Hillary's Winning (In Her Own Mind)

As Obama prepares to celebrate winning a majority of pledged delegates, Hillary and her campaign continue promoting the fable of her impending victory. Pundits and columnists have suggested various rationalizations for her staying in the race: she's keeping her supporters involved so that they're more likely to support the eventual nominee (Obama); she doesn't want to embarrass Obama by winning a primary after she's withdrawn, etc.

Her campaign's new excuse for its poor performance is "slanted press coverage." But as Michelle Cottle's article in The New Republic details, Hillary's campaign first wasted too much time anticipating her coronation, and then was beset with infighting, inability to craft a consistent message, and underestimating her opponent. And the conclusion is inescapable that the mismanagement began at the top.

Clinton's flimsy claim to her campaign's viability rests on her assertion that she is winning in the swing states, and that she is winning the popular vote. "I'm slightly ahead", in the popular vote she told CBS's Katie Couric in an interview the day after the West Virginia primary.

The web site Real Clear Politics is tracking votes and polls for both parties in the 2008 election. For the Democratic primary it shows six different versions of the popular vote: the actual popular vote total per the Democratic primary rules, the actual vote plus estimates for caucus states (IA, NV, ME, WA), the actual vote plus Florida, the actual vote plus Florida plus estimates for caucus states, the actual vote plus Florida and Michigan, and the actual vote plus Florida, Michigan, and estimates for caucus states. As of this writing, of the six different ways of counting the popular vote, Clinton is only ahead if Florida and Michigan are counted, and the caucus state estimates are excluded.

As for the claim that she's winning in the swing states, the web site PolitiFact.com writes that "her math doesn't add up."

As we've noted elsewhere:

Just because a candidate wins a primary in a given state does not mean the candidate has an upper hand in that state in the general election.

That's because primary elections are very different than general elections. Primary voters tend to be more partisan and more active in politics, so candidates adapt their messages to appeal to them. In a general election, the candidates can usually depend on support from their own party, so they focus more on moderates and independents.

Also, many states lean toward one party, so a victory or loss in a primary does not indicate how the state will go in November. For example, Obama lost Massachusetts to Clinton. Yet if he is the nominee, he is a strong favorite because Massachusetts has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1984.

That said, Clinton's claim that she's "winning in the swing states is still false." Fourteen states are generally acknowledged to be the "swing states:" Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. Clinton has won primaries or caucuses in: Florida, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, New Mexico and Nevada. Obama has won in Virginia, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado and Washington.

That's six for Clinton and six for Obama.

And Obama is expected to win Oregon on May 20.