It is starting to be exceptionally painful for me to come across anything coming out the Clinton camp's mouth lately. But, as a good netizen, I am honor-bound to force my self to write on some of the more steamy piles of excrement.
This one is a doozy.
Perhaps trying to deflect attention from today's coverage of Obama's phenomenal $40 million grassroots fundraising haul for March, Howard Wolfson today bleated away on the infamous daily Clinton conference call with this gem, as reported on MarketWatch:
Officials from Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign estimated Thursday that her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama, is outspending her by a 4-1 ratio in Pennsylvania, ahead of the April 22 primary there.
"If they fail to win there, they will have failed," said Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign.
My first response to this is a guttural one: "How freaking stupid do you think we are!?"
My second response is more factual and nuanced.
See below the fold for the latter...
So, calming myself down a little bit, let's deal with the facts.
THE MONEY FACTS
Clinton's camp claimed cash-on-hand of $33 million after February, with around $22 million of that restricted to use only in the general election. Not only that, her campaign reported nearly $9 million in debt, leaving her campaign with a primary net cash figure of only $2 million.
Obama's campaign, by comparison, disclosed that his cash-on-hand at the end of February was $39 million, of which only $7 million was restricted to the general election. Obama's debt at the end of February was only $625,000, which leaves his campaign with a net cash figure of around $31.4 million!
Let me emphasize that. At the end of February, Clinton was left with $2 million in net cash whereas Obama was left with $31.4 million!
Now let's progress into March.
As today's news stories reveal, Obama raised more than $40 million in March alone. When asked, the Clinton camp was cagey about their number but said that it was something approaching $20 million.
Let's be conservative with those numbers and say Obama got only $40 million and Clinton drew in on the high side and got $20 million.
Simply add this to February's net cash figures for both campaigns (which admittedly isn't a very accurate calculation because it doesn't include March expenditures) for both campaigns and whammo:
Obama: $31.4M Feb. net cash + $40M Mar. fundraising = $71.4M
Clinton: $2M Feb. net cash + $20M Mar. fundraising = $22M
Hmm, what are you thinking about the relationship between those numbers? Is one obscenely larger (nearly 224% larger to be exact) than the other one?
As we've seen demonstrated above, without taking into consideration March expenditures, Obama has 224% more funds with which to spend on Pennsylvania advertising.
So, of COURSE, Einstein, Obama is going to be vastly outspending you in the state -- because Hillary doesn't have enough money to even come close.
THE VOTING FACTS
Let's turn our attention to Pennsylvania and Wolfson's claim that "If they fail to win there, they will have failed."
As we've seen above, Obama is strongly competing in Pennsylvania. If you go to the Real Clear Politics history of Pennsylvania polls this cycle, you'll notice that in the last couple of months, Clinton has routinely polled ahead of Obama with spreads ranging from 16, 18, 22, to even 33%.
Now, just like in Texas and Ohio, Obama has sharply tightened this gap by coming into the state, meeting voters, running ads, and telling his story. The most recent polls up on RCP show Clinton with spreads of only 3, 5 and 9% and Obama leading in one outlier by 2%.
After Ohio and Texas (where, in Texas, it turns out that Obama actually "won" by winning 3 more delegates than Clinton), it really strains the bounds of credulity to suggest some all-or-nothing sophist bulls&%t like "If they fail to win there, they will have failed."
Have we come to this state in this race? Have we come to this state in our society where people will buy this crap?
Perhaps I've gone on too long and maybe lost a thread or two of thought along the way but the rage I feel when I hear such idiotic, putrid, bilous, excrement stream forth from a campaign just has to be put to paper (er, keyboard).