I can’t say I’m surprised by Hillary Clinton’s ebullient claim that she’s “going all the way,” because I am most assuredly NOT surprised. If ever I harboured any hope that the Clinton Power Machine existed for any reason other than to further Bill and Hillary Clinton’s own personal ambitions, any last vestiges of it were sucked up like dust mites in the vacuum cleaner last night.
Leaving aside the catastrophic possibility of the superdelegates handing Clinton the nomination in Denver (though I now believe that Clinton will not hesitate to undermine democracy in the Democratic Party if it’s the only way she thinks she can win), it is now mathematically IMPOSSIBLE for Clinton to win the 2,025 delegates needed for the nomination.
And barring overwhelming victories in every single primary/caucus remaining, Obama’s chances of gathering the needed number also rate a snowball’s chance in hell.
So it will come to one of the following scenarios:
Beware: I am very bad at math. Source: NYT
Either Clinton and Obama go to the convention each lacking the necessary delegates, thus ensuring a brokered convention…
Or the DNC works out a last minute pair of “do-overs” in Florida and Michigan to be held after the Puerto Rico caucus, some time in June.
Assuming (and granted, it’s a difficult assumption) that Clinton and Obama continue apace and end up splitting the remaining 611 delegates and the 366 disputed delegates of Michigan and Florida: That leaves Obama with 1,787 pledged delegates and Clinton with 1,669, give or take a couple.
At this writing, 456 of the 794 superdelegates are committed to Clinton and Obama (254 for Clinton, 202 for Obama).
Including an evenly split delegate count for Michigan and Florida, that would make the total count 1,989 for Obama and 1,923 for Clinton.
Assuming, again, an even split for the rest of the 338 superdelegates, Obama wins, 2,158 to Clinton’s 2,092.
Clinton would have to garner approximately 203 of the remaining 338 uncommitted superdelegates to defeat Obama.
Even adjusting for the SLIGHT possibility that in the remaining primaries and caucuses Clinton could close the gap in pledged delegates — and it is VERY slight, considering the margins of victory in virtually every state so far and the way that delegates are doled out — Clinton would still face the need to win a VAST majority of the uncommitted delegates.
In other words, unless the Clintons have photographic evidence of those superdelegates committing sodomy, Satanic rituals and cannibalism with dead babies… SHE CANNOT WIN.
Even if my math is wrong, it’s not THAT wrong. SHE CANNOT WIN.
But she can sure as hell “bloody up” Obama for the general and assure herself another chance in 2012.
What a fucking asshole.
I’m not the most math-proficient person… I figure my kid will surpass me by the time he turns 11…
funny, I just asked the same question without the math.
Good to see you here. I hope that all is well with you.
The odds of Clinton winning this one by honorable means are next to nil. She does not appear to find that an impediment to her ambition, even if she damages the party in the process.
I don’t come around here much lately; gotta change that.
you’ve some consensus behind your math.
I was watching the Texas numbers last night, and when MSNBC called it for Clinton with only a 3% margin, I had a feeling Obama would come out ahead by the time the caucuses were added up and totaled in.
I’m glad there ARE folks out there who can do the real math though!
(Good to see you, Maryscott!)
Your rationale is fine but your numbers are a bit off.
Let’s start with pledged delegates.
1- Up until now (including all the 3/4 contests) BO has 1384 pledged delegates and HRC has 1231, for a difference of 154.
2- There are 609 delegates left in the 12 contests. Let’s be charitable and split the take. Obama would lead with 1688 to 1536.
Now let’s deal with the superdelegates.
3- According to the most recent tally of superdelegates by the Associated Press, BO trails HRC by 42 (241-199). We’re now at 1887 to 1777.
4- There are 794 superdelegates. 440 are aligned with a candidate, 354 are not. Among those, 74 super-delegates are Add-on unpledged delegates, to be nominated by the executive of state parties or in a convention. Let’s say they split 50-50 (37 each). The score is now Obama 1923 to Clinton 1814.
5- There are 26 delegates controlled by John Edwards (14 from IA, 4 from NH and 8 from SC). We can assume the 14 Iowa will realign in the later stages of their selection process. Let’s be generous, and split them 50-50. So we now have BO at 1930, HRC at 1821 and JRE at 12.
So, in this scenario, Obama needs to pickup only one-third (95) of the 280 remaining superdelegates to reach the 2,025 magic number.
It even gets easier if Edwards throws his remaining delegates’ support behind BO, but I won’t do it, in order to be charitable.
So you’re right MSOC. Barack Obama has a much better path to the nomination.
Fuck, I hate math.
I’ve edited the post… and will likely edit again until I get it RIGHT.
Thanks!
and used the NYT counts.
.
I’m no good at math either, but with the help of Slate’s Delegate Calculator I’ve scoped out the rest of the primaries, and even if you assume huge Hillary wins from here on out, the numbers don’t look good for Clinton. In order to show how deep a hole she’s in, I’ve given her the benefit of the doubt every week for the rest of the primaries.
Need to get 2,025 delegates to clinch the nomination. Decision will end up with the superdelegates and … undetermined Michigan/Florida delegates sitting in the penalty box.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Heck yeah!!!! GET OUT!!!!
She didn’t EVEN win Texas:
Here’s the count as of the last few minutes:
Obama is winning Texas. The press has been terrible on how they’ve reported this situation.
Btw – I’ve been checking this all day – the percentages, and therefore delegate allowances, aren’t changing. More numbers are coming in, but roughly in the same proportions.
Whew!
I think it’ll be a brokered convention. Clinton is too stubborn to give up what is very likely her one and only chance to become president. And she has managed to get just enough delegates to prevent Obama from getting the necessary amount needed to secure the nomination.
Whatever happens, the two massive egos that are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have pretty much destroyed the Democratic Party’s hopes of taking back the White House. John McCain now has months during which to raise money, shore up Republican support, and craft his strategy for whichever DINO survives his or her party’s nominating process.
More Math:
According to StatisStat, 43% (or a minor plurality) of the 35% of Americans who would vote for either of the 50% of Democratic candidates remaining in the 33% of the remaining primary season (less than 50% of the entire election season has run its course), would prefer (by a 26%-32% margin) to have 110% of their opinions counted, provided more than 86% of Serious Pundits agree, or disagree, with the prevailing opinion of the 12% of citizens who reflect the average demographic of the 63% of non-white residents (not counting the 37% who live in cities larger than 51% of other cities). As for the other 23%, reality is up for grabs.
Go Freedom!
Thanks.
I can’t believe you wrote “friggin’.”
I mean, c’mon, the word “friggin'” is funny in itself, no?
Oh I agree with all that, its just a bit surprising coming from you. Not a complaint, just an observation.
I’ve got to get my girls napping, I’ll check back later.
OK, I got all that except for one little part.
What part is that, Omir??
The part after “According to StatisStat” . . .
Did you follow the link? That should explain it.
You just made this up, right?!
86% of people seem to think so, but 68% know that the other 14% are marginally deceived 33% of the time. Its all in the math.
I just had a conversation with a guy I work with who really loves Hillary. I’m not making fun – he’s the nicest guy. VERY nice. Very smart. Very professional. But he just adores her and thinks she would be fantastic.
He feels her experience as wife should count. He feels she really was a co-president.
He also thinks Obama has made worse attacks against Hillary than she has made against him. I guess it just shows that love is blind. (Of course, he’d say the same about me! But hey, one of us is right and one of us is wrong.)
I say this so we remember that other good people are going to disagree with us, and we do have to kiss and make up somehow when this is all over.
We’re also going to have some MAJOR educating to do to bring the party together. I’ve heard Hillary supporters say things that aren’t true that they believe to be true. Once disabused of some of the anti-Obama myths, they can be persuaded to join us. But we have our work cut out for us.
As an Independent, I’m not kissing and making up. One of the candidates has espoused a positive vision of changing the political climate. I can get on board with that (and give the benefit of the doubt — awaiting that candidates actual performance should that candidate actually attain office).
The other candidate has pretty much done things that turn me off of the process.
The reality of one.
(At least I understand Michigan will be re-voting now — Gov. Granholm has a horse in this race — predictable that we’ll be doing a do over).
Good to see you MSOC.
When is Michigan revoting?
Ah – they’re thinking June.
maybe, maybe not BJ…looks like a bit of political theatre to me.
now they’re looking for howard dean and the dnc to pull their asses out of the fire? after dissing him for how long? l hope dean holds his ground, and that some serious adults will take ms clinton aside and ‘splain the facts to her in language she can understand.
it’s time for her to go.
Mary Scott you fucking rock. I am without tv and internet and sneaking this in at work right now as I just moved this past weekend. Waiting for Tine Warner hookup as usual. I had an idea from family that she won big last night. Now, not so much.
I spoke with a client yesterday that I had never met before and he even joked that Hill was so desperate to win at any costs she was paying the Russians to make calls to Ohio people to encourage them to vote Hill. And we all thought it was Bill that was the egomaniac? lol She will ruin the party and the country by staying in. I wil not vote for her. This is the feelings of large numbers of dems and we could be looking at cour more Bush years. Hey, ya get what ya’all deserve. She takes the cake.
You have described her well, Maryscott. If Hillary Clinton were a guy, she would be a prick, just like her husband.
She reminds me of the old school feminists, all of them white, who defined feminism as getting themselves into the old boys club. They didn’t much give a shit about their sisters of color or lower economic means. Having said that however, she and Obama have actually accomplished a miracle in America: a woman and an African American considered only on the merits of their policies and character. Unfortunately for us, as she has shown in the past week, she has none of the latter.
I can’t wait for my baby boomer generation to get it’s self-indulgent fucking self out of the way and let a shareable vision like that inspirationally described by Obama have sway.
One thing we can be sure of: if Clinton steals this nomincation, (and that is the only way she can get it), the millions of new participants in Obama’s hopeful politics will stay home and nothing will have changed in America. So Hillary gets to be President and be in the history books and the rest of us get fucked.
Interesting that you should be posting about this today. Will add my 2 paranoid, conspiratorial cents, which I just posted in the comments at another blog earlier this evening.
I’ve got some paranoid ramblings that I need to get written down, on the chance that they are not all that paranoid after all.
Here’s what Rush Limbaugh has said:
We hear again and again that it’s nearly impossible for Clinton to earn enough delegates in the primaries and caucuses to clinch the nomination. But isn’t it mathematically impossible for Obama to clinch the nomination without superdelegates?
Regarding superdelegates, the common refrain from people speaking on Clinton’s behalf is that they are supposed to use their independent judgment, based on what’s best for the party. So, rather than voting to reflect the wishes of their constituents, they are supposed to vote for the person who is most “electable”.
Is it possible that Clinton’s goal is to get Obama “bloodied” enough by (or before) the convention that she and her surrogates could make the case that he’s simply not electable?
Or, in other words, keep throwing mud at Obama and then make the argument, “Look, he’s covered in mud! No way is he electable against McCain looking like that!”
Turning over the math in my head, I think that’s exactly her strategy now. If the status quo continues, Obama wins the nomination. There’s no way one of them’s going to get a major lead in pledged delegates or superdelegates, and with anything close to an even split, Obama wins.
Clinton’s only option seems to be a scorched earth, salt-the-fields strategy. She’s going to try make Obama radioactive, load him up with so much toxic media baggage that an Obama victory in November becomes inconceivable. She needs to make him such a poisonous candidate that the superdelegates have no choice but to come to her, hat in hand, and beg her to accept the nomination.
Except… I don’t think she can do this without destroying her own chances in November. I’ve said before that the next President will be McCain or Obama. Clinton can destroy Obama, but she can’t win herself. I think these numbers confirm that, and we’re going to see what choice she makes in the next week.
I’m just waiting her to start saying that Obama “stole” Texas. I think that was the point of delaying the caucus results and trumpeting her victory there last night, and all the groundwork Bill was laying over the past week. If she can make it sound like she won Texas fair and square, then Obama came along and took it away from her, she can paint him as the scummy “insider” candidate, and herself as the valiant underdog. I’ll be a total cock-up and a white-wash, but that’s hardly new for the Clintons, now, is it?
What the hell is wrong with you? Can you be a little more rude and unpleasant and disrepectful? Really, if you tried really hard?
I left this site weeks ago because it had become so filled with hate and bile. I come back and this is the first things I see. People like you are the reason I will NEVER NEVER NEVER vote for Obama or anyone who supports him. Clinton isn’t an asshole – you are.
Why do we have to be respectful to those who would destroy, only for personal ambition, that which we want to see come about, namely an America that works, that has a Congress and executive that wants to solve problems by working together rather than revisiting old ideological battles? Clinton is more of the same old crap, and Obama is outlining a vision of a very realizable, but difficult to achieve future. He is asking people to become engaged in their own governance, in other words to remain true to our status as citizens of a republic. Clinton is trying to keep people fearful, confused and at home. The way she is campaigning is anti-democratic as well as anti-Democratic. Do you respect George Bush or Karl Rove? When Hillary Clinton and her flack Howard Wolfson act like Bush and Rove, do they deserve any respect? And Clinton does not have those qualities and attributes which she attacked Obama for lacking. In what way does Hillary Clinton have more foreign policy experience than Barbara Bush?
By the way, why would you own books and not read them?
the people vote for the candidate of their choice. I don’t know what it is that Obama supporters are so scared of every single day other than their own shadows. May the best candidate win, that’s democracy and that’s evolution. Funny how Obama supporters call democracy destroying things.
I’m not a Clinton fan (really either one) nor am I much hip on the nitty gritty of politics but I guess I don’t see what the big fuss is about having a “brokered convention” and why that’s such a “bad” thing. Honestly it seems kind of exciting and well democratic in the sense that there’s two very strong camps with their various ideas and platforms and they appeal to roughly about half of the people who voted/caucused Democratic. Sounds to me like getting together and hashing out their ideas and making compromises is a GOOD thing on some levels.
Again I’m no expert but that’s my take on it. As for the theory that it gives McCain time to “consolidate” this position well give me a break, the campaign season is already far too long. A shorter version seems to me all the best.
Pax
I will absolutely, positively GUARANTEE that if Clinton is bumped out of this thing, with a matter of days or weeks Obama will start to feel the dissing heat from many of the same leftinesses.
It’s what they do.
They complain.
If you look closely, you can see it happening already.
And this compulsive complaining is the single most important reason why the Dems have been batting about .225 compared with the Ratpub’s .775 over the last 50 years or so.
I can see it coming over the horizon.
Another Rat win.
Unbelievable as it may appear given the total fuck-up that has been BushCo for the last 8 years.
Watch.
Self-immolation is not just a Buddhist monk thing.
Dems have been doing it since the mid-’60s.
Bet on it.
AG