Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Chris Matthews Implies Popular Vote Gets Nomination
A few minutes ago Chris Matthews was talking to New Jersey's Governor about the Democratic primary race.
He first pointed out what Obama said about currently being ahead in the delegate count and the popular vote.
He eventually got around to asking the Governor (A Hillary Supporter) which he thought should be the deciding factor for Super delegates to make a decision who wins this thing, the delegate count or popular vote.
The governor said popular vote. I can understand why 'he' would say this being a supporter of Hillary's and that option being her only chance of winning the nomination now. But Chris went on to say something about the founder of democracy saying something about the vote plus one is what democracy is all about (don't quote me on this).
Chris Matthews is now going to help push that it's the popular vote that decides this winner. What the 'heck' gives?
The DNC rules say it is the Delegate Count that decides. Not too long ago Hillary said the same thing. She's changed her mind now of course, that she knows she'll never reach more than Obama's total.
In my view there should be three qualifications to win. Delegate count, Popular vote and number of States won.
Barack Obama currently has 29 States out of 43 won. He's ahead in delegate count as well and will always be (voted delegates - if Hillary doesn't try to bribe them). He's also ahead in popular vote. Even if Hillary should get the popular vote by a small margin, Obama still has two out of three. He's also the one to have brought in millions of more voters.
How anybody, this time around, other then for their own political reasons, would override that winning combination is beyond me.
I suggest voters contact hardball@msnbc.com and point these facts out to them right away.
Comments (4)
I'm an Obama supporter, but the "states won" measuring stick is already factored into the delegate count since smaller states get proportionately more delegates, so double counting it doesn't seem right.
I truly hope (and expect) that he'll have the popular vote so it will be a moot point.
March 10, 2008 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt we'll ever know for sure why the super delegates vote the way they do. They are going to do what they do. We can piss and moan about it, or say okay, I thought that's what would happen, or man I never thought that would happen -- whatever -- and just get on with the campaign. I just hope McCain can campaign this Fall so we can have the immense pleasure of beating the s**t out of him whoever our candidate is.
March 10, 2008 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not exactly true in all cases. Texas for example. Obama appears to have won more delegates but she supposedly won the State.
I sure hope the DNC will reconsider all this crap after this election and go with how Republicans do it, winner take all in each State.
I realize we were all angry when the Supreme court handed Bush Florida in 2000 even thou Gore won the popular vote -- but the law says, delegate total decides the winner -- not who's got the most power and control over supers.
March 10, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well and part of the issue is that Matthews job is not to enforce journalistic standards, its to increase ratings. His ratings go up if the race goes on, and seeing as how its damn near impossible for Clinton to catch up in the delegate race, him and the media are peddling this whole popular vote thing... ignoring the fact that there are state caucuses that don't count to this vote.
I like Matthews but I take what he and every TV person says with a grain of salt. (Although Olbermann I'm a fan of.)
March 11, 2008 1:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment