If it's in the News, it's in our Polls. Public opinion polling since 2003.

POLITICAL COMMENTARY

What If Democrats Used Winner Take All?

A Commentary by Wesley Little

Even as the Obama and Clinton campaigns fight frantically to establish the appropriate yard-stick by which to judge the will of the American people, one fact has been largely ignored: Obama's significant delegate lead is largely a product of the Democrats' unique delegate allocation system.

A remnant of the bitter convention of 1968 and the McGovern-Fraser Commission that followed, Democrats now award their presidential convention representatives in a proportional manner, under which delegates are given to all those surpassing certain percentage thresholds. We have to wonder, what would the race look like if the Democrats used the same "winner-take-all" system used in the Republican Party? The results are quite surprising, to say the least.

Table 1. Pledged Delegate Totals Using Hypothetical "Winner Take All" System

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton

Still to Come

TOTAL

1260

TOTAL

1427

TOTAL

566

Alabama

52

Arizona

56

Guam

4

Alaska

13

Arkansas

35

Indiana

72

American Samoa

3

California

370

Kentucky

51

Colorado

55

Florida

?

Montana

16

Connecticut

48

Massachusetts

93

North Carolina

115

Delaware

15

Michigan

?

Oregon

52

Democrats Abroad

7

Nevada

25

Pennsylvania

158

District of Columbia

15

New Hampshire

22

Puerto Rico

55

Georgia

87

New Jersey

107

South Dakota

15

Hawaii

20

New Mexico

26

Unassigned

0

Idaho

18

New York

232

West Virginia

28

Illinois

153

Ohio

141

Iowa

45

Oklahoma

38

Kansas

32

Rhode Island

21

Louisiana

56

Tennessee

68

Maine

24

Texas

193

Maryland

70

Minnesota

72

Mississippi

33

Missouri

72

Nebraska

24

North Dakota

13

South Carolina

45

Utah

23

Vermont

15

Virgin Islands

3

Virginia

83

Washington

78

Wisconsin

74

Wyoming

12

If the Democrats were to allot their current state delegate totals in a winner-take-all format, Clinton would actually have a significant delegate advantage. Despite having won only 14 recognized contests to Obama's 30, Clinton would currently have a 120 (1738 to 1618) total delegate lead and a remarkable 167 (1427 to 1260) pledged delegate lead. These numbers give Texas' "prima-caucus" delegates to Clinton and do not include Florida, Michigan or the 693 total delegates and 566 pledged delegates still to be won in the next few months.

Obviously, the Clinton campaign cannot argue for changing the system this late in the game, especially since they agreed to the ground-rules of the process before the campaign started. Yet in a race that has become principally about winning the several hundred uncommitted super-delegates, this argument could be used to provide cover for electors currently unwilling to go against the race's "clear leader".

Table 2. Combined Pledged and Superdelegate Totals Using "Winner Take All"

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton

Still to Come

TOTAL

1618

TOTAL

1738

TOTAL

693

Alabama

60

Arizona

67

Guam

9

Alaska

18

Arkansas

47

Indiana

84

American Samoa

9

California

441

Kentucky

60

Colorado

71

Florida

?

Montana

24

Connecticut

60

Massachusetts

121

North Carolina

134

Delaware

23

Michigan

?

Oregon

65

Democrats Abroad

11

Nevada

33

Pennsylvania

188

District of Columbia

38

New Hampshire

30

Puerto Rico

63

Georgia

103

New Jersey

127

South Dakota

23

Hawaii

29

New Mexico

38

Unassigned

4

Idaho

23

New York

281

West Virginia

39

Illinois

185

Ohio

161

Iowa

57

Oklahoma

47

Kansas

41

Rhode Island

32

Louisiana

66

Tennessee

85

Maine

34

Texas

228

Maryland

99

Minnesota

88

Mississippi

40

Missouri

88

Nebraska

31

North Dakota

21

South Carolina

54

Utah

29

Vermont

23

Virgin Islands

9

Virginia

101

Washington

97

Wisconsin

92

Wyoming

18

The Clinton campaign could contend that it is the proportional allocation system's inherent "over-fairness" that is denying her the significant delegate gains that she justifiably deserves from winning states like Ohio, where Clinton's 10 percent margin of victory only garnered her 9 more delegates than Obama. This may be an effective argument for Sen. Clinton to justify going forward in the race, especially if she is able to pull closer to even in the popular vote after the contests in Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina.

See Other Political Commentary

Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.

We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.

Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.

To learn more about our methodology, click here.