Nomination At A Glance, April 24th

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 15:38


Here is the latest delegate count. I have removed the add-on projections, because the add-on delegate from Oklahoma endorsed Obama instead of Clinton, thus showing that these delegates are not hte same as pledged delegates. Also, I lowered Obama's Michigan total to 27, because 19 are still to be selected at the state committee, and because I can't verify that 9 of the 36 uncommitted delegates at the district conventions last weekend support him.

Democratic Nomination Delegate Count
Type Obama Clinton Edwards Remaining 50% + 1
Pledged 1,490 1,336 18 408 1,627
MI + FL 94 178 13 28 NA
Super 239 271 0 339 --
Total 1,824 1,785 31 775 2,208

According to current polling, here are projections for the remaining pledged delegates:

Democratic Nomination Primary Schedule
State Date O % C % P. Del Obama Del Clinton Del
Guam May 03 -- -- 4 2 2
Indiana May 06 43.0% 45.0% 72 35 37
North Carolina May 06 51.7% 36.8% 115 66 49
West Virginia May 13 27.0% 55.0% 28 9 19
Kentucky May 20 26.0% 62.0% 51 16 35
Oregon May 20 52.0% 42.0% 52 29 23
Puerto Rico Jun 01 37.0% 50.0% 55 24 31
Montana Jun 03 -- -- 16 8 8
South Dakota Jun 03 46.0% 34.0% 15 8 7
Total June 10 -- -- 408 197 211

This leads to the following June 4th projection:

Democratic nomination campaign delegate projection
Type Obama Clinton Edwards Remaining 50% + 1
Total 1 1,824 1,785 31 775 2,208
Projected 197 211 0 -408 --
Pelosi Club 6 -1 0 -5 --
Vacant 3 0 0 -3 --
Total 2 2,030 1,995 31 359 2,208

With Clinton + Edwards coming within four delegates of Obama, the possibility of a convention fight looms. In order to avoid fights at the credentials committee, rules committee, or floor of the convention, it is important for Obama to secure the as many of the 28 remaining uncommitted delegates from Michigan as possible, and to improve on the delegate projections for states and territories yet to hold nominating contests. It is also important that the remaining superdelegates commit to a candidate, just as almost every primary voter or caucus goer has already had to commit to a candidate. I still don't see a way for Clinton to pass Obama, short of Edwards moving his delegates to her in a block. Remarkable that Edwards still has an important role to play in the campaign, even at this late date.

Chris Bowers :: Nomination At A Glance, April 24th

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Nomination At A Glance, April 24th | 53 comments
Chris, I'm going to be honest (4.00 / 6)
I'm disappointed that you've fallen for the Jerome Armstrong school of counting delegates and now include Florida and Michigan in the real counts.

Plainly put, that is a highly illegitimate fashion of counting votes and distorts the true number. It also neglects the fact that FL and MI won't be seated until one of the candidates has been pushed from the race, particularly from the Obama camp. They have absolutely no incentive to give in, and they will have a strong position to argue from.

Not only that (0.00 / 0)
Not only does he assume FL and MI will be seated as is, it's his FIRST assumption!  Chris, I'm disappointed too.  Please explain your reasoning of why Obama would allow these delegates to be seated if it puts his nomination in jeopardy.  I know you've argued he should, but certainly you can agree that it's unlikely until he has sewn up the nomination.
[ Parent ]
FL and MI will be seated (4.00 / 1)
Even Howard Dean has said this.

If they are going to be seatd, I'm not sure how counting them is illegitimate.

The Florida and Michigan state parties will be sending the above delegates to the credentials committee for approval.

If the Obama campaign plans to challenge either some or all of those delegations at the committee, I will move some or all of them unto the undecided column. At this point, however, they have made no public statement indicating they will challenge all or some of them. And until they do, then we should all assume those delegations will be seated as is.

That's the process. It always was the process, unless there was an agreement otherwise. No agrement otherwise was reached. So, this is the process.  

[ Parent ]
They will be seated... (4.00 / 2)
...after it is clear who the nominee is.

There is absolutely no way in hell they will be determinative when it comes to actually affecting who becomes the nominee and is therefore a bad metric to use in this count.

[ Parent ]
The CF Line (0.00 / 0)
If Obama can't reach 2,208 without the Michigan and Florida delegations being seated as is, then there is no "after" it being clear who the nominee is. At that point, the fight will go to the crednetials committee. And there is no way around that, unless Clinton decides to just give up.

The Clinton campaign is going to take the MI and FL fight to the crendetials committee. Clinton herself has said this. As such, unless Obama can reach 2,208 with the MI and FL delegations seated as is, then we are in lala land if we think  this isn't going to be decided at the credentials committee.  

[ Parent ]
yes but (0.00 / 0)
yes but Obama will very likely control the credentials committee. The idea that the credentials commitee will seat the FL & MI delegates as is, is just not particuarly likely.
[ Parent ]
I didn't say it would work (0.00 / 0)
The point of the CF line is to see if we have a convention fight or not.

It is extremely unlikely that any of htese tactics from Clinton would result in her beocming the nominee. However, it is just as important to see whether or not this thing will drag on past June.  

[ Parent ]
Excuse me ... (0.00 / 0)
When you say, "If Obama can't reach 2,208 without the Michigan and Florida delegations being seated as is", what you are really saying is that the magic number has changed from 2025 to 2,208----AND, that Obama must get the 2,208 even if Michigan and Florida are not seated.  Sorry, this only makes sense if you have already assumed that the number of delegates necessary to secure the nomination is 2,208.

If the number changes to 2,208 then the MI and FL delegates are included exactly as they were originally intended prior to their violation of the rules and they were stripped of their seats.  The facts are: both states intentionally violated the rules; the DNC imposed a penalty; the severity of the penalty is in question (not the fact that they violated the rules and a penalty is the consequence!); there will be a decision on how to seat the delegation.

This leaves the question open as to how many delegates each state will have.  It does NOT imply they will retain their full delegate count, it only begs for a decision on how to seat them.  It is VERY unlikely that either MI or FL will get their full delegate count.  Certainly, in MI it is utterly impossible to count the delegates as it stands now--remember, even Clinton implies that in a democracy all votes must count.  The trouble with counting MI is that it was not democratic--it was more like what you would find in Russia or China, with only one candidate on the ballot.

So, if you really want to analyze the effect of MI and FL you must create at least four tables: as is now w/o MI & FL; one for only FL; one for only MI; and as it now with MI & FL included.

Dean does say that both states will be seated.  He just doesn't say what power each states delegates will have.  That is the real question: How much power will the delegates from MI & FL have?

[ Parent ]
Yes, but... (0.00 / 0)
I always assumed it would be a face-saving gesture for FL & MI after the race has been decided.  If it came down to seating these delegates or handing the nomination over to Hillary, I can't believe it would be so cut and dry.
[ Parent ]
MI (Clinton Camp?) advancing HALF votes for MI? (4.00 / 1)
If the Clinton camp is actually advancing this, wouldn't that mean this is pretty much a best case scenario for Clinton's MI delegation?  This would halve Clinton's advantage in the state.
[ Parent ]
Half (4.00 / 2)
Yes, if even the Clinton folks are proposing half votes, it seems a bit much for Chris to repeatedly push seating of the full delegations as a done deal. It feeds the Clinton spin machine and helps extend the nomination battle.
[ Parent ]
Agreed... (0.00 / 0)
I can't think of any scenario, even if Obama blows away Clinton in the rest of the contests, that FL or MI will actually be given full slates of delegates based on their elections.  I can't remember if the credentials committee can change the rules completely (which stipulate a 50% delegation for going early) or if they can only overturn the additional penalty of no delegates that the DNC imposed as an additional punishment.  If they seat the full delegations all hell will break loose and we will start the 2012 primaries sometime in 2009!
[ Parent ]
Chris' motivations? (4.00 / 1)
Chris, if you read this, please stop.  You're directly helping the Clinton spin machine, and that's destructive.

Of course, you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else.  The problem is, you're a widely read blogger, and actually have some influence.  As a result, when you post things like this, it actually causes some people to believe that Michigan and Florida could make the difference between an Obama win and a Clinton win, and that the Florida and Michigan contests were somehow legitimate.

I've been trying to figure out why you've latched on to counting FL and Mich the way you have.  With Jerome, it's simply that he's blindly partisan.  But why you?  Are you just trying to prove that you're smarter than everyone else, and therefore see the FL/Mich situation more clearly?

I know there's no point in arguing the merits of this with you.  People have tried, and you simply ignore them or dismisses their arguments with the same platitudes.

But please, think about the effect your posts have.

[ Parent ]
it's more objective (0.00 / 0)
Than most analysis out there.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist
[ Parent ]
Very true!!! (4.00 / 1)
Please don't stop making these posts Chris!  I love them - just want them to be as close to objective reality as possible.
[ Parent ]
Lack of analysis (4.00 / 3)
The problem is, Chris makes no analysis.  His argument is simply that the Florida and Michigan delegations will be seated as is because (1) Howard Dean and others have said the delegations would be seated; and (2) there are no alternative delegations.  This is a false argument, because Dean and others did not say, and certainly did not mean, that under all circumstances the delegations would be seated in exactly the form offered by Florida and Michigan.  What they've been saying is that the nomination race will be over before the convention, and that as a result, no one will have any reason to oppose their seating.  If the nomination were not decided before the convention, Dean's statements would not apply, because his assumption about the race being over would be incorrect.

If, in fact, the race is not over, the credentials committee would consider whether to seat Florida and Michigan.  Since Obama will almost certainly have a majority of the votes on that committee, the vote will be not to seat them.  A minority of the members probably will contest that decision, leading to a debate before the entire convention.  However, once again, Obama will almost certainly have the support of a majority of the Convention delegates.  As a result, the vote, again, will be not to seat the conventions-unless doing so would make no difference in the nominee.

[ Parent ]
minority report (0.00 / 0)
Michigan and Florida will send delegations.  Whatever the Credentials Committee decides, there will be a minority report out of that committee.  That means there will be a floor vote on whether to seat the contested delegations before any other business can be conducted.  I think we can assume that the Obama campaign will exercise control on voting on this issue by the pledged delegates, who generally are real loyalists.  But superdelegates will be voting too.  The question then becomes, will superdelegates who prefer Obama vote against seating the contested delegations in order to preserve Obama's lead?  IMO, that is not a question that has a self-evident answer.
[ Parent ]
Not everyone automatically has an ulterior motive (0.00 / 0)
"You're directly helping the Clinton spin machine, and that's destructive.", is not a sentence that is going to convince anyone.  And to believe that there's a definitive solution to the MI and FL thing rather than just that it's a quandary is also odd.

Telling someone what they should believe is always a bit odd.

[ Parent ]
This is still.... (0.00 / 0)
assuming that the Michigan delegates are going to be counted full-vote?  I know politics are politics, but I still can't help but believe there's going to be huge backlash from doing something that blatantly unfair ("uncommitted" can in no way, shape, or form be interpreted to mean "Obama" votes).  If Michigan's delegates are really going to be awarded that arbitrarily, I think the "unfairness" factor goes far beyond even the sort of "unfairness" Clinton supporters allege caucus states represent.
I also can't help but believe... (0.00 / 0)
the reason why the Obama campaign is having nothing to do with this is so that they do not award any semblance of legitimacy to the process.
Superdel Rep. David Wu of Oregon went to the Obama side today: (0.00 / 0)
Corporacrat (0.00 / 0)
Frankly that's doesn't bode well for Obama because many know Wu is Intel corporation and Nike Corporation representative.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist
[ Parent ]
Agreed (4.00 / 2)
Thank goodness no Hillary supporters have any connections to big business!!
[ Parent ]
LOL - LOC! (4.00 / 1)
df. LOC - Proper noun:  Least Objectionable Candidate

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist
[ Parent ]
ABM (0.00 / 0)
Anyone but McCain...
[ Parent ]
mi & FL (0.00 / 0)
I think you still need to do one of these without MI & FL.   It is very likly once the numbers play out for 2025 that the whole thing converges.   Obama or the DNC is never going to agree to counting all these delegates unless the nomination is already decided.   It makes things seem alot closer than it really is.  
Let's see the add-ons (0.00 / 0)
I also think your assumption that all add-ons are in play is premature.  Are there any other examples besides the one OK delegate?  
Nope (4.00 / 1)
That's the only example so far. I'll keep thinking about it. The problem is that in some states, they deifnitely are pledged delegates. In a few states, it might not be so clear.  
[ Parent ]
Heh (0.00 / 0)
No one said you had an easy job doing these summaries, Chris.  Thanks for doing your best!
[ Parent ]
Wouldn't the issue be (0.00 / 0)
whether they're chosen by the state convention (in which case they're basically just like pledged delegates) or by the state democratic party committee (in which case it's much less clear cut)?
[ Parent ]
You're not going to like what I have to say (4.00 / 2)
But, I think some analysis should start on which one can actually beat McCain in the fall.  I personally suspect that Obama can't and a huge percentage of voters, what they vote on, what's important to them are discounted in the blogs.

But, looking at some numbers might be useful.  In terms of the big picture here, that needs to be more focused upon.  

McCain wants to put Carly Fiorina in his administration.  She is the notorious no American has a God Given right to a job anymore fired HP CEO who lined her own pockets with merger money.  In spite of all of that, magically she has weaseled into the actual CIA, DoD technical realm and I'm sorry, but does anyone who believes offshore outsourcing/labor arbitrage is a business model, do you really wanting them deciding or influencing the Department of Defense or the CIA on technological investment areas?  I sure don't.  Talk about weakness on national security, this is a sure fire sign!

Iraq, well enough said.  But I don't think it's realized just how Corporate McCain really is and just how much he will continue the selling of the United States to the highest bidder here.

I think more focus should be put on who and how to beat McCain.  Considering his policy positions on so many fronts poll in the 20% of what the American people really want, it's clear from a personality standpoint people really like him...and in my view that's because he's played the media game better than anyone in a very long time.

....objectively look at it from a electoral college, pattern, votes view point and let's get a more clear picture on this one.  

It doesn't matter who makes it to the top of the ticket frankly if they cannot beat McCain in the general.  

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

Savings (0.00 / 0)
I think some analysis should start on which one can actually beat McCain in the fall.

Perhaps Clinton or her supporters should have told us this ahead of time. That could have saved us a lot of time and money going around and, you know, actually counting votes. If Clinton is so strong, why is she losing?

[ Parent ]
she just won (0.00 / 0)
and someone just abused the troll rating, which shows you just how badly few will look at this situation or even dare to contemplate the general objectively right now.

I'm looking at the big states, critical in the general, they have a strong point on this in my opinion.

All my post says is to look at it from the electoral college math, the registered GOP/Dems, history and so on.  I didn't say any conclusion but I think it's worth analyzing.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

[ Parent ]
Electoral College math? (4.00 / 2)
Since all the state-by-state analysis of Obama-McCain and Clinton-McCain matchups for the general that I've seen show Obama doing at least as well as Clinton, and in most cases better, what exactly is your argument?

The "big states" argument is inane. You don't actually believe that because Obama lost to Clinton in the New York primary, he'll lose New York to McCain in the general, or that because Clinton "beat" Obama in Texas in the primary, she'll beat McCain there in the general.

[ Parent ]
I'll let number cranking Chris (0.00 / 0)
deal with this, but from some of the recent polling I've seen, the Clinton case looks like something to examine.

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist
[ Parent ]
I don't see how (4.00 / 1)
You can get over the objective fact that her campaign has been a disappointment.  She started with nearly half of the Democratic party supporting her, and didn't build on that at all.  There's no evidence independents have been won over to her.  To be sure, she's didn't crash and burn like Giuliani, but the idea that anyone who voted for Obama is going to be won over by claims that Clinton is stronger in the face of the fact that he beat her is absurd.

While Florida is a good piece of evidence for her, it's not at all obvious that Clinton, who consistently polls below 50% there, will actually win it.  Look at how she had big leads in Arkansas over McCain which have completely vanished.  Electoral maps don't give much reason to think Clinton is better than Obama.  

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
It is even simpler (0.00 / 0)
Clinton has gifted Democrats with a year long demonstration that she can't run an effective campaign. If she'd been able to, if she'd hired people who bothered to read the rules and contest the contests, she would be the nominee. But no...

Can it happen here?
[ Parent ]
THE MAP (4.00 / 3)
I look at Obama's potential Electoral Map and I see a world of possibilities. I see a broke McCain spending money in Texas and the Carolinas. Playing defense in states he would otherwise sweep. I see the West changing from solid red to a mostly-blue checkerboard. I see record black turnout reinforcing solid wins in coastal states, and narrowing margins in Southern states. I'm well aware that winning without Florida and Ohio (if it comes to that) will not be easy. But I'd rather fight to change the map than have to face the alternative...

The alternative, of course, is rehash of the same old map we've seen in the last two elections. Bitterly fighting round number three over the same swing states we keep losing anyway. That is the best we can hope for from Clinton. The narrowest of victories in Florida and Ohio are her only chance - and McCain knows this.
And have you seen her polling in Washington and Oregon? And the Great Lakes region? She will start off fighting to reclaim Blue Kerry states, while at the same time hoping to pull off wins in Florida and Ohio. McCain will be on the offensive, not the defensive.

That is what I see when I look at the Electoral Map.  

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

[ Parent ]
Well said (0.00 / 0)
I witnessed in '00 and, especially, '04 the Democratic Party abandoning NC, a southern state that is clearly in play. And I ain't going through that frustration again. The Clinton campaign seems headed toward that type of GE sell-out in my state. The evidence for this conclusion is not only in the electoral map you outline but also in the fact that the Clinton campaign thus far has been very much tactically driven by previous political realities while the Obama campaign more forthrightly calls for a new strategic direction based on verifiable changes in the electorate (think, '06). As an Edwards-backer, I initially doubted the effectiveness of the Obama campaign strategy, but its success in Iowa, Wisconsin, Colorado, and the anticipated success in NC has made me more of a believer.

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...
[ Parent ]
Rec'd for TR abuse, not agreement (4.00 / 2)
I hardly ever agree with Robert's substance but he posts in good faith (if overwhelmingly, annoyingly economically deterministically ;-) )
[ Parent ]
I'm a member (4.00 / 1)
of the math class, not so much the creative class.  ;)

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist
[ Parent ]
TR rescinded (0.00 / 0)
I thought making an off-topic screed was worthy of a Troll Rate, but apparently these types of things are appreciated here.  I hereby rescind my Troll Rating and vow to find the posting "rules" that guide the rating of trolls.
[ Parent ]
The lost opportunity of this extended campaign (4.00 / 1)
is that neither candidate has really taken the opportunity to really go after McCain.  They could have been building themselves up as the fighter who is going to stand against McCain, rather than these idiotic character attacks.
[ Parent ]
Small math error in first table (0.00 / 0)
1,490 + 94 + 239 = 1823 instead of 1824.

I appreciate the effort to count these things.

Gotta agree with several comments above (0.00 / 0)
There are many conceivable formulas and conditions in which MI and FL could get seated. It's pretty odd to insist otherwise after this has been explained. The credentials committee is going to favor Obama and is going to here alternative proposals and you're convinced that they'll choose the one that flips the overall verdict from pro-Obama to pro-Clinton. Are you nuts?
they'll probably choose some alternative ... (0.00 / 0)
... like the Republicans chose, and give FL and MI delegations half-votes.  Obama still wins then.
[ Parent ]
Where do these SuperDel numbers come from? (0.00 / 0)
Where does the  239/271 O/C (net HRC + 32) Super split come from? DemConWatch has this table up:

         DCW CNN CBS AP
Clinton 256 256 257 259
Obama 234 233 229 235

MI & FL (4.00 / 1)
Look a little farther down the DemConWatch sidebar, to the table where Michigan and Florida are included. Chris is assuming all the MI and FL superdelegates will be seated and have full votes.
[ Parent ]
Stupid speculation on MI and Fl (0.00 / 0)
This continued stupid speculation about MI and Fl. I don't know why Bowers imposes this absurdity on us. No contested elections and we're supposed to pretend that they really happened. Once it's determined who the nominee is by June, this other stuff will be worked out behind the scenes also in June. If it gets to fighting it out at the convention then it's a bloodbath and are the supers going to allow that? If they do, then it's over the cliff.
what's so hard to understand? (0.00 / 0)
These elections happened.  You may think they were illegitimate, but they happened.  The state parties will send delegates to the convention.  The convention will have to decide what to do with them.  Chris's posts take these facts into account.
[ Parent ]
McCain (0.00 / 0)
"Considering his policy positions on so many fronts poll in the 20% of what the American people really want, it's clear from a personality standpoint people really like him.."

I don't see how this holds up unless he hides under a rock until November.  He gave a very confused and contradictory answer last Sunday about Hagee.  He's a smarmy weasel.  If Democrats can't expose this guy and win we are truly hopeless.  And either Democrat is electable.

As far as Michigan & Florida, including their vote as-is makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Convention Fight or No Fight (0.00 / 0)
I think what Chris wants us to consider is that Obama reaching 2025 will NOT prevent a convention fight of some magnitude on Clinton's part.

The only way to actually mute a Clinton fight at the convention is for Obama to reach 2,208 thus totally negating any impact MI and FLA might have on the delegate count.

He is NOT saying that Obama won't be the legitimate nominee if he reaches 2025 - but we need to be mindful that Clinton is going to the convention to fight this thing one way or the other. The only way to effectively diminish her standing  PRIOR to the convention is if Obama has 2,208 going in.

Chris - I do think you could make your intention clearer - but thanks for the numbers.

Clinton Will Net 2 Delegates in WV, NOT 10 (0.00 / 0)
I appreciate the challenge in putting this together, but I want to point out an issue in your WV projection.  Because of proportional representation and the fact the WV only has 3 Congressional Districts, it will be very difficult to Hillary Clinton to get a significant net gain in Delegates in our state.

Even if she wins by 20 points (which is possible, but unlikely) she would get a maximum of +2 Delegates * 3 Districts = +6. Combined with 6 out of 10 of the At-Large Delegates (+2) would mean +8 at most.

If she wins less than 58.3% of the vote statewide or in any of the 3 Congressional Districts, then it will be less.

Most WV projections including the leaked Obama spreadsheet have Clinton gaining +2 out of WV.  Much less than the +10 you have projected.  If she wins by 17 points she only gets +2.  She needs a huge blowout across multiple Congressional Districts to go much higher.


In a good conversation everyone speaks. In a great conversation some even listen.

Nomination At A Glance, April 24th | 53 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