Davis analyzes race, gives Obama edge

Author: Theodore May

On Feb. 20, Professor Emeritus Eric Davis was introduced to thunderous applause in a standing-room-only Dana Auditorium as the latest speaker in the Faculty Lecture Series. Introduced by the Dean for Faculty Development and Research Sunder Ramaswamy, Davis spoke for the better part of an hour about the race for the White House.

Quoting influential political scientist V.O. Key, Davis announced, "'The voters are not fools.' And that's what the voters have demonstrated to us this year."

Davis covered a wide array of electoral issues including historical elections, the Vermont primary, delegate allocation, and the influence of superdelegates.

At the conclusion of his lecture, Davis entertained more than 30 minutes of questions from the assembled audience.

Jack Lysohir '08.5, who attended the lecture, weighed in on Davis' approach. "Professor Davis's robot-like recall of election history as well as his quantitative precision regarding the nomination process definitely helped to elucidate today's races."

Looking ahead to the remaining primaries and caucuses, Davis discussed the three most important remaining contests for the Democrats: Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania. Ohio and Texas vote on March 4, and Davis asserted that if Senator Hillary Clinton can survive those two, she faces a friendlier demographic makeup in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania, said Davis, is an "old-fashioned, organization-dominated Democratic state" with the second-oldest population the country. Seniors have tended to break disproportionately for Clinton in this election.

Attracting chuckles from his audience, Davis mentioned that the last time the Vermont primary (and its 23 delegates) counted was in 1988, when Michael Dukakis was competing for the nomination against Jesse Jackson and Al Gore. Davis also mentioned that the deadline for voter registration was Wednesday.

Once it became clear that neither Senator Barack Obama nor Clinton would seize momentum and waltz to the nomination, voters and media outlets alike began a complicated process of delegate counting. Delegate allocation rules, explained Davis, vary between the two parties. The Republicans, he noted, give out delegates on a state-by-state winner-take-all basis, whereas the Democratic Party in each state gives out delegates on a roughly proportional basis.

Smiling, Davis noted that Clinton would be the Democratic nominee if her party allocated delegates on a winner-take-all basis like the Republicans.

"I am not aware of a single system other than the United States where proportional representation is used that has a two, and only two, party system," Davis said.

Now that Obama has won 11 straight contests and holds the overall delegate lead, many have begun to question the viability of Clinton's candidacy. At this point, admits Davis, it is almost impossible to believe that Clinton could overtake Obama in pledged delegates.

Clinton, however, has two recourses. For one, she could push to have the discounted delegates from Florida and Michigan reinstated. Davis recounts that the Democratic National Committee permitted only four states to move their contests before Feb. 5. When Florida and Michigan violated those rules, they were stripped of their delegates and all candidates pledged not to campaign there, though the election was still held. Clinton won both and now argues that those delegates must be seated so as not to alienate those voters in November.

Clinton could also try to woo superdelegates, party elite who are given a vote at the convention. Re-established in 1984 to prevent a contested convention, superdelegates may make it just that in 2008.

Guided by history, Davis warned that an election (or nominating process) that did not follow the will of the people could spell serious trouble for the Democrats. In 1824, he noted, Andrew Jackson beat John Quincy Adams in the electoral vote count but failed to secure a majority. The election then went to the House of Representatives, which elected Adams. Four years later, Jackson was elected and the country underwent a serious realignment.

At the end of his lecture, perhaps sensing that his tone had been too tough on Clinton, Davis closed on a sentimental note. Davis said he could sympathize with Clinton because she is not a natural politician but rather, like him, more of a wonk. While arguing that she will likely not win the nomination, Davis suggested that she might make an excellent Supreme Court Justice, to be appointed by Obama, should he win the general election.