FlishFun.com

The short answer is “no”. Well, not in this universe, but that seems only to be because of the way Democrats have “split” the delegates, rather than have the “winner-take-all” system of the Republicans. A lot of people probably assume that Obama would be still winning had the Democrats used that system, but they’d be wrong. According to Electoral Vote, it looks like the only way Hillary isn’t currently winning is due to the fact that there isn’t a “winner-take-all” system in place. To quote the data:

Quite a few people have asked what would have happened if the Democrats had used a statewide winner-take-all rule. In other words, suppose the statewide winner got all the delegates. Where would be be now? Here is the answer. The calculation assumes Clinton won Nevada and Texas. She got more votes in Nevada but fewer delegates (by 1). She also won the popular vote in the Texas primary.

Hillary Clinton would have 1726 delegates to Barack Obama’s 1533. The reason the Democrats don’t have a winner-take-all rule is because they are Democrats. They don’t consider it fair that the birthday boy or girl gets to eat the whole cake. You have to share it with your friends. Republicans have a different world model. You either win or you lose. If you win you get to take all the marbles home. If you lose, you get no marbles. Try harder next time. If the Democrats had employed winner take all but for only 80% of the delegates leaving 20% for the PLEOs, the score now would be Clinton 1381, Obama 1226.

So there you have it… Obama should be counting his lucky stars that the Democrats don’t have a winner-take-all rule. The other interesting thing about this number is that Florida and Michigan aren’t included, so it shows Hillary would be ahead even without the help of those two states. I wonder if this will change anyone’s opinion on the whole race, or will maybe just be seen as an interesting fact.

Rhode Island… done. Texas… outta here. Ohio… stick a fork in it. Last night Hillary Clinton not only stopped Obama’s winning streak, but with 3 large victories she stopped his momentum faster than a crash barrier could stop a speeding dump truck. Obama has to be hurting… not only has the press turned on him over the past couple days, but now his “sure thing” has become a little more unsure. To quote the article above:

And how did Obama react? He blew up during a Texas press conference heavily attended by Chicago journalists. He stormed off after only eight questions regarding the contacts between his campaign and Canadian diplomats over NAFTA and the Rezko trial. The national press had already been grumbling about his insularity, and Obama gave them an excuse to write reams of material about it, Rezko, and the NAFTA dance.

In short, Obama has exposed himself as a seriously inexperienced and flawed candidate. He hasn’t really been tested until now, and the glass jaw he showed in the first few days of the real bout must have the party establishment worried about a lengthy battle against either Hillary or McCain. Against both, he may soon flounder — and that slim lead in pledged delegates will not present much of an obstacle to bypassing him in Denver.

Yikes. Obama doesn’t do well when he’s not winning and everything isn’t rainbows and puppy dogs and sunshine it seems. Now, the one thing I keep hearing people say is “Well, he’s won more states! Hillary should just give up!” The only response I can give to that is, have you checked out the “popular” vote? Sure, Obama has a few more delegates and has won more states, but the man can’t seem to swing a big state to save himself. California? Clinton. New York? Clinton. Texas? Ohio? New Jersey? Clinton. Obama does great in small states like Alaska, North Dakota, Hawaii, etc… but he just can’t seem to get a big win. Not something someone trying to become President wants to see. Anyway, the popular vote… last week Obama’s camp said Hillary should drop out after losing 11 states in a row, but here is the current breakdown of the popular vote (as of 8:00AM CST from CNN.com):

Barack Obama: 13,423,474 (50.36%)

Hillary Clinton: 13,234,050 (49.64%)

Just a bit close, no? That’s a difference of only 189,424 people out of 26,657,524 votes… that translates into a 0.71% lead. Oh yeah, she really has no chance at all… you know, unless she actually starts winning states again (whoops, looks like that’s happening!). For those curious, these numbers include FL and MI, with Obama getting all the “non-Clinton” votes from MI and it does not include the Texas caucus (which is still being counted and too close to call).

In other news (meaning Republican news), Huckabee finally conceded defeat last night after losing to McCain. While this news is completely expected, it was nice to see him actually run the full race rather than just give up early on. So, the GOP finally has their nominee in the bag… now he just needs to pick a running mate. Let’s hope the Democrats figure this whole thing out soon before they’re left in the dust. Now, I’ve mentioned it before, but I’d love to see a Clinton-Obama ticket, and apparently so would Hillary:

With most political observers sound asleep after a long Tuesday evening that appeared to augur at least seven more weeks of possibly bitter and divisive struggle between the two Democrats until a potentially decisive Pennsylvania primary on April 22, Clinton went on some morning news programs, according to the Associated Press, and appeared to raise the possibility of a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket.

“That may be where this is headed,” she said, “but, of course, we have to decide who is on the top of ticket. I think the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me.”

Interesting… that’s the second time this has come from her camp, but the first time it has been mentioned by her. It’s also a smart move… it shows that she respects Obama and wants to try to re-unite the Democratic Party. It’s also a trap, as he’s kind of in trouble either way he answers. If he says “no”, then it make it look like he’s just trying to make a power grab, the nomination is his and only his! Screw the party!! If he says “yes” to the thought, then voters may start voting more for Hillary as it will stall his momentum more. Smart move by her any way you can look at it.

Well, it looks like we’ll be continuing on to the next races… fun fun fun!

Well, it looks like Obama took NE as expected, but I’m glad to see we didn’t go down fighting. The numbers were as follows:

As you can see, it was a very close race in the 3rd district, and even in the 1st district it wasn’t a grand slam for Obama. The only real home run was the 2nd district, with Obama getting 76.8% of the votes. Now, I will admit, the whole process was a complete disaster. I thought it was just our polling place yesterday, but looking at the Nebraska Democrat Blog, it seems there were massive issues everywhere from drinking while voting to people feeling the voters didn’t get a say in what was happening:

I went to the caucus at 1st and Cornhusker. As I sat at a table, I was told that I could not drink the soda that I had in my purse. I looked around the room and saw several people drinking liquior. I was not comfortable discussing politics with people who are drinking liquior. After observing this, I felt I could not be a part of what was going on. It has been my experience that when people are drinking liquior they do not come up with good solutions. I left and went home.

All delegates went to Obama, even though we exceeded the 15% viability threshold for Clinton. In talking to others, it sounds like there was little consistency in how these caucuses were run. If my vote counts, which after this I don’t think it does, go back to the primary way of voting. This was a joke!!!

But what is done, is done. Hopefully they learn from their mistakes and fix it before the next election. Besides that there isn’t too much else… except after talking with people yesterday and reading an article this morning, I feel like I should mention something.

While I was speaking with people, one thing came up in every conversation, and that was that they worried that if this whole fiasco went to the convention, no matter who was picked (be it Hillary or Barack) they felt that the energy the Democrats have now would go away. They all suggested that declaring a Clinton/Obama ticket. The feeling was that if they joined forces, Obama wouldn’t lose the energy he has with his crowd, and Hillary would keep the energy she has with her crowd. The would be able to keep speaking around the country, but instead of rivals, they’d be speaking as partners. Now, according to that article, that’s something that has been brought up before and may be in consideration.

The Clinton camp hopes to stop the Obama bandwagon by winning Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, after which Mrs Clinton is planning to call on party grandees including Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives and Harry Reid, the party’s leader in the Senate, to persuade Mr Obama to stand down.

Clinton aides have privately admitted that Mr Obama would only consider such a move if offered the position of vice presidential running mate, something Mrs Clinton has always been reluctant to consider.

I believe at this point they both need to stop thinking about winning, and start thinking about their party and winning back this country. If Obama and Clinton truly were candidates for change and dreams and everything else, they’d realize what they needed to do to bring this all home. Only time will tell what will happen, but this is the only way I see it ending well (with the party so divided, a lot of Hillary supporters may not vote for Barack, and if he stands down a lot of the people he’s inspired may not stand behind Hillary). Oh well, until next time!