I really hope Obambi gets the nod from the Democrats. When will the DNC realize that they need to nominate candidates that actually have a chance of winning? You guys are making this way too easy for the Republicans to continue their 40 year dominance of the Executive Branch. Mark my words, after the General Election in November, doctrinaire liberals across the country will be scratching their heads and wondering," how did we lose yet again?"

__________________
I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat . . . I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money."
-- Barney Frank, October 20, 2008

Obama doesn't have a chance?

Oddsmakers say he's, in fact, the favorite:

OffshoreInsiders Sports Betting Picks


I know you placed your bet (as you declared in another thread) on the other horse, but to claim the favorite has no chance sounds like wishful thinking.

__________________

Congratulations President-Elect Obama

I dont take the advise of someone that wants me to lose my money.

But that begs the question, is a system which produces an outcome which is contrary to stated principles of the party (one man, one vote; every vote must count)


First of all, if the Obama forces want to equate the process for selecting their nominee for the leader of the free world to the arbitrary rules for games which have utterly no impacting on the course of human history, be my guest.

Second, Hillary is not "claiming" and "entitlement". She is making the case that under the very rules Obama (and you) are appealing to, Obama does NOT and likely WILL NOT have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination. Thus, under the "rules" that Obama is citing the nomination rests with the Super Delegates who under THE RULES are completely independent.

BOTH Hillary and Obama are making reasoned arguments in support of the Super Delegates supporting their respective candidacies. While it is true that Hillary is not "entitled" to the nomination based on the prospect that she will end up with more votes than Obama, it is EQUALLY true that there is absolutely NOTHING in the rules which "entitles" Obama to the nomination because he has more pledged delegates even though he has fallen short of having the majority of the pledged delegates which WOULD "entitle" he to the nomination under the rules.

It is intellectually dishonest of people supporting Obama to dismiss Hillary's argument for the Super Delegates by appealing to the "rules" while pretending that their own position that someone who under the "rules" failed to get enough pledged delegates to have a lock on the nomination is nonetheless "entitled" to it because he has more delegates. Please show me where in the democratic party "rules" for the nomination it says that Super Delegates must or even SHOULD support the candidate who got the most delegates (although not enough to secure the nomination) as opposed to the person who got the most votes?

As I have said, both have perfectly reasonable principled arguments for appealing to the Super Delegates, I just happen to think that Hillary's is more in line with the previously mentioned supposed principles of the democratic party

Yes, and under those rules you are appealing to, Obama falls short of the nomination with his pledged delegates, meaning that he is no more "entitled" to the nomination than Hillary.

ScoreBoard!!!! Well, according to the ACTUAL score, under THE RULES, Obama does not have enough "points" for the nomination based on pledged delegates, and under the "rules" Super Delegates don't "count" until the convention.

Now we hear that Florida and/or Michigan may only count as 1/2 people for the purpose of their representation at the convention. Maybe the democrats should try explaining to the people of those states come the general election that slaves faired better under the Constitution than the voters of those states do under the democratic party "rules". That's a great and principled position for Obama to run on!

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Yes, he does have a chance. He could be elected if McCain makes so many mistakes that White voters stay home. I don't see that happening, but ya never know.....

At any rate, Odds makers set the odds on bets so that they receive equal action from both sides of the wager. They make their income from the 'handle' and will change the odds or lay off action with other gambling houses when things get lopsided. Last election these same oddsmakers had Kerry an over whelming favorite - we all know how that turned out.

__________________
I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat . . . I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money."
-- Barney Frank, October 20, 2008