Delegate math for the remaining primaries

[rockyct]

http://marcambinder.theatlanti...e_math_the_numbers.php

I thought this was an interesting look at the math for the remaining Democratic primaries. He gives a solid win in Ohio to Hillary and a slight win in Texas, which could very well happen. Even with slightly inflated numbers for Hillary, unless the dynamic of the race changes, it would be very hard to win as she probably could only net 60 delegates. Of course, there's a good chance all of this stuff will be meaningless by tomorrow. It sure is a great time to be a political junkee.

 

[rockyct]

I'm going to bump this up because his numbers had even given a win to Clinton and Texas and Ohio.

 

[nageov3t]

neither candidate will be able to hit the magic number before the convention.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

Yup the Politburo should decide.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

that's what the SD's are there for, unless Obama's too good to play by the rules

personally, I blame Howard Dean for this entire debacle.

he had any number of chances to head this off, starting with not killing his campaign in '04.

 

[M0RPH]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

No, actually I do think the popular vote should be VERY important in determining the nominee. Even though I have my reservations about how it's calculated, in light of places like Texas where voters actually got to vote twice, once in a primary and once in a caucas. Regardless, I believe that after all is said and done, and FL and MI have revoted (I'm very confident this will happen), Hillary will be ahead in the popular vote.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

No, actually I do think the popular vote should be VERY important in determining the nominee. Even though I have my reservations about how it's calculated, in light of places like Texas where voters actually got to vote twice, once in a primary and once in a caucas. Regardless, I believe that after all is said and done, and FL and MI have revoted (I'm very confident this will happen), Hillary will be ahead in the popular vote.

Fine, then I propose we have Obama or Clinton as a Democratic choice and if the Democrats get more votes than Republicans the Democrat with the most votes wins.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: M0RPH

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Yup, mathematically impossible for her to win.

If you want to say that then I'll say that it's mathematically impossible for him to win as well, since it requires 2,025 delegates to win.

how about:

"Unless Obama dies, it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to lead in pledged delegates going into the convention"

But you've already let everyone know how you feel about those pesky voters who keep getting in her way, so why am I bothering to debate this with you?

You seem quite content to let the super-delegates override the popular vote AND the pledged delegate count.

shocker.

If you think that then you fail at math.

 

[Starbuck1975]

And this is why Hillary's lawyers are probably currently in the process of sharpening their knives.

Watching the Democrats implode from within due to their own archaic and chaotic nomination process is the best reality television currently on air.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: rockyct
http://marcambinder.theatlanti...e_math_the_numbers.php

I thought this was an interesting look at the math for the remaining Democratic primaries. He gives a solid win in Ohio to Hillary and a slight win in Texas, which could very well happen. Even with slightly inflated numbers for Hillary, unless the dynamic of the race changes, it would be very hard to win as she probably could only net 60 delegates. Of course, there's a good chance all of this stuff will be meaningless by tomorrow. It sure is a great time to be a political junkee.

By all estimates worst case scenario she is +1 for the last night. Best case scenario she is +18 for the night.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
And this is why Hillary's lawyers are probably currently in the process of sharpening their knives.

Watching the Democrats implode from within due to their own archaic and chaotic nomination process is the best reality television currently on air.

I don't think we're going to implode. I think we're going to explode from Hillary's ego. Better McCain wins than she lose.

 

[umbrella39]

It has been on WJR all day here in Detroit how a Michigan and a probable Florida "re-vote" is in the works ($$$$ to do this 2x) ffs.