"Before you sell you sell your soul, better do the math." -Ice Cube
Disclaimer: I'm one of those supporters of "democracy," as such I'm counting only the pledged delegates. (i.e. voters)
Wikipediadelegate counts:
Obama: 1,188
Clinton: 1,029
Obama lead = 159
Obama campaign claims 159 lead as well, according to NYT
Delegates in play on March 4:
TX: 193
OH: 141
VT: 15
RI: 21
Total: 370
For Clinton to TIE Obama, she will need 265 of these delegates. Or an astonishing 71% of all pledged delegates on March 4. More math after the fold.
"Don't have me break this thing down for nothin'! I am yo' neighbor. Give me some sugar!" - Andre3000
Texas:
The polls.
Average of last 3 polls:
Clinton: 51.33
Obama: 43.66
Obama is on a geometrically increasing curve to Clinton's linear, the trend is strikingly obvious:
This trend line is similar to that of the national polls, many (and I) had been predicting that this geometric vs. linear rise would mean Obama would inevitably take the lead, which has happened.
The upshot: Clinton taking 70% of Texas delegates is nearing the impossible.
Ohio:
The average of the last 3 polls on pollster:
Clinton: 52.66
Obama: 38
The trends on this one are both linear, but Obama's slope is greater. This is not the trend you would want to see if Clinton is going to take 70% of Ohio's delegates.
RI:
CBS poll says Clinton ahead by 8 points. Going to have to call 8 a tad short of 40, sorry team.
BU says in latest, Clinton: 36 Obama: 28
VT:
Anyone have a poll for VT?
Can anyone give me an objective rationale for how Clinton will overtake Obama on March 4? Is it reasonable to think she can still be trailing after March 4, even after some small wins, and still stem the tide of Obamamentum?
BREAKING: Clinton campaign claims math doesn't matter.
BREAKING: Clinton derides Obama for making speeches, in her speech today.