Jun 1, 2008 9:57pm
Post-Puerto Rico Math
EmailSen. Barack Obama has 2,069.5 delegates to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 1,910.5.
2,118 are needed to secure the nomination.
Obama is 48.5 delegates away from clinching the nomination.
Clinton is 207.5 away.
There are 248 delegates left — 31 pledged delegates up for grabs in Montana and South Dakota’s primaries Tuesday, and 217 superdelegates.
Obama needs 19.5 percent of them to win.
Clinton needs 84 percent of them.
- jpt
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Why can’t you clue us in on the statistics, Jake?
When you wrote on B O’s second pastor speech, you dedicated about five full screens to the “details”…..
Why none here as to percentage of win, etc.
Posted by: QUESTIONER | June 1, 2008, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
Uh…don’t care to post the BLOW OUT in PR, I see. Another cover up. Nice. You give us delegate numbers that mean nothing until the convention? Where’s the PR vote totals and the popular vote totals? Don’t want to make Obama look as weak as he is, eh?
Hillary now LEADS in the popular vote AND in electoral votes when put up against McCain in the GE.
Take it to the CONVENTION Hillary! BO cannot win.
Posted by: Vickie | June 1, 2008, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
Jake I think you forgot two delegates for Obama today that makes it 46.5 to go for Obama
Posted by: Thinking | June 1, 2008, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
So, how many votes were cast? What percentage for each candidate? What is the popular vote count now?
There is much more to the math than the delegate count.
Posted by: LJ | June 1, 2008, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
Who cares.
Obama won more delegates.
Obama will be the nominee. They decided that months ago.
Posted by: cgeast | June 1, 2008, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
If BO is the presumptive nominee and has been so since NC, why is he losing KY,WV and now PR by blowout margins? Why are the Democratic votes voting for HRC in large numbers? Shouldn’t he be sewing it all up like McCain did for weeks? Why was the KY and WV white blue collar Reagan Democrat voters even more harsh in their rejection of BO comapred to OH? While PR does not vote in Nov, it indicates that HRC will carry lationo votes while BO will lose them to JM. Why on earth is the Democratic party chosing the best winning moment since Nixon to nominate BO who simply cannot win over key sections of the voters who are going to determine our next President?
Posted by: Warren5678 | June 1, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
There is nothing ABC news can do to stop Sen. Clinton from becoming President. About three years ago a well known televangelist, Perry Stone Jr., told his congregation that God spoke to him and said Sen. Clinton will be the next President. This information can be obtained from one of his published works on CD entitled “Strange Patterns of Recent American Presidents.” On track 7 of this CD, he tells us that Sen. Clinton will once again be in the White House. So give it up ABC News. And Barack, your days are numbered.
Posted by: brianerickson65 | June 1, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
Obama made one appearance in WV one in KY and one in PR. He has not truly campaigned in the primaries since IN and NC.
Posted by: Thinking | June 1, 2008, 10:26 pm 10:26 pm
Puzzled:
delegates don’t count either until the convention and THEN it’s the SDs that decide who will be the strongest candidate against McCain in November and that is Hillary. NOT Obama. You don’t go into a GE with fewer popular votes and less of a chance of winning the most electoral vote. Not only will the SDs see how weak Obama is, they will vote for the candidate that can actually win. That’s what this election is all about. Unless you really do want to lose in November?
Go to the convention, Hillary! Fight these thugs!
Posted by: Vickie | June 1, 2008, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm
Why was this decided months ago? It really seems since Jan. all we heard on MSM was Obama…and Hillary (the Clintons) were dogged since day 1 of this. Who is trying to manipulate this for Obama? He hasn’t had a substantial win in weeks and the more we know, the more we know he could never be electable (except with college kids/blacks/liberal/radicals). Aren’t super dels supposed to back the candidate that can win? I don’t care if he’s the first black Dem. to go this far…no more passing and double standard for this. If Hillary or McCain had all the renounce, denounce, reject speeches Obama has had over his lack of judgement…they’d have been outed long ago. Are they afraid of riots and scenes if Obama doesn’t get it because super dels wake up to the popular vote? There will be a quiet riot in the ballot booth come November when Hillary supporters vote McCain if Obama is the sorry Democrat to be nominated.
Posted by: Debra | June 1, 2008, 11:43 pm 11:43 pm
“And it’s one, two ,three, what are we fighting for? Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn, next stop is” DENVER.
Country Joe & the fish
Did you see the size of that Monkey wrench?
“What do you do when all your enemies are friends Now and then Ill try to bend
Under pressure wind up snapping in the end.”
Foo Fighters
Posted by: Fresh Brains | June 1, 2008, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm
It is really sad when all these intelligent media people try to convince the entire world that 2118 persons can decide who the nominee for POTUS will be over the voice of over 17 million people.
I would of thought this kind of story is one that you would hear coming out of some third world country led by a dictator, one would never think that this is what is being spun from a country such as the USA, a country that always talk about the rights of the people, democracy, fair play and so on.
Posted by: SJ | June 1, 2008, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
Donna Brazile says the super delegate vote “should reflect the will of the people.”
I wonder if this good lady can clarify her own statement now, since some of these delegates have gone against their state choice to Obama, also not that Hillary is leading in the popular vote is that not the “will of the people”?
Posted by: SJ | June 1, 2008, 11:58 pm 11:58 pm
This assumes SDs and even pledged delegates will vote for Obama after tomorrow. Number don’t mean anything until they VOTE at the CONVENTION. Nancy Pelosi can’t do anything about it.
Posted by: frisee | June 2, 2008, 12:02 am 12:02 am
If these numbers don’t mean anything why then is the media harping on this as if its the end all of everything, one would think that since they have covered so many elections they would be well aware of how things are done.
So exactly what is the MSM doing then causing all this bickering among the voters and why do that, don’t they see that is causing the country to split in two?
Posted by: SJ | June 2, 2008, 12:07 am 12:07 am
cgeast
Obama may be the nominee, But The True American McCain will be the President of the greatest Nation
Posted by: Tony | June 2, 2008, 12:17 am 12:17 am
As I said am tired of all this now they want Obama well give them Obama, lets see how this plays out.
If McCain wins there are going to be some very angry people walking around, for once again the democrats has lost the WH, a whole lot of people are going to have to face that hell fire when that happens.
I sure would not like to be around when these results start coming in and all who jumped on the Obama train be it in the media or delegates watch out things are going to be very shaky for them for the next couple of years.
Posted by: SJ | June 2, 2008, 12:28 am 12:28 am
Superdelegates have flip flopped back and forth several times now. They are not pledged by definition. So, my question is:
How do we know how the superdelegates will vote until the convention and they are asked to vote? If a candidate doesn’t have a majority of pledged delegates isn’t it by definition, premature to say he or she has a majority of delegates?
Posted by: hopesprings52 | June 2, 2008, 12:32 am 12:32 am
The media and everyone on the Obama train are part of the physic hot line so they know just what the SD will do.
They also know that Obama will win the GE, and all the Hillary supporters will join the Obama train going merrily to the voting booth just to punch in his name.
Posted by: SJ | June 2, 2008, 12:38 am 12:38 am
Unless Obama names clinton his vp, he loses the general election.
So if he doesnt want her, he has to cook up a deal with her behind the scenes, then have hillary formally state she doesnt want the vp spot, or Obama offer it to her and she declines.
Posted by: cgeast | June 2, 2008, 12:43 am 12:43 am
I hate to say it because I really, really would love to see this thing over but…
if I were Hillary I would keep going.
Alex Castellanos, a GOP strategist on CNN, who a month or so ago said Obama had it wrapped, today said “Obama is a seriously flawed, maybe terminally flawed general election candidate.” If I were the Dem leadership I would try bigtime to work out a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket fast. The Dems need a merger. That’s the only way out of this mess.
Posted by: hopesprings52 | June 2, 2008, 12:44 am 12:44 am
So, there is no way for Obama to sew this up with Tuesday’s 31 pledged delegates up for grabs, even if he was to sweep them.
And, Super Delegates can change their endorsement right up to the time they vote at Convention.
After Tuesday night, all the States’ and Territories’ voting populous will have, albeit perhaps in some imperfect fashion, spoken and been counted.
The candidates are virtually split down the middle and the Super Delegates have to make the call as to which candidate WILL without a doubt triumph against McCain in November.
A lot can happen between June 2nd and Denver. (Just as much as come to light in the past two months.) Democracy will be served if and only if this goes all the way to Convention and the process runs its entire course!
If the Party Elite try to strong-arm an Obama nomination before it is fully earned, they will never see this Party unite in time to secure the GE.
Posted by: Amy | June 2, 2008, 12:48 am 12:48 am
All my friends democrats and family
members WILL NOT VOTE for Hussein
Obama in november.
Posted by: Nicholas | June 2, 2008, 12:49 am 12:49 am
A court of law needs to looks at the way the DNC rewarded the delegates of Michigan on Saturday. Their actions should be illegal by most rational and clear-thinking individuals. Obama–O., Clinton–74 when votes are counted correctly.
Posted by: Mary | June 2, 2008, 12:51 am 12:51 am
If the Party Elite try to strong-arm an Obama nomination before it is fully earned, they will never see this Party unite in time to secure the GE.
Posted by: Amy | Jun 2, 2008 12:48:13 AM
================================================================================
Amy, you’re 100% correct.I agree.
Posted by: Nicholas | June 2, 2008, 12:54 am 12:54 am
In the old days, the party boss would take the 2 candidates into the back room and knock their heads together. He’d say, neither of you are leaving this room till you work it out. What’s it going to be Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama. Where have all the bosses gone?
Posted by: hopesprings52 | June 2, 2008, 12:56 am 12:56 am
After fighting and defeating the devil,you don’t then go and name it to your vice presidency.
Posted by: TK | June 2, 2008, 1:00 am 1:00 am
Clinton would be a fool to serve as BO’s Veep.
The reasons are obvious.
She’ll have time enough to be a nursemaid when Chelsea becomes a Mom!
Posted by: QUESTIONER | June 2, 2008, 1:20 am 1:20 am
This will be over on Tuesday night.
Posted by: Dan | June 2, 2008, 1:24 am 1:24 am
Don’t count on it, Dan!
Posted by: QUESTIONER | June 2, 2008, 1:28 am 1:28 am
If the Popular Votes don’t count why DNC fought so hard when Al Gore got popular votes against Bush last time?
Posted by: catleya | June 2, 2008, 1:32 am 1:32 am
SJ,
You are right.
The SDs are so sure Hillary will endorse Obama and all her supporters will follow her to support him.
They act like the dictators.
Posted by: catleya | June 2, 2008, 1:37 am 1:37 am
A bit of sobering truth for all of us Democrats! Let us all reflect and act on these truths fellow Democrats.
McGovern the Democratic nominee did not win the popular vote in the primary and caucus votes in 1972 and McGovern did not win the big swing states. In the General Election in 1972 Democrat nominee McGovern won 1 state Massachusetts 17 electoral votes. Republican incumbent Nixon won 49 States 520 electoral votes. This was the biggest and most embarrassing Presidential election loss for the Democratic Party in our history. A repeat of this extremely embarrassing loss will happen again if Obama is the Democratic Nominee for President. McCain will win just as many electoral votes and be the President. History will repeat itself guaranteed. The DNC, the Media, the super-delegates, Obama and his supporters are playing right into the very well designed plan of the Aristocratic Republican Party. If Obama doesn’t pull out of the race now we will suffer the same results we did in 1972 only it will hurt the people of the USA more than it did in 1972. The poor and middle class people of the USA will suffer the most. I urge my fellow Democrats, Obama, the DNC, the supporters of Obama, and the super-delegates demand that Obama pull out of the Presidential Race and support Hillary for President for the Democratic Party and for the benefit of all the people of the USA.
Posted by: Bob4USA | June 2, 2008, 1:39 am 1:39 am
i am amazed that every one pushes hillary to stop. if she does they will say she did not have the back bone to keep going!
Equally amazing to me is that after all the nasty divisive comments from the bho supporters and party elders, they want hillary to drop out, support bho, AND CAMPAIGN FOR HIM!!! if she is so awful, why ask her to campaign for him? why ask the supporters of hillary to vote bho if we are so uninformed and obviously backward to have supported her to begin with? cannot have it both ways. i will vote mccain. i would love for hillary to leave the dems and go independant with a new party. the dems do not deserve her support, nor the votes of her supporters.
Posted by: rt | June 2, 2008, 1:44 am 1:44 am
BOB4USA,
Thanks for the information.
We can’t do anything,looks like the DNC already made up their minds.
We are so disappointed of them.
Posted by: catleya | June 2, 2008, 1:45 am 1:45 am
rt,
I agree.
It’s pretty disgusting whenever I hear on tv the pundits say Hillary will start campaign for him.
He never mention Hillary has helped him to become Senator last time.
Posted by: catleya | June 2, 2008, 1:50 am 1:50 am
I think HRC could win as an independent by drawing Dem, Indy, and dis-enchanted Rep. bread and butter oriented, women.
That faction plus we millions of HRC supporting DEm and Indy males could prove to be a winner.
I think with Wesley Clark as a running mate she also draws many Rep. males.
I think she would draw votes from McCain in large numbers, while absolutely demolishing Obama.
Even if McCain still won, Obama goes down in flames and she builds a solid base for 2012.
The DNC would lie in ruins.
I fervently advocate such an effort and will gladly donate the maximum allowed to facilitate such.
Posted by: West Texas | June 2, 2008, 2:10 am 2:10 am
Hey West Texas:
This Southwestern New Mexico voter agrees with your idea 100%.
If the Dems do show Hillary the door, I hope she does go Independent, and I have always thought Wesley Clark would be an EXCELLENT running mate.
Posted by: SandyB | June 2, 2008, 2:16 am 2:16 am
Posted by: West Texas | Jun 2, 2008 2:10:45 AM
awesome post. could not agree more!
think she would draw the “reagan dems” back. I have always loved Wesley Clark. anyone who has listened to his calm, intellegent conversation on so many subjects cannot help but be impressed. and he is a hillary supporter.
the demise of bho would also be too much to ask for. once a looser on the ge front, he is gone.
the dems would deserve what they got after the shameful way they have treated hillary.
Posted by: rt | June 2, 2008, 2:18 am 2:18 am
Thanks much Sandy and rt for the support
I would very much like to see a new party formed in the Clintonian/FDR mode.
I want a party that considers all Americans, fights special interests, wins elections because it seeks to be inclusive not devisive, and will govern for all Americans, as much as possible.
I would like to see work/incentive programs like the WPA and CCC revitalized, with refinement, to create jobs and rebuild our infrastructure.
I feel like Bill clinton did an excellent job of trying to govern for the broad spectrum of America, not just segments. I believe Hillary clinton would do the same.
Posted by: West Texas | June 2, 2008, 2:36 am 2:36 am
Whoops–correction to my post below. Obama leads in PLEDGED delegates by 116, and by 156.5 delegates overall, inclduing supers. Still, he does have the majority of pledged delegates, even if Clinton were to win all 31 delegates from MT and SD–essentially impossible with proportional allocation.
Posted by: IndependentVoter | June 2, 2008, 4:21 am 4:21 am
Why she shouldn’t be President? She is the vanguard of Washington’s politics of Deception – and is incapable of bringing change.
Posted by: Sally | June 2, 2008, 5:33 am 5:33 am
The funniest thing of all is the fact the Obama supporters are STILL bashing bill and hillary clinton , when the whole thing is over.
Then they expect the clinton supporters to vote for Obama in november.
I wont.
Posted by: dummies | June 2, 2008, 5:45 am 5:45 am
The DNC has the power. That’s why this primary election is flawed.
The superdelegates who commit themselves before it’s time for them to do so,( they are supposed to be uncommitted till the end of the process ), do it to signal they want BO to be the nominee.
It’s very clear, it’s not about who might get the better chance to win in November.It’s about the strategy worked out behind the scene before the primaries started and that is : the left wing supports BO and by successfully giving him momentum from the beginning of the contests, have rallied the others around their candidate.
Why do you think they don’t make availabe the count of popular votes in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, Washinghton?
There must be some inconvenient reality (the heavy numbers of republicans crossing the lines to vote for BO because they were asked to), or something that they don’t want to release because it hurts the truth.
Let’s face it, the remaining superdelegates should commit themselves openly this week, as they were asked by HC.
This is the only way to speak the truth. If they choose side, they should have the courage to do it openly so the voters know what is going on.
The voters, where do they stand in all of this?
Posted by: jane | June 2, 2008, 6:15 am 6:15 am
One of the worst thing in life is a sore loser….
Posted by: Lawrence | June 2, 2008, 7:29 am 7:29 am
Democrats Against Obama:
Please tell us where we can sign up!!!
Posted by: SandyB | June 2, 2008, 9:29 am 9:29 am
People don’t support Hillary out of fear.
She is the target of a lot of criticism, because of Bill legacy, the reason of it is that they don’t want another Clinton in the White House.
This is agreed even though understated by both the Republicans and the Dems who are against her. Whatever motives, business, ideology etc… belong to the arguments of her detractors.
Her supporters see her as a strong character, that she runs campaigns with less money but with determination and they like her.
They can overlook some of her mistakes and they have confidence in her, because they see that this election is not given to her. She is no more the front runner. It’s always easier to go with the crowd who sing the song of the winner. Everyone has been telling her how a loser she is.
So supporting her does not come out of fear, but of appreciating her strength for resisting the pressure and showing determination.
It also comes out of resisting the anti-democratic machine of the DNC. BO is the man of many leaders. That’s why he is called an empty suit. People have the right to support him but they lose their time if they think like the leaders of the Party that they can make them fall in line like the rest.
Posted by: jane | June 2, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Obama made one appearance in WV one in KY and one in PR. He has not truly campaigned in the primaries since IN and NC.
Posted by: Thinking | Jun 1, 2008 10:26:36 PM
——————————-
The fix was in a long time ago.
Time I quit flapping about here.
Come Nov I will go to the polls and vote for McCain, it is over!
The DNC has made it so!
Posted by: HP Boston | June 2, 2008, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm
We need to stop voting the same old which voting for HC would be. Really people what has she done for you? Voted to kill our young for oil! Protected the rich! As I have traveled the world I have had to ask my self why as a country have we allowed our leaders to take away our rights and freedom–which they call keeping us in our place. Let me tell you I am a white old woman and I have been hoping for a woman to run and win but that woman has never been HC. I am sick of the same old I have been waiting for some one like Obama all my life to put things back on track!
Posted by: Gloria | June 2, 2008, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm