Posted on 04/23/2008 4:52:37 PM PDT by The_Republican
Barack Obama says it's an "abstract measure" to count votes in Michigan and Florida, whose contests were essentially nulled by the Democratic National Committee when the states violated party rules and moved their primaries ahead of others in the election calendar.
"There have been a number of different formulations that the Clinton campaign has been trying to arrive at to suggest that somehow they're not behind," Obama told reporters following a town hall meeting in New Albany, Indiana, "If you want to count them for some abstract measure, you're free to do so. But, you know, the way that the popular vote is translated is into delegates, that's how these primaries and these caucuses work."
The debate is more than an academic one for the candidates and Democratic superdelegates who may decide the tightly contested nomination.
If votes in Florida and Michigan count toward the national popular vote total, Clinton currently leads Obama by over 100,000 votes; if those states do not count, Obama leads Clinton by several hundred thousand.
Adding another point of contention: Obama's name did not appear on the Michigan ballot but both candidates did appear on ballots in the Florida contest.
Obama said on Wednesday, the day after a double digit defeat in the Pennsylvania primary, said he would leave it to reporters to "sort thought the various permutations of what should count and what shouldn't that the Clinton camp is presenting."
Not surprisingly, Sen. Clinton is advocating for inclusion of the Florida and Michigan counts, a position she made clear in an interview on Wednesday's "Good Morning America".
"The votes in Michigan and Florida were official," Clinton told ABC News' Diane Sawyer, "I mean, they were certified by the secretary of state. It's just that the Democratic Party can't figure out what to do with all those votes, and try to seat delegates."
"I actually have more votes from people who actually voted for me," Clinton added. "Last night's win should give a lot of fresh information to our superdelegates, because after all, the road to Pennsylvania Avenue does lead through Pennsylvania."
At his earlier event in Indiana, Obama responded to a question on superdelegates saying, "I do think that these elections that we've been doing should be counted for something, and if we've won the most delegates from the voters, seems to me that it might be a good idea to make me the nominee."
Obama also took a moment to analyze his Pennslyvania loss for the press.
"If you look at the numbers, in fact, the problem has less to do with white working class voters, in fact the problem is, that to the extent there is a problem, is that older voters are very loyal to Senator Clinton. And I think part of that is they've got a track record of voting for not just Senator Clinton but also her husband," Obama said.
The junior Senator from Illinois also complained about his rival's approach to their nomination fight.
"Nobody has complained more about the press, about questions at debates, about being mistreated than Senator Clinton has or President Clinton," the candidate said, quickly adding, "I've always believed that if you're tough you don't have to talk about it."
Tuesday's loss marks the third time in recent months Obama has had an opportunity to put sizeable distance between he and his rival, with opportunities to all but end the nomination contest in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.
When asked by reporters why he can't seem to close the deal with voters, Obama replied, "The way we're gonna close the deal is by winning, and right now we're winning . . . I think it's apparent that we're in the strongest position to win in November."
Nice to see them so twisted up. Who the hell cares about “popular” vote in a series of primaries??? It’s not a nat’l election. It’s a series of state contest. It would be like a second place team complaining that they scored more runs than the first place team. So what? It’s wins that matter.
Well,people did vote,is obama saying he would disenfranchise them?
He is soft and will cave to her.
That’s a great analogy.
Does Obama know how bad this makes him look?
Now he’s saying Michigan and Florida are just abstract numbers that aren’t a part of the real world. Naw, they can’t be real places with real people that want their votes to count.
He’s an idiot!
Yeah, but before the race started they said it won’t count. Back then he was still a newbie and nobody thought he would turn out to be a legit candidate and actually win. Time after time we have seen, he goes from State after State, starts 15-20 points down, and then catches up and most times surpasses. He almost pulled it off in Texas, if not for Operation Chaos and Hillary get help from unexpected quarters. He was closing in for the Kill, if not for his analysis of small town Voters.
So even if those guys voted, the circumstance could not be any more unfair for Obama.
Bicker, bicker, bicker - from the article:
“I actually have more votes from people who actually voted for me,” Clinton added. “Last night’s win should give a lot of fresh information to our superdelegates, because after all, the road to Pennsylvania Avenue does lead through Pennsylvania.”
Not so witty.
Hillary would jump on the word “abstract” as well. His background as Professor works against him in this race. Every time he analyzes or uses that kind of Language, every single word is put through a grinder. He should simply say we are following the rules that both parties agreed to. Back then she thought it would be good enough. Now that she is losing, she feels the need to change the rules. Keep moving the goal post, till you are ahead.
It is consistant among Democrats that if they don’t win an election they claim voter fraud. It is truely refreshing to see them do this even among themselves.
He should pay you a million dollars to create strategy for his campaign. Obviously, the people he’s paying aren’t doing their jobs.
If its Tax Free, I would have to strongly consider it.
> He should simply say we are following the rules that both parties agreed to.
Of course, you are absolutely correct.
However, the whole notion of counting popular vote in preference to delegates has a strong undercurrent in ‘Rat circles, since that was the “Gore defense” in 2000. And if one is willing to consider the popular vote as a measure at all, then Hillary’s point, insofar as Florida at least, is accurate. That is to say, just because the party doesn’t seat delegates has absolutely nothing to do with how many citizens voted for her. Michigan, of course is more problematic, because Obama removed his name from the ballot.
However, the whole popular vote “scheme” vi-a-vis delegate count is a red herring to begin with, though I suppose a superdelagate might want to consider it.
It’s the same strategy the Dems use to this day when they say Al Gore actually won in 2000. I guess Obama now agrees that George Bush was actually elected not selected.
Yeah sure.......
But Hillary’s camp is not signing up for any metric that determines the winner.
They even went as far as saying you should look at Electoral Votes or use Republican Delegate allotting system. You can’t argue for Popular Vote and Electoral Vote at the same time.
Second, anybody thinks if Florida is do-over, Obambi gets 36%?
Like I said, you tell a guy before race that it won’t count, and he simply jogs or walk to the finish line, and the other one runs full speed, and then once they get to the finish line you say, well it counts, and she is the winner.
He never campaigned there or spent any money and at the time she was the PRESUMPTIVE NOMINEE waiting for Super Tuesday to wrap this up.
She wasn’t worried about disenfranchising voters when she agreed that their vote didn’t count. Now she has lost, she wants to count them. Hardly NOBLE intentions.
Dick Morris is kiss of Death.
I can’t disagree with anything you said because rationality dictates that popular vote has nothing to do with the result.
I was just trying to put my mind in the twisted condition of an impressionable ‘Rat voter or superdelegate. I know... a big mistake.
Your observation that Hillary isn’t signing on to a single metric is pure Clintonian. She will fill the air with smoke until the last primary is run, figure out which metric benefits her most, and then settle on that one as the one she meant all along.
Dick is soooooo full of himself...he knows it all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.