Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Well so much for getting closure before the convention
The conventional wisdom on the net seems to be that not holding a re-vote in Florida is good for Obama, bad for Hillary.
Nothing of the sort.
The point of warfare is not to win but to convince the other side that they have lost. The only way that Obama can win before the convention in to move ahead in the total count of pledged delegates of all 50 states plus D.C. and the territories.
Having had surrogates loudly harassing superdelegates to tell them that they must respect the mandate of the people, Obama will find it rather hard to convince delegates to choose him if Hillary ends up ahead of him in both the pledged total and the popular vote.
Obama might think that the rules favor his position, but in practice seating the Florida delegates is not much more than a formality. If Clinton has the math to win the nomination she has more than enough support to seat the Florida delegates. The report on the rules committee is the first item of business at the convention. The rules are that the convention, not Howard Dean or the DNC or the rules committee get the final say.
If Clinton does not have the math to win the nomination the seating of the delegation is automatic because Obama needs to win Florida. If Clinton is anywhere close the same argument will be used to seat them over Obama's objections. The problem here for Obama is that forcing the issue is likely to cost him rather more superdelegate support than the net 38 delegates he loses by allowing Florida seated.
Even with Florida's votes, Hillary has to make up a huge deficit. She is sixty behind and there are only three big prizes left, PA, MI(redo) and Puerto Rico where the defacto winner takes all rules turn it into a wildcard. It is not very likely but if Hillary was to pull it off she would be coming into the convention with the momentum behind her while Team Obama was looking like the spent force.
It is far from clear that this is actually damaging to the Democratic party's chances. McCain got less press than Bush last week. And Bush got far less than Spitzer while Hillary and Obama each got more than the rest combined. McCain's visit to Iraq barely registered.
Comments (7)
"if Hillary ends up ahead of him in both the pledged total and the popular vote."
Of the 10 (possibly 11) primary contests still to come, which scenario do you foresee a swing in Hillary's favor of a net gain 150 pledged delegate and a net gain of more than 700,000 actual votes?
March 17, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
What planet are you on? If MI and FL don't have a revote then unless Clinton wins the rest of the primaries by blow outs (read 65% or better) then she can't catch up in either the pledged delegate count or the popular vote. He's slowly picking up more delegates as results from caucuses come in. (Don't insult states with caucuses or delegates might jump ship). Florida is off the table and that leaves Michigan for her but right now Michigan is running into some problems. As in, what about those Democrats, Independents and Republicans that voted for McCain because Obama wasn't on the ballot? Do you let those people vote again? But what about the Republicans who only want to mess Democratic results and make things difficult for the democratic party, i.e. the Rush Republicans that swung Hillary's way in Ohio, Texas and Mississippi. Complicated, isn't it? Moral of the story is that if you break the rules, there should be consequences.
March 17, 2008 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Person
Were you aware of this switch by Puerto Rico?
"The mostly unnoticed switch of Puerto Rico from a caucus on June 7 to a primary on June 1, gives Hillary Clinton a very real opportunity to surpass Barack Obama in the popular vote count. If Senator Clinton can "win" the popular vote, this will provide undecided superdelegates ample rationale to go with the less risky general election option of Senator Clinton."
For some odd reason there have been no stories about this.
This could be a way for HRC to gain the popular vote lead.
March 18, 2008 1:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
As with so many Clinton campaign talking points, this one can only be made from a position of total ignorance of mathematical reality.
Even when you exclude the caucus states that have not reported popular-vote totals (a tactic that only a fervid Clinton partisan would contemplate), Obama still leads the popular vote race by more than 700,000. (With reasonable estimates of those caucus states, he's north of 800,000.)
There is a single remaining state--Pennsylvania--that provides any hope of Clinton gaining meaningful ground in the popular-vote race. Clinton picked up approximately 230,000 net votes in Ohio, a slightly smaller state than Pennsylvania, so it's not unreasonable to think she could net 250,000 from the Keystone State.
Clinton followers need to explain where the other 450,000 votes are supposed to come from. (Then they can figure out how Clinton is going to be able to avoid that number rising right back after Obama wins by substantial margins in North Carolina, Indiana, Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota.) West Virginia and Kentucky blatantly don't have enough inhabitants to do the job.
So now Puerto Rico is supposed to be Clinton's savior? Get a clue. Puerto Rico has just under four million inhabitants. That's smaller than Kentucky; it's more than two million people smaller than Indiana, and it's only half the size of North Carolina.
Moreover, Clintonistas appear to have forgotten that Puerto Rico Governor Anibal Acevedo-Vila has endorsed Barack Obama for President. It's anything but a sure thing that Clinton will even win Puerto Rico, much less that she'll get the blowout she'd need to do her any good in the delegate and popular-vote races.
So never mind the spin from the Clinton campaign and their followers, who have consistently demonstrated stunning ignorance regarding the math of their situation. It's not clear at all that Clinton will even show a net gain in the popular-vote race between now and June 10. The notion that she can gain more than 700,000 net votes is utter innumerate foolishness.
March 18, 2008 2:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for that good news Rieux.
I assure you a Clintonista I am not.
March 18, 2008 2:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rieux,
There is an old rule in debate that anyone who accuses someone else of being ignorant is about to make a claim that is untrue. Making personal attacks as you do does not emphasize your points, it undermines them.
Excluding Florida from the totals renders them meaningless. Obama cannot claim a mandate based on totals from 48 states. Rules, schmules, Florida had a ballot and the results are known.
The Puerto Rico rules are rather interesting and appear to have been overlooked by the DNC. But its too late for them to object now. Puerto Rico's impact on the election could well end up being more significant than California. Its effectively winner take all.
Endorsements are made for the political benefit of the person making the endorsement. They do not appear to have had any real effect on the outcome in any state.
Clearly if Obama maintains his lead in the remaining contests he will be the nominee. But it is far from being the certainty that his supporters insist.
March 18, 2008 8:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am voting against John McCain. I am an Obama supporter but if Hillary wins the election fair and square as can be expected, then she wins. I am tired of all the posturing, Obama is in the lead as of right now, I expect him to win the nomination but if he doesn't then I will be voting for Hillary! As to your last ascertation regarding the media and its treatment of John McCain, I sincerely wish the major media would continue to focus its stories on the lives of Americans and the effect that the current president has on them. Its focus on the elction is important but I believe not as important as the benefits or lack thereof that our returning veterans are getting. The state of our economy or lack thereof and what are we doing about it? How are the investigation regarding the EPA going, I could go on and on and clearly there enough news to go around rather than just the popular story of the Dem election.
March 18, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment