# Obama leads in delegate count **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 7, 2008, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633 "2008-02-07T03:09:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/61 "2008-02-08T00:56:00Z")
[QUOTE=XWalrus2] Did you mean to put on that percent sign? If so, your quarter probably isn’t doing that much good. [/QUOTE] If it paid for just one of those recorded calls I got on Monday and Tuesday, I’m personally blaming _you_. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/62 "2008-02-08T00:59:19Z")
[QUOTE=Desert Nomad] Obama is not one of the good ol’ boys and will break the Bush/Clinton dynasty that has griped the US for two decades. [/QUOTE] Explain that, please. Do you see the Bushes and the Clintons as all part of the same power cabal, perhaps? All working for the same interests in the same way? Part of the same family? That’s what a “dynasty” is. It’s much more common among the Bill Kristol set, but not unknown among Obama supporters obviously, to make the insinuation that, since Bush 2 has been a disaster, Clinton 2 would be as well. IOW, cut the shit, pal. You’re not helping anybody with that foolishness, especially not Obama. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/63 "2008-02-08T02:12:22Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Explain that, please. Do you see the Bushes and the Clintons as all part of the same power cabal, perhaps? All working for the same interests in the same way? Part of the same family? That’s what a “dynasty” is. It’s much more common among the Bill Kristol set, but not unknown among Obama supporters obviously, to make the insinuation that, since Bush 2 has been a disaster, Clinton 2 would be as well. IOW, cut the shit, pal. You’re not helping anybody with that foolishness, especially not Obama. [/QUOTE] But if Hillary turns out to be Clinton II? Damn, I certainly hope so. “Slick Willie” and all, he was likely the greatest prez in recent memory ( I can barely remember JFK, so I exclude him). I’d _love_ to see Bill back as Prez. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/64 "2008-02-08T02:21:08Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] I’m not quite as convinced that there as many Obama supporters who feel that way as do Clinton supporters, though. [/QUOTE] FWIW, despite what you see from some Obama supporters on this board, the exit polls suggest both sides \*Democratic \*supporters will vote for either candidate if it comes to it. Indeed, when there is a disparity, it is actually among Hillary voters not wanting to vote for Obama. Go figure. In any case, it’s a relatively small percentage. The problem seems to be with independents, who seem to like both Obama and McCain. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_Door](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@Bill\_Door](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_Door)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/65 "2008-02-08T03:27:13Z")
I think the superdelegates will switch to whoever they think is most electable in the end, and I think that’s Obama. Look at the states Clinton has won compared to the state Obama has. She wins in the blue states, Massachusetts, New York, California where either of them would likely win in a general election. Obama is winning in the red states and the “purple” states, states that willl make a difference. He won in Georgia, in Alabama, Alaska and North Dakota. Sure, Clinton might win her states by more votes than Obama, but he’ll still carry Massachusetts, and the rest of the blue states. Obama has a chance to reach into the states that haven’t gone democratic since, ironically enough, Bill Clinton. The superdelegates are going to go for a winner. Remember, the whole impetus for taking some of the control out of the hands of primary voters was the nomination of George McGovern in '72. What were they thinking? The only wild card in all of this is that some of the superdelegates may think that they “owe” Clinton the nomination for past favors, and that there’s plenty of time for Obama to run in 2012 or 2016. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/66 "2008-02-08T04:48:46Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] But if Hillary turns out to be Clinton II? [/QUOTE] That would never happen, I’m afraid. Bill had better than 60% approval rating through much of his presidency, which allowed him to get some things done. Hillary, on the other hand, has negatives so high that Congressional Republicans could earn points with their constituents by blocking any initiatives she tries. And even Democrats in shaky districts are not going to want to be seen as working with her. ---
**Author:** ![Cyberhwk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7993a0/32.png) [@Cyberhwk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyberhwk)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/67 "2008-02-08T07:52:08Z")
[QUOTE=Liberal] The state exists to serve the individual, as far as I’m concerned, not the other way around. [/QUOTE] That’s the spirit. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/68 "2008-02-08T13:21:26Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] That would never happen, I’m afraid. Bill had better than 60% approval rating through much of his presidency, which allowed him to get some things done. [/QUOTE] You may be reversing cause and effect there. From everything I have read and heard, he looked like a one-term President for the first two years. Remember the 1994 Republican Revolution? He got things done after that by compromising with them. ---
**Author:** ![Phlosphr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Phlosphr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phlosphr)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/69 "2008-02-08T13:22:58Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] That would never happen, I’m afraid. Bill had better than 60% approval rating through much of his presidency, which allowed him to get some things done. Hillary, on the other hand, has negatives so high that Congressional Republicans could earn points with their constituents by blocking any initiatives she tries. And even Democrats in shaky districts are not going to want to be seen as working with her. [/QUOTE] Underlining mine, I believe this is the exact crux of the reason why I really hope she does not make it. She won’t be able to jump over that hump. No way. Obama on the other hand will have a much easier time passing initiatives. He’s not the teflon don by any means, but he’s got a much better chance than Hillary. Secondly, the underlined reason above is why she will ultimately fail in gaining the presidency. ---
**Author:** ![KSO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@KSO](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KSO)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/70 "2008-02-08T14:40:01Z")
[QUOTE=Bill Door] I think the superdelegates will switch to whoever they think is most electable in the end, and I think that’s Obama. Look at the states Clinton has won compared to the state Obama has. She wins in the blue states, Massachusetts, New York, California where either of them would likely win in a general election. Obama is winning in the red states and the “purple” states, states that willl make a difference. He won in Georgia, in Alabama, Alaska and North Dakota. Sure, Clinton might win her states by more votes than Obama, but he’ll still carry Massachusetts, and the rest of the blue states. Obama has a chance to reach into the states that haven’t gone democratic since, ironically enough, Bill Clinton. The superdelegates are going to go for a winner. Remember, the whole impetus for taking some of the control out of the hands of primary voters was the nomination of George McGovern in '72. What were they thinking? The only wild card in all of this is that some of the superdelegates may think that they “owe” Clinton the nomination for past favors, and that there’s plenty of time for Obama to run in 2012 or 2016. [/QUOTE] I agree with all of this. Assuming it really comes down to polling the superdelegates (at least, I assume that would happen before a deal is struck), they should support the more electable candidate and I think Obama has a clear edge in that regard. ---
**Author:** ![BJMoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5fc32e/32.png) [@BJMoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BJMoose)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2008, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/71 "2008-02-08T16:15:05Z")
[QUOTE=ShadowFacts] Why the hell is the Democratic delegate-apportioning system so unbelievably byzantine? It blows my mind that we’re 36+ hours from the end of voting and _nobody really knows_ who has what yet. It’s Clinton 900, Obama 800. No, it’s Obama 635, Clinton 610. No, it’s Clinton 1015, Obama 999. No, it’s Obama 845, Clinton 844, but that doesn’t count supersecretdoubledogdelegates, who may or may not vote a certain way in the end, but are definitely pledged if they were holding a blue flag when they declared who they were supporting under the light of the full moon… ARG! [/QUOTE] Which brings to mind Will Rogers’ famous line: “I am not a member of an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” We Demos have been making life difficult for a long time. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/72 "2008-02-09T02:17:07Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] Hillary, on the other hand, has negatives so high … [/QUOTE] Yes, so high. :rolleyes: About 5 points higher than Obama or McCain, and ten points lower than GWB. :dubious: In other words, her “negatives” are not massively higher than either of the other two possible candiate for Prez, and much lower than the current incumbent,who still manages to get deals done. Can you dudes stop with the freaking anti-Hillary lies? I mean, I am not thrilled with her but all the undeserved lies dudes are telling about her are forcing me to defend her and thus support her. It’s backfiring. No one beleives you. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/73 "2008-02-09T02:39:47Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Can you dudes stop with the freaking anti-Hillary lies? [/QUOTE] That’s like asking them to actually analyze Powell’s 2003 presentation to the UN, in 2003. It’s not going to happen. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/74 "2008-02-09T02:55:16Z")
[QUOTE=KSO] I agree with all of this. Assuming it really comes down to polling the superdelegates (at least, I assume that would happen before a deal is struck), they should support the more electable candidate and I think Obama has a clear edge in that regard. [/QUOTE] [In that regard …](http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/08/20008.matchups.schneider/index.html) > [@](#): > > A CNN poll, conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation February 1-3, shows Clinton three points ahead of McCain, 50 percent to 47 percent. That’s within the poll’s margin of error of 3 percentage points, meaning that the race is statistically tied.. > > A Time magazine poll, conducted February 1-4, also shows a dead heat between Clinton and McCain. Each was backed by 46 percent of those polled. > > Sen. Barack Obama believes he can do better, arguing “I’ve got appeal that goes beyond our party.” > > In the CNN poll, Obama leads McCain by 8 points, 52 percent to 44 percent. That’s outside the margin of error, meaning that Obama has the lead. > > And in the Time poll, Obama leads McCain by 7 points, 48 percent to 41 percent – a lead also outside of the poll’s margin of error of 3 percentage points. > > In both polls, Obama looks stronger than Clinton. Why? > … > > Clinton does have higher negatives than Obama – and McCain. Forty-four percent of the public say they don’t like Clinton, compared with 36 percent who don’t like McCain and 31 percent who don’t like Obama, according to the CNN poll conducted February 1-3. > > … > > the big difference is men: Men give McCain an 18-point lead over Clinton, 57 percent to 39 percent, according to the CNN poll. The margin of error for that question was plus or minus 5 percentage points. > > But if McCain and Obama went head to head, McCain’s lead among men shrinks to three, 49 percent to 46 percent – statistically a tie. > > Women, on the other hand, vote for either Clinton or Obama by similar margins. > > Some Democrats may be worried about how Obama will fare with white voters. Whites give McCain a 15-point lead over Clinton, (56 percent for McCain, 41 percent for Clinton). > > But Obama actually fares better than Clinton with white voters. McCain still leads, but by a smaller margin, (52 to 43 percent). ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/75 "2008-02-09T03:03:12Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Yes, so high. :rolleyes: About 5 points higher than Obama or McCain, and ten points lower than GWB. :dubious: [/QUOTE] First, even among the population in general, Hillary’s over-under (favorable-unfavorable) is about 10 points worse than Obama right now (and her likability has actually increased lately). 10 points is actually pretty significant. Certainly enough to affect the outcome of an election. Second, the point people are making isn’t necessarily about her negatives among the population as a whole. Instead, they’re talking about her negatives among Republicans (which affects Republican turnout) and among independents (who we need in order to win). There her negatives are much higher than Obama’s. Arguably, this is just a matter of familiarity. Hard to say, though I think reasonable people can believe it goes far beyond that. [[Cite](http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=392) ]. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/76 "2008-02-09T03:17:47Z")
They have no idea how many delegates anyone has, do they? As for superdelegates, I noticed several articles surfacing recently about the system coming under heat. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/77 "2008-02-09T03:20:56Z")
[QUOTE=cricetus] They have no idea how many delegates anyone has, do they? [/QUOTE] Pretty much. They’re still counting the Super Tuesday pledged delegates, and the superdelegate counts are all over the place. One reporter starting calling up the superdelegates that were identified as leaning one way or the other, and a bunch said they actually hadn’t decided at all. Rumors, innuendo, and rapidly shifting minds, methinks (which is why NBC is not counting superdelegates yet). ---
**Author:** ![Jurph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/50afbb/32.png) [@Jurph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jurph)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/78 "2008-02-09T03:47:39Z")
I am still completely baffled why anyone would _count_ a superdelegate at all until the convention. They are almost all politicians, and they have absolute freedom to change their minds anytime they like up to the day of the convention. You can bet your ass that if there’s a clear front-runner going into the convention, more than 80% of them will have found a convenient escape hatch from whoever’s trailing, and will pile on the winner’s side to make it look “close but obvious” who the right choice is. Also: if FL and MI get seated at the convention, the superdelegates’ influence and importance are likely to be diluted unless Obama leads by nearly the same number of delegates as those states would give Hillary. They don’t want either candidate to get far enough ahead that the superdelegate vote becomes irrelevant, and they sure as hell don’t want to be seen as powerless to stop FL and MI from flouting their rules. Watch for the superdelegates to come together with Dean and reach a backroom deal to break hard to one side or the other – probably within a day or two after the Ohio & Texas primaries. Until that day, all superdelegate totals are propaganda fantasies. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/79 "2008-02-09T07:24:37Z")
[QUOTE=villa] I had the same experience. After Edwards dropped out, I emailed a couple of friends active in the Obama campaign in DC saying I was leaning to Obama, but wanted to be sold on him. One email back was brutally honest - telling me Hillary could not get things done because of her personality. The other was the typical line about hope and change and fluffy bunnies. All I wanted was policy differences, and in particular why an ex-Edwards supporter would back Barack. Seems like that was asking too much. [/QUOTE] If you are a former Edwards supporter, I would say that Obama’s stance on lobbying and government transparency would probably appeal to you. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2008, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633/80 "2008-02-09T07:26:04Z")
[QUOTE=spoke-] I was just thinking the same thing. Might not hurt for a superdelegate to get a few letters from voters within his or her district. [/QUOTE] I believe that most Superdelegates are not elected officials. They are DNC members (which basically means they are fundraisers and bundlers). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-leads-in-delegate-count/436633.md?page=5)