As many pundits on the networks discuss the McClellan book that links the Bush Administration to the lies that many have speculated for years about the Iraq War...they are overlooking an important release by the Clinton Campaign today.
Reports on CNN's Political Ticker outline the fact that many in the DNC feel that a compromise is possible when seating the Michigan and Florida delegates, but that little impact will be made on the current race. Furthermore, CNN reports that Hillary Clinton today refrenced the fact that we "Did not come all this way in this historic primary to lose in November". Hillary Clinton continues to make the argument that she is most electable in November due to the electoral map that was seen in 2004.
The Clinton Campaign today released a memo and letter to the remaining undecided superdelegates that outlines the Clinton path to the presidency. She claims to have won the popular vote, the primary delegate vote and to be the most electable against John McCain in November. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of the changing metrics that the Clinton Campaign has utilized throughout the primary process.
First, at the beginning of the primary season, Hillary Clinton while campaigning in Iowa agreed with the punishment against Michigan and Florida (and many pundits describe this as an appeal to Iowa voters who view thier position in the Primary Process as sacred). Now, as Clinton's chances for the nomination are dwindling, she claims that disenfranchising Michigan and Florida voters is similar to denying civil rights to all Americans, or denying women the right to vote. This switch is clearly a political appeal and has been overlooked by many in their analysis of the Clinton Campaign.
Second, Clinton claims that she will win the "Popular vote" and that she has recieved the most amount of votes in any primary race in U.S. democratic history. Unfortunately, what the Clinton campaign is NOT telling you...is how they calculate the "polular vote". First, they include Clinton's vote totals from Michigan and Florida (which are currently not valid) and only include Obama's vote totals from Florida (Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan, but over 40% of voters voted "Uncomitted" and those votes are implied as votes for Obama as described by almost every political analyst). So, the Clinton campaign removes over 400k votes from the Obama total from Michigan. Furthermore, the Clinton campaign removes votes from selected caucuses that Hillary Clinton did not do well in. These caucuses include: Iowa (But remember, when she was campaigning in Iowa until her 3rd place finish...she would have counted Iowas vote totals), Alaska, Idaho, Nevada, Colorado. So, the western states that Clinton views as "red states" are not counted in either vote total even though Barack Obama won many of these caucuses by over 15%. So convenient for the Clinton Campaign, that she is "ahead" in the "popular vote" by removing (or disenfranchising) the votes of millions of Americans to make sure that she is winning in the new metric that she wishes to decide this election by.
Third, Clinton believes that she will be ahead in "primary" delegates, that do not include super or "caucus" delegates, because she is behind in superdelegates, caucus delegates and total delegates according to DNC rules.
Fourth, the Clinton Campaign continues to change the metrics of the race in order to appear ahead where her prospects for the nomination continue to dwindle. At the beginning of the race when she was campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, she called for the importance of delegates, and how pledged delegates would show the voice of the people. Then, the Clinton Campaign, following Barack Obama's 11 victories in a row after Super Tuesday, the metric was shifted to total delegates, including super delegates, becuase Clinton held a lead in superdelegates. Then, as that lead began to dwindle, the Clinton campaign refrenced the fact that Superdeleagates had to choose the strongest candidate, rather than the candidate that won their state. Then, when that strategy didn't work, Clinton reminded "pledged" delegates that they werent actually pledged, and that they could vote for any candidate. As the delegate math became grim, the need for the seating of Michigan and Florida became Clinton's new argument. So, the total delegate needed for the Nomination of 2025 as set by the DNC and refrenced by the Clinton Campaign leading up to Super Tuesday was disregarded by Clinton's top advisers. Her campaign Chairman Terry McCalufe stated that he would not "accept the math without Michigan and Florida...2025 is not the needed number". When John King of CNN refrenced DNC rules, McCalufe responded by saying that "math without Michigan and Florida is not real". When the delegate math was over for Clinton and she began to fall behind in all delegate metrics, the popular vote was the most important. But then caucus states wouldn't be counted, and their vote totals were not "official". And with the twisted math, Clinton could finally find a metric that was manipulated enough by her advisors to calculate a bogus victory.
Fifth, Hillary Clinton argues that she is the strongest candidate to beat John McCain in the fall. In the words of Chris Matthew: "She is missing the big picture" and Tim Russert: "The math works better for Obama". Clinton's claim rests in the fact that the electoral map will be the same as it was in 2004, where Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida are the key states for either party to win in order to win the presidency. Unfortunately, even if this map were the reality for 2008, Clinton's claim is weak. She argues that she is the only one that can win all 3 states...but is that the truth? Maybe. She definately is currently leading in all 3 states in the polls, but the reality is...Obama is winning Pennsylvania and Ohio in the polls and trailing by about 8 pts according to Real Clear Politics. But, when looking at the WHOLE electoral map, the future for Clinton doesn't look so bright. Obama is winning Wisconsin, New Mexico, Colorado, Michigan and Iowa as well as only trailing McCain by 1.3 points in Virginia. Clinton on the other hand is trailing in Wisconsin, New Mexico, tied in Colorado and Michigan and losing both Iowa and Virginia by over 7 points. So, while she may be able to win Florida, a mere 25 electoral votes over Obama...he will win over 50 extra electoral votes through his victories in the above states. Obama's strategy from the start has been to avoid the map of 2004 and fight for the western and midwestern states that could go blue in november. In a state like Arizona, McCain's home state, Obama is only trailing by 9 points, while Clinton trails by over 20. The ability of Barack Obama to move beyond Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida allows him to run a 50 state campaign in which Democrats will do better nationwide.
So, in analyzing Clinton's metrics as well as her claims to be the "stronger" candidate...one must realize that she reall isn't and that her quest for the nomination is all but over. She has run a terrific campaign, and she is a very formidable candidate, and a great democrat. But after over 17 months of campaigning, it is time for the Democratic party to unite behind their nominee: Barack Obama and ensure that the double talking John McCain is not in the White House come January of 2009.
Polls and Statistics were gathered from CNN Poll of Polls, Realclearpolitics.com and Politico.com.
A video of John McCain that you must share with your friends and family:
No comments:
Post a Comment