Alter: "Hillary's Math Problem"

[scheming daemons]

"Hillary Clinton may be poised for a big night tonight, with wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. Clinton aides say this will be the beginning of her comeback against Barack Obama. There's only one problem with this analysis: they can't count."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240


My summary:

Alter makes the assumption that Hillary Clinton wins EVERY race from here on out... Including Vermont tonight. In most of the races, he has her winning by 8 to 10 points, and in the states that are currently heavily in Obama's favor - he has her winning by narrow margins.

Even if that INCREDIBLY rosey scenario occurs.... Hillary would still go to the convention with nearly 60 fewer pledged delegates than Obama. She could then only win the nomination if the Superdelegates overturn the pledged delegate count. If that happens, she'd lose the GE anyway... because half of the convention would walk out on her.

[blocker]

1. Look math is not her strong point just look at how

she manages her campaign finances.

[Dogmudgeon]

2. I've never seen Jonathan Alter smile so much

I never thought he was able to smile at all.

Although "smirk" might be a better word for it.

The man lives for schadenfreude. Only it's getting more and more difficult to determine the source of it for anyone except Hillary Clinton.

--p!

[scheming daemons]

6. What did he say that wasn't true? His "smirk" is irrelevant. Debunk what he said!

Of course you can't comment on the content of his article.


Again.... he made an assumption that Hillary exceeds all reasonable expectations and wins the remaining 16 contests.

The math shows she's STILL be behind.


Please try to refute the facts in his article.... rather than commenting on his "smirk".

[Dogmudgeon]

26. You first, big guy

Your ratio of gossip-to-linkage isn't high enough to give you table-pounding rights.

All you have is your hatred for Hillary.

--p!

[scheming daemons]

30. I posted an article from Alter with raw numbers and facts... not opinion.... your response...

...was to ridicule Alter's smirk.


Which means... in effect... that you have no REAL response to Alter's conclusions and that you concede that he is correct.

You've been given two cracks at it, and have yet to debunk his numbers.



Thanks for admitting that you agree there is no path to the nomination for Hillary.

[Dogmudgeon]

32. Facts not opinions? You're joking, right?

The article was about Alter using the Slate delegate calculator and assuming a straight split after serious delegate defections to Obama.

It's like loading the dice before the crapshoot.

He also assumes that there is no way the supers will defect back to Hillary. None of Obama's troops are even thinking about 3/25. But Obama is. That is why it is so vitally important to get Hillary out of the race in the next three weeks. Because by the time PA rolls around, there may be some serious trouble in the Garden of Hope.

"Which means... in effect... that you have no REAL response to Alter's conclusions and that you concede that he is correct."

Looks like the usual Internet statistics lawyering to me: "You didn't answer my questions to my satisfaction, so I win! BWAHA! LOLZ! PWND!"

And Alter's tone of rich-kid derision -- smirking -- was unabated through the entire article.

Did you even read it?

Tonight at 8 PM there is a TV show on called Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Jonathan Alter is a frequent guest. Take a close look at his face, particularly his mouth. That is what a smirk looks like. (For reference: also see the George W. Bush photographic catalog.)

--p!

[scheming daemons]

33. Straight split?

He gave Hillary wins in all of the remaining 16 contests.... a VERY unlikely possibility, even for someone blinded by Hillary-love like yourself.


...and I'll bite. What phony scandal will the Clinton campaign kick up on 3/25?


I have no argument with you that Alter "smirks". That has nothing to do with the content of his article, though.


He gave Hillary every possible benefit of the doubt in the article... and she STILL came up short. He also noted that she could go over the top by having the Superdelegates push her over the finish line. And I indicated as much in my OP as well.

But in THAT scenario, she wins the battle, but loses the war. Because if the SDs overturn the vote of the PLEDGED delegates, there will be civil war in the Democratic party and McCain's victory over her will make the 1984 election look like a nailbiter.

[JackORoses]

8. when he lays out the numbers, It makes me smile, too

You can understand what this means, right?
I know a lot of Hillarites are not so good with numbers.

[surfin]

27. He forgot to mention this

50 plus super delegates who will support Obama soon. Tomorrow will be interesting but did here we may not know of the results of the delegates won in Texas until the weekend according to MSNBC.

[billbuckhead]

3. So even though a majority of dems vote for Hillary, we let Republican crossovers

So even though a majority of Dems voted for Hillary, we let Republican crossovers determine that Obama should be our candidate, I don't think so.

[JackORoses]

9. why do you continue to say this? Your count does not include any of the Caucus States.

I guess there were no Democrats in those States, huh?

Give it up. Hillary is done. Find something else to invest your time in.

[scheming daemons]

10. So... you think that rules are meant to be broken and shouldn't be followed?

The DNC set up rules for the nomination.

At the end of the process, the winner is the one the RULES say is the winner.

In states where there is an open primary, the RULES state that Indies and Repukes are allowed.




Finally.... Repukes are crossing over in great numbers in Texas to vote for HILLARY today. I expect you to completely discount those votes and simply go by the count among Dems in Texas.

No? Hypocrisy?

[billbuckhead]

22. Any proof Republicans are crossing over in record numbers for Hillary

The Obama "movement" has long bragged about all theese Republican's voting for their smiling Reagan fellating empty suit and exit polls support this phenomenon but there is no proof so far of pro-Hillary mischief votes.

[surfin]

24. How about this answer

Maybe they are repubs but they are getting experience in voting dem for the fall. They know they will vote for him for president. Like the Reagen dems.

Just my thought.

[Gore1FL]

12. The Right wing talk show hosts are mobilizing their listeners for Hillary.

So it evens out.

[jefferson_dem]

4. Ohio State Dem Chair: Hillary Needs Eight-Point Win In Both Ohio And Texas

Ohio State Dem Chair: Hillary Needs Eight-Point Win In Both Ohio And Texas
By Greg Sargent - March 4, 2008, 1:45PM

If this is an indication of what Dem party infrastructure types will be saying about Hillary and the general election after the dust settles from today's contests, she will need a major win in Texas and Ohio to avert pressure to get out of the race:

State Democratic Chairman Chris Redfern said Mrs. Clinton needs an 8-point victory margin in Ohio and Texas to remain in the race against Mr. Obama, who now has a lead of about 100 delegates and victories in the last 11 contests.

"She must, in my opinion, make that kind of show. It's not an either-or," Mr. Redfern said. "If we don't have a nominee sooner rather than later, it makes it increasingly difficult to defeat John McCain."

People like Redfern, the Ohio state chair, will only grow more vocal in the days ahead, obviously. So it's do or die -- now.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/texas_state_dem_chair_hillary.php

[high density]

5. Jonathan's problem is that he's forgetting that in Clinton World...

States she wins matter and states she loses do not matter.

That calculator he linked to at Slate is fun... I put in OH for Clinton by 10%, RI for Clinton by 10%, TX for Clinton by 10%, VT for Obama by 10%, and then the rest of the states at 60/40 Clinton. She wins by three pledged delegates under that "win everything but VT" scenario. Good luck with that one.

[THUNDER HANDS]

7. if i was at the convention and she was the nominee after getting fewer delegates and less states

I would walk out on her too.

[Gore1FL]

11. I've done some similar math here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4881834

She simply needs a minimum of an 80 delegate swing TODAY to have the chance the patriots did in their final drive of the Super Bowl.

One thing that many over look when speaking of PA's 158 delegate count are the combined 160 delegates in NC, WY and MS. As the the race continues and less delegates are available, Obama's 155 pledged delegate lead gets bigger and bigger relative to what is left.

[Hieronymus]

13. Thanks for posting this piece. I agree with Mr. Alter completely.

[malik flavors]

14. Damn, when Alter puts it that way it really seems as if this thing is over and done with...

I didn't realize how far behind she was.

[snooper2]

23. 11 states in a row...

:)


GOBAMA

[alcibiades_mystery]

15. Senator Clinton is running her 2012 campaign

Everybody but the die-hard Clintonite knows it.

The brutal tactics of the last few weeks are designed to torpedo Obama in the general so that 2012 becomes viable.

[Wayjose]

16. Not 2012, she'll wait until 2016

[alcibiades_mystery]

18. No, she won't.

That's the problem.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. The argument is...

if she can torpedo Obama, then McCain might win and she'll have an opportunity to run in 2012.

[IDemo]

17. If she succeeds in torpedoing Obama and the Democratic party in '08

the Hillarity for another run by her will not exist in any year to follow.

[scheming daemons]

20. Follow-up article... since I've hit my post limit....."Why voters pick Bugs Bunny over Daffy"

http://www.slate.com/id/2185720/

Obama = Bugs

Clinton = Daffy


Nice read.

[Liberal Dose]

28. That was indeed a nice read. Thanks for the link. nt

[scheming daemons]

29. Maybe you can use one of your three threads to promote it for me...

...

;-)

[gravity]

31. Love the article, I'll post it up

[sandnsea]

21. That's exactly right and why hasn't the PRESS said so

You know, the press that's biased against Hillary. If it were anybody else she'd be long gone.

[gravity]

25. It's not an interesting story

compare to "Can Hillary make a comeback against Barack?"