« The Limbaugh Effect Helps HRC? | Main | Dueling Spin: The Big Picture V. Clinton's Taxes » Clinton Narrows The Delegate Gap05 Mar 2008 12:36 pm NBC News's Chuck Todd, about the smartest delegate counter I know, estimates that Hillary Clinton closed the pledged delegate gap by a minimum of six delegates last night. That's more than I had anticipated and can be directly attributed to the margins she ran up in Ohio. Comments (31)
Wow, 6 pledged delegates. That means she's only down by...144? God, it's embarrassing how bad the punditariat sucks at math. This thing is over, people. 
Great! All she needs is 20 more nights like yesterday, and baby, she's got a stew going!
Her biggest win in the campaign, and she gains 6 delegates. And now the media is treating the race like it's neck and neck. Meh. Maybe the Dems deserve her. I registered Democratic to vote for Obama, but I may have to switch back to Republican. Try to change the party from within.
6 delegates? So, how long will it take her to catch up? Oh, I know, NEVER! I am looking forward to this initial 48 hours or so to get over so the irrational exuberance of the Clinton campaign and the media will dissipate. Time for a "REALITY CHECK". Her campaign is now based on "FALSE HOPES".
The Obama campaign's website is estimating she gained only 4 last night. My impression is that they have been fairly reliable in their counts.
Jeff Larson, If you keep bringing the Arrested Development references, I'm voting for you in November. This isn't the first one I've picked up on and I appreciate that you are staying on message.
Actually, let me recharacterize my previous comments. She picked up six delegates -- her best nightly showing yet, by the way -- and there are now nearly 400 fewer delegates available for her with which to take the lead. It appears to me that Hillary prematurely shot her wad on what was supposed to be a dry run, and now she has a bit of a mess on her hands.
A net of 6 delegates that will be wiped away in the course of 1 week.
OH YEAH, BABY....6 DELEGATES!!!!! WOOHOOO!!!!!! WE'RE COOKIN' WITH GAS NOW MISTER!!!!! LOOK OUT BELOW CAUSE 'OL HILLZILLA IS COMING ON TO LEVEL OBAMOKYO!!!! YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well sure you can run up a vote, when the media helps a candidate appeal to the worst side of human nature. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside when you realize the media can pull the racist harp strings and then wonder what happened. Heck of a job there...Oh and there are a few stories that need to be retracted. One more thing, talking points should not be a substitute for journalism!
While the readers here may not understand what "at least" means, or what a "superdelegate" is, it's certainly the case that she's made a dent, albeit a small one, but has far more word-of-mouth momentum than delegate momentum.
dt: do you understand what 'moron' or 'imbecile' means? ask your mom.
Jeff Larson, if that's a veiled criticism about Hillary, I won't hear it and I won't respond to it.
Instead of talking about the +6-9 delegates she earned last night, the media should be spinning about her First Lady records that are about to be released and the phone log records they are keeping from being released. Also, the media should be hitting her much harder about her tax returns. If she is so vetted than she should have no excuses for continuing to withhold this information. What is Hillary Clinton hiding? National Archives to Release Hillary Clinton’s White House Daily Schedules to Judicial Watch before March 20 (Washington, DC) – Judical Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that the National Archives and Records Administration notified the U.S. District Court on March 1 that it expects to release to Judicial Watch 10,000 pages of former First Lady Hillary Clinton’s daily schedule records by March 20, 2008, the date of a status hearing in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit in the matter [Judicial Watch, Inc. v U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Civil Action No: 1:07-cv-01267 (JR)]. The Archives, however, suggests it will take “one to two years” to begin processing Hillary Clinton’s telephone logs. “The Clinton Presidential Library (“Library”) completed its exacting page-by-page, line-by-line review of approximately 10,000 of the 30,000 pages of records potentially responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] April 5, 2006 Freedom of Information Act request (“Request”) that is the subject of this action,” the National Archives stated in its brief. “The Library has notified the Presidential representatives of the records scheduled for disclosure and anticipates that it will produce those records to plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. in advance of the March 20, 2008 hearing.” “We are pleased we are finally getting Hillary’s daily schedules despite the Clintons’ delaying tactics,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And it is ridiculous to expect the American people to wait ‘one to two years’ for the telephone logs of a candidate for the presidency. The Archives needs to get its act together and comply with the law, which requires the timely release of these records.” Judicial Watch also seeks access to records related to the National Taskforce on Health Care Reform, a “cabinet-level” taskforce chaired by former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a separate lawsuit [Judicial Watch, Inc. v U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Civil Action No: 07-1987 (PLF)] . For more information on Judicial Watch’s campaign to force the release of Hillary Clinton’s White House records, please click here. March 4, 2008
I'm sorry, Dr. VDH. She's a selfish country-music-loving lady.
Marc, I think a little perspective goes long way... Obama was 162 delegates ahead of Clinton and now he's 156 delegates! If that's narrow(er)... well, what can I say :)
Obama also picked up Ohio superdelegate Rhine McLin today so that negates 16% of what she gained.
She's a selfish country-music-loving lady. Jeff: you forgot to mention cookie baking.
It's worth keeping an eye on the Texas Caucus counts. At the moment, the projections based on current returns posted at the Texas Democratic Party site are: State Delegates projection: Obama: 48662 55.3% National Delegate projection: Obama: 37
LOL @ Jeff Larson keep it up!
Well, if Mark T.'s numbers are right, then she picks up -1 delegates. At this rate, she only needs 13,895 more contests once the universe starts contracting and the space-time continuum is reversed in order to take the lead. Or, as Sweet Dick Willie said in Do The Right Thing: "Fool, you're thirty cents away from a quarter. How you gonna get a boat?"
Jay, I think she's more of a "hot ham water" girl.
Clinton picked up 10 delegates, depending on the Texas caucus result. For Clinton: Total: +10 So Obama goes from a pledged delegate lead of 162 to 152. And this is a game changer? What is the media smoking?
Just heard on NPR Talk of the Nation about 10 (190 C, 180 O, 4 seem to be unknown). Which of course changes everything. For those who don't like math: Your scenario is to go into the convention trailing 100-200 delegates, and argue that the black man who won should step aside because the Clintons want another turn. Armtwist Barack onto the ticket as veep, have him give a really good speech--NO ONE is that good a public speaker. I do expect the supers to be smart and not overturn the pledged delegates.
Geraldine Ferraro is on now, bashing the mayor of Dayton for going with her city, and complaining how unfair it is that some supers will switch C to O just because they're threatened with a primary contest. Unfair! This moments after assuring us that supers are deeply in tune with voters, much more than voters themselves. I will note that both callers and neutral analysts basically are giving Ickes and Ferraro short shrift on the "voters don't matter--they aren't in tune with what they want the way superdelegates are" balloon.
To all the Obama suporters: you need think this through and ask yourself why you think Clinton should get out now.
Jeff, what you don't understand is that when life hands you a chance to be President, you have to grab that brownish area by its points and you don't let go no matter what your mom says. Me, I'm an ideas man, Jeff. I think I proved that with F*ck Mountain.
wnfb, Actually, decisive wins for Obama in Texas and Ohio would not have been enough to allow him to win the nomination on pledged delegates alone (unless you are talking implausibly decisive). Of course that would have made the hole Clinton finds herself in a lot deeper, but Obama's decisive wins in many other states already made that hole plenty deep.
wnfb, I gave an argument right up there for why losing her way to the nomination is not likely to secure it, and should not if the supers are not idiots. (They don't seem to be signalling they're idiots, for what it's worth.) As for why she should get out now: Do you honestly believe she's going to be a Huck-like positive sparring partner? She's already repeated her line about "John McCain brings a lifetime of experience to the presidency; Barack Obama brings a speech he made in 2002" a few times. I don't argue that she'll think up things the Rs won't, but to keep arguing for McCain's exceptional fitness (something she would grant about not a single one of her primary challengers, and she was asked a few times) is not helpful. For any D nominee, because McCain's record actually looks a wee bit more substantial than hers, even if he was never First Lady of Arkansas. Why vote for Clinton on commander in chiefhood when you can have McCain? She's just being a McCain echo. John: I am more prepared to be commander in chief than Barack. Hillary: Yeah! John is much better. *shrug* I'm an independent. I rarely vote in the primaries--it takes an exceptionally good or bad candidate. If Clinton did well enough yesterday to be indulged with a bloody march to the convention, I certainly can't stop it. At the convention, Ms Ferraro will repeat the argument she just made that even the popular vote matters not, for some foolish states let independents vote--the last thing the party wants is a nominee who's attractive to independents. The nominee shall be decided by exit-polling in certain states, ignoring all the states who inconveniently used other methods. And if you think that will be attractive to independents for Ds anywhere on the ticket, or to a number of newly motivated D voters, you've been listening to Ickes too long. The D leadership will do what they want; I just don't see the long-term benefit to the party of the insult-every-voter plan.
first of all, the delegate lead that obama holds in comparison to the overall delegates he is ahead by only a/ five percent which won't change very much. also in relation to this due to the importance of hillary's superdelegate lead puts her ahead of obama. this lead that she technically holds seems to be unimportant now but her wins in ohio and texas lends faith to the super delegates concerning her electability: an essential political stronghold in the primary elections.
|
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.
| 
I would estimate it is more attributable to her margins in South Texas, Marc: She got unexpected 3-1 splits in the 19th, 20th, and 21st districts, running up huge margins. That alone accounts for 6 delegates, and her win in the Texas delegate count!
Posted by Daniel | March 5, 2008 12:41 PM