delete

[jsamuel]

delete

didn't realize it included PA already

[wndycty]

1. Does that include caucuses?

:kick:

[jsamuel]

2. yes, I think so

I am basing this on RCP's data, but I am unsure if I am reading that part right.

[Kittycat]

5. No, it doesn't - look at the line below. And recheck you rmath - PA is already factored in that tota

w/caucuses $330K+ Also, this number already factors in PA reported so far. Look down thread in your link - PA numbers are listed.

[jsamuel]

17. I think that is an estimate based on extrapolation.

I don't know how they do that.

[DUyellow]

6. not really

[Yes We Did]

7. It does not include caucuses. He has almost 1.5 million vote lead.

if you guestimate.

[Coexist]

10. you can't do popular vote w/caucuses

unless you make a formula and extrapolate.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Clinton supporters The biggest fans of breaking the rules EVAH!

[KittyWampus]

4. there is no popular vote in primaries that include caucuses.

[BzaDem]

9. Too bad that is only a meme. I have yet to hear anyone say that outside this board.

[sandnsea]

8. We Are Electing DELEGATES

Why is that so hard for people to get through their heads.

[BzaDem]

Because you are wrong. Pledged delegates do not fully decide anything. Too bad.

[DUyellow]

16. Wolfson: "This is a delegate race" Wake up!

[cui bono]

20. That doesn't have anything to do with the FACT that the popular vote doesn't mean anything.

And anyway, she's not even close to Obama.

Plus, if she cares so much about votes counting, ALL votes, not just the ones SHE wants to have count, she wouldn't even THINK about using the popular vote argument since it would not include any of the caucuses.

Too bad.

[cui bono]

14. They're desperate. There's a lot of things that aren't getting through. n/t

[provis99]

11. does that include Repukes and Indeps who voted in Democratic primaries?

If so, why is popular vote count relevant at all?

[BzaDem]

15. Because if you actually get rid of Repukes and Indeps, Clinton is actually ahead.

[DUyellow]

12. If Obama played by Clinton rules, she would be completely unelectable.

[kentuck]

13. If Hillary takes over the popular vote...

The Super Delegates will surge to her side. She will be the nominee.

[sandnsea]

22. No they won't because they're not stupid

They know you cannot calculate a popular vote with caucuses. The caucus states will go flippo and that will be worse for the party than anything. This is a delegate election, it always has been.

[GoesTo11]

18. La dee dah

1) Caucuses require more commitment so those states have lower numbers, diluting Obama's overall lead
2) Don't count Florida, because going for pop vote instead of delegates is already an asterisk. Asking to include the non-primary of Florida is adding an asterisk to the asterisk.
3) Even if HRC pulls ahead in votes and behind in delegates, what's that got to do with November? If you win the popular vote and lose the electoral vote, you lose the election. Better to be strategic and win.

Let's put this meme to sleep, out of mercy.

[ProSense]

19. Dream on, that includes PA. She's behind 220,191 with FL

She can't win.

In reality: Obama +514,963

She can't catch up in delegates, which is how we select our nominee.

[cui bono]

21. and if you calculate the votes that the caucuses represent he would be up by over 1m votes

[BzaDem]

Translation: If you count MY votes 5.5 times as much, MY candidate does better.

You keep dreamin.

[cui bono]

26. It's the truth. You'll see when you wake up. But I liked your Hillary impression there.

[BeyondGeography]

23. Completely wrong

Todd just spelled it out on MSNBC; she's down 200K including Florida.

[Bread and Circus]

24. Yes, let's include Florida where they couldn't campaign but exclude places where people...

actually voted in a legitimate process, like all the caucus states.

Yes, let's do that.

While we are at it, let's pretend Bush was a great President, up is down, and black is white.

I hope we all enjoyed our trip to silly town.

[Condem]

25. What an absolute desperate thread!