March 2, 2008

Mathematically Impossible

Posted by Adam Graham in : Presidential Race 2008

Mathematically impossible has become a phrase those who’ve watched coverage of the Mike Huckabee presidential campaign have heard ad nauseum. I become very wary of overused phrases, because they sound very much like talking points rather than facts.

Mathematically impossible is one of those talking point phrases that is inaccurate. It is mathematically impossible for Huckabee to win the nomination outright through the number of delegates won at upcoming primaries and caucuses. It is not mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination. In order to secure the nomination a candidate needs 1191 delegates. In order to be assured of the nomination before the convention, a candidate must have 1191 pledged delegates. A pledged delegate is bound to support the candidate they are pledged to no matter what. Low poll numbers in the general election, substantive allegations of felonious acts, or acting like Tom Cruise on Oprah Winfrey will not deny a candidate the votes of his pledged delegates on the first ballot.

On the other hand, unpledged delegates can vote for whomever they want on the convention floor. Many news organizations, in a rush to seal the deal for their long-time media darling, have called unpledged delegates to see how they would vote and find many saying they’d support McCain.

Of course, the problem here is the convention is not being held today or a week from now. Rather the convention is an event that is six months in the future. Six months is an eternity in politics. Six months ago, Rudy Giuliani was the frontrunner. Political careers can be destroyed in weeks. Therefore to assume the thoughts of pledged delegates right now will be their thoughts six months from now assumes far too much in our fluid political world.

Only when a candidate has 1191 delegates pledged can we say he is the nominee (and McCain only has 874). Until that occurs, it is mathematically possible for someone else to be the winner.

The term mathematically impossible is incredibly inaccurate. As every baseball fan knows, math gives hope to every improbable cause. Even the Tampa Bay Devil Rays were not mathematically eliminated from baseball’s playoff race until Mid-September of last season.

Unfortunately, one has to admit the term has been largely successful in achieving its goals, as many conservatives have surrendered in the fight against John McCain, acceding to a nominee that we cannot stand and tolerate. Many have, instead, found their purpose as unethical saboteurs of the Democratic Party process crossing over to defeat Hillary or Obama, depending on their strategic view.

In the end, this election has been a lesson in how the media can manipulate elections and create news, with phrases repeated often and long enough. News anchors and stories chattering on about impossibilities and candidates having “no chance” as a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion or analysis, have created a perception that doesn’t match fact. But the constant, incessant buzz is taking a toll and creating the reality it alleges.

We’ve also learned that just become someone labels a news organization “conservative” doesn’t mean it will provide reliable information on the presidential election. And alas, blogs, for which so many people have so much hope, are only as good as their biases and sources allow them to be.

For whatever reason, be it John McCain’s Washington Insider status v. Huckabee as the man from Arkansas, a fear of losing to Obama or Hillary should the primary campaign go on one minute longer, conservative media has been just as likely to play the game as the liberal press, only with more passion. The same people who were telling us a few weeks ago that Mike Huckabee was only staying in this race to help John McCain, are now complaining about Mike Huckabee hurting John McCain by continuing in this race.

Perhaps it was because outlets such as National Review are greatly responsible for the McCain ascendancy. Conservative media, including yours truly, spent a great part of December providing a contextless attack on the record of Mike Huckabee, while ignoring the rise of John McCain in New Hampshire, thus giving him an effective free pass.

Much to their annoyance, Huckabee not only survived these attacks, but won eight states’ contests. I assumed that Huckabee was obviously running to be John McCain’s VP, and found egg on my face as he continued on. I was also guilty of attacking the unconservative portions of his record and platform in my writing and ignoring the positive parts. I was man enough to own up to my errors and admit that I’d goofed They weren’t.

These errors in perception created by conservative media hounds are huge. A man who favors restoring America’s military to the same percentage of GDP that it was at under Ronald Reagan is thought by many to be as weak on national defense as Jimmy Carter.

The lesson for the future is that media bias exists, regardless of ideological stripe, and that no media outlet can be trusted to do your thinking for you. Of course, it’s still possible for voters to revolt against media-imposed groupthink in this cycle when they go to the polls in Texas and Ohio. After all, it’s not mathematically impossible.

Share and Enjoy:

Comments (39)

39 Comments

Comment by common folk

It is clear that National Review and Foxnews are worse than the liberal media in manipulating the election. I have switched to watch cnn, ABC and others. I do have choice and agenda pushing is boring at best after awhile.
Comment by Mark West

What about all of the attacks that McCain has survived to still have built the solid lead he has? Where is the NY Times hit piece on Huck?

I’m from Arkansas. Our economy SUCKS, our education system SUCKS…both were revamped under ole HUCK. HUCK SUCKS! That is why he isn’t winning the nomination.

Yes he is socially conservative but he is a fiscal moron. The only good fiscal idea he is floating is the flat tax. He never attempted to get it done in Arkansas so why should we believe he will do it on the national level. It’s rhetoric and conservatives are showing their gullibility in falling for it.
Comment by Mark West

Let’s be honest. As far as conservatism goes Huck is what we call a social conservative. That means pro-life, pro-gun, pro-family. Huck is a fiscal disaster, definitely not conservative by anyone’s stretch of the imagination. He didn’t fight against the centralization of public schooling in our state (allowed judicial activism to win). He attempted to get government scholarships for the children of illegal immigrants. He didn’t veto tax increases. He didn’t offer a Fair Tax initiative in 10 years (though he is campaigning on such now).

Under his leadership the Republican Party in our state (of which I am a part) split apart and now holds less seats in Congress than it did when he became Governor.

His administration is a recipe for disaster for the national GOP.

Mind you, I am a strong social conservative, but I’m ALSO a fiscal conservative. We need someone who is BOTH in the White House. John McCain has a proven record of both.
Comment by Adam Graham

A couple things here. First of all, the way you describe Huckabee’s time as Governor, it’s surprising he received 61% of the vote in the primary compared to John McCain’s 49% in Arizona and Mitt Romney’s 51% in Massachusetts. For clarification, Republicans have one less Seat in Congress from Arkansas, and I really have trouble believing Mike Huckabee was the culprit in Jay Dickey’s re-election loss in 2000.

Huckabee didn’t study the Fair Tax in Arkansas, and even if he had, a Democratic Legislature wouldn’t have approved it. It wasn’t until the campaign started that the Fair Tax people met with him

John McCain has a proven record of ticking off every portion of the Republican base, and also thinks your tax dollars ought to be used to destroy human embryos.
Comment by Mark West

The GOP needs to GROW. Huck couldn’t GROW the GOP as its head in our state. He made a mockery of it. Just do some easy Google research and you will see what I’m talking about. He hasn’t given any indication that he would be any different as Pres. The national GOP is fractured and in need of solid leadership. Huck didn’t provide it here and wouldn’t provide it there.

Huck should have gotten 80% if he was so good for Arkansas.
Comment by Mark West

Here, I’ll save you some trouble.

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/11/updated_huckabee_white_paper.php
Comment by Mark West

And for John

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/03/arizona_senator_john_mccains_t.php
Comment by Job

Fox news is fair and balanced, is says so on their logo. When you wanted to believe George Bush was the messiah Fox news was wonderful. It seems they’re only biased when you disagree with them. Just more evidence of the GOP implosion.
Comment by Speedzzter

“Mark West” appears to be a Romney troll.

Huckabee’s continuing electoral popularity in Arkansas proves a lot more than the complaining of a few Romney-ian bloggers.

Moreover, Mike Huckabee is obviously generating more excitement “on the stump” among many in the GOP base than old “hold your nose” and vote McCain (or even Mitt-the-Flip).

Of course, if some in the Arkansas GOP attacked Governor Huckabee and his supporters with the same verve, slander and hypocritical fanaticism as “Mark West” and the Romney-surrogate backed “Club for Growth,” Huckabee’s opponents are responsible for any split in the state party.

Huckabee is a strong Reagan conservative who governed in Arkansas as Reagan did in California.
Comment by cons3rvative

Good evening guys. Another great article Adam! (tings glasses of a beverage with Adam)

Wasn’t the “Glub for Growth” something Romney created for smear? Forgive me if I’m wrong. I haven’t seen anything sensible come from them yet.

The media has been an incredible influence in this nomination. First it promoted Romney, now it’s darling is McCain. If you publish enough “presumptive nominee” “coelesce” Mathematical impossibility” people will believe it. Our GOP nomination was hijacked by the media. It has worked, much to the disdain of people like me. Now the best my party has is John McCain and he’s the most conservative? I’ll be sick when I get done typing.

“What about all of the attacks that McCain has survived to still have built the solid lead he has? Where is the NY Times hit piece on Huck?”

Uh, the press buried that artice by the NYT as garbage. And, would rather report how Janet Huckabee went to Vegas and stayed at Hooter’s.
Where are the articles on McCain’s FEC issues now? Buried on page 3 of a google search. Fox is certainly friendly towards McCain, and appears that AP is as well.
McCain says he never applied for matching funds with the FEC, you can go to the FEC website and see this untruth.

McCain is not the best representative of our party, and it’s too late to do anything about it. You too will “Coelesce” or vote for Hillary.
Comment by Adam Graham

Yes, Mark, here’s what the Club for Growth has to say about John McCain:

While Senator McCain’s economic record contains a number of pro-growth positions, such as his support for school choice and free trade, and his steadfast opposition to wasteful government spending, his overall record is tainted by a marked antipathy towards the free market and individual freedom.

Stirring endorsement, particularly that part about opposition to Individual freedom. As for CFG, they’re usually pretty good. They make good endorsements for Congressional races, but I think with Huck for whatever reason, they weren’t able to see the forest through the trees, which is why they spent $750,000 in South Carolina against Huckabee which in effect helped McCain.
Comment by Lynn

If people had done their own homework and not followed Rush et al off a cliff, we would have a true conservative in this race with the ability to communicate with voters on the on the scale of Ronald Reagan. We have Limbaugh et al to thank for this mess.

Mike Huckabee has a real future in the Republican party. Like Reagan he was a governor of a liberal state before he became the all touted “Conservative God”. Romney spent MILLIONS of dollars. Millions more will not make him any more acceptable. He is wasting his time and money.

Who are the members of Club for Growth? Who died and made them king? Maybe someone should check their credentials before blindly accepting their recommendations.
Do your own homework!
Comment by Mark West

A few clarifications are in order.

First, I have not, do not, and will not ever support Mitt Romney. I believe he is a phoney. I voted for McCain on Super Tuesday in Arkansas thank you very much.

Second, I posted the Club for Growth links to be fair. Romney ran against both Mike Huckabee and John McCain so I figured that by posting his surrogates attacks against both that I would be seen as being fair. Looks as though that back-fired.

I have LIVED under a Mike Huckabee administration for 10 years. What have I seen? I’ve seen our education system become centralized in a manner that makes “No Child Left Behind” look like good policy. I’ve seen taxes increase. I’ve seen jobs leave (I live in Batesville and we have seen three factors close down leaving hundreds jobless). I’ve seen my Governor campaign FOR tax increases. I’ve met the Governor personally (I was a SBC pastor and met him at our state convention about 5 years ago). I’ve seen the GOP loose its ground due to its distrust of ole Huck. And you guys tell me this is the future of the national party! If this is true, a third party will soon be emerging. I hope and believe that you guys are wrong. He’s the soup of the day and tomorrow is coming soon. I’ve seen him fight harder for scholarships for the children of illegal immigrants than he did for the non-centralization of our education system.

If any of you want to take me to task on my conservative beliefs that’s fine. I’m as conservative as they come. I would rather see the White House in a moderately conservative’s hands than for it to go to Billary or Hotbama and their far, FAR, left ideology.

Huck doesn’t have national credibility. Just look at the exit polling data. He has a limited base. That limited base will not win an election.

Reagan is dead. I admire him. I still read his speeches. I post his quotes on my blog. But he is dead. We’ve got to move forward and pray that God will raise up another. Huck is NOT it. He hasn’t done a great job in Arkansas. Nothing he has done here convinces me that he will do any differently as President. We can’t just “make” someone the next Reagan, leave that to God.

This isn’t a wacko-hit job on Huck. He a likable guy. I find him very amuzing. I find his fiscal policies atrocious and unstomachable.

Again, I’m not a Romney-ite. How about asking before accusing?

I am, and have been, a John McCain supporter in this campaign. Romney was too fake, Huckabee too limited, Giuliani too liberal, and Paul is…well he is running for Congress.

I hope I cleared up some misunderstandings.
Comment by Adam Graham

Yeah, you had some things happen in Arkansas that you didn’t like, but at least a Majority of Republican voters chose Huckabee. McCain’s is a little more than an ego-centric man who thinks he’s here to save us.
Comment by Mark West

However, those who keep trying to anoint Huck as the future and Savior of our party are wrong. He is far from what the GOP needs.

He is the reason we now have a Constitution Party in Arkansas.
Comment by Mark West

http://www.cparkansas.com/
Comment by Adam Graham

Um, there’s Constitution Parties across the nation and activists across the nation. The Party started as US Taxpayer’s Party in 1992 (in protest of Huckabee’s candidacy for the U.S. Senate?) That doesn’t really even suggest anything.
Comment by Gerry Byrnes

With all the back and forth about Huckabee’s qualifications and record I keep waiting for someone to nail it. I guess it’s up to me to suggest that the frenzied opposition to Huckabee might be connected to his stand on frivolous lawsuits. The trial lawyers are organized, they have money, and they hate tort reform. Enough said.
Comment by Mark West

I know personally the organizers of the consititution party of Arkansas. When they organized, it was due to the Huck-a-publicans, and their seeming stranglehold on the state party. Let’s again look at conservatism. You have social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and total conservatives.

Huck’s support in Arkansas came from the fiscal liberals and social conservatives that dominate the Arkansas GOP. Unfortunately, there are not very many total conservatives.

Trial Lawyers? You’ve got to be kidding me…right?
Comment by Mark West

One final comment.

Most people in our state believe that Huck ran for Prez because he knew he had little chance of winning another statewide election (which he would need to do to win a Senate seat) or of winning in the Democrat leaning Congressional district that he lives in.
Comment by Adam Graham

Uh, yeah, that’s why the NRSC tries to get him to run. After executive experience, few people want to go to the Senate if they’ve got sense.
Comment by cons3rvative

Hello all;

Mark, I never lived in Arkansas but I know I like Huckabee. I admire him for his platform and think that he IS good for the GOP. I did not/ do not like Romney at all. I think he is what is bad for the GOP and good for the elite. Tonight Huckabee stepped down, and I’m not happy. I respect your opinion on Thompson, but I don’t like your opinion of Huckabee. Like you, I think I’m pretty darn conservative.

Adam, Thank you for your blogs. I’m glad I found you. You seem to have a knack at reflecting what I’m thinking lately.

To all, now I’m in a quagmire. My candidate stepped down and we only have McCain to support. How can I bring myself to support him? I don’t know if I can! I don’t have a choice unless I choose not to vote. Then it will only help the dems. I refuse to cross the aisle and vote Dem despite Ann Coulter’s advice. McCain can’t be worse can he? Do you all think that McCain will ask Huckabee for VP? That’s the only way I think I could vote for him. What happens now with the FEC issue? Do you think that McCain will get stymied until September?
Tonight I’m going to pour myself a tall glass of wine and try to sleep this nightmare off.
Comment by Adam Graham

My friend, some people feel better about this in 6 months, but I don’t think I will. If you can’t vote for McCain, you can always vote Republican the rest of the ticket and vote third party for President or write-in if no third party even comes close to your values.
Comment by Mark West

Guys, the sky isn’t falling.

I promise, this cycle will produce a BETTER candidate in the next primary. It always does.

However, let us not allow the absence of the “perfect” candidate cause us to give up the progress we have made over the last thee decades by virture of Billary or HotBama.

McCain will stand by what he says. That is one thing you can count on.
Comment by mary

Mark-

I have never lived in Arkansas. I do know that Governor Huckabee inherited a school system that was ranked 48th in the nation at the time. Its most recent ranking was 8th. Okay, you say it “stinks.” (I choose not to use the word you used, even though I recognize it is not considered profanity these days – no offense.) Guess what, Mark? Government schools generally do stink these days. That’s one reason why so many people have chosen to homeschool these days. The model is failing, all over the country.

I guess that’s Mike Huckabee’s fault, too.

As I said, I’ve never lived in Arkansas, but I’ve met hundreds of conservatives who do, thanks to this campaign. They don’t share your opinion of Mike.
Comment by Adam Graham

Actually, it should be pointed out, too. That more than 80% of Arkansas Republicans had a positive opinion of Huckabee, even though only 61% voted for him.
Comment by cons3rvative

Not that I trust the Post, but I found this

“”A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll shows McCain trailing in hypothetical matchups with both Clinton, by 6 percentage points, and Obama, by 12 points. That new poll and others also suggest that McCain will have a fight on his hands in attracting moderates and independents, a majority of whom not only have a highly negative opinion of Bush but also oppose the Iraq war, which the Arizona senator firmly backs”"

One thing is for sure. Obama has the Democrats energized.

Now our GOP needs to get some momentum, energy, excitement. Thus far McCain seems pretty lame. He hasn’t reached out to us conservatives except for attending the CPAC and Bush’s endorsement. It’s not enough!! How is he going to pull independent voters?
I think now more than ever my GOP chose the wrong nominee.
Even if McCain now chooses Brownback for VP, I don’t think that the right will be comfortable. Even if McCain smartly brings in Huckabee it will be a battle. I think we would energize behind Huckabee and pull independents and win the election. We need energy, ideas, and someone in the GOP that normal folks can relate to. The GOP’s rush for a nominee left us all hanging. Huckabee had huge percentages against McCain with absolutly no positive press/media. It will be interesting to see what McCain has up his sleeve in the next few months. Hopefully, he will pull us together somehow. He better, he’s the nominee.
Comment by Mark West

Who has Arkansas schools ranked 8th?

Does anyone want to make excuses for the Arkansas economy while we’re at it?

I’m in the 80% that have a favorable opinion of Huck. There is a difference in liking someone and believing that they are best suited for a job. I’m in the 39% that voted against him.

Huck dealt with MODERATE democrats in this state by-and-large and still allowed tax increases throughout his tenure. I imagine it would be much worse on the national level with the more liberal and aggressive bunch.

Huck doesn’t energize the GOP base, just a portion of that base (social conservatives). There exist two wings of that base.

OF COURSE MCCAIN IS TRAILING IN THE POLLS! Look at Dubya’s two campaigns. See where he was polling at this point. During the primaries the Dems get a national press love fest. I.E. last night I watched an anchor on Fox News interview a surrogate from BHO’s camp. He asked him how BHO plans to get out of Iraq. The surrogate said that BHO opposed the war in 2002 and still opposes it today and that he will in the war in 2009. The anchor went on to the next topic rather than asking the guy again HOW! The press lets them off the hook. They aren’t doing their job.

The difference that should energize GOP voters is not that McCain is so charismatic, but that the other side is a side of platitudes w/o substance.

Someone posted that McCain was going to struggle to get independents. How can he not, seeing that the far right is STILL making him cater to THEM rather than allowing him to reach out while the Dems are going further left in their battle. WE are killing ourselves with all our whiny drivel. WE want the perfect candidate! Guess what it ain’t McCain and it wasn’t Huck, or Mitt, or Fred, or Rudy. We knew coming in to this year we were stuck with a bad bunch. Yet I argue that the alternative is much, MUCH worse!
Comment by Adam Graham

First of all like you’re part of the 89% who have a favorable opinion of Huckabee.

Secondly, Huckabee did not increase any taxes in a growth-killing way such as income taxes, etc and he favored reductions of Capital Gains taxes. Nationally, Democrats, they’ll be fewer of them and unlike McCain, he signed a pledge not to increase taxes.

Thirdly, I find it odd that you’re arguing you’re so much more conservative yet you’re calling those of us who have a problem with McCain the far right. Guess what Independents don’t really give a rip about ideology, they don’t give a rip about substance, and they don’t think we’re in a time of war. McCain is going to be a surefire loser.
Comment by cons3rvative

I just found this statement by a comment under an Arizona Republic article on a GOP comeback.

“How did our system get so twisted as to leave us in MARCH with three Democrats running for President?”

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0309mccain0309.html, read the article and the comments, also check the thumbsup or thumbsdowns.
Comment by Mark West

I don’t demand that a candidate cow-tow to what I believe. Candidates should be free to have a mind of their own. When I’m referring to the far-right, that is what I’m referring to. Those who act as though they are entitled to the perfect candidate every election cycle. Dubya has been as socially conservative as they come (which won him two elections) yet he has burnt us fiscally! Huckabee would have done the same thing.

BTW, I’m not accusing Huck of raising taxes, but of standing by and ALLOWING them to increase. The same thing Dubya has done with spending on the national level.

I think I’ve said it several times in this area alone. We didn’t get a perfect candidate, what we got was a social conservative/fiscal moderate to liberal (Huck), a moderate (McCain), a flip-flop (Mitt). Where were all of you guys when the total conservatives (Hunter, et al) needed your support? You were following the cult of personality (Huck).
Comment by Adam Graham

First of all, I didn’t endorse Huckabee until after Super Tuesday. I gave $110 to Fred Thompson. Secondly, if you study Duncan Hunter’s record, you’ll find, he was pretty big spender according to the Club for Growth.

Secondly, McCain is not “not perfect”, he’s an awful candidate. He is a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina. Romney, I could have lived with. Fred Thompson would have been great. Ron Paul would have been preferable.
Comment by Mark West

Adam,

I guess maybe now you can see how I feel about Huck. You didn’t put McCain in office. I did help get Huck in office. So you are feeling an indirect pain, nonetheless. Let us not forget the “conservative” smear campaign that cost McCain in 2000. There are a lot of knives on both sides of that issue.

Huck didn’t have the backbone to reign in spending or tax increases as our Governor. He stood by as our schools were consolidated by judicial activism. Then he called us immoral and bigoted to oppose his plan to give government scholarship money to the children of illegal immigrants.

Like you said, too many knives!
Comment by Granny T

I don’t understand Mark West’s hatred toward Huckabee. I know many people in Arkansas that have positive things to say about him. If Huckabee raised taxes as much as the CFG and Mark West claims he did; how did Arkansas’ Tax Freedom Day stay the same after 10 1/2 years in office? (April 22, 1997 and April 22, 2007, I used the year after obtaining office for starting and the year after leaving office for ending; because it is based on “last year’s taxes.” I used Excel to open the file from”
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22328.html Just for the sake of “apples to apples” check out how fiscally irresponsible Romney was after 4 years in office (April 23, 2004 and May 6, 2007) From everything I read, things improved tremendously in Arkansas: schools, roads, health care, nursing homes, parks, tourism, etc., not to mention the instant population growth from all the Hurricane Katrina victims. I think that is remarkable accomplishments without any change in the state’s “tax freedom day.”
Comment by cons3rvative

Mark..plz clarify

“Then he called us immoral and bigoted to oppose his plan to give government scholarship money to the children of illegal immigrants.”

Where they illegal children or natural born American citizens with illegal parents?
Comment by Mark West

Does it matter? It wasn’t a scholarship based on anything scholastic. There wasn’t a children of legal citizens scholarship out there. I don’t believe any government should be peddling out scholarships to anyone period. Government money shouldn’t be used for that type of stuff anyway, especially on the basis that this was being offered. It was a liberal fiscal policy…and he had the nerve to call us who opposed it immoral and bigoted! I would and do oppose scholarship money coming from the government period, regardless of whom it is going to.
Comment by cons3rvative

Mark,

“I don’t believe any government should be peddling out scholarships to anyone period. Government money shouldn’t be used for that type of stuff anyway” I would and do oppose scholarship money coming from the government period, regardless of whom it is going to.”

I disagree. There are scholarships that promote teaching, science,leadership, government and ifrastructure,healthcare and more. Let’s not forget the GI Bill, who promises money for school for our veterans. I think that with all the truly wastefull government spending, that a re-investment in our own people’s futures is forward-thinking in comparison. I wish we would borrow a trillion dollars from China and send every deserving kid to college in America. That would be an investment that would have a high return.
Comment by Mark West

That money is in a public trust and according to the Constitution is not to be spent for such purposes.
Comment by cons3rvative

I just re-read the posts above. Sorry for my typos. I normally spell better!