Super Tuesday overnight open-thread

February 5, 2008

There’s all kinds of Super Tuesday excitment ahead … so I’m heading to bed. I’ll have full team coverage in the morning.

As of now, delegates aside (despite the obvious significance of delegates in this process), here’s the breakdowns of which candidates have won which states, as of now. On the Democratic side…

Obama wins: Georgia, Illinois, Delaware, Alabama, Utah, North Dakota (some networks are calling Connecticut for Obama right now, but some aren’t)

Clinton wins: Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey

…and on the Republican side:

McCain wins: Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, New York, Oklahoma, and New Jersey

Romney wins: Massachusetts and Utah

Huckabee wins: Arkansas, Georgia, and West Virginia

And with that, the floor is yours. Plenty of results still to come, so have at it in comments.

Colorado caucuses wrapping up. The local one here was PACKED with a great, excitable mood. Barack won. There is an amazing wave of energy behind the Democrats.

The caucusing system sucks. This state needs to get a real primary.

  • DELAWARE FOR OBAMA

    The Delaware-Obama campaign absolutely freaked out today. I was canvassing for him and you couldn’t turn a corner without seeing a guy holding up an Obama sign and screaming. Most of the houses I canvassed already had Obama literature somewhere lying nearby from previous visits. We were absolutely bombarding Wilmington.

    And we came from a 2% loss to Clinton on Sunday to a 9% win today! WOOHOOO

    DELAWARE MAY BE SMALL BUT WE THREW IN OUR SPEAR FOR YOU OBAMA ARRRRGH

  • W. TN had a series of horrible storms moving through late afternoon, early evening. Feb 5 and tornados already.4 counties shut down their voting early. My guess was Obama would have done really well in these ciounties, Harold Ford, Jr, carried this part of the state. So that may be why the distance between them was so wide here. Just a FWIW thing. Was really glad I had taken my mother earlier in the afternoon to vote.

    And honestly, if it weren’t for KO and Rachel Maddow, I’d never watch MSNBc>

  • Steve, not to be redundant or anything, but when you report out tomorrow please shout out some voter turnout numbers dems to goopers. Mucho grassyass! 😉

  • Appending some predictions to CB’s and heading off to bed too:

    Barack wins:
    Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota.

    Billary gets:
    Arizona, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah.

    That’s 11 to 9 with two undecideds:
    California and New Mexico.

    Give New Mexico to The Lady of Guadalupe.
    She apparently walks on rose petals.
    So that’s 11 to 10.

    They will battle into the wee hours for California and bragging rights.

  • California Bay Area news was reporting that ballots ran out in the San Jose area…Stanford included. Apparently it is specifically Dem. and Ind. ballots that are short. Good news??? Turnout high??? or something more sinister? I’m thinking the turnout was high or the precincts screwed up.

  • I am so proud of Obama. Even though the CT chapter of NOW unleashed an 11th hour attack email on him on his pro-choice position, he still won the state. Way to go O!

    It also looks like he’ll get at least 1/2 the 22 states, which is great because he’ll keep it even with Clinton.

    I hope he wins CA.

    So much for the Bradley Effect. Everyone was so quick to pigeonhole him, and he has proved everyone wrong. Obama is winning white majority states all over the map – and by WIDE margins.

    Obama 08.

  • sue, what’s interesting is that BOTH candidates are taking their state wins by fairly wide margins. I was expecting that in, say, Illinois and New York, but most of the wins are lopsided.

    Don’t know what it means….

  • Going to bed? Dude? I’m still working at the hospital. I’ll be blogging later on.

    Git UP!! It is time for progressives to be in the fight. It is time for us to be alert and all of that jazz. Bed. You are crackin’ me up. q

  • I keep hearing that MO was called for Hillary, but with 97% reporting, he seems to have overtaken her by 3,200 votes.

  • Meme he does give good speech. He paraphrased my favorite Gandhi quote : “One must become the change one wishes to see in the world”. Or, Obama: ” You are the change!”

    McCain sounded like he was running for the general in his speech. Graciousness is good.

  • Dee,

    What I found fascinating about McCain’s speech was that, instead of, “I am the nominee!” it was, “I am now the frontrunner.” Very uninspiring, and came across as very disappointed in his own performance.

    He’s the nominee, but he’s passing through like a kidney stone.

  • Does Romney pull out tomorrow? I mean he won the three states he lived in and a few others. I think McCain-Huckabee is a very difficult ticket for the Dems.

  • Hillary’s ahead in California. but only 14% reporting.

    I’m hearing the same about Missouri, Zorro.

  • McCain HUCKABEE is dificult? I’m more worried about McCain/Leiberman. It appears to be bipartisan, and only geeks like me know it’s not. It would play well in the generals, and the conservatives have nowhere else to go.

    McCain’s speech in one line: “I’m not dropping out!”

  • I think McCain-Huckabee is a very difficult ticket for the Dems.

    Indeed, it would be difficult to decide which to spend more media money on – the ads of McCain singing Bomb Iran and saying he’s ok with us being in Iraq 100 years, or the ads of Huckabee saying women should submit to their husbands.

    Yes, because of electoral math and media bias, we cant take anything for granted and we have to work hard. But there is no combination of Republicans that really scare me. This is ours to lose (which, admittedly, Dems have a real knack for doing).

    Those polls that show McCain hanging close to Clinton and Obama do not measure the enthusiam gap, or the power of a historical first, and no one has started running the truly negative stuff that comes out in a general – or forcing people to think about what more Republicanism means versus what it would mean for Dems to be in charge. McCain has nowhere to go but down.

  • i find it a little early to put much faith in this, but CNN just called California for Clinton.

  • Romney’s gonna drop out. “Frank discussions” tomorrow. And they cancelled a trip on Thursday. Yup, he’s gone.

  • I’m with Zeitgeist — Mr. “Don’t know much about the economy, let’s stay in Iraq 100 years, I’m conservative because I cling to Bush’s foreign policy in the face of all evidence to the contrary” is not going to win. Choosing Leiberman would give him great rhetorical advantage in posing as above politics (ha!). We geeks know that’s a hoot, but your average blokes will just know he was open enough to bring on a “Democrat”. But even then, they will be the only remaining politicians on the face of planet Earth who insist on continuing Bush’s foreign policy, and expanding it.

    And I haven’t even gotten to his health and age.

  • if he brings Lieberman on the ticket, 50% of registered, traditionally-voting Republicans will stay home. McCain is already weak with his base.

  • if he brings Lieberman on the ticket, 50% of registered, traditionally-voting Republicans will stay home. McCain is already weak with his base.

    McCain has no good options. Huckabee would placate the base, and Leiberman would be a reach out for independents. Rove’s “energize the base” strategy does not work when Obama and Hillary each brought in more votes than McCain by large margins. If I’m McCain, I’d waste some valuable time sucking up to the base while the focus is on the Democratic race, and then shoot for the center, since he’s more likely to get independants than energize the base. With Huckabee, he loses independants.

    Either way, McCain loses, and America wins.

  • Missouri is narrowing slightly, although Obama surely will still win (the margin dropped from 5000 to 4000 when the reporting went from 98% to 99%).

    But the big Missouri news to me is that in a swing/slightly red state, it looks like D turnout was about 200k over the Rs. Wow.

    And for those concerned about electability, given the essentially tied vote it is likely that both Obama and Clinton contributed to that turnout gap.

  • You guys are completely discounting the 8 year love affair the media has shown to the maverick McCain. And his “experience” trounces any thing Senator Clinton can claim as Senator or wife of a President in re National defence. Her Commander in Cheif is a complete wash to McCain’s.

    Yes, John has no administrative experience, but Huck does as a governor. And Huck pulls in many of the evangelicals. And Huck at one time was rather sane about immigration and helping illegals kids get an education. McCain is also on the sane side on immigration. And McCain is also, for a Republican, strong on the environment, on cleaning up money in Washington, and on taxes.

    I think a Hillary- Bayh or a Hillary-Villsak team would be hard pressed to win against Mac and Huck. I’m not saying this because I am anti- Hillary. I’m a concrened citizen who thinks if we don’t get a dem in the WH in 08 that our country will go to hell for 50 years or so, just from the damage of the 8 Bush years and a possible other 4 Rep years.

  • there is no way HRC picks Vilsack if she is nominated, and only a modest chance it is Bayh. if she runs against McCain, it is almost surely Wes Clark to match up with McCain ribbon for ribbon (and trump him by stars). if the economy continues to tank and is by far a bigger issue than foreign and military come fall, particularly if it leads to a desire for more progressive economics, she could go either Obama or Edwards (assuming either would accept) and thrash him. if the country sees her as liberal, she can go Schwitzer (sp?) of Montana, providing executive experience and playing to the independent West. lots of good options.

  • Obama winning Missouri – both in raw votes and quite possibly in delegates – is huge, and a real bellwether for November that the Dem party should heed.

    And the CA margin for Hillary is shrinking rapidly. She will win the state, but Obama is going to peel off lots of delegates.

    Obama will continue with lots of momentum. Hillary’s support is too narrow and stagnant for her to win the primary or the general – and soon superdelegates will start breaking his way too. Money race–no contest. Obama will outraise and outspend her easily.

    He’s in this to the end, and the end may just be a happy one.

  • Re #25 from Zeitgeist:

    I think the last month shows that McCain’s stronger with the Republican base than the various leadership factions, but I have no doubt that come fall the suits will take a deep breath and push hard to retain the White House, even with McCain at the top of the ticket. With McCain’s weakness vs. Huckabee in parts of the South I’d expect to see a VP chosen to attract the South/Religious Right constituency, don’t think it will be Huckabee, but stranger things have happened. Choosing someone even more ‘insurgent’ than McCain is risky, but after 8 years of Bush, having a more credible claim on the ‘change’ meme is probably a good idea for the Republicans.

    With McCain as the nominee, I don’t think it will be at all an easy win for the Democrat nominee. As predicted by many, the Republicans will try to focus the fall campaign on character issues (and involving the ‘Billary’ meme if it’s the Clintons), allied to toughness in the ‘war on terrorism’, with a limited sub-text of ‘change’ in a Republican key, along with an appeal to prevent all-Democrat government by not giving over the White House.

  • How is HRC’s support “narrow” and “stagnant”? They split the states – including splitting most regions (the maps is rather interesting, actually, in that he has a coast-to-coast line of states, and then she does too – just below his). Each had some big blowouts, but Missouri and Connecticut were dead-even. She won all of the larger states except Illinois. She runs much stronger with Latinos, one of the fastest growing voting groups; he runs stronger with younger voters, an important way to change the electoral pie. I’m not seeing much difference here.

    But, its too late of an hour to stay up and fight it out. Off to bed. A good night to be a Dem either way.

  • In PBS’s video of a speech by McCain tonight, Joe Lieberman was standing behind him, beaming about McCain’s big night. It will be a great day when Lieberman is stripped of his committee chairmanships and kicked out of the Democratic caucus in the Senate.

  • Again, KANSAS went Democratic when the Huckabees threatened to put evolution in schools. You had moderate Republicans switching parties. What do you think a Huckabee as VP is going to do to the rest of the country?

    McCain’s only option is to go for the center, and hope conservative partisan loyalty gets them to vote for the lesser of two evils. You can’t run an “energize the base” campaign when Red States are having Dems turn out in much greater numbers than Republicans.

    Aside from all that, the Republican party is a shamble in general, and McCain’s candidacy will reflect that. He can’t raise money, and you have the religious conservatives and fiscal free-market types, and neocons all vying for control of the party, and the echo-chamber terrified a McCain win will demonstrate their ineffectiveness — Limbaugh wants McCain to LOSE the generals, or they will be rendered irrelevant.

  • OhioDem, a McCain nomination takes near all of the charcter issues out of their quivver – particularly if the financial industry is still in crisis. Heck, the Dems – even HRC – can go on the offense on Keating 5, on McCain’s major flip-flops, and if he opens the door, with his own issues in his personal life (and his totally offensive joke about Chelsea being ugly when she was a teenager). The idea of joking about bombing Iran and staying in Iraq 100 years are totally at the fringes in the polls; we just need to educate the low-interest voters.

  • Zeitgeist, I’m glad to see someone else around here mentioning Brian Schweitzer as a potential VP choice. I think he’d be the perfect VP for Obama– Schweitzer has been a true agent of change in Montana. Furthermore, although you imply that he is somehow conservative, Schweitzer is actually quite progressive. He is pro-choice, and his environmental policies have put Montana at the forefront of wind energy. It is merely his presentation that seems more “conservative”– which really just means more red-state-friendly. Schweitzer calls it as he sees it, without seeming bellicose (a la Jim Webb,) and can therefore be a very effective “attack dog” against the GOP.

    I guess he’d work well on Hillary’s ticket, although the contrast in message may be too stark. Nevertheless, I certainly would like to see him on the national stage. And if I, as a loudmouthed East Coast Jewish woman, can say that, then you know the guy can resonate!

    Okay, back to our regularly scheduled programming . . . it’s quite a night. I’m an Obama supporter, but we’ve got two quality candidates and an enthused electorate. It’s a great night to be a Democrat!

  • Hmmmmm…. Wesley Clark? I’ve seen that idea flying around for a few days here and there on the inter-tubes. Not sure he brings much to the electoral party, in terms of his own independent support, as I recall he folded pretty quickly in 2004…. if you’re going in that direction I think Jim Webb is much more dynamic, and has actually won a fairly major campaign. In either case I’m not sure there would be any kind of ‘mano-a-mano medal match-up’ since the VP’s would debate one another, not the other presidential candidate, and Mrs. Clinton will have to run on her own war record, not that of someone who hasn’t even held elective office, even if he was a general several years ago.

    Not sure that either would want the slot, anyway, but might accept out of loyalty to the party. Why not Vilsack or Bayh?

    I think it’s possibly problematic for any politician who doesn’t already have a lot of status, since if Mrs. Clinton is nominated, the ending convention picture will be of her post-speech, arm-in-arm with former president Clinton waving to the assembled throng, with the VP nominee somewhere off to the side in third-banana-land, probably to stay there for the duration of the campaign.

  • My guess was Obama would have done really well in these counties, Harold Ford, Jr, carried this part of the state. — Dee Loralei, @4

    All Inscrutable Orientals look the same, eh? And all blacks ditto?

    Obama and Ford may share the skin tone and party membership but they’re a long way from being “birds of a feather” otherwise. Ford is establishment, by-the-book, red-state Dem (vide his post-candidacy “career” and positions). Ie, he’d have been better than nothing (esp given his location), but not all that good (as in: progressive) altogether. And he has almost as much (if in a smaller way) “family baggage” as any other political dynasty (Clintons, Kennedys and Bushes not being the only ones) and not all of it smells like the attar of roses, either.

    At least… Obama had d…d well *be* better than that 🙂 I’m staking my hope on Obama, the way I had on Jim Webb in ’06. And, if he wins, I’m gonna keep tabs on my “investment”, same as I have been on Webb — a “have you lost your cotton pickin’ mind???” every time he makes a wrong move, and a “thanks!” when he makes a right one. I use Webb’s contact key regularly. And, to his credit, I hear back *every time* (if late). Not really a personal response but, generally, to the point. With a “I’d like to hear more from you; please check my website for upcoming votes and positions” attached. My DH was really incensed, when I got the “women in DC” calendar, since all I do is hassle the guy, while DH writes the checks… 🙂

  • Zeitgeist, re character issues, I disagree. I believe that if you look at current polling data, or even results later in the spring and summer, on positives and negatives and specific character dimensions (honesty, trustworthiness, independence, steadfastness, etc.), McCain will do very well among Republicans, and increasingly well among independents as the narrative of the Iraq occupation tends toward ‘success.’

    The Keating 5 story is ancient history, McCain walked away just as the Clintons walked away from Whitewater, and charges re associates convicted of banking felonies, etc. are not an area that would be good for the Clintons– as I recall, they had several Arkansas friends, associates and political allies who were convicted and jailed.

    Ditto for person life issues: can you imagine Mrs. Clinton’s camp attacking McCain over his marital behavior? That TOTALLY drags Bill Clinton’s well-known penchant for adultery back into the campaign. Do you think Bill Clinton’s issues with women are something she wants to go anywhere near? The temper issue probably is true in terms of what I read about McCain, but if you’re running a pro-war super-tough guy campaign, it may just as well reinforce what he will want to project.

  • I think right now people think McCain is honest, but wait until they get to know him. I think right now people think Hillary is Satan, but wait until we look back at the overblown scandal-mongering, prosperity and surpluses with the wisdom of hindisight, after suffering from 8 years of corruption, deficits and no accountability.

    I’d be willing to go head-to-head with McCain on integrity with Hillary or Obama.

    (How do they always attack our strengths and make them weaknesses? Why do we never attack their weaknesses because they create the misperception they’re their strengths?)

  • It looks like Obama won NM as well – that’s 14 of the 22 states. Here’s the report from TPM:

    *******

    Exit Poll Shows Possible Obama Win In New Mexico
    By Eric Kleefeld – February 6, 2008, 1:22AM

    One of the last contests to report tonight is the New Mexico Democratic caucus, which has 26 pledged delegates up for grabs. The first thing to understand is that this really isn’t a caucus — it’s more like a party-run primary, with voters stopping by polling locations, voting by secret ballot and then taking off. So with the voting all over and done with, let’s take a look at … the exit poll.

    The numbers show Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama splitting women at 47% each, with Obama beating Hillary among men 53%-39%. Crunching the numbers, this seems to point to a six-point win by Obama. We’ll find out later if this holds out in the actual results. But as it is, Obama might just have another state to put on his list of wins for the night.

    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/exit_poll_shows_possible_obama.php#comments

    ******

    Obama has done an outstanding job. When you think about it, he had to focus on IA, NH, NV, and SC for the last year. He only started advertising in the Feb. 5th states within the last 3 weeks (some of them in the last 2 weeks). He was a virtual unknown in all these states and was able to close the gap in nearly two dozen states and win 14 of them in that short amount of time. He has also kept the delegate count pretty close. It isn’t over yet, but this is outstanding.

  • OhioDem, Wes would be a strong #2 to Hillary for his military experience, foreign policy expertise, eloquence on the stump, ability to take on the opposition face-to-face and he’s also already a Clinton advisor. I don’t see Webb giving up a hard-won seat, though he does have the leadership credentials to fill the VP job. Wes got into the last election too late and never could overcome to momentum others had carried from the opening gun. He did do well on the stump, just obviously not well enough.

    Hillary-Clark would be a hell of a ticket for a McCain-some other knucklehead ticket. Clark would know how to end the Iraq mess, and even with so much attention focused on the economy, Americans would sure rest a lot easier knowing that quagmire would conclude.

    McCain is an oppo researchers dream. He has skeletons everywhere. But for some reason anti-war Republicans are supporting McCain. I have to think that some of them would get peeled away when they realize that John will never end the war in Iraq. And he sure as hell doesn’t know how to fix an economy if he wants to make W’s cuts permanent. McCain seems to be fracturing the Republican base, even though leaders of base factions say they’ll support him. It will take until November to know for certain, but I can’t imagine the Democratic tide is inspiring too many Republicans to get out and vote this fall now.

  • If I were a betting woman, I would put money on Hillary picking Evan Bayh for VP. He’s been angling for the job for a long time. I do agree that Hillary would do well to pick someone with military experience, though.

    Of course, I’m hoping Obama gets the nomination– and, as I mentioned above, picks Schweitzer for VP. Unstoppable, I tell ya!

  • Ohio Dem, @37,

    Bite your tongue, re Jim Webb being a VP on anyone’s ticket… Damn it, VA is — finally — positioned to have two Dem Senators (thus turning blue, at long last) come Jan ’09, since Mark Warner ought to be a shoo-in. And I like it that way; Webb may be a tad to the right of where I’d like him to be but I think it’s due, in part, to his own past (Reagan admin) and his overweening respect for Warner, John. Paired off with Warner, Mark, he’d be much more blue himself, I believe.

    Personally, I don’t want to see our best and most effective Senators run for other (executive) offices; I don’t want to see the Senate staffed with second choices/chaff. We need a good, strong, Senate as much as (if not more than) the fashionable suit in the Oval Office. Senators can stay — and make a difference — for decades; presidents are out on their butts after the maximum of 8 yrs.

    Governors is a whole different kettle of fish. Their terms of service are limited so, if they were to accept a VP position after a term or a term-and-a-half, they would not be short-changing the country (or their state) quite as much as a Senator giving up his/her post would. Since both our presidential candidates are Senators, I’d really hate it if either one of them fished out *another* one out of the Senate’s bowl as his/her running mate.

    Yours (growing white feathers on my fingers, a la swan, from multiple postings)

  • Libra,

    I SO agree with you. Its sucks that we need Jim Webb in the senate so badly. He would be a FORCE on the campaign trail.

    God Damn I love Jim Webb

  • re: #36, Caped Composer;

    I heard Schweitzer speak with John Edwards a couple years ago. I still remember almost all of Schweitzer’s speech. Edwards came across as flat.

    Schweitzer told me afterwards that he was tired of everyone asking him if he was planning to run for president!

    Schweitzer’s the real deal. He’s ahead of the curve on most issues and a potent communicator. He knows how to connect. My intuition is that he and Obama would have a wonderful time together, even when locking horns. It would make for one of the most powerfully persuasive duos to come along in several generations.

    Clark is great but I’d prefer to see him in the cabinet.

  • Man… I cannot resist! Can you just imagine Jim Webb getting banned from a debate in San Francisco with two Colt 45s strapped to his side. AHAHAHAHA

  • I have it directly from Dick Cheney’s office that I have, in fact, won each one of these contests. They’re mine, bitches. And I’m not giving them back. So suck on it.

  • So, from all appearances, Obama won:

    Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Deleware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Utah

    Clinton won:

    Arizona, Arkansas, California, Mass., New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee

    Right now, Alburqueque News is showing a 117 vote (!!) Clinton lead in New Mexico with only 3 precincts left to report. Unclear what precincts those are…do they lean Obama? How big are they? One college town left to report could easily throw it to him, but it could end up being a difference of 20 or 30 votes either way.

    Regardless, by my quick calculations, not including Cali (which has 38% still to report), Obama actually won all the other primaries by ~100-150K votes. Obv Clinton’s popular vote win in Cali will be bigger than that, but looking at the drubbings he gave her in all 6 caucus states, and it’s easy to imagine them ending up with v. similar vote totals; we’re talking 1-3% difference either way, and either of them coming out ahead. Really depends on turn-out #s for those caucus states.

    Still, we’re gonna have roughly tied popular vote, Obama winning the total states 13-9 or 14-8 (or, probably most accurately, 13-8-1 given the unbelievably narrow margin I’m seeing in NM right now), and I believe Obama is looking like he’ll end up winning slightly more delegates at the end of the day than Clinton did. That’s basically a tie, which is, IMO, a pretty big win for him. He erased her entire national lead in the month of January, which is phenomenal in and of itself, but Feb sets itself up quite nicely for him to rack up a bunch of wins uninterrupted. And if Jan was any indication, he’s also in position to start running up the score on Clinton in fundraising, since her donors are all maxed-out and he’s got like 700,000 to keep coming back to.

    I think he can probably end it March 4th with a clean win. The next two weeks will be a quick whirlwind tour of the rest of the Feb states, but Texas and Ohio will probably decide this thing. And between the schedule (two weeks to stump there exclusively for Obama; a lot of wins coming up) and the money, I’d say the playing field favors my man Barack.

    Good stuff. I’d give him 60-40 shot at the nomination right now; maybe even 70-30

  • you guys don’t get it, do you?

    your pipe dream fairy tale has ended.

    barack obama cannot win the democratic nomination.

    clinton has won all the big states, with the exceptions of georgia and illinois plus i’ll throw in alabama and missouri.

    clinton has won: michigan, new york, new jersey, florida, california, plus tennessee, arkansas, arizona and is heavily favored in texas, pennsylvania, and ohio.

    the race for the dem nom is over and barak lost.

    deal with it.

  • I don’t know why this sort of tabulated workup of the primary results isn’t more readily available:

    Get it HERE as .pdf, HERE as .jpg, HERE as .htm.

    My data is from CNN, taken this morning at 5 AM. Here is Barack’s data and here is Hillary’s.

    New Mexico and California may change a little, but it shouldn’t be significant.

  • The L.A. Times this morning is reporting that Clinton won 471 delegates to Obama’s 437 on Tuesday.

    Clinton now has 732 delegates, Obama has 639.

    The Democratic nominee may actually be decided at the convention this time.

  • Is it just me or shouldn’t McCain have done better in Arizona and Mitt should have done better in Massachusetts?

  • english teacher, Are you an e.e. cummings wannabe? Or are you working from a library? GO RON PAUL!!!!!!

  • Daniel Morgan – On the caucus states, in the column marked “Votes” are they all delegate counts. They certainly aren’t all individual voter counts. And do your “total counts” mix the two sets of numbers? For example, do your total counts reflect that Iowa only had 1677 “votes”?

  • Danp,

    I used the delegate counts for the caucus states when CNN reported it that way. Some caucus states (e.g., MN) were given as apparent votes rather than delegates. I’ll try to revise later today with actual votes if I can find them for states with delegates. I don’t know why CNN has some caucuses as delegate counts and some as vote counts.

    I did highlight the caucus states in an attempt to differentiate that.

  • Dennis –

    CNN said a minute ago that the Super Tuesday delegate count right now is Obama 496, Clinton 490 – as close to an absolute tie as one can get.

  • Danp,

    PS: Yes the delegate counts are added to total votes.

    You can download the Excel file HERE to look at how the columns are added.

    You can look at all my files’ latest versions HERE, I will try to update later today.

  • Well, like I said yesterday, it looks like Libra and I get our votes to count next Tuesday.

    WooHoo!

    And yes, you guys CAN’T have Webb for VP. Go pick a governor.

    Have Spitzer give Bill Hillary’s senate seat and give Obama the VP nod (assuming, as I do despite all the venom here, that Hillary will prevail in the end). That way Obama can be a real (modern style) VP and Bill can be gainfully employed far from the White House.

    I think Mike’s wins are the most interesting part of the story of Super Tuesday. He won where Republican’ts win in November.

    And Hillary won where Democrats win in November.

    Do you really think Obama is going to carry Idaho in the General?

  • Daniel Morgan, Thanks. I would love it especially if you are able to get actual votes from Iowa and Nevada. I don’t think they have ever been released. In case you don’t find the results until after this post disappears, do you keep the following site active, or will you be posting a site where I can keep up. Thanks again.

    http://web.danielmorgan.name/primary.pdf

    • Comments are closed.