Interesting academic exercise: Obama was on the cusp of losing the nomination

[Tropics_Dude83]

I think a lot of people in the media and elsewhere got too wrapped up in the math and believed that Obama was inevitable because of his pledged delegate lead. My opinion is that Senator Obama was on the verge of losing the nomination at this time last week. His lead in North Carolina was alleged to have been under 5 points. His deficit in Indiana was apparently 10+. Now, imagine if he had only won North Carolina 51-49 or if Clinton had somehow won it 50.5-49.5? Now, imagine if she eked out a win in North Carolina and won Indiana as she was expected to by 10 points.

So, the narrative out of February was that Clinton was on the ropes after Obama won 11 contests in a row. Then, Clinton began her comeback by winning the Texas and Ohio primaries. Then, the Wright fiasco and "Bitter" hit. While Obama seemed to be struggling and "tired" on the campaign trail", Clinton had "found her groove" as a "populist fighter' and was "having fun." Then Obama lost Pennsylvania by a significant margin. Just days after that, Reverend Wright decides to go on a freak show tour including putting in a spectacular performance at the national press club. Fortunately, Clinton made her gas tax pander and Obama was able to pivot off of the Wright mess and kind of revive his candidacy by reminding so many of why we like him so much. It reminded me so.

Imagine if there had been no gas tax mistake and Clinton had won some sort of moral victory in North Carolina and won Indiana by 12? The media would have gone crazy discussing all of his alleged problems with "key constituencies." So a disappointing IN/NC primary result for Senator Obama would have been followed up just a week later by a huge loss in West Virginia where again the media could spin itself silly saying that working class people didn't vote for him. So we now have 3 months of unrelenting negative press coverage of Obama. His losses in all of the key primaries since March 4th help Senator Clinton narrow the gap in Oregon, Montana and South Dakota. Maybe she wins Kentucky by 50 points and has a close finish win or loss in Oregon. The media narrative gets even worse. "He can't even win one of his base states" they would say. Then Puerto Rico votes and gives Clinton a huge win.

So yeah, Obama would have finished the primary almost certainly with more pledged delegates but his candidacy would effectively have been crippled and Hillary Clinton would have had huge momentum going into the convention. The media would be eating him alive and who knows if she'd be able to start a superdelegate flood towards her since if that happened she probably would have taken a popular vote lead. She then would have pushed HARD to seat Michigan and Florida exactly as is, which may even have given her an overall delegate lead.

Obama is on track for a narrow win in Denver of around 100 delegates. It is tenous.

Let's be thankful that he put in a stellar performance exceeding all expectations and won Indiana and North Carolina big (He won Indiana IMO because we have to discount the Limbaugh effect).

I guess the point of this post is that the math wasn't and isn't everything. I was thinking to myself last night how different things could have looked. It was a mistake to assume that everything was locked up. It wasn't. Plus it's always fun to do what-if scenarios.

Do you think my scenario outlined above was realistic if Obama hadn't performed in such an outstanding way last Tuesday night? It's easy to see how it could have slipped away.

[BlooInBloo]

1. Woulda, coulda, shoulda. DIDN'T.

[John Q. Citizen]

2. From Iowa to today, the voters have said they want change. They don't

hate Clinton, they just want change.

This was never going to go to the convention. Ever.

I know there are a certain group who love the drama and think that a convention will give them that drama, but they aren't the super delegates. The supers are much more pragmatic than that. They want to win a lot more than they want drama.

[Tropics_Dude83]

4. My point is that things weren't locked up until Tuesday night

The math wouldn't have looked dramatically different on Tuesday night no matter what but the psychology would have.

[Inuca]

7. I agree

I was on needles Tuesday until the polls closed in NC and they announced Obama the winner right away. Then I went and poured myself a drink. As the results got closer and closer in IN, I poured myself another one (and then I stopped, not much of a drinker :-)). Incidentally, the latest (but not final) results for IN that I saw on Kos yesterday showed a difference of only around 11,000 votes with more absentee and provisional ballots to be counted I think.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Perception is like silly putty. It was my perception that things were locked up after WI, back in

Feb.

It is your perception that things weren't locked up until last Tuesday.

We all perceive the same things individually.

[HousePainter]

3. IF, IF, IF

sounds iffy to me.
In the meantime let's wake up and build the landslide all the way up and down the ticket in November.

[Tropics_Dude83]

5. I don't think you understand the point of my post

There are many what if's in history. What if Chamberlain had declared war when Hitler annexed the Sudetenland? What if Hitler had listened to Rommell and shored up the defences on the beaches of Normandy? What if Sirhan Sirhan hadn't shot RFK? What if Al Gore had asked for a statewide hand recount of all ballots everywhere right after the election in 2000?

There's a whole genre of world history what if scenarios and it's interesting. I can see no one agrees with me so whatever.

[VolcanoJen]

6. What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

That's always been one of my favorites. :-)

It's a provocative post to be sure.

[Orsino]

8. There was no reasonable what-if in the past few weeks...

...that could have lost Obama the race. Had he lost badly in Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina, he would remain ahead.

The impression of a close race was perpetuated by the MSM, who were slow to acknowledge Obama's lead.

[bigbrother05]

9. Understand your point, but the Obama campaign never assumed anything

That's one of the reasons he's gotten this far, they are thinking ahead and not taking anything for granted. Just another way of saying JUDGMENT.

[dailykoff]

10. I heard that yesterday but I don't think it was ever close.

Tuesday could have been slightly less decisive, but frankly it's never really been close since the New Hampshire "game changer" failed to change the game.

[graycem]

12. Well technically it still could

if he implodes. That IS the job of the Superdelegates. To rescue us from a badly damaged nominee. That's why they're trying so hard to paint him in that light to the SD's, only it's not working because it isn't true and their tactics are turning them off. If by some chance something that did shatter his campaign happened tomorrow, then they would have a right and obligation to overturn the pledged delegates. I don't think they get that right when it's only "questionable" and that too from the person in second place. And that's still what it would've been if what you described had happened. He would still be in the lead and she would still be losing, just because his wins were in the middle that shouldn't mean they mean less than hers because they were closer to the convention. I do agree with you though, that SD's are considering a lot more than just the math, however, it would have to be something pretty big for them to make that case to the Democratic party. The narrative would've changed, but I don't think the SD's make their choices based on what Tim Russert and the gang spout night after night. They are politicians after all, and they know the game of spin better than anyone. So things might've been more difficult, but I don't think that would've caused anything to slip away.

[democrattotheend]

18. I agree with you

If there were some big scandal that rocked his campaign to the point of making him damaged goods, it would be the obligation of the superdelegates to avoid a meltdown. But at this point I think it would have to be something big, much bigger than Reverend Wright.

What bothers me about what Clinton is doing is that she is essentially hinting that she's more electable because she's white. She is essentially saying that the superdelegates should weight the votes of certain voters more heavily than other voters, essentially rewarding the Reagan Democrats for being fickle while assuming that black voters can be taken for granted because they have voted 80-90% Democratic in the past. For someone who talks so much about counting every vote, it seems kind of odd to suggest that certain demographic groups should have their votes weighted more heavily than others.

I know people who did not vote for Obama in the primaries because they thought America was just too racist to elect a black man, and they want Democrats to win this year. They may be right, and it's there right as voters to consider that when voting. But for the superdelegates to buy into that argument now (and make no mistake, that's what Clinton's 'Obama's support among hard working white people is slipping' argument is) would essentially mean that they were denying Obama the nomination when he has earned it based on the color of his skin. They would be weighing the votes of white voters more heavily than black voters, a nice throwback to the days of 3/5 of a person. I'm a young white Jewish woman who has been so proud that the Democratic Party is going to make history and shatter a glass ceiling this year one way or another. But if the superdelegates were to take the nomination away from Obama because he's black, I don't see how I could ever be a Democrat again. That's not the party I believe in, that's not what we stand for, and it's not right.

[graycem]

20. And I agree with you...

I am a white female who would be very disgusted if they had the audacity to take away his win because Hillary believes he's not electable. I certainly wouldn't remain in the party if they didn't have sufficient reason to deny him what he's rightfully earned. If the evidence were there, of course I would be heartsick, but I would have to support it because I do want a Democrat in the WH. But the claims of unelectability are just not true. It may be anecdotal, but my logic tells me that if he has managed to convince me to vote for him, and donate pretty heavily to him, my mother to vote for him, and 4 other people in my family so far, to vote for him, people who have not been political activists or really anything other than plain apathetic except in November when it's time to pull the lever, then I have to believe that other people have similarly been affected.

I think the largest problem for people in the current Washington climate and largely the media, is that they have lived in their political bubble far too long and they don't really understand the new political landscape that is being cultivated with the help of the internet, and younger generations having a much more open mind with things like race. They, just like Rev.Wright, are seeing things from the perspective of 20+ years ago, when the reality was prejudices ruled the day. I just don't buy it anymore. Of course racism will always be here, and in some ways, nothing has changed in the last 50 years, but in many ways, lots have changed. Just like another thread that was started it illustrated very well all of the African-American officials that have won elections and hold public office. The times have changed. :)

[WeDidIt]

13. Nope, he was never ever even close to losing. He's lead the entire time

Not once since Iowa has Obama lost the pledged delegate lead.

Since topping 100 delegates over Clinton, he hasn't lost that margin.

He has never been close to losing this thing unless you want to put a higher standard on a black candidate than you would on a white candidate.

[tritsofme]

14. What kind of dumbshit logic is that?

What does Obama's race have to do with this discussion?

The OP didn't dispute any of the facts you stated.

All I took away from the OP was that NC/IN were big tests for Obama and he passed with flying colors.

This reflexive race card that many here like to play is ridiculous.

[WeDidIt]

17. Obama has been held to a higher standard than anybody in this race

and it has been consistent since his announcement.

It's standard, though, in the United States. Black men in business are always held to higher standards. The same holds rue even in the military.

It is the way it is. Hopefully, the Obama presidency will eb the end of the beginning of the fight against the double standard.

[quakerboy]

15. I understand what you are saying

I think Obama had the win either way, even if he had not knocked it out it NC and IN. Unless she pulled Amazing victories, in the 30+ point range, it was still his. But it would have been a much closer, harder fought win.

The Math is the major part. Because of Superdelegates, you are right, it is not everything. But even SD's listen to the math.

I think that the most true part of your OP is this: "Let's be thankful that he put in a stellar performance exceeding all expectations"

[democrattotheend]

16. I thought he was on the cusp of losing it too

I agree with you that people here and in the real world got complacent, believing that the math made him inevitable. I was labeled a concern troll many times for saying that I thought the media narrative was important and that Obama did not have it locked up yet. For the two weeks in between PA and OH, it felt like the sky was falling and his support was collapsing, and I started going through the emotional process I went through 4 years ago with Dean. On Tuesday, I was a total basketcase all day (in part because my grandmother and my dog were having surgery the same day; both are okay, fortunately) and I was really nervous that it was going to be the beginning of the end for Obama. The last thing in the world I expected was for them to say it was the end for Clinton.

I think your scenario above is not that far-fetched, although I did a calculation and discovered that it would have taken a total implosion (say, losing Oregon by 20 points) for her to have a shot at overtaking his delegate lead even with Michigan and Florida. But I thought that it would be a horrible scenario if he limped crippled across the finish line, and that maybe the best thing to do was a Clinton-Obama ticket if she won all of the later primaries. On Tuesday, I took comfort in knowing that if nothing else, Obama had at least earned one of the slots on the ticket.

[Tropics_Dude83]

19. Glad your dog and grandmother are doing OK:)

Great news. That was my concern as well regarding the election. Senator Obama is building tremendous momentum towards the GE now but he would have gone in dramatically weakened at best if he had not performed so well on Tuesday. BTW, Reverend Wright hasn`t been mentioned since Indiana and North Carolina!!! What a relief.