When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
However, one truth is undeniable: McCain now has a commanding lead ranging anywhere from the NY Times 689 to NBC’s 720 delegates won out of a total of 1,191 needed for the nomination. Romney’s total ranges from 244 to 312.
This is the media’s newest addition to what they call accurate news—–like the pollsters, they are within the margin of error. Actual numbers would require a “journalist” to think and that’s not resonable to assume they have this ability.
jainphx
15 years ago
Journalist THINK, hell our own party doesn’t think. So many fell into trap that McCain was only one who could beat Hillery. Truth is he’s the only one that would and will lose to her taking the Congress and senate with him down the tubes. We are in for a long 4 years. I just hope I live to see the correction that is inevitable.
Hey Folks… I looked at this from a variety of sources as you can see. It’s just undeniable that McCain is WAYYY ahead in delegates beating Romney by more than 2 to 1.
bbartlog
15 years ago
Actual numbers would require a “journalist” to think
Maybe you’d like to do the research and come up with an accurate figure? Believe me, the reason these estimates vary is not because journalists are lazy (though I’m sure they are). The problem is that
– the rules are complicated
– everyone wants a delegate estimate once a caucus has been held, even if things are really still undecided
– even if you had the twenty or thirty hours you’d need to spend on the research, some needed information simply isn’t available (i.e. the actual candidate supported by some nominally uncommitted delegates in various states).
For example, Maine, Nevada, Minnesota and Louisiana are all considered to have had their caucuses, and most news organizations will show you (national) delegate counts for those states. But in all those places all that’s happened is that delegates to a *state* convention have been elected (and a straw poll conducted alongside). The delegates to the national convention will be chosen at the state convention. To figure out who *those* delegates will support, you would need to know the procedures of the state conventions: do they have one up or down vote on a national delegate slate? Does each area of the state get allocated some number of delegates to the national convention (this is how it works in Louisiana)? Do they have some other way of trying to make the representation proportional? And also: did the delegates that got elected to the state convention get elected in proportion to the percentage of the popular vote received? In Maine and Louisiana, you have two sort of opposite situations with respect to Ron Paul’s state delegates. In Louisiana, Paul’s people mobilized pretty well and had a plurality of support in several districts, but the LA GOP was able to run a unity slate of sorts and thus keep Paul’s take of delegates to the state convention down to 15 out of 105 or so. On the other hand, in Maine, Paul’s actual take of the vote was only 20%, but thanks to good organization he was able to capture about 35% of the state delegates.
Truth is he’s the only one that would and will lose to her taking the Congress and senate with him down the tubes
And you are basing this “truth” on what? —–your emotions? Your total disdain for McCain? The latest RCP shows that if Clinton or Obama were to run against Romney, he would lose by over 10% points. At least McCain is in the plus column. Nothing will unite this party more than if Clinton is the nominee, which will bring out the base in full force. That my dear jainphx
is how REPUBLICANS AND CONSERVATIVES will defeat Clinton. If you continue to contribute to the nightmare of a Democratic President because you refuse to back the eventual Republican nominee, then you reap what you sow.
bbartlog
15 years ago
Image test post:
Sorry about the clutter, just want to see if this will work (I know typepad will zero this out).
Wordsmith was showing off. And proving that he can do more than DANCE!
bbartlog
15 years ago
Thanks for the advice! Second try:
bbartlog
15 years ago
I imagine that if just anyone could post images wherever they liked, porn spammers (not to mention trolls) would have a field day.. so I shouldn’t be surprised that blogger strips them out –
(img src=” “) works so I think you might have hit enter/submit comment before you inserted the image.
I’m pretty sure I put it in and Blogger stripped it out. I might try some other permutations later just to see if I’m being clueless – maybe I didn’t close tags and got things taken out for that reason. But I think the simple explanation (blogger is set up to stop random yahoos from posting images because that would cause a ton of problems) is probably correct.
This is the media’s newest addition to what they call accurate news—–like the pollsters, they are within the margin of error. Actual numbers would require a “journalist” to think and that’s not resonable to assume they have this ability.
Journalist THINK, hell our own party doesn’t think. So many fell into trap that McCain was only one who could beat Hillery. Truth is he’s the only one that would and will lose to her taking the Congress and senate with him down the tubes. We are in for a long 4 years. I just hope I live to see the correction that is inevitable.
Hey Folks… I looked at this from a variety of sources as you can see. It’s just undeniable that McCain is WAYYY ahead in delegates beating Romney by more than 2 to 1.
Actual numbers would require a “journalist” to think
Maybe you’d like to do the research and come up with an accurate figure? Believe me, the reason these estimates vary is not because journalists are lazy (though I’m sure they are). The problem is that
– the rules are complicated
– everyone wants a delegate estimate once a caucus has been held, even if things are really still undecided
– even if you had the twenty or thirty hours you’d need to spend on the research, some needed information simply isn’t available (i.e. the actual candidate supported by some nominally uncommitted delegates in various states).
For example, Maine, Nevada, Minnesota and Louisiana are all considered to have had their caucuses, and most news organizations will show you (national) delegate counts for those states. But in all those places all that’s happened is that delegates to a *state* convention have been elected (and a straw poll conducted alongside). The delegates to the national convention will be chosen at the state convention. To figure out who *those* delegates will support, you would need to know the procedures of the state conventions: do they have one up or down vote on a national delegate slate? Does each area of the state get allocated some number of delegates to the national convention (this is how it works in Louisiana)? Do they have some other way of trying to make the representation proportional? And also: did the delegates that got elected to the state convention get elected in proportion to the percentage of the popular vote received? In Maine and Louisiana, you have two sort of opposite situations with respect to Ron Paul’s state delegates. In Louisiana, Paul’s people mobilized pretty well and had a plurality of support in several districts, but the LA GOP was able to run a unity slate of sorts and thus keep Paul’s take of delegates to the state convention down to 15 out of 105 or so. On the other hand, in Maine, Paul’s actual take of the vote was only 20%, but thanks to good organization he was able to capture about 35% of the state delegates.
And you are basing this “truth” on what? —–your emotions? Your total disdain for McCain? The latest RCP shows that if Clinton or Obama were to run against Romney, he would lose by over 10% points. At least McCain is in the plus column. Nothing will unite this party more than if Clinton is the nominee, which will bring out the base in full force. That my dear jainphx
is how REPUBLICANS AND CONSERVATIVES will defeat Clinton. If you continue to contribute to the nightmare of a Democratic President because you refuse to back the eventual Republican nominee, then you reap what you sow.
Image test post:
Sorry about the clutter, just want to see if this will work (I know typepad will zero this out).
You have to use the [img src=] tag BB, not the [a href=]
Wordsmith was showing off. And proving that he can do more than DANCE!
Thanks for the advice! Second try:
I imagine that if just anyone could post images wherever they liked, porn spammers (not to mention trolls) would have a field day.. so I shouldn’t be surprised that blogger strips them out –
Bbartlog,
Looking at the Second Try, there does not seem to be anything following the colon. When I view it on the admin page, nothing is there.
I will insert your picture below.
(img src=” “) works so I think you might have hit enter/submit comment before you inserted the image.
yes, people could post really tasteless stuff:
(img src=” “) works so I think you might have hit enter/submit comment before you inserted the image.
I’m pretty sure I put it in and Blogger stripped it out. I might try some other permutations later just to see if I’m being clueless – maybe I didn’t close tags and got things taken out for that reason. But I think the simple explanation (blogger is set up to stop random yahoos from posting images because that would cause a ton of problems) is probably correct.
If you are trying to hotlink images from blogger.com they won’t work.
Priceless Mike!