If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
llen R. Malcolm writes over on the Washington Post:
Why on earth should one candidate quit before the contest is finished? Democrats need not be so fainthearted. Both of the party’s remaining candidates have raised tens of millions of dollars. Both have the respect of Democrats nationwide. Each has a progressive agenda that stands in stark contrast to Sen. John McCain and his adherence to Bush administration policies.
Yeah, what she said.
I get irritated listening to the rhetoric coming from Obama supports and/or the mainstream news media calling for Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race. I’m not a big fan of quitters. I never have been. What’s the harm in Hillary staying in the race while there are still a few remaining primaries left?
I realize Barack Obama has a lot more money. I realize Barack Obama has a lot more support in the mainstream news media. I realize Barack Obama has the support of the entrenched, inside the beltway Democratic power base, men like Kennedy and Kerry. I also realize Barack Obama has a slight advantage in the number of pledged delegates — 1,592 to Hillary’s 1,424 — along with a slight lead in the popular vote.
Pledged delegates are not going to decide this race. It’s mathematically impossible for either candidate — Obama or Hillary — to pick up enough pledged delegates in the remaining primaries to reach the magic number of 2,025. Even if Hillary quits and lets Obama run unapposed in the remaining contests, he still can’t reach 2,025.
So why the pressure on Hillary to quit?
I think it’s because Obama supporters and/or the mainstream news media don’t want her to take back her lead in the popular vote. That’s something she has a very good chance of doing after West Virgina and Kentucky hold their primaries. Recent polls in West Virgina show Hillary with over a 40 point advantage.
Eight years ago when the Presidential election was finally over and Gore won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college vote to Bush, many of my fellow Democrats were quite perturbed at the situation and rightfully so. Though technically it was correct and legal to pick the president by counting the electoral college votes, many felt it went against the spirit of a true democracy to choose a president in a way other then by a popular vote. The idea was that the President should be chosen by whoever gets the most votes.
I think many Obama supports and/or the mainstream news media fear a Democratic Convention in August where Obama has a slight lead in the pledged delegate count while Hillary has a slight lead in the popular vote. It would put the superdelegates in the uncomfortable situation of following the will of party leadership and selecting Barack Obama as the 2008 Democratic nominee while shunning the candidate with the most overall votes.
If that mean lady would just quit and let that man run unopposed, it would make their job a lot easier.
