Did Olbermann Just Say Obama Could Have Won By 15-20 points?

[Bullet1987]

At the beginning of Countdown, it sounded like Keith said that if it weren't for Iowa's weird mathematical system...Obama could have won by 15%-20%. Am I the only one that heard that?

[City Lights]

1. I heard it too. If it was a "normal" primary he would have won by that much.

[MADem]

2. No support, or way less, in the rural areas, perhaps?

They weight the cities lighter than the rural areas...

[Drunken Irishman]

3. It was said that some rural areas had more clout that urban areas.

[MADem]

4. They do. They weight the rural areas heavier. It is part of the formula. NT

[LiberalFighter]

5. How do we know that Obama would had won by 15-20 points?

For all I know the votes that switched to Obama were more than those to Edwards or Clinton.

[Kahuna]

6. Intrance polls. nt

nt

[LiberalFighter]

7. Intrance?

[Berry Cool]

9. Everyone was in a trance. n/t

[Zueda]

8. Is it the way they appoint delegates?

Say in a precinct that had 4 delegates and Obama had 60% of the people and Edwards and Clinton had 20% each then Obama would only get 50% of the delegates and Edwards and Clinton would each get 25%.

[Orangepeel]

10. it's kind of like the popular vote vs. the electoral college

only more complicated.

the number of delegates for an area (I'm not sure if it is by county or congressional district) is based on a variety of factors, including weighted performance for democrats in past elections. But it works out so that compared to areas like Des Moines, rural counties with less people have more influence than would be warranted based solely on population (*cough*Wyoming*cough*)

[BearSquirrel2]

11. I do get tired of the "land map"

I do get tired of rural people claiming that they are much more important then urbanites. I don't discount their contributions, but it's one man one vote, not one cattle one vote.

It really is time to end this anti-democratic institution as the primary bellweather.