Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Commentary: Why Clinton Should (And Will) Stay in the Race Through South Dakota

Bookmark and Share

As expected, Barack Obama rolled through the Wyoming caucuses and Mississippi primary this past week, apparently dulling the shine of the Clinton campaign's big victories in Texas and Ohio on March 4th.

Due to those Clinton victories, the growing pressure for her to exit the race subsided, at least until the results of the Pennsylvania primary on April 22nd are known. But Clinton is expected to do as well in Pennsylvania as she did in the neighboring state of Ohio, so the question becomes—what then?

There remains a constant chatter within the media and by Obama supporters that Clinton cannot mathematically win the pledged delegate vote, therefore eventually necessitating a Clinton exit from the race (and the sooner the better). That is unlikely to happen.

First, Clinton is likely to win several more contests—Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Puerto Rico. While Obama has done very well in Western states, those have all been caucus victories with the exception of Utah (Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, North Dakota, Nebraska, Washington, Wyoming). Overall, Obama has a nearly 2:1 lead over Clinton in states won, but they are deadlocked in state primary contests (14 to 14, including Florida and Michigan). Clinton should therefore be competitive in the remaining Western states—all of which hold primaries: Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota. Obama, on the other hand, should do well in North Carolina, but the Illinois Senator is not 'guaranteed' any more victories through June.

Therefore, it is quite possible Clinton could come close to running the table with the 10 or so remaining contests. Such a scenario would not likely give her the majority of pledged delegates, but the momentum and positive media coverage she would receive would go a long way in solidifying and expanding her lead over Obama among super delegates. A perceived "Obama collapse" at the end of the primary season could make super delegates nervous about pitting Obama as their nominee against John McCain. The media and super delegates alike will be reading the matchup polls come May and June to see if they have a 'winner' in Obama or Clinton.

Furthermore, it is in Clinton's interest to remain in the race because it is not yet certain what will happen in Michigan and Florida. Clinton would stand to gain delegates (and a lot of positive media exposure) if Florida revotes or somehow validates its January 29th returns. A revote in Michigan would be a close race between the two candidates.

Therefore, Clinton has everything to gain by remaining in the race, if one can assume her candidacy is about winning the White House. Calls for Clinton to back down at some point for the good of the Democratic Party are not going to be heard, so long as there is a chance Clinton could win the nomination outright.

Lastly, it is a political observer's dream to witness such a tight race—a 100-delegate lead may sound like a lot, but it has been decades since the Democratic nominating process has gone down to the wire like the Obama-Clinton battle. May the games continue…

Previous post: Obama Wins Mississippi Primary
Next post: Will Bush Drive Independents Away from McCain in Upper Midwest?

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

Political Crumbs

Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting