From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
The statistical front-runner: No matter how one slices the election results from last night, there's no denying that Obama is the statistical front-runner.
He's got a 100-plus pledged delegate lead and even has the lead if you factor in superdelegates.
Here's our math: The NBC News election unit hard count stands at 1078 to 969. If you factor in the unallocated pledged delegates, our estimate rises to approximately 1128to 1009 in Obama's favor (margin of error +/- 5 delegates).
Toss in the superdelegates and Obama's lead is 1306 to 1270 (again +/- 5 delegates). What does this mean?
For Clinton to overtake Obama for the pledged delegate lead -- which we think is the single most important statistic for the superdelegates to decide their vote -- she'll have to win 55% of the remaining delegates.
Assuming next week goes Obama's way in Wisconsin and Hawaii, that percentage rises to 57%. Toss in likely Obama victories in Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota, then Clinton's percentage need tops 60% of the remaining delegates available. And this is simply for her to regain the pledged delegate lead…
Follow the leader: So no matter how you slice the total popular vote, Obama is the leader. He's at 50% in states that have awarded delegates; he's at 49% and leads Clinton by 3 points in states where both their names were on the ballot, and his lead is big enough that he leads even when you factor in Michigan where Obama's name wasn't on the ballot. Why does this popular vote total matter? Because it's yet another important talking point when wooing superdelegates. How many supers will be comfortable voting against the candidate who's leading in the pledged delegate count and the total vote count? msnbc
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Obama Leads in Delegate Count
obama is leading by 100 plus. for clinton to win, she'll have to get 55% of the remaining delegates.