Remember "Super Tuesday"? The supposed turning point of the Democratic presidential race? Hardly. How bout "Comeback Tuesday" last week, when Hillary Clinton got up off the mat, took off the gloves (or did she put them on? even the sports metaphors escape me sometimes) and sent Barack Obama to crushing defeats in the two huge states of Ohio and Texas? Hmmmmm. I'm going to have to say, no. The superlatives were flying like confetti, yet now that the political dust has settled, anyone who cares to look at the results can see what really happened: Hillary Clinton didn't gain enough delegates to make up for Obama's win in Idaho.
Idaho?
When it comes to states, it's not how many delegates a candidate has that matters in the new math of the Democratic primary season. It's how many more delegates you have than your opponent. Sure, wins in states like California, New York and Ohio are impressive--and will surely look good on your resume come convention time--but not if you don't walk off with the lion's share of delegates.
Obama's finely tuned political machine has known this from the outset. So when will the former First Lady learn that size doesn't matter?
Well, it's clear the news hasn't even reached the Clinton doublespeakers. Earlier tonight on CNN, longtime Clinton family apologist James Carville dismissed with a laugh the point that Obama has won more than twice the states (26) that Hillary has (11), saying, "How many Idahos equal one Ohio?" Truth be told, it's the other way around, since Idaho equals a 12-delegate advantage for Obama against Clinton's gain of 9 in Ohio.
Still laughing, Jimmy? Either Mr. Carville is as dumb as he looks, or he's attempting to spread the perception that some states are more important than others. Whatever the motivation may be, he can't hide the ill-focused strategy he's trying to defend. His candidate may lie, but the numbers don't.
Savant that I am, I couldn't help but take a look at the real scoreboard, the numbers that really, really count: the delegate differentials. These are the real indicators--though clearly not as colorful as the homespun 47-year-old short-order cook in Spokane, or the picket-toothed white supremecist from Southern Ohio. The media delights in lighting up U.S. maps, discussing daily rhetoric with expert panels and "talking to the people". Yet scientifically speaking, it's the political equivalent of summoning Puxatawney Phil out of his hole. Wake up, the real story is right under your nose. (The nose of the collective media, not Puxatawney Phil.)
There's a reason why Obama won Nevada's delegate count, 13-12, despite "losing" the state on primary night. There's a reason, while the press was boldly hailing Mrs. Clinton's "huge" win in New Hampshire, that Mr. Obama had actually tied her, each gaining nine delegates. It's the same reason why, as we sit here with 10 domestic primaries remaining in the march to Denver, Hillary has effectively won just 11 states, while Barack has bested her delegate total in 26 (with three states even). He's won more than half of the United States; she's won about one fifth of them.
It's also the very likely explanation should the Voice Of Hope win Mississippi tomorrow with a double-digit delegate advantage. Some other fascinating points I discovered, simply by doing what the media refuses to do... look at the race in terms of DELEGATE DIFFERENTIALS:
> Barack Obama's lead is reportedly slim, with the difference in delegates being anywhere from 139 (1336-1227 per NBC) to 141 (1345-1204 per the yahoo dashboard). Yet in reality, we're getting close to magic-number time. A closer inspection of the delegate differentials tells us that the Clinton regime will need to average a 14-delegate gain in each remaining primary in order to overtake Obama. Yet, of the 40 contests held so far (not counting the USVI), less than a third of them (13) resulted in a delegate difference of 13 or higher. And only three--Arkansas, California and New York--were won by Clinton.
So in other words, with 10 state primaries left to go, if Hillary intends to reach Denver with a lead in total elected delegates, she has to do 10 times in a row what she has done just 3 times in the 40 states thus far. No tall tale can mask such a tall order.
> There are seven states that were won by a differential of at least 20 delegates. Five of those seven were won by Obama (Illinois, Georgia, Washington, Virginia and Minnesota). In fact, two of the three states that saw a 40-or-greater differential were Obama wins. So much for the "can't win the big one" angle.
> And the largest delegate differential of all? Obama's 54-delegate rout in his home state of Illinois, edging out Hillary's delegrabs in home states both genuine (19, Arkansas) and artificial (45, New York). So, being that the state most likely to go Hillary's way (Pennsylvania, Michigan & Florida) happens to be the largest remaining primary, equalling her highest margin of victory (45), while unlikely to say the least, would still leave her nearly 100 delegates behind Obama. And as we've already seen in the Idaho-beats-Ohio, Third Millenium world of the DNP, the Illinois senator could win Mississippi tomorrow by enough delegates to offset a close defeat next month in the Quaker state.
> Should the Democratic Party cave like a spoiled brat's parent and forgive Michigan and Florida for violating party policy, and should these two large states become "in play", to the delight of Bill & Hill... well, in the words of Todd Rundgren, it wouldn't really make any difference. A 3/7 Rasmussen poll of likely voters in Michigan shows the candidates in a virtual dead heat, each preferred by 41% of respondents. Assuming Camp Clinton doesn't hoodwink officials into validating the initial results or something similarly ridiculous (not to mention unconstitutional), Michigan will pretty much end up even. That leaves Florida, a state large enough to turn heads with a substantial win.
Problem is, unless it's Clinton's home state, Obama's home state or California, even a landslide win won't appear to garner more than 30, maybe 40 if it's a true blowout (and Obama's already shown he'll likely avoid a rout, as he gained a fair share last time without the benefit of a single campaign stop).
He'll keep Pennsylvania close (within 60-40), minimizing delegate damage. And by the time we get to Puerto Rico, we'll probably be roughly where we are now. Bracing ourselves while Hillary Clinton and her husband tirelessly woo super delegates.
