MyDD :: Obama's delegate haul today

Obama's delegate haul today

by politicsmatters, Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:51:23 PM EST

Sorry, folks, this is going to be a short one. Just wanted to report that Obama netted 6 delegates today, including some from Nevada where the state convention completed picking delegates for the national convention.

As summarized by a poster on The Field
Kansas addon selected; Obama supporter.
Washington DC pledged delegate flips from Clinton to Obama.
Nevada state convention: 14 O, 11 C (expected 13 O, 12 C)
(previously DNC Pecoraro for Obama)
Net on the day so far: +6 (+4 O, -2 C)
http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1218#c omment-37013

For more on Nevada, see http://blogs.rgj.com/inside-nevada-polit ics/2008/05/obama-flips-clintons-nevada- win.html

Tags: Obama (all tags)

Permalink :: 67 Comments :: Post a Comment

looks like the delegates (2.00 / 1)

are aligning themselves with the candidate they view best suited to win in November.

Clinton supporters, this is what y'all wanted. Be happy.

should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?

by Firewall on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:55:13 PM EST

Re: looks like the delegates (none / 0)

Obama should be getting another add on from Colorado today.

by Destiny on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:22:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: looks like the delegates (none / 0)

Washington DC pledged delegate flips from Clinton to Obama. He's not a superdelegate

by Destiny on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:33:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (2.00 / 3)

How did they steal delegates?

To add on delegates from a precinct or county convention to a state convention, you can't steal delegates.

You have to hope that your opponent's delegates don't show up.

Which, apparently, is what happened in Nevada.

HRC delegates didn't all show up, and alternates were seated in their place.

You might not like the outcome, but I fail to see how it's "stealing" delegates.

by DeskHack on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:04:07 PM EST

It was snark (none / 0)

and meant to point out the hypocrisy of some Obama supporters. The same thing happened in Colorado at the county level a while back and every. single. Obama supporter that chose to way in, accused HRC of stealing.

Hypocrisy is human though.

by linc on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:22:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It was snark (none / 0)

"Every single Obama supporter"????

My, ye paintest with a broad brush.

by Rick in Eugene on Sun May 18, 2008 at 04:16:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

And it's also got nothing to do with the Obama campaign "stealing" anything. The Clinton campaign wasn't able to manage their OWN delegates and get them to the convention. Once again, Senator Clinton has been kneecapped by her own campaign's incompetence. You just can't hire good help these days.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:03:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

It was meant to point out the hypocrisy of who now?

I don't think you have the faintest idea what you're talking about.

by DeskHack on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:32:00 PM EST

OK, we are done now (none / 0)

but, if you want people to know that you are replying to them, try hitting the reply button and then posting a comment. If you just use the comment box that appears at the bottom of a diary or thread, it goes to the bottom of the thread or diary. Just an FYI.

by linc on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:37:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OK, we are done now (1.00 / 1)

And if you want to make an argument against unseen "Obama supporters" from a thread about the Colorado county conventions, perhaps you should say that instead of backpedalling furiously and looking like a chump.

Just an FYI.

by DeskHack on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:50:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

F*ck the popular vote (none / 0)

see Nevada, Texas, NH....it doesn't matter if you win more votes in a state.

dear DNC, why should we bother voting?

by darwinism on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:55:27 PM EST

It seems odd that on one side, we have Clinton supporters saying that Clinton can play the electoral college better than Obama, and on the other, the same Clinton supporters criticizing Obama for being TOO good at playing the primary map.

If anything, the fact that Obama has been so surgical in his campaign that he can nab a delegate win even in states where Clinton got the popular vote shows he runs a much better campaign and will be much more prepared to play the map in November.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:59:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It is interesting to watch this, and we are all learning a lot about the process.

The DNC rewards different things, such as having voters from a wider area, thus suppressing the votes in populated areas. This has actually worked against Obama, although in NV it worked against Hillary.

Another rule is that the candidates have to have staying power. Apparently, more of Obama's delegates than Hillary's showed up in the next tier of the election, so she lost a delegate. The selection process begins with a popular vote, but it isn't a 1-1 representation.

The electoral math can be just as elusive. It's possible to win the election without having the popular vote.

Personally, I'd like to do away with all this funny math and get back to real representation in both the primary and general election. But, this is the system we have.

by Kiku on Sat May 17, 2008 at 11:59:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

KY?
As in many places it is by district..
Even with big blow out..
Clinton would gain only 13 delegates..
it still comes down to math...

Hey...
Rock on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxNf2uCxd 3E

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:04:58 PM EST

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

This is not helpful. There is no reason to post this on a Hillary site except to gloat. Bad form.

by platy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:38:51 PM EST

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

This is a progressive site with a fair number of Clinton supporters.

And I would think people would like to know the evolving state of the race.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:43:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton site. Huh? (2.00 / 1)

Since when is MyDD a "Clinton site"? I've been reading it for four years and I thought that it was a progressive Democratic site. Hillary will be out of the race in a few days but MyDD will hopefully go on.

by Gene In PA on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:42:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pretty damn good haul (none / 0)

People are pissing on this diary because they don't like the news it conveys. Oh well. It doesn't look likely to go the other way.

Obama leads the popular vote too

by kellogg on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:54:11 PM EST

Re: Obama's delegate haul today (none / 0)

View this contest through the prism of institutional memory and there are aspects of this race which are comical. The two innovations of the 1984 reforms--superdelegates and the principle that pledged delegates can change their votes at the convention--were both, depending upon how on spins it, sops or prizes won by the also-rans of losing campaigns.

Superdelegates were created as a way to solve the "McGovern" problem (what happens if noisy special interests try to foist a nominee on thhe party regulars?). Not binding pledged delegates was done in the aftermath of Ted Kennedy's bid to wrest the nomination from Carter in 1980 through this tactic (though he never came close to matching Carter in the pledged delegate count). The Clintons, it's also worth pointing out, were huge McGovernites in '72, and superdelegates, essentially, were originally adopted to reduce the influence of, well, people like them.

And what both changes have done is create a primary season which is at least as divisive than the ones which prompted these changes (and, I'd argue, more so). If superdelegates didn't exist, and there was a common understanding that the contract which bound pledged delegates was ironclad, this race probably would have ended with the Wisconsin primary, and Clinton supporters wouldn't have gotten ginned up on this idea that she could win it at the convention with some "Hail Mary" play.

What we're going to find out, I predict, is that the real competitive race, essentially, did end around the time of the Wisconsin primary, because a majority of superdelegates will back the winner of the pledged delegate contest, and there will be no significant defections among pledged delegates (when this is all over suspect the number will be less than ten).

by IncognitoErgoSum on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:01:36 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.