The Delegate Fight: Obama Clinches!

[Erc]

Today's superdelegate endorsements put Obama ahead, even if one includes superdelegates in states already voted & MI & FL.

This leaves only one count in which Clinton is still ahead:  All pledged delegates, all superdelegates (including those from the March & on states), and ML & FL.  Even in that count, she's only up by 8.

[Erc]

I'm assuming Erc's figures in Iowa are assuming Edwards' state delegates split 50-50 between Hillary and Obama. I just calculated that and got those figures. I'm predicting more 2-1 in Obama's favor, which would result in 27 delegates for Obama compared to Hillary's 18.

Here's a nasty figure for Hillary: Even if 70% of Edwards' state delegates go to her, so she still doesn't come out ahead in Iowa (Obama would have one more delegate.) She'd need around 77% to come out ahead in Iowa. And I think 50/50 is best case scenario for her frankly.

Until I hear an endorsement out of Edwards, I'm going to stick with the 50-50 split / Edwards delegates stay home.  (Though, privately, I do agree with you that they likely will favor Obama, though not as much as one might think).  County Conventions will be held March 15th, I think?  Assuming results of those will be made available, we'll have a much better idea of what the situation in Iowa looks like.

The other major "convention fight" to be aware of...the fight for Michigan's Uncommitted slate (should it ever be seated), to be held I believe around March 28th.

[Erc]

Added details on the March 4th contests:

Vermont:
Open Primary
7 PM Closing
23 Delegates
--15 At-Large
--8 Unpleged

At-Large Delegates:
--10 by 'District' (there's only 1)
--3 At-Large
--2 Pledged PLEO

Unpledged delegates:
5 DNC Members (3 Obama, 1 Clinton)
1 Senator (for Obama)
1 Representative (for Obama)
1 'Add-On' (selected by the district-level delegates, June 7).

Ohio:
Half-Open Primary
7:30 PM Closing
162 Delegates
--92 by District
--49 At-Large
--21 Unpledged

District Delegates:
4 for CDs: 1,2,4,5,7,8,15
5 for CDs: 3,6,12,16,18
6 for CDs: 9,10,13,14
7 for CDs: 17
8 for CDs: 11

At-Large Delegates:
31 At-Large
18 Pledged PLEOs

Unpledged Delegates:
--9 DNC Members (2 for Obama)
--7 Representatives (1 for Clinton)
--1 Senators
--1 Governor (for Clinton)
--1 Distinguished Party Leader (for Obama)
--2 'Add-Ons' (selected May 10, by State Executive Committee)

Texas
Open Primary, + Caucus/Convention
8 PM Closing (9 PM for El Paso area)
228 Delegates
--126 by District
--67 At-Large
--35 Unpledged

District Delegates:
These are what the primary elects.  They are also apportioned by State Senate Districts.
2 for SDs: 31
3 for SDs: 6, 7, 9, 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30
4 for SDs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 26
5 for SDs: 10, 17
6 for SDs: 23, 25
7 for SDs: 13
8 for SDs: 14

At-Large Delegates:
--45 At-Large
--25 Pledged PLEO

Precinct caucuses convene no earlier that 8:15 Eastern (after polling closes), choosing delegates to County & Senate District conventions.  On March 29, those conventions meet, choosing delegates to the State Convention, to be held June 6-7.  The State Convention chooses the At-Large delegates, proportionally to the convention delegates' preferences.

Unpledged Delegates: (Clinton 12, Obama
17 DNC Members
13 Representatives
2 Distinguished Party Leaders
3 'Add-Ons' (selected at the State Convention)

Rhode Island:
Half-Open Primary
9 PM Closing
33 Delegates
--13 by District
--8 At-Large
--12 Unpledged

District Delegates:
CD 1: 6
CD 2: 7

At-Large Delegates:
--5 At-Large
--3 Pledged PLEO

Unpledged Delegates: (8 Clinton - 2 Obama)  [only one undecided in Sen. Reed]
7 DNC Members
2 Senators
2 Representatives
1 'Add-On' (selected by State Committee, June 19)

[Erc]

Alabama has selected Alabama AFL-CIO President Stewart Burkhalter as its 'Add-On' delegate.  Burkhalter was backed by the Obama campaign, giving Obama one of the first 'Add-On' delegates this season.

Also, all sources I can find are giving Obama a larger lead in GA delegates than in my calculations:  CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, and the Green Papers are giving him a 61-26 advantage, while Obama's own website gives him 60-27 (compared to my 58-29 figures).  To be conservative, I'll be using the 60-27 figure until some official results get released, although it easily could become 61-26.

Similarly, in TN, the media sources that have decided to allocate delegates fully have a 40-28 breakdown for Clinton, and Obama has a 39-29 breakdown.  As everyone disagrees with my (admittedly quite tentative) 38-30 breakdown, I'm changing it to 39-29.

Updated results from MD tip the balance towards Clinton by 1 delegate, as well.

Net result of the GA/TN/MD updates is therefore a wash.

[Erc]

Nevada update:

The County Conventions were supposed to be held last week, on Feb. 23 (I believe).  However, due to chaos at the Clark County convention, no vote was held and the event is to be rescheduled for sometime next month.  No results have been posted from other county conventions, which may have gone more smoothly.

[Erc]

McCain, with >50% wins in OH & TX, is now guaranteed (regardless of the breakdowns by CD), to have clinched the GOP nomination.  No further tracking of the Republican process will be done (esp. considering Huckabee's dropped out of the race).

[Erc]

Delegate results from yesterday's contests:

Vermont: Obama 9, Clinton 6
Rhode Island: Clinton 13, Obama 8
Ohio: Clinton 75, Obama 66

There are a couple CD's still on knife-edge (CDs 1 & 17) that could go either way at this point.  As, currently, each candidate is ahead in one of them, the worst any last-minute changes can do is flip one delegate to either candidate.

Texas Primaries: Clinton 65, Obama 61

Results are pretty complete, though, as usual, one delegate might flip in further counting.  (The ones most sensitive to minor changes in recounting, the At-Large delegates, aren't in play here):

Texas Caucuses (TENTATIVE): Obama 35, Clinton 32.  Only 37% in, and a lot could change in that last 63% (let alone the whole convention process).


Net result of yesterday: Clinton +12

[Erc]

Let's envision the following scenario:

Clinton has a pretty good rest of the primary season...winning the states she should win in by narrow margins (incl. IN & NC, for arguments' sake--let's say she gets an Edwards endorsement), and winning PR by a substantial, if not blowout margins.

There are also revotes in FL & MI (or they're counted as normal, but with all the Uncommitted for Obama), giving Hillary substantial, if closer wins than in actuality. 


Obama still comes out of this up 31 delegates.  She'd then need to win 194 of the remaining 357 superdelegates (54.3%) to win the nomination. 

That's the best case scenario for Clinton.   She needs to win at least 194 of the remaining superdelegates to have a reasonable shot.

[Erc]

Wyoming & Mississippi details posted.

Wyoming:  Saturday, March 8
Closed Caucus
18 Delegates
--12 At-Large
--6 Unpledged

Caucuses, open to all Democrats, are held in every county.  The 7 "district" delegates are chosen in direct proportion to the total statewide vote in the caucuses (as if it were a primary).    Voters also choose delegates to the state convention (to be held 24 May), which in turn chooses the 3 At-Large & 2 Pledged PLEO delegates to the convention.

Unpledged Delegates: (2 Obama - 0 Clinton)
4 DNC Members
1 Governor
1 'Add-On' (selected at the State Convention)

Mississippi: Tuesday, March 11
Open Primary
Polls close 8 PM Eastern.
40 Delegates
--22 by District
--11 At Large
--7 Unpledged

District Delegates:
5 each for CDs 1, 3, and 4
7 for CD 2.

At-Large Delegates:
7 At-Large
4 Pledged PLEOs

Unpledged Delegates (2 Obama - 0 Clinton)
4 DNC Members
2 Representatives
1 'Add-On' (selected at State Convention, May 31)

[Erc]

Also if you give all the uncommitted to Obama he has a lead in all delegates including Florida and Michigan.

No giving all the uncommitted to Obama isn't perfectly fair, however it certainly is more fair and closer to the opinion of the state than giving no delegates to him. And the only reason he has no projected delegates from Michigan is he withdrew to show respect for the DNC rules. Is the DNC going to punish him for that?

As a purely technical note...

We should find out about the Michigan Uncommitted slate later this month (March 28th or so), when they actually choose the delegates.  If Obama's got his game together, he may be able to make sure they're in his camp.

To satisfy J.J., I'll make a post about the differences between my count and the Green Papers' in a bit.  Basically, the Green Papers errs on the side of not assigning delegates...a conservative estimate, and it's fine if you just care about totals.  But it's not so great for looking at the differences between the two...especially since the places the Green Papers haven't assigned delegates happen to be states where Obama's done well (Washington, Colorado, Illinois).

I've been trying my hardest to avoid bias in my count (I personally don't particularly favor either candidate over the other)---though it's certainly possible that there are some, and I'd be glad to know if anybody finds any.

[Erc]

Differences between Erc's count and the Green Papers (March 5, 2008)

(All delegate totals Clinton - Obama - Edwards, TGP = The Green Papers.  All net changes are what the candidate gains in my count vs. the Green Papers)

Iowa:
Erc: 21 - 24 - 0
TGP: 15 - 16 - 14

Obama +2.  Edwards won't be winning delegates out of Iowa (where the County Conventions & all the other processes haven't been held yet).  I've assumed that the Edwards supporters divide evenly or stay home---he may very well do better than that (or worse), but I'm sticking with that for now.

Illinois:
Erc: 49 - 104
TGP: 42 - 83

Obama +12. My results are based on publicly available, reliable CD breakdowns.  Why the Green Papers hasn't assigned 28 delegates is beyond me.

Tennessee:
Erc: 39 - 29
TGP: 35 - 23

Obama +2.  TGP hasn't fully allocated delegates, unsurprisingly.  There are no good breakdowns out there.  My numbers are based on my own rough guesstimates & media reporting, all of which indicate 39 - 29 or 40 - 28.

Colorado:
Erc: 18 - 37
TGP: 9 - 19

Obama +8.  TGP hasn't fully allocated delegates---it's a caucus + no good CD breakdown.  Mine is based on the best county-by-county approx. to CDs I could get.

Idaho:
Erc: 1 - 17
TGP: 3 - 15

Obama +2.  TGP, like all other sources, missed the fact that Clinton will miss viability in CD 1.

Washington:
Erc: 26 - 52
TGP: 12 - 25

Obama +13.  No good CD breakdown + it's a caucus.  Mine is a half-guess (I don't have good Seattle-area breakdowns), but it's certain that the margin out of WA will be much closer to 26 than 13 when all is said and done.

Louisiana:
Erc: 22 - 34
TGP: 23 - 33

Obama +2.  Their CD-by-CD breakdown lists my result.  They could easily be right on this one--I'll give it another check.

Ohio:
Erc: 75 - 66
TGP: 71 - 57

Obama +5.  We'll wait for more results to come in here.

Texas Caucuses:
Erc: 32 - 35
TGP: 0 - 0

Obama +3.  We'll need some more data here, and this is probably being too generous to Clinton actually.

No difference in all other states.

For a total of 49.  (There's a 54 delegate difference between my count & TGP's, but I can't find where they come from).  And, with most of these, excepting Louisiana, it's either a judgment call (with net effect 1-2 delegates) or I'm much closer to being right than they are.

[Erc]

What do you need from the Seattle area, Erc?

What else?...breakdowns by CD of the caucus results in King Co. & environs.  It's a bit of a lost cause, though, due to the complicated caucus system (there are conventions by county level and/or on SD level, which in turn might have CD caucuses within them if they straddle boundaries?)

I could get you some more specifics, but I'm going to be away from where I tabulate all of this stuff until Monday...ironically enough, because I'm going to be in Seattle for the weekend.

[Erc]

Party sources have released final counts for WA, LA, & TN: (reported by the green papers)

WA: 52 - 26 Obama
TN: 40 - 28 Clinton Source
LA: 33 - 23 Obama

Net result of these changes: +4 Clinton.


For the Super Tuesday states, we're still awaiting official confirmation of delegate totals from Utah, Missouri, Massachusetts, and Arkansas--we have no by-CD breakdown, but all sources agree on the delegate counts there.  In Georgia, sources disagree between 60 - 27 Obama or 61 - 26 Obama.  My count uses the former.

[Erc]

According to the Hamilton County Elections office (but not the secretary of state, which, apparently has not updated its vote totals), Obama gets an extra delegate in OH-01 for a 3-1 split there.

I don't think any of the outlets reporting delegates have included this increase in his delegates in their Ohio delegate counts...  if I'm correct, this change makes the total 67-74.

I also noticed that the secretary of state transposed the totals for District 6 in Mahoning County incorrectly.  Clinton's total there is 22,714 votes, not 22,174 votes.  That, of course, will not change Clinton's 4-1 delegate lead in that district.

Ultimately, given his popular vote totals in the state, it looks like Obama did very well in the district divisions of delegates, barely keeping 3-3 margins in OH-09 and OH-13 and meeting the threshold of 4-3 in OH-17.

Thanks for the info...I'll check on it.  It's certainly quite possible that Obama could pick up another delegate there...by my last count, he was about 192 votes short of doing so.

[Erc]

According to the Hamilton County Elections office (but not the secretary of state, which, apparently has not updated its vote totals), Obama gets an extra delegate in OH-01 for a 3-1 split there.

Update on this point...

Most of CD 1 is indeed in Hamilton county, where Obama got 63.2% of the 2-way vote (65449-38056 in CD-01, Hamilton Co.).

However, there is a small portion in Butler, which Clinton won decisively, 2085 - 1108, meaning that the total for the district is 66557 - 40141, or 62.38% of the vote.  Shift 130 Clinton votes to Obama, and he picks up that extra delegate, but, otherwise, looks like she's hung on to a 2 - 2 split there.

No change in CD 17...looks like Obama is holding her to a 2 - 2 split there, by a 78 vote margin.

[Erc]

Unless I can be convinced otherwise, or more results come in, I'm sticking with my projection of 37 - 30 Obama for the TX caucuses.  The raw numbers would suggest 38 - 29, but a more detailed analysis shows that the 'raw numbers' appear to be biased slightly (on the order of 1-2%) towards Obama...his areas are marginally more likely to have reported than hers.

We may know more on March 29, should any results from the County/SD caucuses be released.

[Erc]

New Iowa Results: (in terms of delegates to the State Convention, changes are with respect to my earlier estimates)

Obama 1299 (+333)
Clinton 802 (+45)
Edwards 388 (-389)
Uncommitted 11 (+11)

Of the defecting Edwards delegates, Obama appeared to pick up over 85% of them.  (Or, more likely, he got somewhat less than that and there was a net Clinton -> Obama defection).

Edwards is still viable, if barely, with 15.52% of the statewide total.  If only 8 of his supporters defect / don't show up, he will lose statewide viability---which I expect will happen.  He has already lost viability in CDs 1 & 4.

Net effect on delegates:
Statewide: Obama gains 2 from Edwards (1 At-Large, 1 Pledged PLEO)

CD 1: Edwards loses viability, Obama gains both Edwards' delegates.

CD 2: Obama gains a single delegate from Edwards (Edwards is at 18.7%, comfortably viable for now).

CD 3: Obama gains a single delegate from Edwards (Edwards at 18.2%)

CD 4: Edwards loses viability, Obama gains both his delegates.

CD 5: Clinton had held a narrow lead here...but Obama is able to take the lead thanks to the defection of Edwards supporters.  As a result, Obama gains one delegate from Clinton.  Edwards is unaffected, remaining just barely over viability (15.4%---if he loses 2 delegates here, he loses viability).


In total:
Obama 25 (+9)
Clinton 14 (-1)
Edwards 6 (-8)


What can we expect from here on out?

District Conventions are held April 26 (post-PA).  These choose the first delegates to the National Convention out of Iowa (the CD ones only, not the At-Large ones).  Edwards will fail to meet viability in CDs 1 & 4, will most likely fail to do so in CD 5, and may have some trouble in the other two CDs (personally, I expect that, of those delegates who were going to defect, most would have done so by now, so Edwards won't lose more than a percent or two between now & the final tally---though that can be a critical percent).

On June 14, the State Convention is held, choosing Iowa's 16 At-Large delegates.  Edwards will probably lose viability...though don't discount the possibility of Clinton supporters defecting to Edwards strategically in order to keep Obama's delegate count down (or prevent Edwards supporters from defecting to Obama if such a move is expected---even if there is no net defection, Obama would be expected to gain Edwards' one pledged PLEO delegate).  Similarly, in CD 5, Obama supporters may defect to Edwards strategically, as, if Edwards loses viability there, Clinton gets his delegate.

Due to the possibility of these strategic defections, I'll keep Edwards' total at 6 in my count, even though one might normally expect him to fail to reach viability in CD 5 and At-Large (dropping his count to 2 delegates).

[Erc]

As it's now appearing clear that the MI/FL delegations are going to be restored in some fashion, I'm including the states' superdelegates under the 'superdelegates in states yet to vote' section, giving Clinton a +10 advantage there.  I'm also removing the 'Total Including MI/FL' line.  The old MI & FL results will remain listed for reference until plans for revotes are finalized.

[Erc]

Where are the conventions being held? That might make a difference. If you live in southern Iowa and the district 5 convention is being held in Sioux City (largest city in the district), is it worth it to make the drive to vote for Edwards?

True enough.  Unfortunately, the Iowa Democratic Party website only gives the date, April 26.  Locations are "Across the State."

[Erc]

Where are the conventions being held? That might make a difference. If you live in southern Iowa and the district 5 convention is being held in Sioux City (largest city in the district), is it worth it to make the drive to vote for Edwards?

True enough.  Unfortunately, the Iowa Democratic Party website only gives the date, April 26.  Locations are "Across the State."

makes it sound like there are many, which makes it seem as if more people are likely to show up.  but if Edwards only needs 8 out of several hundred defections/absentees he is going to lose viability.

The "loss of 8 delegates for viability" line is for the State Convention (to be held June 14).  There is only one meeting place (in Des Moines).  However, it's well-announced ahead of time, and there are only 2500 delegates in total---generally, these should be pretty committed party activists (they had to campaign for their seat, after all).  So we should probably be more concerned about defections than no-shows (although, as you said, given that he only needs to lose 8 out of nearly 400, no-shows are a concern as well).

Edwards is thus in risk of losing viability---what will determine whether he does or not is likely the Clinton camp, who, if they're smart, lend him some support to make sure he makes viability.  Yes, this means Clinton loses a delegate to Edwards, but Obama loses two delegates, which makes it worth it.  Whether the Clinton camp will be savvy enough to pull it off (or there are enough Edwards supporters by June 14 to make viability a possibility / enough Edwards supporters willing to play along), is something that remains to be seen.

[Erc]

Florida is not holding a revote, after all, it seems.

This means the only possible determiner of the final delegation is that January 29th primary.

The final decision is going to be up to the DNC Rules & Bylaws committee, which meets again next Month.

Personally, I'd bet that half of Florida's delegation (each delegate gets a half vote, not only half get seated) will count (the Bill Nelson plan), with superdelegates either completely unaffected, equally affected, or completely stripped of their positions (the latter is only fair, but quite unlikely).

Florida's Original Delegate Count:
Clinton: 105
Obama: 67
Edwards: 13
Clinton-Super: 8
Obama-Super: 4
Uncommitted-Super: 14

What effect would different seating plans have on the delegate margin:

(Across, % elected delegates seated, Down, % superdelegates seated.  'Reasonable' scenarios in bold)

	0	.5	1
0	0	19	38
.5	2	21	41
1	4	23	43

Clinton has a lot to gain here, and Obama's going to fight it, understandably.  But I'd be surprised if Clinton didn't net at least 20 out of Florida.

And Edwards may start to be a factor again...with as many as 31 delegates if FL is fully counted, he's beginning to accumulate a moderately sizeable bloc.

[Erc]

Edwards is 4 delegates short of viability in CD 1.  Clinton supporters would be well advised to throw a few delegates' support to Edwards, shifting one Denver delegate from Obama to Edwards.

The same could theoretically be done in CD 4...however, there Edwards is a good 24 delegates short of viability (he only has 53 at the moment), so it's rather unlikely it can be pulled off.

In CD 2, Edwards is a good 21 delegates above viability, and in CD 3 16 delegates above viability.  If these should slip, Clinton should help him out in CD 3...whereas Obama, in CD 2, should probably bet on convincing Edwards' delegates to defect to Obama (if he gets more than 2/3 of them, he can make the split 5-2).


If this sort of behavior happens in each district and statewide, the final total would be:

Obama 23
Clinton 14
Edwards 8

If, instead, Edwards pretty much folds everywhere, Clinton & Obama can be expected to split Edwards' 6 delegates (he gains statewide & in CD 3, she gains in CDs 2 & 5), making the final count...

Obama 28
Clinton 17

[Erc]

A long post on Michigan's process for selected the Uncommitted Slate.

Click on the quote if you'd like more details on Michigan's March 29 District Conventions (which will choose those 'Uncommitted' Delegates).

Executive Summary:
At all parts in the process, Uncommitted delegates are chosen by Party members who claim to support Uncommitted.  This means they will need to explicitly deny being Clinton supporters in order to have a say in the process.
Clinton has the right of review of her delegates (while Uncommitted, obviously, does not) so Obama supporters cannot pull shenanigans with her delegates.
Of the 55 Uncommitted Delegates, 36 are by District.  Of these, Obama is guaranteed (barring extremely good organization by the Clinton camp) at least 30.  A few of the other 6 (all in the Detroit area) may go to Clinton if she has decently good organization.

The remaining 19 are At-Large delegates, chosen at the State Central Committee.  If it is dominated by Clinton supporters, Clinton may grab a significant chunk of these (if enough of them claim to be 'Uncommitted'), though the voting is proportional, so it is unlikely that she'll steal all of them.

[Erc]

I really doubt the current slate will be seated. What'll likely happen if Michigan doesn't revote is the DNC goes back to its plan of half of Florida's delegates seated and seating Michigan's 50/50.

Probably true.  But then the Democrats in Michigan would have to hold these District Conventions all over again, so just 'seating them 50/50' is not as easy as it sounds.

In any event, barring a resolution / revote agreement in the next week, these District Conventions will be happening and the MDP (and Clinton) will be doing its utmost to seat that delegation, so it's worth reporting on (if only to see what Clinton's 'best case scenario' is).

[Erc]

I really doubt the current slate will be seated. What'll likely happen if Michigan doesn't revote is the DNC goes back to its plan of half of Florida's delegates seated and seating Michigan's 50/50.

Probably true.  But then the Democrats in Michigan would have to hold these District Conventions all over again, so just 'seating them 50/50' is not as easy as it sounds.

Couldn't the Clinton and Obama campaigns just propose a list of delegates?

Yes, but generally it's accepted practice in the Democratic party to have some sort of selection procedure in which party members (usually those supporting that candidate) can choose between delegates.  It may violate party rules (not to mention pissing off your own supporters in a state) to just say "here are my delegates, you will seat them."