Here's how grim it actually is for Hillary Clinton:

[extarbags]

It's been brought up in a few threads today, but I figured this article was compelling enough to be worth a new one, so everybody sees it: http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240/output/print

Hillary Clinton may be poised for a big night tonight, with wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. Clinton aides say this will be the beginning of her comeback against Barack Obama. There's only one problem with this analysis: they can't count.

[Jason McCullough]

Yeah, barring a meltdown, she's toast.

[Rimbo]

Hooray for Mathematical improbability! :)

[BlueJackalope]

Yeah, Obama's margin of victory in his 11-0 streak has pretty much ended the game.

I assume Hillary's chances boil down to winning most of the rest of the primaries and then getting MI and FLA seated and getting the support of the superdelegates.

And then the Democratic party will eat itself like that snake on Millennium.

[extarbags]

One interesting thing that came up in a conversation I had over the weekend was that Clinton is really only barely more serious and viable a candidate than Huckabee at this point, so for all her talk about being treated unfairly by the media, it's basically the media's fascination with her last name that has kept her in this thing to the extent that she is still in it at all.

[jeffd]

extarbags: That's quite true. Does anyone really imagine the media would be treating Obama as a serious contender if he'd lost the previous 11 contests?

[Fooey]

She didn't major in math, she majored in miracles.

[wahoo]

If Hillary wins TX & OH, she's back in it. She should win at PA. Then she'll be able to argue that she'll carry the swing states better than Obama. Dems can't win w/o OH and PA.

If Clinton wins TX, OH and PA, then she's set herself up for the Convention and the Superdelegates. The Supers just want a Dem victory. If this relatively soft media attack knocks Obama off his game, then Clinton is really viable again.

Remember, Obama has never really been tested in an election before. His response to some of the media so far has been underwhelming.

[Gav]

One interesting thing that came up in a conversation I had over the weekend was that Clinton is really only barely more serious and viable a candidate than Huckabee at this point, so for all her talk about being treated unfairly by the media, it's basically the media's fascination with her last name that has kept her in this thing to the extent that she is still in it at all.

That's not quite true, I think. The Clintons have enough friends in the party that she may theoretically be able to pull of something with the super-delegates. Huckabee has no equivalent among Repubs.

[magnet]

The supers aren't going to overturn the "will of the people". If this were a normal primary season, then they would simply be stupid to do so. But it isn't a normal primary. It's an election motivated by deep opposition to the current president - who is perceived as coming into power precisely by overriding the popular vote. In that context, pulling another Florida 2000 wouldn't just be stupid, it would be political suicide.

[triggercut]

If Hillary wins TX & OH, she's back in it. She should win at PA. Then she'll be able to argue that she'll carry the swing states better than Obama. Dems can't win w/o OH and PA.

If Clinton wins TX, OH and PA, then she's set herself up for the Convention and the Superdelegates. The Supers just want a Dem victory. If this relatively soft media attack knocks Obama off his game, then Clinton is really viable again.

Remember, Obama has never really been tested in an election before. His response to some of the media so far has been underwhelming.

Wrong again, and sadly so for a guy named wahoo.

Virginia is a swing state this cycle. Georgia as well. Missouri too. North Carolina will be as well (for those of you who aren't Carolinians, the population growth in NC over the last 12 years has been staggering; with new people moving to Charlotte and the Triangle, they're turning the reliably red Tar Heel State purple.) Obama will win them all.

[extarbags]

If Hillary wins TX & OH, she's back in it. She should win at PA. Then she'll be able to argue that she'll carry the swing states better than Obama. Dems can't win w/o OH and PA.

Sorry, did you not bother reading the article? I'll sum it up for you: she's not back in it if she wins TX and OH. She can't catch up to him even if she wins landslide victories not just in TX and OH, but in every primary from now on.

[extarbags]

Also, I like the notion that the candidate whose only wins so far have come in California, New York, New Jersey, and her home state is the one that's best suited to carrying swing states.

[Jeff Green]

I love this quote today from a "top strategist" named, um, "Tad Devine." (I think I've rented some of his gay porn movies!)

"Even if the math works in Obama's favor, if he loses two big states, I don't think that's how you win the nomination," Devine said. "You don't win the nomination by losing. You have to win the nomination by winning, or at least splitting ... I think it's going to be incumbent on Obama to win one of those big states if he wants the race to end tomorrow."


You don't win by losing? Like Hillary's big win streak recently?

[extarbags]

Reminiscent of that recent Clinton memo indicating that anything but a crushing defeat in all four of today's states amounts to a win for her.

[Aleck]

Sorry, did you not bother reading the article? I'll sum it up for you: she's not back in it if she wins TX and OH. She can't catch up to him even if she wins landslide victories not just in TX and OH, but in every primary from now on.

The article says that it's highly improbable that Clinton will win more pledged delegates than Obama, but could come close.

The logical next question is: how do the superdelegates come down? It'll be a bad thing for the Democratic party if Hillary wins by virtue solely of superdelegates, but it's possible.

[extarbags]

The article says that it's highly improbable that Clinton will win more pledged delegates than Obama, but could come close.

Yes, it says that she can come close... if she wins landslides in every primary from today on.

The logical next question is: how do the superdelegates come down? It'll be a bad thing for the Democratic party if Hillary wins by virtue solely of superdelegates, but it's possible.

I don't see it, man. I don't see a bunch of politicians sacrificing the stability of their party and in a lot of cases a big advantage in their own fall campaigns for the sake of one person's ambitions, even if that person is someone they've known for a long time.

[wahoo]

Sorry, did you not bother reading the article? I'll sum it up for you: she's not back in it if she wins TX and OH. She can't catch up to him even if she wins landslide victories not just in TX and OH, but in every primary from now on.


And again my point is who cares? Yes, I read the article but shockingly I came to a different conclusion based on other reading that I've done from other sources. So don't be obnoxious.

My pt is that even if Clinton is behind in primary delegates, she can argue her cause saying she won the traditional key swing states. That gives her a card to play. She can also downplay caucus states as not being representative of the true will of the people.

I don't think it will happen, but everyone is acting like the stage is set. Right now, the Obama campaign is bleeding and the media is going after them. Imagine an Obama that can't respond effectively to these attacks and staggering into the Dem convention. Hillary is then back on message to the Super Dems: She's been through attacks, she can handle a hostile media/aggressive folks.

The Clinton campaign is down, but she won't be out if she wins TX/Oh.

The dominant media story will be: The come back Clintons do it again; How Obama lost his groove due to the Nafta esq. Clinton will be given momentum.

[extarbags]

Do you think the superdelegates are retards? Clinton can't call herself the comeback kid when she's still getting the shit kicked out of her.

[malphigian]

My pt is that even if Clinton is behind in primary delegates, she can argue her cause saying she won the traditional key swing states. That gives her a card to play.

It would I guess give her a card to play, but it's not one that makes much sense. Beating another democrat in a swing state primary doesn't tell you much about what's going to happen in the general election.

[Mark Asher]

Clinton won NY, CA, and FL, although FL doesn't count. If she wins TX and OH, she can make a compelling case for the nomination if Obama doesn't get enough votes to first round it.

I mean, Obama won KS, but what is KS to the Dems? A state they will certainly not carry in November. Clinton has won the key big states that the Dems have to carry to win.

I'm not saying I think she deserves the nomination after losing so many states, but I can see a good argument for her continuing.

[wahoo]

Extar:
Have you ever followed politics before? If hillary wins, she gets great media coverage. The New Hampshire comeback will get played up. Already there's the theme going on about how soft media coverage of Obama is and how Hillary gets screwed. The Press will play makeup much like a hoops ref.

On the flip side of the coin, Obama is having to answer the following questions: Is your chief economics advisor lying? Are you being deceitful on reworking Nafta? Obama is gonna/already getting hammered on the talk shows/Lou Dobbs crowd. Then throw in his crony fundraiser. Then the media will question whether the Obama surge can be sustained.

That's the way politics works. If Hillary wins both tonight, Obama is still the favorite but now Hillary has a path to the nomination.

Superdelegates will vote for whoever they think can beat McCain. If Obama has 150 more delegates but he's faltering while Clinton has racked up some big winds then it's anyone's game.

[Jeff Green]

A Right now, the Obama campaign is bleeding and the media is going after them.

I love this current "narrative." It's only "bleeding" because the media is trying to say it is, so they have something to write about.

Meanwhile, Clinton has been bled to freakin' death over the past month. But hey, let's not count her out! She might actually win a state or two, MAYBE! She's totally electable!

[Jeff Green]

Extar:
On the flip side of the coin, Obama is having to answer the following questions: Is your chief economics advisor lying? Are you being deceitful on reworking Nafta? Obama is gonna/already getting hammered on the talk shows/Lou Dobbs crowd. Then throw in his crony fundraiser. Then the media will question whether the Obama surge can be sustained.


And you think Hillary won't get hammered the same way? If not worse?

[extarbags]

Clinton won NY, CA, and FL, although FL doesn't count. If she wins TX and OH, she can make a compelling case for the nomination if Obama doesn't get enough votes to first round it.

I mean, Obama won KS, but what is KS to the Dems? A state they will certainly not carry in November. Clinton has won the key big states that the Dems have to carry to win.

You think Obama won't carry fucking New York and California? Sheesh. And yeah, she won Florida, a huge, key swing state... in a Soviet-style election, with no competition. Texas isn't a state that the Democrats are going to carry in November anyway, so if she wins that and Ohio, she can say that she's beaten Obama in one key state. Scroll up and read triggercut's list of swing states that Obama has won so far.

[wahoo]

I love this current "narrative." It's only "bleeding" because the media is trying to say it is, so they have something to write about.


It's bleeding when you have to answer multiple questions at a press conference about how badly your chief economics advisor screwed up in talking to one our main trading partners. This will get a huge amt of play in Ohio/Pa, the rust belt states.

Hillary isn't getting the same treatment b/c Sperling et al didn't tell Canadians "She didn't mean it"...or at leas the Canadians are saying she didn't mean it.

I think Obama will be the candidate. But there is a viable path to Clinton to win if she takes the big, populous states.

[extarbags]

Extar:
Have you ever followed politics before? If hillary wins, she gets great media coverage. The New Hampshire comeback will get played up. Already there's the theme going on about how soft media coverage of Obama is and how Hillary gets screwed. The Press will play makeup much like a hoops ref.

Man, that theme isn't going on anywhere but inside the Clinton campaign and on Saturday Night Live.

On the flip side of the coin, Obama is having to answer the following questions: Is your chief economics advisor lying? Are you being deceitful on reworking Nafta? Obama is gonna/already getting hammered on the talk shows/Lou Dobbs crowd. Then throw in his crony fundraiser. Then the media will question whether the Obama surge can be sustained.

That's the way politics works. If Hillary wins both tonight, Obama is still the favorite but now Hillary has a path to the nomination.

Superdelegates will vote for whoever they think can beat McCain. If Obama has 150 more delegates but he's faltering while Clinton has racked up some big winds then it's anyone's game.

None of this makes any sense. It's like you've been in a coma since October and just woke up.

[Anders Hallin]

And yeah, she won Florida, a huge, key swing state... in a Soviet-style election, with no competition.
No candidate campaigned there, including Clinton.

[extarbags]

No candidate campaigned there, including Clinton.

Clinton very definitely did. (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=276341)

[jeffd]

Clinton won NY, CA, and FL, although FL doesn't count. If she wins TX and OH, she can make a compelling case for the nomination if Obama doesn't get enough votes to first round it.

I mean, Obama won KS, but what is KS to the Dems? A state they will certainly not carry in November. Clinton has won the key big states that the Dems have to carry to win.

I'm not saying I think she deserves the nomination after losing so many states, but I can see a good argument for her continuing.

By my count, Clinton hasn't yet won a major swing state except sorta Florida. New York and California and New Jersey are not states that the Democrats are likely to lose, regardless of who the nominee is.

A win in Ohio gives her a bit more of a case that she can win swing states.

Obama, as pointed out, won in Virginia - which is a state Dems are really looking to crack open.

She can try to make the case that she wins swing states, of course. It's just not one that's based on reality at the moment.

[Lum]

Obama was on the ballot in Florida, and given its demographics (lots of old people, lots of Cubans) it probably would have gone to Clinton even as contested.

In any event, it's academic - Clinton would need to win both Texas and Ohio (which probably won't happen, it's looking pretty likely that Obama will win TX) to break the loser narrative, her campaign spin to the contrary. I'd expect a LOT of supers to start breaking Obama's way unless she does a convincing sweep tonight.

[wahoo]

Man, that theme isn't going on anywhere but inside the Clinton campaign and on Saturday Night Live.



None of this makes any sense. It's like you've been in a coma since October and just woke up.



Why don't you read the accounts of this morning's press conference with Obama?

This is from the Wash Post's political writer. Argue with them.

It took many months and the mockery of "Saturday Night Live (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Saturday+Night+Live?tid=informline)" to make it happen, but the lumbering beast that is the press corps finally roused itself from its slumber Monday and greeted Barack Obama (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Barack+Obama?tid=informline) with a menacing growl. The day before primaries in Ohio (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Ohio?tid=informline) and Texas (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Texas?tid=informline) that could effectively seal the Democratic presidential nomination for him, a smiling Obama strode out to a news conference at a veterans facility here. But the grin was quickly replaced by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog.

[BlueJackalope]

And yeah, she won Florida, a huge, key swing state... in a Soviet-style election, with no competition.

That is the real danger if this thing goes to a convention. She will argue to seat FLA (and MI). Obama will be forced to argue against it. (this is assuming there isn't a "do over" which seems unlikely)

If she wins by getting FLA seated everyone will see it as Clinton cheating Obama and be turned off. If he wins by keeping FLA from being seated everyone in FLA will be turned off and FLA could go Republican.

[extarbags]

The latter is less of a risk. I think non-retards in Florida understand that their election wasn't fair, and even if they do hold a grudge about it, Clinton winning by cheating them into relevancy hurts her everywhere, not just there.

[extarbags]

But I do see what you mean about it being better for the party and the eventual nominee if that fight doesn't even happen in the first place.

[Anders Hallin]

Yes, those two fundraising events (or whatever) and one press release was sure the media carpet bombing that I associate with campaigning.

[extarbags]

Yes, those two fundraising events (or whatever) and one press release was sure the media carpet bombing that I associate with campaigning.

Yeah, because she didn't decide to break the rules and do it until a couple of days before, after being trounced in South Carolina. You'll also note that campaigning is a relative thing; you don't need more than a couple of appearances if your opponent isn't there at all.

[Mister Widget]

Even if what Clinton did wasn't really campaigning, I don't see how absence of a campaign by either side is compatible with a valid democratic vote. Clinton had the name recognition -- thanks to her husband -- so she "won". No surprise there: without a campaign of any kind, Florida had a glorified poll, not a vote.

[Jeff Green]

Why don't you read the accounts of this morning's press conference with Obama?

This is from the Wash Post's political writer. Argue with them.

It took many months and the mockery of "Saturday Night Live (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Saturday+Night+Live?tid=informline)" to make it happen, but the lumbering beast that is the press corps finally roused itself from its slumber Monday and greeted Barack Obama (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Barack+Obama?tid=informline) with a menacing growl. The day before primaries in Ohio (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Ohio?tid=informline) and Texas (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Texas?tid=informline) that could effectively seal the Democratic presidential nomination for him, a smiling Obama strode out to a news conference at a veterans facility here. But the grin was quickly replaced by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog.

And, again, the media decides that they themselves are the story. "We went soft on the guy. A comedy show made fun of us. But not anymore! Obama's campaign is reeling from our fierceness!"

[Jason McCullough]

CNN has a delegate counter flash thingy (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/29/delegate.counter/index.html) up.

Playing with that, I'm more than a little confused how Alter gets his numbers. Ignore the superdelegates - lets see how the elected delegate count works out.

* Clinton is behind by 109.
* There's 1012 delegates remaining.
* So if Clinton manages a 561/451 delegate result - 55% of the delegates remaining - she wins the elected delegates.

Am I missing something here?

Edit: Slate's delegate calculator shows Obama having a lead of 156, instead of 109, and only 990 remaining. Strange - what's the deal there? Even so, that results in her needing 573/417, 58%, which still isn't that impossible. Also I'm pretty sure a 55/45 breakdown in a state doesn't translate into a delegate margin like that at all.

[Tom McNamara]

The media's been intimidated into remaining largely silent on the Bush administration. So in an area where they can bear their teeth, they will hurl themselves bodily at an issue; gay marriage, abortion, Hugo Chavez, tasers, and domestic politics. It distracts them and us from the lumbering elephant in the room, and it generates ratings at the same time. Make no mistake, this primary has been a godsend for the 24/7 news networks. I haven't seen such a brigade of talking heads, charts, and graphs since the Persian Gulf War. The only thing that's missing from the coverage is the room where they print their money.

[Jeff Green]

The media's been intimidated into remaining largely silent on the Bush administration. So in an area where they can bear their teeth, they will hurl themselves bodily at an issue; gay marriage, abortion, Hugo Chavez, tasers, and domestic politics. It distracts them and us from the lumbering elephant in the room, and it generates ratings at the same time. Make no mistake, this primary has been a godsend for the 24/7 news networks. I haven't seen such a brigade of talking heads, charts, and graphs since the Persian Gulf War. The only thing that's missing from the coverage is the room where they print their money.

Yes, the press always bare their teeth at the Dems to disprove the "liberal bias." So that's why they couldn't get enough of Bill's blowjob. Meanwhile, they've been fucking pathetic, toothless lapdogs for 8 years of Bush's incompetence. Hey, there's a war on!

But should Obama actually win the presidency, look for his press "honeymoon" to be over by March '09.

[jeffd]

CNN has a delegate counter flash thingy (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/29/delegate.counter/index.html) up.

Playing with that, I'm more than a little confused how Alter gets his numbers. Ignore the superdelegates - lets see how the elected delegate count works out.

* Clinton is behind by 109.
* There's 1012 delegates remaining.
* So if Clinton manages a 561/451 delegate result - 55% of the delegates remaining - she wins the elected delegates.

Am I missing something here?

Edit: Slate's delegate calculator shows Obama having a lead of 156, instead of 109, and only 990 remaining. Strange - what's the deal there? Even so, that results in her needing 573/417, 58%, which still isn't that impossible. Also I'm pretty sure a 55/45 breakdown in a state doesn't translate into a delegate margin like that at all.

The count of Obama being up by 109 includes Supers, most likely. Literally every estimate that doesn't include superdelegates has him up by 150+.

[StGabe]

For Clinton to argue that she is better suited to win swing states she has to be able to argue that she is more successful with the voters that *matter* in swing states. I.e. moderates and independents. I don't think she can make that case. Even given that she wins Ohio, her demographics fare worse against McCain there.

[Jason McCullough]

Ah, yeah, CNN is supers included. So she needs 58% of the delegates left to win the elected delegates.

That said, if she gets close enough (50? 100?) and maybe wins most of themf rom here on out I can see superdelegates barely putting her on top. Depends how the "convince the supers" arguments work out. There's also Edward's delegates.....

[Andrew Mayer]

If she doesn't win big today, and she won't, she's out.

[Jason McCullough]

You know, now I'm not so sure. If she can get within striking distance on the elected delegate count, she could maybe sell the supers. How?

Check out this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html) and this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/is_it_over_1.html) - very interesting posts. The short version is "wins in OH, TX, and PA, overtake Obama in popular vote totals, and argue that Obama's elected delegate lead is from caucuses, which suck."

[Andrew Mayer]

You know, now I'm not so sure. If she can get within striking distance on the elected delegate count, she could maybe sell the supers. How?

Check out this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html) and this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/is_it_over_1.html) - very interesting posts. The short version is "wins in OH, TX, and PA, overtake Obama in popular vote totals, and argue that Obama's elected delegate lead is from caucuses, which suck."

That's a lot of ifs.

I think she's burned too many bridges, and lost too many elections (in a row) at this point.

Remember, Hillary has never been ahead in the delegate count.

[Tom McNamara]

You know, now I'm not so sure. If she can get within striking distance on the elected delegate count, she could maybe sell the supers. How?

Check out this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html) and this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/is_it_over_1.html) - very interesting posts. The short version is "wins in OH, TX, and PA, overtake Obama in popular vote totals, and argue that Obama's elected delegate lead is from caucuses, which suck."

I think it's going to come down to (1) how Michigan and Florida are dealt with and (2) who the superdelegates see as a stronger contender against McCain. I sincerely doubt that the Clinton campaign will let the situation with MI and FL stay put -- nor would they be amenable to a caucus, nor do I think that the voters in those stays would be amenable to the third solution: letting those delegates choose their candidate regardless of popular consensus. While the delegates are technically free to do so, I think it would hurt the party in the long run.

[Uncle Larry]

I love this quote today from a "top strategist" named, um, "Tad Devine." (I think I've rented some of his gay porn movies!)

Is it ok to call people fags on QT3? Because someone just admitted to renting porn. OHHHHH!

Has her campaign been so poisonous that it would preclude her from being Obama's running mate? VP Hillary would be like magic kevlar for the presidizzle.

[JeffL]

You know, now I'm not so sure. If she can get within striking distance on the elected delegate count, she could maybe sell the supers. How?

Check out this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html) and this (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/is_it_over_1.html) - very interesting posts. The short version is "wins in OH, TX, and PA, overtake Obama in popular vote totals, and argue that Obama's elected delegate lead is from caucuses, which suck."

So she loses 11 states in a row, by big margins. She wins a couple of states by probably fairly close votes (and even if she wins TX by, say, 5 points, she'll probably lose on delegates.)

The argument will be that the caucuses basically don't count, that those states really shouldn't be considered "real?" That the string of 11 states in a row shouldn't really mean anything?

As for the swing states - any state that Hillary wins by a big margin is very likely going to be voting for Obama, but I'm not sure the reverse is true. I somehow believe that the Dem party bigwigs feel that Obama has a much better chance of beating McCain than Hillary.

For the person saying "oh, Obama has never faced the heat of a real election" - neither has Hillary until now (she didn't have a big challenge in New York.) And we can see who put together the best team, made the best decisions, made the biggest mistakes and blunders, and who has in general done the best under the heat of a real campaign.

[Jason McCullough]

Jeff, I didn't say it necessarily made sense, just that's what they're talking about doing.

NPR was asking some analyst about the popular vote vs. the delegates tonight, so yep, here it comes. Assuming they do somehow pull all that off, figure with ~350 superdelegates it's possible at -50, unlikely at -100, and impossible at anything more than that.

[Mark Asher]

You think Obama won't carry fucking New York and California? Sheesh. And yeah, she won Florida, a huge, key swing state... in a Soviet-style election, with no competition. Texas isn't a state that the Democrats are going to carry in November anyway, so if she wins that and Ohio, she can say that she's beaten Obama in one key state. Scroll up and read triggercut's list of swing states that Obama has won so far.

I'm not saying Obama wouldn't carry them. I'm just suggesting the kind of argument that the Clinton campaign would make. I'm an Obama guy myself, so I'd like to see him knock her out of the race this evening, but it's interesting to speculate on the kind of spin Clinton might try to put on a some wins this evening.

[Fooey]

Neither Ohio nor Florida are realistically swing states at this point. Florida's gotten significantly redder since 2000. And the Republicans have no chance of winning Ohio, and they know it and will probably pretty much concede the state and not devote many resources there.

[docvego]

Dems can't win w/o OH and PA.

PA hasn't gone Republican in a General Election since '88 Bush/Dukakis.

[JeffL]

Jeff, I didn't say it necessarily made sense, just that's what they're talking about doing.

NPR was asking some analyst about the popular vote vs. the delegates tonight, so yep, here it comes. Assuming they do somehow pull all that off, figure with ~350 superdelegates it's possible at -50, unlikely at -100, and impossible at anything more than that.

Oh, not targeted at you, Jason. Just kind of rolling my eyes.

For all the complaining about the media, I doubt anyone but a Clinton would have the media playing up these two states as potential "turn-arounds" after losing eleven straight states in a row, many just complete blow-outs, and at least a couple composed of the type of demographics that should have been all HRC.

[Jason McCullough]

I know what happened in Ohio (terrible economy, state GOP meltdown over corruption), but what's been driving the shifts in Florida? Was 2004 just a temporary result of Bush's brother being governor + all the money he dumped in the state in disaster relief?

2004: Bush by 5.
2000: Gore by 0.
1996: Clinton by 6.
1992: Bush by 2.

...and before that was is GOP by huge margins every year.

[bigdruid]

My parents retired there sometime between 2000 and 2004, so I think that accounts for the IQ drop in the state.

(yes, I'm still pissed about my mom's recent "Obama's secretly a muslim!" rant)

[Jason McCullough]

My mom in Texas walked up to that but didn't actually say it - she was "concerned about his background." Apparently she's been getting those right-wing chain emails which show Obama supposedly without his hand on his heart giving the pledge of allegiance, too.

[Machfive]

"Both Ohio and Florida should be declared too dumb to be counted."

- My ever-wise GF, hearing about Obama's current ranking in Ohio.

[Fooey]

Here's an interesting article:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html

Hillary can't overtake Obama's lead in pledged delegates, but she has a reasonable shot at overtaking his lead in the popular vote, which would give her a legitimate argument to make for the support of the super delegates.

[Tom McNamara]

She's not getting a million more votes than Obama tonight.

[David Erikson]

My mom in Texas walked up to that but didn't actually say it - she was "concerned about his background." Apparently she's been getting those right-wing chain emails which show Obama supposedly without his hand on his heart giving the pledge of allegiance, too.

Funny, my mom was also very concerned that Obama is muslim. It took me quite a bit of time to explain to her that he is not and to convince her to vote for Obama rather than Clinton.

[Tom McNamara]

Because you know what it means if we have a Muslim in the White House.

Actually, what would that mean? Do these nasty fliers actually spell it out, or do they darkly intimate?

[bigdruid]

Well, it's pretty explicit:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp


Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegiance nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.



ZOMG, it's true - look, I have a picture!:

http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/2576/anthemme7.jpg


The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States , one of their own!!!!



QT3 - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

[Sarkus]

Because you know what it means if we have a Muslim in the White House.

Actually, what would that mean? Do these nasty fliers actually spell it out, or do they darkly intimate?

Yeah, I find it humorous that in a culture that is increasingly non-religious that we would think that someone being muslim woud be an issue. Hell, we just had two terms with a "born again" christian.

[bigdruid]

Yeah, it's amusing. I asked my mom if she thought it was OK to judge Obama based on his religious preference, and she actually said "*that's* not a religious preference!"

In the minds of many Americans, Christianity and Judaism are religions, while Islam is a fanatic cult.

[Rimbo]

This is the basic problem with Democracy: People are idiots.

[Podunk]

You know I didn't quite identify with the "WTF are you people thinking?!?" sentiment common among Kerry supporters after the last presidential election. Until now.

[Dirt]

Politics trumps math.

[awdougherty]

My understanding is that the photo posted above was actually taken while the national anthem was being played, not the pledge. You don't have to do the hand over hearth thing for that (you shouldn't have to do it ever, but oh well). And why is his back to the flag any different than the other two?

[bigdruid]

Because he's muslim.

[Dave Markell]

Yeah, I find it humorous that in a culture that is increasingly non-religious that we would think that someone being muslim woud be an issue.

Do we live in the same country?

[mono]

My understanding is that the photo posted above was actually taken while the national anthem was being played, not the pledge. You don't have to do the hand over hearth thing for that (you shouldn't have to do it ever, but oh well). And why is his back to the flag any different than the other two?

I'm also pretty certain that video of the event also shows he was the only one singing aloud with the anthem, as everyone else stood there. Not that any of this shit matters.

[Reldan]

This morning on NPR they had a little clip from a man in Vermont about why he voted for Hillary.

"Because she's truthful," the man said. "I don't trust this Obama fellow."

[Podunk]

This morning on NPR they had a little clip from a man in Vermont about why he voted for Hillary.

"Because she's truthful," the man said. "I don't trust this Obama fellow."

"...because he's a darkie."

[NoWayJose]

My understanding is that the photo posted above was actually taken while the national anthem was being played, not the pledge. You don't have to do the hand over hearth thing for that (you shouldn't have to do it ever, but oh well).
The only reason not to put your hand (or hat) over your heart while the national anthem is being played is if you have a beer or a hot dog in it - and please, Obama lovers, no posts about how his hands are clasped over his foot long hot dog - that is in poor taste! >:[

[Jackie Treehorn]

The only reason not to put your hand (or hat) over your heart while the national anthem is being played is if you have a beer or a hot dog in it - and please, Obama lovers, no posts about how his hands are clasped over his foot long hot dog - that is in poor taste! >:[

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2007-6/1262543/1203396986868.jpg

[Andrew Mayer]

The only reason not to put your hand (or hat) over your heart while the national anthem is being played is if you have a beer or a hot dog in it - and please, Obama lovers, no posts about how his hands are clasped over his foot long hot dog - that is in poor taste! >:[

My grandfather taught me how to say the Pledge of Allegiance when I was 2. During the Pledge of Allegiance you put your hand over your heart. During the national anthem you sing.

12345

[Gremlinclr]

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2007-6/1262543/1203396986868.jpg

Hey, when was Obama in Metropolis (that's in Ill. by the way)? It's right across the river from where I work in Ky. They are the official home of Superman and have a "Superman Celebration" every summer.

I would have totally went to see him if I knew it was happening.

[NoWayJose]

My grandfather taught me how to say the Pledge of Allegiance when I was 2. During the Pledge of Allegiance you put your hand over your heart. During the national anthem you sing.

Well, I'm not going to take the word of a guy who refuses to wear the flag on his lapel. You're running for president of the United States of AMERICA, pal.

[MikeSofaer]

Well, I'm not going to take the word of a guy who refuses to wear the flag on his lapel. You're running for president of the United States of AMERICA, pal.
Really? Did you know he proposed tax breaks for producers of large-aperature fixed-focus lenses?

[Tom McNamara]

Well, I'm not going to take the word of a guy who refuses to wear the flag on his lapel. You're running for president of the United States of AMERICA, pal.

Would you prefer the word of a woman who refuses to wear the flag pin on her lapel?

http://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/hillary-clinton-howard-u-400a062907.jpg

http://fitsnews.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/hillary-clinton-on-phone.jpg?w=451&h=342

http://www.fiveanddime.net/hillary-clinton-for-president-in-2008/senator-clinton2.jpg

But let's make sure we have it for the official photo op!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg/480px-Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg

[NoWayJose]

Really? Did you know he proposed tax breaks for producers of large-aperature fixed-focus lenses?
Those are made in JAPAN!!!! Holy Christ, he's already planning to give the country away (also to Canada).

[MikeSofaer]

Those are made in JAPAN!!!! Holy Christ, he's already planning to give the country away (also to Canada).
No, man, he's going to bring the good jobs back home

[magnet]

The only reason not to put your hand (or hat) over your heart while the national anthem is being played is if you have a beer or a hot dog in it
What if you can't find your heart?

http://www.newshounds.us/Bush_Hand.jpg

[Lum]

GET IN MAH BELLY!

[Matthew Gallant]

"Heh heh heh, I'm a robot. O say can you oil my elbow? Heh heh heh, oil."

[NoWayJose]

What if you can't find your heart?

http://www.newshounds.us/Bush_Hand.jpg
Wow, check out magnet crucifying the blonde girl on the far left. So she's a little confused, so what?

[Aleck]

Listening to the radio this evening while picking my kid up, I heard an interesting point that I hadn't thought of before: unless something changes dramatically, neither Obama nor Clinton can possibly win enough delegates through the primaries to sew up the nomination. So, pretty much by definition, it's going to come down to the superdelegates, and whatever arrangements get made by Obama or Clinton to win their votes.

I had known that was true of Hillary, but it's basically impossible for Obama to win without superdelegates, too.

I wonder how much a superdelegate vote costs these days...

[Sarkus]

Listening to the radio this evening while picking my kid up, I heard an interesting point that I hadn't thought of before: unless something changes dramatically, neither Obama nor Clinton can possibly win enough delegates through the primaries to sew up the nomination. So, pretty much by definition, it's going to come down to the superdelegates, and whatever arrangements get made by Obama or Clinton to win their votes.

I had known that was true of Hillary, but it's basically impossible for Obama to win without superdelegates, too.

I wonder how much a superdelegate vote costs these days...

That's really only true if you factor in the superdelegates, who are really only supposed to overturn the elected delegates in extreme circumstances. If you take the supers out of the picture, then Obama only needs 1614 delegates to be the single largest holder of delegates and 1627 to have a majority of them. Right now he has 1321, meaning he's roughly 300 short with about 750 still to be decided. He'd have to lose pretty badly to not get at least 300 delegates the rest of the way.

Of course, Obama has 200 superdelegates of his own on top of that right now.

I fully expect that Obama will enter the Democratic convention with a majority of elected delegates. Then it will come down to how many supers he's attracted by then and whether the undecideds are willing to ignore the elected delegates, who reflect the voters, and if they think Hillary is still the better candidate for the reasons her side suggests.

[Chris Nahr]

What if you can't find your heart?

http://www.newshounds.us/Bush_Hand.jpg

...

Even the little girls put their hands over their hearts during this ritual of pledging your soul to Morgoth or whatever it is?

I'm sorry, I'm just a foreigner, please ignore me, I was just looking for the nearest exit anyway...

[The Bitter Cynic]

Would you prefer the word of a woman who refuses to wear the flag pin on her lapel?

http://news.filefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/hillary-clinton-howard-u-400a062907.jpg

http://fitsnews.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/hillary-clinton-on-phone.jpg?w=451&h=342

http://www.fiveanddime.net/hillary-clinton-for-president-in-2008/senator-clinton2.jpg

But let's make sure we have it for the official photo op!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg/480px-Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg

Satan's mother is running to see if she can run to be president.

She just scares the ba-jeebers outta me.

Evil I say, EVIL!

[extarbags]

According to Newsweek yesterday, Clinton now has to win every remaining contest by an average of 23 percent in order to catch up to Obama.