The Political Chase

Rendell: 4 States and Electoral College Govern Dem Nomination

After Gov. Ed Rendell subtly presented his money-spin on Meet the Press today (mentioned here), he argued that four states — OH, FL, PA, and MI — and the Electoral College system are the factors that should and will govern how the Democratic Party selects its presidential nominee. Interestingly enough, Tim Russert actually challenged the Rendell Rules with a few provocative questions.

Russert pointed out that a recent New York Times/CBS News poll (pdf) indicated most Democrats believe Barack Obama has a better chance of beating John McCain than Hillary Clinton (Obama 56% to Clinton’s 32%).

Poll, schmoll according to Rendell. Democrats have been applying the wrong rules and math.

"Well Tim, I don’t think they’re doing the electoral math very well. We elect the President of the United States. . .by the Electoral College. And and no Democrat can win the Electoral College without carrying three of the four big states — Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Michigan."

And now that the party has conveniently changed to the new Rendell Rules, Florida and Michigan’s invalidated primaries are legitimate. All Hillary Clinton has to do is win Pennsylvania and the campaign is over. Mark Penn can go back to Bogota, Colombia on April 23.

RENDELL:  "Assuming Senator Clinton wins in Pennsylvania, she will have demonstrated — and she’s demonstrated — she’s running way ahead of Obama against McCain in all four of those states. And those are crucial. And that’s why she is the strongest candidate in the Fall, without question…

"It’s not just primaries. If you’d see the match-ups in these primaries and not just these polls. In Ohio, Obama trails McCain by 6 points. Senator Clinton is ahead by 5 points. In Pennsylvania, same thing. In Florida and Michigan, the same thing. She runs better and is more likely to carry those big states.

"You can’t win — a Democrat cannot win the presidential vote in the Electoral College without them. And that’s what the superdelegates are going to have to consider — whose the best candidate to put together the electoral map in the Fall."

Did you catch that? Superdelegates wait till the convention. And national polls or any other state polling means nothing. Just Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Russert was kind enough to make note that Barack Obama is a candidate and there are a few states his campaign believes he will win, even if they are not applicable under Rendell Rules.

RUSSERT:  "The Obama people counter, Governor, that they have a chance to win Virginia. They have a chance to win Colorado. They have a chance to Nevada. They have a chance to win states — broaden the electoral college map — that Senator Clinton can’t win."

That seemed to be a bit too complicated for Rendell and definitely not in accordance with Rendell Rules of only Four Big States, so he just starts jabbering about other states that Russert did not even mention. But Russert did not let it slide, and instead pointed out quite well how ludicrous Rendell Rules were.

RENDELL:  Yeah, but, I don’t get that, because some of those states are Arizona and New Mexico, and Sen. Clinton won Arizona and New Mexico. . .So, I don’t understand that math that they’re saying, that their the best candidate to carry those states. They didn’t carry half of them of the primaries.

RUSSERT:  So, Sen. Clinton could not win then, Missouri and Connecticut and Colorado and the 28 contests that Obama won?

RENDELL:  Tim, don’t misunderstand me. I have disagreed with people who said Sen. Obama can’t win Pennsylvania. He can. And if he’s the nominee Bob Casey and I will be working together with every ounce of energy we have. But Sen. Clinton is more likely to carry Pennsylvania. She’s more likely to carry Michigan, and Ohio, and Florida, and the key states that we have to win.

Sen. Obama was losing, just ten days ago, was losing New Jersey to Sen. McCain and even in Massachusetts. No Democrat can survive with making those two states toss-ups.

As for Obama’s surrogate, Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA), he was weak and provided  little substantive help to Obama’s campaign. He may be a wine-sipping elitist in Pennsylvania, but on the national scene, he might as well be a cookies-and-milk man.

Responding to Rendell’s BS, Casey points out if candidates are judged "based on polls a month ahead of time, then some of us would not be sitting here." He added, "I think Sen. Obama has the ability to as a general election candidate to get votes that Democrats have never gotten before. He’s already proven that."

So, there you have it, Rendell Rules. Live ‘em.