At RCP, Jay Cost notes that the current media estimates of Hillary Clinton’s odds of winning the Democratic nomination are as imprecise as predicting who will win the World Series:
First, there are many reasonable ways to count the popular vote. None is obviously superior to the rest. Of course, it does not matter which we think is most appropriate. What matters is what the superdelegates think, as they will be the “tie-breakers” in the nomination battle.
They could approach it in many ways. They could take the basic vote count and choose to exclude or include Michigan, Florida, or caucus estimates. Assuming they want to include the Michigan results and the caucus estimates (for IA, ME, NV, and WA, whose state parties do not supply actual vote totals), they could account for them in different ways. With Michigan, they could (a) give Obama the “unaffiliated” vote, (b) not give Obama the “unaffiliated” vote, or (c) reallocate the vote based upon whom voters claimed in the exit poll they would support if all candidates had been on the ballot. If they include caucus estimates, they could (i) count the non-binding Washington primary instead of the caucus, or (ii) count the Washington state caucus instead of the primary.
This implies more than a dozen ways to count the votes. Different counts would achieve different goals – beyond favoring one candidate or another…
In order to underscore the point, Cost offers no predictions about the race between Clinton and Barack Obama as such, but supplies a sample spreadsheet showing a variety of counts that you can alter to suit your own estimates.
Cost has also discovered the wild card that is Puerto Rico, which has never voted in a presidential election of any kind. It no longer seems like it will swing the nomination to Clinton, but regular PW visitors have been aware of this unusual primary since February 11.
While Cost (and I agree) that Clinton remains a long shot, the spate of media stories reminding us of this should be read in light of the fact that Obama, like Clinton, stands little to no chance of winning the nomination based on elected delegates. Many superdelegates may wish for a deus ex machina, but it is not forthcoming.
Update: Insta-lanche!
I asked this question re Puerto Rico on Feb 7… and the opinion on HubDub.com is as follows: 39% say Obama, 61% of respondents say Clinton. BTW the site is frequented by lots of peeps under 26, so they are susceptible to the Obama Kool-Aid.
http://tinyurl.com/2x963b
[Edited to make URL tiny -K]
If this race winds up turning on some damfool thing in Florida, the resulting Dave Barry column is going to be heirloom quality.
Enoch:
Try using tinyurl.com for those horse-chokers.
I’ve already just sorta given it to Baracky. They put a lot of value on the firstiness of him, and they loves the built-in America wasn’t ready excuse for when he’s rejected. The “it’s not about race cause Baracky transcends that” is just for the primary I think. From the primary to November it’s a festivus of race race race I bet.
Oops. I meant from the convention.
Much self-congratulation will be the order of the day. The media has kept their powder dry on that.
Ohnoes. Someone wants to crash their festivus.
Hmm – that page is no longer available, but the cursor says it is something about mumia abu jamal. Could you comment on what it was, haps? Cause I don’t think the Dems wanted that one to come popping up again.
But as to Festivus, it certainly is becoming a fun one! We have that old favorite “A Festivus Carol” with Barack Obama getting visited by the Ghost of Sermons Past, and Hillary Clinton singing that old favorite “Sniper Wonderland”!
I can’t wait to see what other favorites are going to appear as we decorate our Festivus tree!
Thanks Mikey. Here’s the AP version.
I wanna thank Joel Klein for identifying Hillary’s Republican style race baiting. I bet he’s never kicked anybody’s ass in his whole life.
Haps, are you saying in #5 that the superdelegates are considering casting their vote for the candidate that will do the least amount of damage to the party?
Not so much, really. More I think they’re seduced by an idea of Baracky as a symbol of transcendent pigmentation. I’m not accusing them of thinking things all the way through, really, just that his defeat would be a huge consolation prize for them.
The sales of whiskey and Maalox are going to spike in Colorado, methinks. The superdelegates are in a position that no politician wants to be in – dead under the spotlight with a tough vote, and no matter which way they go, someone is never ever going to forgive or forget.
So what to do? Looking at this from a politicians’ perspective, I think the superdelegates are going to look at their own powerbases, which way their districts or states went, and then vote that way. That provides them cover that they are doing the popular will as expressed by the citizens of the State of Leftopia or the 356th congressional district. I doubt anyone is going to be able to get the superdelegates all lined up and marching in the same direction, it would be political suicide for too many of them and they didn’t get to where they are today by exercising their courage gland at the expense of their weasel gland.
– I stand by My earlier assessment. Niether side can win without the support of the others loyal voting blocks, so its a oepn border standoff, and will continue to be right down theough the impending fllor fights during the convention.
– Most of the super delegates that face re-election or at the very leasta potentionally hostile haoe sate constituiency, will vote the state popular positions because they have no choice. How amny of the total that is would be good research for someone so inclined.
– Florida and Michigan remain the two 700 lb gorilla’s in the political tent for the Dems, and no amout of wordage is going to let them off that impossible hook. Aside from the lose of votes in the General, a fact no one is denying, not even the Dems themselves, the very idea of simply jetusing two entire sate voting blocks would make the Dems look inpotent and foolish in the extreme as a national party.
– Hillery thinks “It just can’t happen”. Shes right if the Dems have any hope of remaining viable in National politics, at least for this election season.
And here I thought this year wasn’t going to be any fun.
Remember when it used to be “one person, one vote.”
Then again, it probably wasn’t ever that way in Chicago.
Hey. I used to live in Chicago. (I’m still in Illinois).
It all depends on your definition of person. And your definition of vote. 1960 was a Classic. I remember ballot boxes getting lost and then – A Miracle – they were found. I live in Omaha at the time and listened to either WLS or WBBM for the story. It was night time and I had a very good (tube) radio from the 40s.
BOOM!
Everybody, look busy!
I really don’t think that Hillary has much of a chance of winning, especially after the Bosnian incident. And let’s not forget that there is really no way of her being able to catch up to Barack. She os running an increasingly negative campaign. Check out her response to Wright’s comments.
http://campaigncircus.com/video_player.php?v=8836
berly22 – There are also very few, theoretical ways for Baracky to secure the requisite number of votes to secure the nomination.
Near as I can tell, the rules do not provide for “closest to” the required number of delegates.
The ’60 election was amazing. Those found Chicago ballot boxes just happened to barely put Kennedy over the top, and winning Illinois was enough to give him the election. Maybe Obama is the new Kennedy after all.
In guessing who’d going to be the Dem nominee – remember there’s a three man committee that decides which Dem delegate gets seated. All three are long time Clinton allies.
From what I have seen if the DNC ruling, they said that the delegates from FL and MI would not be seated, not that the vote would not be considered a real vote. Isn’t it a simple matter of the rules that when counting the popular vote, FL and MI should be included?
As we are seeing, this is not a trivial distinction. Will voter in FL and MI be partly disenfranchised (not having their delegates seated) or will they be entirely disenfranchised (not even counting in the purely symbolic popular vote)? It seems that the DNC decided this when they made their original ruling: that they would only mostly disenfranchise FL and MI voters, presumably to try to ease the blow a bit.
How can that be ignored now?
It is a pattern with the DNC to attempt to disenfranchise the voters of Florida. They are just giving MI a test run in the primaries.
You are a wise man.
Another wild card still unmentioned is electability: which candidate has the best chance against McCain in the general election? Both Candidates must address this. Most of those Super-delegates are desperate to regain the presidency. This is worth more than a few dollars which they will stuff in their pockets
This is settling into a bitter, divisive struggle which hands the contest to McCain. This is identity politics run amuck tearing apart the fragile coalition on which the Democratic Party is built. 22% of Hillary’s voters want Obama to bow out of the race for the good of the party, a similar percentage of Obama’s voters want the same of Hillary. Neither Candidate is likely to cooperate. Neither is thinking about the good of the party. Both have special rights based on their race/sex.
FWIW – I think Baracky’s claim to be in the lead, though technically true, to be a good bit of horse pucky. Given the millions of votes cast and the number of delegates, they are practically in a statistical tie. Given the Dems inability to count votes in any semblence of rationality, there is really no telling who is winning.
knock-knock…
Who’s there ?
I am already laughing
Another factor–there are a zillion ways to count up the popular vote, but in addition, every superdelegate has two easy alternatives: he can cast his vote the same way his district votes, or the way his state votes, and argue that he’s obeying the will of the voters.
I think that’s a key thing. Superdelegates have their own opinions about who would be the best nominee, but they may be afraid of voter retribution. What’s important is that they have a credible story to tell, something that lets them go to the people and say “here’s why my vote was not, in fact, bucking the will of the people”. Any of those vote-count methods in the spreadsheet would work. So would “I voted for the one with the most pledged delegates”, or “I voted for the one who won my state”, or “I voted for the one who won my district”.
Of course, for Democratic congressman, “who won my district” may be key. Frankly, a lot of Democratic voters aren’t worried about the abstract “how can the winner be anyone other than the leader in pledged delegates” question; rather, they’re upset because their favored candidate might lose. If you’re Joe Congressman in a heavily-Obama district, there’s no story you can tell that will make your constituents feel happy about your vote for Hillary. No matter how the spreadsheet works out, if you don’t follow the district you might well be punished at your next primary.
Rove, you magnificent bastard!
BOOBS!
and, uh, I’m not talking anatomy. yeah, that’s it.
Obama’s bagged and tagged enough of the kicking sheep that there’s no way he can lose. Hillary’s chances are as dry as her Kotex.
O
BTW, what the hell does TWP mean?
Is typical white person I thought, cause of how our first instinct when we encounter something we fear is always to engineer a sexually-transmitted retrovirus what will kill it.
[…] Glenn Reynolds and PW, Jay Cost of RCP explains that pundits bloviate and voters decide: I agree that Clinton is more […]
Maggie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thor:
Obama’s bagged and tagged enough of the kicking sheep that there’s no way he can lose. Hillary’s chances are as dry as her Kotex.
That’s probably true. I was thinking that the super delegates would give it to him because doing so would cause the least damage to the party. But happyfeet made a great point earlier: the Dems probably aren’t smart enough, or farsighted enough to consider those repurcussions. They’re probably just so in love with the idea, the cachet, of having a black candidate that they don’t even care if they lose.
In fact, as feets pointed out, if they do lose they’ve an automatic “out.” The rest of you just aren’t as cool as we are. Someday, maybe you’ll be advanced enough to embrace the idea of a black president.
Typical Democrat Dumb-asses.
um, yes?
in related news…. I got a call from the precinct captain or whatever his title was, they’d lost their list of delegates…. going through the caucus roll….. was I an alternate? um, no.
If I were to predict, and I’m not wont to do that, but if I were, I’d say we’re going to see the most egregious deconstruction we’ve ever seen in our country.
Really, Obama is an interloper. And the Dems do eat their young.
Think we were puzzled about what “is” is – wait ’til we’re conflabulasted with what delegate “votes” vote.
Cowboy –
“They’re probably just so in love with the idea, the cachet, of having a black candidate that they don’t even care if they lose.”
IMO Loves way, way down the list. The nutroots as a bloc are noisy, but it’s votes that are currency in this market. The people who depend on VOTES are officeholders, of which the SUPER Delegates comrrise a large number of….
…and I’m noticing problems with grammar and tense creeping in again. Criminy.
Anyway, there’s not a chance that Hillary Clinton will be installed by the SUPER Delegates in the face of a popular vote lead held by Obama. The SUPER Delegates won’t head to their own elections (many in urban Democrat fiefdoms) carrying the onus of having voted against Teh First (viable) Black Candidate.
I don’t pretend to know what tricks are in the Clinton’s bag, but this entire situation could be illustrated by a picture of a Donkey standing on a pressure release mine in the bottome of a hole.
There are no good outcomes for them. I put this comment up on Belmont Club, on the same topic.
Pass that popcorn, wouldja?
Just to illustrate my point – see Powerline.
Gack – linky thing is broke:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/03/020143.php
I spoke a while ago about this possibility and now Hillary has dropped the bomb in a CNN interview.