WILL MATH OR MOMENTUM DECIDE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY? ...

[babylonsister]

WILL MATH OR MOMENTUM DECIDE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY? ...
Ari Berman


snip//

Obama's lead in pledged delegates remains virtually insurmountable. "{Clinton} isn't going to win at the polls," Jonathan Chait of The New Republic wrote last month in a provocative column. "Barack Obama has a lead of 144 pledged delegates. That may not sound like a lot in a 4,000-delegate race, but it is. Clinton's Ohio win reduced that total by only nine. She would need 15 more Ohios to pull even with Obama. She isn't going to do much to dent, let alone eliminate, his lead."

Based on these numbers, Chait goes on to make the case for why Clinton should exit the race for the good of her party. (Chait's argument, incidentally, has been strengthened by the events of the last week, with Clinton and McCain sharing the same talking points against Obama.)

One's perception of the race still hinges on whether you think the contest is about math or momentum, as Tim Noah of Slate has chronicled. Before Iowa, the press was all about momentum--whomever won the early states would go on to capture the nomination. Three months later, before Ohio, the press was all about math--and Obama's string of victories since Super Tuesday, they concluded, made it impossible for Clinton to win.

After Ohio and Texas, the media doesn't seem to know what to believe, the "arithmecrats" or the "momentucrats," as Noah calls the respective groups. Most political reporters I know privately believe Obama is all-but-certain to be the Democratic nominee, no matter what Clinton does. Yet they continue to cover the contest, in Pennsylvania and elsewhere, as if it's a dead heat.

The math has favored Obama for the past two months and will likely continue to. The momentum swings back and forth. Obama had it after Clinton's Bosnia gaffe and the Mark Penn scandal. Clinton had it after Obama's Jeremiah Wright scandal and small-town gaffe last week. These controversies, real or invented, last for a week or so and then give way to something else.

The momentum impacts the math, particularly when it comes to influencing the votes of superdelegates who continue to (maddeningly) sit on the sidelines. But the math is ultimately what matters, and will decide when this never-ending primary finally comes to a close and that other race, against John McCain, finally begins.

[hedgehog]

1. Yes

[guyanakoolaid]

2. Right now Bill Clinton is probably saying "but it depends of what your definition of 'math' is"

[chknltl]

3. As long as it isn't Diebold or a tragedy, I'll be happy with...

...either math or momentum deciding this primary and doing so soon. Let's get the show on the road, time to get after mCaine!

[housewolf]

4. PA delegate math - On the Ground in PA (the BooMan speaks)

by BooMan
Tue Apr 15th, 2008 at 12:06:02 PM EST

The latest polls show Obama trailing in Pennsylvania by six (Quinnipiac), nine (Rasmussen), and fourteen points (SurveyUSA). That leaves Pollster.com with an average of: Clinton 48.2% Obama 42.5%. Over at CQ Politics their district by district analysis shows Clinton emerging with a net three delegates. She would gain more for winning the popular vote, but they project a small net gain of delegates. It's hard for me to tell whether Obama is behind by six or behind by fourteen because in this area (the Southeast) he is doing very well. In fact, I project that CQ Politics is wrong about District 1 (South and central Philadelphia; Chester) and District 7 (Suburban Philadelphia — most of Delaware County). I think Obama will get a 5-2 split in the First and win the Seventh, earning him a 4-3 edge. And, while CQ Politics projects a 7-2 split in the Second District, a 8-1 split is not completely out of the question.

more...
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2008/4/15/1262/03017