Obama Gains +45 Delegates So Far...

by: Matt Stoller

Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 22:10


( - promoted by Matt Stoller)

Clinton hit $10M from over 100,000 donors since February 5th.  That is nothing less than stunning.  The delegate results are coming in, this is what I can gather from various news sources.  They are tentative but my guess is that the numbers are roughly accurate.

Washington (+26)

According to Washington state Democratic Party Chair, Obama will get 52 delegates, Clinton will get 26.  A smart Obama supporter noticed that both Senators endorsed Clinton in a reverse of what happened in Massachusetts.

Nebraska (+8)

It looks like Obama will get 14 delegates, Clinton will get 10. (UPDATE:  The delegate numbers shifted after all the returns came in. 16-8 looks more likely now.)

Louisiana (+8)

The exit polls are here, it's a pure color line.  Louisiana has 56 delegates up for grabs, and Obama is up by 53-39 percent.  In a pure proportional split, Obama would take a plus eight margin in delegates.

Virgin Islands (+3)

Obama won 90% of the vote, so the caucus math might shift another 2 delegates into Obama's column.... And it does, with all three delegates going to Obama.

It looks like Obama will gain in margin around 43-45 pledged delegates.

Update:  Obama's large margin in Louisiana is probably going to expand the number of delegates he gets beyond 8.  The exact number won't be clear tonight, but what is clear is that Obama had a big sweep.

Matt Stoller :: Obama Gains +45 Delegates So Far...

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Obama Gains +45 Delegates So Far... | 51 comments
Matt, Nebraska will be 16-8, not 14-10 (0.00 / 0)

source? (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Your link! (0.00 / 0)
Jerome has updated
[ Parent ]
Color line, but this IS Louisiana (0.00 / 0)
The number's in WA and NE show him doing a lot better among whites.  I agree it would be nice to see that sort of improvement in a primary, though.  Then again, Obama would have done a lot better in CA, for instance, if Edwards hadn't been on the early voting.

The Politics of Bruno S.

Connecticut (4.00 / 2)
Closed primary (non Indies), lily white...Obama won.  

Also, SUSA had Obama up in Wash among Dems, whites, tied with women, and their margins weren't even as favorable as it ended up being.

In the south, esp. areas with Southern Baptists (according to poblano at DKOS), he might have some trouble with whites, but he seems to have no trouble in NE, prairie and mountain states, west coast, etc.  Basically, everywhere else.

He's making inroads into her base, and she's not making any inroads into his.  That's a bad trend for her.  If she limps into Texas/Ohio in the same manner Rudy limped into Fla, it'll be over March 5th

[ Parent ]
Don't let's forget the Virgin Islands (0.00 / 0)
2-1 Obama
I read (4.00 / 1)
3-0

He got 90% of the vote

[ Parent ]
Here (4.00 / 1)
The Illinois senator also won caucuses in the Virgin Islands, completing his best night of the campaign.

His winning margins were substantial, ranging from roughly two-thirds of the vote in Washington state and Nebraska to nearly 90 percent in the Virgin Islands.

link

[ Parent ]
Virgin Islands Is +3 Obama (0.00 / 0)
So sayeth the party official in the Virgin Islands:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/...

Obama (0.00 / 0)
I wonder to what extent the Virgin Islands are a predictor of how Obama might do in Puerto Rico?   There are 63 delegates there, which is more than South Carolina.  It's kind of a sleeper, as our media don't give P.R. all that much attention.

I hope we don't have to listen to any more talk about how Obama is the 'black' candidate in this race.  He has done extremely well in the predominantly white states of Nebraska, Iowa, Washington, Minnesota, Kansas, Utah, Colorado, Missouri, New Mexico...  and Maine is tomorrow.

PR is HRC territory (0.00 / 0)
CW is that Puerto Rico is Latino and will go in a big way for Clinton.  USVI have a large black population.  If Obama can wrap up the race before PA, then the high percentage chance of HRC taking PR in June won't have any impact.  But if the race goes to the end, expect PR to help HRC in the delegate count.
[ Parent ]
Jesse Jackson (0.00 / 0)
Jesse Jackson won Puerto Rico in '88. While PR is mostly hispanic, they are considered "black" hispanics, as opposed to the US where they are mostly considered "white" hispanics.  
[ Parent ]
Really? Interesting detail. (0.00 / 0)
Wonder if that math will hold up in this cycle. The racial dynamics are a bit different this time out, Bill Clinton's snide comments to the contrary. Plus, there wasn't anyone with strong Latino support in '88, whereas Clinton has some deep roots going, as we've seen.

Still, we'll see.

[ Parent ]
It's a wide spectrum (4.00 / 2)
  I am Puerto Rican, and I'm white. There are whites, blacks, and every shade in between in Puerto Rico -- it's one of the meltingest pots in the world.

 As for who'll win in the primary down there, it's going to be dependent to some extent on local endorsements. My guess is that the statehood party endorses one, and the commonwealth party endorses the other. (The two major parties detest each other, for real; there's no Dem-Rep slowdancing like you see in the US Congress.) And because in Puerto Rico everything revolves around the status issue, most voters will likely gravitate to the endorsee of their preferred local party.

 So it should be close.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

[ Parent ]
Latinos don't go for Clinton more than Obama (0.00 / 0)
Someone at Daily Kos did a regression analysis of who votes for Clinton and who votes for Obama and the most interesting result was the lack of a correlation with Latino voters.  Clinton does better with naturalized citizens and with those who don't have a college education, which in some states correlates with the Latino population, but the Latino impact itself doesn't appear.
[ Parent ]
On CNN's website... (0.00 / 0)
They have the delegate breakdown in NE being 17-7.
CNN Is 15-7 Right Now (0.00 / 0)
A 16-8 split in Nebraska looks quite probable.
[ Parent ]
Nebraska delegate math (0.00 / 0)
CD1: 6 delegates - 65% Obama
65% of 6 = 3.9 rounded to 4
Delegate distribution: 4-2 Obama

CD2: 6 delegates - 76.8% Obama
76.8% of 6 = 4.608 rounded to 5
Delegate distribution: 5-1 Obama

CD3: 4 delegates - 52.5% Obama
52.5% of 4 = 2.1 rounded to 2
Delegate distribution: 2-2

"Nebraska's 5 Pledged At-Large delegates and 3 Pledged Party Leader and Elected Official delegates will be apportioned by the number of delegates each candidate receives to State Convention."

With 99.7% of the votes counted, the state convention delegates go 65% to Obama and 33.5% to Clinton. That results in 5 delegates for Obama and likely 3 for Clinton. It's pretty far from the rounding borders and unlikely to change.

Final results: 16 - 8 for Obama

Nebraska will be 17-7 Obama (0.00 / 0)
Statewide total for Obama is 67.5% right now, with 99.7% reporting. That means a 6-2 statewide split. This is from the official NDP results.

CD 1: 4-2 Obama
CD 2: 5-1 Obama
CD 3: 2-2 split

Further Reading

Nevermind... (0.00 / 0)
It's state convention delegates. 16-8 is most likely.

Further Reading
[ Parent ]
Virgin Eye-lands (4.00 / 2)
Holy crap -- 90%?!? Sauron doesn't get 90% of the vote in Mordor.

John McCain
Heh (0.00 / 0)
SNL is reairing the episode with the Obama cameo tonight.
Obama's campaign (0.00 / 0)
They're saying they got a 42 delegate gain:

linky

Their projections:

Delegate Estimates

Louisiana Delegate Projection: Obama 32 - Clinton 24

Nebraska Delegate Projection: Obama 16 - Clinton 8

Washington Delegate Projection: Obama 52 - Clinton 26

Virgin Islands Delegate Projection: Obama 3 - Clinton 0

my b (0.00 / 0)
45 delegate lead, jives with Matt's math
[ Parent ]
Jibes (4.00 / 1)
Matt may be jive but his delegate math jibes with the best projections.

John McCain
[ Parent ]
I don't know about anyone else (4.00 / 5)
but I'm stunned by the size of the victories Obama is piling up in the caucus states:  Idaho, 79%; Alaska, 75%; Kansas, 74%; Nebraska and Washington, 68%; Colorado and Minnesota, 67%; North Datota, 61%.  Where the hell is the vaunted Clinton machine?  Also, throw in the primaries in Georgia and Illinois, and Obama has ten states where he won by margins of 60-70%.  Clinton has done that once, in Arkansas.  Who would have thought....
Me Too (4.00 / 4)
And that's how you get delegates in a close race. Which is why I'm wondering "Where's Clinton?" in trying to at least hold those Obama vote totals down. It also doesn't help to have "decisive," "blow out," and "crush" as the campaign narrative adjectives.
[ Parent ]
She's using the brilliant Reid/Giuliani strategy (4.00 / 3)
keeping her powder dry, you know, for an important fight.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
These caucuses have mostly been in non-machine, mostly red states. (4.00 / 2)
Caucuses are cheaper to hold than primaries, I believe, and as Dem Parties in mostly red states tend to be impoverished they tend to hold caucuses as a result.  Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Washington are kindof exceptions, but note that the super-blue big states all went with primaries.  

For a variety of reasons, this works well for Obama.  There is an age gap between the two campaigns, and something of an enthusiasm gap as well.  Caucuses help his side of both gaps.  The differences in senior citizen turnout should not go unremarked here.

Add these advantages to the fact that these caucuses tend to be happening in red states that are not Southern, which for some reason have been showing a pronounced Obama lean.  Then, add to that the fact that poor state parties correlates to the absence of a Democratic machine (or, put less pejoratively, a strong Democratic establishment).  Democratic machines have been Obama's worst nightmare, for the most part, because they're led by people who owe the Clintons, and those people are actually able to deliver large vote totals in their cities.  Mass, New Jersey, SoCal, and Clark County have machines that delivered for Clinton.  These caucus states do not.

By mentioning "machines", I don't really mean to delegitimize those voters.  I think non-college-educated whites would have favored Clinton in this race regardless (though in a different world, they might have chosen Edwards).  But in addition to the general preferences of these areas, the strength of the machine, when it is aligned with Clinton as it usually is, further improves her performance by a significant margin.  The presence of Dem Machines is material here, though it's hardly her only strength.

[ Parent ]
Where does this place Texas? (0.00 / 0)
Currently very red. Though the machine only seems to run on four cylinders with a couple of burnt valves, nonetheless decisions seem to be made in the well guarded smokey back rooms that have not been redecorated since their grand days of LBJ. Will Boyed Richie and his boys have an impact?
 
[ Parent ]
its a rout! (0.00 / 0)


Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
Great Night.. (4.00 / 2)
It went like I thought it would.. ;) Obama's organization in Washington was self-organizing as far back as June, and was very active for the past 6 months.  Clinton's decision to not contest these states will cost her the nomination.

Again, though, the media is still behind on the fact that superdelegates will not break against the person who has a 100 + delegate lead in pledged delegates. Obama will be up around 70 pledged delegates after tonight, and he could seriously be up 100 after Tuesday.  That's a lot of momentum heading into Hawaii and Wisconsin, which I think will probably add a few more delegates to his lead.

At that point, all he needs is to get close to Clinton in Ohio and rely on the 1/3 caucus in the Texas hybrid system to get another draw on that day, and I think she will be effectively finished.  

obama (0.00 / 0)
Once he gets a lead of 150 delegates, her needs to cut a deal like the one Bowers suggested on Florida and Michigan.  head off that fight ASAP.  
[ Parent ]
Looking into the next few weeks (4.00 / 1)

                     O C
Maine                12 12
District of Columbia 11 4
Maryland            40 30
Virginia            47 36
Hawaii               13 7
Wisconsin            37 37

+72 Delegate lead (according to the campaign), would be 106 lead going into Tx and Oh - she cannot close that gap

Don't Forget... (0.00 / 0)
Florida and Michigan loom... he needs a lead of 150-200 without those states counted, IMHO.
[ Parent ]
Watch Louisiana Now.... (0.00 / 0)
It might be a bit better than Obama +8. The late results are coming in a bit stronger than I expected, but we'll see.
57-36 Obama. (0.00 / 0)
It's another rout. He's gotta get more than +8 out of this.
[ Parent ]
Can someone post a summary tommorow? (0.00 / 0)
I'm kinda confused.  I'd like a simple count done two ways.

1. Pledged delegates for Obama/Clinton/Edwards not including MI/FL
2. Pledged delegates for Obama/Clinton/Edwards including MI/FL

I'm trying to figure out where we are in that middle ground where the voters will is subject to debate.

If this continues? (0.00 / 0)
Maine and the states this upcoming tuesday are expected to be leaning Obama, right? How many delegates are up for grabs tomorrow and on Tuesday?

Is it conceivable by Wednesday that Obama could have a large enough pledged delegate lead that it actually overpowers Clinton's superdelegates?

Clinton Favored in Maine (0.00 / 0)
Clinton has already won New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and up-to-the-minute conventional wisdom has her favored in Maine. I think I agree with that.
[ Parent ]
Clinton IS favored in Maine... (0.00 / 0)

But, it's a strange one, because if you look at the money raised - Obama has raised over 3x as much as she has in Maine.  And he's the top recipient of donations in many counties, whereas she isn't the top recipient in any county.

[ Parent ]
No way (0.00 / 0)
Sorry, I'm not buying it. This snowball is rolling downhill and he has been way too effective at caucuses in general to give her any kind of overall advantage.

Double digits.

[ Parent ]
Obama's strengths (0.00 / 0)
Obama seems to do best in red states where there is no existing democratic party apparatus to speak of.

If thats true (rather than hillary being strong with say lations, perhaps she is only strong with latinos in democratic states).  That would mean that he does ok in Ohio and cleans up texas.

The liberal wiki
Send an email to terra@liberalwiki.com

Am I the only one bothered by caucuses? (4.00 / 2)
And not because they favor Obama (I'm a Clinton supporter).  But because they don't have nearly the participation of primaries.  And I know the rationale for them is "party building" but wouldn't a democrat more likely carry a state where more people showed up and selected him or her for the nominee?  To me, caucuses are the way the party elite make sure they stay in control of who gets their delegates and that's a problem.  A problem we're stuck with in this cycle, but shouldn't we be trying to change it for 2012?

Or maybe I'm just pissed because as a Californian, it took more than 10,000 of us to get 1 pledged delegate.  Assuming participation in Washington state doubled over 2004 (which was the projection going in), it took only about 2,500 caucus participants to get a delegate.  How on earth is that right?  My vote is only worth 1/4 what a Washington vote is worth.  And don't give me that everyone could participate in caucuses - they can't.  Caucuses are designed with their limited hours and their time consumption to keep everyone from participating.  Not to mention on a large scale, caucuses become expensive and impractical.  Look at the chaos caused by the surge in participants this year and they still represent a smaller fraction of democratic voters than primaries get.

[ Parent ]
AFAIK, the Maine caucuses (0.00 / 0)
let you submit an absentee ballot, which is counted at the caucus the same as if you were physically there, the only difference is you can't relocate to a different candidate if your group isn't viable. That's still not a primary -- which I think is pretty obviously the most democratic -- but I think it's a whole lot better.

Superdelegates' votes are something like a million times more important than yours, and in November, votes in swing states are worth, appromixately, infinitely more than those in deep red or blue states; and not to mention the Iowa/New Hampshire situation, had they not delivered a split verdict this time around. There's these ugly undemocratic aspects throughout the system.

[ Parent ]
large state vs small state (0.00 / 0)
This goes back to the framing of the constitution.  Small states were worried that they wold be dominated by the large states in a legislative body, thus the two legislative bodies.  You think CA should have more say than Washington in who is president.  You do, based on total number of delegates apportioned to CA 370 to Washington's 78.  

One could also argue that primary's also favor the party elite, because it is simply about getting voters to polls and then voting for the establishment candidate (ie. grabbing any breathing eligible voter off the street and getting them to the polls).  If Hillary had complaints about Caucuses, I didn't hear them until after Super Tuesday, and she has been through this before.  The problem about time and how long it takes to Caucus works both ways.  Maybe the real reason Obama does better in those states is because the voters like him more than Hillary.        

[ Parent ]
It doesn't work out that way (0.00 / 0)
The Party activists tend to be more Liberal. The Party higher-ups tend to be more Conservative. The public tends to be more Moderate.

Insurgent candidates tend to do better in caucuses, and establishment candidates in the Primary.

At least, that is how it works out in Colorodo.

[ Parent ]
sexist McCain ad (0.00 / 0)
On our blog I use adsense and just wrote up a comparison contrast on Obama and Hillary on trade positions.

So, I look to my left and see an official McCain ad comparing Hillary Clinton to the Wicked Witch of the West.

The image is horrific and we know what witch rhymes with...

bitch.

I find this really offensive and I think I've said I don't like either other them but this is just really obvious and it's an official John McCain campaign web ad.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

Obama Wins (Hillary!) (0.00 / 0)

Does anyone else find the current cover photo on the NYT to be a little strange?

A photo of Obama with the enormous 'subliminal' Hillary sign behind him.  And this is when he wins, conclusively, in every contest of the day.

They wouldn't want us to forget who they've endorsed, I suppose....

New York Times (0.00 / 0)
The Times is one of the most overrated papers in this country and is propelled by the arrogance of certain Manhattan residents.  They have lacked journalistic integrity for years.  
[ Parent ]
"It's a pure color line" (0.00 / 0)
Um, I'm not feeling it. Upon review of the link to CNN breakouts of the Louisiana vote, it's a pure "people for Obama" line. Obama got both genders and just about any other demographic. I think your read of the demographics may be a bit short....

Just sayin'.

Obama Gains +45 Delegates So Far... | 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