SNAPSHOT ANALYSIS OF OBAMA AND CLINTON PRIMARY VICTORIES IN THE 2004 SWING STATES -- A WAY OUT OF THE ALLIGATOR PIT? The Democrats are up to their eyeballs in alligators these days. Obama says he has won more states and racked up more delegates and raw vote totals, and so it would be “undemocratic” for superdelegates to award the nomination to Clinton even if he has failed to clinch the 2,025 delegates needed for victory. Obama makes this fairness argument while at the same time trying to block the staging of new primary contests in Florida and Michigan, important swing states that may determine the outcome of the general election on November. Obama appears ready to poison the well if he does not get the nomination. Clinton counters that she has won the big states that will count most in the general election, that Obama wants to change the rules so that “close” gets the cigar, and that the superdelegate system was created to serve as a tie-breaker in just this kind of deadlock. Yet Clinton wants to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations even though Obama did not even appear on the ballot in Michigan, and neither campaigned in either state. (Clinton won 870,986 votes in Florida compared to Obama’s 576,214), a difference of 294,772.) She says she is ready to fight on to the bitter end, even though many Democrats fear that her increasingly negative campaign tactics will do lasting damage. Many Clinton and Obama voters will stick to their guns no matter what. But the majority of Democrats (and many progressives), will support either candidate against McCain, and are looking for a principled way to assess the relative strength of the Democratic primary contenders and award the nomination to the strongest candidate. What do the votes tell us? Read the attached file for an analysis and proposal.

Attachment	Size
ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY VICTORIES IN THE 2004 SWING STATES.doc	143.5 KB