For those mathematically challenged individuals who believe Senator Clinton's claim that she won the popular vote here are the totals from NBC News:Staying on the statistical front: Check out these cumulative vote totals for primaries and caucuses to date:
States Awarding Delegates
Total Vote %
Obama 9,373,334 50%
Clinton 8,674,779 46%
Others 726,095 4%
With Florida
Total Vote %
Obama 9,942,375 49%
Clinton 9,531,987 46%
Others 984,236 4%
With Florida and Michigan
Total Vote %
Obama 9,942,375 47%
Clinton 9,860,138 47%
Others 1,249,922 6%
*** Follow the leader: So no matter how you slice the total popular vote, Obama is the leader. He's at 50% in states that have awarded delegates; he's at 49% and leads Clinton by 3 points in states where both their names were on the ballot, and his lead is big enough that he leads even when you factor in Michigan where Obama's name wasn't on the ballot. Or check out the Jed Report:Clinton's dishonest popular vote claim has a new caveat
Hillary Clinton claims to have won the so-called popular vote, but if you pay close attention to her words she is now using a critical qualifier: "in presidential primaries."
Many people won't notice Clinton's caveat, but the meaning of her carefully chosen words could not be more clear: her definition of "popular vote" now includes only primary states. In the past, she excluded four caucus states that did not report vote totals: Iowa, Maine, Nevada, and Washington. Now she's excluding all of them.
By excluding caucus states, Clinton is dismissing the preferences of voters in fourteen states, home to more than 56 million Americans and nearly one in five voters. And by Clinton's new rules, they might as well have never voted.
As she might say, how can you win in November if you don't count one-fifth of the Electoral College?
For Hillary Clinton, this has nothing principle. It's a simple math problem: the only way she can claim any sort of "popular vote" victory is by refusing to count all the votes.
|
