Is Clinton vs. Obama really necessary?

Hey... check it out. I did some of my own research this evening. I took the approach that if the democratic primary was run the same way as the GOP primary what would the result be? In the GOP primary, its very simplistic. Whoever wins the most votes, gets all of the delegates.

What I found was rather revealing and causes me to understand a little more clearer what the Clinton supporters are talking about.

I don't think the GOP has "super delegates" either. I think what this illustrates is really how close this election is. Hang on... its not over yet!

Check out the attachment to see the map!

Attached Images

map.jpg (37.5 KB, 17 views)

Well...maybe Hillary chose the wrong party?

Lol. I think the Democrat styled primary is more fair than the Republicans though.

Because what happens is that constituents are equally represented by percentile.

If 49% say "Yes" and 51% say "No", is it really fair to the 49% to ignore the way the feel about a situation?

If the Democratic primary process worked like the Republican process it would have been over shortly after Super-Tuesday. Clinton would have the bigger states and the momentum to win some of the states Obama won and thus the nomination.

Since the general works on the winner takes all system (can you imagine the chaos if the Electoral College votes were awarded on a proportional basis?) I would prefer the primaries to work the same way as well.

Maybe its time that this whole Electoral College mess is revisited and we move to a direct election for President
.

That is NOT correct. In Nevada for example, there was a well publicized lawsuit which put Teacher's union against Culinary union and Clinton against Obama. The DNC ratified rules in August 2007 that created "special precincts" that allowed some voters to easily caucus than others in the casinos on the Vegas Strip. There was also controversy over the delegate apportionment power of the "special precincts."

The teachers said it was wrong for the party to set up special sites for one type of worker while doing nothing for others who have to work on Saturday. Further, they said, the system wrongly allocates more delegates from the at-large sites than from other caucus precincts, a provision that former President Clinton alleged would give the at-large caucus-goers as many as five times the number of delegates, if there was a full turnout.

- The Boston Globe

Transformer is right. Notaguru, you have the facts of the process, but where you are wrong is your assessment that it is Fair.

Take Nevada for example:

Senator Clinton won the Nevada Caucuses but Obama was awarded more delegates: Clinton 50.7% Obama 45.2% Edwards 3.8%

Barack Obama may have won the most delegates in Saturday's Nevada Caucus, even though Hillary Clinton bested his statewide turnout by about six points.
A source with knowledge of the Nevada Democratic Party's projections told The Nation that under the arcane weighting system, Obama would win 13 national convention delegates and Clinton would win 12 delegates. The state party has not released an official count yet.

According to RealClearPolitics Obama 14 delegates Clinton 11 delegates



How did this happen?

Obama was able to edge out Clinton, Obama aides explained, because two rural regions, sub-areas of one of Nevada's three congressional districts, apportioned an odd number of delegates, and Obama won the balance of them, taking away a total of three delegates to Clinton's one. In more populated areas, especially Las Vegas, the districts apportioned an even number of delegates. But Obama was able to come in a close enough second to Clinton to evenly split those delegates. The Washington Post

And then you have this diddy:

On Jan. 19, party caucuses meet in each precinct to choose delegates to county conventions. The delegates selected are not bound to any candidate. At the county conventions on Feb. 23, delegates to the state convention are chosen. They are not bound to any candidate. The state convention is April 18-20, during which delegates choose 25 of the 33 delegates to the national convention. Sixteen of the 25 delegates are allocated proportionally to presidential candidates based on the support for the candidates in each of the state’s three Congressional districts. Nine delegates are allocated to candidates based on the support among all of the delegates attending the convention. The remaining eight unpledged delegates are chosen from party leaders. - Explanation

In total, that's 16 for Obama (14 pledged, 2 super), 13 for Clinton (11 pledged, 2 super) and five undecided/uncommitted (4 super, 1 add-on). That's a total of 34 delegates from Nevada. - listed

The Texas Two Step was even worse. Fair? Democratic? I don't think so.

Keep it up Dems. The Republican strategists thought they didn't have a chance in hell now they are smiling. Smiling. They can actually take the White House in November and continue the disastrous Bush Administrations policies since ideology trumps reality.

GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’

It sounds crazy at first. Amid dire reports about the toxic political environment for Republican candidates and the challenges facing John McCain, many top GOP strategists believe he can defeat Barack Obama — and by a margin exceeding President Bush’s Electoral College victory in 2004.

GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’ - David Paul Kuhn - Politico.com

I was wrong, the entire democratic primary system was pre-rigged to have Barack Obama win the nomination. It's a conspiracy put into place for years with Obama in mind. Senator Clinton should immediately file suit against the DNC for "electioneering" that has denied her her rightful place as the Democratic nominee and ultimately the President. She should fight it all the way to the supreme court.

I used to think Trinity was campaigning for Hillary Clinton. Now I think she's campaigning for John McCain.

I mean, if she believed in Hillary's issues she should have no problem supporting Obama in the fall. She's just chasing after celebrities at this point.

bro you were the one originally saying you wouldn't support hillary if she got the nomination. After it became apparent that obama was going to get the nod now you start preaching this shit? YOUR A FLIP FLOPPER stick to your guns son

In a nutshell, the Democrats have shot themselves in the foot. I will list the events that lead to this debacle. I am laying the blame at the foot of Howard Dean and the DNC, not Hillary or Obama.

I wrote a post here started with the above. Then I decided to instead make a new thread as the responses I was wanting weren't part of this OP's purpose.

If you want to read it it is
HOWARD DEAN, DNC AND SUPERDELEGATES

I copied and pasted what was here and put it there ver batim.

Thanks

Deleted.

See HOWARD DEAN DNC & SUPERDELEGATES?

But who says Dean should have 'annointed' anyone?
The mere fact that the advantage moved back and forth so much is the proof that any effort at the points you have indicated would have been premature.
Don't the super delegates have the right to make up their own minds, when they choose?
Wouldn't the super delegates likely have responded with considerable anger?
And wouldn't the scorned candidate have done the same?
Not to mention that candidate's supporters?
I don't think there was any onus on Dean to preempt the democratic process in his own party.