This is all getting old…Everyone's trying to find a way to keep Barack out…Hillary is sadistic…she's a liar…she's flip flopped so many times during her campaign…but if they don't follow the popular vote and the super delegates give her the nod…it will truly show…just how much we're still in the times of old…and I know you guys know what I mean…I'm just saying it in a nice way…

Obama is unelectable in November.

TYhat's a fact - no matter how many states, pledged CAUCUS delegates, votes or promises of "change" he invokes - the fact remains, he stands virtually no chance in November.

And it's unfortunate that neither his supporters nor superdelegates who are siding with him can see that.

What's your point Wolf? It's very easy to make numbers work for you if you can spin it the right way. You show a few numbers that favored Clinton and suggest that those numbers show she's winning in what really matters?!? Too bad for her, the numbers that REALLY count strongly favor Obama. Those numbers are the number of delegates, and i don't think you are going to convince the DNC to change their selection process at this point in the game, so just cut it out with your stupid biased commentary.

I am a Clinton supporter, despite my young age, which makes many think I like Obama, which I do, but my support lies more with her. While I despise the Electoral College system and think it should be based on the popular vote, the President will be decided by the EC. Be that as it may, I think Hillary has a strong case. She needs to be careful though not to sound as if she wants to drown out the cries of the popular vote. If Democrats want to win in November, they need to win the big states such as Ohio, Texas, Florida, California, New York, New Jersey, etc. She can definitely carry those states, with the exception of Texas. Obama will have more of a struggle in Texas, California, Ohio, and Florida. I think we need to be smart about this without disenfranchising people. I will support whatever candidate wins the Democratic nomination, but we do need to be smart about this.

I came to this country during Peter Jennings on television and I miss those day everyday!

Then by that reasoning why have the smaller states vote at all? I'm pretty sure it's the Clinton campaign that advocates every vote counting so that nobody is disenfranchised.

Not controversial, just common sense.

No! How dos Hillary say every vote should count and in the same breath say that the “pledged delegated” can do whatever they want and small people/state don’t matter and not one reporter have call her on it?

What's wrong Wolf? All the negative news about Hillary this weekend wasn't to your liking, so you decided to comment on THIS non-issue?

You are so transparent.

I have to admit, the arguement holds some merits. Especially in light of the FL & MI votes. Both of these are key swings for the Dems. and not looking very good for Obama in the general.

No and please quit trying to make it look close, Wolfe. If Clinton was ahead in pledged delegates, popular vote and most states won then all of you would've written him off.

No because it's a democrat race. When you include republicans and independants…many of those blue states go red if Clinton is the nominee. Obama, on the other hand, turns many red states blue. It should be obvious who the nominee should be.

Just more spin but I am glad to know that America is not buying that one.

It is an argument.
I do not know if it will hold up, but add in Florida and Michigan and she has even more than 219 Electoral College votes

There is another problem, and a strong argument. It seems that more of Hillary's supporters will vote for McCain or not vote at all if Obama gets the nomination.

Then there is the states Obama won that many republicans were allowed to vote in and they voted only for Obama to stop Hillary. These republicans will vote for McCain in the general

I used to love the Clinton's, but if they can't win according to the rules, then Hillary is not worthy to be President or VP, so that leaves McCain't. C'mon Billary, you guys are destroying yourselves with your own narcissism. It's not at all becoming. Win the right way or lose gracefully and be the VP we need.

It's a desperate point and said that you BUY into it.

The argument is illogical; winning a primary is no indication of winning a general election.

A democrat will win in every state that holds a democrat primary because democrats are voting for democrats.

However, a democrat will not win in every state in a general election because democrats, republicans, and independents are voting for either the democrat candidate or the republican candidate.

For instance, a democrat will absolutely win in the democrat primary in Texas. And in fact, a democrat won in the Texas primary. However, the democrat who won in Texas is not guaranteed to win in Texas in a general election. Indeed, it is highly likely the democrat will lose in Texas during a general election because Texas voters overwhelmingly vote for the republican candidates on the state and national level.

Yes, Senator Clinton has won the big states. So what if Obama won more states? I really don't care. What is important is that Senator Clinton is the stronger candidate by far. Obama is all words but haven't seen much action. I think he has listened too long to tapes of famous people. He will NEVER measure up to them. Senator Hillary Clinton should be our nominee, period. GO HILLARY 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The argument maybe unusual but it would be correct. If the Electoral College makes the final choice of the president, they will do so again in the general election. Right now, I support Hillary but will vote McCain before I ever vote for Obama. Obama's record in the senate is weak and has no real showing of leadership. All I see is a good cheerleader at the game but no real offer of how he will fix the mess Bush got us into. McCain and Clinton do have strong records to back them up. The Electoral College in the end chooses the president based on each states votes.

Wolf,

Do your numbers give the state of Texas to Hillary? It seems to me that giving her Texas would be a matter of debate because Obama actually ended up with more delegates coming out of Texas. Would that make a difference to your conclusion?

Leon
Toronto, Ontario
Canada

I am sick and tired of hearing these type of comments from the Clinton campaign. When Florida and Michigan held their primaries early, bot her and Obama said they wouldn't campaign in the state and their delegates would not count. Now that Hillary is loosing and unable to catch Obama she is trying to get that reversed. The RULES ARE THE RULES! it Michigan and Florida wanted their votes to count they shouldn't have moved up their primaries!

Obama needs to prove (NOT BRAG!!!!) that he is able to win the states which he has lost to Mrs. Clinton as well as swing states, otherwise, be a MAN, for the sake of the Party, and step aside.

So there you go America. Clinton doesn't care about your vote. The popular vote doesn't count. They only thing that counts is whatever will get the Clintons back into office. Wake up America! You don't matter to them. In any given day, Hillary says she's not dropping out because she feels that every vote counts, while her campaign is making the argument that the popular vote doesn't count. And if the popular vote doesn't count, then your vote doesn't count. And once again we find Hillary lying to the American people.

This argument incorrectly presupposes that Obama won't carry those states where Clinton won the primary - often by a small margin. It also presupposes that She will win in the general election in those states. I thought this strawman argument had lost steam a couple of week's ago because everyone knows the primary is not an indicator of the general election. Why has'nt BLitzer blogged on Penn? 109million? I think CNN is trying to hard to keep the Clintons' chances alive.

The Clinton campaign will do anything to win, even if it means writing their own rule book. Amazing!

..and thats all the Clinton camp could come up with?

Its not like she won some of the states with a thumping majority..

Talk about clutching at straws.

Oh please! The Clinton's have tried to change this game whenever it’s convenient for them. They are loosing in every category, with the exception of super delegates and Obama is slowly overtaking Hillary in that category also. I’m just surprise people is still supporting this lying person who obviously would stop at nothing to win this election. She’s basically doing the same thing Bush did to Gore. . . no matter what, win at all cost. Even if you have to cheat, lie and deceive the American people. People wake up!

2000 is the reason we should have gotten rid of the Electoral College and go solely by popular vote.

This is silly math. Recent polls show that Obama has a better chance of beating McCain in California than Hillary. I wish Clinton would stop perpetuating the idea that Obama will lose in November.

Addition to comment above;
Polls in the "small"states Obama won show him leading McCain while Hillary lags behind McCain. If Hillary can not win these republican leading states in the primary how can she win them against McCain come November?

Does not matter Dems will win in 2008. Bush has wrecked the republican party. sadly I am a republican

Wolf,

Everytime I hear this argument from the Clinton camp I cringe. Just another example of the Clinton camp attempting to move the goal posts.

Matt

Words of the deperate. Times running and and they are pulling on twigs not to be sucked in by the quick sand. Hopefully this latest evil move will not gain any ground.

It's a stupid and moot point as well. The nominee is chosen based on delegates. Period.

If this happens I'll switch to the republican party. Hillary better no try to STEAL this election from Barack Obama. How would it look if the democratic party took the nomination of a black man away because they don't think he is electable> Hillary should be ashamed for even proposing this absurd idea.

Just another spin on things from Clinton supporters. They are trying desperately to make the public see things their way. I think we the public are smarter than they think!

Hillary is behind no matter how CNN or Hillary try to move the post!
If Hillary was ahead - I am sure that would be the news!

Blitzer, I can't believe ypu can bring this as an issue- it is extremely funny. Just a joke for the media.

Every vote counts! Sometimes clinton's and supporters claim, we shouldn't supress people's vote and then they come around and say, small states don't count. The game is all about delegate lead. Otherwise Obama didn't need to compaign in 50 states. Unfortunately her compaign focused on big states. That doesn't mean the rules change by her compaign. The sad thing is the media picks nonsens and talk about
it.

I am sorry she is finished. First they lowere the bar to popular vote and now to this.

Well I know for a simple fact, that if it's Clinton and McCain - I no longer have to worry about voting for either of those 2 factions. A woman voted the most corrupt politician of 2007, and a Man who has sold his integrity for a chance at the big chair. No Thanks to both. I pray for this nation that neither Clinton or McCain win. I have little hope for Obama, But little is better then despair.

its a controversial point her camp makes because she is desperate to win, Nothing more, nothing less.

Why is CNN afaid to post my comments? I thought your news platform was fair and unbaised.

it's also more of the "will do anything to win" strategy that americans can see right through. she is done. period.

That is very true.
white voter of states which Obama won will never vote for him.
and his pastor controversy will hurt him in general election then Hillary's Bosnia's story.
also don't forget about rezko deal which will be going on at the time of general election.

Well, if that is the way Senator Clinton and her supporters feel then they should try to revise the Democratic primary rules for 2012 accordingly.

Gee, why don't we just make up the rules as we go along~~!! And just what would the "magic" number be if this were to happen??

Preposterous! She'd still lose the general election with this strategy!

Pathetic journalism

With all the negative news out of the Clinton campaign over the weekend, this is a serious "reach" at trying to make her look better.

Come on Wolf, be a real journalist and quite playing the Clinton tune.

Yes, I agree with the Clinton Camp. The rules need to be changed now and in a way that favors her. I like that stategy, if you can't win with the existing rules, fight to get them changed. Who cares if it is unfair. As she said at one of her rallies "winning, winning, winning, that is my measurement of success, winning." There are some who measure their worth and success in other ways, but I don't think those particular values will occur to her.

The main issue here isn't that she is ahead in electoral college count, it is that we still have an Electoral College. The only reason we have such an institution is, when our country was founded the founding fahters were afraid that not all citizens could be informed properly of the candidates for the presidency. In the digital era in which we live, people of the other side of the globe are informed on our candidates. Its an outdated system, and I think that there should be an amedment drafted to fix the problem. What type of system says, "Sorry will of the people, this might be your choice, but because of number allotments to states in the Electoral College, you really elected the other guy, (or girl?" It defeats the entire point of voting for the candidate who could best do the job, be they white, black, brown, purple or male or female!

Wolf, you are so pro-Hillary it makes me think they have paid you good money to support her on CNN. I can't watch CNN anymore because you are so biased!

There difference between the Clinton strategy and the Obama strategy is that Obama already has real solid numbers behind him in pledged delegates, popular vote and most states won, whereas Hillary is claiming she will have numbers that are non-existent and that cannot be validated until a general election actually takes place. Hillary forgets some other numbers that like Obamas are real and already validated - Hillary's negatives.

A report on this issue Mr. Blitzer (what might be) is a waste of your time and our time, and is obviously pro- Hillary , or at least a pro-keep this race going for the media's interest. The sky may fall in tomorrow too.

Even though she won those "large" states. If obama makes it to november, he will not only get the votes of all his original supporters but will also receive the votes of many of her former supporters as well. Even if 25% of her supporters stay at home that day (in protest cuz they are mad she didn't win) but the other %75 of her former supporters vote for obama for the sake of the democratic party, then he will not only have the votes of all his original supporters but many of hers as well! So I would argue that he WOULD be able in the general election to win even the "big" states that hillary has won in the primaries. Plus, as you know Rush Limbaugh's "Operaration Chaos" has caused many republicans to falsely vote for Hillary in an attempt to keep the tension within the democratic party raging. Obama would be better in the general election because the republicans that crossed over to vote for hillary and participate in "operation chaos" will cross back over in november!!! Hillary is a great woman and I supported her at first, but now I am 100% behind Obama. I'm an african american young adult and am not for obama just because of that. I WAS for Hillary at first until I heard some of her husbands remarks and even a statement she made to church on Martin Luther King day comparing the Republicans in the White House running the country to a PLANTATION. She said this to a black crowd and it seemed a bit insensitive. Yes, she was just trying to relate and meant no harm in the comments, but I think she could have used a better/different example. She then followed with a comment to the degree of "you know what i'm saying". It seemed like she was trying too hard. I was a hillary supporter at first, but it seems like she is more concerned about gaining the presidency than helping America now.

OBAMA 08!!!!

OBAMA 08!!!

This guy has lost credibility!

Except that recent polling shows that Barack Obama does way better in California against John McCain than Hillary Clinton does.

Great point. It's ashamed that too many have been persuaded by Obama. She has won the states that Democrats carry and she can win Florida. Obama has won states that Democrats would have to pray and fast to win. States like Montana, Idaho, Mississippi, Alabama, and even Geogia. They are all Republican states in the general election.

Hillary/McCain '08′

Here's another question or two. If, (and it's a Big IF) Sen. Obama wins in PA will Mrs. Clinton finally get out? My guess is no, she'll just say it's only PA and it's only one state. What do you think?

How many of you think that if the Super Delegates go to Obama giving him the 2025 votes that Mrs. Clinton will sue the DNC?

Do the math; it is too late for Clinton. If she was to win the nomination the only reasonable explanation as to why is RACE and the superdeligates playing it safe rather than listening to the voice of the people. This would have a long term and very negative impact on the Democratic Party and race relations in general.

Also, somebody please get an explanation as to what exactly was entailed in the $15million (Dubai) business arrangement Bill had. As well as how many speaking engagements were performed by Bill, payment per, etc., etc. How many favors are the Clintons going to owe and will these favors also are owed to interests outside of the US?

So the people who think this is a good approach are saying Democrats in these states are on their own. It's likely Obama will win 30+ states.

Since those 30+ states do not matter to matter to the Democrats, for arguments sake, let's give all Senate, Representative, and Governor seats in those states to the Republicans.

If you care at all for the Democratic party, you really don't want to see the Republicans control 60+% of the Senate, and Governors, and over half the Representatives.

Uh Oh….the Clinton News Network (CNN) is at it again. After trying the pledged delegate count & losing; and the polular vote count & losing; soon to be the loss in Super Delegates; 28 to 14 in STATES …it is CNN to the rescue of the ever popular loser, HRC. It is over … get used to it, Wolf.

I think this argument is ludicrous. The level of support a candidate receives in an intra-party matchup in which half the electorate may vote is fully different than the level of support that candidate would garner in an inter-party election with all eligible to vote. Logic simply does not support this kind of approach.

I fully believe Clinton can win the "big" states. I do believe it will be a struggle for Obama. I, for one, will vote for McCain if Obama is opposing him. And yes…I live in CA!

Winning those states in a democratic primary means nothing in terms of the general election. Most of the people voting in the dem primary will vote for either candidate versus a republican. The real trick will be to beat the republican in those states by collecting the independent vote and the unhappy republicans.

Wolf, I am tired of Hillary trying to "do the math." If she's so great with numbers, why is she behind in paying her bills? HRC will say and do whatever necessary to skew the stats in her favor. I am weary of her deceit and nastiness. Cathryn, Petoskey, Michigan.

Sounds like something Billary would cobble together….

LOl nope because the states she is winning Barack will win in the general election, but the states he is winning she cant win.

Obama 08

A bunch of crock. Will these people ever accept the reality that Hillary is out of this???? Man, talk about trying to get blood out of a turnip! Come on…many of Hillary's supporters WILL get out and vote for Barack in the general election…they will!!!!!!! So, just because she may have "slightly" won a state over Barack in a primary CANNOT be a predictor for the general election! You are comparing apples and oranges! Come on people! The Democrats will be in the White House…and we will be thankful for the next President, Barack Obama!

Obama 08!!!!!!!!!!!

It's not a compelling argument by any standard– it's yet another attempt by the Clinton camp to change the metric in her favor, (and they are running out of options on this score). If she were truly the stronger candidate, Obama would not be ahead by so many measures. I am a fan of the rules, and I believe that they should be argued before a contest begins, or adhered to– not changed the moment your candidacy stops being an inevitability.

One way to fix all of this is to do away with the electoral college. Base all elections on the popular vote.

Are you serious?

Let's follow the rules people-this is a primary-we follow the proportional allocation of delegates, not the electoral college map. This is yet another example of the Clintons changing the rules as they go. Is this the type of president you want running the country? I want someone who plays by the rules and understands that the ends don't justify the means.

I think Hillary is trying all the tricks in the book. It doesn´t matter how you rationalize it or twist it any other way, the fact still remains that Obama has one more states and is ahead in terms of the popular vote.

Just because Hillary has won certain key states does not exclude the fact that Obama can also win it in the general election. After all, we all "hope" that the democratic party will reunite against the nominee in a general election and if this is the case it should not matter whether one or the other won certain states in the primaries.

This is just one more "creative" way to try to rewrite the rules during the game since Mrs. Clinton is losing based on traditional metrics. If the current standings were reversed, the Clinton camp would dismiss this argument with a swift and forceful rebuttal. Additionally, the Clinton seems to infer that somehow she is the only Democrat that can win a traditionally Democratic state like NY or a battleground state like Ohio. Talk about the hubris. Obama might have an even better chance to prevail in California.

I REALLY know that Hillary had a much better chance than Obama does. She knows what she is doing!!!!

It's starting to make Clinton look really, really bad now…it's not a pretty site to see her grasping at straws and trying to bend only the rules that sway in her favor. I think the majority of Americans are starting to see this side of Hillary….and it's not pleasant.

Will the big states like CA and NY suddenly go Republican if Hillary isn't the nominee? Where's the logic here?

And that's how it should be. No fuss about it! Hello!!!!

Wolf,

Didn't you hear? This isn't a contest about delegates anymore. The only metrics that matter are the ones that Hillary is leading in.

Who's the idiot who came up with the fantasy idea that electoral votes determine the primary? One thing and one thing only determines who wins primaries, whoever gets 2025 delegates first wins. It's not the popular vote nor the number of states won. It's not even whatever Bill Clinton suggests.

The superdelegates can base their decision on possible electoral performance, but who's stupid enough to believe that the polls right now are representative of what will happen in November enough to try to overturn the will of the people? Oh yeah, Ed Rendel is.

This is the dumbest argument ever. Even if she's ahead in the "states that count", that doesn't take into account the fact that when you compare McCain v. her in those states. She will lose miserably if that's the match up in those states.

I've got to admit to being a bit confused. I really can't understand why news outlets haven't been calling the Clinton camp on how one minute, they're talking about going all the way to let the people have their say in the primaries and how it's a tragedy if the voters in FL and MI aren't represented at the convention, while the next they're putting forward the argument that, despite not having the votes, they should still be the ones nominated. (Don't even get me started on the "we're not advocating it, but did you know that elected delegates don't really have to support the candidate they were elected to vote for" hypocrisy.)
Can someone explain?

Wolf… just ask Gore that question… he won the popular vote but lost the election because of the electoral college…

The media and Obama keep talking about the delegates and popular vote… Neither candidate is going to get enough votes… it should not count since MI and FL do not count… the talk over the weekend was that MI and FL will be seated but in a way that it will not decide the winner… How is that fair???

You award each candidate delegates and the popular vote does not count… if you were to add in the popular vote I believe Clinton would win the popular vote… Obama would win the delegate count… Which one would determine the "will of the people" ???

I would throw the whole thing out and use the electoral college to determine the stronger candidate… I know that both have won several states that usually go Republican… seems the ony fair way to me!!!

If all she is winning are states that typically vote democratic anyway, what is the big deal. If I were a Superdelegate I would want the nominee to be someone that can win over republican's and independents. That sounds like Barack Obama would be the better choice….

it is funny. They alwasy want to change the bar. They want to come up with a new rule that serves them. This is a delegate race. It ends there.

So I take it that they cannot use their influence to swing those key states if Hillary isn't the nominee? Sorry, but this sounds like "fuzzy" electoral college math to me and didn't Bayn and Hillary say the electoral college was an outdated system back in 2000 when it didn't favor the Dems? Now its the keys to the kingdom that it favors her campaign. Just another in a long list of double-speak moments for a doomed campaign.

What a bunch of crap. How are the primary and the general even close to the same thing. Obama leads popular vote, pledged delegates and number of states won. And somehow he is supposed to be losing?

The Supreme Court handed Bush his victory, not the electoral college. Let the voters decide who they want as president. It should go to the person who has received the majority of the popular vote.

This comment is silly but typical. The result this year should be decided by the rules now in effect. Obama is currently leading in delegates and if he remains ahead he should be the Democratic nominee. If there are flaws in the rules and procedures, we should start working after the election to improve things for 2012. We should not change the 2008 rules now just because Hillary is losing.

Clinton Can beat McCain. If Obama is the nominee Democrats will loose for McCain. In reality clinton is ahead in popular if FI and MI are counted. They need to be counted.

Honestly, we all know that If Clinton was up in popular vote and not electoral college, her campaign and base would say THAT's the only vote that matters. I can see the reasoning, but it's apparent they will say anything to get the nomination.

this pretty much proves that the people paying for this government are not being represented but are just being robbed. Our Reps" are making millions on the war…. but that doesn't affect their vote!? remember the bastille day!!

The last great pillar of the aristocrats: The Electoral College. It needs to be abolished. It gave us Bush. Do we really need more of an argument against it?

This is just pitiful. She is trying to bend every single rule just to win. If Obama was in he LOSING position, she would be calling him out every day for him to drop out. The primaries/caucuses are NOT about Electoral College votes, so stop trying to turn it into that just so she can be ahead in something. She is losing, and will lose, so deal with it.

All the hate and underhanded tactics the Obama supporters have given towards Hillary will just lead a lot of her supporters to vote for McCain. If his supporters just promoted his policies instead of just constantly attacking Hillary then there would be a more united party.

I have not heard any details of his policies but only criticism of Clinton.

If Obama is the Democratic nominee then McCain will be the next president.

Demonstrates how poorly managed the DNC and Democratic Party are. In something as important as a Presidential primary, the candidates, voters, and party power players are all trying to figure out the rules when the game is nearly over. And they should be running the most powerful, complex organization in the world? Scary

That argument does not hold up.Regardless of who won those larger states in the primaries,THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE will still win those large states in the general election.Blitz,your logic is about as flawed as Hillary`s.

It seems like the Clintons are looking for an area that Obama has not won and are trying to make that the standard for superdelegates to make there choice. Once again trying to change the rules in the middle of the game because to play but the rules would not get them the nomination.

Absolutely not.

Popular vote is popular vote and there's no way to change that, no matter how much Clinton supporters or the media afraid of speaking the facts (Fox and CNN) try to spin it.

Not only is it controversial, it isn't how the system is set up.

The Democratic nominee is nominated via, wait for it, wait for it… a democratic system!

Delegates are awarded based directly on the popular vote. Only in the case that neither candidate wins are the super-delegates "activated."

And by all accounts the super-delegates will not over-turn the delegate votes. Who would they rather upset - the majority that voted for Obama, or the minority that voted for Clinton?

Also, it is a spurious argument that since Clinton beat Obama in Ohio, that means Obama can't beat McCain there. That isn't necessarily logical.

This is nonsense! Just pure spin! Electoral votes only count in the general against an opponent of the opposite party. There is nothing that says she will win the states in the general that she has in the primaries. If the super-delegates are stupid enough to fall for this line of horse-pucky than we are surely doomed as a party.

Is that so? No she is not…..Is it a low news day? Clinton's Tax Returns, Mark Penn, more HRC lies) is not enough?

Clinton can say anything she wants; it is only to further demonstrate her stupidity and ruleless opportunisim. No data supports that the primary election result represents the general election result - that is why we have a two-tier election system. The meaner she is, the sooner her supporters will abandon her - a path ahead. Just see how many her supporters have said so on your web site for her calling "boycott" the Olympic opening.

It may be a contraversal point but Obama is hinging on the idea that he can change the electoral map. He may have been able to do that if this was 6 or 7 months ago. But as the campaign as gone on, he has gone froma candidate who transcended race to a candidate who submerges himself in race. He has become a man who is outside of the old politics, who stays out of mainstream politics to a politician who does exactly what any other old politician does. His original mesage is slipping away and he's no longer a man who can change the electoral map. I don't really know if Hillary can win at this point with that argument, but I don't think it looks that great for Obama, who thinks he doesn't need Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan in NOvember by flipping some red states. It seems like something he's arrogantly thinking he can do and in November, fail.

Um, no, Wolf. No it isn't.

The system is set up for delegates for a reason. History shows that winning a state in a primary bears little to no reflection on how that state votes in November.

It's only a "controversial" point if people like you continue to give it credence in effort to make a story out of a primary race that is all but decided.

Oh, and in terms of star power in the Golden State, I'll take Obama over McCain anyday. Give me a break.

It's not really a bad argument, except that it's hard to prove and it would amount to superdelegates overthrowing the popular vote. Florida will likely go to McCain in any event due to the mess with the Democratic primary there. Ohio seems to lean more strongly towards Hillary than towards Obama, but McCain has to prove to Ohio that he can handle the economy before he can win there against either of the two. And who knows how California will go in the general election? Hillary is the favorite, but Obama has gained a lot of support there recently, and so has McCain.

"keep slicing it till you find one tiny angle where you are CURRENTLY winning" - That is a loosing strategy.

Hillary leads in ONE vote that matters. That is the vote asking her to quit and stop humiliating herself publicly.

At this point Hillary will say or do anythimg to get the nomination. She won New York for obvious reasons. Does any one think that New York or other so called "big states" are suddenly going to go to McCain? Hillary has lied too much in this campaign and I think most people are seeing right through it. She has no one to blame but herself. She was arrogant to the point of thinking that the nomination was hers for the asking and it would all be decided by Super Tuesday. That is why her campaign was broke and she had tgo loan it 5 million.

109 million guess she feels she can buy what she wants. and now she wants to buy the presidency. I use to have a lot6 of respect for hillary but now her true colors are shinning through and i do not see red white and blue.

This is more misdirection from the Clinton campaign.

It's like saying that if Obama is the nominee, there will somehow magickally be more Republicans than Democrats in California, but if Clinton wins the nomination there will magickally be more Democratic voters than Republican in the general election.

Only a fool would fall for this.

Team Clinton has as many theories about why she should eventually win while currently losing as President Bush had for going into Iraq. Wait….I think she should be the nominee because she has won the most Thursday primaries on odd numbered days.

Of cource it is more about electoral college, please be aware that there is no caucuses in general election at all, and in the general election, Obama will lose all the black states he won in the primary. Don't be kidding to think he even has a chance in Ohio or Florida.

We got a president the popular vote didn't want in 2000; why should we get a nominee that the popular vote doesn't want in 2008? That's directly analogous to George Bush's win, and a strong argument for electoral reform.

The Democrats might as well throw in the towel if their superdelegates elect the candidate who did not win the popular vote.

Ah, the Clinton campaign is moving the goalposts yet again.

Exactly correct, Wolf. It's the November general election that really counts. Florida and Michigan will count then and Hillary Clinton is the only candidate who has stood up for their primary election concerns. There could be a backlash against the Obama campaign come November because of his attempts to suppress the primary votes in those 2 large states.

and……

Did I hear the governor of Peurto rico is being investigated for whatever crime? what a coincidence?

Just because Hilary won those so-called big states against Obama I don't see what that has so much to do with the General election.After all the primaries put democrat against democrat.In the general election it's democrat against republican.I think that most voters that say that they will cross to the other party if their candidate is not the nominee are just blowing smoke to make a cases for their favorite.In this case popular votes and pledged delegates have to make the decision.

No, its not controversial at all. She's behind and desperate and honestly, leaving a foul taste in my mouth. I just wish she would lose Pennsylvania just to see what excuse she'd come up with then!

No Way! The Electoral College doesn't matter because once she is out the majority of democrats will be behind Obama. I'd like to know one thing, Wolf, why are you going so easy on Hillary? She has had so many missteps lately and you are not hammering her like you did Obama on the Rev. Wright issue. Come on, she is totally screwing up and the media is afraid to acknowledge it.

Wolf listen to the voters and the DNC. The only vote that matters is basically that of the electorate. It seems you are listening to the Clintons- which you are free to do.

Hillary has a good point and should be considered. Everyone has to remember one thing, neither Obama or Hillary will have enough pledged deleagtes to win the nomination, you can't get around that. It then becomes of question of who is better at beating McCain in the general election and there is a lot of data to look when considering that.

I personally don't consider the popular vote or pledged delegates so much because both Obama and Clintion (at this time) are within 1-5% difference of each other.

I think there are a lot of traditional democrats like myself who would rather vote for McCaion the voye for Obama. It becomes a choice of protecting this country against a fraid such as Obama.

Wolf, can you ask the Obama campaign why they want to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants who are here unlawfully? They seem to be talking a lot about Florida and Michigan breaking the party rules. Was Sen. Obama for breaking the law before he was against it?

Clinton is behind in the only vote that matters: trust. Half of the electorate distrusts her. She cannot win in November. It's just that simple.

This election is clear. Obama is leading and will continue to lead, stop this spin it is not helping!

I wonder if this were the other way around for Clinton and her supporters and how Hillary would react if she was ahead. There is no doubt if it were Obama making this argument she would be calling it absurd. As always it's whatever suits Hillary.

People tend to forget that these are the primaries. The states won and lost are going to change drastically when it comes to the general election.

Dear Wolf,

The whole argument of the elctoral college primary is specious. In a general election, primaries have already been held, the candidates have fully debated and the nation has voted. You do not speculate on electoral votes in the general election; either you have them or you do not. You cannot speculate that one candidate will win electoral votes in the future, when more than one party is present, because they won a primary in the past when only one party was in play.

It is also objectionable to categorize MI an FL as "wins" because there were no debates, campaign stump speeches, rallies or kissed babies in MI or FL. This was not a victory by forfeit; the game was called on account of rain. Many Obama supporters thought the vote would not count and the candidates agreed it would not count. If democracy dictates MI and FL be seated, then seat them 50/50 or at half strength like the Republicans did. The point is that MI and FL not be permitted to seat based on votes that did not have an engaged electorate in the first place nor be granted the reward of determining a winner after violating the rules. If this bad behavior is rewarded then every state is going to put the whole system in chaos by doing it too.

Camp Clinton has made a mockery of this election.

i have lived in california my whole life and i'm telling you if it is obama/mccain mccain will win. the only way the dems win california is with hillary. even with richardson as obamas vp he won't win.

I swear. Only CNN (The Clinton News Network) actually believes Ms. Clinton still has a chance. Bet you all believe sniper stories and non factual medical insurance stories as well.

It's over. ENOUGH already! I guess she won't stop until she tears apart the entire Democratic party!

This is all non-sense…

I think Clinton's high negative ratings, nearly 1/2 the people in the country, are a more important barometer of how things would go in the general election.

Obama has been taking the high road and not doing negative campaigning (unlike Hillary), but that will not be the case in a general election. All the Clinton laundry will come out again and she wouldn't stand a chance.

Obama has a very real chance of beating McCain and is likely to capture the large blue states in a general election.

Raising the bar again is Clinton, After ever bad golf shot I like to be like Clinton's camp and get a do over not matter where my ball ends up.., that way I can keep hitting it without penalities until it ends up where I need it to be to win.

Silly democrats, always trying to change the rules.

In 2000 everyone screamed for the popular vote to be counted, and now the clintons are lobbying for it to the electoral vote. How about we keep the rules the same, everyone abides by them, and the person with the most electoral votes wins…just like always!!

Clinton is the better nominee and the only candidate that will be able to beat McCain. Obama is basically unelectable, he has been caught in too many untruths, alot of which are in print in his book, even going so far as to not tell the truth about his own parents. Also, there is the problem with his pastor that is not going to go away. And then the words of Michelle Obama , both out of her month and in college papers. That will never go away. The Clintons have been accussed of many things but not being patriotic is not one of them, the Clintons dearly love this country. The Obama's feelings for this country have been in question during the entire nomination procedure. That is not the makings of a President. Democrats will vote for McCain in record numbers if Obama gets the nomination, I am one of them.

Wolf please don't be tarnishing you the good reputation you had built up over the years with this sort of norrow unobjective article of question. Wolff your views are too narrow and out of place.

I can say this being neutral because I am voting for McCain. Who ever has the most should be the nominee. Just because if the one with the lesser wins, it will divide the party. However at the same time. Dems keep this up. I enjoy the side show watching you divide your party is a beautiful thing to me.

enough already. I can still win if I only count this, or that, or move the goal post, or what if I lie? Or, what if I fire my campaign manager for the 2nd time, another ridiculous 3am ad might help. I was under sniper fire though does that help? What if I said I was a normal everyday person, oh wait I maid 109million in five years, crap that won't work. Please just stop, I used to respect you.

clinton or mccain? its up to the dnc.
bowling green, mo

That is a ridiculous argument. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game and twist things around that are purely speculative (Clinton has a better chance of winning in very blue states like NY and CA). Any democrat is likely to take the "big states" that Clinton has won so far, and recent polls in CA indicate that Obama is ahead in CA of Clinton anyways. Her supporters will say anything to twist the story in their favor but the fact remains that Obama has MORE STATES WON, MORE PLEDGED DELEGATES, and MORE POPULAR VOTE. No denying that.

Only the Clinton News Network could actually put something like this out as an actual news story. Barack Obama is winning in terms of pledged delegates, states won and the popular vote. Additionally, he is quickly closing in on Superdelegates.

The Clinton campaign continually changes the win-condition and CNN seems to be more than happy to play along.

Most of these anchors are on Clintons payroll. Does anyone remember this guy Pushing Hillary down our throat last year, till people started calling CNN Clinton News Network? They are afraid of their carreers but change is coming to America. Give it up wolf!

It's become fairly apparent that Clinton doesn't want to be President so much as she wants to win the election, and she's apparently willing to do absolutely anything to win. Her motive is obviously ego rather than any desire to do good things for the country.

I am 53 years old and have never voted for a Democrat in a presidential election. If Hillary is the nominee, that string will be intact. If Obama is nominated, sorry Mcain, I have to go the other way. Multiply that by a lot of other like minded voters and tell me what that does to "the only count that matters"

What other D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-E argument are they going to try? This woman can't even run a decent campaign or manage her campaign finances and we're supposed to trust her in the general and potentially to run our country?! That is one big, fat NO!!! She's the most underqualified (and dishonest) candidate that just happens to be female.

This is ludicrous. The Clinton campaign changes its mind about what is “crucial” to being elected whenever it suits them. Pretty soon they will say that it's the number of primaries won on Thursdays that should decide the primaries.

The left wing of the dem party has a hard time acknowledging that Obama, for all his virtues, is unelectable due to Rev Wright. Sad but true that this friendship that was so necessary for Obama to win over black support for his state senate bid should make him unelectable in a national election. Obama may get 50% of the dem primary vote and the nomination but he'll lose 35 to 40 states to McCain. I'll be ther to say I told you so too. Another dem for McCain or Hillary.

I am amazed daily by the new "count theories" the Clinton campaign comes up with! The Europeans are laughing at (us)her and scratching their heads asking themselves how can we possibly go around to other countries trying to force the very same democracy down their throats; that we ourselves cannot seem to follow!

She is behind in every count that matters! Including what "counts" to the American people in general…..honesty, integrity and loyalty within and to ones party!

Clinton."s argument is a last ditch effort to influence those super delegates who have not as yet jumped on the Obama ship. Previously Democratic states, such as New York will vote Democratic no matter who the candidate is. Obama, however, has made inroads into those "Red States' and may., indeed, carry them in November. Thus, he will lead in the presumed Electoral votes, popular vote and pledged delegate vote. Hillary needs to brush up on her math skills!

That's just ridiculous. Pledged delegates are what counts. Enough with the Clintons moving the goal posts.

George Bush won that election because he clearly stole it from Al Gore. Does McCain plan on doing the same to Obama? Or does Clinton think that she is a bigger crook than McCain. This may be why she is making this argument that only she can beat McCain. This year is going to be a revolution and I am hoping that America is ready for it. This dirty politics will no longer work.

It's speculation to say Obama can't win in Florida or Ohio….besides, if it is based on electoral the candidates wouldn't need to campaign around the nation, nor would we need to await the people's vote.

Simply have a 4 state runoff—New York, California, Florida, Texas…

I'm sure the Clinton supporters will cry that they won 3 of the 4…but ANY Democrat will win New York, and maverick moniker or not, I'd say Obama has the edge over McCain in California…

Yet more scrambling by the Clinton supporters…trying to find a way to squeeze into the white house…evenwhile not being the people's vote.

Why is Michigan lumped with Florida? Obama wasn't even on the ballot.

There is no low those crooks won't sink to. And Blitzer is just as bad for so consistently being such a weasel to their talking points. Call it for what it is - they will make any claim they can to win the nomination, even if it means trying to steal delegates Obama already won.

In the General, it's the Electoral College votes that count. However, in the Primary (which we are in) it's the DELEGATES that count! How many times and how many ways is Mrs. Clinton going to try to change the rules of the party?

Now to FL and MI, Sen. Obama AND Mrs. Clinton "SIGNED" a Pledge that the FL and MI votes would Not count. I guess this shows how much it means when Mrs. Clinton puts her Signature on a Pledge, Nothing!

Wolf,

I suggest you go back to Civics 101. This is a primary election, and the only count that matters is the delegate count. Once again, Barack is following the rules and Clinton and her supporters, like you Wolf, are hedging.

And stop talking about a dream ticket. The only person a dream ticket helps is Hillary and why should we help her, she supported McCain. We want her out of our sight because she's bad news. Send her to China, she has more in common with their government than ours.

America & Barack 08

China & Hillary 0-Never

What is the next Clinton metric for electabilty? Who lies the most?

Keep moving the goal post Clintons!

Blitzer; you are not serious for bringging this nonsense up.

There are more newsworthy news.

Why are we changing the rules in teh middle of the game?

Why are we giving the Clinton campaign the authority to even suggests new rules in the middle fo the game?

That's the stupidest argument yet. The Clinton campaign is dabling in prophecy now. Good luck with that.

She'll just try anything…lies, making up "rules" and excuses as the wind shifts. There was a time I felt sorry for her- now all I feel is disqust!

Hillary's rural city supporters hvae noone to blame but them selfs if John MCcain becomes the President. If they do not vote for OBAMA in the General Elections. Just becuase Hillary lost. You will see more jobs lost more soldiers killed and maybe A war In Iraq, Which we don't need

WAKE UP PEOPLE

DEMS 08

LMFAO.. sorry to say, Electorial College don't matter in the primary. Nice argument though.

If that was the case, the superdelegates would be going for Clinton not Obama right now. But funny how Obama has picked up around 69 supers since February and Clinton a net loss of 2 supers.

After all is said and done, the November election needs to be won. people lose sight of that. Hillary is the one to do just that. That is how the general election works.

Thank you Mr.Blitzer for going beyond petty fighting and bowling photo-ops. Now this is a real dicussion! Very brave of you also to go against the formula of simple Hillary bashing.

Please! That is just plain silly, I don't know how else to describe it! It is the ONE way to look at it, where she may hold an advantage, and that is to say that states like New York would ONLY choose Clinton over McCain, because New York & McCain obviously go togther like peas & carrots. Give me break. At this point she is trying everything to justify victory by the super-delegate elite w/in the party of the people. Almost as disgusting as her right of entitlement. Even if she does get the nod, it will be severly tainted.

GO OBAMA!!!

Wolf, the Clinton camp will find all kinds of excuses and reasons. Even if you want to decide it by electoral votes, as she ignorantly argues, who actually won Texas? She is counting Texas as if she won Texas. Texas had a two-step approach. Overall, Obama won Texas. Would she count that as part of the electoral college delegates for Obama and not hers? She is a liar and a big cheat indeed.

Wolf you are one low life stupid man. Last month you were talking about the Florida and Michgan untile people were sick hearing it. Now here you go agiain with you stupid baias Electoral College votes crap
who do you think will listen to your stupid report, American people are way smart than that. I just hope some day you and Lou Dobbs fired form CNN.

Right on! Hillary is ahead in the only count that matters while Obama is ahead in the only count that doesn't matter.

How does Obama expect to win in November against a Republican, when he can't even win any big states against another Democrat?

Cnn…post my comments!

Hillary 08

Another way for Clinton and her cronies to steal this election.

Wolf,

I suggest you go back to Civics 101. This is a primary election, and the only count that matters is the delegate count. Once again, Barack is following the rules and Clinton and her supporters, like you Wolf, are hedging.

And stop talking about a dream ticket. The only person a dream ticket helps is Hillary and why should we help her, she supported McCain. We want her out of our site because she bad news. Send her to China, she has more in common with their government than ours.

America & Barack 08

China & Hillary 0-Never

Wolfe,
Is this your 'not so subtle" way of continuing to promote the false hope that Hillary will win? Counting electoral college votes at this point makes absolutely no sense….much like most of your commentary.

There is an easy way to judge this. What was Clinton's camp saying one month ago, two months ago, 6 months ago, 12 months ago?

There is another point to be made. If at the beginning of it all, Obama and the others were told that the nominee would be determined by who won the most electoral college votes, don't you think he would have ran a different campaign strategy?

You cannot change the rules in the middle of the game; because then someone can well argue as follows: the nominee should be who has the least number of delegates, the least number of popular votes and the least number of electoral college votes. what could justify this citerion? this is the person who democrats prefer least and hence the one that republicans have a better chance of liking. sounds stupid? well that's what happens when you can make up the rules to suit yourself.

In the Primary nomination season, it is all about the delegates. In the general election, it is all about the electoral college. These are separate elections with completely isolated terms from one another. Therefore, arguing Hillary's abilities to win the general election based upon results on the primaries and caucuses is not relevant. Pro Hillary supporters need to get a grasp of reality and just admit that she lost…fair and square. But hey, let her keep running…let her keep spending all of that money for an election she simply cannot and should not win.

Wolf, . Hillary is behind in the Delegate Count, Popular vote, and number
of states won. Ed Rendell and other Clinton supporter's twisted logic on the vote counting will not change that fact.

She keeps trying to change the rules midgame. No, the electoral college doesn't matter at this point. If every vote counts, why does she keep trying to ignore all the states, and their votes, that Obama has won by some wild reason or another? And her claim that pledged delegates can switch is another wild tale. While it may technically be true, if she were to win the nomination by twisting arms of pledged delegates who were pledged to Obama, won by votes cast for Obama, those voters who had their delegate stolen would vote for McCain in a heartbeat. Better to have a republican than a thief!

Electors are not elected until the general election. Primaries are indicative of nothing related to that.

What are the rules to win the nomination. That should be deciding factor instead of differing ideas. Just follow whatever rules are in place.

Bottomline - untill Florida and Michigan count, all estimates are out the window because nothing is valid. Superdelegates should vote as if Florida and Michigan were counted and select Hillary Clinton.

If she can not come in one door she will make up another…

LOL. Most amusing, most amusing.

We can declare victory if we win on Super Tuesday…

Hmm… the real test will be winning Ohio and Texas…

Hmm… the person with the mo