Obama needs only 43 more unpledged superdelegates to clinch the nomination. That's right. Not 100, not 60. Just 43. At 43 more currently-named, unpledged superdelegates, Obama and his supporters can claim that Hillary Clinton cannot win.
Here's why:
- If you've played strategic boardgames, you know that the cardinal rule is that you declare victory and stop playing when your win is possible and your opponent's is not. At that point, your opponent becomes irrelevant. Remember McCain vs. Huckabee?
- 305 UNPLEDGED SUPERDELEGATES IS A MYTH. Please repeat this over and over. There are only 240 undeclared Superdelegates, because 65 are Add-Ons, and their selection process is not arbitrary.
When Obama wins another 43 superdelegates, although he has not yet reached 2024 delegates, his supporters will be able to argue tat as a matter of practicality, Hillary Clinton no longer has a viable path to 2024 delegates.
Read why on the jump.
First of all, the undisputed facts, taken from DCW:
Undeclared Superdelegates |
240 |
|
Unnamed Add-Ons |
65 |
|
Remaining Pledged Delegates |
408 |
|
|
|
|
|
Obama |
Clinton |
Pledged Delegates |
1490 |
1337 |
Declared Superdelegates |
233 |
256 |
Let's break down some of these numbers:
Pledged Delegate Leader Superdelegates
- We can all agree that Obama will be the Pledged Delegate leader at the end of this contest. Even the most fervent Clinton supporter does not think that she can gain the lead in Pledged Delegates.
- Most significantly, Nancy Pelosi, Christine Pelosi, Gov. Roy Romer, Betty Richie, Denise Johnson, and Maria Cantwell have declared that they will support the Pledged Delegate leader.
- Since Maria Cantwell is currently a Clinton supporter, this is +6 Obama, and -1 Clinton. The Undeclared Superdelegates count needs to be reduced by 5 for these.
Crypto-Delegates
There are a number of Crypto-Delegates -- Superdelegates who have strongly hinted at who they support, but for whatever reason, haven't publicly endorsed. Most of these favor Obama. However, for simplicity, and just for fun, let's give Obama Carter, since his two public statements have all but given away who he'll vote for.
Add-On Superdelegates
The consensus has been that Obama will win more of the Add-On superdelegates (I've read, by up to 16+), simply because he has significant won more contests and pledged delegates. At the moment, Obama is leading Add-On's by 8 to 3; however, for this exercise, let's err on the side of caution, and split them 33 Obama, 32 Clinton.
The actual number will probably closer to 38 Obama, 27 Clinton. However, in consideration of the next assumption, where we project a worst-case scenario for Obama, where Clinton wins 6 of the 9 remaining primaries (and ties Guam), let's keep this number even.
Remaining Contests
The remaining contests are competitive. However, let's assume a conservative, worst case scenario for Obama:
- Let's give Clinton Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, and South Dakota by a raw vote margin of 10-15%. This is as high as most of her strongest showings.
- Let's give Obama a raw vote margin of 10-15% in North Carolina and Oregon. This is a much smaller margin than he has enjoyed in southern states and Oregon's neighbor and most similar state, Washington.
- Due to delegate allocation rules, neither will gain an advantage exceding 10%, unless they break at least 15% in the raw vote (usually higher). For argument's sake, we'll give Clinton a 10% advantage in her contests, and Obama 10% in his 2.
- We'll split Guam down the middle.
Realistically, Obama will probably do much better than this. For example, I think it's highly improbable that he'll lose Indiana or South Dakota by as many points as Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Analysis
Now, let's play this out:
|
Obama |
Clinton |
Pledged Delegates, April 23 |
1490 |
1337 |
|
|
|
Declared Superdelegates |
233 |
256 |
Crypto Superdelegates |
7 |
-1 |
Add-on Superdelegates |
33 |
32 |
Total Superdelegates |
273 |
287 |
|
|
|
Total Delegates |
1763 |
1624 |
|
|
|
Obama, Pessimistic Forecast |
|
|
Guam |
2 |
2 |
Indiana |
32 |
40 |
North Carolina |
63 |
52 |
W Virginia |
12 |
16 |
Kentucky |
23 |
28 |
Oregon |
29 |
23 |
Puerto Rico |
25 |
30 |
Montana |
7 |
9 |
S Dakota |
7 |
8 |
Total May/June Pledged Delegates |
200 |
208 |
|
|
|
Total Delegates, June 6 |
1963 |
1832 |
|
|
|
Needed to Win |
61 |
192 |
% Superdelegates to Win (of 234) |
26.1% |
82.1% |
*234 = 240 minus N Pelosi, C Pelosi, Romer, Richie, Johnson, and Carter. Maria Cantwell is an allocated SD (for Clinton) so is not subtracted from 240.
At the point where Obama gains the support of 61 additional superdelegates, he should be crowned the "overwhelmingly likely nominee" -- as all he must do at this point, is not implode.
In the same scenario, Clinton would need a daunting 192 Superdelegates to claim the same.
However, there are only 234 Superdelegates left to allocate -- so, when Obama has won 43 superdelegates more than his current position, Clinton can no longer reach the threshold of 2024.
Of note, if she were to obtain 173 superdelegates, she could also prevent him from becoming the nominee; at this point, the Edwards delegates would be the king/queenmakers.
However, it's entirely likely that Obama gain 43 more superdelegates in the near future, whereas Clinton certainly will not be able to obtain 173 superdelegate endorsements anytime soon.
For comparison:
|
Obama |
Clinton |
Needed to Deny |
43 |
173 |
% Superdelegates to Deny (of 234) |
18.4% |
73.9% |
Conclusion
When Obama obtains 43 more endorsements presently-named Superdelegates (ie not add-on's), which is very possible shortly after May 6, the "Math people" should make the case that while Barack Obama has not yet reached 2024 delegates, that, as a matter of practicality, Hillary Clinton cannot reach 2024 delegates.
This is the point at which Huckabee was facing strong pressure to withdraw -- and that was during a highly competitive Democratic contest, where an extended Republican contest would not have hurt the GOP.
Don't forget: as Obama outperforms this very pessimistic projection, the magic number of 43 drops, too.
UPDATE:
Thanks for helping his make the rec list!! It's my first time, so I'm excited :) Just some notes -
- The primary-by-primary estimate isn't meant to be a forecast; however, I am very confident Obama will (greatly) outperform it.
- Edwards SD's - This is why the numbers don't add up to 100%. However, thy're unlikely to swing Clinton; if anything they're more likely to swing Obama. If they do swing Clinton, they can be offset by the Add-On buffer that Obama has.
UPDATE 2:
As requested, here's the results using the Obama Campaign's numbers for the estiamtes. This would be, I suppose, a "medium-case guestimate". They reverse the May/June numbers, netting Obama 16 extra delegates in those contests.
I prefer the pessimistic numbers, because there's a LOT of space for the "what-ifs". If you really want to be optimistic, throw in the Edwards delegates, and the add-on's... and Obama is almost there.
|
Obama |
Clinton |
Obama, Obama Campaign SS |
|
|
Guam |
2 |
2 |
Indiana |
39 |
33 |
North Carolina |
61 |
54 |
W Virginia |
13 |
15 |
Kentucky |
23 |
28 |
Oregon |
28 |
24 |
Puerto Rico |
25 |
30 |
Montana |
9 |
7 |
S Dakota |
8 |
7 |
Total May/June Pledged Delegates |
208 |
200 |
|
|
|
Total Delegates, June 3 |
1971 |
1824 |
|
|
|
Superdelegates Needed to Win |
53 |
200 |
% Superdelegates to Win (of 234) |
22.6% |
85.5% |
|
|
|
Superdelegates Needed to Deny |
35 |
182 |
|
15.0% |
77.8% |
Also, I have changed the title to "Clinch" rather than "Cinch" :) Technically, I think both work, as Cinch can mean "a certain win"; Clinch can mean, "to settle a matter". But whatever, renounce, denounce, and reject!
UPDATE 2
Ok, there have been many, many posts indicating that I've overestimated Obama performance in West Virginia and Kentucky. I would like to point out a couple of things:
- These 3 states have a total of 151 pledged delegates (72, 28, 51). That's about the same as either Ohio (141) OR Pennsylvania (158). Yet, I have given Clinton a total of +17 delegates there -- nearly double her PA delegate difference. If you want, give her a couple more delegates; it won't change anything. If doubt Clinton can squeeze more out of IN, KY, and NV, than out of Ohio and PA together.
- I was trying NOT to play prognosticator. The numbers above (not the Obama numbers, my numbers), are VERY, VERY favorable to Clinton, and do greatly underestimate the Add-On delegate difference, where Obama is expected to net another +11 (on top of the current +5).
- It's unlikely that Obama will lose Montana and South Dakota. For that matter, he probably won't lose Peurto Rico, and certainly not by the number of delegates I've given Clinton. But, again, this misses the point of the diary.
For what it's worth, since this morning, Obama has gotten the endorsement of Rep. David Wu (OR) and Bob Bradley (PA) has become an Obama Crypto-Delegate. Bob Bradley re-iterated (today) that he would vote with his constituents, which voted overwhelmingly Obama; however, he hasn't said when he'll officially endorse. Likely, this is being co-ordinated witht he Obama campaign for some theoretical strategic reason.