Memo to the Superdelegates: If You Want to Win

Howard Dean has announced that it's okay for you to cast your votes for the candidate you think most likely to beat the Republicans. In light of that announcement take a look below:

Hillary Clinton has won the primaries in 15 states with 240 electoral votes. Barack Obama has won primaries/caucuses in 26 states and the District of Columbia with a total of 201 electoral votes. But nobody notices.

For weeks now, we've heard that Obama has a hundred and fifty more convention delegates than Hillary does, or that he's gotten a half million more popular votes than she has, and therefore the superdelegates must, therefore, cast their votes for him at the convention.

I suggest that superdelegates consider the number of electoral votes cast by the states each candidate has won. When it comes to the general election, electoral votes are the only ones that count, and, as I write this, Hillary is 20% ahead in that critical category.

Delegates from Michigan and Florida (who between them have 44 electoral votes) have yet to be seated at the convention, but Hillary won the primaries in both states. If Hillary's victories in those states were counted she would already have won primaries in states with a majority of the Electoral College -- 288 votes out of a total of 537. Fifty-two more electors will come from seven states with upcoming primaries, and Hillary will almost certainly pick up a state or two there.

Barack Obama won primaries in a half dozen states (Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Alaska, Nebraska and Utah) with about 40 electoral votes that haven't gone Democratic in 20 years. Georgia is another a tough state for Obama. In the general election, Hillary's not going to carry Arizona, McCain's home state, and Texas is going to be very tough, but she's got a chance in every other state on her list.

So, if I were a Democratic superdelegate and I wanted to win the presidency next November, I'd take a hard look at the electoral college before I made any decisions.

Comments

[GaiasChild]

You are unfortunately right. Which means we wind up with a dirty campaign and crazy president or an unpredictable warmonger with no center. Didn't we just do that already?

[KarenKaren]

With Clinton on the ticket, Democrats LOSE Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington according to Rasmussen's most recent State by State snapshot poll. That's five states Democrats are favored to win and get to KEEP simply by having Obama head the ticket.

These poll results persist even with the Wright controversy. In nearly all 29 states polled, Democrat numbers go DOWN when Clinton heads the ticket against McCain in the states Democrats are expected to win (California, Connecticut, Maine, Minnesota, etc.). The exception is Massachusetts in which Clinton leads over Obama, but both Democrats outperform McCain. The extraordinary flips from Democrat to Republican with Clinton on the ticket is what the Super Delegates must be looking at. As early as Iowa, and despite the aura of inevitability, people said Clinton was too polarizing. These polls bear that out.

So, while Super Delegates are taking a hard look at the Electoral College map, they're not seeing the benefit of a Clinton vs. McCain ticket. They know Obama will carry California and New York, though Clinton won those primaries. They're also taking a hard look at Obama's fundraising and voter registration prowess. And, remember, this is the year that 70% of Americans think the nation is on the wrong track and have a preference of change over experience.

Link to Rasmussen poll:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_presidential_race_state_by_state_snapshot

[kdublya]

Super Delegates aren't Super Heroes.

After June 3rd, when regular voting is finished, there is an immunity argument rollover,

"The people have chosen a clear winner, I choose ______."

Otherwise, if the race is too close to call,

"For the sake of the party, I must choose. Therefore, ______."

Either, Super Delegates are human.
If $hit hits the fan in November, the electorate will not be satisfied blaming themselves.

Right now, immunity is more valuable than moving goal posts.

[dawlishgal]

Hillary has won those states that either won't vote for a Democrat no matter what or will vote for any Democrat. Why should it matter who won TEXAS, for gawdssakes, or New York? Obama has won the swing states that will matter,and has brought millions of young and Independents voters. HC, with her slash and burn campaign, is hell bent on turning these people off of Obama, but they will NOT turn to her, rather revert to their previous lethargy or previous political affiliations. The partly leaders are certainly aware of that respect of her destructive behavior.

The "logic" of the creepy partisan who wrote this "letter" is just more bullcrap like the Lieberman "logic " in which he manages to convince people he is a Democrat because he votes with them a majority of the time. Yeah, he votes with them when his vote isn't going to matter....­whoever wins and loses will do it no matter how he votes, so he votes with the Democrats just so he can say he voted with the Democrats Xpercent of the time. But when his vote matters ( rarely true ) you can count on Joementum to vote with Republicans.

GAWD, I hope that some Obama spokesperson is explaining this to the superdelegates. And also that delegates are reminded that if total votes are what count, then each vote from caucus states ought to count MORE THAN ONE, or these states are disenfranc­hised..

[Doofus]

Oversimplifying some (& that's often what's called for), Demos will do better
than Repos in most large states, Repos will do better than Demos in most
small states, regardless of who the candidates finally are. The troublesome
thing will be that the smaller states are more numerous & each has a slight
electoral vote advantage - no matter how small (in terms of population), each
has AT LEAST 3 electoral votes. So... yet again... the popular vote, because of
the large states, may go one way, and the electoral vote, because of the small
states, may go the other.

[Doofus]

'Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows Democrats leading in states with 200 Electoral Votes. The GOP has the advantage in states with 189. States with 111 Votes are “leaners,” and states with 38 Votes are Toss-Ups

When “leaners” are added, the Democrats lead 260 to 240.

A total of 270 Electoral Votes are needed to win the White House. ...

Until the Democratic nominee is determined, the polling data used for each state will be based upon an average of the results for Barack Obama vs. John McCain and Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain.' ...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update

[davidly]

The problem with this logic is the same as the logic you deride: Neither were running against McCain, and the crossovers screwed up any possible accurate analysis of the situation as it will be.

If voters--including super delegates--would just vote for who they think is best for the job, we'd be a lot better off. The electability issue is a red herring propagated from the beginning of every election by the corporate-owned press to maintain control of every other issue.

[tosca2008]

Mayhill Fowler, you need to come clean, you caused a whole lot of trouble for Obama and it's disgraceful. How dare you lie about supporting Obama, you support Hillary and she probably sent you out on your little "go spy on Obama and twist what he says tour". You should be ashamed of yourself, why don't you report the truth about the Clintons? Hillary Clinton is lying about alot more that Bosnia, she's also lying about attending church and learning to shoot a gun when she was little...y­ou didn't check that out did you? Check it out now go to http://www.againsthillary.com/hillary-pictures/ and scroll down a bit and you'll see the video clip, click on play and enjoy all courtesy of John McCain, he paid for it and I'm sure he has many more to come. How dare you rob us young people of a candidate who really does care, and who wants to fix the country. I hope you know that you may have condemned the entire country to another 4 years of the Bush-Clinton Dynasty where nothing will change, they will not give you Universal Health Care, if they wanted to do so, they had 8 years and did nothing. She's not going to do anything for the people, she's just a power monger, period!

[rpass1]

Hey that was not paid for by Jon McCain it was created by the gentlemen that runs www.jedreport.com which is a very fine blog page created and ran by an Obama supporter.

[dawlishgal]

I hope she is enjoying her 15 minutes of fame.

[likeicare]

Mr. S. --

I guess the fact that Hillary's name, alone, is radioactive to 55% of the electorate, in a general election, doesn't count.

How can ANYONE conjure a scenario where the Clintons win, with 75-90% of Republicans voting against them (in knee-jerk fashion), 90-95% of A-A's either boycotting the election entirely or voting for someone else, without the critical support of the anti-war wing of the party (Hillary's pretty much cut herself off from moveon.org), or the gay vote, which she's distanced herself from, and the youth vote, which Bill has dissed as being "easily swayed" and "naive?"

Looks like you're using the Clintons' "new math" to help them steal the nomination.

[runswithscissors]

This brings to mind the two possible nightmare scenarios of November. Obama continues to struggle in big states, and the small ones that supported him go back to McCain. Or Clinton basically replays the 2000 and 2004 election results and McCain squeaks by.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Ack.

It's not a question of in which states Clinton beats Obama in the primary -- let's not get hung up on MI and FL -- but in which states either beats McCain in the general!

And moreover, in which states, whether it is Clinton or Obama that determines Dems beating -- or losing to -- McCain. (Not quite the same as para above.)

www.electoral-vote.com

[AnAmericaninLondon]

What the columnist doesnt seem to realize or want to is all of the states Hillary has won will also be won by Obama in the Presidential election or the states Obama loses to McCain; Hillary would also have lost those states to McCain. In addition Obama will win some states in the general election in which Hillary would have lost had she been the nominee. The reason is Obama brings in the new independent voters or the newly excited voters, Democratic, independent and Republican, in far greater numbers than Hillary would.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Sounds good, but not so. Also, you must weight for electoral votes -- not simple a tally of states. Please examine the following:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/Apr29.html
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr29.html

Compare for states in which Clinton beats McCain, but Obama loses to McCain. And vice versa.

Last I made that comparison on Friday (maps since updated), there were eight such states.
Most notable: FLORIDA. Also, Ohio, Michigan, CO, IA, WI, NC.

By electoral math, it's Clinton over McCain. And McCain over Obama. Hands down.

Of course, this could all change five times by Thursday.

[rpass1]

If you really want to look at the areas people have won or lost look at the big cities, these areas are mostly populated with African Americans, who will feel they have been robbed and this election has been stolen from them, just imagine you will have Al Sharpton standing on his soapbox screaming about all the injustice and I am sure the cable news channels will have him on every night. THere will be drive to do a write in vote for Obama or just dont vote at all, and this will kill the rest of the Democratic party on all lower elections on the card. How can a democrat win without winning cities like Philadelphia, Detroit, Cleveland, Cinncinati, Houston, Dallas, Denver, Atlanta, Chicago, New Orleans, Baltimore, St Louis and more, and Obama won all these areas very easily (except Detroit but if they voted today he would probably hit 90%, Hillary barely won against nobody) and without them the Democrats have absolutely no chance and to make it worst if it is considered stolen from them and an injustice to the Black community they may just bite the bullet for a few years and instead on not voting may actually vote the opposite way.

It is alot easier to heal from a Clinton loss that was by the rules and how the American People voted, then an Obama loss that was overruled by a bunch of political people who's exsistence is in direct contrast with the term Democratic.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Compelling.

But please note, again, that it's all about the electoral college. NOT Reverend Al. (Check out the specific Hillary and Obama maps on linked site.)

Personally, I think the "my guy or the highway" threats, while real, are contemptible. And that goes for both Obamanistas AND Clintonistas.

Repeat after me: "I promise to support the nominee of my party."

What, you think McSAME will be better for the cities and African Americans than Hillary? Puleeze.

[drmavis]

I should have known not to waste my time reading this intellectually dishonest piece, given that your last "Blog" was entitled "Geraldine Ferraro Was Right"!

[SCG2]

"New Poll Weakens Clinton Supporters' Electoral College Argument"

A new poll in California shows more voters now have a positive view of Obama despite Clinton's Super Tuesday win in the state
By Justin Ewers
March 27, 2008

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/03/27/new-poll-weakens-clinton-supporters-electoral-college-argument.html

"Obama is Clear Frontrunner in Connecticut" (not a large delegate state granted, still post primary)
March 30, 2008 Angus Reid Global Monitor (Obama won CT now has a wider lead there)

Connecticut - U.S. Presidential Election

John McCain (R) 35% - 52% Barack Obama (D)
John McCain (R) 42% - 45% Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)

Source: Quinnipiac University Polling Institute
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,697 registered voters in Connecticut, conducted from Mar. 19 to Mar. 24, 2008. Margin of error is 2.4 per cent.

Link: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/30303/obama_is_clear_frontrunner_in_connecticut

Where he spends time and campaigns his numbers go up, the longer Hillary campaigns her numbers erode. Why?

If she is the strong candidate she claims, why the struggle to win her own party's nomination? Why does she routinely lose caucuses? Why is she behind in the number of contributors and money? She has the years of name reconition, and started with the most money.

If she's in trouble among her own party, what would lead you to believe she'd do better with Republicans or even independents?

[kmkm]

I agree with the Obama supporters here. You are off the mark on this one, Reese. As precinct chair for Obama in a rural community in Alaska, we had over 50% of our voters as newly registered voters and/or newly registered Democrats. And 77% for Obama. This is what is needed to reenergize the Democratic party in Alaska and across the nation. Alaska's superdelegates are going to miss the boat unless they endorse Sen. Obama enthusiastically and soon. We have other state and national races at stake as well as citizen initiatives. We need Sen. Obama at the helm.

Gov. Richardson was right. This is a once in a lifetime candidate. I'm heading over a thousand miles from Haines, Alaska, to Palmer, Alaska, to support Sen. Obama as delegate to Alaska state convention. My party loyalty depends upon Obama leading it in 2008! The Democratic party will unite behind Senator Obama.

There is a bigger picture here than old politics and the old style of calculating. Watch us!

[Citizenofreality]

Mr Schonfeld, Something you may have not considered in your analysis is the infrastructure of county Democratic parties. As the race stands now, many of our volunteers are Obama supporters. These are the people who organize the canvassing, man the phones, run the fundraisers for downticket races , make the coffee, and dump the trash. Some would probably vote for Clinton in the general election, but a good many would lose interest in helping out during the fall campaign. For the first time in years our county has people who are more than willing to help, much of this is due to the candidacy of Senator Obama. So should the scenario you describe take place, and the superdelegates take it upon themselves to annoint Senator Clinton, she will find herself with a disgruntled, disillusioned and disinterested volunteer force. I myself will probably vote for Clinton to keep my conscience clean, but after this primary season if she is chosen behind closed doors and against the will of the people I shall change my 32 year alliance with the Democratic party and tell them to go to hell!

[speciallady2003]

Puhlease, if I hear one more delusional comment about Hillary's wins in Florida and Michigan I will lose it. They don't count--end of story--Queen Hillary decreed that, prior to their voting, and now that her crown is tarnished she wants to lead the charge for every last vote. She never expected that the contest would last this long and that she would lose her throne. Now the "let them eat cake" queen is showing a passing interest in her subjects. And many of them are passing.

[Gould123]

How many times do you have to tell idiots like this that Fl/MI don't count? Gee whiz can't they stop being sstupid already? Man you just don't get it, do you! You have millions of more voters because Obama brought them into the Demacratic party, and they just won't stay or show up if he loses the nomination or it's stolen! Hillary's pissed of the black voters and she'll lose a lot of them now to! than you have the independent swing voters he's gotten in! If they could have voteed in PA, Hillarys 9% lead would have droped down around an embarrasing 4 to 5% lead! than those repub who jumped ship to vote for obama, who won't stay to vote for Hillary! They find Mccain more honest at least then Hillary, if they can't have the best in Obama. Your old enough Reese to know better than try to lie, and do spins on the American people! if you want to write articles, at least do it fair and balanced!

[tosca2008]

The Florida and Michigan thing is really annoying, Hillary supporters like Lanny Davis the very rude pain, that keeps talking about a mail-in ballot in Florida on t.v rubs most people the wrong way. Good morning Hillary supporters who keep harping about a stupid mail-in ballot; it's ILLEGAL IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, they ought to check the laws there. Therefore, Hillary Clinton and her supporters want her to win no matter what, even if it means breaking the law, and don't think for a second that Hillary and her supporters don't know that. Hillary is a lawyer and so is that whiner Lanny Davis; he's so annoying that I have to change the channel because of the idiotic things that come out of his mouth. sheeesh!

[Incredulous]

Hillary didn't win Michigan and Florida. There was no contest in Michigan and Florida. This bullshit that you and the other surrogates keep spinning just makes Hillary look like the lying, cheating, scheming, "more of the same" candidate she really is! It illustrates the absolute need for change, both within the Democratic party and in America. Everyone accepted that Michigan and Florida wouldn't count from the onset. Now Hillary's going to change the rules at the end of the game? I don't think so! You're a deluded old fool if you think people are just going to sit still and let Hillary steal this thing, in Florida of all places, where Bush stole it from Gore. She's already proven that she's nothing more than a Republican, and this illustrates it perfectly. If you want to reform the Democrat's primary process, to better reflect popular vote or electoral votes, more power to you. But to suggest that it's OK to rewrite the rules, and move the goal posts at this point in the game, is preposterous! Who do you think you are? You're willing to change the playing field in the final stretch, just to accommodate Hillary stealing this thing? How arrogant, to think you can subvert the democratic process, and just get away with it. Oh right! You're closet Republicans! Well, out of the closet now, because we all see you for the scheming elitists you really are.