Updated Delegate Count

[redsoxliberal]

Unofficial as of now... I'm just adding everyone up.

Kerry 397
Dean 175
Edwards 108
Clark 81
Sharpton 13
Kucinich 2

[arewethereyet]

1. does anyone differentiate real delegates from super delegates ?

I cannot find it so broken out.

[question everything]

10. According to the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/20040127_px_RESULTS/

(first number is superdelegates, second is pledged delegates)

Clark 43 + 43 = 86
Dean 121 + 16 = 137
Edwards 39 + 20 = 89
Kerry 101 + 119 = 220
Kucinic 2 + 0 = 2
Sharpton 3 + 1 = 4
Undetermined 192 + 3291 = 3783

Need 2161 for the nomination

[buckeye1]

14. Thanks.

Your post gives us clarity. Dean is fourth in real votes. To avoid further embarrassment Dean ought to quit now. Hype squawks,losers walk.

[dsc]

16. It doesn't include the delegates that Dean won today

[eaprez]

2. I Can't believe...

...Sharpton has more delegates than Kucinich.

[arewethereyet]

7. but how many are super delegates ?

they are meaningless

[dsc]

8. Sharpton's support is more concentrated

which helps him get delegates. Sharpton all but certainly got a few delegates in SC where most of the blacks are in one or two districts. His 10% overall showing may well have been a 20% to 25% showing in those districts. He also got a Deleware delegate. Kucinich has more disparate support. Thus his percentage is about equal in all Congressional districts.

[rocketdem]

3. What is the required minimum for nomination?

I'm sure that we're miles away from a true conclusion, but I don't know what the goal is for a first ballot nomination.

[WilliamPitt]

4. 2,161

Super Tuesday will tell some tales.

[alexwcovington]

5. Some 2,161

[redsoxliberal]

6. I think Dean should stay in regardless of Wisconsin

he is doing well now, a "clear alternate to Kerry."

We're going to Boston.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Dean staying in would help Kerry enormously

The media has its Dean story line set now. Dean staying in would allow them to run with it night after night, primary after primary, like they did tonight. Kerry would escape the fray.

Wanna stop Kerry? Have Dean drop out. I'm serious.

[joshcryer]

11. Or just have Kerry drop out.

I'm serious. :)

[WilliamPitt]

12. Well, that would surely do the trick

:)

[shredder]

13. Yep far from over in the real world

It's takes over 2000 delegates to be nominated. The idea here is that a few states with the help of the media will decide who the winner is. If you consider a few things.
1.That it WILL eventually become a two man race at some point in time.
2.Kerry represents Typical Washington politics.
3.He has not receieved MOre than 50% in any states primary,(yes 50% in the michigan caucus but no more than that)
4.You consider that the other surviving nominees have essentially taken a stand against Washington politics.
5.As the contenders drop out, the support for the anti washington establishment contenders will follow other AW contenders and NOT Kerry.
You can only come to one conclusion..... It aint over till the fat lady sings!

And for all you ABB folks the cold truth is.. at this point ANY of the Dem contenders could beat bush, the question is.. do we really want to just win or do we want to make a real change in the future of America. What's the differance if all we do is change the label from repub to dem. For christ sakes John Kerry has supported just about everything Bush has done. Let's vote for a real change not just another Washington Politician! I say for the Dem party It should be ABK! Anybody but Kerry!

[countmyvote4real]

17. Yes! I agree.

[Samantha]

18. Hey Shredder, welcome to DU

If you are here to discredit ABB, a brainwashing propaganda tool floated by DLC strategists to convince Dems it's okay to vote for a DLC'er just as long as you win, you and I are on the same track. It's not okay to simply seek a win if you end up electing a candidate who does not represent your interests.

John Kerry does not represent my interests. In Washington, DC we have a way of asking, what have you done for me lately? I don't pretend to try to detract from Kerry's war heroics, but he seems not to have evolved out of the 60s. His lame attempt to continually, subtly have the voting public see a similarity between him and John Kennedy is pitiful. In the political arena of late, his sense of heroism has been AWOL.

Where was John Kerry during the Election 2000 debacle? I did not hear him protest the theft.

Where was John Kerry when the anti-war element within the Democratic party was speaking out and protesting against the pre-emptive attack on Iraq? He was siding with the enemy.

Where was John Kerry when the Medicare bill came up for a vote? He was "busy."

Where was John Kerry when the overtime fight was fought?

So when I ask myself what has John Kerry done for me lately, I come up with the same answer if I asked myself that question about Bush.* John Kerry and George Bush* both have done nothing for a middle-class person like me. I will vote for neither of them.

[shredder]

19. Thanks for the warm welcome

I've been monitoring DU for over two years! Just finally decided to speek up figured I'd get Flamed on my first attempt. Glad you see my point. Now can we wake the rest of DU up please!

[question everything]

20. But we are not looking at percentage but at delegates

I have no idea how this fuzzy math works.

First, we will not know the delegates from the caucus states, including Washington and Michigan until after their state conventions.

Second, you look at N.H, for example. Kerry got 38% and Dean 26%. Clark and Edwards to 12% each (I am rounding the numbers). Yet Kerry got 13 delegates, Dean 9 and the rest none. So even though Kerry did not get 50% of the votes, he did get 60% of the delegates. How? I have no idea.

Even more bizarre, in DE Sharpton came sixth, with less than 6% of the votes, yet got one delegate. Kerry did win more than 50% of the votes and got the remaining 14 delegates. None for Lieberman, Edwards or Dean each with around 11%.

I disagree with you that at this point each would beat Bush. Karl Rove was ready for Dean and was caught unprepared. They will have to tiptoe around Kerry.

[krkaufman]

21. Splitting vote is killing non-Kerry candidates

The delegates are apportioned based on percentage of the votes cast for "viable" candidates, so splitting the vote is hurting candidates in states that require some non-zero "viability threshold" of votes. (e.g. a candidate must get 15% of the vote or better, or he/she's considered unviable and gets no delegates)

Assume candidates A, B, C, D & E get 40%, 20%, 20%, 10% & 10% of the vote, respectively, with a viability threshold of 15%... and the state has 20 delegates... the final delegate distribution would be:

A - 10 (50% of viable votes)
B - 5 (25% of viable votes)
C - 5 (25% of viable votes)
D - 0 (not "viable")
E - 0 (not "viable")

So with just 40% of the vote in a state (and 60% of the vote effectively "against" him/her), candidate A gains 50% of the delegates.

The longer that truly unviable candidates remain in the race, the greater the likelihood of candidate A getting 50% of the delegates without majority support of the Party.

[krkaufman]

22. Re: your specific New Hampshire example

Looking at your specific New Hampshire example, you'll see that only Kerry and Dean exceeded the 15% "viability threshold":

Percentage of total NH Dem primary vote:
Kerry 38.4%
Dean 26.3%
Clark 12.4% **
Edwards 12.1% **
Lieberman 8.6% **
Kucinich 1.4% **

** <15% of vote; so "not viable"

64.7% of all votes cast were cast for viable candidates.

Viable votes cast, as % of total:
Kerry (38.4%) + Dean (26.3%) = 64.7%

Then you simply determine each viable candidate's percentage of the viable votes cast:

Candidates' % of viable votes:
Kerry: 38.4% / 64.7% = 59.4%
Dean: 26.3% / 64.7% = 40.6%

And, finally, the 22 New Hampshire delegates get distributed between these 2 viable candidates based on their percentage of all viable votes.

Delegate distribution to viable candidates:
Kerry: 22 * 59.4% = 13 delegates
Dean: 22 * 40.6% = 9 delegates

[question everything]

15. Caucuses delegates?

According to the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/20040127_px_RESULTS/ delegates from the caucus states: Iowa, North Dakota, Washington and Michigan are not determined until later this year.

Is it?