Posted on 04/23/2008 9:38:49 AM PDT by The_Republican
Hillary Clinton won a decisive ten-round decision over Barack Obama in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary, but she didn't score a knockout. The struggle continues. Clinton still has virtually no chance of overtaking
Obama's delegate lead or his edge in the popular vote. And the superdelegates will be loath to ignore this advantage. Meanwhile, Obama's weaknesses as a general election candidate grow more apparent with each successive primary.
Clinton's best chance of winning the nomination was to win Pennsylvania so decisively that she would have set off a media firestorm about Obama's electability--one that would lead superdelegates to wonder whether she would not be a much, much stronger candidate in November. In the wake of revelations about Obama's relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Clinton was ahead by 15 percent or more in polls. I visited Pennsylvania during this time, and could feel the growing disillusionment with Obama.
Obama, of course, cut into Clinton's lead through outspending her two-to-one on advertisements, but Clinton seriously damaged her own cause by going negative on Obama during the April 16 debate--and probably, too, by her subsequent ads. ABC moderators George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson had already done sufficient damage without Clinton piling on. According to the exit polls, 68 percent of Pennsylvania Democrats thought Clinton attacked Obama unfairly, and they backed Obama by 55 to 45 percent. It's hard to know for sure, but these tactics probably cost her among white college-educated voters who don't like to think of elections as prize fights. (The editorial in this morning's New York Times, entitled "The Low Road to Victory," reflects this dissatisfaction with the way Clinton conducted herself.)
For his part, Obama cut into Clinton's advantage, but couldn't erase it. Even though he campaigned extensively among white working class Pennsylvanians, he still couldn't crack this constituency. He lost every white working class county in the state. He lost greater Pittsburgh area by 61 to 39 percent. He did poorly among Catholics--losing them 71 to 29 percent. A Democrat can't win Pennsylvania in the fall without these voters. And those who didn't vote in the primary but will vote in the general election are likely to be even less amenable to Obama.
But Obama also lost ground among the upscale white professionals that had helped him win states like Wisconsin, Maryland, and Virginia. For instance, Obama won my own Montgomery County, Maryland by 55 to 43 percent but he lost suburban Philadelphia's very similar Montgomery County by 51 to 49 percent to Clinton. He lost upscale arty Bucks County by 62 to 38 percent.
My colleague Noam Scheiber attributes Clinton's success among these suburbanites to the influence of Governor Ed Rendell, who campaigned with Clinton, but I wonder whether Obama's gaffes and his suspect associations--whether with Wright or former Weatherman Bill Ayers or real estate developer Tony Rezko--began to tarnish his image among these voters. If so, the electoral premise of Obama's campaign--that he can attract middle class Republicans and Independents--is being undermined.
Indeed, if you look at Obama's vote in Pennsylvania, you begin to see the outlines of the old George McGovern coalition that haunted the Democrats during the '70s and '80s, led by college students and minorities. In Pennsylvania, Obama did best in college towns (60 to 40 percent in Penn State's Centre County) and in heavily black areas like Philadelphia.
Its ideology is very liberal. Whereas in the first primaries and caucuses, Obama benefited from being seen as middle-of-the-road or even conservative, he is now receiving his strongest support from voters who see themselves as "very liberal." In Pennsylvania, he defeated Clinton among "very liberal" voters by 55 to 45 percent, but lost "somewhat conservative" voters by 53 to 47 percent and moderates by 60 to 40 percent. In Wisconsin and Virginia, by contrast, he had done best against Clinton among voters who saw themselves as moderate or somewhat conservative.
Obama even seems to be acquiring the religious profile of the old McGovern coalition. In the early primaries and caucuses, Obama did very well among the observant. In Maryland, he defeated Clinton among those who attended religious services weekly by 61 to 31 percent. By contrast, in Pennsylvania, he lost to Clinton among these voters by 58 to 42 percent and did best among voters who never attend religious services, winning them by 56 to 44 percent. There is nothing wrong with winning over voters who are very liberal and who never attend religious services; but if they begin to become Obama's most fervent base of support, he will have trouble (to say the least) in November.
The primaries, unfortunately, are not going to get any easier for Obama. While he should win easily in North Carolina, where he benefits from a large African-American vote and support in the state's college communities, he is going to have trouble in Indiana, Kentucky, and West Virginia, where he will once again be faced by a large white working class vote. He can still win the nomination and lose these primaries. Pennsylvania was the last big delegate prize. But if Obama doesn't find a way now to speak to these voters, he is going to have trouble winning that large swath of states from Pennsylvania through Missouri in which a Democrat must do well to gain the presidency. That remains Obama challenge in the month to come.
“The Next McGovern?”
The racist Obama may be even left of McGovern, but the country is considerably less sane (ie more Leftist) than it was in 1972.
After all, a supremely arrogant, openly traitorous,incredibly condescending candidate like Kerry came relatively close to being elected Commander in Chief.
There is definite danger out there. Unrelated Observation:
Just bought my first tank of gas for 4.01 $/gallon (San Jose) CA.
It doesn’t bother my wallet as much as it bothered my psyche.
Some people would be more pissed. You are right that today an Ultra Leftist has much better shot - especially since Republican party has lost all its credibility lately.
McGovern could probably get elected today
November is looking brighter for McCain with each passing day. All he has to do is avoid a major gaffe while the ‘Rats keep bashing each other around and expose how radically left they are for all to see.
Could it be that HRC is staying in the race merely to cripple Obama so that he can’t win the presidency, thus opening up things for a repaeat run for her in 2012?
What I don't understand is why the GOP isn't hammering the dhimmis on energy prices. If we had enacted W's energy plan in 2001 we wouldn't be in this problewm today.
I think I have heard OBAMA supporters on CNN make that argument - she maybe thinking as far ahead as 2012.
I’m in San Jose also. What part of SJ did you pay that and what brand? Was it for supreme? I was hoping 4 bucks could hold off until the summer months.Oh well 5 bucks by next summer I’ll guess.
If Obama is the candidate we want to run against, Operation Chaos is not a good strategy. It seems to have the negative side effect of driving up Democratic registrations.
Its too late now I guess. Dhimmis OWN the GAS ISSUE. They have been hammerring W on GAS, EVEN BEFORE HE GOT ELECTED the first time.
If you want to convince people of a lie - you have to follow the Klintonian rule - Believe it yourself, and repeat it with confidence, over and over.
Dems have and now the truth as they see it is the accepted truth.
Osbama is so wackjob liberal that he actually makes Hillary seem thoughful and responisible (at times).
Santa Teresa Blvd. South San Jose - Chevron - regular gas. Haven’t bought Supreme since I moved from PA to CA.
Ping!
“Some people would be more pissed.”
As if a big-government radical is going to rescue their self-absorbed asses from high gasoline prices.
The economically ignorant electorate is in for a major fiscal education and nightmare if they put either Democrat candidate in the White House.
$4.00/gallon gas will seem like the good old days....
But if the Dims don't nominate him now, they can kiss the black vote goodbye this election. It won't go to McCain, but it won't go to Obama either. As bad as the Republican numbers look right now, the Dims can't win without a big black turnout.
The Superdelegates know all this. It sucks to be them. :-))
Thanks for the ping!
I wish so bad that that was true - the Black Vote staying home and Dems falling apart.
I think just as Hildabeast showed yesterday - Klintons view them as whores and would thrown around Chinese Dish Washer Fund in Ghettos to pay for all the votes they need. Even MSM picked up on the “street money” but not to an extent they should.
Second, the power of fearmongerig can not be estimated.
If Klintons are the nominee, they would demonize conservatives anyway as they always have, but they know exactly what buttons to push to make Blacks feel scared and convince them that slavery would be brought back if John McCain wins.
In my view, Black anger against Hildabeast stealing the nomination will NEVER EVER even come close to their fear and anger against GOP who they are told every 4 years are racists.
SO ALL CONSERVATIVES or EIB MICRO-PHONIES who are counting on Black Votes to stay home with Hildabeast nomination, please pay attention to the pattern, the events and rhetoric and get a CLUE first.
When was the last time Black Community voted for their own interest? They only vote EMOTION. Dems know how to control it.
Bottome Line: If Hildabeast is Nominee, 60 Senators or so, GIANT majority in Congress and Presidency for Liberals.
Exactly! I see Jimmy Carter 2.0 coming if either dem is elected. Price controls etc. only cause shortages not solutions. If we leave Iraq ASAP then the Iranian’s will close the Strait of Hormuz to any oil traffic and that would stop approximately 80% of the world oil supply flowing. If that happens finding it will be a miricle let alone what it would cost in those circumstances. We have the bio diesel recipe ready just incase!
Whoever wins the Democrat nomination will have the whole democrat machine and the leftist media on his side. And if hillary wins, she still knows how to get out the black vote.
McCain, meanwhile, is a positively lousy candidate. He turns off the base, and when push comes to shove the MSM will demonize him as a warmongering conservative racist and he won’t get any Democrat votes either, as he is stupidly hoping.
Nor will he get any money or people to turn out the vote, other than the paid professionals.
As one poster said somewhere today: Only Obama can defeat the Democrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.