This is a good thing. Signed a petition yesterday to our 2 local Superdelegates (the 2 Dem senators for WA state) asking them to listen to the peeps.

Obama '08

They don't have much of a choice. Hillary may be willing to destroy the party to sate her ambitions and ego. The rest of us aren't.

Yeah, I know jack-shiat about superdelegates, but even I knew that the Democrats would want to go with the strongest candidate. We'll see who comes out with more momentum after Texas and Ohio, I guess. I'll be happy with either, but personally I'm rooting for Obama.

Someone on teevee yesterday opined that early super-D support of Clinton was based more on fear than actual "support." As she looks less likely to be in a position to make their lives miserable, they are bound to gravitate toward Obama.

I am still amazed at the lousy candidates the Dems have. At least the Republicans have more variety. Obama is little more than a black Jimmy Carter and Hillary's views and proposals even scare the Democrats I know.

More Hillary threads! Yay!


And to think America believes the rest of the world takes it seriously. Think about it.

Lionel Mandrake: Someone on teevee yesterday opined that early super-D support of Clinton was based more on fear than actual "support." As she looks less likely to be in a position to make their lives miserable, they are bound to gravitate toward Obama.

The Clinton machinery went after Kerry with a vengeance when he endorsed Obama. Told him to lose their numbers and say goodbye to any future support or money.

The American people are tired of the politics of fear, in all its forms. She'd better learn that real fast or even her loyalists will bail.

No shiat.

Hillary may be willing to destroy the Democratic party for a nomination, but the superdelegates aren't about to go against the voting public and force Hillary over the top when Obama is leading in delegates.

Yes, I know it's happened before, but this is not the year to defy the populace.

Crosshair: I am still amazed at the lousy candidates the Dems have. At least the Republicans have more variety. Obama is little more than a black Jimmy Carter and Hillary's views and proposals even scare the Democrats I know.

Was this a joke?...cuz I LOLed.

Check out the Dem turnout and the Rep turnout in the primaries/caucuses, then tell me which party is putting up lousy candidates.

Okay, one more, a bit more appropriate.

Hillary Clinton holds commanding leads over Barack Obama in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two of the three upcoming mega-states that will determine the fate of her White House ambitions.

Clinton leads Obama 55% to 34% among likely Democratic primary voters in Ohio, and she's besting him 52% to 36% in Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac University polls released today.

Link (new window)

Haven't heard about Texas yet. Seems to me that she and he could still walk into the convention with a virtual tie... Close enough that the superdelegates could ignore which one is actually in the lead and "vote their conscience" (arrange cushy ambassadorships, pay off blackmail)?

Bloody William: Seriously, there's an entire site of this shiat.

It's official...the internets are full.

/more tubez plz!

Bloody William: Seriously, there's an entire site of this shiat.

Why do you know this?

If they don't it will destroy the democrat party & you would likely see some inner cities riots.

Crosshair: I am still amazed at the lousy candidates the Dems have. At least the Republicans have more variety. Obama is little more than a black Jimmy Carter and Hillary's views and proposals even scare the Democrats I know.

FAIL

Crosshair: I am still amazed at the lousy candidates the Dems have. At least the Republicans have more variety. Obama is little more than a black Jimmy Carter and Hillary's views and proposals even scare the Democrats I know.

Please put the gold paint down... I think you've had quite enough.

choice and consequence: Hillary Clinton holds commanding leads over Barack Obama in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two of the three upcoming mega-states that will determine the fate of her White House ambitions.

Clinton leads Obama 55% to 34% among likely Democratic primary voters in Ohio, and she's besting him 52% to 36% in Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac University polls released today.

Link (new window

A few points about those numbers:

1. Those polls were from 2/9-2/12. There's been quite a bit that has gone on since then that may influence those numbers.

2. Obama was trailing by similar margins in most Super Tuesday states 3 weeks out as well, and those turned out pretty well for him.

I'm not worried about either of those states. Two weeks of Obama campaigning in them following the WI election will eat into those numbers. Frankly, all Obama has to do is walk into Ohio and say, "NAFTA" and her numbers are going to drop.

I am not sure they will have much choice. If Obama comes into the convention with the majority of the popular support, throwing the nomination to Hillary would immediately destroy the party.

The base of the Democratic Party has already about had it with the fact that much of the party is run by political insiders who can't seem to do anything but read the latest poll. If the party no longer allows its members to nominate their preferred candidate, then there is no point in the party's continued existence.

ilambiquated: More Hillary threads! Yay!


And to think America believes the rest of the world takes it seriously. Think about it.

Pardon me for asking, but what the hell are you talking about?

choice and consequence:
Haven't heard about Texas yet.

I just heard what's up with Texas on the radio. The delegates are proportional to the previous election turn out. So, if heavily black districts turned out in larger numbers than say heavily Latino districts, it doesn't matter if Hillary got every damn Latino to turn out, and Obama got one black from each demographically homogeneous area to turn out -- he'd get the delegates because those districts turned out more heavily last election.

The way the system is weighted probably has to do with the lack of meaningful polls.

/I'm sure I'm simplifying a bit. . .

choice and consequence: Hillary Clinton holds commanding leads over Barack Obama in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two of the three upcoming mega-states that will determine the fate of her White House ambitions.

Clinton leads Obama 55% to 34% among likely Democratic primary voters in Ohio, and she's besting him 52% to 36% in Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac University polls released today.

Link (new window)

Haven't heard about Texas yet. Seems to me that she and he could still walk into the convention with a virtual tie... Close enough that the superdelegates could ignore which one is actually in the lead and "vote their conscience" (arrange cushy ambassadorships, pay off blackmail)?

I've seen those Quinnipiac polls too, and I'm curious as to how accurate they are. They surveyed 742 likely voters. That to me is short of a representative sample, and I honestly can't find anything about what their methods are.

-1 to subby for not knowing the difference between a primary and an election.

Shrugging Atlas: A few points about those numbers:

1. Those polls were from 2/9-2/12. There's been quite a bit that has gone on since then that may influence those numbers.

2. Obama was trailing by similar margins in most Super Tuesday states 3 weeks out as well, and those turned out pretty well for him.

I'm not worried about either of those states. Two weeks of Obama campaigning in them following the WI election will eat into those numbers. Frankly, all Obama has to do is walk into Ohio and say, "NAFTA" and her numbers are going to drop.

You, sir, are a farking genius.

Democratic Super Delegates Guided By Voters, Not Backroom Deals

And a fat guy in a red suit leaves presents in your stockings every 24th of December.

/_{And I DON'T mean Truman Capote!}

schiefaw: I am not sure they will have much choice. If Obama comes into the convention with the majority of the popular support, throwing the nomination to Hillary would immediately destroy the party.

Though I know it wouldn't make all that much difference, if that were to happen, I will write a strongly worded letter to every single Super Delegate who would dare usurp the will of the people.

Hideously Gigantic Smurf: Democratic Super Delegates Guided By Voters, Not Backroom Deals

And a fat guy in a red suit leaves presents in your stockings every 24th of December.

/And I DON'T mean Truman Capote!

Ba-DOMP, CHHHHHH!!!!

Bloody William: Seriously, there's an entire site of this shiat.

You sir, have TRUELY made my day.

schiefaw: I am not sure they will have much choice. If Obama comes into the convention with the majority of the popular support, throwing the nomination to Hillary would immediately destroy the party.

i keep reading everyone saying it will 'destroy the party'
but what i really see is....as soon as it happens, theres gonna be an outcry from hillary's camp: 'we've all gotta work together to fight the republican nom'

nothing will get destroyed when people will have to choose between sticking together or letting it fall apart and letting the other guys win.

she's got a good position to spin it if she does get the nom from the Superdelegates

i think this super delegate thing is just smoke. it's going to be a non-issue real soon.

I know the democrats are experts at stupid political moves but giving the nomination to Hillary when Obama has won the most delegates is too stupid even for them

Here's hoping Obama wins enough primaries to swing the convention his way, and Hillary bows out with something vaguely approaching grace. McCain's looking good for the Republican nomination, and I'd love to have an election come around with two candidates I actually respect as people running. I'd also prefer that the Democratic Party not rip itself apart in a veritable orgy of backroom backstabbing and party disillusionment.

Ironpendragon: -1 to subby for not knowing the difference between a primary and an election.

Yeah. Because, technically, wouldn't hading Hillary the primary actually be handing McCain the election?

From what I understand, that Ohio survey left out Independents as likely voters. Obama is going to get those folks and make things more interesting.

Ohio also put Bush in office twice, so never underestimate the ability of the Democrats to fark up a wet dream.

GoGoGo: nothing will get destroyed when people will have to choose between sticking together or letting it fall apart and letting the other guys win.

You underestimate the power of angry, motivated people in large numbers. There are many, many registered Democrats (myself among them) that would never vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination via superdelegates. In fact, I would vote either 3rd party or straight Republican just so things get even shiattier and maybe eventually some good comes out of it.

ZigThis

i love hillary tree notes?

/please, enlighten me
//bonus points if you make me feel stupid for missing it

An_Innocent_Primate

I'll say it again. As a registered Democrat, I not only refuse to vote for Hillary if the Superdelegates give her the nod, but I'll be switching to Independent. If the party takes a big jump backwards, I will hold them accountable for it in the only way I can. I'm urging my friends to do the same.

burndtdan: i love hillary tree notes?

I love [blank]try music.

burndtdan: i love hillary tree notes?

I thought it was "I love liar tree music"?

Or maybe "I love frigid tree music"

Not sure which, but he's posting it to multiple threads.

JohnnyC: burndtdan: i love hillary tree notes?

I thought it was "I love liar tree music"?

Or maybe "I love frigid tree music"

Not sure which, but he's posting it to multiple threads.

Here is a hint. Garth Brooks sings what kind of music.

Mr. Anon: JohnnyC: burndtdan: i love hillary tree notes?

I thought it was "I love liar tree music"?

Or maybe "I love frigid tree music"

Not sure which, but he's posting it to multiple threads.

Here is a hint. Garth Brooks sings what kind of music.

I love Mulva tree music?

/That makes even less sense.

Mr. Anon

Straight up genius.

C U Next Tuesday

tnpir: ilambiquated: More Hillary threads! Yay!


And to think America believes the rest of the world takes it seriously. Think about it.

Pardon me for asking, but what the hell are you talking about?

This is what I'm talking about:
Hillary may be willing to destroy the party to sate her ambitions and ego.

...throwing the nomination to Hillary would immediately destroy the party.

Hillary's views and proposals even scare the Democrats I know.

Hillary may be willing to destroy the Democratic party for a nomination...

...support of Clinton was based more on fear than actual "support."

I'm sure more of this blather has ben posted in the meantime. And see all the other fark threads about Hillary. People say any old bullshiat to support their candidate, or oppose another. It is just like a dumbass junior high school pep rally.

burndtdan: ZigThis

i love hillary tree notes?

/please, enlighten me
//bonus points if you make me feel stupid for missing it

I love country music. Nice to see there's a jpg of the joke I've told hundreds of times before.

/can't draw a tree for shiat

Jesus Farking Christ
choice and consequence: Hillary Clinton holds commanding leads over Barack Obama in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two of the three upcoming mega-states that will determine the fate of her White House ambitions.

Clinton leads Obama 55% to 34% among likely Democratic primary voters in Ohio, and she's besting him 52% to 36% in Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac University polls released today.

Link (new window)

Haven't heard about Texas yet. Seems to me that she and he could still walk into the convention with a virtual tie... Close enough that the superdelegates could ignore which one is actually in the lead and "vote their conscience" (arrange cushy ambassadorships, pay off blackmail)?

I've seen those Quinnipiac polls too, and I'm curious as to how accurate they are. They surveyed 742 likely voters. That to me is short of a representative sample, and I honestly can't find anything about what their methods are.

742 people polled under any standard polling methodology would give you enough confidence that 10+% leads that you have at least the correct winner being predicted to a high degree of confidence (99% or more even). Whether their methods are reliable, including whether the sample they chose to interview were representative would need more information of course.

Superdelegates are a shining example of how the Democratic party is the party of "We know what's best for you".

It would be really classy if these people put their own opinions aside and vote with the will of the people supporting them.

yea, "classy" and "politics" does not happen. I know...

Still. It would be nice...