Time to add Puerto Ricans to all the other demographics that think Obama's an empty suit.

Why can't the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party do any better than last place?

"Why can't the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party do any better than last place?'

Why complain, cookshit?

Just means yer guy, McShame, will be a shoe-in, right?

Why complain, cookshit?

Posted by ANGRYDAD

I would, but right now I'm really busy with UNSATISFIEDMOM.

Time to award the nomination to Hillary. The people have spoken.

Ummmmm who has more pledged delegates Axiom??

Larry

Israel wants Hillary too, and they may still get their way.

Good for her, too bad puerto rico doesn't vote in november.

"I would, but right now I'm really busy with UNSATISFIEDMOM."

That's a crappy way to talk about your life partner.

BB-
Vote for McCain, then.

I am begining to think Buffalo Bob is Tadowe's replacement. Sighhhhh

Larry

Anyone from the NYC area or knows any Puerto Rican isn't all that surprised by this result. There is three way hatred in East Harlem, NYC (or at least what it used to be) - Puerto Ricans/African Americans/Dominicans. It translates to the Island as well. They don't vote in the election so it doesn't matter. It's just for show.

Too bad for Hillary that the redneck and irrelevant vote comes so late in the primary season.

It's weird that the race being a foregone conclusion doesn't hurt Clinton in these late votes. Either her "it's not over" rhetoric is really working with people or they could give two craps about making the Democratic nominee stronger going into the general so he won't be on shaky ground against McCain.

It seems to me that people are just voting for who they want, effects be damned. Which is ironic, given the amount of people now telling Obama supporters we shouldn't have voted for him because he won't beat McCain.

Too bad for Hillary that the redneck and irrelevant vote comes so late in the primary season.


Posted by tigerbalm at 2008-06-01 08:14 PM | Reply

So true .... and funny.

too bad most puerto ricans want independance
and they didn't get to vote on that?

Aye thought Clinton fatigue was bad in the 90's !

This sow is like my worst dream, day after day after day.

Puerto Ricans/African Americans/Dominicans. It translates to the Island as well. They don't vote in the election so it doesn't matter. It's just for show.


Posted by Gibson at 2008-06-01 08:14 PM


So Very True !!!

It Goes Back 5 Decades At least If Not Longer.

-Sarge

Window dressing.

Hillary you lost the election on super tuesday. All this other shit is just your ego.

Hillary has spunk and keeps on fighting.
Like her or not, you've got to give her that much.

Yes--she is tenacious.

Too bad the superdelegates don't have the whitey tape. They would all vote for Clinton.

I see buyer's remorse in the future of the Dem Party.

"It seems to me that people are just voting for who they want, effects be damned."

This is a surprise? Have you forgottenNader already? And that was in the general election.


"Which is ironic, given the amount of people now telling Obama supporters we shouldn't have voted for him because he won't beat McCain."

Tell me the big blue states Obama won. He didn't win those states because the people in the blue states wanted Clinton. The people in the red states wanted Obama. With the way the democrats split their delegates, the red state people won.

Now--look at the map and tell me which of the states that gave Obama the nomination are going to support him in November? There is no irony--you've had this explained again and again. The polls have been clear for two months on a national level. The results of the primaries were clear--Obama wins red states--Hillary wins blue states.

Obama may win in November, but he is clearly the second best candidate dems could put forth. They should eliminate caucuses and go to a primary system only. More delegates are awarded in cauceses than primaries by 2-1. The system is flawed when it puts forth the second best candidate.

Hillary has spunk ... you've got to give her that much.

Not my spunk. Even Bubba won't tap it.

But what do you expect? She's lived down there for two weeks. She's the Hometown Girl. Ha!

There used to be place called the Black Angus in San Juan, and it ain't owned by Stuart Anderson and they don't serve steaks. A regular Sailor's Delight!

I guess the Ricos figured what's more whore on the Island.

So, is Puerto Rico a swing state?

P.S. - Bob, stick to shit you know, like lunar furnaces. Politics is just not your for-te.

BB--Obama ran the better campaign and Hillary thought is would be over Feb 5th. Horrible misjudgment and come Wednesday she will likely Suspend her campaign.

He worked those caucuses which are really unfair to the general populace of any state. You only have folks who don't work, go to school and don't have a family to give up 2-4 hours of an evening to go participate. Then you have a state like NV where the person had to be signed up beforehand to caucus.


The RNC and DNC need to change the primary order of states.

They need to rotate states--to be fair--so that Iowa and NH are no longer the receiver of Farm bills that break the bank and other BS.

Spread it around I say--

And Obama is the weaker candidate compared to Hillary. Obama may be headed to a landslide defeat.


Only the Dem Party can screw up a year they had in the bag.

Hey Murphy off topic since You are here. Who is the Dumb Fuck who designed an Aluminum Softball bat with a flat end to it?? I mean come on You would expect the bat to look like a wooden one now would.t You??

Larry

this only presents hillarys biggest problem in a very specific relief.

uneducated entitlement class people like her.

basd on the evidence, one might even go so far as to say that you either 1) have to be stupid or 2)have another agenda, to think that she can ever get elected.

"BB--Obama ran the better campaign and Hillary thought is would be over Feb 5th. Horrible misjudgment and come Wednesday she will likely Suspend her campaign."

Agreed

"He worked those caucuses which are really unfair to the general populace of any state. You only have folks who don't work, go to school and don't have a family to give up 2-4 hours of an evening to go participate. Then you have a state like NV where the person had to be signed up beforehand to caucus."

Agreed


"The RNC and DNC need to change the primary order of states."

Agreed

"They need to rotate states--to be fair--so that Iowa and NH are no longer the receiver of Farm bills that break the bank and other BS."

Agreed

"Spread it around I say--"

Agreed

"And Obama is the weaker candidate compared to Hillary."

Agreed, the national polls confirm this fact.

"Obama may be headed to a landslide defeat."

I doubt it will be a landslide defeat, and Obama may win, but it will be closer than if it were Hillary, and Obama will have more problems getting things accomplished than Hillary. An Obama Presidency now opens the door to a Republican resugence in 4 years. By that time the republicans will have blamed Obama for all of Bushs mistakes and point to their guy as the guy who can fix it.


"Only the Dem Party can screw up a year they had in the bag."

Agreed

See, the converse problem is, the only way to guarantee a loss in November is to select the candidate who did not win by the rules set in place at the beginning. It's also a good way to lose some constituencies for decades. "It was a tough race, but you lost" should lose fewer votes than "it was a tough race, and I know you busted butt raising money and getting out the vote, but we decided the #2 person was better... sorry black America and Gen-X".

I dislike HRC. A lot. But, I would have voted for her if she had won the legitimate majority of pledged delegates. If she gets the nomination another way... not a chance.

It's weird that the race being a foregone conclusion doesn't hurt Clinton in these late votes.

----

I read somewhere the Bill Clinton is super popular in Puerto Rico so I think that's why she won.

Turnout was pretty bad though. Something like 400,000 out of 3 million registered turned out.

Hillary of course will include Puerto Rico in her popular vote total even though they can't vote in the general.

Ummmmm who has more pledged delegates Axiom??


Obviously sarcasm isn't your strong suit, larry.

Hillary's on a roll! When she wraps up the next 25 states, she'll leave Obama in the dust!

Oh, wait. There's only two left?

Nevermind.

They are speaking but no one is listening.


I guess it's a good thing we don't pick our leaders based off of polling data, shmuck.

Obama can't win with pledged delegates--he will have won the nomination with the Super delegates.

Great going with the choice of the people award.




Larry--I guess the flat end is filled with rubber so is the inside of some bats--Rocket Tech--great power.

Goes with the yellow ball, 43 feet from the pitchers mound to home plate, 60 feet between the bases and shorter infield fences for home runs.

Fastpitch softball is different than baseball.

Funny thing is that baseball players can't hit a pitch off the women.

They aren't thinking too much--they should be trying to bunt the ball instead of trying to hit it. Did you see the guy hit Michelle Smith? Couldnt' touch it. Then she literally threw him a grapefruit. He got that one!

The ball is coming at 90 mph when taking the distance (43') and the speed of a 68 -70 mph ball coming at them.

It seems to me that people are just voting for who they want,

How dare they? ;-)

This reminds me, did anyone see Howard Dean on... hmmm... MTP or This Week today? He explained that the rules committee votes indicated that the divide in the Dem Party is over.

Does this guy think voters serve any purpose but contributing money? It does not occur to him that if there's a divide among the voters, THERE IS A DIVIDE?!

He needs to go. His persistent disregard for the will of the people runs counter to everything the Dems used to stand for.

"It does appear to be pretty clear that Senator Obama is going to be the nominee," said Tom Vilsack, the former Iowa governor and a national co-chairman of Clinton's campaign. "After Tuesday's contests, she needs to acknowledge that he's going to be the nominee and quickly get behind him."

But Clinton herself on Sunday argued a case for staying in the race and even trying to capture Obama's own delegates. Flying on the plane with her was Kevin Rodriguez, a Virgin Island superdelegate who switched from Clinton to Obama and then recently back to Clinton again.

"One thing about superdelegates is that they can change their minds," she said aboard her plane in Puerto Rico before taking off for South Dakota.

She also said she is not committed to accepting the new 2118 delegate threshold for winning the nomination. "That's a question we will be considering," she said.

From above link:

Even if she were to press for a change to the Michigan decision, Clinton would still lack the delegates necessary to secure the nomination -- a point made by Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Clinton supporter.

"I don't think we're going to fight this at the convention," Rendell said on CBS's "Face the Nation" Sunday. "Because even were we to win it, unless it's going to change enough delegates for Senator Clinton to get the nomination, then it would be a fight that would have no purpose."

"We have what it takes to get to the 270 electoral votes needed to win the general election," Clinton said at a victory rally in Puerto Rico Sunday.

But privately, her aides have said Clinton's run is over and it's simply a matter of when it becomes formal. And after maintaining a respectful distance in the final weeks of the campaign, Obama campaign aides have begun to reach out to their counterparts on the Clinton campaign in hopes of pulling together and ameliorating hard feelings.

Ahhhhhh I see now. Yeah I seen that guy really screw up and not hit anything but that grapefruit. I played baseball when I was about 8 or 9 and I couldn't hit for shit. I think My bat hit the ball THREE times in My total baseball career(It only lasted 2 Years) They always stuck Me in the out outfield cause I couldn't catch a damned thing. Hutch Broncs was the name of our team. I still have the bat that I used too. Had to put electrical tape on the end cause it started splitting. Least I know where I will be glove in hand just in case next year. Do You know what part of Oklahoma City it's in??

Larry

Unbelievable that BB would agree with 7 out of 8 points!

Yes--she is tenacious.

Too bad the superdelegates don't have the whitey tape. They would all vote for Clinton.

I see buyer's remorse in the future of the Dem Party.

Posted by MURPHY

This statement scares me because buyer's remorse is a concept that Murphy should be very familiar with.

Larry--They showed the downtown in a camera shot from the ball field--in fact, it is the ASA Hall of Fame field..?

I am not voting for Obama--therefore no buyer's remorse for me...;o)

Phoenix appears to be trolling again. Obama is the people's choice. Get used to it

Yes Murphy they said it was some Hall of Fame Field. Not sure where THAT is however. Have YOU been there before?? Maybe You could help Me out on that. Instead of googling it.

Larry

Clinton Wins Big in Puerto Rico


So?

I am not voting for Obama--therefore no buyer's remorse for me..

I'm fairly certain you also wouldn't vote for Hillary. So, assuming you are voting Republican, you never seem to have any compelling reasons to vote FOR McCain. Perhaps you'd like to explain your reasons for constantly deriding Obama, much of the time with trivialities that may not even be factual, but are merely inflammatory at best.

Are you afraid McCain has no positives, worthy of making him our president, on his own?

Christ Hillary, just go the fuck home already.

Time to award the nomination to Hillary. The people have spoken.

Posted by Axiom at 2008-06-01 06:44 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


Ummmmm who has more pledged delegates Axiom??

Larry

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008


ah yes those democrats. going to run away from the will of the majority and put the loser of popular vote on ticket and then when he loses the election through the electoral college, these same people will scream about how he got a majority of the vote and should be president......you watch what I am saying. if that happens these same people will be out to end that pesky little electoral thing.....maybe the MOST important states rights issue of our history, I think.

Uh, BLT ... Bush lost the popular vote in 2000.

As for Hillary's "I lead the popular vote" talking point, it depends on counting caucusgoers as zero votes. If you actually attempt to figure out how many people voted in caucuses for which candidate, Obama leads.

Your moderation policy sucks, rogers.

Don't know what you're referring to, Alex. I haven't moderated much for a while because I'm working on the server move.

I sent ya an email a few days ago, rogers. At workbench.

There's the problem. Something broke my cadenhead.org email and I've been working on that too. When it rains ...

Ah. Sorry for being a dick.

Whens the new gerbil come online?

Murphy can't get abusive flags to work. Neither can I.

57 hours and 37 minutes.

Hillary of course will include Puerto Rico in her popular vote total even though they can't vote in the general.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-06-01 11:29 PM

I understand that turnout was much lower than she was hoping so I expect her to drop the popular vote argument soon since she won't have it.

Lessee, the last Dem nominee that won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote?

President George McGovern.


If this were not supposed to be such a weak year for Republicans, even when they are running what amounts to a conservative Dem, I don't think even Obama supporters would chance nominating the candidate who looks so weak on the electoral map, who lost every major battleground state, and who is so far behind with Hispanics, women, and the traditional blue-collar Dem base........ OK, Obama supporters would prolly jump off that cliff, too.

Hillary would have had a good argument to SDs if the delegate lead were down around a 100 or so as they had hoped, but as it is, and without a new Pastor Bimbo Eruption, they will likely fight to see who squeezes Obama over the top as he wheezes towards the finish line.

As he wheezes over the finish line.

And were the situations reversed you'd heap praise upon hillary for victory.

You're a true poor sport, corky.

So Alex,

What else would you call having lost 75 percent of the elections in the last two months, by anywhere from 10 to 40 points, including Ohio and PA and WV and KY (and FL and MI) while showing poorly against McCain on anyone's electoral map?

"What else would you call having lost 75 percent of the elections in the last two months,"

But what percentage of all the primary elections and caucuses. The Clinonistas seem to want to view everything in selective portions of reality.

Murphy can't get abusive flags to work. Neither can I.

Alex

How so won't work

If a football team scores enough points in the first 3 quarters of the game to beat their opponent, should the opponent be handed the victory because they outscore the other team in the 4th quarter?

We were talking about how he is ending, Danni, that being the selective reality you mention.

No one said she should be handed the victory, SA. Except you.

In that same game you mentioned, the winner could easily be said to be wheezing over the finish line, happy that the time on the clock was running out since he had been outscored so badly in the fourth quarter.

And since his chances in the playoffs were not pretty on paper.

Murphy can't get abusive flags to work. Neither can I.



Murphy must have been alluding to this the other day when asking how to post a flag.

I appreciate subtle but Murph went about a block past subtle.

"We were talking about how he is ending, Danni, that being the selective reality you mention."

It isn't selective reality to notice that he has the most delegates which is the only criteria for nomination. Avoiding confronting that simple fact creates the need for selective reality viewing.

And since his chances in the playoffs were not pretty on paper.

Yes indeed just like the NY Giants.


Corky drop the bone the game is over the official the horn sounded Saturday.

-It isn't selective reality to notice that he has the most delegates which is the only criteria for nomination.

It is the only criteria for nomination until the primaries are over. SDs can use any criteria they like, including popular vote and who can best win.

Corky drop the bone. The game is over, the official sounded the horn Saturday.



Sorry I do have to stop editing on the fly...

Yes, we know, Zap.

You must be thrilled that it was party insiders who broke their own rules to decide it instead of voters.

55 hours, 36 minutes, tops.

"It is the only criteria for nomination until the primaries are over. SDs can use any criteria they like, including popular vote and who can best win.

Posted by Corky"

So then you ARE saying she should be given the victory by the SD's.

Thank you.

"You must be thrilled that it was party insiders who broke their own rules..."

But enough about Harold Ickes.

More straw men from your factory, SA?

I'm saying they could, in response to Danni's post.

Perhaps if you were to work with what people say instead of what you wished they had said, you could come to grips with the idea of context. And honesty.br />

You must be thrilled that it was party insiders who broke their own rules to decide it instead of voters.
~CORKY


Not at all. I don't know how you can read that.

It's pretty interesting when Hill had much better control of the inside and it still came out against her.

Poison the well Corky you are dooming her to pariah status..

Back to the Senate 36th out of 49 and a pariah, sounds like a great springboard to future success.

So are you saying they should or should not Corky?

Or are you remaining "neutral" in the debate?

-Hill had much better control of the inside

HA!

With Howard the Duck Dean having given his email list to Obama, having helped put South Carolina up front, having foisted his absurd 50 state theory on everyone, and having loaded the committee with his own selections, the committee was bound to decide in favor of one candidate before it started, even if it had to break it's own rules to do so.

Sooner or later it always returns to victimhood, doesn't it Corky?

Sooner or later it always returns to victimhood, doesn't it Corky?
~SAR

Indeed

Perhaps back to the Senate 36th out of 49 and a pariah is what she is aiming toward.

Madam Perpetual Victim..

Resorting to labels never helps a losing argument, it is merely pathetic.

Corky - the "bimbo eruption" would come if Hillary got the nomination

a losing argument
~Corky


Great line IF you had faired better on Saturday...

Corky you do realize that after all of this Hillary has no chance in 2012 if Obama doesn't win the presidency this year right? If the Clintons sabatoge this thing you will see Al Gore come out in 2012 and Hillary won't have a prayer then.

If the Clintons sabatoge this thing you will see Al Gore come out in 2012 and Hillary won't have a prayer then.

Posted by taxman

One can only hope. I think Gore is the one person who she wouldn't necessarily see as less qualified/electable than herself.

I think Gore is the one person who she wouldn't necessarily see as less qualified/electable than herself.


Hillary?

ROTFLMAO

She and Corky would suggest Christ was being a sexist and inferior to her if he were in competition.

I did say necessarily, Zap. Allow the poor woman a little wiggle room, willya? LOL.

Sweet 8lb 60z baby jesus.

The PR turnout: 16 percent


Wow Impressive Corky, why did you point that out.

It all but makes your case!

What else would you call having lost 75 percent of the elections in the last two months, by anywhere from 10 to 40 points, including Ohio and PA and WV and KY (and FL and MI) while showing poorly against McCain on anyone's electoral map?

----

Considering Hillary was inevitable and was crushing Obama in the polls at the start on the primary.

Even when you count FL, Obama still has 125,000 lead in popular vote. That will increase tomorrow.

That "I won the popular vote" argument is spurious, at best. But it IS obvious that Vernon locked up the "Official Supplier of Calculators to the Clinton Campaign" contract.

"For some bizarre reason, Puerto Rico has more delegates than 27 U.S. states. For a territory that has zero electoral votes in November to have a greater say than over half of the states in the United States isn't just bizarre on the merits, but it's also an insult to those 27 states."
www.dailykos.com

Posted by Doc_Sarvis

I'd say that's as good an argument as any to abandon the democratic party altogether. First and last, they only care about their own careers. If they have time for anything else when not out fundraising, well then maybe the people get thrown a bone.

That "I won the popular vote" argument is spurious

----

I won the popular vote!* Count all the votes!








*...except when including a few caucus states.

*...except the people who voted for Obama when they selected uncommitted.

"*...except the people who voted for Obama when they selected uncommitted."

Posted by Pirate

All other arguments aside for the moment, you can't say that every vote for uncommitted was a vote for Obama. You can't even say what percentage of that vote was for him.

From above link:

her victory speech yesterday from Puerto Rico, in which she said in the end: "Let's keep fighting. Let's keep fighting. Let's keep fighting. Let's keep fighting." Clinton certainly has the opportunity to make bygones be bygones -- as well as quell the resentment brewing among some of her ardent female supporters -- but when does she do this? And what does she say?

The answers, not soon and never, never, never:

For yet another hint at what Clinton's week is going to look like, Terry McAuliffe announced on Morning Joe that Clinton will be giving her Tuesday night victory speech in her elective office home state: New York.

All other arguments aside for the moment, you can't say that every vote for uncommitted was a vote for Obama. You can't even say what percentage of that vote was for him.

----

No but you also can't say that every vote for uncommitted wasn't a vote for Obama.

That's why there is no accurate popular vote total by a long shot so saying somebody won the popular vote is ridiculous, especially when the popular vote is withing the reasonable margin of error.

And if a campaign circles around the "all votes count" bandwagon, then the campaign better make sure they mean it and isn't an empty hypocritical slogan.

I think the most Clinton will do after the final votes Tuesday is suspend her campaign. At this point, I think she's done enough damage to Obama among Democrats that he has no choice but to put her on the ticket if he wants to win. I just wonder whether she wants to be on the ticket or would rather see him tank and run in 2012.

And if you make and use estimates for the caucus states that don't keep vote totals, it's reasonable to use an estimate for the MI uncommitted votes for Obama. For example, base it on the most recent MI poll averages.

Even then the popular vote total would still have an asterisk because you have to consider that MI and FL was told when they voted that their vote would not count. People who normally would vote didn't due to that.

I just wonder whether she wants to be on the ticket or would rather see him tank and run in 2012.

----

I vote for the latter. Obama would overshadow her in the history books and she would probably be too old to run in 2016.

"All other arguments aside for the moment, you can't say that every vote for uncommitted was a vote for Obama."

The point is that you CAN'T leave the other arguments aside. They are all part of the equation. We don't know how many people for ANY candidate may have stayed home because they thought their vote didn't matter. We don't know how many people voted "uncommitted" that would have been Obama votes. We don't know how many people would have voted Edwards. We don't know how many people voted Clinton as a second choice only because she was there and Obama/Edwards weren't.

All of these things are inextricably linked, which is why the election was fatally flawed, and a reasonable compromise reached by the state party. And why it is less than honest for a candidate to claim the popular vote there.

Taking no sides here....

"No but you also can't say that every vote for uncommitted wasn't a vote for Obama."

You think that is likely? That's a bit of a disingenuous argument. Especially when uncommitted might actually mean what it says to those who voted that way.... uncommitted.

And when it comes to empy hypocritical slogans, I think that "change you can believe in" is equally empty and hypocritical, regardless of who uses the slogan.

This country "believes" in alot of things that probably aren't ever going to happen. Belief is holding a position absent any evidence for it. With evidence, it becomes something you know. Until that point, it's a fairy tale.

You think that is likely? That's a bit of a disingenuous argument. Especially when uncommitted might actually mean what it says to those who voted that way.... uncommitted.

----

What I'm saying is there was a % of uncommitted who voted for Obama when they voted for uncommitted.

I think it's disingenuous to say that 100% of the uncommitted votes were for Obama. I think it's also disingenuous to say that 0% of the uncommitted votes were for Obama.

Obama received votes in every other state and non state so to say that he received 0 votes in MI is disingenuous.

"which is why the election was fatally flawed..."
Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I know, rogue. which is why I say that supporters of both candidates, and the candidates themselves, should keep their pride in the back drawer this time... bring out the humility if it exists. BOTH Candidates. Nobody has the right to pride this time around.

Obama received votes in every other state and non state so to say that he received 0 votes in MI is disingenuous.

Posted by Pirate

I agree. I would never and have never said that. I think it would have been better to give him a percentage of the uncommitted votes based on how he was running in the previous caucuses, primaries, at that time. To just hand them all over to him now is a fraud.

-At this point, I think she's done enough damage to Obama among Democrats that he has no choice but to put her on the ticket if he wants to win.

If by damage you mean that she kicked his ass for the last two months, won all the battleground states, at least split the popular vote with him, and looks better able to beat McCain in every electoral map projection..... then you may be right about that.

If he wants to assure a victory, he will ask her. If not, then she will still work to get him elected, making all the whining about her damaging the Dem Party look all the more pathetic.

I agree that he should get a % of the uncommitted. When using 100% of uncommitted for Obama and include the 4 caucus state estimates, he leads...

Obama +44,667 +0.1%

However, MI votes for uncommitted was 238,168. 44,667 is only 18.75% of the total uncommitted. So Obama would need 81.25% of the uncommitted for to be a tie. I'm not saying that's the % to give him...just that's how close it is.

Only 566,477 voted in the Dem primary. Anybody know what the total was for 2004?

Correction, 566477 voted for Clinton or Uncommitted.

589,984 voted total.

Anyway you look at it, the primary results in both MI and FL were bogus. No one campaigned there, so the natural advantage would have gone to Clinton and Edwards, who both campaigned there in previous primaries/elections.

So Obama would need 81.25% of the uncommitted for to be a tie.
Posted by Pirate

How many candidates were running at the time and also not on the ballot? who were those candidates?

That's some rough calculus, no matter how you work it.

I think John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden.

That's why I think you can't call it either way. The popular vote total is too close to the margin of error with the estimates. I think you do have to include the estimates for the caucus states and for MI Obama votes.

The primaries tomorrow might push Obama past that margin of error but I still think the popular vote total should have an * just because it's using estimates.

The reason that popular vote count has never been determinative is because some states do have caususes rather than primaries. If caucuses are now consider unfair to many voters, the rules should be changed for 2012, but you can't change the rules now, at the end of the game. I would have liked to see popular vote count in 2000 instead of the electoral college, but no one suggested we change the rules after the election had been held.

but I still think the popular vote total should have an * just because it's using estimates.

Posted by Pirate

Agreed. Would be nice to know the numbers for caucus states as well.

I would have liked to see popular vote count in 2000 instead of the electoral college, but no one suggested we change the rules after the election had been held.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday

That's because there are some very persuasive arguments in support of the electoral college, or, at the very least, arguments for why it's better not to go the popular vote route.

The thing here is that if you don't like the rules in the DNC, you can always go somewhere else. Not true in the national election... no other country to go to...

Personally I hate the electoral college, but that's another issue.

And why is a place that isn't even a state given soo many delegates??

And why is a place that isn't even a state given soo many delegates??

Posted by bigjohn_1972

pandering with plausible nod's to democracy?

Posted by bigjohn_1972

Big J, are you in a highly populated state? All the states with low populations will be completely ignored without the electoral college.

the popular vote total should have an * just because it's using estimates.

I think an argument could also be made that Hillary would NOT have received 55% of the MI vote if there had been more choices. Much as Castro gets 95% of the vote, even though he is the only one on the ticket, (I am NOT comparing Hillary to Fidel. This was only an example).

There really was no fair way to split the delegates in MI. The MI delegates should not have been awarded to either side without a new vote. For Hillary to count the MI vote in with her total is disingenuous at best.

For Hillary to count the MI vote in with her total is disingenuous at best.
Whatsleft
================

Devil's advocate...then all the BO caucus votes based on estimates would be " disingenuous at best."

The democratic primary system is flawed in that it puts forth the second best candidate as its nominee.

The democratic primary system is flawed in that it is filled to the brim with democratic primary voters like yourself who continue to vote for the second best candiate.....over and over and over.

The democratic primary system is flawed in that it puts forth the second best candidate as its nominee.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob


What exactly is flawed about the American people deciding for themselves that the majority believe Obama best represents what they wish to project in the election?

The only flawed part is that will could be overturned by some powermongering party insiders thinking they know what is best for their party members like they were taking care of a petulant child.

Utterly scary.

I guess you don't want to count all these votes either

----

Um, those are polls and not votes.