|
Title: If dems did winner takes all Post by: ukchris82 on February 16, 2008, 05:44:43 AM If dems did a winner takes all in the states that republicans do, what would the delegate totals be? Cheers Chris Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Gabu on February 16, 2008, 05:47:37 AM Obviously Clinton, due to California and New York.
Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Iosif is a COTHO on February 16, 2008, 07:01:49 AM Assuming the total pledged delegates is the same:
Obama: 1190 Clinton: 1075 That doesn't include MI and FL or the superdelegates. So Obama would have a bigger lead in that case. (But would be more susceptible to a fall in Ohio and Texas) Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Gabu on February 16, 2008, 07:13:30 AM Assuming the total pledged delegates is the same: Obama: 1190 Clinton: 1075 That doesn't include MI and FL or the superdelegates. So Obama would have a bigger lead in that case. (But would be more susceptible to a fall in Ohio and Texas) Eh? Where does Obama pick up all those delegates? I figured for sure Clinton would have a lead, what with her winning most of the big states. Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Iosif is a COTHO on February 16, 2008, 07:22:04 AM Quote Eh? Where does Obama pick up all those delegates? IA, SC, AL, AK, CO, CT, DE, GA, ID, IL, KS, MN, MO, ND, UT, LA, NE, WA, ME, DC, VI, MD, VA. :P Lots of small states tend to beat a few big states. Though as I said, were it WTA, Clinton would be in a better position now because of Ohio and Texas. Obama would have to win one of them. Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Gabu on February 16, 2008, 07:25:00 AM The original poster specified that this is only "winner takes all in the states that republicans do". In other words, if the Republicans don't have winner take all in a state, neither do the Democrats in this scenario.
Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Iosif is a COTHO on February 16, 2008, 08:08:08 AM Ah well, funnily enough TPM Election Central has done the same thing today and come up with slightly different numbers. Where did I give Obama the extra ones, I wonder ???
Edit: I got ahead of myself and gave him Hawaii and Wisconsin! Oops. Delegates Obama 1,096 Clinton 1,075 http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_would_have_benefitted.php#more (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_would_have_benefitted.php#more) Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Trilobyte on February 16, 2008, 11:07:47 AM http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/02/15/us/politics/20080215_DELEGATES_GRAPHIC.html
Look towards the bottom of the graphic. Title: Re: If dems did winner takes all Post by: Mr. Morden on February 16, 2008, 12:33:20 PM In a 2-person race, PR actually tends to (effectively) end things more quickly, since it becomes really hard to catch up once you've fallen behind (though I guess the possibility of superdelegates overturning the pledged delegates complicates that somewhat). With WTA, even if you're far behind, you can make up a lot of ground with just a few 51%-49% wins.
|