Election Shock? Tuesday hands Obama a delegate lead over Hillary Clinton

[JerichoHill]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8358.html

Summary:
With the delegate count still under way, NBC News said Obama appears to have won around 840 delegates in yesterday’s contests, while Clinton earned about 830.

Clinton was portrayed in many news accounts as the night’s big winner, but Obama’s campaign says he wound up with a higher total where it really counts — the delegates who will choose the party’s nominee at this summer’s Democratic convention.

With the delegate count still under way, NBC News said Obama appears to have won around 840 delegates in yesterday’s contests, while Clinton earned about 830 — “give or take a few,” Tim Russert, the network’s Washington bureau chief, said on the “Today” show.



The bottom line is that the two are virtually tied.

Obama won 13 states, some of them smaller, and Clinton won eight.


-----
David Plouffe, Obama's pointman on delegates, corrected the networks after the Nevada caucuses by correcting the delegate counts the networks had gotten wrong. He's a pretty good stat guy.

By my count that I maintain here, total delegates are almost split evenly at 900 a piece. My count shows Obama with a 3-5 delegate lead...well within my margin of error.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

This is most encouraging indeed.

 

[Mark1031]

That's a Drudge headline. I like your spin tho

 

[I'm Cleo!]

It's The Politico. It's not too far from Drudge.

Cleo

 

[JollyRoger]

Even if Hillary ends up with slightly more delegates coming out of Super Tuesday, the coming slate favors the Obamanation. Obama came out of Super Tuesday in very good shape.

 

[Mark1031]

It's The Politico. It's not too far from Drudge.

Cleo

Yeah but the blazing anti-Clinton headline "Election Shock? Tuesday hands Obama a delegate lead over Hillary Clinton" is Drudge.

 

[mrt144]

Yeah but the blazing anti-Clinton headline "Election Shock? Tuesday hands Obama a delegate lead over Hillary Clinton" is Drudge.

this is no worse than hillicrats claiming that MA was an upset. hillary was always in the lead in MA. ted kennedy and john kerry endorsements arent that good.

 

[JollyRoger]

Yeah, that Massachusetts bs was laughable. Obama makes up ground in Massachusetts from the polling and somehow it is an upset victory for Hillary because he didn't make up enough ground to overtake her.

 

[Mark1031]

O yeah I think Obama is getting screwed in the post election spin. He has never been ahead in the national polls and is still about 5 points down if you average all recent polls. He has gotten good press treatment tho it just biult expectations too high. Wait till he starts winning next sat. The mo will be back and he has a whole month before the next big states.


@Jolly When is your boy Edwards going to endorse?

 

[JollyRoger]

@Jolly When is your boy Edwards going to endorse?

Hopefully soon now that Obama survived Super Tuesday in reasonable shape. Obama needs to up the offer from AG to Supreme Court Justice though.

 

[Masquerouge]

Won't that tie hurt the Dems against a united Rep party though?

 

[JerichoHill]

It's The Politico. It's not too far from Drudge.

Cleo

Politico headline, report from NBC News.

 

[Mark1031]

Hopefully soon now that Obama survived Super Tuesday in reasonable shape. Obama needs to up the offer from AG to Supreme Court Justice though.

He'll be much better at Justice. There will need to be aggressive enforcement of a lot of neglected areas as well as the new health insurance coverage. Lot's of new rules in both dem plans for the insurance industry. We need a Spitzer at the national level.

 

[Mark1031]

Won't that tie hurt the Dems against a united Rep party though?

United

 

[JollyRoger]

Won't that tie hurt the Dems against a united Rep party though?

The Republican party is hardly united, they are just decided. If the Dem nomination is decided by early March, it won't be that big of a deal.

 

[sourboy]

Or in actuality:

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

Clinton is ahead.

 

[Serutan]

Won't that tie hurt the Dems against a united Rep party though?

As has been pointed out, the Republicans are not united. The moderates are voting for McCain, the evangelicals are voting for Huckabee, and Romney
seems to be getting the LDS vote + neocons who hate McCain.

A close Dem race isn't necessarily bad, provided that the losing side
doesn't feel embittered towards the winner (i.e. it doesn't become a
mudslinging match). So far, it appears the Dems will be able to unite behind the nominee.

 

[amadeus]

That's a Drudge headline. I like your spin tho

ZOMF DRUDGE HES A FACIST

 

[Archbob]

Or in actuality:

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

Clinton is ahead.

Thats with the super delegates. But even though Barack is favored in many of the upcoming states, Clinton is ahead in the big ones.

 

[Masquerouge]

As has been pointed out, the Republicans are not united. The moderates are voting for McCain, the evangelicals are voting for Huckabee, and Romney
seems to be getting the LDS vote + neocons who hate McCain.

You guys are right bad choice of words on my part. Yeah, McCain is not exactly uniting the Republican party...

What I wanted to say was that if the Reps get their candidates earlier, they'll be able to start campaigning earlier also, while the Dems will have to wait until they pick Obama or Hillary.
Can the Reps benefit from such a lead?