She's also praying to get an unfair proportion of delegates from Florida and Michigan. But, yeah, it's pretty much impossible for her to come back. She might have had an argument had she blown out Obama in NC/Indiana.




The point is that Obama supporters were (statistically) more open-minded voters, who wouldn't be so bitter if Obama didn't get the nomination.

Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that those mostly voting for Clinton are the uneducated?

Well, yeah, but think about it. If you're Clinton supporter from the beginning, you go in thinking your candidate is a shoe-in for the nomination. All of the sudden, this prick shows up and starts winning states your candidate was supposed to win, takes the lead, and never gives it back. Aren't you gonna be a little more pissed than the supporters of the guy who's winning?

There's no room for sore losers in politics.

And there you have it. Hillary just can't catch up. Even if neither of them have reached that magic number of 2,024 (I think), Obama has won the majority of pledged delegates. He's less than 100 away from that magic number, and Hillary would need to get like 80% of Florida and Michigan (In current numbers, she got 55%) to pull it off.

Even if all delegates are seated, Hilary is still behind. She can only win through what would be a political disaster. For now, she only commands a lead over working class/rural/uneducated (I can't help but feel that they're quite synonymous) white people, many of which who threaten to vote for McCain because they're too stupid to learn what the candidates actually stand for.

I hope she concedes by the end of the week. :-D

I think Obama's inability to win over working class whites is really overstated, too. The only places he's being flat out denied in are West Virginia and Kentucky. West Virginia I'll concede to Clinton, but I don't think Kentucky is at all on the Democratic map this year regardless of the candidate. While early polling might prove useless at this point, http://www.electoral-vote.com/ shows both Obama and Clinton losing it to McCain by sizable margins.

Current Numbers as of this Morning:

OBAMA: 1962
--1656 Pledged
--306 Superdels

CLINTON: 1777
--1498 Pledged
--279 Superdels

It's mathematically over, and yet she's still trying...

Also: it's 2026 Usurper.

As a side note, I swear to god, if McCain manages to win, I may give up all hope for this country and gtfo... McCain = 4 more years. Nothx.

Clinton 327
McCain 194

Obama 266
McCain 248

Polling numbers are gonna dart around like crazy in the coming weeks and months. Considering that they're just polls and can be quite a way's off from actual election outcomes (see: California Democratic primary polling which averaged out in Obama's favor by 1.2 before Clinton won there handily), Obama is virtually tied with Clinton in Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nevada and is now shown as winning Ohio and Pennsylvania over McCain. Hardly comparable for the 'we ain't votin' fer no nigra islamocommunist' stance taken by Kentucky.

I don't mean to say it'll be a breeze and that he won't have his work cut out for him. I just found it kind of strange that people were speculating Obama would lose, say, Pennsylvania because white voters will be irreversibly outraged over Hillary's loss and his... well, blackness. Obama stands only to gain more of Hillary's constituencies when he's the undisputed Democratic nominee and has her support.

It's the other way around. Hilary can reach out to more voters outside of the party base. Obama's appeal is within the democratic party.

Obama is not going to have the support of Reagan Democrats, the rural white working class voters. Obama has already hurt his credibility with smalltown America by saying how they are bitter and because of that, they cling to religions and guns. Obama is also not as popular with other minorities except for blacks. Instead of the Latino vote uniting under Clinton, they'll be divided between McCain and Obama. Hillary is more electable and the caucus voting really messed her up.

Obama needs Hillary as a running mate if he wants to win and keep her voting base.

That's because Obama sticks to his principles, and is a true liberal. But what's this, a democrat who appeals mostly to democrats, in a time when our congress is mostly democratic? Clearly, something is wrong with this picture.




Honestly, did anyone expect the 'black' candidate to win amongst poor/uneducated white people? First of all, most of them (and the states like Kentucky that are made up of them) are Republican. Second of all, that statement is ancient history as far as the media is concerned.



This is highly debatable. One of the Republican's biggest complaints about McCain are his weak standards on, say immigration for example. I think McCain is going to toughen up to energize his base (who really needs the energy) and in the process will hand over the Latino vote on a silver platter.





If Hillary is so more goddamn electable, why can't she win a primary? She's losing in delegates, which is what's most important. She's losing in popular vote, which is a big "fuck no" to her "electability". Sure, you could count Florida and Michigan, but as you may know, the choices were "Clinton" and "Undecided". We could have another, with the choices being "Clinton" and "Obama", but she doesn't want that. She would at least lose Michigan.

If this was Obama in the losing position, we'd be telling him "See ya in 2016". Clinton thought this was going to be a piece of cake, and her recent arguments are just ways to stay in the game when she's obviously losing.

Also, having her as vice president would piss off women everywhere. Either they hate her, or they think she deserves the highest position.

One question, though...Why does Obama totally own in a caucus?

Then Obama shouldn't have quit Trinity Church.



Local elections =/ Presidential Election. Not everyone is a college student threatening to go to Canada if a Republican is elected president. The entire country is not as liberal as Obama. That will be his pitfall. When his radical liberal views are shown then it's over just like Michael Dukakis or George McGovern.



Clinton can win against McCain in Republican states like North Carolina, Missouri, Arkansas and West Virginia. Current polls show Obama losing in those states. Don't downplay the importance of these states because they have 45 combined electoral votes. By comparison only California has more votes with 55 and Texas has 34. A democrat hasn't won the presidency without winning states like WV or KY in a very long time.



Whether you like it or not, the Reagan Democrats have been here way before Reagan and will continue to be a major factor until America is no more. They've impacted every single presidential election and Obama can't ignore them.



Clinton has the Latino vote over Obama. That is not debatable since Clinton won 68-32 against Obama in Puerto Rico yesterday. Clinton has been cleaning house nationwide when it comes to the Latino vote. Latinos would vote for Clinton no doubt about that.

McCain is a senator of a border state so he has experience with latino voters. Obama is the opposite. Secondly Obama adopts the same position McCain has had since forever. McCain introduced the McCain-Kennedy Immigration bill which enforces border security but also creates a pathway for illegal immigrants to citizenship. Bush himself has granted amnesty for illegal immigrants. Bush was successful in courting the Latino vote. The Republicans have done much more in immigration. Also keep in mind that most Latinos are socially conservative. McCain has the edge with Latino voters 60-40, maybe even higher.

Obama has little to no history with Latinos as a senator representing Illinois. He's only been elected for one term and a majority of that term has been spent on the campaign trail. There is an underlying brown-black divide which will be an obstacle for Obama. Obama getting the latino vote is debatable only because democrats believe they are entitled to the minority vote.



Obama racked up his votes and delegates in:

1. the South where you said it yourself, Obama has absolutely zero chance to win in the general election.

2. the Northeast and west coast where the people there will vote democrat even if it was Osama Bin Laden himself

3. the Midwest where they had caucus voting. If you vote for someone other than Obama then you're racist and no one wants to be called out as a racist in public. Especially politically correct democrats.



Why wouldn't she want that? That would mean all the votes would be counted not half. Michigan would have been a toss up and Florida has Clinton's voting base right there for the taking.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/03/ele...rats/index.html

Looks like it could be over.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/03/ele...rats/index.html

Nevermind. God damn it.

False. It would be political suicide for him to stay, and he would have been eaten alive for it. Fallacious argument, no one will call him a flip-flopper for that.



Like it or not, Usurper has a point here. Bush is a hugely unpopular President right now, and people will associate McCain with him based on party...an association that the DNC is working hard to maintain. If people think of McCain as 4 more years of Bush, which I would guess many do, he's losing for sure.



You can't actually believe that Hillary Clinton would take red states away from the Republicans. She couldn't, and neither can Obama, and McCain won't be taking away California or New York either.

There's a long way to go till the general election, but being fromt he midwest and originally living in the Ohio/Pennsylvania/West Virginia tri-state area, I'm willing to concede that WV and KY will probably vote McCain. However, in exchange, Obama will probably carry some swing states that have gone Republican in the last few elections, like Ohio and Missouri. Probably Pennsylvania, too. You can pull out your cherry-picked statistics about how long it's been since a Democrat has won without carrying West Virginia, but it'll be a close race with or without WV supporting Obama.

It's true that Reagan democrats will play a big factor, but in the end I see more of them begrudgingly accepting Obama than embracing McCain.



I'll concede that Clinton has the Latino vote. For that reason, gaining her support in the campaign will be a huge need for Obama. McCain does have an edge being a senator from a border state. If Obama gets Clinton's support, I can see it being a close split in slight favor of McCain.

Number three on your list is absolutely fallacious. Are you seriously playing the race card here?

Obama accepted McCain's town hall debate challenge. I'm very excited about this prospect, I hope they broadcast them on TV.

He can be called a flip flopper because he said he wasn't going to disown his pastor or his church. Then when political heat came, he did a 180 and quits. He has no principle when it comes to that issue.



If the DNC mischaracterizes McCain as Bush, then you're right. The strategy would have been used on any Republican opponent regardless though. When the General rolls around Obama is preaching to a different choir (than the primaries), and he'll have a tougher time. The Democratic party had the ultimate opportunity, a bad economy, a disliked president (and party), and an unpopular war and they go and nominate the most inexperienced candidate in our modern time. Amazing.




Really? I don't. Obama is going to have to work real hard to do that...or pick Jim Webb as his vice president candidate. If he does that, then he'll get them, otherwise, no, they might not even vote (or will go for McCain).



No, he is just observing the atmosphere out there.

Clinton tried to use the "inexperienced" argument, and look how far it got her. :-D

Exactly. Clinton faltered by running like an incumbent. If McCain tries that, it'll be even worse, because he'd be running as the incumbent on the same ticket as one of the most unpopular Presidents in recent history.

Hillary had no legitimacy making the experience claim. This is also the general election, not the primaries. It'll play out different.

Yet McCain is the underdog, no doubt about it.

This country is fucked if McSame gets elected...

Legitimacy wasn't the issue. The issue is that more experienced candidates have been doing such a terrible job, that experience is less important than ever. Who cares if you have decades in the senate when you voted for the war? Who cares about your economic knowledge when you want to extend Bush's tax cuts? McCain isn't the same as Bush, but is going to lose because he shows no signs of reversing anything Bush has done.

No, legitimacy was the issue. Those in the Democratic primaries saw that Hillary had no merit in holding the experience claim (i.e. vote for authorization of Iraq war, etc.). She had no legitimacy on the issue of experience.

Yet that was a primary, it WILL play out different in the general election. Experience is important and I'm sure you'll see that reflected in Obama's VP pick. People should be making the argument that the "right kind" of experience matters, and point out how the "wrong kind" can spell disaster. That would make more sense.