Politico: Obama camapgin states it is next to impossible for HRC to win

[Tropics_Dude83]

This is in the pledged delegate race. Of course, the superdelegates whom owe the Clintons favors could yet decide this race in HRC's favor.

Anyway, here's the math:

Plouffe: She can't catch us


As we wrote last night, Obama has begun to make his own inevitablity case, and David Plouffe made it explicit on a conference call this morning, telling reporters that it's now "next to impossible" for Clinton to surpass what he says is a 136-person lead among pledged delegates.

"The only way she could do it is by winning most of the rest of the contests by 25 to 30 points," he said. "Even the most creative math really does not get her, ever, back to even in terms of pledged delegates."

"This is not about votes -- it's about delegates," Plouffe said.

The other half of this case, of course, is that superdelegates will and/or should follow the pledged delegates.

[SoFlaJet]

1. and even if you add up

the Florida AND Michigan votes (where she was the only one on the friggin ballot) Obama still has more votes and delegates

[SteppingRazor]

2. I've also said that superdelegates will and/or should follow pledged delegates, but...

this ignores the reason superdelegates were invented in the first place -- to make sure that party officials had a say in the candidate selection, and could thus influence the selection should it appear to be going in a direction they were not comfortable with. Like the electoral college, superdelegates were instigated because the rich and powerful, whether they be our Founding Fathers or the current democratic leaders, did not trust the people to vote properly. Therefore, SDs need not vote with the people -- that's not the point.

[sandnsea]

4. There will be riots

I think the people advocating superdelegates decide this need to rethink that idea.

[SteppingRazor]

7. Oh, I agree it would spark incredible outrage, but...

if the pledged delegates looked as though they were going in favor of a candidate that the party was not comfortable with, the SDs would almost certainly swing the election in the other direction. Fortunately, I think Obama is acceptable to most of the party bigwigs -- at least acceptable enough that they're not willing to cause the backlash that would be created by installing Clinton over the will of the people.

[sandnsea]

23. If the pledged delegates vote Obama

the superdelegates better respect that vote or there will be riots. If the Clintons are toying with the idea that they can take this election through the sd's, they need to rethink in a hurry. This party bigwig stuff isn't going to play.

[ShortnFiery]

5. "SDs need not vote with the people" - they better lest "ALL HELL BREAK LOOSE !"

:evilgrin:

No OBJECTIVE Democratic Voter would support the Democratic Party ELITE selecting *OUR* Nominee. If our royal Super-delegates counter the People-delegates, there will be "hell to pay." :grr:

[SteppingRazor]

11. Totally agree, SnF!

And as I said above, in this case, I don't expect the SDs to do so. Too much to lose, and not a whole lot to gain by swinging the election away from Obama.

[ShortnFiery]

20. I'm sure there are many "moral" Super-delegates but the true impetus is, for the bigwigs,

their continued survival and success within Our Democratic Party. What someone typed below is very concise and insightful - despite all the "loyalty to the DLC / Clintonian Machine, Obama's seemingly "rising tide will lift all boats." :shrug:

[Horse with no Name]

3. Ahh the hubris

it's all big before the fall.

[ShortnFiery]

8. No, this is NOT coming from Obama himself, but it's no lie that HRC has an uphill battle.

:shrug:

[Alhena]

9. No, more like the mathematics

[pnwmom]

15. Not really. The mathematics of this is that neither is likely to achieve

the super-majority that is required for nomination -- which means that we're likely to end in a brokered convention.

[TwilightGardener]

13. His job now is to move in for the kill--this is smart. This is when you WANT to start

appearing inevitable, at least in terms of pledged delegates--we're more than halfway through the game. McCain got Romney to drop out when it became clear that Romney would have a tough (though not impossible) time catching up in delegates, and Romney bowed out for the good of the GOP. This is how the game is played.

[Frances]

6. I think Obama will win too

That's why I have written so many posts asking Obama supporters on DU to treat Hillary supporters with respect. You will need them and the Edwards supporters to win the general election.

It seems to me that many DU supporters of Obama have not been through many elections. Just because all is going super well for Obama now does not mean that he will not have some very rough times ahead.

Those of us who are older remember McGovern, who was anti-Vietnam War when that war was very unpopular. There were more people at anti-war rallies than there are people who come to hear Obama. Yet McGovern carried only 2 states against Tricky Dick Nixon, a most unlikeable man.

At this point in the 1988 election cycle, Dukakis was way ahead of the first Bush. The Willie Horton ad, a not-so-subtle appeal to racism, helped Bush win the election.

At this point in the 2004 election cycle, Kerry, the genuine war hero, was doing well against Bush, the man who got out of going to Vietnam. Kerry was attacked on his strongest point, his hero status, and that swift-boating caused him to lose the election.

My guess is that the Repubs will take Obama's strongest point and make it his weakness. I don't know how they will try to do this, but try they will. And if past history is any indication, they may succeed.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

14. For many

Obama is considered to be perfect and invincible. You are very correct in saying that things can change very quickly. The Republicans are not going to give this away.

[WRPendleton]

10. not just the Obama campaign

I think almost everyone can see the Hillary has a huge uphill battle to gain the nomination. And for myself I don't really see it happening short of some major news event against Obama. She's just been losing by too much and the strategy of waiting for states like Ohio & Texas to make a stand may very well be her downfall. While I'm not a hard core supporter of either Obama or Clinton (I'd gladly vote in the GE for either); this kind of strategy of not really putting up a fight in states prior to March 4th seems a cynical and definitely not very populist approach. It's seems mostly like a strategy of trying to be overly clever instead of just trying to appeal to and address everyone; and it definitely does not reflect well on Hillary.

[Jane Austin]

24. I really wonder if the Clinton campaign's not putting up a fight in the states

prior to March 4th had more to do with lack of money rather than lack of will.

It's the only thing that makes any sense to me.

[WRPendleton]

26. good point

Hadn't really thought of it in that light. It seems entirely possibly that this was the calculation that was made based on the limited resources they had and trying to buy some time. Although I guess they may have found out (probably too late to correct for now perhaps) that they really had no time to spare. Thanks for bringing that point up.

[pnwmom]

12. It could also be almost impossible for Obama to "win" because

winning requires much more than a simple majority of delegates. No matter who is ahead at convention time, this could be a brokered convention

[KittyWampus]

16. nope- superdelegates WILL go w/ majority of pledged.

[pnwmom]

22. And you know that how? n/t

[ShortnFiery]

17. No way! That what you term "simple majority" reflects the will of the People-delegates ...

if the arrogance of the "I know better than the lowly chattering classes" type Super-delegates OVERTURNS the will of *THE PEOPLE* there will be HELL TO PAY and very well leave the party in tatters. Even the bloated "insiders" know not to go against the will of The People-delegates.

[TwilightGardener]

18. The Superdelegates and party bigwigs are watching, carefully--they

will do what is best for the party, rather than what is best for Hillary or Obama. That sort of analysis favors Obama, because he's proving himself to be an across-the-board winner, he's improving his numbers in all electorates, and he's appealing to Indies and bringing in new people to the party. They will not turn a blind eye to these strengths, because a rising tide lifts ALL boats, even theirs.

[Frances]

21. You make a good point

I think the super delegate thing is to prevent another McGovern event. The older political hands knew that we young anti-war people had too many stars in our eyes.

I think the super delegates will go for Obama if he continues to look like he's the best candidate for the party. I think they will only back Hillary if Obama makes some huge mistake that looks as though it could cost him and us the election.

[CreekDog]

25. Superdelegates cannot help but notice the failures of the Clinton campaign strategies

I'm sure that will figure into the calculus as well.

Her pull of superdelegates is directly related by what she offers them by being president, however, if it looks like she can't win, her leverage is zilch. At that point, she only gets them based on personal loyalty. For party insiders, loyalty to a winning candidate is of more value than to a losing candidate and for elected officials (the other part of the superdelegates) loyalty to the winning candidate offers the same reward.

So Obama's campaign is probably now working to show

1) she will lose, even if she gets the nod, because she is weaker
2) she will lose if she gets the nod because the only way she can win will make so many within the party angry that turnout will decrease --a lot
3) Obama will get the nomination anyway because of pledged and superdelegates realizing the above two points
4) Since Obama will win both the nomination and the election, party insiders and elected officials will be on the outside looking in with a new head of the party that they opposed. To the victor go the spoils.

Hillary's one last gasp is to disrupt this progression of thought within the superdelegate minds, but she hasn't so far and with the passage of time, it becomes progressively harder to do that. It is a near impossibility at this point. Barack is working towards making it a total impossibility.

[robcon]

19. I thought the "inevitable" meme was discredited.

n/t