Breadking Down Super Tuesday State By State

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 18:05


( - promoted by Matt Stoller)

Click here for a more recent update

Here is a breakdown of February 5th states favorable to Obama and Clinton, with the number of pledged delegates in each state in parenthesis:



Overwhelmingly favorable to one candidate

  • Clinton: 4 states, 422 pledged delegates: Arkansas (35), Connecticut (48), New Jersey (107), New York (232). Clinton is former First Lady of Arkansas, and as current Senator of New York, her favorite daughter status spreads into Connecticut and New Jersey as well. Further, Clinton holds oversized leads of 25% in all of these states, and only Arkansas allows independents to vote in primaries.



  • Obama: 3 states, 258 pledged delegates: Georgia (87), Idaho (18), Illinois (153). Illinois is Obama's home state, obviously making the state favorable to him. Georgia is another very good state for Obama. Independents can vote in the Georgia primary, the state has the highest percentage first or second largest African-American population in the country (New York's might be larger, I'm not sure), and Obama either leads or is close in pre-Iowa polling of the state. Obama also leads in pre-Iowa polling in Idaho, where he should be favored in an open caucus system.


These are the core Super Tuesday states for Obama and Clinton. If either loses one of the states in the their core, it is all over. As such, these are not the keys to February 5th, and for all intents and purposes are off the table. Here is the next tier of states:



States That Favor Candidates Other Than Clinton and Obama

  • New Mexico (26): This is still Bill Richardson's state if he wants it. In fact, it is entirely possible that he will win here even if he drops out before February 5th. After all, Dean won Vermont in 2004, two weeks after he left the race. As a closed-party caucus, a large percentage of the participants will be in the Richardson-dominated state Democratic Party.



  • Oklahoma (38): This looks to be the best chance John Edwards has to win a state on February 5th. Opinion polling in Oklahoma has consistently shown him well ahead of Obama, and either tied or only slightly behind Clinton. Obama is not going to win this closed-primary state, but Edwards just might. In fact, given that his national profile has increased of late, he might be considered the favorite here now.


Both of those states are something of a blow to Clinton, since without Edwards or Richardson she almost certainly cleans up in both. While Clinton has an edge in the safe states, the two wild card states help out Obama a little bit.


Somewhat Favorable to one candidate

  • Clinton: 4 states, 232 delegates: Arizona (56), Delaware (15), Massachusetts (93), Tennessee (68). Arizona is a closed primary, which helps Clinton, and most polls in the state show Clinton with an oversized lead. Delaware and Massachusetts are also closed primaries where Obama has not polled well, and where Clinton sports a regional advantage. As far as Tennessee goes, Clinton led Gore in Tennessee polling. 'Nuff said tthere.


  • Obmaa: 2 states, 45 delegates: Alaska (13), Kansas (32). There are no polls out of Alaska, but the state is heavily disproportionately male, which will hurt Clinton. Obama has a home-state connection to Kansas, and has polled well in the state. Clinton could easily finish third in Kansas.


This leaves us with the battleground states, where Obama needs to win the majority. Specifically, because of the other advantages Clinton has on February 5th, there is no path to the nomination for Obama without California. If Obama wins California, he overcomes all of the other advantages Clinton has listed here. If Clinton wins California, her delegate total and narrative all but end the campaign.



February 5th Battleground: 7 states, 612 delegates: Alabama (62), California (370), Colorado (55), Minnesota (72), Missouri (72), North Dakota (13), Utah (23). Minnesota and North Dakota are caucuses, Utah is a closed primary, and the other four are open or semi-open primaries. I don't think there is a big difference between open (where Republicans and Independents can vote) and semi-open (where only Independents can vote) primaries, since the competitive Republican nomination campaign will keep most Republicans voting for their own. Nevada, plus these seven states, look set to decide the nomination. Or, perhaps more accurately, Nevada and California appear set to decide the nomination.  

Chris Bowers :: Breadking Down Super Tuesday State By State

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Breadking Down Super Tuesday State By State | 51 comments
What about Election Day Voter Registration? (0.00 / 0)
Do you think the lack of Election Day Voter Registration in CA, and I'm not sure about Nevada, will play a role in dampening Obama's youth and student vote relative to what we've seen in Iowa and New Hampshire?

John McCain says overturn the law that legalized abortion
I do (0.00 / 0)
I also think that caucuses should favor Obama for that reason. That means Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota and North Dakota. Obama needs those states, plus California, Illinois and Gerogia in order to "win" February 5th.
[ Parent ]
Democrats should go Same Day Registration for all their Primaries? (0.00 / 0)
It will only help to increase the Dem vote for the general elections, even if the General election is NOT Same Day Voter Registration. 

But, I guess that is a Secretary of State decision, not a Party decision.

John McCain says overturn the law that legalized abortion

[ Parent ]
Strong in the caucuses (0.00 / 0)
The Obama campaign has plans to come on strong in all of those caucus states you mentioned.  My sources tell me that in the Mountain West Obama is looking a very strong showings on Feb. 5.  In a contest were every delegate may count that could be important.  Also, it looks like Obama should now be favored in Nevada despite yesterday's returns he got two union endorsements today SEUI Nevada and the Culinary Workers Union in Nevada these should be key.

Also, your analysis of which state favors who ignores the impact of proportional voting.  It isn't so much who comes out ahead but how much they are ahead by.  Obama will probably win Illinois by a much larger margin that Hilary wins New York.  California is the biggest target but unless things change after South Carolina I no longer see Feb. 5th as being decisive.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
No same day registration in CA, but there is an even bigger wrinkle than that.

VBMs went out Monday.  Almost half of the vote will come in by mail.  People are voting today through Feb 5th.  It is absolutely crucial that they have good absentee programs.

In California, Obama is aided by Vote Hope a 527 that has been working almost exclusively on banking pledges and VBMs for Obama.

Clinton has have an experienced team out here and they started out with a large edge in the polling 20+.  I have not seen any new polls since either NH or IA.  Much has changed since the last numbers.

[ Parent ]
Does anyone have any insight on what is going to happen with Florida? (4.00 / 1)
Who if anyone will campaign there, etc?

I have a hard time believing that Florida does not become a meaningful contest.  Especially if Clinton loses NV and SC, isn't she going to want to go to Florida?  Is Obama likely to not follow her?

Alternately, if Obama loses Nevada, he needs to go to Florida to have a win beyond just SC, if he's capable of winning Florida that is.

It seems that one or the other is going to need a bump before Feb 5th, and if one goes and the other goes as well, then you have a head-to-head contest that becomes increasingly important.  The more they put in, the more it matters, so the more they have to put in, in a cycle that turns Florida into a real contest.  Five days before Feb 5th.

And unlike some states, there are no good excuses for declining to compete in Florida (other than the DNC thing).  Nevada is a union state, SC is a black state, but Florida is a microcosm of the entire nation.

THANK YOU! (0.00 / 0)
Why no mention of Florida???  Even Howard Dean has said that our delegates will most likely be seated at the convention by the nominee, so why are you ignoring us?  Personally, I think the candidates should break the pledge not to come here.  The GOP hasn't abandoned Floridians, and our Democratic voters are noticing. 
[ Parent ]
What complicates things (4.00 / 3)
is that these aren't winner-take-all. So if they all split 40-40-20 in one order or another, then you still have an unsettled situation.
Complicated Math (0.00 / 0)
This will lead to some complicated math for the campaigns. Does Obama forgo NY entirely? Or does he put some money in hoping to snag a few extra delegates? Same for Hillary and Illinois. Hell, same for basically every state in play on Feb 5.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
[ Parent ]
Obama will fight NY (4.00 / 1)
Obama will not give up the delegates in New York, even if he only comes in with 30% that is money and time well spent.  From the rumors I hear, Obama will perform better than that in New York and there is no reason to give up any delegates in this race.  The only time it isn't worth it to compete is if you will be under 15% is several congressional districts.

Obama is going to try to keep Hillary and the rest under 15% in the small caucus states and in several congressional districts of Illinois, but I don't think there are any states that he is worried about viability in.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama

[ Parent ]
But there is a limit to $ (0.00 / 0)
California, Florida, NY - I know they have broken fundraising records, but can they compete everywhere at once? They certainly can't be everywhere at once.

I suppose they will ignore the smaller states, and the real competition will be where the big delegate counts are.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

[ Parent ]
I don't think he'll be keeping Hillary under 15% anywhere (0.00 / 0)
except maybe three or four Chicago congressional districts.

You want an entire caucus state to go 80-10-10?  No way.

[ Parent ]
Not the whole state (0.00 / 0)
I don't think that an entire caucus state will shut Hilary out, but she may get shut out of some of the districts.  Any one of them only has to get 605-70% in a given CD for them to have a good chance of shutting out one of the other two.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama
[ Parent ]
NY is 17% black. (0.00 / 0)
It should help.
[ Parent ]
Hey! (4.00 / 1)
I thought this thing was gonna be all over by now! What's the big idea of stretching this thing out. Bad things will happen....

Voters have longer to make up their minds!

Voters in CA might have an effect on the nomination!

Candidates might change their stated positions under pressure from polling!

This is starting to look sort of...well, 'democratic'.

What happened?

Heh...I bet the Clinton team has has some interesting phone calls with 'SellOut' Reid and Miss Nancy. I'm sure she's more than a little pissed at having to become 'change candidate number three' in mid-campaign. Funny, how that works.

Kinda like that old NYY double play...How'd that go? Oh, yeah....Edwards to Obama to Clinton.

'S fun so far. Like to see Edwards break through the media blackout however. That is not a good thing for our democracy.

Maybe if he cries on TV Tweety will notice he exists. Nah, why bother.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
It'll be interesting to see if Edwards can maintain his voters. (4.00 / 1)
It kinda looks like the first-choice-Edwards-second-choice-Obama people stayed with him, while the 1stEdwards/2ndClinton people broke for Clinton.  Which makes since cause Obama was supposedly up and didn't need the help, while Clinton was down and did. 

Now that they're both tied nationally and in a lot of states, I wonder how many of his voters are going to break for their second choice to help him/her win.

I think he takes just as many voters from her as from him, but if the 1stEdwards/2ndObama people break in a different proportion than the 1stEdwards/2ndClinton, then you can get weird results, like maybe yesterday.

At any rate, Edwards lost a lot last night.  If Obama had put Hillary away, Edwards becomes the interesting, if still not totally viable, alternative.  With a hothothot Obama/Clinton race going, Edwards has a much less interesting case for himself.  (Except maybe as attack dog.)

Which is all to say, by Feb 5th I think Edwards will be down to 10%, and the question is whether it's 45-45-10 or 50-40-10.

If he came in second in NV and SC it might be different, but I don't see that happening.

[ Parent ]
Well ten will make him irrelevant. (0.00 / 0)
Since he needs 15% to pick up any delegates anywhere. The question will be how many states he hits 15% in. Also, remember Clinton needs over half the delegates to avoid a brokered convention. If Edwards and Obama combine to pick up over half the delegates things might get interesting.
[ Parent ]
Er (0.00 / 0)
How many states and how many Congressional districts. Edwards can't win but he can sure do some damage.
[ Parent ]
Edwards supporters (0.00 / 0)
How the bulk of the Edwards supporters vote on Feb 5 may depend on the perception in each state as to whether he is near the 15% threshold.  If so, why not give him a share of delegates and increase the percentage of progressives in Denver this summer?  But if state polls show him at 10, supporters might bail in order to help their second choice and not waste a vote.  It will be interesting. 
[ Parent ]
Not without good messaging (0.00 / 0)
Unless voters realise that there is a benefit to Edwards of getting above 15%, they're less likely to vote for someone they do not believe can win. The meme needs to be spread that 15% keeps him in the game whilst he tries to come back.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog
[ Parent ]
All about CA eh? (0.00 / 0)
So when I insist to my friends that our state will be important - for the first time ever - I am not lying? phew!

I just signed up a little while ago to volunteer for Obama in CA. If they call on me, I'm there.

It is starting to look like money will be key for both Florida and Feb 5. Some have predicted Obama has more resources to draw from between now and Super Tuesday, though I suppose that potential could be dampened by a loss in Nevada, or less than stellar performance in SC. I sure wish we could get more frequent fundraising numbers!!

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

No prob.... (0.00 / 0)

.............he'll jes call up Goldman Sachs or National Amusements, Inc. and order a few dumptruck loads of hundreds.

His backers will never run out of money.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
I was referring... (4.00 / 4)
...to Obama's record-breaking amount of small donors, few of which are maxed out.
But, you know, spin it however you'd like.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
[ Parent ]
You are factually correct and... (0.00 / 0)

...so am I. 'Spin' doesn't enter into it.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.
[ Parent ]
I don't understand... (0.00 / 0)
...how an investment firm gives Obama an unlimited amount of money. Is there some loophole for investment firms that I am not aware of, allowing them to give unlimited campaign donations?


"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
[ Parent ]
of course not. (0.00 / 0)
Individual employees give, not companies themselves.  Each of the candidates has received a lot from Goldman Sachs -- yes, even Edwards.
[ Parent ]
"Bundling" (0.00 / 0)
All those bundlers you hear about - they ain't bundling twigs!

"I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that."
-Lawrence Summers
[ Parent ]
You miss the point (0.00 / 0)
Point being - THOSE are the people who are ALREADY maxed. They are maxed on both Obama and Clinton. That is why Obama has an advantage - Obama's small donor base is NOT maxed.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
[ Parent ]
absentee (0.00 / 0)
Have everyone you know submit their california absentee ballot TODAY. Go and do it. That's how you and all the other California folks can help. VOTE TODAY.
[ Parent ]
What!? (0.00 / 0)
And miss out on the visceral joy I get from completing those little broken lines with my pencil on Election Day? Sorry, but no way!

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
[ Parent ]
utah (4.00 / 3)
Obama has an office in Utah and his people are pretty organized here.  Combine that with a fear of a Cinton on the top of the ticket for Utah Dems, and you get another state that is more likely to go to Obama.

Even though I think Huckabee would be tougher to beat nationally than McCain or Romney, for Utah, Huckabee would be a disaster for the state GOP.

In 1998, Huckabee came to Salt Lake and bashed the LDS church and has repeatedly hinted at attacks on the Mormon religion.  Local talk shows have reported that they have gotten lots of callers saying that they would vote for a Democrat or stay home if Huckabee would be the nominee.

I am not saying Utah would go blue, but if it went to a Ron Paul instead, that's 5 less electoral votes for a GOPer, 5 electoral votes that they were counting on, making Ohio and Florida all the more critical for them to win.

Truth over balance, progress over ideology

I think you should move Massachusetts to Battleground (4.00 / 3)
Here's a link from 2004:
"Galvin said independent voters can participate in either party's primary today by requesting a ballot at their polling places. They would then become members of that party temporarily; cards are available at polling places for them to return to unenrolled status once they have cast their ballots, Galvin said."

http://www.boston.co...

So unless the laws have changed since 2004, technically the Massachusetts primary is closed, but independents can still vote. Evidently, this favors Obama.

Also, remember Obama went to Harvard and has some connections to the area. There are a lot of young + educated + activist students in Massachusetts, which you have to also figure would break for Obama. I'm not sure Clinton being a senator from New York resonates with Massachusetts voters very much - at the very least, I don't think she holds the edge in the state.

Deval Patrick endorsed Obama, right? (0.00 / 0)
That combined with an open primary means one could speculate Obama has a decent shot.

Basically, we need a whole new round of polls in all of these states.  (I am wondering about CT too.)  I'm quite sure we're going to get them.

[ Parent ]
Yes, Patrick endorsed Obama... (4.00 / 1)
...and was very active in helping lead volunteers, activists, and assorted supporters and progressives to go to New Hampshire for Obama.  And regionalism won't play a role: if anything, people in MA would be *less* inclined to vote for a NY senator, all other things being equal.  So I'd chalk up MA as competitive -- perhaps one of the key states for Feb 5.
[ Parent ]
Agreed on all points. (0.00 / 0)
Oh, and Bill Richardson just dropped out, so Chris gets to redo New Mexico.
[ Parent ]
Utah (0.00 / 0)
Obama has lead in polling for Utah and is the only campaign with a office there. Likewise in all the caucus states he has a strong field staff which matters.

It's really hard to say though.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

Georgia (a change, Chris) (4.00 / 2)
Georgia has the highest number of African Americans.  Mississippi has the highest percentage of African Americans at 36% followed by Louisiana (32 IIRC).  Georgia is 27.5%, a smaller percentage than South Carolina (28.5%).

California has nearly the same black population as Georgia but it is only 6.7% of the state's total.

As mentioned above (4.00 / 1)
This is a lot more complicated than your analysis indicates, as this isn't a winner-take-all system. In the early states, media spin is much more important than the delegate count (ie: "Obama wins Iowa" and "Clinton wins New Hampshire" are the headlines, instead of "Obama, Clinton, Edwards all pick up some delegates"), but on 2/5, we'll be looking at delegates, not at states won. If Hillary wins 16 states, but Obama wins more delegates, who's the real winner on 2/5? Obviously, Obama.

There's no way Clinton's going to get all 232 of NY's delegates, just as Obama's not going to get all 153 of IL's. The race will really be shaped around the margins, as candidates fight for that extra 5% to win those few extra delegates in each state.

It's tough to analyze this on a state-by-state basis, as we're not counting electoral votes here. We're counting fractions of the vote in each state that give a candidate a slight boost to the nomination.

I think Obama might have a slight edge on 2/5, as he has a better field operation around the country than Clinton does. He's already spent money opening up field offices in the reddest of red states, working on voters early. If Obama gets at least 30% everywhere, and upwards of 70% in his strong states, there is no way Clinton can beat him in the delegate totals, even if she "wins" more states than he does.

Whoa! (4.00 / 1)
Spent a while here today reading Chris's post and....something....Well, something seemed wrong, out of place...

Missing....

Lucky for me I could zip over to Jerome's place and there it was!

Holy jumpin' HuckaBees!

Democrats
  NH Total
Obama  9   25
Clinton  9   23
Edwards  4  19

Me? I'm no pollster though trained in Fourier analysis, statistics and solving differential equations I find polling fun to watch other folks argue about but don't generally get too involved as I don't have time for a deep analysis.

But....

After the biggest polling blunder since Dewey, and yeah I know they didn't have polls then like we do now and yeah that's mostly snark...mostly, what's the point of leaving of the number three person in the.....wait for it...here it comes form Jerome again:

If that's not a race, then nothing is. Certainly, Obama and Clinton have a monetary edge over Edwards, but don't discount earned media or Edwards having enough funds to compete well enough. All of the post-Iowa national polls have shown Edwards trending up into the 20 percents, and he's viable. There is no frontrunner. I still predict that Clinton will ultimately win the nomination, but I care more about it being a battle in which everyone participates that wants too than I do about the ultimate Democratic nominee.

In all seriousness it is one thing for Brian Williams, Tweety or PumpKinHaid to 'forget' John Edwards but quite another when he's 'disappeared' by the 'A-List' bloggers. Kos is on the front page talkin' Obama, Obama, Obama and 9 of 10 recced diaries are about Edwards 'surging'.

Here? Res Ipsa Loquitor dudes!

Now, he may or may not be doing so but I do think he should be included in every analysis at this point.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

Diaries about Edwards surging (0.00 / 0)
aren't comforting enough to make up for the fact that he apparently has no office in the state of Missouri. As an Edwards supporter, it's pretty damn frustrating to have my advocacy opportunities limited to convincing people I know not to switch their support from Edwards to Obama. But then I'm used to being frustrated, living in a state that seems to be an afterthought in national campaigns despite its alleged bellwether status.
[ Parent ]
I disagree on Ten (0.00 / 0)
I think the AA pop. in the primary will make it a toss up... We will have to get polls, but Alabama may heavily favor Obama.
Tennessee has only half the black population of SC, GA, AL, by percent that is. (0.00 / 0)
14% in Tenn vs ~28% in the others.

Still, we're talking about a Democratic primary.  If black people are 50%+ of the primary electorate in SC, does it stand to reason that they're a quarter of the electorate in Tennessee?

Figure also that black primary turnout is going to depart from historic norms by quite a bit.

I would assume Obama is favored to at least scoop up 45% of the delegates in Tenn and Alabama.  And at this point, delegates matter more than the win-loss column does.

My question is about the California primary.  Are delegates awarded equally to the 52 congressional districts, or are they proportionate to Democratic performance in those districts?  Or are they awarded based on the statewide totals?  Obama's strength in red territory (rather, Clinton's weakness in red territory) could be a big deal here.

Ugh, this is going to be a nerd's wet dream pretty soon.  If only I weren't so invested in the outcome I'd be having a blast.  Too bad it couldn't be Edwards vs Obama.

[ Parent ]
Details of delegate assignment? (4.00 / 1)
Can anyone explain the details of how delegates are assigned, or know where there's clear info on that?  I've seen references to 15% thresholds mentioned here, but am unclear whether that applies at the state or congressional district levels (or at some other level), and whether its consistent across states.  And if the threshold isn't met by some candidates, are the TOTAL number of delegates split proportionally among the candidates that did meet it?  I assume that this would be the case, but don't really know.

As Kal notes, the math (and campaign strategies) can start to get fairly complex--and very different from the win/lose perspective we're used to seeing--especially for 2/5, when so many delegates will be proportionally decided in a climate that may have no clear frontrunner claiming the lion's share of media attention. 

If the 15% applies at the district level, wouldn't this favor the campaign with the strongest field operation and ability to quickly mobilize one at a pretty localized and targeted level?  And, as Kal suggests, would that campaign be Obama's?

Wikipedia page with primary details (4.00 / 1)
I just found this Wikipedia page that seems to have answered my questions about delegate selection. It said that in primary states, the 15% threshold is at the state level. 

It also has nice state-by-state tables that show details of delegate counts by type for each state.  I'm gonna pop them into a single Excel table, since it looks like they may come in handy in terms of following the process as it unfolds.

[ Parent ]
Also, (0.00 / 0)
Clinton Today said she had $25 million COH, not specifying if it was Primary or General.  Is she really in that bad of financial shape?  She'll raise more.  But, if they included general dollars she has less the 10 million for the primary.  Obama has raised 8 million in the last 8 days...does he have an advantage?
Red states will avoid Hillary (4.00 / 2)
Whoever posted from Utah raised an excellent point -- and one that bears amplification.

In any "red" state, local Dems are likely to avoid Hillary like the plague.  The last thing they want is to have Hillary at the top of the ticket.  If the presidential race had been held in '06 with Hillary at the top of the ticket, there's no way that Tester wins Montana or Webb wins Virginia.  Those kind of states will break overwhelmingly for Obama and Edwards.

What does this mean?  Let's cover the states with this in mind:

Nevada, South Carolina, Georgia, Idaho, New Mexico (with Richardson out), Oklahoma, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Colorado, Missouri, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah -- all of these will likely break more for Obama and Edwards than for Clinton, and in many of them, Clinton could very well finish third, with very few delegates. 

Arizona -- this could be the exception with its high population of retirees, and with older voters backing Clinton by a high margin.

Arkansas -- possible exception; I haven't seen any poll numbers, but my impression has been that the Clintons aren't exactly beloved in Arkansas except by their circle of loyalists.

It doesn't get any easier for Hillary after Super Tuesday either:

February 9: Louisiana (56), Nebraska caucus (24), Washington caucus (78).  Louisiana is a likely Obama victory; Nebraska will break well for Edwards and Obama (presuming Edwards stays in the race past Feb 5); Clinton might do a bit better in Washington.

February 10: Maine caucus (24).  Anyone's guess, but even a Hillary victory doesn't get her much.

February 12: Virginia (83), Maryland (70).  Virginia is a bad state for Clinton: the Democratic Party is dominated by white moderates who want to keep Hillary off the ticket and African-Americans who will likely break to Obama.  Maryland could be a closer contest.

All this leads to three main points:

1.  Hillary has to win big in the deep-blue states, or she's toast.  It won't be enough for her to "win" New York or New Jersey; she has to win big, because she might not be getting many delegates from the middle of the country.

2.  This may not be over in February at all.  Super Tuesday is an interesting blend of big coastal states and lots of smaller interior states.  But the date to circle might be March 4, when Texas and Ohio have their primaries.  Neither state looks like a natural win for Clinton; two big wins for Obama might be enough for him to clinch it, momentum-wise if not mathematically outright.

3.  Edwards.  He and his supporters may well end up with the balance of power.  If can keep raising money -- or even if he can't -- he may stay in this all the way to Denver.  (In the old days, he would've had a chance to position himself as a compromise candidate at the convention.)  He's been aligning himself with Obama as being on Team Change rather than Team Experience, but who knows what he'll do?

Perhaps (0.00 / 0)
In any "red" state, local Dems are likely to avoid Hillary like the plague.

While that makes a certain amount of intuitive sense, I'd have to see the polls to prove it.  It seems equally likely that the idea of pissing off their local rednecks with Hillary holds great appeal.

[ Parent ]
Delegate counts!!! (0.00 / 0)
This actually makes the race for me, since I'm not strongly supporting any particular candidate. After doing a paper on how FDR won the Democratic nomination at the Convention, I'm pumped that we have a delegate race on our hands. I think though, that the Supers *ugh* might wind up deciding this one. There are an awful lot of uncommitted superdelegates, and if they hold out long enough, they might be enough to put one of them over the top.
not credible (0.00 / 0)
Georgia is "overwhelmingly favorable" to Obama, yet California is a "toss-up".

I don't find that a credible analysis.

New Jersey (0.00 / 0)
Actually Chris, in NJ independents can vote in the primary.  We just have to declare for a party on the day of the vote.
Colorado is holding caucuses on Feb. 5th (0.00 / 0)
Not a semi-open primary.
Breadking Down Super Tuesday State By State | 51 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox