I clicked with the hope of finding a TPM link to report such an obvious ploy as Abuse. Why doesn't TPM have a 'Report Abuse' feature? The author must have serious issues if he just created this post to say "Look at Me!". What are you? 12?

Posted at March 21, 2008 5:21 PM in response to Nude Photos of Barack Obama's Pastor!

Smarter than a 5th Grader
______________________
I ask for your help in stopping the spread of the popular vote myth throughout the media for the Democratic nomination. Many TV, radio and newspaper, and internet blogs continue to claim that a valid path for the superdelegates to choose Hillary Clinton is if she wins the so-called popular vote. However, the popular vote should *not* be considered in the discussion (and thus be removed from all conversation, and be disregarded by the superdelegtes) because adding caucus results to primary results is like adding apples and oranges (nevermind that it's not even a part of any of the contest rules!).

Not an apples-to-apples comparison: The popular vote in caucus states inherently under-represents the state's population when compared to that of primary states, because fewer people participate in caucuses. Therefore, we use delegates to 'normalize' these two systems: the number of delegates won is representative of how the state voted, regardless of the system it chooses to select them.

Some 5th grade math: It's like adding 1/4 to 1/2. Before you add 1/4 to 1/2, you have to first create a common demoninator - the delegate is that common demoninator.

Let's take an example: Washington state (which Obama won) vs Oklahoma (which Clinton won). Since Washington State is a relatively populous state, it's awarded 78 delegates. However, since it used caucuses to determine it's delegates, it added very little to Obama's popular vote advantage (+90,000 according to dailykos), despite his winning by a HUGE margin there (53-25 in delegates). Compare that to Clinton's win in Oklahoma, which is about half the size of Washington: She won the popular vote in Oklahoma 55%-31%, though only came away with a 10 delegate advantage (24-14). However, she gained a +100,000 popular vote advantage since it's a primary state and many more people participated than in Washington's caucus.

Eventhough Clinton comes out ahead in the popular vote between these two states (Okla -(minus) Wash = +10,000), I don't think anybody would debate that her Oklahoma win was more significant than Obama's Washington state win (Okla isn't a "big state" afterall!).

I'd love it if all the news programs (and talk shows) stopped trying to use the popular vote to compare these two candidates. We have had this system which has been effective at normalizing these two processes for a very, very, long time, so please focus on the only math that matters: the delegate math!

Of course, the Clinton campaign will continue to push the popular vote question, and dedicate quite a bit of time discussing this myth leading up to Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida, since it's the only numbers that they can spin the media into believing, though this is really 5th grade math, and they definitely aren't 'Smarter than a 5th Grader' here.

Please help stop the spread of the popular vote myth and put and end to this.

Posted at March 13, 2008 12:53 PM in response to Rendell: Isn't Popular Vote As Important As Pledged Del Count?

Hillary may just be trying to press the 'electability' argument by winning the popular vote, which I think is why she wants to drag Florida and Michigan back into this. However, I don't believe that the popular vote is a fair measure of the voters preferences in these contests (nor is it the way the rules are set up, but don't dare suggest that to Hillary!); you can't add primary results + caucus results together - it's like adding apples and oranges...

Since a smaller number of voters participate in caucuses than they do in primaries, Obama's overwhelming victories in caucus states like Washington, Colorado and Minnesota added little to his overall popular vote. If you wanted to add the caucus and primary votes together, I'd think you'd have to adjust the results from the caucuses upward by some factor (2x? 3x?). Of course, none of the major "news" networks bother doing this, either... You have to lump them in with Huckabee and Hillary as the growing number of spinners that "didn't major in math" (or, even more likely, never took a math class in college)

Posted at March 6, 2008 9:45 PM in response to Convention Math: Remember the UADs!

re: the '50' Superdelegate bloc first reported by Brokaw...

If true, do you think it's likely that the Obama campaign has asked them to spread their endoresments out across the next couple of weeks so that there's no appearance of any 'back-room' dealing going on? If so, very smart move (again, IF the initial story was correct).

Posted at March 6, 2008 8:17 PM in response to Convention Math: Remember the UADs!

Stop the Presses! Hillary won "Crucial Tuesday" by 10 delegates!?! Obama won *Wisconsin* alone by 10 delegates!

Posted at March 5, 2008 1:14 PM in response to Latest Tally: Hillary May Emerge With Gain Of 10 Delegates

Putting the Clintons' delegate wins from March 4th need to be put in perspective, something that her campaign seems to have completely lost: the ability to reason, use logic and have any kind of perspecttive. Her combined net delegate wins from Texas and Ohio won't even amount to the Obamaa's delegate lead from *many* individual states: Washington state (+23) or Virgina (+25), etc.... and is about the same delegate advantage he gained in Wisconsin(+10).

*** Texas + Ohio + R.I. + Vermont = Wisconsin!!!

Posted at March 5, 2008 1:11 PM in response to Latest Tally: Hillary May Emerge With Gain Of 10 Delegates

No worries; I grew up in Chagrin Falls, the demographics heavily favor Hillary. It's nothing like most of Cleveland. A lot of old folks, and only about a 1% minority population (when I went to high school there, only 3-4 african american kids out of 600 in my HS)

Posted at March 4, 2008 5:05 PM in response to Republicans Turning Out In Ohio — For The Dem Primary

Hey!!! I grew up in Chagrin Falls. My parents still live there (ages 60+). It's a very well-to-do touristy township where the demographics heavily favor Hillary. (a lot of 50+, 60+, 70+ year olds). Almost ZERO minority voters. During my high school years, there were probably 3-4 african-american kids in a high school of about 600.

Posted at March 4, 2008 5:02 PM in response to Republicans Turning Out In Ohio — For The Dem Primary

It's this simple: Clinton has had more negative press because she's lost 11 contests in a row. Obama has had more positive press because he's overwhelmingly won 11 contests in a row.

Make the analogy to how a baseball team is covered in the newspapers and on TV when they have an 11-game losing streak vs an 11-game winning streak.

'nuff said.

Posted at March 4, 2008 3:07 PM in response to Is Press Harder On Hillary? More Writers Weigh In