| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 6:37am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
With Clinton winning in Pennsylvania by 10 percentage points, in my mind, it shows why she should be the candidate.
She wins the big, high electoral count, states.
In the primaries, the counts are apportioned to the candidates. A 51% to 49% win in a state primary garners an almost equal number of delegates for both politicians. That's not true in the general election. A 51% to 49% win in a state general election gives 100% of the win in that state to the 51% guy.
Clinton has shown she can carry the states that are necessary for a Democratic win. Obama has failed to do that.
If you took the primaries and gave all the delegates in the state to the candidate that won the primary, rather than apportioning them, you would get a very different picture than we have now.
Edited by Scott Richards on 23 April 2008 at 6:39am
|