That's the goal - hard to see it in Ohio (0.00 / 0)

but I've seen the analysis that says that Texas, even if Clinton wins, will on delegates, be only a small loss for Obama.

But yes, this should be the goal of Obama, to win all 4.  But the polls and demographics have been against this so far, so personally, I hope he closes strongly, and erases all doubt.  

---

by: JC @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:08:04 PM CST

Not exactly going out on a limb there (0.00 / 0)

Clinton needs wins in at least some of the following: Hawaii, Wisconsin, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont. If she fails to win at least some of those states, she can take it to the convention and argue about super delegates, Michigan and Florida all she wants, but it won't matter.

This quatrain ain't exactly gonna get you in to the New Nostradamus Club.

---

by: Matt H @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:12:23 PM CST

March 4th (0.00 / 0)

I would say that it is less that he needs to win the states as it is that he needs to tie in delegates for that day.  If he can make up for small losses in Ohio and Texas with landslide wins in Vermont and Rhode Island so that the net outcome is even... then Hillary has no possibilities to catch up to his existing advantage.  

Not saying that it will work out in exactly this way.  Hillary could win Rhode Island, lose Texas, etc. Just saying that what matters is whether or not Hillary is able to dig into his existing advantage in pledged delegates.  If not, I predict she drops out after March 4th.

---

by: jbsloan @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:19:44 PM CST

Texas (0.00 / 0)

Question: Is Texas a primary or a caucus? As far as I can tell they're holding one of each, but I can't tell which one is the one that actually assigns delegates.

---

by: mcc @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:34:23 PM CST

It's both (4.00 / 1)

It's approximately 2/3 primary and 1/3 caucus. There are a lot of good summaries floating around out there that discuss the specifics.  

---

by: Matt H @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:53:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

both (4.00 / 1)

The statewide delegates are apportioned based on a caucus, while the district-level delegates are apportioned based on a primary. Al Giordano had a good summary here: http://ruralvotes.com/thefield...

---

by: Tim Sackton @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:54:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Why 202 magic number? (0.00 / 0)

Where is the 202 delegate lead necessary to be the presumptive nominee coming from?

At this point, Clinton needs to win by huge margins in Ohio and Texas to make up the lost ground in delegates. With Clinton not even campaigning hard in Wisconsin, it looks like Obama will increase his lead next week.

Do you see a scenario where Clinton drops out after a Wisconsin loss?

---

by: bthalmann @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 13:38:18 PM CST

Do the math (4.00 / 4)

And see Chris' post from earlier today

73 delegates for HRC in Michigan.

+38 delegate advantage for her in Florida.

+90 superdelegate advantage for HRC at present

73+38+90 = 201

Magic number for BHO = 202

Personally, I find it a bit ironic that Chris is using this number, since he's been an outspoken advocate for not counting superdelegates in our counts -- and appropriately so, as they will swing to the pledged delegate victor (unless it's an absolute nailbiter).

If we discount them, as Chris has advocated all along, we get the magic number for BHO = 112.

His delegate advantage at present = 135.

So do we have a presumptive nominee?

The answer is yes, UNLESS you think HRC can come close to closing this gap with the remaining states.

With the present state of the race this is extremely unlikely. Of course, things can change on a dime in this business, so you never know. But unless she has a BIG win on March 4, the odds of this will drop so low that we will have a presumptive nominee then.

---

by: scottso @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 14:20:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Why do the math (0.00 / 0)

when nice people like you do it for us. :)

John McCain won't insure children

---

by: magster @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 14:28:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

no (0.00 / 0)

If Wisconsin were that crucial to her, she would be campaigning there. As it is, she is in the race until at least March 4.

---

by: dwbh @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 14:21:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What Obama needs to do to wrap up the nomination... (0.00 / 0)

Is actually much simpler.  Clinton would have to drop out under even this scenario.

Hawaii - Obama takes 2/3rds of the delegates
Wisconsin - Obama takes 55% of the delegates
Ohio - Obama takes 45% of the delegates
Rhode Island - Obama takes 45% of the delegates
Texas - Though the popular vote is for Clinton by around 5%, delegates are split
Vermont - Obama takes 60% of the delegates

And the result is - Clinton has one more delegate than Obama. Obama quickly makes up the difference in Wyoming and Mississippi.  

Clinton would undoubtedly be in a better position in this case than if she was swept away, but there would be no remaining way out of her delegate hole.  

---

by: telephasic @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 14:52:16 PM CST

Or any other combo (0.00 / 0)

that adds up to Obama getting enough delegates to make her uphill climb steeper.

There are now at least million different ways for Clinton to lose and only 2 or 3 ways to win.

---

by: Matt H @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 15:24:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Easier solution for Obama (0.00 / 0)

I wrote a diary on DailyKos arguing that Obama should encourage the DNC to put the punishment back to the original punishment and urge Clinton to do the same.  He should fight for the Uncommitted votes from Michigan, and fall back to the exit poll percent of the Uncommitted votes.  The idea is that once Florida and Michigan are removed, there is no path to the nomination for Clinton.  Clinton would gain 44 delegates on him, if he got his percent of the Uncommitted's.  If he got all of the Uncommitted's, she would only gain 28 delegates on him.  I think the deal would have to contain some way to deal with the Uncommitted delegates, if not she gains 55.5.  Not the end of the world though.  He is ahead by 130 in pledged delegates.  There is no way, that I can see, for her to catch up.

She would also lose 10 Super Delegates from those states, as per the original rules.  This would take away a major argument people have been using for her.  This is her path to the nomination.

Suggestion for Obama about Michigan and Florida

I don't know.  I feel that some solution has to be put forward for dealing with those, just to end any debate on it.  I think the issue will heat up more.  If Obama did this, he would look like the mature one.  He has also never fought for one side or the other.  I would go to the DNC before doing anything, but he could essentially undercut the possibility of Clinton coming back.  I don't think she could say no, if he hit her with it in a debate.

It is not a very popular idea though.  Everyone seems to either want the entire delegation seated, as is, no ifs and or buts....or they want it to be not seated at all.  I think both of those are extremes.

---

by: Tantris @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 20:31:04 PM CST

Games (0.00 / 0)

It is sort of a gamers answer to the problem.  See, you offer something that your opponent can't turn down, but that actually harms them if they accept it.  If Clinton decides to demand a full seating of the delegations, she ends up going completely against the DNC.  He ends up looking like the voice of reason and like he is giving something up.  The DNC, who would probably need to be talked to first, can back off their demands and say something about since both the candidates want this, we will do it.

There needs to be some solution.  Senator Schumer posted on DailyKos, and mentioned the Florida/Michigan problem in the post.  What are the chances Obama can get to 202?  I can see him winning a little in a bunch of states, just not sure he can reach that high.  Unless Clinton drops out, or is forced out after March 4th, this could be a long and dreary fight.

---

by: Tantris @ Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 20:39:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]