Obama Narrowly Leads Among Pledged Delegates

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:23


In the extended entry, here is the updated pledged delegate results for Democratic nominating contests so far:
Chris Bowers :: Obama Narrowly Leads Among Pledged Delegates
State Reporting C % O % Delegates Clinton Obama
P. Delegates 61.6% 46.5% 50.9% 2,003 934 1,020
Alabama 99% 42% 56% 52 25 26
Alaska 98% 25% 74% 13 4 9
Am. Samoa 100% 66% 33% 3 2 1
Arizona 93% 51% 42% 56 31 25
Arkansas 94% 69% 27% 35 27 8
California 96% 52% 42% 370 207 163
Colorado 99% 32% 67% 55 19 36
Connecticut 99% 47% 51% 48 22 26
Delaware 100% 42% 53% 15 6 9
Georgia 99% 31% 67% 87 26 61
Idaho 100% 17% 79% 18 3 15
Iowa 100% 29% 38% 45 15 16
Illinois 97% 33% 65% 153 49 104
Kansas 100% 26% 74% 32 9 23
Louisiana 100% 36% 57% 56 22 34
Maine 91% 41% 59% 24 9 15
Massachusetts 97% 56% 41% 93 55 38
Minnesota 81% 32% 67% 72 24 48
Missouri 100% 48% 49% 72 36 36
Nebraska 99% 32% 68% 24 8 16
Nevada 98% 51% 45% 25 12 13
New Hampshire 100% 39% 36% 22 9 9
New Jersey 99% 54% 44% 107 59 48
New Mexico 99% 49% 48% 26 14 12
New York 99% 57% 40% 232 138 93
North Dakota 100%. 37% 61% 13 5 8
Oklahoma 100% 55% 31% 38 24 14
South Carolina 99% 27% 55% 45 12 25
Tennessee 100% 54% 41% 68 38 29
Utah 99% 39% 57% 23 9 14
Virgin Is. 100% 7% 90% 3 0 3
Washington 96% 31% 68% 78 15 43

The difference between my numbers and official numbers come in three locations. In New Mexico, I think it is safe to call it for Clinton now, giving her a 14-12 final delegate advantage. In Colorado, I have allocated the results according to Meta Data's projections. In other states, I have included the highest delegate total reported for both candidates that I could find from any news source.

The remaining delegates come from the following locations: John Edwards (26), Washington (20), Alabama (1), New York (1), and Tennessee (1).  

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Obama Narrowly Leads Among Pledged Delegates | 24 comments
So has Hilary had a night, where she has won the delegate count? (0.00 / 0)
Not Iowa.
Not New Hampshire.
Not Nevada, SC.
Michigan - not contested, because no delegates awarded.
Florida - not contested, because no delegates awarded.

While really only more a rhetorical point, so far, Hilary hasn't had a night where she has won delegates.  And she probably won't, until March 4th.

But, she is running a very close second!!

:)

If Obama keeps this up... (0.00 / 0)
...He could win the nomination without ever losing his delegate lead. From Iowa until August, Obama will probably never lose the lead to Clinton. Talk about taking the country by storm!
[ Parent ]
More worrisome (0.00 / 0)
He could LOSE without ever losing his pledged (elected) delegate lead...

[ Parent ]
if you count all the delegates (0.00 / 0)
He's never been ahead.
[ Parent ]
Nomination at a Glance (4.00 / 1)
I don't suppose there are any useful polls right now for the upcomming primaries and caucuses - but if possible I'd love to see a Nomination at a Glance!
Though good arguments have been presented as to why Obama is favored for the rest of Feb, I still feel like I'm in a black hole! Need....data....

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra
leave a slot for (4.00 / 1)
Democrats Abroad, who won't finish voting until Feb. 12. There are 7 pledged and 4 unpledged delegates.
I'll include them (0.00 / 0)
Once their final numbers are known.  
[ Parent ]
Great work Chris (4.00 / 1)
Regarding NM, the story appears to be that Clinton leads 9-8 in delegates assigned by CD and that the winner of the popular vote will take 5 of 9 delegates allocated proportionally statewide.  So if Clinton wins, it will be 14-12, if Obama wins it will be 13-13.

John McCain: Health insurance for low income children represents an "unfunded liability."
Cheers (0.00 / 0)
I see now. Thanks for the info!
[ Parent ]
Not to create more work but... (0.00 / 0)
It would be nice to have a column on that table showing the number of outstanding (yet to be awarded) delegates from each state.  
[ Parent ]
Regarding Super Delegates Chris Matthews just said... (0.00 / 0)

"People had a hard enough time accepting the supreme court deciding the election, imagine what they'll think of this..."

I think he's totally right about this - especially with the Obama momentum.

you know that (0.00 / 0)
Hillary won more of the popular vote on Super Tuesday, right?
[ Parent ]
Expectations (4.00 / 1)
Based on Chuck Todd's district-by-district delegate breakdown from before Super Tuesday (http://www.cookpolitical.com/races/house/tsunami_tuesday.php), it looks like Clinton got her best case scenario in most of the states she won (expect maybe NY and NJ, it is hard to tell without the breakdown of the delegates won in each district). But the big story is that Obama way overperformed even the optimal expectations for him in caucus states.  For example, in Kansas, my rough estimate has Obama winning 8-3 on the 11 statewide delegates and 15-6 on the district level delegates, compared to Chuck Todd's optimal scenario for Obama of a 11-10 win in the district level delegates. Or Idaho, where if I am doing my math right, Obama won 11-1 among the district-level delegates, compared to an optimal prediction of 7-5. Minnesota isn't quite as dramatic, but again, Obama won 32-15 among district-level delegates (again, if I'm doing the math right), comparing to an optimal prediction of 30-17.

So assuming Obama's slight delegate lead holds up, I suspect that most of it can be attributed to vastly overperforming in midwestern and western caucus states.  

Same thing in Colorado (0.00 / 0)
Following Cook Political Report, I was expecting Colorado to be Obama by 20-16, or with luck Clinton could have possibly tied things. Obama did better everywhere possible, getting over 50.1% in all four of the 5-delegate districts and even pulled off the 62.5% necessary to push a 4 delegate district to 3-1. Curiously, that was in Religious Right Country, Colorado Springs.

So in the end, instead of 20-16, it was 23-13 for the district allocation.

State-wide allocation gave Obama an additional 13-6 advantage.

[ Parent ]
I think the missing 9 delegates in NJ (0.00 / 0)
are the three districts that Obama actually won, giving him a 6-3 advantage.  At least, that is the difference between your numbers above and mine.  Maybe someone is waiting on the official results, to confirm it?  If Clinton could somehow find nearly 3000 and then nearly 4000 votes (2-3% of the total vote), two of those could be flipped back to her.  

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
Chris, just a stupid question (0.00 / 0)
Are you determining these numbers of pledged delegates yourself by looking at actual results district-by-district (making this a projection), or are you relying on other media sources for the breakdown.

So if you have 863-850 in pledged delegates for Obama, will other news outlets like CNN eventually catch up and match your results?  

I've been looking at the outstanding (0.00 / 0)
superdelegates and actually expect Obama to take a lead amongst them...do to the overwhelming number of red state and minority delegates who have not spoken out.
California's going to be a bit tighter (0.00 / 0)
than a 39-delegate spread, as you have it.  More likely is 35, and if Obama sizzles with the ONE MILLION late absentees still uncounted, as well as the votes that will be counted due to the double bubble trouble in LA County, he could get it to 30.

Insert shameless blog promotion here.
2/9 right around the corner (0.00 / 0)
Look out now but by the time this is sorted out 2/9 will be upon us and by the time we figure that out, 2/12 will be nigh.

And here I sit in Virginia, shocked to learn that my primary vote will be actively contested.

A slight quibble with delegate CW (0.00 / 0)
It seems to me that based on this and everything else I've read floating around the Intertubes, Obama's going to go into 2/9 with about a 25-40 pledged delegate lead. The insta-CW is that Obama should have about a 100-pledged delegate edge going into March, which means that folks are pegging him to get a 60-75 vote margin off of those 7 February contests. This seems a little light to me given how thoroughly Obama has trounced HRC in exactly the types of states up for grabs in February. Granted there is no big-haul state but VA, MD, WA and whatever else I might be forgetting at the moment are nothing to sneeze at.

So here's the quibble: I expect his March 1 pledged-delegate lead to be closer to 150 than 100.

Strange... (0.00 / 0)
"I fail to see how anything except a 13-13 split can come out of a state that is so close."

Sounds reasonable, but didn't some smartass here just recently claim there's "No Such Thing As A Tie"?
:D

Hillary won delegate count according to AP (0.00 / 0)
Your count does not match the one reported by the AP late Wednesday:

http://www.star-telegram.com/1...

Which has Hillary up 784-758.  A 26 delegate lead is no where near the 100 people were saying it would take to really beat Obama, but it is significantly better than a tie or a slight Obama win.

Interesting that I have not seen this on TPM or other progressive sites.

never mind - I see your numbers are later (0.00 / 0)
Wish I could delete posts!!!  Sorry!!
[ Parent ]
I don't know if you noticed this, but with your latest numbers, it is exactly (0.00 / 0)
18 points between them. Coincidentally, there are 37 points (so far) for South Carolina that Clinton and Obama would have split in two,  or 18 points.  
Obama Narrowly Leads Among Pledged Delegates | 24 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