No more SDs needed to reach 2025?

OK, before going on, I should clarify that I'm separating add-on delegates from currently existing supers who haven't already pledged to anyone.  At any rate, I just ran the numbers, and barring some incredible collapse like Oregon or Puerto Rico going 80/20 Clinton, I believe Obama can clinch the nomination without having one more superdelegate commit.   The crunching is below.

Right now, according to Demconwatch, Obama needs 108 delegates to get to 2025.  With his lead in OR mostly canceling out Clinton's lead in KY, Obama should be able to get close to 50 of the 103 delegates distributed today.  Let's say he gets 48 and Clinton gets 55.  That gets him down to 60 needed.

There are 41 add ons remaining.  Obama leaning states AK (1), GA (2), WY (1), HI (1), ME (1), MN (1), MS (1), WI (1), ID (1), IO (1), VA (2), WA(2), NC (2), OR(1), and NE (1) should all go to him; the 2's are all in states that went pretty overwhelmingly for him, so he should get at least 17-18 out of the 19 remaining.  SD/MT are likely wins for him two and they get one each and PA/TX were close enough losses that 1 or 2 out of the 6 add ons there is a possibility.  20 add ons doesn't seem unrealistic.  The count then is 40 needed.

PR has 55 delegates.  Let's assume Clinton wins that big and gets 33 of the 55 (60%).  The count is then 18.   South Dakota and Montana have a combined 31 delegates and Obama is expected to win both.  18-13 is a bit of a stretch, but it's quite possible.

So Obama could get to the magic number without requiring a groundswell of superdelegates - remember if Obama falls one or two short, there still are 171 outstanding unpledged SDs, and 6 of them (OK 8 total, but 2 are Obama supporters) are members of the Pelosi Club.

So, you ask, what about MI/FL?  Yes Obama could get to 2025 easily with at least 165 superdelegates staying neutral, but what about the rules committee?

Let's see how that looks.  Here are my assumptions about the states:  

(1) The 69/59 split or something close to it happens in MI as it has the support of MI politicians.

(2) FL is given a 50% haircut and Obama gets Edwards' delegates.

If that happens, Obama gets 59 pledged delegates from Michigan and 40 pledged from Florida.  Obama has 5 SDs pledged to him already from MI and FL. The new magic number is 2162.5.  

In this case, he would need some more delegates.  He'd be at 2134 delegates, meaning he'd need 28 endorsements out of the pool of 201 (there are 15 unpledged SD's from each FL and MI).  

So without Florida and Michigan, Obama most likely doesn't need anymore superdelegates.  With them, a 173-28 break in favor of Clinton would be enough.  In either case, Obama can get to the magic number without a groundswell of endorsements making it look like Clinton is being pushed out.  I'm willing to wait a few more weeks in order to not create that feeling.



Display:


Here's the problem: (none / 0)

It's unlikely that Obama will reach 2025 before the May 31st Rules meeting.  If he did, the meeting would be canceled, according to Donna Brazile.  He will most likely be 20-30 short at that time.

I'm expecting a compromise at that meeting, and your new number is probably right.  So while I agree with you that he probably doesn't need anymore SD's due to the add-ons, you should probably just say he doesn't need them to reach any number regardless what it is because my sense is that 2025 will not be the number after May 31st.


by The Distillery on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:18:48 PM EST

Re: Here's the problem: (none / 0)

Well he'd need a few more SDs to get to the new number, whatever it is, unless the compromise would in part be that Obama would receive some endorsements.  


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:21:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem: (none / 0)

Agreed - he can and should allow at least 50% so the GOP can't make disenfranchisement claims in those states.


by Falsehood on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:34:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem: (none / 0)

I find it very likely he reaches 2025 by the 30th. He'd only need 50 delegates today and an average of maybe 5 SDs for the next 10 days, which is about what he's been getting anyway.


John McCain hates terrorists, except the ones that hate women. Those are just swell.
by terra on Tue May 20, 2008 at 04:14:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (1.50 / 4)

If this, then this. If this, then this....

If I had a snout and a curly tail, I would be a pig.


by arkansasdemocrat on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:20:27 PM EST

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

Which of my assumptions are unrealistic?  It's not like I'm saying that Obama is going to win states 70/30 or something.  If things go as the polls suggest they will and add on elections go on the way that they have been in the past, Obama won't need any more SDs.

If they don't?  The worst case realistic scenario (e.g. no 85/15 blowout in KY/OR/PR/SD/MT) is that Obama would need like 8 endorsements.

...out of 165 left.  

If you don't like my assumptions there, which ones do you prefer?


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:25:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pay no attention (none / 0)

they dislike the conclusion and see no obvious fault, so they dismiss the exercise.

I show slightly different numbers, but here's my short-stack:

108 to go
-48 tonight (maybe a touch high, but okay)
---
60
-27 Add-ons*
---
23

That's before Puerto Rico... anything better than 40% gets him there, and he's got a likely haul of about 17 from MT/SD combined.

*There are 27 unnamed add-ons from states Obama won, 8 from states Clinton won.  The discrepancy between this total and yours is that your 41 includes Add-ons who were elected as uncommitted -- for all purposes, these are superdelegates now, so I'd just lump them with the other.

And yes, some amount of inclusion of MI/FL pushes it out a little bit.  If you give Obama all the uncommitted in MI, Edwards' delegates from FL, and then half everything (which I think is probably pretty close to what we'll see), then it only pushes his needed out by about 25, maybe, which means he'd need only about 10 more supers from here.

It's all fuzzy math, of course, but the shape of it is clear.


by Rorgg on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:48:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama will get more SD's tomorrow (none / 0)

There should be a nice pop in SD endorsements after he wins the pledged delegate race today.


by parahammer on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:22:19 PM EST

Re: Obama will get more SD's tomorrow (none / 0)

No - that would give the impression that she's being pushed to drop out. She's campaigning all positive right now - no sense in pissing anyone off like that.


by Falsehood on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:35:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

Thanks for dose of reality.  


"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."
by fugazi on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:23:01 PM EST

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

But he is going to get more.  Soon.  You know they already have the SDs just lined up, ready to parade out, one by one and in small groups Wednesday and Thursday to steal the media away from Hillary and Kentucky.


by rf7777 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:24:29 PM EST

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

I think a good deal of them have said they will not go public until after all the primaries.  So I think once it's all said and done, the majority of the undeclared will just rally around the leader in delegates, which is Obama.


by The Distillery on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:25:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

I'm almost hoping that doesn't happen though.  Let it go on until 6/3 with Obama picking up 2 here and 3 there and another 2 there and whoops, the last election happened and Obama is 34 delegates over the lead without having Clinton forced out by anyone other than the voters.


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:27:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

Tomorrow Obama should get at least 10 or so SDs.  Hillary will get some Kentucky SDs.  The primary continues.  After PR I believe that Gore will come out and endorse Obama.  He will not do it before all the primaries are completed first.


by Spanky on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:30:21 PM EST

Re: No more SDs needed to reach 2025? (none / 0)

Gore is probably waiting in case there's a bad media possibility.


by Falsehood on Tue May 20, 2008 at 02:35:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't let the Clintons find out about this (none / 0)

It would be so discouraging.


We shall overcome. Yes we can.
by Sam Wise Gingy on Tue May 20, 2008 at 03:36:07 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.