Obama-Clinton Hilarious Math Update
By David Swanson
It's reached a point that everyone has known for months it had to reach, the point at which even people paid to do so cannot keep it going with a straight face. On Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama picked up approximately 99 new pledged delegates from North Carolina and Indiana, while Senator Hillary Clinton picked up about 85. The final count may move a delegate or two, but these numbers are close enough for the following calculation.
Obama now has 1,592 pledged delegates to Clinton's 1,419. There are 217 delegates remaining to be pledged. Of those 217, Clinton would need to win 196 to beat Obama, or a victory of 90 percent to 10 percent. That's about as likely as Dick Cheney hitting 50 percent approval.
Will Clinton finally at long last drop out on Wednesday? Will she wait another week for West Virginia, or yet another week for Kentucky and Oregon? Will she hang in there until June to make sure Puerto Rico doesn't win it for her, or Montana and South Dakota? And will people dumb enough to still watch television have to endure this crap all summer?
I have nothing against West Virginia or Oregon. I wish every state could be involved in the primaries. I'd hold them all on one day in October if it were up to me. But the corporate media has not been keeping Clinton on life-support these many months out of concern for the voters of remaining states. I'm glad to complain with the best of them when pundits hound decent candidates out of the race after Iowa and prior to 49 states. But once the outcome actually has been decided, why should we tolerate our televisions pretending it hasn't been?
The numbers above are based on leaving out Florida and Michigan, which are being left out, and also do not include 19 delegates pledged to John Edwards.
These numbers do not include Super Delegates. Why not? Because this is a democratic republic, and only pledged delegates are awarded by voters. These are the indisputable numbers of delegates assigned to candidates by actual voters and caucus-goers.
Clinton cannot win. Period. She can only hope for an anti-democratic coup by Super Delegates that would destroy the Democratic Party.
So, why does the corporate media behave as if it's still a contest, and why does the independent media obediently fall into line? Presumably those two questions have two different answers.
When has any other candidate been kept on life-support by media corporations in this way? Hasn't the standard for dropping out always been - for every other candidate - the impossibility of winning, not actually having lost?
What can Clinton hope to gain from staying in other than hurting Obama's chances in order to avoid his running as an incumbent in 4 years?
And why is it so difficult for people to think for themselves and let the media and the Super Delegates and the Democratic Party know that WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH?
Don't believe me? Don't know how to do addition? Don't own a calculator? Here's a video of Chris Matthews admitting the media's role in this farce:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/32937
Here's how you can contact the DNC: 877-336-7200 or
http://www.democrats.org/contact.html
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version
- Spotlight this page




















www.VelvetRevolution.us
New Math
Thought I wouldn't understand these math updates. Thought too many variables, etc., but you put those worries to rest. Chris Matthews clip is priceless.
Thanks.
What's the hurry? Why work toward another shafting?
I don't understand "progressives" telling anyone to drop out of a race before the institutionalized selection process is complete. What the heh? While the math makes a convincing case that Hillary cannot go into the convention with the needed number of delegates to be the nominee, it also suggests that Obama won't either. Since the selection process, vis-a-vis delegates, and the shenanigans of super delegates is anything but democratic, anything is possible. What I find troublesome in all of this is that progressives should urge Hillary to drop out when the selection process put in place by the Democratic Party is incomplete. How progressive is that? I am not a Hillary supporter. I am not an Obama supporter. I am not a McCain supporter. I support Ralph Nader who is the only candidate running with consistent progressive positions and values. It's amazing that progressives should jump on board 1/2 of the Corporate Party bandwagon with expectations that anything will change. How many times are you going to bend over and let the Democratic Party give you what you forgot they gave you in the last election? You know, what Pelosi did after taking your vote and abusing you. Come on folks. You know better. Just look at John Conyers and his silencing. Look at what Obama and Hillary did to make sure that "one of their own" Democrats, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel were not treated as equal participants in the democratic process. Obama, like Hillary and McCain, are more of the same. More corporate sock puppets. You know it!
What is disturbing me is that more and more so-called peace and justice websites are revealing themselves to be front groups for the Democratic Party. And that is why: Run! Ralph Run!
Thanksgiving every day for the Media
I hope all the media outlets are grateful for Hilary's stubborn clinging to a "race" which ended soon after super Tuesday. She has singlehandedly kept the fires burning and become more coarse and strident as time goes on. Her aggresive talk about "fighting"; being a "fighter"; refusing to quit; makes me think of GWB and the Iraq situation. It makes for good copy. I wonder if Hilary is on the payroll for helping the media outlets to become more profitable. She has done her part to keep interest up. After all, who is more boring than John McCain and his "friends".
Hillary may go nuclear....
...and this is by running as an independent. That would crush Obama and maybe even get her in the Whitehouse.
I am a Florida voter that
I am a Florida voter that wants all our votes to count as they were cast on January 29th. If this would happen Hillary would be in a better position than you give her credit for. I love you using Chris Matthews, a glowing, tingle up his leg, supporter of Obama from early on, as the big expert on Hillary having no chance to win. Well if you have to win by not counting votes that is not a way to win a lot of support for your policies when you are in the White House. I just have to point to our current President George "Dubya" Bush to make my argument. He cheated his way into the White House and look how partisan things became and remember he was the guy everyone would rather have a beer with. I don't think Obama can win the support of people when he would not even respect the only voice that they have in our democracy and that is our vote. You have to lead all the people not just your voting block and he can't make that argument anymore in my view.
Bush likes to play by the rules .... his rules
Hillary is his clone.
EW
Hillary is my favorite Republican!
DUH
I expect her, regardless, to take it to the convention, with Bubba working OT to threaten the super-D's into going for her. Remember, whoever doesn't give the Clintons their way usually winds up in the obituaries. Anyway, if anybody were going to participate in this rigged sham that we call the electoral process, which actually belongs in a banana republic, there is only one person that anybody with an ounce of brains, historical perspective, constitutional knowledge, or who wasn't a preening fascist or expects the government to supply their every need out of other peoples' pockets could vote for, and that person is Ron Paul. He is the only candidate (and yes, he's still in the race) that makes any pretense of knowing what the true role of the federal government (which needs to be destroyed, in my opinion) is in a constitutional, representative republic. Obama has never identified the "change" he keeps talking about, for one thing, and he has consistently balked at specifically saying he would end this genocide in the Middle East, much less when. At least John "Where's my Diaper?" McWar and The Hillaroid openly admit that Israeli puppeteers have their hands up both their asses.
Mario Cuomo is right
Fight to the bitter end , then join ranks against McCain. We need BOTH of them. It will be harder for McCain to devour BOTH of them.
The media keeps painting McCain as the sweetest most genuine warmongering warhawk you'd ever want to meet. Not only does McCain LOVE war, he LOVES being in war. It's a family business , his entire family LOVES war, as we just found out.
Do any of these McCains love PEOPLE ?
How do you argue that this McCain clan is bad news? You argue that IRAQ WAR is bad and archaic and evil and that it was easily preventable mass murder and mayhem, and yet McCain and Lieberman were its major marketers of the illegal Iraq Invasion/Regime Change for the Neocons anyways.
IMPEACH BUSHCO & RICO PNAC/AIPAC>"OUT" ANTI-AMERICAN CABALS!
WE MUST DEFEAT MCCAIN!!! http://www.cafepress.com/bootthepnac