Looks like Yahoo jumped the gun. Obama ended up winning MO. It is also predicted that he will end up pulling more delegates from Super Tuesday than Hillary.
by my count Hellafat will be up 100+ delegates (incl superdelegates in the discussion) after today is over. Momentum is in her court, especially in the big state battles that she won (NY, CA). Ba'raq is winning the red states that aren't in play during the general election. This combo is why the futures markets are opening up a lead for Theighs
I dont believe the delagate count is that close. the way i see it: Obama wins Alabama 60 delagates Delaware 23 delagates Georgia 103 delagates Illinois 185 delagates North Dakota 21 delagates Connecticut 61 delagates Kansas 40 delagates Minnesota 85 delagates Colorado 70 delagates Idaho 23 delagates Obama leads Utah (51-42 w/ 28% reporting) 29 delagates Clinton wins Arkansas 47 delagates Massechusetts 121 delagates New Jersey 127 delagates New York 280 delagates Oklahoma 47 delagatges Tennessee 85 delagates Clinton leads Missouri (49-48 w/ 91% reporting) 88 delagates Arizona (51-40) w/55% reporting) 67 delagates California (55-32) w/10% reporting) 440 delagates Too early New Mexico 38 delagates Member since: [ignore user] [report to moderator] IP Address: logged ClaudeMonet Posted: 02/05/08 11:44PM ET man, missouri is close Member since: [ignore user] [report to moderator] IP Address: logged ClaudeMonet Posted: 02/06/08 12:18AM ET Obama wins Alabama 60 delagates Delaware 23 delagates Georgia 103 delagates Illinois 185 delagates North Dakota 21 delagates Connecticut 61 delagates Kansas 40 delagates Minnesota 85 delagates Colorado 70 delagates Idaho 23 delagates Utah 29 delagates Alaska 18 delagates total: 718 Clinton wins Arkansas 47 delagates Massechusetts 121 delagates New Jersey 127 delagates New York 280 delagates Oklahoma 47 delagatges Tennessee 85 delagates Arizona 67 delagates California 440 delagates total = 1214 too early/close missouri 88 delagates new mexico 38 delagates I understand that it isnt winner take all, but with that big of a difference in number of delagates in states won, i dont think it is that close. I would imagine that Hillary would have a sizable lead but not a commanding lead (as mccain has)
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby February 3 - February 4 poll had Obama 49% to Clinton 36% in California. The discrepancy is so unbelievable. These guys should not be in poll business.
It looks like the early voting has had a huge impact on CA. With 21% reporting, Edwards has 10% of the vote. Presumably, that's all early voters. I wonder how that affects the delegate breakdowns (ie, can he get delegates still?).
It's no coincidence that Zogby's brother is a big deal in the Arab American/Muslim movement in this country, and for obvious reasons (weak on terror, ties to Muslims) supports Ba'raq It's criminal.
The whole non-winner take all thing blows up that whole thing. Hillary had a few big states (CA, NY), so if you just look at the states won, it messes it all up. Obama had a lot of smaller states, but he also won several of those by enormous margins. Just about all the professional analysis shows a pretty even split.
LOL ... I don't know about the Muslim connection. But I do recall Zogby poll was also one of the major screw-ups in the last general election between Kerry and Bush.
Of course, in other states, Zogby was the most accurate. Are all the other pollsters criminal in those cases, since they are run by white people and must be biased in favor of Hillary?
The MSNBC delegate prediction comes from the polls, and talking to both Hillary's campaign, and Obama's campaign. I think they said they figured their prediction were +/- 10 delegates which could put Hillary up by about 6 delegates. In the end tonight is probably a tie. I think both sides will argue over who a tie favors, but it's really a tie. Hell, I'll start the argument, I think it goes to Obama because just a few weeks ago he was down nationally and in almost all of the states involved in Super Tuesday. For their campaign to pull out a tie, they have to be ecstatic. That is especially true given his fund raising lead. Hardly any of Obama's donors have maxed out their contributions, and it's all almost grass roots general populace donations from the internet and the like. So he has a good chance of increasing his fund raising edge. That's my preliminary argument why a tie favors Obama.
Speaking of grassroots effort, my wife, who has never been into politics in her life, is energized this year and going to vote for Hillary (and call friends to do the same) in our home state which holds primary on March 4th.
So much for the theory that Obama can't win the white vote. The guy won in KS, MO, CT, ND, UT, CO, DE, Idaho! It's pretty amazing.
Obama is going to win the Democratic nomination. He's got the money and the momentum. Now he just needs to win Texas.
Well I've got to call it a night. It's amazing to think that what was supposed to be a decisive night of primaries ends with only net gain of 6-14 delegates one way or the other. Chuck Todd on MSNBC added some figures in of Super Delegates, that were already named, and figured in the next week's delegate split, and it just gets even closer.
The more I read about McCain, the more I cannot vote for him. My mother has a better grasp on economics - and the economy is where its at.
McCain only won 3 out of 15 red states and won mostly blue states. In both states, it's indicative of their crossover appeal - who knows what that's really worth. By the way, those vaunted geniuses at intrade are back to 50/50.
CNN estimates 582 for Hillary; 562 for Obama last night. My estimate is that it favors neither. The Obama momentum argument is weak and tired. If all it took was exposure to his name and his message, why was his highest point in the days following Iowa? You can frame it a number of ways. Sure, he was down big two weeks ago in many of these states. The flip side, however, is that pollsters considered him on a level playing field in big states like California and Massachusetts, and he ended up being crushed. In the latter, he had the endorsement of the two state Senators -- two of the most prominent people in the entire party -- and still couldn't come within single digits. Hillary has also consistently won the states with the biggest and most diverse electorates. Do I believe it's that cut and dried? No, but it's not as simple as your argument makes it, either. People know Hillary Clinton. People also know Barack Obama. These folks are like rock stars. You can make a legitimate argument that either has momentum. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle, which means that they're probably in comparable positions. It's going to depend on who energizes the voters in Texas and Ohio next month.
