Hillary v. Sarah 2012

You read it here first.

It is official. Hillary Clinton vs. Sarah Palin for President of the United States in 2012.

Before you laugh, scream, or shake your head in disbelief, please consider the following:

• Who is currently more popular, by far, than President Barack Obama? Hillary Clinton (70 percent approval v. Obama’s latest RCP poll average of 53 percent; Rasmussen approval poll of “likely voters is 49 percent).

• Who bounced President Obama off the cover of Time Magazine in July? Sarah Palin.

• Who did Willie Brown, former San Francisco Mayor, Speaker of the California Assembly, and one of the craftiest of Democratic politicians, say possessed “some of the best political instincts I have ever seen?” Sarah Palin. (Brown also said her early resignation as Governor was “genius.”)

• Who has a 70 percent approval rating (or better) among the staunchest members of their respective parties’ base (liberal and conservative respectively)? Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.

• And who has well over $1 million in their political bank accounts, with lots more ahead? Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. Hillary has an additional $2.1 million in her Senate account)

• Who is considered a “ratings magnet” for the increasingly addled, dying mainstream media? Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. (See: Dana Milbank’s “bitch beer rant” WAPO, July 31st and Maureen Dowd’s whine in The New York Times).

Simply put, those losing “star power” attack those with it, in order to keep their jobs—even if the attacks are unfounded, nasty, and sexist in the ugliest sense of the word.

• And, finally, who is presiding over the biggest domestic mess since the Great Depression, with dwindling poll numbers (that slide faster once below 50 percent); a Congressional team with the lowest approval numbers in history; Democratic Governors in serious trouble in once formidable Democratic states (New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts)—as well as Ohio, North Carolina, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Wisconsin (all below 50 percent); as well as a “wrong track, right track” rating that is serious cause for alarm about re-election in 2012. (NPR, UNH, RCP, Fox, Rasmussen, Quinnipiac, Marshall College, etc.).

President Barack Obama.

In addition, a new memo just published, explains how Obama strategist, David Axelrod’s biggest fear about Obama, is that he can’t take criticism... Read more

"4) Popular Vote Total, (Estimates for IA, NV, ME, WA, includes Michigan)
Obama - 17,869,542
Clinton - 18,046,007
Winner - Clinton +176,465

By adding in the caucus estimates, Sen. Clinton gets to 18 million votes to Sen. Obama's almost 17.9 million votes. The margin drops to 0.5%

So on their page, depending on the statistics used, Obama wins 50% of the popular vote or Clinton wins 50% of the popular vote.

But we still have that pesky 238,168 Michigan votes that are in limbo because they didn't vote for Sen. Clinton. One could logically argue that ignoring those voters could in fact be disenfranchisement of those voters. And that's 44.8% of the people who voted in that primary.

Real Clear Politics did NOT add those votes to Sen. Obama's count. But what if we did, just to see what would happen?

5) Popular Vote Total, (no caucus estimates, includes Michigan, uncommitted to Obama)
Obama - 17,773,626
Clinton - 17,822,145
Winner - Clinton +48,519

So here, by excluding the caucus votes, both get over 17 and a half million. Sen. Clinton wins by a margin of 0.1%

Now we get to the last estimate.
6) Popular Vote Total, (Estimates for IA, NV, ME, WA, includes Michigan, uncommitted to Obama)
Obama - 18,107,710
Clinton - 18,046,007
Winner - Obama +61,703

Both get over 18 million votes. Sen. Obama wins with a margin of 0.2% And again, there's that pesky 50% thing."