View Story | 22 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Look Noonan is a twit but she can write well and her "rolling loss" is probably dead on. Here's how this will likely play out:
If Obama wins tomorrow, gets Maine on sunday and then sweeps DE, VA, MD on tuesday, the pressure will be on for Clinton to win one to stay alive. Hawaii is probably going for Obama (he grew up there) so Wisconsin becomes important for Clinton, if Obama takes that, then a Clinton win in OH or TX is a must.
Now, with all those wins, Obama is going to be carrying alot of momentum and be the anointed frontrunner. He's also got a ton of cash so he's got the resources to try and take advantage of that momentum.
If he wins TX and OH, its over. There will be enormous pressure on Clinton to drop out. If Clinton can pull off a win in TX or OH or both, then she's given herself a lifeline to PA to try and stem the tide (and if she wins both, she may even become the "frontrunner" again). If that happens, it will get very interesting as the whole superdelegate issue comes into play, not to mention FL and MI.
So, Obama ends this thing by sweeping (or only dropping a small one like Maine) from now till March 4.
Hillary can only end this by surviving to win PA. Yes, its unfair to her, but thats the position she put herself in with the "inevitability" strategy.
by hamiltondj on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:25:50 PM PDT
The key is that the cascade of victories BEFORE OH and TX will convince the bulk of undecideds and soft Hillary supporters to support Obama in the interest of "ending this thing." She would need to score a full-on knockout in both debates to stop him.
One of the problems with the analysis overall is the tendency to essentialize the Democratic electorate. We assume that all blacks will support Obama. Well, that wasn't true until very recently and might not necessarily stay that way. We assume that Latinos love Clinton because they voted for her overwhelmingly in California. But in Arizona they only gave 44% to her and in Illinois Obama dominated among them as strongly as he did every other group. Young people mostly prefer Obama, but young people voted Clinton in MA and CA. Older white women generally support Clinton, but not in Illinois or Idaho or Colorado. White working class union voters love Clinton...except not in Iowa. Every demographic can go any direction. None are set in stone. That's why telegraphing OH and TX based on numbers of blacks, Latinos or white workers is foolish this far out. If the race were tomorrow then, yes, the demographics would define it. But those big races will be after a cascade of Obama-friendly states.
by Elrod on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:35:03 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
>Hillary can only end this by surviving to win PA. Yes, its unfair to her, but thats the >position she put herself in with the "inevitability" strategy.
Obama is only wining the primaries because the race card and racists accusations that energized the blacks to a 8 to 1 polarity towards Obama over Clinton. Might be wining strategy for the primaries but how will it effect the general.
by 1alpha on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:50:39 AM PDT
Minnesota and Wyoming.
by Oothoon on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 06:05:14 AM PDT
How many times does the Clinton campaign play up some supposed sexist attack to gin up sympathy votes. See: David Shuster.
Face it, both campaigns play the victim card. Unfortunately, identity politics has entered this race because the candidate will be a historical first one way or another.
by Elrod on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 07:33:47 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 22 comments