How's that? I just checked on CNN and it shows Clinton got ~51% of the popular vote compared to 47% for Obama. The delegates were 65 for Clinton and 61 for Obama.
How's that? I just checked on CNN and it shows Clinton got ~51% of the popular vote compared to 47% for Obama. The delegates were 65 for Clinton and 61 for Obama.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
There were caucuses held simultaneously that will give him more delegates. They don't have to mail in the results until tomorrow so we probably won't find out how many he won until this weekend at the earliest.
But look at Nevada: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...ries/results/state/#NV
She won 51-45 and he got one more delegate. Caucuses need to go bye bye.
lopri
Elite Member
- Jul 27, 2002
- 13,314
- 690
- 126
This would belong to one of the 'peaceful' caucuses.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxFKPOzddow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dln_I_iwPnU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxFKPOzddow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dln_I_iwPnU
Deeko
Lifer
- Jun 16, 2000
- 30,213
- 12
- 81
Its too late to "fix" this election. I agree the whole primary system is flawed - if you asked me, we'd just have one vote nationwide and that would be it. It would function the way the general election does. But its waaay too far into the process to change it.
The Hillary camp wants to change the rules and let FL/MI in.
The Obama camp wants to change the rules and get rid of SuperDels.
Can't be changing the rules now. Just deal with it, and fix it for the next election.
The Hillary camp wants to change the rules and let FL/MI in.
The Obama camp wants to change the rules and get rid of SuperDels.
Can't be changing the rules now. Just deal with it, and fix it for the next election.
Wow, caucases. Up until this year I didn't even know they existed. It amazes me that they do exist. Show up at a predetermined time and sit/stand around in a room with a bunch of people for hours? You wouldn't catch me dead at one of these things.
dphantom
Diamond Member
- Jan 14, 2005
- 4,763
- 327
- 126
The only part I disagree with just a bit is the SD's wanting off the hook. To an extent maybe, but the SD's have enormous power now since it is highly unilikely either Clinton or Obama will have a majority of non-SD delegates by the convention. So the SD's are going to make a decision and that person will be the dem nominee for president.
That kind of power is hard to let go of. The SD's willbe under huge pressure to commit one way or another, but I doubt few would give up the power of being among the elite few who decided who would be the candidate for president just to avoid the pressure.
- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 174
- 106
If you're referring to my suggestion, I'm no Obamaniac, I'm a conservative. So don't blame them.
Honestly, and objectively, I just see problems with what they've got going on. Maybe I imagine more than there are, but I think I've made a reasonable case for them. AFAIK, this situation wrt SDs has never happened before. So, I think they're in uncharted territory.
If I wanted to act partisan, I'd just say leave it as is and let 'em slug it out. It does nothing other really than help poor ol' John McCain.
BTW: I think you've got it backwards, fascist are authoritarian. Having an elite group of insiders pick the candidate strikes me more as fascists than letting the people decide through a vote.
Fern
Hmmm... That does sound pretty messed up. I would definitely support system reform. I don't think it's possible to do it this year though. Stick to the rules defined before the election and once it's finished go about the reform.
that's all well and good, but what's the democrats path to victory after Howard Dean hands Florida to the republicans on a silver platter?
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
That essentially happened the moment Florida decided to move up its primary against party rules that were well understood, and the repercussions for which were also well understood.
Democrats cannot hope to once again lead the country if they cannot figure out how to run their own party.
You can't really ""disenfranchise"" Floridiots and Michiganders. It's not fair to them.
Obama leads in delegates.
Clinton leads the popular vote.
It's all semantics,
They only thing I care about is throwing the current rascals out of the White House.
And as seen in the AT Forums:
Yup. That's about it.
You may like the sausage but you don't want to see how it's made.
Obama leads in delegates.
Clinton leads the popular vote.
It's all semantics,
They only thing I care about is throwing the current rascals out of the White House.
And as seen in the AT Forums:
Yup. That's about it.
You may like the sausage but you don't want to see how it's made.
It may be crazy to say this, but this year the Republican primaries are much more representative of the November elections than the Democratic primaries. I am saying this even though I don't like the Republican party or the Republican candidates.
The primaries are supposed to help pick the candidate with the best chances of winning in November.
Here is whats wrong with the Democratic Primaries relative to the way the November election works.
1. The caucus system. The November election is a blind vote. The caucus is a public vote. Everyone knows who you voted for.
This is important because it means that since your vote is not public knowledge then you can't be pressured by your neighbors or your employer to vote for some one that you don't want to vote for.
The caucus system viotates a basic principal of American democracy and it should be eliminated.
The results in a caucus state do not accurately predict the same vote in the elections.
2. The November election has a winner take all rule for delegates in nearly all the states.
The Democratic primaries divide the delegates according to the popular vote in the state. This is probably fairer but, until the November elections change the way states give out delegates, the primaries should be changed so that they are similar to the November elections.
3. The super delegates. This was created deliberately because everyone knew that points 1 & 2 screwed up the process. The super delegates were supposed to be there to make sure that the candidate chosen had the best chance to win in November. This was done just in case the regular primaries did not do this correctly.
I think that the best way to fix the Democratic primaries is to make them more like the Republican primaries. Votes in every state. Winner takes all delegates in each state. The point of the primaries is to choose the candidate most likely to win in November. The way to do that is to make the primaries behave like the elections.
I don't think that any major changes can or should be made this time around. The only real hope is that the super delegates fix the current situation and reach a compromise that will produce a Democratic candidate who can win in November.
The only "change" I would do now is to try to re-run Michigan and Florida primaries to make sure that those voters get a voice in this process. Re-run them as elections not as a caucus.
The primaries are supposed to help pick the candidate with the best chances of winning in November.
Here is whats wrong with the Democratic Primaries relative to the way the November election works.
1. The caucus system. The November election is a blind vote. The caucus is a public vote. Everyone knows who you voted for.
This is important because it means that since your vote is not public knowledge then you can't be pressured by your neighbors or your employer to vote for some one that you don't want to vote for.
The caucus system viotates a basic principal of American democracy and it should be eliminated.
The results in a caucus state do not accurately predict the same vote in the elections.
2. The November election has a winner take all rule for delegates in nearly all the states.
The Democratic primaries divide the delegates according to the popular vote in the state. This is probably fairer but, until the November elections change the way states give out delegates, the primaries should be changed so that they are similar to the November elections.
3. The super delegates. This was created deliberately because everyone knew that points 1 & 2 screwed up the process. The super delegates were supposed to be there to make sure that the candidate chosen had the best chance to win in November. This was done just in case the regular primaries did not do this correctly.
I think that the best way to fix the Democratic primaries is to make them more like the Republican primaries. Votes in every state. Winner takes all delegates in each state. The point of the primaries is to choose the candidate most likely to win in November. The way to do that is to make the primaries behave like the elections.
I don't think that any major changes can or should be made this time around. The only real hope is that the super delegates fix the current situation and reach a compromise that will produce a Democratic candidate who can win in November.
The only "change" I would do now is to try to re-run Michigan and Florida primaries to make sure that those voters get a voice in this process. Re-run them as elections not as a caucus.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter