Err of Inevitability
Plus, tragic Kerry Brow drama.
Crude Wishful Thinking Reality Check: If you a) take the number of delegates Kerry has won so far and b) add the number of superdelegates he already has according to the N.Y. Times (101) and c) assume he wins the remaining elected delegates at the same rate he's been winning them (approx. 52%) and d) assume, generously, he gets all the currently uncommitted superdelegates (about 500)--and Kerry still doesn't mathematically wrap up the nomination on March 2, the date of the huge 10 state superprimary, or even by the end of the March 9 four-state southern primary, according to my admittedly insomniac algebra. .... He'll be close to 200 delegates short of the magic 2,161 number.. ... After March 9, almost 1,000 delegates will still remain to be chosen in primaries and caucuses. ... Am I missing something, or doesn't the nomination race usually come down to this sort of counting? And if it does, don't Democrats still have at least a month to get cold feet? ... Update: [You are missing something: Michigan. I told you to stay off the Sudafed-ed. Michigan. Right. 128 delegates. And I mislaid some people in Missouri. Also, CNN's numbers seem more up-to-date-ed. Going by CNN, Kerry now has 409. More important, he's won about 60% of the elected delegates so far. If he maintains that pace, by my calculation he'll still need all of the uncommitted superdelegates, plus a couple of dozen more, to go over the line on March 9. Maybe he can get the necessary extra dozens by converting unpledged delegates previously committed to Dean. That seems do-able, but not easy by any means. Still plenty of time for feet to cool! ... [Thanks to alert reader C.S.] ... P.S.: I'm not saying the other candidates won't run out of money or willpower. I'm just saying that if they don't, they're not crazy to hold out the hope that Kerry can be beaten. I also agree with the CW that if Kerry is going to be beaten, it's important that two of his rivals (Clark and Dean, I hope) drop out to set up a national one-on-one Kerry vs. not-Kerry match that could hold down Kerry's delegate haul on March 2 and March 9. ... P.P.S.: Does this mean Kerry will try to somehow prop up Clark in Tennessee? ... 5:05 A.M.
WaPo's Dewar and Balz do a good job of highlighting the contradictions in Kerry's rationalizations for his 1991 vote against authorizing war versus Iraq and his 2002 vote in favor of authorizing war. Sample:
Kerry argued in 1991 that there was no need to pass the resolution to send a message threatening force against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, although that was his justification for supporting the 2002 resolution.
Before and after last year's war on Iraq, Kerry criticized the president for failing to assemble the kind of coalition Bush's father put together in 1991. But in his 1991 floor statement, Kerry was dismissive of the elder Bush's coalition. [Emphasis added.]
The point isn't to tangle Kerry up in the minutiae of his speeches. The point is that there is a much simpler rubric that completely--without contradiction or complication--explains both Kerry votes, namely that he did what he thought was the politically safest thing to do. Voting for Gulf I, as Al Gore did, took some foresight and guts for a Democratic presidential contender. Kerry lacked one or the other or both. ... P.S.: Unlike many Congressional votes that will be held against Kerry or cited in his favor, these were not show votes, but real votes with (as Dean points out) real consequences. ... P.P.S.: Why didn't Gore endorse Kerry, anyway? Having been his senate colleague, maybe the former VP has a few observations about him. Some enterprising reporter should ask Gore before he regains his balance and falls into line. ... 1:59 A.M.
Err of Inevitability: Poor Howard Dean is now being actively hurt by his bigshot endorsements, as his endorsers pressure him to get out of the race (so they can jump on another candidate's train). What did AFSCME do for Dean, exactly? ... And take a look at this unusually excellent New York Times graphic. Kerry has a long way to go, delegate-wise, before he mathematically crosses the finish line and clinches the nomination. Why should Dean (or Edwards, or Clark) drop out when the broader public is only just now finding out about Kerry's potential liabilities--especially if (as polls suggest) by staying in Kerry's rivals haven't been hurting the party. ... P.S.: Even if they go negative on Kerry, do Democrats (as Noam Scheiber has asked) really want to wait until the general election campaign to find out if Kerry can take a punch? .... 1:07 A.M.
Tomorrow's Dick Morris Column Today: With Bush now clearly vulnerable, how long before Hillary makes "I'm available" noises? ... 12:59 A.M.
Saturday, February 7, 2004
Kerry Brow Tragedy: Officials had plenty of warning. 4:20 P.M.
Friday, February 6, 2004
Michael Kinsley seems to share kausfiles' enthusiasm for Sen. Kerry. ... 3:28 PM
Photograph of Howard Dean on the Slate home page by Jim Bourg/Reuters.


