FREE TAPATALK APP

Upchurch · 10th January 2008, 08:48 AM

My wife found this for me.

It is a summary of delegates that each candidate currently has, which I think is much more useful than who "won" what state.

As of this writing:

Obama: 25
Clinton: 24
Edwards: 18

Romney: 24
Huckabee: 18
McCain: 10
Thompson: 6
Paul: 2
Hunter: 1

The Central Scrutinizer · 10th January 2008, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Paul: 2

timhau · 10th January 2008, 09:26 AM

I think this is more accurate, because it includes pledged superdelegates.

Upchurch · 10th January 2008, 09:32 AM

Well, yes. I meant that whole section in general was more useful than who won what state.

mrbaracuda · 10th January 2008, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Can you feel it? The revolution is coming!

Upchurch · 11th January 2008, 07:59 AM

So, I used their summary of issue positions and a spreadsheet to rate how I felt about each position. I used a scale of +++ to ---, with 0 as neutral, to judge whether or not I agreed with their position and how important it was to me. I did my best to ignore whose position it was and to be objective.

At the end, I totaled up pluses and minuses and got the following:

Clinton: +7
Edwards: +7
Gravel: +10
Kucinich: +10
Obama: +8

Giuliani: 0
Huckabee: -6
Hunter: -12
McCain: 0
Paul: -2
Romney: -5
Thompson: -9

Of course, that is based solely on the nine issues CNN provided summaries on and only on the summaries provided: Abortion, Guns, Health Care, Immigration, Stem Cell, Iraq, Gay Marriage, Social Security, and Taxes.

These totals don't take into account more fuzzy aspects like likability and how much I would instinctively trust them to lead. Obama, Huckabee, and McCain would have gotten extra points if I had and Kucinich, Giuliani, Paul, and Thompson would have lost points. It also didn't take woo'iness into account either. Kucinich, Huckabee, and Paul would have lost points.

I still think Obama is my candidate at this point, but if it comes down to, say, Clinton vs McCain, I'm going to have to revisit the issues and look in more depth.

rtalman · 11th January 2008, 01:49 PM

Next on the schedule is Michigan, which has far more delegates at stake than Iowa and New Hampshire combined. Does anyone know why the focus has already shifted to North Carolina? It seems like Michigan is getting about as much attention as the Wyoming Republican caucus.

10th January 2008, 08:48 AM	#1
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,472	Delegate Summary My wife found this for me. It is a summary of delegates that each candidate currently has, which I think is much more useful than who "won" what state. As of this writing: Obama: 25 Clinton: 24 Edwards: 18 Romney: 24 Huckabee: 18 McCain: 10 Thompson: 6 Paul: 2 Hunter: 1

10th January 2008, 09:16 AM	#2
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,572	Originally Posted by Upchurch Paul: 2
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

10th January 2008, 09:26 AM	#3
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: East of Sweeden Posts: 9,755	I think this is more accurate, because it includes pledged superdelegates.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

11th January 2008, 01:49 PM	#7
rtalman Muse Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 835	Next on the schedule is Michigan, which has far more delegates at stake than Iowa and New Hampshire combined. Does anyone know why the focus has already shifted to North Carolina? It seems like Michigan is getting about as much attention as the Wyoming Republican caucus.
rtalman Muse Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 835	__________________ Re-education Camp Director: What's better than a big juicy steak? Camp Detainees: Nothing is better than a big juicy steak! Re-education Camp Director: And what's better than nothing? Camp Detainees: A stale piece of bread is better than nothing! Re-education Camp Director: Therefore a stale piece of bread is better than a big juicy steak.

10th January 2008, 09:32 AM	#4
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,472	Well, yes. I meant that whole section in general was more useful than who won what state.

10th January 2008, 01:30 PM	#5
mrbaracuda Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Germany Posts: 3,799	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Can you feel it? The revolution is coming!

11th January 2008, 07:59 AM	#6
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 23,472	So, I used their summary of issue positions and a spreadsheet to rate how I felt about each position. I used a scale of +++ to ---, with 0 as neutral, to judge whether or not I agreed with their position and how important it was to me. I did my best to ignore whose position it was and to be objective. At the end, I totaled up pluses and minuses and got the following: Clinton: +7 Edwards: +7 Gravel: +10 Kucinich: +10 Obama: +8 Giuliani: 0 Huckabee: -6 Hunter: -12 McCain: 0 Paul: -2 Romney: -5 Thompson: -9 Of course, that is based solely on the nine issues CNN provided summaries on and only on the summaries provided: Abortion, Guns, Health Care, Immigration, Stem Cell, Iraq, Gay Marriage, Social Security, and Taxes. These totals don't take into account more fuzzy aspects like likability and how much I would instinctively trust them to lead. Obama, Huckabee, and McCain would have gotten extra points if I had and Kucinich, Giuliani, Paul, and Thompson would have lost points. It also didn't take woo'iness into account either. Kucinich, Huckabee, and Paul would have lost points. I still think Obama is my candidate at this point, but if it comes down to, say, Clinton vs McCain, I'm going to have to revisit the issues and look in more depth.