Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Democrats Are Considering Dropping Superdelegates Altogether [View all]karynnj
(59,503 posts)It is adding apples and oranges and thus down weights the primary states. If you tried to correct for that by weighting the states, you would get something near the pledged delegates.
The "popular vote" was never spoken of in 2004, 2000 or before. The first mention of it was in February 2008, when Clinton did less well than her team planned on superTuesday. They hoped to have her so far ahead then that she would have been the almost certain nominee. Instead, Obama and she were nearly tied. In addition, he was better positioned for the next group of states. Her team had been so confident in the I think 23 SuperTuesday states, they had not done much for the next states. Obama's team was fighting for a long shot victory and they knew every contest would matter.
This is why as soon as results came in, the Clinton team first saw they could lose the race. One response was to socialize the idea that the superdelegates could opt to give the nomination to the slightly behind in pledged delegates candidate. They simultaneously pushed that it could be justified if she won the popular vote. That discussion was to normalize that idea. They knew she very likely would have more votes because she won many big primaries.
However, it was a sign her team KNEW she was potentially going to lose. Note neither Gore or Kerry who won easily ever spoke of the popular vote.