Thread: Is Hilary being edged out?

Originally Posted by latm

It amazes me how people speak with such certainty as to what is going to happen even now. It was somewhat understandable before Ohio and Texas, but since then it strikes me more as wishful thinking.

Actually, Ohio and Texas were a virtual tie. Obama won more delegates in Texas (due to the caucus afterward), but lost Ohio. Clinton netted like +5 delegates (or thereabouts) all told that day.

I just read an analysis the other day that showed the math on this race. I can't remember where I read it, but it basically gave projections of the remaining races, giving the benefit of the doubt to Clinton where things were less than clear. Even under this rosy scenario, it showed that by the time all was said and done with the voting, Obama would only need to convince around 40 of the remaining 230 or so superdelegates to support him in order to win this race.

What's more is that undecided superdelegates, even this week, were trending Obama (he got seven new superdelegates this week, compared to Clinton's four). I think this should show that something major (beyond this Wright stuff) is going to need to happen in order for Clinton to have any chance in this race.

When people say the race is over, I don't think its wishful thinking so much as it is basic math.

All that being said, I sure wish the media hadn't effectively pushed John Edwards out of this race by blacking him out in the media. It is clear he was a superior candidate, both in message and electability, than either of the remaining candidates. All that being said, Obama is clearly a preferable candidate to either Clinton or John W. McBush.

Originally Posted by redhaze

When people say the race is over, I don't think its wishful thinking so much as it is basic math.

A major flaw in your argument is that it assumes superdelegates, who have announced their support for a candidate, will actually vote for that candidate at the convention. There is absolutely no compulsion for them to do so, and you can expect a lot of backroom shenanigans should this contest proceed to the convention.

Don't worry, I'm a superdelegate, as is my mate Dave. We're voting Obama.

Originally Posted by zaphodbeeblebrox

A major flaw in your argument is that it assumes superdelegates, who have announced their support for a candidate, will actually vote for that candidate at the convention. There is absolutely no compulsion for them to do so, and you can expect a lot of backroom shenanigans should this contest proceed to the convention.

I would argue its a minor flaw in my logic. Sure, the superdelegates are free to change their vote, but they don't commit for no reason either.

As I said above, something major would have to happen in the campaign in order for superdelegates to believe that Obama is totally unelectable. Barring that event, there is no way the supers override the elected delegate count. That would be total suicide, and the supers (mostly being elected officials) have a vested interest in the dems. winning this fall.

Originally Posted by redhaze

When people say the race is over, I don't think its wishful thinking so much as it is basic math.

Or both.

Well, if Obama wins both Indiana and North Carolina today then this thing is over. If, however, there is a split then this thing goes at least until June.

Redhaze's predictions:

North Carolina: Barack Obama by +9

Indiana: Hillary Clinton by +6

Originally Posted by robitusson

Good Christ I hope not. It's gone one long enough already.

Quite right! Jolly well put a stop to it, would you old bean?

Pssst......Hillary.

It's time to step aside.

Originally Posted by toong tao daeng

Pssst......Hillary.

It's time to step aside.

Not until Barack demonstrates he can get undereducated white voters to support him. Undereducated whites are a majority in the U.S., isn't it obvious?