Finally: a delegate count with some integrity.

[Seabiscuit]

Forget all the conflicting TV blather about delegate counts after Super Tuesday.

The New York Times counts delegates as follows:

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/index.html

And this is how they count them:

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/2008delegates.html

"Many news organizations include delegate projections in their counts that are based on nonbinding votes for candidate preference, such as the Iowa caucuses. The New York Times counts only delegates that have been officially selected and are bound by their preferences."

[AX10]

1. kick

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. This Is So Confusing

Probably because each camp plays games with the numbers...

Barring a major scandal or gaffe I expect them to be really close when the dust has settled...

If they are not both on the ticket despite their hard work and the hard work of their supporters the party is going to be fractured in the Fall with the losing side accusing the winning side of screwing them...

Folks say the Pugs are fractured but the Pugs can't say McCain didn't win a clear and convincing victory...

[Seen the light]

3. Obama won Alabama 56%-42%, yet Clinton won 19 delegates to Obama's 10?

This is why I'm ignoring this total.

[goldcanyonaz]

5. Clinton won the majority of vote in Nevada and Obama got more delegates.

[Seen the light]

7. 5 percentage points separated them and he won, what, 2 more delegates

FOURTEEN points separated them in Alabama and she got nearly double the delegates according to the NY Times? No way is that correct.

If someone can show me how that works, then fine, but I don't see how that adds up whatsoever. If it does, then our presidential nominating process is absolutely fucked up.

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. he won 1 more delegate in Nevada

she won 9 more than he did after beating her by double-digits. It doesn't make sense.

[Seabiscuit]

11. The Times isn't counting Nevada, because none are bound/decided yet.

[hedgehog]

I suspect that it is like the Electoral College in miniature. It doesn't

matter how many votes you have in the neighboring district or in total. All that matters is how many votes you have n this district. Don't feel bad. There were more actual voters for Hillary in Nevada, but Obama won the most districts so he ended up with more delegates.

[joshcryer]

16. Exactly, which is why this system is completely flawed.

Elections are too close these days because the media likes close races, so it makes them close.

[Perky]

10. I posted a consensus table of major news outlets and it is more like 25-22 Obama

[Seabiscuit]

15. That's because the major news outlets are owned by Republicans and they want

to promote Obama's candidacy, or haven't you noticed?

They are all indulging in deceptive wish-fulfillment, counting delegates for Obama that are not yet bound or committed, and therefore belong in neither camp at this point in time.

All of those news outlet counts are biased and based on biased projections instead of fact.

[nonconformist]

13. Delegates are are allocated according to population of each county.

That's why there are occasionally results like that.

[Seabiscuit]

31. Therein lies the illusion that throws people off.

[Yossariant]

17. She did win more delegates in Alabama. There were threads and posts on ST about it.

There's a thread in my home state by an Obama fan complaining that the same thing could happen here.

He could get more votes. She could get more delegates.

When Obama's fans complain about the superdelegates going against the "will of the people" I can't get an answer about whether they mean "people" as in "voters" or "people" as in "pledged delegates."

Do you have an answer?

[nonconformist]

20. They mean, whichever scenario works for them.

If Obama gets the popular vote but not the majority of delegates, then they mean "voters".

If Hillary gets the popular vote but not the majority of delegates, then they mean "pledged delegates".

[Yossariant]

26. The lack of a response from the poster shows that you are correct.

[Seabiscuit]

23. New Hampshire's a good example.

Hillary won there by a decent margin.

Yet Obama got the same number of delegates: 9.

[MonkeyFunk]

25. Alabama

has 52 pledged delegates. They haven't all been awarded yet.

CNN has 21 to Clinton and 20 to Obama.

[City Lights]

27. NYTimes has a total of 29 delegates for Alabama and MSNBC shows

48. How can there be not only a difference in the way they're split between the candidates, but also in the total awarded? Who is officially tallying these numbers? :crazy:

[Seabiscuit]

28. Presumably, the only "official" tally will be made by the DNC. However, they haven't done so yet

for the same reason the NYT isn't counting the caucus states yet, because such delegates are not yet bound to any candidate.

[jackson_dem]

30. Delegates are given based on congressional district

Obama won only 25% of the white vote in Alabama while Obama won blacks 83-16. Since many districts in the South are drawn on racial lines it would not be surprising if Hillary won more delegates in Alabama. There are more white districts than black in Alabama, right?

[Alhena]

4. So Obama's big caucus wins don't count according to the NY Times?

How convenient to pretend that the Colorado, North Dakota, Idaho, etc caucuses never happened. Surely you can provide that as a serious list- it is an absolute joke.

[Seabiscuit]

9. Because the delegates are not bound. Therefore any attempt to count them

is necessarily a projection - wish fulfillment, if you will.

As the original link shows, they are yet "undecided".

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. so there are 4 Obama states that have yet to be decided

that should narrow the margin

[ElsewheresDaughter]

12. notice Obama only won in caucus red states with an OPEN primary...very telling

[goldcanyonaz]

18. Yeah, but we're not allowed to talk about that.

[Dogmudgeon]

21. No bad news about Obama! It hurts the process!

Didn't you get the memo?

Obama and his senior campaign people can bear to hear it, but it adversely affects the Transformational Obamic State of Consciousness.

All of the benefits of the TOSC are lost in a matter of minutes, and they begin to ask questions about policy. Psychosis, murder, cannibalism, suicide, and Pat Boone music follow soon thereafter.

--p!

[emilyg]

14. k

[grantcart]

19. there actually little disagreement between the two camps on delegates

While this site has been better on a state by state basis the totals are off because they include michigan and florida

[joshcryer]

24. In their numbers both MI and FL say: Delegates stripped by party.

[samrock]

22. By the way

Due the total number needed to win 2025 reflect MI and FL's totals NOT being counted???

[Seabiscuit]

29. Good question. It would appear the answer is yes.

Since the NYT isn't counting those states and they weren't caucus states, then their delegates logically wouldn't be included in the total number needed to win either.

[Unsane]

32. thx