Obama's 122 point spread

Howard Fineman did the math.  Obama's lead is insurmountable.  The pledged delegate race is over. The nomination is a done deal.  Not so fast, kids.  There's one teensy-weensy little problem. Make that two, and their names are Michigan and Florida.

Michagan and Florida?  Where Obama didn't campaign?  Where his name wasn't even on the ballot?  Aren't they banished from the convention?  Isn't Hillary campaigning to have them seated, to keep the good voters of two key states from being disenfranchised in a bald-faced manoever to save her candidacy?  Simply: Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! and Yes!

The reality of the situation for Obama is that to win in November he has to roll into Denver as the agreed-on winner.  As the agreed on winner, he will have the opportunity to show leniency on the critical Michigan and Florida Democrats by seating their delegations.  And to seat their delegations, he has to have enough pledged delegate lead to overcome Hillary's net margin from those contests.

How'd this mess come about?  It all started sometime around 11:00 PM, Tuesday, November 2, 2004, as it became clear that Ohio was breaking for the soon-to-be lame duck Bush presidency.  Everyone then knew that 2008 was going to be the Presidential election of the century.  There was no incumbent V.P. to lock down the party in power.  The last two elections had been incredibly close.  And there appeared to be quite a few good candidates likely to make a run.  Everyone, meaning everyone who runs a state party committee, wanted to get in on the action of having their state weigh in on the nominating process, and over the next few years there was a mad rush to move 2008 state primaries as far up in the calendar as possible, to ensure that their voters had a chance to vote while there was still a field that mattered.

For the national committees, this frenzy to get to the front of the line was a very big threat to the logic and order of the primary season.  As much as everyone agrees that Iowa and New Hampshire have a disproportionate impact on the nominating process, the reality is that everyone is well served by starting small and growing the election process.  Iowa and New Hampshire force candidates to hone their pitches, grow their organizations, and sell themselves many times over.  They are small enough that minor candidates with a strong or timely message can cost effectively compete.  And they are different enough that success in one doesn't necessarily mean success in both, or success in the end.  But, a lack of success in one or both is a clear message that it's not that candidate's time.

Unfortunately, given the excitement expected in 2008, a number of other states threatened, and Michigan and Florida decided to get in on the early action by moving their primaries into January.  The DNC, in an effort to enforce the rules and keep the floodgates of January primaries from opening, crafted a punishment for their hubris.  It had two parts.  First, the states were stripped of their delegates to the national convention.  Second, the candidates were pressured to agree to skip campaigning in the rogue states.  This second part was the real punishment: withouth the attention of the campaigns, the goal of the states to have more influence on the debate and agenda was thwarted.  With the promise of no delegates, the candidates would easily agree not to campaign, as the results wouldn't go into the rolling tally used to determine the nominee.  Problem solved, order restored.

Now, of course, the promise to strip the delegates was pretty severe.  In fact, the idea that the Democrats would turn their back on Florida and Michigan is on its face ludicrous.  Party leaders at the state and national level assumed that after the real nominee became apparent (in the wee hours of Wednesday, February 6, most likely), that nominee would go to credentialing committee and petition for the Michigan and Florida delegations to be seated anyway.  There'd be a lot of nice-nice, the states would admit they learned their lesson, everyone would be happy, and the party would be whole again. 

This is certainly what will happen (later than anyone expected) as long as one very unlikely circumstance doesn't occur.  If for some reason, the race is so tight, and the candidate with the net margin from Michigan and Florida is losing in the pledged delegates, but by less than the number of delegates she'd (wink!) gain by seating Michigan and Florida, then that magnaminous gesture by the front runner would put the front runner behind in pledged delegates, and all hell would ensue.

To think that this is an unlikely scenario is very reasonable.  First, it's reasonable to think that one strong candidate will emerge and that the race won't go to the wire.  Second, even if the race is tight, it's reasonable to think that the candidate that wins Florida and Michigan is going to be the leader, so seating the delegation would just enhance the outcome.  Third, if the race really is tight, it's reasonable to think that the net margin of Florida and Michigan, by Democratic proportionality rules, is small, thus unlikely to be greater than the margin from all of the other races.

But, alas, in this year that is not the case.  Hillary, alone among the major candidates, left her name on the ballot in Michigan, and garnered a 55% advantage over Obama or the equivalent of 86 net delegates.  And in Florida, Hillary leveraged her name recognition, strength with older voters, and strength with the Hispanic vote to land 50% of the vote, 17% over Obama, for an estimated 36 net delegates.  Taken together Hillary bagged 122 ghost delegates, delegates that the party needs to seat to honor two key General Election states, and to win in November, delegates that can only be seated if Obama has covered the spread.

What happens if Hillary is within the 122 or so delegates after Puerto Rico on June 7th?  Good question, and it all depends on Hillary.

If she insists on seating them, and Obama refuses, Obama torpedoes his chances in Florida and Michigan.  Can't happen.

If she insists on seating them and they would tip the balance to Obama, he will refuse unless she bows out of the campaign.  Do you see Hillary bowing out knowing that once the delegates are seated, she's got the high-road argument that she won the election in pledged delegates?  No. 

The only other way he agrees to seat the delegates is for the super delegates to agree to vote for him, anyway.  That, too, is very unappealing, as no Democratic leader wants the story line to be that the fat cats are stealing the election from Hillary, fracturing any chance that the party comes together in November.  Any brokered convention will be devastating to the Democrats, and could be one of the few ways they can lose it this year.

Short of Hillary dropping out, there really is no good option for what to do with Florida and Michigan if they would decide the race.  And that is why, fair or not, Obama has to keep padding his lead to win by cover the Florida and Michigan spread, and better still, by the net of the ghost delegates and the declared super delegate gap.  For only then can the party come together victorious, and can Hillary let go and resign her campaign.

Comments

[Errol Limani]

There is one good option, and that's for the DNC to honor their word. The rules are the rules. Even Al Sharpton came out today in favor of observing the boycott, saying that the black disenfranchisement argument was an unworthy one.