The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Californians Would Switch Clinton Vote For Obama
cbs5.com — California voters would change their February primary vote for Hillary Clinton to a vote for Barack Obama if the vote were held again, according to an exclusive poll commissioned by CBS 5. A new SurveyUSA poll shows that if given the chance to vote again, Californians would choose Barack Obama by a 6-point margin, 49%-43%.
DAFitzwater- 1301 diggs
- digg it
- R1b4z01d, on 05/09/2008, -6/+60I think this would be the same in many states.
- clickmyface, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Sadly SurveyUSA is no longer considered to be a reliable polling firm. They were 10 points off in Indiana and North Carolina, way too far outside of the margin of error. They use to be decent, but now they are similar to Rasmussen.
realclearpolitics.com is a great place to find all the polls and averages. - C3RV4NTE5, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1This is what you must hear before Obama wins the elections. Whoever wins the elections, Illuminati & Skll and Bones win. You'll be their bitches.
- clickmyface, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Sadly SurveyUSA is no longer considered to be a reliable polling firm. They were 10 points off in Indiana and North Carolina, way too far outside of the margin of error. They use to be decent, but now they are similar to Rasmussen.
- tcbishop12, on 05/09/2008, -6/+26That's important news for the large group of California uncommitted (or undeclared) superdelegates to consider.
If you haven't done so yet, please write a message to each of your state's superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com- BrendanSheehan, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Yeah and be nice, unlike Hillary's supports (yes I know it was only a few) were earlier when writing to the supers.
- redcolumbine, on 05/09/2008, -7/+8Funny, innit? She dragged it out to give dirt about her opponent to surface, and...
- theaceoffire, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2... her dirt clouded the water?
- SheilaNoya, on 05/09/2008, -7/+39I know many people here in Los Angeles who started out as loyal Hillary supporters, but they now support Obama after watching Hillary lose all respect and credibility. Obama is better known now and people really like him and his policies, especially when you compare him to the nasty troll that Hillary has morphed into. Hillary has shown us that she won't bring us anything but the same old catfights and divisiveness that has been tearing this country apart.
We need a fresh face in the White House and a new mindset. Obama is right on target.- winampman2, on 05/09/2008, -2/+11Yup, Feb 5 was too early... most figured she would be good enough for the job. 3 months later... we now know better.
- Klisk, on 05/09/2008, -8/+3I still don't understand how Hillary "lost credibility". All of the things people criticize her for, I must say, I agree with on her end.
- Namakemono, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6She had no credibility to lose.
- Klisk, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1Don't you think that's a bit biased, for no real reason?
- theaceoffire, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7The lying, constantly, on video, for one thing.
- Namakemono, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6She had no credibility to lose.
- JosselynB, on 05/09/2008, -5/+26His numbers are now better in NJ too: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05 ...
I have suspected for a long time that if we could re-vote Super Tuesday, Feb 9th again, Obama would have this sown up no problem. I wish they'd poll my state, NY. Really curious to see how her Democratic constituents are feeling about our Senator these days.- Codee, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I believe the NY results would be very different than that of Feb.5.
I don't even hear support for her anymore here in NY. It's all for Obama.
Not that a democrat would have a problem in NY, it's still a good sign general election.
- Codee, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I believe the NY results would be very different than that of Feb.5.
- aussiejan, on 05/09/2008, -6/+35What's amusing about this is that Hillary has been saying for weeks that she should stay in the race because people were having buyer's remorse - about Obama!
- masterm1nd, on 05/09/2008, -12/+5It was a poll not a vote. You know about polls, right?
- dinot, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6Yeah, they're usually wrong. And yet Clinton uses them to back her "Obama can't win hard working white Americans" theory.
- masterm1nd, on 05/09/2008, -9/+3Lol, so you agree with me yet I get buried and you get dugg because you had an anti hillary pro obama plug. Diggers is so ***** retarded.
- rdoger6424, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4Exactly! Take you for example: That comment made an english teacher cry herself to sleep.
- masterm1nd, on 05/09/2008, -6/+1The old "argue their grammar because you can't argue their point" trick.
- 47f0, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4Ever notice how the biggest guy in the platoon is named "Tiny"? Or the chubby guy at work is named "Slim". Masterm1nd - it's beginning to make sense.
- masterm1nd, on 05/10/2008, -3/+1Care to explain why I'm wrong? Or just call me a doody head? I didn't think so. Kind of ironic that you deflect me after I just called the other guy on it. If you were so smart, you would know that some words have more than one meaning. Mastermind is a brain archetype, specifically my brain archetype. I am factually and scientifically a mastermind you ***** moron.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTJ
47f0, yeah that explains a lot... - masterm1nd, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2Edit: http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2977873590 ... .
- 47f0, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1Nice shoes - I only wish I could tie mine, I'd damn sure take a pic, as I haven't been able to tie mine since a wreck and spinal injury about eight years ago. You'll have to reach back a bit further for the pedigree of my nick, I'm afraid. Should be trivial for a self-obsessed genius such as yourself. But here's where you were wrong in the post above: as someone who obsesses with stale Jungian-based personality typing, you should be more careful with self-labeling. As you have managed to achieve a 5.41 Digg+ vs. 5.01 Digg- rating, you're slightly less than a half-point above neutral. Which puts you rather solidly, and somewhat boringly smack in the middle of the group you call "retarded". Cheers.
- masterm1nd, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1I feel bad for you but that doesn't give you the right to be an ass. I'm not sure how you could conclude I "obsess with stale Jungian-based personality typing", because I don't. I'm not sure how a digg rating would be a measure of intelligence.
- 47f0, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1Why feel sorry for me? I don't miss tying my shoes one bit - I've probably saved many hours of my life that would have been wasted on knotcraft otherwise.
The original comment that sparked this little tête-à-tête. was your assertion regarding the level of retardation in the Digg community. I pointed out that you were a very average Digger, garnishing a lifetime Digg rate of 0.4. Which either condemns you with your own words, or renders them false.
Unless, of course, the retardation of the Digg community is in their failure to fall down and worship your sheer brilliance. - masterm1nd, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1Why mention it if not for me to feel sorry for you? The bandwagon of digg is retarded. That does not include me. It's not that difficult to understand. Do you not find it retarded that the difference between being dugg and buried for two agreeing comments is a pro Obama, anti Hillary plug? Because I do, and I think most rational people would.
- masterm1nd, on 05/09/2008, -9/+3Lol, so you agree with me yet I get buried and you get dugg because you had an anti hillary pro obama plug. Diggers is so ***** retarded.
- dinot, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6Yeah, they're usually wrong. And yet Clinton uses them to back her "Obama can't win hard working white Americans" theory.
- dxgg, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2My therapist calls that "projection".
- masterm1nd, on 05/09/2008, -12/+5It was a poll not a vote. You know about polls, right?
- ryan83189, on 05/09/2008, -7/+59Lets admit, California is not a key state in the election....
/Clintonism- kertong, on 05/09/2008, -1/+17Especially if you "count as I count"!
- SenorCardgage74, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1"Dont worry about New York. Its not a big rock n roll town"
—Spinal Tap Manager Ian Faith- andyduncan, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3"[Boston's] not a big college town."
- kaelyiesta, on 05/09/2008, -4/+11Fickle uniformed voters realize they made a mistake in picking their candidate? Sounds familiar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gallup_Poll-App ...
Perhaps it would help to do more than just listen to debates and the latest media driven 'scandal' before casting ones vote. Clintons political record already had enough divulged dirt to peg her as a terrible person well before the primaries. Whatever ones political preference, the least we can do is go beyond MSM drivel and actually research candidates that seem viable.- Naieve, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1I can't wait till most of the country finds out about her upcoming trial.
THEY HAVE HER ON VIDEOTAPE VIOLATING ELECTION LAWS FOR HER SENATE SEAT.
LOL - oldgal, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2I am from California, did my research and supported Obama, and agree with you that many Californians did not. Disagree on what they should have researched, however. I made my decision based on what I found out about Obama, his advisors, his policies (although they differ little from Hillary's) and the brilliant way in which he organized and ran his campaign. I also believe he has a better grasp of today's realities and opportunities and a healthier, younger world-view. I also like that his style requires me to participate while Hillary's expects me to take advantage of opportunities that she provides.
- Naieve, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1I can't wait till most of the country finds out about her upcoming trial.
- mnemy, on 05/09/2008, -3/+15Yep. It's unfortunate that we voted so early. At the time I didn't care one way or another, but damned if I want to vote for that slimy bitch for president now. Doesn't really matter though, whoever is the Dem nominee is getting california's vote come election time. And luckily, it looks like hillary has dug herself an ever growing hole
- ender7074, on 05/09/2008, -9/+1So the slimy bitch is worse than the slimy asswipe running against her? I think not.
- biotch, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7so early? It was blatantly obvious what was going on by the time we voted... next time get your head out of your ass before you vote... Im sorry to be rude but votes are a big deal. And the same goes for all you Bush voters who changed your minds. It does us no good to change your mind after you vote if you keep voting without first paying attention. Educate yourselves BEFORE you vote.
- buba1243, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Which is why I would like to see a simple test that a person has to take before being allowed to vote. Make people aware of who they are voting for and why. It would never work but imagine if it did.
- wynja, on 05/09/2008, -23/+8Too ***** bad those hippie ***** wannabes didn't vote for him in the first ***** place.
- EntropyNine, on 05/09/2008, -3/+12San Francisco County did! woop woop! We're ahead of the curve.
- biotch, on 05/09/2008, -0/+8Actually it was the hippies in California that voted for Obama... Berkeley and SF voted for Obama. Whereas it was the more conservative districts that voted for Hillary such as orange county, San Diego, and Stanislaus county (shutter), contra costa (not terribly conservative but more than alameda and SF) etc...
http://maps.google.com/maps/mpl?moduleurl=http://w ... - pimpofpixels, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1Also, my parents voted absentee for Edwards. Then, Edwards dropped out just a few days before the California Primary. My parents’ votes as well as the majority of the absentee votes for Edwards would have gone to Obama.
Clinton won by 9%, and Edwards got 4% of a primary election he'd dropped out of.
If you account for Edwards absentees than you're down to a pretty slim margin of around 53%clinton to 46% Obama.
- eminiguy, on 05/09/2008, -5/+11I live in Hollywood. I think it's a shame that Californians did not choose Obama over Clinton when it was the time to do this. Now, who really cares?
- Administrator00, on 05/09/2008, -9/+0I think its a shame that you live in Hollywood. Screw Hussein. Go McCain!!!
- wonderchemist, on 05/09/2008, -2/+37I'm pretty sure California is going to be a blue state, regardless of who the final nominee is.
- BrendanSheehan, on 05/10/2008, -3/+2I'm sure that comment is from a month ago. We know who the nominee is, it's Obama. Well at least the ones educated enough to do 4rd grade math do. (no disrespect to you, I'm just being bluntly honest)
- SteveCUBE, on 05/10/2008, -0/+5 4rd. lol.
- AMD64MM, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2I "lol" with you sir!
- SteveCUBE, on 05/10/2008, -0/+5 4rd. lol.
- BrendanSheehan, on 05/10/2008, -3/+2I'm sure that comment is from a month ago. We know who the nominee is, it's Obama. Well at least the ones educated enough to do 4rd grade math do. (no disrespect to you, I'm just being bluntly honest)
- zepher5150, on 05/09/2008, -3/+12I live on the West Side in Los Angeles...I talk to alot of people about this election (becuase after last election results) I feel it's my moral responsiblity to talk to people about the issues in OUR country. Anyway, there are Hillary supporters...but I would say 3-1 people I talk to want Obama to win. California will defintily be a Blue state....regarless.
- ender7074, on 05/09/2008, -15/+2How is that different than any other election. California is always is blue state. You're packed full of those nutjob liberals.
- faceless323, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11your mouth is full of my nutjob....
- ender7074, on 05/09/2008, -15/+2How is that different than any other election. California is always is blue state. You're packed full of those nutjob liberals.
- rmxz, on 05/09/2008, -6/+15So annoying that these people don't do their research before they vote instead of after.
- biotch, on 05/09/2008, -0/+10yeah digg him down for demanding that people do research before they vote... he is exactly right. It wasnt too early to tell that Hillary was willing to tear this party apart by going negative for her own gain. People should of been able to discern what was happening.
- pedo, on 05/09/2008, -7/+6if they had gotten it right earlier we wouldn't be in this mess. ***** uninformed electorate.
- Enjia, on 05/09/2008, -11/+5oh geez, you mean they would support someone they now know won??? BIG FREAKING SURPRISE!!!
- BrosDuCK, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1i lol'd
so true.
- BrosDuCK, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1i lol'd
- gsadamb, on 05/09/2008, -2/+12In San Francisco here, and there's a huge pro-Obama sentiment as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure it was a big Obama area even in the Feb. primary.
- Stevo23, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6Duh, you're in San Francisco. Latte-sipping, prius-driving, college-going-to liberals have been behind Obama since the start.
- iofthestorm, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Yeah, the thing is California's pretty big. A lot of the people I know support Obama too, but one of my friends is a Hillary supporter (and I assume she doesn't see the kind of stupid stuff Hillary does that's all over digg/reddit/the internet ever day) and I bet there are areas where people are overwhelmingly pro-Hillary.
- lovestospooge, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I have to say that I felt a strong pro-Clinton sentiment here across the Bay, especially among the richer segments of the population.
- The_Red_Monkey, on 05/09/2008, -7/+5Why does this matter? If I could change what lotto numbers I picked last week I would pick the winning numbers!
- Stochio, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4You're part of the problem. The object isn't to pick the winner. Think harder.
- DroidBlender, on 09/18/2008, -1/+16California is going to be a blue state, doesn't really matter what people voted for here. I don't think there is strong loyalty to either Barack or Hillary, and Californians chose based on what was familiar. If Obama would have campaigned here for 2-3 weeks, the results would have been different. But I also understand that Cailfornia is a huge state, and it would take too much time and energy to get votes here, where he would have rather focused on smaller swing states that he was pretty confident to win.
I do wish we had more influence during the primaries though. - ender7074, on 05/09/2008, -14/+1Awww isnt that nice. Now we just vote until the popular candidate is elected. Nice. Obama didnt win? DO OVER!!
- Albear89, on 05/09/2008, -14/+4I can't wait for the ***** that will come when all you obamabots try to spin the inevitable ***** ups he's gonna do to this country. Good luck and God bless us all cuz we are in for a hell of a ride.
BTW : i'm not for Hillbill or mcdonalds errr Mcain. =)- alittleroy101, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7yes, the 'God bless us' mantra has really helped out this country. We're in fine shape, really! This country is already *****, thanks to your loser in the whitehouse.
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -4/+1Get ready to learn the names of all the republican congressmen, because if Obama's elected what the hell is going to be posted on digg?
- Naieve, on 05/09/2008, -1/+0In a perfect world I would vote for Ron Paul.
But you are an idiot for thinking this is a perfect world.
If Obama screws everything up, and only starts to effect some change in how Washington operates (election law reform) he will have accomplished more then any President since Reagan.
- kenedamick, on 05/09/2008, -5/+6Won't the bitch just hang it up? It's done. Come on.
- dagamer34, on 05/09/2008, -3/+5Yeah, this is pretty much reflected in the 50-43 split of Democrats in the nation. You can see that the stunts she pulled later in the campaign have really hurt her standing.
- winnestow, on 05/09/2008, -9/+1does it really matter where our handouts come from? hrc or bho - no diff.
- Administrator00, on 05/09/2008, -5/+1Vote McCain to put an end to handouts.
- Naieve, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Yeah let's give it to the Iraqi's instead.
FYI I support the Iraq War, but look at reality. WE ARE SISSIES WHO WILL NOT FINISH IT. That is now plain. Maybe if the Democrats hadn't been for it before being against it the war would not have happened. The moment they swayed with the political breeze and decided to oppose it we lost the war, not on the battlefield, but right here at home. Iraq was a long term commitment, they didn't understand that and went out to score political points.
Now there is no point in staying. Whether its this President who pull's us out or the next, it doesn't matter.
The Surge failed, oh we did what we said we would, but the whole point of bribing some 200+ warlords with lucrative contracts to stop the violence was meant to give the Iraqi politicians a chance to come together and work on a political solution.
THE IRAQI'S ARE JUST GOING TO KEEP FIGHTING, THEY ALL WANT MORE OF THE PIE. THE NEWS WILL SEE TO US LEAVING.
The only question is how long...
- Naieve, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Yeah let's give it to the Iraqi's instead.
- Administrator00, on 05/09/2008, -5/+1Vote McCain to put an end to handouts.
- dinot, on 05/09/2008, -3/+12Who cares about California? They're not white, hard working Americans!
... oh wait. they voted for Clinton? Nevermind. - DroidBlender, on 09/18/2008, -2/+1get help dude
- DroidBlender, on 09/18/2008, -1/+1^ this was supposed to be directed @antiburybrigade, somehow reply got messed up. Do everyone on digg a favor, and report this spammer as offensive.
- thesandbender, on 05/09/2008, -3/+10This is what happens when you don't read and you take your political advice from public figures and MSM without thinking. Anyone who couldn't figure out that Hillary was a backstabbing power grubbing witch from day one is just foolish. Her first political act was to cook up an excuse to run for Senator in NY. She's from IL, she built her career in AR and she dumped both for the prestige of being "the Senator from NY". She did not grow up there, she did not go to school there, she didn't raise her family there. That, alone, tells you everything you need to know about her. She was going for the power base and could care less about any other facet of her life.
She and her husband are "scoundrels" in every sense of the word.- heliox, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Show me a politician who is NOT in it for the money and power rather that pure social good.
- thesandbender, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Unfortunately, the time of the "noble statesmen" is long gone. Jefferson... maybe Lincoln.
- stretch611, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I wish those people would return.
- thesandbender, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Unfortunately, the time of the "noble statesmen" is long gone. Jefferson... maybe Lincoln.
- heliox, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Show me a politician who is NOT in it for the money and power rather that pure social good.
- BeerRules, on 05/09/2008, -3/+4OMG someone alert the Department of Who Cares(DOWC)..... they voted I'm sure that most americans today wouldn't vote Bush in office but no do overs unless the supreme court says so.
- mlrigsby, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Most Americans didn't vote for Bush in the first place.
- BeerRules, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1did I say in the first place.... no i said today thanks for playing though... as a departing prize you get a tour of the DOWC, and you get to submit a story to digg about how you love Oboma and hate Clinton. Maybe you'd like to visit the Department of Monday Morning Quarterbacks (DOMMQ)? Or maybe the Department of if Wishing Made it so (DOIWMIS).... admittedly I don't do as good a job of coming up with acronyms as congress does.
- Velnich, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1umm what?
- BeerRules, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1did I say in the first place.... no i said today thanks for playing though... as a departing prize you get a tour of the DOWC, and you get to submit a story to digg about how you love Oboma and hate Clinton. Maybe you'd like to visit the Department of Monday Morning Quarterbacks (DOMMQ)? Or maybe the Department of if Wishing Made it so (DOIWMIS).... admittedly I don't do as good a job of coming up with acronyms as congress does.
- mlrigsby, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Most Americans didn't vote for Bush in the first place.
- ohthedaysofyore, on 05/09/2008, -2/+11I was so bummed when the majority of people here picked Clinton...
- mehan, on 05/09/2008, -4/+21700 respondents to this survey is a pretty ***** sample size, considering that the population of CA is over 36000000
Not to mention that the difference between Obama's and Hillary's results is within their self-admitted margin of error...
What's the news here? - geneticlone, on 05/09/2008, -5/+2Actually if you look really carefully, most of the Silicon Valley and Bay Area regions voted for Hillary. The Los Angeles and San Diego areas of course for Obama. The majority of Northern California are supporters for Clinton because of the benefits her campaign provides them and Southern California supports Obama because of the benefits they get from his campaign. Since Northern California has more delegates its safe to say that even if they do this over again Hillary would win but by a smaller margin.
As an Obama supporter I have to sadly say, that I am just not yet convinced he can win in large places like California, New York, and Texas against Hillary.- intanet, on 05/09/2008, -1/+0Dude, you are completely mistaken. Take a look http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-elexresult ...
Hillary won Los Angeles and Orange counties (and most of SoCal) by more than 10 points. Barack did well in the central cost, and the more liberal areas of Northern California: San Francisco, Alameda, Santa Cruz, Marin.
And Barack will win both California and New York easily in the general.
- intanet, on 05/09/2008, -1/+0Dude, you are completely mistaken. Take a look http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-elexresult ...
- Stevo23, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3What's the point of taking this poll? Seriously, why'd SurveyUSA waste their time on this?
- Kyan, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2It was a paid for poll (you can order one, you know) funded by the Obama campaign to generate positive news?
/just a-guessin'
- Kyan, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2It was a paid for poll (you can order one, you know) funded by the Obama campaign to generate positive news?
- cl2yp71c, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Shoulda, woulda, coulda....but can't.
- murraj2, on 05/09/2008, -1/+11Floridians would switch Bush vote for Gore
- junkwheel, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6What would have been a 100% fair race is if Hillary's second name was Smith.
As unknown as Barack was at the start. No previous president many liked to campaign almost as hard as she did. No military lobbyist money friends. No enormous political brand name, massively established with deep roots everywhere. No states which are yours by default, purely because of a previous president, even before campaigning starts.
Hillary Smith Vs Barack Obama.
Barack would have won all states 60% - 40% or better.
Run any state again which Obama didn't win and you know he would do even better second time around. In the space of a single campaign the Obama team created a political brand name stronger than the Clintons. What an achievement. It takes time to get that going from nothing which is why she took early, big states, easy. - ericdano, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4Which is why we should NOT HAVE moved the primary so early. We wouldn't have seen what a truly terrible campaign Clinton has run, or really how delusional she and Bill are.
- joessandwich, on 05/09/2008, -2/+9I wouldn't change my vote.... but that's because I got it right in the first place and voted for Obama.
I was so disappointed in my state when it went for Hillary - taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -5/+0Democrats don't give a damn about California because they'll win there no matter what. This is why the electoral vote should be split proportionally IMO
- taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -1/+0But, if you don't want your vote to actually count suit yourselves.
- insanebrain, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Throwing dirt is a sign of weakness.
- Fordi, on 05/09/2008, -1/+19I'll explain this in simple terms:
Total:
.....Delegates: 3253
.....SDelegates: 795
.....Overall: 4048
Simple majority (sum of D and SD): 2025
Current standings:
.....Obama:
..........Delegates: 1590.5
..........SDelegates: 265
..........Overall: 1855.5
..........Needed: 169.5
.....Clinton:
..........Delegates: 1426.5
..........SDelegates: 269.5
..........Overall: 1696
..........Needed: 329
.....Remainder:
..........Delegates: 236
..........SDelegates: 260.5
..........Overall: 496.5
Projected Delegates (DCount * 236 / 3253):
.....Clinton: 103
.....Obama: 118
Needed superdelegates to win (Needed - PDelegates):
.....Clinton: 226 (86.75%)
.....Obama: 51.5 (19.77%)
Clinton needs to pull 86.75% of the remaining superdelegates to have a shot at a simple majority. There is no chance of this happening. None. There's just not enough capital left in the race. Just go home. - Wynner3, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5If the California primaries were held later, not grouped with other states, Obama clearly would have won. They shouldn't have grouped the states together.
- NelsonR, on 05/09/2008, -3/+4I'm just another poster who despises the wicked witch from the East that will destroy Obama and the Democratic party so she can say, within her perverted mind, "I told you so". Hillary is Hillary and like her hubby, they are humans who think they are owed the Monarchy. I wish her name would be ignored by all and allow them to take their ill gotten millions with Chelsea and go live in luxury without destroying America. Divisive equals the Hillary legacy.
- skunks, on 05/09/2008, -1/+8This Californian got it right the first time.
- FiestyPumpkin, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2I say do-overs for all states!! Hehe
- FredFredrickson, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4I don't really give a ***** which one wins at this point. Just pick one, and let's get these crook Republicans out of office for a while.
And yeah, I know - Democrats are just as big of crooks. But every now and then you've got to flush the ***** out, and replace it with something a little fresher, just to keep them from getting too comfortable in their ivory towers. - NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2Well I've seen who Californians vote for in our state government.... the results have been disastrous year after year after year.... but it doesn't matter, we just keep on voting for status-quo blue. $150 billion budget this year, up 108% since 1998 (population growth 9%), and the state is still falling apart in every sector of public service...
Wait until the plethora of interest payments on the proposition bonds we passed the past 10 years start kicking in....holy crap.
So who cares who we'd vote in the presidential race when we can't even pick people to run our own state.- makenshin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Yeah, what's with that blue voting? I mean, even the governor is blue.
- Administrator00, on 05/09/2008, -15/+0I don't know why this matters. In the end John McCain will win it all and salvage our country. Screw Hussein!!! Go McCain!!!
- murlox, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1... which is impossible. It's too late, majority.
- Quaterni0n, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1This wouldn't happen if the primaries were all held on the same day. Many states don't even get to participate in selecting their candidates because it's all over before it's even their turn. Is there a good reason for this?
- pearbobber, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1doesn't matter.
-
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is 