Where Are the Democrats Going to Be in June?: A Purely Speculative Exercise

With all this talk in the 'ether' about whether or not it will be "FAIR" if FL and MI are counted (and politically they've got to be)--and by the way it was SC, NH and IA who ALSO broke the rules--I've never seen that they had "permission" from the DNC.
I'm wondering-If Obama is nominated--can we live with a Nominee that was essentially determined by the CAUCUS SYSTEM (and same day registration states). I mean, what could be LESS representational than that? Where anyone can show up, and the whole process is full of intimidation, mismanagement, confusion and chicanery??? Shouldn't we ask ourselves what's going on when a state like TEXAS has a record turnout of voters--ONE candidate (Clinton) wins handily in a legal, organized system--but the OTHER candidate (Obama) wins in the caucuses (and therefore gets the delegates??? I mean, doesn't that SMELL BAD TO YOU?
And what about the rumor that "LOCAL"AA OBAMA supporters were showing up in WI (the whitest place on earth) in interstate buses--and the blue haired ladies were afraid to challenge them & let them vote...IS ANYONE ELSE HEARING THIS STUFF?
AND, AREN'T WE WORRIED??

Why does it have to be so personal? Why would someone have no respect for me because I support Obama? I've served my country overseas, I think I've earned the right to make my own choice. I support Obama because I think he has a better chance to beat McCain, and I think he is more likely to change the political tone of Washington. If Hillary wins the nomination, I will vote for her- I think she's a strong candidate. But I think Obama is stronger.

I don't think any less of Hillary supporters, so why would some of them think less of me?

In such a close race, it is important for every state to count, including Michigan and Florida. If the Democratic Party didn't want to have to potentially wait until June for a nominee, they should have structured the primary calendar to end earlier.

As for Nancy Pelosi's statement about superdelegates "overriding" the pledged delegates, that seems to go against the entire purpose for having superdelegates to begin with (weren't they designed as somewhat of a check and balance, in case the superdelegates felt the most popular candidate might not necessarily be the most electable)?

And, as for the benefit of allowing the primaries to continue, it is in the Democratic Party's benefit to allow the vetting process for Obama to continue. Over the upcoming weeks, they should get a better picture of which candidate should actually be more electable in the general.

someone on this post asked, "why the anger?"

Let me share MY anger ...because my anger is making way to weariness that woman are STILL fighting the same prejudice we have been fighting for sooooo long, and a sadness that if Hillary does not win the nomination (I pray the super delegates will do the right thing!) - that this country - after all we have been through for the last 8 years, will ONCE AGAIN have to chose between two under qualified men.

so here goes...

A woman, highly qualified, exceptionally brilliant, with a deep commitment to this country, with 35 years (a lifetime) of making a difference in both public and private life - of defending the poor, the disabled, the young, of standing up for the rights of women and children everywhere in this word, who has earned the respect of leaders everywhere including Cesar Chavez, Maya Angelou, Gloria Steinem, etc., etc.

... she FINALLY runs for president.

She has the great combination of heart, soul, experience, savvy, poise, brains and compassion.

She is supported by the majority of democrats, she has the nomination in the bag (as she should she is the best candidate). With her the democrats will win in November.

Then from left field a young man, with NO proven experience, NO proven history of ever making a difference, with a bland dismal voting record, with a history of being cheap in donating to charities, starts a campaign based on flowery speech and vague politics - talking about unity and peace.

never mind there was peace and harmony and unity in the party - everyone supported Hillary.

he talks flowery - but has nothing to show that he has ever stood for change, or made a difference for anyone but himself.

then we find out that he surrounds himself with people who are racists - who blame white people for everything - who condemn people for their sexual orientation, and want to subject women.

then we have the media slamming the female and building up the man. everything she does is negative - everything he says is golden. they make sexist insults (as do Obama supporters) of her deviousness, shrill voice, and other sexist remarks. they rake her over the goals, and bring him coffee in bed.

he steals his policies from Hillary - she knows the issues - foreign and domestic inside and out - he parrots everything she says. takes credit for all her ideas.

and blacks flock to him. because of what he has done for his race??? hardly! - Hillary has done more for people of color, especially women of color than Obama has ever done (or will probably ever do.)

young people flock to him... because he has done so much for them??

Yes truly I do feel anger and I feel personally betrayed.

After having sat in boardrooms for many years watching intelligent women work twice as hard as men and get less respect and less pay, and watched women bring great ideas to the table only to have their ideas beaten down only to resurface against from a man's mouth and suddenly be a viable idea.

yes I am sadden, I am sadden by blacks that flock to Obama, especially black women, who are not being true to chosing the BEST and most qualified candidate.

I am sadden by young ladies following Obama's flowery words, after all the barriers Hillary, and women like her, have broken to allow them to have the choices they have today.

I am sadden that once again the media has helped divide this country between race and sex. When truly like any job - your proven work history, experience and qualifications are what should get you the job.

I am sadden by women like Nancy Pelosi who has so ardently asked for our first viable female candidate to withdraw early - just because Obama is considering Pelosi as his VP. Sad. sell out.

If women voted for Hillary it's because she's a woman. but if blacks, and men, vote for Obama it is because he is somehow he is a better choice?

As a Hillary supporter I will probably not vote in the general election if Hillary is not the nominee.

Why? Because I am sick and tired of having to chose between two unqualified men, who are only in it for themselves.

because Obama will not make a good leader - neither will mccain. Hillary has been there for the democratic party for many years - fund raising for Obama, Pelosi, Richardson and many others - only to be betrayed by them when she is the best candidate.

I have no respect for Obama or his supporters - he knows he is not the best candidate, not the best qualified, and that the republicans want him to win because its Mccain's only chance to win.

he has to know. and yet he continues to "talk" a good game.

we are so close to REAL CHANGE, not just empty words. Pennsylvania PLEASE DO THE RIGHT THING!! and super delegates - do what you were created to do (long before this campaign) make the BEST choice for the country and for the democratic party - VOTE for Hillary!!

Thanks for this post, sir. I appreciate it when people do the math for me, I try doing it on the various delegate calculators but it's just not as fulfilling.

But where do you get the idea that Hillary is pulling out dirty tricks? Do you call it dirty tricks that supporters of Hillary, both women, men and black voters are dirty tricks? We spend hours of our own time calling voters all over the country. We canvass for her. WE read articles attacking her and respond to these articles with fact that we know. We know what her ideas are on issues. (Not like Barack supporters who when ask, can't discuss his ideas) We know that Barack's ideas seem to magically develop after hearing Hillary in the debate. Before that, he talked in generalities. What did Hillary actually do while first lady and senator from New York that makes you think she is so devious? She is a woman like my frontier grandmother who was strong, loving, respected and caring. She would go out of her way to make sure her frontier store provided credit, some never repaid and she never ask for repayment, to any person in need. She did this without making that person feel demeaned. Behind the scenes I watched her and developed a real model for "women". She had a partnership with my grandfather that enveloped religion, economics and a good community that was awesome. Neither one felt the other was subject to the other. That is the person that Hillary is; is that what is so objectable to Hillary? That she is a strong competent woman; that you buy into the hateful disrespectful tone of the media that a woman dares to raise herself to the level of President? Again name one dirty, hateful trick. Oh, maybe it is that she dared to say that she would leave a church if she had a pastor who spite forth hate messages about America instead of love as Christianity teachers. Are you buying the venom of the media when they questioned this as an attack. It is the truth. NO decent person would stay in a church and allow thier children to hear this, UNLESS THEY BELIEVED IT THEMSELVES or were a political OPPORTUNIST! Either reason should disqualify them from being president of our United States. Maybe you buy into the twisting of her words when she tried to do honor to Dr. King in South Carolina, when she repeated historical truth that Lyndon JOhnson rose to support Dr. King and get the 1964 Civil Rights act passed. Obama's people savagely accursed her of racism. She spoke the truth! Did Obama's people have any scruples about demeaning Johnson who stood up for black rights against heavy pressure. Why is the media set around and let this pass? Why didn't they take the chance of a lifetime and teach a little history to the young blacks who do not really understand the enormous sacrifices made to gain them their rightful place in America. Black, whites, jewish, catholic and protestenant individual did this; some died during this time. How dare the media let this ride without doing their job and calling Barack on this. I have black friends who will not support Barack because to do so would be to betray their long time friends, the Clintons, for race. They feel this would be disloyal and also a betrayal of Dr. King's dream of having individuals judged by their actions, talents and competence, not race. Read the "I have a Dream" speech. Again what dreadful things has Hillary done, except forego private sector to work in the service of the people, particulary the ones who do not have the power to speak for themselves. The thing I am most amazed at is the fact that every time Hillary actually focuses on the reason Barack is not as qualified for the Presidency as she is, the Obama campaign launches into this attack mode of calling it dirty tricks, mean, racist, etc. The media gives him a free ride on this. Do they continue to pursue him on his contacts with the Canadian government to say, "I don't really mean what I am saying about NAFTA." Only FOX is pursuing the Resko connections that Barack has had for years, such as buying prime property at a discount, listening for 20 years to A preacher advocating that America is a murderer, whites are out to keep the black race down, and then LYING about it Be careful, the prosecution of Resko and the group surrounding and supporting Barack for so many years may give us some unpleasant revelations; maybe too late, after Barack is chosen as the nominee. I won't even go into Barack's family ties in Africa. I am trying to do the job the media should be doing and determining whether they are true or not. The press is given special considerations in our Constitution for a reason. They are not taking this responsibility seriously. What about right now discussing Barack's ties to Ayers and other radical groups like the "weathermen". Keep investigating
Hillary is strong and will use that strength, smartness and talents to work for ordinary Americans like me. She will again help us gain economic prosperity, respect from the world community as well as keep our country safe.

" "An AP-Ipsos poll taken in late February had Obama leading McCain 51-41 percent. The current survey, conducted April 7-9, had them at 45 percent each"

Well, no wonder. The only candidate who the MSM has given a free ride so far is John McCain. It's amazing.

But that'll change when the Dems have a nominee... just wait see McCain drop in the polls from then on.

NO Republican would be able to win the GE this year. 80% of Americans feel that our country is on wrong track, so what they wish for is: yes, CHANGE. One of the 3 remaining candidates refuses to provide just that. It's the Republican."

@ken: I think this is the only intelligent, rational post on this entire board. It's amazing how many people buy into EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUBLICANS WANT THEM TO DO. No republican is electable on the issues alone in 2008, so they go back to the tried and true method of preaching hate, fear, and lies in hopes of getting people to go against their own beliefs of what is right and what is wrong. Wake up, Democrats!

This is not nearly as complicated as you want to make it.
In the democratic process, each vote should count.
The super delegates do not have any dictate as to how they should vote. Ultimately their vote will hopefully go in the best interest of their party as to who can win in the General Election. Clearly their role is separate from the popular vote. It was created for that purpose.
See, all quite simple.

We interrupt your Obama bashing to report this:

Jake went through all of that stuff above to say is, that in the end, Obama still leads in the ONLY metric that counts -- DELEGATES. Even with FL and MI counting, OBAMA STILL LEADS.

Hillary would have to get eighty percent 237(80%) of the outstanding superdelegates to get the nomination. Obama would only need 165 (55%) to win...

Most likely to win: OBAMA.

Return to your Obama bashing now.

Considering the states of PA, KY, IN, PR and WV qill have twice as many voters as the Obama states (NC, OR, SD, GM, MT), Hillary Clinton will have a net gain of 250K-500k votes winning the POPULAR VOTE (With FL and MI).

I guess Rev. Wright than is worse than Falwell, Robertson, John Hagee, and all the bigots that McCain has embraced. And McCain's extensive ties to lobbyists are no problem.

Do you really think Obama's faults (and yes, he has significant faults) are worse than McCain's??? Are you serious? You really think McCain would be a better president? I guess you must be a fan of the last 7 years, because that's what we'll be getting- more of the same economic and foreign policy.

While I think Hillary is the strongest candidate with the best grasp of the issues, I would probably vote for the Democrat DONKEY MASCOT over McCain.

It's a real shame that rather than try and convince Obama supporters (who, by and large, are decent people who like him better than Hillary) that Hillary is a better candidate, rather than alienate them and (even worse) CAUSE THEM TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN IF HILLARY GETS NOMINATED!!! I'm honestly worried that the vitriol present in posts like yours (and angry Obama supporters) will doom Obama OR Clinton in the general election!

" Lily from Florida":

Well, guess WHAT?? I actaully voted for the FRAUD OBAMA in Feb. before researching him...He scares me more than Mccain!!! I have a loyalty to this country.. not a political party... and if this Dem party can't even stand up for a core value like Universal Health care...

BUT stands by Obama after learning his associations with Wright and other racist, bigotted, antisematic,antiamerican...well...I WILL NOT THEN BE ASSOCIATED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY...

Well if that's the case, Jenn, I weep for the Democratic party. The Republicans will be laughing all the way to the white house, if angry voters like you (Obama supporters and Clinton supporters) choose McCain if their candidate doesn't win the nomination- us Democrats just can't get our act together. If we can't unite behind the Democratic candidate THIS year, of all years, then the Republicans will probably always win.

Sorry Jenn, but I'm sure you realize that for every Democrat who says they'll vote for McCain over Obama, there's another Democrat who says they'll vote for McCain over Clinton. Wouldn't you much prefer that the Democrat wins? I'd rather exert my efforts uniting the party behind the Democratic candidate.

Well...of course Obama is winning if you DON"T count MI and FL... I thought this Obama was a civil rights lawyer... apprently voters only count when it doesn't cut into his numbers... what a FRAUD!!!

as for the person who said "Please, please use your head and not your heart- I really hope Hillary manages to pull it out, but I WILL support either candidate, because I think a McCain continuation of Bush's policies would be DISASTROUS."

DON"T THINK SO!!!... Mccain is getting our vote...this is no longer the Dem party I remember... Kerry/Obama "Universal Healthcare a NONstarter"...on ABC's "THIS WEEK"....

Where are the Democrats going to be in June? In a world of hurt.

I'm a Hillary supporter, but I will support Obama if he wins. I don't understand how ANYONE who supports Hillary and thinks the Bush administration is among the worst in history could vote for McCain. Please, please use your head and not your heart- I really hope Hillary manages to pull it out, but I WILL support either candidate, because I think a McCain continuation of Bush's policies would be DISASTROUS.

Got news for you..math is all wrong. MI & FL will be seated as is and Hillary will win 8 out of the last 10. Besides for a lot of votes Obamas handling of Wright, Farrakhan, thesis, and other like issues begs the question, Is it enough? Absolutely not! In fact what Obama has said and done is going totally in the wrong direction! Excuses! Rationalization! Continued allegiance! If it had been Clinton's or McCain's white pastor who preached not just 5 snippets but rather week after week, month after month, year after year that another race with in America is the enemy and America is not our friend because that race controls America do you really think what Obama has said and done to date would be enough if it were Clinton or McCain? Absolutely not! If Clinton or McCain’s pastor had written supporting Hamas and had visited terrorist states in support of those terrorist states and we found that out would what Obama has said and done be enough if it were Clinton or McCain? Absolutely not! If we heard this white pastor was a part of there campaign team and had been there spiritual adviser for 20 years and was still continuing to be there chosen spiritual adviser would we be OK with that? Absolutely not! If they were still attending that Church when 24 other churches of the same exact faith are within the same driving distance would it be acceptable with the American public? Absolutely not! If Clinton or McCain had thrown there grandmother under the bus but not the pastor, especially if that grandmother was of the race that the pastor weekly’s innuendoes called the enemy would we think that was the right thing said and done? Absolutely not! Americas answer should be a resounding absolutely not to Obama! In fact it is not even close to being enough right words, action and attitude! If it had been Clinton or McCain’s involvement with this kind of pastor and spiritual adviser the cry from the public and the media would be non stop as it absolutely should be. Obama’s handling of this issue should absolutely not be enough for any TYPICAL AMERICAN citizen of any race, creed, color, age, gender, or sexual orientation.

Hillary will be the winner.If not the democatic party will not win in Nov.2008

One further point:

Since when is Obama "disenfranchising voters"? He has done NOTHING to the voters of FL and MI other than abide by his signed pledges regarding their votes. Its the DNC and the state parties making the decisions and rules -- how does that become Obama's fault other than its an easy thing to hang the hat of your anger on?

Hillary has decided that her pledge on FL and MI should be recinded, and I don't blame her for trying, but I don't see how anyone could blame Obama for the situation. The Clinton Machine is the most powerful voice in the Democratic Party and could have had plenty of influence on how FL and MI were handled BEFORE the decisions were made. In fact, Clinton's top advisers were some of the main proponents of the decision to not count the votes.

Now that it is clear she must have FL and MI to have even a colorable argument for the nomination, cries of disenfranchisment by her supporters seem disingenuous at best.

If the table were turned, and Hillary had the delegate lead Obama has, and he was doggedly pursuing her with a "kitchen sink" strategy, he would already have been forced aside.

Its a testiment to Hillary's power and perserverance that she has been able to stand up this long to the movement that Obama represents.

Don't throw around "disenfranchisement" only when it benefits your choice -- its petty.

To all those who say Obama can not win in the GE: that is undoubtedly what many people told him about the Dem Nomination 6 months ago.

To all the OH harpers: There is nothing magical about OH. HISTORICALLY, there has been a statistical co-incidence. Nothing more. Mathematically there are many ways to win an election without winning OH.

To all the "what about the SD's/": Super Delegates are politicians; if the Obama maintains his overall lead, they will vote for him. Look how many he has picked up in the past month compared to HRC. The Clinton's have already attempted to publicly bully them without success. No way they would someday go behind closed doors and agree with them.

Bottom line is that without a huge HRC win in PA, it is over. If PA is close, he'll strike a deal for her support and then help with her debt.

At which time MI and FL will be seated and everyone will be happy!

Or I could be wrong...