THE MATH Weekly (GE Edition) – Friday, May 30

[phrigndumass]

THE MATH Weekly (GE Edition) – Friday, May 30





Projected Electoral Votes:
Obama – 286
McCain – 252
Needed to Win – 270


Projected Popular Vote:
Obama – 56,995,152 (45.0%)
McCain – 54,956,530 (43.4%)
Undecided/Other – 14,769,318 (11.7%)


Strength of Projection – 20.8%

*********************************************************************

Electoral Votes (270 needed to win)













*********************************************************************

Strength of Electoral Votes







*********************************************************************

Popular Vote (50.1% needed to win)







*********************************************************************


Highly Probable Electoral Votes:
Obama – 197 (36.6%)
McCain – 135 (25.1%)

Probable Electoral Votes:
Obama – 254 (47.2%)
McCain – 175 (32.5%)

Potential Electoral Votes, Advantage Obama:
Obama – 363 (67.5%)
McCain – 175 (32.5%)

Potential Electoral Votes, Advantage McCain:
Obama – 254 (47.2%)
McCain – 284 (52.8%)

Runaway Electoral Votes, Advantage Obama:
Obama – 403 (74.9%)
McCain – 135 (25.1%)

Runaway Electoral Votes, Advantage McCain:
Obama – 197 (36.6%)
McCain – 341 (63.4%)


*********************************************************************


Comparison of Poll-Averages:
2008 Obama – 44.7%
2004 Kerry – 46.5% (Final)
2000 Gore – 46.1% (Final)
1996 Clinton – 48.0% (Final)
1992 Clinton – 42.1% (Final)




*********************************************************************

Obama Projected Win Index (greater than zero is a projected win for Obama)







*********************************************************************


Read Last Week’s Edition
Saturday’s Daily Widget
Sunday’s Daily Widget
Monday’s Daily Widget
Tuesday’s Daily Widget
Wednesday’s Daily Widget
Thursday’s Daily Widget
Friday’s Daily Widget


*********************************************************************


Please keep this thread bumped for easier access in GDP.


.

[phrigndumass]

1. Competing with too many "concern" threads lol ...

:kick: Bless their hearts!

[Hope And Change]

2. K & R!

[JimGinPA]

3. Great Work!

K&R

[Bucky]

4. kay and arr

:dem:

[phrigndumass]

5. Saturday morning kickers

[Kukesa]

8. And a KICK! from me, too. n/t

[davidpdx]

6. K and R

[fight4my3sons]

7. k&r!

nice work!

[uponit7771]

9. K & R

[Buzz Clik]

10. Do you take requests?

Would you mind posting some of your "retired" scenarios covering the various compromise options in MI and FL?

It would be interesting to see what the bottom line would be if Hillary get her way entirely, etc.

[phrigndumass]

11. You bet, I'm happy to! ... It's all in my journal ... links:

First and foremost, Senator Clinton will not receive full seating in Florida and Michigan. But DemConWatch has those calculations (see link).

Senator Clinton's best-case scenario, according to the rules, is as follows:

The Nuclear Argument

Given that the current status of Florida and Michigan is non-compliance, the Clinton campaign will first argue that both state primaries were conducted in a democratic manner and thus represent the actual intentions of the will of the voters in both states, and that no rules were violated. They may very well win on the first point, but not on the second, since the dates of the primaries were in violation of timing.

They would then argue that no compromise could be reached with the Obama campaign as to how to split the delegations, so the delegations should be seated as determined by the outcome of each state’s primary:

Florida:
Clinton – 105 pledged delegates
Obama – 67 pledged delegates
Edwards – 8 pledged delegates
Unpledged – 26 superdelegates

Michigan:
Clinton – 74 delegates
Uncommitted – 54 delegates
Unpledged – 28 superdelegates

The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will then, if they agree, make an official recommendation to the Credentials Committee that the pledged delegates be split in half and rounded for the National Convention pursuant to Rule 20.C.1.a. Thus, the delegations will be granted compliance status with these numbers:

Florida:
Clinton – 53 pledged delegates
Obama – 34 pledged delegates
Edwards – 4 pledged delegates
Unpledged* – 0 superdelegates*

Michigan:
Clinton – 37 pledged delegates
Uncommitted – 27 pledged delegates
Unpledged* - 0 superdelegates*

*From Rule 20.C.1.a.: ”In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation.”

With nothing going to Senator Obama in Michigan, this is the best that the Clinton Campaign could possibly hope for.

The new goalposts would be:
3,427 pledged delegates (half = 1,713.5)
795 superdelegates* (see above)
4,222 total delegates
2,112 delegates needed to nominate

My own personal interpretation of the rules was slightly incorrect on May 13. The add-on superdelegates will count with the same weight as the pledged delegates (halved). But the other superdelegates will be denied a vote. Here are the results from my current interpretation of the rules:

Florida (delegation and results halved):
Clinton - 53 pledged delegates
Obama - 34 pledged delegates
Edwards - 4 pledged delegates (which will end up going to Obama)
Unpledged - 2 add-on superdelegates

Michigan (delegation halved, results split evenly 50/50):
Clinton - 32 pledged delegates
Uncommitted - 32 pledged delegates (almost all whom will endorse Obama)
Unpledged - 3 add-on superdelegates

Total outcome:
Clinton - 85 pledged delegates
Obama - 70 pledged delegates

* * * *

More links from past posts of THE MATH:

Florida and Michigan scenarios from two months ago

Florida and Michigan scenarios from one month ago

Let me know if you have more questions! :D

[Buzz Clik]

12. I wish I had the time to dig in, but I still have two questions:

If they go the "reasonable" way of taking Florida as is and give Obama only the 54 uncommitted delegates from Michigan, Clinton narrows the gap by 62 delegates. What would that make Obama's "magic number" clinching the nomination (over half the pledged and Supers)?

If the nuclear option is accepted and Clinton gets it all her way (FL as is, she gets her pledged delegates and Obama get nothing), she closes by 116. What's Obama's magic number then?

Sorry for making you do the work...

[phrigndumass]

13. Here 'tis ...

Disclaimer: I believe this scenario will not happen. The evidence is too great against it, and the rules don't support this scenario at all.

However, here are the numbers you request:

Needed to nominate: 2,209.0

Obama:
Pledged delegates - 1,726.5 (Doesn't include PR, MT, SD, MI Uncom., or FL Edwards)
Needed for pledged delegate majority - 93.0 (of 153.0 remaining)
Superdelegates - 331.5
Total Delegates - 2,058.0
Delegates Lead - 80.0
Delegates needed to win nomination - 151

Clinton:
Pledged delegates - 1,678.5 (Doesn't include PR, MT, SD, MI Uncom., or FL Edwards)
Needed for pledged delegate majority - 141.0 (of 153.0 remaining)
Superdelegates - 299.5
Total Delegates - 1,978.0
Delegates Lead - (80.0 behind)
Delegates needed to win nomination - 231

Important considerations: On the outside chance this happens, Obama will most likely gain 13 pledged delegates from Edwards' Florida count, as well as the remaining 10 pledged delegates from Edwards' count in other states, plus almost all of the Uncommitted delegates in Michigan (54), and 43 pledged delegates from the remaining primary races. Total - 120 pledged delegates for Obama (he would only need 93 for a majority).

That would leave him 31 superdelegates shy of the nomination. The add-on superdelegates from state conventions and the endorsements by the Pelosi Club superdelegates will easily put him past the number needed to nominate.

[Buzz Clik]

14. Many thanks.

Clearly, the worst case scenario would tighten things but would not solve Clinton's problems.

She knows this, yet she pushes on.

Amazing.

[grantcart]

15. I am concerned about the math

[phrigndumass]

16. LOL ... concern noted. I'm concerned about your health. Don't you have low blood pressure?

You look a bit pekid, like you won't be able to run.

:rofl:

[grantcart]

17. that's why I go to churches with Crazy Assed Pastors - they bring my blood pressure up

and it all evens out.

[grantcart]

18. a little calm me down pill for the hysterical

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6197500

[phrigndumass]

19. LMAO!

[bhikkhu]

20. But you are disenfranchising Puerto Rico!

(preemptive snark) :)

K&R'd

[phrigndumass]

21. LOL ... postemptive reply :)

I wish I understood more about Puerto Rico. They really should be our 51st state.

[bhikkhu]

22. They've opted out of statehood 3 times

The last time http://www.proenglish.org/issues/pr/index.htmlin 98.

Oddly enough language seems to be a big issue, as Puerto Rico is essentially a Spanish speaking country. The older generations were mostly bilingual, but the younger generation is more Spanish only...which would seem to have little to do with statehood, but it is seen as a part of the popular trend away from the idea of "inevitable statehood".

There are enough advantages to their status quo, however, that no immediate changes are likely.