Clinton Camp Says It Will Use The Nuclear Option

[Dan J 277]

Here's something worth noting...

Over the last several weeks, we've seen a few items explaining just how difficult it would be for Hillary Clinton to catch up to Barack Obama, but Ezra reminds us today that "the math is harder for Clinton to make up with every passing day."

There simply aren't enough contests remaining for Clinton to close the gap among pledged delegates, and Obama's lead is also out of reach: "If you add Florida, where neither campaigned, she's still 300,000 votes behind. If you cheat and add Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and you give him the 'uncommitted' voters (as some Clintonites have suggested), she's still 188,000 votes behind. If you do all of that, and then Clinton wins every remaining contest by 10 points, according to Rick Hertzberg's calculations, she'll still be 160,000 votes behind. And that doesn't even include Obama's caucusgoers [in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state], who aren't in the straight popular votes tally. Point being: She's not making up the popular vote either."

So, what does this tell us? That Clinton needs to win over about two-thirds of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates, which would be quite a challenge.

I'm struck, however, by the fact that Clinton doesn't seem to be targeting superdelegates much at all. To be sure, the remaining superdelegates who are on the fence are no doubt the target of an intense lobbying campaign from the Clinton (and Obama) team. But what I'm talking about is the public face of Team Clinton — shouldn't they be doing more to impress the very small target audience that could give Clinton the boost she needs?

There have been two weeks since the Pennsylvania primary. The first week, Clinton was fairly aggressive in claiming that she now has the popular vote lead. That might work on a lay audience that's unsure of the details, but superdelegates tend to be pretty well-informed insiders who are not easily taken in by dubious talking points. Clinton was pushing an argument that was very unlikely to work on those she needs to win over.

This past week, Clinton was extremely aggressive in pushing for a "gas-tax holiday," blasting anyone who dared to take reality seriously as an over-educated elitist who'd been bought off by Big Oil. Again, superdelegates surely saw through this rather pathetic pandering, which, again, seems counterintuitive — Clinton's argument seems aimed at low-information voters, when she should be aiming for high-information voters.

Shouldn't she?

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/

Your still forgetting those pesky states of FL and MI. If she gets those results counted she will be ahead in the popular vote and even in pledged delegates. That changes everything.

Only if you use creative accounting. Caucus states do count if she wants them to or not.

But then a popular vote argument is pretty much moot anyway. Each state does thier primary/caucus differently. Some are open, others are not. Some people might vote in a primary, but wont particpate in a caucus.

She may try to make the argument that she would be ahead in the popular vote, but the same argument could be made about how inaccurate the popular vote during the primary process really is.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Your still forgetting those pesky states of FL and MI. If she gets those results counted she will be ahead in the popular vote and even in pledged delegates. That changes everything.

I'm guessing you overlooked this part...

"If you add Florida, where neither campaigned, she's still 300,000 votes behind. If you cheat and add Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and you give him the 'uncommitted' voters (as some Clintonites have suggested), she's still 188,000 votes behind. If you do all of that, and then Clinton wins every remaining contest by 10 points, according to Rick Hertzberg's calculations, she'll still be 160,000 votes behind. And that doesn't even include Obama's caucusgoers [in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state], who aren't in the straight popular votes tally. Point being: She's not making up the popular vote either."

She's spun it into telling everyone she has the popular vote, but we all know that the truth and Hillary don't see eye to eye.

[GaryC 7]

Your still forgetting those pesky states of FL and MI. If she gets those results counted she will be ahead in the popular vote and even in pledged delegates. That changes everything.

I'm guessing you overlooked this part...

"If you add Florida, where neither campaigned, she's still 300,000 votes behind. If you cheat and add Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and you give him the 'uncommitted' voters (as some Clintonites have suggested), she's still 188,000 votes behind. If you do all of that, and then Clinton wins every remaining contest by 10 points, according to Rick Hertzberg's calculations, she'll still be 160,000 votes behind. And that doesn't even include Obama's caucusgoers [in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state], who aren't in the straight popular votes tally. Point being: She's not making up the popular vote either."

She's spun it into telling everyone she has the popular vote, but we all know that the truth and Hillary don't see eye to eye.

But it will be enough to sway some of the SD's back to her side. Giving her FL and MI will in the end give her more delegates than Obama. To be honest I think this whole debacle will be good for America. Hillary will destroy the dem party and McCain will be elected. McCain will totaly pizz off the dems and the reps. In the end the rep party will suffer the same fate as the dems. This will lead to a strong third and maybe a forth party in the future. It will be a real b!tch for the country for the next 4 years but we will get what we really need, more choices in future elections. I would hope to see 4 parties come out of this, a progressive party for your hard lefties, a dem party for the moderate left, a centrist party for the moderate right and a conservative party. That would be good for America in the end.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But it will be enough to sway some of the SD's back to her side. Giving her FL and MI will in the end give her more delegates than Obama. To be honest I think this whole debacle will be good for America. Hillary will destroy the dem party and McCain will be elected. McCain will totaly pizz off the dems and the reps. In the end the rep party will suffer the same fate as the dems. This will lead to a strong third and maybe a forth party in the future. It will be a real b!tch for the country for the next 4 years but we will get what we really need, more choices in future elections. I would hope to see 4 parties come out of this, a progressive party for your hard lefties, a dem party for the moderate left, a centrist party for the moderate right and a conservative party. That would be good for America in the end.

Gary, many of the super delegates are elected officials themselves and are privy to the process. They're not as malleable as you want to think. If it rests on the super delegates to decide, I have full confidence they will choose wisely.

[GaryC 7]

But it will be enough to sway some of the SD's back to her side. Giving her FL and MI will in the end give her more delegates than Obama. To be honest I think this whole debacle will be good for America. Hillary will destroy the dem party and McCain will be elected. McCain will totaly pizz off the dems and the reps. In the end the rep party will suffer the same fate as the dems. This will lead to a strong third and maybe a forth party in the future. It will be a real b!tch for the country for the next 4 years but we will get what we really need, more choices in future elections. I would hope to see 4 parties come out of this, a progressive party for your hard lefties, a dem party for the moderate left, a centrist party for the moderate right and a conservative party. That would be good for America in the end.

Gary, many of the super delegates are elected officials themselves and are privy to the process. They're not as malleable as you want to think. If it rests on the super delegates to decide, I have full confidence they will choose wisely.

Yes but many are not elected officials and are subject to persuasion by Hillary. Go ahead and continue to deny what you already know in your heart is the truth. Hillary will take the whole party down. She just does not care.

[Dan J 277]

Your still forgetting those pesky states of FL and MI. If she gets those results counted she will be ahead in the popular vote and even in pledged delegates. That changes everything.

I'm guessing you overlooked this part...

"If you add Florida, where neither campaigned, she's still 300,000 votes behind. If you cheat and add Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and you give him the 'uncommitted' voters (as some Clintonites have suggested), she's still 188,000 votes behind. If you do all of that, and then Clinton wins every remaining contest by 10 points, according to Rick Hertzberg's calculations, she'll still be 160,000 votes behind. And that doesn't even include Obama's caucusgoers [in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state], who aren't in the straight popular votes tally. Point being: She's not making up the popular vote either."

She's spun it into telling everyone she has the popular vote, but we all know that the truth and Hillary don't see eye to eye.

But it will be enough to sway some of the SD's back to her side. Giving her FL and MI will in the end give her more delegates than Obama. To be honest I think this whole debacle will be good for America. Hillary will destroy the dem party and McCain will be elected. McCain will totaly pizz off the dems and the reps. In the end the rep party will suffer the same fate as the dems. This will lead to a strong third and maybe a forth party in the future. It will be a real b!tch for the country for the next 4 years but we will get what we really need, more choices in future elections. I would hope to see 4 parties come out of this, a progressive party for your hard lefties, a dem party for the moderate left, a centrist party for the moderate right and a conservative party. That would be good for America in the end.

I think this is the one time i actually might agree with you on something.

In essence, both Democrats and Repubicans are facing the same problem, albiet in diffrent ways. A new generation not born out of vietnam is beginning to assert itself in poltics. For Democrats its showing itself in the close battle between Clinton and Obama. For Republicans its going to mean a falloff in popular support, as many more young people than before identify themselves as Democrat instead of Republican.

It could really go diffrent ways. We could end up with 3 diffrent parties. Democrats and Republicans as they are, but another party that better represents the new generation. The parties could evolve, with both parties moving somewhat left. This would likely result in some older Democrats supporting the Republican party instead.

The next decade or so in poltics will probably be a turning point.

[GaryC 7]

Your still forgetting those pesky states of FL and MI. If she gets those results counted she will be ahead in the popular vote and even in pledged delegates. That changes everything.

I'm guessing you overlooked this part...

"If you add Florida, where neither campaigned, she's still 300,000 votes behind. If you cheat and add Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot, and you give him the 'uncommitted' voters (as some Clintonites have suggested), she's still 188,000 votes behind. If you do all of that, and then Clinton wins every remaining contest by 10 points, according to Rick Hertzberg's calculations, she'll still be 160,000 votes behind. And that doesn't even include Obama's caucusgoers [in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington state], who aren't in the straight popular votes tally. Point being: She's not making up the popular vote either."

She's spun it into telling everyone she has the popular vote, but we all know that the truth and Hillary don't see eye to eye.

But it will be enough to sway some of the SD's back to her side. Giving her FL and MI will in the end give her more delegates than Obama. To be honest I think this whole debacle will be good for America. Hillary will destroy the dem party and McCain will be elected. McCain will totaly pizz off the dems and the reps. In the end the rep party will suffer the same fate as the dems. This will lead to a strong third and maybe a forth party in the future. It will be a real b!tch for the country for the next 4 years but we will get what we really need, more choices in future elections. I would hope to see 4 parties come out of this, a progressive party for your hard lefties, a dem party for the moderate left, a centrist party for the moderate right and a conservative party. That would be good for America in the end.

I think this is the one time i actually might agree with you on something.

In essence, both Democrats and Repubicans are facing the same problem, albiet in diffrent ways. A new generation not born out of vietnam is beginning to assert itself in poltics. For Democrats its showing itself in the close battle between Clinton and Obama. For Republicans its going to mean a falloff in popular support, as many more young people than before identify themselves as Democrat instead of Republican.

It could really go diffrent ways. We could end up with 3 diffrent parties. Democrats and Republicans as they are, but another party that better represents the new generation. The parties could evolve, with both parties moving somewhat left. This would likely result in some older Democrats supporting the Republican party instead.

The next decade or so in poltics will probably be a turning point.

Well, not all hard right types are old boomers you know. And not all genXers are liberal. I see the reps moving right, the dems moving left and in the center a new party or two coming out. I think the center will attract the new adults as they start coming of age politicly speaking. But in essence you and I agree, there will be a shake up over the next 10 to 15 years.

Edited May 6, 2008 by GaryC