Yes and even if she wins with a landslide 60% of the vote she still would be behind in delegates and the overall popular vote.

Apparently it eludes your mental grasp that the delegates are allocated proportionally, so even a big win in a big state won't allow her to close the sizeable lead he's built up over the last 25+ contests.

Unless Obama gets caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy she will not be able to catch up in pledged delegates or the overall popular vote....so the only way she can win is to somehow get the superdelegates to overrule the will of the voters....and in the meantime she'll be constantly attacking Obama and making John McCain's job that much easier should Obama become the nominee.

cant blame baddog for not understanding.. he is old as dirt!! u old fuck go to a retirement home or something

Well, I have not been tracking the popular vote because the Democrats hold open primaries, so I don't trust them to be very accurate. However, as stated earlier, whether she catches up or not, NEITHER will have enough to clinch the nomination ala McCain.

Funny you say Zogby is not reputable here.

But in this thread/post you ask specifically for a reputable poll like Zogby or Gallup.....



http://www.gfy.com/13849625-post90.html

Open primaries and caucuses are just ridiculous for either party to have when choosing a nominee. I understand caucuses are far far cheaper to run and a big reason they take place in primaries.

Pennsylvania will be a good test for Obama to show just how much of a democrat base he truly has as its a closed primary. Based on all the previous primary exit polls I think we already know the answer on this one.

I'm not sure if Obama just has a delegate lead that the supers will switch if it is close.

The Dems HAVE to win the big states, I think Ohio proved tonight they don't like Obama all to much... that's not good for Dems in the general election.

Oh yea and if Obama is bitching now about Clinton running a negative campaign.. wait until he tangles with the Republicans.

Ohio is a true swing state. Didn't they say it has been 100 years since a candidate has lost OH and still won the presidency?

That's a mischaracterization of the process. You should really know what you're talking about before you come in here criticizing the democrats.

STATES have open primaries, not democrats.
If a state chooses to allow people to vote in whatever primary they want, that's their prerogative.

In the states where alot of republicans and independents voted in the democratic primary, theoretically there could have been alot of democrats and independents voting in the republican primary.

The fact that the republican race has been all but over for awhile now is the reason these voters are getting involved in the democratic race.....but that fact that they're allowed to is something decided by state governments, not the democratic or republican parties.

Also.....if the republicans didn't have winner take all primaries then McCain wouldn't have clinched the nomination yet.....as a matter of fact Romney would still be in the race.

And yes, since neither candidate will be able to reach the magical number of 2025, and there is no definitive tiebreaker in the rulebook, then both the logical and right thing to do is to nominate the person with the most votes and delegates.

BTW after tonight Clinton will have made the popular vote a dead heat if not in the lead on that front. your right about the delegates. And the reason he has the delegates and not winning big in the popular vote is he won red state cacuses with low turnout but got good net gains in delegates there.

She netted +330,000 votes tonight in the popular vote.

Not a single president has taken the white house without winning the Ohio primary as well in their respective parties.

When it comes down to it the GE always hinges on Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.

Right kind of like the general election in 2000 when popular vote got taken down by the electoral college

Maybe where you live. But I have yet to hear of a state setting different rules for different parties.

Perhaps you can show me an example.

I never said Zogby wasn't reputable, I said he's been off this campaign season....and that's a fact.
He's obviously having a hard time figuring out which voters will show up and which ones won't.....he must be oversampling some groups and undersampling others, he hasn't even been close to the actual election results yet this year.

My point in that post was that if you were going to show me an online poll conducted by a pro-Clinton blog then that's obviously not a fair or accurate reading of how the majority of democrats feel about an issue.....but if it was an unbiased poll conducted by professionals then it would carry some weight.

Not to mention both WY and MS are red states that the dems got no hope of winning come Nov either way, while Pennsylvania is a pretty important swing state.

Just like Missiouri which can go either way and he won. By 1/10 of a percent but still won.

Oh I agree Zogby has been way off. Its clear he is under/oversampling the latino and A.A demographics to get the poll results he wants. Gives the press what they want and you make coin. But he overplayed his hand this year and is looking like a joke of late.

For example, in CA, are you suggesting that the State of California is forcing the Democrats to allow Independents to vote on their ballot and not allowing the Republicans to do that?

Ummmmm....before tonight Obama was ahead by about 1 million votes.

How her +330K tonight makes it a dead heat or gives her a lead must be more of that Clinton math.

He's ahead by about 600K votes now.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ote_count.html

I really need to stop doing this....it makes absolutely no sense for me to argue about this with people who have no regard for the truth...or the facts....or the numbers......but who apparently just make shit up to support their candidate and then tell me I have to refute it in order to be believable.

According to your argument, John Kerry should have won the presidency in 2004 because he won the "big states" and George Bush won the "small states" that according to you don't really matter.....even though GWB won the popular vote and the electoral college that year......the same way Obama has won the popular vote and the delegate count in this primary season.

Actually, in Nevada, the Democrats were allowing direct, same-day registration for former non-voters, and party changes, but the Republicans were unable to offer the same services as they didn't find the Dems had it until late, and were then blocked from doing so.

Because of the RNC or the State of NV?

Is Lenny suggesting that FL did not count because of rules set by the State of Florida?

They don't set different rules for different parties.....where you're mistaken is that you think all of the republican primaries are closed when they're not.

In New Hamshire, independents are allowed to vote in either primary, but democrats and republicans are only allowed to vote in their own party's primary.

Today in Texas, any registered voter was allowed to vote in whichever primary they wanted. These rules are set by the state, not by the political parties.

That's exactly why.....it wasn't the FLA democratic party that decided to move the primary up....it was Florida's state legislature. The DNC said the primary wouldn't count but the state moved it up anyways (republican controlled legislature and governor)

Jesus christ old man.....do I really have to be your fucking civics professor here? The least you could do is google this shit and learn for yourself before you come in here telling me that I don't know what I'm talking about.

I'm done with this....no more political threads here for me....I'm sick of debating people who have no regard for the truth or the facts or the numbers.....but who just make shit up to suit their purpose.

I'll start a thread on Jan 20, 2009 when Obama is being inagurated....until then, it was nice knowing ya.

There is a difference between winning them in a primary and winning them in the General Election, and Kerry did not win enough big states. Like TX, OH, FL, GA, NC . . .

Can you just tell me where it says that if you have the delegate lead without hitting the threshold that all the super delegates go to you.

thats the fact.

It was the DNC that decided they would not count. Not the state.

But it was the state run by republicans that moved up the election. They knew it was against dnc rules but did it anyway. So it was the state that made the decision.