Credit the campaign's organization in the caucus states -- Obama won supermajorites in Alaska (75%), Kansas (74%), Colorado (68%), Minnesota (68%) and in the primary state of Georgia (68%). Obama's margin of victory in Illinois was proportionately larger than Clinton's margin in New York -- more than enough to give him some extra delegates.
« Where The Democratic Race Is Now | Main | What Will Happen To Florida And Michigan? » Why Did Obama Win More Delegates Than Clinton?06 Feb 2008 10:34 am Comments (33)
There is nothing to "win" if you get more votes in a state. There is at least one delegate at stake in that question. Beyond that, what exactly is the delegate count likely to be? I can't find anything useful on the news sites, which haven't awarded any delegates for California yet. 
The following website, 2008 Democratic Convention Watch, http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/super-tuesday-delegate-tracker.html has a running tally of the delegates won in yesterday's vote. While the delegates are still being assigned in some states, the current count shows that Clinton picked up more delegates yesterday, but Obama has the overall lead due to his previous wins.
That site has the California split more or less right, but Clinton will likely get a couple extra delegates. It hasn't assigned a bunch of delegates in Colorado, Illinois, or Georgia, though, which will all go overwhelmingly to Obama. The calculus of the spreadsheet he's sending around now seems pretty conservative and accurate, but we'll see in a couple hours.
What's interesting is Clinton invested no resources at all in those states where Obama swept.
John: Yes, there is something to win and it is called a delegate. Where have you been...under a rock? Hillary won the popular vote in California, but she will not get all of the delegates. What is wrong with you? WE are going to beat Hillary over the head in Texas even though she has that stupid Sheila Jackson Lee on her side!
John: Yes, there is something to win and it is called a delegate. Where have you been...under a rock? Hillary won the popular vote in California, but she will not get all of the delegates. What is wrong with you? WE are going to beat Hillary over the head in Texas even though she has that stupid Sheila Jackson Lee on her side!
John: Yes, there is something to win and it is called a delegate. Where have you been...under a rock? Hillary won the popular vote in California, but she will not get all of the delegates. What is wrong with you? WE are going to beat Hillary over the head in Texas even though she has that stupid Sheila Jackson Lee on her side!
Texas Star: John may or may not have been under a rock, but I think your "submit" button clearly was under on. [Rim shot]
I know that Idaho is fundamentally irrelevant, or at least that's what I hear, but I believe Obama won his biggest "supermajority" in our caucus. And it was damned cold in that line.
Barack Obama is holding his first "presidential news conference" right now. Which is to say: it feels that way. This is a very smart move. He has come on national TV (CNBC is covering this) and he has opened it up, for questions. The press corps is taking the cue, and moving right into broad-ranging questions. Smart move.
WE are going to beat Hillary over the head in Texas even though she has that stupid Sheila Jackson Lee on her side! Sheila Jackson Lee is dumb as a rock.
Marc, you need to back off the Obama bias, it's getting a little too apparent.
I am so sorry....it would not post the first time and I hit it more than once! Mea Culpa!
I am so sorry....it would not post the first time and I hit it more than once! Mea Culpa!
Media is beginning to ask whether Hillary is self-funding. Wolfson says he doesn't know. Sure.
Problem for the Obama crowd is that Clinton is holding on to her coalition, save for the black vote. There are simply more of her voters than there are Obama voters. And I question whether Obama takes Texas, given Clinton's strength among Hispanic voters. Ohio should be the bellwether. BO's surprising take in MO last night forecasts a long night in the Buckeye state. Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) should bring it home for Barack.
Hillary was for the war before she was against it ...
I think democrats have to wake up to the very unpleasant reality that this race will continue to the convention with neither canidate having a knock out blow. It seems Obama may very well win the day in terms of delegates won during an election while clinton may get the nomination due to overall advantage of superdelegates. All the same democrats decrying hanging chads will be faced with the reality that a politcal machine may win the nomination and not the voters. Further complicating the matter is Michigan and Florida. This looks real, real ugly. Can someone please put out a list of superdelagates? My suggestion: and Obama Richardson ticket. A couple of overlooked observations: Obama did well in states where Democratic machine was not able to get fully activated: Conn, Deleware, and New Mexico were all states with favorite sons. Obama won oor tied those. I was out campaining for Obama in Brooklyn yesterday in a heavy Latino district and I saw the old machine politics in full operation.
Obama got close to 90% of the Idaho vote statewide but it looks like he gets 15 delegates, Hillary 3.
"WE are going to beat Hillary over the head in Texas even though she has that stupid Sheila Jackson Lee on her side!" Your creepy, violent ideation is what turns people off your candidate.
"Your creepy, violent ideation is what turns people off your candidate." Agreed. Look, I'm a die-hard Obama supporter and have been for a year and a half, well before he declared. Keep the language down. Let's talk about Bill comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson or lying about his position on Iraq. Let's talk about Hillary's deceptive mailers on abortion and distortion of Obama's Iraq and state senate voting record. Let's talk about Clinton's votes on Iraq and Iran and what a liability her health care mandate plan will be in the general election. I believe we have the stronger, better candidate, but some of the Obama folks need to put down the kool-aid, roll up their sleeves and get to work.
"Your creepy, violent ideation is what turns people off your candidate." Agreed. Look, I'm a die-hard Obama supporter and have been for a year and a half, well before he declared. Keep the language down. Let's talk about Bill comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson or lying about his position on Iraq. Let's talk about Hillary's deceptive mailers on abortion and distortion of Obama's Iraq and state senate voting record. Let's talk about Clinton's votes on Iraq and Iran and what a liability her health care mandate plan will be in the general election. Let's talk about how Obama performed in critical swing states like CO, MN, and MO yesterday. I believe we have the stronger, better candidate, but some of the Obama folks need to put down the kool-aid, roll up their sleeves and get to work.
This is a great, hard fought race and there is nothing wrong with that. We dont all have to be looking for Clinton exit strategies or doing something to "save the party." This will play out to the end and it should lest either side's supporters feel cheated. The party will unify around the candidate, or the party wont deserve to win.
Texas Star - my point was that a popular vote win in a state gets you at least one more at-large delegate than the other guy.
I suspect that most voters have only begun to pay attention. They don't know much about Obama. So far, he's just The New Guy, you know, the black one. He fought Hillary to a draw yesterday, and I hope that, as he gets more exposure, people will see what a talented politician he is and look beyond skin color. I still think Obama has room to grow, in terms of attracting votes. Hillary does not.
On Iraq. If Hillary's approach to Iraq is anything Obama opposed both the sanctions (along with
I expect to see increasing media attention to the fact that Obama has won more delegates allocated through people's actual votes and Clinton has won more unpledged superdelegates, as well as the point that there would be utter chaos and outrage if Obama enters the convention with a lead in the former and Clinton were to take the nomination because of the latter.
Where are you getting the information that "Obama won more delegates"? That statement is VERY MUCH IN DOUBT. There is every chance that Hillary both WON MORE DELEGATES and HAD A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULAR VOTE, last night. Show a little responsibility in what you write, please.
Hello Robert: Obama won more delegates! They are winning proportionate delegate representation depending on where they win their votes in each state. It is not winner take all! Get on the internet and read and familiarize yourself with what is going on in the world instead of hanging on Hillary's words. She is a liar anyway! Also, did you hear that her campaign is almost broke and she is lending money to herself? Well, that is good new for Obama. He is outraising her! Obama is a movement....Hillary is a has-been!
I'm confused. The delegate counts I had seen prior to this post (NY Times, Washington Post) had Clinton ahead. I just checked TPM and see that Obama is claiming that he is ahead (which I hope is true). Should I gather that it is still up in the air?
My calculus puts it at Obama 846, Clinton 832, assuming New Mexico breaks 13-13. But the big news is that Hillary's broke: she had to loan her campaign $5 million and still couldn't match Obama's spending leading up to Super Tuesday. What's more, her top staffers are now going upaid, according to TIME online: Clinton's latest email urges supporters to raise $3 million in the first 3 days after Super Tuesday. Yet Obama has raised $6 million IN ONE DAY after Super Tuesday. This is it, folks: the end of the campaign. Obama stands to win in Louisiana, Nebraska, and Washington, so there will be a drumbeat of bad news for Hillary leading up to Virginia. Will she still be in the lead by then? Very, very doubtful. Without money, she's dead on the electability issue, and that makes her poison for Democrats.
KEITH- you are absolutely right. Democrats We Need To Wake UP!! %60 percent of McCain voters voted for him because they think he can WIN!!! As Dems, we need to shift our thinking to who can actually win against McCain! Hillary folks: You fought the good fight. But, she's desperate, begging for 4 debates (free advertising) and will most likely go negative. AND NOW SHE'S BROKE. If we want the White House back- Obama needs us. He is the ONLY dem who can beat McCain. And now the only Dem who can afford to. WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
But all of that supposedly doesn't matter because Hillary won California and New York.
I don't know why the news channels even bothering telling us who "won" states. There is nothing to "win" if you get more votes in a state.
Posted by Jayhawk Max | February 6, 2008 10:43 AM