The Democratic nominating contest now enters a new phase. There are no elections until April 22nd, in Pennsylvania. Let’s look at the lay of the land. First, let’s look at contests won. Forty states have voted. Barack Obama has won the popular vote in twenty-six of them. If we look at a different measure (the winner of pledged delegates), Obama has won twenty-eight of them (and tied in Missouri and New Hampshire). Put another way, Clinton has won the delegate fight in 12 of 40 contests. If we add in DC, the Virgin Islands, Democrats Abroad, and American Samoa, Clinton has won the delegate fight in 13 of 44 contests. That’s a less than 30% success rate.
Obama has a popular vote lead of over 700,000 votes. If we include Florida (where no one campaigned) Obama has a popular vote lead of over 400,000 votes. If we add in Michigan as well (where Obama was not even on he ballot), Obama has a popular vote lead of just under 80,000 votes. Of course, Clinton received 328,000 votes in Michigan and Obama received none, so that is a very unfair way of tabulating the popular vote.
Two thousand six hundred and eighty-seven pledged delegates have been elected and Obama has won 1,403 (52%) of them. Clinton has won 46% of them.
The only measure where Hillary Clinton still maintains a lead is in the superdelegate count. She has a 247-211 (54%-46%) advantage. On Super Tuesday (February 5th), Clinton had a ninety superdelegate edge. Now the edge is a mere thirty-six.
Using Slate’s delegate calculator, even if Clinton wins every remaining contest with 60% of the vote, she will only pick up 111 pledged delegates, and will finish 52 delegates behind Obama.
In spite of this, the Clinton campaign plans on doing this:
The Clinton campaign plans to use the coming six-week gap in primary voting to aggressively push its case that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., lacks the necessary experience to be president as the superdelegates loom by far as the most important voters in the race…
…Mississippi marks the last primary or caucus for a six-week stretch — by far the longest pause in this year’s nomination fight.
That gives Clinton a chance to battle Obama without time pressures that magnify every moment on the trail, allowing her to make a deliberate and methodical case in favor of her candidacy — and against Obama’s.
Here is my question. Why should the Party allow the Clintons to spend the next six weeks tearing down our nominee? Why not get together and tell the Clintons that the nomination is over?
How do you recommend conveying that message?
Party leaders need to put together a bloc of superdelegates and drive home the point that no negative campaigning against Obama will be tolerated and that the nomination is over.
do they have the spine to take on the Clinton machine?
someone had better find a truck load of bamboo, quick.
Btw, Clinton’s surrogates in Florida-the Congresscritters and State party officials who had endorsed her – mounted quite a vigorous campaign on her behalf…flyers, ads. door to door the works. And Hillary did not dissuade, was not shy about flying into the state on the afternoon of primary voting date.
Here’s my idea. Take the delegate totals for MI – FL states; split 50/50, but deduct 40% from Clinton’s take as her penalty for violation of a signed pledge not to campaign in those two states. That should have her STFU.
Wanna bet she has her sights on the Gov. NY slot if she lose?
Dick Morris who knows well the Clintons wrote a hint to Hillary:
Clinton having won 46% of pledged delegates is banking on super-delegates.
and as per Chris Bowers, Pennsylvania is not a mini-firewall.
The important point to remember (and tell anyone who’ll listen) is that it is now impossible for Clinton to win the popular vote, and her campaign is now predicated on overturning the popular vote.
being reinforced by a lazy MSM who are deficient in math.
Keep your TVs On
This should be interesting: via Huffpost
The question is, who has sufficient standing to tell them to do this? The Clintons are both stubborn and ambitious.
The only thing I can see that will make a difference is that if the superdelegates start to leave her in large numbers. Even then, she would probably soldier on.
The thing I don’t get is the rabid support for her from some quarters.
I agree. It is going to be up to the superdelegates to make it clear to her that the game is over. Until they say, in no uncertain terms, that their support is going to Obama, she will trudge along, slashing and burning at every opportunity, right up to the convention. She is banking on an eleventh hour superdelegate swoon in her direction after all the inevitable arm twisting and back-room deal making is done.
If the party is willing to allow this to happen, deludingly thinking that this somehow helps the eventual nominee and the party, then they will most certainly get what they deserve; a John McCain presidency.
I just wish there weren’t so many precedents of the Democratic Party shitting in the same place where they eat. I would be a lot more comfortable about them doing the right thing. As it sits right now, I’m not sure what they might do. Or worse, what they might not do.
This isn’t helping make it over sooner.
From http://www.kveo.com/news/local/16594611.html:
I have so many expletives I don’t know where to put them!!! OUTRAGEOUS.
I think we should all call Texas and ask either WTF or, more politely, “how can we help”?
Leave it to Texas. I would say I can’t BELIEVE this, but it’s Texas, so nothing is beyond belief.
even their links are broken!
try this http://www.kveo.com/news/local/16594611.html
(actually it was just an extra “:” in your link)
Boo, you might as well make some room on your couch and in your ‘fridge for the hundreds of volunteers heading your way for the 4/22 contest. And this is why:
*Billary doesn’t listen to reason. Like Cheney, she believes the presidency is her due.
*Her backers have more money than brains, and Billary is perfectly willing to exploit that.
*The party’s backbone grows in fits and starts.
*The media has a juicy political melodrama that can keep the likes of Pat Buchanan and every other washed up racist has-been salivating for another 15 minutes the opportunities they’re looking for. Ratings and ad revenue, cha-ching. They can only talk about Spitzer for so long.
We should exhort, persuade and demand an end to this, but I don’t expect Billary to think of the party before themselves at this late date. So have your place ready for us.
We’ll bring beer.
Here’s another reason for Clinton to call it quits:
See the link above for the list of generals and admirals and specifics re their background.
thanks for this link.
Tune in for Keith Olbermann’s special comment tonite directed at Hillary Clinton– see my comment down thread.
Only the money crowd could do it. According to http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/, they are having a private confab today to go over strategy, etc. Wonder of crazy Geraldine Ferraro will be there?
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillary_to_huddle_with_her_top.php
Perhaps they party leaders believe this long process, which is building a ground game in each state, is good for the party. Maybe they don’t like the Clintons and don’t mind them destroying their legacy. Maybe they are in the bag for the Clintons and want her to get as close as possible so they can hand the nomination to her.
If the last statement is true, then they are so cynical and so out of touch that they actually believe that she can beat McCain after tearing apart the party. Of course that’s not true. But politicians and political insiders of the Democratic Party are proven losers not winners.
The Clintons are being cheated out of what is rightfully theirs. As examplars to the nation, they cannot let this injustice stand. They intend to right this dreadful wrong, going right to the core of the matter, re-educating the pitiful ignorants who lack the means, intellect and, might I say, class to recognize the darkness of their ways. And if need be, force will be used as a last resort. It’s all for our own good. We don’t know what we’re missing. How will they act during Obama’s GE campaign and when she is back in the Senate? I really can’t see this whole thing ending in any kind of reasonable accord. The longer it goes on, the more bad blood there will be everywhere. There already is so much bad blood.
the fat lady sings. Monica’s on vacation….so…there…
Until Obama stands at the convention podium still ALIVE. Hell, until January 20th 2009.
I suggest you chip in and buy the man a first rate personal security team of tall healthy Black men to back up the Secret Service detail. He needs it against red necks.
The red neck Republicans want Hillary as the weakest potential opponent.
The Clinton red necks want Clinton no matter what.
Don’t be fooled by the facade of democracy in America. When push comes to shove the red necks will kill their way to the top.
I thought about that a lot at the outset, but I’m actually not too worried about assassination attempts, provided Obama actually wins the general election. The authoritarian personality type finds it very difficult to contemplate such things. It’s one thing to shoot a civil rights leader, one of them, but it’s quite another to shoot our president. These are, after all, people who equate dissent with treason.
Bill Clinton stands as a perfect example. If there was anyone right-wing extremists wanted to put a bullet in more than Bill Clinton when he was president, I don’t know who that would be. There were actually a surprising number of attempts on his life, but they all came from people who were genuinely mentally ill, not just hate-filled members of the militia fringe.
That said, I do hope his security detail has their shit together.
Bill Clinton gave the right everything it wanted while he was president. The extreme right in the congress stayed on his shit to keep him in line and it worked like a charm.
Had he actually ever done anything for the liberals he was demonized as representing the right would have nailed him.
Besides, killing Clinton would have given America Al Gore who actually did have some nascent liberal tendencies. Unlike Clinton.
I learned long ago to differentiate between the actuality of a politician and the character that the politician is demonized as being by their political enemies. Clinton was never a liberal. Hillary is not a liberal. They are simply demonized by the right-wing as being liberal as part of the never ending right-wing effort to shove all politicians to the right by demonizing “liberal” and “left” so that these Democrats will run from the label.
Its been going on since the 1970’s and I expect it will never cease. I just wish the liberals and left would eventually come up with a counter attack. At least call these right-wing Jim Crow thugs for what they are.
AG
“Why not get together and tell the Clintons that the nomination is over?”
A two-part simple answer to simple questions:
(a) because the party is run by a lot of risk-averse pussies, many of whom are in Bill and Hillary’s collective pocket and most of whom are at any rate afraid of them.
(b) because the Clintons whon’t listen.
AG
Hillary doesn’t care about the Democratic Party, she cares only about herself. We are suppose to be the pawns who vote for her because she is the heir to the Presidency.
Her refusal to fire Ms. Ferraro is proof of her willingness to destroy her the Democratic base of African American voters, instead of doing what’s right. She cannot win the nomination without trying to steal the delegates already pledged to Barack Obama.
P.S. who do you tell the Clintons its over, give as much money as you can afford to Barack Obama..
Breaking news banner at MSNBC says that Ferraro is leaving the Clinton campaign. No story to link yet…
So she can continue to spew this racist nonsense all over the right wing airwaves without ‘hurting’ Hillary. Speaking for herself only. Because everyone always believes that disclaimer … right.
“Speaking for herself only”
Gee, what does that remind me of? It’s like Ferraro is the new Armando.
I didn’t intend that.
I don’t think I’ve been this angry at a Democrat in years. Or as disgusted. Ferraro is like the George Wallace of the early 21st century.
And before anyone jumps all over me for comparing her to Wallace I know that she isn’t doing what Wallace did. But this is a different time and what is acceptable now is quite different than what was acceptable then. Wallace took his behavior over the edge of acceptability for that time. The edge of acceptability has (thank god) moved in our time. Ferraro has crossed it.
I know you didn’t mean that, I just find the whole “speaking for myself” thing ridiculous. Who else are you speaking for, if not yourself?
And I have way more respect for Armando than Ferraro. I think she’s a hateful country-club racist.
ugh.
I’m tired of women acting like victims — especially when they lead very nice lives and have gone further than most people in the world – male or female.
I know how hard it is to succeed in a man’s world but it’s a hell of a lot easier for a white woman born to a non-poor family than for most of the rest of the world.
I hope this creates a backlash from the younger white women who hear her and think how much they don’t want to be like her.
Anyway. I’m off to dinner with a friend who is a Hillary supporter. I hope I can get through it without harming the friendship.
As George Wallace got older he actually showed a little bit of remorse. Ferraro seems to get more and more of the racist stank as she gets older.
But then again this all seems so premeditated that Geraldine’s faux anger must be a part of the strategy.
This garbage has the same scent as Steinem’s op-ed.
The question brings me back to Steven D’s ‘Quote of the Day II’ this morning: Is Nancy Pelosi, one THE key superdelegates, actually angling at ANYTHING with these curiously cryptic little ‘I don’t want there to be any ambiguity for anyone about any of this’ statements?
Are her statements indicative of a shifting, a movement within the core of the superdelegate elites toward some kind of a preemptive resolution of this thing? Common sense would suggest she’s trying to influence the direction of all this to some degree. But is she simply trying to steer these events, or end the nomination fight? Is she just talking to hear the sound of her own voice? I’d like some answers. The consensus is that she likely favors Obama as the nominee. But where, if anywhere is she going with this?
Oh yeah– And this supposed reserve cache of Obama superdelegates? Would they wait until after PA to come out, and if so… why?
It’s probably because they haven’t had a chance to buy the supreme court off yet. :/
“Oderint dum metuant”, “let them hate, so long as they fear”, was a favorite saying of the mad Roman emperor Caligula. What made me think of this quote is the likelihood that the support of many superdelegates for Hillary — the ones that are not out-and-out henchpersons of the Clintons — comes more from fear than from love. If they see the possibility that the Clintons can be beaten — which surely they do by now — the SDs in this position have a real incentive to support Obama, because by the very act of doing so they can help de-fang the Clintons.
In addition, the 50-state strategy that Obama has been pursuing is a major part of his success. And one of its features is that the Dems in the usually-neglected states will tend to have a deep loyalty to Obama. Not only did they help him, but he has helped rejuvenate their state parties and made them relevant on the national scene for the first time in their political lives.
Many observers, Republicans with glee, Dems with trepidation — have been talking about the increasing split that is developing in the Dem campaign. But the fact is, this polarization really began in 2004 under the leadership of Howard Dean, and it is absolutely necessary and salutary. Perhaps it would have been better if it could have played out in a non-camapaign environment, but the truth is, it took the drama of this highly dramatic campaign to bring it to a head. This campaign is about way more than just two personalities, although Hillary certainly symbolizes everything that is wrong with the Party and Obama, what can restore it. The fact is that the Democrats will never be an effective opposition until they neutralize the Clintons and the Clintonistas. This absolutely can happen, and I think the fate of Obama’s candidacy lies in whether enough of the Democratic party — and independents and crossovers — want it to happen. The Democratic quisling leadership have been getting away with their enabling of the Bush agenda because they have managed to ignore the full weight and import of the Democratic congressional victories of 2006. But in the context of this election, I am hopeful that they can no longer stem the tide. Things really have changed.
But it being over wouldn’t make for such great news!
I am SO SICK of the NY Times.
(copied from my diary…)
“Clinton Presses for Florida, Michigan Voters”
If you click on this… notice what happens as you scroll the page. Clinton & McCain are paired. Obama & Ron Paul are paired. As a designer, I’d like to say – no decisions like this are accidental. Not that it’s some big conspiracy, but it would have been a do-able design decision to show Obama & Clinton next to each other, or otherwise prevent this from appearing the way it does.
Ugh.
Not until something happens with Michigan and Florida – they’re too damn big to just say they don’t count