|
Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 22:09:14 PM EDT
|
|
I saw this funny post up at Taylor Marsh, and just had to laugh. It seems people are getting nervous. Entitled "Faithless Delegates- how PUMA wins the battle and loses the election", it's an interesting insight into the minds of nervous Obama supporters who know that what has been stolen before can be "re-stolen" right back. Check it out.
First, they do the delegate math, which, surprisingly, isn't too far off...
Sen. Obama got 1766.5 pledged delegates out of 3434, and Sen. Clinton got 1639.5. Sen. Obama got 463 super-delegates out of 823, and Sen. Clinton got 257. This means Sen. Obama got 333 total delegates (127 pledged delegates and 206 super-delegates) more than Sen. Clinton. As such, under normal circumstances, he is the de-facto nominee for the Democratic party, which means the party infrastructure is working to support him as is normal for a de-facto nominee.
The only three ways this changes are:
1) The unthinkable happening, i.e. the assassination of Sen. Obama
2) Sen. Obama withdrawing from the race due to medical or personal reasons.
3) A "faithless delegate" situation in which the will of the voters is questioned or overthrown.
Forget about the "will of the voters" part - you DON'T want to go there, Obamazoids. Hillary got more popular votes... and the DNC gave Obama more delegates. Hey, don't ask me, I'm just a voter. From FLORIDA, no less. Call me half a voter.
It's the "faithless delegate" part that got coffee all over my computer screen.
Follow me... |
| campskunk :: Flop Sweat - Obamazoids Get Nervous About Superdelegates |
| As those of us who actually know the rules have understood for a long time, delegates haven't taken any vows, and are free to vote for whichever candidate they believe in good conscience is consistent with the wishes of the voters they represent (if they're pledged), or they can support whomever they wish, if they're unpledged.
The "faithless delegate" description is just an attempt to cast aspersions on delegates who switch from Obama to Hillary. It's a riff on something that actually exists - a "faithless elector" in the Electoral College, under an entirely different set of rules. By conflating the two, the Taylor Marsh diarist is attempting to imply the delegates intending to vote for Obama, pledged or superdelegates, are somehow breaking some "rule" if they switch. They aren't.
How do I know this? Because how do you think Obama GOT these superdelegates? By stampeding them in the first week of June, as the primaries ended. Threats, inducements, whatever it took, he convinced people that supporting Hillary would be hazardous to their political health if he ended up with the nomination. Apparently, these delegates who switched from Hillary to him were just seeing the light and making a rational decision, but if they switch back, all of a sudden they're "faithless". Double standard, anyone?
This reminds me of the old saying - if you steal somebody else's spouse, that's what you get - someone who cheats on their spouse. Sorry, Obamazoids. You got those superdelegates by threatening them into switching their support - let's see you hang onto them now.
Oh, and one more glaring error - it's 167 switchers needed, not 334. 167 switchers would lower Obama's count by 167... and raise Hillary's count by 167, for a net swing of 334, or one more than the current difference in delegate count. As we're finding out these days, girls are
pretty good at math, too ;-) Turns out that research dbrown04 put a diary up about last week is getting more empirical support. Sorry, blogger boyz. If you don't want people to know how bad you are at math, don't calculate in public ;-)
Oh, and ANOTHER glaring error - all that "PUMAS winning the nomination and losing the election" is speculation which flies in the face of the actual facts. In other words, the Taylor Marsh diarist is pulling it out of his ass. More people want to vote for Hillary in the general election than want to vote for Obama. PUMAs would be winning the election, not losing it, by persuading delegates to nominate Hillary. She's beating McCain by eight points. |
|
"Always aim high, work hard, and care deeply about what you believe in. When you stumble, keep faith. When you?re knocked down, get right back up. And NEVER listen to anyone who says you can't or shouldn't go on."
Hillary Clinton - June 7, 2008
|
|
- Put stuff here
|
|
Blog Roll
|
|
- Put stuff here
|
|
