What is Digg?15 Comments
- MadKennyP, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7"Hillary Clinton has proven she is by far the strongest candidate an most likely to achieve that victory. "
How? By winning the least number of states? By winning the fewest delegates? By trailing in the popular vote? - SheilaNoya, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7There are so many distorted facts and so much misinformation in that article that I had to stop reading it halfway through. The "assumptions" it makes are laughable at best, and downright WRONG in many cases.
Sorry, but I have to bury this as incorrect *****. - wampeter, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7hah... hahahaha... Thanks for that. I needed a laugh. Can you IMAGINE the volume of the laughter by Billary and their supporters if the tables were turned and Obama tried to make this argument?
- MadKennyP, on 05/10/2008, -1/+5Remind me again where the Democratic Party rules state that delegates are chosen based on the Electoral College.
- EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -3/+7Even counting FL and MI, Obama leads in the popular vote, pledged delegates, number of states won and now super delegates. The DNC rules are what they are and that is that the candidate with the most delegates wins. Everyone including Hillary, FL & MI agreed to the rules before the Presidential race began. It is too late to claim that the rules are unfair and that instead the DNC should have had a coronation of Princess Hillary behind closed doors in a smoke filled room.
It is pretty clear who should be the Democratic nominee and it isn't Hillary. - EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -0/+4In the primary process the only metric that matters is the combined tally of pledged delegates and super delegates (electoral college doesn't matter until the general election). The point is that Obama is leading by all metrics including pledged delegates, super delegates, popular vote, states won. So no matter how you try to slice the numbers, Obama is winning even if you use a metric that doesn't matter.
- MadKennyP, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Can you show me where Hillary has won even ONE electoral vote?
- PeoplesChoice, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3McCain's victories are also in swing states. You don't know what you're talking about.
But let me just give you one example: Dukakis won the Pennsylvania primary. But he lost the state in the general election. I hope that helps. - EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -1/+3Do not tell the millions of people across the country who showed up to their caucus that caucuses don't matter. Here in Portland Maine, people who never voted/caucused before in their life stood in line for hours just to get into the high school and register. Maine had a higher turn out for the caucus than it normally does for a general election. Hillary and her supporters dismissing caucuses is BS. The reason Hillary did lousy in caucuses is because in a caucus the voters in each precinct frequently have a mini debates about why they are voting for a specific candidate and have an opportunity to sway other people's opinions and voting is a matter of people physically separating off into groups based on which candidate they support.
When a political discussion in a precinct room filled with strangers got past the pandering of candidates and carefully structured talking points by political surrogates Hillary's personality, political legacy, and political position fell apart like a house of cards and voters easily saw Obama as the better choice. This wasn't some organized grassroots conspiracy against Clinton either. In fact it seemed that at least here in Maine Hillary had the better organized political machine with way more operatives than Obama. It was simply when push came to shove, the voters decided Obama was the better candidate.
Contrary to the myth that is portrayed by Hillary Clinton and her camp at least the caucuses here in Maine were not dominated by party activists. Just like the primaries they were dominated by ordinary voters who wanted to make sure their voices were counted. The only difference was that they didn't get to go in a booth and blindly cast a vote in secret. They had to seriously consider why they were voting in a certain manner and had an opportunity to sway the opinion of other voters in their precinct.
The whole white voter excuse is race baiting BS as well. Maine is one of the whitest states in the union and up until shortly before its caucuses, the conventional wisdom was that Hillary was going to carry Maine. When all was said and done, Obama won Maine in a landslide even though 90%-95% or more of the voters were white and a fair percentage of them were blue collar mill workers. By her own claims, this state had the 'perfect" demographics for Hillary to do well yet she was hammered with Obama getting 3/4 of the votes. When all was said and done, Obama beat Clinton here by almost 20%.
Caucuses may not work in all states, but they are a valuable part of the primary process because they give some groups of voters the chance to discuss and vote on candidates amongst themselves and get past the political pandering and look at the real issues. Any candidate who can not win at least some caucus states has serious problems and probably is not suitable to be president because it probably means they are depending upon gimmicks and pandering to win quick votes and won't be able to live up to their promises if they actually won.
Oh and contrary to popular opinion, Clinton did not win Texas. Texas holds both a primary and a caucus and after the caucus was completed, Obama had actually won the majority of delegates in Texas.
I highly recommend that anyone who lives in or moves to a caucus state register for a party (which ever one will doesn't have a sitting President running for reelection) and participate in a caucus it will be a great civics lesson in participatory democracy. In fact, the whole reason I'm a registered Democrat is that 2004 only the Democrats were having serious caucuses as GW Bush had the Republican nomination wrapped up and I wanted to see what caucuses were all about. I found caucusing to be the most exciting and fun way of participating in the democratic process that I had ever experienced. I even managed to get myself elected to be a pledged delegate to the state conventions in 2004 and again in 2008. This is not too bad for an individual who had never participated in the primary process before 2004 and have no political activity outside of showing up for caucuses and voting in most elections. - MadKennyP, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2Start with Wisconsin. Swing state. No caucuses.
Not really Latino, Asian-American, or African-American dominance in Wisconsin.
Do you have something else? - lambert, on 05/10/2008, -2/+3No... By WINNING THE MOST ELECTORAL VOTES which is the ONLY METRIC THAT MATTERS in November.
Sorry to shout, but that mindlessly repeated "most states" talking point really sticks in my craw. - TurdZilla, on 05/11/2008, -2/+0Can someone tell Billary where the goal posts is. Seem like her supporters and hillary change it every other week.
Please someone put it in writing - PeoplesChoice, on 05/10/2008, -3/+1LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Try this:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Mark_Halperin_Wh ... - LaredoLass, on 05/10/2008, -5/+5Clinton's victories are in swing states.
Clinton's victories are in voting, not in caucusing. The turnout in the balloted primaries is broader than the turnout in the caucuses, because the caucuses were held in places (deliberately?) and times aimed at reducing participation by the elderly, the poor, shift-workers, and people who didn't own their own cars.
Clinton's victories are not limited to Latino, African-American, or Asian-American neighborhoods; they're across the board wins, often in states with strong Republican presence (e.g. Texas).
By contrast, what has Obama won? - lambert, on 05/10/2008, -6/+2The key math that the super-delegates should (according to the rules) base their judgment on -- and they can change their commitments all the way up to the Convention, according to the rules -- is the electoral college math, since that's what brings victory in November. "The nomination decision is no longer disputable. It cannot be that anyone rational would expect the Democratic Party to nominate a candidate whose support is based on primary results from states that are unlikely to deliver Electoral College votes in November. ... The only matter at hand is fielding a candidate who can achieve an Electoral College majority; Red State resident or Blue, everyone must agree that the candidate with the best chance of winning the general election must be made the nominee:" Hillary.
If you want to make up your own mind instead of listening to the Obama Fan Base, read the post.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is