Decision ‘08

To The Surprise Of Exactly Not A Single Living Soul…

…Hillary Clinton has won West Virginia. No margin yet, but expect it to be huge…What does it change? Nothing, but she’ll get some good headlines, and various pundits will breathlessly wonder what this says about Obama’s electability…

UPDATE 11:22 p.m.: Well, credit where credit is due…40+ points is a huge win. Unfortunately, what this result does is bring up uncomfortable questions about race, and how big a factor it will be in the 2008 election…it’s the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about very much, because it’s a minefield if not handled properly…but more on that later…

12 Responses to “To The Surprise Of Exactly Not A Single Living Soul…”

1 Gulf Coast Bandit Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 12:51 am
41 points is indeed huge. Another striking statistic: when the WV Democratic Party goes to choose delegates, they’ll throw out the votes for John Edwards because they don’t total 15%. So when they allocate delegates, they’ll be looking at Clinton: 72.2% Obama: 27.8%. In the numbers that actually matter, Obama went down by over a 5-2 ratio. (Exactly 5-2 would give Clinton 71.4%.) What does it matter? Well, the capable people at the Green Papers created a nifty little table [http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/WV-D.phtml - scroll down a little ways] to show us what that means. The long and short of it is that Hillary nets 12 delegates tonight.
Also, the goalposts got moved slightly tonight, as a Democrat was elected to the House in the MS-1 special election (more bad news for us Rethuglicans). This increased the number of delegates to the convention by 1, so they now total 4050 delegate votes, meaning 2026 are needed to nominate instead of 2025. This doesn’t matter in the end, since the new Congressman is expected to endorse Obama. But it’s fun to talk about.
2 anaskaz Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 6:52 am
To Mr. Bush Jr.
Are you a Communist, Sir?

Yes!
This would have been the given answer, if the question had been submitted during the Cold War era, before the collapse of the Soviet Union.
How have I came to this conclusion regarding U.S’s President?
Simply because Mr. Bush, through his policies in the Balkan region, follows Stalin’s and Tito’s aspirations for reducing Greece’s national entity.
The pseudonym state, the so-called nation and the newly invented language of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was one of Stalin’s dreams. Both Stalin and Tito manufactured this state, back in August 1944, in the frames of Yugoslav federation.
They simply altered the name of old Vardarska in Macedonia and they baptized the multi-ethnic population of Vardaska constituted by Bulgarian, Serb, Greek Albanians and others into a so-called “Macedonian nation”. Using as a pretext the fabricated name of the state, they claimed that the inhabitants of “Macedonia” are “pure” descendants of Alexander the Great.
Today, Alexander’s descendants they call their state as “free Macedonia” and they argue that Macedonia is under Greek occupation!
They strive to find an exit to the Aegean Sea, following Stalin’s plan to absorb Greek territories and establish a new state, under the protection of the Warsaw Pact, under the name “Macedonia”. This important detail is clearly mentioned in f.YROM’s constitution and is globally transmitted through state propaganda. Their main aim is to incorporate Thessaloniki – Greece’s second largest city – into their national frontiers and proclaim Thessaloniki as their future capital! It is important to note that this kind of propaganda is not presented in the web, but is also recorded in school books.
Back in 1944 U.S reacted rational. Edward Stettinious, the then American Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that “Every discussion about Macedonian nation, Macedonian homeland or Macedonian conscience constitutes unjustifiable demagogy and does not correspond any kind of national or political reality whatsoever”. And he concludes by saying that this kind of behavior is an act of aggression against Greece.
During the I and the II World War and during the Cold War era Greece helped US, and US assisted Greece through the reputable Marshall Plan. However, now Mr. Bush Jr maintains this communist monstrosity and strives to aid f.YROM stealing the unquestionably Greek name of Macedonia from their legitimate title – holder, Greece.
Mr. Bush’s wants to make real Stalin’s and Tito’s dream, put an end to a hundred years of Greko-American friendship and alliance. He supports American enemies, till some years ago. Mr. Bush must answer the following question. Who fought side by side with the American soldiers in Korea. The pseudo-macedonians or Greek soldiers, many of them originated from the ancient Greek soil of one and only Macedonia?
Traditionally, Greeks stood side by side with the United States of America. However, neither Mr. Bush Jr. nor Mrs. Hilary Clinton value this honest attitude. In order to rectify the aforementioned damage to the mentality of the Greek nation, the American President or his Foreign Secretary should admit that: nowadays citizens of f.YROM are not of Macedonian ethic roots, but they come from the Slavs. My proposal to them, if they question this historic fact, is to approach American academic historians or archaeologist. Maybe, after that they will be able to re-approach history form a valid point of view.
Maybe….

Anastasios Kazantzidis
A Greek Teacher
3 Chris J. Breisch Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 7:22 am
The goalposts have already been moved. 2025 (or 2026 if you prefer) is only the count if FL and MI aren’t included. Which is a ludicrous proposition. Every person in America knows that they are going to be included somehow, just not sure how. If included in full (which almost certainly isn’t going to happen), brings the count needed to win up to 2208 (or 2209 with the new delegate). So, what’s the right number? I don’t know, but it sure ain’t 2025.

The other big point about this win, is that it now (as I predicted weeks ago) brings Hillary ahead in popular vote count if MI and FL’s votes are included. I think it’s safe to say that no matter what happens with MI and FL’s delegates, their popular vote should/will be considered.

So, why does Hillary push on? Maybe because she leads in the popular vote. Maybe because she sees Obama as unelectable. Maybe because she recognizes that if Dems counted their delegates the way Reps do, she’d actually have locked in the nomination by now. Maybe she’s just plain ornery (hey, Teddy went to the convention in 1980 without withdrawing against an incumbent President with far less support than she has).

Current odds:
Obama wins Dem nom: 9/10 (steady, although another butt-kicking in KY and a less than impressive performance in OR may actually drop this number)
MI and FL delegate counts included in some fashion: 100% (steady)
Hillary wins popular vote for Dem nom: 6/10 (new entry)
Hillary withdraws before convention: 1/20 (new entry)
Dem nomination decided on first ballot: 9/20 (down from 1/2)
Hillary takes VP slot: 1/4 (new entry)
Obama wins Presidency: 1/3 (steady–will go up once he’s declared officially Dem nominee)
4 Chris J. Breisch Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 8:42 am
I keep hearing that Obama plans a victory celebration after May 20, because in his eyes he will have cinched the nomination then.

Obviously it’s bad form to declare yourself the winner before the other side has conceded. But there are problems with this.

The math doesn’t add up.

He’s still about 130 short of what he needs to reach the incorrect number of 2025. OR and KY together only add up to 125, and he’s going to lose KY, probably big. But he’ll win OR too. Let’s be generous and give him an even split on delegates in those two states, so he picks up 63 (I’ll give him the half even). That still puts him 67 short. So, unless he’s planning on picking up around 70 superdelegates this week, it can’t be done.

The scary thing for Obama is if he doesn’t get to the magic number after PR, SD, and MT. A total of 52 delegates, I think, and it seems unlikely that he’ll even get half, but let’s be generous. Give him 26. Now he’s 41 short. Call it a round 40. He needs to pick up 40 more super delegates in the next three weeks (let’s be honest, he probably will), or he’s in trouble.

The primary season will have ended and there will be no incentive for other superdelegates to march his way. If I were an uncommitted super at that point, I’m pretty sure I’d wait for the convention to announce my support. Obama can’t have that. Howard Dean can’t have it either.
5 Ginger Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Everyone keeps saying Hillary can’t win enough delegates, but all she has to do is keep Obama from winning enough to forge on to the Convention. She has a case that she’s more viable in the general election. As a Repub I’m not sure who I’m rooting for. If McCain loses I think I’d rather have Hillary than Obama. I never thought I’d say that in a million years.
6 too many steves Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
“…what this result does is bring up uncomfortable questions about race, and how big a factor it will be in the 2008 election…it’s the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about very much..”

So, can you be white and vote for someone other than Obama and not be racist? Increasingly the answer, from many, is no.
7 Ryan Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
My two cents:

1. This racism card is overplayed. The idea that white people who don’t vote for Obama are racist is as absurd as the idea that women who don’t vote for Hillary are insufficiently feminist. Hillary annihilated Obama in West Virginia because she has positioned herself as the candidate of older, whiter, bluer-collar voters. There is a traditional divide in the Democratic Party between blacks, wealthy liberals, and blue collar workers. That Clinton and Obama represent those divides doesn’t have to have anything to do with race. We do ourselves no favors by pretending it does.

2. Obama will almost certainly have enough superdelegates by next Tuesday to clinch victory with a win in Oregon. He’s adding them at a rate of like 5-10 a day at this point. The Edwards endorsement tonight should be very influential as well. Also, there are 8 members of the so-called Pelosi Club who will be free to endorse him as soon as he takes a majority of pledged delegates next Tuesday. This one will be finished then. Harping on and on about Florida and Michigan is a distraction; the fastest way to get them seated is to get Clinton out of the race. A victorious Obama will be happy to seat those delegations. And finally, the idea that “no matter what happens with MI and FL’s delegates, their popular vote should/will be considered” is completely insane. I know you’re a Republican shill, Chris, but Michigan’s popular vote *should* be considered? Really? With Obama not even on the ballot? If I were in the habit of making up silly odds that don’t bear on reality at all, I might give that a 1/50 chance. Since I’m not, I’ll give it the odds it actually merits: 0.
8 Andy Vance Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
There is a traditional divide in the Democratic Party between blacks, wealthy liberals, and blue collar workers… Those divides doesn’t have to have anything to do with race

I think this is one of those “koan” things the Buddhists down the street keep fussing about.
9 Ryan Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Hmm… that seems like a misquote to me.
10 too many steves Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
We are in agreement then, voting against Obama does not make you a racist, voting against Clinton does not make you a misogynist, and voting against McCain does not make you an ageist. Glad we cleared that up!

Can we now agree that in the selection of the party’s candidate “democracy” is vastly overrated? Obama may not be strong in the way that Clinton is, and vice-versa, but he is the candidate the Democrats want to put forward as their candidate for the presidency. There is no doubt about that, is there?
11 Andy Vance Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
voting against Obama does not make you a racist

God is love. Love is blind. Stevie Wonder is blind, therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
12 Peter Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Wrong. Clapton is God.