The Clinton Challenge: come up with a plausible scenario where she wins the nomination

[jgraz]

Here's some delegate counters to help you out.

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/29/delegate.counter/index.html

Slate: http://www.slate.com/features/delegatecounter/



My prediction (2025 needed for nomination):

       Hillary   Obama
Current 1269     1378

OH        72       69
TX        82      111
RI        12        9
VT         5       10
WY         5        7
MS        12       21
PA        56      102
GU         2        2
IN        40       32
NC        41       74
WV        11       17
KY        27       24
OR        21       31
MT         7        9
SD         8        7
PR        21       34
SuperDs  158      205  

Totals  1848     2143 

[adoraz]

1. sorry, but as an Obama supporter...

PA 56 102 in Obama's favor???

[jgraz]

3. Yes, if the polls keep breaking the way they do once campaigning starts

I'm not gonna stake my life on it, though. ;)

What's your guess?

[Hawkeye-X]

2. There's no way in hell that Clinton wins the nomination after today.

Hell, she hasn't had a chance since Wisconsin, and yet people are still having hopes for her.

The only way she wins if she forces all of the SD's on her side, which will NOThappen. The party leaders and the SD's will begin the exodus from Clinton tonight after Obama wins the delegate count for today - even if he doesn't win either OH or TX. He'll win VT easily, and RI is now a tossup.

Hawkeye-X

[Window]

19. Exactly. Obama wins even if he loses OH, TX, RI and wins VT.

Hillary can spin it any way she wants, but those are the facts.

[thereismore]

4. Crickets... nt

[jgraz]

5. Give 'em some time

Those delegate counters are kind of a pain to get right.

[jgraz]

26. OK, NOW you can cue the cricket noise.

[AtomicKitten]

6. It isn't possible.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4880170&mesg_id=4880170

[jgraz]

8. I tend to agree, but I'm open to someone presenting a real scenario

SHE'S IN IT TO WIN just doesn't cut it any more. At this point, Clinton supporters really need to show us some numbers.

[XemaSab]

7. I don't think it's going to be that close in WY, MT, or SD

:shrug:

[jgraz]

10. You may be right. I don't pretend to be an expert on how those states will vote

I don't pretend to be an expert on any of this, but it's hard to see how the numbers work out for her.

[XemaSab]

16. I'm on dial up right now or I'd get the numbers for you

but I seem to recall that Idaho, Utah, Nebraska, and North Dakota were BLOWOUTS for Obama. He won Colorado pretty decisively too, but not as decisively (but I may be wrong about this; not about him winning, but about the spread.)

Lotta Libertarian-types in that part of the country, and little love lost for the Clintons.

[Shine]

9. Sorry, I hate math

:)

[jgraz]

11. Did you major in miracles?

:P

[HeraldSquare212]

12. That' what I'm hearing on TV and reading in papers and on the internet, too

Everyone is saying there's no way she can catch up. I think tomorrow is the beginning of the end.

[CK_John]

13. Obama could become the target of a grand jury. n/t

[scheming daemons]

15. Didn't stop Bubba from having 8 years in office, now did it?

...

[anigbrowl]

27. Or he could be abducted by aliens...

or get hit by a low-flying pig...

[jgraz]

31. Or freeze to death during a campaign stop in Hell

[catgirl]

14. She doesn't, thank goodness.

It's time for her to be dragged off the stage (kicking and screaming, of course).

[skipos]

17. I think the massive amounts of responses you are getting from Hillary supporters

should tell you all you need to know.

Hillary/Huckabee 08: we didn't major in math.

[jgraz]

18. I'm sincerely curious to see if anyone can make a case at this point

I just can't make the numbers come out for her, no matter how I fiddle with those sliders.

[skipos]

20. I am with ya,

If Obama was badly trailing in the pledged delegates, I certainly wouldn't advocate that he try to win the nomination via superdelegates. If Hillary ends today with only a 15 or so pd bump and chooses to stay it, it indicates to me that she is going to try to win some other way. It sure won't help us in November.

[Mother Of Four]

21. I clicked out of curiosity...

Even if she made 50 percent in every single remaining state, splitting the Supers evenly she would still only have 1946. Where in the same scenario, weighted in HRC's favor with the odd delegates, Obama would have 2045. And from what I see on the CNN page, they are counting all states.

[Mother Of Four]

23. Played with the second link...

Setting each slider at 58-57 percent down the line, she would have to win each state by about that much to catch up to Obama and break even.

[jgraz]

25. Yeah, but I said "plausible" ;)

No way she takes Mississippi or North Carolina. Or Wyoming. Or any of the western states, really.

[Mother Of Four]

28. Well...to use a favorite phrase of mine...

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Yes, its from a fiction novel BUT! (cue cheezy muzac here)

Using the most improbable, just this side from impossible...

HRC can't win, and that's the truth :)

[jgraz]

30. Hey, that's not original!!! You plagiarist!!!11111

I both reject and denounce you. :P

[Mother Of Four]

32. EEEEK! I've...uh....uhm....No really!

RUN AWAYYYY! :yoiks:

[surfin]

22. Agreed except PR

I heard they are big for her there as the Clinton's pardon the terrorist from there. I am not sure if it was Obama staff or the press that raised that issues. Has anyone heard what the polls in PR are now.

[jgraz]

24. I'm wondering if her race baiting will will hurt her down there.

But really, I have no clue how PR will end up voting.

[tritsofme]

29. Obama wins a plurality of pledged delegates, Clinton wins an outright majority of popular votes.

Equals Clinton having the strongest moral claim to the nomination, and that's the case she will plead to SDs.

First she needs to take the lead in the popular vote, and will probably include FL in those calculations.

She doesn't need to overtake Obama in pledged delegates.

[jgraz]

33. How does she even keep Obama from winning a majority of pledged delegates?

In what scenario is he not over 50% of the pledged delegates?

[tritsofme]

34. Could have been worded better.

She doesn't need to overtake Obama in pledged delegates as neither candidate will have an absolute majority of total delegates.

She needs to cut the lead down and win the popular vote; then plead her case to SDs.

That's her path to the nomination.

[jgraz]

36. That's the part I'm missing. How could Obama possibly need Edward's 23 delegates to top 50%?

I just can't make that work out. Maybe I'm missing something.

[tritsofme]

38. Its mathematically impossible for either candidate to win the nomination without SDs.

Obama may very well win a majority of pledged delegates, but if Hillary keeps it close and wins the popular vote, she has a compelling argument to make to SDs that she has the strongest moral claim to the nomination.

[jgraz]

39. Wow, that would just be terrible

No offense, but having the superdelegates decide this would tear the Democrats apart. It will make Chicago 68 look like a freaking tea party.

[tritsofme]

40. SDs have to decide one way or the other.

Obama would have to win something like 85% of the remaining pledged to win the nomination outright.

If there is a split between pledged delegates and the popular vote, both candidates have compelling arguments for why they should be the nominee.

I think the winner of the popular vote has the strongest moral claim.

[jgraz]

44. It would have to be a spectacular collapse on Obama's part

He's led the delegate count every day since the race started. Cherry picking stats, even a supposed popular vote lead, would really give Hillary legitimacy problems with the rank-and-file dems.

[tritsofme]

47. Not really. These articles explain the scenario:;

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/is_it_over_1.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/03/clintons_moral_claim.html

A lead in popular votes is hardly cherry picking.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

35. There are some uncommitted delegates elected in these contests (and Edwards has 23)

It is very, very likely that someone wins a majority of pledged delegates, but it's not a mathematical certainty.

[jgraz]

37. It's not a mathematical certainty that Obama will beat Hillary in pledged delegates

But, within the realm of plausibility, he'll likely get a majority of the pledged delegates.

[Spider Jerusalem]

41. Actually, that bit about 'popular vote'...

totally DISCOUNTS the states whose delegates are selected via caucus. So no, she doesn't have a moral claim to the nomination in that scenario; you don't get to just ignore all those states because you're losing.

[tritsofme]

42. We can count up caucus goers in most of those states as well.

nt

[Spider Jerusalem]

45. No you can't

because they don't contribute as much to the 'popular vote' total as a primary would. I'm sorry you don't like the system, but it's the one we have.

[tritsofme]

46. Well that's just some tough luck there.

They are not as representative as a primary either.

Since neither candidate will secure a majority of delegates from the primaries, there are many ways to measure voter intent, pledged delegates being one, popular votes being another.

This is completely working within the system.

[Spider Jerusalem]

49. No, it isn't

Sorry, you're wrong; whoever has the lead in delegates regardless of nonsensical considerations like 'popular vote' (which, again, ignores caucus states with lower total votes cast), is going to be the nominee; it may be tough luck, but it's tough luck for Hillary, not Obama.

[tritsofme]

50. The fact that there are fewer votes casted will be part of Hillary's argument

for the supremacy of the popular vote over pledged delegates.

Caucuses get the same weight as primaries in delegates, but are hardly as representative.

In a contest where neither candidate can win without SDs, the popular vote will certainly play a major factor.

[jgraz]

51. Thanks. This makes me feel a lot better about Obama's chances

There's simply no way anyone will buy this argument.

[tritsofme]

52. The argument that actual bodies are worth more than arcane rules?

And caucuses that are strange and foreign to most voters?

I think that if, and this is still a big if, Hillary can say that more people have gone out and voted for her, she will have the strongest claim.

People like the popular vote, not arcane, strange, and confusing rules that allocate delegates.

[jgraz]

53. More accurately, that Hillary can only win by changing the rules

Nobody's going to stand for that.

[tritsofme]

54. What rules would be changed?

There is no rule that says SDs must vote for the pledged delegate leader.

Many factors, such as popular vote totals, can weigh into their decision.

[jgraz]

55. But, you forget the desire to get the nominee and start fighting McCain

I can't believe ANY Democrat is going to want to see a protracted fight if Obama stays close tonight.

[jgraz]

43. Damn. Excellent point.

:thumbsup:

[flvegan]

48. Obama gets bitten by a zombie, see. Then, CNN catches him

on a mass killing spree of orphans. Then, with the blood of innocent children still running down his chin, he's seen tossing puppies into a woodchipper.

And even then, it'll be close.