*dons tinfoil hat*

If the actual number is something like 48 superdelegates, they can plausibly deny Brokaw's report. I expect a trickle of 2 or 3 supers pledging to Obama every day for the next few weeks. It'll stay out of the headlines, Clinton won't be able to complain she's being railroaded, and Obama will quietly erase her last hope of swiping the nomination.

One of the comments on that site make sense... Maybe they *did* have 50 lined up, contingent upon Obama having a blowout this past Tuesday. That didn't happen so now the 50 delegate line-up isn't there. And if someone from Obama's camp really did say something to Brokaw, they need to start keeping their mouth shut with stuff like this. Even if it were to happen, Brokaw mentioning it in passing would diminish the impact of such an announcement.

Hillary can win all remaining primaries 60-40 and she still won't have more delegates than Obama.

If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

mferris

Brokaw did say on MSNBC that his source said they are still coming out for him despite the results.

So either Brokaw is mistaken or Obama's camp is being "coy"

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

how do you figure?

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

If cows defacated chocolate, would we still call it manure?

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

If the Dem primaries were held on the moon no one could BREATHE!

Jubeebee: If the actual number is something like 48 superdelegates, they can plausibly deny Brokaw's report. I expect a trickle of 2 or 3 supers pledging to Obama every day for the next few weeks. It'll stay out of the headlines, Clinton won't be able to complain she's being railroaded, and Obama will quietly erase her last hope of swiping the nomination.

I can just imagine the Fox News headline: Barack Obama - Destroyer of Hope?

Why did it take so long for them to deny this? Has anyone else noticed it seems like he is taking longer and longer to respond to these things? He used to respond within the same news cycle. I think one of the reasons he was doing so well was that he was responding immediately to any news and getting his word on it out there right away.

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

And if I had a million dollars I wouldn't be wasting my time reading your inane stupidity.

(I'd have my personal assistant read it to me)

Come on, Brother Theodore...say it. Just for me. Come on. For old time's sake. WE GO PLAY HOOP! You know you want to.

I realized last night that this whole primary process is a lot like Deal or No Deal. In the end this spacing of the primaries will still result in a final answer. That is to say it could be done in one day throughout the country and the outcome would be known immediately. That's exactly like DOND, the process of slowly eliminating cases just lengthens the process of determining what is in the case you picked. The entertainment is in the shift of momentum that occurs when you slow the process down. They also share the fact that slowing down the process can change the outcome with shifts in momentum. In the end you are going to eliminate 24 cases or win/lose 50 states. The order in which cases are eliminated and which states hold their primaries shifts the momentum.

Long story short, I think the media has picked up on this similarity from the beginning and that is why the primaries are the way they are. It's far more entertaining/profitable to stretch out the suspense than to simply finish in one fell swoop.

/it really made more sense in my head

Lando Lincoln: Come on, Brother Theodore...say it. Just for me. Come on. For old time's sake. WE GO PLAY HOOP! You know you want to.

I'll do it:

The_Shoggoth: Why did it take so long for them to deny this? Has anyone else noticed it seems like he is taking longer and longer to respond to these things? He used to respond within the same news cycle. I think one of the reasons he was doing so well was that he was responding immediately to any news and getting his word on it out there right away.

More importantly, why did the media take so long to ask him about it? Hell, if I were a journalist, I'd be all over that action.

Journalists rely too heavily on anonymous sources. They should start telling these guys, "Yeah, I'll protect you as a source if you are correct. If it turns out you're feeding me a line of crap either because you don't know but want to be seen as a big shot or for some spin reason, I'll name names on the 7:00 news."

The_Shoggoth: Why did it take so long for them to deny this? Has anyone else noticed it seems like he is taking longer and longer to respond to these things? He used to respond within the same news cycle. I think one of the reasons he was doing so well was that he was responding immediately to any news and getting his word on it out there right away.

Do you know when it was asked? Or when he responded to the email? None of that is mentioned in the article (only that it's 2 days late).

Hah! Told you so!

BrotherTheodore 2008-03-06 01:04:00 PM
If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!


That's like saying if Field Goals counted more than Touchdowns than the Patriots would never had a perfect regular season.


My point being: Your strategy is dependent on the rules of the game. This game is collect the delegates. Obama focused money and orgazational muscle on small states where he knew he could blow out Clinton and thus get more delegates.

If it didn't work that way, then he wouldn't have focused on that. He would have only put enough effort into the small states to win by a small amount, then would spend most of his money on big states trying to win there.


In short, your argument is retarded.

mferris: One of the comments on that site make sense... Maybe they *did* have 50 lined up, contingent upon Obama having a blowout this past Tuesday. That didn't happen so now the 50 delegate line-up isn't there.

I think you're on to something here. My belief is that a stronger Tuesday combined with the news of 50 SD's would've been the death blow, and I think the Obama camp was holding that close to the vest for just that reason.

Maybe he doesn't have the 50 any more, so he lost the totality of the desired effect, but I would imagine that he's retained a lot of those and may leak them as needed as part of a new strategy to re-form momentum combined with anticipated wins leading into PA.

The_Shoggoth: Why did it take so long for them to deny this? Has anyone else noticed it seems like he is taking longer and longer to respond to these things? He used to respond within the same news cycle. I think one of the reasons he was doing so well was that he was responding immediately to any news and getting his word on it out there right away.

The date on the top of the article is March 4, Tuesday. We're just noticing Obama's timely response now, not that he didn't respond.

Local Man: I think you're on to something here. My belief is that a stronger Tuesday combined with the news of 50 SD's would've been the death blow, and I think the Obama camp was holding that close to the vest for just that reason.

Maybe he doesn't have the 50 any more, so he lost the totality of the desired effect, but I would imagine that he's retained a lot of those and may leak them as needed as part of a new strategy to re-form momentum combined with anticipated wins leading into PA.

Hypothetically speaking, if Obama did have these 50 lined up and the reason why they didn't pledge for Obama on Wednesday was because of Hillary's wins on Tuesday, maybe we will see some of them coming over if Obama wins on Saturday and Tuesday coming up.

Sooner or later, that dam is going to break and Hillary is going to be washed away. It's just a matter of when.

Lando Lincoln: The_Shoggoth: Why did it take so long for them to deny this? Has anyone else noticed it seems like he is taking longer and longer to respond to these things? He used to respond within the same news cycle. I think one of the reasons he was doing so well was that he was responding immediately to any news and getting his word on it out there right away.

More importantly, why did the media take so long to ask him about it? Hell, if I were a journalist, I'd be all over that action.


If i were a journalist i would actually talk about issues instead of more of this drivel. Of course the paper i was writing for would tank because people care more about soap opera crap instead of real things.

Lando Lincoln: Local Man: I think you're on to something here. My belief is that a stronger Tuesday combined with the news of 50 SD's would've been the death blow, and I think the Obama camp was holding that close to the vest for just that reason.

Maybe he doesn't have the 50 any more, so he lost the totality of the desired effect, but I would imagine that he's retained a lot of those and may leak them as needed as part of a new strategy to re-form momentum combined with anticipated wins leading into PA.

Hypothetically speaking, if Obama did have these 50 lined up and the reason why they didn't pledge for Obama on Wednesday was because of Hillary's wins on Tuesday, maybe we will see some of them coming over if Obama wins on Saturday and Tuesday coming up.

Sooner or later, that dam is going to break and Hillary is going to be washed away. It's just a matter of when.

Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

If Hillary doesn't enter the convention with more delegates than Obama but walks away with the nomination, the Democratic party is f*cked. Does Hillary honestly believe that she can use whatever underhanded strategy she can think of to get the nomination and expect that we'll all quietly line up behind her like sheep?

At the start of the campaign I probably would have voted for Hillary if she got the nomination. There is absolutely no chance of that now.

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

This is why we can not trust her. With all the trade deals her husband made with China she is now filled with lead.

/ sorry

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

The fact is that Obama will win Colorado and a couple of Southern States that Gore or Kerry could not win.

Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

Check out the graph

You really think that if Clinton had a bunch of supers that she could pull out, she'd have allowed this to happen?

You think she'd have allowed Obama to get the lead in the first place if she had enough supers to counter it?

Damn that graph URL didn't work, let's try again:

Link

Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

do you think seating the MI/FL delegates for hillary is fair?

BrotherTheodore: If the Dem primaries were the Electoral College Hillary LEADS!

And if a pilgrim shot a cat instead of a turkey, we'd all eat pussy on Thanksgiving!

equilibrium_0: Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

If Hillary doesn't enter the convention with more delegates than Obama but walks away with the nomination, the Democratic party is f*cked. Does Hillary honestly believe that she can use whatever underhanded strategy she can think of to get the nomination and expect that we'll all quietly line up behind her like sheep?

At the start of the campaign I probably would have voted for Hillary if she got the nomination. There is absolutely no chance of that now.

What he said.

Sharing Artist's Boobies: Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

Check out the graph

You really think that if Clinton had a bunch of supers that she could pull out, she'd have allowed this to happen?

You think she'd have allowed Obama to get the lead in the first place if she had enough supers to counter it?

Last I looked she was leading in super-delegates ....at least ones that hve declared support one way or another thus far.....Lando lincoln premise or his friends is that there are 50 supers waiting in the wings to add to the declared ones on Obama's side....And perhpas there is ....

My point is Obama isn't the only one courting supers behind the scenes and if some sort of blitz occoured I am confidant Clinton could oppose it with a similar move....

The reason she and presumably Obams supers haven't shown their colors yet is because it would be unseemly to do so at this point in time they will wait until the covention has drawn closer and in the meantime they will be pursued and courted and stand to collect greater rewards the longer it goes theres no incentive to come out until the last moment for many of them waiting makes thier vote increase in value.

unexplained bacon: Jennifer: Two can play the super delegate game Hillary could counter any Obama super-delegate declaration with her own theres a heck of alot more supers than 50....And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein all the way up to Obama potentially being washed away....Don't count your chickens until their hatched!

do you think seating the MI/FL delegates for hillary is fair?

Definatley under the right circumstances......the Dnc rules stated that the primary couldn't be held early and therefore the delegates were negated.....but should a primary or caucus be held on or after thier traditional time then those delegate would be legitimate and accepted......indeed the DNC is hoping to seat those delegates all that needs to be resolved is which way to go about it primary/caucuss or convention apeal....even Obamas people say its the right thing to do....keep in mind it was the republican govener and congree in Florida that moved the date of the primary in the first place against the desire and protests of the democrats in the first place.........so yeah I am for the voters getting a voice

Jennifer:
even Obamas people say its the right thing to do

got a cite for that?


so yeah I am for the voters getting a voice

my candidate obama, wasn't on the ballot.
I was told no delegates were being awarded.
what about my voice?

Jennifer:

You seem to have a strategy regarding how Hillary can win the nomination regardless of how the primaries play out. I wonder if you've given any thought to just how she will be able to win the general election.

Lando Lincoln: At the start of the campaign I probably would have voted for Hillary if she got the nomination. There is absolutely no chance of that now.
---------------------------------------------
What he said.

THIS.

unexplained bacon: my candidate obama, wasn't on the ballot.
I was told no delegates were being awarded.
what about my voice?

Florida and Michigan would need to have a complete do-over to be viewed as legitimate.

unexplained bacon: Jennifer:
even Obamas people say its the right thing to do

got a cite for that?


so yeah I am for the voters getting a voice

my candidate obama, wasn't on the ballot.
I was told no delegates were being awarded.
what about my voice?

By having another chance at voting now that the penalized time of voting early is over nothing stands in the way of the DNC rules to have another Primary the results of which could not be rejected in Fl/MI

equilibrium_0: Jennifer:

You seem to have a strategy regarding how Hillary can win the nomination regardless of how the primaries play out. I wonder if you've given any thought to just how she will be able to win the general election.

Simple by merely being the canidate with a D by thier name on the ballot in November.....theres no way in hell a republican would win against ethier potential Democratic nominee..... It will be a lanside victory to think otherewise is naive imo....Hillary or Obama will be the next President

equilibrium_0: unexplained bacon: my candidate obama, wasn't on the ballot.
I was told no delegates were being awarded.
what about my voice?

Florida and Michigan would need to have a complete do-over to be viewed as legitimate.

I agree.
as a michigan voter I would accept that.

however I heard it would cost the tax payers somewhere around another $25mil for that so...

I see lines like this:
Jennifer "so yeah I am for the voters getting a voice"

from the hillary camp a lot, but I've never had anyone of that mindset tell me what they think about my vote. I'd like to hear it.

Jennifer: Simple by merely being the canidate with a D by thier name on the ballot in November.....theres no way in hell a republican would win against ethier potential Democratic nominee..... It will be a lanside victory to think otherewise is naive imo....Hillary or Obama will be the next President

I seem to recall hearing this same strategy only a few short years ago.

Jennifer:

By having another chance at voting now that the penalized time of voting early is over nothing stands in the way of the DNC rules to have another Primary the results of which could not be rejected in Fl/MI

ok, yeah

a re-vote is ok with me.

when you said:

...And the Michigan/Florida delegates being seated/counted is a more apt description of what might occur along your "its just a matter of when" vein

I was pretty sure you meant seating the delegates from our jan vote that wasn't really a vote. I guess you mean seating/counting the delegates from an upcoming re-vote.

but neither the party nor the states are willing to pay for it right now.

Both Hillary and Barack have raised well over $100 million for their campaigns so far. Both are making well over $1 million per day right now. It seems like it wouldn't be that hard for them to combine to raise the cash necessary for a couple of caucuses (which are cheaper than primaries).

However, it'll take a miracle just to get Hillary to agree to a re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Asking her to help pay for it would be out of the question. She wasn't willing to follow the DNC rules before- why start now?

Obama declining...

Hillary rising...

That is not to say he won't get the nomination, necessarily. But now he's forced to go negative, play defense, run damage control, and shore up defections.

We don't know if he can do that -- especially against a Clinton!! And especially with PennsHillvania looming. The boy's in trouble.

Jennifer: Simple by merely being the canidate with a D by thier name on the ballot in November.....theres no way in hell a republican would win against ethier potential Democratic nominee..... It will be a lanside victory to think otherewise is naive imo....Hillary or Obama will be the next President

Oh, Hitler Jennifer. How naive you are. I do not think you have an inkling of the hate that white males in the South have for Hillary Clinton. This is a real problem for the party. You are right about one thing. I think either could win the general. Hillary has the Blue States sewn up. Let's say that she does win the Presidency because she can win all the states Kerry and Gore won and take LA and AK.

This will however guarantee that every Congress person and Senator in Federal and State Government in the other Red States will be a Republican. Obama on the other hand brings out more voters to Red States and allows for the possibility of picking up far more Democrats in House and Senate races. If Hillary takes this at the convention and Southern blacks stay at home, you can kiss this goodbye.

You should be looking at the bigger picture for the good of the party. So should Hillary. She has done a stellar job naming post offices after her donors. She should keep with it.

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: Both Hillary and Barack have raised well over $100 million for their campaigns so far. Both are making well over $1 million per day right now. It seems like it wouldn't be that hard for them to combine to raise the cash necessary for a couple of caucuses (which are cheaper than primaries).

However, it'll take a miracle just to get Hillary to agree to a re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Asking her to help pay for it would be out of the question. She wasn't willing to follow the DNC rules before- why start now?

Heh thats funny..... I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary's camp isn't mulling over the prospect of donating the funds necessary to pay for the redos even behind the scenes as a mysetery donor.....she has nothing to lose and everything to gain by seeing delegates seated from Fl/Mi the results might be a bit closer but I still think she would carry Florida with a sizeable lead and perhaps tie in Mi worse case scenario.....I am sure the money will be found to hold the primaries though one way or another even if its Hillary footing the bill

Obama is actually having to answer real questions and has suffered for it.

Jennifer: The reason she and presumably Obama's supers haven't shown their colors yet is because it would be unseemly to do so at this point in time they will wait until the convention has drawn closer and in the meantime they will be pursued and courted and stand to collect greater rewards the longer it goes theres no incentive to come out until the last moment for many of them waiting makes their vote increase in value.

A reason why many supers have declared for Obama (and many have switched sides to Obama from Hillary) lately is most likely due to the fact that mathematically Hillary has no chance of winning the delegate lead. Therefore, they'd like to see this contest come to its' inevitable conclusion as soon as possible so the GOP can't take easy shots at Obama without him being able to focus his attention back on the GOP in kind. But yes, I agree with you that many may be holding out because they are waiting for better rewards is a likely possibility. These are politicians we're talking about here.

Nemo's Brother: Obama is actually having to answer real questions and has suffered for it.

Name one question that he has answered where the answer hurt him? The real problem is that the press is not listening to the answers. There is nothing wrong with Rezko. There is nothing wrong with a propfessor from UofChicago meeting with a friend at the Canadian Embassy in Chicago. The press has acted like these are real scandals in wake of the SNL skits and Clinton's whambulance calls for equal coverage. These issues all came out on Monday and did so some damage to Obama, but considering that up to 9% of the Democratic vote in Texas was Conservatives and the vast majority of them voted for Hillary because they think she was a weaker candidate I really don't think they worked.

Look the press is getting the best ratings they have had in years for election coverage this year. Do you think they want this to end?

Dead_Mandela: Obama declining...

Hillary rising...

That is not to say he won't get the nomination, necessarily. But now he's forced to go negative, play defense, run damage control, and shore up defections.

We don't know if he can do that -- especially against a Clinton!! And especially with PennsHillvania looming. The boy's in trouble.

Like hell he is. I don't mind Obama starting to play some hard ball with her. Asking her to release tax documents is fair. Asking her to clarify what she means about her "experience" is totally fair (and I'm surprised he hasn't jumped all over her ass on this earlier). Just steer clear of the cheap shots and half-truths. I'm not saying that he hasn't thrown any her way yet (because he has), I'm just saying steer clear of them. The cleaner he runs this thing the better.

He's winning Texas for the moment and it looks like he'll win it after all the votes are counted. He still has a 140+ delegate lead on her. He's gaining superdelegates and she's losing them. He's got two elections coming up within the next week and it looks like he'll win both of them. And he's got six weeks after that to focus on PA. And she's only got a few point lead on him in that state. And she has to pull off a miracle and he does not.