Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The three themes from PA
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, April 23, 2008

This is the first theme coming out of the Clinton win in PA:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton scored a decisive victory over Senator Barack Obama on Tuesday in the Pennsylvania primary, giving her candidacy a critical boost as she struggles to raise money and persuade party leaders to let the Democratic nominating fight go on.
She can claim PA as a legitimate reason to continue her campaign, as it demonstrates once again that Barack Obama can't win the large electoral count industrial states which house those coveted "Reagan Democrats" so necessary to a Democratic win in November. Couple that with her wins in CA and TX and she has a case, however weak you may find it, for going on. And, of course, she has the full support of the Republicans.

That brings us to theme two, which is also being pushed by the Clinton camp. "Why can't Obama close the deal" if he's such a strong candidate and the inevitable nominee? Shouldn't there be, by now, some sort of "bandwagon effect" where voters begin joining that which is perceived to be the winning camp with no other obvious reason than it is indeed winning? The suggestion, of course, is he's not that strong of a candidate and that the fact Clinton is able to win by significant margins in a state like PA actually shows his inherent weakness as a candidate - he doesn't appeal to the critical demographic necessary to win. It is this argument you can count on hearing often as the Clintons try it out on the superdelegates.

I mentioned the third theme last night. A reminder:
Perhaps the most disturbing statistic for Democrats to come out of the exit polls show that 26% of Clinton voters would vote for McCain over Obama and 19% would just stay home. That's 45% of Clinton voters saying they won't vote for Obama.

On the Obama side, it is 17% claiming that they would vote for McCain over Clinton and 12% would just stay home.
That points to how bruising and divisive this campaign has been. And the numbers you see above have increased since the last primary. Now, in all honesty, I fully expect most of those claiming they'll vote for McCain or stay home to have changed their mind by November (and I have no doubt that McCain will find numerous opportunities between now and then to help change their minds), but there is a certain percentage that mean what they say. Even if that's just a percentage or two, that could be a very significant blow to Democratic chances.

I think it is now clear and almost inarguable that the longer the Dem primary goes on, the more it benefits the Republicans and John McCain. Democrats are left with the unenviable choice of ending the democratic process by appealing to the superdelegates to choose now and not allowing remaining Democratic primary voters to vote, or letting this run its full course and suffering the consequences in November.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
There’s also the problem of how a candidate who outspent his opponent almost 4:1, after winning election after election managed to lose.

This doesn’t bode well for the DNC. I wonder what Dean will say?
 
Written By: Joel C.
URL: http://
While the media is trying, very hard, to tell this story as "Hillary lives another day, but shouldn’t she drop out?," the real story is that Obama is an extremely vulnerable candidate right now.

A news cycle can take him down, and bring on a superdelegate veto of his candidacy.

Obama is a fatally flawed candidate. He is a candidate about whom there is justifable and bottomless doubt. (And when the context for that is Hillary possibly getting the nomination, that is really saying something, because there is no way in hell that woman should be running for president herself. In my book, she should be in retirement as a paroled felon about now.)

You see Bill Clinton out there, yesterday, trying to double-talk his way out of having accused the Obama campaign of playing the race card against him, and it raises the question of who has really done the double-talking in this campaign, as in throwing the grandmother who raised him under the bus to get him off the Reverend Wright hook.

The whole thing is a catastrophe posing as a farce.

I’ve never seen anything like it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
`
There’s also the problem of how a candidate who outspent his opponent almost 4:1, after winning election after election managed to lose.
The interesting part about that in relationship to how Obama will fare not only in the primary going forward, but in the GE, is the breakouts from last night.

The one group Hillary Clinton did most remarkably well with, is the people Obama slighted in his ’Bittergate’ comments. Given the Demo breakouts in places like Kentucky and Oregon, this would seem to suggest Clinton will do well in the primary voting in those states, as she did in PA.

Which, it would appear, would set her up even closer to the nomination. This clearly is the worst of all possible worlds for the Democrat party. Neither one of their candidates will do well in the general election, and whoever the Democrat leadership decides to nominate, is going to piss off half the party, and half of THEM are going to vote Republican as a result.

The breakup the Democrats are headed for past Denver makes Chicago 68 look like a walk in the park.

Hmmmm.... (grin) Ya know, come to think on it, this is 68 all over again, and yes, Martin, you HAVE seen it’s like before.

Consider; Back in 68, we had a very notably liberal Republican in Nixon. We had a Democrat party nomination fight between two fairly closely matched Democrat candidates whose Democrat supporters each would never vote for the other candidate. We wave every left-wing crazy on the planet who could hitch a ride, in Chicago, protesting the war. The party leadership ended up having to take a hand to get the nomination process done, which alienated around half the party. The resulting breakup of the Democrats in 68 was of legendary proportions.

Today, on the other hand, we have two candidates whose political and family roots are deep in liberal Chicago politics. We have a very notably liberal Republican in McCain. We have a Democrat party nomination fight between two fairly closely matched Democrat candidates whose Democrat supporters each would never vote for the other candidate. We have rumors of every left-wing crazy on the planet who can hitch a ride, in Denver for the convention, to protest the war. This Clinton Obama thing will be close enough that the party leadership will be forced to take a hand in the decision.. and there are already signs that any chocie they make won’t be popular. Is there any conclusion but that the resulting breakup of the Democrats in 08 was will be of legendary proportions?






 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Eric:
This clearly is the worst of all possible worlds for the Democrat party. Neither one of their candidates will do well in the general election,
Well, the Clintons probably can’t win the election without substantial support from black voters, which they have now alienated, but they can make it very close, maybe even lose the popular vote and win the electoral college.

Obama has no chance. He’ll get clobbered. But the Clintons know how to work the electoral map against the GOP.

She’d be competitive, and the outcome would be similar to the last two elections.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Martin:
Well, the Clintons probably can’t win the election without substantial support from black voters, which they have now alienated...
Just ahead of the primary, Byron York chatted up Pennsylvanians at rallies for Clinton and Obama:
At the Clinton rall[ies], I asked a lot of people, all of them white, whether they would vote for Obama if he wins the Democratic nomination. More than half of them said no. One man told me he would move to Canada. At this Obama rally, I ask ten people, most of them black, the flip-side question — If Clinton were the nominee, would you vote for her? Everyone says yes, they would vote for Clinton. “She’s a Democrat, I’m a Democrat, and I support the party,” a man named Mark tells me. It’s a striking difference from the Clinton crowd.
Anecdotal sure, but it tallies with the exit poll stats McQ reports in the previous post, wherein fewer Obama voters than Clinton voters threaten to stay home or vote McCain if their candidate loses.

Maybe the Clinton’s haven’t alienated average black voters so much as they’ve alienated the hard lefties in their party. And in national contests, the fewer of those guys you’ve got attached to you, the better off you are.

I agree with you that Hillary could make it a horse race instead of the rout that Obama’s candidacy promises.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
From Linda’s quote from York:
I ask ten people, most of them black, the flip-side question — If Clinton were the nominee, would you vote for her? Everyone says yes, they would vote for Clinton. “She’s a Democrat, I’m a Democrat, and I support the party,” a man named Mark tells me. It’s a striking difference from the Clinton crowd.
I could be wrong, but I don’t buy it. The numbers that McQ cited — the lower (than Clinton supporters saying they wouldn’t vote for Obama) percentage of Obama supporters saying that they wouldn’t vote for Clinton — might reflect the white liberals doing the high snoot. But when you look at the percentage of the black vote going to Obama, when the Clintons have done everything but change their skin color to court blacks, I’ve got to believe that there’s no going back for a lot of them.

For instance, maybe Hillary would again get the 9-1 black vote for the Democratic nominee, but on what kind of turnout?

Black voters have heard the call to Obama, and if Hillary knocks him out now, with a killer blow, I don’t see them jumping up for that "I’m a Democrat, and I support the party" thing.

But that’s all a matter of theory based on how high the expectations are for Obama among blacks.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Linda;

Yeah, I saw that one, too. Hence my comments about " and half of THEM are going to vote Republican as a result."

But let’s not lose sight of the fact that those comments were made long before Obama got burned so badly by his own mouth, and by his demonstrated willing association with less than savory people. Granted there will be less reaction to those flaws being exposed than we might desire, but I cannot imagine that such things will be totally without consequence among the kind of people York interviewed.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
I don’t see them jumping up for that "I’m a Democrat, and I support the party" thing.
Frankly, nor do I. the Democrat electorate has never struck me as being all that disciplined, in that area, as the Republcians have, at least for ideological reasons.

As examples of Republican party discipline, despite ideological misgivings, I submit Both Bush’s, and the aforementioned Richard Nixon. When Republicans ’jumped the fence’ it wasn’t for ideological differences, it was fitness issues. Dole, as an example. And before you start, yes, Jerry Ford would have been fit for office, despite some differneces with the base, but given the post watergate aura, I consider that a special situation.

But notice that in the cases of Both Bushes, and Nixon, and for that matter, Reagan, there were more than a small number of Democrat voters jumping the fence.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Martin:
For instance, maybe Hillary would again get the 9-1 black vote for the Democratic nominee, but on what kind of turnout?
Obama’s presence on the ticket in November would almost certainly bring to the polls a larger-than-usual number of eligible black voters. But, admittedly on the basis of scant evidence, I’m beginning to wonder whether his absence would substantially lower the usually expected number, whatever that may be. Whereas I think McCain, against Clinton, could capture a somewhat higher percentage of black voters than an ordinary (real) republican in an ordinary election year, I suspect Clinton could count on the large majority traditionally accorded the Dems.

Rather than average black voters, it’s the uber-organized shrieking hardcore left who are poised not only to pout but to institute all screaming Bedlam if Obama’s bid for the nomination is ultimately rejected. Should that somehow come to pass, I actually wonder if they wouldn’t do everything in their power to convince Obama to make a third-party run. Were they to succeed, no Democrat reluctant to vote Republican would have to stay home and no Republican reluctant to vote McCain would feel much pressure to go to the polls and do so.

The superdelegates can’t let that happen.

This is indeed one crazy election year.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider