May 13th, 2008
06:00 AM ET
13 years ago

McAuliffe says Clinton staying in, will win popular vote

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption="McAuliffe said Clinton is in the race through June 3."]
(CNN) - Despite calls from some for Hillary Clinton to abandon her presidential bid, her campaign chairman insisted Monday she will stay in the race until the last primary and predicted the New York Democrat will overtake Barack Obama in the popular vote.

“We are going through to June 3," Clinton Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said on MSNBC Monday. "I can unequivocally tell you we are in until June 3.”

“We will move ahead in the popular vote. There are 1.1 million Democrats in West Virginia, there are 1.6 million in Kentucky, 2.4 million in Puerto Rico. We win by these huge margins, have good turnout there, we will pick up a significant amount of the popular vote."

Polls show Clinton will likely score big wins in the next two primary states, West Virginia and Kentucky, though it remains virtually impossible for the New York senator to catch Obama in the pledged delegate count. She lost her lead among the party’s superdelegates on Monday.

Montana and South Dakota hold the last two primary contests on June 3.

Filed under: Hillary Clinton • Popular Posts
soundoff (704 Responses)
  1. Carolyn

    Why has the media not pointed out that Obama wins Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, and Washington while HRC loses those states to McCain according to Rasmussen reports. Also, she does worse than Obama in Florida (surprising), Montana, Nevada, Virgina, North Carolina, and New Jersey. He would get more electoral votes than her so her winning the West Virginia, Kentucky, and Puerto Rico (no vote in election) primaries is inconsequential compared to what he has to offer for the general election. Why is this story not in the news?

    May 12, 2008 08:39 pm at 8:39 pm |
  2. TR, CT

    Bt the popular vote doesn't include Caucus states so they would be disenfranchising 4 entire states. That will NEVER fly....IT'S OVER, THE FAT LADY IS SINGING

    May 12, 2008 08:40 pm at 8:40 pm |
  3. Dougall

    If Obama is so wonderful and he has already "won" then how come he doesn't have enough delegates? If people really wanted HIM, then wouldn't he be winning all the states?

    May 12, 2008 08:40 pm at 8:40 pm |
  4. A.A.B.

    A democracy means that you have a right to vote any way you like but I think it is completely irresponsible and extremely immature to say that if she doesn't get it her supporters will stay home or vote for McCain. If she does get it at least Obama supporters have vowed to support her campaign. Come on people!

    May 12, 2008 08:40 pm at 8:40 pm |
  5. Generation X

    Hillary Supporters-
    Obama- 155 delegates to win the nomination
    Clinton- 327 delegates to win the nomination..ouch

    May 12, 2008 08:40 pm at 8:40 pm |
  6. Independent in Florida

    Oh boy.. changing rules , again. How sad.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  7. Gerry In Toronto

    I wonder if anyone told McAuliffe, the "official Ohio vote" just came in and the Hill girl won by 200,000 votes less than origionally reported. Of course seeing how the Clinton campaign has managed their finances, it's plain to see a lot of them don't know how to count right.

    Why doesn't he just say that if Clinton wins West Virginia she wins the nomination.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  8. Captain Cannabis

    I am sick and tired of all the Clinton supporters threatening to defection to McCain in November. You can do what you will, even if it is purely motivated out of spite. The general electorate usually pays little attention to primaries even if we are seeing record turnout this year. By the time it matters, people will have moved on or never even cared about her. If every single one of you turned out in November to fuel the hatred, you still wouldn't get more of the popular vote than Ross Perot.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  9. B. Smart

    It is so funny to see Terry McAluffe trying to explain how Hillary still has
    a chance at winning the nomination. It is so obvious that he doesn't
    even believe what he is saying himself.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  10. Greg

    And yet the popular vote doesn't matter!! What's wrong with playing by the rules? Rules that were well known well before this all started.

    Sure,it might be time to look at changing the rules after this fight. That doesn't have anything to do with Clinton vs. Obama, though.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  11. kelly WI

    you'll notice the unelected supers haven't declared yet. They are waiting to see which way the wind in blowing. They will take polls.
    Delegates can change their minds now or at convention.
    Polls have shown now in WI that the repubs would take it even tho OB won here at the time. People are having buyers remorse since learning more about OB.
    will surprised if this gets posted.

    May 12, 2008 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  12. sjp

    is it me or are there only three members of the elect hillary campaign? all i seem to here from her group is bill, hill and mccaulif.

    May 12, 2008 08:42 pm at 8:42 pm |
  13. Penn State Student for Obama

    I just don't get it. Don't the clinton's understand that even in huge wins in KT WV and PR they will still be down in pledge delegates. BTW TERRY there is no way that all 1.1 million voters in WV will go to clinton. I know they love her but i don't believe they love her that much.


    May 12, 2008 08:42 pm at 8:42 pm |
  14. steve

    obama 4 president,
    of course the popular vote doesn't count, how do you think we got into this mess in the last 8 years ? Why bother vote if a handful of people make the decision anyway ?

    May 12, 2008 08:42 pm at 8:42 pm |
  15. Susan, PA

    B – New York

    Fighter for who?!
    CHINA, COLUMBIA, Herself.. . ?? No, for blue-collar workers because she has $110 milions in last seven years.

    Middle-aged White Woman for Obama.

    May 12, 2008 08:42 pm at 8:42 pm |
  16. J. Benito Pastora

    Honor the will of the people, which seems to be “ nobody will have won at the end of the primary season”.
    Senator Clinton won the popular vote in Texas, I voted for Her; then I went to the caucus meeting. The number of Obama supporters who showed up to caucus was very large, so Sen. Obama won the caucus election, even though He clearly was the less popular candidate in the state. Where is the democracy of that result?
    The Texas result shows Caucus elections are totally undemocratic. The candidate’s campaign that can haul more of its supporters to the caucus meeting will win the caucus election, even though that candidate might be the least popular in that state. That is how Sen. Obama has taken the lead of pledged delegates over Sen. Clinton, by winning caucus states. Obama’s claim that nationally He is the more popular candidate is bogus, as Sen. Clinton has won most primary elections AND MILLIONS OF CITIZENS DIDN’T GET TO VOTE IN CAUCUS STATES.
    Furthermore, the process to determine the candidate for president for the Democratic Party requires the winner to get 2025 ( or so ) delegates to obtain a majority and thus be the democratic presidential candidate next fall. Currently, neither Sen. Obama nor Sen. Clinton has obtained the required majority. It appears that neither of the two Senators will be able to obtain the required 2025 delegates from pledged delegates at the end of the primary election process to get the nomination, so they will be tied, neither Senator will be ahead nor behind, THEY WILL BE TIED, it will be a draw ( NOBODY WON ).
    That is, in spite of Sen. Obama’s campaign claims, no citizen who cast a vote in primary elections will be disenfranchised ( except maybe those from Michigan and Florida ) if his or her candidate isn’t picked in Denver, because NOBODY WON during the primary process. A runoff election will then take place at the democratic party’s national convention in Denver, where only delegates will vote. There, the superdelegates will end up picking the winner. This is the process, this is how it should be if neither candidate obtains the required 2025 delegate pledged majority during the primary period. SUPERDELEGATE ENDORSEMENTS COUNT ONLY AT THE ELECTION IN DENVER, SO, THE CONTEST HAS TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION.
    Hence, Superdelegates, pick the candidate most likely to win in November; pick the candidate best prepared to lead our country into the future; pick Sen. Hillary R. Clinton; otherwise we democrats will lose NOT ONLY THE WHITE HOUSE BUT CONGRESS AS WELL.

    May 12, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  17. right source

    The question is.....Does anyone care at this point in the game? Hiliary needs to make up her mind. Either she wants the superdelegates to make the decision or the popular vote. She keeps changing the rules for her own purposes. Please lets move on and unite before November.

    May 12, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  18. susa

    Nothing new here. The Clinton campaign has always made such outrageous claims.
    I'm not buying it.
    In my opinion Hillary is in danger of not just losing the nomination, but also her credibility and political career.

    May 12, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  19. sean in oregon

    I'm sorry Terry, but your choice of which numbers to use and not to use is getting ridiculous. You might have an argument (a shaky one) if you took out Mich. because Obama was not on the ballot and added the caucus states (I think people there voted as well.).

    To Hillary supporters:
    This has been a vicious primary, and I understand your disdain for Obama because at times I have felt the same towards Hillary. At one point I decided I would not vote for her when it looked like she would win the nomination, but then I remembered why I was a democrat. It's because of the issues and what they mean to me and the rest of the people in this country. Don't fall for the tricks we've been duped by year after year by voting for who we would rather have a beer with or who wears a flag pin.

    This election will have REAL consequences and I encourage you to not make decisions based on anger. Think about what you want for yourself and this country, and then decide who to vote for. It is your choice who to vote for, and you don't have to justify yourselves to anyone, but just remember that this isn't a game and lives WILL depend on your decision.

    May 12, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  20. Vera Shabazz

    I have never seen such a circus and the media just laps it up. Only a Caucasian can manuver an election the way Bill and Hitler has. Only media ran by Caucasians would ignore the fact that Senator Obama out smarted her and her expert Presidential husband the man no one could beat. Only Caucasians would ignore that none of them have the vision or had the vision or smarts Senator Obama has. Now this nonsense of Popular votes SO WHAT!! What does the rules say or how do they read, OH I FORGOT, THAT'S HOW YOU SPELL EXPERIENCE "STEAL WHAT YOU WANT" Thats how you Caucasians spell EXPERIENCE! You just can't give him credit, now you want him to help pay her debt!!!??? I mean the living gall!!! If Obama was as stupid as the Clintons and was in debt would all of this nonsense be relevant, no, it would be "HE WAS IN WITH THE CLINTON MACHINE HE WASN'T READY." But you give them (I don't want to use their names they disgust me" all the respect in the world, but if this was Obama, you would tell him to get out not ask if he should you as a cable station would say it. OH HAVE YOU SEEN ANY MORE BULLETS MAYBE THERE IS SOME IN VIRGINIA HAHAHAHAHAHA YOU ARE COWARDS!! TO AFRAID TO SPEAK THE TRUTH, BUT THEN AGAIN MAYBE YOU ALL LIE SO MUCH YOU DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH!

    May 12, 2008 08:43 pm at 8:43 pm |
  21. Chad

    I can't believe the coverage of this campaign is even legal. On election night, no state is announced until the polls have closed and everyone has voted. Yet Obama has been declared the winner by TIME, CNN, MSNBC, and others, when he doesn't yet have a majority and several states are still voting. It's almost as if the media is trying to demonstrate their power over our political system.

    Also, I don't understand why Hillary is being called a racist for campaigning in West Virginia. If she got 91% of the white vote, and Obama had majorities of all other ethnic groups, would he be called a racist for campaigning in a majority black area? Again, very biased commentary.

    Bush had a 52% to 48% margin and called it a "mandate." Should Obama do the same with a 49% to 47% victory? Should he be declared with such a narrow margin before the end of voting?

    May 12, 2008 08:44 pm at 8:44 pm |
  22. Marg

    The presidency of the United States is the most important job in the world. Why on earth wouldn't someone give their all out to get the job. She is going to have one crack at it. This is it. I am sure she, like you, would want to know that she gave it her best. Isn't that what we want in a president?

    May 12, 2008 08:44 pm at 8:44 pm |
  23. S Callahan

    I just have to ask, what prescription is the Clinton camp handing out? There is a real sense of denial coming from most of them.
    It's time to turn the lights out, close the door and give the key to Obama.

    May 12, 2008 08:45 pm at 8:45 pm |
  24. gail

    I would like the MEDIA to STOP CAMPAIGNING for Obama. He has done NOTHING! Hillary has created proposals, voted for changes, and is telling us what is going on...Obama is sweet-talking us and DOING NOTHING!!

    May 12, 2008 08:45 pm at 8:45 pm |
  25. jeff - Dallas

    Win the popular vote? Not likely. The Clinton campaign is in dire need of a reality check.

    50 year old college educated white Texan for Obama

    May 12, 2008 08:45 pm at 8:45 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29