Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Obama's magic number: 75 superdelegates
I've posted previously about the superdelegate math. Respected TPM blogger Flyonthewall has also discussed the delegate math, including an explanation of those strange UADs.
I was fiddling on the Slate delegate counter (yes I know it's not perfect) and put in some educated guesses on the results and delegate counts for the remaining contests.
I gave Hillary significant victories in PA (+8), KY (+8), WV (+12), and PR (+10).
I gave Obama significant victories in NC (+12), OR (+8), SD (+15), MT (+15).
I also counted IN and Guam as virtual ties. I did not include FL and MI. The result, according to Slate's delegate counter, would leave Obama with 1694 pledged delegates and Clinton with 1540.
Looking at the unbiased and well researched http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/, we find that the current numbers on superdelegates are:
Obama: 211
Clinton: 246
Also, let's go back to the UADs (also known as add on delegates) discussed in the Fly post linked above. These 76 UADs are usually lumped in as undecided superdelegates but that's not actually the case. If you read that post you'll see that these 76 UADs are very likely to benefit Obama (in short, because he has won so many more states). Fly's numbers predict that Obama will end up with an advantage in the range of 45 - 31.
Adding those numbers to the current superdelegate numbers we get Obama 256, Clinton 277. We can then add those numbers to the pledged delegate count and the above projections of the results in the remaining states.
And if we do all that:
-Obama needs 75 superdelegates to clinch the nomination. [2025 - (256+1694) = 75]
-Clinton needs 208 superdelegates to clinch the nomination. [2025 - (277+1540) = 208]
Obviously, this is whole exercise is an estimate, but does give a clear picture of the odds facing each candidate with respect to the superdelegate numbers and the nomination.
If you enjoyed this post, please share with other readers by clicking on the 'recommend this' link.
Comments (54)
minor points:
1. obama lost Rep Wynn
2. 2024 is the current target
3. 2 of the delegates counted by demcon are UADs
so magic number at 77
March 27, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
damn math...yep, you're correct. But if Obama loses Wynn, doesn't he pick up Donna Edwards at the same time (assuming she is elected before the convention)?
I almost added one line at the end saying this: I'm sure that we could all argue at some of these estimates or pick away at some of the numbers from Slate, demconwatch, or FLY, but the overall picture really is still pretty clear: Obama needs to get roughly 75 supers while Clinton needs roughly 200.
March 27, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a very tall order for Clinton considering that there are only a little over 250 unpledged supers left.
March 28, 2008 1:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
What happened to Wynn?
He's in MD and they went overwhelmingly for Obama.
March 27, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
he lost his primary and is going to take his vote home with him before the convention.
March 27, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't work that way. Either he votes at the convention or Donna Edwards does. Obama may have lost a SD that was declaring support for him, but I am fairly certain the overall number of delegates are not changed because of the primary election results.
March 27, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a little more complicated than that. Edwards won the primary - she hasn't yet been elected to the seat. Wynn steps down in June. So it's up to the governor to decide when (or if) to hold a special election to fill the seat. If it happens before the convention, Edwards can be sworn in to replace Wynn, and she'll become a super. If it happens, for example, concurrently with the general election in the fall, then the seat will be vacant during the convention.
March 28, 2008 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do we know for sure that Wynn won't be at the convention? Isn't it up to the credentials committee to decide whether or not he's a SD?
March 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I'm not mistaken, all members of Congress and Governors are de facto superdelegates.
March 28, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Suppose Hillary includes Florida and Michigan. What would the numbers look like?
March 27, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are simply so many scenarios for FL and MI and that's why they aren't included here. In addition, most people have declared the re-vote efforts dead.
Go to http://demconwatch.blogspot.com for all the various scenarios with FL and MI. I don't consider the seating the MI and FL delegates (based on their already held primaries) as a remotely plausible scenario though.
I think if just the supers were counted from MI and FL (a possibility) then Clinton would gain 10 and Obama 5.
March 27, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
FL and MI are net 66 delegates, that puts Obama 90 ahead on pledged delegates, 100 ahead with the add-ons.
It is not worth bothering doing the math without FL and MI, because Obama wins with them.
It is very clear that if Obama comes out ahead by 75 elected delegates or more including FL and MI he has won it fair and square.
It is also clear that the Hillary camp won't accept any delegate math that does not include FL and MI as pre-empting the process.
This is important as the vote that matters is going to be the one held by Reid shortly after June 3rd to determine the superdelegate positions and shut the whole process down there and then to go after McCain.
Thats not going to be final final if Obama only comes out 65 votes ahead of Hillary. Then its going to go down to the convention and get really really ugly.
March 27, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
urbinato, you truly deserve your Yoda avatar.
Recommended.
March 27, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now I have something for my tombstone!
"He truly deserved his Yoda avatar"
March 27, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe you mean "His Yoda avatar truly he deserved."
March 28, 2008 12:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Man, you'd better hope you don't end up deserving your avatar. ;)
March 28, 2008 1:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
But unfortunately none of your scenarios factor in the impact of Limbaugh's Operation Chaos and the huge numbers of Republicans he's managed to get to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary.
March 27, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't matter. Obama will lose PA and he will win NC anyway. Clinton needs a clean sweep to make the case to the SDs and that ain't going to happen.
March 27, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny that despite how well you make this case that people are still unwilling to believe it.
March 28, 2008 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great post!
If these supers are smart, they will start migrating over in the next few weeks.
The tighter the noose gets, the more the media, donors and voters will start to jump ship and the sooner we wrap this up!
March 27, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the Republicans in Pa. who were registering as Dems. were voting for Obama.
March 27, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Limbaugh's Operation Chaos and the huge numbers of Republicans he's managed to get to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary."
All Limbaugh's done is minimize Obama's advantage with Republicans. Obama still usually wins Republicans. Limbaugh is not significant.
March 27, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The polls I've seen don't give Obama quite as big an advantage as you suggest. My projections are:
Obama - 1679
Clinton - 1556
So,I see him needing about 90 more super delegates rather than 75. But otherwise I agree with your conclusion. The math is daunting.
But the fly in the ointment is Florida & Michigan. Although they don't count officially, they have to be part of the conversation. It the results there were factored in, she would come away with about 50 more delgates net, reducing his lead in pledged delegates to 73 (by my count). That's still a big deficit, but if she can boost her margin of victory in some states & win some that she is not supposed to, she may be able to turn that around. (Just to note for the record: I gave him all of the uncommitteds in MI but not the Kucinich delegates.)
The point is that if she can get to within 50 of him in pledged delegates, she can legitimately make the case that it is essentially a tie because of the debacle in Florida & Michigan. At that point, she may be able to sway enough supers her way. It's a long shot, but not out of the realm of possibility.
One other note is that in addition to the super delegates, there are the Edwards delegates out there as well to be wooed by both camps. With him eschewing an endorsement, there's really no way of knowing in which direction they'll go. But with every delegate having significance, they remain important.
March 28, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
These are my educated guesses of where the polls will be, but that's certainly the fuzziest thing in all this.
I can say confidently that FL and MI are not possibly going to be seated as they are. The logistics of a revote now are near impossible too. That's the only way she gets within 50.
I don't think she can legitimately claim a tie if she's behind by 50 delegates, but she can sure try. Here's the thing: if superdelegates were going to come to her rescue, they would have done it already. Those are the folks who endorse early though. The people left are mostly people who for one reason or another just want to get behind the voters choice. In all the ways you measure voters intent, Obama will be the leader.
As many people have noted, it would take a collapse of epic proportions for Obama to lose the nomination now. And truthfully, Hillary could also suspend her campaign and yet still be the nominee. Her chances would be about the same.
How would that look: Let's say Obama is indicted in July for tapping his foot in a airport men's room and his campaign implodes. Hillary could become the nominee by delegates switching to her in droves. But what are the chances of that?
March 28, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
March 28, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it will be interesting to see whether a decisive win in NC brings out an Edwards endorsement for Obama.
March 28, 2008 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hadn't thought about that but I still think it's unlikely he'll endorse. He gains nothing out of it and neither do Hillary or Obama. On the Other hand 2 candidates have already endorsed Obama without gaining much. Thought I think if edwards was going to endorse a winner he would have done it or at least hinted at it by now.
March 28, 2008 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really can't speak to the likelihood per se, but I don't think it's really correct to say that neither would have anything to gain. If the superdelegates are going to come out publicly to bring this to an end then it is likely that they will do it after the next strong Obama showing which will almost certainly be NC. Not only is Edwards from NC, but this gives him a great excuse to endorse Obama AND he also has something that no other remaining superdelegate has: pledged delegates of his own. In that sense, he's the most super of superdelegates at the moment. Imagine Edwards, Gore and, say, Carter all coming out for Obama after a decisive showing in NC. To say that Obama doesn't stand to benefit from this strikes me as a bit short-sighted.
For all of the same reasons I think it's very unlikely we'll see him endorse for Clinton if he hasn't already done so. Not to mention that his populist message was very critical of her stance on Washington politics and I don't think he wants to burn up whatever political capital he still has by making such a move. Not at this point in the game at least.
March 28, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, as far as Edwards gain, I agree with some who have said that we might see him as an AG. So, assuming that Obama will be the winner, he has a lot to gain by joining his team at a decisive moment in the campaign.
March 28, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clarification for Vissicitudes. Al Wynn resigned his seat and lost his SD status. Donna Edwards won't pick up that status until she's sworn in.
From DemConWatch, the current number of SDs is at 793:
* In December, 2007, there were 797 superdelegates
* December 11, 2007: Steve Beshear is sworn in as Governor of Kentucky. Up 1 to 798.
* December 15, 2007: Rep. Julia Carson died. Her seat will be filled by Special Election on Tuesday, March 11. Down 1 to 797 superdelegates.
* January 15, 2008: Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco leaves office. Down 1 to 796.
* February 11, 2008: Rep. Tom Lantos died. His seat will be filled by Special Election on April 8. Down 1 to 795 superdelegates.
* February 28, 2008: Former DNC Chairman Ken Curtis's legal residence changed from Maine to Florida, and therefore he lost his superdelegate voting status. Down 1 to 794 superdelegates.
* March 8, 2008: Bill Foster wins the Special Election for Denny Hastert's old seat. Up 1 to 795 superdelegates.
* March 11, 2008: Andre Carson wins the Special Election in his grandmother's old seat. Up 1 to 796 superdelegates.
* March 12, 2008: NY Governor Eliot Spitzer resigns. Down 1 to 795. Note that the DNC has now confirmed that David Paterson is not resigning his DNC seat.
* March 17, 2008: The DNC vacancy from the National Conference of Democratic Mayors has been filled by Mayor Brenda Lawrence of Southfield, Michigan. Michigan has no delegates at this time. Down 1 to 794.
* March 27, 2008: Maryland Congressman Al Wynn announced his resignation bringing the total number of superdelegate votes down to 793. Overall number of delegates is 4,046, and it takes 2,023.5 to win.
March 28, 2008 1:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are clearly a lot of these guys ready to pull the trigger when they feel the time is right. Tom Brokaw's group of 50 story had to have had some basis in truth. Obama clearly has Pelosi and whoever she brings with her. He also has Brazille. There are also several anonymous supers who have stated they will support the pledged delegates, including now Cantwell who is a Clinton super. You might also think that Richardson's former supers would start to migrate. The list goes on of people that you would just have to believe are going to support him (Webb, Biden, Gore). Dana Milbank seems to think a few might go over pretty soon in response to the DCCC/Pelosi blackmail letter.
I also seem to recall that FOTW indicated that few dozen would simply make the lead too great and also act as a tipping point. I know many feel it's in the party's best interests to let this thing play out in order to try and let it die a natural death, but you sure get the sense over the last few days that there could be some more supers moving in response to the latest Clinton antics.
Thanks for the analysis.
March 28, 2008 1:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this post is headed in the right direction. This thing does need to play out a little, because there's no way that the voters will understand that it's over at the moment. It might be best for it to go at least through May 6th.
But on the other hand, it's interesting to ask what would happen if BO took the superdelegate lead at some point between now and May. I realize that in mathematical reality it makes no difference, because the superdelegates can change their votes until August, and then keep changing them. But I've heard a few people (Stephanpoulos, actually) suggest that the race will be over as soon the Clinton superdelegate lead disappears. I assume the idea is that, narratively, it just makes HRC's endgame scenario look too implausible.
My guess is that the Obama campaign won't press hard to make that happen before May 7th, and I don't think it's very likely to happen before then, either. But it could well happen in May.
March 28, 2008 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great post but you are greatly overestimating Clinton's support in PR. From everything I've read it's going to be more like Hawaii. Maybe not that kind of a blowout but I could see Obama taking it by at least 10%. Unless someone can point to some information other than "it has latinos", which is silly, I'm pretty sure Obama has it wraped up in PR.
March 28, 2008 2:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I actually agree with you but there have been no polls that I've seen and HC suporters and several media accounts say that PR will will a win for HC. So I gave her the benefit of the doubt here as much as I could since I wear Obama tinted glasses.
I think the belief is more that there is a strong NY connection in PR and that gives her a natural base there. But I have the same conern that people are thinking of PR latinos as the same as AZ latinos and that doesn't make sense.
If any TPM readers have polling or insight on PR race, please share.
March 28, 2008 7:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama spreadsheet has him losing PR by 9 - and that's when it was a caucus. They clearly don't see themselves winning there. The spreadsheet has been wrong on margins but has missed calling only ME, which they had given to Clinton. FWIW, they have themselves losing PA by only 5 which seems pretty optimisitic.
March 28, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about I will give you this:
Hillary will win PA (+16), KY (+12), WV (+16), IN (+10), GUAM (+12) and PR (+15)
Obama will win OR (+5), SD (+15), MT (+15)
NC is a toss up because the white voters will vote overwhelmingly for Hillary. Let us say half of the delegates from FL and MI will be seated and give Hillary 30 more delegates. Then the superdelegates will look at the situation from within the poll on how Obama lost to these moderate states. If he loses big among the white voters, then the superdelegates will then give the nomination to Hillary. Superdelegates will also look at the poll that about 28% of Hillary's supporters will vote McCain if she is not the nominee while only 19% will vote McCain. How about that?
March 28, 2008 4:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a resident of NC and it simply can't be called a toss up in the primary. I know that some polls last week had the race close but those were based on traditional turnout models. That just ain't going to happen. Hillary's best case scenario will be to stay within 8 points.
The delegate math in NC favors Obama as well. 77 of the delegates awarded are given out by Congressional district. The districts with the most delegates favor Obama because of demographics.
March 28, 2008 7:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow insightful. Had to double take this with the flip side argument at MyDD, (I lurk to understand). Yours is objective and detailed. Jerome's insight is lacking mention of UADs and reality based options to MI. Not surprisingly, no one there seems to care, actually they seem energized that one could write an argument that looked like it held water. But his post seems to start with the premise "she has a real window to get with 50 delegates" and then create the argument as best he can, versus a more independent view of math.
Have you noticed the new spin btw? "Incredibly close" in pledged, "within a hair of each other before its over" Winning? Cmon, whats 50-100 delegates among friends?
March 28, 2008 5:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Trivia:
Governor O'Malley gets to decide whether to conduct a special election to replace Wynn. The Governor is a Clinton Super.
PR Governor Acevedo is an Obama Super. If he is forced to resign (he's fighting back hard right now) he will be replaced by the PR Secretary of State, who apparently is not a Super now.
March 28, 2008 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love your predictions. However, I think you're underestimating HIllary in PA and KY.
Being conservative (did I say that out loud?) I think he needs at least 90 superdelegates.
But Bob Casey's endorsement today in PA should help close the gap some. And it's early enough to make a difference. Caroline and Ted Kennedy would have made a difference in California, except for the early voting. Late deciders broke for Obama.
Hillary now has a model for dumping something damaging the weekend before an election. So we'll see what nefarious plot she has this time.
She's decided to be "nice" again. However she seems incapable of holding on to that for very long. But those unfavorable ratings had to scare the hell out of her.
March 28, 2008 8:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Voters who made up their mind on the day of the election in California voted for Sen. Clinton 51-43 (according to MSNBC and CNN).
I know these are exit polls and need to be taken with a grain of salt, but I argue that you can no more make the point that "late deciders broke for Obama" than you can that they broke for Clinton.
March 28, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's another way of looking at superdelegates needed:
20.
Movement from 20 supers before PA especially but certainly right after would be a strong signal.
March 28, 2008 9:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it will be close in Indiana. They are right next door to us here in IL, with a lot of connections - businesses, urban areas, universities. Obama's got a great ground game. With IN proximity to Chicago, his organization can flood the state with volunteers (if he hasn't already). Personally I think he'll win by a large margin in IN.
March 28, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice, but I do disagree with one thing, Hillary can't "clinch" the nomination via superdelegates, because the voters won't stand for it, and it would tear the party in two (and to be fair, Obama can't steal this thing via superdelegates either, although he wouldn't and he doesn't have to).
What is lost in all this talk about superdelegates is the fact that each superdelegate equals about 10,000+ votes. So every superdelegate that Hillary tries to use to overrule the will of the voters essentially stuffs 10,000+ votes into the ballot for her, or if you look at it another way, it cancels out the votes of 10,000+ people. That is the cold ugly reality of what she is trying to do, and her newest tactic of wanting to switch pledged delegates is even more disgusting. You can read my total analysis the super and pledge delegates here:
http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/03/is-hillary-dictator-at-heart.html
and
http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/03/hillarys-only-path-to-nomination.html
And please remember what it means every time she uses these euphemisms of "super delegates" and "pledged delegates should exercise independent judgment", because she is really talking about hijacking Democracy, at the same time she is whining about having every voter count in Florida and Michigan. She is as two-faced and hypocritical as they come.
March 28, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you Lux, but those are the rules.
If Obama supporters are going to argue that FL and MI shouldn't count (at no fault of Obama, for sure!), then we can't argue against Supers right to decide independently.
In fact, I argue the opposite: The Supers should step in and decide this NOW, rather than waiting until June 3rd, but I recognize that won't happen, and it's going to be a long 3 months.
March 28, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's the current totals of Superdelegates endorsements since Feb 5?
Last I checked, it was something like 20 to Obama and 5 to Hillary.
March 28, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
SCMadden, demconwatch
(http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/02/superdelegate-history-tracker.html)
has a weekly history of delegates gained and lost. Unfortunately, its last update was 3/23 and it won't be updated again until 3/30. Since February 3 (the update nearest February 5), Clinton has gained 48 net endorsed superdelegates and Obama has gained 105, for a net increase of 57 for Obama.
March 28, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I prefer to wait and do my counting after all our Easter Eggs have hatched. Let the voters in the remaining states have their say. Let Senator Obama introduce himself to them now, instead of during the General Election. He is adding new voters in each State where he has to compete. That is a long term dividend for the party. Let it play out. We will get things settled once the primaries are over, and we will unite behind our nominee. Take a deep breath everyone.
March 28, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
liam, the Huckabee-McCain model is fine. But Huckabee did not attack McCain, he just promoted himself. If Clinton would act that way, I'm sure no one would be asking for an end soon.
March 28, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well she is Hillary just being Hillary. I do not expect her or Bill to change their spots. I think we should just let her destroy her chance all on her own, and we should focus on electing the next Democratic President.
I like to poke fun at Hillary but I do not take her to be a serious candidate. She and Bill are actually turning the voters off all on their own.
March 28, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Urbinato is mathofascist. Ignore him. I counter with my own math:
I gave Hillary modest victories in PA (+28), KY (+18), WV (+82), PR (+105).
I gave Obama significant losses in NC (-12), OR (-40), SD (-99), MT (-infinity).
I counted FL and MI because their going to get counted. I could give a crap about IN and Guam. Slate's delegate counter is biased against Clinton, so I made my own, which clearly shows Clinton with 4523 delegates and Obama with -8232.
How's them apples Urbinkoolaiddrinker? Your candidate is toast. He should withdraw and spare the Democratic party from having to put up with his shit any longer.
March 28, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I meant "they're" not "their"
March 28, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Edwards is not acutally a super. His would be an endorsement only. As pointed out however, it might change the pledged delegate count if he released them.
March 28, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary only wins PA by 8 and then turns around and looses NC by 12 and IN by 1+ even I will be surprised if she doesn't concede. If the scenario suggested plays out Barack will still be up over 160+ pledged delegates with only 217 left to win. Having set the bar in PA surprisingly high its going to be hard for her to justify continuing if she wins by less than 10 and I expect the frozen SDs would start to warm to Barack.
Still the polls still show Hillary leading by 12+ now and the PPP recently showed her winning by 26 points in PA. Hillary has managed to dodge every knockout blow so far. If she wins PA by 10+ she will have dodged another and then it's on to IN and NC where she needs to win in IN and keep NC within 10 to keep the dream alive.
March 28, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment