Slog - Comments on Re: Wyoming & Mississippi & Credulity http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity Warning: Messy math ahead. I think the pundits skipped lightly over Wyoming and Mississippi mainly because those states were/are unlikely to change the status quo: ie, Obama leading Clinton by well over 100 pledged delegates. Pennsylvania is her next best chance to catch up. Not that she will. What I find curious is why people aren't marveling over how accurate the Obama camp's early February projections have been. That document probably wasn't leaked in order to manage expectations, people said then--why, it has him winning every February post-Super Tuesday contest save Maine. (He ended up winning those caucuses too.) But... Copyright 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:35:41 -0800 Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:16:43 -0800 http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Comment by cressona I've got news for you, Little Miss Math Professor Annie Wagner. Delegates schmelegates.

I don't care if Obama ends up with more pledged delegates and more votes, Hillary deserves to win. She's earned it. You go, girl!

The Clintons are America's First Family, the closest thing we have to royalty in this land, and this is the way you treat them, Annie? You ingrate.

Sure, the only way Hillary can win at this point is by getting incredibly dirty and divisive, to essentially make the supers do with this nomination what the Supreme Court did with Florida in 2000. And I say, more power to her. It's about time we had a Democrat who's battle-tested, who we know and trust will play even dirtier than the Republicans, who will be even more destructive, who will out-Swiftboat the Swiftboaters, who will lie, cheat, and steal and do whatever it takes to win.

If there's anything we can learn from recent American political history, it's that (A) Republicans don't play fair, and (B) Republicans are winners. I'm glad to know at least one proud Democrat has taken that lesson to heart.

]]> cressona http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962029 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962029 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:48:46 -0800 Comment by Tony When Michigan & Florida are included, the delegate threshold to be the nominee will rise back to the original number.

]]> Tony http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962032 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962032 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:49:33 -0800 Comment by Henrietta Arguably, the Bush family is our firster first family. Multigenerational, multi-state, three terms and all. Should we also show them respect and gratitude out of loyalty?

]]> Henrietta http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962045 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962045 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:55:25 -0800 Comment by John @1. that's pretty gross.

I spose you think she should probably invade a couple countries to celebrate her victory too eh?

Also

Bill Clinton sucked.

And our last liberal president, if you haven't been keeping count, was Richard Nixon. Damn actually... I mean if one of the two is the next RN you make it sound a lot like that person would be HRC.

]]> John http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962051 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962051 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:57:40 -0800 Comment by annie @3 & 4: Cressona is an Obama fan who loves the satire. Calm, calm.

]]> annie http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962055 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962055 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:59:12 -0800 Comment by Matthew How many delegates do Florida and Michigan have to offer (if they do get seated)?

]]> Matthew http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962065 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962065 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:04:47 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle However, most of the Pennsylvania voters I know are for Obama, so don't count that one in the Clinton camp yet ...

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962100 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962100 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:21:16 -0800 Comment by Fnarf Ah, Will knows everybody in PA too. Figures.

Clinton's going to win big there, but it's not going to matter. That spreadsheet looks pretty much like the one I've been keeping, though my projections aren't as accurate. But it bears repeating that even if they seat FL and MI as-is, with no do-over, Clinton loses.

The superdelegates are not a mystery; they're holding back because they're going to go for the pledged winner, which is going to be Obama. I actually have a bigger superdelegate spread for Clinton, 261 to 214, but she's been shedding them as Obama has been rising. And almost half of them are undeclared.

]]> Fnarf http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962141 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962141 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:39:56 -0800 Comment by Tony MI has 156 delegates, and FL has 185.

]]> Tony http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962142 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962142 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:42:36 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle Oh, Fnarf, I know you don't get around much, but try to keep up.

Unlike you, I lived there, my parents went to college there, and I still have relatives there. Heck, my mom taught Kindergarten and 2nd grade there ... so lots of people remember us.

Clinton is just going to have to accept that she's playing chess and Obama's playing poker.

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962162 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962162 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:58:07 -0800 Comment by Matthew Thanks, Tony @9.

So let's see...Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, and Clinton managed 55% of the vote (pathetic, btw). So 55% of 156, barring some weird delgate-apportioning criteria, would be around 86 delegates for Clinton. Florida was 50%-33%, Clinton to Obama. So of those 185, around 98 go to Clinton and 61 go to Obama. So the totals are:

Michigan:
Clinton: 86 delegates
Obama: 0

Florida:
Clinton: 98 delegates
Obama: 61 delegates

Net gain for Clinton: 98+86-61= 123 delegates

Obama is currently up in the pledged delegate count by roughly 1348 to 1210.5 (according to NYT), or 137.5 delegates. If he maintains that lead, Clinton still falls over 14 delegates short in the pledged delegate count total even IF the DNC lose their minds, subvert democracy, and seat Florida and Michigan at the conventioin. Right?

She's pathetic.

]]> Matthew http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962174 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962174 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:03:10 -0800 Comment by Andrew I still do not know why everyone keeps treating this like it is the general election? Really, it is about the delegates in the end not which "big states" or "little states" anyone wins.

At the end of this we all need to accept there will be no resultion until the convention in August. In the next several months McCain can control when the media covers him and not cover him. McCain gets to rally the base of the GOP back by getting endorsements from every piece of right wing shit that exists in the country and get money lined up for the general election.

Meanwhile, Clinton and Obama continue to bleed the democratic party of treasure and motivation to actually win the White House in November.

This is why I said months and months ago: Do you REALLY think having this two year (yes, two year) election cycle is a good idea?

]]> Andrew http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962182 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962182 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:08:36 -0800 Comment by Andy Niable There's nothing quite so "democratic" as insisting on seating delegates from a state where your opponents aren't even on the ballot (Michigan), or where those opponents promised not to campaign to follow the rules that had been agreed to by all (Florida). Not even Putin attempted something as naked as that.

If this is how the Clinton campaign treats the campaign rules, isn't it important to wonder how a Clinton Administration will treat the rule of law in the post-Cheney-evisceration of checks and balances on Executive Power?

]]> Andy Niable http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962208 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962208 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:25:33 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle @12 - because McCain has such little chance, quite frankly. I mean, the guy is so old he makes Tina Brown look young ...

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962213 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962213 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:29:00 -0800 Comment by Anon Can you imagine the revolt if the Superdelegates were to defy the will of the people (popular vote) and give it to Hillary?

Obama isn't a crackpot, we don't need super delegates to 'save' us from the picking him.

I wonder how the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is coming along...

]]> Anon http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962217 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962217 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:31:16 -0800 Comment by Cato Edwards needs to pledge his delegates to someone, that's an added +61 to whichever candidate gives him the AG spot.

]]> Cato http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962222 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962222 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:33:59 -0800 Comment by Cato According to the WSJ he only has 26, guess that's not going to help either side all that much. Maybe his endorsement would carry more weight.

]]> Cato http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962227 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962227 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:36:43 -0800 Comment by Tony Matthew @19, not sure why you addressed your comments to me. I agree with them btw. I was just responding to #6.

]]> Tony http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962239 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962239 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:48:08 -0800 Comment by Tony Oops, correction on 18: Should be "Matthew @ 11"

]]> Tony http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962243 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962243 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:50:45 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle @15 - yes, we can imagine all the primary and write-in campaigns for Obama supporters in congressional districts where the superdelegate went for Clinton even when Obama won the delegation.

And you KNOW that will happen.

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962283 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962283 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:25:11 -0800 Comment by Seattle dem It's looking like there will be a re-do for Michigan AND Florida, which will cancel each other out, resulting in no net change in the delegate count, which means Obama stays in the lead and should be awarded the nomination by the supers.

]]> Seattle dem http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962342 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962342 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:06:22 -0800 Comment by Greg I had been marveling at those predictions myself over the last couple of weeks. I think the trick is that the Obama campaign ended up securing the services of Ken Strasma and his firm, Strategic Telemetry. He is apparently the best in the business and had been pursued by all of the major candidates before signing on to the Obama campaign.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/11/26/071126fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=3
http://strategictelemetry.com/strasma_bio.htm

]]> Greg http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962718 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962718 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:25:32 -0800 Comment by Fnarf Matthew @11: Clinton didn't win Michigan 86-0. Someone called "Uncommitted" won 40% of the vote. If they seat Michigan as-is, they'll be seating those ~51 delegates too, and they will be voting for Obama -- which cuts her advantage even further. You're also overstating her Florida edge a little, too -- 50% of 185 is 93, not 98. Her net gain from the two states, disregarding superdelegates, is 50.

Your conclusion ("not enough") is actually stronger than you make it out to be.

]]> Fnarf http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962936 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962936 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:54:38 -0800 Comment by montex If the situation were reversed and Clinton was ahead in delegates, I think she'd be calling for Obama to drop out of the race. She seems to believe that she's going to do something to change the momentum and miraculously win the nomination.

It's a fantasy.

She needs to show us her integrity and do the right thing for the Democrats. Unfortunately, she doesn't have the honor to do the right thing and she is going to tear this party apart in her bid for power.

I used to like Hillary. I don't anymore.

]]> montex http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962946 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962946 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:58:47 -0800 Comment by montex BTW, if you agree to the rules at the beginning of the campaign season, but then try to change them half way through to benefit yourself - that is the definition of dishonorable.

]]> montex http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962959 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c962959 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:01:46 -0800 Comment by Ebenezer What's illuminating about this is how smart and honest Obama and his campaign team are. They know what to expect, and they do it in a logical way. Sure, they want to put a spin on things, but it doesn't turn ugly.

Not so with Clinton. She will destroy the party and country in an attempt to win at any cost. I'm surprised that Slog hasn't discussed the comments of Clinton supporter Geraldine Ferraro:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

]]> Ebenezer http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c963138 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c963138 2008 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:01:11 -0800 Comment by J As several have noted, but not really said, there is a possible situation in which Edwards could be the decider- it's possible for Obama to get fewer than 39% of remaining superdelegates AND Clinto to get fewer than 75%. That little bit in between is John Edwards.

The other factor no one has mentioned is splitting Michigan and Florida. What happens if only Florida or only Michigan has a revote?

]]> J http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c963434 http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/03/re_wyoming_mississippi_credulity#c963434 2008 Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:16:43 -0800