Too lazy to figure this out myself

[NewHampshireDem]

By closing the gap, how many delegates did Obama pick up? (Let's assume for the moment a 10 point victory.)

If Obama were to close the gap to 9 points, does he get 1 more delegate?

How far would HRC need to widen the gap (from 10 points to what?) in order to pick up another?

Assuming that Obama outspent HRC 3-1, how does that work out in terms of cost per delegate gained by closing the gap?


I guess what I'm wondering is, to what extent was the Penn money really money well spent? I suspect it was, since, IMHO, a 10-point 'win' for HRC isn't really a win at all ... and that Obama's money was really much better spent than Clinton's was.

And, FWIW, as a reward for enabling my laziness ... Obama had the money to spend. Win or lose, if he hadn't had spent the money, HRC would be spinning this as 'his campaign is too inept to even spend the money it has to make the race close.' Anyone who wants to throw the 3-1 in your face should consider that!

[Gore1FL]

1. There are a lot of variables

The strategy of spending doesn;t matter so much when you can afford it. Obama forced Clinton to bankrupt herself. By closing the gap to below 10, he also cut off a lot of future funds.

In that sense it was money well spent, because it will impact future contests.

On the face of it, he spend a lot more per delegate, but effectively ended any realistic (or unrealistic) chance she had.

An argument could be made that outspeding but still losing (but by less than she needed to have him lose by) he spent quote wisely.

[Eric J in MN]

2. Delegates gained from PA: Hilary Clinton 52, Obama 46

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/23/1217/63269/68/501315

[Gore1FL]

3. Thewre is another 60 in there somewhere

as PA had 158.

[NewHampshireDem]

4. Well, if he spent the $200 I sent him over the past two months

in Pennsylvania, I'm pretty happy with what my money bought.