Mathematical note

[mamadeb]

Neither Democratic candidate can get enough delegates to win. We're headed for a brokered election.

I'm sorry that my candidate has the nerve and stubborness not to lay down and die.

Comments

[batdina.livejournal.com]

ah, that's what superdelegates are for, which is why your candidate hasn't left the game yet.

[sdelmonte]

I honestly think that, under the current system, as long as there is a chance that a candidate can win, he or she should stay in.

I just hate the current system, given that all but two choices were gone before the vast majority of us could vote.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

That's actually counting superdelegates (and there are a number pledged to Obama) and I wish they didn't exist. I also believe that Florida and Michigan should have *been* counted, but once the decision was made to NOT count them, that should NOT be changed.

[seperis.livejournal.com]

If I hear one more time she should drop out--*grits teeth*

But I am zen. And God, am I hopeful.

[batdina.livejournal.com]

Hell, I voted on SuperTuesday in February and even *then* my candidate was already gone. Something's definitely wonky here.

[batdina.livejournal.com]

seriously? I'm not so sure about that, actually. At any rate, they should both stay in for the convention and then let the delegates hammer it out there. That's what the convention is FOR after all. It's only been in the past decade or so that the candidate's been chosen before the delegates have even voted.

[batdina.livejournal.com]

I don't think she should drop out either. I just wish the other candidates had stuck around too. Then it would be a race instead of a bloodbath.

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

You seem to be unusual among Clinton supporters in that. Which disappoints me -- not about you, I hasten to add, but about them, and her, and the evident idea that it would be better for the DNC not to follow through on a promise if it would be inconvenient to one's candidate that they do so. Sigh. (I'm with you, in case you couldn't tell.)

[sethg]

Not gonna happen.

Dean (chairman of the DNC) has said that he wants the undecided superdelegates to make up their minds ASAP after the last primary. To get the nomination on the first ballot, all Obama has to do is at least break even getting delegates in the remaining primaries and win over at least one third of the superdelegates who haven't declared a preference yet, or vice versa.

The superdelegates can theoretically throw the nomination to the candidate who has fewer pledged delegates, fewer overall votes, and less money raised than her opponent, but I think most of them would want a damn good reason for doing so, and I don't think the Clinton campaign is providing them with one.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

It's better than other years, when we'd have been down to one a long time ago. Two strong candidates - not a bad thing.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Mine, too.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Why do you think I made the post in the first place? I have NO problems with Obama - just with many of his followers. He's ahead, but the game isn't over yet.

(And really - I want a president who is just that stubborn.)

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

But until that happens, both are in the same position.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

I may be. But I don't know - most of the Clinton supporters on my friendslist have been entirely silent.

I just believe in consistency.

Even for stupid decisions.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

We have a president who's "just that stubborn" -- combine that with poor judgment and a callous disregard for the truth, the Constitution, and the vast majority of the people he's supposed to serve, and we've gone from budget surpluses to the largest deficits in history, NOT counting the funding for the war he lied to get us into for his buddies' profit, and all the other things we could list to each other all day.

It's not Hillary's stubbornness that bothers me about her; it's her being a corporate apologist, and her willingness to adopt right-wing talking points without apparent critical consideration. (Among other things, but those are the two that stand out.) Those qualities, combined with stubbornness, in a president, don't reassure me.

[museclio]

I voted form my candidate even thoug he'd quit already!

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Yes. And I have been concerned with all her recent pandering - she's NOT running a good campaign.

I just truly believe she'll do a better job once in office. The problem would be getting her there.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

I'm not as convinced. It's not just her recent campaign, but her record going back to that awful pro-war vote that she took so long to repudiate that bothers me.

I'm not really convinced about Obama, either. I just think he's the least of the three evils we're still being offered (there were two or three goods, in there, but they got pruned early by the party and the media).

I'm curious: if, following the final primary in June (NOT today or tomorrow), the total delegate count (including committed supers) shows Obama has enough support to win a first-ballot nomination, do you think that Hillary should concede, or try to continue to change minds? Would it be worth the cost, in that scenario? Similarly, if by some magic enough supers committed to bring him to the magic number any time before the primaries end, would that be an appropriate time to concede? I'm not saying that Obama will make his nut at all before the convention, but if he does, does it make the difference?

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I don't know. I don't think it's going to happen - There are, according to the information I found, 133 more delegates available. (This (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html)is my source for information - note that it counts superdelegates.

I assumed that Obama would get all the remaining delegates when I made my original post.

By those numbers, neither will get a first ballot nom.

If the numbers change (superdelegates, pledged or unpledged changing votes publically), then other things will change.

[celandineb.livejournal.com]

I assume that's irony? I'm glad she's not laying down and dying. Especially if that makes it any more possible for there to be a joint ticket.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

I've been seeing a lot of posts that she should just concede NOW. Or even, "Why won't she just go away?" There's one person on my flist I keep thinking of defriending because he's been extremely *nasty* - he's taking it personally that Clinton dares to still stay in the race.

And it would be a total waste for Clinton to be VP. (And I wouldn't want Obama to be *her* VP for the same reason. They should be in the other's cabinet.)

The person I think Obama should choose (assuming he's the nominee?) Bill Richardson. Be a good choice for Clinton, too.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

I must disagree, to the extent that I think there's a good chance of it happening:

Via http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/May07.html we see that the delegate count, while slightly uncertain as a result of the supers, is running roughly 1840-1685 in Obama's favor, with 2025 needed for the nomination. There are 217 delegates up for grabs in the last 6 primaries; if we give Obama only 45% of those (the states tend to be Hillary's demographics, but her margins haven't been large; the analysis at the site suggests that margin, but that he'll win some states), he gains 97 for a total of approximately 1937. With somewhere around 280-300 uncommitted superdelegates, he only has to convince somewhere around 100 to commit. The only question, in my mind, is their timing.

(You neglected the three primaries -- Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota -- at the bottom of the page, on the site you mentioned. That's where the extra delegates come from.)

[blueraccoon.livejournal.com]

(disclaimer: I am a strong Obama supporter, have been since the beginning)

My concern is that the longer this goes on, the more fractured the Democratic Party gets, and the stronger chance we have of McCain winning in November. Obviously, I would prefer my candidate to get the nomination. I will vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination. I won't like it, but I'll do it, because either of them is better than McCain.

I just don't know as the many swing voters and die-hard fans--on either side--will see it that way. And that's what worries me.

[rachel-wilder.livejournal.com]

I didn't want to jump in the middle of a discussion, so this is related to the thread about how campaigns were managed vs. how the administration might be run and for me that was a major tipping point.

Here in Iowa we see a lot more of the operation up close because most of the campaigns spend 8 or more months here. After a disappointing experience with the Dean campaign four years ago I shopped around for a candidate based on his/her views and the organization that was supporting them.

I have to admit that it was the Obama organization that put me in his camp as much as his views (although I support the things he stands for). There has been a thoughtfulness and pragmatic approach that I believe will be part of a successful administration. I'm not saying that Hillary' presidency would have been the same as Bill's, but there are a lot of the same people involved and what I saw with her campaign here was the kitchen sink philosophy that often times seemed to make the first Clinton administration have a hard time finding their voice and agenda.

At this point I am hopeful for a resolution that stops the in-fighting. None of that will be good for us this fall.

And thank you for continuing to share your views. In the end I believe that most of us really want the same things--a change for our country and our future.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Whereas I mostly see the Internet voice of Obama's campaign, and not what happens up close. It's the followers that scare me, not the candidate - there is a worshipfulness in his most vocal supporters that is really frightening.

I do hope so much that who ever loses does so in a way that will unite the party. But the negativity on both sides...I don't know.