Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
More Electoral Delusion from Clinton's Campaign
eyesonobama.com — Hillary Clinton continues to move the goal posts when things don't go her way. With the delegate fight ending in Obama's favor, it is time for Clinton to change her case again and claim a popular vote victory, but even that requires us to ignore some facts and use some fuzzy math.
Stonecipher26- 181 diggs
- digg it
- PeaceAndJustice, on 05/14/2008, -5/+21If Obama was behind like HRC is, they would have already told him to "sit down" months ago. Beautiful when you realize he hasn't beaten one but TWO Clintons. The "times they are a' changin'" - Nothing like 8 years of Bush to motivate those who have never before been engaged to stand up to the corporate candidates and say: "No, not this time". Peace from another "white" woman who the pundits say "should" support HRC but who votes her true beliefs and her conscience...I'm just another Mama for Obama - We are many and we are not going away. We have only just begun :)
- calipan, on 05/14/2008, -1/+33 if you count the fact that the Clintons' hell spawn Chelsea is out their stumping for her mother trying to get the youth vote.
- B1663r, on 05/14/2008, -15/+4LOL, Obama is unelectable!!!! Neener! neeener! neener!!!
Hahahahahahah - bitfreak, on 05/14/2008, -4/+12The "upside" of her staying in this race is that she is slowly destroying her future in politics, at least with the democratic party. That's a good thing.
- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -12/+6Clinton can still win... 250 superdelegates are undeclared...
- pablo0713, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7An election should not be rigged by superdelegates. She is losing in delegate count and popular vote. Do you really want her to be elected by Superdelegates only? DO you realize if that happened, it would have been due to "back room deals"? Is this really how we want to start electing our officials? Do you really want your Hillary to be elected at all costs? Even if it means throwing democracy out the window? You must if you are hoping Clinton can still win via these undecided superdelegates.
- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2Blame the democrat leadership, not me. I didn't come up with the stupid "super" delegate concept. Should be like the republican way, winner take all...
This would have been over 3 months ago...
- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2Blame the democrat leadership, not me. I didn't come up with the stupid "super" delegate concept. Should be like the republican way, winner take all...
- trutek, on 05/14/2008, -2/+4"Clinton can still win" That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.
I guess by your logic Mondale could still win too. Enjoy your corrupt little dream. - Fordi, on 05/14/2008, -2/+5Clinton needs 309 more delegates to reach the magic number. The liberal estimate of how many delegates Clinton will get in the remainder of the primary is 93. That means she has to get 216 of the remaining 240 superdelegates to back her if she's to win.
Not. Gonna. Happen.- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3They said that about the NY Giants too!
- Fordi, on 05/14/2008, -1/+9I don't follow basketball. I assume they pulled off some miraculous victory.
Unfortunately, in sporting events, there is not a fixed bag of points for which each team competes, as there are in elections. You can hold out for a miracle all you want, but miracles don't really happen in elections.- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Ever heard of "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" ????
- Fordi, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Dewey's misreported victory was based on polling that misestimated the late counts of the election, and was printed before the election finished. Given that Truman was in the lead THE ENTIRE TIME, and NEVER LOST IT, I don't see how your DDT even applies.
- dan.stryker, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Kennedy_stayed_i ...
- Fordi, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Oh, I didn't say she should drop out. I said she can't win. I actually hope she stays in and spits all the bile she can Obama's way; she's wasting McCain's ammo on her own dwindling dime. She's helping Obama out while driving herself into bankruptcy.
I see this little 'endgame' of hers as a quirky little bit of political poetic justice. - dan.stryker, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I dunno... with around 17 million votes she deserves the VP slot???
- Fordi, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1The question of who deserves the Veep slot is entirely up to Obama and the political pressures facing him. Hillary, her votes, and what she 'deserves' has nothing to do with it.
- dan.stryker, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1obama can't win FL or OH. Clinton can...
- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Ever heard of "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" ????
- Fordi, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1I apologize; digg forced demotion.
"obama can't win FL or OH. Clinton can..."
An opinion which remains irrelevant, as she can't even win the primary. - dan.stryker, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1"can't win the primary" ???? What was last Tuesday about then?
- Fordi, on 05/16/2008, -1/+1A 12 delegate gain in the face of a nearly 200 delegate deficit, in a state that voted red in the last two elections, and has a mere 5 electors in the general.
- dan.stryker, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Next you'll say that MI and FL don't matter either... I thought democrats want "every vote to count" a la 2000 campaign...
- Fordi, on 05/14/2008, -1/+9I don't follow basketball. I assume they pulled off some miraculous victory.
- dan.stryker, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3They said that about the NY Giants too!
- pablo0713, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7An election should not be rigged by superdelegates. She is losing in delegate count and popular vote. Do you really want her to be elected by Superdelegates only? DO you realize if that happened, it would have been due to "back room deals"? Is this really how we want to start electing our officials? Do you really want your Hillary to be elected at all costs? Even if it means throwing democracy out the window? You must if you are hoping Clinton can still win via these undecided superdelegates.
- pablo0713, on 05/14/2008, -4/+13I wanted to beat her silly when she claimed Michigan and Florida as states she won in her speech last night. I wanted to beat CNN silly for repeatedly bringing up a poll which supposedly indicates that 25% of Clinton supporters will not vote for Barack in the general election without also explaining that most likely, just as many Obama supporters would not vote for Hilllary in the general election. Why are they making a big deal about WV? So Hillary has the support of dumb white people who are most likely racist types who would never vote black. So, who cares? How can Hillary claim she is the more electable candidate by claiming she is winning "swing" states? What about the rest of the country, you stupid idiotic woman? If you were more electable, you would not be losing to Barack Obama!!!!! God damn, I HATE SPIN!!!!!! This is why she would make a horrible president. She'll just lie to us, spin reality just like Bush has done and her husband before him. ***** the Clintons. It is time for change!!!!
- baldr, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2I cringed last night when she said that the democratic party rules say you need 2,209 delegates to get the nomination (the party changed this when they excluded Florida and Michigan) and people cheered. So pathetic. I hate sheep. Even CNN uses the 2,025 number.
- B1663r, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Obama supports violence against women. Check, yet another reason why he is worse than McCain.
- EatingPie, on 05/14/2008, -4/+9"Clinton can still win... 250 superdelegates are undeclared..."
He gets dugg down, yet what he said is absolutely true. Clinton CAN still win.
FTA: "Now, even in Hillary Clinton's delusional mind there is no path to victory with a delegate count, so the focus has shifted to the popular vote and the supposed battle for Electoral Votes between Obama and Clinton.... Furthermore, Clinton's argument that a popular vote victory makes her the more electable candidate in the fall is flawed by the fact that in order to achieve this supposed win she needs to count three U.S. territories that have absolutely nothing to do with Electoral Votes or the General Election."
Now, is it me, or is the article arguing AGAINST the popular vote being the imperative factor? Doesn't this contradict previous articles appearing on Digg? Particulary where President Carter said the Delegates / Nomination should go the candidate with the most votes.
-Pie- Fordi, on 05/14/2008, -1/+6You're right, of course. Still, an Obama gain of 24 delegates of either type (SD poaching does more damage), and Clinton's lost, permanently. As of right now, meanwhile, her current standing means that she must either get consistent 62 point margins in the remaining contests, or get 90% of the remaining superdelegates to back her. Neither of these scenarios exist in the realm of reasonable probability. It would have to come out that Obama rapes babies as a past time or some other stupidity for Barack to blow this nom.
- jforjools, on 05/14/2008, -3/+2FALSE -- Carter CLEARLY stated (at every venue he's been featured) that the DELEGATES [not popular vote] was the measure.
When Hillary was ahead (a LONG time ago), she started the rant that this is a 'delegate fight' (cuz she was even further ahead by that count than be the popular count at that time...and also, perhaps, those are the RULES.) Obama has along said 'yes', this is a delegate fight. And he now has an insurmountable lead in delegates (barring Fordi's suggestion that some otherly-world faux-pas would occur.)
It's ALWAYS been a delegate fight...and Hillary has agreed to that up until it was not possible for her to win that way. - EatingPie, on 05/14/2008, -3/+4Carter CLEARLY stated:
"I don’t see any reason at all to continue after June 3rd when we know who got the most [pledged] delegates, who got the most *popular votes,* who won the most states and so forth.”
Popular vote is supposed to determine the delegates... and it sounds like that's what Carter is emphasizing.
-Pie- jforjools, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1Thanks for the subtle correction...but you're still WRONG.
Yes, Carter did indeed say: the most [pledged] delegates, who got the most popular votes, who won the most states and so forth.
YOU put the emphasis on 'popular votes' and discounted the others. If you watched any of the full interviews, you'd understand his quote even more...He was saying that one candidate [Obama] already meets ALL of these requirements. ....And if you want to quibble about which measure he values most, I'd hardly jump to the conclusion that the 2nd in a list of 3 items listed is the most important.
On other occassions Carter DID say the 'delegates' are the final measure--as that's the rules. But then he expanded his quote to include ALL measures--since one candidate was and IS ahead by all measures. - Lyk4n, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Sigs are not for Digg..
- jforjools, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1Thanks for the subtle correction...but you're still WRONG.
- SheilaNoya, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4Clinton doesn't have the majority of the popular vote. The only way she makes that false claim is to count Florida and Michigan. The flaw in her "math" is as follows:
FLORIDA - Since everyone was told their votes wouldn't count, many people didn't bother to vote. However, the homeowners (mostly older white people) had an incentive to go to the polls because there was a property tax measure on the ballot. Renters (mostly younger people) had no incentive to vote since the property tax bill didn't impact them. Counting the votes "as-is" would give Hillary an unfair advantage (even though she won, her margins aren't as much as they would have been if everyone thought their vote was going to count).
MICHIGAN - Hillary claims Obama has ZERO votes in Michigan because he took his name off the ballot. I shouldn't even have to explain why this is pure *****.
- Grova, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQlF-JVKRK4&feature ...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by