BRTD's delegate projections by state

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

My insomnia is still haunting me so I might as well make this thread. I'm doing congressional district level breakdowns of delegates for all upcoming states and I figure it's better to put them all in one thread rather than have for each. All I've done so far will be moved here eventually. For now I'll just do Wyoming and Mississippi. Obviously I reserve the right to change them and will probably edit posts a lot.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wyoming

Wyoming has 12 delegates but actually allocates them in two groups, one group of 7 based on the votes cast at the caucuses and one group of 5 based on the state convention. If Obama can, like in Idaho, hold Hillary below 15% in one of the larger counties, she'll fail to get any delegates from that county, and thus likely fail viability at the convention giving him all 5 delegates. I won't go that far though. My prediction of Obama >70% would give him 5 delegates to Hillary's 2 from the vote and 4 delegates to Hillary's 1 from the convention.

Total:
Obama 9
Hillary 3

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Mississippi

Mississippi has 22 delegates allocated by district and 11 at large. In an interesting twist All districts have an odd number of delegates.

MS-1: 5 delegates. I wonder if Obama will DeSoto? Well maybe not but luckily the whites there vote Republican and blacks probably have a majority of the Democratic electorate. Obama 3-2
MS-2: 7 delegates. Almost 2/3 black. Obama might stand an outside chance of winning 6 delegates here. But I won't bet on it. Obama 5-2.
MS-3: 5 delegates. Want to see something scary?

Black population of this district: 34.1%
Kerry's percentage in this district: 34.2%

At least those numbers give Obama a damn good chance of taking 70%. I'll play it safe though. 3-2 Obama.
MS-4: 5 delegates. The whitest district in Mississippi, but also the most Republican (despite Gene Taylor). Still a black majority electorate. Hillary's best district in Mississippi but she still loses. 3-2 Obama.

Mississippi has 11 at-large delegates. The magic number for Obama is 68.11%. That'd give him 8 out of 11 delegates. But I'll play it safe and say he gets 7 to Hillary's 4.

Total:
Obama 21
Hillary 12

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has 103 delegates allocated by district and 55 at large.

PA-1: 7 delegates. Pretty damn close to majority black. Hillary should do very well among the whites though, so whether Obama wins 4 or 5 delegates becomes a turnout war. I'll assume worst case scenario. Obama 4-3.
PA-2: 9 delegates. 61% black, and Hillary WON'T win whites here. If there's any primary seat Obama stands a shot at holding Hillary below 15% in the country, it's this one. I won't be that optimistic though. 7-2 Obama.
PA-3: 5 delegates. White working class district with few blacks. 3-2 Hillary.
PA-4: 5 delegates. There are some affluent parts of this district, but that's not where the Democrats live. 3-2 Hillary.
PA-5: 4 delegates. Hillary wins most of the district easily, but it still has State College. It splits.
PA-6: 6 delegates. In 2006 Lois Murphy received almost three quarters of the votes she got from Montgomery and Chester. Not sure if that'll be enough to put Obama over 58.25% but I'll assume it splits for now.
PA-7: 7 delegates. Typical affluent suburban district. Obama wins. 4-3 Obama.
PA-8: 7 delegates. Same deal. 4-3 Obama.
PA-9: 3 delegates. Bad for Obama, but margin doesn't matter in a 3 delegate district. 2-1 Hillary.
PA-10: 4 delegates. Can Hillary break 62.5% here? It's worth noting that she only barely got around that in the parts of New York bordering the district where she got a bounce no doubt. I'll assume she does anyway though. 3-1 Hillary.
PA-11: 5 delegates. Good territory for Hillary. 3-2 Hillary.
PA-12: 5 delegates. Also good territory for Hillary. 3-2 Hillary.
PA-13: 7 delegates. Everyone's favorite district. Obama won't landslide here, but he should win. 4-3 Obama.
PA-14: 7 delegates. Almost 24% black, but the whites here are too good for Hillary. Not out of the realm of possibility for Obama but we'll see. 4-3 Hillary.
PA-15: 5 delegates. As I said before, who wins this district depends on if the yuppies and college kids can outvote the old blue collar workers. The yuppies might be too Republican though, and another problem is the Hispanic population is more than twice the black population (do the Hispanics vote though? I doubt their proportion in voters is that large.) 3-2 Hillary.
PA-16: 4 delegates. Hillary wins a split.
PA-17: 4 delegates. This district isn't as bad for Obama as it looks originally, it's one of the blackest rural districts outside the south (12.4%). Blacks probably make up about a quarter of Democratic voters. But Obama won't do well enough among whites to not split (or even win possibly.)
PA-18: 5 delegates. This district is quite a bit more affluent than the general area, but I doubt the Democrats are. 3-2 Hillary.
PA-19: 4 delegates. A split, yawn.

That's 52 delegates for Hillary and 51 for Obama. I'll be nice to Phil and give Hillary a 10-point victory. That would give her 30 delegates to Obama's 25.

Total:

Hillary 82
Obama 76

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Indiana

Indiana has 47 delegates allocated by district and 25 at large.

IN-1: 6 delegates. A bit more blacks than Hispanics, and blacks turn out more and vote for Obama in bigger numbers than Hispanics do for Hillary. Also some affluent Chicago suburbia, but some industrial areas too. Probably adds up going to Obama, but count on a split.
IN-2: 5 delegates. South Bend has a lot of blacks and Notre Dame, nothing else good for Obama. He'll lose but that'll be enough to stop him from losing by more than one delegate. 3-2 Hillary.
IN-3: 4 delegates. It won't vote for Obama, but with the numbers from northwest Ohio it'll split too.
IN-4: 4 delegates. Ultra-Republican Indianapolis suburbs, probably vote for Obama but it splits.
IN-5: 4 delegates. See above.
IN-6: 5 delegates. It's got a college town (Muncie), everywhere else sucks. 3-2 Hillary.
IN-7: 5 delegates. Enough blacks and urban-style liberals for Obama to win. Just about everyone who isn't in either category will hate him though, so not a landslide. 3-2 Obama.
IN-8: 5 delegates. Hillary's best chance in the state to break 70%. Still more Midwestern than Appalachian though, so I'll say no. 3-2 Hillary.
IN-9: 5 delegates. Obama probably can't win this one, but Bloomington should be enough to ensure Hillary doesn't break 70%. 3-2 Hillary.

25 delegates for Hillary and 22 for Obama. Giving Hillary a 10-point Ohio-style victory gives her 14 delegates to Obama's 11 at large.

Total:
Hillary 39
Obama 33

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

North Carolina

North Carolina has 77 delegates allocated by district and 38 at large.

NC-1: 6 delegates. Majority black. Obama is guaranteed at least 4 delegates from here, the question is if he can crack the 75% margin and get 5 (certainly possible if lots of the racist whites vote for Edwards.) Possible: 4-2 Obama to 5-1 Obama, most likely: 4-2 Obama.
NC-2: 6 delegates. This district will probably be about 50/50 racially split in the primary electorate, which guarantees Obama a victory. The question is if it'll be large enough to win him 4 delegates. It's possible, but I won't bet on it. Possible: split to 4-2 Obama, most likely: split.
NC-3: 4 delegates. This creation of racial gerrymandering has removed most of the blacks that would be in a normally drawn district, but it's still 17% black. That's probably enough to hold Hillary below 62.5% even if this is a conservative Democrat stronghold. Possible: split to 3-1 Hillary, most likely: split.
NC-4: 9 delegates. The ultimate prize and favorable to Obama is an understatement. He's guaranteed a win and might even win the white vote here, of which he needs only about 40% to win 6 delegates. Even 7 is doable in a real blowout. Possible: 5-4 Obama to 7-2 Obama, most likely: 6-3 Obama.
NC-5: 5 delegates. This district is only 7.6% black. The good news for Obama is that most of the whites are Republican and there are some rather affluent suburban areas, where the few Democrats should favor him. The bad news for Obama is that he's going to be absolutely destroyed in the rural and industrial areas (though as Al said, he should be quite thankful the industrial areas are historically Republican.) If Obama wins this district Hillary's going to be having a REALLY bad night. Possible: 3-2 Hillary to 3-2 Obama, most likely 3-2 Hillary.
NC-6: 5 delegates. This affluent ultra-GOP district is somewhat tricky to gauge. Not a ton of blacks (9.3%), but a similar situation with the whites being ultra-GOP and the few that are Democrats likely being fairly affluent. Flip a coin. Possible: 3-2 Hillary to 3-2 Obama, most likely: 3-2 Obama.
NC-7: 6 delegates. I am admittedly not too familiar with this district. It's 21% black, which is probably enough to guarantee Obama at least a split though. It seems to have more white Democrats than NC-2 though, which means 4-2 is probably out the question. Call it a tossup, but with a split in delegates almost guaranteed.
NC-8: 5 delegates. This district does contain many working class whites, which is why a populist message almost toppled Robin Hayes. But at almost 30% black, it's tough to see how Obama loses. 3-2 Obama is the only scenario I can see.
NC-9: 6 delegates. Why this ultra-GOP suburban district gets more delegates than NC-8 is beyond me. It's only 13.4% black, but affluent and educated enough to be favorable to Obama among the few white Democrats. Probably not enough to win 4 delegates though, but who knows. Possible: split to 4-2 Obama, most likely: split.
NC-10: 5 delegates. Now this is a bad district for Obama. He should just take comfort in the fact that whites here are historically Republican and thus the 8.6% black population is probably large enough to hold Hillary below 70%. Possible: 3-2 Hillary to 4-1 Hillary, most likely: 3-2 Hillary.
NC-11: 6 delegates. You have Buncombe County and you have everywhere else. Buncombe is Obama country, everywhere else isn't. And it's only 5.3% black. Luckily for Obama with most of the Democrats living in Buncombe that might be enough to hold Hillary below 58.25% especially if Edwards runs well and it is worth noting that the rural counties in the area of eastern Tennessee near here while bad for Obama weren't quite as bad as central Tennessee. Possible: split to 4-2 Hillary, most likely: split.
NC-12: 7 delegates. A true gerrymandering work of art. This district is actually not majority black though, it's barely plurality white (45.9% to 44% black) and around 11% Hispanic. Obama still wins it though with the whites mostly voting Republican and the Hispanics just not voting, but it's likely enough will vote to keep him from breaking what he needs to win 5 delegates. I suppose the key to that is if there's any affluent white Democrats, of which admittedly I don't know. Possible: 4-3 Obama to 5-2 Obama, most likely: 4-3 Obama.
NC-13: 7 delegates. This is kind of the key district. You got everything, 27% black, 9% Hispanic, white working class Democrats, white affluent Democrats, every group you can name. Overall Obama probably has a slight edge. Possible: 4-3 Hillary to 4-3 Obama, most likely: 4-3 Obama.

Then you got the 26 at large delegates and 12 PLEOs. Obama's ceiling is probably around 58% while Hillary's is probably 50% if even that. In terms of delegates Obama's best case scenario is probably 23-15 while it's very hard to see how Hillary tops a split. I'll call the middle ground as most likely, that being 21-17 Obama.

Obama best case scenario: 68-47
Hillary best case scenario: 54-61
My call: 63-52 Obama

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

West Virginia

West Virginia has 18 delegates allocated by district and 10 at large.

WV-1: 6 delegates. This district most closely reflects the state at large. So suffice to say, it's not good for Obama. But the existence of Wheeling and Morgantown are probably enough to guarantee him 2 delegates. 4-2 Hillary is the only likely outcome I can see.
WV-2: 6 delegates. Almost certain to be Obama's best district containing the most affluent and educated parts of the state. The bad news for him is that those are also the most Republican areas. But I see no reason for him to not advertise here considering it's cheap and he's got so much money, and might manage to hold Hillary low enough to split it. Possible: split to 4-2 Hillary, most likely: 4-2 Hillary.
WV-3: 6 delegates. The worst district for Obama easily. He should just be thankful it contains Huntington. That's probably enough to hold Hillary below 75%, but it'll be close. Might even come down to Edwards votes taking away enough from her. Possible: 4-2 Hillary to 5-1 Hillary, most likely: 4-2 Hillary.

Statewide there are 7 at large delegates and 3 PLEOs. Those PLEOs thus are basically guaranteed to split 2-1 for Hillary. The at large delegates are the ones to watch, meaning the "magic number" is 64.29%, breaking that would give Hillary 5 at large delegates and thus 7-3 statewide. Please note that's also only of the two candidate vote, as Edwards and all other candidates' votes will be thrown out unless one somehow manages to break 15%, which isn't going to happen. As if Hillary breaks that number, it's a tossup but my call is with the momentum running as it should at the time, Obama narrowly holds her below it. Possible: 6-4 Hillary to 7-3 Hillary, most likely: 6-4 Hillary.

Hillary best case: 20-8
Obama best case: 17-11
My call: 18-10 Hillary

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Kentucky

Placeholder.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oregon

Oregon has 34 delegates allocated by district and 18 at large.

OR-01: 7 delegates. There are some favorable parts of the district for Hillary, like Clatsop and Columbia counties. The bad news for her is that these, and rural Yamhill county only cast about 20% of the votes cast for Kerry in this district. And the district also contains a slice of Portland. Washington County is the key. To take this seat, Hillary needs to win that, or at least come very close. Odds are she won't. Possible: anywhere from 5-2 Obama to 4-3 Hillary, most likely: 4-3 Obama.
OR-02: 5 delegates. This district is tricky. It's like Idaho but also a primary. But the Clintons have never been popular in this area, and Deschutes County, the largest one is hardly favorable to Hillary. Her best bet would be to hope the Hispanics bail her out. But in this area, Hispanics don't vote. Possible: 3-2 Obama to 3-2 Hillary, most likely: 3-2 Obama.
OR-03: 9 delegates. The main Portland district. Favorable to Obama is an understatement. Hillary will have a tough time holding him below 61% and Obama probably has a better chance of breaking 72% than that happening. Possible: 7-2 Obama to 5-4 Obama, most likely: 6-3 Obama.
OR-04: 7 delegates. Can Hillary win a district that contains Eugene? Probably not. Her only hope is that she runs strong enough in the working class parts of Eugene, Springfield, and the rural counties. It's tough to tell in this district what the rural counties where she should be fine and the ones that hate the Clintons though. Just don't count on her winning. Possible: 4-3 Obama to 4-3 Hillary, most likely 4-3 Obama.
OR-05: 6 delegates. Probably Hillary's best chance for a win. Too bad then that it's also even numbered. She also can't get 4 delegates with Corvallis included. I can't see any scenario other than a split.

There's 12 at large delegates and 6 PLEOs. Personally I think Hillary's best case scenario is a very narrow win, so narrow it splits. But I'll be favorable and call her best case 10-8 out of those. Obama's best case is probably 12-6.

Best case for Hillary: 28-24
Best case for Obama: 34-18

My call: 30-22 Obama.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Montana

Placeholder.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

South Dakota

With only one district South Dakota is rather boring, however due to the annoying way delegates are allocated the thresholds to win an amount aren't so simple. 15 delegates total, 9 are allocated from SD's at large district, 4 at large, and 2 PLEOs. Therefore the "magic numbers" are:

8 - Win the state
9 - 61.11%
10 - 62.5%
11 - 72.22%
12 - 75%
13 - 83.33%
15 - 85%

With the state party machinery firmly behind Obama (probably mostly due to a general dislike of the Clintons and interference from the national parties that both parties there share.) and the region and demographics so favorable to Obama, it's very difficult to see how Obama loses, but since it's so far ahead I won't rule out the possibility of an upset. However I'd say Obama has as much of a chance of hitting 62.5% as Hillary does of winning it.

So the possible range is from 8-7 Hillary to 10-5 Obama, 8-7 Obama probably most likely.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Puerto Rico

Too many delegates to ignore, but it goes without saying I'll likely be totally wrong since I know nothing about the area and my analysis will be based on what someone on DU says. It's not like anyone can predict it though so who knows.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Just did Pennsylvania.

[Erc]

Just a brief FYI on At-Large delegates:  There are two categories of delegates, regular At-Large & Pledged PLEOs.  They are both allocated on the basis of the statewide popular vote, but the allocation is done for each groups of delegates individually, not for both sets of delegates together.  Thus, in MS, there are two sets of At-Large delegates, a set of 7 and a set of 4 (not one set of 11):

Thus, in MS, the key %ages are:

50.0%: Obama 6, Clinton 5
62.5%: Obama 7, Clinton 4
64.3%: Obama 8, Clinton 3
78.6%: Obama 9, Clinton 2
85.0%: Obama 11, Clinton 0

(As opposed to the 50.0% - 59.1% - 68.2% - 77.3% - 85% ladder for an 11-delegate batch).

This scheme benefits Clinton if Obama gets 59.1 - 62.5%, and benefits Obama in the 64.3 - 68.2% range (where he could very well land).

[Keystone Phil]

PA-15: 5 delegates. As I said before, who wins this district depends on if the yuppies and college kids can outvote the old blue collar workers. The yuppies might be too Republican though, and another problem is the Hispanic population is more than twice the black population (do the Hispanics vote though? I doubt their proportion in voters is that large.) 3-2 Hillary.

Uh, Allentown? Very large Hispanic population and they'll turn out. Plus, the yuppies are insanely Republican in PA 15.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

Be nice? You think she'd do any worse? Try accepting reality. PA won't be close.

[elcorazon]

PA-15: 5 delegates. As I said before, who wins this district depends on if the yuppies and college kids can outvote the old blue collar workers. The yuppies might be too Republican though, and another problem is the Hispanic population is more than twice the black population (do the Hispanics vote though? I doubt their proportion in voters is that large.) 3-2 Hillary.

Uh, Allentown? Very large Hispanic population and they'll turn out. Plus, the yuppies are insanely Republican in PA 15.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

Be nice? You think she'd do any worse? Try accepting reality. PA won't be close.

good to see your honing in your arrogance.

[Keystone Phil]

PA-15: 5 delegates. As I said before, who wins this district depends on if the yuppies and college kids can outvote the old blue collar workers. The yuppies might be too Republican though, and another problem is the Hispanic population is more than twice the black population (do the Hispanics vote though? I doubt their proportion in voters is that large.) 3-2 Hillary.

Uh, Allentown? Very large Hispanic population and they'll turn out. Plus, the yuppies are insanely Republican in PA 15.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

Be nice? You think she'd do any worse? Try accepting reality. PA won't be close.

good to see your honing in your arrogance.

Again, let's try not to be biased.

"I'll be nice to Phil..."

And sorry if anyone take "Uh, Allentown?" as arrogance. I was just pointing it out.

[elcorazon]

i was referring to the "try accepting reality", "pa won't be close" comment.  you could be right.  but there's no question that's an arrogant way of saying it.

[Keystone Phil]

i was referring to the "try accepting reality", "pa won't be close" comment.  you could be right.  but there's no question that's an arrogant way of saying it.

Well, saying "PA won't be close" isn't arrogance but I guess "try accepting reality" is. I'll admit that. Again, I say this to BRTD because he continues his antics with "I'll be nice to Phil." I'm done playing these games though. I'll let the results speak for themselves on April 22nd.

Oh, by the way, keep an eye out for me at Hillary's victory party if it's in Philly. I'll make it a point to be there. 

[elcorazon]

i was referring to the "try accepting reality", "pa won't be close" comment.  you could be right.  but there's no question that's an arrogant way of saying it.

Well, saying "PA won't be close" isn't arrogance but I guess "try accepting reality" is. I'll admit that. Again, I say this to BRTD because he continues his antics with "I'll be nice to Phil." I'm done playing these games though. I'll let the results speak for themselves on April 22nd.

Oh, by the way, keep an eye out for me at Hillary's victory party if it's in Philly. I'll make it a point to be there. 

i should give you a pass on this one as he kinda asked for a response from you and he's certainly not your most rational poster around here.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm going to be blunt and say that while Pennsylvania may not be close, I'm not going to base a prediction of that off someone who predicted a Santorum victory and blew the state HARD.

[Keystone Phil]

i was referring to the "try accepting reality", "pa won't be close" comment.  you could be right.  but there's no question that's an arrogant way of saying it.

Well, saying "PA won't be close" isn't arrogance but I guess "try accepting reality" is. I'll admit that. Again, I say this to BRTD because he continues his antics with "I'll be nice to Phil." I'm done playing these games though. I'll let the results speak for themselves on April 22nd.

Oh, by the way, keep an eye out for me at Hillary's victory party if it's in Philly. I'll make it a point to be there. 

Because we know how accurate your PA predictions are. Just look at the man in your sig. How was Hillary's victory in Virginia by the way?

(See? I can be an arrogant ass too.)

LOL

Except this time, the polls and everyone else agrees with me.

You know, bringing up Virginia and my Santorum prediction is only funny for so long. You're going to have to eat a lot of crow when the time comes, little Zach.

Oh, and noticed how elcorazon is man enough to admit his prediction about Obama in RI was just as wrong as my Hillary prediction in VA. No comment about his wrong prediction? Interesting.

I'm going to be blunt and say that while Pennsylvania may not be close, I'm not going to base a prediction of that off someone who predicted a Santorum victory and blew the state HARD.

You don't need to base it off me. Base it off of what everyone else is saying, little Zach.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You know, bringing up Virginia and my Santorum prediction is only funny for so long. You're going to have to eat a lot of crow when the time comes, little Zach.

I have never made a prediction as off as those were. Even if Hillary wins Pennsylvania by 20 points I won't be that off. Face it Phil, you have been way more inaccurate than me. The only person who compares to you in inaccuracy is WalterMitty.

[Keystone Phil]

You know, bringing up Virginia and my Santorum prediction is only funny for so long. You're going to have to eat a lot of crow when the time comes, little Zach.

I have never made a prediction as off as those were. Even if Hillary wins Pennsylvania by 20 points I won't be that off. Face it Phil, you have been way more inaccurate than me. The only person who compares to you in inaccuracy is WalterMitty.

Uh, how are you not as off if Hillary wins by twenty in PA?

I don't care if I've been more inaccurate than you. I'm also a far more intelligent, more mature person than you are. I've made three notable wrong predictions. I'm man enough to admit it and move on. You continue to make it an issue because you are a childish loser. Amazing how you refuse to mention Harry as one of the most inaccurate predictors when he has just as many wrong predictions as I do. Hack. Your personal hatred for me and Walter is alarming.

By the way, pick me up some razors when you go to work tonight. I don't have time to stop by Target. I have a real job (oh, and I'm younger than you).

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Uh, how are you not as off if Hillary wins by twenty in PA?

I have her winning by 10, so I'd be off by 10 points. You were off 28 points in Virginia and 17 points in Pennsylvania Senate.

I don't care if I've been more inaccurate than you. I'm also a far more intelligent, more mature person than you are. I've made three notable wrong predictions. I'm man enough to admit it and move on. You continue to make it an issue because you are a childish loser.

I'm not doing this to say "HAHA PHIL SUCKS, LOLZ", It's just something that one must take into account in one's prediction track record. Common sense dictates that people with accurate predictions will be taken more seriously than people who seriously blow it.

By the way, pick me up some razors when you go to work tonight. I don't have time to stop by Target. I have a real job (oh, and I'm younger than you).

LOL. You have a "real job" in college? Well so did I then I guess. And I just quit Target.