Obama Camp: Using Popular Vote Metric Just Ain't Gonna Work

As the Clinton campaign turns its focus towards securing the popular vote in the Democratic primary, the response from the Obama campaign has been, and will continue to be: these aren't the rules of the game.

And on Wednesday morning, as the Illinois Democrat was licking his wounds from his loss in the Pennsylvania primary, aides made just that argument.

"If this was about popular vote, we have a comfortable lead, and don't see that lead diminishing," campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters. "We would have spent more time in California and tried to run up the popular vote in Illinois [if that were the case]... But we've run this race based on pledged delegates. And we think pledged delegates is the fairest assessment."

The argument is a reflection and affirmation on Plouffe's behalf that the Clinton campaign will make a strong push to use the popular vote as a metric for persuading superdelegates and, ultimately, securing the nomination. And indeed, before the conference call commenced, the Clinton campaign sent out a memo entitled "More People Have Voted For Hillary Than Any Other Candidate."

"After last night's decisive victory in Pennsylvania, more people have voted for Hillary than any other candidate, including Sen. Obama," wrote spokesperson Phil Singer. "Estimates vary slightly, but according to Real Clear Politics, Hillary has received 15,095,663 votes to Sen. Obama's 14,973,720, a margin of more than 120,000 votes. ABC News reported this morning that "Clinton has pulled ahead of Obama" in the popular vote. This count includes certified vote totals in Florida and Michigan."

Obama's press secretary Bill Burton took umbrage with the memo, noting that ABC News had posted a story saying that the Clinton campaign had not included the author's skepticism over counting the Florida and Michigan results, neither of which were sanctioned by the DNC (Obama, in addition, wasn't on the ballot in Michigan).

"We weren't even on the ballot in Michigan and there was not ballot in Florida," said Plouffe. "For the Clinton campaign to try and count the results of election that bears no resemblance to the rest of these contest is not going to work and it seems pretty clear that the superdelegates won't have tolerance for this argument."

Going forward, the battle over the significance of the popular vote could be the deciding factor in determining the Democratic nominee. That's because, at this point in time, it appears all but impossible for Clinton to pull out a pledged delegate win. As Plouffe estimated, Obama's margin among pledged delegates was decreased from 171 to 159 following his loss in Pennsylvania. But the Illinois Democrat now stood "less than 300 delegates" - pledged or super - "away from securing the nomination," and Clinton "would need to win 70 percent of all the remaining delegates to secure the lead."

"We don't believe that the structure of the race is going to change fundamentally," said Plouffe. "Sen. Clinton is obviously a strong candidate but she really does need to try and win out here and win with some margin.

Comments

[baskar]

If you want to count the vote, the only way it is possible is to have new primaries in every state. Otherwise the popular vote count is meaningless. It was not intended to be counted for any measure. The only thing count is "the number of delegates".

[Nader2008]

Hillary is now down only 5 on latest Gallup Tracker. Pennsylvania bump is showing. By end of Sunday, polls will be more reflective that she is better candidate. Jeremiah Wright going on Bill Moyers and having press conference at Washington on Monday is doing no favors for Obama. I suggest Obama to keep that man in the attic. All he needs to do is say one more outrageous comment and he will be right back on front page. From Politico J.Wright "He"s a politician, I"m a pastor," he said. "We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. But they"re two different worlds." That is very reassuring of what he thinks of Obama!! Sounds like he knows Obama is a BSer and taking everyone for a ride. Keeping him on front page will only make rural voters stay that much far away from him. HE CANT WIN!!

[Nyland8]

"http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html"

He can't lose. She can't win.

8

[Housewife]

Clearly the Clintons define the word "winning" about as well as they do the words "sniper fire" and "is". All these people who say they are so smart should get themselves a dictionary.

[missntexas]

I am so sick of Hillary's people saying that Hillary is still in the game. She is not. The only reason they are giving her as much air/space time is because she is a Clinton. Hillary has lost. She is hoping Barack will disintegrate. He will not. She has come up with a new math. The old one works fine. Check out the remaining states. There is no way Hillary will win them all and absolutely no way Barack will come out of these contests with no points. Hillary wants to count the votes she got in NY senate race! Again, barack obama was not on the ballot, but that doesn't bother Hillary. Hillary, your mama should have taught you not only how to win , but lose graciously.

[anthrob]

Obama Blows 13 Point Lead in Pennsylvania!

On April 21st., one poll (PPP) reported that Obama has a 3-point lead. If you couple that 3-point lead with his 10-point loss, you get a 13-point deficit.

Ridiculous? Yes. However, no more ridiculous then the repeated headline, and so-called analysis, that insists that the only meaningful metric from Tuesday"s election is that Obama successfully closed Hillary"s 20-point margin. That also is based entirely on manipulating the numbers -- referencing the one and only poll with that obviously preposterous spread.

In fact, the polling was rather consistent early on showing Clinton with a 15-point lead. Obama "succeeded" in closing approximate 1/3 of that Gap, and that with all the time and money in the world.

Respectfully, you " Obama partisans " should be focused on these numbers:

Obama lost 70% of the Catholic vote, 58% of the white Protestant vote. Clinton won the support of the majority of union members, low and middle-income workers, and people not blessed with a college education.

Before you get dismissive, please consider the following. Catholics make up approximately 21% of the electorate. White Protestants make up 46% of the electorate. Union member households are 32% of the electorate. College graduates are only 25% of the population.

Recently, every effort on Obama"s part to appeal to the later populations has been essentially unsuccessful.

In fact, the larger, and more inclusive the electorate is, the worse Obama does.

[ebanks84]

Check out this one: http://gentleurl.net/FNLNS/ - It's funn!

[Housewife]

Check the poll results from this time last year. Obama shouldn't even be in the race right now. Seems Billary is the one with the electability problem. But of course, you Clinton partisans seem to overlook that fact constantly. She has an ex-president and worldwide name recognition and she still can't close the deal. Clinton will never, ever be president. Too many thinking people from both partys can see that she and her husband are nothing more than power hungry liars.

[Nyland8]

Quick - what's the aggregate number in percentage of these polling results from 8/07 to 9/07 ???

Quinnipiac 10/01 - 10/08 393 RV 41 14 Clinton +27.0
Strategic Vision (R) 09/28 - 09/30 LV 42 24 Clinton +18.0
Keystone Poll 08/24 - 09/02 209 RV 38 21 Clinton +17.0
Quinnipiac 08/14 - 08/20 524 RV 42 12 Clinton +30.0

That was the lead the "incumbent" Rodham blew in Pennsylvania on her way to losing the Democratic nomination. She had every advantage in organization, name recognition, political patronage and the fact that her husband was a popular president among the Dems. Now she trails in every meaningful metric.

Nobody who has fallen so far or so low should be trusted to win in the general election.

8

[anthrob]

I am constantly amazed at the lengths Obama supports will go to buttress their delusions. You really think that polling number from last year -- before the primary began -- are meaningful. The only meaningful metric is winning. As Obama said a win is 50% plus 1. Here is a percentage to contemplate. Obama will likely be the nominee but will lose the general election by 5 to 10 percent points. You heard it here first.

[Nyland8]

As if most of your assumptions aren't already wrong, you assume that I'm an Obama supporter. I'm not. I just look at the data, and I'm not colored by any preference. He was not my first, second, third or fourth choice in this contest. And the only reason he's my last choice is because there's no way for him to lose. You can deny the data - and you can fancy yourself a Nostrodamus, but that won't change the numbers on the board.

He still leads in every meaningful metric and has since the balloting started. That won't change.

Sorry.

8

[ConcernedAmerican]

Who's delusional?

Who cares about polls? Let's talk actual voting results. Obama has an insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, popular votes and states won.

The only thing you Hillary supporters have left is trying to count the votes in a state where Obama wasn't even on the ballot. Yet you still claim to be in the race.

Now that's delusional.

[Hillbug]

And what makes you say that?

The fact that he lost the PA primary?

Well, here's a fact: he may have lost there, but he's leading there against McCain. And he's leading in a lot of those "big states" that Hillary's won in the primaries. But it doesn't stop there. He, essentially, puts a number of states into play. Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Washington....as well as others. Hillary loses pretty badly up against McCain in those states.

To be honest though, Hillary can beat McCain too. Both Dems can. Hillary fans seem to enjoy going around shouting about how Obama can't win in the general, and only Hillary can...unfortunately, the facts disagree with you.

[MalloMel]

Hillary is a cheater.

[ascottcard]

what i love about clinton's newest fuzzy math (are we going to start counting the syllables in the states names she won next?) is she gives obame zero (that's 0) votes in michigan. hmmm, now that's a cogent argument.. so it does not matter how many times her chattering repeat-a-surrogates mouth this particular false argument it still will not make it true (although they get lots of points for paying attention to bush tactics in the last eight years).

[katefranklin]

Did Clinton not know the rules before the primary? If she was so opposed to using the delegate count as the deciding metric, then maybe she should've spoken up then. If the popular vote counted then Al Gore would've been our president, and the last time I checked we got George W. If only the media could parse this continuous flow of drivel eminating from the Clinton campaign ...

[vsign]

My prediction is that the superdelegates will not stand up to Obama-math and will move over to Obama by the end of June.

The Republicans will continue their attack ads on Obama and his negatives will go up and the polls will change throughout the summer.

By the end of August and the convention, the party will be scared out of nominating Obama because of his negatives showing he will lose the General.

Like Bill Clinton says - the third ballot at the convention will likely nominate Hillary.

[personalpolitical]

Hillary lies lies lies. She isn't even close to overtaking Obama's popular vote lead:

http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/04/pennsylvania-results.html

[MoreCowBellNow]

In a race this close, the only math that matters is the math of the GE. According to the geeks that put these numbers up Clinton is a sure thing against McCain and Obama is a risk. 270 is a win.

Clinton 264 McCain 259 Ties 15
Clinton 284 McCain 244 Ties 10

The SDs and any possible disgruntled voters have to decide which they would rather have. A sure thing or a risk? It's not an unfair question. If you're willing to take the risk, support Obama, if you want a sure thing, support Clinton. It's really that easy.

Risk or Sure thing? Seriously, I want to know what YOU think. Please respond.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr24.html
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/Apr24.html

[MalloMel]

Hillary is a cheater.

[vsign]

Obama's coalition of voters are not going to be able to be logical or realistic when answering your question.

They are defiantly pretending they have "won" already or are ideologically bound to supporting only Obama. They do not think like Democrats. They likely would rather lose the General.

[MalloMel]

Hillary is a cheater.

[Nyland8]

This race is NOT close. It hasn't been close since the day after Super Tuesday. And concocting metrics that had nothing to do with what was agreed to just won't wash. One of the reasons that Obama has an insurmountable lead is exactly because the Democratic electorate KNOWS that the biggest risk is having Rodham run in the GE. She is a walking, talking GOTV poster girl for the GOP, and she's sure to cost us, not only risking the White House, but other important races as well.

8

[Nader2008]

When Hillary takes over the popular vote after Indiana, West Virginia and Kentucky give her wide margins of victories what will the Obama people say. Hillary will say: "I am the people's choice for the Democratic Party" This will give the OK for the SuperDelegates to move for her. This last SuperDelegates are waiting for a reason. They know Obama CANT WIN!!

[Nyland8]

Stop embarrassing yourself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shawn-christensen/dont-be-fooled-obama-is-a_b_96118.html

If Obama sat out the rest of the race, he'd be hard to beat in the popular votes. Two states that he's already won haven't even release their popular vote numbers.

8

[Nader2008]

Obama to MI and FL: "DROP DEAD!!!" Why oh why Obama didn't you let MI or FL vote back in early March? Are you a leader that we should follow or were you hiding under the bedcovers because YOU CANT WIN THE BIG STATES.

[Nyland8]

Texas and Illinois ARE "big States" - and the assertion that he can't win others against Madman McCain is just horseshit on it's face. There's no evidence of that whatsoever.

The man who has led this campaign in every meaningful metric since the day it began is not hiding under the covers -

- he's out in front, where he's been since day one.

8

[Nader2008]

How did Obama win the popular vote in Texas? Oh yeah Math By Obama People. No you won the caucus portion. Do we have any caucuses in November? NO!! Illinois is his own state. Please, I doubt he will win NY in November since Giuliani will campaign hard to deliver for McCain. He hold a slim lead over McCain in NY, while Hillary has commanding lead in NY. Just be happy he won the nomination for your party, but you guys loose again in November.

Where was Obama's leadership on FL and MI, Sounds like he couldnt deliver like FEMA?

Dissed Hillary supporters: Nader will be on ballot in all 50 states. Maybe Obama will take his name off the ballot in MI again?

[gurukalehuru]

a. Caucuses count. Those are the rules and, in a sense, they are extremely democratic. I like the idea that people talk about things and vote openly. It's a town hall meeting style of democracy.
b. Clinton is from Illinois, too.
c. If you're voting for Nader anyway, your interest in this subject is a bit out of place. Could you, by any chance, be a troll?

[Nyland8]

Continued:

It has been that very recurring marginalization that has turned this year's primary season into the mess that it is. Now Rodhamites who don"t even live in FL or MI are screaming that voters there should have some effect on the nomination. Bullshit! If anything, by breaking party rules and demanding to be first, they should have NO say in the selection process. In other words, just as much say as California, and so many other States throughout history, typically had WHEN THEY PLAYED BY THE RULES!

Otherwise the party will be encouraging its worst outlaws. Can you imagine what the next primary season will look like in four years if they seat anyone from MI & FL, or worse, count popular votes??? States will start holding their primaries a year before, and then demand they not be "disenfranchised" at the convention.

Where is it written that this year"s votes from MI & FL are somehow sacrosanct over and above what"s been happening in our politics for the last 200+ years? There are ALWAYS states that are effectively disenfranchised, and it"s not
Obama"s fault.

The last thing in the world we need is to reward States for breaking the rules. Dean should just tell the Rodhamites in FL & MI to pay attention in four years and make sure they don"t shoot themselves in the foot again.

Nobody should be awarded a Purple Heart for a self-inflicted wound, especially if they did it deliberately.

8

[Nyland8]

Your first post said NOTHING about popular votes. Regarding MI & FL ...

NOW HERE THIS:
Somebody, anybody, in the media should point out that the entire MI & FL issue is nonsense. The Rodhamites will continue to flog this dead horse in an effort to create dissent among Democrats, but the notion that it should be up to anyone other than those two states to correct their error is just so much horseshit. ¨The Democratic Party owes them no such consideration.

In my lifetime, there has NEVER been a primary season that didn't involve a great deal of disenfranchisement. THAT"S WHAT THIS ENTIRE CIRCUS HAS BEEN ABOUT!!! Marginalization of voters has been the rule, not the exception.

The Governator of Khalifornia was tired of the fact that the single most populated State in the Union was effectively disenfranchised every four years, because by the time his primary was run, all the candidates had already dropped out with one exception. So the good voters of Khalifornia had an effective choice of voting for someone picked by less populated States, or voting for someone who'd already thrown in the towel. In other words, no choice at all.

* Total * Effective * Disenfranchisement *

The State with 370 delegates was asked to rubber-stamp the person who had already been picked for them.¨

TBC

8

[rixxk]

Not to spoil the fun, but the 2008 Democratic nominee for President is Senator Barack Obama. After the May 6 primaries, it will be Senator Barack Obama, after June 2 it will be Senator Barack Obama and after the Democratic Convention it will be Senator Barack Obama.

I know a dead parrot when I see one, and anyone who disagrees needs to think about opening a Pet Shop.

[vsign]

Get used to saying President McCain.

[skip4Obama]

The only reliable predictation of future behavior is past behavior. Studies have proven this over and over. I ask you then who thinks that Hillary's behavior on this campaign translates to what type of behavior for her as President.....deception, dishonesty, race card, distortions, "I'll out Rove them", financial management, contradictions, "BILL, Mr. Slick Willy", etc....add your own list of behaviors and that is what you'll get....

[ReportThis]

CLINTON: "I've won more votes than anyone." THE TRUTH: No you haven't.
CLINTON: "I landed under sniper-fire in Bosnia." THE TRUTH: No you didn't.;
CLINTON: "The allegations against my husband are the product of a Right Wing conspiracy,."
THE TRUTH: He banged the intern.
CLINTON: "I opposed NAFTA from the beginning." THE TRUTH: No you didn't.
CLINTON: "I would not have chosen [Reverend Wright] as my pastor."
THE TRUTH: You and Bill invited Reverend Wright to the White House after Bill admitted he banged the intern.
CLINTON: "My campaign raised $10 million in 24 hours." THE TRUTH: No it didn't.
CLINTON: "Because of my 8 years in the White House, I'm the most qualified candidate."
THE TRUTH: The pastry chef spent 8 years in the White House, too.
CLINTON: "I don't have an overbite or a weight problem." THE TRUTH: Yes you do.

[Nader2008]

CLINTON: " Obama CANT WIN" THE TRUTH: FL,TX,MI, CA, NY, NJ, PA, OH