« Two thoughts on the unfolding Clinton campaign | SFalex's Blog | Employee Free Choice Act and Americans' Conception of Themselves »
Clinton spinning herself dizzy
The report that HRC told her chief financial backers to look at three data points for her campaign's chances to win the Democratic nomination:
1. pledged delegate count
2. popular vote
3. the specific states where HRC won
Well Hillary's either not paying attention to the details or is simply delusional.
On the first point, it appears that they've pretty much conceded that she will not come in first.
On the second point, BO is ahead in the popular vote and it is unlikely that he will lose that lead. I haven't seen anyone run likely vote total scenarios but it is quite likely that whatever his loss in PA & WV, Obama will make up some great ground in Oregon and NC. With his success in rural areas Indiana may end up being a wash. Regardless, it is doubtful that HRC will prove to be the popular vote leader when its all said and done.
It is in the third point that HRC is holding on to a very thin reed. Her argument is based on the basic fallacy that her supporters will not support B.O. HRC's prinicipal support has been concentrated in a few deep blue states or states where the Dems have an abiding loyalty to the Clinton brand. I believe the Obama campaign said something to the effect that 1/2 of HRC's votes have come from 5 states. So while HRC has a ton of very deep support, its not as broad as Obama's. BO's argument is simple - I do reasonably well in areas with mainline Dems and expand the coalition in places that we've conceded over the past decade.
Will someone please do an intervention on this poor woman?
1. pledged delegate count
2. popular vote
3. the specific states where HRC won
Well Hillary's either not paying attention to the details or is simply delusional.
On the first point, it appears that they've pretty much conceded that she will not come in first.
On the second point, BO is ahead in the popular vote and it is unlikely that he will lose that lead. I haven't seen anyone run likely vote total scenarios but it is quite likely that whatever his loss in PA & WV, Obama will make up some great ground in Oregon and NC. With his success in rural areas Indiana may end up being a wash. Regardless, it is doubtful that HRC will prove to be the popular vote leader when its all said and done.
It is in the third point that HRC is holding on to a very thin reed. Her argument is based on the basic fallacy that her supporters will not support B.O. HRC's prinicipal support has been concentrated in a few deep blue states or states where the Dems have an abiding loyalty to the Clinton brand. I believe the Obama campaign said something to the effect that 1/2 of HRC's votes have come from 5 states. So while HRC has a ton of very deep support, its not as broad as Obama's. BO's argument is simple - I do reasonably well in areas with mainline Dems and expand the coalition in places that we've conceded over the past decade.
Will someone please do an intervention on this poor woman?
Advertisement
Leave a comment