Hillary Clinton Spews More Lies in NPR Interview

In an NPR interview that aired today, Hillary Clinton offered more lies and distortions about Barack Obama and the Democratic Primary. Listen Here.

It is clear to me that there might be something pathologically wrong with this woman.

She suggests that the results from the ceremonial Florida and Michigan contests should be counted as is (because she "won"). She goes on to play the victim by suggesting that it was not her fault that Obama took his name off the ballot and didn't compete in the States.

In response to the issue of Barack Obama's name not being on the ballot in at least one of the two States, Clinton says:

(taking his name off the ballot)

"That was his choice".

There she goes again....attempting to mislead voters and play the victim. But those of us who have been paying attention all along understand that when the DNC stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates, that part of the punishment was to have candidates avoid competing in the two States. Obama was not the only candidate who took his name off the ballot (as if that matters). But she is clearly trying to trick voters into believing that Michigan and Florida were normal primaries and that the results should be counted. She is also trying to send the message that she was somehow robbed of her delegates.

From ABC News: (regarding the Florida and Michigan results)

The results were meaningless since the elections violated national party rules. The DNC stripped both States of their delegates for holding the primaries too early, and all Democratic candidates — including Clinton and rival Barack Obama — agreed not to campaign in either state. Obama's name wasn't even on the Michigan ballot.

Source (page 2)

So the idea that the results in Florida and Michigan were fair and should be counted (since they were in her favor) is utterly ridiculous. How on earth can delegates be fairly and properly allocated in States where all of the candidates did not compete on a level playing field...and in States that the candidates were in fact told to avoid by their Party leadership? Her "i'm the victim" routine is also absurd, and it's getting a little old.

Here is the agreement that Hillary Clinton broke.

It is ironic that during the interview...when Hillary Clinton is caught lying, she ends up telling even more lies to cover up the lies she has already told. Talk about a tangled web.

A Math Problem That Hillary Clinton Cannot Solve

....No matter how she tries to spin it.

Everyone (well at least the corporate media pundits) has been talking about how Obama cannot win the nomination and that Superdelegates would have the last word. They swear that neither candidate will be able to reach the 2025 delegates needed to clinch the nomination outright.

But according to my math, Obama will get extremely close to the number of delegates that he needs from earned pledged delegates alone....not counting the Superdelegates that are likely to get behind him between now and June.

However, in order for this to be a possibility, the problem of Florida and Michigan would have to be solved. I am a little more open to the idea of a "do-over" as long as it would be fair. The problem that I see is that Clinton is not only being allowed to call for the "do-overs", but she is also being allowed to dictate exactly how the do-overs will take place. It's extremely annoying...and Obama has to be more aggressive with both States and with the Democratic Party elites in making sure that the process is not being manipulated to benefit Clinton.

Just imagine for a moment that the situation was reversed, and it was Obama who was behind. I am confident that there would not even be a discussion about seating delegates from Florida and Michigan. There would be no discussion about any "do-overs". Clinton is being allowed to do this because her name is "Clinton", she's a former First Lady, and as a prominent White figure within the Democratic Party, she is being afforded a certain amount of priviledge.... This is the kind of advantage and leverage that Obama would never be allowed to have.

The vote has to be fair. Currently the two camps, and the State Party officials are discussing which method of voting to use. First they considered a Primary...but that would probably be the most costly method. Neither State wants to pay for new Primaries. So the idea of Caucus's came up, but the Clinton camp quickly rejected that method (worried about losing their advantage). So now they are talking about a mail-in vote. This method does not seem to be the most fair or the most cost effective. It would also be open to all sorts of fraud. It could easily be manipulated.

Then there is the issue of voters needing a "mailing address". This may disinfranchise poor and minority voters. If Obama was smart, he would push harder for the Caucus idea. The Caucus could be cheaper than a mail-in system... (less materials required...and fewer issues with logistics and postage).

Another problem is that the "mail" method would be an experiment for both States. It's not a good idea to have an experiment on a process that you have to get right the first time and the only time. A better compromise might be a Primary in one State and a Caucus in the other....and have the Federal government pay for it. The cost would be equal to a few hours of Iraq war costs. If the U.S. can pick up the tab for elections in other Countries, certainly it can pay for two State elections here at home.

But with that in mind, Obama could benefit in the end. As things stand now, and barring any major collapse or setback on the part of Obama, he would reach 2025 delegates before Clinton would, and the Michigan and Florida results would make it possible. I think Hillary might come to regret calling for "do-overs" in those two States. She would be better off calling for the delegates not to be seated and setting the stage for Obama to fall short...so that she could argue for Superdelegates. Don't be surprised if Clinton reverses course on this, once she realizes that Obama could benefit more than she would.... that's if she wants to drag this thing on through May and June.

But here are how things stand:

Obama has 1608 total delegates after his win in Mississippi.

With pledged delegates only... he would get very close to the 2025 requirement by June.

The following are rough estimates of what Obama's delegate take would be from the remaining States. The numbers are extremely conservative...and I was generous in giving Clinton a few big wins...

April 22nd

Pennsylvania - 158 Pledged Delegates at stake

40% of delegates would give Obama 63

_________________________

Florida and Michigan (assuming that this will eventually be resolved...hopefully fairly).

Florida has 185 pledged delegates at stake.

45% of delegates would give Obama 83.

Michigan has 128 delegates at stake.

45% of delegates would give Obama 57. (Although Obama has been looking good in recent polls.... he could actually win the State. But as I stated...these are modest predictions).

___________________________


May 3rd

Guam - 6 pledged delegates at stake.

50% of delegates would give Obama 3 of course.

May 6th

Indiana - 72 pledged delegates.

I will give Obama a win in Indiana...he has been looking good in recent polls and may even be stronger by the time we reach May 6th.

55% of delegates would give Obama 40.

North Carolina- 115 delegates at stake.

55% of the delegates would give Obama 63.

May 13th

West Virginia - 28 delegates up for grabs.
This is Clinton territory.

with 40% of delegates, Obama would get 11.

May 20th

Kentucky - 51 delegates at stake.

This part of the South would be more friendly to Clinton.

But I still give Obama 45% of delegates for a take of 23.

Oregon - 52 pledged delegates at stake

This should be Obama Country.

I will give Obama 55% of delegates for a take of 28.


June 3rd

Montana- 16 delegates

I will give Obama at least 50% of delegates for 8.

South Dakota - 15 delegates

I will give Obama 7

June 7th

Puerto Rico - a whopping 55 pledged delegates are at stake. Puerto Rico officials have just announced that they will hold a Primary.... Delegates will not be given as a block as in previous elections. Since Puerto Rico is going to play an important role this time, they want to make the most of it. The Governor has endorsed Obama.... Obama also seems to be in tune and in step with what most of the people want... however, they don't know Obama as well as they know Clinton.

Obama's team could benefit from bringing up the issue of Vieques. The Island of Vieques was at the center of a bitter battle between the Puerto Rico grassroots and the Clinton Administration. Puerto Ricans, who treasure the island, successfully fought against the Clinton administration to stop the Navy from using the Island for live fire bombing exercises.

But Clinton also has support from several members of the legislature. Obama should begin campaigning there as soon as possible...at least with surrogates.

Clinton thinks that her success with Hispanics elsewhere will translate to PR. I am not so sure... Puerto Ricans have different concerns than Mexicans, Cubans in Florida, etc. The candidate who is perceived as being the most knowledgeable about local history, culture, and political/social issues, will be in a better position to win. That's why it's important for Obama to get to PR quickly. This dead time between now and April 22nd would be the perfect time to gain a foothold in PR and begin campaigning hard.

I will give Obama at least 50%...for a modest 27.

Obama's pledged delegates from the remaining States should total at least 413.

1608 + 413 = 2021

That 2021 is not including any of the approximately 300 Superdelegates who are uncommitted as of now. Assuming that Obama get's a few of those Superdelegates, he should be in a position to reach 2025 before Clinton.

But even without the Superdelegates... a guy by the name of John Edwards is still sitting on 26 pledged delegates of his own. He could be instrumental in swinging the election.

It is inconceivable that Obama would lose any Superdelegates during the next few months... He will only gain Superdelegates. He will likely reach the 2000 + mark before Puerto Rico (with the help of Superdelegates). But certainly after PR he will be well into the 2000's.... while Clinton would be just short.

Over the same period, Clinton would accumulate approx. 468 pledged delegates. Added to the total delegates that she already has (1476) she would have 1944 to Obama's 2021.

The above represents the best case scenario for Clinton. with 1944 earned delegates...she would have a much higher mountain to climb than Obama in terms of convincing Superdelegates. And if it came down to John Edwards.... I just can't imagine that he would support Hillary Clinton.

This could be a photo finish.

But reaching 2000 is important because it should end all of the silly talk about a brokered election where the Democratic Party establishment would essentially dictate terms to Barack Obama. That would be unacceptable.

(Note: This guestimate is unscientific... because delegates in each State are weighted differently and are awarded under rules decided by each State legislature).

Obama Pulls A Miracle on Super Tuesday

I'm watching CNN and I'm literally getting sick to my stomach.

The media is already spinning this as a big night for Hillary Clinton, the big name Senator and former first lady who was supposed to be coronated tonight.

In fact, the Associated Press went so far as calling Missouri for Clinton with 88% of precints reporting. But the reporters clearly don't understand the State like I do. I knew that the counting wasn't finished and that the urban areas (Obama's strong points) had not been counted yet.


Here is the report from the AP (from Yahoo News):

Clinton wins in Missouri; GOP race close

By DAVID A. LIEB,
Associated Press Writer

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - Propelled largely by rural voters, Democrat Hillary Clinton won the important presidential testing ground of Missouri on Tuesday. Republicans Mike Huckabee and John McCain were in a tight battle for a rich delegate reward.

Clinton had about 50 percent of the vote compared with about 47 percent for rival Barack Obama, with 88 percent of Missouri's precincts reporting. The Associated Press declared the New York senator the winner based on a review of actual vote results, exit polling and an analysis of outstanding precincts.

Clinton carried most of the state, doubling and even tripling the Illinois senator's vote totals in some rural, predominantly white counties. Obama kept the race close by racking up leads in the St. Louis and Kansas City areas, home to many of Missouri's black voters and among the last areas to report results.

Mechanic Byron Fulkerson, 56, of Columbia, voted for Clinton. He was among those declaring the economy the big issue.

"They all have a bunch of blah blah blah talk, but she has the most experience and knows how to get around Washington," Fulkerson said.

Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, and McCain, an Arizona senator, were essentially even. Each had about 32.5 percent of the vote with 88 percent of precincts reporting results. But most of the outstanding votes were in the St. Louis area, were McCain was faring better than Huckabee.

The Republican statewide winner receives all 58 Missouri delegates to the national convention.

Although Clinton had more statewide votes, she was likely to split Missouri's 72 delegates with Obama. Delegates are awarded proportionally, based partly on the statewide results and partly on congressional district results.

All five leading Democratic and Republican candidates made weekend campaign stops in Missouri leading up to the primary. Prospective voters were targeted repeatedly with telephone calls and TV ads.

Missouri is considered a bellwether state because its voters have come down on the side of the winner in every presidential election except one in the past 100 years. In 1956, Missourians narrowly chose Democrat Adlai Stevenson of neighboring Illinois instead of Republican President Dwight Eisenhower.

But Obama pulled out a victory in Missouri within the last 7% of precincts. The St. Louis & Kansas City Metro's had not yet had a chance to speak at the time of the above article. Votes from these areas always come in late. That's how Claire McCaskill won her Senate race in 06.

Part of the reason why Clinton is getting this "spin" from the media is because of her win in California. They are even praising Clinton for winning New York? NO S--T CNN.... It's her home State!!!

But this was a woman who led in almost all of the Super Tuesday States as recently as a month ago. She was leading in some States by 20% points or more...and she was leading nationally by similar margins. This was supposed to be her crowning moment.

The national story should be all about Obama. It should be about how this man came from behind to make a competitive race, when he was supposed to only win Illinois.

But this man won 13 States....more States than Hillary Clinton. The fact that he was able to compete nationally is a victory in itself. Plus, it looks as if he may come out with more delegates. This is a huge night for Obama. He was not supposed to win States in the Northeast...in Clinton territory.... States like Delaware, & Connecticut. He was not supposed to win Minnesota, Utah, & Kansas. I followed the polls in these States and Obama was not supposed to be in the picture. The results were nothing short of a Miracle for Obama.

He certainly made a believer out of me tonight. This was his first big test... and he passed with flying colors.

The media is desperate to have their candidate win so they will spin tonights results as everything but a victory for Obama.

It will be up to the bloggers to give Obama the credit that he deserves.

I suspect that the Democratic establishment will steal the election from Obama by shifting Super Delegates to Clinton, no matter what happens in the Primaries.

_________________________

I hope to post an update with the State by State breakdowns...