Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast

by Todd Beeton, Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:29:14 PM EST

Following up on Jonathan's post about the Obama camp's claim that he actually won more delegates today, Dave asked Nevada Democratic Party Chair about the inconsistency and wrote the following about his conversation with her over at his site:

OK, I just spoke with Jill Derby, the head of the Nevada State Democratic Party. Regarding the Obama claim that he'll actually get more delegates out of this, essentially that's spin. Derby said that the caucuses are an "expression of the support of Nevadans today." Around 11,000 delegates were elected today. That will be winnowed down at county conventions and eventually at the state convention in May to the 25 that will go to Denver for the DNC. In 2004, Kerry didn't win every delegate on Election Day, but most of the delegates that eventually went to the DNC were his. Once there's a presumptive nominee, the delegate numbers are subject to change. It's non-binding.

If that makes your head spin, the short version is that this was a beauty contest, and you can't project delegate numbers at this time.

I just overheard Jill Derby elaborate to someone else, essentially saying:

We didn't elect any national delegates today and it's non-binding.

If you think all this confusion is going to make it more likely that Nevada will forsake the caucus system in the future and return to primaries, don't count on it. The state will continue to push for caucuses because the state has to pay for a primary, whereas the parties pay for the caucuses.




Tags: 2008 presidential election, democratic nomination, nevada caucus, barack obama, hillary clinton (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 18 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

I believe there are 25 pledged delegates (to be determined at the state convention), 8 nonpledged delegates (state party officials and such), and 5 superdelegates (2 Clinton, 1 Obama, 2 uncommitted).


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:30:57 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

If you're right, then it's Clinton 13, Obama 13, 8 nonpledged, and 2 uncommitted.

That's a total of 36 delegates.


by enthusiast on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

My numbers add up to 38.  Maybe I'm confused.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:40:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

steve m is right, and jill derby is actually spinning the case now. the majority of the unpledged delegates will go with Clinton. But that doesn't mean that the pledged delegates will. There's no reason to think that, unless Obama concedes down the road.


by along on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:42:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

This is why caucuses are so undemocratic and needs to be abolished. It's purpose it to decided on state delegates to the state convention which will then decide on national delegates to the national convention. So by the time the national delegates get to the DNC, their makeup will be nothing like the representation of the people or what was actually voted for.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:35:33 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (1.00 / 1)

Obama/Axelrod have to smear crap on every Clinton victory. In New Hampshire they sent their "Gofer" Dennis Kucinich to challenge the result. After Michigan, they said the state was "meaningless". Now it is some convoluted mishmash of complaints. No dignified concession speech, no congratulations directed toward the victor.


by robert ethan on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:41:09 PM EST

Yeah This Reflects Poorly on Obama (none / 0)

Obama's camp is trying to smear mud when Hillary has won--clearly!  That smacks of arrogance to me.


I proudly support Barack Obama for President!
by Zeitgeist9000 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:44:55 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

If that makes your head spin, the short version is that this was a beauty contest, and you can't project delegate numbers at this time.

Yea, people should understand, this is just getting started. These are all 'soft' delegates at this point; they have to go through another couple of steps. Look at Iowa's past history, there's many an example of an upstart getting pushed aside by the establishment down the line a bit with the actual delegate selection.


by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:50:43 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

Primaries are wars of attrition, in which the results lead to fundraising advantages which lead to everyone but one, eventually, being forced to stop campaigning.  At that point, the survivor will pick up the remaining delegates.

Unless this year is different.


by Adam B on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:52:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

No, Obama has more delegates b/c he dominated in rural areas.


by Adam B on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:50:59 PM EST

Re: Obama Unforced Error (none / 0)

This lack of class is an "unforced error" on the part of the Obama campaign. The Democratic Party of Nevada is already stating that their statement is false and misleading, and that the delegates will only be firmly apportioned at the National Convention in Denver this summer.


by robert ethan on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:52:54 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

If they wanted to push a Western State up front why didn't they choose some place like Colorado or Arizona?  And what's with having two States with no State income tax in the first 4 States?


by Piuma on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 07:56:13 PM EST

Re: Obama Really Won Today? Not So Fast (none / 0)

It will be Hillary and Mitt. Good race between two good people.


by robert ethan on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 08:01:42 PM EST

Hilllary will beat McCain (none / 0)

She will get ≥ 270 electoral votes, including New Hampshire, Iowa, New Mexico, Arkansas, and all the 2004 blue states.

She might get more, by winning States like VA, WVa, OH, and MO.


by enthusiast on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 08:01:57 PM EST

Re: Hilllary will beat McCain (none / 0)

Why don't we wait and see...  till GE.  I wonder what will happen when McCain states that he wants to double the troops and budget in Iraq.

GE Polls are meaning-less until parties pick their nominees.


by comebackkid on Sun Jan 20, 2008 at 01:01:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obamaidiots go tell world Clinton lost today. (none / 0)

Go check all news bulletins, cable shows, etc etc. This is just another load of Obama bs which is only having any play in the crazy world of blogs. Well that's not the real world as much as all these Obamaidiots who are also ranting on about vote fraud may want it to be. It's over guys. She won, Obama lost. We are always poking fun at the Freepers for being in denial over Iraq, well it seems to me they have serious competition over in Obamaland.      


by ottovbvs on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 08:07:03 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: