Democratic Scorecard: Clinton 232 delegates, Obama 158 and Edwards 62

[agdlp]

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

[bluestateguy]

1. What is your point?

??

[ShortnFiery]

2. The illustrious "super-delegates" can (and will!) flip in a heartbeat.

;)

[Alexander]

4. They already are. I think one flipped from Edwards to Obama today.

Can't remember who it was.

[allinktup]

3. Hmmm.. Looks like "our" vote doesn't count for shit

Love this country. We can't even pick our own candidates. We gotta have a system that picks them for us.

[Tarc]

9. Don't get that bent outta shape

Super-delegates only account for ~20% or so. To say that "we don't pick our own candidates" is a bit of a stretch. All it says is that at the moment, Clinton is in 1st place.

[lurky]

5. After this nomination is over,

I would like to see the elimination of super delegates. It's undemocratic, and it has the whiff of the paternalistic leaders wanting to "protect us" from ourselves. Same idea as the Electoral College. Isn't it about time we got this relic out of our nominating process?

[Abacus]

6. I've been watching too

Recently, the gap between Hillary and Obama has been closing at about 2% or so per day. At this rate, that's about 16 days until even.

[Diane R]

7. I'm more impressed with elected delegates. Why don't you post those numbers? *Obama's ahead*

[goodhue]

8. Obama 63, Clinton 48, Edwards 26

The numbers without superdelegates are a better measure of primary progress to date.

[candice]

10. Did Obama lie? I thought he said he had the most delegates?

But then his biographies have a bit of fudge in them, too, according to his "hometown" newspaper:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0703250359mar25,1,6124597.story?page=6&coll=chi-news-hed

[goodhue]

11. he does if you don't count the superdelegates

which should not be counted IMHO since they are not directly related to ongoing primaries