John Edwards to endorse Obama.
You fought a good campaign Senator Clinton, and I for one think you're going to be Senate majority leader in the very near future. Best of luck in all your future endeavours.
Update:
The story I'm linking to hasn't been updated yet, but it's official. I've got John Edwards playing at the Obama rally from CNN's live online feed right now in the background. "The reason I am here tonight is that the Democratic voters in America have made their choice, and so have I... There is one man who knows in his heart that it's time to create one America, and not two, and that man is Barack Obama" (crowd goes nuts...)
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Nail, meet coffin.
Hillary Clinton wins West Virginia, and it couldn't matter less...
So, Hillary had a "big win" last night in West Virginia. She beat Obama, as expected, 67% to 26%.
Let's take a stroll through the other big wins this primary season shall we.
Races Obama won by 60% or more:
Mississippi
Maryland
Illinois
Georgia
the District of Columbia
Virginia
Races Clinton won by 60% or more:
West Virginia
Arkansas
Total net delegates gained by Clinton in her huge win in WV last night: 10
Delegate lead for Barak Obama this morning (CNN): 165
So, I guess all Hillary needs now is 17 more West Virginias, or for more than 77% of the 214 remaining super delegates to move to her camp (or some combination thereof).
In other words...
Nothing to see here.
Move along.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Clinton simply can't win. Period.
I think Hillary Clinton's really got to start thinking seriously about how she wants this all to end, because she can't win the Democratic nomination for President. Not convinced? Look at the graphic below from CNN's handy dandy delegate counter. In the hypothetical scenario below, I've given Clinton 70-30 wins in West Virginia and Kentucky, and 60-40 wins in Oregon, Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico. A clean sweep with huge to sizable wins for Clinton. I've also given her the lead in super delegates 60-40 (even though Obama has recently pulled ahead in super delegate support). The results of this fantastic hypothetical for Clinton? She loses the race to Obama 2046 to 1983.
A 63 delegate loss from arguably the best, most spectacular scenario one could possibly fathom for Hillary Clinton. Anyone want to argue she can still win?
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Clinton is DONE...
Not to be overly harsh, but the former first lady is toast.
I just went to CNN's handy little delegate counter to confirm my suspicions.
Go the the counter and give Hillary 60-40 victories in EVERY REMAINING RACE. Then, put in that the super delegates ALSO go for Hillary 60-40. You'll agree, I think, that this scenario is IMPOSSIBLE for Clinton to achieve, but take a look at the results.
60-40 Clinton in all the remaining races, AND among the super delegates gives you:
Obama 2039 delegates
Clinton 1980 delegates.
So, if Clinton does the impossible, she'll only lose by 59 delegates.
Good luck with that Hillary.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
OK, now this is just getting ridiculous....
The Tories are now threatening to make Bill C-10, the freakin' movie tax credit Bill, a matter of confidence!!! Now, leave aside the merits of the Bill (which proposes to deny tax credits to films that are "offensive" where the government gets to determine what constitutes "offensive") what really grinds my gears here is how obvious it's become that the Tories are using "confidence" motions as a sledge hammer.
Any time the Tories feel there's the smallest chance that a bill might not get passed (or in this case, not even that, just the chance that the Bill might be AMENDED has them foaming at the mouth) the Tories will proclaim the Bill to be a matter of confidence and dare the Liberals to do something.
And they won't.
Canadians elected a minority government so that the parties would be forced to compromise, and come up with better and more balanced legislation for all Canadians. Well, "screw that" say the Tories. We'll do what we want, and if you even think about amending the bills we propose we'll make you force an election over it.
And it's working.
At this point it occurs to me that the Liberals are keeping the Tories from being elected to a majority position in the House by simply GIVING THEM majority power in the House, without the need for anything so awkward as an election. The strategy, so far as I can tell, is to save the village by burning it down. We can't risk an election, because then maybe the Tories would win majority power, so we'll give the Tories majority power to prevent an election from happening.
So, this is me getting on the bandwagon with those who want to quit this inanity and just rip off the band-aid. Sure, maybe Harper and the Tories would win an ensuing election. I'd be mildly surprised, but not shocked. But SO WHAT??? At least then all the things they're doing would have some democratic legitimacy. At this point they have all the power, and none of the veneer of legitimacy. How is that BETTER than allowing the people of Canada to decide whether they WANT the Tories to have a majority or not??? Why is giving it to them by default better than letting the people decide???
Knock it off already.
This is just a farce.
