|
|
|
So this is the current shakedown:
Obama: 1,489½ pledged delegates vote estimate
Clinton: 1,336½ pledged delegates vote estimate
Looks pretty comfortable for Obama, don't you think with all the big states off the table?
100% Wrong unfortunately
Indiana, Kentucky, West Virgina, North Carolina, Oregon, South Dakota, and Montana still all have to vote. Also I am unsure of how Michigan and Florida will seat their delegates as their democratic primaries didn't count because they voted on the wrong date. It's almost mind boggling how idiotic that is.
Plus there's also superdelegates (unpledged delegates generally governors, mayors, and senators) who are allowed to vote for whoever they want at the democratic national convention. It seems a lot of them are on Hilary's side.
So all and all, there are about 700 to 800 delegates still up in the air not counting Florida and Michigan. So this is still a very tight race. How do you see it unfolding?
|
Greg says:
Coding music...
Greg says:
Hmm...
Greg says:
I wouldn't rule it out. 
Chris 3.0 [New features? Yes.] says:
Greg says:
If you think about machine code it's a bunch of 1s and 0s
Chris 3.0 [New features? Yes.] says:
Anything is possible.
Greg says:
Yeah try to code Metallica
Chris 3.0 [New features? Yes.] says:
Yeah, I'll get right on that... right after I learn to fly.
|
|
|
|
|
There are a few errors on Obama's behalf which I think have brought his votes down in recent states. However, note that it was still usually something like 44 and 56 for Obama and Clinton, respectively. As for superdelegates, I personally think the tides are changing. Remember in the beginning of the primaries? Clinton was absolutely dominating Obama when it came to superdelegates. But now, it's almost 50/50, and there's a lot to go. At the end, Obama has an advantage since he needs fewer delegates overall, but that doesn't mean a thing considering how many "big" states are left. Very tight race as you said Greg, personally my money's been on Obama so far. This is for two reasons primarily, his funding has been much more successful than Clinton's (hers has been great too, but not as great as his), and Obama manages to stand up to Clinton when she has a former president on her side (Bill Clinton). Considering that Obama really hasn't been around for that long compared to Clinton, that's really something. Nonetheless, both are interesting candidates. Good luck to both. 
Last Edit: Apr 28, 2008 22:33:42 GMT by mukei
|
|
|
|
