![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
On the numbers right now, even if Obama takes 75% of the remaining delegates, he won't have enough pledged delegates to guarantee the nomination. So in all likelihood, the convention is going to come down to the superdelegates.
Clinton probably can't get the nomination if it's as extreme as 75-25 from here on out. But if she gets 40% or better of the remaining delegates, she's probably going to win the nomination. The natural compromise at a convention that comes down to how the superdelegates vote is a Clinton/Obama ticket, not Obama/Clinton. Why?
First, Clinton presumably has a lot more favors to cash in than Obama does among the superdelegates, so going in with the decision in their hands favors her to begin with.
Second, age and resume are such that the Vice Presidency is more advantageous for Obama than the VP slot is for Clinton; comparative advantage between the candidates suggests Clinton/Obama over Obama/Clinton.
Third, Hillary Clinton will take a lot less reputation damage from a backroom brawl than Obama; since the costs of a brawl are higher for Obama, Obama has a greater incentive to take a compromise spot as VP than Clinton has.
Fourth, it also defuses any wrangling over the status of the Clinton-dominated Michigan and Florida delegations.
Fifth, a woman on the top of the ticket and a black on it anywhere is two firsts, while a woman in the #2 spot has happened before. Insofar as history-making is a consideration, Clinton/Obama is mildly stronger than Obama/Clinton.
Clinton probably can't get the nomination if it's as extreme as 75-25 from here on out. But if she gets 40% or better of the remaining delegates, she's probably going to win the nomination. The natural compromise at a convention that comes down to how the superdelegates vote is a Clinton/Obama ticket, not Obama/Clinton. Why?
First, Clinton presumably has a lot more favors to cash in than Obama does among the superdelegates, so going in with the decision in their hands favors her to begin with.
Second, age and resume are such that the Vice Presidency is more advantageous for Obama than the VP slot is for Clinton; comparative advantage between the candidates suggests Clinton/Obama over Obama/Clinton.
Third, Hillary Clinton will take a lot less reputation damage from a backroom brawl than Obama; since the costs of a brawl are higher for Obama, Obama has a greater incentive to take a compromise spot as VP than Clinton has.
Fourth, it also defuses any wrangling over the status of the Clinton-dominated Michigan and Florida delegations.
Fifth, a woman on the top of the ticket and a black on it anywhere is two firsts, while a woman in the #2 spot has happened before. Insofar as history-making is a consideration, Clinton/Obama is mildly stronger than Obama/Clinton.
