Senator Clinton, Be Honest

1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 : to create a false or misleading impression
     In recent days, Senator Clinton and her surrogates have been claiming that Senator Clinton leads in the popular vote.  This statement does not violate the first definition, but it does "create a false or misleading impression."

    First, it is important to consider how Senator Clinton draws her conclusion.  She omits the totals in caucus states (which followed the rules, by the way) and includes the results from Michigan and Florida (which did not follow the rules).  According to the count at RealClearPolitics.com, this math puts Hillary Clinton ahead by .45% or over 160,000 votes.

    However, as a politically informed and honest person would admit, it would be deceiving to claim that Senator Clinton has received more votes than Obama.  For one thing, it creates the impression that there was always a choice between the two candidates.  Obama and Edwards were not on the ballot in Michigan.  Thus, while forming their calculations, the Clinton campaign claims an over 300,000 vote lead in that state.  As we all know, Clinton did win Michigan by over 300,000 votes.  She received a little more than 90,000 votes more than her next competitor, uncommitted.  Senator Clinton claiming victory in Michigan is like George Allen claiming he beat Mark Warner by over a million votes in 2006.  Allen was the only one on the ballot and Warner was not even competing.  Would it be inaccurate to say Allen got over a million more votes than Warner in 2006?  No.  Would it be laughable and misleading?  Yes.  

    In the case of both Florida and Michigan, Senator Clinton is creating the false impression that it was a fair competition.  Aside from violating the rules, neither candidate competed in either Florida or Michigan.  With New York being a primary source of new residents to the State of Florida, should we be surprised that Hillary Clinton was the default candidate?  In a state where the voters knew very little about Obama and were extremely familiar with Senator Clinton, should we not expect her to win the state by a huge margin.  As most of the past contests show, when Obama and Clinton actually compete in a state, her numbers generally fall and his generally rise.  We have seen her double digit leads in states like Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania decline to single digits as time went on.

    Thus, Clinton is lying not because her statement is inaccurate, but because it violates many of the underlying assumptions people have when they hear her say she "won."  When you hear a candidate say I "beat the others," you generally assume all candidates were on the ballot, they had an equal opportunity to campaign in the state, and the voters and candidates believe the results matter.

    Senator Clinton is smart enough to know she is misleading people.  She knows that neither competed in either states.  She knows that Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan.  She is making inflammatory comments once again because she really will say anything to win.  Like many of her past comments, Clinton does not either realize or care about the damage she is inflicting on the party and the impact it may have on the general election.  She is convincing many voters in Michigan and Florida that Obama is working against them and convincing many other Democrats that Obama's nomination is flawed.  This will decrease the Democrats' chances in November and depress Democratic turnout.  

    Senator Clinton, please stop putting yourself before the country and the party and please stop lying.

UPDATE:  Kos has some thoughts up about this very same topic: http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Comments