So if Hillary wins PA she is the nominee.

[Egnever]

Do I have that about right?

At this point the wisdom seems to be if Clinton wins PA the super delegates will go to her despite Obama leading in pledged delegates because Obamas states don't matter. Does that sound about right?

Is this what Hillary supporters are hoping for?

Do they believe at this point that if she wins PA then it will be clear that Obama is unelectable and he and the rest of the states will realize it and she will win everything else in unprecedented landslides giving her the lead going into the convention?

Is this the hope they hold out that excuses the damage this is doing to the party at this point? I am watching respected dem senators and congress people on the TV sneering at each other. This is helpful how?

Does she just need to get a texas type win to seal the nomination or does it need to be a blowout of Obama type proportions?

So many questions..

[helderheid]

1. Yep. If Obama doesn't win PA (and the 2004 primaries as well),he's toast.

[earthlover]

6. Yup, the goal posts are moving again! Next it will be Obama has to win PA by 60%

or he's toast. Pretty soon Obama will have to win all the rest of the primaries by 64% or he's toast. (which is now the per cent Hillary needs in all the primaries to tie Obama in pledged delegates).

[TwilightGardener]

2. Yes, one state negates the results of all the other primaries. They could

have saved a lot of time and money by just holding two primaries this year, OH and PA, according to Clintonites. Most ridiculous argument ever--there is NO proof that the winner of PA/OH, or any particular state, will have an edge in November. That cannot be predicted now.

[Unsane]

I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton ever.

I will vote straight dem on down ticket races; but am voting McCain in the general (should she be the nominee). She is that harmful to our party.

[TwilightGardener]

5. Same here. I will actively punish her for taking a wonderful historic race

that made us all proud and turning it into a scab-ripping disaster.

[northzax]

13. oh, look at the little intimidation tactics

if we don't win I am going to take my ball and run home crying. wah wah wah.

have you considered Ralph Nader? that's where your kind went in 2000. thanks for that, too.

remember all those times when we just wanted to talk about hope and change and that evil bitch hillary and her supporters just wanted to keep talking about policy? what an awful idea.

[Unsane]

14. Why Nader? She's practically endorsed McCain.

I'll go with him, especially if my state (Washington) is close.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Sorry, she's no Democrat. If I have to choose between two non-Democrats, I'll

pick the one who served his country.

[BonnieJW]

16. Supreme Court Supreme Court Supreme Court Supreme

Court. Don't be fools. ANY dem is better than ANY repub. No choice for women. Prayer in the schools. No justice for discrimination. Farther in debt, more privitization, less jobs, more civil liberties destroyed, more uninsured, more elderly working at Wal-Mart to be able to afford food. THINK.

[Unsane]

19. A Dem congress can effectively check a Supreme Court

In any event, most conservative jurists support the notion that hot button political issues be decided in the legislative branch anyway (a branch we'd likely lose under a Hillary presidency, see e.g. Bill's oversight of historical dem losses in Congress). I'd rather preserve Congress, and prevent a divisive Hillary presidency, where we lose Congress and have to rely on a fractured court to save us.

[northzax]

20. doesn't matter

if Dear Leader doesn't win, they would rather see self immolation than give an inch.

[SOS]

30. Bush 41 appointed Souter

We have no idea who President McCain will appoint.

[northzax]

18. sigh

i guess you are right. we need to remember that the wing of the Party comprised of the working class and middle aged women are simply not really Democrats. the core of the Party interested in things like national healthcare, for instance, not really Democrats.

but I guess you are the Democrat, since you are willing to actively state your eagerness to vote for Senator McCain. and you are the one to tell ME what or who a Democrat is?

so let me get this straight. if I don't like our candidate, I will still work to get him elected. if you don't like our candidate, you will vote for the other side. sounds like you're the real Democrat to me. yup.

[TwilightGardener]

22. A Democrat doesn't elevate the GOP opponent above another Dem rival

for personal gain. A Democrat doesn't engage in, or allow campaign members to engage in, race-baiting, Muslim smears, and the politics of division for personal gain. The Democratic Party is about tolerance and respect for minorities, not for appealing to the worst instincts of the less-enlightened for political gain. That's Republican tactics, not Democratic tactics. And Democrats don't use legal maneuvers and rule-bending and breaking to win--that's Republican shit. I repeat--she's no Democrat, and I won't vote for her.

[northzax]

26. legal maneuvers?

rule bending? the rule says 2025 delegates are needed to win. Once Obama has those delegates, he has won. until then, it's wide open. race baiting. please. how about sexism? both are in the eyes of the beholder on this campaign.

[TwilightGardener]

29. When did the Obama campaign engage in sexism against Hillary?

And yes, the attempt to seat FL and MI, when the rules were clear, IS a bending of the rules. The NV teachers' union lawsuit (Hillary's supporters) to shut down caucus locations, in the face of the rules all campaigns agreed to, was a dirty legal maneuver. You see what you want to see, I suppose.

[Life Long Dem]

23. Your wrong. Obama already won. We are talking about Hillary changing this outcome

And the after effects. You WILL NOT SEE ME CAST MY VOTE FOR SOMEONE LIKE THAT EVER! And that is to say the least because I see the doors being kicked down at the convention if it does happen.

Now you need to tell Hillary to quit being a sore loser and take her ball and go home.

[northzax]

25. just as soon as Barack Obama has his 2025 delegates

you can say he has won. and just as soon as she does, you can say Hillary has won. until that point, neither has.

I understand that the Obama people want this to be over, I get that. but it's not over until someone wins. and winning is defined as 2025 delegates.

[kenfrequed]

17. Ok please!!!

If you have to do a not-Hilary vote (provided she actually even wins the nomination) please, please, please...do NOT vote for McCain. Better that you vote for some bloody third party candidate that actually has some connection to progressive positions or issues than a damned republi-clone.

[northzax]

21. don't beg

if they would rather vote for McCain, let's get that out in the open right now. we need to know who is reasonable, and who is simply in love.

[kenfrequed]

31. I dunno

If I can encourage anyone, anywhere, anytime to not vote for republicans I usually try to.

I mean I understand where you are coming from here but there are both Obama people and Hilary people that are spitting out the same silliness. "If H. (or O) wins I am voting for McCain."

If there are hard issues that you are for or against and McCain is better than the other candidate on that issue (Which is either absurdly unlikely or impossible) then go crazy, switch to the dark side and cast your ballot. But frankly I cannot see how that is possible.

Now if someone told me they were voting green if H/o wins than I would ask them where the hell their support was when more progressive Dems were in the race. I mean there were good candidates that were significantly more progressive on the environment, healthcare, getting out of iraq, poverty, and education than either Hilary or Obama.

In my mind this means that those supporters of O an H that make those threats chose their candidates based on emotions and feelings rather than thought.

[northzax]

32. emotions, yes

I think you hit the nail on the head. and they want to be reaffirmed when they say it publically in threats like this. better to call them out for being brats (on both sides) than enable them. If I see a fellow Hillary supporter saying the same thing, I ridicule them, as well. We're all on the same side here, folks.

[AgadorSparticus]

3. ...or if she loses by less than 10%, she will be the nominee.

That is BOUND to be next. I'm almost sure of it.

[whatchamacallit]

10. Or 20% or 30%...

Whatever keeps them searching for the grail:crazy:

[KittyWampus]

4. Yup, Super Delegates of all the states Obama won'll be happy to jump to Hillary after she says they

don't count.

[Tarc]

7. A Penn victory + wins in likely revotes in MI and FL would do it.

I realize that the Obamaniacs are demanding the crown to be given to him right now, but it ain't gonna happen.

[Strawman]

8. Don't try to pin down their rationales. It's pointless. They'll change

[elixir]

9. Neither candidate has the SDs or popular vote to win the contest. W/ 2.7% PV separating them.

[northzax]

11. if she wins Pennsylvania by over 5 points

he might as well pack it in, frankly. even if he donates enough money to enough superdelegates campaign funds to get them to his side (oh, you think he gave Robert Byrd ten grand just because?) or convinces enough of them, he's then limping going into Denver, having proven himself unable to win in the rust-belt outside of his home state. the only swing state he won was missouri, that's a tough row to hoe.

[thereismore]

24. He makes Carolinas into swing states. Please don't respond, I don't want to hear

your "logic."

[northzax]

28. ok, I am not responding to you

I am responding to others. If John Edwards, local son, couldn't make the Carolinas swing states in 2000, then I don't trust early polls showing that BOTH Hillary and Obama beat McCain in North Carolina. and there aren't enough votes in the CArolinas to make up for losing Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan, already swing states.

[Yurovsky]

12. Anything less than 90% for Obama is a Clinton victory

it's that "new math", I guess.

I miss the old math, in which you won if you got more votes and delegates. :eyes:

[GodlessBiker]

27. LOL. Not even Bill is saying that.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

33. all she has to do is lose to him on delegates in PA & she's right back in it!