In addition to the switch by Andrew, Obama picked up 3 more superdelegates today, making it Obama 4, Hillary 0 (net*).
*She picked up Connecticut AFL-CIO President John Olsen.
People have said almost exactly the same thing about Clinton. It is hard to believe that the clear democratic front-runner has faded away, but it has happened. This remark says rather more about your personal biases than the facts.
What’s the new magic number?
The difference is that the remarks about Clinton were made before Super Tuesday, as opposed to after 90% of the delegates have declared their intent. There’s no personal biases about it, that’s what’s happened. It’s too late now for Hillary to come back now, barring some major miracle on her part. The numbers (facts) speak for themselves.
What do you mean?
Magic Number = number of total delegates (both pledged and super) still needed to clinch the nomination. I don’t know how up-to-date this is but RealClearPolitics gives Obama 1733 total delegates at the moment, leaving him with a “Magic Number” of 291 more delegates needed.
Hillary is currently credited with 1597 leaving her with 427 still needed.
I suppose the “magic number” would be the number of super or pledged delegates that each candidate needs to obtain to get to the much-discussed 2024 (excluding FL and MI).
Near as I can tell Obama’s current magic number is
2024
- 1490 (pledged)
- 243 (super)
= 291
And Clinton’s is:
2024
- 1336 (pledged)
- 260 (super)
= 428
Since they are both chasing the same number, there is no additional component- for example if when Clinton loses one superdelegate there is no effect on Obama’s number unless the person specifically declares for him.
I think though that Shayna cited new three aren’t part of those figures yet as they are not official yet - they are appointments to the Illinois slate to be made next week that are all Obama people, but until it goes through next week they are not yet supers - just supers to be.
So if you count them, then his new magic number is 288, or 287 if Andrew isn’t already in DemConWatch’s figures (and I don’t think that he is). Hillary’s magic number doesn’t change as she gained and lost one today. At least so far. It’s still morning!
Numbers rarely speak for themselves. The fact that Clinton was overtaken as front-runner is a Rare Event, one that we cannot attach a probability to based on past events. We have no way of assessing how likely an HRC miracle is that would change the superdelegates’ minds before they cast their final votes at the convention. Let’s not pretend we do.
Indeed. And Obama has picked up yet another superdelegate endorsement, 31 year member of the United Steelworkers, DNC Member John Patrick of Texas.
Don’t forget, from my post above, the Obama campaign claims to have had the endorsements of 247 supers as of yesterday, which is 5 more than is being reported elsewhere. When you add these 5 from today, that would bring his total to 252 to Hillary’s 260, which brings the difference down to only 8!
You’re right. Sometimes they’re contorted to say things that would be considered ridiculous by a reasonable person.
Thanks, Stoli. That’s what I was looking for. I’m guessing John Patrick is is not in your SD number for Obama, so that’d make his new number 290 as of today, if you discount the to-be-announceds from Shayna’s post, and the as yet unresolved disparity of the 5 more SDs Obama’s team has referenced, which Shayna also mentioned.
So Time is calculating the magic number as 283. How they get that I don’t rightly know, but let’s go with it.
Let’s assume May 6 brings Obama a modest NC win (picks up 60 delegates and she picks up 55) and a tie in IN. Guam splits. Obama’ magic number is then (assuming no more supers announce) 185 and Clinton’s is 335 with 217 elected delegates to go and another, what 28something? supers to announce … and 19 delegates nominally pledged to Edwards but who can do what they please.
Very funny.
Amazingly enough, reasonable people are very often wrong. I am not trying to contort any numbers here. You don’t bank the money until you have the money, is all.
I wasn’t talking about you specifically. Sorry if it came off that way.
Reasonable people are often wrong, you’re correct. But that doesn’t mean that unreasonable people are correct more often. While we can’t cash our checks just yet, it still boils down to the “delicious chips” argument.
Being of the view that the entire universe is about me, personally, I must conclude that you’re getting some amusement out of perplexing me.
The “delicious chips” argument? 
The first of the “Logic of Hillary” clips.
It’s much better to watch, but here’s a summary:
Man has two dozen cookies in front of him, woman has half a dozen. She says, “You have a lot more cookies than I do, but what you don’t realize, is that the chips in my cookies, are far more delicious than the chips in yours.”
Thank you. I can’t watch youtube from this computer, but you may be sure that I’ll be screening this one later.
And your summary is hilarious.
Here’s the full text of his letter to the Democratic superdelegates. Not everyone may be convinced, but it’s blistering in its honesty and forthrightness. Here’s hoping it falls onto enough receptive ears.
The whole series is hilarious, mostly because it’s spot on. Be sure to check the other 5 our when you get around to it! My favorite is the “magician” argument. Classic.
I think he’s in for a happy surprise in IN. I think polls are polls and if Obama was steadily up for many weeks, he will ultimately do well when people enter the stalls. IMHO