Clinton’s Advantages over Obama

Published in Ming Pao
(Taiwan) on 2008-03-13
by Ziqiang Cai (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Weihao Zhang. Edited by .
On Jan 8th, Hilary Clinton won New Hampshire with the help of her infrequent tears; Then on Feb 5th, Super Tuesday, she again captured populous California and New York although Obama won most states;

The 3rd "Marvelous Victory" came on March 4th for this "Comeback Gal". She unbelievably won Ohio and Texas primaries after straight losses within a month - and so the Democratic primaries continue with suspense.

Magic Ohio:

After assuring her victories on Tuesday, Hilary Clinton confidently said to her constituents during the celebration, "You know what they say, as Ohio goes, so goes the nation!"

These words certainly have a basis. In the history of the United States, never did a presidential candidate, Democratic or Republican, , win the White House without winning Ohio in the primary.

Ohio, which has 20 electoral votes, always plays a crucial role. In the 2000 election, Bush won over Gore only by 50% to 46% (Nader from the Green Party won 3%) and took all of Ohio’s 20 electoral votes. When it came to 2004, Kerry narrowed the margin from 4% to 2%. If in 2008, one Democrat wins Ohio by 2%, the entire Republican win by 286 to 251 from 2004 will be overturned.

Two weaknesses of Obama:

Although Barak Obama has approximately 100 votes more than Hilary Clinton, he has two weaknesses that may eventually cause him to lose the presidential election when he meets the Republican candidate.

First, of the seven “big states” which have the most electoral votes, six have finished their Democratic primaries. Hilary Clinton won four of them but Obama won only one. Clinton also won Florida whose votes were considered invalid due to an unauthorized early primary. For Obama, not winning the majority of the big states will not suffice.

Second, and most significantly, there is this “Swing States” problem. A “winner-takes-all system” is adopted in the US Presidential Election. In other words, even if you have only one more popular vote in California, you can take all 55 electoral votes. President Bush took this advantage eight years ago in Florida. He only won several hundred more popular votes than Gore, but he was able to take over all 25 electoral votes and eventually become the president.

Therefore, it is extremely crucial to capture the states in which the two parties are separated by a narrow margin. If the candidate wins a primary by ten thousand votes, he/she may win his/her Party tens of electoral votes.

According to the 2004 US Presidential election results, “Swing States” are defined as those in which the two Parties’s votes differ by less than 5%. We find 12 States that fit into this category.

Clinton leads in Swing States:

Of the 12 Swing States, ten have already finished their primaries. Clinton won four of them. You may say they are well-matched in strength after just a glance. But a deeper look will reveal that Clinton also won Florida and Michigan where their primaries were considered invalid. Including these two, Clinton actually won 78 electoral votes out of the ten “Swing States”, while Obama won only 35.

Once again, one cannot win the eventual presidential election just because he/she receives more popular votes across the nation. Victory usually comes from victory in the “Swing States”. At this point, Clinton obviously has more advantages.

Obama, from this point of view, may win the Democratic Primary under this particular system and particular rules. However, he may lose the other battle for the Presidency under a completely different system and completely different rules.


繼1月8日在新罕布什爾州中以淚水絕地反勝;2月5日「超級星期二」在加州、紐約幾個大州中穩住陣腳;3月4日又成了這位Comeback Gal(打不死女郎)的第三個「大奇蹟日」,本來命懸一線的希拉里,在事前民調看淡的情下,在關鍵的俄亥俄州和得克薩斯州之初選中,同時絕處縫生,再次顯示其打不死韌力。

 俄亥俄的關鍵地位

 一洗頹風的希拉里,在其祝捷演說中信心百倍的說:「You know what they say, as Ohio goes, so goes the nation.」(你知大家怎樣說,贏得俄亥俄,就贏得美國)

 她這樣說是因為在美國近代史上,不管民主黨或共和黨,還沒有任何一位未贏得俄亥俄州初選的參選人,能贏得白宮的紀錄。

 俄亥俄州當然重要,它有20張選舉人票,在2000年大選,小布殊以50%對46%的直選票贏了戈爾(第三候選人納德拿到3%),拿走20張選舉人票;到了2004年大選,克里已經把差距由4個百分點收窄至僅2個百分點,如果今次走前多一步反勝,一來一回,共和黨上屆以286對251張選舉人票贏民主黨的局面,就會完全翻盤。

 奧巴馬選情上兩大弱點

 雖然奧巴馬至今在黨代表票上仍然領先希拉里約100票,但他卻有兩個致命弱點。

 首先,在7個擁有超過20張選舉人票的大州中,有6個民主黨已舉行初選,當中希拉里贏得4個,奧巴馬只贏得1個,在因為一些技術原因而宣布初選無效的佛羅里達這個州中,也是由希拉里贏出。未能贏得大州,奧巴馬的威望始終大打折扣,欠缺說服力。

 更重要、更關鍵的是,第二,在游離州份(Swing States)中兩人的實力對比。美國總統大選採用的是「勝者囊括制」(winner-takes-all system),換句話說,即使你在加州只贏多過對手1張直選票,你都可以一次過拿走55張的選舉人票。8年前小布殊就是如此,在佛羅里達以幾百票力克戈爾,全奪25張選舉人票,搶走總統寶座。

 因此,在兩黨選情咬得很緊,雙方差距很窄的州,就別具戰略價值,因為那個候選人可以為黨拿多一萬幾千票,就可能可以一來一回,幾十張選舉人票的上落;相反,在選情拉得很開的州(無論是你贏還是我贏),多些票少些票也不礙事。

 如果我們拿2004年美國總統大選結果作為參考,以兩黨選票差距不超過5%作為基準,以此來定義什麼是游離州份,我們將會找出附表二中的12個州份。

 希拉里在游離州份佔優

 在12個游離州份中,有10個民主黨已舉行初選,當中希拉里贏得4個,奧巴馬亦贏得4個,驟眼看來,屬半斤八,旗鼓相當。但再看深一層,在因為一些技術原因而宣布初選無效的佛羅里達和密歇根兩個州中,都是由希拉里贏出。如果把兩州一起包攬計算,在這10個州中,希拉里共拿到78張選舉人票,奧巴馬只拿到35張。

 再說多一遍,要贏得總統大選,關鍵不單是候選人在全國贏得幾多直選票,而是能夠攻克幾多游離州份,在這方面希拉里明顯比奧巴馬優勝。

 從這個角度看,奧巴馬或許能在一個特定制度和遊戲規則下,贏出民主黨初選;但在完全不同的另一個特定制度和遊戲規則之下,他可能卻會為民主黨斷送了總統的寶座。

 作者是中大政治與行政學系高級導師
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Japan: US-Japan Defense Minister Summit: US-Japan Defense Chief Talks Strengthen Concerns about Single-Minded Focus on Strength

Taiwan: A Brief Look at Trump’s Global Profit Grab

Taiwan: Taipei Must Act To Soften Trade Blows

Taiwan: Trump Makes Another Bid

Taiwan: Leadership at a Challenging Time