The Numbers

Speaking of Hillary, it seems very odd to me that this woman, who has been harping on the gender ticket being used on her, has the gaul to say she needs time....OMG...will she start crying now??? PLease...give us a break...She has been through worse...get up off your pantsuit and get the party rolling toward victory HRC...You are supposed to be an example to our young women on how to handle themselves...you are acting like a spoiled child...show some strength and honor...ZEeeez

Congratulations Hillary!

I am so proud she made no decision!

She left it wide open, for any possible outcome for her!

Obamanation is completely upset and rather furious this morning. Seething with hate. Their posts speak for themselves.

This isn't over for Hillary. She is going to take this to Denver!

Hillary '08

If she'd run as an independent - she'd win .. "YES - she can"!

neil1785 wrote
"ACCORDING TO RECENT POLLS FROM FOXNEWS"

Why this does not suprise me? Because according to Reuters/Zogby Polls Obama wins McCain 48% - 40%. Please try to find data from independent pools; and more than that polls are meaningless, thay are the tool for Media and interest groups to manipulate public opinion. So leave those dummy polls alone.

As your reporting shows, Obama narrowly won the popular vote, just as he narrowly won the nomination. For Clinton and her supporters to claim a popular vote "win" is both false & damaging to our party's nominee.

formerhillary, I recognize that it's probably over. No, I don't think Hillary would make a "great" President; I viewed her as the lesser of three evils.

McCain is my second choice, simply because I will NOT vote for Obama under ANY circumstances.

My wife and I supported Obama until February, but the more we learned about him the more we realized we were betting on the wrong horse.

Well, maybe he's the WINNING horse, but he's very wrong for America.

We've just been through eight years of living under a President who SEEMED right at first, but who turned out to be a disaster. I didn't think we'd get fooled again, but I was wrong.

If educated voters actually did vote for Obama .. that just confirms the "well, he/she is book smart" quote. Most of the so-called 'edumacated" people I know are ridiculously stupid or lacking in the common sense department.

The Democratic convention is where the democrats have the super delegates cast a vote.

Then they Announce the Democratic Nominee.

Part of the process.

Due process.

Those, whinning, moaning, groaning and acting like children about it. Need to get control of themselves and act like grown ups.

No one should have to give up a right because someone wants them to, forced into giving up a right, or ridiculed for exercising their rights.

That is the American way.

You forgot to mention caucus' are not figured in. If you add them in Obama easily wins. Yes our small caucus states should count!!!!

Independent and third-party candidates CANNOT win in our present political system, where party bosses control EVERYTHING.

If Hillary runs as an Independent, it will assure McCain's election. If Bob Barr runs as a Libertarian, it will assure Obama's election.

It could get interesting if Clinton AND Barr both ran on third-party tickets.

We have seen what Ralph Nader and Ross Perot have done to elections. They couldn't win, but they were effective spoilers.

      "So your point is if you don't account for FL and MI, she
      has the vote? Ok - that's just unrealistic.
      Lynne | Jun 4, 2008 9:49:59 AM

Ummmmm, no.  I'm pretty sure he wrote that she only got "the popular vote" if she got her cut of Michigan and Obama got zero. 
Add Florida in (and she'd NOT have gotten a 17 point margin there if there'd have been a real campaign waged there), but leave Michigan out (or, even, give Obama the "uncommitted" vote) and Obama wins, but not by much.

This primary was about delegates. Senator Obama has the delegates. Too bad for the other candidates that they were playing checkers and he was playing
chess. To think all of that political experience against this inexperienced newcomer. I'd say that's a good start.

Yes, Trish, the primary was about delegates. That's the problem.

America is telling the rest of the world that they must convert to democracy, and we don't even have one here!

Our primary process has become an oligarchy. (Yes, I looked up the word to see if it fits, and it PERFECTLY describes what has just happened.)

The popular vote is not a relevant number for the Primary. The case to count Florida is arguable, there can be no reasonable math to include Michigan, if you are going to count Florida you should also count the caucuses. Clinton loses this argument because she doesn't want every vote to count, only every vote for her. If she persists, she is going to be confronted with that fact and her whole all or nothing power grabbing plan will fall apart. She has made this contest about her and forgotten that it is not about her, but about US. If you want to know the reason the founders put the electoral college in place, just read any post that would dictate that you as a democrat vote republican in the fall because your favorite didn't get the nomination. To take the metaphor further, that is cutting your head off to spite your nose.

It's this simple. I'm not voting for Obama. No way. And I hope others will see through him and vote against him as well. Don't put him in the WH where he can do real damage!

Until the DNC revamp its system, the primary is about delegates. Any rule changing should occur before the primary season begins not during it.

Trish, I completely agree that it's too late to "save" this primary election. Obviously, it cannot be changed in mid-stream.

But it isn't the DNC which needs to change the process; it's the Federal Election Commission. This year's so-called primary is proof that our voting should be governed by LAWS, not "rules" established in a Star Chamber.

Caucuses, conventions, delegates, and "super" delegates must be abolished and replaced by a REAL vote of the people. Every state should have a primary on the same date under the same rules.

What is this, enpty suit, no experience, another G W Bush. You people don't even know him. Why is it so hard to take a chance on someone that wants to help you. Can't you see what going on in our country. These big companies are tryng to take every expense they can out of their business. They are trying to turn us into China where people are forced to obey. Hillary was willing to let her friends gain while the rest of the country suffers. Half the country is voting to better their lives, and the other is to see a woman president. You don't seem to remember who it was that put us in this possition. It sure wasn't Obama.

As someone who voted for Hillary Clinton, and who is also EDUCATED,
I resent your comment that only educated voters supported Obama.

For Obama, what matters is not his election-year rhetoric, or an election-year resignation from his church, but his track record in the years before the election.
He gave $20,000 of his own money to Jeremiah Wright; as a state senator Obama directed $225,000 of the Illinois taxpayers' money for programs run by Father Pfleger. In the U.S. Senate Obama earmarked $100,000 in your tax money for Father Pfleger's work. Pfleger donated over $10,000 of his own money to Obama's campaign. Jeremiah Wright also received $15 million of your tax dollars for his church. Check it out folks, it's on the public record.
Obama's foreign policy seems to be somewhere between Rodney King's "Can't we get along?" and Alfred E. Neuman's "What, me worry?"