I'm back to pessimism re: Obama. (Gotta go with what you know...)

I don't think he can get less-educated whites or old people to vote for him in sufficient numbers. Were the franchise restricted to those under 60 or people with at least some college, he'd win in a walk... but lower-information Democratic voters, I'm guessing, prefer Clinton not even so much from vestigial racism (though I'm sure that plays a part) as from brand loyalty. The Clintons are like McDonald's, Starbucks, Wal-Mart, etc; a known commodity, more or less.

The tactic for Obama now might be, one, to emphasize that he polls better and can draw a clearer contrast against McCain; and two, to subtly play up stories like Bill Clinton's Kazakhstan fundraising shenanigans ("Borat-gate") and various other post-presidential adventures, reminding Democrats how annoying it is when the First Narcissist starts dipping his wick all over the place. (Ew.)

I'm still confused. NBC still has Obama ahead 838 to 834.

philliesphhan wrote:I'm still confused. NBC still has Obama ahead 838 to 834.

CNN has it 818-730 for Clinton. Nothing like transparency in the nominating process.

jerseyhoya wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:I'm still confused. NBC still has Obama ahead 838 to 834.

CNN has it 818-730 for Clinton. Nothing like transparency in the nominating process.

doesn't it depend on:
1) how/if they are counting michigan and florida
2) how/if they are counting superdelegates

i mean, some variation between outlets would be expected given those factors and how each outlet elects to count things, right?

seke2 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:I'm still confused. NBC still has Obama ahead 838 to 834.

CNN has it 818-730 for Clinton. Nothing like transparency in the nominating process.

doesn't it depend on:
1) how/if they are counting michigan and florida
2) how/if they are counting superdelegates

i mean, some variation between outlets would be expected given those factors and how each outlet elects to count things, right?

I don't think any are counting Florida or Michigan.

It depends a lot on how they're counting super delegates, and also on how quickly they're tallying from last night and how they're doing so.

The Dems give out delegates proportionally by district. Here's another different count. I like this one because it's easy to read, and I think they're drawing from lots of sources.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

this link seems fairly transparent.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... ounts.html

not counting superdelegates, obama has 778, hillary has 763

counting superdelegates, hillary has 974, obama has 906.

this site does not count florida or michigan for the democratic totals.

lol i'm consistently about 30 seconds late today

What happened to the thread title?

phatj wrote:What happened to the thread title?

He probably wants us to go to the other politics thread.

i guess some counts must have just changed been added...

with supers
clinton 1012, obama 933

without supers
obama 805, clinton 801

Sorry, guys, Woody started another thread, so take all the arguing over there, please.