Six weeks of bowling and Bittergate and Pastorgate and nonexistent Bosnian snipers....and for what? The Pennsylvania results have essentially changed nothing. There is seemingly no cure for the chronic Democratic migraine - and the fear, among so many members, that they are tearing themselves asunder.
Memo to the voters of Indiana and North Carolina: Take these candidates, please!
Now that Hillary Clinton has secured her solid Pennsylvania victory, we know two things - both of which we basically knew before:
1. She will slog onward against increasingly heavy odds. (And why shouldn't she, given the fact that she just won another big state and again demonstrated that she is the preferred candidate of the working-class whites who will be crucial to Democratic hopes this autumn?)
2. Barack Obama can't seem to seal the deal, thereby torturing the sizeable number of exhausted Democrats (including many unpledged superdelegates) who yearn for closure.
Obama's attempt last night to spin the defeat was empirically absurd. Hewing to the loser's ritual of flying to the next state while the bad news is still being tallied, Obama shared this assessment of the Pennsylvania race with a group of Indiana supporters: "We rallied people of every age and race and background to the cause."
Problem was, he lost all the older voter categories, starting at age 45. He lost white people, both genders. And with respect to every background, he lost the working-class folks, the union members, and the non-college educated. He lost suburbanites (including two of the suburban Philadelphia counties, Montgomery and Bucks, that he needed to win by comfortable margins), small-town dwellers, and rural residents. He lost the white Catholics and he lost the Jews. He lost the culturally-conservative Democrats on Bob Casey's home turf, Lackawanna County, by a 3 to 1 margin.
And let's return to the racial factor for a moment, because there is a jarring and highly sensitive finding that showed up in the exit polls. Thirteen percent of white voters statewide said that the race of the candidate was important to them; of those voters, 74 percent cast their ballots for Hillary Clinton. This is arguably a warning sign that Obama may face a higher racial hurdle than many observers have generally assumed.
An arguably bigger problem is his persistent deficit among late-deciding voters. I mentioned here yesterday that, in most primaries, Obama has stumbled at the finish line because voters making up their minds during the final 24 hours have tended to break for Clinton, the known quantity. Well, in Pennsylvania it happened again. Eleven percent made up their minds on the last day; 6 out of 10 wound up breaking for Clinton, thereby padding her victory margin.
All told, he appears to have won only five of the 67 Pennsylvania counties. The template for victory was Ed Rendell's '02 gubernatorial campaign, which notched victories in 10 counties - winning overwhelmingly in Philadelphia and its suburbs, then basically hanging on everywhere else. Obama didn't even get the winning margins he needed out of Philadelphia.
So it's easy to see where this campaign is headed: nowhere fast. Clinton's Pennsylvania win (by more than 200,000 votes, slashing his national popular vote lead by more than 25 percent) will gain her some breathing space - forestalling any pro-Obama stampede by the unpledged superdelegates, and prompting some donors to pony up the money that she so badly needs (given the fact that she's currently awash in red ink). She'll net more Pennsylvania delegates than Obama, thanks to her victory, but not nearly enough to appreciably dent his national lead. And Obama will have to reload, yet again, and demonstrate in Indiana that he can relate to, and win over, the lunch-bucket Democrats.
They'll essentially split the Indiana delegates...he recoups whatever he lost in Pennsylvania delegates by winning a majority of North Carolina delegates...she wins West Virginia...he wins Oregon...she's got the seniors, he's got the kids...she's got the whites, he's got the blacks...she's got the bowlers, he's got the brie-eaters...she the whiskey, he the wine...tomato/tomahtoe, let's call the whole thing off.
But nobody seems to know how. And therein lies the danger for Democrats this autumn.
-------
I had more thoughts on Pennsylvania and the Democratic race during an hour-long conversation last night on PBS' "Charlie Rose" show. And so did my betters: historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, Washington journalist Al Hunt, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, Time magazine's Mark Halperin, and Jacob Weisberg of Slate. The video is posted here.
Posted by Dick Polman @ 1:50 AM
Permalink |
102 comments
Pennsylvania is a state where she is cashing in (in many cases) 15 years of debt chips. The traditional GE swing states are really the only places where Hillary's organization had its act together --- OH, FL, PA & MI.
Dick, How can media let Obama go without answering the questions “What do you think about Jimmy Carter meeting HAMAS leader (like you wanted to meet Iran’s crazy leader)?” HAMAS leaders are elected representative like Iran's crazy leader. Obama's stated policy and Carter's action line up perfectly in this case. Therefore, Obama has to answers. If he wants to pick and choose the terrorist leaders he wants to meet, he needs to let us know the criteria.
As a Hillary supporter, I feel redeemed. Hopefully, by winning by 10 points, the pundits will shut up and stop trying to force the race toward Obama and let the voters have their say. He outspent her 4:1 and still couldn't close the deal. I think that she has shown time and again that she has what it takes. The shine has finally started to fade on Obama's halo. I only hope the press takes on more responsibility for BALANCED journalism from this point forward.
I suspect that it was more than 13% of white voters in PA who aren't ready for a half-black president. I am retired, white, a gun-owner, against abortion, generally a Republican voter, was born in Pittsburgh, and sense the latent racism in the people in that part of the country. The result of the primary last night disgusts me and makes me fear that Wright was mostly right.
**THIRTEEN** percent said RACE mattered? Is Hillary going to reject and denounce those voters?
I'm beginning to think that this country will never be able to get over its race problem. Poor and middle-class whites, the majority of Americans, will never vote for an "uppity" black. Never. And America will continue its slide into the sewer of the world because we're too stupid to understand who it is that is actually putting us there.
There's seems to be a great temptation to speak for voters before they have voted! We do have a process for ending all of this -- it's called the primary (and, if necessary, the convention)! Granted it's a nail-biter but so are many football, soccer, basketball, etc., etc., etc., events. Do we say: "Stop the game, I can't take this!" in situations like that? Just because many people are not now mesmarized by Obama does not mean they are racist! Many of us are very concerned about his honesty, his lack of experience, his snobbery, his evasiveness, his radical affiliations, etc., etc., etc. It is, in fact, the great majority of black voters who are sticking solidly with Obama (though many are not) regardless of the above-mentioned factors. Is that group voting for him primarily because he is black? Probably some are, just as there are probably some who are voting for Hillary because she is white. By the way, I've supported Hillary all along and I actually have TWO college degrees. It's quite an insult when journalists imply that only those with a high school education support Hillary! I am happy to see that many more of my peers in that group in PA are beginning to leave the Obama room now that the somewhat blinding light of his charisma has been dimmed. Hillary is the best qualified, the strongest, the most representative of more of the population. In other words, she's simply the best candidate for the party.
Hillary won by 9 points, not 10. A small difference perhaps, but it is mistakenly being reported (and she is falsely stating) that she won a double-digit victory.
Clinton voted 16 times against gun owners and sponsored 18 anti-gun bills that never got to a vote. Yet, she's telling everyone that she loves guns. She will say or do anything to get elected. And you have to ask this question: why are Republicans going all-out to get Clinton the nomination? Because they know McCain can beat Clinton and they are scared to death of Obama. If you examine Clinton's campaign donor list, I'll bet you'll find lots of prominent Republicans donating to her campaign. As far as they are concerned, it doesn't matter whether it's Clinton or McCain -- the status quo stays the same. However, you throw Obama into the White House and all bets are off. Wake up, America! The lobbyists and special interests are stealing this election again!
This win was important because it proved the people of Pennsylvania don't trust their local newspaper editorial and news section -- and for good reasons. The massive bias by the reporters and editorialistas for Obama, the coverage that was outright censorship of any negative news about Obama, and the unacceptable bias by the editors was rejected by the voters. I believe this will send a message to newspaper dinosaurs across the country that have been sucking down the Obama koolaid that sloganish endorsements like "change" "unite" "bipartisan" are not supported by Barack Obama's record. The way they have given preferential treatment to Obama rubs fair-minded Americans the wrong way. This is a media backlash more than anything else.
Cut the MEDIA/clinton SPIN;
PENN NUMBERS:
Pennsylvannia numbers
Actually, it is down to almost 8.5%. See http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/ 54.3 (Clinton) 45.7 (Obama)
Maybe the best thing for Democrats would be for Hillary Clinton to get the nomination and then get soundly trounced by McCain (which she will). Maybe then the Clintons will slink off into their shadowy world of special interests and lobbyists and leave the rest of us alone!
It's not about "latent racism". Democrats are finally starting to pay attention to the DETAILS. It's one thing to have a bright, new, shiny politician who talks about "change" and "unity"; it's another to realize that he doesn't really have any new ideas. They're all the same old socialist, liberal ideas. He's the most liberal Senator in Washington, and THAT is saying something! He's never voted in a way that brings unity on Capitol Hill. He toes the democat party line. People are waking up that that reality.
He has virtually no experience that would lead voters to believe he can lead our great country. He is a FIRST TERM senator, propped up by the democrat political machine in Chicago. People are waking up to that reality.
The best thing for democrats would be for Hillary to be their candidate. She stands a MUCH better chance of beating John McCain than Obama. The only reason republicans are cheering her on now is that they want to see a bloody battle between the democrats that goes to the convention. Republicans fear running against Hillary; they hope Obama is the opponent, but that he is so damaged by Hillary that McCain doesn't have to do the dirty work in the summer and fall.
Comment removed.
well, airgeorge, while the 4-1 outspending ratio sounds good and makes for good soundbites...obviously why HillBill has used it everytime she opens her mouth....CNN and MSNBC have both shot that down and report that O actually outspent H by just slightly more than 2-1.
"**THIRTEEN** percent said RACE mattered? Is Hillary going to reject and denounce those voters?"
What about the 92% who voted for Obama solely because of his race? revere racism? the bleeding hearts seem blissful enough to ignore it
If Clinton needed a double-digit win, she didn't get it.
You only get 10% if you round Clinton's number up, round Obama's number down, and then do the subtraction. Rounding only works when you have a large enough data sample so that rounding doesn't affect the result. Here you just have just two numbers, and since one is rounded up, and one is rounded down, you exaggerate the difference rather than providing an accurate number. The real result is 9.4%. Still a strong win for Clinton, but if 10% was the bar, she didn't pass.
The most consistently telling statistic throughout the primaries is that last-minute deciders have consistently gone for Hillary over Obama. The old "the devil you know versus the one you don't" lives! It will be the same in November, which is why Hillary has the better chance of beating McCain than Obama.
The number is rounded up because it is in the MSM's best interests that this fight continues as long as possible. The biggest winners of Hillary's PA victory (after McCain) are all the Indiana TV station GM's who will be selling much more commercial air time than they would have with Hillary out of the race.
Americans won't elect an elitist, ultra-liberal as president whether he's white (John Kerry) or black (Obama).....especially if they have looney left-wing wives, too (Teresa Heinz OR Michelle Obama).
When will the media see this? Even the democrat rank-and-file has woken up to the fact.
Inky coverage of this campaign was unabashedly pro-Obama. The editorial page was almost as blindly partisan and lacking in credibility as the New York Times. Serious negative comments about Obama's economic plans never get posted on these fora.
Is this a newspaper for the people? Or for the people on the editor's desk?
I've been so fed up with the censorship and refusal to present alternative viewpoints, that I've cancelled all but the Sunday paper. And if it weren't for ads and coupons, I wouldn't get that. I can read biased articles on the web for free.
I usually disagree with Dick Polman but this was the tightest and clearest of the analysis pieces to date. And I agree with Mr. Polman's conclusion: the Democrats are in a stalemate. What to do? Get the media to do their jobs and demand that the voters of Florida and Michigan get heard and and their votes counted. If the Obama team has a problem with this and tries subverting the will of the people in these two states, then they will have no moral ground to stand on when the superdelegates go with Clinton as opposed to "the will of the people who voted in the earlier caucuses and primaries". If Obama is so great, and his appeal so strong they should have no fear of a re-vote in these two states CRUCIAL to a Democratic victory in Novemeber. If these voters are not brought into the decision it will ruin the party for years to come.
The sad news...and it is very sad...is that as a lifelong registered Democrat of the liberal persuasion there is simply no way on God's green earth I will vote for Hillary Clinton for president, and I know many fellow Democrats who feel the same way. She is insufferable. If Obama doesn't get the nomination, I will go out of my way to send a message to the Democratic Party that it's time for them to wake up and change business as usual. I will either vote for McCain to help make the point, or if he goes nutso rightward during the campaign, vote in local and state races only. It's very disheartening.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
Two comments: various posters have been lamenting Hillary's double-digit lead by saying someone rounded up, someone rounded down. Obama folks just can't face the fact, that despite 3:1 spending advantage, they were clobbered, as Obama will be in the general election.
nick_peters.....I have a question for you. As a life-long liberal, what is it about Obama that makes you think he is qualified to lead the USA? What in-depth policy stances does he hold that you can point to as reasons to support him? Or is it just the hollow promises of "change" and "unity"? Honestly, I see a straw-man when I look at his resume.
Yeah doo dah. Like 2004 and the 30 days of Kerry ads masquerading as editorial content... I finally had enough and canceled for about 6 months. I anticipate canceling about September I guess. I've already warned my wife - she enjoys the Sunday coupons and my son reads the sports. I in turn whip through A section in about 5 minutes and chuckle at the editorial headlines.
While some Pennsylvanians did not vote for Obama because he is black, most did not vote for him because of his extreme liberalism. America is still a center-right nation and simply will not embrace a man or woman of the far left. Hillary is a left centrist; McCain is clearly a moderate-to-liberal conservative. Hillary's problem has always been her high unfavorable ratings, and her dishonesty adds to her woes; that's why it is surprising that she has done as well as she has in the primaries. With his high-flown rhetoric, the star power that has wowed an adoring media, and his promise not only to change America but to change the world, Obama should have run away with the nomination and should be leading McCain in the general election polls by double digits.
That he is in a dog fight tells us clearly that America is not yet ready for an extremist of any stripe, right or left.
• Hillbill won by 10 points
• Hillbill was outspent 4:1
• Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
• Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary.
• Hillary was under sniper fire in Bosnia.
• Hillary didn't know about the FALN pardons.
• Hillary didn't know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.
• She had nothing to do with the New Square Hasidic pardons.
• She negotiated for the release of refugees in Macedonia.
• Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.
• She didn't know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.
• She opposed NAFTA.
• She was instrumental in the Irish peace process.
• The billing records showed up on their own.
• She was always a Yankees fan.
How can anyone support this?
Why is anyone surprised that Obama lost? After all, in San Francisco the guy srrogantly insulted the very voters whom he most need to persuade to swing his way, the small town Christian working class. That was worse than having oneself video taped windsurfing.
I did vote for Obama but it now appears that he isn't the candidate that can beat John McCain. Obama appears to have sprung muliple leaks due to his 'bitterness' comments and affiliation with Rev. Wright. I still think he is the best candidate but defeating McCain is the only thing that is important. What a fine mess this is! I don't think that Clinton can get enough delegates to win, at least officially. Some of the designated delegates may have to change their affiliation from Obama to Clinton. Whatever happens, this country cannot afford another 4 years of George Bush which is what you are going to get if McCain gets elected.
Check this out: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
If you count FL and MI, HRC is ahead in the popular vote. That is going to be some terrible PR for Obama and the Dem party in general, especially if they ignore those votes and those voters feel annoyed come November. I know HRC didn't play by the rules back when those votes occurred, but that is going to be long forgotten when the "every vote must count" mantra really starts going strong after she wins Indiana, WV and KY and makes a closer race out of NC.
Another interesting point is that if the Democrats tallied delegates like the GOP - winner take all - HRC would have the nomination by now.
What a train wreck.
Obama didn't win a majority because a majority of Americans don't want to elect another Stalin as our president. Robin Hood is a fairytale and communism and the politics of envy and class warfare is a losing ideology. And, for God's sake, promising to raise taxes? Might as well promise to make it rain every Saturday and Sunday and promise to take the NFL off TV. Obama should ring up Mondale and ask what guaranteeing a tax increase does for one's presidential aspirations. Did Mondale win any states?
I saw you on Charlie Rose last night, and thought several of the things you said were informative: citizens of Pa did not like "new;" exit polls when people actually said they would not vote for an Afro-American. Surprised the Pope's visit did not affect the vote at all. As a Dem., Pa. left me disspirited. Obama made no inroads w/Clinton's constituency altho your explanation helped me understand why. She did not outperform Ohio, even w/Rendell's help and in a closed primary w/a classic "Clinton" constituency. I think he's got to find some way to talk to these people, so even tho I believe he will be the nominee, if keeping her in makes him a better candidate and sharpens his message, then let her keep campaigning. When she goes negative, I just see his numbers go up in the national tracking polls which is why I found the 10 pount margin a little surprising. I thought it would be closer to 6. To the entire Philly.com staff, thanks for excellent campaign coverage.
This result doesn't really change the math for Hillary. Looking forward, Indiana is toss up and North Carolina will go for Obama. The only realistic way Hillary gets the nomination is if party bosses award her the nomination - that's not an opinion, it's a fact. If that happens, it will tear the Democratic party apart. After all the talk about voters defying conventional wisdom, we might get the two candidates we were told we would get since 2004 - McCain and Hillary.
nick peters- I am sure your protest vote will send shimmers down the Partys spine. Losing your vote is going to be a dramatic statement. The statement s/b that every 4 years except for the Bill Clinton years the Dems put up a looney left candidate and they lose as they will with Obama. Obama would lose with a McGovern type result. Other then the PC white elite crowd, some looney Hollywood types and a bunch of students who dont make it to the voting booth anyway Obama cant win with whites. And atleast for now Whites decide General Elections!
Obama lost because no one wants to elect a communist. That war is over.
p diddy who the heck cares about "Math" its about electability and your friend BH. Obama doesnt apprear to be able to attract the type of voter who wins General elections. The blacks always vote for the Democrat and guess what they still dont win. He can get 100% of the black vote and it wont mean a darn thing, and thats his main constituency.
Is it not also racism that the majority of blacks vote for Obama precisely because he IS black? If a black man were not in this race, most of those black votes would have gone to Hillary. Get over it. OF course race still matters- both to whites AND blacks.
Redmanrt, blacks vote Obama 90%+. Is that, too not racist? Bottom line: people have a right to vote as they see fit based on whatever criteria they chose.
It's obama's fault that he pushed "change" and popularity instead of ideas and a strong platform. Obama should have been better prepared during the debates as well. He knew those questions were coming but failed to prepare.
Sadly he's grown use to the guilty white liberals lower standards acceptance of him and his Jesus like devotion among Blacks. Folks must vote as they chose.
I also think its time for revotes in florida and MIchigan. Obama would never get florida votes after suppressing re election efforts there. Repubs would be all over it....along with his numerous dubious associations.
Polman's analysis is the best I've come across.
If Obama's weaknesses are being exposed by a Democrat rival who shares most of his policy beliefs, imagine what the Republican attack team will do in the Fall.
They won't have to worry about irriating the base or "playing nice". Hillary and Obama are just sparring now ... wait until the bell rings and the real fight begins.
I'm enjoying the Prelims.
Doodahman,
You're dead wrong. Obama was the only candidate who ILLEGALLY CAMPAIGNED IN FLORIDA. Obama bought TV advertisments on cable stations. Hillary did not. She won Florida fair and square!
Besides, Hillary wants revotes in those states Obama does not. Just like Obama refused another debate. Clearly he doens't understand the issues well and speaks best when giving a canned talk.
Dick-Thanks for the breakdown and the interesting commentary. It always tickles me these days when I come across objective reporting that is actually informative.
It seems clear to me that with 9/10 blacks voting for Obama that it's only a matter of time until white voters start to feel the racial tug. If blacks are voting for color over substance, shouldn't we expect to see whites follow suit?
This is a terrible scenario, but watch it unfold before your eyes.
Attn ladywsense
I understand blacks thinking that it's their turn. In any case, Obama is our first line of defense against a pair of sick megalomaniacs seeking an unconstitutional 3rd term.
Beware if Obama really takes the gloves off. So far he has been restrained, but what he could say about McDougal, Red Bone, Chung, Hsu, Ron Paul, and the other adventurers in the Clinton closet will be the real stuff.
Obama ran ads in Florida under the guise of a National candidate and he lost easily. Its funny how Florida with Obama is being considered a write-off and I guess add Ohio, Michigan, and PA to that list. Now tell me how he wins the GE. Hillary ran a general election campaign in the primary and that was her mistake. Obamas GE strategy is Iowa, Wis, Idaho,VT, Montana, the Dakotas, Wyoming and a bunch of black southern states that havent voted Dem since Kennedy/Johnson admins. Someone wasnt doing their homework were they?
Banshee, and others, it is ridiculous that Obama continues to take a bashing for comments that anyone who lives in rural PA knows are right. Rather than think, or read, or do anything, people in my part of the country DO INDEED prefer to nurse their addiction to the Jesus myth, drink themselves silly, pursue idolotrous fawning of brainless athletes, or do ANYTHING other than evaluate and criticize the system that screws them simply because of their own brainless resistance to anything or anyone "NOT FROM AROUND HERE" or "elitist" or "liberal" or whatever their slur of the day may be. If they get McCain (or, to a lesser degree, Clinton's support of the status quo), they will get exactly what they deserve, and they can complain about it at the church picnic or gun auction or book burning or whatever.
I'm sick of all the concern about race. The same people who wouldn't vote for the black guy won't vote for Clinton either. You people would just as soon justify the racism by yielding to it because you're afraid it will hurt you in November.
Gee I wonder how many people didn't vote for Hillary because she is a woman? I guess we are a chauvinstic country too. Oh, I wonder how many blacks voted for Obama because he was black. I guess we have some reverse racism going on too.
The thing is, he HAS sealed the deal. She needs to win ALL the remaining contests by 33 points (not 10) to even up the pledged delegate count.
She won't win by that margin in more than one of the remaining states.
JPH -
Who cares about the math? The "math" I was referring to consists not only of pledged delegates but of votes cast by Democratic voters. Hillary is in SECOND PLACE. Who is she to be telling us that Obama isn't electable?
Nestci- He sealed the deal yet the last 3 primaries, 3 of the biggest and most important important states in the Union rejected him handily. Now there is some momentum for you!!
This year for the first time I campaigned for a candidate and have donated many times for a candidate: Obama. If the Democratic Party steals this nomination away from Obama and gives it to Clinton, then I and a whole lot of my friends from around the nation are going to leave the Democratic Party. And we won't go quietly. Hillary Clinton is intent on destroying the Democratic Party and that's exactly what the lying **** is doing.
Dear me. Given all her PA assets of 24/7: Hillary herself, Bill, Rendell (who stated in local press that his state won't vote "black," even before the campaigns arrived ) and the Rendell machine, Hillary should have clobbered Barack by no less than 20 points, surely.
Well, the margin was 9.2 or 9.4 not even 10 solid pooints!
Barack, with his few new friends, and his $$$$ I would say lost any way but "won" too in PA, the state that even the governor Rendell said won't go "black"! Barack Obama has turned '08 on its head, no matter what the resolution becomes. Doubtlessly the Illinois senator is having the time of his life, putting former first lady and former presidential spouse on the run for nomination she expected to cakewalk. Senator Obama can't beat her; she can't beat him. By now, a political process of sound and fury signifying nothing all around.
Aside from the electoral math, most of the enthusiasm that has turned out new voters and independents to the booths is because of Obama. Obama fares much better among independent voters than Hillary does. Besides, NY, CA and NJ are going to vote Democratic no matter who the nominee is. Obama can make win some of the typically red states. If the Democrats are to win this fall, they have to win some states in the heartland, and Obama has a better shot than Hillary.
Undecided, late deciders, the Bradley factor
Did not want to tell the pollsters can not vote for a black man for president, for mayor maybe but not for the leader of the free world.
bison.. yep Bradley factor. There was ol' Wolf Blitzer proclaiming early on how white man broke 54% to 45% (or something like that) for Hill versus O, "much more/better than Ohio" "This is going to be a contest" And you saw other exit polling that didn't quite line up with reality. I was sitting there doing the Bradley math and a rough guess was about 10-15% of exit pollers lied about who they voted for. Likewise, O does *extremely* well in caucases where everyone can see who is doing what with their vote but in the privacy of a booth... that's a different story, isn't it?
Why is that Obama can't carry the votes from people his age and older? Because they know that by now he should have performed more than his has. He was horribly ineffective as a Illinois State Senator. Voters older than 45 look at their own lives and realize that they are paying for mistakes they made during their youth and can't afford to make any more. Younger people have their whole lives ahead of them to pick themselves up from the mistake of voting for Obama.
I am so sick of people blaming Hillary because this is taking soooo long. Who exactly set up dates in April, May and June for a primary? Hint: It was NOT Hillary. Who decided to disenfranchise Florida and Michigan voters? ... A double whammy to Florida Democrats since they did not even have a choice in deciding which day they would vote. The DNC is responsible for this mess and no one else. If they want the selection process over sooner, then move all the primaries up and stop pointing the finger at Hillary. And just why does the DNC still hold caucuses instead of primaries in some states? It is well known they are only used by political wheels to slide things in under the radar. In many precincts in Texas, they had NEVER had a person show up to a caucus before and in MOST precincts where they had seen prior participants, they could count the numbers on their hands.
White folk are great and perfect and black people should thank their lucky stars that they were brought here in slave ships to partcipate in this great country! Since my earlier more truthful post were consistently denied by this blog. I guess I'd try this great big lie. Evidently this is all Polman can handle from a thinking black elitist!
YES Clinton won by 9.3% But let me just say Obama has BOTH the Clintons and Republicans running lies against him. REPUBLICANS WANT TO RUN AGAINST CLINTON. They will pull out every statement Bill and her said
in the 90'S. WATCH HOW THEY ARE BOTH TRYING TO FRY OBAMA. These MEDIA PEOPLE ARE OWNED BY people that are Republicans. WHY ARE THEY SO AFRAID OF OBAMA??????
YES Clinton won by 9.3% But let me just say Obama has BOTH the Clintons and Republicans running lies against him. REPUBLICANS WANT TO RUN AGAINST CLINTON. They will pull out every statement Bill and her said
in the 90'S. WATCH HOW THEY ARE BOTH TRYING TO FRY OBAMA. These MEDIA PEOPLE ARE OWNED BY people that are Republicans. WHY ARE THEY SO AFRAID OF OBAMA??????
P Diddy- Let me dumb this down for you since you are probably new to the electoral process. He is not electable becuase he is a poor General Election candidate. You see this primary is "supposed" to put the best candidate to beat the Republicans (they are our opponents. Thats the Dems main goal in case no one has told you. So when HRC says unelectable she measnhe cant win the important bigger states (which he hasnt except his home state) and he will have trouble with regular folks not inner city voters or the elite SF and Hollywood crowd that dont have that big of an effect in a GE. Its the average white folk that elect Presidents, he aint going to get them. HRC can. He is good on caucus states where a bunch of left wing zealots get together in a room and share their anarchist pacifist theories or with the black voters who legitmately cant believe one of their own could be President. Unelectable in the GE doesnt mean he cantt win the Dem nomination, thats what she means!! Obama is the ultimate divider black/white old/young rich/poor
church-going/not religious.
What a bunch of garbage. Hillary is roundly known as one of the most divisive politicians in either party. To listen to Hillary on the stump is to hear an endless litany of battles and past grievances. Meanwhile, Obama has actually expanded the the Democratic base and turned out a previously apathetic generation of young voters. That alone is a huge accomplishment. Who else, in the past 40 years, has managed to that? Time to turn the page on the baby boomers, for crying out loud.
In any case, the primary is supposed to deliver the candidate with the most votes, not the most "electable". According to your logic, the actual election isn't even necessary.
But the crux of your argument is that blue collar PA voters will not vote for Obama in a matchup with McCain. I don't accept that premise. The truth is that Hillary and Obama have virtually identical stances on trade and most issues important to blue collar voters. Plus, Obama stands a real chance of reducing the rancorous polarization that afflicts the nation. He is the only candidate in the field who stands a chance of doing that. Obama stands a real chance at winning some red states for the Democrats - that's not going to happen if Hillary is the nominee. Hillary would be the female version of John Kerry.
If Hillary wins the nomination, I'll be voting for McCain. Poor and lower middle class whites are bitter and ful of resentment for any other group to being doing as well or better than them; however, they are voting for someone who is attched to the source of their bitterness.
Hilllary voted for the bankruptcy laws that extended the powers of home laoners and credit companys. Her husband brokkered the laws that extended the powers of shool loans (high intrest and garnishment)and Nafta (Lost of American Jobs) these institutions taht benefitted from these laws have paid him incentives in the form of speeches and chairman, which genrated 65 million dollars in a 8 year period, now who is the eleitist
I'm sure most super delegates love the Democratic party & want this to be over (not to mention that I'm sure they're getting sick of the Clintons). All Obama needs to do is to fight to a draw in Indiana & bury her like he's supposed to in NC. That will give the remaining superdelelgates the "out" to vote for Obama & be done with it. Heck, if you think YOU are getting burned out on the Democratic nomination, how do you think these Democratic SD's feel?
If Hillary is so confident in her victory (& so broke), why isn't Bill giving her the money she needs?
What is missing from the arguments is the fact that Obama cannot seem to close the deal by expanding his base. He draws his support from African Americans (is that racist....especially given that Hillary is ceding North Carolina due to the 40% African American electorate) and the more liberal wing of the party. He has yet to draw support from Moderate and Conservative Democrats, the working class and senior citizens who Lanny Davis calls the core of the party. Without them, he cannot win in the general election. It is also true that since Super Tuesday, Obama has lost a great deal of his luster. People are no longer fainting during his rally's. While things like his association with Wright and Ayers, or his comment in San Francisco are not key issues, they do go to his character. And while people may say the economy and Iraq are important, they also want a President they trust and believe.....that they generally like. Usually it is the candidate with the character problem who complains that issues are not being discussed. Obama could have handled these matters better, and put them to bed weeks ago...he did not. Now they are a drag on his campaign.
yobill626,
Bill cannot give Hill the money she needs. It would violate the campaign finance laws established by McCain-Feingold.
Seal the deal? It's not a sporting event. The press talks about this race for the nomination like Clinton or Obama can just score a touchdown and win the game. The only way Clinton can with the nomination is if the superdelegates steal it for her, I hope people don't get caught up in the press and pundit foolishness. Seal the deal, you have to be kidding me.
When a person defines themselves first as a black or a woman or as a white first, other folks are going to feel left out. Obama sat for 20 years in church and listened to a man who spouts racism and anti-Americanism--so that he could be more closely identified as a Black man. Now that he is identified by many as a Black man, it's too late to whine about it. I imagine that if Colin Powell were running, the percentage of white voters who feel uncomfortable voting for a black person would dramatically diminish.
And what of the the racism of the many, many African Americans who vote for Obama's black skin, instead of the man underneath?
Hillary will carry her message to Indiana, and it will resonate there as well.
Time to realize that the only way either candidate can win the nomination is by the Superdelegates giving it to them. At some point, they are going to have to allow something from Florida be counted. With those votes, HRC is a lot closer in vote totals and delegates. Had the Dems conducted their primaries like the Reps and the General are held (with winner take all states), then HRC would have been the nominee by now. Truth be told, Obama has lost 6 of the nine larger states (I am not counting Michigan), and many of those he will not carry in the general because they are not his type of voter (Ohio, PA, Florida for example).
And G, sorry for the euphimism, but what else would you call it. After Super Tuesday, Obama was seen as the great hope of the Democrat party. So, if he is so wonderful, why can he not win this thing already. He has lost nearly every primary since Super Tuesday, but people still see him as rallying the party and bringing out new voters to his message. So, where are all these new voters to carry him to victory?
The so-called "Reagan Democrats" will not vote for Obama, and McCain will carry a lot of independents. He cannot win.
The job of the Superdelegates was to nominate the most electable candidate, not the most popular. That is why they were brought into existence after the McGovern fiasco. Although I would hate to see it, HRC is more electable than Obama.
Tom, considering that you're a Republican, I find your advice to Democrats to let party bosses choose the nominee to be laughable. If that were to happen, it would render all self-righteousness about the 2000 debacle meaningless. It would be a signal that the Democrats are no better than the Bush Republicans. Huge numbers of people would view the election as illegitimate. The "Reagan Democrats" don't exist post-Bush (post-Newt Gingrich, really). You think a trucker from PA is going to vote for McCain, a guy who admits that the economy is not his strong point? I'd bet a lot of money that PA goes to the Democrats this fall. Where are all these new voters to carry Obama to victory, you ask? Strange question to ask about the candidate with more actual votes, a guy who had no national name recognition a mere five years ago. All of Obama's wins have been marked by huge turnout and large numbers of independents voting for him. Among independents, Obama routs Hillary. Why can't Obama win the required number of delegates? Because he's running against someone named Clinton who has a very popular husband (at least among Democrats). Let's be clear about who the underdog is here. How quickly we forget that Hillary was the presumptive nominee for years, all the way up to the Iowa primary.
Barack Obama had transcended race for the better part of a year until 1.) Bill Clinton likened him to Jesse Jackson after South Carolina and 2.) his off-the-wall preacher brought Black Liberation Theology into every living room in the country. The college-educated folks in wealthy suburbs and young voters can accept Obama's reasoned appeal for racial understanding as eloquently spoken in Philadelphia. For blue collar folks in decaying industrial towns with an out-of-control crime rate, they have neither the time nor the patience for rehashing the 'victims of society' narrative when their lives of three, four, and five decades are coming apart at the seams. For the same reason he wins lily white states like Vermont and Idaho but loses Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Tom ----- P-Diddy is right. I think the lesson out of PA is "all politics is local". Clinton has spent a considerable amount of time helping Democratic candidates in the 2002, 2004 & 2006 local, state & national elections (that doesn't include all the visits during Bill's Presidency). She's done her work & built a solid foundation here. The fact that Obama was able to reduce his potential loss had everything to do with his ability to bring more people into the process, rather than turning voters from her. Plus, his candidacy has been instrumental in increasing the size of the party & its voter turnout. He'll capture more Independents than McCain. That & the fact that she will bring the GOP together better than McCain ever will makes her the clear preference to head the Dem ticket for the RNC.
Obama wins in untraditional markets and has a tougher time in traditional markets because of party infrastructure. In states with a strong Democratic base, the party insider is coming out ahead. Rendell and Nutter are but two examples of the relationships built by the Clintons in the 90's contributing to a strong showing by Hillary.
In the GE, the majority of these Democratic voters will pull the lever for a Democrat, regardless of whether it's Obama, Clinton, or Walter Mondale. Why? Because McCain's sell-out to the Neo-cons, Christian Radicals, and WSJ economic policy to win the nomination makes it highly unlikely a Republican can follow this terrible Republican President and win. He had to embrace a failed presidency to win the nomination. Who won't believe he owes a lot of people payback, people who are loyal Bushies today?
Losing PA, OH, NJ in the primary says zilch about winning them in the GE. It says a lot about party insiders back-scratching.
Did anyone think electing a black in what is largely a racist country would be easy?
But relax folks, Barack has the nomination, unless something unexpected happens. He'll have the most delegates, etc., and the superdels aren't dumb enough to throw away the party's future by overturning the primary results.
Hillary has remained competitive because she has nothing to lose and can attack at will, which she's done, and we know that can be effective. Barack has too much to lose (like the nomination) to respond in kind. So he's takes a beating, but he will win.
Michigan and Florida are bogus issues that Hillary will continue to spin. The fact is she and Barack could not agree on how to redo the primaries there. It was not just him. Those two states are more valuable to her campaign as a way to attack Barack than they would be if the primaries were actually held again, as she would not pick up a significant number of delegates in a revote.
"Close the deal" is also a bogus issue because it is simply a closely contested race. She has not closed the deal either. He leads and he will win as it plays out.
So, get used to it.
**THIRTEEN** percent said RACE mattered? Is Hillary going to reject and denounce those voters?
Posted by psv .
----------------------------------.
Hillary can not denounce the 13% of white voters that said race matters because then she would also have to denounce the 80-90% of black voters that said with their votes that race matters. It cuts both ways.
Obama has shown that he is beatable and for Dems who don't like either candidate, McCain may be a real alternative. The Dems are showing that they really aren't better that the Repubs when it comes to the purity of political spirit issue. Hillary's enormous negatives seem to dim with each flare up of an Obama "stupid " eruption.
What's frustrating is that after more than a dozen initial entries we are left with a weak field of choices and the winner will be a member of our great legislative body who are less revered than the president with cellar dweller ratings. This is like a Marx Brothers skit.
The "purity of political spirit issue"?
P-Diddy,
That is not my advice. That is fact. That is why the Super delegates were brought into existence. Check it out.
And do not be fooled by all the party switches. Many of those people are switching to vote for HRC, or not to vote for one candidate but to vote against another. A lot are not switching because of the Democrat party ideals.
Take away the votes from New York and Illinois, and this race is a lot closer in the popular vote totals. Obama has a +300K vote margin from those two states alone since his margin in Illinois was greater than hers in New York. So, around the country, this race is a lot close than the media is portraying. Should Florida be counted (since they were both on the ballot and neither "campaigned" there, HRC has a vote plurality. The Super delegates can and ma still take this away from Obama. What then?
Tom -
Since we're now counting hypothetical races, let's look ahead to IN and NC. IN will be close, and Obama will rout Hillary in NC - putting Hillary in no better position that she was after OH. This whole idea of Hillary being more electable is propaganda being put out by her campaign. Polls have consistently shown Obama to perform as good or better than Hillary in a matchup with McCain. Hillary is winning the Democratic voters who are going to vote Democratic anyway. Obama is bringing in new voters, and he's winning large numbers of swing voters in red states. In the end though, we're going to have a Democratic president. I think Hillary is an excellent candidate too Tom. Glad to have you aboard.
What do you mean take away IL and NY? There were actual elections in those states.
I'm waiting to see which small town in Indiana Hillary will claim to have roots in.
P-diddy,
"purity of political spirit issue"
Yup, the Dems have claimed the high road. But the pols tend to be all alike. It's just a matter of degree. The Repubs are a little bloodier about it and they've learned how to wipe the fingerprints off.
102 comments | View All By Latest | Paginate Comments
About Dick Polman
- American Spectator
- Blogs for Bush
- Campaign Standard
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Outside the Beltway
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Altercation
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Carpetbagger Report
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Katharine Seelye Online
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- The Stump
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
Blog Roll
Get it now
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
Archives
Categories
Philly.com Promotions
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
Site Services:
Classifieds:
- Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Rentals | Marketplace | Celebrations
Partners:
