Arithmecrats vs. Momentucrats: The Democratic Primary Paradigm

Indeed, whether or not one agrees with the Times’ decision, could it signal that the paper, consciously or not, is taking a particular direction in regard to a question that has quietly vexed the news media since it became clear that the Democratic race would extend past Super Tuesday: whether to cover the contest as a mathematical race for delegates (Slate’s Tim Noah has dubbed those who take this view “Arithmecrats”) or as a battle over momentum among voters and party insiders (Noah’s “Momentucrats”)?

By downplaying Obama’s win, despite the fact that it helped him make up the pledged delegates he lost last Tuesday, the Times suggested it now hews closer to the latter view. And the case is bolstered by the fact that the one campaign story the Times did squeeze onto A1—Healy’s “Clawing for Edge, Democrats in a Fight Over Defining ‘Winner’”—falls clearly into the momentum camp.

That’s not unreasonable: it’s becoming clear that Obama’s lead in pledged delegates is all but insurmountable, so Clinton’s only real shot is to convince super-delegates that she has the wind at her back.

But it’s worth noting that The Washington Post, for its part, kept one foot in the Arithmecrats camp, putting the story of Obama’s Mississippi win on page A1.