The media and the vote today in PA. Argh!

I'm getting really irritated with the way the media is spinning every state as a "must win" state for Clinton. There is no "must win" state anymore. Her campaign is over. It is impossible for her to catch up with Obama at this point and has been since before Texas and Ohio. Texas was called a "must win" state also, but the fact of the matter is that she would have had to win it by double digit margins as well as every single state left in the primaries at that time. She didn't. Now they're trying to spin PA as a "must win state." The fact of the matter is that Obama supporters fully expect her to win that state by a wide margin. It still doesn't change the fact that she cannot catch up to Obama. Winning PA, even by the double digits, will only make her more desperate to pressure the superdelegates into overruling the popular vote. It has zero impact on whether or not she'll win more states or whether or not she could win the race fairly.

This crap is really starting to annoy me.

[PETA]

moved \/

[Ash]

I like how Hillary is the political doppleganger. Everywhere she goes she changes her appearance to fit the surroundings. She such a damn phoney.

[PETA]

lol - the guy who lives here is a phoney!

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Ash

I like how Hillary is the political doppleganger. Everywhere she goes she changes her appearance to fit the surroundings. She such a damn phoney.

this is the most natural i've seen her..

she doesn't flinch... my kind of woman

Hillary a Shot and a Beer, down the hatch

Close

You need to upgrade your Flash Player

[PETA]

Quite rather Hillary is banking on the notion that:

Obama cannot collect enough delegates

The popular vote will be close

and

Obama has been so damaged as to be unelectable...

one updated argument....

no clue how the numbers would shake out with this but if I were her I'd argue that of the states that are actually not committed Red/Blue she holds a commanding lead in terms of committed voters. That is to say either Dem would take the committed blue states but Hillary should say she is much more likely to take the uncommitted states that are necessary to win the election thus making her more electable... another way, even if she would win fewer total popular votes she would carry more electoral votes. I think its a good argument but have no clue if the facts back it up or not.


with those three things she can lobby the superdelegates to give her the nod... I don't think that will work though... but that's her theme

[Dionysos]

Originally Posted by xian

... another way, even if she would win fewer total popular votes she would carry more electoral votes. I think its a good argument but have no clue if the facts back it up or not.

They don't. Obama pretty consistently does better than her when they're matched against McCain, 'home' states notwithstanding. Electoral-vote.com has a pretty good map on this in their archive. The effect of Obama v. McCain makes sense on a lot of fronts, not the least of which is his ability to draw voters in a lot of typically 'red' states. He makes states like Texas a place - where 4 years ago the GOP didn't have to spend a dime - just enough in play that the GOP has to spend _some_ cash to campaign. It's significant because Obama's a cash machine and McCain's likely taking federal funding and thus forcing the RNC to spend their money on the presidential election. It has a cascading effect on the GOP's ability to campaign for their Congressional, state, & even local candidates because their resources are being tapped by McCain in a way they never were with Dubya.

This is a long way of saying that picking Obama as the nominee might not win the White House for the Dems(though he'd obviously have a good shot at that as well), but it could go a long way in picking up extra seats all over the political map for the left side of the aisle. If the Dems are smart, they'll shut down Hillary sooner rather than later.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Dionysos

It has a cascading effect on the GOP's ability to campaign for their Congressional, state, & even local candidates because their resources are being tapped by McCain in a way they never were with Dubya.

That is an interesting point.

Originally Posted by Dionysos

This is a long way of saying that picking Obama as the nominee might not win the White House for the Dems(though he'd obviously have a good shot at that as well), but it could go a long way in picking up extra seats all over the political map for the left side of the aisle. If the Dems are smart, they'll shut down Hillary sooner rather than later.

I think the Dems are foolish not to nominate Obama regardless. Your arguiment ^ strengthens it. Even if Obama loses and even if they think he'll lose it is better to lose this presidential race than to split the party and lose many... for some time.