Politics, USA

Democratic Primaries results since February 20th (update)

Since February 20th, there have been 13 democratic primary contests: Obama has won 439 pledged delegates; Clinton has won 456 pledged delegates.

So since February 20th Obama has gathered fewer pledged delegates than Hillary Clinton.

In the same last 13 contests Obama has received 6,085,465 votes; Clinton has received 6,569,504 votes.

So since February 20th Clinton has received 484,039 votes more than Obama.


6 thoughts on “Democratic Primaries results since February 20th (update)

  1. Phil says:

    Is the 20th of February in any way significant? ’cause otherwise the obvious response is “Well yes, but she’s not winning, is she?”

  2. Hi Phil,

    First of all, she is not winning in pledged delegates; but she in on course to win ill all significant counts of the popular vote.

    the 20th of february itself isn’t particularly significant – it just marks the end of that post-supertuesday period on february in which obama did so well.

    the idea is that these data is not only consistent, but it actually supports, the idea that obama is no longer a viable candidate. he was for a few weeks in february, but for the last three months he has been trailing. and if you sum that up with the quite obvious advantage that the polls seem to indicate hillary would be in november, then superdelegates should choose the candidate who will have won the popular vote over the candidate who will have won the more pledged delegates.

  3. Phil says:

    But Obama’s ahead on pledged delegates, ahead on superdelegates, and ahead on the popular vote. By any measurable standard he’s winning and by some he’s already won.

    Clinton may have closed the gap, but she’s still behind, and with the Clinton campaign themselves saying this thing will be decided by the 15th of June it seems odd to me that you don’t see the frontrunner as a viable candidate.

    To put it another way, Obama’s now so likely to be the nominee that if you bet £1 on him to become the nominee, you’ll only get £1.05 back when he is, so if you really believe you’re right then now would be a very good time to have a flutter.

    On the subject of performance vs McCain in the polls, Obama seems to do better than Clinton, at least in the national polls going by the results compiled over at:


  4. Phil,

    Obama is ahead on pledged delegates and superdelegates; and he is NOW ahead on SOME significant counts of the popular vote (in others Hillary is ahead), even though most people agree that after Puerto Rico Hillary will overtake him in at least two important counts: the one without Michigan, and the one with all the uncommitted from Michigan counted for Obama.

    I don’t see why the fact that Obama has practically won the nomination has any bearing on him being a viable candidate: plenty people won the nomination who were not viable, see Kerry and Mondale, for example (and notice who Obama appears to have chosen as his VP strategist – the same who advised Kerry and Mondale).

    Finally, national presidential votes don’t mean anything. Its the state-by-state polls that matter: and you can very well see from RCP who between Obama and Clinton is more viable according to those.

    otherwise look here:



  5. Phil says:

    My understanding is that the only way you can put Clinton ahead in the popular vote as things stand now is by both counting Michigan and by not counting Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington, and it’s tough to defend counting the vote that way.

    On viability: again to go back to simple betting because it has a way of simplifying things nicely, while at the same time providing a very reliable prediction I’ve been unable to find a single betting site where Obama is anything other than the person in the world most likely to be the next president of the US. So I reckon he’s viable.

  6. Phil,

    on popular vote:

    yes, as things stand today, Obama is NOT ahead only if you count Michigan. and thats both with and without the other four states.

    after Puerto Rico it is very likely that Clinton will be ahead without Michigan. and possible that she will also be ahead without Michigan and WITH the RCP estimates on the four states. also note that RCP estimates Washington caucus rather than simply counting Washington non-binding primary, which offers REAL numbers

    on viability:

    quite obviously Obama is ahead in betting, because it is very unlikely that Clinton will become the nominee. the point is that, if you look at state-by-state polls that compare how Obama and Clinton would do against McCain, Clinton would have more chances against McCain than Obama. that does not mean that Obama doesn’t have chances, nor that he will start as the underdog. to the contrary…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s