Stupid Excel Tricks: Tomorrow's Final Delegate Count

A few people, including crazymoloch earlier today have come up with sophisticated means to predict tomorrow's outcome.  My methodology is simple: I start with the latest poll from each state (averaged if there are two or even three finishing on the same date).  I then adjust it forward to today's date based on the changes in a 5-poll national average between the state poll's date and today.  Then I impose a 15% threshold for delegates and assign them proportionately.

So, here are tomorrow's delegate totals:

State Clinton Obama Edwards
AL 26 26 0
AK 7 6 0
AZ 27 29 0
AR 22 13 0
CA 209 161 0
CO 23 32 0
CT 23 25 0
DE 7 8 0
GA 33 53 1
ID 7 11 0
IL 48 105 0
KS 13 17 2
MA 50 43 0
MN 35 37 0
MO 40 32 0
NJ 58 49 0
NM 11 15 0
NY 137 95 0
ND 7 6 0
OK 23 12 3
TN 40 28 0
UT 5 18 0
TOTAL 851 821 6

Clinton receiving 30 more delegates than Obama would be good news for Obama, but this projection may underestimate Obama's strength somewhat.  The latest California poll is from Survey USA and gave Clinton a 12 point lead, which is almost an outlier.  If California ends up being more or less a tie, as many pollsters predict, Obama would end up with more total delegates for the day than Clinton.  Now it's all up to the voters and campaign GOTV!

•  Sorry to be a wet blanket

  but I'm too superstitious to make any predictions based on science. I'm going to do a tarot card reading instead :). GO OBAMA!!

  by beltane on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:22:43 PM PDT

  •  I hear you

    The voters have thumbed their noses at the pollsters in NH and SC.  I figure their thumb their noses equally in opposite directions tomorrow, so my prediction will average out about right.

    by CA Pol Junkie on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:30:11 PM PDT

    •  Good stuff.

      Now put your money where your mouth is and click the link in my sig (still dKos)!  :)

      by ManahManah on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 05:15:45 PM PDT

  •  Taking a cue from GWB

    and the republicans view on science :D

    by FerrisValyn on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:39:45 PM PDT

•  want the miracle

  I really wanted to choose your "Edwards Miracle" in the above poll, but reality keeps getting in the way of my preferences.

  by Vitarai on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:26:12 PM PDT

•  CA Pol Junkie...

  ...I think this is as accurate as any prediction I've seen based on the available polling.

  The important caveat is that the polls have been crazy this year.

  by DC Pol Sci on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:35:51 PM PDT

  •  Ha!

    Time to break out the dartboard!

    by CA Pol Junkie on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:37:03 PM PDT

•  A factor the polls don't catch...absentee ballots

  I live in California and we have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people who are absentee voters.  Since Hillary was doing so much better in the polls two, three, four weeks ago, I would assume that she will get a majority of those absentee votes.  Therefore, any poll on California is going to be skewed and should be viewed skeptically.

  Almost all of the attorneys at my firm were Edwards supporters (I was not, I voted for Hillary absentee three weeks ago, but can't say I would have done the same tomorrow.  I really have struggled a lot with that decision these past few weeks.) and already voted for him.  They are upset that their vote is "wasted" now.  

  I wonder how much the absentee ballots will be a factor tomorrow?  Something to consider.  I'm guessing they could give Hillary a 2-3% boost in the polls, which could be significant in a close race and when counting delegates.

  by kipzoo on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:35:55 PM PDT

  •  They try.

    They ask respondents in early balloting states whether they've already voted.

    by DC Pol Sci on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:36:55 PM PDT

  •  my feeling, too

    I look for Hillary to win by 15% in California.

    by Shahryar on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:38:53 PM PDT

  •  CA absentee voters

    Probably the biggest reason Clinton will do well win CA absentee voters is that she does well with seniors.  The pollsters do ask if voters have already voted, so that should be taken into account in poll results.  

    Most reports I've seen indicate that Clinton has done better in absentee ballots than in election day voters.  The Field Poll, which is the gold standard in California, said that absentees were even while Clinton was a little ahead in election day voters.  We'll find out tomorrow who's right by seeing which way the returns move as the night progresses.

    by CA Pol Junkie on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:40:43 PM PDT

•  30 more good news?

  Clinton receiving 30 more delegates than Obama would be good news for Obama?  Within 30 would be fantastic news!  I say if Obama can keep within 150 delegates it's good news for Obama.  
  It will take a commanding victory delegate-wise for Clinton to slow Obama's momentum and the rest of the states in Feb. are looking good for  him.
  He just needs to keep it close.
  Clinton needs to blow him out of the water.

  by Shullat on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:47:04 PM PDT

  •  Winning is winning ...

    If it's within a handful of delegates it's a tie, but if someone is 30 delegates up on the night, they win the night and come out with the mo.

    by al Fubar on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 04:52:47 PM PDT

•  I think Obama made a mistake

  in not running ads in Illinois and wiping Clinton out there, especially in Chicago.  

  Anyone on the ground in Illinois?  How big will Obama win in Chicago and in Illinois.  I really think he needs 70% at the minimum.  Is the Daley machine going all out for him, or are they going to stab him in the back?

  by IhateBush on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 05:27:23 PM PDT