Why we are now approaching the Huckabee Syndrome - in detail

[grantcart]

(For purposes of clarity the list at Demcon http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html is used as authoritative for delegate calculation)


Summary
I Sen. Obama about to pass Sen. Clinton in key Super Delegate category.
II. Sen. Obama now leads Sen. Clinton by 99 Delegates
III. Review of Up coming Primary States
IV. How Delegates are distributed.
V. Approaching Huckabee Syndrome


I Sen. Obama about to pass Sen. Clinton in key Super Delegate category.



The rate of Super Delegate committments to Obama has picked up 10 Super Delegates in three days.

At the same time Senator Clinton was officially assigned two NY DNC delegates who were previously assumed to be pro-Clinton but had no public record and lost one DNC SD who switched to Obama.


Remarkably this has brought Sen. Obama very close to passing Sen. Clinton in a very significant Super Delegate threshold that has gone unnoticed in the Media.

Sen. Obama is now one Super Delegate away from tying Sen. Clinton in the number of 'elected Super Delegates' Obama 93 Clinton 94.
(meaning Super delegates who are automatically entitled to Super Delegate status because they are US Senators,Govenors or Congresspeople)

Whatever moral authority Sen. Clinton might have been able to argue by suggesting that she retained the support of the highest level elected party leaders in the country - is now gone.

Sen. Obama has now passed Sen. Clinton in number of Govenors (11 to 10) and Senators (14 to 12), and trails in congresspeople 68 to 72.

Sen. Clinton leads Sen. Obama in other DNC delegates by 146 to 91. (Thirteen of these from New York alone.)



II. Sen. Obama now leads Sen. Clinton by 99 Delegates

. . . . . Delegates . . . . Super Delegates . . . Total
Sen Obama . . 1188 . . . . . . . . 184 . . . . . .1372

Sen Clinton. .. 1033 . . . . . . . . 240 . . . . . .1273


Total needed 2024.5



III. Review of Up coming Primary States

Super Tuesday Mar 4

Ohio 161 Delegates- . . .- Clinton is ahead by 5/6 points in two latest polls
Texas 228 Delegates . . .- All polls within the margin of error
Vermont 28 Delegates. . .- All polls showing Obama by a landslide
Rhode Island 32 Delegates- All polls showing Clinton + 15

April 22
Pennsylvania Clinton up 6 but Obama trending up very rapidly

May 6
North Carolina 2 recent polls showing significant lead
(Also in this time frame are Wyoming 8, Mississippi 40 Guam 9 and Indiana 84)




Additional details on Texas here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4600962&mesg_id=4600962
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4782802&mesg_id=4782802





IV. How Delegates are distributed.

Most delegates are assigned to congressional delegates and distributed proportionately. This makes it very difficult for a candidate to catch up in a competitive race with only two candidates.

Without knowing the exact formula (If anybody has access to it please add)

If a CD has 2 delegates then it is going to be a proportional split 1-1 unless one candidate does not make the threshold (15%).
** (Its doubtful that this has happened but if it has it would be limited to a few CDs where Sen. Obama had huge margins.)

If a CD has 3 delegates then it is going to split 2-1 whether the winner has 51% or 75% **

If a CD has 4 delegates then it is going to split 2-2 unless one candidate has atleast 65%

And so on.

Even where Sen. Clinton has won she has never won by such substantial numbers that she could achieve large numbers of delegates. That is why it is irrelevent if Sen. Clinton wins Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania by reaching 52% or 58%. They simply will not generate enough increased delegates to reduce Sen. Obamas lead.




V) Approaching Huckabee Syndrome

Moreover every day Sen Obama picks up 2-3 Super Delegates means that Sen. Clinton must pick up atleast 2 CDs not by winning them but by achieving landslides. Since Feb 5th she has yet to achieve this in a single congressional district. And added to that Sen. Obama is now ahead or tied in Texas. Texas has half of the Super Delegates on Super Tuesday and its internal delegatedistribution (along with its caucus that accounts for 1/3 of the delegates) show a heavy bias to CDs that include demographical groups that Sen. Obama has dominated.

So even though the numbers appear close there is no reasonable formula that can take the BEST CASE SCENARIO FOR SEN CLINTON that would add up to her reducing significantly Sen Obama's lead. The only scenario for Sen. Clinton left is the Huckabee Syndrome, i.e. carrying on until Sen. Obama reaches 2025 delegates awaiting some possible self destruction



Additional details on Texas here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4600962&mesg_id=4600962
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4782802&mesg_id=4782802

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. Shame to see all this nice work spoiled by your asinine headline

[anigbrowl]

2. Seems pretty accurate to me.

Anyone else would have called it quits by now.

[grantcart]

12. and if anybody didn't and stayed they would have been 'denounced and rejected'

[maddiejoan]

18. and obviously what the Democratic Party needs now

is a quitter.

:shrug:

[grantcart]

13. I was hoping you would make a helpful suggestion

[FlyingSquirrel]

3. Have a problem with your concluding statement

Moreover every day Sen Obama picks up 2-3 Super Delegates means that Sen. Clinton must pick up atleast 2 CDs not by winning them but by achieving landslides.

It makes the assumption that Superdelegates will not change their minds.

Overall I agree that it's not looking good and Obama will almost certainly win - but Superdelegates can and often do change their minds right up to the convention so really PD's are much more important to be focusing on.

----

Having said that, however, there's another psychological milestone which may be reached on March 4: Obama may be ahead in overall delegates (Pledged and Super) EVEN IF Michigan and Florida are included.

That'll get some GDP'ers in a nice big frenzy!

:crazy:

[grantcart]

5. You are correct that they can change their minds - and they

are, virtually all of the changes are from clinton to obama = people who jumped too early thinking that Obama could never mount such a credible campaign at such a young age. There is no pattern of any Obama supporters changing back.

The only reason that they would change to Clinton from Obama is because Obama made a major gaffe - which fits the 'asinine' termed Hucklebee Syndrome".

There is a large pent up group of folks like Rep Lewis who, coming from deistricts with significant AA population are facing enormous pressure from within their district to change. (Rep. Rangel is facing enormous pressure even within his own household)

37 of Hillary's Super Delegates are from New York. Last week she took a day off for a major policy address and fund raiser in New York. There wasn't much policy addressed and the $ 50 ahead wasn't much of a fund raiser but all of the major SDs were in the room.

In trying to find the reference for that meeting I found this revealing article which includes the quote from Schumer that proves my general thesis that its impossible to catch up with proportional delegate distribution by district.


Schumer on Avoiding a 'Self-Destructive' End to Clinton Vs. Obama
http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama

Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"The number one thing that people worry about is that the candidates will cut each other up and make it harder to win the general," he said. "But I think that is not going to happen. Because everyone cares about winning so much. Not only the candidates, but the electorate. So if one candidate is doing something that is regarded as really self-destructive, of the ability to win, that's really going to hurt them."

"It would widely be regarded negatively in the electorate," he said.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it."


Now not to put to fine a point to my original post here are the significant points

1) With the way that delegates are distributed it is impossible for Hillary to catch up unless she is getting 60+% in several big states

2) She is not going to do that

3) Everyone in the upper echelon's of the party knows all of this but like Huckabee, there is no way to stop it without further defeating Clinton and preferably by significant margins. The ball is in Clinton's court and how much damage they are willing to inflict on his legacy, her future and our party.

[TexasObserver]

4. We need 200 superDs to announce they're backing Obama.

200 who either have said they are for Hillary, or who are uncommitted, or some of both.

The party need to put the delegate race out of reach.

[grantcart]

6. pls see # 5 above - after i posted I found schumer saying basically the same

thing - its impossible to catch up with the way that delegates are spread in disticts


see also bloomberg not running

[TexasObserver]

25. From the things Schumer has said recently, he seems to have concerns about Hillary's excessives

[Johnny__Motown]

7. I love these posts, and appreciate them. But MSNBC has a much higher SD count for Barack

Dunno exactly where you are getting all your numbers but as I said MSNBC had Barack at 201 SD earlier today and I am sure there have been at least 2 more announcements since I saw that count earlier today.

I make it at 203+ SD for Obama (on the cable channel, the web site is still at 184)

Also I believe Hillary lost 1 or 2 today.

[grantcart]

9. I use this as the single source so as to avoid confusion

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

Its pretty neat and one of the editors will pop up here (Oreo)

What I like about it is that every time they credit some body they have an independent link that you can go and see.

The methodologies of the networks is to contact the campaigns and get the inside numbers from each campaign and then try to reconcile any discrepancies.


This thread is updated during the day but because editing is limited by time I have to make the additions by adding replies so you have to scroll down. You will also see that I steal the link from demconwatch back to the announcement.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4783480&mesg_id=4783480

[Johnny__Motown]

19. Well, I can respect that. I guess I was just using the highest count I had access to

It is about 15 SD above the count you are using but your consistent sourcing is admirable.

[grantcart]

35. It is rare but nevertheless apreciated when lazy gets mistaken for admirable lol nt

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Johnny__Motown]

10. wow, that was harsh.

[Blarch]

14. Take a good look.

This is what losing looks like.

[Johnny__Motown]

20. My Eyes, My Eyes... omg... It Hurts My Eyes

[grantcart]

39. still trying to figure out what was deleted lol

[grantcart]

11. Well basically that is my message that HRC supporters simply don't

care what additional damage might be done to the party regardless of the fact that it cannot be made up because of the way delegates are apportioned.

As Schumer states
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"The number one thing that people worry about is that the candidates will cut each other up and make it harder to win the general," he said. "But I think that is not going to happen. Because everyone cares about winning so much. Not only the candidates, but the electorate. So if one candidate is doing something that is regarded as really self-destructive, of the ability to win, that's really going to hurt them."

[K Gardner]

15. To address your point #5..

I posted an analogy yesterday that likened the Hillary Campaign to Huckabee's and was roundly trounced for it, although I posted merely an opinion and you have posted concrete facts. Excellent work ! It is short-sighted and ultimately denial for even her most ardent supporters not to realize this, especially when given the numbers and the defection of major superdelegates. It seems the comparison to Huckabee is offensive to them (I ultimately deleted this reference in my post)but it is once again short-sighted not to see that all she can hope to do at this point is continue to try to destroy Obama, for little net gain.

There has been some criticism this morning of Lewis' defection, but I think Lewis also sees the big picture and his is a message to Clinton that "win at any cost", when that winning involves personal destruction of Barack Obama, is not acceptable.

My post/opinion: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4795052&mesg_id=4795052

[grantcart]

16. Thank you for your earlier post.

I would like to raise another point, "its offensive to them". You are correct and that is why I included it in the title it is part of the issue that needs addressing.

1)90% of the Obama supporters in here are refugees from other campaigns. Many of us still would prefer our own candidate but have put our own personal preferences aside.

2)If the numbers were reversed, if Sen. Clinton had won 11 straight victories and now had an empirically proven formula that showed further campaigning could not change the outcome - exceptional pressures would have been put on Sen. Obama to stop. The references to Huckabee would be, I submit, everywhere.

3)The main argument for Sen. Clinton not continuing the campaign is in her own interest, and the party's. If there was any viable option that showed a realistic chance it would be a different matter. How is it helpful that Sen. Clinton faces additional defeats? And they will continue to try everything including the kitchen sink. Here attempts to try and find some dramatic strategy to reverse what is happening is having a counter effect





It simply is in no one's interest in having Sen. Clinton face more defeats.

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. "The Ship Be Sinking"

to quote one of my favorite ex basketball players.

[grantcart]

21. "Bail faster"

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

22. Huckabee?

yikes.

[grantcart]

24. The parrallel's are now the same.

http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama

Schumer admits in an off hand overlooked statement what I am saying;
quote
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it."
unquote

To put it into another perspective for Sen Clinton to erase Obama's 99 net delegate lead (including all of the superdelegates), she would have to win atleast 50 congressional districts with a 3-1 split. Since Feb 5th she may have won a dozen but I doubt it.

Thanks for the daily thread

[psychopomp]

23. Bookmarked

Thanks for the hard work you put into this organized, concise explication of the data.

[grantcart]

34. 'your very kind thank you

[Vinca]

26. If the candidates' records were switched and Obama had lost

11 straight (counting the foreign vote), he'd be an asterisk in history by now. The only reason Hillary is still around is her last name.

[grantcart]

37. It would be an outrage

[elixir]

27. Boy, you must love to hear your own voice (or see your own posts, as in this case)....

The fact remains HRC is still in the race because she can mathematically win depending on future primaries. Until the primaries are over, she's in this thing.

Get used to it.

[grantcart]

29. This post is in answer to the many posts by Clinton supporters that if

she simply does 5% better in one state that it will have an impact.

Don't trust me here is Sen Schumer admitting as much

http://www.observer.com/2008/schumer-avoiding-self-destructive-end-clinton-vs-obama
unquote
Schumer on Avoiding a 'Self-Destructive' End to Clinton Vs. Obama
Schumer also suggested that the current system of awarding pledged delegates is flawed. "The delegate counts are so close, and you can win a state by quite a lot and you still don't win the delegates by quite a lot,” he said. "Maybe that's a flawed system. But that will be for the next election, not this one.

"I think if you win a district 55 to 45," he said. "The delegates shouldn't be three to three. Yes, I think proportional representation makes some sense but they sort of overdid it.
unquote

Senator Clinton can will all of the remaining states by 55% and would not gain much in delegates. She would have to win roughly 50-70 congressional districts by a margin of 65% or more to be able to get 4-2 splits.

Don't listen to me listen to Sen Schumer
quote
But he also said he doubted that one candidate would stay on long after it became clear he or she could not win the nomination.
unquote

Continue to run all the way to Puerto Rico and then start floor fights in Denver, go to the rules committe and the credential committees. Fight, burn and destroy. It simply is not going to change the way delegates are elected in congressional districts.

[galloglas]

31. "I love this job!!" ???????

What job??

Playing The Ancient Mariner on the blazing deck of the HMS Hillary??

[Independent-Voter]

32. No problem. I've been enjoying watching her shrill ass get spanked by 25%.

[grantcart]

33. Not me don't think it helps the party

[UALRBSofL]

28. The fact you are counting super delegates

And knowing they are not obligated to any candidate thus the super delegates could change as far ahead as the convention in august. This is the issue with statistics when there are no absolutes concerning super delegates.

[grantcart]

30. Are we not counting all super delegates or just Obama's

By the way all delegates including pledged and super delegates have no legal obligation to vote for anyone once they get to the convention. Demcon Watch has a link to every SD that is allocated to a candidate showing an explicit public statement. At this time there is no real controversy on the basic numbers of which SD is supporting which candidate.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

[grantcart]

36. Sen Obama tied Sen Clinton today in elected SDs 94 each

[psychopomp]

38. kick

:kick: