Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary can't win the primary legitimately, but OMG, she can win WV...by 30 pts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:06 PM
Original message
Hillary can't win the primary legitimately, but OMG, she can win WV...by 30 pts
Hillary would net 10 pledged delegates, but the spin is this would be a huge victory.

updated 1:21 p.m. EDT, Sat May 10, 2008

What might West Virginia's primary mean?

By Bill Schneider
CNN Senior Political Analyst

CHARLESTON, West Virginia (CNN) -- West Virginians will head to the polls Tuesday for the state's Democratic primary between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. But what will the vote there really mean after new delegate totals show Obama with a sizable lead?

Some say it could send a sobering message to Obama's Democratic supporters.

West Virginia is expected to go for Clinton big time -- and the polls show it.

Clinton has a 43-point advantage over Obama, 66 percent to 23 percent, according to a survey from the American Research Group released Friday.

The poll was conducted after Tuesday's primary results and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

"This state is really Hillary Clinton's wheelhouse. It's an older population, socially conservative, blue-collar workers," said Kennie Bass, a political reporter for WCHS in West Virginia.

<...>

A big Clinton win will send a powerful message that there are a lot of Democrats not ready to get on the Obama bandwagon.

link


What about the message sent by the primaries that Obama won by 29 or more pts. (delegates to Obama):

IL 65% (104)

GA 67% (60)

DC 75% (12)

VA 64% (54)


Obama also won the following caucus states by 30 or more points:

HI (76%), WA (68%), NE (68%, MN (66%), AL (75%), ID (79%), KS (74%) and CO (67%)


The spin coming from the media and Hillary's campaign and surrogates is bordering on delusional (or deceitful).

May 10, 2008, 6:19 pm

Clinton’s Mother’s Day Fund-Raiser

By Katharine Q. Seelye

<...>

The afternoon was a chance for Mrs. Clinton to raise a bit of money _ tickets started at $100 _ and showcase her platform for women and families. “It would be exciting to have the first mother in the White House,” she declared at one point, but most of her 40-minute talk was devoted to her plans for universal health care, making college affordable and investigating the oil companies.

It was not clear if she was trying to telegraph something to Senator Barack Obama, the frontrunner for the nomination, but she made two particularly interesting comments. She seemed to relax her much-criticized call for a vacation from the gas tax, saying she was open to other ways of providing relief for people from high gas prices. And she reaffirmed her view that a health-care plan needs to be universal, describing that as a core Democratic value.

“Our Democratic nominee should stand for universal health care,” she said, raising one of the most salient policy differences between her and Mr. Obama.

The fighting words were left to two members of New York’s congressional delegation — Nita Lowey and Charles Rangel — who introduced her and her daughter, Chelsea.

Referring to superdelegates, Ms. Lowey said: “We must persuade them that Hillary Clinton is the right choice, the rational choice, the smart choice, the choice of the heart and the head.”

Mr. Rangel declared, “We were with Hillary Clinton before, we are with Hillary Clinton now and we will stay with Hillary Clinton until we win.”

link


Never mind the facts.

Current pledged delegates: Obama 1591, Hillary 1426

If he gets MI 55, the delegate split for the FL and MI is Hillary 178, Obama 122.

The totals become Obama 1713 Hillary 1604

If Hillary gets 70% of the vote in WV, KY and PR, and Obama wins by a margin of 4 pts in SD, MT and OR, Hillary gains 135, Obama 82.

The totals become Obama 1795, Hillary 1739

Other scenarios (these include current superdelegates):

FL gets 1/2 vote, no MI
Obama 1899, Hillary 1757.5

Florida 1/2 vote and MI split 59/69
Obama 1959, Hillary 1833.5

___________________

FL gets 1/2 vote, no MI, plus the remaining states from above:
Obama 1981, Hillary 1892.5


Florida 1/2 vote and MI split 59/69, plus the remaining states from above:
Obama 2041, Hillary 1968.8

Hillary can't win.

Recently NJ flipped to Obama, now CA:

Californians Would Switch Clinton Vote For Obama

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) ― California voters would change their February primary vote for Hillary Clinton to a vote for Barack Obama if the vote were held again, according to an exclusive poll commissioned by CBS 5.

While voters in the California Democratic Presidential Primary backed Clinton by a 10-point margin, a new SurveyUSA poll shows that if given the chance to vote again, Californians would choose Barack Obama by a 6-point margin, 49%-43%.

The poll was conducted on May 7 and 8 and has a margin of error of 4%.

On the Republican side, John McCain won by 8 points in the California primary. The new poll says he would win by 35, in a 55%-20% victory over Mitt Romney, if Californians were given the chance to vote again.


Goodbye to Clinton's double digit Ohio win

Indiana: Obama 49.4%, Hillary 50.6%


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Johnny__Motown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. great post, thanks.. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
43. Thanks.
Thanks, all, for the comments and recs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. At some point, the grandstanding for grandstanding's sake has to stop
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. I hate saying this, but does that pose strike anyone else as offensive? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Thinin that's part of the reason it showed up on a political humor site
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. no more offensive
than your stalinist sigline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. Stalinist? I'm not sure how "Hillary Who?" is Stalinist. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
36. So you're comparing Barack Obama to Stalin?!?!
Wow.

That's as bad as comparing Clinton to Hitler. You guys have issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #25
42. What possible value have your snarks held lately??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #25
52. OH SHIT COMMIES! COVER YOUR EYES! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
49. This is a snapshot
she was probably waving to the crowd and the photographer caught her in mid-wave. So, no, I don't find it offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Even if she scores 117 on the final, she will not get a passing grade in the class. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Obama will need to remind everyone of
how many times he's beaten Hillary by a huge margin. How many 30 point wins does Hillary have so far? Zero?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mudoria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. Who knows? Maybe Barry will make a big
comeback in WV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Oh goody.
Another disrespectful Obama hater on DU. Just what we need at this juncture. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Barry? Anyway, I say let her have one 30 point win. It allows her to go out with a small victory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. President Barry forgives your spitefulness
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Please don't be bitter, Mud.
Edited on Sat May-10-08 07:21 PM by BushDespiser12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. Doesn't need to..There once was a filly named Hillie
People may have thought it silly
She wanted to win the big race
Which was fine on its face
But she was undone as it all went south
Thanks to Filly Hillie's & Billy's big mouth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
28. He doesn't need to ...
... he can let Blondie have it. It'll give her something to brag about years from now, when she talks about her otherwise dismal campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ekwhite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
57. Probably not
He doesn't even appear to be contesting West Virginia. It will be a blowout, but West Virginia doesn't have enough delegates to matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. Who cares, WV will go Repuke in the GE anyhow
The "Some say...." stuff about this article is so FauxNews.

It matters not the results of WV, if it did it would be a whole new ballgame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Don't be so sure
* took WV by 13 points in 2004 and just 6 points in 2000. Many factors this year could contribute to a substantial reduction in that spread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. The numbers are going the wrong way. If it went from 13 in 2000 to 5 in 2004 then you might .......
have an argument, but they didn't. Not only did the rethugs win in 2000, they more than doubled their margin in 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Exactly....they loved * MORE in 2004? WTF?
Sorry but that tells me there's a lot of dumbass people in that state....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. In every single state but one - see post below.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #27
38. You might not have noticed, but only one state did that.
Not that it is something pleasing to look at:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May10.html

any state you rest the cursor on will open to the last 4 GE results. There is only on state where the repug got less by %'s in 2004 than in 2000, and that was Vermont.

If you browse around and look at the trends, they are all bad for twelve years so far. It is certainly something that I hope to see reverse in a big way this time around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Here's the rational answer as to why that has happened .....
The 17 state solution. The DLC has pushed this and pushed this, and out of three elections it worked only once, and that was Bill's second term, but it also cost us Congress. The DLC didn't want to work at keeping blue seats in primarily red states. I find it amazing that Utah has managed to hold onto the one Democratic district that they have, but that is due to the grassroots efforts of people like the Robert Redford's of the world.

When you follow the 17 state solution, you willingly forfeit 33 other states which the rethugs will happily take without a fight. Rethugs then fight for one or two swing states and win the election.

Kerry lost four states by 2 points or less. Swing on or two those states back and it would have been an easy win. Now the sad part, the 17 state solution only called for campaigning in two of those states.

Hillary thinks she can win WV because Bill did, but here's the cold hard facts. 33 states feel abandoned by our party and it's because of a Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. That explains 33 states, but the negative trend is in the 17 too.
That is, if you look at the sets of GE results in the 17 states the DLC counts as worth winning, the repug results in each one improve each election from 1992 to 2004.

I haven't given it a lot of thought as I just noticed the trend the other day, but I suppose it is worth a "puzzle me this" OP. I haven't heard it talked about here, but it is striking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Take a look at this ......
California: Bill Clinton 1: 46% Bill Clinton 2: 51% Al Gore: 53% Kerry: 55%
Oregon: Bill Clinton 1: 43% Bill Clinton 2: 47% Al Gore: 47% Kerry: 52%
Minnesota: Bill Clinton 1: 43% Bill Clinton 2: 50% Al Gore: 50% Kerry: 53%
Illinois: Bill Clinton 1: 49% Bill Clinton 2: 54% Al Gore: 55% Kerry: 55%


Notice that the Democrats have been trending upwards in these states, and it holds pretty much true for almost all the blue states. There is some minor influx on any given year, but most have an upward trend in 3 out of the 4 elections. Look at the red states and you will notice that Democrats have been trending downwards.

It's true that republicans have been trending upwards, but so have Democrats. Most of the downward trends happened in Gore's run with Nader, and most of Clinton's wins in '92 in red states can be attributed to Perot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #47
51. Thanks. My hair is a little less on fire now.
I have been putting together a graph to help visualize the thing, but haven't any great ideas other than that the HRC story of electability and turning things around is crap - the repugs have gotten more votes in every single state every election since Bill got in. Its old news, and nothing has gotten better under their watch.

But that's all negative...I hope to see a big change in the numbers this year, and hope to see it early in the polls once the GE gets rolling. Thanks again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #27
55. In 04 he was an incumbent in wartime.
WV has long been a Democratic stronghold. There's no reason it couldn't move back into our column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. Bookmarked to diffuse the BS we know will be upcoming.
Great post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
14. With all the states that Hillary says don't count, I'll go ahead and say WV doesn't count either...
at this point in time. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluebellbaby Donating Member (275 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
15. Please don't shoot me...but doesn't this smack of a race race...so to speak
It's scary to think but the repukes will bill the GE as a racial divide...the MSM has been very careful not to put the exit polls in this light...but I don't think anything is above the repukes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
16. Dems can write that swing state off with Barack Obama -- NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
35. How is it a "swing state? They voted more for * in 2004 than 2000!
That's one dumb state! I can almost write off 2000 since he campaigned differently than he actually ended up governing, but for them to like him MORE after the first term? I don't get that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Clinton won W.V. in 92 and 96
Edited on Sat May-10-08 08:05 PM by DemGa
of course - Clearly it would be in play for Hillary - count it out for the Dems with Barack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
18. Obama could pick Byrd as VP in win WV
Edited on Sat May-10-08 07:33 PM by bushmeat
:rofl:



/edit its Robert Byrd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. You mean Robert Byrd, Harry Byrd was a Senator from Virginia
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. doh! fixed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. How disrespectful of you. Get lost. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. huh? - no disrespect intended - I bet Byrd is an Obama supporter -
Edited on Sat May-10-08 07:38 PM by bushmeat
I just think its funny how we are still focusing on state after state when this is wrapped up already

It would be ridiculous to pick a VP just to win a particular state but thats the tone around here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoof Hearted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. I can't imagine how you could be more disingenuous
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoof Hearted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #18
29. We'll mark you down for the "disability is just hilarious" wing of the party.
Sadly there are plenty of used asswipes willing to join you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #29
48. well sorry i used a recent photo, it was the first one that I came across, you took it the wrong way
Edited on Sat May-10-08 10:08 PM by bushmeat
i had his name wrong and searched for
Senator Harry Byrd of West Virginia
its the first hit on image search
perhaps you like this one better

if you doubt me do the search yourself http://images.google.com/images?q=Senator%20Harry%20Byrd%20of%20West%20Virginia it is the first hit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #18
45. Senator Byrd has earned our respect.
Not nice :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #45
50. see #48 not what was intended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
20. Obama won Virginia with about 68% a state we're much more likely to win in the GE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #20
32. Exactly -- and NC!
A lot of this is up to the college aged voters -- and Obama's been getting them out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
44. The GE could blow all predictions.
McCain is a lousy candidate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #20
58. The signs are good for both NC and VA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
22. "clinton's wheelhouse... socially conservative..." aka bigots and "family values" idiots.
Edited on Sat May-10-08 07:31 PM by Zhade
Says it all.

Whatever. Obama now leads in EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY, including SDs.

She's sooooo done.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. Yeah I'm so sick of the codewords.
"socially conservative," doesn't that just mean DUMB? I mean I suppose I live as "socially conservative" life as anybody, in that I'm long time married etc. but people who use such things as VOTING CRITERIA? D-U-M-B and most likely Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ronnie Donating Member (674 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #34
56. How's the view up there on your
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
41. Isn't it a small state? I thought those didn't count?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 01:06 AM
Response to Original message
53. The math hasn't been in her favor since Sooper Twosday
Which is when any normal candidate would have dropped out .... with grace and dignity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-11-08 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
54. SNL disses Hillary

A Saturday Night Live Skit Clinton Won't Be Referencing Anytime Soon

May 11, 2008 10:58 AM

During a recent Ohio debate, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., cited an SNL skit mocking media adulation of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., to make the argument that there had been a media double-standard.

Watch HERE.

The problem with citing a comedy show as an authority is that it can come back to haunt you.

Watch Amy Poehler's "Hillary Clinton" talk to the superdelegates HERE.


Ouch!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
workinclasszero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
59. All the Hillary voters in WV will go home to McCain in the GE
and Obama will be our next President.:toast: Yippee!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
60. Current totals from Real Clear Politics:
Edited on Mon May-12-08 01:54 PM by ProSense
Total Delegates Obama + 172
Super Delegates Obama + 6
Pledged Delegates Obama + 165
Popular Vote Obama +736,579

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
61. It's all a charade now for her, to what end I'm not sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heather MC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
62. THIS IS HILLARY CAMPAIGN MSM SPIN CRAP
Obama's camp. never expected to win WVA, or Kentucky and the Media knows this
trying to spin it like some kind of Uh oh for Obama. See for yourself.
So far they have only been wrong on 2 states Maine and Indiana
They thought Hillary would take Maine but she didn't and they thought they would get Indiana
but Obama only lost by .885%
I wish the media would stop repeating everything the Hillary's camp says.
why couldn't she close the deal on 32 out 47 states?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
63. "Expect the Clinton campaign to use tonight's result as an argument against Obama's electability"

Obama Expected To Lose Big In Today's West Virginia Primary

By Eric Kleefeld - May 13, 2008, 8:51AM

Although Barack Obama is now widely expected to be the Democratic nominee, the campaign is in for a bit of embarrassment tonight in what is likely to be a very bad showing in the West Virginia primary -- indeed, if the polls are accurate, he'll be lucky to get more than 30%:

Clinton 60%, Obama 24% (Suffolk, May 11)
Clinton 66%, Obama 23% (ARG, May 9)

Clinton 56%, Obama 27% (Rasmussen, May 5)

Expect the Clinton campaign to use tonight's result as an argument against Obama's electability, and as evidence that Hillary can reach out to rural working-class voters where Obama can't.


Hillary's delusional hype.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevietheman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
64. So, Hillary becomes Queen of West Virginia tonight. {yawn} :) n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
65. Hillary's campaign sound bitter:
Edited on Tue May-13-08 01:30 PM by ProSense
Via TPM Election Central:

To: Interested Parties
From: Clinton Campaign
Date: Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Re: Why West Virginia Matters

With a record turnout expected in today's primary, West Virginia Democrats will make clear who they believe is the strongest candidate to take on Sen. McCain in the Fall.

The Mountain State is used to picking winners. Every nominee has carried the state's primary since 1976, and no Democrat has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916.

Democrats carried West Virginia in 1992 and 1996, but lost the state--and the White House--in 2000 and 2004. Hillary has predicted victory against Sen. McCain in West Virginia based on the strength of her economic message.

Given the attempts by our opponent and some in the media to declare this race over, any significant increase in voter turnout, coupled with a decisive Clinton victory, would send a strong message that Democrats remain excited and energized by Hillary's candidacy.

In the face of grim poll numbers, the Obama campaign has attempted to dismiss today's outcome despite the fact that Sen. Obama has outspent us on advertising, has more staff in the state, and more than double the number of offices.

He has also benefited from the support of the most high-profile endorsers in West Virginia--Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Congressman Nick Rahall. By every measure, the Obama campaign has waged an aggressive campaign in the Mountain State.

Despite being the so-called "presumptive nominee" and benefiting from these advantages, Sen. Obama has been unable to close a significant gap in the polls.

Sen. Clinton has already won Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan. With a win in West Virginia, Sen. Clinton will have once again proven her greater ability to win in the key swing states




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
66. Breaking: Hillary wins WV. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democracy1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
67. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC