Hillary”s New Math Problem

For all the crowing about Senator Clinton’s “BIG Wins” Tuesday, one simple problem remains. MATH!  The numbers simply do not add up in a way that is reasonable to concieve. 

While in politics, sometimes anything is possible, it’s looking more and more unlikely that her “Comeback” will lead to the nomination.

Jonathan Alter over at Newsweek has some revealing commentary on the issue that It think is worth considering.

Tuesday’s big wins? The delegate calculus just got worse.
Mar 5, 2008 | Updated: 6:48  p.m. ET Mar 5, 2008

Hillary Clinton won big victories Tuesday night in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. But she’s now even further behind in the race for the Democratic nomination. How could that be? Math. It’s relentless.

To beat Barack Obama among pledged delegates, Clinton now needs even bigger margins in the 12 remaining primaries than she needed when I ran the numbers on Monday—an average of 23 points, which is more than double what she received in Ohio.

Superdelegates won’t help Clinton if she cannot erase Obama’s lead among pledged delegates, which now stands at roughly 134. Caucus results from Texas aren’t complete, but Clinton will probably net about 10 delegates out of March 4. That’s 10 down, 134 to go. Good luck. READ MORE.

  11 comments for “Hillary”s New Math Problem

  1. March 6, 2008 at 9:23 am

    I think it is hilarious. The Hillary supporters are buzzing about her “Big” win. It is like when something occurs to you after the game is over. Reminds me of Zoo Lander moment where he “thinks” he won the award. Where it finally hits him that he lost. Same thing goes for here. She may have won the states, but she did not win the delegate account of course pending the caucus.

  2. March 6, 2008 at 9:40 am

    When a Clinton is involved, the math does tend to get a little fuzzy, doesn’t it? Just never count Hillary out. If she comes close enough in delegates and nobody gets to the magic number, she will most certainly come out on top in a brokered convention. The DLC doesn’t exactly have a reputation for giving up, and she’s their poster-child du jour.


  3. Andrew Davey
    March 6, 2008 at 10:10 am


    Nice try, but this isn’t working today. Sorry, but I’m with Turkana here…


    As much as you don’t want to hear this, neither Clinton nor Obama can win on pledged delegates alone. And right now, the total delegate gap is around 100… Not that much considering that each of them has over 1,200 delegates and both still have a long way to go to get to 2,024. No matter how long you hold your breath, Hillary isn’t “finished”, “dead”, or “lost”. She broke Obama’s winning streak, and she’s on her way to another BIG win in Pennsylvania. 🙂

  4. March 6, 2008 at 10:29 am

    I kind of got jumped on for raining on this parade but it’s true, not much changed in the landscape of pledged delegates. And now there is talk of Obama having the backing of 50 superdelegates that are going to endorse any day now. Details.

  5. Eric
    March 6, 2008 at 11:01 am

    If FL and MI revote, then it is actually possible for Hillary to get a lead in pledged delegates. That is of course IF she wins by the same margins in both states, and IF those states revote.

    Most of the supers will follow the pledged delegates. Boxer just supported Hillary because that is who her voters supported. And good for Boxer for not going against the voters.

  6. Northcountystorm
    March 6, 2008 at 11:38 am

    Chris–There must be some nervous moments over at the Hope OC if you’re having to drag out Jonathan Alter to make a point. He’s been wrong more this electoral season then Bob Schrum has lost campaigns. He wrote Hillary down and out after Iowa and South Carolina and said she was going to get a whipping on March 4. He urged her to withdraw from the race before she got a drubbing in Ohio and Texas.

    If he’s right for once, you’ve got nothing to worry about. In which case I would think you would be gracious in congratulating Hillary on her “big wins” on Tuesday and then go on to say “but the numbers still do not add up” and that Obama will win. Having some doubts on the road to Denver? Anyway, it’s a valid point you make but better made with someone more credible then Alter.

    Heather–You didn’t get “jumped on” for raining on Hillary and Andrews parade. In fact, quite the opposite. Go back and read my comment-I complimented you for the way you rained on the parade. It was the gratuitous attacks on Clinton that drew incoming fire. Two very seperate issues.

  7. just...asking?
    March 6, 2008 at 11:56 am


    Doing the Math, doesn’t give Barack any chance of reaching the number of required delegates either!

  8. March 6, 2008 at 12:42 pm

    Hmm – I guess I missed it where Chris said the math supports Obama passing 2025 on pledged delegates. My bad.

    Anyway, here’s some more math to consider. Obama’s campaign just now released its February fundraising figures. $55 million in 29 days. Staggering.

    And this. As of today at 12:35 PM PST, there were 1,042,870 people who have made contributions to the Obama campaign. Also staggering.

  9. just...asking?
    March 6, 2008 at 2:09 pm


    Do you know how much each campaign has spent to date?

    Obama’s effect on bringing in small contributions is amazing and will hopefully pay dividends for democratic nominee in November.

  10. demmother
    March 6, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    Seems to me that Hillary may be part of the ‘vast right wing conspiracy’ after hearing Limbaugh’s boast of sending Reps to the polls to vote for her to prolong the primary.

    We do have to consider that some/many of the Reps went for Obama but I heard some reps called the right wing talk shows to boast of doing so and then complaining because they could not vote for any down ticket Rep.

  11. March 6, 2008 at 7:22 pm

    Sorry, I don’t know who has spent how much. A figure I do have is that as of a week ago, Obama’s average donation was $109. I don’t know how that compares to anyone else.

Comments are closed.