Ok, I know I have not convinced many Obama supporters that there is a problem, but I am going to spitball some ideas on this.

I think Obama needs to latch onto some populist issues that appeal to that group. The best one I can think of is one I completely disagree with - the anti-trade movement. The whole anti trade schtick is wrong on policy. But it makes for great populist appeal and contrast with Republicans and with John McCain. I know Obama trotted it out in Ohio but he has not stuck to it and he never was very convincing arguing it.

More . . .

So writes our friend SusanG (and TalkLeft does think of her as a friend) at the Great Orange Satan's place (also our friend Singer at MYDD), citing Gallup:

Obama stacks up against McCain at this point is similar to the way in which Kerry performed against Bush in 2004 within several key racial, educational, religious, and gender subgroups. That is, the basic underlying structure of the general-election campaign this year does not appear to be markedly different from that of the 2004 election.

Assuming that is true, and I do have quibbles with that, it is important to remember John Kerry LOST to Bush in 2004. This is not exactly the electability argument I think I would want to make. More . . .

It looks less definitive than I thought it would. Here is Chris Bowers' analysis:

[W]ith Florida seated as is, Clinton trails by 95 delegates when the Michigan Party's plan is enacted. Further, since Edwards has declined to make an endorsement, his 32 delegates are now effectively uncommitted superdelegates. So, this means that the best case-scenario for Clinton right now is that she trails by 95 delegates with 550.5 delegates remaining. So, even in Clitnon's best case scenario, Obama only needs 228 of the remaining 550.5 delegates, or 41.4%, to win the nomination.

Obama still needs 41.4% of the remaining delegates with this FL/MI plan? I thought the math was worse than that for Clinton.

Clinton Nixing MI Proposal? See below.

Thomas Edsall at Huffpo writes that the Obama campaign may agree to pay off Hillary Clinton's campaign debt of $10 plus million, plus her campaign expenses of $10 plus million, if she bows out gracefully now.

George Stephanapoulous says:

We know that Senator Clinton loaned herself a little more than $11 million. Going into April, the campaign finance reports show the campaign was carrying a debt of $10 million to $15 million. My sources are now telling that that number is far higher. The campaign debt is far higher than ten million dollars. It could be double that, maybe even more. And the lack of money and load of that debt could be driving the decisions inside the Clinton camp in coming days.

What do you think? Will there be an offer of debt repayment and if so, is Hillary likely to take it?

So I take it we can agree now that 2025 is not the magic number?

Everything we're hearing is that a deal over Florida and Michigan could be cut in the next few days. . . . The hurdle isn't Clinton and Obama anymore, though; it is folks in the DNC who believe those two recalcitrant states still need to be punished in some form . . . [I]t's clear to us that DNC types want some flesh on this issue. Many hate the idea of Florida and Michigan getting full delegations . . .

Does anyone in the DNC want to win in November? Donna Brazile is a travesty.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

This bad:

[I]in a strategy session last year, according to two people who were there[,] [a]s aides looked over the campaign calendar, chief strategist Mark Penn confidently predicted that an early win in California would put her over the top because she would pick up all the state's 370 delegates. . . . Sitting nearby, veteran Democratic insider Harold M. Ickes, who had helped write those rules, was horrified — and let Penn know it. "How can it possibly be," Ickes asked, "that the much vaunted chief strategist doesn't understand proportional allocation?"

One good thing about this campaign is the utter demise of the idea that Mark Penn is a competent political operative.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

Politico is reporting that Barack Obama will declare victory on May 20:

Not long after the polls close in the May 20 Kentucky and Oregon primaries, Barack Obama plans to declare victory in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. . . .The Obama campaign agrees with the Democratic National Committee, which pegs a winning majority at 2,025 pledged delegates and superdelegates—a figure that excludes the penalized Florida and Michigan delegations.

So let me get this straight -- the first act of the self declared Democratic nominee Barack Obama will be to state that Michigan and Florida will not count? This is insane. Two key states in November will be dissed in the first act of the newly crowned Democratic nominee. At the least, Obama should wait until he has 2209 delegates counting the existing Florida and Michigan delegations. One assumes that will likely happen by the end of the primaries barring some unforeseen event. I can not understand the logic of this approach.

More . . .

Barack Obama is almost certainly going to be the nominee. As I wrote to our friend Markos today (yes, he is still a good friend of Talk Left), it is in Barack Obama's and the Democratic Party's interest to seat the delegations. I assume Democrats in all races, including the Presidential race, want to compete in Florida and Michigan. Seating their delegation contributes greatly to that.

That's why I think attitudes like that exhibited by Matt Yglesias are totally misguided. If Obama loses the nomination, it won't be because Florida and Michigan are seated. It will take a huge meltdown for that to happen. On the other hand, seating Florida and Michigan could very well contribute to Democratic victories in Florida and Michigan, including at the top of the ticket.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Comments now closed.

You'll be hearing this a lot in coming days. The true delegate number and the one Barack Obama must surpass is 2209, not 2025. Litigator Mom over at The Confluence explains, beginning with the correct calculation:

50% + 1 of all the delegates, pledged and SDs, alloted to the 50 states, Guam and Puerto Rico.

Not 48 states, but 50 states. She explains: [More...]

TwinMom at MyDD has an interesting diary up comparing Obama's win in Virginia to North Carolina:

Obama won Virginia by 28 points and North Carolina by 14. What's different, given the similar voter demographics?

Using exit poll data here and here from the NY Times, TwinMom shows the percentages of white men, white women, black men and black women voters were very similar but the results were not:

• In Virginia, Obama won 67% of White Men. In North Carolina only 40%

• In Virginia, Obama won 45% of White Women , in North Carolina only 33%.

• In Virginia, Obama won 93% of Black Men and 85% of Black Women. In North Carolina, he won 91% of Black Men and Black Women.

The conclusion: [More...]

I am watching Hardball and the total nonsense is amazing. They are discussing how the white working class issue disappeared. Specifically, Chris Matthews, with the once respected Chuck Todd nodding vigorously, said Pennsylvania was the past and North Carolina was the future on race relations. This is simply counterfactual. Let's review the data.

In Pennsylvania, Clinton won whites 18-29 (52-48), 30-44 (58-42), 45-59 (63-37), 60+ (68-32). In North Carolina, whites 18-29, just 8% of the vote, went for Obama 57-41. But whites 30-44 went for Clinton (52-45), 45-59 (64-33), 60+ (69-29).

Barack Obama is almost certain to be the nominee, and Tweety is ebulliant about his guy looking like the nominee. But let's stick to the facts please. On the demographics, nothing got better for Obama. The difference between North Carolina and Pennsylvania is there are a lot more African American voters in North Carolina. She never had a chance to win it. Ever.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

Comments now closed.

Update: Marc Ambinder's 7 reasons why Hillary should stay in the race.

Hillary Clinton picked up a superdelegate in North Carolina today.

U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler pledged his support to Sen. Hillary Clinton after she won in his Western North Carolina district.

Obama also picked up a North Carolina superdelegate today. At least two are staying uncommitted, U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge of Lillington and an attorney (Parker?)whom I heard on the news earlier.

Almost 300 of the 796 superdelegates remain uncommitted. Here's a list of some of the more prominent ones.

Hillary today said she's staying in until there is a nominee. Good for her.