Obama Needs Superdelegate A Day Under Current DNC Rules

Last night, Barack Obama clinched a majority of pledged delegates excluding Florida and Michigan, as well as under certain Florida/Michigan scenarios. But, in spite of a big win in Oregon and a well-executed speech in Iowa, the milestone did not quite produce the sense of euphoria and closure that his campaign might have been after. The circumstances of the day -- Hillary Clinton's overwhelming margin of victory in Kentucky, the late hour at which Oregon ballot boxes closed, the subdued tone of the evening necessitated by Senator Kennedy's diagnosis, and some relatively effective pushback from the Clinton campaign on the pledged delegate metric -- conspired to prevent that.

Obama might have another opportunity to declare victory on June 3rd, when South Dakota and Montana conclude the primary calendar. The conditions for doing so are otherwise pretty favorable. He is likely to achieve victory in one or both of these states (his worst case scenario is probably losing one of them -- more likely South Dakota -- by a small margin). And while Obama could conceivably hold a victory rally anywhere, there is a sound argument for doing so in Montana, a potentially competitive state that symbolizes the Democrats' 50-state strategy (think Brian Schweitzer and Jon Tester) and their hopes to expand the electoral map in November. But will the math be there to make Montana the state that puts Obama over the top?

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[kellygrrrl]

The "Popular Vote" math myth is straight-up offensive and is causing more damage to the Party than a swiftboat load full of Pastors and Flag Pinz

[spaceman3838]

face it people by the end of the primaries she will have more votes for her then obama has even without florida or michigan counting. anyway you slice it she will have more votes. so you people are like the bush people of 2000 bitterly clinging to the fact that the rules say its delegates and not votes. falsely proclaiming a mandate when you didnt even with the most votes in the election. truely pathetic

[TKI]

A super delegate a day keeps Clinton away?

[Sparklez]

Gallup Daily: Obama 53%, Clinton 42%

[sanywhere]

well, at least that is good news. i just want everyone to finally come together and back the obvious candidate. we need to come together to defeat mccain. i think he is stronger than i originally thought.

[sanywhere]

there is something strange today. no supers for obama. any one know what is going on that could explain this?

[kellygrrrl]

cowards are under bed until June 4

[olivia]

A significant number of her rabid supporters are Republican plants.

Rush Limbaugh is bragging on his website that he is coaching her.

[sanywhere]

don't fool for rush's crap. he is doing nothing. he is all hot air

[FirstShirt]

What you call a "plant" others call a crossover voter. Obama eagerly invites republicans to vote for him so whats the problem?

[kellygrrrl]

O'Reilly + Rush = Oral-Thrush

nasty!

[pupbayer]

Since he has so much money, he can just continue to buy them!

"Obama's political action committee has doled out more than $694,000 to superdelegates since 2005, the study found, and of the 81 who had announced their support for Obama, 34 had received donations totaling $228,000." (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/superdelegates.html)

This is from Feb. 14, 2008 so I'm sure it is a MUCH higher figure by now.

[djelimon]

So I read your article, and I can't help notice Clinton does this as well. This leads me to believe that it's normal for Dems to make campaign contributions in house. So Obama's crime is having more money.

[pupbayer]

"Clinton's political action committee has distributed about $195,000 to superdelegates, and only 13 of the 109 who had announced for her have received money, totaling about $95,000."

Many on this site have accused her of buying delegates. And she has...13...the others had received no money from her. BUT so has he.

11.9% of her pledged delegates received money compared to 41.9% of his. I just found this interesting and thought you would, too.

[pupbayer]

And from ABC:

"And quantities may count.

'In cases where superdelegates had received contributions from both Clinton and Obama, all seven elected officials who received more money from Clinton have committed to her," the report states. "Thirty-four of the 43 superdelegates who received more money from Obama, or 79 percent, are backing him.'"

[pupbayer]

The more I research this the more I feel like, "yeah, his crime is paying more and buying more delegates." Obviously, it is not a crime and all candidates do it.

But it just says that one candidate is buying the election because his campaign has more money. Just doesn't seem democratic to me but I guess that is the American way, isn't it? Money talks and money buys power and position. I think it is just a sad commentary.

[djelimon]

I also can't help notice that 2005 was well before he declared his candidacy

[pupbayer]

So he plans ahead.

[Sparklez]

Clinton does too....And?

[kellygrrrl]

Clinton is spending her own money
and asking hard-working Americans to pay her back.

Obama is spending the money that hard-working Americans gave him.

see the dif.?

[theMightyT]

Here's a great rebuttal to the "popular vote" myth that seems to be gaining steam... written by John Alter of Newsweek. A clear look at the numbers, without spin...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/138109/page/1

[kellygrrrl]

great article! thanks T

[zbearlady]

PART 2:
In addition: By insisting on staying in the race when there's no possible math metric that even Hillary can fabricate or rationalize, and even when pressured (by superdelegates, etc) not to smear Obama with any further lies and/or dirty tactics, she's still doing damage everytime she drums into the minds of her supporters the myth that she's the better candidate to win against the Republicans in November.

While Obama proves again & again that he has gathered great enthusiasm & support among the middle-class 'white' vote, how many times has Hillary hypnotically repeated the thoroughly unsubstantiated statement that she's the only one capable of winning those 'hard-working-white-American votes against McCain -even though the popular vote, the pledged delegates, the swarm of superdelegates & even the polls completely defy the reasoning of that argument?

Hillary, whatever your personal, ego-motivated, self-serving agenda may be -to drag this race out 'into oblivion'...don't you have the integrity...or even a shred of moral decency left to see that you are now in a position where you are actually doing far more damage than good? If you truly do care about the good of the people -as well as the Democratic party- then surely you can see that continuing this race will only create more divisiveness & unwarranted prejudice against Barack Obama -in turn, giving McCain more momentum in November.

If there is any sincerity regarding your true support of the Democratic party, then please bow out gracefully -now!

[zbearlady]

PART 1:

Hillary says that by staying in the race, she is not dividing the Democratic party, nor diverting votes to McCain? She also adamantly states she'll campaign & fight hard for the Democratic nominee, so as to assure a victory over the Republicans in the fall?

Yet, everytime she gives voice to allowing the Michigan & Florida votes, she not-so-subtly implies that Obama is the one standing in the way of these voter's rights. While playing into the paranoia of 'unfairness' & 'undemocratic vote-counting', she's creating division & outrage in their minds -implying that she's the only one championing for them -not Obama- as she chips away & sours their opinions about his character & integrity. Subsequently, come the general election -when she is long gone- the fall-out from such underhanded insinuations may well result in Obama being seen as the man who supposedly stood in the way of the voter's rights to be heard.

As most of us already know, this mess was not Obama's doing. Those states broke the primary rules, the voters knew their votes wouldn't be counted, the candidates ceased their campaigning (Obama wasn't even on Mich. ballot) & Hillary agreed to it all! Yet now that she has all but lost the race & is desperate to 'steal' votes wherever she can, she's conveniently spinning it all as if this whole mess is somehow Obama's fault?

How is that not being divisive? How does that not have a long-term negative impact on the Democraticnominee?

[Stagehnd1]

She probably paid them....

[conniedogs]

She did???????

[Vantunow]

Tomorrow Arkansas Add-on will be added. Hillary has so far every single AK Super that has comitted. She is getting benefit of hometown girl in 3 States - NY, AK, and PA. On top of that NJ must think they are part of NY because they are acting like it.

[ggmome]

Chicken SD's are holding out for the Million offered by the Shrill and Bill.

Think about this....why are 'they' fighting so hard to get back in the White House and for the Presidency? What is it that they are looking to accomplish by being there, It couldn't be the Salary, so there is a modus operandi that they have that should be evaluated. They have done ever dirty trick, ever demeaning act and every unscrupulous deed to get back. Did they leave something there? Do we 'owe' them anything?

[Gemma08]

How much did Clinton offer her?