Pennsylvania Primary Thread

[KipWellsFan]

Is Obama going to spin this with how much he closed the gap in the last month or so? Didn't the polls show her about 20 points up at one point?

 

That would be bulls***. The frontrunner should not finish 10 points behind.

[NorthSideSox72]

CNN saying 9% right now, with 99% in.

 

How annoying. If it was >5 points, that's an Obama victory. More than about 12, and its a win for Clinton. Right in the middle? Yup, we're just going to keep stringing this thing along.

 

Gawd, I hope Obama wins big on May 6. He's got a substantial poll lead in NC, and a small one or within-margin in Indiana. He needs to win both to have a chance to ice this thing soon. If it splits, who knows how long it will go on.

 

[Heads22]

My final projection

 

Clinton 54

Obama 45

 

I'm pretty money.

[NorthSideSox72]

Only 3 PA counties have oustanding votes remaining, all others are 100% reported. The three counties are Philadelphia, Chester and Delaware - all of which voted for Obama (Philly heavily, the others by 10 points-ish). They are all reporting 91 to 96%. So if its 10% now, its probably 9% as a final number. That would give Clinton 86 delegates, and Obama 72. That's 14 delegates, net, she'd pick up (if the precincts fall in line with the total vote, give or take). His lead was what, 150 delegates or so? So her big victory made up about 10% of that ground, and she now faces 2 fairly big states where she is already behind. And remember, thus far, most states start heavily Clinton, then go towards Obama, to one extent or another, when both campaigns are in town.

 

[Texsox]

That would be bulls***. The frontrunner should not finish 10 points behind.

 

Reagan lost a state or two in the general. Of course he was moer like the "only runner", not just a front runner.

[southsider2k5]

So a 10 percentage point victory. Interesting to note that it means the Clinton internal polling which had her with an 11 point win was by far the closest of the late polls, along with the Survey USA poll that was showing Hill +12.

 

I have heard the talk ad naseum that Hillary can't win the nomination on her own, but is there any math out there that shows Obama can win it either? I am starting to think that it is impossible for EITHER one of them to win it outright, which gives Hillary an easy reason to fight through to the convention.

 

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jDkQnMm...NpsLKgD907I3LO0

 

Clinton wins most delegates in Pennsylvania primary

 

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER – 59 minutes ago

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won the most delegates in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary.

 

Clinton won at least 80 of the 158 delegates up for grabs in Tuesday's contest, according to an analysis of election returns by The Associated Press. Sen. Barack Obama won at least 66, with 12 still to be awarded.

 

The final delegate count was delayed because many of Pennsylvania's counties are split into multiple congressional districts. Pennsylvania awards delegates according to the statewide vote as well as the vote in individual congressional districts.

 

Election officials were expected to continue working Wednesday to assign votes from split counties to the appropriate congressional districts.

 

In the overall race for the nomination, Obama led with 1,714.5 delegates, including separately chosen party and elected officials known as superdelegates. Clinton had 1,589.5 delegates, according to the AP tally.

 

It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the Democratic nomination.

 

On the Republican side, Sen. John McCain clinched the party's nomination in March.

 

The AP tracks the delegate races by calculating the number of national convention delegates won by candidates in each presidential primary or caucus, based on state and national party rules, and by interviewing unpledged delegates to obtain their preferences.

 

Most primaries and some caucuses are binding, meaning delegates won by the candidates are pledged to support that candidate at the national conventions this summer.

 

Political parties in some states, however, use multistep procedures to award national delegates. Typically, such states use local caucuses to elect delegates to state or congressional district conventions, where national delegates are selected. In these states, the AP uses the results from local caucuses to calculate the number of national delegates each candidate will win, if the candidate's level of support at the caucus doesn't change.

Hosted by Google

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Pres

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/22/pa.primary/index.html

 

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Clinton claimed victory in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, beating out Sen. Barack Obama after a bruising seven-week campaign.

art.clinton.pa.afp.gi.jpg

 

Sen. Hillary Clinton addresses supporters following her win in Pennsylvania.

Click to view previous image

1 of 2

Click to view next image

more photos »

 

"It's a long road to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and it runs right through the heart of Pennsylvania," she told supporters in Philadelphia.

 

"I'm in this race to fight for you ... You know you can count on me to stand up strong for you every single day in the White House."

 

Clinton commended Obama and his campaign, saying they are in many ways "on this journey together." Video Watch Clinton claim victory »

 

Tuesday's projected victory follows Clinton's wins in other big states such as Ohio, New York and California.

 

Her campaign said that should raise new questions about whether Obama, who leads Clinton in the overall Democratic race, can beat presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in November.

 

"The tide is turning," Clinton told cheering supporters. Chelsea Clinton's eyes welled with tears as she watched her mother speak.

 

With about 99 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton was leading Obama by 10 points. Video Watch what Obama's campaign says about the results »

 

Clinton will pick up a majority of the state's 158 delegates.

 

But the win still leaves Obama ahead in the race to the Democrats' August convention in Denver, and he is likely to hold that lead unless "the wheels come off his wagon," said CNN analyst David Gergen, a former adviser to both Republican and Democratic candidates.

Don't Miss

 

"He came up short, but it doesn't look like the wheels came off," Gergen said. "That's going to be her problem. I don't see her way to the nomination. The wheels aren't coming off the wagon unless there is some new, big revelation."

 

According to CNN's latest count, Obama leads in the delegate count -- 1,694 to 1,556.

 

He also leads in the popular vote and the number of states won so far this primary season. See how the delegate race has played out so far

 

CNN analyst and Clinton supporter Paul Begala said Clinton still scored "an extraordinary victory" in Pennsylvania.

 

Obama congratulated Clinton on her win and looked ahead to the May 6 contests in North Carolina and Indiana. Video Watch Obama congratulate Clinton »

 

"There were a lot of folks who didn't think we could make this a race when it started," he said in Evansville, Indiana.

 

"But we worked hard ... And now, six weeks later, we closed the gap. We rallied people of every age and race and background to the cause. And whether they were inspired for the first time or for the first time in a long time, we registered a record number of voters, and it is those new voters who will lead our party to victory in November."

 

Obama drew more than 90 percent of the vote among Pennsylvania's black voters, who are heavily concentrated around Philadelphia.

 

African-Americans made up about 14 percent of Tuesday's vote.

 

But whites made up about 80 percent -- and voted 60-40 for Clinton. Her supporters turned out heavily in Pittsburgh and the counties of western Pennsylvania, and she was racking up similarly lopsided margins in the state's industrial northeast, the exit polls found. See the exit polls

 

Obama also scored big with new Democrats in Pennsylvania.

 

One out of every seven Democratic party voters was not registered as a Democrat at the beginning of the year, and 60 percent of them cast their ballot for Obama, according to the exit polls.

 

Clinton fared better with voters who made up their mind in the last week, the exit polls showed.

 

Fifty-eight percent of those voters said they chose the New York senator. That includes voters who made up their mind in the aftermath of last week's heated Democratic debate.

 

Clinton also got the support of older voters, with 61 percent of those age 65 or older backing her, according to the polls.

 

In recent weeks, Clinton fended off calls to drop out of the race as the increasingly bruising primary fight raised worries from within the party that the daily cycle of charge-and-countercharge could hurt the Democrats' chances in the general election.

advertisement

 

Neither candidate is expected to win the 2,025 delegates needed to clinch the nomination by the end of the primary season in June. Call races for yourself and see how delegates add up »

 

The superdelegates -- party leaders and officials -- then could decide the nomination. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

[Texsox]

Both have got to stay in until mathematically eliminated. But even then, pledged is not the same as legally bound, if I understand it correctly. I think I have been saying for six months is goes to the convention. Which I am really looking forward to.

 

This convention will be the most watched in history.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Both have got to stay in until mathematically eliminated. But even then, pledged is not the same as legally bound, if I understand it correctly. I think I have been saying for six months is goes to the convention. Which I am really looking forward to.

 

This convention will be the most watched in history.

 

 

The biggest train wreck of a convention in history to boot.

[NorthSideSox72]

So a 10 percentage point victory. Interesting to note that it means the Clinton internal polling which had her with an 11 point win was by far the closest of the late polls, along with the Survey USA poll that was showing Hill +12.

 

I have heard the talk ad naseum that Hillary can't win the nomination on her own, but is there any math out there that shows Obama can win it either? I am starting to think that it is impossible for EITHER one of them to win it outright, which gives Hillary an easy reason to fight through to the convention.

 

Correct - neither can win it outright before the convention, based on pledged delegates remaining. However, one of them could theoretically win it as soon as the remaining few hundred superdelegates get off the bench and endorse one of them.

 

After the PA dust settles, Obama will have a lead of about 125 delegates overall - 150 or so in the pledged category, and about 25 behind Clinton in Supers. Obama needs 310 more delegates to reach the magic 2025 number (he has about 1715 now). There are about 400 superdelegates who have yet to endorse, and there are 408 pledged delegates remaining to be had in the remaining contests. So there are the numbers.

 

Check out the remaining primaries and caucuses*:

 

Guam, 5/3 (4)*

 

NC, 5/6 (115)

IN, 5/6 (72)

 

WV, 5/13 (26)

 

OR, 5/20 (52)*

KY, 5/20 (51)*

 

PR, 6/1 (55)

 

MT, 6/3 (16)

SD, 6/3 (15)*

 

Most of those look like Obama states to me, and 4 of them are caucuses which will give him a boost. So for fun, lets say the results look like this in the remaining states, based on polling and my guesswork, and erring on the side of Clinton...

 

Guam: split the 4 delegates

NC: Obama +12%

IN: Obama +4%

WV: Clinton +20%

OR: Obama +8%

KY: Clinton +20%

PR: Clinton +6%

MT: Obama +8%

SD: Obama +12%

 

Assuming those are the margins, that gives Obama 212 more delegates, by my math. And this is giving Clinton huge victories in KY and WV, even though they probably won't be that big. That would give Obama 1922 delegates, and Clinton would have 1778.

 

That leaves one thing - the 400 remaining supers. The only way Clinton wins, at convention or otherwise, is if 75% of the remaining supers vote against the delegate count AND against the popular vote AND against the number of states won, and endorse Clinton anyway. How likely to you think that really is?

 

I'll be bold here and say that it won't happen. For one thing, the superdelegates aren't that well organized as a group - they are individuals, and they won't all be swayed one way or the other. For another, if the Dems s*** all over the will of the people that way, they will lose a ton of voters for a long time. And third, as I've been harping on, it seems clear to me that Obama is a much stronger candidate for the general, and that is what these Dems want most - a win in November.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Final tally, per the state of PA...

 

Clinton: 54.3%

Obama: 45.7%

 

In terms of the vote total, Clinton wins by 8.6%. Not exactly the hug victory she was looking for, but not as close as Obama would have liked.

 

[jackie hayes]

That leaves one thing - the 400 remaining supers. The only way Clinton wins, at convention or otherwise, is if 75% of the remaining supers vote against the delegate count AND against the popular vote AND against the number of states won, and endorse Clinton anyway. How likely to you think that really is?

Not a chance.

 

This thing has been over for a while now. I thought it was kind of cute how excited everyone was yesterday. The power of marketing.

[Gregory Pratt]

The biggest train wreck of a convention in history to boot.

 

I don't think any convention will ever beat 1972. First, from here: http://www.bookforum.com/inprint/015_01/2248

 

The 1972 Democratic National Convention concluded with what some thought was the greatest speech of George McGovern’s career. Unfortunately, it was delivered at 2:45 am. Only three million people saw it. Twenty million would watch Nixon’s acceptance speech in prime time a month and a half later. Plenty more had been watching hours earlier during the vice-presidential roll call, when two men wearing purple shirts reading gay power kissed in an aisle. Television cameramen have an eye for the peculiar. Though the vast majority of conventioneers looked utterly conventional, they dwelled on the likes of Beth Ann Labson, an eighteen-year-old California delegate, walking around without shoes. (“By 1976,” wrote Abbie and Jerry, “the convention will be held in a meadow.”) Larry O’Brien delivered a speech at the podium while, twenty feet below, Allen Ginsberg sat cross-legged, chanting mantras. Denim and tie-dyed T-shirts and peasant dresses; men carrying babies in papoose boards—and, the Post recorded in its article on the abortion floor debate, “girls in patched jeans and no bras.” A black man and a white woman kissing on camera. Interracial marriage had been illegal in some southern states until a Supreme Court decision only five years earlier.

 

Where were the sweaty, fat, bald men in suits and ties of yesteryear? The congressmen’s wives in evening gowns? The plump matrons in floral dresses dancing with banners and balloons? The broads in cheerleader outfits, Humphreyettes, Johnsonettes, Kennedyettes, Stevensonettes, Trumanettes—where were they? The only men dressed in Native American dress were . . . Native Americans.

 

These people were . . . the wrong kind of exuberant. They were dressed . . . the wrong kind of crazy. The colors were . . . the wrong kind of riotous. The women were . . . the wrong kind of sexy.

 

Gus Tyler, old-line leader of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, watched it back home on TV. Tyler was a socialist. He knew something about radical. He also knew something about people’s longing for security and stability. That was what had made him a socialist. He also thought he knew something about politics: There was no politics without accommodation. That was what made him a Democrat. He wondered what this all must look like to the farmer in Iowa, a housewife in Bensonhurst, “somebody out there,” he later reflected to an interviewer, “in Peoria.”

 

All of these people had given the Democrats a landslide in 1964. They had trusted the Democratic Party.

 

In the interim, they had seen America plunged into chaos.

 

And then they looked at this convention and thought, “Here are the people who are responsible for this chaos.”

 

and my favorite part, from here: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...75BC0A960958260

 

By 1972, the Republican convention was as canned as a sitcom -- as one reporter discovered when he fell upon a copy of the minute-by-minute script for Nixon's re-coronation, complete with stage directions for applause.

 

That same summer, Democratic disarray over Senator McGovern's nomination produced the anti-model for convention planners. Humphrey would not leave the race until midway through the convention, and puckish delegates cast votes for Mao Zedong, Mickey Mouse and Walter Cronkite as Vice President. These antics so delayed Mr. McGovern's acceptance speech that it aired in prime time only in Guam.

 

Although this year's might be worse for very different reasons.

 

It absolutely blows my mind that a major party as recently as 1972 had such a mind-boggling convention to nominate its President.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Gregory Pratt

[HuskyCaucasian]

Final tally, per the state of PA...

 

Clinton: 54.3%

Obama: 45.7%

 

In terms of the vote total, Clinton wins by 8.6%. Not exactly the hug victory she was looking for, but not as close as Obama would have liked.

It's now 54.6%-45.4%

 

Clinton +9.2

[Heads22]

Again, this just means I'm good. No real story in that, though.

[Y2HH]

Not that it matters, but with Clinton's recent question about, "Why can't Obama win the big states?", I have her answer...

 

The big states don't matter, Hillary. They never matter. Because *regardless* which democratic candidate makes it in, the SAME big states are going to vote for them, just like they do in every election.

 

Chicago, New York, California = Automatically democratic. You can put it in the bank.

Texas = Republican. Put this in the bank, also.

 

The swing states, and the states inbetween that can change the tide of an election are the states that matter.

 

Now I wish she and her minions would seriously think about that before they say it again, because it's beyond stupid to even bring up.

 

Honestly, and this goes to anyone here reading this, if you think Chicago/New York/Cali will not go to Obama or Clinton, regardless of which get in, you too, are an idiot.

[Balta1701]

Not that it matters, but with Clinton's recent question about, "Why can't Obama win the big states?", I have her answer...

I have a different answer. When you define big states as "Large states that Hillary Clinton has won", then you come up with a definition that fits that statement. If you define large states as states with large numbers of electoral votes, then that definition fails, because it then excludes quite a few states with >10 electoral votes that Obama has won, including Illinois, Virginia, Washington, Georgia, 1/2 of Texas.

[lostfan]

Plus, the counter-argument to that counter-argument of Obama not getting Florida and Michigan is it's not 2 or 3 swing states that matter to Obama... it's honestly more like 10 or 12. (Although it is completely mind-boggling to me how so many people in Florida actually blame Obama for their whole voting fiasco when neither he nor Clinton had much to do with it.)

[lostfan]

I have a different answer. When you define big states as "Large states that Hillary Clinton has won", then you come up with a definition that fits that statement. If you define large states as states with large numbers of electoral votes, then that definition fails, because it then excludes quite a few states with >10 electoral votes that Obama has won, including Illinois, Virginia, Washington, Georgia, 1/2 of Texas.

I'd be kind of stunned if Obama won GA in the general... that would mean basically the whole deep south can be considered "in play."

[Y2HH]

Plus, the counter-argument to that counter-argument of Obama not getting Florida and Michigan is it's not 2 or 3 swing states that matter to Obama... it's honestly more like 10 or 12. (Although it is completely mind-boggling to me how so many people in Florida actually blame Obama for their whole voting fiasco when neither he nor Clinton had much to do with it.)

 

Not to mention Obama wasn't even on the Michigan ballot, yet Clinton wants to count the votes.

 

That sounds fair.

[Heads22]

What I get a kick out of is the traditionally red states out here, like the Dakotas, that just seem overwhelmingly Obama, despite the fact he's generally seen as more liberal that HillDog.

[NorthSideSox72]

What I get a kick out of is the traditionally red states out here, like the Dakotas, that just seem overwhelmingly Obama, despite the fact he's generally seen as more liberal that HillDog.

I think the main reasons why western and plains states seem to favor Obama heavily is two-fold. One, I think people in those parts of the country tend to have less tolerance for politics as a game. The midwest, south and northeast enjoy the heck out of that game. Obama is, in my view, much more consistent and direct than Hillary, and doesn't peddle and change personalities as often as she does. So, they favor Obama.

 

Secondly, and maybe even more important, their memories of the Clinton years are far less rosy than in other areas. If you look at the plains states, and much of the mountain west, they didn't experience as much of the huge economic boost of those years. In fact, their core industries - agriculture, mining, etc. - suffered quite a bit. So they just don't feel very strongly about having another Clinton in the White House.

 

[jackie hayes]

Not that it matters, but with Clinton's recent question about, "Why can't Obama win the big states?", I have her answer...

 

The big states don't matter, Hillary. They never matter. Because *regardless* which democratic candidate makes it in, the SAME big states are going to vote for them, just like they do in every election.

 

Chicago, New York, California = Automatically democratic. You can put it in the bank.

Texas = Republican. Put this in the bank, also.

 

The swing states, and the states inbetween that can change the tide of an election are the states that matter.

 

Now I wish she and her minions would seriously think about that before they say it again, because it's beyond stupid to even bring up.

 

Honestly, and this goes to anyone here reading this, if you think Chicago/New York/Cali will not go to Obama or Clinton, regardless of which get in, you too, are an idiot.

I'm very confused. Chicago seceded?

[NorthSideSox72]

I'm very confused. Chicago seceded?

Oh, I'm sure downstate Illinois would be perfectly happy to break away from the Chicago area.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Not that it matters, but with Clinton's recent question about, "Why can't Obama win the big states?", I have her answer...

 

The big states don't matter, Hillary. They never matter. Because *regardless* which democratic candidate makes it in, the SAME big states are going to vote for them, just like they do in every election.

 

Chicago, New York, California = Automatically democratic. You can put it in the bank.

Texas = Republican. Put this in the bank, also.

 

The swing states, and the states inbetween that can change the tide of an election are the states that matter.

 

Now I wish she and her minions would seriously think about that before they say it again, because it's beyond stupid to even bring up.

 

Honestly, and this goes to anyone here reading this, if you think Chicago/New York/Cali will not go to Obama or Clinton, regardless of which get in, you too, are an idiot.

 

Y2HH, you must read, agree to and acknowledge with a post in the MUST READ thread before posting again in the Buster. Thank you.

 

[lostfan]

I'm very confused. Chicago seceded?

When people ask where I'm originally from, I always, always say "Chicago." I never say Illinois. Ever. However, when people answer that question for me they say "He's from Illinois." And then I have to correct them. "No. I'm from Chicago."