Tim Hames
Your last chance to get tickets to Top Gear Live
Readers of a certain age might remember the hit American television show Dynasty. It was originally conceived of as a rival to Dallas, with all those Texan oilmen types, but fast established itself as the most lavish and ludicrous of soap operas. The plot operated around Blake (John Forsythe), his wife Krystle (Linda Evans) and his former bride Alexis (Joan Collins) and others who constituted the rival Carrington and Colby families.
It had Americans under its spell in the mid 1980s, but the combination of ever more insane storylines and endless pay disputes among its performers undermined it. Eventually the plug was pulled in 1989 with a cliffhanger tale in which the stars were imperilled but viewers never found out what happened to them.
Dynasty was set in Denver, Colorado. By appropriate coincidence, the Democratic national convention will occur in the same city in late August. It is already evident that the contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will match anything created by fiction. Yet as the next few weeks will demonstrate, their competition will soon make Dynasty look like gritty social realism. This is a battle destined to become both extremely close and exceptionally combustible. It is hard to believe that Democrats will benefit from it.
The situation today is as follows. It takes 2,025 delegates to secure a majority and with it victory. About 80 per cent of these Democratic stalwarts will be chosen by voters through primaries and caucuses (“pledged delegates”), the remaining 20 per cent are party leaders of various sorts (“super delegates”). As of now, Mr Obama has won 1,414 pledged delegates to Mrs Clinton’s 1,246, which looks like an imposing lead.
In the states that chose their representatives by primaries (open ballots, much like local or general elections here), though, they are almost even. Mr Obama has a clear lead because of his success in caucuses (formal meetings in which the turnout is far lower than primaries and dominated by the most dedicated activists), which are arguably less legitimate indications of general support. Furthermore, two big states – Florida and Michigan – held primaries (in which Mrs Clinton did best) but have been barred from participating in the convention because they held them earlier than they had been instructed.
If this all sounds murky, it is about to become much, much worse. There are still a number of ballots to be held. The first is in Pennsylvania, which Mrs Clinton must, and probably will, win. Her rival then has a decent chance to hit back in North Carolina on May 6, where a large proportion of the electorate are African-Americans. Most of the remaining states (Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota) are likely to be inclined towards Mrs Clinton.
Such an outcome would result in three intriguing consequences.
The first is that there could almost be a tie over the number of pledged delegates. Mr Obama, thanks to the proportional representation rules his party uses, will probably have the greatest number in straightforward terms, but will be behind among those secured in primaries, rather than caucuses. Mrs Clinton would also be able to assert that, if the votes cast in Florida and Michigan were included, then she would be the stronger. In that case she would have finished more impressively than her opponent.
Secondly, the nomination will have to be settled by the super delegates. There are almost 800 of these and more than 300 have still to state their position. Not that it would matter if they had done so, because super delegates are allowed to change their minds right up until the official count at the convention. That being so, even if either Mr Obama or Mrs Clinton were to calculate that they were in second place when the very last primary had been completed in early June, they would have no good reason to abandon their campaigns.
Why not hang on and see if events were to turn up another version of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the pastor who has embarrassed Senator Obama recently, or produce an issue that could be exploited? In a further quirk, the convention is being held later than usual because the Democrats decided that it would “maximise momentum” to defer it.
Which means, thirdly, that it may be a convention like no other in recent decades. These occasions are normally totally controlled by the presumptive nominee and orchestrated to suit him (or her). They decide who will make the big speeches, impose the policies to be adopted, and the delegates confirm a vice-presidential selection that the candidate has announced to the world a while earlier. The convention is thus simply a vast rally.
That cannot occur if it is uncertain who the champion will be. The party itself will have to run the convention in close, if tense, consultation with the two contenders. The policy details will become a proxy for the fight between the Clinton and Obama camps. No vice-presidential name can be put forward until the top of the ticket is determined. It is entirely possible that the nomination will be awarded on the basis of a margin of as few as 50 delegates, or fewer, out of more than 4,000 present. The super delegates might overrule the pledged delegates, as they are entitled to, attracting intense controversy.
A bitterly divided party would then have about two months to bind its wounds before polling day in November. Meanwhile, a few days later, the Republican convention will open in Minneapolis, a model of love, peace and unity compared with the Democratic showdown.
In one of the more crackpot Dynasty plotlines, Blake and Alexis end up running against each other for public office (the post of Governor of Colorado) but their expensive feud serves only to allow another candidate to emerge triumphant. John McCain has reason to hope that Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton are poised to do exactly the same, to his advantage.

Tim Hames joined The Times in 1999 and is a columnist and Chief Leader Writer. He was previously a lecturer in American and British Politics at Oxford University
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2006
£14,337
2008
£39,937
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
1 & 2 Bed apartments
From £249,995
Great Investment, River Views
Great Dubai Investment Opportunities
from £89,950
low-cost ownership homes in London
Las Vegas SALE!
£POA
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - search houses for sale and rooms and property to rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Forget about the popular vote. The Democratic nominee is the one who amasses 2,025 (now 2118) delegates. It doesn't matter if you win by 250 delegates, by 50 delegates or by a single delegate. Obama will pass that hurdle within a week or two and be the nominee. Clinton knew the rules going in.
David Kennedy, North Babylon, NY,
Where are the Party elders and leaders? Where is Gore? Where is Dean? Why are the permitting the crazy deluded power-mad Clinton dynastic couple to destroy the party and the republic? There will be a revolution of party loyalists like me should Hillary succeed in stealing the nomination. Obama won the primary race fair and square. He is the superior candidate, the candidate who has won by ALL metrics. What about fairness do the Clintons not understand? What about justice does Hillary not know? We are disgusted with this scene of dynastic lunacy and with our party's enabling of the Clintons' continued power grab.
lin, Eureka, USA
Well written, Mr. Hames. You have captured the essence of what has happened and is going to happen, God help us. There may well be a racial backlash in the intervening summer of our discontent, however, and that is not a crackpot Dynasty plot for sure. McCain will win ultimately in November but the soap opera will have six months more of installments until then.
JoS. O'Brien, Pompano Beach, Florida, USA
Can somebody tell me what McCain was doing all these for Americans than his 'Heroisms' in Vietnam war??? Whatelse did he do for America???? Nothing.
Now, He must be dreaming that he will be the next US president.
This can happen only in America.
Not even in Pakistan!!
Uma Shankar, UK,
"...two big states â Florida and Michigan â held primaries (in which Mrs Clinton did best)..."
Your wrong, brother. Clinton couldn't have done 'best' when Obama's name was not even on the ballot. Clinton claims victory in Michigan, but it is nothing more than a cheap political trick. All of the Democratic nominees took their names off of the ballot in Michigan except for Clinton. Since her name was the only one left, the people who actually showed up to vote in that state obviously voted for her. Despite this, Clinton only got 55% of the vote in Michigan (a full 40% decided to vote "uncommited" rather than vote for her).
Haile, Cleveland, USA/ Ohio
Unconstrained by any detailed knowledge of these occasions, the point that has occurred to me as the roadshow has proceeded, is that the early definition has begged the possibility of the precipitation of some late transformation which would considerably change individual prospects; making it worth delaying any assessment until closer to the big moment.
Henry Percy, London, UK
The argument that the super-delegates should "follow" the "popular" vote is completely flawed. Firstly this is effectively like saying there shouldn't be any super-delegates at all. Has Obama consistently opposed thier vote? Or only now it suits him?
Secondly, as this article points out, the "popular" vote is anything but, as it excludes two states on a technicality, and sometimes has a wide franchise, sometimes not, sometimes only democrats vote, sometimes anyone can. Furthermore the staging of the contest is clearly influencial - states voting in different orders might produce a different result.
The primary process has a lot of strengths, not least in testing a candidate to the full, and part of that process is that the super-delegates can take a considered view on the candidates merits in a close contest, based on what has gone before.
They have every right to vote for who they think is the best candidate to win and represent thier views.
Nick, France,
Obama has a better chance of beating McCain in November. Never underestimate this so-called inexperienced "neophyte". Hillary did and look where she is, behind in almost any number that matters. People seems to overlook the fact that it is hard to defeat an established candidate with such a huge name recognition as Clinton. Except for PA, Obama can definitely beat Hillary in Oregon, Indiana, Montana (which like Utah where Obama beat Hillary), even North Carolina. McCain is ver rated. He is intellectualy similar to Bush; incurious, he was almost at the bottom of is class in Annapolis and he has his shares of scandals waiting to be re-revealed.
M. Stratas, St. Louis, Mo, USA
Hillary Clinton will never give up. She would prefer John McCain to win the general election than Barack Obama. She would prefer to see her party reeling from deep divisions of her own making than see Obama winning the Democratic nomination. She is a ruthless, scheming, self-serving woman and she has skeletons in her closet that the Republicans will not hesitate to air when the time is right. If she somehow manages to win the nomination, by fair means or foul, she will definitely lose the Presidency. That's why Republicans are being encouraged to vote for her in the Primaries. So far the only major Primaries she has managed to win are because Republicans turned out in large numbers to vote for her.
Caroline Kennedy, San Jose, Costa Rica
this article is a joke, Obama also has overwhelming support in Oregon which votes very similarly to neighboring Washington which went hands down to obama.
Kumar, Chicago, IL
I'm guessing that Clinton, after Pa. and North Carolina, is still behind in the total votes cast or delegates will quietly work out some deal with Obama so as to not further damage the parties chances in November.
As it stands now, Obama is actually the far weaker candidate in the November election and without a fully engaged Clinton on his side will most likely lose to Senator McCain.
I would predict Clinton will do just what she did for Kerry in 2004, very little. She did some public campaigning, but behind the scenes she undercut him when possible. The last thing she wanted was a President Kerry for 8 years. Now, if Obama is beaten, she will feel she has the inside track(again) for 2012.
Problem is, once the country has 4 years of no Bush and no Clinton, and a good man for President, they won't be the least bit interested in a candidate that was already shown the door once and is too well known and understood by the electorate to win.
Joshua, Buckeye, Az/USA
Easy enough to keep them all sorted out. Just think of them being in an episode of "The Simpsons", as the Simpsons.
Tucano Fulano, Big Beag, USA
The Republican Convention will be in St. Paul, not Minneapolis, only ten miles apart but a world of difference to the people who live there.
James Lachowsky, Swindon, Wiltshire
John McCain is the man for the big job forget the others they just like to look pretty.
VJB, London,
Oh, my gracious sakes, alike! You say that Obama can do better in North Carolina because "a large proportion of the electorate are African-Americans." Are you saying that black Americans in North Carolina are RACISTS?
Bob Evans, Anaheim, California
The author's Euro-cultural myopia is on full display in this article. There is no way that Montana and South Dakota, two of the last states to vote in the caucus/primary season, will choose Senator Clinton over Senator Obama. The author's suggestion, which is entirely off target, seems to be that because they are heavily white in ethnic make-up, they will vote for Senator Clinton.
Yet their neighboring, often equally white states, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, etc., etc., voted heavily for Senator Obama, as did the more ethnically diverse Minnesota.
What is true for one region (or even one state) is not necessarily true of another region (or state) in this geographically diverse country. For instance, while ethnicity was a huge factor in South Carolina and Louisiana, it was hardly a factor at all in Iowa or New Hampshire.
Recent Montana polls suggest that Senator Clinton is reviled there; Senator Obama (and Bill Richardson, a Hispanic) score far better there
C. Hassel, Saint Paul, USA / Minnesota
This 'race' is only 'very close' because the people have been fooled into thinking it is by the media. To fuel endless ratings, discussions and 'webhits'.
There is no race when one leads in delegates, votes and states won (Obama) and the other lags and cannot catch up.
She is waiting for a miracle for god. That is the truth.
Kathy Millet, Toledo, OH,USA
The Democrats are a freak show, a diverting and grotesque entertainment. Which makes it all the more plain that a serious and responsible figure needs to be elected president, not least to continue the necessary task of bringing stability to Iraq and security to the wider Middle East. That figure of course is John McCain.
Sandra Dean, Newport, RI
There is little to no statistical chance that Clinton will emerge as a delegate front-runner at any stage in this race. While the superdelegates can (and I suppose, might) overrule the pledged delegates, I doubt this will be the case. Obama is the clear winner on the maths of the thing, and the only reason for supers not to declare in his favour (as quite a few have been) is that there is still a chance (and therefore a political cost in doing so) that Clinton could somehow pull it out of the bag. With Florida and Michigan increasingly unlikely to factor into it, it's only by the grace of God that Clinton still has a whisper of a hope.
Obama can't really lose this, save for a political (or literal) meteor hitting the man. It just seems that given where we were six months ago, with Clinton being "inevitable" I don't think either side has really had that idea sink in yet, especially with the interminable news cycle playing its part.
Alan Black, London,