Clinton's New Strategy: Focus on Uncommitted Delegates and Build Blue-Collar Momentum

Hillary Clinton's path to the nomination has been growing increasingly difficult since she fell behind in the fight for delegates in the latter half of February. Ever since the Potomac primary, she has been facing the question of what path she possibly sees to winning the nod. And the answer is rather clear, and has been so for a while. In fact, the whole situation is much more simple than what many people think at this point.

It has been pretty much settled that Obama will win the battle for pledged delegates. Campaign Diaries' latest count gives him a 162 delegate lead. Looking at the upcoming batch of states and trying to figure out the allocation of upcoming delegates shows that number is too high. "Bonncaruso's Politics Blog" (to which Mark linked this morning in another one of my posts) runs through a number of different scenarios and shows that Clinton would need to win every upcoming primary with 65% of the vote. For that to happen would require Obama to suffer a collapse of truly epic (and unimaginable) proportion.

(Note that this assumes that no delegates from Florida and Michigan will be seated according to the January votes, and the totals Clinton would need in the upcoming primaries would obviously go down if she managed to get an edge out of those two states. But we will cross that bridge when we get to it.)

But it has been a while that we know that Clinton is no longer relying on surpassing Obama among pledged delegates. Her strategy is now to amass as much momentum as possible between April 22nd and June 3rd by winning almost all the contests by as massive margins as she can muster and to then use that momentum to convince uncommitted superdelegates to turn to her (which would probably require Obama to be considerably weakened in general election polls by the summer).

However likely you judge such a scenario to be, it is through this frame that you have to consider the results of the upcoming contests and of any poll that is released until then. Some claim that even the bestest of best scenarios she could envision would leave Clinton short. That is true of the fight for pledged delegates. But is it true of the race overall?

This question can be subdivided into 3 problems:

* Will upcoming results give Clinton the momentum she needs?
* Will they allow Clinton to win the popular vote?
* Will they allow her to argue that Obama has fundamental weaknesses in the general election?

Momentum: This basically means that Clinton needs to get out of June 3rd looking like a winner. Of the 11 upcoming contests, she can perhaps afford to lose Oregon and North Carolina -- but both losses would have to be narrow (I will come back to Oregon, by the way, because I am not certain that it is as Obama country as people assume). And in the states in which she is favored, she needs really big wins.

Popular vote: Superdelegates are very unlikely to desert the pledged delegate leader as it is, they would be even more reluctant if Obama also clinched the popular vote. And this is one metric in which Clinton can hope to reverse the lead, as Obama is narrowly ahead right now. Depending on if and how Florida and Michigan are counted, of course, yields very different results. But Michael Barone from US News plays with the numbers and sees a route for Clinton to take the lead here even without counting FL and MI. It would require a very favorable scenario for Clinton, sure, but the whole question we are asking is whether Hillary has a way to the nomination even with great results.

To those who say that the popular vote doesn't matter, Clinton has a point in answering that neither does the pledged delegate total in deciding what superdelegates should do. If the argument is that superdelegates should respect the will of the voters, who is to say whether the will of the voters is best represented by the popular vote or by the pledged delegate count?

Arguing for Obama's weaknesses: Clinton needs to convince superdelegates that Obama would not need voters that Democrats absolutely need in the general election. So she will have to hope that she continues to post very strong numbers in the Appalachians, that she remains solid among blue-collar voters. On the other hand, Obama can close Clinton's door by posting stronger-than-expected numbers among white voters in North Carolina or among blue-collar voters in Indiana. He has done so in the past (Virginia, Wisconsin) and doing it again in May would make convincing superdelegates that much harder for Clinton.

But even if Clinton satisfies all these conditions she would still be the underdog (!), as every sign points to the fact that uncommitted superdelegates have little intention or desire to vote against the pledged delegates leader. Though it would certainly mean that we would have to prepare for an epic convention fight.

Comments

[Montanamotor]

* Will upcoming results give Clinton the momentum she needs?
How in God's name, while she is going to lose Pennsylvania AND North Carolina, should THIS be going to happen?

* Will they allow Clinton to win the popular vote?
See above.

* Will they allow her to argue that Obama has fundamental weaknesses in the general election?
Bill will - at home, in the Clinton's living room. But else? Who would listen to a loser...? And, as soon as Hillary will finally have dropped out of the racefor nomination, Obama's polling numbers compared to McCain will soar - because 75 percent of those, who still support Hillary, will rally to support Obama, now. All the Neck-and-neck-fuss you hear, actually, is nothing but meddling with statistics. But we are very rapidly approaching the point, where this meddling will stop, because everything lines upt to the good old: "Him or me!" - that's Barack Obama, of course! McCain will be no serious opponent, but a footnote of Barack Obama's win. McCain is expendable for the Republicans - and the Rep-bigwigs, as well as McCain himself, know this.

Obama's ONLY only fundamental weakness actually is, that he still has to struggle with a stubborn, reluctant Hillary, instead of being able to unite the DNC behind him, secure his troops for the general campaign and take on McCain head-on. BUT: "We shall overcome some day-hay-ha­y-hay-hay.­..!"

[Nancyann]

It is a beautiful thing to see the Clintons disassembling. I hope they keep it up and are in forced retirement NOW!!!!!!

[mojomagic]

part 2

The super-delegates have a big decision to make this year....ho­w do they interpret these things and evaluate who would be the best candidate; who is electable. It isn't quite that obvious as many might think. They will have to ask questions of themselves, if they fulfill their purpose for having been created in the first place. How much has the Republican party, who were ready to concede this year as a year for the Democrats.­......with the economy and the war, surely a Democrat, no matter who it was would be a shoe in........­How much has the Republican party manipulated our primary process? And have they done so to increase the possibility of winning the presidency for the Republicans? We know that corporate media has been bashing the Clintons..­...18% in a poll do not want Bill Clinton back in the WH, but does that mean 82% do? Its akk in the numbers and how they are reported. Experience is a big problem for Obama, and up against the experienced John McCain will that be a fatal flaw? Michigan and Florida are still an elephant in the room, and will they feel disenfranchised if their vote aren't counted in the selection process of our candidate.
Nothing is easy, nothing is a sure thing, and one has to wonder if their a Republican strategy behind the curtain pulling the strings?

[mamamay]

AGE does not quantify experience. This is a myth. From experience, we as educators have learned that one being around a work place,or so called work place for an enormous amount of time, DOES not warrant one as experienced. To know a JOB's task efforts by consistant trainng is required to carry out the tasks of a specific job, ie. D OD. One can not be called a worker for the DOD in any capacity, ;not even by association, because One rides the elevator timely and daily with personnel from that Dept. Obama has over 20 yrs of actual work experience as leading, organizing, managing,etc which is more actual experience than HRC or JMcC. Why are folks getting off with assuming that because both are older and was introduced to the lifestyle not the arena of the work place, that they have more experience than Obama? This is where America is misled. There are folks much younger than Obama who have even more of, but yet a DIFFERENT type of experience than Obama.

[mojomagic]

Part 3

The other factors they must consider are threats of AA riots in the streets if they perceive Obama had the nomination "stolen" and threats that the AAs wiil stay home on election day.. On the other side of that coin is the perception by many Hillary supporters that Obama has run a race baiting "dirty" campaign and the media has bashed her and Bill. Some will not vote for Obama because of these perceptions. I hope the Democrats don't do something to insure defeat and four more years of Bush policies. If we blow this election, I guess we deserve it, but what a huge price to pay.

[monique]

No, the super-delegates do not need to consider the "threats of AA riots in the streets" no more than the U.S. needs to negotiate with terrorists to get kidnap victims returned safely.

I was sickened when George Bush was unfairly and unjustly handed the presidency by the Supreme Court, but I wept inside my house, and the event strengthened my resolve to stand for democracy and the little guy, and strengthened my personal opposition against the republicans. I did not take to the streets and commit acts of violence.

Whatever ultimately happens in this race, there will be disappointment by many. Tears, anger, and outrage are all acceptable and understandable reactions. But violence is not. And super-delegates should not, for a minute, let that threat influence their decision.

[mamamay]

We as Americans are just as guilty of this lie, if we do not stand up for America and Obama and denounce the incredible slurs put on Obama from the Hil supporters. We need to stop supporting the many lies and bashing used to play dirty politics. This is not good. Hil and Bil brought on all of their own struggles that shouldnt have been brought to the American people who voted them in office the last time.

[Montanamotor]

Don't waste time to listen to his delusions. He is sowing dissent. A losing army's last resort: Divide and conquer. Not this time, pal. Not this time.

[mojomagic]

Part one

Big time staunch Republicans have been singing the praises of Obama for months; they include people like Peggy Noonan, Bill Kristol and Frank Luntz, the big R. wordsmith that turned the R. anti-abortion group into a pro-life group, (like Obama says "words matter)" and they certainly have been effective in this case. If you are pro-choice, are you anti-life That is what Frank Luntz' pro-life implies. Does any Democrat really think that the Republicans want us to nominate a "super nominee" who will put a Democrat in the WH in 2008? Then there is the question of open primaries in RED states? The Repugs really didn't have much reason to vote in the primaries this year......­...poor choice of candidates, and then after Florida Mc Cain was pretty much the nominee. We have had record turn out this year, but considering the conditions in the country and people who hate the war, wouldn't Democrats have a big interest in voting this year. What about the youth turn out? I can see the Democrats salivating about drawing all these new voters into the Democratic voting pool, but how will it play out in the general election? Dennis Miller is a Republican who supports Bushes war. Is he going to tell the truth about our candidates?

[Janelynne]

I agree with you. mojo. Barry Obama is getting the wind beneath his wings from the GOP. He is most favored by the corporate interests in mainstream media, and I think they are banking on his being a one term wonder. They are looking to replace him handily in 4 years.

Obama has zero experience in the financial problems this country is facing. He speaks about unity and bringing people together. Does he understand that while everyone would like this scenario, this country and the global interests run on money and not on togetherness? Obama does not have the experience or knowledge to get change made. Obama is being selected because the seats of power who understand that he can "play" president while they continue to run the show.

[court99]

Let's not knock it before we try it. A democratic country is run by the will (or lack thereof) of the people. Unity and togetherness can change things if we are active. Not too long ago there was legislation in Congress for immigration reform. Republicans considered this to be the wrong thing to do and the PEOPLE called their leaders. Phones were ringing off the hook and networks were jammed because the PEOPLE spoke up and in the end, the bill did not pass. I think we need to take a page from that situation. You want change, do something, call someone, send a letter. If all the people did that (unity), then change would come, or the people in office would get voted out. What politication is going to publicly support a corporation when their constituents are so vocally against it and not risk losing their jobs? Unity and Action. Let's give it a shot. So far, we know that by being passive corporate dollars have taken over..."ho­w's that working for ya?"

[mamamay]

Get your facts straight. Rep would not support Obama if they thought for one minute, as a Blk man, that he had little or no experience. Read up on it. Folks arent stupid or naive anymore. We believe Obama has more experience than either JMcC, or HRC. because we KNOW it.
Rep happen to recognize a qualified leader in Obama unlike America has had in decades. Vote Obama and follow the facts.

[court99]

Let's get real, most states never get a say in who the presidential nominee. I am in TX and it is usually decided by the time it gets here, so I feel lucky. I laugh when people say that Americans that don't get to vote in the primaries are disenfranchised. Let's be honest, the only people that are disenfranchised are the ones in the later states that wanted to vote for Edwards, or the Republicans that wanted to vote for Huckabee or Romney because they truly don't get a vote. At this point, since neither Clinton nor Obama can hit the magic number, they are trying to pad their numbers so whoever has the highest number of delegates wins. All I want is honesty and consistency. In the past, the nominee was decided based upon the number of delegates (pledged, super, whatever). If the super delegates decide to vote based on popular numbers and weigh that over pledged delegate numbers (which hasn't been done in the past that I am aware of), then I would consider the winner illegitimate because we modified the rules so that this person could win. This process, as silly as it is, has been used for years and should not be changed or adjusted to meet the needs of one candidate in the middle of the process. If you want to change it and make the popular vote the driver, then do that after the primary is over.

[PhoebeFay]

Wait. You're saying Hillary's strategy is to go out and get lots of votes and win a bunch of elections?

Wow. If only she'd thought of this radical idea earlier!

[MJ20]

What you are not explaining in this article is how exactly is HRC going to do all of what you are saying? She has NO room for error anymore. Obama has way more money. HRC does not have the money for the ground or media games that will be necessary in the remaining contests. Also, he is seriously closing the poll lead in PA. If HRC loses or does not win BIG in PA, this is all moot as there will be a stampede of superdelegates to Obama. Actually that is more likely than your scenario.

As to McCain, I would not be worried about the current Democratic infighting. With our 2 second attention span, it will be like all of this never happened 2 months from now. At that time, the Dems will turn their full attention and money advantages to McCain the the 'pubs. Unlike previous years, we will not be coming to a gunfight with a popgun, but we will be bringing a howitzer. If he's smart, he'll be getting ready for that onslaught and doing what ever he can to increase his poll numbers while he has the chance. Dude, don't believe the hype from your buddies in the mainstream press and rest on your laurels. Were coming for you. Were coming.

[mojomagic]

Hillary still has an ace in the hole......­it is called Michigan and Florida. Somehow they are going to have to settle that and not disenfranchise the voters, who voted for HIllary.

[mamamay]

We are watching Mi and Fla too. It is not fair, nor a wise ace in the hole for HRC to try to disenfranchise these states by blaming obama for the Mixup. Delegates must be divided evenly between Obama and HRC. then, both states seated. These states should follow the rule as the DNC, HD,et al said must happen since that date was changed. We need to stop this drama and these dirty negative politics NOW.

[desertson]

As a still uncommitted Democrat from a very red state, it's important to set the record straight about the Rev. Wright. The Clinton campaign DID NOT bring up the issue initially. However, it must also be said that this will be used very effectively by the Swift Yacht Whores for Bush. Believe me. We haven't even heard the first volleys of this attack. It will be a very big issue in the GE and it will be very effective with right-leaning independents as well as working class Democrats.

Everybody feels uncomfortable around the the guy (or gal) who has the radical, anti-American, hate-spewing "friend", even if they like the guy or gal personally. This is especially true of working-class and lower middle class people, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.

We need to be very careful about fooling ourselves into thinking Obama has talked his way past this issue. I can hear the Repugnant smear-and-fear machine sharpening their knives and drooling at the prospect.

[Dalpine]

I think Wright is being used more by the Clinton campaign and Clinton supporters than would be by McCain. Dennis Miller said last night that most people understand the grandstanding of preachers to make a point . The Clinton swiftboat machine is using Wright as leverage but the Republicans have so much on Hillary they are hoping she can get Obama out of the way as Barak is the far bigger threat in the GE.

[mojomagic]

Part two
The super-delegates have a big decision to make this year....ho­w do they interpret these things and evaluate who would be the best candidate; who is electable. It isn't quite that obvious as many might think. They will have to ask questions of themselves, if they fulfill their purpose for having been created in the first place. How much has the Republican party, who were ready to concede this year as a year for the Democrats.­......with the economy and the war, surely a Democrat, no matter who it was would be a shoe in........­How much has the Republican party manipulated our primary process? And have they done so to increase the possibility of winning the presidency for the Republicans? We know that corporate media has been bashing the Clintons..­...18% in a poll do not want Bill Clinton back in the WH, but does that mean 82% do? Its akk in the numbers and how they are reported. Experience is a big problem for Obama, and up against the experienced John McCain will that be a fatal flaw? Michigan and Florida are still an elephant in the room, and will they feel disenfranchised if their vote aren't counted in the selection process of our candidate.
Nothing is easy, nothing is a sure thing, and one has to wonder if their a Republican strategy behind the curtain pulling the strings?

[Truthortradition]

Obama's strategy is the same as it has been from the start.
1. Ensure the black vote by accusing the Clinton's of being racist.
2. Remain arrogant by refusing to disassociate with Rev. Wright, his pastor who spews hatred of Whites and America.
3. Continue talking about his White family members, but remain silent about his Muslim family members.
4. Laugh at the fact that the Democratic party is divided to the core because of all the hatred.
5. Claim to be a uniter. Ha.
6. Count on the fact that sexist men will never vote for a woman.

[Dalpine]

truthortradition, You are describing Hillary and the Clinton campaign! ( Clinton trying to swiftboat to further divide the party )

[CLYDEFOROBAMA63]

This reply is for all extremely uninformed people out there. Senator Obama's family in Africa including his grandmother changed to the Catholic religion a long time ago. His father did as well before his death. And one more thing for those of you who are hateful enough to believe the crap that is being spewed out by the Clinton's, the are racists pretending to not be. that's what got Mr. NAFTA elected in the first place. First black president, what a joke. How many black people lost jobs because of the Clintons? Maybe some of them are disillusioned and pissed off. Just for posterity, I was raised with a black father and a white mother, who was very for womens rights. I would vote for a woman if there was a qualified one running.

[mojomagic]

The black family income increased in the 90s. First black president was a title bestowed upon him by blacks, because he was sympathetic to their cause. Now I have heard black pundants on TV say that was an insult to black people....­..10-15 years too late. What have you done for me lately. It might be interesting for Obama supporters to read her graduate degree thesis which said that affluent blacks, didn't help their people....­..they joined the white establishment to make money

[Dajo]

As a former Blue Collar Worker and Retiree, I was attracted to Hillary because of her life long committment to Working People, the Poor, Children and Seniors. I still love her and respect her for her lifelong committment.
I live in New York so I already voted but many of my neighbors to the South in PA are also Blue Collar just like me and the only thing that will turn them away fom Hillary is if she continues to snip at Obama rather than attack the real enemy of the Working Class, McCain .
IMO, the vast majority of the Working Class realize that both Hillary and Obama are better than any republican. We also realize that it does our cause no good to be bad mouthing a fine young candidate like Obama. Therefore I suggest that all my fellow Blue Collar neighbors in PA send that message to Hillary, LOUD and CLEAR...

[seakiev]

I wonder if any of the Blue Collar votes she's going after know of Hillary's siding with Wal-Mart against the unions when she was on their board?

Doesn't sound like she's much of a friend of the Blue Collar voter or Unions.

[irishgawdess]

She's going after the blue-collar workers because she knows she can manipulate them and reinforce their false beliefs that Obama is a Muslim. Just look at what she did in Ohio... "As far as I know..." What bullshit that was! It just reinforced the misinformation many Ohioans already had, and she did nothing to change their minds.


Just like BushCo pandered to the evangelicals to get their votes and once in office dropped 'em like hot potatos, so will Hillary pander to her blue-collar workers and forget all about them once she's in office.


Shame on you Hillary.

[xzano]

Hillary is doing & has been doing everything she needs to get elected, so is Obama. Obama backed by Soros, Brzezinski, Rohjatyn, Rudman, & don't forget his economics Goolesby a Skull & Bones alumni. Is everyone on the H.Post for Obama ? The guy is an empty suit & can be molded into what ever the big boys would like. I love hearing Senators say that there kid swayed them to vote for Obama. Some Mother said it best, She said, I'm going to take my cubs by the scruff of the neck & vote for Hillary. What momma bear would let her cubs get into a bad situation. So, what is to be done? First, we need a real debate towards electing a President and Congress who will confront the crisis, the real issues surrounding the present meltdown of the derivatives bubble and what that means for the entire economy. The sub-prime mortgage collapse is the tip of the iceberg. If Obama prevails, Americans will find that like the SS Titanic, the USA does not carry enough life boats that are not already owned by the bankers. Congress must come to reassert its constitutionally mandated sovereignty, by taking steps to federalize the Federal Reserve, regulate the markets, save the essential banking interests of the people, and then create the money with which to create honest investment into our nation's infrastructure to thus promote the general welfare of all.

[irishgawdess]

Whoa! You veered off there. Get back on the road, xzano!
One democrat going for the other's jugular is just a nasty thing to watch. It's the 2008 version of the "Running Man," and it's painful to see her increasing desperation. Bill's too. How many non-pledged delegates will be alienated before this thing comes to an end? Some are already feeling battered and bruised.
The longer this primary season continues the longer Americans will have to get to know Obama. Hey, it worked for JFK.

[druidmary]

sounds like a plan to me. Blue collar workers are the base and Hillary won them in every state.

Sounds like a bunch of angry Obama fans. if you go to CNN/politics and look at each individual state. Time and time again, hillary won the blue collar parts of the state.

for a fact, RI---Obama won the elite seciton of Newport(that was it) Hillary won Providence, Pawtucket, cranston, warwick(all blue collar democrats.

In Massachusetts(Kerry , kenneddy land) Hillary won Springfield, Worcester, Pittsfield, Lowell all blue collar voters.

She has the blue collar..in New england Obama only got elite and college voters.

Look at all the maps of the states and you'll see Clinton wons most of the countes in most states.
Join us at:

http://hillaryisourchoice.com/simplemachinesforum/

[paixa3]

I cannot understand why ANY blue collar worker would support her??????

Billary is a corporatist if there EVER was one.

[live by the golden rule]

Have you read the specifics of the legislation she has introduced and programs she outlines? Have you read Paul Krugman's analysis in the NY Times? You have an opinion of her that comes from the blogosphere, not from her specific substantive policy proposals. The blue collar voters know better.

[rachaelisacancer]

Amen!

[jstock]

This primary season has worn out its welcome. Let's wrap this bad boy up, already!

[gevan]

Damn, we're giong to need a lot more celophane.