How much will a Florida and Michigan do-over really matter? Update: 57% want popular vote winner to be nominee
posted at 11:56 am on March 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
My favorite liberal asserts this morning that wins there could put Hillary “in striking distance” of Obama. Let’s define striking distance. According to CNN’s count, Obama leads 1527-1428, or, if you exclude superdelegates, 1328-1190, a difference of 138. There are 366 delegates at stake in the two states; if Hillary wins both 55/45, the delegates should split roughly 201/165, a difference of 36 — which won’t even get her to within double digits of Obama among pledged delegates. Bear in mind too that the latest Rasmussen poll not only doesn’t give her a 55/45 lead in Michigan, it doesn’t give her a lead at all: 41/41, with 18% undecided. So Michigan’s likely to end up a near-wash, with Florida providing her 25 extra delegates or so. Obama’s on track to blow her out tomorrow night in Mississippi so even that 25 will be offset.
All that being so, what do Florida and Michigan really do for her? Winning them strengthens her case that she can win the big states that Obama can’t but she’s already won enough of those that she doesn’t need these two to cement the point. If, as expected, there are problems with the ballots or vote-counting or lawsuits, then winning only makes her look that much less legitimate ahead of the convention. As noted above, her “moral” case to the superdels that she should be the nominee isn’t much greater than it was before since she’ll still trail far behind in pledged delegates. All that’s accomplished by the victories is to make her task of wooing superdels (or even pledged delegates, per her answer to the first question here) marginally easier by reducing the number she’ll need to convince to clinch the nomination. I’ve always assumed that party bigwigs will broker some kind of deal among the undecided superdelegates to vote en masse for one candidate or another — especially since the bulk of them are DNC apparatchiks — so even that very marginal improvement isn’t hugely significant. So what’s the big deal about the two states? Just a case of her campaign grasping at any straw they can find, imagining that “Hillary wins Florida — again!” headlines are going to turn the whole race around?
Update: Commenters agree that it’s all about the popular vote.
Update: Our commenters are ahead of the game. Verrrrry interesting.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Good news: if the Clintons can bum rush their way back into the white house, maybe they’ll bring back some of the furniture.
moxie_neanderthal on March 10, 2008 at 12:02 PM
IMO, it is more about what Michigan and Florida can do TO her or Obama in the general election. These are states that (unlike California) could concievably go either way. The Democrats don’t want a bunch of pissed off voters staying home from the polls because their votes didn’t count in the primaries.
highhopes on March 10, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Returning to those states is both statistically silly and financially wastefull. Hillary is grasping at straws.
The only thing it does is solidify hard feelings inside the Dem party. I like that.
RETURN TO FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN!
natesnake on March 10, 2008 at 12:04 PM
I realize that Allahpundit is focusing on the Democrat primaries, but there is very good reason for Republicans to support do-overs of both the Democrat and Republican primaries in both Florida and Michigan.
I explain why here. That was specific to Florida, but it applies to Michigan as well.
Imagine if the 50% restriction was lifted in do-overs, and all 100% of the Michigan and Florida delegates were up for grabs.
Second look at a brokered convention.
McCain doesn’t have to be THE CHOSEN ONE.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 12:05 PM
YES. Florida matters. It matters in delegates. It matters in popular vote. It matters in momentum. It matters in fund raising. It matters in news coverage. Do you know that Al Sharpton, an Obama Supporter, is threatening to sue Florida if they count Florida? The Obama Team wouldn’t be worried about Florida if it didn’t really matter.
SoulGlo on March 10, 2008 at 12:05 PM
This is great.
I hope the mass confusion continues. The more muddy and contentious the better. I hope Obama and Hillary keep beating the hell out of each other, spending all of their money and keep making their supporters more and more frustrated.
cat-scratch on March 10, 2008 at 12:06 PM
“is threatening to sue if they count Florida” is what I meant to say. AllahPundit, it’s time for you guys to install an edit button.
SoulGlo on March 10, 2008 at 12:07 PM
It’s over. Let it go.
On the primaries – are either of those open primaries for the Dems? If so, how are they planning to stop Republicans from strategically voting?
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 12:07 PM
But it’s providing me with so much entertainment. I wanna see a redo!
rbj on March 10, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Great points made AP, but the real story was the way in which Dean addressed the democratic voters here in MI as well as those down in FL: “We can’t afford to do that,” “That’s not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race.”
I translated that to mean that you are not our concern even though you helped fill our coffers. Every vote does count except yours..we have more important things to worry about other than a voter.
For a party that screams about the working man getting stiffed, they sure have no problem tossing $30-40 million at a problem that he should have handled originally..The RNC was faced with the exact same problem, but they addressed it up front..penalize the candidates and the states by taking 50% of the delegates away.
Another interesting point is that Dean is once again short of funding..the RNC is sitting on a ton more money than he is and as was the case in 06′, people are wondering where the money is.
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 12:08 PM
The harridan wants to be able to say she got more popular votes than B Hussein, in an effort to steal the nomination. So she needs both states.
desperately
dogsoldier on March 10, 2008 at 12:09 PM
I’ve always assumed that party bigwigs will broker some kind of deal among the undecided superdelegates to vote en masse for one candidate or another — especially since the bulk of them are DNC apparatchiks
Democracy at work, baby. Every vote counts, right? No need to even worry about hanging chads this way.
Shtetl G on March 10, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Just more political cover to make her case for fighting at the convention especially if she can lay claim to the popular vote.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Hmmmm
Foreign Policy: Complicated Subject
Domestic Policy: Complicated Subject
Economic Policy: Complicated Subject
Running an Election: Simple
I’ll let you draw your own conclusions
franksalterego on March 10, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Open primaries yes, but with a twist. I voted Republican in January, and based on the new law effective in Nov. 07′, I am now on the registered list of Republicans..I can’t go back and re-vote if the opportunity arises as they have me on record as grabbing a Republican ballot.
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Ps – she’s only off by 600K in popular vote. She can make that up with wins in Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Give the Dems position in 2000, that the popular vote winner should win, she’ll have a case that she deserves the nomination. That’s the play at this point I think.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Nice analysis. For what its worth, I believe she’ll swipe the nomination from Barry O and the Dems will have something worse than 1968 to deal with.
We should have helped get rid of her in the early primaries.
The Democrats picked our nominee by crossing over. Why can’t we pick their nominee?
Valiant on March 10, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Where I see it matters is the Democrats have disenfranchised the voters and need to face the consequences. Enough of this I don’t like the outcome of my decisions so let’s do-over. Is this who you want to answer the 3 AM phone call. Not me.
Wade on March 10, 2008 at 12:16 PM
… I just LOVE the Florida idea of a mail-in ballot!
Not a chance for any funny business there, no sirreebob!
Freely distributing ballots to all and sundry, relying on the honesty and diligence of people who were too stupid to deal with a butterfly ballot and a chad-poker, with help from Project ACORN (no doubt)…
It’ll be fine!
The lawsuits will go on for centuries.
heldmyw on March 10, 2008 at 12:16 PM
GORE/OBAMA ’08!
mojo on March 10, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Ah. Well, no fun for Florida Republicans then.
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Bravo. It’s their MO for everything, has been for years.
funky chicken on March 10, 2008 at 12:20 PM
that is exactly what’s up, she can use popular vote plus big state wins as an “electability” hammer with the super delegates
from real clear politics Obama Clinton
Popular Vote Total – - 13,025,003 12,421,316
Popular Vote (w/FL) – - 13,601,217 13,292,302
Popular Vote (w/FL & MI)13,601,217 13,620,611
windansea on March 10, 2008 at 12:21 PM
I think dogsoldier pegged it. Hillary needs to beef up her numbers, in advanced of some planned arm-twisting at the convention. In order to placate Obama, and his supporters, she and Bill keep floating the idea of a Clinton/Obama ticket. They know that unless Obama is on board the Clinton bus at the end of the day, a lot of Dems are going to sit out this election.
She knows she’s not going to be able to win the nom with pledged delegates…Obama’s already got her beat…..with or without Michigan and Florida. She’s chasing after numbers now….just enough to legitimise her nomination in the eyes of her party’s faithful.
It still all makes for great entertainment though. SNL has not enjoyed such a target rich comedic environment since Ford was president.
DngrMse on March 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I agree with BOD. She’ll play the popular vote card.
Tanya on March 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I have been sitting here for months on end wondering what the DEMS will do to self destruct this election season??? Boy talk about a gift from above. I won’t even have to wait for the convention. They are really early. Truth in the old adage, “if the democrats formed a firing squad, it would be a circle”.
pueblo1032 on March 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM
First we get a pic of Herself that made me hurl my breakfast then we get a reference to and an article written by AP’s dream bimbo, Kirsten Powers. TMI, AP, TMI.
Christine on March 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM
The democrats can’t even stand up for their own party rules. I certainly don’t need them “standing up” for America. Those people frighten me on so many levels.
SouthernGent on March 10, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Insane.
The_Freeze on March 10, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Oy. Did you really just call Kirsten Powers a bimbo? Seriously?
Tanya on March 10, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Could not be happier, it is so refreshing to see the party of the most ethical congress evah hard at work. Keep it up a$$ clowns, the Republicans could not script better campaign fodder for the big show. Bring on the brokered convention, power to the people…bwahhahahaaaa!
dmann on March 10, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Romney supporters should be excited about this as well.
Consider the current situation:
Florida: McCain received 57 delegates
Michigan: Romney received 23 delegates, McCain 6, Huckabee 1
Take those delegates away from each of the candidates…
McCain would lose 63, Romney would lose 23, and Huckabee 1.
Now assume the 50% restriction is lifted on a do-over, and now there are 174 delegates up for grabs.
If Romney won both do-overs, he could end up with a net gain of 151 delegates.
If Huckabee won both do-overs (unlikely), he could end up with a net gain of 173 delegates.
The main points here are:
1) If the Democrats are allowed to do a Democrat-only do-over, it would be an absolute outrage to our electoral process because it would allow certain people to vote twice.
2) The only fair way to have a do-over is to wipe the slate clean on both sides.
3) It is not a foregone conclusion that McCain is the “presumptive nominee”.
As much as I have been maligned by Romney supporters, I would actually prefer Romney over McCain as President. It is no secret that I would prefer Huckabee over Romney, but honestly my #1 priority in this situation is that we keep our elections honest and fair. Our country is to precious to allow our elections to be hijacked.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Great work.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Agreed. I think it’s a bad idea.
Wait…I thought it was an “outrage to our electoral process.” How does doubling the outrage make it okay?
Everyone had a fair shot in Florida’s primary, and the winner was McCain. Not what I wanted to see, but unlike Democrats, I don’t feel the need to mash the reset button and hope for a result I like more.
Yes, it is.
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 12:31 PM
True, the net amount shaved off the Obama lead may be minimal after including Michigan and Florida’s delegates. However, that’s a rock that cannot be left unturned. Like a football team trailing in the last half of the fourth quarter, Senator Clinton has to take advantage of any openings and hope the ball takes a “good bounce”, a call goes her way, or Obama makes some turnovers. Possible, no?
Texas and Ohio were not epic wins in terms of delegates either, but they moved the chains and kept the superdelegates in their seats rather than the parking lot.
Graybark on March 10, 2008 at 12:32 PM
forgot to paste this from RCP
windansea on March 10, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Enough of this nonsense. How about if the elected governments of these two states tell both of these private corporations that how they count their primary election delegates will be how the Electoral College delegates are counted.
meci on March 10, 2008 at 12:35 PM
The outrage would be allowing certain people to vote twice. If you wipe the slate clean and have do-overs on both sides, that prevents the outrage, not doubles it.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 12:36 PM
If that’s such an outrage, then why should only “certain people” in Florida get to vote twice? Why can’t Iowa, New Hampshire, Texas, etc all vote again?
Best not to open this door at all.
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 12:38 PM
In MI, we aren’t even talking about do overs for the Republicans, and I have not seen anything about that in FL either. There isn’t going to be talk about a do over because all of the candidates campaigned here, and knew that they got 50% PERIOD. The delegates have been assigned.
You can’t vote twice in MI, unless you took a democrat ballot in January..even if I had been a Democrat in January, and took Kos’s advise and voted Republican, I don’t get to vote again because I took a Republican ballot and was registered that day as doing so…Only those that didn’t vote in January or those that took a Democrat ballot would get to vote again in a new primary..
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 12:47 PM
She won all big dem states and he didn’t..(except Illinois)
Chakra Hammer on March 10, 2008 at 12:48 PM
What is that expression about wrestling with a pig, Slu?
Hollowpoint on March 10, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I think you are missing the point of Red Pill’s argument. It should be a do-over for the reps, too, because of the cross-overs from the dems. The dems, technically, didn’t have any reason to go vote, because, supposedly their votes wouldn’t count. So, why not cross-over and pick the reps nominee. Besides, John Pinata McCain won pretty handily anyway. Should be easy for him to duplicate if he is really the candidate of choice.
cjs1943 on March 10, 2008 at 12:52 PM
If there is a “do over”, does that change the number of delegates needed? Wouldn’t that increase the number of delegates available, therefore increasing the number it takes to reach 50%? Wouldn’t that make this even more of a moot point?
duggersd on March 10, 2008 at 12:55 PM
We are all missing the point; this is a test case for the democrat’s new foreign policy. If we get attacked, the POTUS will ask the enemy to attack again so this time we will be prepared. TDO folks, The Do Over, I like it!
dmann on March 10, 2008 at 12:55 PM
SECOND LOOK AT RUDY IN FLORIDA.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on March 10, 2008 at 12:59 PM
And they don’t get to revote if they did cross over and vote for a republican..it isn’t that difficult to understand. They may be Democrats, but in January they pledged themselves as Republicans..it’s the price they pay for switching over..
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 12:59 PM
I understand that entirely. It’s irrelevant. All of the nominees knew the rules going into this election. They paid their money and took their chances, and all but one lost. The fact that a relatively small percentage of Democrats voted in our primary shouldn’t be an excuse to change the rules of that primary.
If Florida GOP voters don’t like the fact that this happened, it should pressure the party for closed primaries, not follow the Dems over the cliff into do-over land.
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Um…you end up with dirty pearl fleas and like it?
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Good point. I stand corrected.
cjs1943 on March 10, 2008 at 1:03 PM
Again, I stand corrected.
cjs1943 on March 10, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Sorry about that. Mine was not an intent to “pile on.” Pam just beat me to the same point.
Slublog on March 10, 2008 at 1:06 PM
Fast forward eight months……
It’s being reported that the former states of Michigan and Florida may get around to re-voting to re-ratify their inclusion back into the United States after ceeding from the Union last summer. Both former governors implied that they preferred to move the dates of the ratification ahead of the schedule to resume their respective relevance according the the newly formed Election Workers Union.
Rovin on March 10, 2008 at 1:07 PM
RE Billary’s picture: FL and MI aren’t the only things that need a do-over.
BTW. If you want me to read your blog, make good comments. Anybody else annoyed at HA wannabes hawking their own blogs?
davidk on March 10, 2008 at 1:16 PM
heh, I forgot about that, the tasty good schadenfrude just keeps on coming, the kos kids thought they were so smart and it bites them in the ass, unbelievably, the same Bambi voters are whining that Hillary got a boost from Rush etc in Texas
windansea on March 10, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Let me state the obvious…
This election, for Democrats, and somewhat for Republicans, has been corrupted.
No matter who loses, they will have been cheated.
franksalterego on March 10, 2008 at 1:19 PM
I’ve seen on both sides now at times in my life when one side or the other in American politics was on the cusp of sweeping into a truly dominant position, hubris has overtaken them and they’ve done something that made them look like buffoons to the non-ideological public at large.
The only way the Dems have out of this mess with the average voters in the entire country is just to tell Florida and Michigan they knew the rules, the rules aren’t changing, and better luck next time.
The idea of revoting, and the complete ineptitude of getting into the situation where they might do it is going to make them look incompetent to handle the affairs of the nation.
But I don’t think they know or care. They feel so certain the prize of their nomination is a ticket to the White House they’ve lost sight of all else.
Here’s hoping they wander right off that cliff.
Typhoon on March 10, 2008 at 1:20 PM
That’s B.S. Texan Democrats voted twice and both votes counted (one in the primary, one in the caucus)! Voting twice and letting only one vote count — the free and fair one — is not a problem.
The Republican do-over concept is silly. This isn’t about turning back time. It’s about holding a fair vote so that those delegates who couldn’t be seated before can be seated now. If the Republicans did that, it would change nothing.
The popular vote card seems to be the right one here. Still, AP’s electoral math is faulty, since it assumes that delegates would be assigned strictly according to statewide proportions, something that’s true in precious few states. She could get 55/45 and that could make the difference if her votes are in the right places (assuming Michigan and Florida use a geographically based or winner-take-all system). Also, polls don’t matter much before a campaign begins in the state in question. Otherwise, we’d be talking “President Giuliani” right about now.
calbear on March 10, 2008 at 1:22 PM
…the problem, if any, is changing the rules in the middle of the game.
calbear on March 10, 2008 at 1:24 PM
Hillary Rodham is promising everyone a Time Life Groovin in the 60′s CD box set autographed by Peter Fonda if elected.
pc on March 10, 2008 at 1:34 PM
The Democrat primary delegates are all proportional. None of them is winner take all.
Here, play with this. It’s Slates Dem Delegate calculator. You’ll see they are all proportional.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2008 at 1:35 PM
What about people who voted Republican but then immediately changed their party affiliation after the primary vote? Those are the people who tried to “fix” the Republican primary and now want to be allowed to vote again in the Democrat primary.
I’ve also heard stories of registered Democrats being given Republican ballots.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Thank you.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:39 PM
It would increase the number it takes to reach 50%. But, you misunderstand the impact.
The higer threshold, combined with McCain’s loss of 63 delegates (57 from FL, 6 from MI) would mean that McCain no longer has the # of delegates required to “clinch” the nomination. If any of the other candidates could keep McCain from winning enough delegates to “clinch”, …
Second look at a brokered convention.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:43 PM
What about them? They still voted Republican and therefore are not entitled, nor will they get a Democratic ballot..You can play what if until you get a genie in a bottle that grants you three withes, but it won’t change the fact that the SOC has a listing of all votes cast in January and that is the list that will be used, not the word of some joker that cast a ballot, thought they were smart and immediately changed party affiliation..You had to have taken a democratic ballot in January in order to re-vote!
They can wish all they want, but they will have the opportunity to vote as a Democrat in November.
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 1:49 PM
I don’t have the link handy, but someone recently posted the rules for changing party affiliation in Florida. It’s not impossible, but there is some time delay. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I suspect that Democrats switched to Republican, voted, and then switched back.
But at this point it may be too late for Republicans to switch in time for a Democrat do-over.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:50 PM
There are also Democrats who didn’t switch their party affiliation but still asked for, received, and voted on a Republican Primary ballot.
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Hmmmm
Whoever planned this, didn’t have a political solution or exit strategy, to get out of the quagmire.
Sound familiar?
franksalterego on March 10, 2008 at 1:55 PM
I hope they have do-overs in every State. I want them to keep on fighting and spending money as long as possible.
TheBigOldDog on March 10, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Red Pill on March 10, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Brokered convention without a doubt….unless…a deal of deals is made between Hilda and Yomama. What might that be, how about a co-presidency. The simple fact is that anything is possible with the democrats. Laws, rules, facts mean nothing, its all HOPE and CHANGE!
dmann on March 10, 2008 at 2:02 PM
what about demo voters who didn’t vote cuz they thought it didn’t matter anyway? Sharpton is supposedly getting a list of these for his lawsuit.
Actually I think Republicans might have a valid lawsuit if Florida gives a revote to all registered dems instead of just those who voted dem in the primary. If some did vote repub in primary and get to vote dem in revote, thats a big no no and I bet there is a Townhouse memo on this very subject
windansea on March 10, 2008 at 2:08 PM
According to AP’s update, a majority prefer popular vote. If it holds, that’ll throw a bit more gas on the fire, given the Glacier gets into striking range.
a capella on March 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Its interesting because now Hillary can accuse Obama of being “Selected and not elected” based on popular vote
William Amos on March 10, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Ugh. Again. Clintons tied up in drama. Look at the in-fighting and viciousness within their own campaign. Look at how Hillary had to calm down Bill because he was getting to blustery. Look how her campaign managers fight amongst each other while Hillary is basically letting them make her look like a fool. She can barely run a campaign, yet she’s supposed to be the best choice for President? Good Lord…for all her “experience”, why is Obama trouncing her and running a classier campaign? I know Repubs are supposed to get behind Hillary because she’s easier to take down in the General, so they say, but all this Clinton dramatics is making me so nauseous it’s like 1998 again. SPARE ME. Sorry guys…I hope Obama clinches this, toss out the Clintons once and for all into the dust bin of history.
mattyj86 on March 10, 2008 at 2:26 PM
If you did not cast a ballot in January, you can cast a Democratic ballot in the imaginary redo. Once you cast that ballot, you are a registered Democrat.
I can not speak for Florida law, but according to our laws in MI, you may have tried to play games in January, but you now realize how much a vote costs…One issue that is kinda lost in all of this is that both Edwards and Obama may have stayed out of MI, and didn’t campaign, but they were openly telling Democrats to vote uncommitted.
Pam on March 10, 2008 at 2:42 PM