1984 is not just a novel, now it's a target

By: snolan
Published On: 5/21/2008 11:50:45 AM

Obama did better in Oregon than expected (+30 rather than the expected +28 delegates).  Clinton did better in Kentucky than expected (+37 rather than the expected +28-31 delegates).

According to RCP that brings us to (Updated 5/29):
Candidate:Pledged:Supers:Total:Needs
Obama1659321198045
Clinton:14992821781244

Careful analysis by Poblano projects that Obama will probably add another 41 and Clinton will add another 45 pledged delegates from Puerto Rico (June 1st), South Dakota, and Montana (both June 3rd).  Since my own poll watching and the leaked spreadsheet also agree, let's treat it as likely, give or take a few delegates.

That means that Obama only needs enough super delegate endorsements between now and those last few primary elections to get to 1984 total (2025 minus the expected 41).
According to RCP that means he only needs 4 more super delegate endorsements to win the nomination.  At this point, with 193 uncommitted, I consider that to be very likely.  The beautiful fact is that if at least 4 super delegates endorse Obama, but no more than 45 do; then it will not be a super delegate's endorsement, but a pledged delegate vote won in one of the three remaining primaries that puts Obama over the top.

That would be elegant and beautiful.  So watch the total delegates column for Obama; if he gets to 1984 this nomination will be over on June 3rd, and it will have been nice to give every eligible state and territory the chance to vote.  For the ever hopeful, Clinton only needs to get to 1980 to achieve the same thing (because she is projected to squeeze a few more delegates out of Puerto Rico than he is).  To get to 1980, she'd need 199 super delegate endorsements between now and June 1st....  still possible, but highly unlikely.

Comments



The only trouble is... (KathyinBlacksburg - 5/21/2008 5:47:54 PM)
As always, thanks for your analysis.  However, just today, HRC threatened to take the FL/MI thing all the way to the convention.  While she's railing about "unfairness," it is Obama and we Obama supporters who have been ripped off.  She committed fraud by signing the agreement not to run or campaign in the two states.  She campaigned in both, showing up in FL on the eve of the election to grandstand and bring out the voters the next day.   I feel like we have all been conned by this candidate and I cannot fathom why her supporters think she should be doing what she is doing...unless they are as ruthless as she appears to be.  

But we know one thing, her word (and signature, mean nothing.  Sounds a bit like GWB, doesn't it?  Signing statements perhaps?  Maybe she crossed her fingers while she signed.  In any case, she committed fraud and NO ONE should let her get away with this highway robbery of FL and MI she is trying to put over on us.  God help me I have tried in the interest of peace between the factions to hang back and not write much about the campaign so as not to rile her supporters.  Few of her supporters seem to think anything of this and keep urging her on.  (Exception: aznew here at RK.)

But the rest--Do they hear themselves?  They are showing one thing for certain.  It changes nothing to have a woman candidate.  This is Bushism all over again.  And Barack Obama is the one being cheated.  One more time, she is perpetuating a fraud on this country every time she spreads the malicious deception about MI and FL.  

And now even the formerly venomous (especially to Hillary) Chris Matthews is even spewing this garbage on her behalf.

Sign me, One Feminist for Honesty About Florida and Michigan.  



Thanks, and for the record, I agree (snolan - 5/22/2008 8:22:40 AM)
I am a Soka Gakkai USA member, and a buddhist.  I agree with Daisaku Ikeda when he calls for more and more of the world's leaders to be women.  He has written extensively about it and says it far better than I can ever even duplicate...  however, this particular woman (Hillary Clinton) is not the right woman to lead the United States.  I have felt that since long before the primary started, and I continue to say that now, and my feelings have been solidly reinforced throughout this long primary by her behavior, by her words, and by her lack of ethics and lack of moral compass.

I believe that Barack Obama is a stronger feminist than Hillary Clinton.

She keeps trying to change the rules, and part of me admires that.  One thing about human beings is that we can change the rules...  but we live with the consequences.  If she wants to keep running, she is entitled to, as an independent, like Joe Lieberman.