Why Clinton's surge has come too late...
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it's still over.
There is a great deal of excitement about the way Hillary is catching Barack. And she clearly is. The numbers show it.
In some states she could win with huge margins. Jay Cost, for instance, thinks that will happen in West Virginia. And clearly Obama is fading, which might have a real impact on the general election.
However, the simple fact is that Clinton's surge has come too late.
The maths are forbidding. Clinton will have to win in the region of 80 per cent of those superdelegates who have yet to declare. This is incredibly unlikely to happen. Indeed we can see, as these superdelegates are declaring all the time, that it is not happening.
Of course there are bandwagons in politics and the remaining superdelegates will copy each other to some extent. Just not enough.


Seperdelegates can switch allegiance, though, so if Hill-Rod can manage to win nearly all of the last primaries by healthy margins and display momentum, there's no reason why already-pledged Supers couldn't change to supporting her.
Posted by: Sam Bowman | 6 May 2008 13:00:15
Daniel, I'm afraid I disagree with you on this. The Obama camp have persisted with the "math is math" argument from when he started to build his lead but what he and the rest of the media failed to report is that he cannot win - just as Hillary cannot win. Both need super delegates to win and regardless of both sides trying to set the parameters as to how they should exercise their vote - they are (and are supposed to be, a law unto themselves, only concerned with supporting the candidate with the best chance of winning). So regardless of the pledged delegates it is the super delegates that will have the final say. My view on this is that Hillary is trying to create what looks like a statistical dead-heat to release superdelegates from being bound by the voting preference of their states. (I mean if its a draw - why shouldn't they vote with their consciences rather than state preferences?) The key questions then are what does a statistical dead-heat look like? (+/- 100,000 people in pop. vote terms or +/- 50 pledged delegates or 70 pledged delegates). Secondly, as I predicted at the time, it all comes down to Florida and Michigan (two Hillary supporting states).
Posted by: Corrupted Mind | 6 May 2008 14:18:57
Yes, Hillary might win the nomination; yes, Hillary might even win the election. But at what price? Clearly what she is doing is destroying the Democratic party. What an ego!
Even if she were to become president, how does she expect to get anything done in Washington, without the full support of the Democrats, and some support from Independents and some Republicans.
Being the Chief executive is no longer about who is the toughest girl on the block, but who can bring people together.
Posted by: VT | 6 May 2008 15:01:47
The problem is not the 'Super Delegates '. It is the Super-Duper Delegates. These are selected by the SD's based on population. I believe their number is 74. Maybe someone has more info. It ain't over 'til its over.
Posted by: Desmond Taylor | 6 May 2008 15:48:09
Hillary has no chance what so ever all this is a waste of voters time and efforts, she can not be nominated with criminal charges hanging over her, and it is about to hit the NEWS HEADLINES, a 5 year streach on Fraud charges is a reality. This is the typical thing Americans do do not do their research and vote for stupidity, why vote for some one that can not be elected, the Democratic Party knows what is hanging over her the puiblic is not aware of the real facts, and Hillary tells lies. She is hoping to gain immunity against prosecution on a White House ticket it is not going to happen, it is going to shock the world and America when it come out.
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 17:27:28
What is the point of electing someone by nomination only 6 months later to find they are in court on a fraud charge with a streach longer than a term in the White House?.
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 17:34:34
What is the point of electing someone by nomination only 6 months later to find they are in court on a fraud charge with a streach longer than a term in the White House?. Obama will end up as President one way or another as Rev Wright said Politicans Change but God does not change, where Politican lie God does not lie. Where Hillary Stole Peter Pauls money from his company, where he would have created jobs in America she robbed him and sold his business plan to the Japs. Putting David Rosen a Jewish man in the dock for a crime he did not commit and then pledge she loves the Jews she loves power and money. And for what she did to David Rosen she will not win, when you fool with gods people you do not win.
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 17:42:00
I do hope some voters whipe that smile off her face and quiets down that shrill voice, and stills that bobbing head someday soon.
I'm tired of hearing how great she'd be day one, just because she says so over & over & over again.
Repetition won't make it true!
Posted by: what the heck | 6 May 2008 18:21:16
Doesn't make any difference - the Dems have screwed themselves and McCain will win the presidency. That said, HIlary (depressingly) has the best chance to beat McCain, Obama has failed because of his inability to fight off the Clinton attack dogs and also in his handling of his former pastor and mentor. Too many Americans now believe he is unpatriotic, the worse crime a candidate could be accused of outside the people's republic Berkely.
Posted by: Neil Murphy | 6 May 2008 18:22:53
How does "corrupted mind" know that both Michigan and Florida are "Hillary supporting states"? Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan when the "primary" was run there, and recent polls have indicated a dead heat. This is typical of the dishonesty of Hillary supporters, who are basically trying to move the goal posts now that their candidate is well behind in the race.
Posted by: MAuer1959 | 6 May 2008 18:32:33
What the media is saying about Obama is a lie, listen to the whole Vedio and you will know what is truth from fiction. If some one Raped your daughter and he should have been tried for his crime and got away what would you call it I would call it injustice, listen to the real facts before making decisions based on a bias from Fox news.
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 18:41:11
Obama has been proved to be a man that is very dilligent, I know he must know a lot that he does no convey to the public, it would come across as spit and venom, he chooses no to. I listened to C.SPAN yesterday with Rev Wright I have never heard a more learned man speak in my life, many comments said they cannot understand why Obama would distance himself from such a man, he should be the one running for office because he would win with justice & truth. If People only heard the whole Vedios they would be amased to know the man that the whole of America wants to condem. Justice liberty freedom & truth, is just what America is lacking. JFK lost his life for the same cause & many others America has chosen to ignor their biggest and best in their country & are now surprised at the mess they are in. Politics has become a big multiBillion business for crooks & criminals, Hillary Clinton is just another of the Big Fish the Law needs to teach a lesson, like they did to Xonn and the fat cats who robbed the investors out of their life savings and their pensions. If America wants more of that, Just Vote Hillary & McCain and your economy will look like a Monkies tea party.
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 18:59:30
Obama is just as responsible of dividing the Dems as Hillary is: it takes 2 to tango... Fact is, about 50% of Dems do not trust Hillary because of her association with the old guard and 50% do not trust Obama because his rethoric sounds, well, just that... It is unfortunate that they dislike each other to the point of being unable to work together...
Posted by: Wowen | 6 May 2008 19:41:34
The Super Delegates cannot vote for Hillary Clinton, it is not because they don't want to they can't. They know things about the Clintons that would make the average man in the street go grey over night. If they could they would, to bring this stupid farce to an end today. The Americans have never heard the word reading between the lines, when you are forced to think for your self. Hillary could not win between Obama or McCain it is obvious no matter how many Racist went out to support this lie, this Market stall mentality, this twisted untruthful decietful Fraud. A woman who would stab people she knows in the back let alone unsuspecting voters who don't know what they are letting them self into. One Black guy called Mr Nutter who is a strong supporter of Mrs Clinton, I laughed and said to my self only if Americans know what the word nutter means here in the UK it means a man who is mad. In Biblical times they would call him Judas. One Hillary supporter who was a part of the Clintons administration who defected to Obama was called a Judas. The element of deception has come up so many times I wonder if this is not symbolic. The deception against Rev Wright, it reminds me of the story of Christ, how he was deceived when the cock crowed three times. How Hillary classified Obama as less than humble, when this guy is from the humblest beginings, like mary who was not married when she had baby Jesus & Joseph took her as his wife, Christ was born in a stable, he spent his life with the poor. Obama is about as close as we'll ever get to the story of christ. The whole of America wants to condem a man for his honesty. Christ said the man with no sin cast the first stone at the Prostitute. No one could because they were all full of sin, like America is full of sin, instead of hearing Rev Wright they went by hear say and sound bit none has heard the message, I live in the Uk and I took the time to hear the message, and I was glad I was able to hear such a man speak because he spoke what was truth, Sept 11th was an example he used to show that the evil that America had done has brought about Sept 11th, wars on innocence creates resentments, the same resentment that Americans felt about Sept 11th it is the same resentment that people in 1953 felt when America and Britain invaded Iran stealing oil and overthrowing a democratically elected government, people do not like it, many lost their lives because these people had something America & Britain could steal forming BP British petrolium on Iranian oil revenues. There is so much to learn and one can not learn by closing ones ears and closing ones eyes, these information is freely available in Britain, why not America. Is it due to backwardness or fear?
Posted by: Daphne Kenward | 6 May 2008 20:27:32
Obama will win, he has the qualities of a great leader unknown since the time of Lincoln. True patriotism is not wrapping oneself in the flag, but being true to the principles that America stands for. I have no doubt that as President he will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, of and for the People-- and WITH the people--like no other president in recent memory has been able to do. Obama's sin if there is any, is in staying out of the gutter where most politicians prefer to dwell slinging their arrows from the shadows. He walks with each of us and is an example of where America needs to lead in this new century. Finally, he is intelligent and genuine, he hasn't sold out to PACs. We are going forward now with Change We Can Believe In. Yes, We Can!
Several million small donors like me are evidence of new life and hope for the Democratic party. I guarantee folks like me will walk if she is on the ballot. We will take it to the streets of Denver if we have to. We will write in Obama's name if we have to. We will not vote for her because her campaign has been based on a lack of ethics.
She was for, now against NAFTA trade; for, now against, the misguided war. All the while, she served on the Walmart board raking in the dough while american jobs were shipped to China and the poor Walmart Greeter workers lacked health care benefits.
I am sick of the triangulating Clintons; they had their turn in the 90s. Who among us really wants Bill wandering the halls of the white house again, this time with no job titles but with his fingers in every pie? Not me.
The 105 million dollar Billary machine that finds $5 million under the couch cushions to loan her campaign in February and can't pay its debts needs to pack their carpet bags and buy a one way ticket back to their New "york". Her swagger is fake, she is in it for personal power only.
Posted by: Just a voter who got Hope | 7 May 2008 01:28:57
Mrs Clinton might have the vote of a portion of the old guard, but Obama has the vote of all of your next generation and the rest of the world.
Posted by: Nomsa | 7 May 2008 03:11:44
Too many Americans think Barack is unpatriotic, Neil? The stupid ones ,maybe, but we've all seen this song and dance before. SMEAR, SLIME ,LIE, DISTORT and do it over and over and over again and again and again. There are just far too many fundamental problems ravaging America caused by bush, cheney and their good buddy John McCain for the majority of american voters to by that crap. We know who has wreaked this havoc on the 97% of us on the outside looking in and it's the bushies and company. And they can't patch it of enough to sneak by in November.
Posted by: william l sims | 7 May 2008 03:56:12
Wel....COme one OBAMA D do not be toto arrogant............either obama were not able to get 2025........be reasonable enough to count the MICHIGAN AND DEMOCRATS. id OBAMA will not ocunt it....MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA VOTERS WILL VOTE FOR mCCain if Obama camp will disregards this voters from those states.YOU MUST REMEMBER OBAMA CAMP YOU ARE NOT GOD.
Posted by: maria | 7 May 2008 05:22:17
God Bless Hillary! Now cab we move on as dems, and get OBAMA elected?
OBAMA 2008
Posted by: Edgar Littleton | 7 May 2008 06:06:34
She did not get a surge. There is no surge. There was no surge. The surge was spin. Stop talking about the "surge."
Posted by: Sigmund Einstein | 7 May 2008 09:11:34
Even the Democrats seem to prefer the unknown Obama to Clinton, about whom we know too much.
The Republicans second that in spades. So, how is Clinton stronger against McCain?
Posted by: G.Reinis | 7 May 2008 10:15:30
Only the Clinton spin machine could view an election night where their candidate lost (in the combined IN and NC vote) by over 200,000 votes and over a dozen delegates as a "surge." Have any of the Clinton supporters happily peddling their "she can still win" fantasies in the previous comments actually LOOKED at the delegate numbers?
After last night, Sen. Obama will lead Sen. Clinton by over 170 pledged delegates (those awarded as the result of actual votes in primaries and caucuses), with just 217 still in play. This means that she would need to win over 78% of delegates in the remaining 6 contests just to pull even -- this will NOT happen. She might very well "win" West Virginia next week, but if she takes less than 78% of the vote, then her task of closing the delegate gap will become HARDER, not easier.
So what, the Clinton crowd will say, neither candidate can reach the magic number of 2,025 without the support of some superdelegates, so THEY will ultimately decide the nomination. This misses the point. Sen. Obama needs just a few superdelegates to put him over the top, thereby ratifying the will of the voters. Sen. Clinton, on the other hand, needs to convince an overwhelming majority of superdelegates to nullify the results of the primaries and caucuses, in order to strip the nomination from the party's first African-American nominee. This would be an impossible case to make, even if most superdelegates LIKED the Clintons, which they do not, and even if they believed that having Sen. Clinton at the top of the ticket would help them win their own House and Senate races, which they do not. The time has come to recognize that this race is OVER, and to unite the party for the general election.
Posted by: Paul | 7 May 2008 11:33:08
daphne please show a little courtesy by not hogging the comment space - what's so important that you need 6 entries to plug your view?
I fear that in times of trouble - war, recession - violence, hunger, depravation - yes people may vote for change but a lot will vote for certainty. JFK came when US was racially divided at home, came out of an extremely bitter legacy of McCarthyism and provided hope to an economic system at its peak. Now big corps are fleecing the little guy but Obama is weak on economics, his health care program is worse than Hillary's. On Iraq, he says get out this may not be compelling in patriotic US against a war hero.
Worse is his absolute inability to use the same dirty tactics that brought JFK to power.
I fear we have another McGovern. He'll win the nomination and maybe 10 states.
Posted by: bitter truth | 7 May 2008 11:46:43
Have a bet on Clinton winning if you're really sure.
If you really believe that Clinton still has a good chance of winning the presidency then why don't you put your money where your mouth is and have a bet. You can get odds of 10/1. I'm not going to because you can only get less than even odds on Barack winning. Good luck to him too! He's an exceptional politician, but as the recent election of Boris as London Mayor proves; that doesn't always matter too much.
Posted by: Kevin Monk | 7 May 2008 12:35:08
The American Political Journalist should be ashamed. Their handling of Obama before Texas was bias incompetence, media at it's worse: Sure they know how to write, funny and creative, but getting up from that warm seat in the candidates campaign planes is too much for the journalist elité. All you get is bla-bla and what the candidate said on any given day, nothing actually discovered thru a little detective work. Wright-DVD you could buy at the Trinity Church in downtown Chigago, only a cap fare away, still it took to February and dig it up. Meanwhile, in the closest election Obama pulled in delegates uncontested. If the American Political Journalist was assigned a paparazzi-gig following Britney Spear; she (Spears) would have three make-overs, two children and a marriage before they would find out.
Sylvia from Oslo, Norway
Posted by: Sylvia Johnsen | 7 May 2008 14:19:07