![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
illusionofjoyWhat has been unofficially referred to as "Super Tuesday II" occurs tomorrow, where Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont cast their votes in primaries/caucuses (in the case of Texas, both, because Texas is big, greedy and insane). My predictions are as follows: Ohio will go to Hillary Clinton by a slim margin, and the same will be true of Rhode Island. Meanwhile Barack Obama will take Vermont by a landslide. Texas, being big, greedy and insane, is far too close to call and will probably be so and remain so for several days after tomorrow. If pressed, I'd have to say that Texas will either split straight down the middle or go to Clinton by a razor thin margin.
Obama currently has 1,192 pledged delegates. 370 delegates are at stake in tomorrow's polls, which means that on the very unlikely chance that Obama were to garner 100% of the vote in each state, that would only bring him to 1,562 pledged delegates. That would be impressive no doubt, but would hardly make him the winner - especially if Clinton holds her ground and refuses to drop out of the race. After tomorrow, there will be 611 delegates remaining in play. With a current delegate tally of 1,035, Clinton could sneak past Obama with a very unlikely 100% win of the remaining states and territories, bringing her up to 1,646 delegates. By the rules of the simple majority, that would make Clinton the winner, but by the rulebook of the Democratic National Convention, neither Obama or Clinton would win, because neither one of them had managed to reach the magic number: 2,024. Obama would have to sweep every single contest to reach that number (with 149 delegates to spare). Conversely, if Clinton were to sweep all of the remaining contests, she would be short by eight delegates, creating a stalemate despite technically winning a majority (again, the magic number is 2,024, not 2,016).
Of course, Clinton would more easily sail past Obama to victory were Florida and Michigan not unfairly stripped of their delegates - a loss for her of 313 total delegate votes.
Despite what the naysayers would tell you, Hillary Clinton's campaign is far from over and I, for one, would be aghast if she were to drop out of the race at this point. The reality of tomorrow's polls will be that they will likely be just as divided as those that came before - neither Clinton nor Obama is going to sweep all four states (though, I will admit that Obama has a large advantage in Vermont). As such, so long as both remain in the race, realistic predictions would make it mathematically impossible for either one to reach the magic number.
And I think this is a good thing. Time and time again I have heard Obama supporters say that we don't coronate kings and queens in America and while I'm sure they believe what they are saying, they seem oblivious to the fact that the media has already crowned Obama king of the Democrats more or less. Hillary Clinton's presence provides a necessary foil for Obama, and as far as I'm concerned, he's yet to prove that he can play in the big leagues. The Obama camp has become whiny and defensive at every slight - real or imagined - lobbed at them by the Clinton camp. This does not bode well for his campaign going into the general election against a republican challenger. While John McCain may seen soft, squishy and only in it for the geriatric vote, the republican party has a nasty habit of pulling together despite it all and becoming a vicious beast which exists for one purpose: winning at any cost.
I hate to bash on Barack, because I have come to terms with the idea that I may be voting for him come the general election. However, I am pulling for Hillary Clinton because I know she is ready for what's coming. The republicans can lob all that they want at her, but it won't matter because all they will have are mere reruns from 1992; she will come out smelling like a rose. Clinton may not have a political resume much longer than Obama's, but she is far more seasoned in the world of Washington that he is.
I am enthusiastic about a Clinton run and presidency because I know she can tough it out and emerge victorious. By contrast, Obama is what Ted Rall has referred to as the "Hello Kitty" candidate due to his calls for bipartisanship. The problem, of course, with bipartisanship is that any republican who hears the term immediately interprets it to mean, "we're finally caving in and doing what you want." How is Barack Obama going to deal with an increasingly nasty rumour mill which accuses him of being a Muslim (he's not, but that's beside the point - it just proves how little progress has been made in curbing religious bigotry in this country)? How is going to deal with his patriotism being questioned by petty right-wingers who like to point out how he didn't wear an American flag on his lapel at one point? What about all of the idiot Ann Coulter imitators who refer to him as Hussein Obama, in a transparent attempt to stir up racial hatred? You may think, being an intelligent reader of my journal, that I'm overreacting, but I assure you that there's a huge section of the United States which actually gives a shit about these non-issues.
I don't want Obama to lose his cool, but I want to know that he can stand up, get tough and throw back everything the republicans can and will throw at him. Hillary Clinton can do it. So, in effect, my challenge to Mr. Obama is to punch through the stereotype of the "cowardly liberal." Hope only floats so far and I want to know that if you're "swift-boated," your reaction will not be like John Kerry's. Do that, and not only would I willingly vote for you in November, I would enthusiastically vote for you in November.
