Letters to the Editor
snoman
Published Letters: 189 Editor's Choice: 3
-
@cythera
[Read the article: Networks call Texas primary for Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Interesting that you call Hillary's 12 point win in Ohio a clobbering? What term would you apply to the much higher wins in every contest after Super Tuesday and before today?
Winning by 12% is a big win relative to other Clinton "wins" I suppose.
-
Heck yeah FL and MI should vote again!
[Read the article: Should Florida and Michigan vote again? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A new contest would settle all the concerns now associated with the two states. Both states would get to seat delegates and the results would actually be due to real campaigning. The citizens of both states should have the opportunity to meet with the candidates before deciding who should be the party's nominee.
-
W.E.S.
[Read the article: It ain't over yet]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maybe moderates would be more interested in Paul vs Clinton, Normon Hsu, Dickie Scruggs, and Mehmet Celebi?
Maybe Florida voters will be really, really interested in Mehmet Celebi. I wonder when we can expect her to reject, not renounce, him.
-
States that matter
[Read the article: Networks call Texas primary for Clinton]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bill, her victories in those states are only significant if she can make a clear case that she'll win those states vs McCain and that Obama will lose them. Given the primary turn out difference between the party I think that those states go to the Democractic nominee. It also assumes that those states still go for Hillary after a brokered convention.
I also think it is very telling about the psychology of the Hillary campaign that they view the number of battleground states as some number less than 50. The republicans never give up on any piece of real estate. It is just defeatist for Democrats to just ignore states.
The "lead" Hillary has with registered Democrats is extremely specualative since it is only based on the, so far, unreliable exit polls (which weren't conducted in every state). Plus, and this may come as a shock to you, independants and republicans are allowed to vote in the general election. At this point any claim that Hillary is leading with "Democratic" voters is also a claim that Obama is handily winning independents. Independents decide elections.
-
The new metrics
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The three metrics to determine which _should_ be the Dem nominee if all three are won by one candidate: Most pledged delegates, most states, and the majority of the popular vote.
Pledged delegates:
It looks like Obama is going to come out with around a 156 pledged delegate lead after last night. There are 561 pledged delegates in the remaining contests. For Hillary to win the most pledged delegates she needs to about 64%. That means that every state in these remaining contests she has to do much better than she did in her "home" state of New York, she is almost at Arkansas levels.
Is it realistic to think that Mississippi, Oregon, and North Carolina will give her 28% victory margins?
It isn't just that every state that she loses from now on puts a nail in her coffin, it is that any state that doesn't deliver her a truly stunning upset puts a nail in her coffin.
Most states: After last night Hillary can't get this even if Michigan and Florida have new contests and she wins both.
Majority of the popular vote: His popular vote lead is still about 600K, much more if you extrapolate the votes in Iowa, Maine, Washington, and Nevada based on turn out and the margins of the caucus results in those states. Her "big" night only took about a 25% bite out of his prior lead.
"But Snoman, Hillary won the 'big states'!": That assumes that Hillary winning those states means that Obama won't win them in the general election. It isn't clear that McCain will be able to beat either in those states, especially considering how close those contests were relative to Obama's wins in other states. It also assumes an odd definition of "big states" that doesn't include Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Virginia, Louisiana, Washington, Georgia, etc, etc.
"But Snoman, Neither candidate will win the nomination without superdelegates!" True story, but assume there isn't a lot of shifting in pledged delegate leads Clinton would need 498-548 out of 796 superdelegates to get the nomination. To do that she would have to get 63-69% of the pledged delegates. Basically counting on a 15-21% swing of opinion between the pledged delegates and the superdelegates. For perspective (even though superdelegates can and have switched), CNN has Hillary with 54% of the superdelegates that have made endorsements.
-
Don't be surprised
[Read the article: No Texas-size victory for Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If Hillary nets fewer delegates from last nights contests than Obama did in Wisconsin. Or if it ends up fewer than his net delegates from next Tuesday.
-
New Elections!
[Read the article: Michigan, Florida governors want delegates seated]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Why is there such resistance to this? Real campaigns and contests will settle this matter. With campaigning, get out the vote and real stakes, there would be no question marks about the winner(s) of those contests like there is now.
I imagine that the Clinton campaign is afraid to do this, and keeps insisting on the "as is" results of the beauty contests, because she thinks that what she did in the early contests is the best that she can expect.
-
@ A billion angry bees
[Read the article: Obama insists losses change nothing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]At this point, yeah, barely losing contests equates to winning for Obama at this point. He has run up the score so high going into March 4th that her wins, because they were so narrow, were virtually insignificant. Don't be surprised if her gain is erased by next Tuesday.
His wins between Feb 4 and Mar 4 were so convining that the onus is now on Hillary to get what are basically, Obama sized wins, from here on out.
All she did yesterday was barely avoid a complete knock out. She didn't do anything to change the eventual technical win that Obama is on track to get.
Feel free to argue this once you have actually broken out a calculator and done the delgate math. Right now it is the Hillary supporters that are running on blind faith and not practical reality.