Letters to the Editor
-
Delegate count
Clinton
210
Obama
123
Edwards
52
Kucinich
1
+++++
This count consists of the delegates won in caucuses/primaries completed thus far and "pledged" delegates.
-
To Lloyd Little: check again
"The Nevada Democratic Party said in a statement that it's "seeing record turnout with more than 114,000 caucus attendees." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) was one of the only people to predict turnout around 100,000. Others had projected a more modest 45,000 tally.
-
Hillary Wins Big
BO can spin this anyway he wants. He lost. Check out the demographics for Clinton supporters. She's taking California on Feb. 5. She has the Hispanic vote. If it makes BO and his supporters feel better tonight to blather on about delegates, so be it. They're postponing the inevitable. They had Culinary and they STILL LOST by 6 points. Hillary Clinton will be the nominee.
-
Yes, Obama People Make a Good Point
How can HRC win in November if she keeps winning primaries that Obama really won? That does make sense, now that I hear what you're saying.
-
A few points of clarification...
MORE Democrats caucused than Republicans in Nevada...
The vote total for the Democrats represents total state delegates and each of these state delegates represents about ten actual votes. The Republicans did a traditional straw poll, however, so the numbers reported there represent total participation. About 114,000 people caucused for the Democrats whereas only about 45,000 caucused for the Republicans. The same system was in place in Iowa where the Democrats also saw far greater participation.
The level of ignorance about how things work in this country is astounding--and that it not directed only toward you Lloyd.
As for the delegate count in Nevada, it looks like Obama did win the delegate count by one, which brings Hillary's total to (roughly) 234 and Barack's to 134.
I am sorry, however, if I do not find it reassuring that this country, or either party, might put forward a winner who, once again, does not win the popular vote.
-
sign me up Hillary
Although it is hard for all the Hillary-haters she will be the nominee. The sexist unfair media coverage has really fueled my support of Hillary. She was my second choice after edwards, but has moved to number 1 because she has the most progesssive plans. Obama is blather and his admiration of Reagan indicates he wants to be Alan Keyes and not Kennedy. It doesn't matter, we need a doer not a poser.
-
Control.
"please buy my bridge!"
-- tangerine
How about crying me a river? On account of, I'll build a bridge and walk over it.
We all won here. If you don't think so, perhaps you will reconsider in the near future.
-
Thanks posters
Thanks for all of you referencing Obama's comment about Reagan and the Republicans.
I actually looked up what he said. Uggh. I used to be an Obama fan, but not now. That's a pretty hard comment for me to get over.
-
I get it...
So the caucusers don't select the national delegates, just which of Bill Clinton's staffers do? Joan, fyi, they're saying, and you're reporting verbatim, that the Obama campaign is wrong on a technicality. If this works at all like say, the electoral college, than the state delegates should equate to the national delegates, no? At the very least, what the Clinton camp has come back with is not helping clarify matters.
Also fyi, there are some other things to report here, like the overwhelming evidence that identity politics have decided the outcome- in particular that there are far fewer blacks in the electorate as people who don't like the idea of a 'black president'. And then there's the Obama camps accusation of voter irregularities, and that lovely push poll that tells prospective voters that Barack Hussein Obama has accepted money from special interests, and didn't you know that about Barack Hussein Obama, or were you not told that by Barack Hussein Obama. Probably its just the state Republicans up for some giggles.
Let's tell more than just the story of glorious hard fought victory, shall we?
-
furtail
Did you see a u-tube interview or the whole interview?
I think that saying Reagon's message fit the times in which he lived--meaning that he was able to tap into something that people wanted--is his way of saying that he wants to do too. It's his method--not his message--which definitely would not fit our times now--that he admires.
Also, Obama talks about Reagon's big change on politics because Reagon did change politics a lot--Obama never voted for him. Clinton has said exactly the same thing about Reagon. Saying that someone has been an agent of change--doesn't mean that you admire everything about the change they brought. Au contraire.
It's amazing how people can base their decisions on such spurious information.
One chopped off video. Weren't people complaining last week that Clinton's remarks on MLK were "distorted" by being taken out of context?
Now we have the same thing happening with Obama's comments about Reagon. All I can say furtail is that if that's all the evidence it takes to convince you that Obama is going to be Reagon II then you weren't much of a supporter to begin with.
(Also--although I didn't support Reagon I sympathize with his remarks because of his age--Reagon stepped into office at a time when Obama was politically impressionable--so he tried to learn from the good--people who try to learn even from people they disagree with are wise....)
-
On Obama and Regan
By the way, Clinton has heaped praise on Regan before, claiming that she admired his skills. Their joint letter after his death could not have been more laudatory. I fail to see how that differentiates them from anything Obama has said. To set the record straight, Obama has done is to correctly note that the Republican Party with the rise of Movement Conservatism became the party that had ideas (he never said good ones- see here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/18/195212/284/181/439165). The Democrats had the New Deal and the War on Poverty- the Republican ideas were to undo all that. Defending programs and principles already in place is not something people usually think of as an idea.
It's worth noting the irony here. Remarkable. Bill Clinton spent two terms as President doing not much of anything outside of enacting Regan Revolution ideas- welfare reform, 'the end of Big Government as we know it', spending cuts- and Obama gets tagged for it in the primary. Never let it be said that the Clintons were not masters of distorting the debate.