So Clinton has crushed Obama in Ohio and squeeked by in Texas. She’s now again where she was after super-Tuesday, and if she wins Pennsylvania, which is the next relevant state, she’ll again be on her way to getting the nomination. Right?
Wrong.
First comes
Then
The point? Settle in, it’s going to be a long ride, and Clinton will have to do pretty much EVERYTHING right (or wrong, see Jason’s post below) to make the nomination.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
How much did Obama’s lead in delegates actually drop yesterday? I’ve seen counts ranging from a dozen down to one (1!). Hardly a major shrinkage either way. And, as you say, he’s likely to widen his margin again in the next couple of (small) states. Which means that Pennsylvania would have to go really big for Clinton to make up the difference.
Somehow it seems from here like she’ll have to get the Michigan and Florida delegates in (and without the re-vote that is being discussed) to get back to parity. Or is there a realistic chance that she can reel in enough of the undecided superdelegates to offset the Obama lead in pledged delegates?
WJ: yeah. I saw something interesting on television. They think that many superdelegates could still go to Clinton. Why? Because they’ll choose the person they think is best capable of winning in November. The reasoning of quite some of them is, right now: if Obama can’t take a beating from Hillary now, how in earth is he going to fight back against the Republicans?
And: both of them may not collect enough delegates to win it. Both of them will be dependent on others. What Hillary, then, hopes is - many think - to create momentum going into a possible convention.
It’s an interesting development.
If the superdelegates hand the nom to Clinton despite Obama being ahead in conventionally determined delegates, the public perception will be that the superdelegates overturned the wishes of the public. The superdelegates may do this anyway, but only with the very greatest reluctance. Remember, many of these folks are elected officials with jobs they want to keep. None of them is eager to be marked as one of the folks who helped kill Bambi.
If the superdelegates hand the nom to Clinton despite Obama being ahead in conventionally determined delegates, the public perception will be that the superdelegates overturned the wishes of the public.
Funny, I’ll think Obama used his financial advantage to buy caucus states where he has no chance to win in November, in an attempt to avoid the will of the people.
The system the Democrats has constructed is anti-thetical to real democracy, and it will remain so no matter who wins the nomination.
There will be no "clean" nominee. There won’t even be one "cleaner" than the other.
Funny, I?ll think Obama used his financial advantage to buy caucus states where he has no chance to win in November, in an attempt to avoid the will of the people.Please. Extract your head from where ever it is lodged. Obama is not responsible for the caucuses- the party is. His wins there are more attributable to a better grass roots organization, and by raising at least twice if not more money than Hillary does- whether he is up or down.Obama may not win the small states in the general. And many of the big states Hillary won will vote Democrat even if ELMO ran as the nominee. I’d use the critical swing states as a measure of electability and how they are doing with perceptions of electability against McCain. They are even on the former, and he is winning on the latter.There would have been a clean nominee, if the more experienced candidate had not decided to act like a Republican. But people like you seem intent to out rove Rove. Good luck with your fragmented party and big loss in November. Republicans have conducted their race with far more class than you guys have.