In Michigan yesterday, we finally got a chance to see how competitive the Democratic primaries would be if we only had ONE change chandidate in the race.
Senator Clinton only won Michigan by 15 percentage points. That margin is only about 6 points greater than the margin of Romney’s victory over McCain.
Romney was facing stiff competition from McCain, the man who won Michigan in 2000.
Hillary Clinton’s competition: "Senator Uncommitted", also known as, the Obama/Edwards unified vote! That is not a very good showing for Clinton, considering that she wasn't truly running against anyone. That's like winning a football game when the other team doesn't show up, and not by a very good score.
In fairness to Senator Clinton, no one campaigned in Michigan, so we can’t take these numbers to heart. But, it is interesting to see how competitive "Senator Uncommitted" was, versus Clinton, and how competitive Edwards or Obama would be if they didn’t split the "change" vote.
We’ve been debating for months about whether or not Edwards and Obama split the "anti-Hillary/anti-status quo/change/youth" vote. Now, we have proof of how powerful that allegiance would be.
MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY RESULTS
Candidate Votes %
Hillary Clinton
328,151 55%
Uncommitted 236,723 40%
Dennis Kucinich
21,708 4%
Chris Dodd
3,853 1%
Mike Gravel
2,363 0%
Key: Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 9:22 AM ET | Source: AP
Again, this 15% margin may seem significant, but just remember, Romney’s margin was almost double-digits, on the Republican side:
MICHIGAN REPUBLICAN PRIMARY RESULTS
Candidate Votes %
Mitt Romney
337,847 39%
John McCain
257,521 30%
Mike Huckabee
139,699 16%
Ron Paul
54,434 6%
Fred Thompson
32,135 4%
Rudy Giuliani
24,706 3%
Uncommitted 17,971 2%
Duncan Hunter
2,823 0%
Tom Tancredo
458 0%
Sam Brownback 354 0%
Key: Winner
Precincts: 100% | Updated: 9:22 AM ET | Source: AP
And don’t forget, McCain won Michigan last time. Not so, for "Senator Uncommitted". McCain’s name recognition is very high. Not so, for "Senator Uncommitted". And, much of the "Uncommitted" vote stayed home anyway, because the real names were not even on the ballot.
Now, if "Senator Uncommitted" can be mildly competitive with Clinton, imagine how competitive it would be if you replaced "Uncommitted" with ONLY "Obama" or "Edwards" names.
Damn it, I hope we don’t split the change vote and end up with status quo!
I’m not going to say that either Edwards or Obama should drop out. They should stay in as long as they feel they have a reasonable chance win. I’m just saying, I hope that this vote can be consolidated around one candidate soon. Because, only the unification of the "change" vote, will bring us a real "change" candidate.