How does Clinton win Every Future Primary 56% to 44% ?

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Using RCP it's Obama 1,116 pledge delegates and Clinton 989.

We have 1,032 more pledge delegates available. 

That means if Hillary wins every single future primary 56% to 44% in terms of delegates that gives her 1,567 to Obama 1,570 in terms of pledge delegates.

Now, unless you are a Clinton hack, it's clear that this is not going to happen unless Obama says the most stupid things in the world. 

So she can only win this nomination with:

   Super delegates
   The nonsense about seating FL/MI.  Imagine sitting MI when Obama wasn't even
       on the ballot.  Garbage argument.


Clinton supporters, how can you support her at this point?  You've got a great candidate in Obama who leads McCain.  Why not move support to Obama and will you support him if he gets the nomination ?


 

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Because I'm not interested in following the crowd - I've supported Hillary from the beginning.

The Clinton campaign is floundering badly, so my support may switch simply because I think her continuing on is hurting the party. But that point hasn't been reached yet for me. Talk to me on March 4.

Obama is not invincible, he's certainly got vulnerabilities his supporters either ignore or don't consider important. But he is proving a great spokesperson, but he needs to continue to eat into Clinton's base to show me he can avoid losses in NH, PA and WI against McCain. Plus his weakness among SW Latinos worries me against McCain, since the SW is where his swing states are. 

[Flying Dog]

Obama is not invincible, he's certainly got vulnerabilities his supporters either ignore or don't consider important. But he is proving a great spokesperson, but he needs to continue to eat into Clinton's base to show me he can avoid losses in NH, PA and WI against McCain. Plus his weakness among SW Latinos worries me against McCain, since the SW is where his swing states are. 

Your worried about New Hampshire and Wisconsin going to McCain. Have you seen the latest poll. If that is your concern then you should be in the Obama camp.

[Angel of Death]

I agree. I just don't see New Hampshire not going to Obama.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Obama is not invincible, he's certainly got vulnerabilities his supporters either ignore or don't consider important. But he is proving a great spokesperson, but he needs to continue to eat into Clinton's base to show me he can avoid losses in NH, PA and WI against McCain. Plus his weakness among SW Latinos worries me against McCain, since the SW is where his swing states are. 

Your worried about New Hampshire and Wisconsin going to McCain. Have you seen the latest poll. If that is your concern then you should be in the Obama camp.

No. Those are states that must be held - and I think Obama would win them. My support is not that fickle. I do think there is a "the writing's on the wall" feeling - Obama knows it, Clinton knows it - I doubt she can win the nomination, but I'm not writing her off just yet. But God help her if anyone tries to carry on. 

If I had one electoral/demographic concern it would be among latinos in the SW.

[Flying Dog]

Obama is not invincible, he's certainly got vulnerabilities his supporters either ignore or don't consider important. But he is proving a great spokesperson, but he needs to continue to eat into Clinton's base to show me he can avoid losses in NH, PA and WI against McCain. Plus his weakness among SW Latinos worries me against McCain, since the SW is where his swing states are. 

Your worried about New Hampshire and Wisconsin going to McCain. Have you seen the latest poll. If that is your concern then you should be in the Obama camp.

No. Those are states that must be held - and I think Obama would win them. My support is not that fickle. I do think there is a "the writing's on the wall" feeling - Obama knows it, Clinton knows it - I doubt she can win the nomination, but I'm not writing her off just yet. But God help her if anyone tries to carry on. 

If I had one electoral/demographic concern it would be among latinos in the SW.

Fair enough.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Consider this.

Many Republicans ( moderate - centrist ) will absolutely not support Hillary under any circumstances.  I also believe she will be hard pressed to get the support of independents. 

Even though McCain is a centrist, the republicans are wary on him on Iraq.  Yes, Iraq.  Remember the position McCain was in the polls when the surge was not going well and he was pushing it.  It only reversed in the republican primary because Iraq has somewhat settled down.  Republicans want out of Iraq also.  It was a mistake.

Well we are learning that the troop withdrawals will stop soon at pre-surge levels.  If Obama is the democratic candidate, you'll only have to worry about the size of the electoral college landslide.  With Hillary, you may narrowly win...maybe

[True Democrat]

It's highly unlikely that Clinton can do this.

However, remember that Clinton need not win every primary 56-44.  That must be the average.  There are some where she will win by loss, or most likely lose (Vermont), but others where she will probably win by more (Puerto Rico).

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

It's highly unlikely that Clinton can do this.

However, remember that Clinton need not win every primary 56-44.  That must be the average.  There are some where she will win by loss, or most likely lose (Vermont), but others where she will probably win by more (Puerto Rico).

I agree that's the average.  Which is why I cannot figure out her not fighting for every delegate such as WI.  When you add up the fact that Obama will win some more states like Mississippi, Vermont, Wyoming, South Dakota etc and pickup delegates, she needs to win her states closer to 60% to 40% to break even.  Very, very unlikely considering that some states allow Republicans and Independents to vote also which will eat into any margins

[Ogre Mage]

I think the only states she really needs to win by that margin are TX, OH and PA.  She may still be behind in the pledged delegate count but will make the argument that she won all the major states except Illinois most of which were primaries which she will argue is more representative.  This, I suspect, will be a powerful argument to the super delegates.

With regards to Obama, I need to see more evidence that he can win downscale voters, Latinos and older voters in major states.  If he can defeat Hillary in at least one of TX, OH or PA I would consider him the best nominee given all he has already done.  His caucus wins are helpful but the general election will be far more representative and not a caucus.

[J. J.]

I think the only states she really needs to win by that margin are TX, OH and PA.  She may still be behind in the pledged delegate count but will make the argument that she won all the major states except Illinois most of which were primaries which she will argue is more representative.  This, I suspect, will be a powerful argument to the super delegates.

With regards to Obama, I need to see more evidence that he can win downscale voters, Latinos and older voters in major states.  If he can defeat Hillary in at least one of TX, OH or PA I would consider him the best nominee given all he has already done.  His caucus wins are helpful but the general election will be far more representative and not a caucus.

The average is 56%.  She could some, larger ones, by more than 56%.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

The whole concept that HRC can get the nomination by winning 13 states ( 3 more...) is the politics of the past and a continuation of the red state/blue state nonsense.

So Obama can win 30+ states, the majority of the pledge delegates, the most voters, and be leading in the polls against McCain and 800 super delegates can decide the nomination?  800 people can override the votes of 25MM.  If this happens, no need to ever participate in primaries again ( on the democratic side )

[Angel of Death]

It could be that Hillary was so convinced of being a shoo-in for the nomination that her campaign team is simply unable to shake loose the winner-takes-all mindset that is appropriate for the general election.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

It could be that Hillary was so convinced of being a shoo-in for the nomination that her campaign team is simply unable to shake loose the winner-takes-all mindset that is appropriate for the general election.

Her supporters ought to consider how poorly this campaign has been run.  For all her alleged experience and ready on day one, they have really run an amateur or an arrogant campaign.  It they manage to get the nomination and do this against McCain, they have a good chance of losing.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It could be that Hillary was so convinced of being a shoo-in for the nomination that her campaign team is simply unable to shake loose the winner-takes-all mindset that is appropriate for the general election.

Her supporters ought to consider how poorly this campaign has been run.  For all her alleged experience and ready on day one, they have really run an amateur or an arrogant campaign.  It they manage to get the nomination and do this against McCain, they have a good chance of losing.

Actually probably Clinton's biggest downfall was that she was running a national campaign at the same time as a primary one. You have to appeal to a different set of voters in those cases. Clinton targeted most GE demographics well, but Obama (since he had nothing to lose) was able to set about formulating a solid primary base - hoping that the rest would come.

Which equally was Giuliani's undoing - he ran as a national candidate long before he should have.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Clinton supporters, how can you support her at this point?  You've got a great candidate in Obama who leads McCain.  Why not move support to Obama and will you support him if he gets the nomination ?
 

empowered womyn will never abandon their champion

[Aizen]

When will the superdelegates start abandoning ship? No amount of tears can keep her sinking vessel afloat.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

She's just that good, she's inevitable.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

It could be that Hillary was so convinced of being a shoo-in for the nomination that her campaign team is simply unable to shake loose the winner-takes-all mindset that is appropriate for the general election.

Her supporters ought to consider how poorly this campaign has been run.  For all her alleged experience and ready on day one, they have really run an amateur or an arrogant campaign.  It they manage to get the nomination and do this against McCain, they have a good chance of losing.

Actually probably Clinton's biggest downfall was that she was running a national campaign at the same time as a primary one. You have to appeal to a different set of voters in those cases. Clinton targeted most GE demographics well, but Obama (since he had nothing to lose) was able to set about formulating a solid primary base - hoping that the rest would come.

Which equally was Giuliani's undoing - he ran as a national candidate long before he should have.

Great point about her and Rudy

[Ogre Mage]

So Obama can win 30+ states, the majority of the pledge delegates, the most voters, and be leading in the polls against McCain and 800 super delegates can decide the nomination?  800 people can override the votes of 25MM.  If this happens, no need to ever participate in primaries again ( on the democratic side )

Once one looks at key state-by-state polling, the bolded statement above is not necessarily the case.  See how McCain matches up with Clinton and Obama in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania:

Florida: McCain vs. Clinton   Quinnipiac   McCain 44, Clinton 42, Und 9   McCain +2

Florida: McCain vs. Obama   Quinnipiac   McCain 41, Obama 39, Und 12   McCain +2

Ohio: McCain vs. Clinton   Quinnipiac   McCain 44, Clinton 43, Und 8   McCain +1

Ohio: McCain vs. Obama   Quinnipiac   McCain 42, Obama 40, Und 10   McCain +2

Pennsylvania: McCain vs. Clinton   Quinnipiac   McCain 40, Clinton 46, Und 9   Clinton +6

Pennsylvania: McCain vs. Obama   Quinnipiac   McCain 41, Obama 42, Und 11   Obama +1

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

[TheresNoMoney]

Once one looks at key state-by-state polling, the bolded statement above is not necessarily the case.  See how McCain matches up with Clinton and Obama in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania:

Obama has not campaigned in any of those states and is not nearly as well known as Hillary, yet his numbers are essentially the same as Hillary's.

Do you notice that Obama's numbers only rise as the campaign season goes on? That his numbers consistently rise whenever he campaigns somewhere?  Do you notice that Hillary's number are either stagnant or decline when she campaigns somewhere?

[Ogre Mage]

Once one looks at key state-by-state polling, the bolded statement above is not necessarily the case.  See how McCain matches up with Clinton and Obama in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania:

Obama has not campaigned in any of those states and is not nearly as well known as Hillary, yet his numbers are essentially the same as Hillary's.

Honestly, I find this argument to be laughable.  Perhaps pre-Iowa this might have been credible.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that he does not have total name recognition at this point?  When the term "Obamamania" has entered the national lexicon and is being used by the media we are no longer talking about a candidate who is "not nearly as well known."  Even if your argument is true it has a flip side -- Hillary is competitive in spite of weathering years and years of baggage, attacks and bad press.  And make no mistake -- massive attacks will be coming at whomever we nominate.

I do think Obama is a great political talent and I am glad he is on our side.  Given the huge lead in the polls that Hillary had several months ago, it makes sense that the race would tighten given Obama's campaigning skills.  However, I am not yet buying the assumption that he is automatically the better candidate.  In Pennsylvania, his numbers and Hillary's are not "the same."

[Beet]

Using RCP it's Obama 1,116 pledge delegates and Clinton 989.

We have 1,032 more pledge delegates available. 

That means if Hillary wins every single future primary 56% to 44% in terms of delegates that gives her 1,567 to Obama 1,570 in terms of pledge delegates.

Now, unless you are a Clinton hack, it's clear that this is not going to happen unless Obama says the most stupid things in the world. 

So she can only win this nomination with:

   Super delegates
   The nonsense about seating FL/MI.  Imagine sitting MI when Obama wasn't even
       on the ballot.  Garbage argument.


Clinton supporters, how can you support her at this point?  You've got a great candidate in Obama who leads McCain.  Why not move support to Obama and will you support him if he gets the nomination ?

I support Hillary for many reasons, but most of all because I think she has fought for and embodies the kind of values that mesh with my political idealism. In that sense I am not so different.

My support of her is kind of half-hearted; I play my role on a stage, and play it proudly.

But I accept that she will probably lose and even hope for it if it will help unite Democrats again.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Once one looks at key state-by-state polling, the bolded statement above is not necessarily the case.  See how McCain matches up with Clinton and Obama in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania:

Obama has not campaigned in any of those states and is not nearly as well known as Hillary, yet his numbers are essentially the same as Hillary's.

Honestly, I find this argument to be laughable.  Perhaps pre-Iowa this might have been credible.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that he does not have total name recognition at this point?  When the term "Obamamania" has entered the national lexicon and is being used by the media we are no longer talking about a candidate who is "not nearly as well known."  Even if your argument is true it has a flip side -- Hillary is competitive in spite of weathering years and years of baggage, attacks and bad press.  And make no mistake -- massive attacks will be coming at whomever we nominate.

I do think Obama is a great political talent and I am glad he is on our side.  Given the huge lead in the polls that Hillary had several months ago, it makes sense that the race would tighten given Obama's campaigning skills.  However, I am not yet buying the assumption that he is automatically the better candidate.  In Pennsylvania, his numbers and Hillary's are not "the same."

not everyone is a hardcore political junkie like us. Most people follow politics very loosely, if at all, and might not even know who the candidates are until a month or two before the election, and far fewer people pay attention to or vote in primary elections compared to general elections.

[Beet]

Not everyone is a political junkie true, but I knew who Obama was in the spring of 2004.

Most likely, they've heard of the name, but their impressions are not as strong.