View Story | 31 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Does the ability to mobilize a small number of extremely devoted supporters who will stand around for hours, eloquently persuading others to switch to their candidate and never changing their support (i.e Obama's ability to do well in Dem caucuses)...
Does that translate into the ability to mobilize large numbers of voters to get off their lazy butts this fall and go down to the polls and vote AGAINST four more years of Bush War and Bush Economics?
It should worry Dems that Hillary keeps winning the vote in the big states, because those most closely mirror this fall's election.
If Obama can not defeat Hillary in Texas, California, New York, Ohio in the popular vote, how can defeat McCain in any state?
Obama is starting to look like George McGovern who only won one state.
"A dog starved at his master's gate/Predicts the ruin of the state" Blake
by McCamy Taylor on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:09:20 PM PDT
. . "small states don't count" people.
Go on, then. Get elected with your big states and leave the rest of us out the equation. Discount our opinions, our efforts. And then see how long we stay in the party. And also watch Democratic nominees for other offices start to fail because the local party has shrunk.
It's fine if you don't want us. Someone else will.
by Myrrhis on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:12:31 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
You don't need to worry that CA, NY, and other big states won't go for Obama. Of course they will, and the fp diary about SUSA's 50 state polling shows you this is true. The argument that if Obama can't defeat Hillary in the bluest of blue states is a problem is simply wrong, because no Democrat loses these states.
by bflaff on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:23:42 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 31 comments