I’ve emailed you … I’m not against counting her wins, don’t get me wrong. I’m just saying let’s count ALL the votes.

Thanks!

Peace,
Zeke

Heh heh.

Thanks for the citation. As always, I bow to your superior knowledge of the numbers. You are “Numbers Master” in my book…

-CW

Is it mathematically precise? No, you are correct. However, I do state in my post that these are based upon MSNBC’s numbers (I chose to use the most Clinton-friendly figures so as to find the highest number of superdelegates for this example - better to be safe, than sorry).

In reference to your notes:

1) The point of this post is to show that once Obama pulls enough superdelegates from Clinton, it denies her claim that it is still possible for her to gain the delegates necessary for her to gain the nomination (and thus can give more credence to the “presumptive” nominee status of Obama). The assumption is that no pledged delegates or superdelegates switch their allegiance. Is this realistic? No, we have seen several Clinton superdelegates already switch (and one pledged delegate - though, officially still a pledged delegate for Clinton). Again, this is based upon numbers we have at hand at this moment in time. Also, Edwards delegates are still “officially” his until the next convention those delegates attend (either state or national).

2) Projected calculations of delegate allotments are based upon previous calculations done on this blog, only updated. These projections are based upon current spreads in poll averages on Real Clear Politics, Pollster.com and FiveThirtyEight.com. I’ve used the statewide percentages and carried them down to each Congressional District, PLEO and At-Large delegate breakdowns. Is it exact? No, however, from past projections done similarly - these have come very close in their estimates.

3) Again, there are plenty of other predictions … the supers that have stated they will wait to pledge the winner of the pledged delegate count should be coming out after May 20 - but most won’t come until after June 3. However, there are enough supers that haven’t stated this that Obama should be able to get 2 dozen supers to come out before the polls close on Tuesday, May 20.

I stated at this front of this entry that this is my prediction. I predict that by the end of the day on May 20th, Obama will have secured enough superdelegates to mathematically deny Clinton the ability to get the # she would need to get to 2025. However, she will stay in the race until past June 3 (and in my original prediction - until June 16).

Thanks again for the comment and I hope a little of this clears up some of the math I didn’t show in my work!

1) The supposed big deal is the difference between Obama getting a majority and denying Clinton a majority. If things did end up in that situation, it would mean a deadlock going into the convention - hardly the Obama victory you seem to be implying. More significantly, you don’t explain what the difference between those numbers is - the Edwards delegates. If we assume that all of them will go to Obama (and some already have), then the difference disappears. But some of them could go to Clinton. So any “magic number” needs to get Obama to a majority; the Edwards delegates are just one more piece to fall in place.

2) Your projections of the remaining primaries are totally unexplained. They appear to be based on someone’s idea of the most favorable results possible for Clinton. But they’re clearly not that - especially in Puerto Rico where there isn’t enough precedent to predict accurately. It’s fine to make predictions like this, but don’t convey them as fact.

3) There are plenty of other predictions you could make about specific superdelegates - like those who have stated they’ll vote for the winner of the pledged delegates, or add-ons to be named in various states whose politics are clear.

You’ve made a reasonable predictionm with some mathematical justification. Please call it what it is, and don’t try to mystify it beyond that.