Pledged Delegate Count

by: Chris Bowers

Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 22:48


Here are the latest totals:

State Reporting C % O % Delegates Clinton Obama
P. Delegates 61.6% 46.8% 50.9% 2,003 937 1,019
Alabama 99% 42% 56% 52 25 26
Alaska 98% 25% 74% 13 4 9
Am. Samoa 100% 57% 42% 3 2 1
Arizona 98% 51% 42% 56 31 25
Arkansas 99% 70% 27% 35 27 8
California 100% 52% 42% 370 207 163
Colorado 99% 32% 67% 55 19 36
Connecticut 100% 47% 51% 48 22 26
Delaware 100% 42% 53% 15 6 9
Georgia 100% 31% 67% 87 26 61
Idaho 100% 17% 79% 18 3 15
Iowa 100% 29% 38% 45 15 16
Illinois 99% 33% 65% 153 49 104
Kansas 100% 26% 74% 32 9 23
Louisiana 100% 36% 57% 56 22 34
Maine 99% 40% 59% 24 9 15
Massachusetts 100% 56% 41% 93 55 38
Minnesota 94% 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% 232 139 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 40 28
Utah 99% 39% 57% 23 9 14
Virgin Islands 100% 8% 92% 3 0 3
Washington 96% 31% 68% 78 15 43

Obama moves above 50%, but Clinton is still well within range should she perform well in Wisconsin and on March 4th. Notes on the table in the extended entry.  

Chris Bowers :: Pledged Delegate Count
Notes
  1. Delegate counts are derived from the most recent numbers posted by one of CNN, MSNBC, or CBS news. The lone exception is in Colorado, where I have used MetaData's projections.
  2. Even though counting continues, I am projecting Hillary Clinton as the winner of New Mexico, and allocating her the one remaining delegate.
  3. The 47 remaining delegates from states with completed results are as follows: John Edwards (26), Washington (20), and Alabama (1).
  4. Delegate counts for caucus states might alter following state conventions, which take place variously from March through May.
  5. The Michigan Democratic Party has claimed it will send a pledged delegate count of 73 Clinton, 55 uncommitted to the national convention. The DNC has ruled that Michigan has no pledged delegates. This conflict will be worked out by the DNC credentials committee, sometime in June or July. For more on the DNC credentials committee, click here.
  6. The Florida Democratic Party has claimed that it will send a pledged delegate count of 95 Clinton, 63 Obama, and 27 Edwards to the national convention. The DNC has ruled that Florida has no pledged delegates. This conflict will be worked out by the DNC credentials committee, sometime in June or July.
  7. There are 796 unlpledged, or "super" delegates, to the DNC convention. Historically, they have lined up behind the pledged delegate leader. In the event that there is no pledged delegate leader in June, they will come into play. In that "tiebreaker" event, Clinton currently holds a substantial advantage, 224-126.

    For more on a possible brokered convention, click here.


Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

thanks (0.00 / 0)
This is great.


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

She has to perform VERY well in Wisconsin and on March 4th (0.00 / 0)
Because there are a whole host of other states, that look to see Obama expanding his lead.  If she has small victories, Obama is still looking to be over 100 ahead.

But you are right, in the sense that at this point, Clinton needs to perform above expectation (she can't just barely "win", I would think.)

But she is capable of doing this.


Three pronged analysis for future contests - where is poll reporting gathered? (0.00 / 0)
The three pronged analysis for states seems to be:

a. Demographics
b. GOTV plan
c. What polls are showing

All three are uncertain, but it helps to narrow down a prognostication range, in the case of primaries.

On neither Pollster, or Real Clear Politics, am I seeing any polling for post 2/5 contests.  Am I missing something, do they exist?  (I know there are reports here and there of Virginia polls, Wisconsin polls, but any averaging going on?)


TPM (4.00 / 1)
On neither Pollster, or Real Clear Politics, am I seeing any polling for post 2/5 contests.  Am I missing something, do they exist?  (I know there are reports here and there of Virginia polls, Wisconsin polls, but any averaging going on?)

TPM's poll tracker has some polls that aren't included in the pollster weighted average:

MD-Pres (D) Feb 10 Mason-Dixon Obama 53%, Clinton 35%
MD-Pres (D) Feb 9 Rasmussen Obama 57%, Clinton 31%
MD-Pres (D) Feb 8 SurveyUSA Obama 52%, Clinton 33%

VA-Pres (D) Feb 10 Mason-Dixon Obama 53%, Clinton 37%
VA-Pres (D) Feb 9 Rasmussen Obama 55%, Clinton 37%
VA-Pres (D) Feb 8 SurveyUSA Obama 59%, Clinton 39%
VA-Pres (D) Feb 8 InsiderAdvantage Obama 52%, Clinton 37%

WI-Pres (D) Feb 8 ARG Clinton 50%, Obama 41%


[ Parent ]
Thanks! (0.00 / 0)
Good info!

[ Parent ]
One last question (0.00 / 0)
I notice that Washington still is missing delegates - what is projection for the rest of the 20 delegates, and would this increase Obama's lead, or have you factored this in? (It doesn't look like it)

Wow (4.00 / 4)
It's pretty amazing that a site powered just a few people is the go-to place for accurate analysis of the race. Good work yet again.

If SD's were loyal to their state (4.00 / 4)
Wikipedia says superdelegates are allotted per state, so using their primary page I added up all the superdelegates in states that have voted. If each SD were to support the winner in their own state, the current spread would be:

Obama: 230
Clinton: 251

If Obama wins all 3 on Tuesday:

Obama: 300
Clinton: 251


I did a similar calculation (4.00 / 1)
In a DKos diary -- has a state-by-state breakdown.  However, I wrote it yesterday, so it doesn't have today's results factored in.  If there is a per-state winner-takes-all SD division, then FL & MI loom larger.  Roughly 70 SDs between the two states.

[ Parent ]
Winner takes it all? (4.00 / 1)
"If each SD were to support the winner in their own state"

Excuse me pls, but wasn't the distortion created by the "winner takes it all" system in state's primaries exactly what led in 1972 to the creation of the superdelegates? And now you want to implement the very same awful system at a higher level? This doesn't sound very democratic to me...
:-/


[ Parent ]
Re: Winner takes it all? (0.00 / 0)
Hi Gray, I added them up to illustrate the increasingly antidemocratic nature of Clinton's superdelegate edge--not to argue they should be forcibly distributed in that way.

[ Parent ]
We will see ... (0.00 / 0)
PA hasn't held squat yet .. and both Rendell(who is DLC) and Nutter(the new mayor) ... both have already publicly backed Clinton ... so if Obama wins PA .... both will have egg on their face .. big time

[ Parent ]
How much longer will superdelegates matter? (0.00 / 0)
I'm increasingly curious as to at what point Obama's pledged delegate lead becomes so large that it starts overcoming Clinton's superdelegate lead. And I seriously think that point can come by wednesday.

Right now CNN's delegates-counting-superdelegates tally stands at:

Hillary Clinton: 1,148
Barack Obama: 1,121

Obama is only 27 delegates behind by this count.

And on tuesday, we have the following primaries:

Washington DC: 15 delegates
Maryland: 70 delegates : Mason Dixon poll predicts Obama 53%, Clinton 35%
Virginia: 83 delegates : Mason Dixon poll predicts Obama 53%, Clinton 37%

We've gotten some huge surprises in this race before, but it seems very difficult to imagine the scenario that doesn't lead to these three races putting Obama up at least 27 delegates net.


CBS (4.00 / 3)
He's already gone over CBS's tally with SDs by 3. With DC probably giving Obama from 12 to all 15 delegates, I have to imagine he will go over on CNN's too and who knows what CNN will be left to do to show Hillary still winning the race.

[ Parent ]
Florida and Michigan (4.00 / 1)
It gets tricky because of Florida and Michigan.  CNN's count doesn't include them.  If they do end up getting seated, then that gives Clinton another 50 to 105 pledged delegates, depending on what happens with Michigan's uncommitted delegates (if they all went for Obama, then Clinton gains a net 50 pledged delegates out of Florida and Michigan; if none go for Obama, then she gains 105.)

Basically, to avoid some kind of messy brokered convention situation, Obama needs to not just be ahead of Clinton, he needs to be ahead of her by, ideally, at least 100 pledged delegates.


[ Parent ]
Don't forget the FL/MI superdelegates (0.00 / 0)
Right now, Clinton has 14, Obama 3, with 37 undeclared.

DemConWatch

[ Parent ]
If Edwards endorses Obama, MI/FL don't matter (4.00 / 1)
If you do the math with the numbers above, Clinton only gets +23 out of MI/FL if you combine Obama & Edwards' delegates for the two states.  Add Edwards' other 26 and it's a non-factor.

[ Parent ]
nobody talks about that (0.00 / 0)
but if edwards endorses i assume his delegates move to obama. that would be worth a lot imho.  

[ Parent ]
I doubt it's official (0.00 / 0)
I expect that the delegates don't officially become Obama's until they vote. I think it's safe to assume that most or all of them can be pencilled in as Obama delegates.

[ Parent ]
Looking at the hard numbers... (0.00 / 0)
I have no idea how Clinton's going to surpass Obama in terms of pledged delegates. He's going to be well over 100 up by the time March 4th rolls around, and even if he loses both TX and OH narrowly (I can't see him losing either state by large margins), he'll still be way ahead in the delegate count. The rest of the calendar favors Obama markedly. If the contest goes to the very end, I can see Obama up 150-200 pledged delegates - and then Michigan and Florida don't matter anymore, regardless of that outcome.

At that point, a Clinton nomination would lack any sort of legitimacy. And if she loses on March 4th, you can bet that there will be calls (and a hell of a lot of pressure) for her to drop out of the race.


In worst case scenario... (4.00 / 2)
Obama would probably barely loses Ohio, but I actually think he might win it. But there's just no way she can win it overwhelmingly. On the other hand, Obama may win all of DC's delegates and he will get big margins in Virginia and Maryland. If it goes on to the future, he will do very well in places like North Carolina, Oregon, Montana, Wyoming, and South Dakota. There's just not enough states left and too many of them favor Obama or will be very close. I mean seriously how does she win because I don't see it?

[ Parent ]
150-200? (0.00 / 0)
I want to believe that, but I just don't see it, even if he wins oh or tx.  You think he wins Kentucky or W. Virginia?  Or are counting on blowouts in other states.  I can buy 100 delegate lead, maybe even a little more, but 150-200 seems a little high.  Like I said, I want to believe but I don't see it.  

[ Parent ]
What's up with the percentages for Iowa? n/t (0.00 / 0)


never mind, of course, Edwards came in second, how long ago (0.00 / 0)
thaqt seems now.

[ Parent ]
Wisconsin (4.00 / 2)
Chris,

I think Wisconsin will be another huge win for Obama. His campaigns "leaked" memo was extremely clever in downplaying expectations, and they still penciled in a 7 point win in Wisconsin. I think their polling tells them it's a good state, and frankly, when you look at his strongholds of African-Americans in Milwaukee, the proximity of the state to Illinois (lots of volunteers already on the ground or headed there), plus the massive student population in Madison, it reads a double digit win for Obama.  

Obama also has Governor Doyle backing him, and Wisconsin Democratic Primaries tend to draw lots of independents.  Plus, there is same day registration in Wisconsin, so all those college students who may have forgot to register in other states will not have that problem in Madison.

Feingold's endorsement would also be really nice, but he seemed like he wasn't satisfied with what the candidates have been talking about lately (in regards to not focusing on the issues) in an article I read the other day, so who knows.


If Wisconsin is a huge win for Obama (4.00 / 1)
and assuming no surprises on Tuesday (both rational assumptions), it's going to be one LOONNG month for Clinton.

Don't know how she comes back from it, actually.

Still, right now, the one ARG poll has Clinton ahead 50 to 41.  Keep that in mind, before getting carried away be the hype!

You also never know - what lies in wait for another New Hampshire Clinton surprise?

Clinton beating Obama in Virginia?
Pulling away in Wisconsin?
The Asian-American population (and longtime democratic machine) in Hawaii, choosing Hilary instead of Obama?  (Possible, the mucky-mucks in local politics in Hawaii, are all on board for Clinton).

We'll soon see.


[ Parent ]
Agree (4.00 / 2)
I agree that expectation setting is important for the sake of the MSM narrative, but they are so slow to catch up, that what we say here has little impact. CNN still clings to the notion that Obama is trailing somehow, despite his ever widening lead among pledged delegates.

Let me add that the one ARG poll is almost guaranteed to be an outlier. They have been perpetually wrong this entire campaign, and I have a feeling that other pollsters will verify an Obama lead sometime this week.

Also, as someone who was just in the Obama HQ in Chicago a few days ago, I can assure you that there is no complacency. In fact, I think being the front-runner in a race with the stakes so high can be a huge motivating factor for voters and volunteers in places like Wisconsin and Hawaii to work even hard to help put Barack over the top.

Also, let me mention that the hype about Clinton winning Hawaii because she has Inouye's backing or because she did well with Asians in California, is too far fetched for me to believe. Obama has grassroots support and congressional support (Rep. Abercrombie has been a fierce backer of his and was a part of the Hawaii Draft Obama campaign). Also, it's a caucus state, which favors activists and grassroots organizers. Hawaiians are extremely proud of those who grew up in the state and have gone on to have great success nationally, and I think they'll take a special pride in caucusing for the Punahou grad.  


[ Parent ]
He was born in Hawaii, FWIW n/t (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
OVERCOMING SUPERDELEGATES (0.00 / 0)
Good Work Chris Bowers. This is the best site on the net. I'm interested in this because my children live in the US. So that means on Super Tuesday Obama picked up 14 delegates and now leads in pledged delegates by about 86. On the recent AP poll today Clinton leads in superdelegates 243 to 156 or a difference in 87. That means that they are now even in total delegates (1177 to 1176) right now. Both NBC, CBS, and CNN put them about even as well (with actually much worse data). Even including Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania, I believe Obama might actually increase this lead.
Question: David Brooks on PBS said Puerto Rico was win-take-all for the 63 pledged delegates. Is this true?

winner-take-all is against Democratic rules (0.00 / 0)
So Brooks must be wrong. As usual.  

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
It's more complicated than that (4.00 / 1)
What I've heard is that the PR caucuses are very tightly controlled by the party apparatus, and that the votes and the elected delegates may be pre-ordained, essentially making it winner-take-all without violating DNC rules. It's hard to imagine that would happen under the intense media scrutiny if the race is still going, but I think there needs to be a lot more reporting on the PR process before we can really say what has gone on there in the past, and what will happen this year.

DemConWatch

[ Parent ]
okay (0.00 / 0)
Here is the Barone article:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/ba...

I suspect is essentially untrue.  There's no question that the rules require proportional representation.  Of course, in all previous caucuses the election was long over, so of course all  delegates went to a single candidate.  That was true in New Jersey, too, with our June primary.  


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


[ Parent ]
delegates (4.00 / 1)
I just hope Obama builds up a big enough lead so that the Democratic Party doesn't have to go through some agonizing ordeal.  Billary will fight like a cornered mongoose if it's close, so I'm praying for some solid Obama wins in the coming week.  I don't want to bear witness to months of ugly....

Ugly fight would sap all the momentum out of the democrats (0.00 / 0)
And create the largest generation of turned off voters in the history of the Party.

Please think about what you are doing. Clinton has no path to the nomination that doesn't go through a breaking of the rules and a crisis of validity.

Think about what you are doing. If it is really your intent to bring HRC almost to the nomination where it will create this crisis, your loyalty is not to the poor, to the environment, to ending war, providing healthcare or rescuing democracy.

Your loyalty is to a person, at all costs, and it must not be.

Please come out for Obama now. Save the country.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
The above post is in agreemant with the OP. (0.00 / 0)
Sorry I am reiterating his excellent point.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Cliniton Campaign a Mess.... (4.00 / 1)
Check out this article from today's Baltimore Sun.  Absolutely amazing.  This information needs wider exposure.  I can't belive this country is thinking of letting HRC anywhere near the White House if her management skills are this lousy. Her campaign has been in terrible disarray all along....  

------------------------------------------------------------

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.co...

"Patti Solis Doyle had been living on borrowed time as Clinton's campaign manager following the disastrous showing in Iowa and the rockiness leading up to the New Hampshire primary.

"What happened today would have happened the day after New Hampshire had we lost," one source said, adding that others may soon follow Solis Doyle's departure.

Initially, Clinton's former White House chief of staff, Maggie Williams, was brought in to run the campaign even though Solis Doyle was still there. The result was confusion and awkwardness for the staff, who weren't sure who was really in charge.

But even more problematic was the campaign's money crunch. Over the last seven years, Clinton had raised $175 million for her reelection and her presidential campaign. But Solis Doyle didn't tell Clinton that there was next to no cash on hand until after the New Hampshire primary.

"We were lying about money," a source said. "The cash on hand was nothing."

In turn, Clinton didn't tell Solis Doyle that she was lending her own money to keep the campaign afloat. Solis Doyle found out third-hand. And when she asked Clinton about it, the senator told her she couldn't understand how the campaign had gotten to such a point."

more.....



Careful! (0.00 / 0)
I wouldn't read too much into any stories that say the Clinton campaign is in disarray. If there is one thing the Clinton's are good at, it is managing expectations.  By supporting the story of a campaign in disarray, they are managing expectations downward.

I still expect to see Clinton do well in Pennsylvania, perhaps Ohio, and maybe even Wisconsin and Texas.  The one common thread among Hillary's victories, outside of Arkansas (where she lived) and Oklahoma and Tennessee (neighboring states), is that they have all come in states with big cities with old-time Democratic machines.  That would definitely put Pennsylvania (Philly) in play for her.

In Ohio, Cleveland still has a Democratic machine, but it is not the biggest city in the state.  Columbus is, and given that it's a college town (OSU) with a highly educated population, Obama should do well there.  There's a black population centered on Cincinnati and Dayton, but the eastern portion of the state, which counts as part of Appalachia, would break for Hillary.  Ohio's a tough call.

In Wisconsin, Milwaukee could still break for Hillary, as will the rural areas, so again, she has a chance.

In any case, an Obama loss in any of these three would be narrow, and the net delegate loss won't, I think, hurt him.

It's gonna be close, though.


[ Parent ]
California may change (0.00 / 0)
I know the counts are technically at 100%, but the provisional ballots are still being counted, and, for example, here in San Diego, some university polling places ran out of normal ballots and had to switch to provisionals.  These CDs (53 and 50) have odd numbers of delegates, and the vote totals are barely in favor of Clinton at the moment.

There may be others in California that are the same.


actually (0.00 / 0)
Hillary has extended her lead in both districts as new votes have come in, but essentially you're right.  And, with maybe a million ballots left to count, that also holds true in a few districts elsewhere in the state, and with the final proportional statewide delegates.

I always get 203-167 when I do the math with current totals, too.  Don't know where I'm going wrong.

Insert shameless blog promotion here.


[ Parent ]
Thanks for all your hard work (4.00 / 3)
You made it easy to read and informative. This better not be left up to the SuperDelegates. I saw, down below, someone dismissing the 'uproar' that they think would happen...marginalizing it to 'internet activists'. That is so not the case. So not the case.  

Yes, very informative. Thanks (0.00 / 0)
I think Obama needs a lead of 80 pledged to make a really strong case to the super-delegates.

FL gives Hillary 32 and MI gives her another 73.  So that's 105.  But I think you could easily argue that of the 55 uncommitted, at least half (25-30) belong to Obama.

According to math above, he's currently up by 86.  So he can probably starting peeling of super-delegates based on not overturning the popular vote.  A gain of another 20, and I think we'll see supers start flipping fast.


[ Parent ]
Folks, we're watching Obama win in slow motion (0.00 / 0)
Great work, Chris!

If Obama is up by 86 going into Tuesday's contests then he very well come out of them up by as much as 120. This is, IIRC, very close to what you had predicted at one point and about 5 less than what I predicted in my optimistic-for-Obama snowball model.

120 is a good solid margin especially considering he's got two more contests before the TX/OH showdowns.

Throw all of the pre-2/5 polling out the window. He's not going to lose OH or TX.  


Percentage numbers for caucusses should be removed! (0.00 / 0)
They obviously don't represent any "popular vote" and are totally misleading. The turnout numbers from Maine are a striking example about what's wrong with caucusses:

See, Maine and neighboring New Hampshire have an almost equal number of citizen, about 1.3 million. Thx to the Maine Dem Party, we now know that "close to 45,000 Mainers attended the Democratic caucus". However, in the Dem primary in New Hampshire, about 284000 votes were cast!

Enough said. The conclusion is obvious: Caucusses keep people away from voting, they don't represent the actual preference of the people and thus they are a shame for a party which calls itself "Democratic".

Chris, you fight for democratic principles, so I'm sure you agree. Pls remove the percentage numbers for the states which held caucusses instead of primaries!


Oh, and what about the percentage totals? (0.00 / 0)
I guess the numbers of 46.5% for Clinton and 50.9% for Obama represent the average of the percentages for the state's primaries? If this is so, this is misleading, too, leaving a casual reader with the impression that Obama's national lead is higher than it actually is. Using a number that's calculated from the actual number of votes cast for each candidate would be a much fairer solution, imho.  

[ Parent ]
Those are percentages of pledged delegates (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
This should be made much clearer! (0.00 / 0)
And the percentages of the popular vote shozuld be added. Many people see Chris' numbers as evidence that Obama has a a more than 4% lead in the popular vote. That's simply not true. in his total percentage, snmall states are totally overrepresented, and thus the race is much closer than it looks here. Since Chris came out fighting for the principle that the superdelegates should respect the popular vote ("If someone is nominated for POTUS from the Democratic Party despite another candidate receiving more poplar support from Democratic primary voters and caucus goers, I will resign as local precinct captain"), he should be so fair as to give us the percentages according to this popular vote, too!

(I'm well aware exact numbers are almost impossible, his best calculation would be good enough, of course!).  


[ Parent ]
Correction... (0.00 / 0)
"in his total percentage, snmall states are totally overrepresented"

Uh, sry, I got carried away a bit, that's misleading. It's not necessarily small states that are overrepresented, it's the fact that the number of votes behind a single delegate vary wildly between the states (with caucuss delegates having the least votes), and so the percentage total is very misleading, almost useless.  


[ Parent ]
Uh, really? The totals, too? (0.00 / 0)
Not likely, because 934/2003 actually comes down to 46.63%, NOT 46.5.
I am a bit lazy now, and really should do some reallife work instead (so pls excuse me not doing the math now myself), but I suspect Chris builds an average from the states' percentages, instead of calculating the overall percentage from the overall number of delegates, and thus this small discrepancy.

[ Parent ]
By that logic ... (0.00 / 0)
Why not have mandatory voting? That's the most democratic way of counting votes.  

[ Parent ]
That joke is lost upon some foreign nationals... (0.00 / 0)
"With regard with your first question, most democratic governments consider participating in national elections a right of citizenship. Some consider that participation at elections is also a citizen's civic responsibility. In some countries, where voting is considered a duty, voting at elections has been made compulsory and has been regulated in the national constitutions and electoral laws.

Some countries go as far as to impose sanctions on non-voters.compelled to vote?

Compulsory voting is not a new concept. Some of the first countries that introduced mandatory voting laws were Belgium in 1892, Argentina in 1914 and Australia in 1924."
http://aceproject.org/electora...


[ Parent ]
Ugly fight would sap all the momentum out of the democrats (0.00 / 0)
And create the largest generation of turned off voters in the history of the Party.

Please think about what you are doing. Clinton has no path to the nomination that doesn't go through a breaking of the rules and a crisis of validity.

Think about what you are doing. If it is really your intent to bring HRC almost to the nomination where it will create this crisis, your loyalty is not to the poor, to the environment, to ending war, providing healthcare or rescuing democracy.

Your loyalty is to a person, at all costs, and it must not be.

Please come out for Obama now. Save the country.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


Edwards rumour growing -Endorsing Obama (0.00 / 0)
To Opinion makers across America!

The time is now to rally and build to a general election win. Do not allow the Democratic Party to be destroyed by Shakespearian folly.  

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
NEW : Iowa Governor Culver has endorsed Barack Obama (0.00 / 0)
http://www.whotv.com/Global/st...

Time to rally round.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Update on LA recount (0.00 / 0)
It looks like this will likely go forward:

link

This is a big deal, since this would probably result in a four- to eight-delegate swing in Obama's favor in the Louisiana totals. This is definitely something you should keep an eye on.


California. Its Los Angeles County --- L.A. (4.00 / 1)
Under questioning by the Board of Supervisors, Logan said about half of the 189,000 nonpartisan ballots cast in the Tuesday presidential primary were not counted because of confusion over ballot design.Logan said an even higher percentage of ballots were also not counted in the 2004 and 2006 elections, although officials were never told.

"This is absolutely stunning," Romero said. "We're supposed to have a democracy. I mean, the most cherished thing in a democracy is the vote and the integrity of the vote. This was an important issue for the California state Senate when we passed legislation back in 2000" regarding decline-to-state voters.

"And now we find out eight years later that the county has been disenfranchising voters and not letting us know. We're not behind some iron curtain. This is America. I'm absolutely stunned,

Full count sought of disputed votes in primary
http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_...

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
duh (0.00 / 0)
I got bamboozled by the paper's title! Thanks for the correction.

[ Parent ]
4 to 8???? (0.00 / 0)
I don't think it's possible for it to change more than 2 delegates.  It's the right thing to do, however, and I hope that all votes are counted.

Insert shameless blog promotion here.

[ Parent ]
Iowa Governor Chet Culver Endorses Barack Obama: Breaking!! (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


What's with Alabama (0.00 / 0)
it seems weird that a 14% victory for Obama would onhy yield one more delegate...

[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox