Not a big fan of CNN, but decided to stick with the HD coverage.

Somewhat puzzling are the numbers on the left and right sides (well actually ALL the numbers) - seem to be contradictory to the "CNN Projection" on the bottom of the screen. For instance on the right side in the blue colored "dots" - Clinton 169 - Obama 66 - Edwards 47 - but the projections on the bottom claim Obama #1, Edwards #2, Clinton #3. On the right sidebar in blue - "Delegates 2,025 needed" - huh? Then the colors switch from blue to red for Democrat / Republican. At the bottom pie chart says "Total Delegates = 57" with "100% reporting" in the green bar chart for the democrats - but you just said 2,025 are needed on the right sidebar. Huh? Then the number next to Obama's name is 940 (38%) and if you add all the others up, it's more than 2,025. What the heck is that?

Someone needs to rethink these graphics - they make no sense at all.

I'm not sure I follow all of the above, but the answer may lie in the fact that despite Obama winning Iowa, Hillary is ahead (make that way ahead) in the number of delegates needed for the nomination. Specifically, according to AP, in the overall race for the nomination, Clinton leads with 175 delegates, including superdelegates, followed by Obama with 75 and Edwards with 46. However, 40% of the delegates for the nomination come from party professionals like Bill Clinton, so Hillary has almost sewed up the nomination already. This change was introduced in the Democratic Party (but not the Republican Party) after the grass roots upsets of McGovern and Carter. The party elite wanted more power. You can read about the current nominating process here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18277678/).

I'm not sure I follow all of the above, but the answer may lie in the fact that despite Obama winning Iowa, Hillary is ahead (make that way ahead) in the number of delegates needed for the nomination. Specifically, according to AP, in the overall race for the nomination, Clinton leads with 175 delegates, including superdelegates, followed by Obama with 75 and Edwards with 46. However, 40% of the delegates for the nomination come from party professionals like Bill Clinton, so Hillary has almost sewed up the nomination already. This change was introduced in the Democratic Party (but not the Republican Party) after the grass roots upsets of McGovern and Carter. The party elite wanted more power. You can read about the current nominating process here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18277678/).

That's pretty crazy. Sounds like Hillary is going to use primary results to decide who to ask to be running mate, Obama or Edwards. Early returns point to Obama of course.

Hopefully we will get more political coverage in HD, whatever that means.

That's pretty crazy. Sounds like Hillary is going to use primary results to decide who to ask to be running mate, Obama or Edwards. Early returns point to Obama of course.


The article iJeff refers to is very interesting, I had never heard of these "super delegates" before. I wouldn't say Hillary has the nomination locked up - it is possible that if Hillary loses New Hampshire, those super-delegates could actually drop Hillary and go with Obama (or whoever else is deemed worthy)

The article iJeff refers to is very interesting, I had never heard of these "super delegates" before. I wouldn't say Hillary has the nomination locked up - it is possible that if Hillary loses New Hampshire, those super-delegates could actually drop Hillary and go with Obama (or whoever else is deemed worthy)


True, but the system makes it much more diffucult for Obama to win. Obama is really going to have to clearly defeat Clinton by a good margin in the primaries to "force" the superdelegates to come to Obama's side.

I believe the movie The American President shows the process of getting those superdelegates.