PJ Media

Bill in Ca. -

You keep referring to how nasty Clinton’s campaign was — I suggest they were both equally competitive.. and neither more nasty than the other — From my perspective, the media attacked Clinton on many things.. and gave Obama a pass on much. Certainly there were attacks on Obama as well (the Wright thing).. but beyond this, very little. Two of the things that come to mind that Hillary was unfairly attacked on were the claims of racism and the claim that she implied Obama was a Muslim (the as far as I know thing). If interested in this, check out these links.. I also included posts about Obama’s donations to superdelegates and a few other things .. as well as caucus details below these links:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200803110002

http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/05/obamas-super-delegates-money-machine.html

and one more detail from me about caucuses:

.. Then why do we get such different results when a state holds both a caucus and a primary? Two examples:

1. Washington State — democratic results only listed below:

* All delegates determined by the caucus results…
* total caucus votes are less than5%of the total that voted in the primary.. total caucus votes = 31, 984. Total primary votes =
662,872. OVER 630,000 more people voted in the primary than in the caucus. The delta ALONE is an order of magnitude greater than those that showed up for the caucus…..
* Obama won both (as was expected)… but he won by a 37% margin if one views the caucus results, but only a 5% margin when the primary results are used. Yet, somehow, the caucus is what determines Obama’s awarded delegates. Obama pledged delegates from Washington = 52… Clinton pledged = 26. Obama gets twice the delegates due to the caucus results that represent only 5% of those that voted in the primary.
* Link from the Washington Post if anyone wishes to confirm my numbers: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2…s/states/wa/d/

2. Texas — Democratic results only listed below

* total caucus votes are less than2%of the total that voted in the primary.. total caucus votes = 42, 538. Total primary votes = 2,868,454. OVER 2.5 MILLION more people voted in the primary than in the caucus. The delta ALONE is two orders of magnitude greater than those that showed up for the caucus…..
* Somehow, Obama won more delegates due to the caucus results than Clinton… This is despite the following: 1) Combined primary and caucus votes for Clinton = 1,478,434. Combined primary and caucus votes for Obama = 1,382,703. 2) If you count BOTH caucus and primary votes, Clinton beat Obama by 95,731 votes. 3) only 42,538 people voted in the caucus…this is less than half of Clinton’s total caucus/primary vote lead over Obama…actually 10,000 LESS votes than half of Clinton’s lead!!!
* Obama still won more delegates from Texas… 99 to Hillary’s 94.

* Link from the NYTIMES if anyone wishes to confirm my numbers:
* http://politics.nytimes.com/election…states/TX.html

One comment — There’s something terribly wrong with the caucus system and the way the Democrats award their delegates.
Reply With Quote