Calling Bullshit on Ed Rendell

[Hailtothechimp]

On Meet the Press today, he claimed that Clinton's electoral vote count in the states she won was "about 260" while Obama's was "about 180." Sounds convincing until you look at the actual numbers.

Obama's wins (with # of Electoral votes)

Iowa =7
Nevada =5 (he won more delegates, even though he lost the popular vote)
S.Carolina =8
Alabama =9
Alaska =3
Colorado =9
Connecticut =7
Delaware =3
Georgia =15
Idaho =4
Illinois =21
Kansas =6
Minnesota =10
Missouri =11 (a draw in terms of delegates, but he won the popular vote)
N. Dakota =3
Utah =5
Louisiana =9
Nebraska =5
Washington =11
Maine =4
DC =3
Virginia =13
Maryland =10
Hawaii =4
Wisconsin =10
Vermont =3
Wyoming =3

Total =201 Electoral Votes

Significantly more than Rendell gave him credit for. Even taking away Nevada, Obama is still at 195. Taking away Missouri leaves him with 184, which of course is the number he rounded down to arrive at 180. All ties clearly go to the dealer in Ed Rendell's world.


Now let's look at Clinton's wins:
New Hamshire =4
Arizona =10
Arkansas =6
California =55
Massachusetts =12
New Jersey =15
New Mexico =5
New York =31
Oklahoma =7
Tennessee =11
Ohio =20
Rhode Island =4

Total= 180 Electoral Votes.

Significantly less than Rendell claimed. No surprise there.

These totals leave out Florida (27 EVs), Michigan (17 EVs) and Texas (34 EVs). It's fair to say, given the caucus + primary system in Texas, that it will be a wash electorally as far as delegates go. I could argue that since he will end up with more delegates, the 34 EVs should end up in his column. I can't envision a scenario where she rightfully gets them (but I'm sure Ed Rendell can). So, using the EdMath, she's now gone from 180 to 214 with the addition of Texas.

Now on to Florida. I'm sure Ed would give them to her, because that's the rigged game he's running, so now she goes from the aforementioned 214 up to 241. This is closer to the 260 that he claimed she has, but also represents a concession that has not been made by Obama and may never be made at all.

Finally, there's Michigan. Ed magnanimously called for a revote there, since even he cannot claim a state where Obama's name was not on the ballot as a victory for Clinton. However, he did go ahead and give her all of the 17 electoral votes the state has, bringing her up to 258, which must be the number he was referring to (after rounding up, of course). So his Michigan strategy is don't claim victory there, but give her the electoral votes to pad the numbers and make his phony argument seem more convincing.

Sorry for the long post, but if you're gonna call bullshit on a governor of a state, you need to back it up. And I have.

[bilgewaterbill]

1. Excellent work!!

[DerekJ]

2. K & R

[rocktivity]

3. Shouldn't Texas go to Obama since he got the majority of the delegates?

After all, delegates are the prizes in primaries and caucuses, not popularity.

:headbang:
rocknation

[fadedrose]

4. We have 8 years of Bush/Cheney, and pray the Dems get in

And look what we get - Rendell. Surely we have better people...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. this is the kind of posting I like to see here

FACTUAL. Not flamebait. Backing up contentions with FACTS. Thanks!