February 5th, 2008
11:30 PM ET
6 years ago

Obama campaign predicts victory

(CNN) – Obama staffers followed a late-night Clinton campaign conference call Tuesday with one of their own just minutes later, with campaign manager David Plouffe reporting that the Illinois senator was still holding a narrow edge among pledged delegates, with just a few states left to report.

"If this ends up being a draw – and it may end up that we win more states – and the delegates are close, it would a remarkable night for us," said Plouffe.

He said the campaign’s tally of delegates awarded in voting tonight stood at 606 to 534, thanks to a big win for Obama in Illinois compared to a narrower victory for Clinton in New York.

Plouffe also predicted victories in Kansas and Minnesota – states Obama did win a short time later. (They amended their count shortly after midnight, saying it was 677-634 in Obama’s favor.)

He said the campaign would release a final delegate count between 3 and 5 a.m. - after results were expected in California, the night’s big prize.

Clinton, they conceded, maintained an advantage among superdelegates – unpledged delegates which may prove decisive in this close race.

–CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux and Chris Welch contributed to this report


Filed under: Candidate Barack Obama
soundoff (9 Responses)
  1. Gary

    Win in 13/22 states!!! America is impressed with the Senator Obama's performance tonight against the machinery of "inevitable candidate". America needs the the change and Obama can make it happen. So far he has run a clean campaign. He is America's true hope and future.

    February 6, 2008 12:51 am at 12:51 am |
  2. Kelly

    Why does Obama not have any delegates from Utah despite the fact that he won in Utah? I don't understand.

    February 6, 2008 01:12 am at 1:12 am |
  3. Claire Slimpson

    You call her win in New York a narrow victory! PLEASE________________!

    February 6, 2008 01:23 am at 1:23 am |
  4. Wade SD

    I REALLY JUST WANTED TO STRESS ONE FACTOID.........HOPE THAT CNN MENTIONS THIS ON THE NEWS......I THINK IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.....

    ILLINOIS : OBAMA 1,256,543
    CLINTON 643,352

    NEW YORK: CLINTON 1,001,835
    OBAMA 696,876

    NEW YORK IS SUPPOSEDLY SUCH DECISIVE STATE WITH HUGE DELEGATE COUNTS, YET SHE HAD LESS PEOPLE VOTE FOR HER IN HER OWN HOME STATE AS BARACK OBAMA HAD VOTE FOR HIM IN HIS HOME STATE. IN FACT MORE PEOPLE VOTED IN ILLINOIS THAN DID IN NEW YORK CITY. HMMMMMM.....ANYONE ELSE FIND THIS ODD?

    February 6, 2008 05:46 am at 5:46 am |
  5. dmw

    Good Spin! The only bad thing about Obama winning the most States is that the States he won were caucus, which are not a true representation of the citizens, and most RED States that never vote for a Democrat come November. So, although Obama and his campaign can spin till the cows come home, they won States that he (a Democrat) would not win in a General elections.

    Obama gives very good speeches and he speaks of change all the time. I have yet, to hear anyone in the media really question him on what 'change' is he talking about. It is just a slogan without substance. I feel what he is really saying is that if you elect a black person as President, that will in itself be the change.

    We all know that the ways of WDC are so entrenched, that it will take Clinton, who knows the system and have worked with many of the players to make policy changes that we can truly believe in.

    February 6, 2008 08:47 am at 8:47 am |
  6. Zalene Barber

    The Change is here! For Obama to have come this far is by the grace of God. We need someone that is fresh, alive and new. Obama is not one of the Good oh Boy's we need to get away from that. Obama you had my vote in Florida on Jan. 29th and you will get it again in the General Election.

    Go Obama!!!!

    February 6, 2008 09:14 am at 9:14 am |
  7. Jerry

    Do you really think Obama can win in November, after the Republican spin machine spends millions painting him as a tax and spend liberal, black man, with little experience who would be weak on defense and who wants to negotiate with terrorist countries. Wait that's not spin, it's true, the machine wont even need swift boat adds. Now that's change.

    February 6, 2008 10:49 am at 10:49 am |
  8. Sherry

    Clinton's superdelegates just goes to her "establishment-ness". I find it unsettling that the nomination could be decided by a handful of Washington insiders, who have received donations from Clinton allies. Give the country back to the people! dmw, Democrats *can* win red states, but they need to nominate someone that can win Independents (read: a non-Clinton).

    February 6, 2008 10:54 am at 10:54 am |
  9. Frank Chase Jr,

    OK, Jerry sounds like you know nothing aobut Obama. This man is brilliant and your comments are demagogary and disengenous. The Republicans can't paint anybody but themselves as tax and spend Repubs. They squandered the trillion dollar A commander and chief that sends troops in Iraq without the proper armor to fight IED is a hot headed numskull. Ok, What's wrong with a black man being president? The expierence argument doesn't work. Let me tell you why. Nixon Argued expierence against JFK and lost. Do you remember this great president?He was younger than Obama. The no expierence argument doesn't hold water anymore.

    To clarify Reagan talked with enemies so why is it wrong for Obama to talk to enemies? Obama said I will shoot if threatened.

    February 6, 2008 02:09 pm at 2:09 pm |

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.