Is Clinton really leading in vote total?

Comments Comment on this article2

By The Associated Press
Published: May 16, 2008

WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton's assertions that she leads Barack Obama in the popular vote are a stretch, at best.

Advertisement

The New York senator is using such claims to shore up supporters and help justify why she's still in the Democratic presidential race despite trailing Obama in the number of convention delegates earned in primaries and caucuses.

The argument is supported only by using dubious math on two fronts: by excluding several caucus states won by Obama and by including Florida and Michigan primary results that the Democratic Party rejects.

"I'm very proud that as of today, I have received more votes by the people who have voted than anybody else,” she said after her narrow Indiana victory and before her big win in West Virginia on Tuesday. "It's a very close race, but if you count, as I count, the 2.3 million people who voted in Michigan and Florida, then we are going to build on that.”

Since then, Clinton has tempered her claim of being ahead in votes, but her aides have not.

Obama is ahead of Clinton by just over 618,000 votes out of 32.2 million cast in states and territories where both candidates competed and where the popular vote was counted.

That total excludes Florida and Michigan, which held early primaries in violation of party rules. Democratic candidates agreed in advance not to campaign in those states. In addition, Obama did not have his name on Michigan ballots.

If primary voters from those two states are included in the totals, Clinton edges ahead by fewer than 5,000 votes.

Do early primaries matter?
Clinton is correct that she and Obama have each received about 17 million votes.

But even if results of the two renegade primaries are accepted, she still has a problem demonstrating she is the vote leader.

That's because no results go into that equation from Iowa, Nevada or Maine. There is no way to count popular votes from those states because their caucuses did not tally them.

Clinton has been pushing for the party to count results from Florida and Michigan to bring her delegate totals closer to Obama's as he gets closer to clinching the nomination.

But given his expanding lead with superdelegates, he is on track to win the nomination even if Florida and Michigan delegates are seated.


Toolbar sponsored by: David Stanley Ford
Bookmark and Share

Related Topics: Politics, U.S. Politics, Elections and Voting, U.S. Democratic Party Politics, Political Parties, U.S. Presidential Election


Comments

Thank you for joining our conversations on NewsOK.com. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.

Editor's note: It is not our intent to offer comments on crime or fatality stories.

Leave a comment. Log in below or sign up (it's free).

   
So how is a disenfranchised electorate after months & months of grueling campaigning any different than a disenfranchised electorate after a presumptive nominee has been determined by 10-12 states voting early in the primary season? Most of the time Oklahomans vote several weeks after the presumptive nominee has been named & everyone else has dropped out of the race. I find the extended primary and close race interesting & invigorating. Kudos for Clinton for “being in it to win it.” We know far more about these two candidates than we could have possibly known if 1/4th of the states had voted the nominee in during the 1st 4-6 weeks of the primary. Now if McCain had been equally vetted we could have an interesting general election instead of the reflex and knee-jerk voting that happens sooooo often.
Concerned, Central Oklahoma - May 16, 2008 2:41 PM
Report as inappropriate
What a nut job grasping at straws.
Jimmy, Sandy Shores - May 16, 2008 9:12 AM
Report as inappropriate