With the largest district left (Dededo) outstanding, Senator Obama leads Senator Clinton by a slim 1951 to 1748 lead (52.7% to 47.3%).
It is possible Senator Clinton could catch Senator Obama once this final village is counted.
What does not seem possible at this time, however, is anything different than a 2-2 pledged delegate split in Guam, as expected.
I'll post a final update on Guam later today.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Two Obama-Leaning Guam Superdelegates Expected to Be Named
As reported earlier, in addition to determining the eight pledged delegates (that compose 4 total pledged delegate votes at the Convention), Guam also was holding elections for the State Party Chair and Vice-Chair, both of whom are awarded superdelegate status upon election.
Previously I noted that it was likely that the incumbent, undeclared slate of candidates for these two positions would prevail over the Obama and Clinton slates. Instead, in what may be an indicator of the results of the Guam primary, the Obama-leaning slate has proven to be well ahead in the vote count and will most likely be named to the party and superdelegate positions.
This slate, Chair Lujan/Vice Chair Paulino, presents one undeclared superdelegate (Lujan) and one Obama supporter (Paulino).
If this result holds up as expected, Obama will pick up one more superdelegate, and possibly the second in future days. Also, with an appointment for another superdelegate from Guam in the hands of the Chair, it's very possible that Obama will pick up that third superdelegate in the coming weeks.
Previously I noted that it was likely that the incumbent, undeclared slate of candidates for these two positions would prevail over the Obama and Clinton slates. Instead, in what may be an indicator of the results of the Guam primary, the Obama-leaning slate has proven to be well ahead in the vote count and will most likely be named to the party and superdelegate positions.
This slate, Chair Lujan/Vice Chair Paulino, presents one undeclared superdelegate (Lujan) and one Obama supporter (Paulino).
If this result holds up as expected, Obama will pick up one more superdelegate, and possibly the second in future days. Also, with an appointment for another superdelegate from Guam in the hands of the Chair, it's very possible that Obama will pick up that third superdelegate in the coming weeks.
Add-On Delegate Update: Obama 2, Clinton 1, Unnamed 1
anaToday saw three separate states holding their add-on selection process: Louisiana, South Carolina and Maryland.
Maryland had two add-on delegates to select, and as I predicted that result was split between Senators Obama and Clinton. Former Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Former Governor Parris Glendening were selected, with Townsend supporting Clinton and Glendening supporting Obama.
Former South Carolina State Education Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum received a majority of votes for the add-on delegate position after it was unclear if current Education Superintendent Jim Rex would support Obama, despite the large majority by which Obama carried the state.
Louisiana is also selecting its add-on delegate today, and the results of that contest will be made known later today.
Maryland had two add-on delegates to select, and as I predicted that result was split between Senators Obama and Clinton. Former Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Former Governor Parris Glendening were selected, with Townsend supporting Clinton and Glendening supporting Obama.
Former South Carolina State Education Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum received a majority of votes for the add-on delegate position after it was unclear if current Education Superintendent Jim Rex would support Obama, despite the large majority by which Obama carried the state.
Louisiana is also selecting its add-on delegate today, and the results of that contest will be made known later today.
New Mexico Superdelegate Announces for Obama
Today, New Mexico Party Chair Brian Colon declared his support for Senator Obama. This decision is a boost to the Obama campaign for several reasons:
1) Colon is yet another superdelegate backing Obama
1) Colon is yet another superdelegate backing Obama
2) Colon is linking his support to Obama as a result of his distress over the "negative tone of the campaign"--an echo to the Joe Andrew announcement a few days ago
3) Colon's decision could provide a preview of what recently appointed add-on delegate, Laurie Weahkee.
If you recall, the Clinton campaign argued vociferously against this appointment, even though she was appointed as an 'undeclared' add-on delegate. Maybe the Clinton camp knew how Colon was leaning and that Weahkee was a stealth Obama delegate?
The Clinton Matrix: May 3, 2008 Edition
Here's an update of the Clinton Matrix for this morning. I wanted to make a clarification in case you had a question. I stopped adding actual add-on delegates won prior to the 4 from New York announcing for Clinton. The metric on the Y-axis (add-on delegates earned from last 64 undeclared) includes the four for Clinton, the five currently undecided, and the 55 left to be named throughout the process.
Also, the add-on delegate schedule does not finish until the middle of June, which means that if the superdelegates wish to end the race prior to June 25th, they will need to add one more superdelegate to their number for every one add-on delegate that would have voted for the winner of the primary.
For example, if the superdelegates were to support a decision to move to Obama after the May 20th elections in Kentucky and Oregon, then that number would have to be 25 greater than at the end of the add-on process, to replace the likely 25 add-on delegates that would have gone to Obama in the intervening weeks.
The splitting of the last 64 add-ons and the last 408 pledged delegates is a scenario that is charitable to Senator Clinton, as she is expected to come up short about 5-10 pledged delegates and about 8-16 add-on delegates. Even under this optimistic scenario, she would still need 86.4% of the remaining superdelegates to win the nomination.
In the meantime, she needs 6 superdelegates for every 1 that Obama produces to keep her head above the 86.4% watermark. If she can't keep pace in superdelegates in the coming days and weeks, that percentage will increase and go into the 90s very quickly.
Enjoy
Guam Primary Closes
And we await the returns. A 2.5 to 1.5 pledged delegate advantage would be a great goal for either campaign.
Will there be a victory speech?
Even more critical might be the two superdelegates being announced today as well from Guam.
More, when results come in.
Will there be a victory speech?
Even more critical might be the two superdelegates being announced today as well from Guam.
More, when results come in.
Friday, May 2, 2008
An Inside Look at Guam
It's good to give Guam its due. Since only a small portion of the American electorate will actually come across this article by accident or on purpose, I thought I would re-print it here.
Here also are links to a letter written on Thursday by a Hillary supporter trying to blast Obama for votes of interest to Guam, and a response from Obama himself in the form of an open letter on Friday, highlighting his role with those critical votes and also how his Hawai'ian background and his grandfather's military experience in WWII influence his respect for Pacific-Islander people and issues.
And here is the editorial that ran today.
And now to the original article promised:
Moment of truth for Democrats; Campaign now down to grassroots
By Therese Hart
Variety News Staff
IT’S just a day away.
Tomorrow Guam Democrats will go to the polls to decide their choice for U.S. presidential candidate in the Democratic National Convention, as well as the leadership for the Democratic Party of Guam.
The closely run race between senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama places Guam in the nation's spotlight as the two go head to head in garnering delegate votes.
Guam holds nine delegate votes, five of which are super delegate votes. Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo, national committeeman and national committeewoman, as well as the chair and vice chair of the Democratic Party of Guam make up the five super delegate votes.
The remaining four delegate votes will go to those who have pledged their support for either Clinton or Obama. Four men and four women will win the pledged delegate seats. Each winning delegate gets a half vote.
Joseph "Joey" Duenas is running for treasurer and has publicly endorsed Obama. Therese C. Arriola is running for secretary and is supporting Clinton.
Democratic senators who are supporting Clinton are senators Tina Muna Barnes and David L. G. Shimizu.
Senators Adolpho Palacios, Judith Guthertz, Rory Respicio and Benjamin J. F. Cruz have endorsed Obama while senators Judi Won Pat and Ben Pangelinan have not committed to either of the two presidential candidates.
Although Won Pat remains uncommitted, she said that she would like the two to run together.
"It would be an awesome team. Guaranteed that the world will not be the same," Won Pat said.
Team Hillary and the Obama camps have been stomping the villages, doing door to door canvassing, making telephone calls throughout the night into the early morning hours, conducting phone banks and generally reaching out to all registered Guam Democrats and feverishly recruiting new ones.
Joshua Tenorio, Obama campaign chair said that the Obama volunteer group has been hitting the pavement, aggressively canvassing door to door as well as phone banking.
"People from National Call Center volunteers are using their technology on our website to reach out and call people to vote on Saturday. We're getting calls from Pennsylvania, Colorado, California, Hawaii, New York and Indiana. It's amazing," Tenorio said.
Former Senator Pilar Lujan and former Inarajan Mayor Jaime Paulino have also been working hard, canvassing and calling friends and relatives for their support in the May 3 election.
Lujan remains uncommitted because she believes that her vote should reflect the will of the majority of Democrats. However, her running mate, Paulino, has publicly endorsed Obama, according to Tenorio.
"Both Hillary and Obama represent the party ideals. As a candidate for the Democratic party chair, I will like my vote to represent the Democratic Party of Guam," Lujan said.
Lujan said that she, along with her family have been Democratic members for many years and that politics is still alive with Guam's vote having a big stake for the Democratic presidential candidates.
The team of Joseph Artero Cameron and Arlene Bordallo are the only two candidates who are running for chair and vice chair who have publicly endorsed Clinton. The two have also been aggressively campaigning for themselves and Clinton.
The two have also been endorsed by Hillary Clinton herself.
"We are making phone calls into the early morning hours. We are waving. We are walking door to door. It's a lot of hard work. Hopefully, it'll pay off," Cameron said.
"Arlene and I decided that there was no reason to remain non-committal as to which candidate we were going to endorse since we know that Hillary is the right person to put in the White House as our commander-and-chief. She knows the problems our people face and she has never backed down from a confrontation, especially when she's fighting for what she believes in," Cameron said.
"When Hillary becomes our next president, we will have a strong voice in Washington. We will no longer be placed on the back burner or as an afterthought. The military buildup alone is an issue that remains vague for our people. We're fooling ourselves if we think we can protect our local interests if we have anyone else other than Hillary in the White House. She knows Guam. She loves Guam and she's going to make Guam a priority," Cameron said.
The team of Tony Charfauros and Mary Ann Cabrera have been making phone calls and touching bases with the grassroots. Charfauros said that he and his running mate remain uncommitted in their support for the presidential candidate.
Charfauros said that he would like to see what each candidate has to offer Guam and whether they can deliver their campaign promises.
"I want to know what they have to say about Guam's political self-determination. It's been too long. We need to fulfill our destiny now. We cannot afford to wait, especially with the military buildup. We need to speak out as an indigenous people and determine our political destiny," Charfauros said.
The Democratic Party will not be appointing an interim national committeeman. Senators Ben Pangelinan, Benjamin J. F. Cruz and David Shimizu were interested in filling the interim seats. With just one day away to the election, the seat will be filled.
* Write-In *
Tenorio said that there are no efforts in organizing a write-in for the positions of national committeeman and woman.
"We are not pursuing or organizing a write-in effort. Taling is a bridge between all sides of the party. I support her," Tenorio said.
Shimizu and Taitano are running for national committee man and national committee woman respectively. They run unopposed.
Voting sites have been chosen and published in local papers. Polling sites will open at 10 a.m. and close at 8 p.m.
Herbie Perez, nominating committee chair, said that her committee is ready for the anticipated voting crowd.
"There will be one precinct official and one alternate for each polling site. The precinct board chairman can select three alternates. In addition, there will be two judges, one from the Obama camp and one from the Clinton camp. There will also be two inspectors, one for each camp," Perez said.
Here also are links to a letter written on Thursday by a Hillary supporter trying to blast Obama for votes of interest to Guam, and a response from Obama himself in the form of an open letter on Friday, highlighting his role with those critical votes and also how his Hawai'ian background and his grandfather's military experience in WWII influence his respect for Pacific-Islander people and issues.
And here is the editorial that ran today.
And now to the original article promised:
Moment of truth for Democrats; Campaign now down to grassroots
By Therese Hart
Variety News Staff
IT’S just a day away.
Tomorrow Guam Democrats will go to the polls to decide their choice for U.S. presidential candidate in the Democratic National Convention, as well as the leadership for the Democratic Party of Guam.
The closely run race between senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama places Guam in the nation's spotlight as the two go head to head in garnering delegate votes.
Guam holds nine delegate votes, five of which are super delegate votes. Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo, national committeeman and national committeewoman, as well as the chair and vice chair of the Democratic Party of Guam make up the five super delegate votes.
The remaining four delegate votes will go to those who have pledged their support for either Clinton or Obama. Four men and four women will win the pledged delegate seats. Each winning delegate gets a half vote.
Joseph "Joey" Duenas is running for treasurer and has publicly endorsed Obama. Therese C. Arriola is running for secretary and is supporting Clinton.
Democratic senators who are supporting Clinton are senators Tina Muna Barnes and David L. G. Shimizu.
Senators Adolpho Palacios, Judith Guthertz, Rory Respicio and Benjamin J. F. Cruz have endorsed Obama while senators Judi Won Pat and Ben Pangelinan have not committed to either of the two presidential candidates.
Although Won Pat remains uncommitted, she said that she would like the two to run together.
"It would be an awesome team. Guaranteed that the world will not be the same," Won Pat said.
Team Hillary and the Obama camps have been stomping the villages, doing door to door canvassing, making telephone calls throughout the night into the early morning hours, conducting phone banks and generally reaching out to all registered Guam Democrats and feverishly recruiting new ones.
Joshua Tenorio, Obama campaign chair said that the Obama volunteer group has been hitting the pavement, aggressively canvassing door to door as well as phone banking.
"People from National Call Center volunteers are using their technology on our website to reach out and call people to vote on Saturday. We're getting calls from Pennsylvania, Colorado, California, Hawaii, New York and Indiana. It's amazing," Tenorio said.
Former Senator Pilar Lujan and former Inarajan Mayor Jaime Paulino have also been working hard, canvassing and calling friends and relatives for their support in the May 3 election.
Lujan remains uncommitted because she believes that her vote should reflect the will of the majority of Democrats. However, her running mate, Paulino, has publicly endorsed Obama, according to Tenorio.
"Both Hillary and Obama represent the party ideals. As a candidate for the Democratic party chair, I will like my vote to represent the Democratic Party of Guam," Lujan said.
Lujan said that she, along with her family have been Democratic members for many years and that politics is still alive with Guam's vote having a big stake for the Democratic presidential candidates.
The team of Joseph Artero Cameron and Arlene Bordallo are the only two candidates who are running for chair and vice chair who have publicly endorsed Clinton. The two have also been aggressively campaigning for themselves and Clinton.
The two have also been endorsed by Hillary Clinton herself.
"We are making phone calls into the early morning hours. We are waving. We are walking door to door. It's a lot of hard work. Hopefully, it'll pay off," Cameron said.
"Arlene and I decided that there was no reason to remain non-committal as to which candidate we were going to endorse since we know that Hillary is the right person to put in the White House as our commander-and-chief. She knows the problems our people face and she has never backed down from a confrontation, especially when she's fighting for what she believes in," Cameron said.
"When Hillary becomes our next president, we will have a strong voice in Washington. We will no longer be placed on the back burner or as an afterthought. The military buildup alone is an issue that remains vague for our people. We're fooling ourselves if we think we can protect our local interests if we have anyone else other than Hillary in the White House. She knows Guam. She loves Guam and she's going to make Guam a priority," Cameron said.
The team of Tony Charfauros and Mary Ann Cabrera have been making phone calls and touching bases with the grassroots. Charfauros said that he and his running mate remain uncommitted in their support for the presidential candidate.
Charfauros said that he would like to see what each candidate has to offer Guam and whether they can deliver their campaign promises.
"I want to know what they have to say about Guam's political self-determination. It's been too long. We need to fulfill our destiny now. We cannot afford to wait, especially with the military buildup. We need to speak out as an indigenous people and determine our political destiny," Charfauros said.
The Democratic Party will not be appointing an interim national committeeman. Senators Ben Pangelinan, Benjamin J. F. Cruz and David Shimizu were interested in filling the interim seats. With just one day away to the election, the seat will be filled.
* Write-In *
Tenorio said that there are no efforts in organizing a write-in for the positions of national committeeman and woman.
"We are not pursuing or organizing a write-in effort. Taling is a bridge between all sides of the party. I support her," Tenorio said.
Shimizu and Taitano are running for national committee man and national committee woman respectively. They run unopposed.
Voting sites have been chosen and published in local papers. Polling sites will open at 10 a.m. and close at 8 p.m.
Herbie Perez, nominating committee chair, said that her committee is ready for the anticipated voting crowd.
"There will be one precinct official and one alternate for each polling site. The precinct board chairman can select three alternates. In addition, there will be two judges, one from the Obama camp and one from the Clinton camp. There will also be two inspectors, one for each camp," Perez said.
Guam Primary Contest Starts Tonight
8400 miles and 20 time zones West from Washington, DC, the tiny United States Territory of Guam (est. pop. 180,000) has its moment in the political sun and has begun voting in the Democratic Primary.
The contest officially began today at 8 PM EST and will conclude at 6 AM EST on Saturday, May 3rd.
As a quick recap, four pledged delegates are at stake from this contest. Eight delegates will be awarded but each only has a 1/2 vote at the National Convention.
In Guam superdelegate news, Demconwatch is reporting that there are three vacancies in the five superdelegate slots allotted to Guam. Two of those vacancies will be filled today when the Chair and Vice-Chair (who are given superdelegate status) are selected.
Demconwatch is also reporting that there are three slates running for these two spots--one pro-Obama, one pro-Clinton, and one-Uncommitted. The Uncommitted slate includes current Chair Antonio Charfauros and Mary Ann Cabrera.
This last slate, which is predicted to be selected becuase of its uncommitted status and its incumbency, has declared that it will leverage its undeclared status to see what the candidates will do for Guam.
As a side note, this development gives a bit more credence to my theory that smaller states/territories will try to leverage an "undeclared" status for its add-ons and recently named superdelegates to gain attention and relevancy for the state/territory.
The contest officially began today at 8 PM EST and will conclude at 6 AM EST on Saturday, May 3rd.
As a quick recap, four pledged delegates are at stake from this contest. Eight delegates will be awarded but each only has a 1/2 vote at the National Convention.
In Guam superdelegate news, Demconwatch is reporting that there are three vacancies in the five superdelegate slots allotted to Guam. Two of those vacancies will be filled today when the Chair and Vice-Chair (who are given superdelegate status) are selected.
Demconwatch is also reporting that there are three slates running for these two spots--one pro-Obama, one pro-Clinton, and one-Uncommitted. The Uncommitted slate includes current Chair Antonio Charfauros and Mary Ann Cabrera.
This last slate, which is predicted to be selected becuase of its uncommitted status and its incumbency, has declared that it will leverage its undeclared status to see what the candidates will do for Guam.
As a side note, this development gives a bit more credence to my theory that smaller states/territories will try to leverage an "undeclared" status for its add-ons and recently named superdelegates to gain attention and relevancy for the state/territory.
Clinton Picks Up a Superdelegate in Texas
Ben Smith over at Politico.com posts that a new superdelegate is coming out for Hillary Clinton, according to sources.
Jaime Gonzalez, Jr., is a DNC loyalist and superdelegate for Texas.
Discounting the Kirk announcement today because it was already part of Obama's total, today could well end Hillary +1, Obama 0. However, some news outlets (like NBC News) did not have Kirk as a superdelegate commitment, so for them this is a new endorsement.
I'm sure Obama could produce some other new superdelegates, but the desire to amplify the Andrew defection and the fact that it's a slow news period on Friday afternoon/evening probably means no more superdelegate announcements tonight.
Jaime Gonzalez, Jr., is a DNC loyalist and superdelegate for Texas.
Discounting the Kirk announcement today because it was already part of Obama's total, today could well end Hillary +1, Obama 0. However, some news outlets (like NBC News) did not have Kirk as a superdelegate commitment, so for them this is a new endorsement.
I'm sure Obama could produce some other new superdelegates, but the desire to amplify the Andrew defection and the fact that it's a slow news period on Friday afternoon/evening probably means no more superdelegate announcements tonight.
Clinton Produces Co-Signed Support Letter from Former DNC Chairs
Sometimes a superdelegate decision is more than just a superdelegate decision.
In an interesting turn of events today, no new superdelegates were released by either campaign. Obama's campaign "re-introduced" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk today, but it appears that this is not a new superdelegate for Obama.
I was wondering why the pace had just stopped today, after multiple superdelegates were announced in the past few days. I have come upon a theory that explains why my previous post was so off in terms of superdelegate announcements.
My opinion is that the Joe Andrew switch from Clinton to Obama has some juice left in it, and the Obama campaign does not want to shift the attention from this major defection to his side. I also think that by "re-introducing" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk, the Obama campaign was trying to (in one of their favorite words) "amplify" the effect of the Andrew switch and the call for superdelegates to bring this race to an end because every step forward hurts the party and every vote for Clinton is a vote for McCain (to paraphrase the general comments that have emerged).
This theory is given validation by the fact that the Clinton campaign has responded with the following letter signed by the following people:
Kenneth Curtis
Former DNC Chairman (1977-1978)
Charles Manatt
Former DNC Chairman (1981-1985)
The Family of the late Ron Brown
Former DNC Chairman (1989-1993)
Mrs. Alma Brown, Michael Arrington Brown & Tracey Brown James
Debra DeLee
Former DNC Chair (1994-1995)
Don Fowler
Former DNC National Chairman (1995-1997)
Steve Grossman
Former DNC National Chairman (1997-1999)
Governor Edward Rendell
Former DNC General Chairman (1999-2001)
Terence McAuliffe
Former DNC Chairman (2001-2005)
Some quotations from the letter that caught my eye:
"Hillary has run one of the most formidable campaigns in the history of our Party."
Interesting choice of words. If she's formidable, what's Obama? And they use this word twice in the same paragraph.
The selective use of the AP-Ipsos Poll that sparks this quotation: "In a hypothetical general election matchup with McCain, Clinton is winning handily (50%-41%) while Obama is statistically tied with McCain (46%-44%)"
"Both states [Indiana and North Carolina] have sizeable voting blocs that resemble constituencies who supported Hillary by large margins in Pennsylvania, Ohio and other contests."
North Carolina has a 30+% African-American voting bloc.
"Hillary’s campaign is currently operating at full capacity..."
The subtext is that she does not have money problems holding her back
"The record numbers of Americans who are registering and coming out to vote reflect the excitement about our candidates and the strength that our nominee will have behind him or her in the fall."
Is there a way to parse how much of this excitement is due to Clinton or to Obama?
"We encourage you to continue to fully consider Hillary Clinton and the fact that she is qualified and accomplished."
Split infinitive, anyone? [yeah, that was picky]
In a race where superdelegates are unveiled in quantity, it's important sometimes to marinate in the effects of a superdelegate announced that provides a level of quality in the race. Governor Easley from North Carolina is one that the Clinton Campaign has highlighted, and now Former DNC Chair Joe Andrew is another one for the Obama Campaign.
Sometimes it is what is not done that matters. Silence can be golden.
I expect a surge of superdelegates on Monday, to coincide with the add-on delegates announced in Illinois, Maryland, Louisiana and South Carolina which will mimic "momentum" for those not savvy to the differences between add-on delegates chosen on a schedule and superdelegates deciding at key moments.
Obama will pick up at least 5, if not all 7, of these add-on delegates to be announced. And if the two new Guam superdelegates (once Guam's Party Chair and Vice-Chair slots are filled) declare before Tuesday, it could be more.
In an interesting turn of events today, no new superdelegates were released by either campaign. Obama's campaign "re-introduced" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk today, but it appears that this is not a new superdelegate for Obama.
I was wondering why the pace had just stopped today, after multiple superdelegates were announced in the past few days. I have come upon a theory that explains why my previous post was so off in terms of superdelegate announcements.
My opinion is that the Joe Andrew switch from Clinton to Obama has some juice left in it, and the Obama campaign does not want to shift the attention from this major defection to his side. I also think that by "re-introducing" former DNC Chair Paul Kirk, the Obama campaign was trying to (in one of their favorite words) "amplify" the effect of the Andrew switch and the call for superdelegates to bring this race to an end because every step forward hurts the party and every vote for Clinton is a vote for McCain (to paraphrase the general comments that have emerged).
This theory is given validation by the fact that the Clinton campaign has responded with the following letter signed by the following people:
Kenneth Curtis
Former DNC Chairman (1977-1978)
Charles Manatt
Former DNC Chairman (1981-1985)
The Family of the late Ron Brown
Former DNC Chairman (1989-1993)
Mrs. Alma Brown, Michael Arrington Brown & Tracey Brown James
Debra DeLee
Former DNC Chair (1994-1995)
Don Fowler
Former DNC National Chairman (1995-1997)
Steve Grossman
Former DNC National Chairman (1997-1999)
Governor Edward Rendell
Former DNC General Chairman (1999-2001)
Terence McAuliffe
Former DNC Chairman (2001-2005)
Some quotations from the letter that caught my eye:
"Hillary has run one of the most formidable campaigns in the history of our Party."
Interesting choice of words. If she's formidable, what's Obama? And they use this word twice in the same paragraph.
The selective use of the AP-Ipsos Poll that sparks this quotation: "In a hypothetical general election matchup with McCain, Clinton is winning handily (50%-41%) while Obama is statistically tied with McCain (46%-44%)"
"Both states [Indiana and North Carolina] have sizeable voting blocs that resemble constituencies who supported Hillary by large margins in Pennsylvania, Ohio and other contests."
North Carolina has a 30+% African-American voting bloc.
"Hillary’s campaign is currently operating at full capacity..."
The subtext is that she does not have money problems holding her back
"The record numbers of Americans who are registering and coming out to vote reflect the excitement about our candidates and the strength that our nominee will have behind him or her in the fall."
Is there a way to parse how much of this excitement is due to Clinton or to Obama?
"We encourage you to continue to fully consider Hillary Clinton and the fact that she is qualified and accomplished."
Split infinitive, anyone? [yeah, that was picky]
In a race where superdelegates are unveiled in quantity, it's important sometimes to marinate in the effects of a superdelegate announced that provides a level of quality in the race. Governor Easley from North Carolina is one that the Clinton Campaign has highlighted, and now Former DNC Chair Joe Andrew is another one for the Obama Campaign.
Sometimes it is what is not done that matters. Silence can be golden.
I expect a surge of superdelegates on Monday, to coincide with the add-on delegates announced in Illinois, Maryland, Louisiana and South Carolina which will mimic "momentum" for those not savvy to the differences between add-on delegates chosen on a schedule and superdelegates deciding at key moments.
Obama will pick up at least 5, if not all 7, of these add-on delegates to be announced. And if the two new Guam superdelegates (once Guam's Party Chair and Vice-Chair slots are filled) declare before Tuesday, it could be more.
Former DNC Chair Kirk to Endorse Obama
This came across the wire earlier today, according to ABC News' The Note:
From Kirk's statement Friday morning:
"It is with a great sense of pride and confidence in his leadership that I am delighted to publicly endorse Senator Barack Obama and pledge my support to him as former National Democratic Chairman and as a superdelegate. Senator Obama is the one candidate who has and will continue to expand the electorate beyond the traditional Democratic party base and bring young and new and Independent voters to the Democratic banner in November, an essential ingredient to a Democratic victory."
There were some questions as to whether or not some of the news outlets already had already assigned Mr. Kirk as an Obama superdelegate or not, so I'll wait a bit before declaring this an official addition to the delegate count. This article, written on April 28th, seems to indicate that Paul Kirk had already endorsed Obama earlier. NBC News does not have him listed as a commitment, though.
And, I'm sure I'll be back with more announcements later today. I'm predicting five total, but then again, maybe I'm being greedy. UPDATE: I was pretty off here. Explanation above.
From Kirk's statement Friday morning:
"It is with a great sense of pride and confidence in his leadership that I am delighted to publicly endorse Senator Barack Obama and pledge my support to him as former National Democratic Chairman and as a superdelegate. Senator Obama is the one candidate who has and will continue to expand the electorate beyond the traditional Democratic party base and bring young and new and Independent voters to the Democratic banner in November, an essential ingredient to a Democratic victory."
There were some questions as to whether or not some of the news outlets already had already assigned Mr. Kirk as an Obama superdelegate or not, so I'll wait a bit before declaring this an official addition to the delegate count. This article, written on April 28th, seems to indicate that Paul Kirk had already endorsed Obama earlier. NBC News does not have him listed as a commitment, though.
And, I'm sure I'll be back with more announcements later today. I'm predicting five total, but then again, maybe I'm being greedy. UPDATE: I was pretty off here. Explanation above.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
The Two Magic Numbers: 1627 and 50
1627
One "magic" number has begun creeping into the zeitgeist of the superdelegates and politically-savvy public: 1627.
1627 signifies the point at which a candidate has gained a majority of the 3253 pledged delegates.
If you somehow add in the 128 pledged delegates from Michigan and the 185 pledged delegates from Florida, the new "magic" number becomes 1783.5, as the total number of pledged delegates becomes 3566. (Yes, you can win a half-pledged-delegate. See Guam or Delegates Abroad).
Obama would still reach this new "magic" number most likely once his Florida
pledged delegates and the "uncommitted" Michigan pledged delegates are added to his total, but the chance that the final compromise for these two states allows
for a full seating of the delegation as determined by the invalid elections in
January is almost none, as the Obama campaign needs to sign off on whatever deal is struck.
Obama currently has 1490 pledged delegates. He will need 137 more to break the "magic" number. He is on schedule to do so in Oregon on May 20th.
The 137 pledged delegates needed by Obama constitute only 33.6% of the remainder of pledged delegates. In contrast, Clinton would need to add 293 pledged delegates to her total of 1334 to achieve the same milesont. 293 pledged delegates signifies a 71.8% share of the pledged delegates remaining, an impossible task at this point. (The difference in percentages is caused by the 19 Edwards pledged delegates still outstanding.)
50
Obama currently has 1739 total delegates. He is expected to pick up, in the worst case scenario, 204 pledged delegates (50% of the remainder) and 32 add-on delegates (50% of the remainder, including New York). that puts him at 1975 total delegates.
The rest of his total will need to come from the superdelegates (Senators, Governors, Congressmembers, DNC loyalists and Distinguished Party Leaders). There are 214 of these Super Delegates left, which means that Obama most likely needs 23.4% of these Super Delegates to win the nomination.
Since the pledged delegate counts and the add-on delegate counts seem to have a logic of their own, and will most likely break in this split scenario (or even favor Obama by a handful), the second "magic" number is 50.
It may not be likely that 50 more superdelegates break for Obama any time soon, but the way things have gone this past week, it is possible that 50 more will announce for him by the time the May 20th primaries come about, which could possibly give Obama the "magic" number in both the superdelegate and the pledged delegate counts.
The Three Separate, Yet Intertwined, Races for Delegates
A while ago I made the decision to track this Democratic Primary as three distinct races, eschewing the "Pledged Delegate" and "Superdelegate" distinctions that the mainstream media created.
And now more than ever I think it is important to put forth the reasons for this again, as one of the three races will now become more "active" in the coming weeks.
The 4,048 total delegates available in this race (as a result of the Florida/Michigan debacle) can be broken down into three categories:
And now more than ever I think it is important to put forth the reasons for this again, as one of the three races will now become more "active" in the coming weeks.
The 4,048 total delegates available in this race (as a result of the Florida/Michigan debacle) can be broken down into three categories:
- 3253 are Pledged Delegates: Pledged Delegates are won as a direct result of the 55 contests held in each state, DC, territories and Democrats Abroad. These 3253 pledged delegates are bound through the first vote in the Democratic National Convention, and represent an 80.4% share of the total delegates.
- 76 are Add-On Delegates: Add-on Delegates are awarded to each state, primarily to balance out the different demographics of their delegate slate to be "diverse". Each state has its own system of handling this process, but in the end, it seems like most states have the State Party Chair nominate people for the spot and then the state delegates or state committee picks them, based on different qualifications. This year these add-ons may be crucial to one candidate's victory. These Add-On Delegates represent a 1.9% share of the total delegates.
- 719 are Superdelegates: These Superdelegates, in my mind, are the current batch of 795 superdelegates (according to the mainstream media) minus the 76 add-on delegates. These superdelegates comprise members of Congress, Govenors, Party Loyalists and Distinguished Party Leaders in the Democratic Party. These Superdelegates represent a 17.8% share of the total delegates.
Each of these categories should be put in its own context and be considered a separate contest, whose results will be influential in the overall contest of Total Delegates. The reason is simple: each has their own schedule to follow.
Pledged Delegates are allocated based on a fixed schedule set by the DNC. This schedule has created three elements of interest:
(1) That Florida and Michigan tried to jump ahead of the pack cost them all of their delegates--pledged, add-on and super; and
(2) Over 56% of the pledged delegates in the primary contest was decided by the Original Super Tuesday, February 5th, front-loading the schedule.
(3) Given the rules of the party, only huge victories in small states, large victories in medium states, and healthy victories in large states can shift bunches of these delegates one way or the other. As a result, the likelihood of any candidate earning more than 55% of these pledged delegates in the last nine contests is small. The lead for Obama in Pledged Delegates is insurmountable.
Add-On Delegates are also allocated on a fixed schedule, but that schedule is determined by when each state has its state convention, where the final delegation to the national committee is selected and produced. As a result, these add-on delegates are chosen in each state well after that state went to the ballot box, creating a second schedule that is different from the Pledged Delegate Schedule.
Of the 76 Add-On Delegates, 59 are chosen in the months of May and June as follows (a more detailed schedule can be found here):
Period of Time: # of Add-on Delegates Chosen
May 1 - May 7: 11
May 8 - May 14: 5
May 15- May 21: 8
May 22 - May 28: 5
May 29 - June 4: 2
June 5 - June 11: 11
June 12 - June 18: 9
June 19 - June 25: 8
As you can see, 28 of the add-ons will be chosen after the last primary is held, which will dramatically alter their importance if the superdelegates break one way or the other. The 31 chosen from now until then (including New York's 4 today) will still play a role, most likely.
Super Delegates are not allocated on any schedule. These delegates are free to endorse whomever they want, whenever they want, all the way up to the Convention ballot. As we saw today, a super delegate can endorse one candidate and then switch to another. This type of delegate has a host of issues to consider, including how their district/state voted, how vulnerable they are to picking the loser, how vulnerable they are in their own district by alienating half their base, when is the right time to come out, etc. If there is a schedule involved, it's a personal one or one designed to minimize political damage or maximize political gain.
As you can see, treating each type of delegate the same is not helpful in understanding this race. When Clinton picks up four new Add-On Delegates from New York today, it does not indicate any new "momentum"; neither will it for Obama when he picks up three Add-On Delegates from New York. This analysis won't prevent "spinning" these results as some measuring stick for how the public feels about the race, however.
Understanding each race separately allows you to make three key distinctions:
(1) Of the 3253 Pledged Delegates, only 408 (12.5%), or 1/8 th of the total pledged delegates, remain. After May 6th, only 217 (6.7%), or 1/15th, will remain. The impact of the pledged delegates from here on out only serve to fill out the rest of the scorecard, most likely in a tie, preserving Obama's 154 Pledged Delegate lead.
(2) Of the 76 Add-On Delegates, only 16 have made their choices known, so the resulting 60 unnamed or undeclared Add-On Delegates will become of the same significance as the primaries of Montana, South Dakota, West Virginia and Guam. These delegates grow in importance over time. Since Obama has won so many more states than Clinton and by such a larger margin of victory, it is likely that Obama will net between 8 and 16 total delegates from this group.
(3) Of the 719 Super Delegates, 505 have made their choices. The remaining 214 Super Delegates will decide this race in the end, and the more their votes become scrutinized, the more the internal mechanisms governing their choices become strained.
Obama's projected lead in Pledged and Add-On Delegates requires him to win far fewer Super Delegates to win the nomination than it requires Senator Clinton.
One Projection (Charitable to Clinton):
Assuming that Clinton and Obama split the last 64 Add-On Delegates (including New York) and the last 408 Pledged Delegates, the final totals for each of them in that category will be:
OBAMA: 1975
CLINTON: 1844
With only 214 Super Delegates remaining to make a decision,
Obama would need 50 to get to 2025 (23.4% of the remainder) and
Clinton would need 181 (84.6%) to reach 2025.
Actual Projections:
The projections for the Add-On Delegates and Pledged Delegates from here on out, however, do not indicate a pure split. Instead, Obama is projected to pick up 209 of the Pledged Delegates and 40 of the Add-On Delegates (199 and 24 for Clinton, respectively), which would make their totals:
OBAMA: 1988
CLINTON: 1831
Then in this scenario, with only 214 Super Delegates remaining to make a decision,
Obama would need 37 to get to 2025 (17.3% of the remainder) and
Clinton would need 194 (90.7%) to reach 2025.
As a result of this disparity, Clinton needs to pick up 21 super delegates for every 4 that Obama picks up (not counting add-ons, of course), to keep pace.
To move ahead of pace, Clinton needs to pick up 6 super delegates for every 1 that Obama picks up.
It is better for Clinton to have zero movement among the super delegates at this point than to be matching Obama super delegate for superdelegate (and Obama actually has outgained her in super delegates 12-5 since Pennsylvania, with Clinton's 5 other total delegates being add-on delegates).
Clinton Gains Four Add-On Delegates from NY
In an expected development, Senator Clinton tallied all four add-on delegates from her Senatorial state of New York. The only question here was whether or not Clinton's state machinery was coordinated enough to stave off any Obama support to peel off a superdelegate. I thought perhaps that one add-on delegate might be undeclared today as a political compromise, but it looks like New York locked in its add-ons for Senator Clinton.
Senator Obama is expected to pick up all three add-on delegates from his home state of Illinois on Monday. For now, though, we can't count those.
Finally, it looks like Maryland's add-on selection will not take place until Saturday, when Guam goes to the caucuses and Louisiana and South Carolina are scheduled to announce their add-on selections (one apiece).
Whether fair or not, these add-on delegates will be seen as "momentum" for either candidate lucky enough to have announcements made at specific times. Heading into the Tuesday elections, Obama will possibly be able to announce 4 more add-on delegates on Saturday, plus 3 more on Monday, to demonstrate momentum from a preordained add-on selection calendar.
More on this later.
Senator Obama is expected to pick up all three add-on delegates from his home state of Illinois on Monday. For now, though, we can't count those.
Finally, it looks like Maryland's add-on selection will not take place until Saturday, when Guam goes to the caucuses and Louisiana and South Carolina are scheduled to announce their add-on selections (one apiece).
Whether fair or not, these add-on delegates will be seen as "momentum" for either candidate lucky enough to have announcements made at specific times. Heading into the Tuesday elections, Obama will possibly be able to announce 4 more add-on delegates on Saturday, plus 3 more on Monday, to demonstrate momentum from a preordained add-on selection calendar.
Joe Andrew's Letter to the Superdelegates
It will be interesting to see what effect this letter has on the campaign.
I am posting all six pages of it. You can click on each page to read it, or click the link above to see the letter in HTML format.
Add-on Delegates to be Named Today: Maryland (2), New York (4)
Six more add-on delegates will be named today, with two at stake in Maryland and four in New York.
Previously I mentioned that these two states will be of interest to test different theories on how add-on delegates will break.
Clinton won New York by a sizable amount, but with four superdelegates in play can she sweep them all? Or can Obama steal one and cut the net gain from four to two?
Obama won Maryland by a large margin, but the State Democratic Party machine is pro-Clinton. Can Obama translate his performance in the state into a two-add-on-delegate sweep? Or will the State Party decide to split the add-on delegates between the two candidates?
Of course, it is very likely as well that not all the add-on delegates named today will make an immediate endorsement, if there is a need for compromise among the candidates' supporters. We saw this happen in Arizona.
Prediction:
New York: Clinton 3, Obama 0, undeclared 1
Maryland: Obama 1, undeclared 1
Previously I mentioned that these two states will be of interest to test different theories on how add-on delegates will break.
Clinton won New York by a sizable amount, but with four superdelegates in play can she sweep them all? Or can Obama steal one and cut the net gain from four to two?
Obama won Maryland by a large margin, but the State Democratic Party machine is pro-Clinton. Can Obama translate his performance in the state into a two-add-on-delegate sweep? Or will the State Party decide to split the add-on delegates between the two candidates?
Of course, it is very likely as well that not all the add-on delegates named today will make an immediate endorsement, if there is a need for compromise among the candidates' supporters. We saw this happen in Arizona.
Prediction:
New York: Clinton 3, Obama 0, undeclared 1
Maryland: Obama 1, undeclared 1
Another superdelegate for Obama
Another superdelegate announced for Obama today. This time, it's John Patrick, a DNC superdelegate from Texas.
Since the Pennsylvania Primary, Obama has picked up 12 superdelegates, while Clinton has picked up 6 superdelegates, lost one superdelegate and picked up an add-on delegate. This represents a net gain of 6 total delegates for Obama.
The superdelegates are flying in so fast that it's getting time to update the Clinton Matrix again.
Since the Pennsylvania Primary, Obama has picked up 12 superdelegates, while Clinton has picked up 6 superdelegates, lost one superdelegate and picked up an add-on delegate. This represents a net gain of 6 total delegates for Obama.
The superdelegates are flying in so fast that it's getting time to update the Clinton Matrix again.
Major Superdelegates News: Clinton Gains a Super (+1), Obama Gains a Defection (+2)
Today's superdelegate news (so far) has provided a new superdelegate and a surprise switch of a superdelegate from one candidate to the other.
In a similar fashion as yesterday's announcement of Pennsylvania AFL-CIO president Bill George (DNC Superdelegate) for Senator Clinton, today brings news that John Olsen, AFL-CIO President for Connecticut, has also backed Clinton.
This gain of a superdelegate for Clinton was quickly erased, and the day has become a net loss of a superdelegate for her, because of a major defection from the Clinton camp.
The Associated Press is reporting that former DNC Chair Joe Andrew, a superdelegate who supported Clinton on the day of her announcement to run for President, has switched to Obama.
This development has a quintuple impact on Clinton and the race:
In a similar fashion as yesterday's announcement of Pennsylvania AFL-CIO president Bill George (DNC Superdelegate) for Senator Clinton, today brings news that John Olsen, AFL-CIO President for Connecticut, has also backed Clinton.
This gain of a superdelegate for Clinton was quickly erased, and the day has become a net loss of a superdelegate for her, because of a major defection from the Clinton camp.
The Associated Press is reporting that former DNC Chair Joe Andrew, a superdelegate who supported Clinton on the day of her announcement to run for President, has switched to Obama.
This development has a quintuple impact on Clinton and the race:
- First, a superdelegate switch is worth two superdelegates, in reality, as Obama gains one while Clinton loses one.
- Second, the momentum of superdelegates continues to favor Obama, and pulling one from Clinton is no easy task. Since Pennsylvania, Clinton has added
- Third, this superdelegate was a loyal fan of the Clintons and he owed his DNC Chairmanship to former President Bill Clinton, which demonstrates the difficulty that such a switch must have been and the urgency he must have felt.
- Fourth, Andrew is a native of Indiana, and will campaign for Obama in Indianapolis.
- And fifth, Andrew is speaking out against the narrative that a protracted race in the Democratic Primary is a good thing, and instead said that he is "convinced that the primary process has devolved to the point that it's now bad for the Democratic Party" and that "a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue this process, and a vote to continue this process is a vote that assists (Republican) John McCain." This is the type of message that could resonate with superdelegates on the fence to support Obama "for the good of the party"--to that end, Andrew has sent a letter to each superdelegate explaining his decision.
Since the Pennsylvania Primary, Obama has picked up 11 superdelegates, while Clinton has picked up 6 superdelegates, lost one superdelegate and picked up an add-on delegate. This represents a net gain of 5 total delegates for Obama.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
The Edwards Primary
I saw this concept on MrSuper.org and it caught my attention.
I have commented before that major gains in net delegates from any contest are rare given the proportional distribution formula for delegates in the Democratic primary. The only way to gain a large net of delegates in a primary contest, excluding a blowout victory in a gigantic state, is to:
(1) Win a healthy margin of victory in a very large state.
When Senator Clinton beat Senator Obama in California by 10%, she was able to win a net pick-up of 38 delegates (204-166). That same margin of victory (10%) in New Jersey netted her 9 delegates, while in Ohio it only netted her 7 delegates. Part of this differential is due to the way delegates are allocated by congressional or state assembly districts, or allocated based on prior Democratic turnout in presidential elections.
or:
(2) Win by a large margin in a medium-sized state.
Virginia saw under a million voters come to the polls, but the 29% advantage for Obama netted him 25 delegates. Georgia also had 1.3 million voters come to the polls, and Obama's 35% margin of victory netted him 33 delegates.
In context, those 58 delegates represented a large net gain for Obama than did the results of the Ohio (7 net delegates), Pennsylvania (10), New Jersey (11), Rhode Island (5), Massachussetts (17) and Arizona (6).
or:
(3) Simply dominate a small state
Obama picked up 9 net delegates with a 75% - 24% win in the District of Columbia and 12 net delegates with an 80% - 17% victory in Idaho. A 25% win in Colorado netted him plus-15 delegates. Clinton picked up 19 net delegates with a 44% win in Arkansas.
The Remaining Contests
The remaining contests after North Carolina do not represent significant opportunities to net a large margin of delegates for Senator Clinton. Her best chances of gaining a net swing of 10 delegates are a 32% win in delegate-poor West Virginia, a 20% win in Kentucky, or a 20% win in Puerto Rico.
Obama can pick up a net of 10 delegates in Oregon with a 20% win or a 20% win in Puerto Rico.
Montana and South Dakota will only swing between 1 and 3 delegates maximum if the margin of victory is under 18%.
The Edwards Primary
So, what's the point here?
MrSuper.org points out that Edwards now claims 19 delegates in his column that could be swung one way or the other. Since he did not end his campaign (which would have released those delegates won), but rather suspended it, Edwards still maintains some leverage in how those delegates ultimately break.
In the big scheme of things, those 19 delegates are not going to decide who wins the most pledged delegates, and most likely will not factor into who wins the nomination.
However, if Edwards were to endorse a candidate, end his campaign, and those 19 delegates shifted to one or the other candidate, the end result would be the same as an astronomical victory in one of the remaining states (like a 36% win in Puerto Rico or 38% win in Kentucky) or the same as a healthy margin of victory in three contests for either candidate:
This is why I have been projecting that the final contests, especially those after May 6th, are essentially a deadlock and are essentially non-factors in the pledged delegate race. The only really significant moment might be on May 20th, when Obama is projected to claim victory in the pledged delegate race by surpassing the magic number of 1627 in pledged delegates.
Any other impact is simply politics, not mathematical in nature.
I have commented before that major gains in net delegates from any contest are rare given the proportional distribution formula for delegates in the Democratic primary. The only way to gain a large net of delegates in a primary contest, excluding a blowout victory in a gigantic state, is to:
(1) Win a healthy margin of victory in a very large state.
When Senator Clinton beat Senator Obama in California by 10%, she was able to win a net pick-up of 38 delegates (204-166). That same margin of victory (10%) in New Jersey netted her 9 delegates, while in Ohio it only netted her 7 delegates. Part of this differential is due to the way delegates are allocated by congressional or state assembly districts, or allocated based on prior Democratic turnout in presidential elections.
or:
(2) Win by a large margin in a medium-sized state.
Virginia saw under a million voters come to the polls, but the 29% advantage for Obama netted him 25 delegates. Georgia also had 1.3 million voters come to the polls, and Obama's 35% margin of victory netted him 33 delegates.
In context, those 58 delegates represented a large net gain for Obama than did the results of the Ohio (7 net delegates), Pennsylvania (10), New Jersey (11), Rhode Island (5), Massachussetts (17) and Arizona (6).
or:
(3) Simply dominate a small state
Obama picked up 9 net delegates with a 75% - 24% win in the District of Columbia and 12 net delegates with an 80% - 17% victory in Idaho. A 25% win in Colorado netted him plus-15 delegates. Clinton picked up 19 net delegates with a 44% win in Arkansas.
The Remaining Contests
The remaining contests after North Carolina do not represent significant opportunities to net a large margin of delegates for Senator Clinton. Her best chances of gaining a net swing of 10 delegates are a 32% win in delegate-poor West Virginia, a 20% win in Kentucky, or a 20% win in Puerto Rico.
Obama can pick up a net of 10 delegates in Oregon with a 20% win or a 20% win in Puerto Rico.
Montana and South Dakota will only swing between 1 and 3 delegates maximum if the margin of victory is under 18%.
The Edwards Primary
So, what's the point here?
MrSuper.org points out that Edwards now claims 19 delegates in his column that could be swung one way or the other. Since he did not end his campaign (which would have released those delegates won), but rather suspended it, Edwards still maintains some leverage in how those delegates ultimately break.
In the big scheme of things, those 19 delegates are not going to decide who wins the most pledged delegates, and most likely will not factor into who wins the nomination.
However, if Edwards were to endorse a candidate, end his campaign, and those 19 delegates shifted to one or the other candidate, the end result would be the same as an astronomical victory in one of the remaining states (like a 36% win in Puerto Rico or 38% win in Kentucky) or the same as a healthy margin of victory in three contests for either candidate:
A 16% win in Oregon [+8], an 18% win in Montana [+4], and a 12% win in
Puerto-Rico [+7] for Obama would also equal +19 delegates.
For Clinton, a 24% win in West Virginia [+6], a 16% win inMrSuper's calling this effect the "Edwards Primary" is an interesting way of looking at the impact of such a move, but upon further review, I think this analysis shows how even with huge victories in states she should win, Senator Clinton will not close the gap on Senator Obama by any appreciable measure, nor will Senator Obama increase his lead on Senator Clinton by any large number, either.
Kentucky [+7] and a 12% win in Puerto Rico [+7] would equal +20 delegates.
This is why I have been projecting that the final contests, especially those after May 6th, are essentially a deadlock and are essentially non-factors in the pledged delegate race. The only really significant moment might be on May 20th, when Obama is projected to claim victory in the pledged delegate race by surpassing the magic number of 1627 in pledged delegates.
Any other impact is simply politics, not mathematical in nature.
The Clinton Matrix -- Take Two
I cleaned up the Matrix a bit and put in percentages for the superdelegates need if Clinton wins a certain percent of the remaining pledged delegates (x-axis) and a certain percent of the add-on delegates (y-axis).Keep in mind that the range of possibilities for both the x and y axes for Clinton is severly limited, and according to all projections, she will be close to the 50% mark for the pledged delegates and below the 50% mark for the add-on delegates.
Even if granted a 50% split in both categories, she will need at least 82.5% of the remaining superdelegates to win the nomination.
I will have to recalibrate these matrices soon with the influx of new superdelegates announcing today.
I remarked earlier that Clinton has to win roughly four new superdelegates for each one that Obama produces.
So when Obama produces five in the past two days, Clinton needs 24 of her own to keep on pace to win the nomination. She produced four, so in theory Obama put Clinton another 20 superdelegates in the hole on her path to the nomination.
Matching Obama superdelegate for superdelegate at this stage of the race is just running out the clock while behind in the game.
One More for Clinton, One More for Obama
Wow!
Another two superdelegates make their choices known today, according to First Read.
Senator Obama picked up the endorsement today of another member of Congress, this time California representative Lois Capps.
Senator Clinton also announced that a Puerto Rico superdelegate, Luisette Cabanas, committed today.
These two announcements bring the tally for the day to Obama 3, Clinton 2. Since last week's Pennsylvania Primary, Obama now leads 10-6 in superdelegate/add-on delegate declarations.
According to First Read, there are only 280 superdelegate remaining as undeclared. 64 of them are add-on delegates either undeclared or unnamed, meaning only 216 superdelegates remain.
Using the First Read numbers, Obama leads Clinton 1737 - 1602 in total delegates.
Assuming a split of the remaining pledged and add-on delegates (which is a charitable position for Senator Clinton), the totals for both would be Obama 1973 -- Clinton 1838.
With 216 superdelegates remaining, Obama would then need 24.1% (52/216) of the superdelegates, while Clinton would need 86.6% (187/216) of those same superdelegates.
It is clear that simply trading superdelegate endorsements with Obama is not going to improve Senator Clinton's position.
What is an interesting thought is that if enough superdelegates declare before the last primaries on June 3rd, there is a chance that the results of those primaries will put Senator Obama over the 2,025 magic number, and not superdelegate or add-on delegate decisions after the fact.
It's been an exciting last two days in the superdelegate race, and it will be interesting to see if this pace of announcements heats up even more over the next few days. This infusion of new endorsements will likely capture a portion of the political bandwidth as the Indiana/North Carolina races approach.
Another two superdelegates make their choices known today, according to First Read.
Senator Obama picked up the endorsement today of another member of Congress, this time California representative Lois Capps.
Senator Clinton also announced that a Puerto Rico superdelegate, Luisette Cabanas, committed today.
These two announcements bring the tally for the day to Obama 3, Clinton 2. Since last week's Pennsylvania Primary, Obama now leads 10-6 in superdelegate/add-on delegate declarations.
According to First Read, there are only 280 superdelegate remaining as undeclared. 64 of them are add-on delegates either undeclared or unnamed, meaning only 216 superdelegates remain.
Using the First Read numbers, Obama leads Clinton 1737 - 1602 in total delegates.
Assuming a split of the remaining pledged and add-on delegates (which is a charitable position for Senator Clinton), the totals for both would be Obama 1973 -- Clinton 1838.
With 216 superdelegates remaining, Obama would then need 24.1% (52/216) of the superdelegates, while Clinton would need 86.6% (187/216) of those same superdelegates.
It is clear that simply trading superdelegate endorsements with Obama is not going to improve Senator Clinton's position.
What is an interesting thought is that if enough superdelegates declare before the last primaries on June 3rd, there is a chance that the results of those primaries will put Senator Obama over the 2,025 magic number, and not superdelegate or add-on delegate decisions after the fact.
It's been an exciting last two days in the superdelegate race, and it will be interesting to see if this pace of announcements heats up even more over the next few days. This infusion of new endorsements will likely capture a portion of the political bandwidth as the Indiana/North Carolina races approach.
New Superdelegates Announced Today: Obama 2, Clinton 1
MSNBC's FirstRead is reporting that three superdelegates have declared or will declare today, two for Obama and one for Clinton.
Senator Clinton is picking up a Pennsylvania superdelegate, AFL-CIO President Bill George. It is noted that George was a former backer of John Edwards. Clinton has picked up 16 of Pennsylvania's 26 superdelegates so far, with 5 for Obama and 5 undeclared. The last five standing are all Congressmembers, some like Jason Altmire who are not expected to endorse anytime soon given the lose-lose proposition he would face in a tight district.
Senator Obama is picking up two Congressmembers, Baron Hill from Indiana and Bruce Braley from Iowa.
FirstRead notes that Hill "represents Indiana's hotly contested ninth congressional district. Hill is a former Indiana high school basketball star who is in the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame, alongside NBA legend Larry Bird." This endorsement will help bolster Obama's credentials in a key swing district and also with the demographics that the pundits say he needs to win over.
The endorsement by Rep. Bruce Braley marks the second from Iowa in consecutive days for Senator Obama.
Since the Pennsylvania Primary 13 superdelegates and one add-on delegate have made their preferences knowns. Nine (9) have declared for Obama and five (5) have declared for Clinton.
As I have noted earlier in the Clinton Matrix and other posts, Senator Clinton will need 82.5% of the uncommitted superdelegates to support her if she manages to split the remaining pledged delegates and the remaining add-on delegates with Senator Obama, who is favored to take a majority of those delegates.
This means that for every undeclared superdelegate Obama announces, Clinton will need to produce FOUR of the same undeclared superdelegates to barely keep pace in the long run.
One of my thoughts on the race's status is that Obama can steadily solidify his position with each superdelegate that 'trickles' in. Think of each superdelegate announcement for Obama as time running off the clock for Clinton. There's nothing anyone can do about the calendar for the pledged or add-on delegates, but the stream of superdelegates announcing is something that
Senator Clinton has tried to stop until she could put herself in a position where the superdelegates would HAVE to pick her based on whatever shifts in the political milieu might occur.
The four superdelegates that Senator Obama has produced in the last 24 hours has forced Hillary Clinton to produce 23 new superdelegates just to offset these four superdelegates, if she needs to win at least 82.5% of the remaining uncommitted super delegates. So far she has produced three in the past two days.
N.B.: 23/27 = 85%
I'll do an update later on today on the new numbers in the race. But you can see how precarious the Clinton delegate situation is at this point.
And what does it say when Senator Obama is able to produce four superdelegates in two days? How many more does he have on "reserve"? With six days left until the primary, is it possible he could produce 12 more superdelegates?
Senator Clinton is picking up a Pennsylvania superdelegate, AFL-CIO President Bill George. It is noted that George was a former backer of John Edwards. Clinton has picked up 16 of Pennsylvania's 26 superdelegates so far, with 5 for Obama and 5 undeclared. The last five standing are all Congressmembers, some like Jason Altmire who are not expected to endorse anytime soon given the lose-lose proposition he would face in a tight district.
Senator Obama is picking up two Congressmembers, Baron Hill from Indiana and Bruce Braley from Iowa.
FirstRead notes that Hill "represents Indiana's hotly contested ninth congressional district. Hill is a former Indiana high school basketball star who is in the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame, alongside NBA legend Larry Bird." This endorsement will help bolster Obama's credentials in a key swing district and also with the demographics that the pundits say he needs to win over.
The endorsement by Rep. Bruce Braley marks the second from Iowa in consecutive days for Senator Obama.
Since the Pennsylvania Primary 13 superdelegates and one add-on delegate have made their preferences knowns. Nine (9) have declared for Obama and five (5) have declared for Clinton.
As I have noted earlier in the Clinton Matrix and other posts, Senator Clinton will need 82.5% of the uncommitted superdelegates to support her if she manages to split the remaining pledged delegates and the remaining add-on delegates with Senator Obama, who is favored to take a majority of those delegates.
This means that for every undeclared superdelegate Obama announces, Clinton will need to produce FOUR of the same undeclared superdelegates to barely keep pace in the long run.
One of my thoughts on the race's status is that Obama can steadily solidify his position with each superdelegate that 'trickles' in. Think of each superdelegate announcement for Obama as time running off the clock for Clinton. There's nothing anyone can do about the calendar for the pledged or add-on delegates, but the stream of superdelegates announcing is something that
Senator Clinton has tried to stop until she could put herself in a position where the superdelegates would HAVE to pick her based on whatever shifts in the political milieu might occur.
The four superdelegates that Senator Obama has produced in the last 24 hours has forced Hillary Clinton to produce 23 new superdelegates just to offset these four superdelegates, if she needs to win at least 82.5% of the remaining uncommitted super delegates. So far she has produced three in the past two days.
N.B.: 23/27 = 85%
I'll do an update later on today on the new numbers in the race. But you can see how precarious the Clinton delegate situation is at this point.
And what does it say when Senator Obama is able to produce four superdelegates in two days? How many more does he have on "reserve"? With six days left until the primary, is it possible he could produce 12 more superdelegates?
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
The Clinton Matrix
THE CLINTON MATRIX
I am unveiling for the first time my Clinton Matrix, which charts how she'll need to perform in the remaining key indicators of pledged delegates, add-on delegates and superdelegates.
By color-coding the chart I hope to provide you a visual of all the possibilities involved for Clinton to secure the 2025 delegates and to win the nomination.
This matrix is from the perspective of Senator Clinton's campaign.
The categories of pledged delegates and add-on delegates are pretty fixed at this point, in that they are less likely to swing wildly one way or the other given the proportional allocation rule for pledged delegates and the state-party-controlled characteristics of the add-on delegates.
The real wildcard left is the superdelegate category, which as I've explained earlier consists of the unpledged elected officeholders, distinguished party leaders and democratic party loyalists rewarded with a superdelegate vote. I separated add-on delegates from this category simply because those delegates are governed under much different rules, and are thus going to follow a different form of logic in their allocation.
The Two Axes: Pledged and Add-On Delegates
I set the range for the Pledged and Add-On Delegate categories from 30% -- 70% for each candidate, which covers the range for each handily. In reality, the most a candidate can hope for from each of these categories is 60%, and the least is 40%.
Consequently, in the matrix above I have italicized and reduced the font size for the squares that are not likely to happen, and put in bold the squares that were within this 60/40 range for each category, for each candidate, with the 50% pledged delegate + 50% add-on delegate square centered and with the percentage shown.
The Golden Center Square
This center square, achieved if Clinton wins 50% of the remaining pledged delegates and 50% of the remaining add-on delegates, leaves a total of 194 superdelegates (out of 235) that Senator Clinton has to have in order to reach 2,025 and the nomination.
194 of 235 superdelegates represents an 82.5% share of the remaining superdelegates in the race.
Changes in the Future
As Senator Clinton outperforms the 50% rating for each of the two axes, her total of superdelegates needed decreases and her campaign moves to a square north and/or west of the center square.
As Senator Clinton underperforms the 50% rating for each of the two axes, her total of superdelgates needed increases and her campaign moves to a square south and/or east of the center square.
Keep in mind that this superdelegate matrix contemplates a total of 234 superdelegates, so while the raw total of superdelegates she will need stays the same within the grid, the percentage of total remaining superdelegates will become larger or smaller depending upon which candidate is receiving superdelegates and in what ratio. This may alter the shading of the square, which represents the range of the percent of the total remaining superdelegates Senator Clinton needs to reach 2,025.
A Second Superdelegate for Clinton Announces as Well
I had a sneaking suspicion that Senator Clinton would announce a second superdelegate today to match Obama's two announcements, and I was proven correct.
Congressman Ike Skelton from Missouri has announced his support today for Senator Clinton, according to her website, which provides a link to the Associated Press story.
And so, today, April 29th saw as much action as you will see on May 3rd, when four pledged delegates total (eight delegates with 1/2 vote each) will be selected in the Guam Caucuses.
While Senator Clinton may have tied the day officially in superdelegates, the one-for-one matching of superdelegates at this stage of the race only serves to deplete the number of superdelegates left that are available to push her to the nomination.
The main reaction here is that Obama showed off strength earlier today with two delegates to blunt the announcement of a solid pickup by Clinton of the North Carolina governor. Clinton met the challenge and released another superdelegate today to even the score.
I'll write more in an update above.
Congressman Ike Skelton from Missouri has announced his support today for Senator Clinton, according to her website, which provides a link to the Associated Press story.
And so, today, April 29th saw as much action as you will see on May 3rd, when four pledged delegates total (eight delegates with 1/2 vote each) will be selected in the Guam Caucuses.
While Senator Clinton may have tied the day officially in superdelegates, the one-for-one matching of superdelegates at this stage of the race only serves to deplete the number of superdelegates left that are available to push her to the nomination.
The main reaction here is that Obama showed off strength earlier today with two delegates to blunt the announcement of a solid pickup by Clinton of the North Carolina governor. Clinton met the challenge and released another superdelegate today to even the score.
I'll write more in an update above.
Another Superdelegate for Obama -- Richard Machachek (IA--DNC)
Just as suspected, another superdelegate announces for Obama today.
This time it is Richard Machacek, a party offical in Iowa, who apparently was influenced by the results of his district, county and state for Obama.
Before today the count of superdelegates breaking for Obama since Pennsylvania was 5-2. As of now, it is 7-3.
This development should be a bit concerning for the Clinton camp. Either, as conventional wisdom would dictate, Obama can afford to release more than one superdelegate a day to keep momentum going for his campaign into the May 6th contests, signifying a healthy reserve of superdelegates in stock...
...or, even worse for the Clinton campaign, this announcement is an unprompted declaration, which might signify a growing weariness within the Democratic Party among superdelegates over this race and a desire to maintain the pledged delegate results as the metric of choice for superdelegate decisions.
Let's see if the Clinton campaign can hit back with another endorsement sometime today.
This time it is Richard Machacek, a party offical in Iowa, who apparently was influenced by the results of his district, county and state for Obama.
Before today the count of superdelegates breaking for Obama since Pennsylvania was 5-2. As of now, it is 7-3.
This development should be a bit concerning for the Clinton camp. Either, as conventional wisdom would dictate, Obama can afford to release more than one superdelegate a day to keep momentum going for his campaign into the May 6th contests, signifying a healthy reserve of superdelegates in stock...
...or, even worse for the Clinton campaign, this announcement is an unprompted declaration, which might signify a growing weariness within the Democratic Party among superdelegates over this race and a desire to maintain the pledged delegate results as the metric of choice for superdelegate decisions.
Let's see if the Clinton campaign can hit back with another endorsement sometime today.
Superdelegate and Kentucky Congressman Ben Chandler Endorses Obama
And Obama negates the superdelegate loss from this morning when Senator Clinton announced the Governor Easley endorsement in North Carolina.
This pickup was reported today and it carries with it a boon for Senator Obama, who is seeking inroads into the upcoming Kentucky primary where some polls have him down by 20-30 points. According to wikipedia, Chandler is considered a "blue dog" Democrat--precisely the demographic with which the pundits have declared Obama needs improvement.
Chandler is also a political legacy in the Bluegrass State, as his father Albert Chandler served as Governor and Senator for Kentucky. This endorsement could be analogous to the Senator Casey endorsement for Obama in Pennsylvania.
I will run an update on the new status of the race, complete with the week's endorsements, in a few days, as I am feeling that there are still several superdelegate announcements to be made in the next few days.
This pickup was reported today and it carries with it a boon for Senator Obama, who is seeking inroads into the upcoming Kentucky primary where some polls have him down by 20-30 points. According to wikipedia, Chandler is considered a "blue dog" Democrat--precisely the demographic with which the pundits have declared Obama needs improvement.
Chandler is also a political legacy in the Bluegrass State, as his father Albert Chandler served as Governor and Senator for Kentucky. This endorsement could be analogous to the Senator Casey endorsement for Obama in Pennsylvania.
I will run an update on the new status of the race, complete with the week's endorsements, in a few days, as I am feeling that there are still several superdelegate announcements to be made in the next few days.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Re-examining Iowa
In a previous post I gave an update that Obama had actually lost a pledged delegate in Iowa when Edwards gained viability (15%) in a district that forced Obama to cede a pledged delegate to Edwards. The understanding was that Senator Clinton's campaign "lent" Mr. Edwards' camp enough delegates to force this split and turn a 3-1 advantage for Senator Obama in one district into a 3-2-1 result for Obama/Clinton/Edwards respectively.
There is some confusion as to whether or not Obama lost a delegate or not, in the overall scheme of things. Some reports said that the net result of the day was Obama -1 and Edwards +1.
However, this article attempts to explain the intricate system of alloting delegates that Iowa uses, and actually makes the case that Obama picked up a delegate.
So, who's right?
I will admit that I have been confused by the way that Iowa selects its delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The total number of delegates allocated through the District Convention this past weekend was 29.
Iowa is sending 57 Total Delegates to the National Convention, with the breakdown as follows:
--29 District Delegates
--10 At-Large Delegates
--06 Pledged PLEOS
Here's what happened since Election Night on January 3rd, 2008.
January 3rd, 2008
45 Delegates were up for grabs, in one of three categories:
District Delegates (29)
At-Large Delegates (6)
Pledged PLEOs (10)
The first category, District Delegates, is allocated based on the viability formula for each Congressional District in the state. On June 3rd, this breakdown came down as follows:
CANDIDATE: (CD1) / (CD2) / (CD3) / (CD4) / (CD5)
Obama: (2)/(3)/(2)/(2)/(1)
Edwards: (2)/(2)/(2)/(2)/(1)
Clinton: (2)/(2)/(2)/(2)/(2)
So, for the first 29 delegates, the breakdown was Obama 10, Clinton 10, Edwards 9.
The second category, At-Large Delegates, are allocated to each candidate based on the total statewide percentage allocation of caucus votes. All three candidates split the vote in essentially a three-way tie, so each candidate picked up 2 delegates each from the At-Large Delegate category.
So, for the first 35 delegates, the breakdown was Obama 12, Clinton 12, Edwards 11.
The third category, Pledged PLEOS, are allocated in the same manner as the At-Large Delegates--based on allocation of the caucus vote. With a number of delegates (10) that leaves a remainder after dividing by three, the extra delegate to be allocated naturally went to Obama who collected the most number of votes that night. Obama picked up 4 delegates while Clinton and Edwards picked up 3 apiece.
So, for the 45 pledged delegates allocated on January 3rd, the breakdown was Obama 16, Clinton 15, Edwards 14.
March 15, 2008
Heading into the County Caucus Conventions, the allocation was Obama 16, Clinton 15 and Edwards 14 for national delegates. However, this event allowed for the Edwards supporters to defect to Obama or Clinton if they so chose because of Edwards no longer being in the race.
With defections in each of the Congressional Districts, the delegate allocation changed as each candidate rose above or sunk below certain viability thresholds that determined whether each candidate gained or lost delegates.
After January 3rd, the split was Obama 10, Clinton 10 and Edwards 9 based on Congressional Districts alone.
Congressional District 1 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-0. Obama +2, Edwards -2
Congressional District 2 went from O-3, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Congressional District 3 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-3, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Congressional District 4 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-0. Obama +2, Edwards -2
Congressional District 5 went from O-1, C-2, E-1 to O-2, C-1, E-1. Obama +1, Clinton -1
As a result of this day's events, Obama gained 7 delegates, Edwards lost 6 and Clinton lost 1, to make the District allocation Obama 17, Clinton 9, Edwards 3.
These events affected the allocation of Pledged At-Large delegates and Pledged PLEOS, also, given the shift in delegate totals.
Pledged At-Large Delegates were split 2-2-2 among the three candidates in January. Now there were split O-3, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Pledged PLEOS were also split, O-4, C-3, E-3. Now, they were split O-5, C-3, E-2. Obama +1, Edwards -1.
After all was said and done, Obama netted +9 delegates, Clinton -1 and Edwards -8
District Delegates: Obama 17, Clinton 9, Edwards 3.
Total Pledged Delegates: Obama 25, Clinton 14, Edwards 6.
There is some confusion as to whether or not Obama lost a delegate or not, in the overall scheme of things. Some reports said that the net result of the day was Obama -1 and Edwards +1.
However, this article attempts to explain the intricate system of alloting delegates that Iowa uses, and actually makes the case that Obama picked up a delegate.
So, who's right?
I will admit that I have been confused by the way that Iowa selects its delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The total number of delegates allocated through the District Convention this past weekend was 29.
Iowa is sending 57 Total Delegates to the National Convention, with the breakdown as follows:
45 Pledged Delegates:
--29 District Delegates
--10 At-Large Delegates
--06 Pledged PLEOS
12 Superdelegate/Add-on Delegates:
--11 Unpledged PLEOS (otherwise known as superdelegates)
--01 Unpledged Add-on DelegateHere's what happened since Election Night on January 3rd, 2008.
January 3rd, 2008
45 Delegates were up for grabs, in one of three categories:
District Delegates (29)
At-Large Delegates (6)
Pledged PLEOs (10)
The first category, District Delegates, is allocated based on the viability formula for each Congressional District in the state. On June 3rd, this breakdown came down as follows:
CANDIDATE: (CD1) / (CD2) / (CD3) / (CD4) / (CD5)
Obama: (2)/(3)/(2)/(2)/(1)
Edwards: (2)/(2)/(2)/(2)/(1)
Clinton: (2)/(2)/(2)/(2)/(2)
So, for the first 29 delegates, the breakdown was Obama 10, Clinton 10, Edwards 9.
The second category, At-Large Delegates, are allocated to each candidate based on the total statewide percentage allocation of caucus votes. All three candidates split the vote in essentially a three-way tie, so each candidate picked up 2 delegates each from the At-Large Delegate category.
So, for the first 35 delegates, the breakdown was Obama 12, Clinton 12, Edwards 11.
The third category, Pledged PLEOS, are allocated in the same manner as the At-Large Delegates--based on allocation of the caucus vote. With a number of delegates (10) that leaves a remainder after dividing by three, the extra delegate to be allocated naturally went to Obama who collected the most number of votes that night. Obama picked up 4 delegates while Clinton and Edwards picked up 3 apiece.
So, for the 45 pledged delegates allocated on January 3rd, the breakdown was Obama 16, Clinton 15, Edwards 14.
March 15, 2008
Heading into the County Caucus Conventions, the allocation was Obama 16, Clinton 15 and Edwards 14 for national delegates. However, this event allowed for the Edwards supporters to defect to Obama or Clinton if they so chose because of Edwards no longer being in the race.
With defections in each of the Congressional Districts, the delegate allocation changed as each candidate rose above or sunk below certain viability thresholds that determined whether each candidate gained or lost delegates.
After January 3rd, the split was Obama 10, Clinton 10 and Edwards 9 based on Congressional Districts alone.
Congressional District 1 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-0. Obama +2, Edwards -2
Congressional District 2 went from O-3, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Congressional District 3 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-3, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Congressional District 4 went from O-2, C-2, E-2 to O-4, C-2, E-0. Obama +2, Edwards -2
Congressional District 5 went from O-1, C-2, E-1 to O-2, C-1, E-1. Obama +1, Clinton -1
As a result of this day's events, Obama gained 7 delegates, Edwards lost 6 and Clinton lost 1, to make the District allocation Obama 17, Clinton 9, Edwards 3.
These events affected the allocation of Pledged At-Large delegates and Pledged PLEOS, also, given the shift in delegate totals.
Pledged At-Large Delegates were split 2-2-2 among the three candidates in January. Now there were split O-3, C-2, E-1. Obama +1, Edwards -1
Pledged PLEOS were also split, O-4, C-3, E-3. Now, they were split O-5, C-3, E-2. Obama +1, Edwards -1.
After all was said and done, Obama netted +9 delegates, Clinton -1 and Edwards -8
District Delegates: Obama 17, Clinton 9, Edwards 3.
Total Pledged Delegates: Obama 25, Clinton 14, Edwards 6.
April 26, 2008
At the Congressional District Convention, the delegates for the National Convention are actually selected for the first time, allowing for a bit of redistribution of the allocation of delegates for each Congressional District from what was seen in the prior two events.
The At-Large delegates and Pledged PLEO delegates were not up for change at this event.
Coming into this event, Obama had 17 District delegates, Clinton had 9 District delegates and Edwards had 3 District delegates. However, Edwards had two opportunities to regain viability in two of the five Congressional Districts, which would strip a delegate from the prior leader in that District.
In Congressional District 1, Edwards regained viability and took a delegate from Obama, shifting the delegate balance from O-4, C-2, E-0 to O-3, C-2, E-1. Obama -1, Edwards +1
In Congressional District 2, there was no change in delegates. O-4, C-2, E-1.
In Congressional District 3, there was no change in delegates. O-3, C-2, E-1.
In Congressional District 4, Edwards was not able to gain viability, which would have taken back a delegate from Obama. Result: O-4, C-2, E-0
In Congressional District 5, no shift in delegates was made. If Edwards, who barely had viability here, had lost enough voters, then Clinton would have picked up the extra delegate and have created a 2-2 tie with Obama. However, this district remained O-2, C-1, E-1.
OVERALL, the change from the County Convention to the final result of the District Conventions was Obama -1, Edwards +1.
For the 29 District Delegates to the National Convention, Obama will carry 16 delegates, Clinton 9 and Edwards 4.
Adding the Pledged PLEOS and Pledged At-Large delegates, the current count for Pledged Delegates to the National Convention for each candidate are:
OBAMA: 24
CLINTON: 14
EDWARDS: 7
CONVENTION POLITICS:
Here's where the politics came into play. There were three delegates at play over this weekend that could have shifted and altered the count for each candidate. By accounts of participants at the Convention, these strategies emerged:
In CD 1, Edwards needed just a handful of votes to move into viability in this district. Since this new viability would take one of Obama's 4 delegates, it behooved Clinton to lend some of her votes to Edwards to decrease Obama's haul by one and shift that delegate to Edwards, with no negative effect on her own delegates. This strategy paid off and Edwards took an Obama delegate. O-3, C-2, E-1
In CD 4, Clinton's voters tried to employ the same strategy as in CD 1, but were unsuccessful in negotiating an acceptable agreement with the Edwards' supporters to give viability to Edwards. Some have previously reported that this district was O-3, C-2, and 1 undecided prior, so Obama going to 4 is considered a pickup. For those that had seen this district as O-4, C-2, E-0 before the weekend, this district had no change. Semantics, really.
In CD5, Edwards was again near the viability threshold, this time barely above it. With only four delegates, the breakdown was O-2, C-1, E-1 heading into this last weekend. If Edwards lost viability, then Clinton would have picked up the delegate. I do not know if the Edwards supporters stayed put or if Obama supporters had to augment their ranks to maintain viability.
Of these three delegates up for grab, the optimal situation for Obama was O-10, C-5, E-1, with an Obama net of +5.
The optimal situation for Clinton was O-8, C-6, E-2, with an Obama net of +2.
The final situation for these three CDs? O-9, C-5, E-2, with an Obama net of +4. It seems that Obama was able to make the best of this situation while Clinton was able to keep on delegate away from Obama at this time.
Please feel free to send me a note if you think this article needs more clarification.
Senator Clinton to Pick Up Endorsement from N.C. Governor Easley
As reported by the Associated Press today, North Carolina two-term Governor Mike Easley is set to endorse Senator Clinton tomorrow in Raleigh.
It will be interesting to see how this endorsement impacts the dynamics of the North Carolina race.
This move negates the net pickup of one for Obama today with Senator Bingaman, and
It will be interesting to see how this endorsement impacts the dynamics of the North Carolina race.
This move negates the net pickup of one for Obama today with Senator Bingaman, and
- extends Clinton's lead in superdelegates (excluding add-ons) to 26
- extends her lead in total unpledged superdelegates (including add-ons) to 22, and
- cuts into Obama's overall lead in TOTAL delegates to 132.
Senator Bingaman (NM) endorses Senator Obama
According to the Obama Campaign's website, Senator Jeff Bingaman (New Mexico) has endorsed Senator Obama.
This latest endorsement adds another superdelegate to the Obama column, and makes the score 5-2 since the Pennsylvania primary.
Furthermore, this endorsement adds another elected officeholder to the Obama column.
Update to the some totals:
Superdelegate #228 for Obama (excluding add-on delegates)
Cuts Clinton lead in Superdelegates to 25 (excluding add-on delegates)
Cuts Clinton lead in unpledged delegates to 21 (superdelgates + add-on delegates)
Extends lead in TOTAL Delegates to 133
Reduces number of uncommitted superdelegates to 238
Obama increases lead over Clinton in elected officeholder superdelegates to seven (107-100).
Obama collects the 15th endorsement by a United States Senator of 32 available. Clinton stays at 10 in this category, with 7 undeclared.
This latest endorsement adds another superdelegate to the Obama column, and makes the score 5-2 since the Pennsylvania primary.
Furthermore, this endorsement adds another elected officeholder to the Obama column.
Update to the some totals:
Superdelegate #228 for Obama (excluding add-on delegates)
Cuts Clinton lead in Superdelegates to 25 (excluding add-on delegates)
Cuts Clinton lead in unpledged delegates to 21 (superdelgates + add-on delegates)
Extends lead in TOTAL Delegates to 133
Reduces number of uncommitted superdelegates to 238
Obama increases lead over Clinton in elected officeholder superdelegates to seven (107-100).
Obama collects the 15th endorsement by a United States Senator of 32 available. Clinton stays at 10 in this category, with 7 undeclared.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008: Update on Total Delegate Status
Recall that I have previously presented the Total Delegate Status in three separate parts, given each part's unique nature:
-Pledged Delegates
-Superdelegates
-Add-on Delegates
PLEDGED DELEGATES
Using the GreenPapers website, as Demconwatch does, the pledged delegate count is as follows:
Magic Number (Pledged Delegate Majority): 1627
Obama: 1490 *Needs 137 for Pledged Delegate majority (33.6% of available)*
Clinton: 1336 *Needs 291 for Pledged Delegate majority (71.3% of available)*
Edwards: 19
Available: 408
OBAMA LEADS BY 132 PLEDGED DELEGATES
SUPERDELEGATES
Demconwatch has entrusted its Superdelegate count to GreenPapers, as ascertaining the accurate number of Superdelegates for each candidate can be tricky at times, as people back out of commitments, some superdelegates lose office, etc.
Excluding add-on delegates, there are 719 Superdelegates (795 - 76 add-ons). A majority of Superdelegates is 360.
According to TheGreenPapers.com, the Superdelegate count (excluding add-ons) stands as follows:
Obama: 227 *Needs 133 for Superdelegate majority (55.6% of available)*
Clinton: 253 *Needs 107 for Superdelegate majority (44.8% of available)*
Available: 239
CLINTON LEADS BY 26 SUPERDELEGATES
ADD-ON DELEGATES
There are 76 add-on delegates that are named throughout the primary season by each state in accordance to their prescribed rules. Chosen at a state-level convention or gathering, the mode of choice can be from a state delegate level vote, or appointed by a state chair, or other mechanism.
A majority of add-on delegates is 39.
Obama: 8 *Needs 31 for Add-on delegate majority (48.4% of available)*
Clinton: 4 *Needs 35 for Add-on delegate majority (54.7% of available)*
Available: 64
OBAMA LEADS BY 4 ADD-ON DELEGATES
TOTAL DELEGATES
4,048 Total Delegates are at stake in the primary. A majority of 2,025 is needed to gain the Democratic Nomination.
OBAMA: 1490 + 227 + 8 = 1725 (42.6% of Total Delegates)
CLINTON: 1336 + 253 + 4 = 1593 (39.4% of Total Delegates)
EDWARDS: 19 (0.5% of Total Delegates)
AVAILABLE: 408 + 239 + 64 = 711 (17.6% of Total Delegates)
To reach the Magic Number of 2025 Total Delegates to secure the nomination,
OBAMA needs 300 more Total Delegates (42.2% of Available Total Delegates)
CLINTON needs 432 more Total Delegates (60.8% of Available Total Delegates)
Assuming a likely split of pledged delegates remaining, with Obama gaining 209 and Clinton gaining 199 as previously projected,
OBAMA would have 1934 Total Delegates and need 91 of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates (30%) more to win the nomination.
CLINTON would have 1792 Total Delegates and need 232 of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates (76.6%) more to win the nomination.
The more the add-on delegate split deviates from each candidates percent of super/add-on delegates needed to win the nomination, the more pressure it puts on the candidate to secure the superdelegate portion of the remaining total delegates.
Of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates in the scenario envisioned above,
64 (21.1%) of those would be add-on delegates and
239 (78.9%) would be superdelegates.
IMPORTANT SCENARIOS TO CONSIDER
Let's examine the range of possibilities. The actual results of the remaining add-on delegate declarations will most likely fall somewhere in the range of 62.5% for Obama and 62.5% for Clinton, to be charitable to Senator Clinton given the realities of the add-on selection process.
N.B. Percentages will not equal 100% in the cases where the Edwards' Delegates come into play.
(1) Senator Obama Wins 40 (62.5%) of the Remaining 64 Add-On Delegates:
Obama wins 40 of the 64 add-on delegates remaining, and Clinton wins 24.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1974 to 1816.
Obama would then need 51 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (21.3%)
Clinton would then need 209 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (87.4%)
(2) Senators Clinton and Obama split the remaining 64 add-on delegates, 32-32:
Clinton wins 32 add-on delegates, and Obama wins 32 as well.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1966 to 1824.
Obama would then need 59 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (24.7%).
Clinton would then need 201 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (84.1%).
(3) Senator Clinton Wins 40 (62.5%) of the Remaining 64 Add-On Delegates:
Clinton wins 40 add-on delegates, and Obama wins 24 add-on delegates.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1958 to 1832.
Obama would then need 67 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (28.0%).
Clinton would then need 193 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (80.8%)
RESULTS:
These three add-on delegate scenarios run the gamut of possibilities in the add-on delegate selection process, with a high level of certainty. The pledged delegate process also is constrained by the landscape of the final nine contests, with Obama favored to win 10 more delegates than Clinton by most counts. Therefore, the volatility exists mainly with uncommitted superdelegates.
ADDENDUM:
There has been talk about how it is that Superdelegates will decide the nomination and move en masse to one candidate or the other to make this happen.
We also need to study the composition of the Superdelegate class to understand who they are and what can be expected of them.
According to Demconwatch, of the remaining 238 uncommitted superdelegates, the breakdown is as such:
Governors 7 ( 2.9%)
Senators 18 ( 7.6%)
Congress 70 (29.4%)
Distinguished Party Leaders 6 ( 2.5%)
DNC Loyalists 137 (57.6%)
TOTAL: 238
This breakdown is important because the superdelegates most likely to move en masse at the request of the Party Leaders are actually the elected officeholders, who will want to use an established metric as justification for their choice to avoid backlash within their own district by supporters of the losing candidate.
That metric appears to be the pledged delegate vote count, although Senator Clinton is pushing a new (and logically inconsistent, but more to come on that later) version of a popular vote count.
95 of the remaining 238 (39.9%) uncommitted superdelegates are elected officeholders. Obama will only need between 51 and 67 superdelegates to move his way to win the nomination. That can be effected entirely through Congressmembers alone.
Currently Obama leads Clinton in committed superdelegates from this rank of elected officeholder by a count of 106 to 100.
Clinton, on the other hand, leads Obama in committed superdelegates from the rank of DNC loyalists and Distinguished Party Leaders by a count of 153 to 121.
In fact, Clinton's lead of 26 superdelegates comes primarily through her strength in non-elected officeholders who serve as superdelegates.
In contrast to Obama, Clinton will need 193 and 209 superdelegates to break her way to win the nomination.
Even if Clinton were to secure every single DNC/Distinguished Party Leader endorsement remaining, she would still need between 50 and 66 elected officeholders to break her way, which would mean between 52.6% and 69.5% of those elected officeholders.
For such a large number of those elected officeholders to accept a new metric that is not based on pledged delegates seems unlikely, if not impossible, given the massive political unrest in each elected officeholder's jurisdiction as a result of such action. At least, that's my take. If you disagree, put a post up and let me hear you.
Remember, as more and more superdelegates trickle in with their choices, these odds will continue to mount for Senator Clinton unless she starts winning 4 out of every 5 superdelegate decisions that are made.
However, as of her epic Pennsylvania victory, she has been outgained by Obama 4-2 in superdelegate declarations.
This analysis shows why Clinton's best course of action is to find a way to get Michigan and Florida seated at her best benefit, so that these daunting numbers soften for her and give her enough breathing room to operate and find a path to the nomination. Without both of those states being seated to her satisfaction, the challenge appears to great to overcome.
-Pledged Delegates
-Superdelegates
-Add-on Delegates
PLEDGED DELEGATES
Using the GreenPapers website, as Demconwatch does, the pledged delegate count is as follows:
Magic Number (Pledged Delegate Majority): 1627
Obama: 1490 *Needs 137 for Pledged Delegate majority (33.6% of available)*
Clinton: 1336 *Needs 291 for Pledged Delegate majority (71.3% of available)*
Edwards: 19
Available: 408
OBAMA LEADS BY 132 PLEDGED DELEGATES
SUPERDELEGATES
Demconwatch has entrusted its Superdelegate count to GreenPapers, as ascertaining the accurate number of Superdelegates for each candidate can be tricky at times, as people back out of commitments, some superdelegates lose office, etc.
Excluding add-on delegates, there are 719 Superdelegates (795 - 76 add-ons). A majority of Superdelegates is 360.
According to TheGreenPapers.com, the Superdelegate count (excluding add-ons) stands as follows:
Obama: 227 *Needs 133 for Superdelegate majority (55.6% of available)*
Clinton: 253 *Needs 107 for Superdelegate majority (44.8% of available)*
Available: 239
CLINTON LEADS BY 26 SUPERDELEGATES
ADD-ON DELEGATES
There are 76 add-on delegates that are named throughout the primary season by each state in accordance to their prescribed rules. Chosen at a state-level convention or gathering, the mode of choice can be from a state delegate level vote, or appointed by a state chair, or other mechanism.
A majority of add-on delegates is 39.
Obama: 8 *Needs 31 for Add-on delegate majority (48.4% of available)*
Clinton: 4 *Needs 35 for Add-on delegate majority (54.7% of available)*
Available: 64
OBAMA LEADS BY 4 ADD-ON DELEGATES
TOTAL DELEGATES
4,048 Total Delegates are at stake in the primary. A majority of 2,025 is needed to gain the Democratic Nomination.
OBAMA: 1490 + 227 + 8 = 1725 (42.6% of Total Delegates)
CLINTON: 1336 + 253 + 4 = 1593 (39.4% of Total Delegates)
EDWARDS: 19 (0.5% of Total Delegates)
AVAILABLE: 408 + 239 + 64 = 711 (17.6% of Total Delegates)
To reach the Magic Number of 2025 Total Delegates to secure the nomination,
OBAMA needs 300 more Total Delegates (42.2% of Available Total Delegates)
CLINTON needs 432 more Total Delegates (60.8% of Available Total Delegates)
Assuming a likely split of pledged delegates remaining, with Obama gaining 209 and Clinton gaining 199 as previously projected,
OBAMA would have 1934 Total Delegates and need 91 of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates (30%) more to win the nomination.
CLINTON would have 1792 Total Delegates and need 232 of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates (76.6%) more to win the nomination.
The more the add-on delegate split deviates from each candidates percent of super/add-on delegates needed to win the nomination, the more pressure it puts on the candidate to secure the superdelegate portion of the remaining total delegates.
Of the remaining 303 super/add-on delegates in the scenario envisioned above,
64 (21.1%) of those would be add-on delegates and
239 (78.9%) would be superdelegates.
IMPORTANT SCENARIOS TO CONSIDER
Let's examine the range of possibilities. The actual results of the remaining add-on delegate declarations will most likely fall somewhere in the range of 62.5% for Obama and 62.5% for Clinton, to be charitable to Senator Clinton given the realities of the add-on selection process.
N.B. Percentages will not equal 100% in the cases where the Edwards' Delegates come into play.
(1) Senator Obama Wins 40 (62.5%) of the Remaining 64 Add-On Delegates:
Obama wins 40 of the 64 add-on delegates remaining, and Clinton wins 24.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1974 to 1816.
Obama would then need 51 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (21.3%)
Clinton would then need 209 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (87.4%)
(2) Senators Clinton and Obama split the remaining 64 add-on delegates, 32-32:
Clinton wins 32 add-on delegates, and Obama wins 32 as well.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1966 to 1824.
Obama would then need 59 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (24.7%).
Clinton would then need 201 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (84.1%).
(3) Senator Clinton Wins 40 (62.5%) of the Remaining 64 Add-On Delegates:
Clinton wins 40 add-on delegates, and Obama wins 24 add-on delegates.
Obama would then lead Clinton by a count of 1958 to 1832.
Obama would then need 67 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (28.0%).
Clinton would then need 193 of the 239 superdelegates to secure the nomination (80.8%)
RESULTS:
These three add-on delegate scenarios run the gamut of possibilities in the add-on delegate selection process, with a high level of certainty. The pledged delegate process also is constrained by the landscape of the final nine contests, with Obama favored to win 10 more delegates than Clinton by most counts. Therefore, the volatility exists mainly with uncommitted superdelegates.
Senator Obama will need somewhere between
21.3% (best case--51) and 28.0% (worst case--67)
of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to win the nomination
Senator Clinton will need somewhere between
80.8% (best case--193) and 87.4% (worst case--209)
of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to win the nomination.
ADDENDUM:
There has been talk about how it is that Superdelegates will decide the nomination and move en masse to one candidate or the other to make this happen.
We also need to study the composition of the Superdelegate class to understand who they are and what can be expected of them.
According to Demconwatch, of the remaining 238 uncommitted superdelegates, the breakdown is as such:
Governors 7 ( 2.9%)
Senators 18 ( 7.6%)
Congress 70 (29.4%)
Distinguished Party Leaders 6 ( 2.5%)
DNC Loyalists 137 (57.6%)
TOTAL: 238
This breakdown is important because the superdelegates most likely to move en masse at the request of the Party Leaders are actually the elected officeholders, who will want to use an established metric as justification for their choice to avoid backlash within their own district by supporters of the losing candidate.
That metric appears to be the pledged delegate vote count, although Senator Clinton is pushing a new (and logically inconsistent, but more to come on that later) version of a popular vote count.
95 of the remaining 238 (39.9%) uncommitted superdelegates are elected officeholders. Obama will only need between 51 and 67 superdelegates to move his way to win the nomination. That can be effected entirely through Congressmembers alone.
Currently Obama leads Clinton in committed superdelegates from this rank of elected officeholder by a count of 106 to 100.
Clinton, on the other hand, leads Obama in committed superdelegates from the rank of DNC loyalists and Distinguished Party Leaders by a count of 153 to 121.
In fact, Clinton's lead of 26 superdelegates comes primarily through her strength in non-elected officeholders who serve as superdelegates.
In contrast to Obama, Clinton will need 193 and 209 superdelegates to break her way to win the nomination.
Even if Clinton were to secure every single DNC/Distinguished Party Leader endorsement remaining, she would still need between 50 and 66 elected officeholders to break her way, which would mean between 52.6% and 69.5% of those elected officeholders.
For such a large number of those elected officeholders to accept a new metric that is not based on pledged delegates seems unlikely, if not impossible, given the massive political unrest in each elected officeholder's jurisdiction as a result of such action. At least, that's my take. If you disagree, put a post up and let me hear you.
Remember, as more and more superdelegates trickle in with their choices, these odds will continue to mount for Senator Clinton unless she starts winning 4 out of every 5 superdelegate decisions that are made.
However, as of her epic Pennsylvania victory, she has been outgained by Obama 4-2 in superdelegate declarations.
This analysis shows why Clinton's best course of action is to find a way to get Michigan and Florida seated at her best benefit, so that these daunting numbers soften for her and give her enough breathing room to operate and find a path to the nomination. Without both of those states being seated to her satisfaction, the challenge appears to great to overcome.
More on the May 3rd Guam contest
By most accounts, Guam has never been more than even a ceremonial blip on the path toward nomination for the Democratic Party, given its late position on the nomination calendar and its seemingly inconsequential number of pledged delegates (four). In fact, there are more superdelegates at play than there are pledged delegates, and by some accounts, Clinton seems destined to finish the nomination race with a sizable lead in superdelegates from Guam.
When using different "delegate predictor" features on different sites, such as Slate's, it appears that in order for a candidate to break the likely 2-2 tie, that candidate would have to capture over 62.5% of the votes to produce a 3-1 lead, and over 85% of the vote to sweep 4-0 by denying the opponent the 15% viability threshold.
What these prior analyses don't show, and what recent articles such as this one show, is that these four delegates are really representative of eight delegates, each with a half-vote. This scenario plays out much like the Democrats Abroad primary, where each delegate had a half-vote as well.
Given this half-vote scenario, it is now much easier for a candidate to gain a full delegate from this contest by winning it 2.5 to 1.5.
One version of how this contest will play out is as follows, although this account appears to be outdated or inaccurate regarding the pledged delegates:
--Six delegates are chosen as pledged delegates, each with a half-vote.
--One unpledged delegate, a Democratic Member of Congress, will have one vote.
--Four unpledged Democratic National Committee members will have four votes as Superdelegates.
Thus, Guam will have a total of 11 delegates voting as 8 delegates:
3 pledged delegate votes
1 unpledged delegate vote
4 superdelegate votes
This information seems conflicting with what a Daily Kos blogger reports as how the Obama Campaign sees this contest, as reported here.
What I consider the authority on this matter, however, is found here on TheGreenPapers. This source confirms for me how this process works.
Secret ballot like at a primary, and then the delegates are allocated like in a caucus where 15% viability is needed to gain delegates.
As I find out more information, I'll update this post.
HERE IS THE KEY:
If it is really 8 delegates with a half-vote each, then winning the threshold to create a 2.5 to 1.5 victory will be vitally important and thus a victory in terms of pledged delegates. Otherwise, a 2-2 split will be as previously expected.
When using different "delegate predictor" features on different sites, such as Slate's, it appears that in order for a candidate to break the likely 2-2 tie, that candidate would have to capture over 62.5% of the votes to produce a 3-1 lead, and over 85% of the vote to sweep 4-0 by denying the opponent the 15% viability threshold.
What these prior analyses don't show, and what recent articles such as this one show, is that these four delegates are really representative of eight delegates, each with a half-vote. This scenario plays out much like the Democrats Abroad primary, where each delegate had a half-vote as well.
Given this half-vote scenario, it is now much easier for a candidate to gain a full delegate from this contest by winning it 2.5 to 1.5.
One version of how this contest will play out is as follows, although this account appears to be outdated or inaccurate regarding the pledged delegates:
--Six delegates are chosen as pledged delegates, each with a half-vote.
--One unpledged delegate, a Democratic Member of Congress, will have one vote.
--Four unpledged Democratic National Committee members will have four votes as Superdelegates.
Thus, Guam will have a total of 11 delegates voting as 8 delegates:
3 pledged delegate votes
1 unpledged delegate vote
4 superdelegate votes
This information seems conflicting with what a Daily Kos blogger reports as how the Obama Campaign sees this contest, as reported here.
What I consider the authority on this matter, however, is found here on TheGreenPapers. This source confirms for me how this process works.
Secret ballot like at a primary, and then the delegates are allocated like in a caucus where 15% viability is needed to gain delegates.
As I find out more information, I'll update this post.
HERE IS THE KEY:
If it is really 8 delegates with a half-vote each, then winning the threshold to create a 2.5 to 1.5 victory will be vitally important and thus a victory in terms of pledged delegates. Otherwise, a 2-2 split will be as previously expected.
What We're Seeing from the Add-On Selections So Far
It appears that a uniform theory on which state's add-on delegates will go with which candidate may need to be complicated a bit.
Several factors are emerging in how add-on delegates are being selected, and how they are making their decision.
(1) Creating a balanced delegation is very important.
fact, if you read through the State Party rules for selecting the add-on delegates, the primary concern is to allow each state to balance its delegation on gender, race or even sexual orientation lines.
This goes to the original point about how add-on delegates were never really intended to decide the nominee for the party--rather, they were given to states as rewards for various 'good behavior' and as a means to provide diversity among the delegation.
New York, for example, has as its goal the following breakdown of its delegation:
28% African-American
18% Latino
7% Asian/Pacific Americans
8% Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgendered
5% Disabled
At least one Native American
If at the end of the process there is an underrepresented group among the delegates, it is conceivable that the New York process will seek to meet its goal as a priority over weighting its delegation toward one candidate or another. Imagine the irony if at the end of the day the delegation needed to select as its add-on delegates a lesbian, a man in a wheelchair and a Native American...and the only three left were Obama supporters.
This just goes to show you the competing goals within the Democratic Primary process whereby close elections such as this one produce greater scrutiny on what were previously considered symbolic or equity selections in prior elections.
Very interesting.
(2) Keeping the add-on delegate relevant
In essence, a State Party profits from having its add-on delegate remain undecided. Some states will select the add-on based on loyalty to a candidate where the stars align and the decision is made by a body (commitee, district delegates, etc.) that is aligned with one or the other candidate.
When the nominees are selected by a State Chair, and that State Chair is not aligned, then it seems there will be a good chance that the add-on delegate will not be a partisan from the start.
This delay in endorsement by an uncommitted add-on delegate could favor Obama in one sense, if there is pressure from the DNC to bring the nomination to a close. On the other hand, Clinton benefits from having more superdelegates (add-on or otherwise) in play as the nomination continues to bolster her opportunity to sway more votes to her side.
Leveraging an add-on delegate for favors from the DNC may be on the minds of State Chairs that control the process of selecting the add-on delegate.
(3) What will happen in states with multiple add-ons?
This scenario will be a true test as to how much control each candidate has over the state party decisionmakers that will select the add-on delegates.
Since Clinton has won the states that will receive more add-on delegates, for the most part, her ability to make a clean sweep in those states will determine if she cedes more ground to Obama in this phase of the campaign.
Situations like in California where the five add-on delegates will be split 3-2 for Clinton over Obama don't help her. Sweeping all four of New York's add-ons will be crucial for Clinton, but if Obama can steal one there, his net loss goes from -4 to -2.
Similarly, if in states where Obama won handily but where the State Party mechanics favor Clinton, losing one of the add-on delegates will be harmful for him.
Example: Maryland. Maryland has two add-on delegates, and Obama won by a large margin,
Maryland's State Chair controls the nominees for these two positions. Each add-on position must have at least two candidates. The State Central Committee then selects the nominees for each of the two positions.
So, if there is an Obama and a Clinton supporter up for both positions, and the State Central Committee is pro-Clinton, you could easily see Clinton picking up both add-on delegates in a coup. However, if the State Chair is pro-Obama, or respects the fact that Obama won Maryland 60% - 36.5%, then you could see a slate of all pro-Obama names for the two add-on delegates that will force the Central Committee's hand.
The Maryland State Chair is Michael Cryor, who remains an uncommitted superdelegate. Of interest is that Clinton leads Obama in Maryland Superdelegates by a count of 11-5, with 12 remaining undecided. Clinton has Maryland's Governor O'Malley, Senator Mikulski and Congressman Ruppersberger, with the rest being party activists. Obama has Congressmembers Cummings and Wynn and three State DNC members.
As New York and Maryland are the next two states up for add-on delegate discussions, let's keep an eye on their politics to see how these decisions shape up. This should give us a better understanding of how the future states will play out.
Several factors are emerging in how add-on delegates are being selected, and how they are making their decision.
(1) Creating a balanced delegation is very important.
fact, if you read through the State Party rules for selecting the add-on delegates, the primary concern is to allow each state to balance its delegation on gender, race or even sexual orientation lines.
This goes to the original point about how add-on delegates were never really intended to decide the nominee for the party--rather, they were given to states as rewards for various 'good behavior' and as a means to provide diversity among the delegation.
New York, for example, has as its goal the following breakdown of its delegation:
28% African-American
18% Latino
7% Asian/Pacific Americans
8% Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgendered
5% Disabled
At least one Native American
If at the end of the process there is an underrepresented group among the delegates, it is conceivable that the New York process will seek to meet its goal as a priority over weighting its delegation toward one candidate or another. Imagine the irony if at the end of the day the delegation needed to select as its add-on delegates a lesbian, a man in a wheelchair and a Native American...and the only three left were Obama supporters.
This just goes to show you the competing goals within the Democratic Primary process whereby close elections such as this one produce greater scrutiny on what were previously considered symbolic or equity selections in prior elections.
Very interesting.
(2) Keeping the add-on delegate relevant
In essence, a State Party profits from having its add-on delegate remain undecided. Some states will select the add-on based on loyalty to a candidate where the stars align and the decision is made by a body (commitee, district delegates, etc.) that is aligned with one or the other candidate.
When the nominees are selected by a State Chair, and that State Chair is not aligned, then it seems there will be a good chance that the add-on delegate will not be a partisan from the start.
This delay in endorsement by an uncommitted add-on delegate could favor Obama in one sense, if there is pressure from the DNC to bring the nomination to a close. On the other hand, Clinton benefits from having more superdelegates (add-on or otherwise) in play as the nomination continues to bolster her opportunity to sway more votes to her side.
Leveraging an add-on delegate for favors from the DNC may be on the minds of State Chairs that control the process of selecting the add-on delegate.
(3) What will happen in states with multiple add-ons?
This scenario will be a true test as to how much control each candidate has over the state party decisionmakers that will select the add-on delegates.
Since Clinton has won the states that will receive more add-on delegates, for the most part, her ability to make a clean sweep in those states will determine if she cedes more ground to Obama in this phase of the campaign.
Situations like in California where the five add-on delegates will be split 3-2 for Clinton over Obama don't help her. Sweeping all four of New York's add-ons will be crucial for Clinton, but if Obama can steal one there, his net loss goes from -4 to -2.
Similarly, if in states where Obama won handily but where the State Party mechanics favor Clinton, losing one of the add-on delegates will be harmful for him.
Example: Maryland. Maryland has two add-on delegates, and Obama won by a large margin,
Maryland's State Chair controls the nominees for these two positions. Each add-on position must have at least two candidates. The State Central Committee then selects the nominees for each of the two positions.
So, if there is an Obama and a Clinton supporter up for both positions, and the State Central Committee is pro-Clinton, you could easily see Clinton picking up both add-on delegates in a coup. However, if the State Chair is pro-Obama, or respects the fact that Obama won Maryland 60% - 36.5%, then you could see a slate of all pro-Obama names for the two add-on delegates that will force the Central Committee's hand.
The Maryland State Chair is Michael Cryor, who remains an uncommitted superdelegate. Of interest is that Clinton leads Obama in Maryland Superdelegates by a count of 11-5, with 12 remaining undecided. Clinton has Maryland's Governor O'Malley, Senator Mikulski and Congressman Ruppersberger, with the rest being party activists. Obama has Congressmembers Cummings and Wynn and three State DNC members.
As New York and Maryland are the next two states up for add-on delegate discussions, let's keep an eye on their politics to see how these decisions shape up. This should give us a better understanding of how the future states will play out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)