until the day you get that call".
While I think it would be good for party cohesion, I would be shocked if Obama took the VP nod (or vice versa). Especially if these two keep getting nastier with their ads and speeches.
It would certainly be a bad look for November if Clinton picks Obama for VP. The right would have a field day using her own sound bites against her.
On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
why would a young upstart want to be a VP in an administration with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At best you'd be relegated to doing international work with countries in Africa, but most likely you just fall asleep every day sitting in Congress.
Talk about having no voice.
I think Gerald Ford said "No one wants to be VP until the day you get that call".
While I think it would be good for party cohesion, I would be shocked if Obama took the VP nod (or vice versa). Especially if these two keep getting nastier with their ads and speeches.
It would certainly be a bad look for November if Clinton picks Obama for VP. The right would have a field day using her own sound bites against her.
that's exactly why she wouldn't...my guess is that if she's nominated she'll tap Bill Richardson
On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
why would a young upstart want to be a VP in an administration with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At best you'd be relegated to doing international work with countries in Africa, but most likely you just fall asleep every day sitting in Congress.
Talk about having no voice.
I think Gerald Ford said "No one wants to be VP until the day you get that call".
While I think it would be good for party cohesion, I would be shocked if Obama took the VP nod (or vice versa). Especially if these two keep getting nastier with their ads and speeches.
If Obama wants to be president one day, I don't see how taking the VP nom would work AGAINST that goal.
The other thing to consider is that Hillary is smashing Obama among democrats, but he is in the lead because of independents and crossover republicans (look at the break-down in Texas as an example). So - the idea that these crossovers will be switching over to Hillary in large numbers is a little far-fetched.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
I agree with this; but it could go both ways. The Party could say, here's the candidate that is winning our vote, will Obama continue to get Republican and Independent votes come November? That's a long time and the press is already picking him apart.
It seems dumb that the DNC would want to back away from bringing Independents and moderate Republicans into their camp. Instead they want someone who is instantly polarizing? Look, she's even extremely polarizing within HER party. Come on.
He couldn't turn it down if you ask me. Assuming that's the ticket, eight years from now (if all goes well), he could easily wrap up the nod for top dog.
1. If Hillary starts winning primaries, and Obama's star starts to fade, the party will be under immense pressure to nominate the person they think can win at the time of the convention not who may have been the favorite three months earlier. They will also need to correct Dean's idiotic draconian response to Florida and Michigan. If Obama can't win Ohio and the Democratic Party alienates Florida, you can forget it if Obama is the nominee.
2. I also think now that we have an actual primary, rather than a coronation, you will see the Obama supporters for the vicious, scorched-earth, either-you-are-with-us-or-you-are-against-us, fanatical partisans that they are (that is the vocal white elite ultra liberal crowd ??? soulstrut). They have already begun to vilify Hillary in a manner usually reserved for Dick Cheney; calling her names, insulting her looks, etc. But, the Democrats have encouraged and fostered this kind of discourse for the past eight years by pandering to the far-left when it served their purpose, so if the far left now wants to try and purge the party of anybody with a modicum of responsibility, then I say "have at it" see who ever survives in the fall.
Comments
Obama has never had a lead among the superdelegates. He has been gaining ground for the last month or so, to where it's now relatively close on that front.
as of this moment, she needs 58.3% of the remaining pledged delegates
Keep hope alive.
Some people I've spoken to think it'd be an even worse death wish than Clinton/anyone since it'd give sexist AND racist bigots a ticket to shit all over. Other folks seem to think it's the only way Clinton will ever ascend to the presidency against McCain.
I don't like yr tone.
Its very likely if she wins, but contrary to j paycheck, the chances of her winning are not very strong. She pretty much has no shot at winning the electorate, barring a new primary in mich and florida, and even then it would be difficult.
I would ride for a hillary-obama ticket either way (him as vp or vice versa). The reality is that if she pulls a miraculous comeback - she almost has no choice but to select Barack. However, if he wins, there is a lot less pressure to choose her as the VP because, as has been said many times, her voters will support him, but she will not get his youth vote.
Actually one of the interesting notes from exit polling last night was that a lot of Clinton supporters - particularly middle aged women - were really angry at Obama's campaign.
One, quoted in the Times, went so far as to say after the last week of bickering, "now I hate him!"
Clinton's waging class, sex, and educational warfare.... it will get worse. Hardcore Clinton supporters will end up viewing Obama's movement as a bunch of idealistic college students and cynical latte sippers. Sad but true.
I really do think that she will have a strong case to make at the end of all this, and the Democratic Party will find it convenient to "unite the party" around a split ticket.
It doesn't really suit Obama to hang his hat on the delegate count, if he keeps dropping big states... kind of contradicts his message.
I don't see them NOT voting for him the general election though. Depending on how Clinton plays this out - especially with all the negativity - I could see Obama supporters becoming disillusioned enough to sit out or vote 3rd party, especially first-time voters who've been galvanized by his campaign.
You got that from Maureen Dowd's op-ed, right? She definitely pulled a Templeton in that article. Talkin' about polls but not citing them and then quoting some unnamed dude at the end with that witty line about Bill and Monica.
I'm not saying that there isn't a small slice of hillary supporters who won't vote for Obama - they fall in the "morons" category. But come on - the notion that there are MORE hillary supporters who won't be pulling for obama if he wins (than the other way around) is laughable.
Bottom line is that both are going to the super-delegates this week to try and shut this down for the sake of the Party. Obama's argument is pretty straightforward. More states, more delegates and more of the popular vote. Hillary's is more convoluted. More big states and swing states. I'm not sure which is more valid. The more I try to learn about this process, the more confused I become.
One thing for certain: Clinton could have easily won these without going negative. But she did and that was a really bad look. We'll see if Obama goes negative back at her. He certainly has the cash. Either way the Dems are saving McCain a lot of time and money.
that was hilarious. girl's on fire these past few weeks.
Dems will vote for the democratic candidate. Obama's gonna get hillary supporters in almost their entirety. On the flip- its not gonna be nearly the same and that is partly why, if she can somehow win, Obama is the no-brainer VP, assuming he accepts.
Somewhere in that argument (which I agree with) a theme jumps out. Do you see it? (Hint: It has something to do with a certain person's sense of entitlement.)
I don't know about Dowd "pulling a Templeton" but it's common knowledge that the lower-middle class female vote redoubled for Hillary (after waning a little bit in Wisconsin). The exit polls last night all showed that a greater percentage of Obama's vote would also vote for Clinton than the other way around.
Here's the quote:
And that's not a risky ticket with no white dude? (Or a Southerner)?
If we start hearing the name Larry Sinclar over the next few weeks you'll know this shit has hit a new low.
I agree with this; but it could go both ways. The Party could say, here's the candidate that is winning our vote, will Obama continue to get Republican and Independent votes come November? That's a long time and the press is already picking him apart.
no. look at the turnout among dems commpared to the gop. dems will have record numbers at the polls in november. conservatives don't even like mccain and i wouldn't worry about southerners considering how they came out for obama in the primaries. if the two of them are on the same ticket i think it will be one of the biggest blowouts in presidential history....or at least it should be. having a woman and a black guy on the same ticket and winning? that would repair a lot of the damage bush has done to the US' reputation over the past 7 years.
i'd like to see obama supporters put the pressure on him to select her as the VP. she was on msnbc this morning and, imo, pretty much acknowledged that he is the top choice for her.
why would a young upstart want to be a VP in an administration with both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At best you'd be relegated to doing international work with countries in Africa, but most likely you just fall asleep every day sitting in Congress.
Talk about having no voice.
I think Gerald Ford said "No one wants to be VP until the day you get that call".
While I think it would be good for party cohesion, I would be shocked if Obama took the VP nod (or vice versa). Especially if these two keep getting nastier with their ads and speeches.
It would certainly be a bad look for November if Clinton picks Obama for VP. The right would have a field day using her own sound bites against her.
i think you just answered your own question
that's exactly why she wouldn't...my guess is that if she's nominated she'll tap Bill Richardson
If Obama wants to be president one day, I don't see how taking the VP nom would work AGAINST that goal.
It seems dumb that the DNC would want to back away from bringing Independents and moderate Republicans into their camp. Instead they want someone who is instantly polarizing? Look, she's even extremely polarizing within HER party. Come on.
He couldn't turn it down if you ask me. Assuming that's the ticket, eight years from now (if all goes well), he could easily wrap up the nod for top dog.
2. I also think now that we have an actual primary, rather than a coronation, you will see the Obama supporters for the vicious, scorched-earth, either-you-are-with-us-or-you-are-against-us, fanatical partisans that they are (that is the vocal white elite ultra liberal crowd ??? soulstrut). They have already begun to vilify Hillary in a manner usually reserved for Dick Cheney; calling her names, insulting her looks, etc. But, the Democrats have encouraged and fostered this kind of discourse for the past eight years by pandering to the far-left when it served their purpose, so if the far left now wants to try and purge the party of anybody with a modicum of responsibility, then I say "have at it" see who ever survives in the fall.
At the same time this post-watergate generation DNC* is 3 for 8, while the RNC 5 for 8.
*POST WATERGATE. THAT'S LIKE GETTING THE BALL ON YOUR OWN 20. IF THOSE STAS WERE FLIPPED, IT'D STILL LOOK BAD FOR THE DNC.
I NEED A LATTE