Clinton's Strategy: the inevitable loss prolonged

There are only 2 contests left and 31 delegates up for grabs in the democratic primary saga. At this point, here are the running estimated total delegate counts:

		Obama	Clinton
Total(2,118 Needed to Win)		2070	1914
Super Delegates	823	331	290
Pledged Delegates *	3410	1739	1624

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

Note: even if Obama were to take 100% of the vote in Montana and South Dakota, he would still not have enough to completely lock down the nomination without more super delegates. This total also comes from the Michigan/Florida compromise, both of which allowed Clinton to take more delegates then Obama (despite the fact that Obama’s name was not on the ballot in Michigan).

Obama now only needs 48 more delegates while Clinton needs 204. Obama leads Clinton in both pledged and super delegates. But the last two primaries are not enough to give Obama the win, so the race will be decided by super delegates. Clinton, now far behind, must convince not only the remaining 202 unpledged super delegates, to vote for her, but she also needs to flip at least 2 who already pledged support for Obama. This looks like a tall tale to me, especially considering the large lead Obama has, but Clinton is not ready to give up.

In order to convince all these delegates to flip to her camp, she makes the argument that she is more electable than Obama in the general election and that she is actually leading in the popular vote. If these statements are true, it certainly would convince some super delegates that perhaps Clinton is a better choice after all. But are they true?

Clinton claims she will do better than Obama in the general election. But look at the most recent polls located at real clear politics. In a match up between McCain and Clinton, some show McCain ahead by 2 while others show Clinton ahead by 2-4. The average is a 2 point advantage to Clinton. In a match up between Obama and McCain, most polls show a tie, while one poll shows Obama winning. The average comes to +0.7 points to Obama. As any statistician will tell you, the data is all within the statistical margin for error and there is no way to predict the results of either scenario. Thus, Clinton and Obama are both in statistical ties with McCain.

Ok, so Clinton does not really have a significantly better chance at defeating McCain in the general election, at least that recent polls can tell. But remember, all those polls measure is popular vote, and the election is not decided on popular vote. A recent Rasmussen Reports poll comparing McCain to Obama: “On Monday, Democrats continue to lead in states with 200 Electoral Votes while 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.” (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update)

The general election race is also a toss up, but slightly favoring Obama. Unfortunately for Clinton, she really no longer has the argument that she can do better than Obama. While she makes good progress with the working middle class, Obama makes other states more competitive by reaching out to African Americans and young voters age 18-24.

Clintons other claim is that she is winning the popular vote in primary states. The “in primary states” is important because she is not counting states that hold caucuses. She is also counting the popular vote in Michigan where Obama’s name was not on the ballot. So sure, if she discounts 1/5 of the voting Americans and stack an entire state so that they must for her, then yes she has a popular vote advantage. But most maths would count caucus states, not count states like Michigan etc. Here is a good breakdown of how the popular vote really pans out (click to enlarge). (http://www.jedreport.com/2008/06/hillary-clinton.html)



So really, the claim Hillary is making about popular vote, is not only pointless, but it does not measure up to scrutiny. So Clinton is trying to convince the super delegates to vote for her because she would do better than Obama vs. McCain, and because she is winning the popular vote. Both of these statements are disputable or downright false.

Of course, Clinton could continue to fight for delegates all the way until the convention in August. But can she really win? Clinton now faces a unique problem, a no win scenario. Should she somehow manage to win all the remaining super delegates and somehow get the Democratic nomination, the entire deal would feel like something concocted in a smoke filled room. There would be allegations of corruption from both democrats and republicans and Clinton would lose a large number of democratic votes this November.

In reality, Clinton has no chance of becoming president because even if she can get the nomination, it would only be under circumstances that would prohibit her from being competitive in the general election. She is doomed to failure and does not appear to know it. Sorry Hillary, you were a strong candidate and set a record for the number of people voting for you in a primary (defeated only by Obama). It is really exciting to see such an intense match up of primary candidates, but it’s over now. It’s time to bow out, thank your supporters and move on.