THE MATH - Sunday, March 9

[phrigndumass]

THE MATH – Sunday, March 9

Changes today: Popular vote, New Superdelegate (IL), Extra details

Delegates needed to win nomination – 2,024.5 (considering status quo)
Pledged Delegates in – 2,619.0 of 3,227.0 – 81.2%

TOTAL DELEGATES

Estimated Total Delegates as of March 9:
Hillary Clinton – 1,475.5 (549.0 short)
Barack Obama – 1,598.5 (426.0 short)
Remaining Delegates – 948.0
(Source: Wikipedia 3/9/08)

PLEDGED DELEGATES

Estimated Pledged Delegates as of March 9:
Hillary Clinton – 1,230.5
Barack Obama – 1,388.5
Remaining Pledged Delegates – 608.0
(Source: Wikipedia 3/9/08)

Maximum possible pledged delegates for each candidate:
Hillary Clinton – 1,838.5 (186.0 short of nomination)
Barack Obama – 1,996.5 (28.0 short of nomination)
Neither candidate can win the nomination with pledged delegates alone.

SUPERDELEGATES

Superdelegates (highest reported for each candidate):
Hillary Clinton – 245 (Source: CBS 3/9/08)
Barack Obama – 210 (Source: AP 3/9/08)
Remaining Superdelegates – 340

POPULAR VOTE

Status Quo as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 13,005,114
Hillary Clinton – 12,414,786
(Source: Wikipedia 3/9/08)

With Florida as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 13,581,328
Hillary Clinton – 13,285,772

FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN SCENARIOS

These are ALL the possible scenarios concerning Florida and Michigan. These scenarios are for pledged delegates only. Superdelegate counts are not included. The presumption here is that most remaining superdelegates will support the candidate who wins the most pledged delegates from the state and territory contests.

If new elections are held in Florida and Michigan, the primary season is still almost done. Pledged delegates in would be 2,619.0 of 3,540.0, or 74.0%.

Changes in the number of delegates are considered in the percentages below.
With Florida, add 185 delegates (Clinton 105, Obama 67)
With Michigan, add 128 delegates (Clinton 74, Obama 0)
With Florida and Michigan, add 313 delegates (Clinton 179, Obama 67)

The current status quo is: Neither Florida nor Michigan’s slate of delegates are seated.

Scenario 1 – Status Quo
CLINTON NEEDS 63.0%, OBAMA NEEDS 37.0%

Scenario 2 – New elections in Florida and Michigan
CLINTON NEEDS 58.6%, OBAMA NEEDS 41.4%

Scenario 3 – Michigan seated as is, Florida seated as is
CLINTON NEEDS 53.8%, OBAMA NEEDS 46.2%

Scenario 4 – Florida not seated, New election in Michigan
CLINTON NEEDS 60.7%, OBAMA NEEDS 39.3%

Scenario 5 – Michigan not seated, New election in Florida
CLINTON NEEDS 60.0%, OBAMA NEEDS 40.0%

Scenario 6 – Florida seated as is, Michigan not seated
CLINTON NEEDS 59.9%, OBAMA NEEDS 40.1%

Scenario 7 – Florida seated as is, New election in Michigan
CLINTON NEEDS 58.2%, OBAMA NEEDS 41.8%

Scenario 8 – Michigan seated as is, Florida not seated
CLINTON NEEDS 56.9%, OBAMA NEEDS 43.1%

Scenario 9 – Michigan seated as is, New election in Florida
CLINTON NEEDS 55.3%, OBAMA NEEDS 44.7%

Clinton’s wins over 58%: (3)
Arkansas – 70%
New York – 58%
Rhode Island – 58%

Obama’s wins over 58%: (18)
Idaho – 80%
Hawaii – 76%
Alaska – 75%
Kansas 74%
Nebraska – 68%
Washington – 68%
Colorado – 67%
Georgia – 66%
Minnesota – 66%
Illinois – 65%
Virginia – 64%
Louisiana – 62%
North Dakota – 62%
Wyoming – 61%
Maine – 60%
Maryland – 60%
Vermont – 59%
Wisconsin – 58%

What the math is telling us: Hillary Clinton has already lost the race.

[KaryninMiami]

1. Somebody better tell Senator Clinton then since it's clear she's not paying attention.

Especially since she keeps offering the VP slot to Obama- seems a bit odd considering he is clealry the winner. But just you wait- those Clintons will figure out a way to steal this- they are using the GOP playbook.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

2. Very Nice, keep up the good work!

[phrigndumass]

9. Thanks

I plan on posting the updates daily until Hillary Clinton concedes.

:hi:

[Catshrink]

3. Thank you for this.

The numbers are confusing -- you've shed some light on the delegate counts.

:hi:

[skipos]

4. I live in MI. We were told our votes wouldn't go towards delegates before voting started

Now some people want our votes to go towards delegates, AFTER voting has already taken place?
Any candidate who pushes for that to happen will have a serious problem in MI come November if they are on the ballot.

[caledesi]

22. same here in FL ! NT

[KittyWampus]

5. so Obama is back up to around +160!

[NDambi]

6. "What the math is telling us: Hillary Clinton has already lost the race."

Indeed.

Thanks for the posting the truth and the light.

[skipos]

7. Are there states missing from the popular vote totals? nt

[phrigndumass]

8. Only the ones that haven't voted yet.

:hi:

[phrigndumass]

10. Are you wanting to see this?

Because you're reaching so far that you're dreaming. You can't even show it without notating it with an asterisk. But I'll include it anyway, just to show all of the math.

POPULAR VOTE TOTALS

Status Quo as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 13,005,114
Hillary Clinton – 12,414,786
(Source: Wikipedia 3/9/08)

With Florida as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 13,581,328
Hillary Clinton – 13,285,772

With Florida and Michigan as of March 9*:
Barack Obama – 13,581,328
Hillary Clinton – 13,614,081
*Uncommitted – 238,168 (Michigan only, Obama wasn’t on the ballot)

Now if you go back to sleep, maybe the tooth fairy will bring you a nickel.

[skipos]

12. Uh, you really misunderstood me

I had heard that some states like IA, WA or NV hadn't done their popular vote totals yet. That was what I was asking about.

[phrigndumass]

13. My apologies ...

I've included those states, but only what has been reported as counted so far.

Thanks for pointing that out!

:hi:

[TheDoorbellRang]

17. In the Wikipedia article you source

They note that their source is Real Clear Politics, which has a footnote at the bottom of the page noting that IA, NV, WA, and ME popular vote totals are not included in their total, since those states did not provide popular vote information.

If somehow they could be added to the mix, Obama would show an even higher percentage of the popular vote.

Here's the argument provided in the Wikipedia entry that should make all the hoopla about the popular vote a moot point, anyway:

Finally, it should be noted that the nomination will be decided by delegates, so the candidates have campaigned to maximize their delegate advantage. If the nomination were decided by the popular vote, the candidates would likely campaign differently in order to maximize their popular vote advantage. Thus, some observers argue that any estimate of the popular vote is meaningless under the current rules.

[phrigndumass]

32. I'll double-check the IA, NV, WA, ME popular votes ...

... and make sure they are added in for tomorrow's update, if they aren't already.

Thanks for pointing it out!

:hi:

[Nederland]

18. Good point

The only possible way you can arrange things so Hillary wins the popular vote is to include a state where only Hillary was on the ballot and assume that NONE of the 238,000 uncommitted voters there were Obama supporters.

[dysfunctional press]

50. and yet, that's exactly what ABC did on the national news last night...

surprise, surprise, surprise...they showed shrillary as being ahead in the overall nationwide popular vote so far.

[phrigndumass]

51. ABC is using HRC's preferred count

Since Iowa, Maine, Nevada and Washington are "unofficial", they leave those out, without a notation.

Then they add in Florida and Michigan, without a notation.

Rose-colored glasses, tunnel vision, wishful thinking, call it what you want ...

:hi:

[tokenlib]

20. As one of those uncommitted--I am smiling at those numbers....n/t

[phrigndumass]

49. These numbers were without IA,ME,NV,WA

Updated to include Iowa, Maine, Nevada and Washington (tallied but not official):

With Florida and Michigan as of March 9*:
Barack Obama – 13,965,071
Hillary Clinton – 13,947,457
*Uncommitted – 238,168 (Michigan only, Obama wasn’t on the ballot)

:donut:

[Crooked Moon]

11. ...

[phrigndumass]

15. Nice graphic, Crooked Moon!

I've been paying attention to demconwatch at blogspot as well. Very informative.

I agree that counting the Superdelegates is problematic. They can always change their minds, as some have already done. So to be fair to each candidate, I listed the highest reported superdelegates for each candidate. The superdelegate counts don't affect the percentages listed in the OP, though.

:hi:

[donf]

16. I don't know when that map was produced, but

Sen. Clinton did NOT win Texas. Not blaming you, Crooked Moon . . . you were only posting what was available – but I wish the media would stop repeating the inaccurate information that Sen. Clinton won Texas. She did not. Last Tuesday was a 2/2 split.

[grantcart]

27. great graphic what is the link?

[txaslftist]

52. The graphic is wrong if it shows Texas as a Hillary win.

Obama got more delegates from Texas than she did. She won the popular vote here, but he stomped her in the caucuses, for a net total out of this state favoring Obama.

[Skywalker]

62. Vermont and New Hamphire?

They have Vermont and New Hampshire switched (I know 'cause I live in VT :D ).

Mark

[Froward69]

14. Math is a Mens

endeavor. Mens RULES! written by MEN! so they it/they do not apply to Hillary... :sarcasm:

Hillary will not accept defeat. she would rather tear our party apart...

To hillary, if it's not her then it deserves to be mcaint.

Hillary is NOT a true Democrat.

[phrigndumass]

19. More math on the popular vote totals

It's unfair to add vote totals for caucuses with vote totals for primaries, because they are different from each other. Only 735,000 votes have been tallied for caucuses, while over 25 million votes have been tallied for primaries.

So to separate them out:

POPULAR VOTE TOTALS

Primaries only (Status Quo) as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 12,533,944
Hillary Clinton – 12,150,484

Caucuses only (Status Quo) as of March 9:
Barack Obama – 471,170
Hillary Clinton – 264,302
(IA,NV,AK,AS,CO,ID,KS,MN,NM,ND,NE,VI,WA*,ME,HI,TX*,WY,Guam)

Some like to add these two groups together to get a "Total Popular Vote."

[phrigndumass]

21. Adding Michigan only, without Florida, Obama is still ahead

POPULAR VOTE TOTALS

With Michigan only added, as of March 9*:
Barack Obama – 13,005,114
Hillary Clinton – 12,743,095
*Uncommitted – 238,168 (Michigan only, Obama wasn’t on the ballot)

The only way to put Clinton ahead in the popular vote totals is to:
- Add primary totals WITHOUT caucus totals, AND
- Add BOTH Florida and Michigan totals, as is from January, into the count

... which is why she wants to do this. Holding new elections in Florida and Michigan won't help her.

[cameozalaznick]

53. Or better yet...

Just add up the numbers for the "big" states. Then she wins by a LANDSLIDE!!! :woohoo:

[longship]

23. Good information

This kind of fact-filled post is just what DU needs right now.
Please consider keeping this information updated for all of us.

Thanks.

Recommended and :kick:ed

[phrigndumass]

24. Thanks longship

I plan on posting the updates every day, no matter how minimal the changes are.

Kicking and recommending will help this information stay more easily accessible to everyone, so thanks!

:hi:

[phrigndumass]

25. bump

[phrigndumass]

35. bump

[phrigndumass]

38. bump

[phrigndumass]

48. bump

[antigop]

26. Not a HRC supporter, but what the math tells us -- it is still POSSIBLE

She has not been mathematically eliminated. It is still possible.

And no, I am not a HRC supporter (check my previous posts).

She will stay in until it is no longer possible.

People buy a lotto ticket because it is POSSIBLE to win. Likely? no, but possible.

[grantcart]

28. It is only possible if you accept the assumption that she is going to

get twice as many votes in upcoming elections as she has been.

Even her key supporters have conceeded that she will not be able to enter the convention with a delegate lead.

[antigop]

40. Yes, you have to accept an assumption -- but it's STILL possible n/t

[phrigndumass]

29. I agree it's still possible ...

... and not likely.

With the changes she's fighting for in Michigan and Florida (which would be her only chance at winning), she'll still need 54% of the remaining pledged delegates.

That's "Ohio" numbers in every remaining contest, but only after the rules change.

[Johnny__Motown]

31. No, it isn't possible. Lotto is possible.Hillary winning isn't due to the way delegates are split

Look at Wyoming's results. Obama won 60-39 and the split was 7-5. She can't ever catch up because of this. It simply can't be done.


Deal with reality. Hillary is doing nothing but damaging the party so Obama will lose and she can tun again in 2012.

[antigop]

41. I am dealing with reality. It's STILL possible. Not likely, but STILL POSSIBLE.

And I don't think she'll drop out until she has been mathematically eliminated.

And for the record, AGAIN, I AM NOT A HRC supporter. Never have been. Check my posts.

[XemaSab]

39. It's theoretically possible

but taking the lead in the delegate count... that's the challenge.

If she got 70% in every remaining election, she'd be at 1,887. Obama would be at 1,758. 70% is what she got in Arkansas, her highest percentage win.

If she got 58%, which is her second highest historical percentage (from Rhode Island), she'd be at 1,817 and Obama would be at 1,831.

She would have to do better in EVERY remaining state by a greater percent than she got in all but one state to overtake Obama in pledged delegates.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/27/obama-clinton-election-oped-cx_jb_0227delegates.html

[antigop]

42. Yes, that's EXACTLY what I am saying -- it is STILL possible. A challenge but possible.

Believe me, I would like to see her drop out, but I don't think she will. She probably still thinks she can win this thing.

[Turn CO Blue]

46. It's not possible due to the "even delegate " Cong. Districts.

Each congressional district (a larger array of precincts that make up a district as drawn on the map; the same districts that Congress critters represent) apportions its delegates based on percentages. Many of these congressional districts have "even" numbers of delegates to give - some have "odd" numbers.

From a DailyKos diary:

Before we go state-by-state, here's a quick reminder of how the delegates are counted:
Most states have about 2/3s of their delegates alloted by congressional districts, each getting between 2 and 9 delegates per district, with the remaining delegates "at-large" and alloted proportionally to the statewide numbers. So if you live in an odd district, say a 5-delegate district, the delegates will most likely split 3-2. But if you live in a 4-delegate district, unless it's a real landslide, it'll go 2-2.

HOWEVER:
In blowout areas, the evens are "breakable":
In districts with 4 delegates, someone with 62.5% of the vote would break it 3-1. Not very likely except in the absolute most-favorable regions.
In districts with 6 delegates, someone with 58.3% of the vote would break it 4-2. More likely in real strongholds.
In the few districts with 8 delegates, you'd need 56.3% of the vote. Certainly possible.

<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/4/15555/61763/176/449332>

Many districts are evens.

In a 4-delegate district, the Party procedures/rules state that the winner must win the vote by 62.5% to get the "extra" vote. In other words, for Clinton to get a 3-1 split instead of a 2-2 split (a tie), she has to get OVER 62.5% of the vote, meaning that she would have to defeat Obama by over 25% in the district.

So even if Clinton were to completely whomp the stuffing out of Obama in all the remaining states and Puerto Rico- if she has less than 62.4% of the vote in each Congressional District with "even" delegates, Clinton and Obama will tie in each of those districts.

The math is already determined - too much of the race has already happened. Statistically, Clinton can NEVER catch up, much less win.

I have seen algebraic calculations on the Internet that show that even if Clinton were to win over 70% of the vote in many of her favorable districts in most of the remaining states, she would STILL be some 90 pledged delegates behind in August.

Think about it in a more familiar way: remember back in high school where they told you that no matter how good your grades were your senior year, you weren't going to increase your GPA by much - that the real work happened in the first three years? That's how it is now. Clinton's team lost the race for her by counting on landslides in the big states and neglecting the smaller states. That's like only getting A's in your weighted classes or Advanced Placement classes - sure, it gives you a 5.0 in that single class - but if you've gotten C's in your other four classes, that A+ isn't going to help your GPA.

[cameozalaznick]

54. Possible but not probable

[Johnny__Motown]

30. I agree, it simply isn't possible for her to win/ I think she knows it too and is planning on '12

She is just trying to make sure that Obama loses the GE now so she can run again in 2012. That is the only possible reason she would be praising McCain's experience while trashing Obama's.




If any of you think she can still win, forget about it. The lead is insurmountable. The way delegates are apportioned makes it impossible. Look at Wyoming's results. Obama won in a 60-39 contest and still split the delegates 7-5. How in the world can Hillary catch up when even a huge win like that results in a near even delegate split? PA is the only delegate rich state left and here lead there is only 6% (last I saw). She has no hope.

[phrigndumass]

33. Feel free to suggest other items to include in updates

Since I plan on updating this daily, feel free to suggest anything else you might want to see updated on a daily basis.

Keep it kicked and rec'd for greater exposure.

Thanks!

[phrigndumass]

34. DNC official stance on FL and MI as of March 5

Democratic National Committee official stance on Florida and Michigan as of March 5:

"We're glad to hear that the Governors of Michigan and Florida are willing to lend their weight to help resolve this issue. As we've said all along, we strongly encourage the Michigan and Florida state parties to follow the rules, so today's public overtures are good news. The rules, which were agreed to by the full DNC including representatives from Florida and Michigan over 18 months ago, allow for two options. First, either state can choose to resubmit a plan and run a process to select delegates to the convention; second, they can wait until this summer and appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which determines and resolves any outstanding questions about the seating of delegates. We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time. The Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game.”

Source: http://www.democrats.org/a/2008/03/dean_statement_45.php

This is the official Status Quo.

[redstate_democrat]

36. Thanks for this post

I was asking the same question in my other thread but you spelled out it very clearly here. I just don't understand why she is still pushing the point and dragging our nominee down.

[phrigndumass]

37. Happy to help

I'll try to come up with a "Pennsylvania: What if?" ... maybe that will open the eyes of some folks.

:hi:

[quantass]

43. Great Post once again!

[RiverStone]

44. Another kick!

Thanks for the great research.

Keep us posted after Mississippi :hi:

[malik flavors]

45. Thanks for the update. Obama needs to get on those 28 S.D.s he needs.

[gristy]

47. This is a HUGE amount of work.

Thanks!

[L0oniX]

55. At this point HRC supporters are working against the democratic party.

It is in the democratic parties best interests for HRC to drop out. To continue the fight will only damage our party and diminish our chances of winning the GE. Those who are still supporting HRC will be contributors to the damage of the party and possible loss of the GE and might well be responsible for another 4 years of Bush/McCain failures and catastrophes. To all HRC supporters, I appeal to you and your thoughtful reasoning ...please give it up and join with us in unity so we can win the GE.

:dem:

[AtomicKitten]

56. Very impressive analysis.

K&R

[bagrman]

57. How many of the states are Cacus and how many black box voters?

[phrigndumass]

58. There are 18 caucuses ...

... all the rest are primaries. Washington and Texas hold both a primary and a caucus.

States and territories with caucuses:
Iowa
Nevada
Alaska
American Samoa
Colorado
Idaho
Kansas
Minnesota
New Mexico
North Dakota
Nebraska
Virgin Islands
Washington*
Maine
Hawai'i
Texas*
Wyoming
Guam

:hi:

[bagrman]

63. I quess the proper question was how many Caucus states left?

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

59. Really nice work! I'll be "bumping" your daily updates.

Thank you for spelling this race out using numbers. I have no more questions.

[frog92969]

60. Ask President Gore, it ain't over yet.

Crossing fingers

Thanks for all the math, my favorite subject because you can't argue with it.:)

[Stardust]

61. Very impressive - Thanks for doing this!

:hi:

[cameozalaznick]

64. Kick

and Recommend :kick:

[verges]

65. kick

nt