Obama Adds 32 Net Delegates After Tonight?

The Constituent Dynamics poll of the Potomac Primary is out today. Thomas Riehle of RT Strategies used automated interviews with more than 14,000 residents of the Chesapeake's region to project the delegate allocation we'll see after tonight's primaries.

In Maryland, Obama wins every congressional district, most of them by double digit margins, and winds up with a delegate edge of 6 to 18, with 12 being the more likely figure.

In Virginia, Obama will have an edge of between 7 and 20 delegates in this projection (with 13 being the most likely figure), and in DC, an edge of between 3 and 11 delegates.

Riehle projects that Obama will see his net delegate totals increase by about 32 tonight.

Comments

Do you mean that Obama gets 32 more than Hilary? The total delegates tied to 2/12 should be around 168. So, I really hope what you meant was the difference beteween Hilary and Obama. Thanks.

Posted by Georgee or AZ | February 12, 2008 10:04 AM

Do you mean that Obama gets 32 more than Hilary? The total delegates tied to 2/12 should be around 168. So, I really hope what you meant was the difference beteween Hilary and Obama. Thanks.

Posted by Georgee or AZ | February 12, 2008 10:05 AM

This is Clinton spin -- Obama does not have to win by large margins tonight. A win is a win.

Posted by evie | February 12, 2008 10:20 AM

Marc, since you're clearly too classy to get out the vote for yourself, I'll do it for you:

Vote Ambinder!

Posted by Joe Drymala | February 12, 2008 10:22 AM

To Georgee - What could Ambinder possibly mean by "Obama will see his net delegate totals increase by about 32 tonight" other than that Obama is projected to get 32 delegates more than Hillary?

Stop trying to attack Marc's reporting just because you don't understand what he's writing. Think before you write.

And spell Hillary Clinton's name properly.

Just because this is a blog doesn't mean people should leave decency at home.

Posted by Almatt | February 12, 2008 10:24 AM

wait a minute. why are you so obssessed with setting up expectations for the obama folks. did they give you a personal phone call to let you know? afterall, you did dismiss is streak of five wins over the weekend as irrelevant because he was expected to win them, didn't you? so, i can see you setting up the narrative pretty well. if he only gets a net delegate of, say, 25 it's disappointing? haha...

i don't think no one can argue that marc ambinder is a hillary fan. that would be irresponsible and naive. but this isn't reporting. that is the stuff campaign spins are made of. and this spin is sure not coming from the obama folks, or from the repubs.

Posted by lupercal | February 12, 2008 10:44 AM

LOL, Marc, you're so transparent. Can't wait for tomorrow's post either way -- if he underperforms these numbers, I'm sure there's a chestnut in there about how voters once again rallied to Hillary's side (or maybe how the fearsome Baldacci machine is that powerful). And if he overperforms, you can portentiously caution us against unwarranted assumptions going forward. Because, you know, lately you're so much more frequently correct than you are incorrect in your repor... er, blogging.

Marc, just between us and your loyal commentors: are you the least bit pissed with your sources over the last two weeks? You're getting spun, badly, and without any decent scoops to show for it (Huckabee's doing ineffective, poorly executed robocalling in VA? OH NOES!). They're causing you to lose credibility.

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 12, 2008 10:56 AM

Marc is plenty smart, so he doesn't need my defense, but this entry is pretty much a factual reading of the report he linked. They project Obama winning 93 delegates, Clinton winning 62, and 13 being too close to call. The bottom line is that the reporting tonight on CNN and MSNBC will be limited to who won which primaries, but the nuts and bolts are in the delegate advantages. A net gain of 32 delegates would be huge since I expect that is much more than Hillary could reasonably expect out of Texas, for example.

Now, if this is a report produced by one or other of the campaigns, and we don't know it, then that is a different thing. But I found this report interesting and Marc's comments on it to be right down the middle.

Posted by Curtis | February 12, 2008 11:54 AM

Ditto what Curtis wrote.

Posted by DTM | February 12, 2008 11:58 AM

Fair comments, but from my perspective I guess I just expect to see some value-added blogging from a guy writing for the Atlantic Monthly. For example, what's Constituent Dynamics's track record like? Have they made delegate projections for any other states this year? Do they specialize in races in this part of the country? Has Riehle worked for either campaign? Who sent him this report, as indicated in the last bit of the post's URL ("dear_marc_i_thought_you.php") -- CD, or one of the campaigns? And so on.

I don't expect every post to include all of this information, or even most of it, but when so many of Marc's recent posts have quite clearly been spun by various interested parties, well, I'm a little suspicious of "objective" numbers without any additional context -- it just seems a little incomplete from a guy who in the past has been clearly capable of incisive analysis.

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 12, 2008 12:11 PM

Ditto what Jeff wrote.

Posted by Tractarian | February 12, 2008 12:47 PM

By the way, how about that new poll showing Hillary up by 9 points in WI?

Will it still be an "upset" if she wins?

Posted by Tractarian | February 12, 2008 12:54 PM

By the way, how about that new poll showing Hillary up by 9 points in WI?

Will it still be an "upset" if she wins?

Posted by Tractarian | February 12, 2008 12:54 PM

Why can't Obama's wins just be WINS?

Why do they have to be blowouts to count as wins?

I'm not getting that.

If Obama wins all 3 by 51/49, that will mean he's undefeated since Feb. 5th - period.

Posted by rikyrah | February 12, 2008 12:55 PM

Ditto what Curtis, Jeff, and Rikyrah wrote. I looked at the SurveyUSA crosstabs for VA and MD and they suggest Clinton will lose the (not insignificant) Latino vote today by not insignificant margins. Does that hold up? Is there a Latino Bradley effect? That's the kind of analysis that we would be interested in, not just a reposting of someone else's analysis.

Posted by John M. | February 12, 2008 1:08 PM

I don't think anyone is saying that a win isn't a win. But the bottom line is that you can win 49 states 51/49 and split the delegates down the middle and lose the last state and the nomination. The magnitude of the victory as measured in delegates is not just frosting, but how the nomination will be decided.

Posted by Curtis | February 12, 2008 3:12 PM

Just read that the Obama campaign is projecting that Obama picked up a net 80 delegates tonight. Wow! Don't think anyone saw that coming.

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 13, 2008 2:35 AM

So, it turns out that Obama netted 31 delegates in the Potomac Primary. Ambinder's source was dead-on accurate, predicting the outcome within 1% of the actual result.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/index.html

Does Jeff Larson still think that Ambinder's a Clinton shill, or maybe he's just passing along good, accurate analysis?

Posted by Almatt | February 13, 2008 1:06 PM

So, it turns out that Obama netted 31 delegates in the Potomac Primary. Ambinder's source was dead-on accurate, predicting the outcome within 1% of the actual result.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/index.html

Does Jeff Larson still think that Ambinder's a Clinton shill, or maybe Marc is just passing along good, accurate analysis, which is what I - as a news consumer - want?

Posted by Almatt | February 13, 2008 1:07 PM

So, it turns out that Obama netted 31 delegates in the Potomac Primary. Ambinder's source was dead-on accurate, predicting the outcome within 1% of the actual result.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/index.html

Does Jeff Larson still think that Ambinder's a Clinton shill, or maybe Marc is just passing along good, accurate analysis, which is what I - as a news consumer - want?

Posted by Almatt | February 13, 2008 1:07 PM

...except that Obama got a net gain of 52 delegates, far exceeding Ambinder's prediction.

Posted by kalimantan | February 13, 2008 5:16 PM