My Three Takes on Super Tuesday

1. A Relatively Small Percentage Difference in Delegates Either Way

2. Winner of Nomination May Come Down to Floor Fight Over Seating of Michigan and Florida Delegations

3. If You Want Both on One Ticket, Vote for Hillary

(Mr. Davis is a supporter of Senator Clinton's but is not a campaign official and the following is his own opinion, uninformed by any Clinton campaign information and totally his own and no one else's)

1. Margin of Difference Within 5% Either Way

This is because of two facts about the Democratic system that are not well appreciated by the average voter:

First, the results of election of delegates are all approximately proportionalized by the percentage of the popular vote won, i.e., the winner of a particular state is likely to get the percentage of delegates close to the actual proportion of the popular vote; and second, the total delegates to be divvied up are, on average, 80% of the total 2,064 delegates available in the 22 states. The other 20% are "Super Delegates" who can vote whichever they want up to the ballot-casting at the August Democratic Convention. So the total pool of delegates actually elected and subject to proportional allocation is probably about 1,600. Thus, even if one of the candidates has a margin of delegates over the other of 80 delegates, that will still be a margin of just 5%.

2. It May Come Down to Seating Florida and Michigan Delegations -- Or Not

If the rest of the Democratic primary and caucuses result in a relatively small differential in delegate count for the same reasons, and the Super Delegates split 50%-50% (which would mean a substantial advance for Senator Obama over the current totals of committed Super Delegates favoring Senator Clinton), then we could be looking at a bloody floor fight in Denver that could determine the nomination over whether to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates. Currently they are barred because they broke DNC rules on scheduling their primaries before February 5.

Such a seating-floor fight could be reminiscent over the divisive and self-destructive fight at the 1968 Democratic National Convention over the seating of the Chicago delegation; or a similar fight in 1964 over seating of the all-white, segregationist Mississippi delegation. Many believe the Democrats lost the election to Richard Nixon thanks in large part to the 1968 fight.

It is certainly possible that Senator Clinton's delegates will favor seating Florida and Michigan. If Senator Obama is slightly ahead, he will be on the horns of a difficult dilemma. If he opposes seating Florida and Michigan, he risks alienating voters in two important states he will need in the general election. But if he does not oppose seating them, they are likely to support Senator Clinton and could well give her the margin of victory.

Stand by. If you care about the Democratic Party's chances to win in November, pray that it doesn't come down to this kind of blood-letting fight at the convention.

3. If You Want the "Dream Ticket" Then Vote for Hillary

I admit my bias towards Senator Clinton because I believe so strongly she is more experienced and ready to be president than Senator Obama, although I am not bashful to say I hold Senator Obama in great respect and admire the way he has energized younger voters.

Watching both of them in last Friday night's debate debating the issues civilly and virtually embracing after the debate was over, I was proud to be a Democrat and to have two such outstanding candidates. However, the final question by Wolf Blitzer as to whether they would consider the other on the ticket begged the following reality. (To repeat: This is entirely my opinion, not reflecting anyone's view from the Clinton campaign or anyone connected to the campaign.)

That reality is that it is highly unlikely -- I would say virtually impossible -- for the ticket to be Obama-Clinton; but it is at least possible that it could be Clinton-Obama. I say this not because of any bias towards Senator Clinton. It is just a simple reality. Senator Clinton would not likely want to be Vice President -- she is now holding the U.S. Senate seat of the revered Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.; and she hardly would enthusiastically give up that Senate seat to go back to the White House, even as Vice President.

Moreover, it is very likely Senator Obama might feel having Senator Clinton as his Vice President would be very difficult since given her fame and political influence, it would create the appearance if not the reality of a co-presidency.

On the other hand, a Clinton-Obama ticket would fit into the aspirations and goals of many supporters of both candidates: Most Clinton supporters like Senator Obama and believe he could make a good president, but just not yet; and most Obama supporters would love to see him as president but might see the wisdom of waiting eight years so when he runs for president as Vice President, the issue of experience and political maturity will not be a factor.

So, if you like Senator Obama but want the dream ticket, vote for Senator Clinton! And be patient -- eight years from now, he could be President Obama.

Comments

[ProgressiveNotLiberal]

My three takes on Lanny Davis:

1)Clinton supporter, lets change the rules.
2)Clinton supporter, lets change the rules.
3)Clinton supporter, lets change the rules.

Hillary Clinton on any ticket would be a nightmare for the other person.

[celticjag]

Lanny, I guess that the crucial experience that Hillary has accrued over her extensive political career led her to vote for the following:
1. Authorization for Use of Military Force
Against Iraq in October 2002, without
reading the National Intelligent Estimate
and ignoring the U.N. findings from Hans
Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei.
2. The Kyl-Lieberman Iran resolution.
And vote against:
1. The Levin Amendment.
2. Senate Amendment #4882 that would ban the
use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
How many people have died, due to Hillary's experience?
And you must be kidding, suggesting that Obama be the Vice President candidate for Billary?

[patrice37]

That "dream ticket" stuff is a crock, and Lanny Davis knows it, and is pushing it at the Clintons' behest. Either that or he's dumb enough to actually think that Obama would like to move into the West Wing with Hill and Bill.

[myname]

Nice try Lanny!

Thanks but no thanks.

First, Obama was 'naive' then he raised 'false hopes', he was a 'talker not a doer', he was another 'Jesse Jackson won South Carolina too' now you guys are scared of his momentum and suggest he is a nice guy that makes a good VP. No way Jose. We did not work at a grass root level so hard just to let you guys make him VP after trying everything to destroy him.

America should not change its dream short. America needs to write a thank you note to the Clintons about the PAST(the 90's)and join the FUTURE(21st century) with Barack Obama.

[diamondprynzez]

Number 3 is a huge lie, and the logic behind the assertion, faulty.

A Clinton-Obama ticket is definitely NOT likely, even if Clinton goes on to win the nomination. Your post seems to wrongly convince people to vote for Hillary because voters would get both in the bargain. First of all, Obama would never take the job (how mighty presumptuous of you to say that the VP job is beneath Hillary, while Obama would go for it). It's no secret that the VP would have to take a back seat to Bill Clinton if Hillary is President, and I'm sure Obama won't take a bargain in which he's screwed over.

Did you ever contemplate the fact that perhaps, their is some personal animosity? A lot of Clinton's old advisors have jumped ship and have publicly backed Obama. There is bad blood there. You know those competent advisers that made Bill so successful? They are backing Obama and will never be able to serve under a Clinton administration again due to the Clinton's loyalty issues.

And you're damn right an Obama-Clinton ticket isn't likely either. Stop trying to con people into voting for Clinton by making them feel they'll get a 3 for 1 offer (Bill, Hillary, Obama).

[Tankan]

If a warmonger replace Bush, America will go down the tubes financially and as a world superpower!

As it stands, America is in grave danger of an attack more devestating than 9/11.
Terrorists may endeavour to give Bush a farewell legacy he will never forget!

The only one who can avert such an attack is Barack Obama, but if a warmonger sits in the big chair, all bets ara off!

[Lon]

These points are all probably true. It is hard to imagine Obama/Clinton, although I wouldn't count on Clinton/Obama either.

Super Tuesday is not likely to decide things. But a brokered convention could get ugly.

On the other hand, with Obama surging, even if the votes are split at Super Tuesday, he could still win enough of the remaining votes to avoid a brokered convention.

Still best to vote for the candidate you think will make the best president rather than trying to overthink things and vote strategically.

[Countess]

This is the tip-off on how the Clintons work. After having pledged with all the candidates not to campaign and not to count the delegates from Michigan and Florida She shows up in Florida on election night to applaud herself and begin the campaign to seat these delegates that everyone agreed would not be counted. The Clintons are without integrity.