Before the Puerto Rico primary, Hillary Clinton needed 79.24% of the remaining delegates (uncommitted + edwards delegates) in order to claim the nomination. She had 1876.5, and there were 303.5 remaining delegates. She needed 79.24% of them to reach 2117.Now, after winning Puerto Rico, she has 1914.5 delegates, with 248.5 remaining. She now needs 81.49% of the remaining delegates. That's a higher percentage than before winning Puerto Rico. She got a lot today, but she didn't even get the bare minimum to hold steady. She fell further behind today - her nomination is even less likely than it was before.
That contest was won fair and square by Barack Obama -- with a lot of help from the inept Clinton campaign. So let me try to list just a few of the votes and other events which collectively "changed everything" for Hillary Clinton -- changed her candidacy from one of inevitability, to one that has embarrassed many who once supported both her and her husband's political careers...
1) Hillary voting to give Bush the power to wage a falsely-justified war;
2) Hillary relying on tired establishment figures such as Mark Penn, Harold Ickes, Terry McAuliffe and Howard Wolfson to steer her strategy and message;
3) Hillary deciding to neglect the Iowa caucuses, until it was too late, giving Obama a huge national burst of publicity and momentum;
3) Hillary failing to prepare for the possibility that the contest would not be decided by the votes cast on Super Tuesday;
4) Hillary failing to comprehend the new nature of campaign fundraising in the internet era, until it was too late;
5) Hillary losing eleven straight votes in states after Super Tuesday;
6) Hillary failing, despite her decades in politics, to understand the importance of a robust 50-state grassroots strategy;
7) Hillary refusing to recognize that caucus voters send delegates to the Democratic National Convention, too;
8) Hillary committing gaffe after gaffe (from Tuzla to RFK) which made Obama's job much easier than it needed to be;
9) Hillary going negative on Obama early and often, causing even some of her own supporters (such as the editorial board at the New York Times, which endorsed her) to call on her to cool her rhetoric -- calls she ignored, further alienating core voters;
10) Hillary using divisive code words and faux-populist posturing in an attempt to divide the Democratic party against itself for her own gain, thus alienating superdelegates, including those on the Rules committee;
11) Hillary losing two out of three contests to an opponent she wrongly underestimated;
12) And most importantly, the millions and millions of votes cast for Barack Obama "changed everything" -- more, by any rational and unbiased measure, than were received by Clinton.
She supported the Defense of Marriage Act, she co-sponsored a flag burning amendment, she voted to send our sons and daughters into the meat grinder of an unnecessary war. And with close to 70 percent of women in most polls favoring stricter gun control laws, what are we to make of her snuggling up to the NRA with tales of her childhood shooting lessons?
1. McCain is McBush and Bush has an approval rating of 28%. In a country that has been roughly 50-50 in the last two Presidential contests, that means that 22% of those who voted Republican are likely to stay at home or vote for the Democrats. If so, that's a landslide for Obama.
2. McCain is having trouble getting the support of the religious crazies in his party and as he panders to them, he alienates the independent, or secular, voters he needs to win.
3. McCain is having trouble getting money from Republican-Bush donors because they know the Party's over for awhile. As he panders and leans on Bush for money, he alienates the independents.
4. Cindy McCain. Her abject refusal to publish her financial net worth, or income levels, is totally unacceptable for the wife of a Presidential candidate. Even John Kerry's wife disclosed information.
5. John McCain's health, not his age. He has Stage 2a melanoma in his declining years...This is a condition which must be checked constantly.
If you listen to these questions, they all have exactly the same thing, which is how do we bring about big change? And I think that’s a fundamental threshold question. And the question is: Do you believe that compromise, triangulation will bring about big change? I don’t.
I think the people who are powerful in Washington -- big insurance companies, big drug companies, big oil companies -- they are not going to negotiate. They are not going to give away their power. The only way that they are going to give away their power is if we take it away from them.
I believe America needs change in the worst kind of way. And I don't mean little change, I mean big change. And I don't believe that change is going to come from negotiation and compromise. I think there are powerful interests in Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. is broken. It does not work. The entire system is rigged, and it's rigged against you...the insurance companies to drug companies to oil companies, those people run this country now...
I think you've got to take them on and beat them, I don't think you can sit at a table and negotiate with them. The idea that they're going to voluntarily give up their power, that's a fantasy, and that will never happen.
And we will never be able to have universal health care, be able to change the way we use energy and tackle global warming. The big issues that face this country. They are standing in between and the change that we need. It's that simple.
