A Note To Previous Readers
Welcome back to No-More-King-George.com, also known as NMKG.com. I'm Mark Heckendorn, editor of this site and author of the adjacent news report.
In January 2006, NMKG.com was launched as a web journal to report on the important issue of how Presidential powers continue to expand far beyond the limits set in the U.S. Constitution.
While President Bush is also named "George", this site's name has always referred to King George III and our editorial credo was a strong but simple message:
America shed its last monarch, King George III, in 1783 and we believe that never again should Americans allow unchecked power to be vested in a single leader -- not in peace or in war.
As citizens, we must not surrender our rights out of fear or barter them for promised safety.
Now, over
two years later, with regret, I must suspend this journal and post
NMKG.com's last news story.
The reason for this decision is the usual reason why most small
online or print journals fail --lack of funds.
It is more than a full-time job to do good original reporting,
raise funds, and manage the mechanics of keeping a web site fresh
and afloat.
NMKG.com has never become self supporting and my ability to devote
more, unpaid, personal time to this project has ended.
While, NMKG.com did not accomplish all its goals, we did keep to
our editorial policy of,
- Less Opinion, More Reporting!™
We avoided the trap of becoming just another loud political blog.
(Although that might have been a better financial strategy.)
The issue of growing presidential power is one of the many subjects
of the 2008 presidential election and in that context I think that
our final story is worth telling and fits into the original purpose
of NMKG.com.
I will leave it posted to remind myself that there still important
news stories that somehow miss the national media's
radar.
Hillary
Clinton Still Leads Barack Obama
In Votes Cast By Registered Democrats
by Mark D. Heckendorn
April 14, 2008, Los Angeles | As political pundits focus on the upcoming, April 22nd, Pennsylvania Democratic Primary the popular wisdom seems to be that Hillary Clinton must win Pennsylvania by a decisive margin, or face the danger of being forced out of the nomination race.
USA Today's delegate estimates currently have Clinton behind 1503 to Obama's 1639, in committed convention delegates.
One number not being as widely discussed is Clinton's continuing lead in popular votes cast when only registered Democrats are voting.
To date, Clinton has received 3,045,826 votes to Obama's 2,661,188 in primaries where only registered Democrats were allowed to vote.
Pennsylvania will be the first "closed" Democratic primary held since February 12th. It's results will reveal whether Hillary Clinton still has the strong backing of the Democratic Party's rank and file.
Other interesting numbers also float just below the surface of the previous primaries' election results.
So far, excluding caucus state delegates, looking just at the delegates won in actual primaries, with secret ballots, Senator Clinton has won 1025 delegates to Senator Obama's 1001.
Obama has built much of his campaign momentum by using his organizational advantages, primarily based on his popularity with college students, to overwhelm the caucuses.
He has also successfully used his well recognized speaking ability to draw independent and Republican voters into those Democratic primaries open to outside voters.
Open primaries are designed to build voter excitement and participation, but can the Democrats really depend on the loyalty of the new voters drawn to Senator Obama?
To what extent are the current primary results distorted by Republican and independent voters more likely to vote for John McCain than to stay with the Democratic Party?
This is where the hard work begins for the Democrat's super delegates.
Most super delegates are elected officials who have won their office in a general election. Their job is to listen to the party rank and file and balance the needs of the party against the claims of the competing candidates.
Because there is general agreement that, before the convention, neither Clinton nor Obama can win the nomination outright, both candidates are forced to wage dual campaigns.
One campaign is for the primaries and the other is a campaign for the loyalty of the super delegates based on the candidate's competing claims of "electability".
While Senator Obama has the current edge in total popular vote and pledged delegates, those advantages, if they remain, must still be translated into a convincing case that he is the strongest candidate for the general election.
This may be the real test in Pennsylvania.
If Senator Obama loses Pennsylvania then Senator Clinton's camp will probably begin discussing another set of little noticed numbers.
To date, Hillary Clinton has won primaries in states that represent 258 Electoral College votes. Barack Obama's small state, caucus weighted strategy has given him victories in states that represent only 207 Electoral College votes.
Pennsylvania has 21 Electoral College votes.
If Senator Clinton wins the Pennsylvania primary, by any margin, she will be able to say that she has already won elections in enough states to reach the 270 electoral votes she will need to become President. A strong argument could be made that "Her" wins are stronger than "His" wins.
By running her own race in this nominating contest, Senator Clinton may prove to be the steady tortoise and Senator Obama may turn out to be the flashy hare.
By winning the most important primaries, Clinton can enhance her case for claiming that she will be the Democrat's best candidate for the November race.
For Obama, if he can't win Pennsylvania, he may find that his current lead in pledged delegates might not be strong enough to win the "electability" argument.
A loss will mean that Senator Obama will need to counter the potential charge that his previous primary victories are "hollow" and don't convincingly prove the case that he can win in November.
In the worst case scenario, Obama may be asked to prove that he is not simply another George McGovern -- another liberal anti-war candidate, with strong campus support, without the ability to deliver any of the states need to win the general election.
With all these complicating factors, the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary may actually hold far more danger for Senator Obama than it does for Senator Clinton.
In Votes Cast By Registered Democrats
by Mark D. Heckendorn
April 14, 2008, Los Angeles | As political pundits focus on the upcoming, April 22nd, Pennsylvania Democratic Primary the popular wisdom seems to be that Hillary Clinton must win Pennsylvania by a decisive margin, or face the danger of being forced out of the nomination race.
USA Today's delegate estimates currently have Clinton behind 1503 to Obama's 1639, in committed convention delegates.
One number not being as widely discussed is Clinton's continuing lead in popular votes cast when only registered Democrats are voting.
To date, Clinton has received 3,045,826 votes to Obama's 2,661,188 in primaries where only registered Democrats were allowed to vote.
Pennsylvania will be the first "closed" Democratic primary held since February 12th. It's results will reveal whether Hillary Clinton still has the strong backing of the Democratic Party's rank and file.
Other interesting numbers also float just below the surface of the previous primaries' election results.
So far, excluding caucus state delegates, looking just at the delegates won in actual primaries, with secret ballots, Senator Clinton has won 1025 delegates to Senator Obama's 1001.
Obama has built much of his campaign momentum by using his organizational advantages, primarily based on his popularity with college students, to overwhelm the caucuses.
He has also successfully used his well recognized speaking ability to draw independent and Republican voters into those Democratic primaries open to outside voters.
Open primaries are designed to build voter excitement and participation, but can the Democrats really depend on the loyalty of the new voters drawn to Senator Obama?
To what extent are the current primary results distorted by Republican and independent voters more likely to vote for John McCain than to stay with the Democratic Party?
This is where the hard work begins for the Democrat's super delegates.
Most super delegates are elected officials who have won their office in a general election. Their job is to listen to the party rank and file and balance the needs of the party against the claims of the competing candidates.
Because there is general agreement that, before the convention, neither Clinton nor Obama can win the nomination outright, both candidates are forced to wage dual campaigns.
One campaign is for the primaries and the other is a campaign for the loyalty of the super delegates based on the candidate's competing claims of "electability".
While Senator Obama has the current edge in total popular vote and pledged delegates, those advantages, if they remain, must still be translated into a convincing case that he is the strongest candidate for the general election.
This may be the real test in Pennsylvania.
If Senator Obama loses Pennsylvania then Senator Clinton's camp will probably begin discussing another set of little noticed numbers.
To date, Hillary Clinton has won primaries in states that represent 258 Electoral College votes. Barack Obama's small state, caucus weighted strategy has given him victories in states that represent only 207 Electoral College votes.
Pennsylvania has 21 Electoral College votes.
If Senator Clinton wins the Pennsylvania primary, by any margin, she will be able to say that she has already won elections in enough states to reach the 270 electoral votes she will need to become President. A strong argument could be made that "Her" wins are stronger than "His" wins.
By running her own race in this nominating contest, Senator Clinton may prove to be the steady tortoise and Senator Obama may turn out to be the flashy hare.
By winning the most important primaries, Clinton can enhance her case for claiming that she will be the Democrat's best candidate for the November race.
For Obama, if he can't win Pennsylvania, he may find that his current lead in pledged delegates might not be strong enough to win the "electability" argument.
A loss will mean that Senator Obama will need to counter the potential charge that his previous primary victories are "hollow" and don't convincingly prove the case that he can win in November.
In the worst case scenario, Obama may be asked to prove that he is not simply another George McGovern -- another liberal anti-war candidate, with strong campus support, without the ability to deliver any of the states need to win the general election.
With all these complicating factors, the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary may actually hold far more danger for Senator Obama than it does for Senator Clinton.