The Delegate Race is On (if you can find the information)

I have to confess a certain amount of frustration as I write this entry. With all the publicity surrounding the caucuses and primaries it occurred to me that I didn’t know how many delegates the various candidates have as they move toward their nominating conventions. It took a great deal of looking; you’d think that the Republican and Democratic Party home pages would give a list, but all their effort points to what is wrong with the other guy. Finally I found the NPR web page that has an interactive map and by going to each of the states and manually counting the delegates I was able to come up with the number. I’ll try to keep up with the process, and please let me know if I’ve made a math error.

I was only able to do this with the two major parties. Obviously the independent candidates don’t have nominating conventions but I wasn’t able to find any information on the process of the other parties. Of the other parties, either I could find no information on their conventions (e.g. Green), or they do have conventions (e.g. Constitution party: April 23rd in Kansas City Missouri) but don’t give current delegate counts. Again, if I’ve missed something let me know.

This Is Going to be a Long Process

I’m writing this early on the morning after the Michigan Primary. It was a strange primary for the Democrats as it didn’t mean anything in terms of the delegate count: only Hillary Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel appeared on the ballot (along with Christopher Dodd who has since dropped out). Also, because the Michigan Democratic Party tried to defy the national party in picking an early date, these delegates won’t be seated for the convention. That said, Hillary won 55% of the vote with Uncommitted coming in second at 40%. You have to wonder how Dennis and Mike are taking the news that they placed lower than “I don’t know.” As a footnote, Dennis’ campaign page is now his re-election to Congress and his presidential bid has moved here.

The Republican race has gotten more complex. Mitt Romney won Michigan; this is good for him not because it gives him a boost but because he needed to win it. He grew up here and his father, George Romney (1907-1995) was Governor from 1963-1969. To use his imagery, he now has two golds (Wyoming and Michigan) and two silvers (Iowa and New Hampshire).

In the Republican race, the four states that have had either a caucus or a primary, there have been three winners: Mike Huckabee in Iowa, John McCain in New Hampshire, and Mitt Romney in Wyoming and Michigan.

The other Republican candidates appear to be staking out states where they think they can (or have to) win. I believe the interesting story is there. Rudy Giuliani was supposed to be be much stronger at this point, and he has staked out Florida (January 29th). Fred Thompson has staked out South Carolina this Saturday. I’m not sure exactly what happened to Rudy’s campaign, but the word on Fred Thompson all along has been that he is a poor campaigner. This is not exactly new: nearly every campaign has some group wringing their hands looking for the candidate and I think Fred thought he was that man. Perhaps he was but he never got the word that he would still have to campaign. The Christian evangelical movement may have been looking for someone like him but it doesn’t mean they were prepared to proclaim him king just on his entry into the race.

Super Tuesday is February 5th; even the best case scenario sees it a longshot that either party process is over.

The Nomination Process: a Marathon, Not a Sprint

The news outlets are writing lots of material about Tuesday’s primary and how the various candidates are doing. It made me think about the calendar of primaries. I found it on NPR.

Date State
January 15 Michigan
January 19 Nevada
South Carolina (Republican)
January 26 South Carolina (Democrat)
January 29 Florida
February 1 Maine (Republican)
February 5 Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut</td
Delaware
Georgia
Idaho (Democrat)
Illinois
Kansas (Democrat)
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Missouri
New Jersey
New Mexico (Democratic)
New York
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Utah
February 9 Kansas (Republican)
Louisiana
Nebraska (Democratic)
Washington
February 10 Maine (Democratic)
February 12 Washington D.C.
Maryland
Virginia
February 19 Hawaii
Wisconsin
March 4 Ohio
Rhode Island
Texas
Vermont
March 8 Wyoming (Democrat)
March 11 Mississippi
April 22 Pennsylvania
May 6 Indiana
North Carolina
May 13 Nebraska (Republican)
West Virginia
May 20 Kentucky
Oregon
May 27 Idaho (Republican)
June 3 Montana
New Mexico (Republican)
South Dakota

As you can see this is an exhaustive list. Unfortunately for most of the country the choice will be made before they get a chance to vote. I’m guessing that after all the primaries on February 5th (known as Super Tuesday) we’ll know who the nominees will be.

The winnowing has begun; today Bill Richardson withdrew from the race, though he didn’t endorse anyone. Look for more in the next few weeks.

New Hampshire: Some Expected Outcomes, Some Surprises

I’m writing this about 8:00pm Pacific Time and 11:00pm Eastern Time. The polls are closed in New Hampshire and the winners have been declared: John McCain is currently carrying 37% of the Republican vote and Hillary Clinton carries 39% of the Democratic vote. Just under 80% of the vote has been counted.

John McCain’s win isn’t much of a surprise as he bypassed Iowa to concentrate on New Hampshire. The news is that Mitt Romney did not win. He has been spending a great deal of money in both Iowa and New Hampshire; New Hampshire is also adjacent to Romney’s home state of Massachusetts. He was expected to win Iowa because of his presence and the money he poured into it and he was expected to win New Hampshire because, frankly, they know him from living next door. Mitt faces an uphill battle; two of the next three primaries are in the South (Michigan, South Carolina, and Florida) whose populations contain a high percentage of evangelical Christians who will have trouble voting for a Mormon. The next few weeks should be good for Mike Huckabee but he needs to sew things up pretty quickly or miss his chance. The evangelical message plays well only in those states with high evangelical populations.

The results of the Democratic primary surprised me a little. Until a few days ago it appeared to be neck and neck between Senator Clinton and Barack Obama but a poll a few days ago had Senator Obama pulling ahead. Tonight it appears that this last poll was dead wrong. That happens: polls always have a margin of error. Interestingly enough the vote count is close enough that they will both end up with 9 delegates (John Edwards takes the other 4). Things would have gone much better for Senator Obama if he had won. As he heads into the South he carries with him an uphill battle of his own. There is a segment of the population in South Carolina and Florida who simply will not vote for an African American and won’t necessarily admit it. He won’t be able to fully trust the polls because of this. I’m originally from Virginia and remember L. Douglas Wilder who was governor from 1990 to 1994. He learned during the race to factor out a certain percentage of people who said they would vote for him but really wouldn’t. Senator Obama may face the same thing.

John McCain may have something to say about this. In the now famous election of 2000 he beat President Bush in New Hampshire and was doing well in South Carolina. The Bush campaign in South Carolina did something called “push polling.” They called Republicans in South Carolina under the guise of taking a poll. They started the call by asking who the person intended to vote for in the primary; if the caller said he or she would vote for John McCain the poller would ask: “Would you be more or less willing to vote for John McCain if you knew he secretly fathered a biracial child out of wedlock?” Of course Senator McCain had done no such thing (though, interestingly enough, South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond had) but that wasn’t the point. The point was to imply to the voter that McCain had, and enough voters were put off because of this that Bush won the South Carolina primary and went on the win the nomination.

In any case, stay tuned. The primary season is just beginning and should prove to be an interesting ride.

Leaving Iowa, Heading to New Hampshire…and the Shuffle

As I’m reading the news about yesterday’s Iowa caucus, the process of winnowing the race has begun. Joe Biden has withdrawn from the race for the Democratic nomination. His web page has this note from his NH Chair, Jim Ryan:

Tonight, we witnessed a great man, a great American, and a great friend of mine fight a proud fight out in Iowa. He didn’t spend millions of dollars, he didn’t throw the mud, and when the dust settles tomorrow, nobody will question Senator Biden’s conviction, nobody will question his passion, nobody will question his experience, and nobody will question his integrity.

The problems that we faced at the beginning of the day are the same now. We need to get our troops out of Iraq responsibly, we need to change our policy towards Pakistan and ensure that nuclear weapons will not fall into the hands of terrorists, we need to make sure that our children have health care, that we fix No Child Left Behind so that we can actually educate our children and give teachers the support that they need, and that we restore America’s moral authority.

Senator Biden has stood entire life for those who didn’t have a voice, in his authoring of the Violence Against Women Act and his call for support for the countless victims of genocide in Bosnia under Milosevic.

I am proud to have had the opportunity to have come to know Senator Biden, to have worked with and to help shape the debate in this race.

Christopher Dodd also left the race, saying this:

I count the past year as one of the most rewarding in a career of public service. Unfortunately I am withdrawing from the campaign tonight. Thank you for all your efforts throughout the course of this entire Presidential campaign. I will be in touch.

Looking at the South Carolina primary web page I found a few minor Republican candidates and have added them.

As for Iowa, I have to say that I’m pleased to see Barack Obama win as he is the candidate I intend to vote for. Hillary Clinton finished third, behind John Edwards; I don’t think Edwards has a realistic chance of winning the nomination and this news has more to do with Hillary. I like Hillary now as I did when she was First Lady, but I worry that she is such a polarizing candidate that she will become a target in the general election. I’m also aware that this may continue the “Bush/Clinton/Bush” dynasties. On January 20, 2009 I hope to wave goodbye to the Bush family forever from the White House, and I wonder if a Hillary presidency will cause the Bush family to try to find another family member to win the Presidency back.

I’m also concerned with the idea that Mike Huckabee won. Truth be told there is no Republican candidate I would consider voting for but Huckabee worries me. He believes that creationism should be taught instead of science and I don’t think this will be good for the country. I’ll probably write more later.

On The Other Hand … (apologies to Harry Truman)

I’m writing this at 7:30 p.m. Pacific Time (9:30 p.m. in Iowa) and it appears that the winners are Barack Obama for the Democrats and Mike Huckabee for the Republicans. I’m writing this not to comment on the winners and losers, but to defend the Iowa process.

Iowa begins the process of electing the new president, and now we move to New Hampshire. Lots of people (including my wife and sister-in-law who are commenting as I write this) believe this isn’t good because a small group of people have an undue influence on the process. That’s true in the sense that the winners in Iowa have a leg up on fundraising and media attention. Many of my fellow Californians believe that since we have the largest state population (with over 36,000,000 people) we should have a more significant say (or at least a say) in selecting our next president; as it stands now the selection may be done by the time we get to vote.

On the other hand…there is something to be said for our current system. California is such a large state that the largest fundraisers are locks for the winners. In Iowa anyone with a minimal amount of interest can meet any of the major candidates, and they can decide for themselves. There comes a saturation point where all the extra money in the world can’t change a person’s vote, and states with small populations hit that point sooner. As for me, I think the good people of Iowa study the candidates and platforms, and make reasoned choices that benefit all of us. Perhaps the voting population is not as diverse as the rest of the country but I’m willing to trade some of the diversity for the care that they give.

As I write this Barack Obama is winning for the Democratic ticket, and he is African American. African Americans comprise 2.3% of the state population; it’s clear that at least some of the 97.7% of the rest of Iowa are supporting him. Perhaps the good people of Iowa are thinking of the rest of us.

Also, Mike Huckabee beat Mitt Romney even though Romney outspent Huckabee 20 to 1.

Oh, and by the way, the phrase “on the other hand” was made famous by President Harry S Truman. He demanded to have a one armed lawyer because he was tired of hearing the phrase “on the other hand.”

Year End Changes

As they year draws to a close I’ve made a few minor changes in this page. On the left side of column I’ve added a few buttons. In the weeks (and even months) before Christmas we were being flooded with catalogs from companies we’d never heard from and never intended to purchase from. Earlier in the month I found out about Catalog Choice. You have to register and give them your name and address but it gives you the opportunity to list the catalogs you don’t want to get. They will then notify the company and ask them not to send anything to you. Additionally when you receive a catalog you don’t want, you can put in the name and customer number and they will ask the company to take you off their list. I know, I know, this depends on the catalog company actually doing it, but it seems that they wouldn’t want to send you more catalogs if you’ve told them you don’t intend to order anything from them. If this turns out to be a complete failure I’ll remove the link.

Just below the link to the Hunger Site I have a link to Donors Choose. If you have children in school, or live near a school, or work with people with children in school, or….OK, if you’re reading this, you know that schools are increasingly underfunded. If you’re tired of having to sell cookie dough or wrapping paper or other assorted stuff, or feeling like you are expected to buy, this is your site. Teachers from all over the country develop ideas and submit proposals that are put on the site. Donors can identify projects they want to support and make targeted donations. Great idea!

Finally, if you scroll down a little to the list of Presidential candidates you’ll see some changes. A few have dropped out of the race and I’ve taken them off. I’ve also included several names of people who are running as independents. I’ve gotten their names from a number of places, mostly Google and Wikipedia. I purposely didn’t include people like Al Gore and Michael Bloomberg because while there are groups that want them to run, they haven’t declared. As always, I’m always looking for updates.

Dead Sea Scrolls

Yesterday my friend Ann and I went to see the Dead Sea Scrolls at the Natural History Museum in Balboa Park. The scrolls were found in a cave near Qumran in Israel starting in 1947. They date back 2000 years and several of the scrolls contain passages from the Jewish Scriptures (also called the Tanach or the Old Testament).

Scholars disagree but many think they belonged to a group that was active in the 1st Century of the Common Era (CE) called the Essenes. They were massacred by the Romans in 68 CE and may have hidden these scrolls to prevent them from falling into enemy hands or being destroyed. However it happened, these scrolls are an international treasure and nobody should pass up the opportunity to see them.

The beginning of the exhibit was little more than a travelogue to visit Israel but the second part was incredibly inspiring and moving. You can see a photograph of one of the scroll pieces here. If you have a chance to see these, do it.

Baseball, Competition, and Loss of Perspective

It’s almost hard to know where to start on this but let me start with the incident that got me writing: Milton Bradley. Yesterday he got in a shouting match with the first base umpire, Mike Winters. Both First Base Coach Bobby Meecham and Manager Bud Black needed to restrain him as he appeared to be charging the umpire, which is absolutely never allowed. Milton claims that he and Mike exchanged escalating words that ended with the umpire calling him an “(expletive) piece of (expletive).” During Bud’s restraint Milton twisted his knee; we now know that he tore the anterior cruciate ligament and will be out for the rest of the season. This is a serious injury and would put him out for several months if the season were to continue. Milton, and a few of his fellow Padres, claim that he was provoked by the umpire and was justified in his reaction.

This is just unbelieveable. If Mike Winters did indeed use that language, I don’t condone it; but Milton Bradley has a long history of failing to control his temper and should know that he has far exceeded all the goodwill he is ever going to get. Had he held his temper in check he’d still be playing and the Padres would still have his bat. Now this has become a huge distraction at a time when the Padres are far from a lock for the playoffs. And yet nobody on the Padres seems to be saying that Milton screwed this up. He has played for Montreal, Cleveland, Oakland, Los Angeles and now San Diego. None of his former teams want him back. He has a great bat and could do wonderful things, but he will ultimately be a victim of his inability or unwillingness to control his temper. As a Padres fan I can only hope this was his last game as a Padre.

No baseball rant would be complete without talking about Barry Bonds. As it stands now he has 762 home runs and wants to return to baseball next year to reach 3000 hits (he’s at 2935 now). His team, the San Francisco Giants have announced that they do not intend to sign him next year. I wrote an entry on August 7th comparing his home runs to Hand Aaron and Babe Ruth. The table was essentially unreadable but it tried to show that he couldn’t have the home pattern without the help of steroids. Now that he has the record many of us are rooting for Alex Rodriguez to break Barry’s record. At the risk of doing the same damn thing, I’m going to attempt a table showing Alex’s progress againts Barry:

Barry Bonds Alex Rodriguez
1986: 16 1994: 0
1987: 25 1995: 5
1988: 24 1996: 36
1989: 19 1997: 23
1990: 33 1998: 42
1991: 25 1999: 42
1992: 34 2000: 41
1993: 46 2001: 52
1994: 37 2002: 57
1995: 33 2003: 47
1996: 42 2004: 36
1997: 40 2005: 48
1998: 37 2006: 35
1999: 34 2007: 52
2000: 49  
2001: 73  
2002: 46  
2003: 45  
2004: 45  
2005: 5  
2006: 26  
2007: 28  
Total: 762 Total: 516

According to this, A-Rod needs to average 31 home runs per season for the next 8 seasons to beat Barry. There are way too many variables, but I know that I will rejoice if Barry’s record is eclipsed.

I can’t help but think back to a panel discussion on ethics I heard several years ago. The panelists were role playing about a high school student who was considering cheating on a test because he felt he was disadvantaged and could cheat to make up for his disadvantage. One of the panelists indicated that if he wanted something so bad that he felt justified in cheating, he simply wanted it too much. I conclude this rant by saying that Milton Bradley wants to treated well too much and Barry Bonds wants to be the home run leader too much.

Thoughts on Barry Bonds, Home Runs, and Steroids

This past weekend Barry Bonds tied the home run record of Hank Aaron at 755. It appears that he will break Hank’s record; this is tarnished by the assumption that Barry used steroids from about 2000 until MLB started testing for steroids in 2005. I posted something on this on March 9, 2006.

It is interesting to look at the home runs over the careers of both players. One of the things that many of us notice is that Barry’s production of home runs increased at a time when they tend to slow down for other players. Here are the numbers:

Babe Ruth (age) Year HR’s Hank Aaron (age) Year HR’s Barry Bonds (age) Year HRs
19 1914 0 19 1954 13 23 1986 16
20 1915 4 20 1955 27 24 1987 25
21 1916 3 21 1956 26 25 1988 24
22 1917 2 22 1957 44 26 1989 19
23 1918 11 23 1958 30 27 1990 33
24 1919 29 24 1959 39 28 1991 25
25 1920 54 25 1960 40 29 1992 34
26 1921 59 26 1961 34 30 1993 46
27 1922 35 27 1962 45 31 1994 37
28 1923 41 28 1963 44 32 1995 33
29 1924 46 29 1964 24 33 1996 42
30 1925 25 30 1965 32 34 1997 40
31 1926 47 31 1966 44 35 1998 37
32 1927 60 32 1967 39 36 1999 34
33 1928 54 33 1968 29 37 2000 49
34 1929 46 34 1969 44 38 2001 73
35 1930 49 35 1970 38 39 2002 46
36 1931 46 36 1971 47 40 2003 45
37 1932 41 37 1972 34 41 2004 45
38 1933 34 38 1973 40 42 2005 5
39 1934 22 39 1974 20 43 2006 26
40 1935 6 40 1975 12 44 2007 21
41 1976 10
Totals: 715 755 755

Ruth’s most productive year was 1927 (age 32); Aaron’s was 1971 (age 36); Bond’s was 2001 (age 37). That seems to argue that Barry isn’t that unusual but on closer observation I’ve noticed a few things. In the years when we assume he was juiced (2000-2004) he hit 258 home runs. In the five years before (1995-1999) he hit 186 home runs. It’s hard to imagine that his body was strongest in his early late 30s and early 40s. Most hitters start off slowly either because they aren’t yet playing every day or because they are still learning the craft of hitting. Barry did very well for the first 10 years, hitting 292 home runs (Ruth hit 238 in his first 10 years and Aaron hit 342). For whatever reason he decided that wasn’t enough.

Since Babe Ruth, home run statistics have become the “gold standard” of baseball and power was king. Since this statistic has become tainted, perhaps other records will gain more popularity. There are records that would not be helped by steroids (and even hurt by them). I’m thinking of Cal Ripkin’s 2,632 consecutive game streak or Joe DiMaggio’s 56 consecutive games with a hit. There is also Cy Young’s 511 games won as a pitcher. This is just a guess but I’m hoping that endurance will unseat power. It would, in a sense, be the ultimate penalty for Barry: he abuses his body and the game to reach a record that garners less respect because of the way he went about it.