Neoteric wrote:

We have a list of superdelegates to the 2008 Democratic Convention who have officially endorsed a candidate but who is left? Who hasn't made an official endorsement?

Now that the primaries have started we will probably see a wave of endorsements. Let's take a look at which Democratic superdelegates haven't endorsed a candidate yet. Along with our superdelegate list we will be updating this list as new endorsements are made.
This will be an ongoing work in progress so check back often for updates.

Superdelegates highlighted in red are from Michigan or Florida and do not count toward the nomination at this time.

There is no *definitive* webpage that can give you the "accurate" count of delegates, but 2008 demconwatch has been watching the delegate + "superdelagate" counts as closely as they can track.

Superdelegates suck. They're ~ 800 dem big shots that get to vote for whomever they like. And since they're *actual* delegates the votes they cast count slightly more than ours.

--timball

In other words, the reason we no longer "need" an electoral college is that the parties have built their own internal means of control...

Neoteric wrote:

Superdelegates suck. They're ~ 800 dem big shots that get to vote for whomever they like. And since they're *actual* delegates the votes they cast count slightly more than ours.

Decius wrote:

In other words, the reason we no longer "need" an electoral college is that the parties have built their own internal means of control ...

National Popular Vote:

Under the U.S. Constitution, the states have exclusive and plenary (complete) power to allocate their electoral votes, and may change their state laws concerning the awarding of their electoral votes at any time. Under the National Popular Vote bill, all of the state’s electoral votes would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538).

Earlier in this thread, I mentioned the National Popular Vote.

Today, Hendrik Hertzberg, an advocate for NPV, argues that the Democrats are in a Dead Heat:

We’re awash in numbers from yesterday’s primaries, but there’s one number that nobody ever seems to crunch: how many votes did the candidates get?

I don’t mean how many delegates, or how many states, or the margin in this or that state. I mean: across the nation, which is to say in all 23 states that held Democratic primaries or caucuses yesterday (I’m focussing on the Dems for the moment), how many human beings voted for Clinton and how many for Obama?

I just spent some time with a calculator and the latest CNN state-by-state totals, and here’s what I came up with:

* Hillary Clinton: 7,347,477 (48.8%)
* Barack Obama: 7,293,887 (48.5%)
* John Edwards: 408,622 (2.7%)

... It was a tie.