The Purple Gorilla in the room
Mark Penn may have over-stated the case for Pennsylvania. Neither the nomination or election hinge on it. That said, the super-delegates would do well to consider the Power of Purple. It is obvious that HRC is stronger in the big purple states, and will, in all likelihood, win Pennsylvania. Does that reality equate to an automatic victory in these states in the general election? No, it does not. What it does point out is her greater strength in these swing states, and greater likelihood of carrying them.
She has the key constituency....working whites, blue-collar hispanics and women. McCain would be difficult for HRC to beat in Ohio and Texas, but it's possible. In Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida her chances greatly improve.
The problem for Obama is McCain in any of these states. I don't see Obama winning in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Texas against McCain. Florida would even be a dog-fight for him. If either Democrat could control these states, hold the traditional big blue states of California and New York, the election is half won. Setting aside the delegate and super-delegate issue momentarily... HRC looks like a much better bet. If Michigan and Florida are re-run, and Hillary wins them, that just strengthens her argument for the nomination. If not, the question remains more open. My feeling is she will win Florida, if an agreement for a re-do can be reached, and will squeak by in Michigan. For the moment, all eyes seem to be on Pennsylvania, at least for the Clinton Campaign. Obama's camp is fighting there, but they are looking beyond Pennsylvania to some extent, and for good reason.
She has the key constituency....working whites, blue-collar hispanics and women. McCain would be difficult for HRC to beat in Ohio and Texas, but it's possible. In Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida her chances greatly improve.
The problem for Obama is McCain in any of these states. I don't see Obama winning in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Texas against McCain. Florida would even be a dog-fight for him. If either Democrat could control these states, hold the traditional big blue states of California and New York, the election is half won. Setting aside the delegate and super-delegate issue momentarily... HRC looks like a much better bet. If Michigan and Florida are re-run, and Hillary wins them, that just strengthens her argument for the nomination. If not, the question remains more open. My feeling is she will win Florida, if an agreement for a re-do can be reached, and will squeak by in Michigan. For the moment, all eyes seem to be on Pennsylvania, at least for the Clinton Campaign. Obama's camp is fighting there, but they are looking beyond Pennsylvania to some extent, and for good reason.
Advertisement
It's not obvious that she would do so today. People view both Obama and Clinton very differently than they did way back when California's early voting program was going on.
Nor is it obvious, even assuming that she would win the Democratic primaries in those states today, that that means she has a better chance than Obama in the general election in those states:
The right wing smear machine has invested a lot of time, money, and effort over the past decade and a half to convince people that this woman -- this woman specifically -- will bring ruination upon America. That she wants to bring ruination upon America. And, to a large degree, their efforts have paid off.
There is a huge segment of the population that simply cannot possibly be brought around to being pro-Hillary Clinton by November. The same cannot reasonably be said about Barack Obama, especially not to the same degree.
No matter how many (well, actually, how few) Democratic primaries she wins.
March 15, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Steven, that is not "obvious" at all. Sorry.
March 15, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Steven, maybe you missed the SurveyUSA poll that spoke to this issue directly:
Hillary
Obama
The thing to ask is, which people will be most motivated to turn out when comparing Obama v McCain and Hillary v McCain. For me, the difference between Hillary and McCain has dwindled dramatically over the past month. Whereas in January, I was equally happy with either Obama or Hillary (with Edwards in 3rd place out of those three), I am now thinking that Hillary would actually be worse for the nation than McCain. She has put forward a pretty convincing case of this. I don't think I'm alone in this boat.
March 15, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC can take Ohio, people forget that Ohio went twice for WJC, Ohio has a new democrat governor and the repubs were so corrupt that even the newspapers had to pretend to notice.
Any democrat has to take New York, California, Ohio, PA, Michigan, Florida and MA to win.
March 15, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink