Make No Mistake: This Is Going to Get Messy

[cali]

by wmtriallawyer
Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:58:05 AM PST

Super Duper Tuesday has left us with a super duper mess on our hands. Now it could be a good mess, or a bad mess...hard to tell at this point. There are merits to a long primary season versus a short one. But let's not get ahead of ourselves, or predict that one candidate has the advantage over the other. Because the fact of the matter is that this thing may not decided until the convention in Denver.

A simple look at the numbers tells us so. First, take a look at the projected delegate count from last night. Projections are that Obama took in 845 pledged delegates and Clinton took in 836. Add that to the delegates already allocated in prior contests (excluding Michigan and Florida) and Obama has 908 pledged delegates and Clinton 884. Add to THAT the "superdelegates" that have pledged, and Obama's total is 1036 and Clinton's in 1095.

Looking ahead, and you'll see where the mess begins.

wmtriallawyer's diary :: ::
It's simple math, really. Of ALL the remaining contests on the Democratic side, there are only 1,378 more pledged delegates to be had. Again, doing the math, with 2,025 delegates needed to nominate, that means that Obama or Clinton need to get roughly 900 to 1000 more delegates to sew it up.

Of the remaining delegates up for grabs in primaries and/or caucuses, that means that one of the candidates needs to win two-thirds of all the remaining delegates up for grabs to win it outright.

Otherwise, it goes to those pesky "superdelegates" to decide our nominee.

As much as one may want to cheer on a given candidate (and I support Obama), I don't think it's rational to even make the argument that EITHER candidate can win 2/3rds of the remaining pledged delegates outright. Neither has come close at this point. And while one may outpace the other in the coming months, it's doubtful that this will be locked up before convention. Extremely doubtful.

At this point, the race is about getting convincing victories that will sway a cadre of those superdelegates to jump on board.

But if this relatively even split continues, look out.

What would have been the "Coronation in Colorado" for one of these candidates could end up being a "Disaster in Denver" for both of them.

At least the convention will be fun to watch again...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/6/124633/7784/431/451135

[AtomicKitten]

1. I fully expect Clinton to try to sue her way to the title.

After the 2000 judicial coup d'etat, I think most Americans have had it with the courts deciding elections. Enough.

1. The DNC set the rules, the same rules Clinton signed on to and obviously intends to try to break in the middle of the game for advantage.
2. Not all candidates were on the Michigan ballot and the Florida vote was name recognition only.

Bill Nelson lost his attempt to sue on this issue. I expect the same result if the Clintons are low enough to pursue that line of attack.

[spotbird]

2. I think Clinton will seat those delegates

It is wrong, but they're fairly powerful people and usually get there way.

[K Gardner]

4. They do that and I predict we lose most if not all of Obama voters out of protest if nothing else.

[Big Blue Marble]

5. If she forces this on the party, the party loses in November. n/t

[cali]

3. I think Dean will end up seating MI and FL

delegates in some form. And just fyi, it wasn't ben nelson, it was bill nelson.

[Yael]

7. If she has to resort to this to win, it shows what her motivation is

and it isn't the party.

She wins without digging through the unethical mud and she has my vote.

She pulls this and I stay home in November. Period.

[Yael]

8. Delete -- wrong spot

[TexasObserver]

6. that's why we need Obama to win going away

The numbers could be very tight and could throw it to the superdelegates, but the trends suggest Obama will pull ahead enough to make the superdelegates see the light, or in the alternative, feel the heat.

[Yael]

9. Have Edwards' super delegates committed?

I checked the site that tracks supers the other day and his name and list was removed.

I hadn't made a copy to know who was originally an Edwards super.

[rodeodance]

10. Here is a prime Exp. of Rovian style Obamababy tactic:

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Obama Directly Attacks Bill's Presidency, Blames It For Massive Dem Losses
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4437316#4437316
4437316, Obama Directly Attacks Bill's Presidency, Blames It For Massive Dem Losses
Posted by russian33 on Wed Feb-06-08 12:50 PM

In what may be Obama's most direct and aggressive criticism of Bill Clinton's presidency yet, the Obama campaign dropped a new mailer just before Super Tuesday that blasts "the Clintons" for wreaking massive losses on the Democratic party throughout the 1990s.

"8 years of the Clintons, major losses for Democrats across the nation," reads the mailer, which goes on to list the post-1992 losses suffered by Dems among governors, Senators and members of the House of Representatives. The mailer was forwarded to us by a political operative who told us it was sent to Alaska, though it was probably sent elsewhere, too.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_directly_attacks_bills_p.php


smell that 'hope and change', and uniting across party lines....beautiful, ain't it?

[Yael]

14. How is this Rovian?

[rodeodance]

15. Divide (in this case the Dems) and Conquer.

[Yael]

16. What?

It is a primary. Rovian is making a big deal out of nothing (scare politics).

What this ad was was stating a fact. The Dems lost the house and senate in 1994 and just got it back in 2006.

Pick your battles. Seriously. Not everything needs (or deserves or has even earned) a lable.

[H2O Man]

11. At least we can

look to DU for civil discussion based upon rational thought.

[smalll]

12. God this is awful.

A maddeningly proportional allocation system + Dr. Dean's stripping of FL and MI + all those superDs = One Big Mess.

Winner-take-all primaries are looking better and better. Maddening proportionality sucks. Saw on ABC last night, for example: most delegates are awarded by Congressional District. If a CD has 4 delegates, one candidate can win 59% of the vote, the other can win 41% of the vote -- and EACH candidate gets 2 delegates! For this reason, the campaigns were focussing on CDs with 5 delegates, because in that scenario, the winner of that CD, DOES actually get 3 delegates rather than just 2. But in the 4-delegate districts, all you have to do is stay over 40% and you're cool. It's not unusual at all to still have a race on at this point of the year, but what usually happens then is that the factors of 1)momentum and 2)winner-favoring delegate distribution eventually give one candidate a critical mass, and the contest can be brought to closure well before the Convention. This time, because Obama and Hillary are both still viable, the system we have pretty much guarantees a stalemate!

:mad: :banghead:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

13. Messy? Like a knife fight between Hillary and Barack in a tiger pit?

Metaphorically speaking, of course. Although that might be the fairest way to settle this.