Another Look at the Math

Posted by BooMan | Apr 30, 2008 | 10 |

Freshman Rep. Bruce Braley (D-IA) is endorsing Obama. That brings Clinton’s lead in superdelegates down to 19. Meanwhile, the Politico reports:

Capitol Hill insiders say the battle for congressional superdelegates is over, and one Senate supporter of Barack Obama is hinting strongly that he has prevailed over Hillary Rodham Clinton.

While more than 80 Democrats in the House and Senate have yet to state their preferences in the race for the Democratic nomination, sources said Tuesday that most of them have already made up their minds and have told the campaigns where they stand.

“The majority of superdelegates I’ve talked to are committed, but it is a matter of timing,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.). “They’re just preferring to make their decision public after the primaries are over. … They would like someone else to act for them before they talk about it in the cold light of day.”

Obama currently holds an 18-13 lead among committed superdelegates in the Senate, while Clinton holds a 77-74 lead in the House. Asked which way the committed-but-unannounced superdelegates are leaning, McCaskill — who has endorsed Obama — said: “James Brown would say, ‘I Feel Good.’”

That 18-13 lead probably comes from DemComWatch’s chart, but by DemComWatch’s own list, the numbers in the Senate are: 16 for Obama, 15 for Clinton, and 19 undecided. I’m not sure why they list Obama as having 18, but Clinton is listed at 13 because Sens. Stabenow (D-MI) and Bill Nelson (D-FL) are currently disqualified. Sen. Jon Tester confirms that the arm-twisting has pretty much ceased.

Montana Sen. Jon Tester — one of the Democrats who has yet to commit publicly — said the campaigns “haven’t applied much pressure” of late. “I haven’t heard much, and it’s been a few weeks,” he said.

There may be a bit of gamesmanship in Sen. McCaskill’s remarks, but she doesn’t seem the least concerned about an avalanche of supers going to Clinton. After next Tuesday’s contests in North Carolina and Indiana, Obama should have a pledged delegate lead of about 166, and a superdelegate deficit of about nineteen. There will be 217 pledged delegates left to earn. Clinton can cut into that lead a little with wins in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Puerto Rico. Obama will probably offset those losses somewhat with wins in Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota. It’s not unlikely that Clinton might pick up a net gain of 10-20 pledged delegates after Indiana and North Carolina. To do that she will need to win Kentucky and Puerto Rico by large margins, while limiting her loss in Oregon. The contests in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia (like Indiana) are unlikely to move the delegate count much in either direction, and they will probably offset each other.

It looks like Obama will probably finish with a lead of about 150 pledged delegates. Clinton would need to win the remaining superdelegates by an approximate 223-72 (76%) margin to secure the nomination.

About The Author

BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.

10 Comments

BooMan on April 30, 2008 at 11:20 am

WASHINGTON — Indiana 9th District Rep. Baron Hill, a previously uncommitted Democratic superdelegate, is endorsing presidential candidate Barack Obama today.

Hill’s spokeswoman, Katie Moreau, said the congressman will make the endorsement tonight at a Bloomington rally where Obama will appear. The rally begins at 8:30 p.m. at Indiana University’s Assembly Hall.

Hill was among a group of superdelegates in Indiana and Kentucky who for months had held off siding with either Obama, a senator from Illinois, or Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York in the campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

But yesterday a Kentucky superdelegate, Rep. Ben Chandler, D-6th District, announced his endorsement of Obama.

Hill released a statement this morning on his decision.

“Some have advised me to be cautious, to wait and see which way the electoral winds may blow,” he said. “I confess that I have listened to those voices and been tempted by their reasoning. But, the stakes are just too high.

“We cannot continue to pursue the same politics of personal destruction we have engaged in for a generation, some never-ending `groundhog day’ endlessly playing out the cultural wars of forty years ago,” Hill said.

“If we are going to develop real solutions for Hoosier families, for America’s families, we have to move past the partisan gridlock,” he added. “I believe both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama want to do that and I believe both are formidable candidates. But I also believe that only one of them truly can. I am proud of Senator Obama’s call for change in Washington — change I have been advocating since I first sought public office. I am truly hopeful that his campaign and election will help unify our nation and ultimately change our politics.”

Hill said Obama’s repudiation of the controversial remarks of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., was a sign of leadership and strength of character.

link
- idredit on April 30, 2008 at 1:05 pm
  
  SuperDs are stepping forward: – this one will infuriate the Clintons – Politico
  
  A California congresswoman with long ties to both Clintons will announce her endorsement of Barack Obama today, a campaign source said.
  
  Rep. Lois Capps, who represents a district on California’s central coast, is the third member of Congress to announce an endorsement of Senator Obama Wednesday, the day after he responded sharply to one of the deepest crises of his campaign, a confrontational and, he said, “appalling” set of remarks by his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The campaign is using the flurry of endorsements to shore up political support and demonstrate the frontrunner’s continuing strength.
  
  “Barack Obama is the better choice because of something larger and perhaps more important. Simply put, he has made a call to the better angels of our nature. He is challenging us to lift ourselves out of the ugliness that increasingly consumes Washington, where the heat of your argument counts for more than the light it should bring,” Capps said in a statement. “He is asking us to stand together as Americans and transcend the traditional lines that have so often divided us by party affiliation, economic status, gender, or race.”
  
  In her statement, Capps praised Clinton, but also suggested she’d been pushed to Obama by negative aspects of the campaign.
  
  This takes courage and should encourage others to step out.
PsiFighter37 on April 30, 2008 at 11:28 am

After IN and NC, my preliminary estimates (more back-of-the-envelope than anything else) has Clinton netting out 14 delegates without Puerto Rico as follows:

WV: Clinton +10 (19-9)
KY: Clinton +15 (33-18)
OR: Obama +8 (30-22)
MT: Obama +2 (9-7)
SD: Obama +1 (8-7)

Puerto Rico allocates 36 delegates across 8 senatorial districts, with 12 at-large and 7 pledged PLEO delegates (per TGP).The only poll done in Puerto Rico (about a month ago) showed Clinton up 50-37. In a crude effort to estimate delegates, I grossed that up to 100%, giving Clinton a victory of 57.4%-42.6%. If I apply that to the popular margin and across all of the districts, Clinton only nets out 5 delegates (30-25). However, if Clinton is able to get over 62.5% in a lot of districts, she could net out as many as 19 delegates (37-18), given that 5 of the 8 senatorial districts have 4 delegates.

All in all, Clinton could end up netting out around 40 delegates in a best-case scenario for her – but only if she performs exceptionally well in PR. Given that the Latino population there has different concerns than those on the continental U.S., as well as the fact that residents with an African heritage may very well support Obama (just look at his blowout win in the Virgin Islands), a closer result is more likely. Clinton netting out 25 delegates won’t be enough to make a difference for her – even if they seat FL and MI as is, which won’t happen.
- BooMan on April 30, 2008 at 12:06 pm
  
  Clinton will need huge numbers in WV to get that kind of split. Demographically, it’s possible, but the establishment in West Virginia is heavily skewed to Obama. We’ll see.
maryb2004 on April 30, 2008 at 12:09 pm

Sounds good.

But one reason Claire was a great candidate to work for was that she was always on message and always sounded completely confident and unconcerned – even when most of the rest of us were doubtful and concerned. In 2006 it turned out she was right to be confident. In 2004 – she sounded confident and she lost; not by much — but she lost.

She sounded absolutely confident that Obama was going to win Missouri – much more confident than that squeaker of a primary deserved.

It’s what makes her a great surrogate for him. But you’re right to say that it might be gamesmanship.
idredit on April 30, 2008 at 12:22 pm

I doubt Clinton will take PR. I expect Richardson will help with the campaign there and the governor has endorsed Obama. Bill Clinton did nothing for PR.

I just read this piece in The Jed Report

Superdelegates to blame for enabling destructive campaign

At any point during the last two months, superdelegates could have made it clear that they would support the will of voters. Instead, by declaring their indecision, they provided Clinton with a new rationale for her campaign. Effectively, they encouraged her coup attempt. It was if they said to her: if you can prove to us that Barack Obama is unelectable, we will overturn the judgment of voters.

It is now clear just how foolish and unwise the superdelegates were for offering Clinton such a destructive path to the nomination, for she has tried to meet it with unrestrained vigor. Two months later, a party that was once unified is now divided. The septuagenarian Republican presidential candidate who devised the Iraq war strategy and wants to stay there for one hundred years is leading or tied in most polls.

And the ultimate blame for making this possible rests with the very people who are supposed to lead the Democratic Party: the superdelegates.

::

It’s important to remember the state of the campaign in late February. At that point, 70% of the pledged delegates had been chosen. Barack Obama had 1,210 pledged delegates and Clinton had 1,044, a lead of 166. It was clear that Obama’s pledged delegate lead was insurmountable.

Now, after two months of nastiness on the campaign trail, voters have selected another another 573 pledged delegates, 20% of the total. With just 10% remaining, the pledged delegate margin is virtually identical heading into May as it was in late February: Obama leads by 161. (He has has 1,494 and Clinton has 1,333.)

[.]The point is clear: Hillary Clinton took the superdelegates up on their irresponsible challenge and tried to prove that Obama is unelectable. Meanwhile, Obama could not respond as forcefully to Clinton as he would have to John McCain. He knew that unlike Clinton, he had to worry about unifying the party after her superdelegate gambit. He couldn’t afford to attack her the way she attacked him.

Moreover, the media created a new Clinton-friendly narrative in order to support a continued campaign.[.]
The Voice In The Wilderness on April 30, 2008 at 12:35 pm

76% I figure she needs 76% of the remaining super delegates or 76% of the remaining pledged delegates.

Expect to hear a WHOLE LOT MORE crap about Rev Wright and Louis Farrakhan. She needs nearly every remaining white person to vote for her and I’m sure she will try, turning the Democratic Party backwards fifty years.
- idredit on April 30, 2008 at 12:57 pm
  
  It’s Over – former President Jimmy Carter says end this by June 3. and goes on to sketch out Obama’s inaugural address:
  
  The Daily Telegraph, UK
  
  Obama can transform America’s image, says Jimmy Carter
  
  Former President Jimmy Carter has given Barack Obama a major boost by calling for the bitter Democratic nomination battle to end on June 3rd and speaking glowingly of his ability to “transform the image” of America.
  
  money quote:
  
  The former president, who travels the globe dealing with the conflict resolution and human rights issues promoted by his Carter Centre, told this newspaper that “overseas there is an intense infatuation with Obama, perhaps more than there ever has been in previous history with any candidate”.
  
  A Nobel Peace Prize winner who abhors the policies of President George W. Bush, Mr Carter added: “A lot of them see Obama as kind of a diametrical opposite from George W. Bush and they think that he will bring to the presidency a brand new picture of what the White House and Washington and the United States ought to be.”
  
  He mused openly about how Mr Obama might harness this feeling in an inaugural address.
  
  “If the first statement he made was while I’m president of the United States we will never torture another prisoner and while I’m President of the United States we will never go to war unless our own security is directly threatened…it would transform the image of the United States in the minds of many people around the world.”
  - The Voice In The Wilderness on April 30, 2008 at 9:22 pm
    
    June 3 means another month of crap from Hillary who becomes more and more Republicanesque. I wonder if she is behind Wright. The Clintons and the Daleys were always tight. The Chicago Machine may feel it can do better with Hillary than with Obama.
BooMan on April 30, 2008 at 1:29 pm

Superdelegate count for today.

Obama: 3

Rep. Bruce Braley (Iowa)
Rep. Baron Hill (Indiana)
Rep. Lois Capps (California)

Clinton: 2

Luisette Cabanas (Puerto Rico)
Bill George, President of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO.

Another Look at the Math

About The Author

BooMan

10 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments