Emerging Consensus Within Democratic Party: Obama Will Be Our Nominee

[Khaotic]

Nancy Pelosi, Pennsylvania, and the sixty-percent threshold
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/03/nancy-pelosi-pe.html

It's surprising how much media coverage there was of Speaker Pelosi's statement that superdelegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate battle. David Broder talked about it on Meet the Press and NBC Nightly news even did a little story on it during their broadcast.

Pelosi's comments, combined with Iowa county convention results and the NYT article on superdelegates, show that a consensus is emerging within the Democratic Party: Barack Obama will be our nominee.

Still, there will be -- and should be -- more voting. Probably even in Michigan and Florida. The bottom-line though is that in order to win the nomination, Hillary Clinton will need to win at least sixty percent of the vote in just about every single contest from here on out.

There's no way that going to happen. But she's got every right to try.



==============================

Here are my personal predictions for the rest of the contests (giving Hillary a huge benefit of the doubt in many of them).

You'll notice Obama STILL remains in the lead w/ a 60+ pledged delegate lead and I believe that the Supers will not over turn the pledged delegate leader.

[WillyT]

1. K & R !!!

:kick:

[msongs]

2. let us have the audacity of hope that he is better than many of his supporters on DU nt

[Umbram]

32. And better than "many" of the people that paint "many" of his supporters with a broad brush. (nt)

[ingac70]

3. Kick!

[MNDemNY]

4. Seems the "consensus" is a deadlocked convention. Yipee!!!!

Re-Elect Al Gore.

[Yurovsky]

5. There you go again ...

bringing fact and logic into the argument!

For the good of the party, I pray that HRC has a moment of clarity and will step aside.

[uponit7771]

6. K&R

[blm]

7. Clintons know this and have for a few weeks now. Their mission now is to get McCain in

office to continue the protection of BushInc into the next decade until Hillary runs again in 2012.

[thevoiceofreason]

8. Excellent point

Time for the supers to break and break hard.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. k (not that it will do any good)

:banghead:Math

[Greyskye]

10. K & R #10

At some point the math is going to have to sink into folks heads...

[EFerrari]

11. THIS is what the Clinton campaign is trying to bury.

:kick:

[meow mix]

12. This is why shes currently trying to help Mccain win for a 2012 run

shes a traitor

[tidy_bowl]

15. If Hillary is not the nominee......

.....she will so damage Obama that he will lose to McCain and set herself up for the avenging pol in 2012. Slash and Burn time now for the Clintons.

[gcomeau]

29. Oh knock it off.

I think the race is clearly over, and that she should obviously concede, but calling her a traitor and launching into conspiracy theories about her campaigning for McCain because she said something positive about him is just petty. I do not believe that Clinton is trying to give the White House (and any Supreme Court nominations that may occur in the next 4 years, let's keep those in mind everyone from BOTH sides saying they'd vote McCain or stay home if their candidate doesn't win the nomination) to the Republicans. I think she's just let her ego and ambitions get in the way of her intellect. Hopefully she reigns it in soon, but talk like this isn't helping anybody but the Republicans in the meantime. Or was your objective to try to permanently alienate Clinton supporters to make sure they don't fall in behind Obama after he's nominated?

[BenDavid]

13. Emerging consensus among hrc supporters. 62.346% will have

trouble supporting Obama...

[meow mix]

16. they are just scared little sheep.. theyll herd back up no problem..

itll be ok dont cry

[tabasco]

22. Then support McCain or don't vote

and then, right after the election, go sign up for the 100-year war:

www.goarmy.com

(ask for "eleven bravo")

[corkhead]

54. I don't know what "Ignored" said, but I got a chuckle from your response

[Arugula Latte]

14. That is a fascinating chart. Thank you!

:hi:

[me b zola]

17. How many delegates does Edwards still have?

I know that he had 27, but that was before the Iowa convention where some peeled off for Obama.

Also, am I the only one who feels that a re-vote in FL & MI would disenfranchise Edwards voters? I am confident that Edwards will release his delegates to Obama, but the more delegates that Edwards retains, the more leverage he has to influence policy with the Obama platform/presidency.

[Khaotic]

19. Iowa County Conventions

Here's a link to the final counts:

http://www.iowademocrats.us/draftconventionresults.pdf

I was at my convention (Scott County) and Obama did very well.

80 delegates will go forward for Obama from Scott County to the District Convention in Dubuque in April.

The link above will show you what the numbers were for the Iowa Caucuses on Jan. 3 and how they changed with each county on March 15.

At my table in the room there were two people, a delegate for Edwards and a delegate for Biden, who changed over to Obama.

I had an Obama button for both of them to welcome them. :-)

There was an Edwards delegate at the table who was going to switch to Hillary, she was covered in Hillary stickers. However, she left the convention before the realignment took place, so her delegate position will stay with Edwards to the next step at District.

She was not around to be selected as a delegate or an alternate at District, so her opportunity to switch from Edwards to Hillary is gone. Someone else will now represent that delegate position and who knows what that person will do at District in Dubuque or in June in Des Moines.

It was yet another great experience here in Iowa for Obama. :-)

[grantcart]

21. unbelievable

What your report tells me is that nobody called her before the convention to explain to her what she had to do and pump her up.

[Khaotic]

25. She misunderstood

She thought the county convention would last about as long as the caucus did back on Jan. 3.

She was there past the time her seat would have been filled by an Edwards alternate.

She left after the pool of Edwards alternates was exhausted. So there weren't any Edwards alts to put in her seat.

There were left over Obama alts, but the rules stated that the delegates seat had to stay the same unless the delegate decided to change.

The delegate left, so the seat stays with Edwards until the District convention in April.

I had zero influence on her dicision to leave and I believe she knew what she was doing. She may have thought that an Edwards alternate would fill her seat, but that pool had been exhausted.

She may have stayed long enough to keep a perspective Edwards leaning Obama alternate from taking the seat however. So she successfully kept the seat from going Obama. Her delegate seat could stay Edwards or go for Hillary or Obama in Dubuque.

One thing is for certain, she won't have anything to do with the outcome now.

[grantcart]

34. got it

It is clear from the numbers that Edwards will not be able to maintian viability thru to the state level so 6 more delegates will come up.

I don't know if you saw this thread but we tried to follow it Saturday.

Two Sparkles added his observations and if you would like to that would be great.

are you a delegate to the next convention?

[EFerrari]

18. Kick

[CakeGrrl]

20. ...which is why the Clinton campaign is playing the "electability" card -- their last gambit

They're trying to capitalize on the Wright situation like a mofo. There's Bill out there moving the goalposts again in his last couple of comments, seeming to be for 'the will of the people', yet adding the slick qualifier that the voters should factor who is most 'electable' into their decision.

I find it hard to believe the Clinton campaign doesn't have a hand in making hay of this. When the right-wing media (Sean Hannity? Rush Limbaugh? Come the f*&k ON!) wants the opposition's candidate to get the party nomination, astute democrats and progressives should hear some big-ass alarm bells going off. They're playing Divide and Conquer with the Democratic Party and it's working to perfection. It's pretty pathetic. The only thing I'm not too sure about is whether the Clinton campaign is riding the swiftboat wave just to get the nomination at any cost, or if they're in with the right-wing media even deeper.

[ClassWarrior]

23. Wow, I didn't realize her weakest wins came in those "big states" that she says...

...matter more than the rest of us second-class citizens.

NGU.

[K Gardner]

24. This is the only post I"ve read here today, in the new WrightRumor DU. Thanks.

[Scurrilous]

26. Gobama!

:thumbsup:

[npincus]

27. Let's settle the damned thing already!!!! Before the Dem Civil War gets hotter.

[gcomeau]

28. "But she's got every right to try."

Agreed, she does have the right. But the right to do something does not automatically translate to it being justified. And in this situation she should recognize the major damage she is doing to the party and its chances in the General election by continuing a race she has almost no hope of winning, acknowledge reality, concede, and throw her support behind Obama.

I posted a thread many days ago asking Clinton supporters to explain to me the specifics of how they still expected Hillary could win the nomination. It got 144 views, and 0 answers to my question after two bumps for responses. Zero. I continued to see a lot of posts declaring Obama is done, and Hillary will win, but it's not happening. I was willing to give the Clinton supporters the opportunity to be heard out on a detailed explanation of how continuing the campaign was justified and not a single one stepped forward to outline a realistic scenario in which Clinton secures the nomination. That just confirmed my previous conclusion, the race is over.

[Not the Only One]

30. I can't wait for the day Hillary recognizes reality

Stop the delusions, already!

[Khaotic]

36. Ditto

[ORDem]

31. I don't think OR will be that high for Obama, nor will FL be that low for him.

Obama pulled 38% in FL without campaigning on a ballot with more than 2 candidates. Unlikely, that when it counts he'll only pull 1% higher. I understand you are trying to be conservative. As a lifelong resident of OR I'd be surprised if Obama didn't win the primary here, but probably closer to a 55/45 split.

Keep in mind, everyone, that if there are FL and MI re-votes approved that immediately, and until June, Hillary's vote and delegate gap will be huge since the current votes will at that moment be null and void. That will be a truer measure of Obama's strength and will put more pressure on Hillary.

:dem:

[Khaotic]

35. Maybe

We'll see, my predictions are just my own personal guesses based on my own observations.

On adding FL & MI.

It will prolong the whole thing.

Right now I think Obama is on track to surpass 50%+1 w/ the May 20 election. I think Oregon will put him over the mark.

After reaching 50%+1 I think we'll see a huge waterfall of Supers to Obama.

However, w/ the addition of FL & MI it will mean that he won't surpass 50%+1 before June and we're probably looking at finishing out every contest without knowing our nominee.

Another however ... I do think Obama will be 60+ pledged delegates ahead and that will give him a belated Super Del waterfall, which will tell Hillary to concede.

The kicker ... even if the Supers have "said" who they're going to vote for, Hillary could force the whole thing to the convention where the Supers do the actual voting, hoping and charging that they'll change their minds.

If she does that, she'll be charged with throwing the election to the republicans.

The 2012 theory will no longer be theory, but fact.

[PerfectSage]

33. K&R

:)

[Seabiscuit]

37. This rosy profile was obviously compiled before Rev. Wright lit up everyone's TV screens.

[Khaotic]

38. Nope

It's the current state of reality where Math matters.

[hfojvt]

39. when did Puerto Rico move to June 1 from June 7?

and why are your delegate counts for MT and SD lower than reported here:

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/primaries/democraticprimaries/index.html

They show 24 for Montana and 23 for SD against your 16 and 15.

[DrFunkenstein]

40. Clintons Super Delegate Lead Only Due to DNC Insiders Pledging Early

Congressional members - many of whom face races with Obama or Clinton at the top of the ticket - are distinctly in Obama's favor.

There is no way they are going to risk a revolution to overturn the contest at the last minute.

[rox63]

41. I'd heard that Indiana was leaning towards Obama, not Clinton

And although I believe Clinton will win PA, I don't think she will win by anywhere near the huge margin you've posted.

[Khaotic]

43. As stated ...

I've given her a huge benefit of the doubt.

I wanted it to be appearant that even w/ a stretch of the imagination she is going to be behind by more than 60 pledged delegates.

The Supers will go Obama and that will be that.

The only thing Hillary will be faced with is whether to take it to Denver w/ some kind of hope that the Supers will change their minds when they actually cast their vote.

Right now they're endorsing and saying who they "intend" to vote for.

At the convention they can change their minds for whatever criteria they want to do so.

Hillary could do the right thing and at least suspend her campaign and vote for herself since she's a Super. Then let the votes go where they may, which will be to Obama.

With FL&MI left out, it should all be over after the May 20 contest.

[Jai4WKC08]

42. The superdelegates will give it to Clinton if...

If she wins the majority of the popular vote, or
If it looks like Obama doesn't have a reasonable chance of winning the GE.

That's what they're there for.

In the end, a small advantage in the number of pledged delegates won't mean jack.

[Khaotic]

44. WTF?

That's what you think?

If Obama is ahead by more than 60 delegates he'll be the Democratic nominee.

Otherwise Democracy is highjacked.

The Supers will not overturn the pledged delegate leader ... period.

[Jai4WKC08]

47. The # of votes will be more important than the # of delegates

If you don't believe that, you're just fooling yourself.

How can democracy be "highjacked" if the winner ends up being the person with the most votes?

[TwilightGardener]

48. You realize, of course, that caucuses and primaries are apples and oranges

in terms of the popular vote, right? To make a popular vote argument, then all states should have held primaries from the outset, and the rules laid down that delegates weren't the prize, popular vote was--we would have then seen a very different primary strategy from both candidates. But, this year, it's a delegate race, same as most other years. Can't change the rules and shift emphasis onto other factors that seem more favorable just because one candidate is losing and doesn't like it.

[Jai4WKC08]

51. I know that primaries actually count more

Not in delegates, but as an indicator of what the people really want. In states holding caucuses this year, only about 5% of registered voters have participated. Primaries are averaging about 40%.

The super-delegates vote will follow the rules, but not in the way that you seem to think. They will want to do what's good for the party in the long run, and mostly what will most help them keep their positions and even more important, win the next one up. If they end up thinking it's a vote for Obama, that's what they'll do. But if it by the time of the convention, it looks like Hillary answers the will of the people (and they will be looking at what that means from their own individual perspectives), then they will vote for her. A hundred pledged delegates, give or take, won't mean anything.

[TwilightGardener]

52. Um, not really true--CAUCUSES show who's got more true support, because

they require more time and more effort to appear and participate--the motivated show up. But you're not getting what I'm saying. Caucuses have limited participation, by their very nature--so CAUCUS states aren't going to have the turnout/vote count that primary states will, and some caucus states don't count individual votes at all--that's not fair to anyone who wins caucus states, then, to rely on national popular vote totals. A race measured by national vote totals would have meant the candidates would only concentrate on big, highly-populous states, like CA, and the less-populated states would have been ignored, like WY (9000 voters in the caucus)--that's why it's a DELEGATE race. To give Dems in all 50 states a chance to "matter", no matter WHAT Hillary says.

[Jai4WKC08]

53. LOL

That's about as twisted a rationale as I've heard.

Have you participated in a caucus? Assuming it's done properly, all the people who show up and stick around are counted. Granted, some of the caucuses were not done properly, but that only takes away from their relevance, not adds to it.

But it's also true that not every one can show up for a caucus. It has very little to do with motivation. Working people are more likely to miss out. And the military (my son was deployed). People with children who can't afford baby sitters (yeah, I know some people bring their kids, but most don't). Old people, especially in bad weather (it was horrible here in Kansas on the night of Super Tuesday).

As for your argument about big states and little ones, that's exactly the argument used for the electoral college, which I happen to think is undemocratic as well. Why should the voter in WY get MANY TIMES the representation of the voter in California? Why are the voters in big states penalized?

But whatever. The point is, it won't matter. The Supers will do what they will do for the reasons I've given, and all your protestations that it's a delegate race, or somehow Hillary is pulling the strings won't mean a thing.

[FrenchieCat]

45. Good!

[thevoiceofreason]

46. Good analysis.

[TragedyandHope]

49. Yes we can!

The people have spoken. The steadily rising tide of voters is clearly making their choice known. This story apparently isn't sexy enough to fuel the media's appetite for drama, but that isn't stopping more and more people from choosing change. Remember, the loudest voices are often the most desperate.

BTW, has anyone else noticed that a few cable news outlets have recently started to refer to Obama's ever-increasing lead as his "fragile" lead? I've noticed this phenomenon just within the past week or so.

[stillcool]

50. I'm with you!!

"Yes We Can" Despite all odds. Despite the Kitchen Sink. There are more of us, on the Unity side, then there are of them.

[casus belli]

55. I suspect the next move is for them to fight to NOT have Florida seated...

despite her statements to the contrary in public, so that they can claim that Florida was disenfranchised and the election "stolen". I would be very, very surprised if the Clinton's go away quietly from this. And I suspect her talk of party unity was dependent on her actually gaining the nomination.

I've never wanted to be wrong more in my life.

[ClayZ]

56. Woooot! K and R