• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

May 6th Primaries Thread

N

nageov3t

Lifer
if Hillary loses both primaries, I'll be the first to call for her to concede the election to Obama... but what happens if she wins Indiana and loses NC by less than Obama lost PA?

I don't see much changing delegate-wise, thanks to lolproportionalallocation, but could Clinton have a case to make to the super delegates if she won the state that was dead even two weeks ago and halved Obama's lead in a state that was heavily favored?

edit:

last RCP average:

North Carolina - Obama +8.0
Indiana - Clinton +5.0

final(ish) results:

North Carolina - Obama +15
Indiana - Clinton +1

 
Originally posted by: loki8481
if Hillary loses both primaries, I'll be the first to call for her to concede the election to Obama... but what happens if she wins Indiana and loses NC by less than Obama lost PA?

I don't see much changing delegate-wise, thanks to lolproportionalallocation, but could Clinton have a case to make to the super delegates if she won the state that was dead even two weeks ago and halved Obama's lead in a state that was heavily favored?
Click to expand...

why is it lol proportional allocation?
 
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: loki8481
if Hillary loses both primaries, I'll be the first to call for her to concede the election to Obama... but what happens if she wins Indiana and loses NC by less than Obama lost PA?

I don't see much changing delegate-wise, thanks to lolproportionalallocation, but could Clinton have a case to make to the super delegates if she won the state that was dead even two weeks ago and halved Obama's lead in a state that was heavily favored?
Click to expand...

why is it lol proportional allocation?
Click to expand...

because it's insane that a candidate could win a state and walk away with the exact same amount of delegates as the loser.
 
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: loki8481
if Hillary loses both primaries, I'll be the first to call for her to concede the election to Obama... but what happens if she wins Indiana and loses NC by less than Obama lost PA?

I don't see much changing delegate-wise, thanks to lolproportionalallocation, but could Clinton have a case to make to the super delegates if she won the state that was dead even two weeks ago and halved Obama's lead in a state that was heavily favored?
Click to expand...

why is it lol proportional allocation?
Click to expand...

because it's insane that a candidate could win a state and walk away with the exact same amount of delegates as the loser.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, I think it's insane you're a proponent of disenfranchising the choice of millions of voters.

Proportional allocation doesn't disenfranchise anyone.

If the super delegates affirm the pledged delegate leader, that doesn't disenfranchise anyone.

The only way Hillary can win is to convince the world that popular vote, contests won, and delegate totals don't matter.
 
super delegates are just as stupid as proportional allocation, but I think we're stuck with both.

not much we can say about the popular vote pre-June 1st, though.
 
Like for the past couple months, it's Hillary's to lose. If she loses both states, she's done. If he wins NC by over 10 and Hillary only wins Indiana by a couple points, she loses. If he wins NC by 8 and Hillary wins Indiana by around 6, then the race continues. As bad as the press has been for him recently, he still leads a national head to head against her or McCain and has cut her lead among super delegates to less than 20. Obama could turn out to be Satan himself tomorrow, and Hillary would still lose the pledged delegate vote. Hillary is relying on the supers to win her the nomination and she is slowly losing that lead as the race continues.

There are about 275 unpledged supers
There are 404 pledged delegates left including NC and Indiana
There are 217 pledged delegates left after Tuesday

The math isn't there for her without a complete upheaval of the party. I understand why she is still running and I don't blame her for staying in the race, but she can't win the nomination for cutting Obama's lead in half.
 
I think after this election Dems should change this stupid nomination process. My opinion is either 1) Popular votes or 2) Winner-take-all like GOP does. If they still want to keep the proportional delegate system, they should hold Primaries only. (no caucus)

I also suggest they shorten the primary process at least by half. 5~6 months primaries are ridiculous. 2 month spread would be enough.
 
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: loki8481
if Hillary loses both primaries, I'll be the first to call for her to concede the election to Obama... but what happens if she wins Indiana and loses NC by less than Obama lost PA?

I don't see much changing delegate-wise, thanks to lolproportionalallocation, but could Clinton have a case to make to the super delegates if she won the state that was dead even two weeks ago and halved Obama's lead in a state that was heavily favored?
Click to expand...

why is it lol proportional allocation?
Click to expand...

because it's insane that a candidate could win a state and walk away with the exact same amount of delegates as the loser.
Click to expand...
It is not insane at all. If there are 100 delegates at stake and one candidate beats the other by a single vote, they should split them evenly. Insane would be the loser getting nothing over what amounts effectively to almost a perfectly even vote split.

Debate is more open on superdelegates. They seem a bit silly.

All we will see tomorrow is a continuation of what we've seen since February 5th, which is that hillary either loses a bit of ground or makes a bit of ground but ultimately Obama loses no significant ground and the race becomes closer to completion, the chances of her seizing a win becoming even closer to impossible.
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It is not insane at all. If there are 100 delegates at stake and one candidate beats the other by a single vote, they should split them evenly. Insane would be the loser getting nothing over what amounts effectively to almost a perfectly even vote split.

Debate is more open on superdelegates. They seem a bit silly.

All we will see tomorrow is a continuation of what we've seen since February 5th, which is that hillary either loses a bit of ground or makes a bit of ground but ultimately Obama loses no significant ground and the race becomes closer to completion, the chances of her seizing a win becoming even closer to impossible.
Click to expand...

Totally agree on all points.

Edit: Bbad quoting on my part again. 😱
 
I'll just let Democrats decide if I am voting for Obama or McCain this November.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
I'll just let Democrats decide if I am voting for Hillary or McCain this November.
Click to expand...

You're right; they're pretty much the same candidate anyway...

Anyway, IN to Hillary by 5, NC to Obama by 7
 
Let's play out the scenarios:

Hillary wins Indiana and North Carolina: None of the polls suggest that either will win with a double digit lead, so even if Hillary takes both states, the delegate math will remain virtually unchanged. This outcome almost guarantees that the nomination decision will go to the DNC floor. Hillary can claim momentum, Obama can claim both the delegate and popular vote leads. What is the more compelling argument? Evaluate the entire campaign season, or focus entirely on the impact of the Wright controversy? This is probably the worst outcome for the Democrats, as the debate will get even more heated in the coming weeks over electability versus dirty politics.

Split: Hillary takes Indiana and Obama takes North Carolina. Takes the momentum argument away from Hillary, and would probably result in a continued superdelegate trickle supporting Obama. The Clinton campaign will continue through June as Hillary will probably refuse to withdraw under these conditions, but it is essentially over for her...granted, it was over for her weeks ago, and only the Wright controversy is keeping her afloat.

Obama wins Indiana and North Carolina: Hillary's momentum is dead, superdelegate concerns about the Wright fallout fall to the wayside, and party leaders start calling for Hillary to withdraw from the race. Similarly, expect a superdelegate surge to rally behind Obama in the coming weeks.

 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Let's play out the scenarios:

Hillary wins Indiana and South Carolina: None of the polls suggest that either will win with a double digit lead, so even if Hillary takes both states, the delegate math will remain virtually unchanged. This outcome almost guarantees that the nomination decision will go to the DNC floor. Hillary can claim momentum, Obama can claim both the delegate and popular vote leads. What is the more compelling argument? Evaluate the entire campaign season, or focus entirely on the impact of the Wright controversy? This is probably the worst outcome for the Democrats, as the debate will get even more heated in the coming weeks over electability versus dirty politics.

Split: Hillary takes Indiana and Obama takes South Carolina. Takes the momentum argument away from Hillary, and would probably result in a continued superdelegate trickle supporting Obama. The Clinton campaign will continue through June as Hillary will probably refuse to withdraw under these conditions, but it is essentially over for her...granted, it was over for her weeks ago, and only the Wright controversy is keeping her afloat.

Obama wins Indiana and South Carolina: Hillary's momentum is dead, superdelegate concerns about the Wright fallout fall to the wayside, and party leaders start calling for Hillary to withdraw from the race. Similarly, expect a superdelegate surge to rally behind Obama in the coming weeks.
Click to expand...

a south carolina win for Hillary at this stage would be literally game-changing. 😉
 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Let's play out the scenarios:

Hillary wins Indiana and North Carolina: None of the polls suggest that either will win with a double digit lead, so even if Hillary takes both states, the delegate math will remain virtually unchanged. This outcome almost guarantees that the nomination decision will go to the DNC floor. Hillary can claim momentum, Obama can claim both the delegate and popular vote leads. What is the more compelling argument? Evaluate the entire campaign season, or focus entirely on the impact of the Wright controversy? This is probably the worst outcome for the Democrats, as the debate will get even more heated in the coming weeks over electability versus dirty politics.

Split: Hillary takes Indiana and Obama takes North Carolina. Takes the momentum argument away from Hillary, and would probably result in a continued superdelegate trickle supporting Obama. The Clinton campaign will continue through June as Hillary will probably refuse to withdraw under these conditions, but it is essentially over for her...granted, it was over for her weeks ago, and only the Wright controversy is keeping her afloat.

Obama wins Indiana and North Carolina: Hillary's momentum is dead, superdelegate concerns about the Wright fallout fall to the wayside, and party leaders start calling for Hillary to withdraw from the race. Similarly, expect a superdelegate surge to rally behind Obama in the coming weeks.
Click to expand...

Woah.

A Hillary win in SC would blow my freakin' mind! 😕
 
a south carolina win for Hillary at this stage would be literally game-changing.
Click to expand...
Ok Ok Ok, so I got my Carolinas mixed up...fixed now...the only thing I know about the Carolinas is that my family had to drive through them on the way to Disney World.

I remember the anticipation building, driving through North Carolina, as we passed sign after sign for South of the Border...only to cross the state line into South Carolina, to behold the greatest disappointment on earth.

Damn you Pedro, damn you to hell. :laugh:
 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
a south carolina win for Hillary at this stage would be literally game-changing.
Click to expand...
Ok Ok Ok, so I got my Carolinas mixed up...fixed now...the only thing I know about the Carolinas is that my family had to drive through them on the way to Disney World.

I remember the anticipation building, driving through North Carolina, as we passed sign after sign for South of the Border...only to cross the state line into South Carolina, to behold the greatest disappointment on earth.

Damn you Pedro, damn you to hell. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Did they stop and let you get some fireworks? 😀
 
I think it's highly unlikely Hilary could win North Carolina so it's either a win-win for Obama or a split between the two...

Anyone know how much cash they've got left?
 
http://freakonomics.blogs.nyti...s-tax-redux/#more-2596

A coherent discussion of the Tax Holiday bs Clinton and McCain are pandering to voters with. When asked if she can produce just ONE credible economist who supports this idea, her response was "Well I?ll tell you what, I?m not going to put my lot in with economists.? :roll:

Tomorrow I guess we get to see if NC/IN voters care what economists think about the, uh, economy.
 
Once again, I think a thread like this might have had some speculation value a few weeks ago, But with the voting now less than 24 hours from now and poll closing only some 30 hours away, we should all be aware of the meanings of the various possible outcomes. They have already been discussed to death.

But my guess, if Obama can win North Carolina with a bigger margin than Hillary won Pennsylvania and Obama also wins Indiana, Hillary may be forced to concede on May 7.
Otherwise the race will go the distance with all primaries until June 3 counted. And unless Obama really screws up, Obama will go over the top by July 1 anyway.
 
And unless Obama really screws up, Obama will go over the top by July 1 anyway.
Click to expand...
This is the worst and probably the saddest part of this whole ordeal.

Hillary's chances at the nomination no longer reside in the hands of voters...her chances no longer reside within the realm of ideas or platforms or visions for the future.

Her chances now reside in how much damage she can do to Obama's electability before the DNC, or at least before the superdelegates weigh in.



 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
And unless Obama really screws up, Obama will go over the top by July 1 anyway.
Click to expand...
This is the worst and probably the saddest part of this whole ordeal.

Hillary's chances at the nomination no longer reside in the hands of voters...her chances no longer reside within the realm of ideas or platforms or visions for the future.

Her chances now reside in how much damage she can do to Obama's electability before the DNC, or at least before the superdelegates weigh in.
Click to expand...

I guess I don't really see how that's sad... I would have much rather Kerry fucked up before getting the nomination than afterward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top