Prediction Map

Prediction States Won

		26 |	52 |
Clinton	13
Edwards	0
Obama	39
Richardson	0
Other	0

Confidence States Won

		26 |	52 |
Clinton	6
Edwards	0
Obama	16
Richardson	0
Other	0
Tossup	30

Analysis

So it looks like Clinton could pull out a squeeker in Ohio. A little too little and too late, IMHO. Obama still takes Texas, and increases his delegate lead through his victories there and in Vermont. Supers start to head his way, not wanting this to drag on another 6 weeks or longer. Whether Clinton attempts to spin this and stay in through Pennsyvania is anyones guess.

Prediction History

Comments History - hide

Version: 7

I give in on PA, but rank it a tossup, along with IN. I exprct to have to update after 5/6 (if not before) as I expect supers to begin declaring, mooting the remaining contests.

Version: 6

So it looks like Clinton could pull out a squeeker in Ohio. A little too little and too late, IMHO. Obama still takes Texas, and increases his delegate lead through his victories there and in Vermont. Supers start to head his way, not wanting this to drag on another 6 weeks or longer. Whether Clinton attempts to spin this and stay in through Pennsyvania is anyones guess.

Version: 5

OBAMA SURGES AHEAD!!!

With Maria Shriver's endorsement, Obama tops off a clear victory on Super Tuesday with a win in California!!! From an overwhelming victory in Georgia announced at 7 p.m. to a victory in the Alaska cacuses announced after midnight, Super Tuesday is non-stop good news for the Obama campaign. In between, he wins in Clinton backyard of Connecticutt, while Hillary barely manages a squeeker in New Jersey. Because of proportional representation, Hillary still has a shot, and stays in the race until being defeated in Ohio on the old super Tuesday in March.

Version: 4

Obamamania! This one's goin' to Denver, baby!

Version: 3

California is obviously the big tomato being contested on Feb. 5. A win there would keep Obama in the race to the end. NE for HRC & south for Obama. Prairie & western states are the other real battlegrounds, with a mixed bag there on Feb. 5.

Hillary is looking to have a tough time for the rest of February, outside of Maine and maybe Nebraska. Losses in Viginia, Maryland, due to large black populations voting overwhelmingly for Barack, and Wisconsin with its progressives, will sting bad. Washington is a tough call, but I call it for Obama based on higher education levels and lower poverty.

Hillary rebounds in March with a big state win projected in Ohio. Texas will be a real showdown but I predict a narrow Obama victory there. May could be the decisive month, with Clinton victories in PA & NC.

Edwards, should he stay in as he says he will, however, could continue to pick off delegates here and there and be in a position to play kingmaker. He can play, who will make me their running mate? Presumably, this game heavily favors Obama.

Version: 2

Interesting developments in the Democratic race. I'm not sure any of them have that much of an impact. Nader has endorsed Edwards. Kucinich has asked his supporters (perhaps 2% of the vote) to choose Obama as a second choice. Apparently Biden and Obama's people are meeting, with rumor being an agreement that each candidate's supporters choose the other candidate for second place. Richardson and Dodd machinations are unknown, but they are thought to be Clinton supporters.

It appears that Biden and Obama have mutual benefits from an agreement. Obama wants Edwards out of the race, and to become the sole anti-Clinton. Biden wants to be so close in 4th so as to be indistinguishable from third, presumably Edwards. If it happend, it would be news, and if followed by an Edwards third (or fourth!) in N.Hampshire, could lead to an early exit for the 2004 vice-presidential candidate. This map is an attempt to predict this scenario, with Biden gaining significant support after Edwards' withdrawal, enough to win a few states and marginally help Clinton in others, and enough to carry a decisive number of delegates to the convention. Neither Obama or Clinton clinch a majority of delegates, and Biden becomes kingmaker, and Obama's running mate. He balances the ticket in terms of experience, most notably in foreign policy, age, and race.

Nader, convinced that Obama is anti-corporate enough, declines to mount an independant candidacy. Obama, having announced his non-partisan goals sometime in March, convinces Unity08 not to run a candidate. Thereafter, the United States of America elects its first non-Caucasian president. Dennis Kucinich is tapped to head either a newly formed Department of Peace or National Service director.

Version: 1

Obama builds his margin in Iowa for the next three weeks, then narrowly defeats HRC in New Hamphire. She battles abck with wins in CA NY NJ & FL, but Obama stuns with a win in Pennsylvania a week later. HRC is bouyed by a win in Ohio, but never recovers after a crushing loss in Texas.

Version History

8: 2008-04-22 @ 23:48:25 7: 2008-04-19 @ 17:16:01 6: 2008-03-03 @ 15:50:32 5: 2008-02-03 @ 21:27:03 4: 2008-01-27 @ 04:16:20 3: 2008-01-13 @ 23:31:19 2: 2008-01-02 @ 01:48:25 1: 2007-12-09 @ 23:00:52 View Version

Member Comments

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-05 @ 08:34:23
Oh Wingindy! How sweet it is to see Hillary's up in your home state of Indiana! Lovin it! This would be the sweetest victory for me just to hear what you'd have to say after the fact. lol Fingers crossed.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-05 @ 23:08:23
She has led narrowly since serious polling began here, so I'm not sure what you mean by saying she is 'up'. A narrow Clinton win in Indiana would be largely irrelevent. She needs to win big, or win in North Carolina, to remain in serious contention. I'll be canvassing for Obama, though!

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-06 @ 00:18:56
Guess the demographics are just a bit more friendly to Hillary here. I do remember you being very confident about Indiana & I see you still are on your prediction map. Nevermind. lol (just stirring you) Who knows. & you were working with no polling data - at least on this site anyway. I wish they'd put on some polls for Oregon. Last Edit: 2008-04-06 @ 00:19:32

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-07 @ 00:43:19
Obama hasn't really put a lot of money in here. If Hillary loses in Pennsylvania, she won't get to Indiana. The Clinton candidacy is over.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-07 @ 01:03:56
Obama is outspending her in every state come off it. 3 to one in pa.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-07 @ 07:44:09
it's a broken record that we've heard too many times now! Hillary is alive & well & you can't stand the fact that your man cannot win the candidacy without the support that Hillary also needs in the Supers. It ain't over by a long shot. She's going to win PA & win it well!

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-07 @ 15:46:59
The super delegates are going to line up and throw her straight off the cliff if she loses PA and doesn't concede, gentlemen.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-07 @ 16:06:00
It doesnt look good by any means so Im getting my Mc Cain 2008 gear ready. LOL Wait and see as always.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-11 @ 17:06:41
Infact, even if she wins Pennsylvania it's basically game set and match if she gets blown out in NC and Indiana. This is in effect now a delegate race, and if Hillary can't narrow the margin then she can't convince Supers to hand it to her either.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-11 @ 22:39:59
If your so confident of victory whoblitzell shouldnt you be trying to unite your party obama will need most of us Clinton supporters this fall?

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-12 @ 00:55:55
Yes, once frustrated and bitter rednecks in small towns stop voting Republican.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-12 @ 01:39:59
LOL So True well somethings will not "change"

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-12 @ 14:22:58
Kinda "bitter" sweet isnt it LOL

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-13 @ 01:56:58
Don't give up Liberalrocks! As she said the other night at the Elton John concert - "I'm Still Standing!" She's ahead in the polls in PA, Indiana (haha), & Kentucky. Obama's ahead in NC (gap closing), & Oregon (1 poll). Here's another interesting tally I just did: Based on the electoral college in the general election of states won Hillary - 263 Obama - 202 Interesting. I know this doesn't count obviously, but maybe the Clintons have been playing this more like a general election & not a primary with the corresponding results.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-13 @ 01:58:04
Also goes to show she has won the states that count in the general election.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-13 @ 15:51:59
Demboy, it will be interesting how his remarks will play in not only Pennsylvania but the numerous small communities in Indiana and North Carolina. There are also two debates coming up. This along with the Rev Wright story should give superdelegates pause even the liberal website politico.com which is 90% pro-obama has a story questioning his readiness for a general election due to his many unknowns political arena inexperience and the two above issues. Last Edit: 2008-04-13 @ 15:54:08

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-13 @ 15:56:01
Elton John raised nearly 3 million for her- someone who's campaign is supposedly broke and on life support while it cant compare to Baracks war chest it is not too shaby. Last Edit: 2008-04-13 @ 15:56:29

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-14 @ 00:44:17
Keep the faith. Some good wins coming up. She could even win all the remaining contests. Would be great to give her the momentum into the super delegate race.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-14 @ 00:45:57
& for all the spin from the Obama camp it looks like she has won the electoral college race that would apply in the general election. So that's a good feather in her cap, even if she does loose, she can hold her head high. Mistakes have been made, but she certainly hasn't been extensively beaten.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-15 @ 07:34:18
Wingindy really should update this map to reflect what's happening on the ground in PA & IN - +16 in latest poll for HRC in your home state Win - oh dear! Loving it! hehe

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-15 @ 14:53:06
I'll be updating later this week. The basis of this map was Clinton becoming irrelevent, and possibly dropping out after 3/4. Obviously that didn't happen. I'll be changing percentages and confidence on IN for sure, but beyond that I'm not sure yet. There are still three weeks until Indiana - a lot can happen in that time. As for the 'electoral college' argument, this is of course novel. Do you count Texas, where Obama won the caucus and more overall delegates in Clinton's column? Are you counting Michigan, where Obama's name was on the ballot? Otherwise neither candidate has reached "270" yet if you apply the electoral college. But certainly Clinton can hold her head high for havnig put up a good fight.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-15 @ 22:06:17
Actually, a fair bit can happen in seven hours. LA Times/Bloomberg now has Obama in the lead in the Hoosier state.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-15 @ 23:57:26
Susa has clinton leading in that hoosier state by 14. If were going to share polling information why not share it all.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-16 @ 00:48:08
SUSA is the poll Demboy references above that has Clinton up by 16 and was released yesterday. LA/Bloomberg was released today. Apparently a volitile electorate. Last Edit: 2008-04-16 @ 10:32:15

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-19 @ 02:31:55
Sorry Wingindy I did feel a bit bad after stirring you in the last post. I was expecting a harsher reaction lol. Just mucking around you know. Anyway yes the polls are all over the place. I think Hillary will win PA, hopefully by at least 10 points. I've never felt confidnent about Indiana, contrary to any previous postings. But maybe got overly excited about previous polls there. Having said that it does seem like Hillary is still in with a good shot there. Demographics are just to positive for Obama in North Carolina. If the Democratic base wasn't so African American I believe she would have a shot there too. As it is a more working class state? At least amongst the Democratic base. There will be big wins though in Kentucky & WV for sure. It's really up to the supers now. She needs to convince them why they should pick her over Obama. It must be awful for her to have gone from the highs of last year where it seemed she was the inevitable candidate to now having virtually lost it. Oh well that's politics isn't it. It's a cruel sport. If she looses I hope she will continue on as a great Senator for the great state of New York. Still not such a bad job.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-19 @ 03:34:57
Well demboy he hates her so he would prefer she didnt even stay senator, just so you know

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-19 @ 10:52:52
Hillary needs a big win in PA to at least swing the popular vote her way. Hoping to sway super delegates to give her the nomination over Obama without getting more votes is probably next to impossible.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-19 @ 16:53:00
I do not hate Mrs. Clinton. I think Mrs. Clinton is a fine Senator, and hope she continues her good work in New York.

---

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-04-19 @ 17:20:50
"Hillary needs a big win in PA to at least swing the popular vote her way." She needs to win every single one of the last 10 contests, without exception, with at least 65% in order to come out 2 pledged delegates ahead of Obama, in which case she would deserve to have the remaining unpledged supers flock to her. But the moment she goes under 65%, for instance, in PA, the game is over. I didn't set the bar. The math sets the bar for us, based on both candidates past performances. ---- Or, if the contests go as I think they will and you still give Clinton FL and MI without giving Obama even one PD from MI, he will, according to my calculations, still be circa 30 PDs ahead of her when all is said and done, in which case the unpledged supers should flock to him. There is no way that the supers are going to go for the candidate that does not have the majority of PDs. Just no way. I suspect that a number of SDs will declare in the next week. Oh, and check out my blog about the paradox in eligible voter numbers in PA, NC and IN. Clinton can still win a landslide in PA and come way up in the PV, only to have that all completely erased by an Obama landslide in NC. Last Edit: 2008-04-19 @ 17:25:37

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-20 @ 01:12:04
She won't win by more than 7 in PA. I'll give you 4:1 odds on it. Do I have any takers? =P

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-20 @ 01:25:38
Posting the exact same time as your friend wingindy thats also from indiana wow what a weird late late saturday night huh?

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-20 @ 02:22:12
Gosh, two people in the state are up past one - scandalous! You should call Hillary's campaign - they can claim that we nightowls are Obama's friends! BTW, who, I'd wager no more than 6.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-20 @ 02:54:46
Wing, its so obvious.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-20 @ 04:49:24
Dopplegangers they may just be. I think Hillary will win PA by 6 points. I hope it's higher though.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-20 @ 18:58:42
I'd give it 6:1. If I'm betting myself, I can't lose.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-20 @ 21:59:12
6 points is still close at 53/47 Clinton. She needs a final push to get it higher. 55+ would be a good result for her & give her some more momentum. Obviously she needs more than this for the delegates but would breathe some fresh life into her campaign, especially with the supers. It would say look the only big state he has won is his home turf in Illinois! Can he do this in the general election? Will the general voters (if not the Democrats) see through the hype?

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-21 @ 11:36:24
What's a doppleganger? Should I be offended??

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-21 @ 22:16:30
He means we are one person in his view.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-21 @ 22:46:59
Is that what the dictionary said wing?

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-22 @ 01:09:21
Oh, I was afraid he was on to me. There can be only one! When other Indiana Dems appear on this site, I channel through the internet and steal their identities. I am who, I am BushCountry, I am WHO AM! Respect my au-thor-i-teee!

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-22 @ 06:12:00
No I think you are seperate. I hope so anyway. It's nice to know there are at least 2 Democrats in Indiana (apart from Gary!) lol I think doppelganger is like a mirror image but still seperate. But that's without looking up the dictonary. So without sounding cocky do you think Win having PA as an Obama win is going to ruin your points in this thing? I'm feeling confident for Hillary. 9 to 12 points hopefully. But more is always welcome. Have you got your Hillary sign on the front lawn? I hope so. I can order one for you if you like. hehe

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-22 @ 08:19:54
I'll put it out for the Veep debates. Maybe. :P

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-22 @ 15:01:46
dem - I put up a new prediction a couple of times. I can't fall off the top 10 board! Shall we reconvene there?

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-22 @ 22:39:47
By: whoblitzell (D-IN) 2008-04-20 @ 01:12:04 She won't win by more than 7 in PA. I'll give you 4:1 odds on it. Do I have any takers? =P Hmm.....

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-22 @ 23:41:46
Well, I was indeed wrong. But I don't think she will net more than 12-15 delegates out of Pennsylvania. That is easily erased by North Carolina alone. Hillary needs Indiana. I don't see her getting it. There is no momentum this late in the game and according to the SUSA poll there are not many undecideds here. The lines have been drawn. Hillary is down, regardless of her media-fueled "big win" in Pennsylvania. The fundamentals of the race remain unchanged. The map remains unchanged. The math remains unchanged. This is pretty much the end, Liberalrocks. Get that McCain lawn gnome ready honey :P

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-22 @ 23:42:31
I explain in my latest map's analysis why I don't believe Hillary stands a good chance in Indiana. The next few weeks should be interesting to say the least. I'll also say I haven't seen a single Hillary ad in this state. I'm supposing that is because she is out of money. Either way, I expect she will lose this state by a goodly amount. Last Edit: 2008-04-22 @ 23:45:51

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-23 @ 00:16:46
There are always undecided's in any race.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-23 @ 03:31:08
No I think Indiana is looking good for Hillary. I'm basing this on demographics, & the fact that she is in it to win it now, & is not giving up on any vote! Shame they couldn't have done this after Feb 5! when there was the string of losses that has put her in the difficult situation she is now in. Yes I would like her to get on the ticket too even if it is as VP (obviously I think she should be first). Nice to see her gain more than 200,000 votes on Obama today in the popular vote in PA. This will close the gap on his lead in the popular vote, & I'm sure if Florida, if not Michagan is counted, this argument becomes irrelevant. I don't think Obama has a lock on the popular vote at all. & again if reruns had/should be held in Florida & Michigan I feel quite confident after today's performance Hillary would win again & have the popular vote. He just can't seem to win the big states can he? Slightly worrying for the general election perhaps. Last Edit: 2008-04-23 @ 03:32:24

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-23 @ 10:10:24
Obama still leads in the popular vote by 600K - 200K if you count Florida. Where will these additional 200K come from? WV + KY may net Hillary an additional 100K, while Obama will negate those she netted in PA in NC. It is very unlikely that HRC overcome's Obama's lead in the popular vote.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-23 @ 12:51:27
Obama does not have a lock on the popular vote but nice spin wing oh lol its so funny the spin thats coming out of the liberal pro-obama media they would rather cut off their arms then give Hillary credit for anything even if its in a small amount.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-23 @ 14:04:58
He does if she doesn't win states like Indiana. At a certain point it will be such that she doesn't have the votes or delegates left on the map to pull off the nomination.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-23 @ 14:53:08
I beg to differ, Lib. As Matthews said last night, "a victory for cable television."

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-23 @ 14:56:47
Yes when the super delegates weigh in and a settlement on Michigan and Florida is decided its clear she will not catch up in pledged delegate count but he will also not reach the 2025 without signifigant superdelegate support. There may be a second ballot if this is allowed to go to the convention which is what were fighting for and last night confirmed he does not have this thing wrapped up.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-23 @ 15:18:14
Obama may end up needing a third of the undeclared supers to reach 2025 which, I suppose, is significant, but in a two person race no difficult to achieve. A second ballot will only be reached if one candidate doesn't recieve a majority on a first ballot. This cannot happen when there are only two candidates to choose from.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-23 @ 16:36:12
That is absolutely correct. It is very conceivable that these super delegates don't sit around with their thumbs twiddling between June and August. Judging from what's happened in the last few months (Obama has gotten around 60 super delegates since Super Tuesday, Clinton about half a dozen) they aren't exactly lining up at her door. Michigan and Florida will not be seated on the original results. Dean has already stated this. And Dean with Obama control over 2/3 of the Rules Committee in August. Assuming Hillary wins enough and by enough and raises enough to stay in the race until August -- even in this scenario she cannot really win without the old Michigan and Florida results. Which weren't sanctioned primaries and in the end will not count. The votes cast there are meaningless. Hillary Clinton has no path to the nomination, save a last minute rule change. And you can take that to the bank.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-24 @ 21:27:30
How do you explain America voting for the most Liberal senator in the Senate in the general election for President? You better hope people vote on the recession (which you may have bounced out of hopefully, & the war in Iraq (maybe becoming less of an issue with the surge). Liberal is still a very dirty word in large parts of America! (although I don't know why).

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-24 @ 21:31:22
It's so smug in my opinion to say the votes of millions in 2 of the largest states in the union are meaningless. Again every one knew who they were voting for, the election was on, & both candidates had had huge coverage, even if they did not campaign locally. How else do explain a 40% uncommitted vote in Michigan where Obama did not run? If these states were rerun I believe the vote would almost be identical. I would still believe this was a miscarriage of justice even if Obama had won here. It's unbelievable that you can discount so many votes simply because the states had the audacity to move the vote forward - big fricking deal. This just goes to show Liberal Dean who could not get elected himself is doing all he can to elect Liberal Obama. ?

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-24 @ 21:33:04
You have not heard the end of the Michigan and Florida debate you can also take that to the check cashing store. I hope this gets even dirtier!!

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-24 @ 21:33:56
Agreed demboy !! Love you!!

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-24 @ 22:17:38
Thanks Liberalrocks! The political feelings are at least mutual! lol If the votes of Florida & Michigan are counted Obama is still in the lead on primary votes by 116,099 (going on the figures on Wikipedia). I thought Hillary would be in the lead but overestimated the vote in Michigan. I still support a unified ticket. I think this is the best chance for the Dems to win in November by unifying both groups of supporters. Obviously due to experience I think Obama should be second but this will be determined by who wins. I don't think it will happen though which is a real shame. Too much water under the bridge, too much animosity & negativity now for it to become a reality unless they are forced. & then it may just seem to the general voter too much of a compromise & too fake to see the two of them suddenly being best friends again. On the Republican side I wonder who John McCain will pick? Obviously someone younger to balance out his age. Last Edit: 2008-04-24 @ 22:19:17

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-24 @ 22:31:03
They broke the rules, and in the end that's really all that matters. When you break the rules there are consequences, and both candidates knew the results wouldnt mean anything. It's only now Hillary is doing an about-face on Michigan and I think that is extremely telling. She is willing to do or say anything to win and at any cost.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-24 @ 23:01:37
If John Kerry would fought that hard we could gone without a painful second Bush term. If Al Gore would have had a backbone and fought he could have carried a few more states in 2000. If Micheal Dukakis had a personality which is required to fight he could have fought off Lee Atwaters attacks I could go on down the years, the point is Democrats dont win if they are not willing to take a win at any cost approach, you have to slug it out against the republicans and give them hell staying silent or defensive gets you at best 48%. Weak weak democrats of the past.... Then we get fuc*ked with a republican like Bush well Mc Cain will at least be moderate and I dont HATE the man. Last Edit: 2008-04-24 @ 23:05:42

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 00:18:26
Let's just rename the Democrats the Technocrats as they don't respect Democratic values. How on earth can you justify denying anyone's vote? If it was Obama's votes not being counted you would be screaming blue bloody murder. You only take this line as it suits your candidate. The key fact here is that they are denying the will of the voters. & for what? the fact that the state party officials moved the dates forward (not the voters) - big deal. Like they've broken some sacred act of the constitution. They're just stupid rules that some autocrat has made. How you can say this is more important than the votes of the same people you will want & need in the general election is quite interesting. This issue will not & should not go away. If I was a voter there not having my vote counted I would be very angry indeed. What they should do - these disenfranchised voters - is pledge to not vote Democrat in the general election unless their votes are counted now. Sign up a petition - get it going! Why don't you go over & help Robert Maugabe stuff ballot boxes in Zimbabwe? How is this any different?

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 00:20:53
& according to the NY Times today a super delegate from Michigan has sent in a protest to the DNC as in their blessed rules it says that when the rules are broken they still have to count half of the votes. So they haven't even followed their own stupid rules! I love how Howard Dean has become such an autocrat, gone are the days of his so called activism. Last Edit: 2008-04-25 @ 00:21:50

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 00:23:33
The Associated Press are also saying if Florida & Michigan votes are counted Hillary is just over 15 million primary votes & Obama is just under. So she now has a strong case on the primary votes. Plus the fact that she has won all the large states bar one, & alot of the key states. Obama has won some key states, & alot of Republican states. Real helpful in the general election.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-25 @ 00:49:50
1. Hill will loose any advantage she gained in PA in NC. 2. Hill agreed that FL & MI would not count. She has gone back on her word and now wants them to count. The decision to strip delegates was made when FL & MI still had an opportunity to move their contests back - in 2007 - before the dynamics of the race could have been known. It was not done to favor anyone, but to stop the crazy frontloading of the calander. 3. Winning a primary does not guarantee winning that state in the GE. Obama, for example, polls better against McCain in Michigan, New Mexico, and Nevada, despite the fact that Clinton won those states. Clinton polls better in MO, despite the fact that Obama won the primary there. Obama won in Utah, but will not win it in the GE. Likewise for Clinton in AZ. Either will win CA & NY. There is no correlation. 4. Your definition of key states is suspect. Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Washington arre all key states in which Obama both won primaries and leads in GE polling. Obama has a higher ceiling, he wins states like Minnesota (and Iowa, Wisconsin, Washington, Oregon, and so on) more easily than Clinton. If "electability" is the measure by which the supers should decide, the numbers are fairly clear. Having better numbers in Florida does Clinton little good if McCain threatens to take away Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Those three states have 37 EVs, to Florida's 27.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 01:11:33
Um don't count your chickens before they've hatched. Oregon has not voted so you can't count this in the Obama column sorry. I think it would be fairly safe to say Michigan would go Democratic in this election no matter what. Minnesota & Wisconsin have not voted Republican in a while & I would be surprised if they break the drought there in this election. Polls on who would win in the general election at this stage are almost hypothetical anyway, it's too soon, & there is no clear winner from the Democratic side yet, despite your own opinions/predictions etc - there is no nominee. Let's just say I'd rather have won Hillary's states in a general election than Obama's. She already has the college vote if it repeated in the general election. Last Edit: 2008-04-25 @ 01:12:25

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-25 @ 01:18:10
GE polls pitting the Dem candidates vs. McCain tell us more about probability of GE outcomes than the primary results. I'm afraid your mistaken about the college vote. Its been consistently for Obama.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 01:19:05
Sorry Electoral college for the general election.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-25 @ 01:20:18
Ask the college voters why they are voting for Obama? Get them to name some of his policies? & wait for the blank stares. It's called peer pressure with most of them unfortunately.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-25 @ 02:02:40
Sure, blame the voters. "Polling data from across the country, from large states and small, reflects the advantage Senator Obama would bring in a race this fall. His ability to expand the Democratic base, and his ability to capture the crucial Independent vote, make him a stronger candidate than Senator Clinton, who would enter the fall campaign with the highest unfavorable ratings of any nominee in half a century. Big States • California: Obama beats McCain by 27, Clinton beats him by 23. (SurveyUSA, 2/23) • New York: A February poll of Clinton's home state shows her beating McCain by 11, while Obama beats McCain by 10. (Quinnipiac, 3/18) • New Jersey: Obama and Clinton both beat McCain by 5. (Farleigh Dickinson, 3/30) • Illinois: Obama beats McCain by 29 in his home state, while Clinton wins by 9. (SurveyUSA, 2/28) Traditional Battlegrounds • Iowa: Obama up 7, Clinton down 6. (SurveyUSA, 4/17), Among Independents: Obama up 9, Clinton down 31. (Rasmussen, 3/31) • North Carolina: Clinton trails McCain by 11, Obama ties him. (Rasmussen, 4/10) Among Independents: Obama up 8, Clinton down 16. (Rasmussen, 4/10) • Oregon: Obama up 9, Clinton up only 1 (SurveyUSA, 4/17) A march poll showed Obama up 6 and Clinton down 6 (Rasmussen, 3/26) Among Independents: Obama up 11, Clinton up 4. (Rasmussen, 3/26) • Wisconsin: Obama up 5 while Clinton ties. (SurveyUSA, 4/17) A March poll showed Obama up 4 and Clinton down 4. (WPR, 3/26) Among Independents: Obama up 17, Clinton up 2. (Rasmussen, 3/26) • Michigan: Obama trailing by 1, Clinton trailing by 3. (Rasmussen, 3/25) A February poll showed Obama up 8 and Clinton tied. (Rasmussen, 2/17) • New Mexico: Obama up by 3, Clinton down by 3. (Rasmussen, 4/8) Among Independents: Obama up 8, Clinton down 5. (Rasmussen, 4/8) • Nevada: Obama leads by 4, Clinton leads by 1. (Rasmussen 3/19) • Minnesota: Obama up 14, Clinton up 5. (Rasmussen, 4/22) Among Independents: Obama up 9, Clinton down 14. (Rasmussen 3/19) • Pennsylvania: Clinton up 9, Obama up 8 (Rasmussen, 4/9) Among Independents: Obama down 1, Clinton down 19. (Rasmussen, 4/9) Making new states competitive • Colorado: Obama up 3, Clinton down 14. (Rasmussen, 4/19) A February poll showed up Obama up 9 and Clinton down 6. (SurveyUSA, 2/28) Among Independents: Obama up 9, Clinton down 13. (Rasmussen, 3/17) • North Dakota: Obama up 4, Clinton down 19. (SurveyUSA, 2/28) Among Independents: Obama up 9, Clinton down 29. (Survey USA, 2/28) • Virginia: Obama down 8, Clinton down 16. (SurveyUSA, 4/17) Among Independents: Obama up 10, Clinton down 8. (SurveyUSA, 3/16) • Montana: Obama down 5, Clinton down 18 (Rasmussen, 4/6) Obama down 2, Clinton down 12 (Rasmussen, 4/6) • Texas: Obama down only 1, Clinton down 7 (SurveyUSA, 2/28)

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-25 @ 22:40:20
Well the Clintonistas won't say it here, but what they're thinking privately is the Bradley Effect. I guess I choose to believe that 98% of this country isn't racist. I still believe in the common decency of America, even after the recent events.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-26 @ 05:50:35
Obama has relied on race more than Clinton has. He wouldn't even be here without the 80-90% of African Americans swamping him to victory in South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, DC, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, pushing him over in Missouri, Delaware, & Connecticut, & keeping him closer in Texas, Tennessee, Ohio, PA, NY, NJ, MA, & CA. If you doubt me in NY check how he went in Brooklyn - the largest African American area, he almost won it! Hillary doesn't even come close to commanding the same support from the white community. Add in the favourtism of a large section of the US media & you can say the Teflon candidate has been blessed to say the least. The fact that Hillary is still standing is quite an accomplishment. The one thing she has had in her favour unfairly is her name - Clinton, which at times has possibly hindered her as much as helped her, or is that Bill I'm talking about! Last Edit: 2008-04-26 @ 05:52:05

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-26 @ 14:46:30
Yeah I guess black people don't count.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-27 @ 01:42:41
Moreover, blacks did not coalesce behind Obama until 1) he won Iowa, with very few black votes; and 2) the Clintons dissed Obama as just another black candidate aka Jesse Jackson and MLK as not as important to civil rights as LBJ before the South Carolina primary. If they had any intention of carrying black votes, they blew it right there.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-27 @ 05:45:26
Black votes obviously do count. & in my opinion were always going to rally around the first "African American" candidate. I use that term loosely as in my opinion he is not traditional African American. His father was from Kenya.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-27 @ 18:33:06
The early polling does not support your opinion. Clinton had large support in the black community prior to the South Carolina primary.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-27 @ 21:49:44
I read that too but in reality it never transformed in any contest. So was always fluid at best. There have been a few stand outs - she did better in New York I think being their home town senator, & possibly Arkansas. Plus she has had some very loyal support from some of the members of congress, & others such as the mayor of Philadelphia, who have not been pressured into supporting Obama simply on race.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-27 @ 22:26:22
If you are attempting to infer that Obama's supporters are supporting him merely upon race, you are sorely mistaken. Indeed, up until the day of the South Carolina primary, Obama was drawing less than half of African American voters. http://www.nypost.com/seven/02262007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/blacks_may_doom_barack_opedcolumnists_dick_morris__eileen_mcgann.htm There are some, however, who have been driven from their support of Clinton due to her disregard and contempt of the sensibilities of African Americans. Just as there are white working class voters who have supported Clinton due to her capitalizing upon Obama's ill worded statements reflecting upon them. Certainly their support for Obama was fluid as well. The fluidity of the support shows that it is not based solely upon race, but upon the statements of the candidates and how those statements are percieved within the respective blocs.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-27 @ 23:16:55
It's skin pigmentation. People don't vote for Obama because they look like him. He has the same values that they do. It's the same reason that rural voters like Hillary. She believes in what they believe in. Hillary is a more protectionist, pragmatic Democrat to Obama's idealism. Of course, some believe it is important that a black person be President. It would certainly end many racial divisions in this country and send the message that young African-Americans can grow up to be anything they want to. And it sounds like I'm just repeating the Obama line, but I seriously do believe that for this country to move forward in a meaningful manner past the failures of our current government that we must end petty politics, partisan bickering, and at very least look past the cultural and racial divisions that some try to exploit. At first, I believed Hillary could be that candidate (if you don't believe me, look at my version 1 map :P)

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-28 @ 03:56:18
I believe the sincerity of you both but I'm afraid race is the unspoken word in this election, it has definitely come into play. You cannot tell me that 80-90% of African Americans are not voting on race. They have a choice of 2 Democrats, this is not Democrat versus Republican, & Hillary has a strong record in supporting African Americans. Of course not all of them are voting on race but many are. How a few comments from Bill can switch this around seems a bit rich. They must be very sensitive indeed. Similarly we have seen a larger vote for Hillary in the South with white voters especially in Alabama & Mississippi. So again it's on both sides. I'm not sure if race is the overiding factor for many (as most people won't admit to this in polling) but it certainly has come into play. I think Obama's support of the very questionably Reverand Wright has further intensified this.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-28 @ 09:26:01
Certainly race is a factor, whether acknowledged by voters themselves or not. Predjudice runs deep and is often subconscious. Likewise, gender is a factor. But to say that the respective support of the candidates can be fully explained by race and/or gender is a gross oversimplafication. The comments by the Clintons disparaging Obama and MLK were not trite. The comments were a display of racism and race baiting, and its not surprising at all that the black community reacted strongly to them. Nor do I deny that Obama's association with Wright has hurt him among some white voters. The effect has not been great thus far, however.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-28 @ 14:15:18
Reverend Wright please continue to speak out, the republicans are already running ads in the southern states for down ballot candidates.... north carolina, mississippi and which one will be next....

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-28 @ 15:23:19
Its very touching to see you encourage racist tactics. Your mother would be so proud....

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-28 @ 15:25:36
LOL.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-28 @ 15:33:25
Touched a nerve.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-29 @ 03:11:50
Wright is going to be out of the news soon I suspect. People are rather tired of hearing him at this point. The guy is basically old news and he isn't really interesting. I expect in 2-3 days the media will be all over some Clinton or McCain gaffe instead. Such is the cycle of our eternal national amnesia.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-29 @ 06:49:21
No Reverand Wright has made a big comeback in the news today! At least on CNN. A man who loves the limelight I believe! Maybe even more than his surrogate Obama. Honestly I think attending this church & making Wright his religious adviser on the campaign is another serious lack of judgement by Obama.

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-30 @ 00:40:48
Obama did not make Wright his religious advisor. Attending a church, despite disagreements with the pastor, hardly indicates lack of judgement. Who is correct, this will be ancient history in a few days.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 00:46:32
Reverend Wright is many things- and a ego maniac is definetly one of them. He craves attention which is apparent so he will stretch his 15 minutes for as long as possible. Its almost like he's angry and wants obama to lose.....

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 00:48:02
Oh and to answer my own question from a few posts up Louisiana, ding ding ding Is the next state to air anti-obama gop ads. Thank you for playing.... Last Edit: 2008-04-30 @ 00:48:55

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-30 @ 01:19:22
The ads in Louisiana, where 32.5% of the population is black, will probably help Landreau. Meanwhile, downticket Dems in most of the country, including VA, NM & CO continue to pray for Obama to be nominated, and soon.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 01:35:01
Which state is next...... The game continues, I think Tennessee or Georgia may pop out something..

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-30 @ 02:05:23
The Dems never had a chance in Louisiana or Georgia this cycle.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 02:28:59
Not at the top of the ticket But this sure f-ups the congressional, senatorial and statewide office holders which is the intent of these ads..... There objective is to take down the party and if democrats are stupid enough to go with obama, well I guess they deserve it !

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-30 @ 06:24:23
I wouldn't write Louisiana off in this election cycle at all. Why? Clinton won it twice (& could again! hehe). It's certainly one of the southern states more inclined to go back to the Democrats, if & when that happens, as we know the south has become the bedrock of the Republican party - for better or worse. Last Edit: 2008-04-30 @ 06:25:48

---

By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-04-30 @ 12:01:45
Well, Obama polls 11 points better than Clinton in LA, but neither candidate is going to carry that state. I suspect Obama is the stronger candidate to help downticket Dems nationwide. Tennessee has no competitive downticket races this year.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-30 @ 13:59:18
The speculation really isn't relevant. Clinton has been defeated. The perpetuation of a "close" race is at its core a myth perpetuated by the American media for ratings.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 14:19:27
Then why were you so concerned and angry with the Wright controversy? Is it because it helps Mc Cain?....

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-05-01 @ 03:06:20
It is petty partisan politics and a distraction from the real economic, social, and military problems facing the nation. I am concerned that the country will again be consumed in talking about non-issues while the real problems the nation faces are ignored. I could care less if Obama or Clinton wins. And the quickest way for things to not change is for the status quo to win by default. In this case, yes John McCain is basically a proponent of the status quo. If nothing changes, then this country is pretty much screwed. Last Edit: 2008-05-01 @ 03:07:14

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-05-01 @ 07:30:15
Sounds like you're opening up the door of possibility for a Clinton come from behind victory with those last comments Who. I wouldn't blame you with the shocker week that Obama has been having. It's all just gone a bit sour on him I think. Last Edit: 2008-05-01 @ 07:32:54

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-05-01 @ 07:31:58
PS How awesome did Hillary look on the O'Reilly Factor on Fox. Her campaign is surging! Question is will it be enough?

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-05-01 @ 17:59:33
No I think some things are more important than the person that wins.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-05-01 @ 21:53:33
Its important that the most competent person who is ready to lead wins so yes it is important that the "right" person wins and that person happens to be a woman this year! Demboy: yeah Hillary was awesome on O'Reilly- he is such an ass but she held her own.

---

By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-05-02 @ 06:08:39
I don't mind him in a weird sort of way. I'm warming to Fox, even though they are so unabashedly Republican. & what's with the dumb token women on there? Not wanting to sound sexist, but they really have dipped into the bimbo pool there I think. Nice girls but they always seem to submit to the men's opinions.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-05-02 @ 11:40:33
Faux News it usually is.

---

By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-05-02 @ 14:14:12
Indeed.

---

Links

• View Most Recent Entries
• View Entries with Most Recent Member Comments
• Go to Dem Presidential Primary Prediction Home
• Update My 2008 Dem Presidential Primary Prediction Map