Official West Virginia Democratic Primary Discussion Thread...

[J. J.]

Delegate Count as of 10:30 pm EDT (9:30 pm CDT).

Obama:  1599 pledged delegates.  282 superdelegates.  1,881 total delegates.  -144 from 2,025.

Clinton:  1,440 pledged delegates.  273 superdelegates.  1,713 total delegate.  -312 from 2,025 and -168 behind Obama.

West Virginia pledged delegates:  16 for Clinton, 7 for Obama with 5 outstanding for a total of 28 pledged delegates.

Serious question.  MI currently lists 80 delegates for Clinton and 55 "undecided."  What is the minimum number Obama can get of those "undecided" delegates?

[WalterMitty]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

[Sam Spade]

I overestimated Obama's "presumptive nominee" bounce as well. But most of all underestimated Edwards.

Well, that was who the anti-wimmin vote should have supported after the "supposed nominee" thingy. (b/c they tend to be anti-black too). 

Hillary may yet fall back down to 66%, which would make my prediction of her number correct.

I know that WV-02 and WV-01 will be 4-2 Hillary.  Is WV-03 possibly 5-1?

So, it'll either be 20-8 Hillary (if 5-1) or 19-9 Hillary. (if 4-2)

[Alcon]

Well, that was who the anti-wimmin vote should have supported after the "supposed nominee" thingy. (b/c they tend to be anti-black too). 

Hillary may yet fall back down to 66%, which would make my prediction of her number correct.

I know that WV-02 and WV-01 will be 4-2 Hillary.  Is WV-03 possibly 5-1?

So, it'll either be 20-8 Hillary (if 5-1) or 19-9 Hillary. (if 4-2)

Clinton's at 77.5% there, so yeah, she gets her fifth delegate.

[agcatter]

The guy has had nothing but glowing coverage from the media as the nominee since last Tuesday - and he still loses by 41 points?  yikes

[Lief 🗽]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I was one delegate off, looks like it'll be 20-8. Oh well. Hardly changes the situation much. Note no movement on InTrade.

Hey, Obama needed 150 delegates to clinch the nomination before tonight, now he needs 142. A little bit closer.

[Smash255]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

Again just because they prefer Clinton over Obama, doesn't mean that when push comes to shove they aren't going to vote for Obama over McCain.

[WalterMitty]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

1.  most of those plain states had a caucus, which is completely un-democratic.  working people cant always show up at 7pm.  give them a 13 hour window. 

2.  you guys won idaho and utah...and will probably do the same in montana and south dakota.   good luck winning those states in november!  yes we can!

[TheresNoMoney]

Obama will win PA and OH (especially if he picks Strickland as VP).

Neither Obama nor Clinton would win in West Virginia.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

1.  most of those plain states had a caucus, which is completely un-democratic.  working people cant always show up at 7pm.  give them a 13 hour window.

And do you think any of them would've flipped in a primary? Unlikely.

[Beet]

Donna Brazille on CNN, perpetuating the myth that every state except FL & MI complied with the DNC calendar rules....no mention of IA & NH's rulebreaking.

IA & NH both applied for waivers to the DNC and received them.

Yes, but only *after* they'd already moved their contests.  They moved to Jan. 3rd and Jan. 8th respectively, which was earlier than the DNC allowed (the original DNC calendar said they could go on Jan. 14th and Jan. 22nd respectively), and said "We don't care what the DNC says, we're going to vote on Jan. 3 and 8 no matter what."  The DNC gave them a pass in December 2007, after their dates were already locked in.

Formally the DNC didn't give them a pass until December, but informally, both states had consulted with Dean before making their moves and it was widely understood that they'd be given the pass. Florida was the first to make a move on May 3, and, in order to forestall a chaotic rush, the Rules Committee decided to set an example with Florida.

When Michigan followed in August, they had no choice but to do the same. New Hampshire's constitution requires that its primary be at least one week before any other primary. Therefore they legally had no choice but to move 1 week prior to Michigan to Jan. 8. After consultations with the DNC both NH and IA were allowed to move.

I used to think Dean behaved unfairly, but now I'm not so sure. Which state moved first-- New Hampshire or Michigan?

You wouldn't happen to know which section of the NH constitution?

All I could find was a state law (which was updated in June 2007 to permit the SOS to set a non-Tuesday date for the election).

The actual law says that the primary will be held coincident with Spring town meetings in March - which may well be a constitutional provision, except it can be moved earlier to cut in front of any other State.

I was wrong about this apparently... yes, it is state law.

[J. J.]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

[WalterMitty]

1.  most of those plain states had a caucus, which is completely un-democratic.  working people cant always show up at 7pm.  give them a 13 hour window.

And do you think any of them would've flipped in a primary? Unlikely.

it wpuld have been closer...no doubt...OMGZ MORE DELEGATES!!11

take it from me...im an ordinary fellow...im glad mass didnt have a goddamned caucus, because i may not have been able to attend.  i do have a life...child etc.

furthermore, id prefer to cast my vote in private.  why the hell should i be forced to announce my vote to the entire precinct?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

Because none have voted since then. He will in June though.

[J. J.]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

Because none have voted since then. He will in June though.

Oh, please.  You've had that in OH, PA, IN and WV. 

The question will be, how many "working class" voters will there be in the rest.

As I've said, the demographics are horrid.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

Because none have voted since then. He will in June though.

Oh, please.  You've had that in OH, PA, IN and WV. 

The question will be, how many "working class" voters will there be in the rest.

As I've said, the demographics are horrid.

I'm talking about South Dakota and Montana. Which are plains states, unlike the ones you listed.

[J. J.]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

Because none have voted since then. He will in June though.

Oh, please.  You've had that in OH, PA, IN and WV. 

The question will be, how many "working class" voters will there be in the rest.

As I've said, the demographics are horrid.

I'm talking about South Dakota and Montana. Which are plains states, unlike the ones you listed.

I'm talking about the white "working class" which was the subject of the post.

I don't think this is over (largely because Clinton is tenacious, and has the morals of a Styrofoam cup). 

[Sbane]

I dont buy the Clinton winning primaries in caucus states argument that much. Yes they would have been closer, but for the exception of perhaps Maine all the other caucus states would have gone for Obama. States like Minnesota and Colorado would have racked up huge margins for him in the popular vote total. He could not get that with the caucus state thus making his arguments on the popular vote weaker. Thus he would have gained there although he may have lost out on delegates. He basically played the campaign the way it should have have been and Hillary had no clue.

[Sam Spade]

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

if i were a democrat, id be worried.  this shows obama has a very serious problem with the white working class.

forget wv.  how the hell is he going to win pa or oh or even va if he cant do better among the blue collars?

i dont say this as a hack.  if i had to vote today. id probably vote obama over mccain.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that whites are only "working class" if they live in Appalachia. Yes, Clinton is winning white Appalachians. But Obama is winning white "working class" voters as well, in the Plains states, in the Mountain West, and states like Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin.

And he hasn't wone of those since March.

Because none have voted since then. He will in June though.

Oh, please.  You've had that in OH, PA, IN and WV. 

The question will be, how many "working class" voters will there be in the rest.

As I've said, the demographics are horrid.

I'm talking about South Dakota and Montana. Which are plains states, unlike the ones you listed.

I'm talking about the white "working class" which was the subject of the post.

I don't think this is over (largely because Clinton is tenacious, and has the morals of a Styrofoam cup). 

And what are Montana and South Dakota? Latte liberal land?

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

Isn't every state "interesting" except for the ones where all you need is racial demographics and you can already draw the entire county map?

[Sbane]

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

Yes they will be provided they campaign there. I am guessing they will but OR could change that.

[Sam Spade]

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

Yes they will be provided they campaign there. I am guessing they will but OR could change that.

Hillary Clinton leaving after Oregon?  You're not being serious, are you?

[Sam Spade]

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

Isn't every state "interesting" except for the ones where all you need is racial demographics and you can already draw the entire county map?

Those states are interesting too.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Montana and South Dakota will be interesting, actually.

Isn't every state "interesting" except for the ones where all you need is racial demographics and you can already draw the entire county map?

Those states are interesting too.

So then what states aren't interesting?