Superdelegates

Only 10 more superdelegates to reach "the magic number"

The News Hour with Jim Lehrer twitter alerts are a must for anybody who wants to have the immediate scoop on what's happening with the elections. They just dropped this number : 27 superdelegagtes in one day.

Baratunde rounded up that nugget by twittering that Obama needs only 10 more delegates to reach the "magic number" of 2,118 delegates.

Town Hall is saying that John McCain is calling it for Obama by effectively scheduling a speech tonight. I think Red State beat McCain to it by first, real "Obama is a radical" kind of post.

By the way : I hear, but have not confirmed, that Hillary Clinton only picked up one superdelegate today.

liza's picture



Another Obama Superdelegate: Kalyn Free

I have had some contact with Kalyn Free since I support and blog about her organization, Indigenous Democratic Network (INDN List). INDN is an excellent organization that has been organizing Native Americans on the grassroots level.

Kalyn Free is also a Superdelegate and has just endorsed Obama. This, on top of the Native American Times endorsement, may be showing robust support for Obama among Native Americans. Endorsement statement below:

Statement from Kalyn Free:

DNC Superdelegate, INDN's List Founder and
USW (United Steelworkers) Associate Member Kalyn Free
Endorses Senator Barack Obama for U.S. President

CHICAGO, IL -- Kalyn Free, an at-large member of the Democratic National Committee, today announced that she supports Illinois Senator Barack Obama for the party's presidential nomination. As a DNC member, Free will serve as a superdelegate to the Democratic National Convention. Free is also founder and President of INDN's List, an organization dedicated to recruiting and training American Indian candidates.

This brings the total number of superdelegates to endorse Barack Obama to 258. Senator Obama is 276 delegates away from securing the Democratic nomination.
 more this way»

mole333's picture



Slate and Newsweek : Hillary Clinton can't win

It's the math, stupid! This from Jonathan Alter over at Newsweek :

Let's say the Democratic National Committee schedules do-overs in Florida and (heavily African-American) Michigan. Hillary wins big yet again. But the chances of her netting 56 delegates out of those two states would require two more huge margins. (Unfortunately the Slate calculator isn't helping me here.)

So no matter how you cut it, Obama will almost certainly end the primaries with a pledged-delegate lead, courtesy of all those landslides in February. Hillary would then have to convince the uncommitted superdelegates to reverse the will of the people. Even coming off a big Hillary winning streak, few if any superdelegates will be inclined to do so. For politicians to upend what the voters have decided might be a tad, well, suicidal.

For all of those who have been trashing me for saying this thing is over, please feel free to do your own math. Give Hillary 75 percent in Kentucky and Indiana. Give her a blowout in Oregon. You will still have a hard time getting her through the process with a pledged-delegate lead.

Alter used Slate's Delegate Calculator to calculate the total.

liza's picture



Syndicate content

User login

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

Upcoming events

  • No upcoming events available

QUOTES

I of all people should know better. The civil rights movement in the U.S. told women to stop talking about gender issues because first the fight against racism had to be won. The feminist movement frowned at women of colour raising their issues, insisting that first the fight against the patriarchy had to be won. The nationalist movements in Africa insisted that feminism was a corrupt and decadent western import, and that first we had to capture our earthly kingdoms, and achieve our panAfricanist Nirvana, before we started looking at "side issues". And those of us who are interested in our contemporary political dynamics have fallen into the same pit of not tackling the prickly, the uncomfortable questions now: we are waiting to win the larger battle before we clean our house. There is always another battle or another issue, and the matters that matter to the foot soldiers are postponed for yet another day. Yet, these issues ARE the battle. We fight for freedom --and do not imagine we are doing anything less--because it is the freedom to live our lives the way we want, from the jobs we choose to the people we fall in love with. If we cannot tackle them, then we are not equipped to tackle anything. What are the lines of difference we draw? For what do we engage, argue, participate and in some heroes' cases, take awful risks? For what?

Poll