737 is actually 29.468... % of 2501

744 is actually 29.74... % of 2501

etc.

Obama 18
Edwards 17
Clinton 16

Superdelegates can change their mind anytime they want, so Clinton's early (completely illusion and projected) superdelegate lead, should her implosion continue, would evaporate completely and probably go to Obama.

(b) Clinton got something like 29.4% and someone must've rounded that up to 29.5%. And so you can't then round that up, again, to 30%. Edwards got something like 29.8%, so his got rounded up to 30%.

In fact, we heard Obama explicitly calling for people to feel free to vote their commitments on the first choice, but to give him the second choice.  It seems a pretty wise statement on his part now.

After 2000 and Florida and again in 2004 and electronic voting, many people started discussing other ways to choose candidates using instant runoff voting and similar techniques.

The past few days a lot of people have made fun of the complexity of the caucus, but I actually have a much deeper respect for it since it does seem to embody what people have been talking about with regards to instant runoff voting.

If the Huckster gets the nod he is not going to get the Mormon vote. Or the Republican Jewish vote (me). Or Republican Jewish money.

About 2/3s of Republicans are not happy with the Huckster and it looks like the Republican coalition is in trouble this year. The only guy with appeal to the fisc-cons, the federalists, the neocons, and the socons - Fred (my guy) - is stumbling badly and is on his last legs. I'm hoping for a surprise, but I doubt I'll get it.

=

On your side I saw here that Obama got the a Prison Guard Union endorsement.

=

A few comments about delegate count vs. vote count; the use of 2nd choices; whether Obama's victory was as impressive as Huckabee's; and whether the margin of victory was significant.

1) The Iowa caucus structure is very confusing, for Iowans as well as others. I wondered going in, what would be considered the most important numbers... state delegates, projected national delegates or individual voters. Clearly the answer is and has always been individual voters. Total votes is the way the media, the public and the candidates themselves gauge the effectiveness of the campaigns. So, while the respective campaigns do consider delagate count, total number of votes is THE number and everybody knew that going in.

By the way, even though it seems the difference in national delegates is small, the first thing they have to do is send delegates to a state convention and there, the difference is pretty much consistant with the voter count.

2) The use of second choices is unusual, but considering that they are the only caucus or primary where all the candidates will be running, it kind of makes sense. Five days after Iowa, New Hampshire voters will not get to vote for Biden and Dodd, or if they do, they know their votes "don't count." So, Biden and Dodd supporters in New Hampshire will be, in effect, voting for their second choices. By the time we get to Super Tuesday, so too might Richardson supporters.

Conjecturing how candidates would have done had this not been allowed is beside the point, because had it not been allowed, candidates would have campaigned differently and some voters might have voted differently. If you want to consider "what ifs," consider what the impact would have been on Huckabee's victory if Iowa insisted that caucusers register and declare their allegiance prior to January 3. How many Republicans and Independents, finding themselves in the Republican caucus instead of the democratic one, might have changed their vote to Ron Paul, who opposed the war, or Mitt Romney, who is less socially conservative than Huckabee?

3. Huckabee had a bigger lead over his field, by percentage than Obama did. But Democratic turnout was nearly twice the size of Republican turnout. And since all voters in Iowa have right up until caucus hour to determine which caucus they wish to participate in, it would be fair to compare the numerical totals of each candidate, in which case Huckabee finished a distant fourth, with about half the total votes of Obama. The Huckabee story is newsworthy, because he is a quirky candidate who staged a late charge spending almost no money. But it's not as significant as the Obama story. Not nearly.

5. How big is the the Obama margin of victory? Enormous. 38 may not sound like so much more than 30, but it's a quarter again larger. If you're 5'8" stand next to somebody who is 7' tall and tell me if he seems much taller than you. That (as a percentage) is how much more 38 is than 30.

The numbers roughly matched the Des Moines Register poll, both in percentages and voter turnout, and all the campaigns (including Obama's) were declaring those numbers unlikely. One campaign said a turnout of 200,000 would be revolutionary and another said it would defy historical precedent. The actual turnout was nearly 230,000.

6) Take these numbers and shuffle the names and they are still significant. Had Edwards been the 38, everybody would have declared his strategy of frontloading everything for Iowa to be brilliant, money would be pouring in now for the rest of the campaign, and people would be whispering that perhaps America ISN'T ready for a female and/or minority President.

Had Hillary been the 38, pundits would be declaring the race over. She's been the favorite since she declared and she went into Iowa with leads projected for NH, Nevada, NY and California. 38% for Hillary would have been a first round knock out.

This margin of victory for Obama is not just news, it's history. The county I was in was largely conservative, largely Republican, and 100% white. The caucus I attended had an average age well over 40, was 50% female and 100% white and an overflow crowd went for Obama.

Because Obama has been a strong contender from the start and because he was projected to do well in Iowa, the importance of this event might not seem as significant as it is, but two weeks ago, Chris Matthews called a potential Obama victory in Iowa the biggest political story in America and that's exactly what it is.

Our next President will be a man of mixed parentage; whose grandfather was a Kenyan goat herder and who lived some of his formative years in Indonesia; whose middle name and last name not only sound Muslim but are almost identical to those of two of our sworn enemies.  For a country that has had such a lack of diversity in the White House, and whose lack of understanding of the rest of the world has had a profound negative impact on world events, this is a story of enormous proportions.