This primary is getting troubling

[Egnever]

I am not sure how anyone can win enough delegates to capture the nomination.

The Obama campaign was brilliant last week and if they continue to control the press he should do well the rest of the race, I don't know if I see him running away with it though. With delegates being split almost everywhere we will likely go into the convention pretty close to where we are now. Obama with a small elected delegate lead and hillary with the advantages in super delegates.

This has the potential to get really ugly.

The only way I see this thing ending is by Obama getting a flood of super delegates between now and texas and beating hilary soundly everywhere before Ohio and Texas.

If he does that and pulls off a win in either OH or TEX. Then I think we might be able to end this thing early. Baring that I think we are looking for trouble come convention.

[LisaM]

1. Maybe you don't mean it to sound the way you did....

But it sounds as if you're saying it's going to get ugly if your candidate doesn't win!

[Egnever]

3. Sorry not what I intended

I don't see a real credible path to victory for either of them. If we co into convention pretty much evenly split there will be one camp or the other coming out of it highly upset.

[LisaM]

25. Well I was very upset after Iowa.

I had to figure out how to get past it. I certainly hope that Obama and Clinton supporters can do the same, no matter who the nominee.

Unfortunately, I do worry that Obama supporters are more likely to drop out if their candidate doesn't win than Clinton supporters, in part because a lot of them are new to the process and don't understand that disappointment is part of it.

[Egnever]

30. I totally understand you being upset

This will be upset on a whole different level though. John ran a great campaign but could not realistically compete with the star power of the other two. His dropping out sucks but it was more of a pragmatic decision.

This fight between Obama and Hillary will have no clear winner. No one will be able to say with any credibility that the other side lost. This thing is in danger of being decided by technicalities and no one is going to like that.

[Big Blue Marble]

2. At this point, I think that money becomes significant.

The rumors this morning are that she is thinking of using her own money, while Obama has plenty and
can get more.

As this process moves ahead, it is important to watch the money politics. If she has exhausted her supporters
pocketbooks and he is able to keep raising funds this has becomes a major dynamic going forward.

[Egnever]

8. I dont think he can sweep though going forward

Even if he wins all the states I think one thing that should be evident from hillary's support yesterday is that it is solid. She didnt really lose ground anywhere last night he just made up a lot of ground.

Even if he wins every state from here out with delegate splitting I think its still too close to call.

[UALRBSofL]

9. Big Blue Marble

That's the problem. MSM has been saying Clinton is out of money and will have to use her own. Money seems to help run a good campaign. That's why I see Clinton having problems ahead.

[jannyk]

17. Excellent! Then we can forgo all this annoying election crap in

the future.
Instead of elections, we'll just make the candidates do 'fund raising' - no votes - just checks. The one with the most money by a certain date will be declared - 'the winner' - and buy the Presidency for a 4 year term. The money will go to buy down the national debt. Everyone wins, we don't have to get off our fat arses and go out in the cold and cast our vote, the credit card companies will love it, the economy benefits and the candidate with the most cash wins! Sounds - so American.

:sarcasm:

[Big Blue Marble]

20. Whether, you like it or not,

and I do not, money is the juice of politics. And in this case, going forward money is to Obama's advantage.

He has lots of small supporters like me willing to continually send him small contributions. That is democracy in action.

[jannyk]

27. No - that is 'American Democracy' in action - with very little

emphasis on the 'Democracy' part. I have lived in 3 other countries where the democratic election of the 'Leader' had no relation to the size of their 'purse'. Amazing as it must seem to you, other leading democratic countries don't buy their way to the top.

[Big Blue Marble]

33. I have been for public financing since the early 70's

I think that financing is the most important issue in politics. As long as multi-national corporations dominate our
election process, we are not a democracy.

That said the next best financing is that that comes from small donors. And that is what is funding Obama's campaign.

I, myself a person who has always donated relatively small amounts to campaigns, have felt compelled to donate much
much more to this one. And at some personal sacrifice, I might add. I will continue to do so as long as he is a viable
candidate, giving him at least $100 each month. Not because it buys me any influence. But because I want democracy
and representative government back and I am will make sacrifices for that.

[lurky]

24. How much money does she have?

I keep hearing reports about Bill getting $20 million here, $60 million there. Do these guys actually have Mitt Romney size money? (Not including the foundation).

[The empressof all]

4. Ultimately, I think we're looking at a Clinton/Obama ticket

The super delegates will lean towards her and she'll get the final nod for the top spot. Obama will be asked to assume second spot for the sake of an appearance of a unified party.

This is not my ideal scenereo...but unfortunately it's what I see coming.

[awaysidetraveler]

15. If Obama goes into the Clinton camp, he won't take me with him.

There's no real difference between a McCain war policy and a Clinton one.

It's a lose-lose vote for me.

[TornadoTN]

28. That's the rub of it for a lot of people - plus VP for Obama is a dead-end

I'll probably still vote for her, but I am not going to be pleased doing so. I highly doubt I would actively campaign for her and I know I wouldn't donate any money to her.

Obama taking a VP slot could be akin to political suicide. After the rough campaign in the primaries, these two certainly don't appear to be amicable. Plus we all know that the "real" VP will be Bill Clinton so why take a trophy position in the first place? Obama wants to effect not change, not sit back and wait his turn.

[The empressof all]

35. My very cynical take on this ...

If it comes to this, Obama will have no choice but to accept VP. Eight years is too long to "linger" in Congress waiting for another opportunity to run and his chances of getting big money support after another eight year Clinton Reign will be unlikely. I would suspect that if he doesn't play ball with Clinton cronies in the event they get the super delegates they won't be pitching for him in the next go around. Their power base will just become more entrenched and will be calling the shots in 2016.

[Cosmocat]

31. There can't be a Hill/Obama ticket ...

in any form ...

Obama's whole premise is that his candidacy would usher out the "old politics" ... Hill is the old politics ... His legitimacy as any kind of presidential/vice presidential candidate would be completely invalidated in a pairing with Hillary ...

[shaniqua6392]

5. Plus most of the SD's that have already pledged

seemed to be for Clinton. If that is the trend with the remaining SD's, and the remaining primaries are as close as the previous ones, she is going to win the nomination.

[Windy]

10. super delegates don't formally pledge until the convention.

to use them is to spin the race thus far.

Disingenuous.

[DJ13]

11. "Plus most of the SD's that have already pledged"

The majority of SD's are still undecided.

Theres 411 undecided SD's as of this morning.

[Colobo]

18. Obama will win them over. Wait and see.

[shaniqua6392]

21. 193 have already pledged to Clinton and

106 have pledged to Obama. So that does leave approx. 497 that have not pledged as of yet. That is a majority, but if the trend of SD's pledging in the future follows along the same percentages as the ones who have already pledged, then Clinton will most likely prevail. I could really care less which one wins, so don't come back and bite my head off with some pro-Obama crap. I think it will end up being Clinton/Obama on the same ticket by the fall. We would sweep every piece of crap Repuke out of Washington D.C. if we had that ticket. That is just my wish for the future.

[jacksonian]

6. look, it's not a football game

either candidate winning the nomination with 50.1% of the delegates is a friggin diaster.

Contested primary in late Aug with McCain comfortably tsk-tsking on TV news shows for 4 months = Dem loss.

It's that simple.

[Egnever]

13. Thats my point

its starting to look pretty bad. We need someone to become the heir apparent here fairly quickly to avoid disaster and I don't think we can get there from either side.

[apnu]

26. who would he be tsk-tsking?

He'd have to split is time talking about both.

What about the notion that keeping the GOP guessing could be useful?

Both Obama and Clinton are enjoying an enormous amount of time and attention in the media. In a way, the country is getting introduced to them now by way of this tight race.

[Windy]

7. Its already settled that NO ONE will run away with the primary election

That is no longer a position that can be supported by either side.

We have a tie today practically with a slight razor edge in the contest for delegates so far (elected delegates) to Obama.

This is a run to the finish line, but it will be close, no matter who is ultimately the victor.

Good for our party. We have an african american man and a woman doing well across all demographics with a record turnout the burys the republicans. Its a day for celebration!

[fasttense]

12. I don't see it as ugly.

I see it as two very outstanding candidates running a political race.

I actually see it as very interesting.

It is just amazing that after over 7 years of the most ignorant, evil, and ruthless corporatist in the country as our bumbling leader, we have both of these very capable and intelligent people running for the job. Either one will make an amazing and dramatic improvement over the liar in chief we currently have today.

[Egnever]

14. well don't get me wrong I am enjoying the race immensely

I am concerned about what happens at the finish line though.

[pampango]

16. I think we are almost certainly headed for a brokered convention with the super

delegates providing the winning margin. To avoid that one of the candidates would have to win 75% of the remaining delegates and that's seems to be out of the question. With the proportional awarding of delegates it is most likely that one or the other will be slightly ahead in elected delegates at the time of the convention.

Of course, a brokered convention COULD get ugly, but it doesn't have to. Both candidates have passionate supporters. If their candidate wins the most elected delegates, it will be difficult to accept that the nomination was given to the other one. If, on the other hand, our candidate finished second in the elected delegate race, most of us could not argue with the other one getting the nomination.

[Egnever]

29. I would agree with that except...

We have the whole florida MI fiasco in the mix.

I really think what we will see is Obama going into the convention with a slight lead of Elected Delegates. The Hillary side wont accept that though unless florida and MI are seated. I think that flips our totals and puts her in the lead which the Obama camp wont accept. We end up with bitterness either way and no real way to claim a true majority of elected Del's.

[pampango]

32. What you present is a worst case scenario, though not outside the realm of possibility.

Either candidate who would use delegates chosen through sanctioned primaries in those states to win the nomination would put personal ambition above the health of the party (which, I agree, would fracture over this).

One can make the principled argument that party officials in those two states broke scheduling rules that they had agreed to. If you do the crime, you should be prepared to do the time. Unfortunately, on two levels I don't think this is practicable.

One is that it penalizes Democratic voters in Michigan and Florida, when they didn't do the "crime". Second, in practical political terms those are two very important states for the GE and marginalizing them may be counterproductive.

If there were new primaries in both states, it would solve these problems. Some Obama supporters might resist this, since it does seem possible, even likely, that without Michigan and Florida counting, he may well arrive at the convention with a slight elected delegate lead and try to parlay that into the nomination. To me that reeks of the "win at all costs" tactics that drove me from the Hillary camp prior to South Carolina.

While pushing new contested primaries may jeopardize whatever slight advantage Obama may have now, it is the "right" thing to do. It enfranchises Michigan and Florida voters and our campaigns there would provide exposure for our ideas to the general voters in those states - good for the GE. If Hillary wins delegates and the nomination with these new primaries, more power to her. I like Obama's chances when he has the chance to campaign and have people get to know him better.

[Egnever]

34. Might be the only way out

This Obama supporter would be for it.

[frazzled]

19. How about a coin toss?

That would at least leave a tied race up to chance, which most of us accept better.

Just kidding, but I think the "good" news is this:

(1) 71-72% of both Obama and Clinton supporters would be satisfied if the other candidate won. (Of course, we may not be talking about "winning" in the case of a brokered convention.)

(2) Either candidate will have been strengthened by this long, tough fight. I think Hillary, especially, should be glad Obama has so closely challenged her--it has made her a much better candidate on every level. Had she sailed through to the candidacy as the same HRC she was last summer, she would not be nearly as strong.

[happyslug]

22. As an advocate of bring back the 2/3 rule, what is the problem?

Prior to 1936 convention, the Democratic Party had a rule that any candidate had to have support from 2/3rds of the delegates to the convention. With such a rule we Nominated Jackson, Polk, Wilson and FDR for the Presidency.

Now the Downside of the 2/3 rule was the 1924 Convention, went (If I remember right) 102 ballots before a Candidate was picked. The 1924 Convention was a fight between the Progressive wing of the Party and the Conservative Wing. Davis (The Candidate picked) did lose to the Republicans that year, but he did much better than the choice of the Conservative wing did four years later (The leader of the progressive wing had died a year after the 1924 Convention and the progressive wing had not yet found a replacement. Funding a Replacement was further complicated by the fact that most people lived, after 1920, in urban areas not rural areas. Urban area, prior to Prohibition, were known as Conservative Voting areas, the progressive movement came from the rural areas prior to 1920, this would change but that would take the onset of the Great Depression).

Anyway, lets go back to what a Convention is for TO PICK A CANDIDATE, not to Crown one already picked. The 2/3 rule will force the Convention to do its job, picking a Candidate, instead of being a Media circus it has become over the last 50 years.

Yes, I know Truman would NOT have won the 1948 Nomination with the 2/3 rule, but you take the good with the bad and as a whole the 2/3 rule brings forth a more acceptable candidate than a simple majority.

[Blue_In_AK]

23. I don't see a problem with this.

It just means they both have to work hard from here on out and refine their positions, which is good, in my opinion. I have little doubt that the Democrats in this country will coalesce around the eventual nominee to defeat McCain or whoever ends up running for the Republicans. I'm not particularly fond of Hillary OR Obama, but I sure intend to vote for whoever ultimately gets the nomination.