<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>WASHINGTON - Congratulations, Hillary Rodham Clinton. You did what your husband said you had to do and won Ohio and Texas. Now what? "Tonight we won three out of four contests and began a new chapter in this historical campaign," the victorious Clinton told reporters on her campaign plane. But even if she wins every contest left, Clinton still would have a hard time overcoming Barack Obama's pledged delegate lead. In fact, her task got even harder because even though she won Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island Tuesday night, she didn't do much to close the delegate gap ?€” and with every contest that passes, the number up for grabs drops. Obama focused on the math while addressing supporters in Texas. "We have nearly the same delegate lead as we did this morning and we are on our way to winning this nomination," he said. Clinton's best hope is to try to rack up big margins in the spring contests. Even her own advisers acknowledge Obama will probably win the two other states left this month ?€” Wyoming on Saturday and Mississippi next Tuesday. If she is able to continue turning voters against Obama in the races after that, she could plausibly clinch the nomination by persuading superdelegates to back her. It won't be easy. Her success Tuesday night came after she put a series of hits on Obama. She ran TV ads that questioned his foreign policy credentials ?€” one that pointed out he didn't call hearings on the fight against terrorists in Afghanistan and another fear-inducing piece that depicted her as the best candidate to handle an international crisis that erupts at 3 a.m. when your children are asleep. Her campaign tried to raise more questions about Obama's connections to an indicted fundraiser as he went on the trail. Clinton said Obama tried to pull the old "wink-wink" by talking tough on free trade in Ohio while secretly reassuring Canadians that he is no protectionist. "He needs to figure out a way to respond quicker without being trapped into sort of the politics of squabbling," said Democratic consultant Jenny Backus. "She slowed him down tonight by throwing a bunch of inside the beltway arguments over him, and it took him a day too long to get out from underneath it." With seven weeks until Pennsylvania, there's plenty of time for the race to get even uglier. And if the race drags on, it may not just be Clinton. Even as he was ahead with 11 straight wins leading into Tuesday, Obama made some of his toughest critiques yet of Clinton, and those are only likely to increase as he tries to force her out of the race. "They need to run their own race, but they need to be able to turn the focus back to her," Backus said.</div> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080305/ap_on_...ocrats_analysis After all the drama, she gained a net count of 12 delegates. The next two primaries are also Obama facials.
It's a damn shame that she is going to make the Democratic party wait this out until the convention...by that time, the GOP will be in full throttle against Obama AND Clinton. She is going to split the party.
How is she splitting the party? Obama has won nothing, why should Clinton give up? Clinton is not the new Huckabee, who had only 200+ delegates while McCain had 1000+. That was a big difference. Do you know how much divides Obama and Clinton? Thats what I tought.
Obama won't win on pledged delegates either. He needs 800 more, or so, to win the nomination. That ain't happening. In spite of the prolonged race on the Democrats' side, the news cycles are all democrats, all day. So the guy who actually dominated the field on the other side isn't getting much press. Good for the Democrats, actually. No matter what the pundits say.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries...ts/scorecard/#D Clinton 238 superdelagtes Obama 199 superdelegates
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Mar 5 2008, 02:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How is she splitting the party? Obama has won nothing, why should Clinton give up? Clinton is not the new Huckabee, who had only 200+ delegates while McCain had 1000+. That was a big difference. Do you know how much divides Obama and Clinton? Thats what I tought. </div> I'm saying is, there is really no virtual shot of Clinton catching Obama on pledged delegates (there is a great article on newsweek [this might be it, actually] about this). Therefore, unless she or Obama bow out, which isn't happening, this thing is going to run it's course to the convention were the super-delegates are going to have to decide the out come...and if Obama is ahead in the pledged delegates and they go against that, you can count on an uproar from the Democratic party.
Clinton has already caught him. Obama 1,520 Clinton 1, 424 Super delegates Obama 199 Clinton 238 Needed to win 2,024 (according to howard dean)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Mar 5 2008, 02:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Clinton has already caught him. Obama 1,520 Clinton 1, 424 Super delegates Obama 199 Clinton 238 Needed to win 2,024 (according to howard dean)</div> How is that catching up to him? She got 12 more delegates, do the Math on the remaining states. Empirically he has about a 70% chance of winning. In fact, read the article I just posted.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Mar 5 2008, 02:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Clinton has already caught him. Obama 1,520 Clinton 1, 424 Super delegates Obama 199 Clinton 238 Needed to win 2,024 (according to howard dean)</div> Like Denny said, those include the SD's.
I know it includes the super delegates, but I'm saying that no way that Obama has this in his pocket. And no way that Clinton is the new Huckabee. You can't connect the two cases.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Mar 5 2008, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I know it includes the super delegates, but I'm saying that no way that Obama has this in his pocket. And no way that Clinton is the new Huckabee. You can't connect the two cases.</div> Tell me how she wins then. You can't, unless you start speculating about Michigan and Florida like Denny does.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Mar 5 2008, 03:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Tell me how he wins. Speculate away! </div> You go first. Using your own Rasmussen polls would tell you that it's more likely then not Obama wins. What is your point?
You're the one who started the thread calling Clinton the new "Huckabee" and then you can't make the case for it. You go first.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Mar 5 2008, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You're the one who started the thread calling Clinton the new "Huckabee" and then you can't make the case for it. You go first.</div> You're just a casual observer if you even thought she caught up. Rasmussen calculations (How many times do I have to say 70+%), the most accurate polls according to Denny, your pal. And you?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...#upcomingstates Illustrates the math a little for you. The next two primaries are Obama blowouts too.
Are we in ****ing pre-school? You go first? Huevon own's you guys...well Denny, he's pretty ****ing smart...just backs up Hillary a little much for my likings.
