Clinton's growing Iowa disaster could effect other caucus states

[grantcart]

Caucus Delegates + Buyers Remorse + Caucus Paradigm = Why Saturday’s Iowa County Conventions have a greater impact on the campaign than Ohio and could mean even worse news ahead for the Clinton campaign.

or in other words: IS IT REALLY A GOOD IDEA TO SPIN YOUR CAMPAIGN THAT ONLY BIG STATES COUNT WHEN IN FACT 14 SMALL STATES ARE STILL THINKING ABOUT WHO THE HELL THEY WANT TO BE PRESIDENT.

I KNOW IT ISN'T DAY ONE YET BUT DO YOU REALLY WANT TO PISS ON ALL OF THESE PEOPLE WHILE THEY ARE STILL DECIDING??




Something very significant happened in Iowa Saturday that was ignored by most of the country but followed very closely at DU.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Iowa took the second step in the Caucus process and had their County Nominating Conventions.

What is at stake:


The caucuses are only the first step in the process – this is how the system will work towards completion:
• Mar 15, 2008 County Convention Iowa's 99 counties are holding their county conventions on March 15th. Contact your local party to find out more!
• Apr 26, 2008 District Conventions The five district conventions will take place April 26th.
• Jun 14, 2008 State Convention The Democratic State Convention will be held June 14th in Des Moines.




The results on Saturday will have a dramatic impact on the national nominating process for three separate reasons:

1) Delegates Obama gains +7

2) The issue of Buyers Remorse - Hillary's numbers drop after the caucuses

3)Paradigm for understanding other Caucus process and other states - 14 more states are still in caucus mode

Conclusion: Soon the Clinton campaign will go on full court spin with their sights set on Pennsylvania and promoting the idea that the only important thing for determining the nominee are Big States and their Primaries they are only undermining support they have in caucus states – who are still determining who to support for President.

Question: How will such a strategy play on the 14 states still in the decision making process? Is it possible that short term Clinton spin will so antagonize small states who are still deciding who they want for President that Hillary could lose some of the 155 projected caucus delegates she now theoretically has but continues to denigrate and insult?

Today Iowa gave us a clue it could be quite a few.



Discussion of the details for the points above

1) In terms of numbers:
a)Barack Obama significantly increased his support in the process by increasing his percent by 40%. Typically County Convention results closely mirror caucus results. Not so here:


Comparison between Caucus and County Convention

. . . . Caucus . . . County Conventions

Obama 37.5% . . . . . .52.33%

Edwards 29.75% . . . . .15.64%

Clinton 29.47% . . . . . 31.68%


http://www.iowademocrats.us/draftconventionresults.pdf

These reflect about 90% returns from the 99 county conventions

b)Obama received his support from a huge split in Edwards delegates going for him and also for some slippage of Clinton supporters. The reason that Clinton had even the marginal 2% increase above is because she gained percentage in some counties where Edwards was not able to maintain the 15% threshold minimum.

c) What is very striking about these numbers, and has not been observed in the press at all, is that the 15% minimum threshold has to be maintained at each of the steps of the process. While there may be some districts Edwards maintains 15%, it is logical to assume that since he is so close to the 15% threshold statewide that he will lose some districts on April 26th and that will mean that he is highly unlikely to maintain the threshold thru to the statewide convention in June.

d) Based on Obama’s performance on Saturday it is logical to assume that he will continue to get support from Edwards delegates later on in the process and continue to add even more delegates.

e) Obama gained between 7-9 delegates Saturday in Iowa – Clinton’s huge win in Ohio accounted for 9 delegates



2) The Issue of Buyers Remorse has been raised by the Clinton campaign

a) The Clinton Charge:

Mark Penn -- who had predicted Clinton and Obama would be "virtually tied" after Tuesday -- wouldn't say if Clinton would remain in the race if she lost either state. But he suggested her chances improve each day as voters experience "buyer's remorse" over Obama.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-ushill0302,0...

b) The problem with this spin is that each new primary or caucus is a first vote for that particular state.

Iowa is the first state in which the process allows the participants to vote a second time. And there is clear buyers remorse – that on Hillary Rodham Clinton.

c) The Clinton campaign apparently thinking that once the caucuses were over that the decision making was also over made very conflicting remarks about the process heaping insults on the caucus process

-Before the caucuses there was the pre spin to take out the sting of defeat:
Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland told The Columbus Dispatch it "makes no sense" to grant Iowa the right to hold the first presidential contest.

He called the GOP and Democratic caucuses "hugely undemocratic," because the process "excludes so many people."

-Then Senator Clinton had to reverse that and before the Primary state what a good thing it was . . .

"As she has said many times she is glad Iowans are entrusted with this responsibility because they take it so seriously. On this issue Hillary and Gov. Strickland strongly disagree."

Then afterwards the Clinton campaign made numerous negative statements about caucus states everytime they lost in one – here is a selection:

My opinion is that the Iowa caucus system should not be any kind of litmus test for our nominee. Unfortunately it is one. The campaign always knew Iowa would be tough for us – they thought it would be one of our toughest states. We have our work cut out for us, that's for sure. From my friend:
I wish there were time for the real story of Iowa to emerge.

The Iowa caucus process is a broken and flawed process. It was designed to allow for the active party Dems generally known to one another to assign delegates and was not designed to handle a flood of students and independents.

(and again after Texas)

A Clinton spokesman denied rumors of a pending legal challenge, but made no secret of Clinton's displeasure with caucuses in general.


d) After the caucuses were over Iowans had a chance for real buyers remorse:



This little spin is unlikely to be offered by the Clinton campaign again.


3) Paradigm for future states?

There are 14 other caucus states who are still going thru the process of selecting delegates, eventually to a state convention where the national delegates will be selected. None of the other states have a sizeable number of delegates pledged to a 3rd candidate like Iowa. But if there is any further buyers remorse in these states then it is possible that Clinton delegate defections could cause delegates to be lost in a particular state.

In most years of course it makes no difference as by the time this many primaries have taken place a winner is acknowledged as a winner and the losing candidates endorse the leader gracefully before state conventions take place.


The bad news for the Clinton campaign is that their incompetent handling of the caucus process can now be replicated in the

following caucus states. :
a) Washington . . . State Convention 5/17
b) Alaska . . . . . . .State 5/24
c) Am Samoa . . . . .?
d) Colorado . . . . . .State 5/17
e) Idaho . . . . . . . . .State 6/14
f) Kansas . .District 4/12 . . . .State 5/17
g) Minnesota . . .District 5/17 . .State 6/6
h) N Dakota . . . District May State April
i) Nebraska . . . . . .County June State 6/28
j) Washington . . . County 4/19 Dist 5/17 State 6/15
k) Maine . . . . . . .State 5/31
l) Hawaii . . . . . . State 5/25
m) Texas . . . . . . State 6/6

[acrosstheuniverse]

1. But...but...but that Wright pastor guy...

will screw things up for Obama so bad that he's looking at a 30 point blow out in Pennsylvania and then from there she will be ahead in the polls and win the majority of the remaining states. And then she will have the FL delegates seated and steal the super-delegates in a very bitter brokered convention and come out the winner in all of this. Winner that is to the silver that is alloted to the 2nd place spot in the GE.

Pastor-gate DID HIM IN because America is retarded that way.

[grantcart]

25. evidently they don't get cable in Iowa

[acrosstheuniverse]

2. I like this article...

let's bump the shit up.

[grantcart]

18. Obama likely to pick up 6 more Iowa delegates at the state convention

This great thread shows how it broke down district by district and therefore Edwards lost 2 more delegates and almost certainly there will be 6 more delegates up for grabs at Iowa's state convention.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5107164&mesg_id=5107164

[bluestateguy]

3. Typical Hillary campaign; top down, superdelegates, party establishment, machine politics

Ignore 30 states in the country, line up the endorsements from people who think they are important, raise gobs of money from a few fat cats.

[roguevalley]

28. God, she went in knowing the rules. SHEESH, Hillary, quit your

bitching. You look bad, really, really, REALLY bad.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

49. To the contrary, keep it up Hillary.

[Diane R]

4. Unfortunately for Clinton, not all caucus states are 'small'. Washington is rather large;

Washington is a caucus state and we will send 78 pledged delegates to Denver (and 19 superdelegates). Not exactly small potatoes. Clinton really miscalculated when she decided to thumb her nose at caucus states. Obama carried Washington by 68% ~ 31 % Clinton. Our county conventions are April 5th, and the state convention is June 15th. My guess is that she'll lose even more delegates by then.

[grantcart]

5. and then there is Texas

[Cha]

69. Wonder whose idea it was

to ignore the caucus states? The incredibly expensive mark penn?

All goes back to the SuperTues close out they thought they were going to have.

[Window]

6. K/R.

:kick:

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. Grantcart...you've done it again.

I swear you have been, without a doubt, one of the most valuable DU'ers during this process. You're educating the dummies like myself who never even knew what a caucus was, and how the delegates are alloted, etc. Thanks for all you do. I'm in a primary state, and until this year, I don't think my vote has ever made a difference at the national level. Recommended.

:hi:

[grantcart]

16. Thank you for your very kind response

[goclark]

56. Grandcart is fantastic!

[crispini]

8. Texas county conventions are in two weeks.

Interesting dynamic going on here -- many of the party regulars are Clinton supporters. On the other hand, they also like the way we do things around here (many of them WROTE the rules) including the hybrid system. Clinton is putting her marker in the sad re: suing the TDP and the mess we made (and it was a mess, a lot of it, but that was mostly just lack of preparation, not malice). That's probably not enough for her hard-core party supporters to leave her, but what about the rank-and-file ordinary delegate type?

All I know is, in the last two weeks since OUR primary, I've talked to a lot of folks who say they're not real thrilled with her behavior.

[grantcart]

27. Were you selected as a delegate?

[crispini]

36. yep!

actually, I'm the delegation chair, haha

[BeyondGeography]

9. "Do you really want to piss on all of these people while they are still deciding??"

The sadly funny part is they will take yesterday's results and spin them as proof that they were right about caucuses being undemocratic, which will only further drive her numbers down against McCain in Iowa.

That's called democracy, Hillaryworld.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. Guess so. Great strategy, keep it up.

[K Gardner]

10. Grantcart.. I just have one question..

Who the hell ARE you anyway? LOL..

Thanks again for superbly brilliant work and education :-) :hi:

[grantcart]

31. your too kind

[Cha]

70. ..

:D

[dempartisan23]

11. great work

hillary must drop out and stop endorsing mccain.

[Hepburn]

12. I don't like your posts...

..I FUCKING LOVE them!

Back to the top with this one! K&R and thank you...:hi:

[WillyT]

13. Excellent Post Once Again GC !!! - K & R !!!

:bounce::yourock::bounce:

:hi:

[BumRushDaShow]

14. K&R

More good info on the caucus process! :thumbsup:

:kick:

[uponit7771]

15. I can see Hillary supporters coming out more against the math than the man in the coming days

[Recursion]

17. Affect

"Effect" as a verb means "cause" or "bring into being"

[bigbrother05]

19. K and R

thanks

[book_worm]

20. but Iowa doesn't count, remember? and neither do CT, VT, ME, DE, DC, MD, VA,

SC, GA, LA, MS, AL, HA, Alaska, WA, ID, CO, UT, ND, MN, WI, NE, IL, KS, WY...

[rainbow4321]

21. Ding, ding, ding

Exactly what I posted yesterday.

How much of a coincidence is it that the same day it is announced that she lost delegates in Iowa's final count, her people announce that they will now try to stall/sue the TX Dem Party over our caucus results/system. To the point where it would delay even the county level conferences on Mar 29.
Her delegate number is being chipped away at, one by one...and her revenge is to drag each caucus states' Dem Parties thru the mud/court to stop the losses. Losses that she and her camp are responsible for, NOT the voters from those states. Is she out to bankrupt the state level Dem parties who will try to defend their system...cuz who is going to PAY to have the investigations/court battles that she wants?

[Arkana]

22. Isn't it amazing

how everything Mark Penn says is wrong?

He's like Bizarro King Midas--everything he touches turns to cowshit.

[grantcart]

80. lol

[Scurrilous]

23. K & R

:thumbsup:

[me b zola]

24. K&R

[DearAbby]

26. Kicking this

Awesome piece of work! :thumbsup:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

29. Hillary's got no coat tails, its a Clinton thing

:kick:

[thevoiceofreason]

30. Reality bites!

[KittyWampus]

32. Listen! Clintons are trying to make the Texas caucus null via several lawsuits. That can be a factor

as well.

[BattyDem]

33. Please forgive me ... I'm not sure I completely understand caucus rules

Let's see if I'm getting this ...

A state has a caucus and people pledge their support to a particular candidate. Delegates are awarded based on the amount of support a candidate received from the people on that day.

The delegates aren't officially awarded until the county and state conventions. At that time, those delegates can switch from one candidate to another. They don't have to pledge support to the candidate they were "awarded" to on the day of the caucus.

Is that right? :shrug:

If it is, then I have to ask ... what the hell was Hillary thinking when she decided to announce that those states were too small or they were unimportant or they simply didn't matter? Didn't she know that the delegates she received could easily turn around and say, "Our votes don't mean anything to you? Well then, f*ck you!"

Tell me I'm missing something because I can't believe the Clinton campaign was that stupid. There's got to be more to it ... right? :shrug:


On edit: Just to be clear ... I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I really do want to know if I understand the situation correctly because I don't think I do. Hillary is not one of my favorite people these days, but I always believed she was an intelligent woman. As far as I'm concerned, "don't insult your delegates until their votes are official" is a no-brainer. What would she have to gain by pissing them off? What am I missing?

[grantcart]

35. You basically have it but let me broaden it out a little more for you

People criticize the caucus system but that is basically how the system evolved over time - precinct - county - state.

You would go to the precinct level to discuss the party's business and you would vote on platform planks that you thought were important. - Like stopping the war. You then selected delegates for the next step. Those delegates would then go to the county convention and at the county convention they would spend a whole day arguing about the direction of the party pass a platform and then select delegates to go to the state and so on to the national convention.

Now people don't really get involved in the platform part of it - its only about the candidate for president.

When they are selecting delegates at each of these stages they are picking for the presidential candidate but because they actually
know each other sometimes the affiliation to the candidate is not as hard core as it is in here for example.

The reason that it never came up before is that by the time they got to the state conventions one candidate already had a big lead and (more importantly) the other candidates ran out of money. Now without an absolute lock on the this stage of the process which has never been important has now become very important.

[BattyDem]

39. Thank you for the explanation

:hi:

My state always had a June primary, so by the time it got to us, the candidate was decided. Our votes were pretty much symbolic. Even if the presumed nominee didn't have the required number of delegates yet, we really didn't have a choice because there was no one else left in the race. As a result, I never got deeply involved in the primary process because I knew the candidate I wanted would most likely be out by the time I got to vote.

This time around, our primary was on Super Tuesday, so my vote actually meant something. (Yay!) I've learned a lot more about the whole primary process, but the caucus system was still a bit confusing to me. Thanks for taking the time to explain it. I guess I understood more about it than I thought I did. But ... I still don't understand why any candidate would risk insulting caucus delegates before their votes were official. :crazy:

[grantcart]

42. They are spin - addicts one of the refreshing things about Obama is that when he spins it sounds

logical and is done with humor.

[Politicalboi]

73. Hillary pissed on

Obama supporters too when she mocked him. Like those people who support him are not important. I will never need them to win the GE. Yeah right. Foot meet mouth

[Quixote1818]

34. Clinton needs to learn the golden rule. Talk about poor judgment. nt

[democrattotheend]

37. I don't think this will happen elsewhere. At least, I hope not

Iowa was different from the other caucus states because Edwards had delegates. In other caucus states, I would expert (or at least hope) that there is not a lot of reallocation, because there were only 2 candidates and they are both still running.

I saw a comment from someone here who said she knew a Clinton delegate (at the precinct level) in Iowa who was a delegate for Clinton but planned to caucus for Obama during round 2 because she was disgusted with Clinton campaign tactics. Personally, I don't believe that's right, because she was elected by people who supported Clinton to represent them, and some of them might still support Clinton. I'd like to believe that if I had been elected to represent a candidate who was still in the race, I would still caucus for that candidate even if I had changed my own mind.

I guess these kind of switches are bound to happen here and there, but I hope neither campaign mounts an organized effort to encourage it.

[grantcart]

38. I agree that it probably won't be a big impact in other states as they don't have a

significant 3rd candidate in play.

However in Iowa there are 6 more Edwards delegate positions that will not make viability all the way to the general election.

Any organized poaching will not be successful and actually would probably cause more of a negative reaction that it would help - only Ickes in the Clinton campaign has made any real mention of it, but I don't think even they are serious about it.

The significance of the Iowa Clinton delegates changing is not that they were going against what their friends and neighbors wanted but were in fact representing a sea change in the state - as is supported by the polling results.

If the Clinton campaign goes with a major all out attack to discredit the delegate lead that Obama has and discredit the caucus system it could put her supporters in an akward position.

[CoffeeCat]

58. I was an Iowa delegate...

...at last Saturday's convention and I'm going on to be a district delegate in Iowa.

I plan to blog live. I couldn't Saturday, due to technical difficulties.

Grantcart, thank you for explaining the process so very well and breaking it down for people to understand.
You're really done a great job!

I'd just like to add a few things, in case people might find these bits interesting. My apologies, if you've
all ready read any of them!

As people have said, the delegates that are sent to the Iowa COUNTY conventions (that were held last Saturday)
were chosen during the Iowa caucus, at the end of the caucus. For example, in my precinct, Obama won 7 delegates
and Hillary won 4. So each candidate camp gets to select 7, 4 people (delegates) to represent the voters at
the first round of conventions--again, the COUNTY convention.

When you walk in and register at the COUNTY convention, you hand in your paperwork--which is a packet that
is mailed to all delegates. That gets you in the door. You sign in and write down which candidate you
support--but it is non-binding. You don't have to end up voting for the candidate you write down.

Also--and very important. When you sign in and show your paperwork, there is NOTHING on that paperwork which
indicates who you caucused for in the Iowa caucuses. For example, I caucused for Obama, was chosen as a delegate,but
I walk into the COUNTY convention with no one knowing who I caucused for. I can do whatever I want.

In a standard election year--by this time we know who the nominee is--and your caucus behavior is congruent
with your COUNTY convention behavior. However, there is always the possibility that you can change your mind.
Delegates are allowed to do that.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I spoke with a few Obama voters--who caucused for Hillary and were elected
delegates--but they were sitting in the Obama room at the COUNTY convention on Saturday--being counted as
Obama supporters. At the COUNTY convention, Obama supporters were in the gymnasium; Hillary supporters were
in the cafeteria and Edwards and uncommitteds were in another room. The counting was done separately.

What was really cool, is that the counting was so precise! Everyone in the Obama room was seated in chairs
or on bleachers. We each passed around a wireless microphone and counted off--out loud---1,2,3,4, etc--until
we reached our final count--537. We also voted on paper ballots that were given ONLY to delegates who registered
after walking in the door. They were filled out as we sat in the gymnasium, handed forward and counted by party
officials, in front of the entire room, while the microphone count happened. The paper ballots had to match with the microphone count. They did.

Let me tell you, it made me feel very secure and proud of my state--to see a count done in this way--with
so much reassurance of accuracy.

The final count for my COUNTY convention was Obama 537, Clinton 304, Edwards 189.

Now, on April 26th, we move on to DISTRICT CONVENTION. I'm a DISTRICT delegate, and this phase should
be very exciting--because people want to know if Obama will continue to gain ground (and more delegates).

As the process moves from various levels: COUNTY, DISTRICT, STATE, NATIONAL--the delegates are winnowed
down into smaller, more concentrated groups.

It's been no big secret that I've been highly critical of Hillary Clinton for her policies, votes and
her campaign tactics. With that said, I continue to be stunned by how ignorant her campaign is, and how
they have made so many errors.

After the caucuses, Hillary whined about how unfair the caucuses were, and how they "disenfranchised"
voters and that the caucuses were confusing. Before the caucuses, she talked about how she would not do well
in the caucuses, because Iowa has not elected a woman governor or Congress members. She said this when
her polls began tanking. She practically called us all backward misogynists--and she did this while
she was still standing on Iowa ground.

Additionally, she has insulted the smaller states with her focus on the big states and her insistence that
she can take the presidency by arguing that she can win the big states. In effect, she's suggesting that
the small states that have spoken for Obama, are of no consequence to her. We don't matter. Never mind
about Obama's higher delegate count or higher popular-vote count--and don't pay attention to the millions
of people in many states who have voted for Obama. What counts, according to Hillary--are the 5 or 6 big
states that she has won.

Furthermore, many, many very-politically-involved Iowans work their butts off to ensure that the caucuses
are fair, organized, transparent and ethical. People work long hours behind the scenes and many volunteers
for the campaigns provide transportation to the caucuses, call people to make sure they know where to caucus
and work with local party members. Iowans work their hearts out. The citizenry takes their "first in the
nation status" very seriously as well.

We are humbled and deeply honored to be "first." My feeling is--that if I am being entrusted to go "first"
that I need to do research, see the candidates, read those mailers, pay attention and meet the candidates
face to face. I saw Edwards speak, I was within a foot of Biden, I talked with Obama on the phone and
I met Elizabeth Edwards. I read all of their plans. I took the time to ask their canvassers and campaign
callers detailed questions.

So, how do you think Hillary Clinton has made the citizens of Iowa feel--when she threw us under the bus
when she saw her numbers tanking--a week before the caucus? Hillary had no problem positioning us as
unenlightened oafs who hadn't elected a female governor. If it scored her a few points, what did an
entire state full of people matter? How do you think it made the caucus volunteers and other party
activists feel--when Hillary repeatedly made the caucuses sound unfair?

I've seen many, many election cycles in Iowa. Some candidates have won the Iowa caucuses, but many more
have lost. Not one candidate complained about the process after the results were tallied. No one has
ever suggested that the caucuses "disenfranchise" people. Not until Hillary Clinton lost.

Then we get this wave of disinformation and lies. It really was a sight to see.

I certainly can't speak for any of the other delegates, but myself, but I can tell you that I couldn't
even fathom throwing my support for Clinton, after what she did in Iowa. She demonstrated that she will
throw any person, any process, anything--under the bus--if it gets her ahead. She will lie, distort
and twist---and if it hurts the target or damages a reputation...so what? All that matters is what leverages
Hillary.

I'm really wondering why she didn't think about all of this--knowing that her delegates could switch?

Hillary seems horrendously ignorant, and almost blinded by her own goals--to understand the consequences of her behavior.

[grantcart]

63. First Thank you for being a delegate - which I would extend to a Clinton supporter as well

Secondly - Thank you for your report on Saturday, which I copied and put into the thread.

Thirdly - Thank you for your more expansive thoughts above.


If anybody has read the OP and your response they will see that you have 'incarnated' my theoretical observations into an actual first person account and the latter is always the most valuable.

Most people have seen the results which have focused on the Edwards folks breaking very big to Obama.

What has not been reported as well is if there is a significant factor of buyer's remorse amongst Clinton delegates - we have seen some anecdotal reports which leads to a couple of questions;

1) Did you see or hear about any poaching operations by either Clinton or Obama?

2) What was your sense of Clinton delegates - why were some of them lining up for Obama? Do you think there will be future defections at the district and state conventions?

3) It is pretty clear that Edwards delegates will not be able to sustain 15% all the way to the state convention. Should we expect that they will continue to break mostly for Obama?


Again thanks so much - Atleast you can tell the delegates at the convention people are still watching Iowa and we are pretty well informed what Iowa was doing. As far as I am concerned Iowans deserve to be first in the country in the process.

[Mme. Defarge]

40. K&R! n/t

[meow mix]

41. K&R

:toast:

[Utopian Leftist]

43. Please excuse

my ignorance but one thing is confusing me. Did Obama get a NET gain of 7 delegates? In other words, 7 more than Hillary? Because when I read about this yesterday in the mainstream news I got the impression that Obama gained 7 delegates while Hillary gained 6 (which would mean he only got a net gain of one delegate).

[grantcart]

52. Great question

It now looks as if Obama gains 9 and Hillary loses one for net +10 for Obama

Ohio for comparison purposes was a + 9 for Hillary.

[Condem]

44. grantcart

great job this weekend!!!!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

45. Obama's got coat tails

and he just needs to get back on message. Even republicans I know respect him
and have said this.

[grantcart]

Its the quiet period we are going to have a couple of weeks

of no real news - unless the superdelegates do something.

He won't try and do anything too visible in PA this early - just ground game and registering voters for another 10 days

He will try and close PA in the last two weeks before the election - doesn't want to peak too early

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

46. Thanks for bringing this up. Spells disaster for Hillary.

[grantcart]

59. thanks

[stop the bleeding]

48. another quality post by grantcart

:beer:

[grantcart]

64. Thanks for the beer

[Joe the Revelator]

50. kick

[PerfectSage]

51. K& R & Thank you

:bounce::applause:

[Arugula Latte]

53. ...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[myrna minx]

54. Informative post.

All of this short term damage control has damaged the bigger picture for Clinton.

[XemaSab]

55. .

:thumbsup:

[milkyway]

57. Thanks for all the great work you put into this. What's most tellling about Iowa is that it

occurred at the height of the Jeremiah Wright hysteria. After a Friday of 24/7 corporate media coverage of the un-American scary black man, Iowans gave their support to Obama in even greater numbers than before.

k&r

[DerekJ]

60. kick

[depakid]

61. Interesting post

For all their supposed political astuteness, the Clintons haven't managed the caucus process very well, have they?

I agree- it's byzantine and has no place in the 21st Century -yet it is what it is.

Curious to see what happens over the next several months with these (might even be a two edged sword).

[kwenu]

62. Wow! The Queen got SMACKED!!!!!!!!

"Let them eat cake" doesn't work today either. Does it Hillary?

[Johnny__Motown]

65. Hillary Clinton..... Ready On Day None

[Cha]

66. hilaryworld has the States

snarfing at each other..just how big of a divider does she plan to be before this is over?

Of course, hilary is "displeased" with caucuses..she's losing. If she were winning she'd be praising them to the high heavens. How transparent can she legally be?

Thanks grant, this is amazing work you've done.

[grantcart]

71. thanks also see the impressive caucus report by 'twosparkles" upthread.

[Cha]

72. Oh, I did..I've read every single

post on this thread with awe. I'm like a lot of others who are thanking you and Two Sparkles 'cause we're learning so much about the process.

I've been reading Two Sparkles since I caught her posts when Iowa was happening!

Good job ya DUers!

[AZBlue]

67. Wow! Amazing post - lots of great info!!

Thank you!

[Oilwellian]

68. Great post

Thanks for all of the hard work you do grantcart. Your threads are always a treat. :toast:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

74. K&R. Thanx4 all your hard work. BTW, a COMPREHENSIVE calendar of all county and

state delegate allocation events, arranged in chronological order, is at

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/events.phtml?s=c

[grantcart]

75. Be sure to go up thread to read the convention report by

TWOSPARKLES

[grantcart]

76. Chuck Todd's latest numbers for Ohio Obama =+ 10

Chuck Todd: "The Clinton and Obama campaigns just got done fighting over Iowa... again! The state's 99 county Democratic parties held conventions today and the two campaigns were actively fighting to gain even more pledged delegates. At stake: the 14 pledged delegates John Edwards earned during the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses."

"Tonight, the Obama campaign claimed a gain of 7 pledged delegates, added to the 16 they earned on Jan. 3. Obama's manager, David Plouffe, also said their math had Clinton actually losing one of her 15 delegates that she garnered on Jan. 3. BTW, if the 7 number is accurate, it would be two short of what Clinton netted out of Ohio."

The Clinton campaign disputes losing any delegates but admits Obama gained.

Update: Todd confirms Obama won 7 new delegates and says Clinton also gained one. There are still six Edwards delegates up for grabs at the convention.

Update II: Todd notes revised numbers today: Obama +9, Clinton -1

[NM Independent]

77. Great post

I'm too late to R, but I can K

Thanks for all the interesting info.

[KittyWampus]

78. The Math, The Math IT BURNS!

LOL

[grantcart]

79. Today Demcomwatch added the Iowa gains and Obama's magic number

dropped to 411.5

He also picked up another superdelegate

[redqueen]

81. The Clinton Campaign - fucking things up since day 1.

GEEZ, these people! Are they *trying* to lose?!

[grantcart]

82. The funny thing is unless they are reading it in here - I don't think they

have figured it out yet lol Too focused on Pennsylvania.

I am waiting for the "We love big states like Penn and can't stand those stupid caucus states" spin every day lol