Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama, Electibility and the Rev. Wright (162 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The issue is getting the nomination. (0+ / 0-)

    Mathematically, she would need unbelieveable blowouts, routs of a magnitude that neither candidate has been able to attain, in order to catch up with Obama in the pledged delegate count.  There are countless diaries attesting to this; I'll allow you to do your own research on that score.

    As for FL and MI, they will not be seated as is at the convention, because the the credentials committee (that would be the final arbiter of the dilemma) is seated proportional to the pledged delegate count (which Obama will have a majority of) plus extra members seated by Chairman Dean (who will undoubtedly hold up Dean's previous ruling, probably unanimously).  Unless FL and MI get new contests, they're not getting seated, right or wrong (I think that's right, but we can argue that point another day).

    If FL and MI get new contests, they're gonna be close; Obama gains ground everywhere he campaigns, and with large African-American populations in Detroit and elsewhere, he may outright win Michigan if not score a statistically insignificant tie (which would be a tactical victory).  As for FL, if he can hold her to 60-40 (smart money would be on 55-45 Clinton), that will be enough to knock her out of the delegate race.

    That leaves us with the superdelegates.  Unless she can get this thing within a few dozen delegates (she can't), it's over.

    Put another way:

    Here's the "Clinton Dream Scenario" I crafted:

    PA 60-40 Clinton
    GU 51-49 Clinton
    NC 60-40 Clinton
    IN 51-49 Clinton
    WV 60-40 Clinton
    OR 51-49 Clinton
    KY 51-49 Clinton
    PR 60-40 Clinton
    MT 51-49 Obama
    SD 51-49 Clinton

    With these numbers, Obama will need a mere 52% of the remaining superdelegates to win the nomination (not too difficult, seeing as he would have won 51.25% of the delegates split between him and Clinton).  Speaking of Clinton, she would need an astounding 65% of the remaining superdelegates to take the nomination.  Nearly two thirds of the superdelegates would have to expend the political capital to overturn the pledged delegate count and the popular vote; frankly, I don't see that happening.

    Not to mention, these predictions aren't just looking at the poll numbers through rose colored glasses; that's painting your goddamn eyeballs red.  This scenario is beyond implausible, and it's still not enough to get Clinton the nomination.

    If this were a closer race, I'd entertain discussion of the electoral advantages and disadvantages of both candidates (and I will admit, Clinton has advantages that Obama does not, even though I still maintain that on the balance Obama is the stronger candidate), but now those conversations have drifted into the field of hypothetical fancy.

    Clinton cannot win the nomination without a scandal or a tragedy (and, no, the Rev. Wright thing doesn't count; if an Oval Office blowjob couldn't take down a president, a quote taken out of context from a sermon that someone else gave won't take down a presidential candidate).

    There are people who say, "If music's that easy to write, I could do it." Of course they could, but they don't. - John Cage

    by RoscoeOfAlabama on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 12:26:08 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Under this scenario (0+ / 0-)

      Clinton would have NO trouble getting 65% of the remaining superdelegates and many tentatively committed to Obama would swing over.  Is that not completely obvious?

      But you don't indicate (and can't really, given the complications of pledged delegate allocation) how this string of victories would narrow Obama's lead in pledged delegates.  I assume those victories would give Clinton the lead in pledged delegates or reduce Obama's lead to less than thirty.  So how does that affect your analysis of how many superdelegates either would need?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site