Removing the super delegates for clarity

[kristopher]

Required to win nomination:
2383
Delegates available in upcoming contests:
2308

Sanders Pledged Delegates + (required to win):
825 + (1558) = 2383

Needs 67.5% of remaining to clinch nomination


Clinton Pledged Delegates + (required to win):
1139 + (1244) = 2383

Needs 54% of remaining to clinch nomination

IMO that looks like a high probability of a brokered convention. That is when the super delegates become relevant; until then their preference is irrelevant. And if/when we get there, the value of their current commitment is far less important than the lay of the political landscape at the time of the convention.

[Kittycat]

1. Good post. Thanks for sharing.

With so much focus on what Bernie must overcome, it's interesting seeing what Hillary must. Side-by-side. Now we move in to his most favorable states. The dynamics have definitely shifted. The convention certainly will be interesting this year.

[jfern]

2. A majority of pledged delegates is just over 2000

[kristopher]

14. True. But that isn't what is required to win in first round vote.

I'm not pretending to be an expert in the process, but I think the small amount I've laid out is accurate.

This race isn't over.

[Adrahil]

26. Super-D's vote on the first ballot.

Fun fact: Obama never gained a majority of pladged delegates. He needed Super-D's to win. Also,Hillary actually got more of the primary popular vote.

[pdsimdars]

44. They can't really be counted yet.

What usually happens is that when there is a clear winner the super delegates switch and support them. They have never been the deciding factor. . .that is, if the states give more pledged delegates to one candidate, the superdelegates will not override the will of the people by selecting the other candidate.

[geek tragedy]

3. Clinton already has 400 superdelegates endorsing her

Super delegates are not going to help Bernie steal the nomination. They will follow the elected delegates.

Whoever wins the most elected/pledged delegates will be the nominee. Period.

[stevenleser]

4. Well, no, you can't do that now. Superdelegates are a part of Sanders strategy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511507075

[stevenleser]

5. And by the way there is close to zero chance of a brokered convention in a two person race.

All the delegates vote, pledged and super, and in a two person race, someone will get at least 1/2 plus one.

[kristopher]

9. If Hillary gets less than 54% AND Bernie gets less than 67.5% where does that lead...

...except to a second vote, since neither would have the requisite 2383 to win?

The second vote has different possible paths based on the dynamics at the time of the second vote. The point is that this race is not over. If it were, the networks that have been working so hard on behalf of Clinton would not be inappropriately including the SDs in the numbers to try and exaggerate clinton's lead. The real numbers would be enough, right?

[stevenleser]

12. Since all delegates vote it leads to one of the two going over the threshold.

The superdelegates and the pledged delegates vote on the first ballot. They all vote.

[kristopher]

15. Ok, I thought I'd heard differently, but I accept your word.

That explains why Bernie is explaining his SD strategy now. It also means that, should Bernie have more pledged delegates (which would imply a great deal of momentum behind him), the SDs will be faced with making their FINAL DECISION between the last primary and the convention.

I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of the 400.

[Firebrand Gary]

6. We're not republicans, we've got super delegates.

There will be no brokered convention. If Sanders is going to be the nominee, he needs to win the majority of the population and a majority of the states, that is what you need to do in order to show you're the best candidate for the general. That's how you win the super delegates. If he wins like Hillary has and does it before we run out of states, then he will be the nominee and I will enthusiastically vote for him.

Otherwise it's Hillary.

[BainsBane]

7. That does the opposite of providing clarity

You get the numbers just plain wrong. The superdelegates are part of the process.

Including supers, Bernie needs 66.3% of remaining delegates and Clinton 30.4% of the total remaining delegates. You really think she can't get that?

[kristopher]

10. You are free to keep believing that fairytale.

[BainsBane]

11. .

[kristopher]

17. It's a fairy tale.

Acting as if the SDs are the same as pledged delegates in order to frame Hillary's goal as 34% is a spin ploy to hide the scale of the challenge facing the super delegates should Bernie have a Majority of pledged delegates.

[JaneyVee]

30. I think he needs 74.6%

Sanders:
Total dels = 825
Nom total = 2383
Margin = 1558
remaining dels = 2,087
1558 / 2087 = 74.6%

Unless his delegate count changed.

[BainsBane]

58. I included his superdelegates

for a total delegate count was 851. My math could well be wrong though.

[jillan]

8. I have been finding it very curious how the msm always talks about the possibility of a GOP brokered

convention but is missing the point that the Dems may be having one as well.

Bernie has said he is in it till the convention.
#StillSanders has been trending on twitter all day and is now up to 165k tweets and that matters because there are well over 100k people that want him to stay in and fight and will continue to fund his campaign.
We are not going to let him quit.

I really think we are going all the way to the convention - 2383 delegates or not.

to the end!

No Retreat No Surrender

Not accepting her as the nominee.

[stevenleser]

13. If you understand the process, you know that with only two candidates, its virtually impossible

on the Democratic side.

[RobertEarl]

16. This is why we must educate the supers

The supers must feel the Bern and be ready and willing to vote for Bernie on the first vote.

That and expect many challenges of the pledged delegates.

[brooklynite]

27. Before you start educating Superdelegates...

...maybe you need to find a way to get Bernie some pledged delegates. He's not doing so well in that regard.

[leftynyc]

42. Aren't you getting tired

of telling us that anyone not voting for Bernie is too stupid to know better?

[LiberalFighter]

18. My math is different.

Not including automatic delegates.
Clinton: 1180
Sanders: 837

Again without using automatic delegates.
Clinton needs 41.59% plus of the remaining to win nomination.
Sanders needs 58.46% plus of the remaining to win nomination.

[kristopher]

19. You mean the assumptions are different

Math is math.

You're assuming that a simple majority of pledged delegates is a winner.

I'm assuming the 2383 number as a function of pledged delegates is the only definitive winner.

I opted for my assumption largely because it lets the SDs off the hook - they don't have to worry about being placed in the position of overturning a popular majority. It is also the only path we can look at that would be definitive on the day the primaries end.

But your case is valid as long as it's clear the SDs will vote with the majority. I'm not sure that's true if the majority holder is Bernie under 2383.

[Cheese Sandwich]

21. I get what you're doing but...

I wouldn't make those assumptions.

Remember many of the superdelegates are still uncommitted.

Remember also that if Bernie wins a majority of the pledged delegates, then he would only need in total HALF of the superdelegates in order to neutralize Hillary's advantage with superdelegates.

It's easy to imagine SOME superdelegates shifting around in order avoid overturning the vote of the pledged delegates.

So if we set the smaller goal of winning a majority of the pledged delegates, it leaves a clearer path still open to win the nomination. Really I think that's his only path, if he has one. But obviously the more pledged delegates he can win the better it will be.

Half of the pledged delegates would be 2026. He would need about 58% of the remaining pledged delegates for that.

It's a pretty big distance from there to 2383. It's hard for me to imagine him winning 58% of pledged delegates from here on out, but it's impossible to imagine him winning 67.5%.

[beachbum bob]

28. hillary can sleepwak to get the 42% of the remaining pledge delegats...its the math

and sanders supporters don't want to accept it...just like hillary supporters in 2008....

hillary wins New York, Pennsylvanian, California....just the gains in delegates in those 3 states puts nearly over

[joshcryer]

20. There was only a 62 pledged delegate spread in 2008.

Obama won by well under 100 pledged delegates because the superdelegates made sure of it and Clinton released her delegates for him. There was a lot of talk going up to the convention that Clinton was going to try to win over a hundreds of superdelegates, argue she had a bigger popular vote, to try to take the thing, but that would've destroyed the party.

So if we take that as precedent then it won't be brokered unless the spread is even much smaller and if you think Sanders won't go to the convention in good faith, will call for a brokered convention, would demand that his delegates don't vote for Clinton, etc (which is preposterous).

Clinton really has followed Obama's delegate strategy this go around with great success.

[BainsBane]

22. She won't need Sanders delegates

She only needs 30% of the remaining delegates to win the nomination. That won't be difficult.

[joshcryer]

23. Sanders will release his delegates.

Just as Clinton released hers in 2008.

Are you kidding?

Obviously she won't "need" them as she has a 300 point lead and by the time this is over it may well be 3-4x what Obama had.

But Sanders will release them and tell them to vote for Clinton. They will by voice vote (some salty delegates might yell no but no one will care or even notice) and that'll be that.

I'm talking about party unity, not about Bernie or Bust nonsense. Clinton and Sanders will make it clear it was a fair fight and will work together. It's a given. What's going to really kill faux Sanders supporters is when he disavows Weaver's narrative about the negative campaigning he was made to do. Every time Sanders went negative I could see trepidation. He'll come out and say it is what it was, campaign politicking.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Ted Kennedy actually tried to get delegates released from their first round pledges in 80 and failed

I idolized the Kennedys; my mom, god bless her, was a Kennedy organizer, and I worked on his campaign. At the time I supported the ploy. In retrospect I was wrong. Jimmy Carter garnered the most votes and pledged delegates. He was the winner.

[joshcryer]

32. The supers are mostly symbolic.

The bigger deal for the nomination process for democrats was the Mikulski Commission (preference for minority heavy states) and the Fairness Commission (ending the winner take all system due to Gary Hart and Jesse Jackson protesting). As far as I understand the supers have never truly decided the thing. They go with the majority delegate vote.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. Ted Kennedy wanted for the delegates to be released from their first round pledges.

Ted Kennedy wanted for the delegates to be released from their first round pledges. His rationale was that circumstances had changed since the primary season began and that if early voters could have voted later they would have voted differently, sound familiar?


Even if they were allowed to "vote their conscience" they likely would have stayed with the candidate they were bound to because that was why they were chosen in the first place.

[pdsimdars]

46. Yes, everyone seems to cloud the issue with their slanted theorizing

But the critical point is just what you said, . . . that the supers have NEVER decided it, they go with the majority delegate vote. Plain and simple. People want to muddy the waters to suit their agenda.

[LiberalFighter]

61. I don't see anywhere that the minority heavy states benefit more than others.

Distribution of delegates is based on average votes for Democratic candidate and electoral votes. While automatic delegates are based on elected officials and DNC members.

[joshcryer]

69. I'm talking of why they go earlier.

In the nomination process.

[LiberalFighter]

70. I don't see how the Mikulski Commission brought about those states going earlier.

Or any other commission. Unless a state opts out they pretty much have to go with whatever the state legislatures agree to for primary dates. Those dates are likely to be the same for both parties when it involves a primary as it costs more to have two separate primaries in a state.

The minority thing is not legislated by the states and only applies to whatever the parties have for their rules. Unlike the Democratic Party through McGovern and Mikulski, the Republican Party does not provide for equal distribution by gender or minority representation.

[Onlooker]

24. But, Bernie blew it with the superdelegates

When the Bernie said he was only a Democrat for opportunistic reasons, he basically said fuck you to the Democratic Party. It will take an enormous change in the situation for superdelegates to support him, especially if Hillary wins more delegates in the primaries. Plus, add to that the fact that many Bernie supporters object strongly to superdelegates having the ability to sway the nomination against the will of the voters, so it's possible that even superdelegates who support Bernie would oppose efforts on his part in that regard.

[LiberalFighter]

62. I find it disingenuous for Bernie to even be on the ballot after all this time.

He wasn't a delegate, automatic or otherwise in 2008 or 2012. But because he is on the ballot now he is one now.

Also, when Bernie became a Senator he had the option of not caucusing with the Democrats or the Republicans, or caucusing. He caucus so he could get committee positions and resources.

[BlueStateLib]

25. Superdelegate votes are counted on the first ballot.

[eomer]

31. Sort of, but with a two-candidate race like this it should really be just a formality.

One of the two candidates is going to win a majority of pledged delegates. Barring some extraordinary set of circumstances that should settle it - the other candidate should concede and the supers should vote in support of the decision of the voters.

[kristopher]

35. I agree, but that isn't the line the news media is promoting to help Hillary.

They are pushing delegate counts that include super delegates and then using the 2383 number as the winning goalpost.

They are doing that to create the false impression that Hillary is much much further ahead than is actually the case.

They are, effectively, lying on behalf of Hillary.

Do you think that's by accident and that Hillary is not complicit in the decisions behind such coverage?

The very last word anyone would use about this contest is fair.

[eomer]

45. True, but I don't think it helps to go along with their framing.

This is the internets - where people who have rejected the MSM go to find out what's really happening.

[pdsimdars]

48. And that is why, if Bernie really does pull it off, he will have beaten "the establishment"

including the media, because he will have had to fight them all and all the barriers they have thrown in his path.

[DanTex]

33. LOL. Brokered convention. Sorry, she's up by 300+ pledged. It's a done deal.

It is hilarious, though, that the same people who just a few days ago were complaining about the undemocratic nature of superdelegates, are now hoping that those same superdelegates are going to override the overwhelming choice of the electorate.

But it's not going to happen. Game over.

[kristopher]

36. No where will you find those thoughts in my posts.

Do you always make things up on behalf of others?

[hrmjustin]

37. Sanders will lose the closed primaries in AZ, NY, PA, and MD.

He will not win.

[kristopher]

38. That may be true. Then again, maybe not.

I have no idea why you thought it was relevant to the OP.

[hrmjustin]

39. My point is these states have a large amount of delegates and Sanders does poorly among

registered Democrats so in a closed primary he will lose.

[kristopher]

40. You actually don't have a point - just an opinion.

And not a particularly well formed one if that is the sum total of your evidence.

[hrmjustin]

41. Well on April 26th you will get my point.

Take care!

[pdsimdars]

51. I always like to point out that the Democratic Party is only 31% of the electorate

That means there is almost 70% who are NOT democrats. You can be a big fish in a small pond, but it doesn't tell you a whole lot about how you will fare in the big pond.

Bernie does MUCH better among Independents and Republicans than Hillary does. And THAT is the field you have to compete in. Bernie regularly gets 20% of the Republican vote in Vermont, they can trust him. Hillary can not. But they can't see past .. "we won, we are awesome." Forgetting to think about the big picture.

[Myrina]

47. .. but are they 'winner take all' in terms of delegates?

If not, your point is moot.

[hrmjustin]

49. No but she will win them by double digits.

There will not be a contested convention.

[Myrina]

50. Like she did the other night, and *still* only came away with 57 more delegates ...

... again, your point is moot.

[hrmjustin]

52. Not all the delegates have been distributed from Tuesday.

But she will end the prmaries with more pledge delegates and she will win.

[LiberalFighter]

64. It looks like the delegates from Tuesday are now all accounted.

Clinton: 397
Sanders: 294

Advantage: 103 Clinton (57.5%)

[hrmjustin]

65. Thanks.

[LiberalFighter]

63. It is really not about losing states. (The media's fault)

If that were the case then it should be nearly over by now with Hillary's 18 and Bernie's 9 and 1 tied. Because then she would need only 11 more states or territories regardless of their delegate strength.

It is about winning delegates. I do think that Hillary will win the necessary delegates without automatic delegates being the major reason.

[pdsimdars]

43. With all the misleading posts about it being all over, it's nice to get real clarity. NUMBERS

[jcgoldie]

53. this OP is not clarity it is the opposite

It is completely confused. Superdelegates vote on the first ballot. The democratic convention has almost zero chance of being "brokered" regardless of which candidate you think will win it's almost impossible to get that result with only 2 candidates in the race.

[DemocracyDirect]

54. Fantastic Argument

I think we also need to take a close look at where we are in July.

As Trump gets closer and closer to nomination, he's going to come after Hillary hard.

Everyone should keep an open mind to reassess at that time.

And keep your passionate arguments ready for then.

[merrily]

55. 54% v. 57% and we're starting on states that are better for Bernie! Woot!

[jcgoldie]

56. lol She doesnt need 54%

She needs 42% going forward. It doesn't even make any sense to say they both need over 50%. This thread is completely mathematically illiterate and wrong about how the convention even works.

[LiberalFighter]

66. Using numbers without the automatic delegates makes it easier.

It should be a good indicator when a candidate reaches the 50% +1 without the automatic delegates that they are the winner. Even if those delegates went proportional.

[jcgoldie]

68. I agree just throw out the superdelegates for the math

Because they can always change and likely will if the opposite candidate gets over 50% of pledged delegates. But if you do that then it makes zero sense to use 2383 as the measure of delegates needed to win the nomination. Use 50% of pledged delegates if you are only counting pledged delegates. That number is only 2026. She has 1151 with a few left to be assigned in FLA and IL.

[dana_b]

60. +1

Woo hoo!!

[Gothmog]

57. Ignoring super delegates does not help Sanders

The super delegates are not going to support sanders and Sanders will not be able to overcome Clinton's lead in delegates (both pledged and super)

[Tarc]

59. Even if Sanders wins every remaining state at 60%, and discounting supers entirely...

He'd have a +90 lead, that's all. As soon as you takeaway the super-obvious states where he won'tbe anywhere near 60%...AZ, DC, NY, CA, and he drops back to 2nd place. Every state where he doesn't hit 60% puts more of a burden on the remaining states to push him back on top.

It's just not going to happen.

[LiberalFighter]

67. Technically, most of the automatic delegates will not support Sanders.

He does have some.

BTW in 2008, Hillary's biggest margin was 15 over Obama just before the Feb 5th Primaries. After those primaries she never led again.

While in 2016, she has a 324 delegate advantage not including automatic delegates.