Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks during a town hall meeting in Plainfield, Ind., Saturday, March 15, 2008. (AP Photo/Tom Strattman)

Obama Expands Delegate Lead Over Clinton

MIKE GLOVER | March 15, 2008 11:53 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

DES MOINES, Iowa — Democrat Barack Obama expanded his fragile lead in delegates over rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday, picking up nine delegates as Iowa activists took the next step in picking delegates to the national convention.

More than half the 14 delegates allocated to John Edwards on the basis of caucus night projections switched Saturday to Obama.

Iowa Democratic Party officials said that with all of the delegates picked, Obama claimed 52 percent of the delegates elected at county conventions on Saturday, compared with 32 percent for Clinton. Some of the delegates picked at Saturday's conventions were sticking with Edwards, even though he's dropped from the race since Iowa held its caucuses in January.

Democratic Party projections said the results mean Obama increased by nine the number of delegates he collects from the state, getting a total of 25 compared with 14 for Clinton and six for Edwards.

Twelve automatic delegates bring the state's total to 57. Obama has been endorsed by four of those and Clinton three, with the remainder uncommitted.

Also Saturday, California's Democratic Party finalized the delegate counts from its Feb. 5 primary. Clinton picked up two more pledged delegates, raising her state total to 204; Obama gained five, raising his figure to 166.

Counting Saturday's new figures from Iowa and California, an Associated Press delegate tally showed Obama with 1,617 delegates and Clinton with 1,498.

Obama won Iowa's precinct caucuses in January with 39 percent of the vote, with Edwards narrowly edging Clinton to finish second. Projections on caucus night showed Obama getting 16 delegates, compared with 15 for Clinton and 14 for Edwards.

"It means the Obama people are very organized," said Iowa Democratic Chairman Scott Brennan. "They have been working very hard for these conventions."

Brennan said turnout was heavy, with more than 13,000 activists showing up at conventions in the state's 99 counties.

"Today, Iowa Democrats again turned out in large numbers to reject the failed Bush-McCain campaign and its policies," said Brennan.

Edwards finished second in the state's leadoff precinct caucuses on Jan. 3, but those caucuses are only the first step in a complicated process of picking the state's 45 pledged delegates to the Democratic National Convention in Denver in August.

The next step in that process was Saturday with selection of delegates to congressional district and state conventions. Party officials said the results Saturday marked the election of 2,173 of the 2,500 delegates who will go to those convention.

The epic presidential race between Clinton and Obama has been reshaped since Iowa's caucuses, but is no less intense with every delegate carrying weight.

"Every single one counts and that's why we've been here organizing," said Teresa Vilmain, a field organizer for Clinton.

"We've filled all of our slots," said Gordon Fischer, a former Iowa Democratic chairman who is organizing for Obama.

Rob Tully, a Des Moines lawyer and prominent Edwards backer, sent an e-mail to supporters urging them to remain neutral, but there was clear movement to Obama when the results were tallied.

"Barack Obama stands for a lot of the same things that John Edwards stood for," said Ro Foege, a state legislator from Mount Vernon who switched to the Obama camp.

The county conventions are traditionally sleepy gatherings where party leaders have trouble gathering a quorum to conduct business, largely because the party usually has a nominee by this point. With the race still up for grabs, activists jammed school gymnasiums, auditoriums and meeting halls across the state.

Former Gov. Tom Vilsack, a Clinton backer, spoke to more than 1,200 delegates jammed into a suburban high school gym.

"The reality is we are united on one thing today, we are Democrats, we are proud Democrats and we are going to elect a Democratic president," said Vilsack, who dropped his own bid for the nomination even before the voting began. "Let us pledge that we will unite behind our nominee _ be it he or she."


 
 

Comments
2123
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (11 pages total)

"¦Fragile lead..." I guess the laws of probability and arithmetic are also fragile.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:34 PM on 03/17/2008

The DNC has learned that Senator Obama is playing right into the hands of the Republicans in Pennsylvania. The Republican plan to cross party lines and vote for Senator Obama and then vote for Senator McCain in the general, the way they have in other open states which Senator Obama has won. This tactic is being abetted by Senator Obama supporters by initiating a program to flip the registrations of independent and Republican voters to Democrat so they can vote for him.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9020.html
Obama works to convert in Pennsylvania
By: Carrie Budoff Brown
March 14, 2008 06:23 AM EST

This tactic was started in the seventies. In 1972, Republican voters in Michigan decided to make a little mischief, crossing over to vote in the open Democratic primary and voting for segregationist Democrat George Wallace, seriously embarrassing the state's Democrats. In fact, a third of the voters (PDF) in the Democratic primary were Republican crossover votes. In 1988, Republican voters again crossed over, helping Jesse Jackson win the Democratic primary, helping rack up big margins for Jackson in Republican precincts. (Michigan Republicans can clearly be counted on to practice the worst of racial politics.) In 1998, Republicans helped Jack Kevorkian's lawyer -- quack Geoffrey Feiger -- win his Democratic primary, thus guaranteeing their hold on the governor's mansion that year.

This is the tactic used in Texas as evidenced by this E-mail sent to Republicans and Independents by those who wanted Senator Clinton out of the race.

http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/EmailAppeal.html?q=node/358

The idea is to lessen Senator Clinton's lead in Pennsylvania and decrease the number of delegates she wins by using Republican and Independent voters.

Sounds like old style politics to me. Any thing to win, even if it hurts your own Party in the general election. I didn't think Senator Obama would stoop so low.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:39 AM on 03/17/2008

You need to check out the Boston Globe story which I think is more accurate, and it does appear that actually Hillary is benefiting form the cross over, not Barack.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:32 PM on 03/17/2008

OH my God...a Republican who wants to see the best candidate win can't change his or her party affiliation to help that candidate out?!? For shame! Obama has been winning the Republican and independent vote since Iowa. There's no such thing as DemocratsforMcCain.com or Repuiblicanskforohillary.com. But there is a vibrant online community called Republicansforobama.com. Check it out. You'd know that Obama has quite a bit of bi-partisan support across the country. You'd know that if you did some research and started paying attention. Actually, the much bigger effort has been to register new Democrats in Pennsylvania and they've been pretty successful with that. I think at last count the Dems have registered something like 65,000 new people and the Repugnantcans have managed to sign up 3,500.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:21 AM on 03/17/2008

The website, "Republicansforobama.com" is where I got the E-mail instructing Republicans to vote for Obama to run Hillary out of the race in Texas and Ohio. So much for being "a vibrant online community".

MarlieBee: You said "You'd know that if you did some research and started paying attention." I am afraid I have been paying much more attention than you have. This website supports Senator Barack Obama solely because he could become the "First Black President" and not because he would be the best Democratic candidate. To me, this reeks of "Affirmative Action" or "Win at all cost". If you do look at the site below, be sure and notice the "Hit List" of Blacks who support Hillary Clinton and are considered traitors to the Black Race.

http://www.blacks4barack.org

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 PM on 03/18/2008

At least Barack can still consider having a V8. No sense in missing every boat.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:30 AM on 03/17/2008

I'll admit the only reason I think it would be fun to see Clinton win is to see how they would go after McCain. I don't expect Obama to be as much of an asshole towards him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 AM on 03/17/2008

it would be different, with clinton you have the "kitchen sink" mentality to get elected. with obama you have someone who actually wants to talk about the issues that affect us daily.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 AM on 03/17/2008

America is on the verge of financial ruin. Perdition. There's an issue which has some currency. Are you out of the Market?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 AM on 03/17/2008

ignore the question mark. i have not owned a stock since 1999. i will never buy a stock. i have invested in real estate all my life and will continue to do so.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:43 AM on 03/17/2008

havent owned a stock since 1999? the stock market is the biggest scam the big boys have going.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 AM on 03/17/2008

some mind boggling numbers regarding republicans crossing over in tx and ohio

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:53 AM on 03/17/2008

If the Democratic super-delegates have not figured it out then they are assholes and deserve to go down with Klinton in November.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 AM on 03/17/2008

the dems have proven time after time that they dont get it. here is an example.
i live in florida and two of our democratic representatives debbie wasserman schultz and kendrik meeks refuse to endorse 3 democratic newcomers who are running against 3 republican incumbents. why wont they endorse? because of their strong ties to the 3 republican incumbents. if i was a dem i would be fuming.
fyi all three republicans are strong supporters of bush as well as his iraq policy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 AM on 03/17/2008

Dems, Pubs opposite sides of a two-headed coin. That's the scam. Imagine the audacity of selling change.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 AM on 03/17/2008

Part of the reason why it's so easy to post on this thread is because the main subject is about Obama; advertisers love that. The more that's buzzed about Obama (in any fashion), the more ad revenues pour into media outlets and internet boards. In contrast, it's harder to post to any story about Clinton since too many negative comments about her may backfire (the advertisers may see declining revenues on the Obama side as well), so they have to make sure the Hillary negative comments are at a minimum, even if the number of visible comments don't reflect the true feeling of all us folks out there posting.

BTW, Clinton won't be the Dem nominee. The party leaders will humor her for awhile by letting her dragging out this nomination process; it's good for the advertisers on all the media outlets (especially the political commentary shows and blogs). Then when the advertising people have gotten their fill of revenues and clicks to their website, the Dem party leaders will pull the plug on Clinton.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:27 AM on 03/17/2008

vschicago:

The mainstream media pulled the plug on Clinton many months ago.... when they went on their full blown pro Obama ad campaign.. so frankly I don't know what on earth you are talking about. it makes no sense whatsoever. Then again... electing an unvetted candidate also makes no sense whatsoever.. but look at how many on these pages are ready to do just that. Blinders on.... all the way. Unreal. Irresponsible and very bad judgment if you ask me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:47 PM on 03/17/2008

If the plug on Clinton was pulled months ago, then the MSM would not have analysts on their shows talking about strategies that Clinton could use as a last ditch effort to win the nomination. If Obama was in her position, I doubt the analysts would try to throw strategies out there to help him. In fact, many of the analysts could have pointed to people like Hagee and Falwell as tools of strategy for the Obama campaign to counteract Wright's remarks (not that they needed counteraction in the first place), but the MSM analysts chose not to. How do you explain that?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 PM on 03/20/2008

Obama has enough delegates now that Hilllary just needs to admit defeat and shut up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:21 PM on 03/16/2008

I will never understand HuffPo posters who post comments that have nothing to do w/the article they comment on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 PM on 03/16/2008

Then wrap your mind around the concept that the other threads are 'broken' worse than this democracy we are fortunate to live in.
'Broken' as in won't post.
That's why it seems as bedlam here lately.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 PM on 03/16/2008

Right on!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 PM on 03/16/2008

Ironically, this is one of the few threads, if not the only thread, which can boast 'insta-post'. And the running commentary here has slowed considerably. Except for chatty folks like me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:55 PM on 03/16/2008

Here"s an excerpt from Dr. Jack Wheeler"s "How the Clintons Will Destroy John McCain" that might explain why Hillary is campaigning as if she were the Republican:

The number of fellow Senators who think John McCain is psychologically unstable is large. Some will admit it publicly, like Thad Cochran who says, "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine."

Others relate times when McCain screamed four-letter obscenities right in their faces in the Senate cloak room, like Dick Shelby, Rick Santorum, or Jim Inhofe. "The man is unhinged," one Senator told me. "He is frighteningly unfit to be Commander-in-Chief."

That John McCain is clinically nuts is scary enough. What worries a small group of GOP Senators and Congressmen even more is a deep and dark skeletal secret in McCain's glorified past to which they are privy, and which the Clintons will use to blackmail him.

They have been having discussions with a Russian whom we'll call "T" for Translator. T's father was the Soviet military intelligence officer who ran the "Hanoi Hilton" prison holding captured Americans during the Vietnam War. One of those prisoners was John McCain.

The GRU -- Glavnoje Razvedyvatel'noje Upravlenije or Main Intelligence Directorate of the Soviet (now Russian) Armed Forces - operated the entire North Vietnamese prison system holding American prisoners of war. GRU officers, all of whom were Russians, oversaw the interrogation of every American POW.

The interrogations themselves were conducted by Vietnamese who spoke some English. After each interrogation session, which could often include torturing the prisoners at the direction of the GRU officers, the Vietnamese interrogator would write a report of the session - in Vietnamese.

These reports had to be translated into Russian. T, a bright teenager living in the GRU compound in Hanoi, had become fluent in Vietnamese, and ended up translating many of the reports and interrogators' notes.

John McCain, flying his A-4 Skyhawk, was shot down over Hanoi on October 26, 1967. Badly injured from the ejection, he was beaten and abused by his captors. In July, 1968, his father, US Navy Admiral J. S. McCain, was made CINCPAC, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Command, commander of all US military forces in the Vietnam theatre. Upon learning this, the Vietnamese offered - according to McCain - to release him.

McCain claims he refused, because he demanded all American POWs captured before him be released as well. He thus remained a prisoner when he could have gone home, and was subjected to constant brutal beatings and torture for years: that is the source of the "war-hero" saga making McCain a greater war-hero than any other American POW.

Yet the offer of release would had to have been approved by the GRU overseers of the North Vietnamese - and T does not recall any such offer being made. T admits, however, that this took place before McCain was transferred to Hoa Loa prison, nicknamed the "Hanoi Hilton" by the POWs. T had only direct knowledge of what happened at Hoa Loa, and not the other prisons, where T's father was in charge.

McCain was kept at the Hanoi Hilton from December 1969 until his release, along with all the remaining POWs, in March of 1973. During this time, T translated all the Vietnamese interrogators' notes and reports regarding John McCain.

According to T, they reveal that McCain had made an "accommodation" with his captors, and in exchange, T's father saw that he was provided with an apartment in Hanoi and the services of two prostitutes. Upon returning to his prison cell, he would say he had been held in solitary confinement. That may be why so many of his fellow prisoners said later they saw so little of him at Hoa Loa.

The notes and reports written in Vietnamese were sent to Moscow, where T was a now a college student, for T's translation into Russian, then placed into GRU archives. That's where they stayed until 1991. Late that year, as the Soviet Union was collapsing, the CIA and the GRU made a deal for a document swap.

All of what it involved, T doesn't know. What T's father, by now retired but still with substantial contacts within the GRU, did learn (and thus T learned) was that the swap included all of T's translations.

In other words, the CIA has in its possession the notes and reports of John McCain's interrogators at the Hanoi Hilton, in both the original Vietnamese and translated Russian, showing collaboration with his Communist captors.

Allegations of this nature have been made over the years, many by Vietnam veterans. There is an even an organization, Vietnam Veterans Against McCain. But they are based on suspicions and circumstantial claims. There has never been any hard direct evidence.

What T says the CIA has is such evidence. Its release would destroy McCain. The threat of its release could force McCain to take a fall, blow the election and lose on purpose. And just who do you suppose would know what the CIA has and work with them to release it?

Someone who has been a CIA asset since he was recruited by London station chief Cord Meyer while a student at Oxford in 1968?

(Back in the 90s years after he retired, if Cord drank a little too much Scotch, he would laugh derisively at those conspiratorialists who accused Bill Clinton of being connected with the KGB.

"They all darkly point to Bill's participation in anti-war peace conferences in Stockholm and Oslo, and his trip to Leningrad, Moscow, and Prague while he was at Oxford. "Who could have paid for this?', they ask. "It had to be the KGB!' they claim." Cord would shake his head. "What rot - we paid for it. We recruited Bill the first week he was at Oxford. Bill's been an asset of The Three Bad Words ever since." Cord passed on in 2001.)

The small group of Senators and Congressmen who have been briefed by T have been unable to confirm with the CIA any details of its document swap with the GRU beyond an admission that such a swap "may have happened." They are very nervous about pursuing the matter any further.

The Clintons are not nervous. They are utterly ruthless, and have buddies at Langley all too happy to help them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:50 PM on 03/16/2008

ErinH:

The ruthless one is the one who preaches unity and peace while in reality delivers division and chaos aka Obama and his mentor Wright. Ditzing Hillary and Bill in your continued attempt to smear them - long enough to avoid looking at the REAL Obama.. is getting very very thin and highly suspect.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 PM on 03/17/2008

this has most likely been asked previously, but for the late-comers to this discussion, can somebody please explain how Obama's delegate lead, which is currently mathematically impossible for him to lose through the remaining primary process, can be termed "fragile?"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 PM on 03/16/2008

Looks like the article is written by a pro-Clinton writer. Calls Obama's victory "fragile", uses Clinton's terms, like "automatic(al mine) delegates", etc.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:40 AM on 03/17/2008

If the media calls it what it really is, insurmountable, the Hillary camp will be all over the place whining about how they're being treated unfairly.

They've got the jackasses in the MSM trained really well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:50 PM on 03/16/2008

Because Clinton says so?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 PM on 03/16/2008

Obama will do for this country what Tiger Woods has done for the game of golf. I have followed golf my entire life. Never has there been such a change in this "old traditional" sport than what has happened since Tiger Woods has come along to change what was racial, sexest about one of the finest sports we have. He did it with class. That what Obama is doing with this election. He is making a change with integrity, intelligence, and class.

Make no mistake they are both very smart about how they are going about making these changes.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/17858430/site/21683474/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:41 PM on 03/16/2008

Fox News, the NeoCons, The Clintons and others scramble about to smear Sen Obama

meanwhile

Barack Obama steadily, calmly just keeps racking up the Delegates.

Let them SPIN.

I think we can all see where this is going.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:42 PM on 03/16/2008

kellygrrrl:

No one needs to smear Obama... he's doing a good enough job of doing that all by himself.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:51 PM on 03/17/2008

Check Rasmussen website today for where it is going. Obama already having a downward shift in poll.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:48 PM on 03/16/2008

But isn't this to be expected? He is still in a primary race while McCain is not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 PM on 03/16/2008

it is to be expected after clinton endorsed mccain and said obama is not ready to be president. it was after hillary first started this that the polls dramatically switched in favor of mccain.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:57 AM on 03/17/2008

its kinda funny the article we are all posting on is obama furthering his delegate lead. i think there are less than a handful of posts addressing this fact.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:08 PM on 03/16/2008

"its kinda funny the article we are all posting on is obama furthering his delegate lead. i think there are less than a handful of posts addressing this fact." scandals&skeletons

Sadly, too true.