Is 2008 the most evenly-matched primary in Dem. history?

[Trilobyte]

At this point of the back-and-forth between Clinton and Obama, can we officially say that 2008 is the most evenly-matched primary in the history of the Democrats? Even if Obama steamrolls his way to the nomination from this point (which I doubt will happen), I think this race has already eclipsed the 1984 contest. Thoughts?

[WalterMitty]

1984.

hart actually won more votes and more states.

the same may be true for obama when it is all done.

[Angel of Death]

1984.

hart actually won more votes and more states.

the same may be true for obama when it is all done.

If that happens, say goodbye to November.

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Obama is already showing the right leadership here.  The super delegates need to accept the elections and honor them.  Good or bad; it is what has to happen.

Hillary's view that they are independent voices will lead the democratic party to disaster.

Let face facts, if Hillary has the elected delegates she will win the nomination.  Case closed.  Obama will not get the super delegates under these circumstances.

The only scenario where super delegates will overturn is to give the nomination to HIllary. 

The whole discussion on super delegates is a "code name" for giving the nomination to Hillary if she loses the elected delegates.   UNACCEPTABLE.  Now it may have occurred in 1984 but it was 2 white male candidates.  This year it is very, very different 

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

Obama is already showing the right leadership here.  The super delegates need to accept the elections and honor them.  Good or bad; it is what has to happen.

Hillary's view that they are independent voices will lead the democratic party to disaster.

Let face facts, if Hillary has the elected delegates she will win the nomination.  Case closed.  Obama will not get the super delegates under these circumstances.

The only scenario where super delegates will overturn is to give the nomination to HIllary. 

The whole discussion on super delegates is a "code name" for giving the nomination to Hillary if she loses the elected delegates.   UNACCEPTABLE.  Now it may have occurred in 1984 but it was 2 white male candidates.  This year it is very, very different 

What do the two candidates being white males have to do with anything?

I was referring to 1984 when Mondale was given the nomination over Hart even thought Hart won more states and had more delegates from elections then Mondale had.   The difference being that this was not a historic selection that would alienate one group of the party

[Saxwsylvania]

Obama is already showing the right leadership here.  The super delegates need to accept the elections and honor them.  Good or bad; it is what has to happen.

Hillary's view that they are independent voices will lead the democratic party to disaster.

Let face facts, if Hillary has the elected delegates she will win the nomination.  Case closed.  Obama will not get the super delegates under these circumstances.

The only scenario where super delegates will overturn is to give the nomination to HIllary. 

The whole discussion on super delegates is a "code name" for giving the nomination to Hillary if she loses the elected delegates.   UNACCEPTABLE.  Now it may have occurred in 1984 but it was 2 white male candidates.  This year it is very, very different 

What do the two candidates being white males have to do with anything?

I was referring to 1984 when Mondale was given the nomination over Hart even thought Hart won more states and had more delegates from elections then Mondale had. 

You still didn't answer my question.  Why should it matter whether they're black or white, male or female? 

[8 out of 11 is not deserved]

 The difference being that this was not a historic selection that would alienate one group of the party. 

[J. J.]

Obama is already showing the right leadership here.  The super delegates need to accept the elections and honor them.  Good or bad; it is what has to happen.

Hillary's view that they are independent voices will lead the democratic party to disaster.

Let face facts, if Hillary has the elected delegates she will win the nomination.  Case closed.  Obama will not get the super delegates under these circumstances.

The only scenario where super delegates will overturn is to give the nomination to HIllary. 

The whole discussion on super delegates is a "code name" for giving the nomination to Hillary if she loses the elected delegates.   UNACCEPTABLE.  Now it may have occurred in 1984 but it was 2 white male candidates.  This year it is very, very different 

The whole point of super delegates is to serve as a check on the temporary passions of the voters.  The theory is that they have greater experience and greater judgment to keep the Democratic Party from making a McGovern mistake.  About 275-300 are elected public officials, actually elected by the voters, and about 15 are former presidents, congressional leaders; the bulk of the remainder are DNC members, elected by their state parties.  These are people who should be able to use their own judgments.

[Verily]

Obama is already showing the right leadership here.  The super delegates need to accept the elections and honor them.  Good or bad; it is what has to happen.

Hillary's view that they are independent voices will lead the democratic party to disaster.

Let face facts, if Hillary has the elected delegates she will win the nomination.  Case closed.  Obama will not get the super delegates under these circumstances.

The only scenario where super delegates will overturn is to give the nomination to HIllary. 

The whole discussion on super delegates is a "code name" for giving the nomination to Hillary if she loses the elected delegates.   UNACCEPTABLE.  Now it may have occurred in 1984 but it was 2 white male candidates.  This year it is very, very different 

The whole point of super delegates is to serve as a check on the temporary passions of the voters.  The theory is that they have greater experience and greater judgment to keep the Democratic Party from making a McGovern mistake.  About 275-300 are elected public officials, actually elected by the voters, and about 15 are former presidents, congressional leaders; the bulk of the remainder are DNC members, elected by their state parties.  These are people who should be able to use their own judgments.

Well, the only time the superdelegates have ever mattered, the Democrats ended up with Hillary Clinton Walter Mondale. So they clearly don't fulfill their purpose of "not making a McGovern mistake".

[Platypus]

I'd expect a huge % of Democratics superdelegates in 'red states'-because of down-ballot issues. I was at a political forum with US politicians last Septemeber where the concerns of an Oklahoma state house rep. struck home: "If Hillary is nominated, i'd lose my seat. I hold it by a 10% margin".

Maybe he was exaggerating, but somehow I think not. There is a huge amount of anti-Hillary sentiment in states like Oklahoma, where the Democrats are very marginal anyway. Sure, she won the state by a large margin, but there's no chance of her winning it in the general and I think it's the kind of state that really would see a large number of people go to the polls specifically to vote against her-and whilst they are at it, against the other Democrats up for election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There is a huge amount of anti-Hillary sentiment in states like Oklahoma,

Maybe there is. But nonetheless, Obama would still poll a hell of a lot worse than her in that state.