All numbers updated with 1 OR super, 2 CA supers, 2 Edwards NH pledged confirmations.
Rachel Maddow has it mostly right. She was right on the night of May 6, the lone voice insisting the Clintons should be taken at their word that they were planning to go out ugly, and I agreed with her at the time and still do.
But she is wrong in one important respect. She cites Obama needing approximately 90 of 210 to get over the top in a seat Michigan and Florida in full scenario. I am now going to conclusively show why the math is much, much more favorable for Obama than that.
Because Obama's camp, ridiculously competent in all strategic choices math-related, certainly sees what I do, I believe Barack Obama is going to pre-empt the May 31 meeting with an agreement to seat both delegations in full, and I think he is going to wait another week to do it so his delegate number is maximized.
If he gets 23-36 supers (unanticipated by the calendar: add-ons) in the next week, he can just let the calendar put him over the top on its own.
Now, everyone knows that there were 55 uncommitted delegates in Michigan. But what few seem to realize is that on April 19 in Michigan, the district conventions were held and Obama claimed 31 of the 36 uncommitted district-level delegates. He already has them. Here, look at the comments in this Bowers Open Left diary back from April 20th to get specific names. Or this diary. It's slightly painstaking, (here are 27 names, here are 3 more, here's where emptywheel cites 31) but they clearly exist. Plus the 67 Florida Obama delegates mean that there are 98 living, breathing pledged Obama delegates from those two states.
There is no such thing as a scenario where Obama gets 0 delegates in Michigan (and DCW should really do away with Scenario 5 because it is no longer operative). Chris Bowers has been writing about this for a long time.
Did anybody notice Harold Ickes arguing Thursday that Obama really should get 0 delegates in Michigan and that all the uncommitted delegates should go to the convention uncommitted?
Why did Harold Ickes make this curious and stunningly brazen argument? Because he knows what I am about to explain.
____________________________________
Let's first all get on the same page with these numbers. I confess I got a little sloppy and followed right along with Chuck Todd when he started repeating 2210 as the "Clinton Number." It's not. It's 2209.
There is one more special election on the calendar. June 17, Maryland-04, Donna Edwards will win the hugely gerrymandered Dem district and become a superdelegate. She has endorsed Obama.
Over the Top Numbers
Without FL/MI now: 2025
With FL/MI now: 2209
Without FL/MI as of June 17: 2025.5
With FL/MI as of June 17: 2209.5
_________________________________
Since there is "2210 fog" out there, justifying 2025 and 2209 as the exact numbers.
There are 3253 pledged delegates, and 796 supers including add-ons. That's 4049. 2025 is the majority. DCW has tracked the fluctuation of superdelegate number here, which sits at 796.
There are 313 pledged delegates in Florida(185) and Michigan(128), and 55 supers including add-ons. That's 368.
4049 + 368 = 4417. 2209 is majority.
When Donna Edwards gets added on June 17, the numbers of total delegates go to 4050 and 4418, with half-plus-one bumping up to 2025.5 and 2209.5.
Ignore this 2210 number. No more. Don't get sloppy, Chuck.
___________________________________
2025, to go over the top.
Pledged delegates earned by Obama: 1645.5
Pledged delegates publicly declared from John Edwards to Obama: 12
Superdelegates earned by Obama (DCW): 309.5
Total: 1967
Needed: 58
Guaranteed add-ons from caucus states by June 3: 4 (AK 5/23, WY 5/24, HI 5/25, ME 6/1)
Hawaii state party chair May 25 (both candidates will vote for Obama): 1
Guaranteed minimum pledged from Puerto Rico: 15
Guaranteed South Dakota pledged: 8 (winning by 1 vote up to 61.11%)
Guaranteed Montana pledged: 9 (winning by 1 vote in each half up to 70% in a half or 62.5% statewide)
Automatically triggered supers at the end of the primaries: 7 (6 Pelosi Club, plus Margie Campbell in MT)
Total: 44
Needed from PR overachievement, further John Edwards switches and/or undeclared supers: 14
With no FL/MI delegates, 58 is the magic number. 14 is the virtual magic number.
[When Donna Edwards gets added, she simultaneously bumps the number and goes into Obama's column. We don't really need to worry about her, because the number would change to 13.5, though I don't think there are any more half-delegate votes still out there so it would stay 14 human beings in practical reality.]
___________________________________
2209, majority of pledged delegates (1783.5):
(3253 + 313 = 3566. 1783 is half, so 1783.5 for a majority.)
Pledged delegates earned by Obama: 1645.5
Pledged delegates publicly declared from Edwards to Obama: 12
Pledged delegates already named for Obama in Florida: 67
Pledged delegates already named for Obama in Michigan: 31
Total pledged delegates already secured: 1755.5
Needed for majority: 1783.5
Shortfall now: 28
Minimum guaranteed from Puerto Rico, South Dakota and Montana (see above): 32
Shortfall June 3 @ 10pm EDT: -4 at worst
Therefore, percent danger to Obama in agreeing to seat Florida and Michigan in full as is: 0.00000000%
Percent of the two pledged Clinton jackasses who switched (MD, DC) who are included in any of this calculus: 0.00000%
Pledged majority: Lock.
Pelosi Club triggered when primaries are officially over under all scenarios.
___________________________________
2209, over the top overall, the big enchilada:
Total pledged delegates already secured: 1755.5
Superdelegates outside of MI/FL: 309.5
Superdelegates in MI/FL: 10
Total: 2075
Needed: 134
Obama will win 100% of the following:
Guaranteed minimum from Puerto Rico, South Dakota and Montana (see above): 32
Guaranteed from Pelosi Club + technical re-validation of MT's Margie Campbell: 7
Guaranteed add-ons from caucus states by June 3: 4 (AK 5/23, WY 5/24, HI 5/25, ME 6/1)
Hawaii state party chair May 25 (both candidates will vote for Obama): 1
Total: 44
Needed: 90
Obama is likely to win 80%-100% of the following:
Anytime; Edwards' remaining named district-level pledged in Iowa: 2
Anytime; Edwards' remaining named pledged in SC: 1
Anytime; Edwards' remaining named pledged in NH: 1
Anytime; Edwards' remaining named pledged in FL: 13
Anytime; Union-backed named district-level pledged in MI: 5
May 24; Georgia primary add-ons: 2
Anytime after June 3; The Obvious Club (Clyburn, Brazile, Reid, Dean): 4
June 7; Minnesota caucus add-on: 1
June 7; Vermont primary add-on: 1
June 7; Mississippi primary add-on: 1
June 8; Montana primary add-on: 1
June 13; Wisconsin primary add-ons: 2
June 14; PLEO/at-large uncommitted pledged delegates in MI: 19
June 14; Edwards' expected unnamed 3 PLEO/at-large pledged in Iowa: 3
June 14; Iowa caucus add-on: 1
June 14; Idaho caucus add-on: 1
June 14; Virginia primary add-ons: 2
June 15; Washington caucus add-ons: 2
June 21; North Carolina primary add-ons: 2
June 21; Oregon primary add-on: 1
June 21; South Dakota primary add-on: 1
June 21; Nebraska caucus add-on: 1
Group Total: 67
80% to 100% of this group: 54-67
Needed: 23-36
Obama has been winning a huge ratio of folks in this group for months:
Anytime; Regular old uncategorized undeclared supers: 184
Various; Undeclared or undetermined add-ons left over: 20
Group Total: 204
Summary, under worst case as-is conditions:
Seat the Michigan and Florida delegations in full, as-is, and Obama needs 134 delegates of any kind as we sit here today. 44 of those are guaranteed by the final three primaries or public declaration, leaving 90 needed. Obama will get a huge percentage of 67 other identifiable delegates in the calendar through June 21, leaving him roughly 24-37 delegates short. The group out of which he needs that 23-36 is 204 delegates, or 11.3%-17.6%.
___________________________________
Why I use exactly 1645.5 for Obama, and what is in that number.
First, though Kos' count does, DCW's count does, and Green Papers' count does, I do not count the Maryland pledged delegate switcher or the DC pledged delegate switcher in Obama's count. I am opposed to that on principle. Those adults gave their word on their honor, and have broken their pledge. That's a disgrace, and principle comes before team.
Obama pledged delegates for 1645.5:
Alaska: 9 (everyone agrees 9-4)
Alabama: 27 (everyone agrees 27-25)
American Samoa: 1 (everyone agrees 1-2)
Arizona: 25 (everyone agrees 25-31)
Arkansas: 8 (everyone agrees 8-27)
California: 166 (everyone agrees 166-204)
Colorado: 36 (results of district and state conventions finally reported Wednesday and confirmed, 36-19. Todd/NBC is wrong in its count.)
Connecticut: 26 (everyone agrees 26-22)
Delaware: 9 (everyone agrees 9-6)
Democrats Abroad: 4.5 (Obama and Green Papers agree, 4.5-2.5)
District of Columbia: 12 (Green Papers, and thus DCW and Kos show 13-2 because they count the Clinton pledged who flipped.)
Georgia: 60 (everyone agrees 60-27)
Guam: 2 (everyone agrees 2-2)
Hawaii: 14 (everyone agrees 14-6)
Idaho: 15 (everyone agrees 15-3)
Illinois: 104 (everyone agrees 104-49)
Indiana: 34 (everyone agrees 34-38)
Iowa: 24 (Obama says 25 and cites 1 Edwards switch, Green Papers says 26 and cites 2 Edwards switches. I list Edwards switches separately below, so 24 is correct for this count.)
Kansas: 23 (everyone agrees 23-9)
Kentucky: 14 (everyone agrees 14-37)
Louisiana: 33 (everyone besides Green Papers has it 34-22, but Green Papers cites the Louisiana Democratic party official results, which specifically name the delegates, which you can count. Here is the official press release naming the 11-8 state level delegates, and on this page are the 22 Obama names and 15 Clinton names of district level delegates.)
Maine: 15 (everyone agrees 15-9)
Maryland: 42 (everyone agrees 42-28, then Green Papers, DCW and Kos included the Maryland pledged flipper, which I do not.)
Massachusetts: 38 (everyone agrees 38-55)
Minnesota: 48 (everyone agrees 48-24)
Missouri: 36 (everyone agrees 36-36)
Mississippi: 20 (everyone agrees 20-13)
Nebraska: 16 (everyone agrees 16-8)
Nevada: 14 (everyone agrees 14-11)
New Hampshire: 9 (was 9-9-4, then Edwards endorsed and Obama, Green Papers, DCW and Kos now include 1 Edwards for 10-9-3. I merely separate them out to keep it clean.)
New Jersey: 48 (everyone agrees 48-59)
New Mexico: 12 (everyone agrees 12-14)
New York: 93 (everyone agrees 93-139)
North Carolina: 67 (everyone agrees 67-48)
North Dakota: 8 (everyone agrees 8-5)
Ohio: 67 (everyone agrees 67-74)
Oklahoma: 14 (everyone agrees 14-24)
Oregon: 31 (Obama, Green Papers, DCW now agrees, 31-21)
Pennsylvania: 73 (everyone agrees, 73-85)
Rhode Island: 8 (everyone agrees, 8-13)
South Carolina: 25 (Obama, Green Papers, DCW and Kos all include 7 Edwards switches to make the number 32-12-1. I'm keeping them separate.)
Tennessee: 28 (everyone agrees, 28-40)
Texas Primary: 61 (everyone agrees 61-65)
Texas Caucus: 37 (Obama, NBC, AP all say 38-29, but I agree with the Burnt Orange Report, Green Papers, DCW and Kos until something changes at the state convention ends June 7 that it's 37-30)
Utah: 14 (everyone agrees, 14-9)
Vermont: 9 (everyone agrees 9-6)
Virgin Islands: 3 (everyone agrees 3-0)
Virginia: 54 (everyone agrees 54-29)
Washington: 52 (Obama changed to agree with everyone, 52-26)
West Virginia: 8 (everyone agrees 8-20)
Wisconsin: 42 (everyone agrees 42-32)
Wyoming: 7 (everyone agrees 7-5)
Total: 1645.5
Edwards to Obama, pledged:
Iowa: 2 (Machelle Crum, Arlene Prather O'Kane)
New Hampshire: 3 (Joshua Denton, Deborah Bacon-Nelson, Peter Burling)
South Carolina: 7 (Lauren Bilton, Daniel Boan, Christine Brennan-Bond, Michael Evatt, Robert Groce, Marilyn Hemingway, Susan Smith... no, not that Susan Smith)
Total: 12
MSNBC's First Read (click that link) has the cleanest list of clear sourcing for 10 switches. Update: and 2 more this morning.
Green Papers, DCW, and Kos are linked, and cite 1659.5 as Obama's pledged delegate number. I have 1657.5 (1645.5 + 12), and the difference is precisely the 2 pledged delegate flippers.
Obama's site gives him 1658.5, due to 1 too many in each of Louisiana and the Texas Caucus and 1 too few of Edwards Iowa pledged switches. (June 7 he might end up being right at the Texas Caucus state convention.)
___________________________________
Conclusion:
31 in Michigan right now. That's worst case. That's why Ickes made that little-noticed, jaw-dropping argument yesterday. You have to be really familiar with the math to appreciate why this staggeringly hypocritical ass did it. Not only did Ickes vote to strip Michigan of its delegates originally back in August and now is screaming at the top of his voice that it's outrageous that Michigan has been stripped, now he wants Michigan to let Clinton keep her 73 delegates but strip Obama of the 31 he got at the district level.
(Get that? Let that sink in. Is there any question that the Clintons are literally the opposite of leadership?)
Maddow is dead-on that the Clinton goal for the May 31 meeting is merely to come out with some result that is being kicked down the road in appeals. But Ickes knows that Obama can surely see the mathematical inevitability in what I just explained, that Obama can call the big bluff by agreeing to Michigan and Florida in full, and then what will the Clintons claim in outrage? The fog they're thriving off of disappears. So Ickes is trying to pre-empt Obama's pre-emption by laying groundwork for further fog - that Obama agreeing to seat the delegations in full is too favorable to Obama because he got 31 and deserves 0. Ickes knows that nobody besides a few bloggers really knows that Obama already has 31, so he's hoping to get in front of the dawning awareness. (It hasn't been in Obama's interest to claim that number until as late in the process as possible, either.)
But the 31 exist, and the math is inexorable. While Obama would need 135 delegates after agreeing to seat Michigan and Florida in full, as-is, 44 are in a group of 100% guaranteed, 67 are in a group of 85-99% guaranteed, and 205 are the rest. Obama has been winning "the rest" by a huge ratio for a loooong time now, and many of us personally know people in that latter group who are just waiting for the primaries to officially end to declare. The closer Obama comes to 24-37 supers in the next week, the more likely I believe he is to agree to full seating.
So someone reassure Rachel. She's dead-on in terms of getting what the Clintons are about, but she'd feel a lot better if she saw this math.
___________________________________
Let's have some supers today, shall we? I've been told one of Edwards' Hanover, NH delegates is about to announce. CNN seems to have added a third Edwards delegate from Iowa.
Update: Four things. One, I want to be clear that I am big on following agreed-to principles. The idea of seating the delegations in full chafes at me after what those states chose to do (despite the lying blather about Florida Dems being helpless to stop Republicans from moving up). I get all that. The point is, if Maddow is correct in her assessment of the Clintons (and I think she is), there are some goals that have to be weighed against one another.
Two, I want to make clear that technically, Obama himself cannot seat the delegations in full (sorry for the slightly misleading title). He can only announce something and then the DNC may make its own determination and still punish FL/MI. But that works too, because Obama removes any fuel from the controversy. It's out of his hands, he can't be blamed. It reinforces that this is about the rules and not about Clinton vs. Obama.
Three, emptywheel has commented here with an important reminder that the Michigan Democratic Party is playing it a bit squirrelly because they're trying to retain some bargaining power and also may be dissatisfied with which individuals won elections as delegates (not enough union representation). I'll defer to emptywheel on this - I'm no Michigan insider, I take data and try to explain and present it. The 31 exist, but the MDP isn't being transparent.
Four, if the end result is that the supers get stripped as punishment and the pledged are seated in full, the numbers get even better. That's also a deal I think that strips Clinton's ability to keep poisoning the well and would be well-received as fair in the public eye (I think the public is sick of the supers, and would buy into that punishment). The reason I ran the worst-case scenario is that any other deal makes the math even easier. Reducing the number needed to go over the top always makes Obama closer. If you click the emptywheel link just above, I replied and ran the what-if-they-just-took-the-supers-away numbers if you're curious.
Update 2: Well, 1 DNC, 2 Reps and 2 Edwards confirmed NH already this morning, and our 25-40 number just moved to 23-36 out of 204, while the 80-100% group was reduced to 67. I also added the Hawaii party chair into the guaranteed group, since both candidates will vote for Obama in Denver (h/t Land of Enchantment). Also, MSNBC just used "2026." Chuck, get on that.
Update 3: Arrgh! I hate errors. I go through a lot of effort not to make them, so I'm annoyed by one that has now been corrected. Rieux points out that 53 MI/FL supers is really 55. It could be written much better on DCW but I should have caught it. So I had to update a lot of numbers. While I was at it, I went ahead and changed all the numbers as of the four endorsements we have today. The two Reps from CA and the two Edwards NH confirmed switches. So 24-37 of 205 is accurate as of 4 endorsements today.
