Later For Texas and Ohio.Next week is Wyoming and Mississippi. Guaranteed victories for brother Barack and enough delegates to neutralize the handful of delegates gained by Hillary last night.
Anybody notice the 'Media Switcharoo' 72 hours before the vote? All of a sudden they started covering Obama like he got caught stealing something.
16 comments:
Submariner beat all y'all to the punch.
First, neither Obama or Clinton will go into the convention with enough pledged delegates (forget supers). The supers hold the key. It is now out of the electorates hands.
I am not young and idealistic. I am a life-long Chicagoan and I know how a party machine works. It is no coincidence that Obama is the Senator from Illinois who cut his teeth in the backyard of Jesse Jackson, Harold Washington and the Daley's. It is no coicidence that Obama's path to a political career was paved by cut-throat party maneuvering. It is no coincidence that he was elevated to the national stage at the convention and introduced as a 'rising star.' It is no coincidence that he was virtually unopposed in his Senate run after a Republican Party scandal. There are no coincidences in Machine politics. They let him have a taste of "Turkish Delight" and now he's hooked.
Now, who does Obama owe (and someone ALWAYS owes someone in Machine politics) for his fast track political career? He OWES the Democrat Party. And now, unless he wants to be destroyed by the people he owes (Does the name REZKO ring a bell?). It is no coincidence that Rezko was brought to trial just as the primaries were heating up. Now, behind closed doors, he will be told to get in line and wait his turn. He will now EARN his seat at the table, take the VP slot and unite the Democrat Party or they will destroy him just as quickly as they made him.
Its the Chicago Way, the Democrat Machine Way.
What a morbid thought. Plausible yet morbid.
KP
Good points Brothers Sub.
True, it is no coincidence that Barack Obama is the Senator from Illinois whose path to a political career was paved by cut-throat party maneuvering, was elevated to the national stage at the convention or that he was virtually unopposed in his Senate run.
However, neither is it a coincidence when Brother Obama opens his mouth, and the voice of God comes out.
Whether one calls them platitudes or chakras, Barack Obama's voice has the power to rise above the media din and to not only be heard - but also to be felt.
In an age of mass spiritual atrophy and political robotrons the demand for genuine human interaction is at an all time high.
The phenomenon that is Barack Obama transcends talking head party politics and political machines.
The phenomenon that is Barack Obama is a religious experience, similar to one that occurred about 2,000 years ago.
Sit back for 2 months and peep game.
Well said DV.
Good observations Sub. Too bad you got the ending wrong.
Nulan...
"Submariner beat all y'all to the punch."
As usual, the Anti-Logic patrol is knocking about. This is what E.C. correctly had to say over at Cobb's:
"
Even though CNN is not as objective as I might like, its Situation Room is better than the other shows, especially when John King goes over the mathematics on the cool touch screen. At the time of this comment, the CNN Scorecard shows Obama is leading Clinton on pledged delegates 1321 to 1186. That's a 135 pledged delegate lead for Obama. Clinton leads Obama on the superdelegates, 238 to 199. That's a 39 superdelegate lead for Clinton. Combined, Obama leads Clinton 1520 to 1424. That's a 96 delegate lead for Obama, with 1079 total delegates still up for grabs, including 359 superdelegates.
A 96 delegate lead!
If anyone really believes Clinton can beat Obama to 2,025 without more than 100 of the total 796 superdelegates voting against the will of the pledged delegates, then I'd like to see their mathematics. From where I stand, as someone who never tested for a degree in political science but who knows his mathematics, especially his statistics and probability theory, I'm admittedly confused about why the Clinton camp is dragging this thing out.
Clinton would probably need to get much, much closer to Obama on pledged delegates, maybe within 30 to 40, in order for enough of her superdelegate homies to be persuaded that they could gain a big chunk of political capital by helping her steal the nomination. Otherwise, the undecided superdelegates who could help her steal the nomination might run too great a risk of political suicide."
These were my two cents:
"Just to give you a dose of reality. In Texas the delegate count tied to the primary is 65 Clinton, 61 Obama. The Texas caucus delegate numbers haven't come in yet, but Obama leads 52 to 45. In Ohio Clinton's "big take" was 71 delegates to Obama's 59. This thing is done. Stick a fork in it."
and...
"Yeah, like Chi-town got the only political machine in the country.
Nope, there is no way that's gonna happen. Not with Obama going into the convention with a plurality. It would be political suicide for Obama. He'd be branded unreliable and a coward. His base would melt away so fast, he wouldn't be able to recover it eight years later. Fact is, if the supre delegates voted against Obama, it would be political suicide. You think John Lewis jumped the Clinton's ship cause he fell in love with Barack? Not in our neck of the woods. We would've torn him a new asshole down here."
This democratic primary is over. Obama won. Hillary is running for office alright, but she's ain't running for President. She's running for a co-presidency as the VP - against Edwards.
Kick ass Mike Fisher. Kick ass.
"Its the Chicago Way, the Democrat Machine Way."
True. Isn't that the real reason its called the Windy City?
Not only plausible KP, but a stoned certainty.
The Obamamandians haven't taken the time to look into the good brother's funding, management team, and establishment backers. This is the same painfully naive crew that was singing the praises of Ron Paul - a candidate with no party support, minimal resources, and all the prospects of an insect speeding into a windshield on the interstate.
Billary'll come out on top in a backroom brokered deal with Obama as veep and the democrat party will be assured of a virtually unshakeable 8+ year run, 3 more seats in the senate, a stoned lock on congress and the wherewithal to make one or more key SCOTUS appointments.
The endgame is already self-evident....,
Here is what Clinton is relying on, if she wins Pennsylvania then there will be huge push by the Clinton campaign to "turn" enough super delegates to swing the election her way and unfortunately that is a plausible scenario.
Nulan...
"The Obamamandians haven't taken the time to look into the good brother's funding, management team, and establishment backers."
Oh ye of little faith. Obama was being touted by disaffected ex-Clintonians for years now. Especially among Yale alumni. We've been having discussions about running him for POTUS on our Yale listserve since at least late 2003. No mystery as to his management team.
Mike,
That's not where CNu's trendy cynicism falls short.
As is often the case with dynamic intellectuals, they believe what they can comprehend is all there is.
Combine that naivete with a healthy dose of cultural secularism and they eventually believe that human endeavor is the product of mere mechanization.
Cats like this bet Foreman would beat Ali and the US would defeat the Vietcong.
Nah, reducing the Obama phenomenon to a mathematical formula of delegate counts, "party" coronations and back room agreements is intellectually lazy sentimentalism.
Ron Paul advocated policy that could save America.
Barack Obama is a spiritual experience that can save America.
Apparently people want more soul and less policy.
When BO wins, it won't be because of any largesse from the "invisible hand" of all powerful 'white folks', alumni associations or political machines.
It will be because God is on his team.
U better preach!
I have been telling folk that this man has been called for such a time as this....
Well, DV, be that as it may. The math helps:
Here an analysis from the daily Kos:
"After today, there are 10 states left, plus Guam and Puerto Rico.
Number of 3 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 4 delegate districts left: 19 (including all 8 in Puerto Rico)
Number of 5 delegate districts left: 21
Number of 6 delegate districts left: 14
Number of 7 delegate districts left: 10
Number of 8 delegate districts left: 1
Number of 9 delegate districts left: 3
Number of 10 delegate districts left: 1 (Montana)
Setting aside Guam with its 4 delegates, there are 11 delegate apportionments based on statewide popular vote totals.
Wyoming - 5 statewide
South Dakota - 6 statewide
Montana - 6 statewide
West Virginia - 10 statewide
Mississippi - 11 statewide
Kentucky - 17 statewide
Oregon - 18 statewide
Puerto Rico - 19 islandwide
Indiana - 25 statewide
North Carolina - 38 statewide
Pennsylvania - 55 statewide
In order to cross all thresholds except the initial break that give you a +2 delegate swing, you need to win by an extra 200/X%, where X = the number of total delegates at stake. Let's see how this works by easy example - West Virginia and its 10 statewide delegates. 200/10 = 20%. To go from 5-5 to 6-4 there you have to win by over 10% (55-45). But to get ANOTHER +2 you need to add 20% to your win and win by 30% (65-35).
To work through one more example, Indiana and its 25. You start with someone winning 13-12. To get an additional +2 swing (ie, 14-11), you have to win by 200/25%, or 8% even. 54-46 + 1 vote is a 14-11 split. You can also calculate this way: 13.5/25 = .5400. 14.5/25 = .5800 (58-42 is a 16% win).
So, let's look at if Clinton wins every statewide total by 10%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1, giving her the +1 vote benefit of the doubt.
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +1
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +1
Indiana +3
North Carolina +4
Pennsylvania +5
Total +19 delegates.
Do you see how totally impossible it is, and how completely significant Obama's South Carolina and February blowouts were? Remember, Obama beat Clinton by 8% in Iowa (a huge win) and netted only 1 extra pledged delegate.
Now, let's assume, in a very unsurgical way, that this 10% is exactly the margin in all the congressional districts.
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: 0
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1, let's give her the 1 extra vote benefit of the doubt.
Total +36 delegates
Overall total +55 delegates.
And it probably is +58, see below.
Obama currently leads by 160 pledged delegates.
Update [2008-3-4 18:22:15 by PocketNines]:: Let me throw in another wrinkle. Let's assume Clinton wins every single remaining district and statewide vote by 16.5% exactly. How does this help her in the districts?
1 3-delegate district: +1
19 4-delegate districts: 0
21 5-delegate districts: +21
14 6-delegate districts: 0
10 7-delegate districts: +10
1 8-delegate district: +1
3 9-delegate districts: +3
1 10-delegate district: +1
Total +37 delegates
ONE EXTRA DELEGATE from going 10% to 16.5%!
Statewide, 16.5%:
Wyoming +1
South Dakota 0
Montana 0
West Virginia +1
Mississippi +1
Kentucky +3
Oregon +2
Puerto Rico +3
Indiana +5
North Carolina +6
Pennsylvania +9
Total +31 delegates.
TWELVE (maybe six, see below) EXTRA DELEGATES from going 10% to 16.5%!
So the overall total with 16.5% is a mere +68 delegates.
And it probably is only +64, see below.
So with all due respect to Jonathan Alter and wmtriallawyer and all the people who are playing with these numbers, everyone seems to be failing to grasp that it's the BLOWOUTS that matter.
It's blowouts, people.
All but 6 remaining congressional districts are either 4, 5, 6, or 7 delegate districts. There are 64 total districts in this range. Here are the magic numbers:
4 delegates - 25%+ to get from 2-2 to 3-1
5 delegates - 40%+ to get from 3-2 to 4-1
6 delegates - 16.7%+ to get from 3-3 to 4-2
7 delegates - 28.6%+ to get from 4-3 to 5-2
THOSE are the relevant numbers to break out of the incredibly rosy +55 delegate pickup if we absurdly assume that Clinton wins every remaining contest by 55-45 margins.
And I humbly submit that if Clinton IS breaching those numbers and blowing out Obama in states where he will have ample opportunity to campaign, then he has been caught with a live boy or dead girl.
It is over.
[UPDATED] Here's another fun one, just to truly show how impossible this catching up notion is. I ran the numbers for winning all 82 races (70 CDs + Guam + the 11 statewide splits) by a whopping 24.9%. Her gain? Only 110 delegates. Obama still leads by 50.
Update [2008-3-5 2:2:37 by PocketNines]: John DE points out in the comments below the split of statewide popular votes between at-large delegates and PLEOs (pledged elected officials). I confess I am not 100% sure whether the statewide total is applied separately to each of these two categories, but just for the sake of more number crunching, here's the math. And SLKRR in the comments says this process of separate calculations is correct.
Each state is broken down like this for at-large, PLEO:
Wyoming - 5 (3, 2)
Mississippi - 11 (7, 4)
Pennsylvania - 55 (35, 20)
Indiana - 25 (16, 9)
North Carolina - 38 (26, 12)
West Virginia - 10 (7, 3)
Kentucky - 17 (11, 6)
Oregon -18 (12, 6)
Montana -6 (4, 2)
South Dakota - 6 (4, 2)
Puerto Rico -19 (12, 7)
Applying the 10% standard to each separate number:
Wyoming +1 no change
Mississippi +1 no change
Pennsylvania +5 no change
Indiana +3 no change
North Carolina +4 no change
West Virginia +2 change of +1
Kentucky +1 no change
Oregon +2 no change
Montana 0 no change
South Dakota 0 no change
Puerto Rico +3 change of +2
Total change +3 for Clinton, i.e., +22 instead of +19
BUT
Applying the 16.5% standard to each separate number:
Wyoming +1 no change
Mississippi +1 no change
Pennsylvania +9 no change
Indiana +3 change of -2
North Carolina +6 no change
West Virginia +1 no change
Kentucky +1 change of -2
Oregon +2 no change
Montana 0 no change
South Dakota 0 no change
Puerto Rico +3 no change
Total change -4 for for Clinton, i.e., +27 instead of +31"
As you can see, Clinton has no statistical chance whatsoever to win this thing. Her maneuvering is about something else.
Ahhhhh ...
You a bad mofo Mike Fisher.
Impressive.
DV, that wasn't my stat analysis. I cribbed it.
Denmark, as my reply is quite lengthy, I will direct your attention here but I will continue the conversation over here in your plush surroundings.
Post a Comment