Best way for Obama to win Ohio.... (4.00 / 3)

  NAFTA, NAFTA, NAFTA.

 

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

---

by: Master Jack @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:03:02 PM UTC

Beyond March 5th (4.00 / 1)

Chris - Hillary is pretty broke and without winning Texas-all the money will dry up. It will become clear to everyone including the superdelegates that she will only win if she creates total chaos in the party. They don't want that - they want to win in November.  

---

by: C.B. Todd @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:24:57 PM UTC

I agree (0.00 / 0)

Clinton is out of the race after Obama picks up more delegates than she in TX.

---

by: shlenny @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:00:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bingo (0.00 / 0)

The arc of her campaign -- as with every campaign -- will be determined by its ability to pay the bills.  If she spend everything on OH/TX and comes out without sweeping both, there will be no new money coming in, so she has to either hold a significant amount in reserve for PA (and impair her ability to win OH/TX), or just go all out.

---

by: Adam B. @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:34:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disagree. (0.00 / 0)

PA is a full 6 weeks after TX and OH with only MS and WY in between?  6 weeks is plenty of time to raise enough money nationally to compete in a signe large state.  

So long as she can make a semi-convincing case to her donors that she has a shot.  Given that most of the media has accepter her frame that TX and OH will determine if she'll likely get the nomination, if she wins both, even barely, she'll keep on going.  And even a split won't stop her.

---

by: Cat Servant @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 03:36:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's six weeks... (0.00 / 0)

Of party heavyweights telling her to get out. She has to win both to keep going. A split doesn't help her, especially after she gets crushed in Mississippi.

Further Reading

---

by: Dave Sund @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 04:26:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If He Wins Texas... (0.00 / 0)

A clean win, popular vote and all, then it's over. There's a landslide victory a week later in Mississippi, and then six weeks of Democratic heavyweights saying that Barack Obama is the nominee. She has to win Ohio and Texas.

Further Reading

---

by: Dave Sund @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:25:41 PM UTC

MI Uncommitted (0.00 / 0)

The only way that Clinton leads by 30 delegates "with MI and FL" is if the 55 MI "uncommitted" delegates break evenly for Clinton and Obama.   If those 55 delegates are allocated to Obama, then he leads even including superdelegates, MI and FL.      I think that if he is ahead on that measure after March 4, the calls for Hillary to drop out will increase.  I don't think she will, but the calls might start to really undermine her campaign.  

---

by: Esbey @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:41:48 PM UTC

The Clintons still plan on winning (4.00 / 2)

  Hillary's conciliatory performance in the debate might have suggested that her campaign is taking the high road, but there's a lot of nasty viral stuff going around -- the 527's, the Weather Underground smear -- that indicate that they're going scorched-earth, just a little stealthier than we thought.

 And I would presume that her campaign's doing this because it still feels it can win -- because if she's conceding, as some have suggested, what would she possibly gain from crippling Obama at this point?

 This thing isn't over. The Obama people cannot afford to let their guard down.  

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

---

by: Master Jack @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:43:26 PM UTC

March 4 must be the time where she wins the delegate count (4.00 / 1)

Of the total between the 4 states.

I would think, even if it is a draw, for the delegate count for the night, there really isn't a way she can go on.

1. That's 390 delegates, another 13%, of pledged, right?

2. She'll be 160 delegates behind, with 611 delegates left to go, since at that point (if I've done my math right, always a sketchy thing), 2491 delegates have been chosen so far.  So only around 20% of delegates left.

3. Not to mention, the two other contests for March, WI and MI, 45 delegates Obama will do well, putting her further behind.

4. It would again be one more example, of a night that Clinton DIDN'T win a night in the delegate count in the CONTESTED primaries:

Jan 3, IA - Obama wins by 1
Jan 8, NH - Obama ties
Jan 19, NV - Obama wins by 1
Jan 26, SC - Obama wins by 13
SupTues - Obama wins by 16 (so far)
Feb 9 (4 states) - Obama wins by 49
Feb 10, ME - Obama wins by 6
Feb 12, (2 states & DC) - Obama wins by 52
Feb 19, HI&Wi - Obama wins by 20.

Obama has NEVER LOST a contested night, in total delegates. Only ONE tie, in NH.  In 9 contests so far, including 40 (states & territories).

If Clinton can't win the delegates count for March 4th, it simply is done.

---

by: JC @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 22:54:31 PM UTC

If Hilary loses/ties March 4th - what is better for the Dem party? (0.00 / 0)

Knowing she is going to lose, should she stay in the race, so that Philadelphia gets a boost of organizing, for both sides (which is good to have in Philadelphia, right?)

Or better to have her concede, so that the campaign against McCain can start?

Especially if she continues on, and has a couple of more debates where there is a "lovefest", so to speak (how the candidates really agree with each other, how they admire each other, etc), this may build excitement among Dems, while keeping media coverage as well, on the race.  And how "democrats love their contestants".

Thoughts?

---

by: JC @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:00:40 PM UTC

Won't happen (0.00 / 0)

Hillary herself is all smiles, but her campaign contains some of the slimiest, most amoral people in the party, who will continue to throw sludge at Obama.  The campaign may as well go through March 4, but at that point, barring a blowout, we'll be better off if she fires her campaign staff and packs it in.

---

by: Cat Servant @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:22:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hope you are wrong (0.00 / 0)

But realize that it's probably hard, even if she wanted to, to "fake" a contest and keep it going.   Money is required, after all.

---

by: JC @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:12:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The popular vote in Texas... (0.00 / 0)

...will be the deciding factor, I'd bet, assuming Clinton wins OH and RI.  I think she'll need a plausible argument that she has won her two firewall states.  If she has one (even if she loses the delegate count in TX), I'm guessing that she can make a case for continuing without relying too heavily on the scenario where her MI margin discounts the 55 unpledged delegates--a scenario that I find poitically untenable.  It assumes that absolutely everything breaks her way, and if that's what she has to rely on to make her case for staying in--i.e. if she loses the popular vote in OH or TX, thus losing her (already shakey) "big state" argument--I doubt that many of her supporters, let alone superdelegates and party elders, would be convinced to give her another shot.

Clinton is plenty smart and would see that coming.  Her performance at last night's debate reinforced my suspicion that she's willing to make a gracious exit before PA if things don't break for her on March 4th.  I suspect that she'd rather do that than stay in the race as she spends 6 weeks publicly bleeding support.

---

by: apelavin @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:25:41 PM UTC

what if ... (0.00 / 0)

... she gets blown out in Texas (which I'm starting to think will happen; it looks like the African-American turnout will be huge, with a lot of early voting) but barely wins Ohio?  I could see that happening.  She won't really have a path to victory after that.

---

by: Joe Buck @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 04:45:55 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doesn't even have to be a blowout (0.00 / 0)

I strongly suspect that if she loses the popular vote in Texas she'll be out, possibly fast (i.e. before she loses two more pre-PA states, which folks seem to forget is what's in store for her without a major dynamic shift in the week after March 4th).

---

by: apelavin @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 23:39:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think she will leave the race on March 6th (0.00 / 0)

By all accounts she is looking and sounding like its over. The CW is against her at this point and the echo chamber is getting louder. I think she will leave the race on March 6th or 7th.

---

by: aiko @ Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 23:36:29 PM UTC

Pledged Delegate Counts (0.00 / 0)

Why does your count for the upcoming states list more pledged delegates up for grabs than the Obama website (e.g., NC 115 v. 91, PA 158 v. 151)?  

A vote against Health Care Reform is a vote for ten 9/11s every single year!

---

by: Schul @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 00:07:42 AM UTC

I'm right (0.00 / 0)

Or, rather, Green Papers is right, which is the source I use. I have no idea why the Obama campaign hs inaccurate counts.  

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 00:32:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

DNC website confirms Obama website delegate numbers (0.00 / 0)

I'm not trying to show you up, but I wanted to be sure...

http://www.dnc.org/a/2007/07/b...

http://www.dnc.org/a/2007/07/b...

http://www.dnc.org/a/2007/07/b...

A vote against Health Care Reform is a vote for ten 9/11s every single year!

---

by: Schul @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 07:15:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

As I understand it... (0.00 / 0)

NC and other states got bonus delegates for holding their primaries later.

Further Reading

---

by: Dave Sund @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 07:50:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

that must be it (0.00 / 0)

Can't think of the source of the descrpency otherwise. There was a time when I remember the lower delegate totals schul is listing.  

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 16:30:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bonus Delegates Indeed (0.00 / 0)

Here are a couple of links that confirm the bonus delegates:

http://projects.newsobserver.c...  

http://www.rockymountainnews.c...

Are these delegates factored into the magic number of 2,025?  Also, isn't it strange that the Obama website has this wrong?  Lastly, although I disagree and think it would be ridiculous, I'm amused by the idea that Florida and Michigan could still qualify for bonus delegates for holding "late" primaries or caucuses.  

Chris, how about a blog posting on bonus delegates, how they are allocated, and whether they have been factored into the 2,025 number?  

A vote against Health Care Reform is a vote for ten 9/11s every single year!

---

by: Schul @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 18:03:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Green Papers may be wrong (0.00 / 0)

another source for all the delegates counts is
http://www.demconvention.com/d...

Looking at NC, I do think the Green Papers has the number wrong.  

DemConWatch

---

by: msn1 @ Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 05:32:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I take it back (0.00 / 0)

Chris and GreenPapers is right. I have a document from the DNC confirming NC has 115 pledged delegates. The DNC web sites are wrong.

DemConWatch

---

by: msn1 @ Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 05:37:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bonus delegates are in the 2,025 (0.00 / 0)

All non-MI and FL delegates are in the 2,025. If FL and MI get included at their current numbers, number to win becomes 2,027.

DemConWatch

---

by: msn1 @ Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 05:52:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obama's Path (0.00 / 0)

Obama's path to the nomination right now seems to be either to win both Ohio and Texas, or to win Pennsylvania and take the lead according to all delegate counts.

Obama's path to the nomination is simply not to self-destruct or step out in front of a speeding bus before August.  He's 150 delegates up in a proportional representation contest.  Clinton can't make up that kind of ground without starting to win a lot of states, even some she's polling behind in, by 25% to 30% margins.

If Obama can just win 40% of the vote in OH an TX, Clinton will have no plausible path to getting within a dozen or two delegates by Denver.  So to just win, Obama needs to get 40% of the vote or even a little less.

As long as she leads in some sort of delegate count, and can win Ohio on March 4th, I just don't see her dropping out after the extensive arguments her campaign has made on those subjects.

These arguments are just chaff.  If the nomination had been close, it would have come down to pledged delegates.  If Obama had an outright majority, beating Clinton by thirteen delegates, there was never any way for Clinton to persuade the supers to reverse that.  (The margin of thirteen is to make up for Edwards delegates.)

With the margin Obama has built, it won't matter anyway.

Would winning Ohio and Rhode Island be enough for Clinton to continue on to Pennsylvania?

Clinton likes campaigning.  Like all presidential campaigns, she will continue as long as there is still money to go around.  Her multi-million dollar consultants will see to that.

Huckabee isn't a viable candidate but he still has money.  Clinton is in exactly the same situation.

The only question is when donors will get sick of throwing good money after bad.

---

by: Brian Watkins @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 00:08:45 AM UTC

I would guess (4.00 / 1)

that at this point the Clintons aren't campaigning so much as they are negotiating.  I think that it was in the NYT this morning that an article raised questions about the extravagant spending of her campaign in which they quoted a donor that was quite unhappy.  I suspect that the issue at this point is less about the delegates and more about money.  The party is going to shut her down to reserve resource. There were rumors that Obama people were meeting with Edwards today.  That would do it. She is going to loss everything in Texas.  Whatever she can make out of this she is going to need to do before she is rendered insignificant.

---

by: Hugh Stearns @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 00:20:26 AM UTC

Per Chris' research (0.00 / 0)

regarding the candidates' relative under/overperformance in the polls and a hundred or so other reasons, Obama will quite likely sweep 3/4. Since 2/5 he has overperformed against the polls by close to 10 percent. Adding 10 percent to RI, TX, and OH gives him a clean sweep.

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:08:55 AM UTC

Clinton not 'Terminator' (0.00 / 0)

Some of these comments assume that Clinton will keep coming back after multiple deaths. She is not the 'Terminator' although at times she appears very scary. It is clear from the debate that she realizes she has lost and will take the high road. The decision is hers and not her campaign lackeys. I agree with many of the above comments that she will drop out soon after March 4. All other scenarios are extremely far-fetched and implausible.

---

by: aussie chris @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 02:48:38 AM UTC

Clinton will lose TX and OH (0.00 / 0)

TX is a dead heat now. There's a full ten days to close the gap in OH and the gaps has already halved the past week. Obama is outspending in the media markets and has a vastly superior ground game.  There's a 100,000 Teamsters that are going to turn out for Obama. Repeat the word NAFTA, a thousand times and you win OH.  It's over after Mar. 4. Even if Hillary keeps wishing it weren't, even if Bill keeps waving his red face and his shaking finger.  

---

by: cmpnwtr @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 03:52:09 AM UTC

Utterly bougs (0.00 / 0)

That phrase has immediately and permanently entered my active vocabulary, and I will do my best to spread it to others, preferably in a Clueless accent.  

That Paxson defense is so utterly bougs...

---

by: Lester @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 06:00:23 AM UTC

If Obama wins Texas (0.00 / 0)

she won't maintain any kind of lead in any kind of delegate count for very long, because the superdelegates will start to pile on to Obama.  He's only 60 behind at the moment, and he's gaining a couple every day.

According to Demconwatch, Obama has gained 41.5 superdelegates since February 12.  Clinton has gained 14.

Since February 19, Obama has gained 12, and Clinton has lost 1 (net).  Even Clinton's dubious "including Florida and Michigan and no Michigan delegates for Obama and superdelegates" counting isn't going to give her a lead for long.

---

by: jlk7e @ Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 16:26:09 PM UTC

Hillary will be out before MS (0.00 / 0)

I think it's become a pretty good bet that Texas Latino voters, like NM Latino voters, aren't some sort of monolith that will follow CA and AZ patterns.

My instincts suggest TX will go big for Obama. Ohio, being a bellwether, should be close like MO was. Either could win, but my ESP says the gap will be 6% or less there. Hardly enough for any gap closing overall with VT and RI pretty much balancing each other out.

So Obama should pull further away and in the remaining contests, only IN, PA, OR and Puerto Rico are potential Clinton states.

There is no way FL and MI can be fairly let in to the process with their current pledged and superdelegates. MI especially, with Obama's name off the ballot. Some compromise will be necessary or a revote must happen. Maybe they'll strip the superdelegates out of both states. Maybe each delegate will represent 3/4s of a vote. The best scenario would be an insurmountable lead before the question gets resolved.

Losing one or two big states on March 4th breaks the Clinton claim on big state power and it's certainly conceivable that RI could be her only post-Super Tuesday victory.

I get Chris' point, but consider it a longshot she'll push on to PA with a 2%-3% win in Ohio if Obama gets the Texas win by 10 pts or greater, which I expect he'll do.

Btw, look for more big endorsements by Thursday. Edwards should be one of them, likely in Ohio.  

---

by: Kevin Hayden @ Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:18:33 AM UTC