Well, Obama and Clinton split the small states last night, and appear to be splitting Texas (with Obama ahead in the caucus, and Clinton having won a statewide victory in the primary). Ohio (at 54-46 with 99% reporting) is the biggest win that Clinton has had (in terms of perception in particular) since New Hampshire.
Of course, at the end of the day, Obama will still be ahead in delegates, and may well win more delegates from yesterday’s contest than Clinton, depending on the final numbers from Texas.
Sphere: Related Content
Of course, Clinton might not be able to catch Obama in the delegate count at all. What will be interesting is whether she can catch him in the national popular vote. She isn’t that far behind, especially if you include Florida, and winning in Pennsylvania could help her close the margin. After what happened in 2024, it would be hard for the superdelegates to not give the nomination to the popular vote winner, even if they had fewer delegates.
Comment by Brett — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 7:05 am
There are a number of interesting scenarios on the table, to be sure.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 8:14 am
Obama was pretty smart shuffling his wife off stage… Do americans realy want a very un-american first lady?
My guess is no she’s done major damage and he knows it.
not to mention Obamas mob ties muslim ties and overall shady past..
Comment by Dr 718 — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 11:22 am
Clinton needs to move on.What changed to her comeback? Delegates seem to be the onlt thing of importance in this election. I thought that the saying was We The People not We the Delegates. This election(debates surrounding the canidates) has been like two childern argueing about who is better than the other.
The Clinton’s had their own time in office it’s time for change.
Comment by Heather — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 11:54 am
The interesting thing will be can the differences be smoothed over before the convention. I don’t see Clinton willing to back off ‘for the sake of the party’, and I’m not sure Obama can either. A group offended and walking away from the process, whether that group be blacks or women, is not what Dems want to see.
I’m guessing that the odds of a nasty time in Denver is still less than even odds, but I’d put it in 1 chance in 3, with the potential of rising better than falling.
But you have to admit, this convention at least has the potential to be more interesting than most.
Comment by Buckland — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 1:21 pm
Well, it took throwing everything and the kitchen sink at Obama to get Sen. Clinton her wins last night and it may not have made a dent in the race as it is. It will be telling what kind of tactic she takes in the next few weeks. Will she campaign on issues for the good of the party or will she decide to try to destroy Obama for the Democratic nod and insure a Republican victory?
Comment by Russell G. — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 1:47 pm
This is the best thing for the party. Maybe in seven weeks you Obamanites, can see what an empty shell he is, I think he called himself a blank slate(his voice is so irritating I try to read his words bot listen.)His speeches are filled with the words you want to hear, and if accomplished we will be more in debt than any war could ever make us. This is a serious time and Clinton is the only person who can at least balance a budget, dreaming of change,that comes with experience and personally I am very afraid of who he is, what he is, and nobody puts a rookie in the big game and expects them to finish . I pray for a brokered convention’ The Messiah isn’t here yet
Comment by Glenda Brinkley — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 3:50 pm
I’m reluctant to feel very strongly one way or the other in terms of which democratic candidate would be better for the country, but the idea that either would balance the budget is highly contentious. Unless massive tax hikes are in the future (for everyone, not just the very wealthy) it would be impossible to balance the budget as is, to say nothing of the enormous costs associated with things like national health care, which both candidates are advocating for in one form or another; and the money can’t simply be created by withdrawing from Iraq, as the cost of re-deploying out of the place would be almost as enormous as the cost of going there was. And in any case, no withdrawal can be complete (some forces will have to stay in theater any way you slice it) because a complete withdrawal would cause utter chaos in Iraq and would destabilize the region. Whoever the president is (dem or rep) we’re not going to be able to substantially alter our military posture for the short-term future that would be 4 years of presidency.
Call me a pessimist, but I just don’t see anyone making any radical changes. And I have zero confidence that the democratic party will sort out who their candidate is peacefully before the convention. I have less than zero confidence that the superdelegates who are not elected officials (a very large portion of them are not, and are thus not accountable to the public in any way, shape, or form) will vote in any way other than what suites their own personal agenda. And, I don’t think the fact that Bush won the presidency and not the popular vote will have any bearing on the way the democratic party renders its decision. The Clinton campaign has already said it would accept the nomination any way it was granted, and Obama will as well. That is the nature of politics - the end is far more important than the means.
The democratic party will spend the next couple of months ripping itself apart, to the benefit of John McCain. If I’m wrong, I’ll take my shoe off, spread mustard on it, and eat it.
And I don’t like mustard.
Comment by Captain D. — Wednesday, March 5, 2024 @ 5:11 pm