At what point should a candidate drop out?

JaJae · 03-26-2008, 01:50 PM

Before I start this thread I want to make it perfectly clear that I personally don't think a candidate should drop out until they are ready to do so. I don't care who it is, Hillary, Paul or any other politician. I do, however, feel that the candidates should utilize the best judgment for themselves, their party and the nation when they are running for political office. That final judgment call should be made by the politician.

I started thinking about this about a week or so ago when I heard a Clinton staffer told Politico that Hillary's odds of winning the primary is no more than 10%. Since then Obama has rebounded pretty well from Wright. Therefore, I personally agree with David Brook's estimate of roughly 5%. Looking at the numbers I would say 5% is a fair estimation of Hillary's chances. Her own campaign put her at under 10 when Obama was at his worst. So I think 5% is probably fair now that he's rebounded. For argument's sake and to be fair to Hillary supporters, I'm willing to use her own campaign's estimate of 10%.

So now the question comes into play, is this 10% chance of a Hillary victory worth taking? I believe it's the common consensus that if Hillary wins the primary, the Democratic party would be in disarray. So even if she wins the primary, she'll be hurt for the national election. And if she loses the primary it would be all for nothing and she would severely hurt Obama's chances of winning the national election, thus greatly increasing the chances of McCain entering the White House. He has already started to pull upwards of double digit leads over Hillary and Obama.

I think it's important to discuss the math here behind the Democratic primary in order to put into perspective Hillary's chances of winning. The most important factor going into the convention is going to be the total number of delegates. So we'll start there. As of right now Obama has a sizable lead and pundits from both parties admit it would take a huge blow to Obama's campaign to be multiples worse than Wright in order for Hillary to overtake Obama in the pledged delegates. Hillary knows this, she understands she won't finish with the delegate lead. In fact, in my opinion if Hillary doesn't pull a 30+ point victory in PA, she has essentially zero chance of taking the lead in pledged delegates. PA is her best bet to gain delegates and she needs a blowout beyond anything we've seen in this campaign so far.

Obama is likely to take North Carolina which is the second largest state up for grabs. Let's assume for a minute that Obama and Hillary break even in North Carolina, which would be a feat for Hillary so I'm throwing her a huge bone here. But, let's assume for a second that Hillary won't have to make up any delegates from a loss in North Carolina and let's also assume she beats Obama in every other primary up for grabs by 40 points. The numbers look like this:

If she wins by 40 points in every other contest, save for North Carolina that Obama will likely win, she needs 26 points in PA to overtake Obama's lead. Those results are obviously not likely at all, which is why I'm saying she needs bare minimum 30 points in PA to have a prayer at winning even if Obama is caught with a dead underage hooker in his trunk.

The second major argument she can take with her to the convention is the popular vote argument. However, without Florida and Michigan revotes her odds of winning the popular vote over Obama are about as good as her overtaking him in pledged delegates.

Without these two major factors in her favor to sway the super delegates she is focusing on the same two lesser arguments to take with her at to the convention that she has been using for the past few weeks. Big states and ability to win. These arguments have netted her a roughly 60 super delegate loss since she started using them. And the common consensus among super delegate voters is to vote the way their states/constituents vote. The super delegate argument seems to have failed her and now she's moving on to another argument...

She is making the claim that the currently pledged delegates decided by the voters should disenfranchise the Democratic system and change their votes in her favor. She claims she is not advocating for it, but she keeps running to the media and throwing the idea out there as if to be a desperate plea from a dying campaign. Since then nobody has bit.

Originally Posted by Hillary Clinton

"I just don't think this is over yet," she said, "and I don't think that it is smart for us to take a position that might disadvantage us in November. And also remember that pledged delegates in most states are not pledged. You know, there is no requirement that anybody vote for anybody. They're just like superdelegates."

In this one quote of many she is saying that "pledged" delegates are not pledged. Seems like an oxymoron, but she is correct. Technically these pledged delegates through the Democratic system could defect, but the odds of this happening are about as good as Obama being caught with a dead underage hooker in his trunk.

So essentially, in my opinion, Hillary's chances of winning the primary are over. By all accounts that I can see, she has been defeated. By her own campaign's account, her chances of winning are less than 10%. And again, that's from her campaign who is likely a bit too optimistic as we have seen.

So we eventually come back to the initial question, at what point should a candidate drop out? I think it would be honorable of Hillary to drop out, but I am not going to specifically call for her withdrawal. Instead, I am going to bring light to the reality of her situation and request that she run a clean campaign. Her chances of winning are finished. Her time is over. She should not make her campaign's destruction the destruction of the party. I am not saying she shouldn't campaign on the trail and garnish support, but I am saying she should stop the divisiveness and stop the dirty politics. And who knows, perhaps if she had done this sooner she would be in an entirely different situation right now.

7960 · 03-26-2008, 02:02 PM

A candidate should quit when her campaigning is hurting her party's chances of winning. Every paper I've read said if she get the nomination over obama then the (D)s are going to defect. So if she wins, (D)s lose. Also, in order to gain points she has to dig deep on obama and that's giving McCain ammo. So if obama gets the nod then McCain only has to pick up where she left off and the (D)s lose.

Essentially the longer she stays in the more she's guaranteeing a GOP win no matter who the (D) candidate is.

I would not think this if she was running a positive campaign. If she was out there saying "I did this and I can do that and you want me because........" then I'd say good for her and keep going. But she's not. Every evening all McCain has to do is sit at the bar, watch the news, and jot a few of her bullets on a napkin so he can use it in the debates in case she can't steal this and obama ends up getting nominated.

hsmith · 03-26-2008, 02:05 PM

As I said before.

The Clinton's will destroy the Democratic party if necessary to get into the White House.

I really don't see her dropping out. I see them going to the courts after the convention.

Donkey® · 03-26-2008, 02:14 PM

Hillary hate? Go figure.

Anyway, she should drop out when she has no chance to win...which hasn't been determined yet.

7960 · 03-26-2008, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Hillary hate? Go figure.

Anyway, she should drop out when she has no chance to win...which hasn't been determined yet.

hate?

no, more like reality.

the blind sackriders who think she should tank the entire party in her quest for the white house amaze me.

Thorgrim · 03-26-2008, 02:17 PM

As long as she's holding big double digit leads in a CLOSED democratic primary...obviously democrats don't want it to end...or else Obama would at least be tied...he's not

and PA has no real connection to Hillary

Donkey® · 03-26-2008, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

hate? no, more like reality.

the blind sackriders who think she should tank the entire party in her quest for the white house amaze me.

I am not and have not voted for her. Guess you mean someone else. The Democratic party is not being destroyed. It will be just fine and it will be in the White House very shortly.

Donkey® · 03-26-2008, 02:27 PM

And it's funny that Hillary is called for "dirty campaigning" yet I have seen the jabs and barbs go in both directions. But let's ignore Obama doing it.

7960 · 03-26-2008, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I am not and have not voted for her. Guess you mean someone else. The Democratic party is not being destroyed. It will be just fine and it will be in the White House very shortly.

she's a liar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrqK_5yJEU8

the tit-for-tat is hurting the party
http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpol...eed_to_cool_it

she's reaching out to pledged delegates to ask them to go against what the voters in their districts voted for
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/...ton.delegates/

she's going back on her word
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03...y3966301.shtml

.........those were just on the first page of news stories about her.

how far can her sack be ridden?

JaJae · 03-26-2008, 02:37 PM

Obama's campaign has said and done some foolish things as well. I've admitted that in many threads. That's very clear. Most of the people who have posted in this thread are of no friend to Obama, but I don't think they took my post as giving a pass to Obama. I'm sorry if I wasn't more clear.

For the sake of arguments, Obama has not run an entirely squeaky clean campaign either.

A_C_E · 03-26-2008, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

A candidate should quit when her campaigning is hurting her party's chances of winning. Every paper I've read said if she get the nomination over obama then the (D)s are going to defect. So if she wins, (D)s lose. Also, in order to gain points she has to dig deep on obama and that's giving McCain ammo. So if obama gets the nod then McCain only has to pick up where she left off and the (D)s lose.

Essentially the longer she stays in the more she's guaranteeing a GOP win no matter who the (D) candidate is.

I would not think this if she was running a positive campaign. If she was out there saying "I did this and I can do that and you want me because........" then I'd say good for her and keep going. But she's not. Every evening all McCain has to do is sit at the bar, watch the news, and jot a few of her bullets on a napkin so he can use it in the debates in case she can't steal this and obama ends up getting nominated.

Yep.

David Octavius · 03-26-2008, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

and PA has no real connection to Hillary

Yes they do - BILL

If her last name was not Clinton she wouldn't even be running for President, she is riding his coattails

Thorgrim · 03-26-2008, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

Yes they do - BILL

If her last name was not Clinton she wouldn't even be running for President, she is riding his coattails

just because he was president doesn't mean jack in PA...he won Missouri in the general yet Hillary lost in the primary

A_C_E · 03-26-2008, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

As long as she's holding big double digit leads in a CLOSED democratic primary...obviously democrats don't want it to end...or else Obama would at least be tied...he's not

and PA has no real connection to Hillary

Every minute she remains hotly contesting a race she has an admitted less than 10% chance of winning, the Democrats get closer and closer to losing the general election.

I agree with 7960, the time to drop out is the time when it becomes clear your candidacy is hurting the party's chances of winning the nomination. Hillary is doing that right now.

In any case, at this point her chances of winning the general election are hovering around 0.0005%. For her to win the nomination, she'd essentially have to undercut Obama somehow and basically steal it. And then she expects to capture the party again, plus all the independent voters needed, three months after undercutting the nomination process??? Please.

I like Hillary's policies for the most part, but she needs to give it up. She's handing McCain the seat in the Oval Office.

David Octavius · 03-26-2008, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

just because he was president doesn't mean jack in PA...he won Missouri in the general yet Hillary lost in the primary

I see you conveniently ignored the part where I said she wouldn't even be running if it wasn't for Bill or do you disagree?

Donkey® · 03-26-2008, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

how far can her sack be ridden?

How far can hate be ridden?

Thorgrim · 03-26-2008, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

I see you conveniently ignored the part where I said she wouldn't even be running if it wasn't for Bill or do you disagree?

That's a hypothetical that's impossible to discuss with any sense...he's been in her life so long it's impossible to tell what she'd have done or not done

7960 · 03-26-2008, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

How far can hate be ridden?

It's hate when it's aimed at someone on "your side", but it's OK when it's aimed at someone you dislike.

Hypocrite much?

JaJae · 03-26-2008, 05:49 PM

Just as an update. The latest poll shows Hillary up by 10 points in PA and Obama up 21 points in North Carolina. If we plug these numbers into the calculator we get something similar to this. I rounded up a point in NC for Obama because you can only get even numbers. So it wouldn't be a tie, Hillary would just barely win in this situation. But this is what the numbers would look like:

Essentially if PA and NC ends the way the latest polls are showing on realclearpolitics.com Hillary would need 83% of the remaining vote. The media really needs to put this into perspective.

If they break even in NC (which isn't likely to happen) Hillary would need 75% of the remaining vote, if she wins PA by the margins the latest Rasmussen poll suggests. That's 50 point margins in all the remaining states.

So again, Hillary needs a HUGE blowout in PA. It's her only hope. There simply aren't enough delegates left for her to get if she doesn't pull out a ridiculous lead.

And I don't mean to give too much credit to a blowout in PA. Even if she gets a ridiculous blowout in PA she'll likely still lose. Let's pretend for a second that Hillary defies all probability and cranks in 80% of the vote in PA and somehow manages to tie Obama in North Carolina. If by some miracle she manages to do that, she would still lose the delegate count if she ended with a 20 point lead in every other remaining contest.

That's the reality she faces. She's lost the delegate race and the popular vote. The only plausible way she can win at this point is if the super delegates and pledged delegates decide to steal the nomination from Obama despite having won the most delegates and having the won the popular vote.

Originally Posted by Donkey®

The Democratic party is not being destroyed. It will be just fine and it will be in the White House very shortly.

If Obama takes the popular vote and the delegates and somehow the Democrats hand her the election, there will be problems in the Democratic party. The Democratic insiders recognize this and have been saying it for some time. If we look at the reality of what Hillary is suggesting it's basically she wants the super delegates and pledged delegates to hand her the nomination despite having lost the delegate count and the popular vote.