Actually, its NOT mathematically impossible. TFA:

So, do the math. If they both have about 900 pledged delegates so far, they need to win more than 1,100 of the remaining 1,400 delegates to win the nomination through actual voting.

But, yeah, one of them isn't going to just sweep almost every state after splitting the first 20-30.

HAHAHAHA the plan is working perfectly

I told you, I told you!!!

/President Hillary Clinton
//say it till you get use to it.

It's early, but am I missing something here?

"one of them holding a slight edge and bothing finishing the voting process with 1,600 or so delegates."

Superdelegates react to torches and pitchforks just like anyone else.

T-Servo: Superdelegates react to torches and pitchforks just like anyone else.

Arrrrh, she's a witch. Let's see if she floats!! Arrrrr.

all the more reason to have MI and FL re-caucus in a legitimate fashion so their delegates can be seated.

Superdelegates are anti-democratic. Irony?

John McCain will be your next president.
Deal with it.

/not affiliated with any political party or candidate.

Biggs: am I missing something here?

TFA: you need 2,025 to win the nomination.

Since they've run pretty evenly in an assortment of states, it is reasonable to expect this will continue. Therefore, neither one will have sufficient committed (read "elected") delegates to win the nomination outright.

So one or the other will have to get a majority of the uncommitted (read "appointed") delegates to take the nomination.

It is even possible that they would split the uncommitted delegates in such a way that no majority was reached and that would leave the Edwards delegates as the deciding votes in a brokered convention.

RagingLeonard: John McCain will be your next president.
Deal with it.

Yeah and the Giants beat the Pats in the Superbowl

/No they didn't
//I can't hear you
///Couldn't possibly have happened, that was just an awful nightmare I had

I'm all for having MI and FL re-vote. I think that's the most reasonable thing to do with no clear front-runner.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: HAHAHAHA the plan is working perfectly

I told you, I told you!!!

/President Hillary Clinton
//say it till you get use to it.

So, you're saying that Clinton's plan was to steadily lose her lead until she wins by the barest of margins because of superdelegate votes?

I'd like to opt-out of your newsletter at this time.

It all strikes me as incredibly undemocratic.

/small d

T-Servo: Superdelegates react to torches and pitchforks just like anyone else.

They're also susceptible to the incredible amounts of fundraising that Clinton has provided the party over the last 16 years. They won't sell her out, even to win the general election.

But since they're Democrats, they will not be strangers to losing an election.

I was talking with my 17 year old who has really taken an interest in the goings on of the primaries...I told him that he may get to witness something that hasn't been seen in a long time in the form of a brokered convention. While it may reek of back room politics, it certainly does add to the lively nature of the American political experience.

I wonder what she'd say if she lost the popular vote but narrowly won the delegates.

It'd probably be 'murmur murmur muuurmurrr' with that shiat sammich in her mouth.

Candidate with the most kryptonite wins.

Unright: So, you're saying that Clinton's plan was to steadily lose her lead until she wins by the barest of margins because of superdelegate votes?

I'd like to opt-out of your newsletter at this time.

She had such huge unfavorables going into this thing that she had to humanize herself and show that she was not just some election winning machine. Obama has helped her do that. We've seen her tired and wore out to the point of tears. It's just like the Rocky movies, you have to see him down before you can get on the bandwagon for the big win. Now people are starting to see her as human and even the guys on talk radio are going easy on her.

Don't get me wrong I dont want her to win.

Dancin_In_Anson: I was talking with my 17 year old who has really taken an interest in the goings on of the primaries...I told him that he may get to witness something that hasn't been seen in a long time in the form of a brokered convention. While it may reek of back room politics, it certainly does add to the lively nature of the American political experience.

I agree, entertainment should take a backseat to the concept of democracy.

/all hail superdelegates indeed
//if it comes to this I'll be pissed
///so will the DNC

The Stealth Hippopotamus: even the guys on talk radio are going easy on her

Yea, because they know Obama would win against McCain, but McCain will win against Hillary.

Dancin_In_Anson: I was talking with my 17 year old who has really taken an interest in the goings on of the primaries...I told him that he may get to witness something that hasn't been seen in a long time in the form of a brokered convention. While it may reek of back room politics, it certainly does add to the lively nature of the American political experience.

And for once, I agree with you.

This SHOULD be interesting to watch.

palladiate: They're also susceptible to the incredible amounts of fundraising that Clinton has provided the party over the last 16 years. They won't sell her out, even to win the general election.

But since they're Democrats, they will not be strangers to losing an election.

January fund raising: Obama, $32 million. Clinton, $13 million.


Go ahead, continue.

legendary: I agree, entertainment should take a backseat to the concept of democracy.

/all hail superdelegates indeed
//if it comes to this I'll be pissed
///so will the DNC

As should everyone who wears a Democrat banner.

palladiate: They're also susceptible to the incredible amounts of fundraising that Clinton has provided the party over the last 16 years. They won't sell her out, even to win the general election.

Not to mention that Hill, Bill, Carville and Co. aren't afraid to dish out the dirt on anyone that crosses them.

GaryPDX: As should everyone who wears a Democrat banner.

How do you..wear...a banner?

The Stealth Hippopotamus: She had such huge unfavorables going into this thing that she had to humanize herself and show that she was not just some election winning machine. Obama has helped her do that. We've seen her tired and wore out to the point of tears. It's just like the Rocky movies, you have to see him down before you can get on the bandwagon for the big win. Now people are starting to see her as human and even the guys on talk radio are going easy on her.

Well, 'Wag the Dog' was a fine movie, and I agree that media manipulation by politicians probably happens more than we'd like to admit. But manipulating the media on a daily basis for months on end seems really unlikely to me.

And anybody who lets talk radio influence their opinions either favorably or negatively is a fool.

/Hopefully doesn't apply to you stealth

palladiate: Yea, because they know Obama would win against McCain, but McCain will win against Hillary.

Or that is what she wants them to think. Really if it's a McCain Obama fight the kid does not stand a chance. However if its the Hill vs. McCain don't be too surprise to see a Bloomburg or Paul show up to spoil it for the (R).

Hell, it worked for Bill it will work for Hill.

cameroncrazy1984: GaryPDX: As should everyone who wears a Democrat banner.

How do you..wear...a banner?

lol..it's a metaphor. You know, "marching to a banner".

cameroncrazy1984: How do you..wear...a banner?

Like a bow. Secured under my chin, tied on top of my head. Then I take it out to eat and say "hello there pretty little banner, I love you." And then I stroke it, and I pet it, and I massage it.
Hehe I love it, I love my little naughty banner, you're naughty. And then I take my naughty banner and I go
*rips banner off, rips it into confetti*
I killed it. I killed the Democrats. And that's when I blow it. That's when people like us have gotta forge ahead, cameroncrazy1984 . Am I right?

legendary: I agree, entertainment should take a backseat to the concept of democracy.

You act if this is unprecedented in the history of the Republic.

Despite what your talk-show hosts are spewing, the GOP also reserves seats^* for party hacks who are not bound to the state vote results. They're just not called super-delegates.

Suck it hypocrites!

^*3 GOP party leaders per state minimum.^

RagingLeonard: John McCain will be your next president.
Deal with it.

/not affiliated with any political party or candidate.

If it's between him and Hillary?
Yes.
Yes he will.

GaryPDX: lol..it's a metaphor. You know, "marching to a banner".

You can't do that either. A banner doesn't play music.

You can march beneath or behind a banner, you can march to the Democratic drumbeat, or you can wear a Democratic mantle.

Dancin_In_Anson: legendary: I agree, entertainment should take a backseat to the concept of democracy.

You act if this is unprecedented in the history of the Republic.

Thomas Nast was awesome...



Great Expectations

"A mountain was once greatly agitated. Loud Groans and Noises were heard; and crowds of People came from all to see what was the matter. After long expectation and many wise conjectures from the bystanders, out popped a -- Mouse!"

Source: Harper's Weekly
Date: May 18, 1872, p. 392

Jaboobinator: GaryPDX: lol..it's a metaphor. You know, "marching to a banner".

You can't do that either. A banner doesn't play music.

You can march beneath or behind a banner, you can march to the Democratic drumbeat, or you can wear a Democratic mantle.

Just like a liberal to go on splitting hairs..

/grin

GaryPDX: Just like a liberal to go on splitting hairs..

/grin

Yes, correct usage of the English language is a political issue.

The establishment will decide, and the establishment will go with hillary

Unright: Well, 'Wag the Dog' was a fine movie, and I agree that media manipulation by politicians probably happens more than we'd like to admit. But manipulating the media on a daily basis for months on end seems really unlikely to me.

And anybody who lets talk radio influence their opinions either favorably or negatively is a fool.

/Hopefully doesn't apply to you stealth

Negating an entire medium would be unwise. Many many people listen to talk radio and I must admit that I do find some useful information there time to time. Mostly due to the fact that they can spend more then three minutes with an interviewee. T.V. interviews are over before they begin and print interview lack important factors. Imagen (or dream) that you never had to listen to Bush talk!! You just read all his "speeches". I promise you his poll numbers would be higher. Or try to think of what the world would have been like if you only read the words or MLK, JFK, or Churchill. I need to hear them to make up my mind.

But what do you trust? T.V., Print, or internet? T.V. is more hairstyles then issues. Print is nothing more then press releases. And the internet gave us Drudge. So unless I can just drive up to their house I am going to have to listen to all the sources and try to figure it out.

As far as media manipulation, its a billion dollar industry. From what tie they wear (or pants suit as the case maybe) to every phrase they use is tested and retested to maximum affect. Plus the news media know that an "attack" piece today could mean a lack of access tomorrow. And without access you are no better then just another blogger.

cameroncrazy1984: January fund raising: Obama, $32 million. Clinton, $13 million.

Go ahead, continue.

You do realize that Clinton and Clinton have raised HUGE sums for the party and other candidates, right? The political world does sometimes extend beyond one month in one race.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Hell, it worked for Bill it will work for Hill.

Yea, even thought he polling matchups show McCain beating Hillary no problem, I can really see this happening.

pandabear: Not to mention that Hill, Bill, Carville and Co. aren't afraid to dish out the dirt on anyone that crosses them.

The DLC is FAMOUS for tearing into fellow Democrats. They're the ones that bring out the "too liberal" canard. Dean, with the support of the state party leaders, has done a good job of reigning them in, but I expect some shenanigans through the next couple of months.

palladiate: Yea, even thought he polling matchups show McCain beating Hillary no problem, I can really see this happening.

Yeah and Bill had Bush Sr. beat from the get go too. Right?!?

Tatsuma: The establishment will decide, and the establishment will go with hillary

I am not so sure about that. The establishment of the Democratic party is currently aligned with Howard Dean. He has accomplished more for the party as a whole in four years than the Clintons and the DLC have done in the past 16.

Also it is no secret that there is no love loss between Dean's allies and the Clinton machine. Howard would love nothing more than to watch Hillary get defeated by a "people-powered" candidate, and refute the DLC model that has been stymieing the party for almost two decades.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Negating an entire medium would be unwise. Many many people listen to talk radio and I must admit that I do find some useful information there time to time. Mostly due to the fact that they can spend more then three minutes with an interviewee. T.V. interviews are over before they begin and print interview lack important factors. Imagen (or dream) that you never had to listen to Bush talk!! You just read all his "speeches". I promise you his poll numbers would be higher. Or try to think of what the world would have been like if you only read the words or MLK, JFK, or Churchill. I need to hear them to make up my mind.

But what do you trust? T.V., Print, or internet? T.V. is more hairstyles then issues. Print is nothing more then press releases. And the internet gave us Drudge. So unless I can just drive up to their house I am going to have to listen to all the sources and try to figure it out.

Good points all around. There is bias in all media sources, so getting multiple views to get a better idea of the story is highly recommended. I do tend to prefer foreign press (such as the BBC) because they have less attachment to the story, so there's a better chance of objectivity. It's not perfect, though.

Talk radio and punditry is just unabashed spin. They (stated or covert) goal is to influence the listeners to consider every story in a specific light. Even if you are aware of the bias, it still creeps in.

As far as media manipulation, its a billion dollar industry. From what tie they wear (or pants suit as the case maybe) to every phrase they use is tested and retested to maximum affect. Plus the news media know that an "attack" piece today could mean a lack of access tomorrow. And without access you are no better then just another blogger.

hachijuhachi: I'm all for having MI and FL re-vote. I think that's the most reasonable thing to do with no clear front-runner.

So we're saying that we want Florida to decide the fate of the nation once again? Do we REALLY want to go there? There's a reason they have their own tag and all.

Unright: Good points all around. There is bias in all media sources, so getting multiple views to get a better idea of the story is highly recommended. I do tend to prefer foreign press (such as the BBC) because they have less attachment to the story, so there's a better chance of objectivity. It's not perfect, though.

Talk radio and punditry is just unabashed spin. They (stated or covert) goal is to influence the listeners to consider every story in a specific light. Even if you are aware of the bias, it still creeps in.

Never did trust the BBC that much. They really fell out of favor with we once I got XM and was able to listen to them on a more regular basis. Again it was something that I could pick up because I was listening to them and not reading it in a paper. The way they treated some guests just dripped with disdain. Something you just cant pick up with hearing it. That and their bias was so bad on the Iraq war they had an investigation. I mean if our own board finds that you are biased then you know you have troubles. But everyone has a bias, it they tell you different they are stupid or lying.

And quit lumping in "talk radio" with only Rush, Hannity, and Beck. I am sure that NPR would like to have a word with you.


And quit being civil, this is the internet you pansy!

Unright
Good points all around. There is bias in all media sources, so getting multiple views to get a better idea of the story is highly recommended.

Absolutely. But let's also keep in mind that, as you point out with talk radio, some sources are much more biased than others (I'm looking at you, Fox News).

simsite9: It all strikes me as incredibly undemocratic.

/small d


And you point is?

/We can't let the commoners actually have a say in things like they did in 1976

simsite9: It all strikes me as incredibly undemocratic.
/small d

But incredibly Democratic.
/big D

Code_Archeologist: Tatsuma: The establishment will decide, and the establishment will go with hillary

I am not so sure about that. The establishment of the Democratic party is currently aligned with Howard Dean. He has accomplished more for the party as a whole in four years than the Clintons and the DLC have done in the past 16.

Also it is no secret that there is no love loss between Dean's allies and the Clinton machine. Howard would love nothing more than to watch Hillary get defeated by a "people-powered" candidate, and refute the DLC model that has been stymieing the party for almost two decades.

Very well said, sir. I like the cut of your jib.

patrick767: Absolutely. But let's also keep in mind that, as you point out with talk radio, some sources are much more biased than others (I'm looking at you, Fox News).

So, who is as pure as wind driven snow? Or who is closer? If Fox is the worst, who is the best?

I sure do feel a national screwing-over coming from Hillary...you can practically guarantee it if it comes down to superdelegates.