Not to nitpick, but since the margin's an issue - it is NOT A DOUBLE DIGIT VICTORY!

[EffieBlack]

The media is playing with the numbers to fit their storyline.

With 99% of the results in, Clinton has 1,235,067 votes to Obama's 1,041,366 - 54.3% to 45.7%. In all of their reporting, the media has rounded up Clinton's percentage to 55% and rounded Obama's down to 45% and then subtracted 45% from 55% to get 10%.

But this statistical manipulation is highly misleading. The proper way to calculate this is to subtract 45.7% from 54.3%, resulting in a margin of 8.6% or, if rounded, 9%.

Interestingly, if they used their own calculations with the right numbers and appropriate rounding, it would be 54% to 46% - an 8 point margin.

Yes, this may be nitpicking. But since these people want to make such a big deal about the margin and what it means, and since they've been screeching for weeks that Clinton would have to get. not just double digits, but high double digits to remain viable, it is a considerable stretch for them to be all over the airwaves this morning not only calling an 8.6% margin a "double digit" victory, but also claiming that it proves that Obama is in serious trouble because - let's all say it together (they sure are)- "Obama just can't close the deal!"

[NJmaverick]

1. The repukes own the media and they like what Hillary is doing to the Dems

so we can expect to see things like this

[TheCowsCameHome]

2. Maybe she can demand a recount.

or maybe Rush will on her behalf.

:crazy:

[DemVet]

3. Close enough.

Anyway you look at it, Obama got stomped.

He's just not electable.

The large demographics (white working class, for example) just prefer Hillary.

McCain would decimate Obama in the GE.

He CANNOT BE ALLOWED to be our Nominee.

Go Hillary!

[ScarletSniper]

5. Don't realize if Obama can't win, Hillary can't win..so say hello to Pres McCain

[guyanakoolaid]

6. He cut a +20% lead to single digits, has an insurmountable delegate lead, and he's "stomped"

He's going to be the nominee whether or not you "allow" him to. Get used to it.

[ClassWarrior]

13. She lost by 11 points using the campaign's own metrics.

NGU.

[FunkyLeprechaun]

18. She needs to win the remaining contests by 70% to overcome Obama's lead

I have to KEEP repeating this. Obama did NOT get stomped, rather he cut into her lead significantly and reduced her chances of overtaking his delegate lead.

I'm looking forward to working with you to get Obama elected into the White House.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

29. An 8.6% loss is not "getting stomped"

Clinton's 67% loss in Idaho was "getting stomped". Her 44% loss in Kansas was "getting stomped". Her 60% loss in D.C. was "getting stomped". 8.6% is not "getting stomped"

[helderheid]

48. Stomped??

:rofl:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5642811&mesg_id=5642811

:pals:

[Taxmyth]

4. Adds to her popular vote totals

and with the delegates from Florida and Michigan still not decided on, that could very well be the deciding factor at the convention.

[tekisui]

8. It won't go to the Convention.

[ScarletSniper]

11. Agreed.

[guyanakoolaid]

9. How is a mythical statistic going to be a "deciding factor"?

[BayouBengal07]

17. They already counted out a revote.

So you're proposing we add votes to Hillary's count where she was the only candidate on the ballot?

That would complement the necessary Superdelegate "coup" nicely...how democratic of Hillary.

[Brinee]

7. Since when...

Is losing MORE than half of a 20 point lead considered a win?

[EffieBlack]

16. Irony of ironies . . .

Flashback to 1992: Bill Clinton was way down in the polls in New Hampshire and came from behind to place second - and the reaction by the mainstream media was to hail him as "The Comeback Kid" who was now unstoppable.

Fast Forward to 2008: Barack Obama was way down in the polls in Pennsylvania and came from behind to place second - and the reaction by the mainstream media is: "He lost a big one. Why can't he close the deal? He's in serious, serious trouble."

[mod mom]

10. PA SOS has 54.3 (C) to 45.7 (O) which is 8.6% AN W/O PROVISIONALS!

Here is the link:

http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/

[ScarletSniper]

15. I bet this is what the Super Delegates look at ..not the MSM breakdown

[EffieBlack]

26. CNN has taken down its election results victory

They know the "double digit victory" line is bull. They haven't corrected it and their anchors are still saying parrotting the talking point. And MSNBC is still pulling out all the stops advancing the lie.

[Changenow]

12. The state reports 8.5 with 99.09% reported

but who cares about that when CNN reports something differently.

[futureliveshere]

14. Not too worry but the SDs are not going to be rounding off the numbers as per their convenience.

[Scurrilous]

19. K & R

:thumbsup:

[mod mom]

20. Effie, Also PROVISIONAL BALLOTS not counted yet and will most likely favor Obama

There were 126,000+ in Ohio which have still not been certified. They are predominately used in urban areas (favor Obama) and new voters (also favor Obama)

The Clinton camp is pushing this "double digit win" early, to sway the media.

[EffieBlack]

21. It's not surprising the Clinton campaign would spin this - that's what they're supposed to do

But the way the media is swallowing it and whole and regurgitating it back at us is disgusting.

[mod mom]

25. Remember Bill Clinton gave the TELECOM ACT OF '96 which lead to media consolidation.

[druidity33]

35. do we know

how many provisional ballots there were in PA?

Are they likely to count them eventually? Or only if someone raises a stink?

An 8.6% lead could shrink to 6% pretty quick if Phila and Pitts have high provisional ballot counts...


:shrug:

[cosmik debris]

22. A 9.4% victory is a good old fashioned ass kicking

It is not a landslide, but it is an ass kicking.

You can say anything you want about the stats, but the bottom line is that Obama got his ass kicked last night.

I'm sorry to say that, because I am an Obama supporter. But I know a good ass kicking when I see it. And 9.4% is a good ass kicking.

[EffieBlack]

36. Talk about moving the goalposts

Until yesterday, the "conventional wisdom" was that Hillary needed to beat Obama by substantial double digits. You can call 9.4% a "good-old ass-kicking" (which it isn't) or anything else, but it's not a double digit anything.

And, by the way, the more numbers that come in, the smaller the margin is getting. Now it's down to about 8%.

It is not an "ass kicking" to go from 20 points ahead in the polls to winning by considerably less than 10%, especially after having to work you ass off for it nonstop for 6 weeks, having to throw everything at your opponent BUT the kitchen sink, and - something that for some reason no one is talking about today (wonder why) - your opponent was beaten to a pulp for weeks with 24-7 attacks over the supposed campaign-threatening Jeremiah Wright "controversy" and "bitter-gate." Under these circumstances, I would hardly call her managing to scrape out an 8% victory a "good ass kicking."

But, if it makes you feel better . . .

[cosmik debris]

44. Yep, I can't figure out where you put the goal posts

But objectively, an 8 or 9 point defeat is a sound drubbing.

You may rationalize, you may justify, you may play with smoke and mirrors, but Obama got defeated last night. And it was a pretty serious defeat because it allows Sen. Clinton to continue the campaign.

So spin it any way you like, I don't care. I just find it funny that you try to justify an 8 point loss as a victory. :)

[EffieBlack]

45. Let me help you . . . the "goal post" was put at "double digits" not

"almost double digits," or "approximately double digits" or "somewhere in the neightborhood of double digits." "Double digits" period.

So for those same people who set the goal post on the 10 point line to flip around and insist that getting only to the 8 or the 9 means she has achieved the goal is dishonest spin. The only way to consider this an achievement of the goal is to MOVE THE GOALPOST TO THE 8 POINT LINE so that they can pretend she actually crossed it. Otherwise, she fell short - pretty far short, in fact - of the goal post that they set for her. This doesn't mean she didn't win. It doesn't mean she didn't have a victory. And it doesn't mean that in some other context, she won big. But in this situation, she did not meet the objective that they set for her and now they're changing the objective after the fact so that is will appear that she did.

Understand now?

[cosmik debris]

46. Gee, I thought 54% was a majority.

How silly of me not to understand such simple math.

How was I to know that 54% was not more than 46%?

Oh well.

[EffieBlack]

47. You're really having trouble comprehending all of this, aren't you?

Who said that this was not a majority? That's not the issue.

Since you're so big on "simple math," try to wrap your brain around this - a "double digit number" means a number with TWO numbers side by side (not separated by a decimal point. 1 is not a double digit number. 10 is. 5 is not a double digit number. 15 is. 8 is not a double digit number. 9 is not a double digit number. Even 9.4 is not a double digit number.

So, when people insist that Hillary Clinton must win the Pennsylvania Primary by "double digits" in order for her candidacy to be seen as viable, that means she needs to win by a margin of AT LEAST 10 points in order for her candidacy to be seen as viable. It doesn't mean that if she gets less than 10 points more that she hasn't won the primary. It just means that she didn't win by enough to be able to support a claim that she is a viable candidate.

Hillary Clinton won the primary. But she won it by LESS THAN 10%. Therefore, anyone who claimed that she should win by "double digits" in order to remain viable who is now insisting that her 8 or 9 point win proves her viability is disingenous at best.

[cosmik debris]

49. You picked an arbitrary standard

and avowed that it was not met.

I picked an absolute standard and avowed that it was exceeded.

My goal posts are clearly set in basic math.

Your goal posts are...what ever you want them to be.

But in absolute terms, Sen. Clinton won by a substantial margin.

All you are doing is rationalizing that victory as inadequate by your arbitrary standards.

Good luck with that delusion.

[EffieBlack]

50. I didn't pick an arbitrary standard. I'm responding to a specific standard that was set by the media

and showing their hypocrisy in changing the standard after the results came in.

I will explain it to you one more time - if you still claim to not get it, I will assume that you don't WANT to get it:

Several major pundits and reports claimed that Hillary needed a double-digit win in order to continue to be viable in the campaign. On the other hand, they claimed, if she fell short of double-digits, she would have to seriously consider dropping out.

Comes election day, Hillary falls short of a double digit win. And the same pundits and reporters who only a few days ago said that anything short of a double-digit win would doom Hillary's campaign are claiming 1) that she DID reach double digits, which is just a flat-out lie; and 2) that her "double-digit victory" gives her the momentum she needs to continue in the race.

I did not pick an "arbitrary standard." I'm calling the MSM on their rank hypocrisy for setting a standard, lying about whether it was met and then pretending that they'd set an altogether different standard in the first place.

And, since I wasn't discussing YOUR goal posts - since I couldn't care less what criteria you apply to this race because I don't know you and doubt you have any influence over the public discussion about it - your goal posts are completely irrelevant to this discussion.

[cosmik debris]

51. Calm down, nobody expects you to give up your rationalization

If it make you happy, good luck.

[DrDan]

23. don't you get it - it was a ploy to irritate you . . .

good heavens - get a life.

and no - I am not a Hillary supporter.

[JCMach1]

24. Yes it is, I saw it on the cable news!

That was the story last night... today is for people like us who nitpick everything.

[Coexist]

27. ...

[bigtree]

28. tough shit

Obama still lost big. He hoped to knock her out. This isn't that knockout.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

32. So what is next?

Obviously he hoped to knock her out, but he didn't need to. This election is effectively done. There is no way Clinton is going to win the 70% she needs to in every remaining state. All Obama needs to do is run out the clock.

[Buzz Clik]

30. It's not nitpicking. You point out the reality: the media are Hillary's best friends.

They want her in for as long as possible.

[yourguide]

31. considering whats still left to report...

it will end up being 8%.

[EffieBlack]

37. A slightly lower margin than Bill Clinton lost by when he proclaimed himself the "Comeback Kid"

I guess it all depends on where you're standing, eh?

[mod mom]

33. Finally media picking up on it: "Clinton's 'double-digit' win? Not exactly "

Clinton's 'double-digit' win? Not exactly
Posted April 23, 2008 8:29 AM

By Paul West

Newspaper readers and network TV viewers awoke this morning to word of Hillary Clinton's 10-percentage point victory in Pennsylvania. An obsession with her precise margin, part of the buildup by her campaign and the news media, dominated election-night coverage and was regarded as an important indicator of her resilience and Barack Obama's failure to close the sale.

Before the votes were counted in Pennsylvania, a Clinton victory in the mid single digits would be seen as good, not great, some said. Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, her leading supporter in the state, said that high single digits would be significant. But double digits was something else. A 10-point win would be "extraordinary," said Rendell.

Getting to double digits would match her primary victory in next-door Ohio last month, which she won by 10 points, and signal Obama's inability to make substantial progress despite heavy spending and six weeks of in-person campaigning.

It also sounds more impressive.

Based on nearly complete returns, however, it doesn't appear that Clinton quite got there. According to the latest Associated Press tally, with less than one percent of precincts yet to be counted (50 of 9,218 precincts), Clinton is leading Obama by 54.7 percent to 45.3 percent. That works out to a winning margin of 9.4 percent.

The elections division of the Pennsylvania Secretary of State's office, which also has more than 99 percent of the districts in (9,177 of 9,263) gives Clinton 54.3 percent and Obama 45.8 percent, a Clinton advantage of 8.5 percent.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/clintons_doubledigit_win_not_e.html

[mystieus]

40. about TIME! SPREAD THE NEWS

[TexasObserver]

34. It's 54-46 in every grade school math class in America. Why does MSM have it 55-45?!

It's pretty transparent. MSM want to give the impression that Hillary won by double digits. They create the meme, then worship it.

Why isn't the Obama campaign saying anything this morning about it?!

[mystieus]

38. Amen

[FatDave]

39. Fuck the MSM

Weren't these the guys who were supposed to be so in love with Obama? Now they're lying about Hillary's margin and spinning a victory that everybody knew she would have to make her look viable.

Also, there are only 2 PA counties not yet 100% counted. They are:

Delaware - 55% Obama, 98% in
Philadelphia - 65% Obama, 98% in

[Bluenorthwest]

42. On the MSM...and even the not so main stream...

Any media outlet of any kind that operates by selling ad time, be they a huge network or a 'netroots' type of thing, is making bank on the Primaries. The major media outlets in particular see the long race as more markets for them, what we call States, and of course something to talk about endlessly. They have a narrative, it is paying off, and damn if they don't want to milk it for all it is worth.
The candidates buy adtime. If the victor is declared, they stop buying. For profit media on all levels is always about selling. That is what they are doing. They don't have a horse in the race, the race itself is what they are betting on. It is that simple. They wish it would never be over. It is to them like a year long Michael Jackson trial, a gift that just keeps on giving.

[SeaLyons]

41. You're Right...

He can't close the deal. He got a thumping in PA.

[azmouse]

43. K&R