Obama will argue that, as the delegate leader, he is the “real victor” and the superdelegates should ratify his lead. Clinton will likely argue that she’s ahead in the popular vote or, if she’s slightly behind, that if you add in the popular votes of Michigan and Florida, she got more votes. Again, if these patterns continue, both will be correct.
As ace US News & World Report political analyst Michael Barone has noted, it’s the 2000 election controversy all over again — down to “count all the votes” (once the Gore slogan, now Clinton’s) and “don’t change the rules in the middle” (once the Bush thesis, now Obama’s). Like the election that year, this controversy could well end up in the courts. And, when it’s all over, one side will feel, somewhat rightfully, that it was robbed.
The Democrats lost the White House in 1968, in part because the public witnessed the chaos surrounding their convention in Chicago. This year could produce something similar, only it will be played out over weeks, in slow motion. Lest we forget, the November election is only nine weeks after the Democrats assemble in Denver, not a lot of time to get a muddled act together.
There’s one way to avoid this whole mess, of course. Obama could win Ohio, Texas, or Pennsylvania and make Clinton’s arguments moot. The alternative is a result that stands to benefit only one candidate. His name is John McCain.
THE FIELD
REPUBLICANS
JOHN MCCAIN
Odds: 1-15 | past week: same
MIKE HUCKABEE
Odds: 30-1 | same
DEMOCRATS
BARACK OBAMA
Odds: 5-7| past week: 6-7
HILLARY CLINTON
Odds: 7-5| 7-6
On the Web
The Presidential Tote Board blog: http://www.thephoenix.com/toteboard
