• Gay BlogAds

  • Gay News Watch

  • Chris Tweets

  • « McCain's hateful and intolerant pastor | Main | Bill to gays: Who loves you baby? »

    March 25, 2008

    Debunking the new Clinton metric

    Posted by: Chris

    Setting aside the obvious desperation of the Clinton campaign's search for some measure of primary support she can use to poach superdelegates (and now even pledged delegates), their latest metric just doesn't add up.

    Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, who is backing Hillary Clinton, argued over the weekend that we ought to be looking not at pledged delegates or superdelegates or number of states won or popular vote or electability or even national polls -- since all of those favor Barack Obama -- but at the electoral votes available in the general election from the states she has won.

    The New York Times and other MSM applied the Bayh approach and show Clinton in the lead:

    So far, Mrs. Clinton has won states with a total of 219 Electoral College votes, not counting Florida and Michigan, while Mr. Obama has won states with a total of 202 electoral votes.

    The math problem with that conclusion is that it counts two states -- Nevada and Texas -- where Obama actually won more delegates, even though Clinton won more votes. Accounting for those two states, the electoral total would be:

    • Obama: 241
    • Clinton: 180

    So for Bayh's metric to work for Clinton, the argument would have to go something like this: Democrats ought to nominate the candidate who wins states representing the most electoral votes, with "wins" referring to the popular vote in each state, without regard to whether the state held caucuses (Nevada) or a mixed primary-caucus contest (Texas).

    It does have the elegant logic so common in self-serving Clintonian logic.



    TrackBack URL for this entry:


    1. Tim C on Mar 26, 2008 1:39:56 PM:

      The Clintons' camp's basic logic in their electorial vote scheme is that Obama cannot win in the general election the states that went to Hillary in the primaries, thus all those electorial votes would go to McCain. Strange logic: to assume that those who voted for Hillary in the primaries would not vote for Obama in the general election if he is the Democratic nominee.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    © Citizen Crain - All Rights Reserved | Design by E.Webscapes Design Studio | Powered by: TypePad