A nice one about Obama possibly picking up "a majority of the pledged delegates". Did the Obama team come up with that or was it the media looking for a headline? Not that it changes the fact that neither candidate can achieve a real majority without the superdelegates.
I was half asleep when the news came on, talking about Oregon and Kentucky giving this to Obama.
My drowsy mind thought, "What? He won both of them???"
"Oh, it's Tuesday. They haven't had those primaries yet."
Today's political news talking point
-
MarleysGh0st
- Posts: 27966
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
- Location: Elsewhere
-
earendel
- Posts: 13871
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
- Location: mired in the bureaucracy
Re: Today's political news talking point
He's only 17 delegates away from having a majority of the "pledged" delegates, which, as you point out, is not the same as having a majority of the delegates (even if one discounts the superdelegates).MarleysGh0st wrote:A nice one about Obama possibly picking up "a majority of the pledged delegates". Did the Obama team come up with that or was it the media looking for a headline? Not that it changes the fact that neither candidate can achieve a real majority without the superdelegates.
I was half asleep when the news came on, talking about Oregon and Kentucky giving this to Obama.
My drowsy mind thought, "What? He won both of them???"
"Oh, it's Tuesday. They haven't had those primaries yet."
FWIW, I went to vote this morning early, as I always do, and there were 20 or so people in line waiting to vote, which is unusual and may be a harbinger of the big turnout the KY Secretary of State was expecting. Unfortunately the three precincts that vote in the same place were not very well organized - since KY has a closed primary one has to declare his/her party registration, then the poll worker has to find the correct book and confirm your name and check a photo ID. The books hadn't been separated into parties (or even precincts) so it took a lot longer to get organized. Interestingly Romney, Keyes, Giuliani and Paul were still on the Republican ballot, and Edwards and Richardson were still on the Democratic ballot. Independent voters could only vote for non-partisan judicial candidates.
KY needs to revise its election laws somewhat - in order to be eligible to vote in the primary for a particular party, one would have had to change his/her registration months ago. Surely in the days of computers the time could be shortened, or maybe even go to an open primary.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."
-
MarleysGh0st
- Posts: 27966
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
- Location: Elsewhere
Re: Today's political news talking point
It's not a question of processing the records; it's the basic debate between an open and closed primary. Is a primary a means for a political party to select its candidate or is it just a sort of generic, preliminary round of voting in which the party means little or nothing?earendel wrote: KY needs to revise its election laws somewhat - in order to be eligible to vote in the primary for a particular party, one would have had to change his/her registration months ago. Surely in the days of computers the time could be shortened, or maybe even go to an open primary.
-
TheCalvinator24
- Posts: 4886
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 am
- Location: Wyoming
- Contact:
-
Thousandaire
- Posts: 1251
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:33 pm
I've already voted as I live in Oregon. I changed my party at the last minute so I got two ballots in the mail - one for each party. I switched to Democrat so I voted for Clinton. Then I saw that Ron Paul is on the Republican ballot - I would have liked to vote for him. Oh well.
As you may have heard, Oregon gave Obama his biggest campaign event so far - 75,000 by police estimate. My Clinton vote is like spitting in the wind, but it's always fun to see if I picked any winners in the other races.
At least his name is fun to say - BarackObama. Try it!
As you may have heard, Oregon gave Obama his biggest campaign event so far - 75,000 by police estimate. My Clinton vote is like spitting in the wind, but it's always fun to see if I picked any winners in the other races.
At least his name is fun to say - BarackObama. Try it!
-
hf_jai
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:31 pm
- Location: Stilwell KS
- Contact:
States and Territories will be sending 3,566 pledged delegates to Denver. Half plus 1 of that is 1,734 pledged delegates. Obama currently has 1,610 pledged delegates, 124 short of a "clear majority."
Kentucky and Oregon have 51 and 52 pledged delegates resp. So, even if Obama won 100% of the pledged delegates in play today (which he won't), he would have only 1,713 pledged delegates, which is 21 short of a "clear majority."
Of course, the Obama spin is that Florida and Michigan delegates don't count. But those two states elected pledged delegates, whether the DNC decides to seat them or not. The majority is far from "clear" at this point.
As Marley said above, they both still need super delegates to win the nomination, so it really doesn't matter. Yet. I think there will be a floor fight.
Kentucky and Oregon have 51 and 52 pledged delegates resp. So, even if Obama won 100% of the pledged delegates in play today (which he won't), he would have only 1,713 pledged delegates, which is 21 short of a "clear majority."
Of course, the Obama spin is that Florida and Michigan delegates don't count. But those two states elected pledged delegates, whether the DNC decides to seat them or not. The majority is far from "clear" at this point.
As Marley said above, they both still need super delegates to win the nomination, so it really doesn't matter. Yet. I think there will be a floor fight.
-
PlacentiaSoccerMom
- Posts: 8134
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:47 am
- Location: Placentia, CA
- Contact:
Thank you for voting for Hillary. My mom did as well. Hopefully you won't be the only two people in Oregon voting for her.Thousandaire wrote:I've already voted as I live in Oregon. I changed my party at the last minute so I got two ballots in the mail - one for each party. I switched to Democrat so I voted for Clinton. Then I saw that Ron Paul is on the Republican ballot - I would have liked to vote for him. Oh well.
As you may have heard, Oregon gave Obama his biggest campaign event so far - 75,000 by police estimate. My Clinton vote is like spitting in the wind, but it's always fun to see if I picked any winners in the other races.
At least his name is fun to say - BarackObama. Try it!
-
eyégor
- ???????
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:26 am
- Location: Trollsberg
That is what is driving me nuts about this primary. Obama can claim, after today, that he has a majority of the pledged votes, and Clinton can claim that she leads in the popular vote in the primaries, and both will be right.
The one thing that is clear from all this, the Democrats method of delegate selection is seriously flawed. In retrospect, it can be argued that, despite the large number of delegates left to be selected, Sen. Clinton had no realistic chance of winning after Super Duper Pooper Scooper Tuesday, three and a half months ago. The tumultuous conventions of years past may have been good for the Democratic party. I say, bring 'em back.
Also, if these self impressed pundits don't mind, please stop trumpeting every primary as the most important thing to happen during the campaign season. And let's try to be a little objective.
I mean "Obama Rolls in Guam Primary" is a little over the top, don't you think. Seven votes, that is what the margin was. Last week, Obama got crushed in WV - ho hum. The week before, Clinton did better than expected in North Carolina - crickets. She won in Indiana and it is a 'razor thin' victory. Does anyone other than those who live there realize that over 25% of the population of Indiana lives in the Chicago media market? This should have been 'home turf' for Obama.
Where is Pat Paulsen when you need him???
The one thing that is clear from all this, the Democrats method of delegate selection is seriously flawed. In retrospect, it can be argued that, despite the large number of delegates left to be selected, Sen. Clinton had no realistic chance of winning after Super Duper Pooper Scooper Tuesday, three and a half months ago. The tumultuous conventions of years past may have been good for the Democratic party. I say, bring 'em back.
Also, if these self impressed pundits don't mind, please stop trumpeting every primary as the most important thing to happen during the campaign season. And let's try to be a little objective.
I mean "Obama Rolls in Guam Primary" is a little over the top, don't you think. Seven votes, that is what the margin was. Last week, Obama got crushed in WV - ho hum. The week before, Clinton did better than expected in North Carolina - crickets. She won in Indiana and it is a 'razor thin' victory. Does anyone other than those who live there realize that over 25% of the population of Indiana lives in the Chicago media market? This should have been 'home turf' for Obama.
Where is Pat Paulsen when you need him???
-
hf_jai
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:31 pm
- Location: Stilwell KS
- Contact:
Last week ur local paper (Kansas City Star, owned by McClatchy) did not even bother to report on Hillary's win in WV. Not a mention. Ya know, regardless of what anyone thinks about who's gonna win or has already won or should have won or whatever, having the front-runner lose a middle size swing state by 41 points sounds like news to me. 