He is dealing with two ruthless characters, who will say and do just about anthing to win. Time is running out.
Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary results
Hillary Clinton has, as expected, won the Pennsylvania primary, matching our pre-election polling exactly by garnering a 10-point victory. Now, let the analysis begin.
Let me start with the observation that Hillary Clinton did not win Pennsylvania by running a negative campaign. The negatives that came out against Barack Obama were self-inflicted mistakes - his comment about "bitter" Pennsylvanians, his bobbling of questions over why he sometimes does not wear an American flag pin in his lapel, and lingering questions about his Chicago pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. He compounded his trouble by going negative against Clinton, because in doing so he took himself off his core message of hope, change, and the promise of a new kind of politics. He became just another politician.
And coming under the heading of "Things I Didn't Need," these multiple negative issues cropped up against him all at the same time, when he was already running in a state where the demographics were stacked against him. Pennsylvania was never realistically a winner for Obama anyway, but he may have done some damage to himself by responding the way he did. We do not yet know.
But political observers know there are ebbs and flows to every campaign and every race, and Obama is now in an ebb. However, he has shown a resiliency throughout this year, and if he can get back to his core campaign messages of hope and change, he may be able to make a full recovery.
Our polling in recent months has consistently shown that American voters want a leader who can competently manage the federal government, be an effective commander in chief, be one who can cross the aisle and unify the country, and be someone who can change the way politics is played in Washington. Obama appealed effectively to those voters earlier this year, and his challenge is to get back to that message while managing attacks from the Clinton campaign.
It would be a colossal error for the Obama campaign to respond to attacks by lashing out at the Clintons and dragging their old scandals back out into the public square. Exit polling from Pennsylvania shows that a significant percentage of Clinton supporters -- 43% -- would either vote for Republican John McCain in a general election match-up against Barack Obama, or would stay home, and Obama is not going to win those Clinton voters over to his team by bringing all the old Clinton scandals back to life. And should he win the nomination, he will desperately need those supporters.
Make no mistake -- the Clinton win in Pennsylvania puts the burden of proof back on the shoulders of Obama, who must show white ethnic voters that he is worthy of their support. He did this effectively in Wisconsin earlier this year, and he must do it again in Indiana. They were evaluating him in Pennsylvania, and he closed the gap with Clinton in the week before the election, but he was unable to close the deal with them for the reasons I mentioned above.
And his trouble winning the big primary elections could become a problem for him, particularly in the minds of super delegates who might wonder if he is too weak to win these key Midwestern states in the general election. It is certainly an argument the Clinton campaign will continue to make, bolstered by fresh evidence from Pennsylvania, and he almost certainly must win Indiana to squelch this argument against him.
And this race is bound to grow more acrimonious by the day, as open sores become festering, open wounds between the two Democratic campaigns. For Clinton, the Pennsylvania win is probably too little and probably comes too late to help. I agree with everyone else who says the mathematics just don't add up for her to win the nomination. The longer she stays in this race, the more harm is done to the party. There comes a point at which -- and I don't think we are there yet -- she begins to do real harm to her own reputation and career within the party. The question she must ask herself is, does she want that? The danger is that by the time such damage is evident to her, it could be too late.
Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary results
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

He is dealing with two ruthless characters, who will say and do just about anthing to win. Time is running out.
I think a time has long past to ask this question: Why is it that the white-dominated media outlets, ad their very rich pundits, and inside-belt commentators find it par for the course to ask a Senator Obama whether he is patriotic enough? Why is it that no one blinks an eye when the patroitism of the candidate's wife Michelle is questioned? Is the media sending a message here that it is black elected leaders, their spouses, and their close friends who are unpatriotic?
how in the world can any one with any idea of fairness say that questioning of Obama during the ABC tabloid debate was self-inflicted? Ae kidding me about the nonsense about his flag lape-pin and patriotism or do the people with the media microphones really belive that we are all that dumb?
Obama have confidence in yourself, and you can lick any thing.
Remember hope springs eternally.
Hilary is envy of you and it shows.
Every man has his price.
Dig up some more pictures or videos. They tell the story.
They"ve got enough on Rev Wright.
I know there have been times she made you feel like crying. But every tear comes with a smile.
Hilary"s clouds have gathered. Now you be the storm.
Never give up hope.
Always remember. New day new fate.
Obama " YES WE CAN"
FIRST OF ALL IT WAS A 9.2% Victory so lets get off the double digit b.s. Hillary also did not win TEXAS so lets despel that fallacy as well.Hillary is working the reality bending kaleidoscope to the maximum. It would take narcotics to believe her math simple marijuana or pills cannot take yo to this level of disbelief. The good news is that there are not enough narcotics even with her new ten million dollars to pass around. If there were enough narcotics to pass around the Clintons would buy up the supply and hand them out while telling everyone they were Pez candies. Enough lying and counting on the magic abacus Hillary. Hang around if you want until the remaining nine contests are over and then try your best to get those you have addicted to the lies to go to rehab with Amy Winehouse and vote there senses and put a Democrat in the White House. Go Barack Go.
It's time for Barack to prove that he can get all kinds of voters. We shall see.
how come you are not asking Clinton why she cannot get votes from blacks and young people?
Are you claiming that the other non-white voters are not important - this is so annoying about the blantant degradation of voters of other races
Will it always be the case that for black people, you always need to work twice as hard to get the same respect as white people?
How come these questions where never raised when Obama won the Wiscosin primary and other states that have less than 1% of the blacks in their populatio? Such hyochrisy?
I would have thought that a clear, consice, and very fair analysis by someone with the proven integrity and impartiality of John Zogby might have elicited a balanced response. Perhaps too much to expect.
As the narrative that Obama is not responsible for his miscues or his own baggage...and is merely the victim of the evil and scurrilous "Clinton smear machine" becomes less and less plausible, more and more voters (and presumably Superdeleagates) may come to see him as less a messianic "movement leader" and more a conventional politician running for office, which would not be an altogether bad thing in my view.
I'll admit I'm quite partisan and I want very much to see a Democratic President inaugurated next January.
As such, I find the mind set that says Obama has no faults, and all he need do is run out the clock on Sen. Clinton, accept the nomination, (coronation?) and proceed to the "cakewalk" general election campaign a very dangerous line of thinking.
For Obama's sake (and that of our nation and our planet) I hope he has someone on his staff that can tell him the hard truths and provide the insightful analysis that Mr. Zogby has here.............tm
"I would have thought that a clear, consice, and very fair analysis by someone with the proven integrity and impartiality of John Zogby might have elicited a balanced response"
"Are you on crack?" is a balanced response.
Barack Obama is winning. He hasn't 'closed the deal" because 1/3 of the votes won't be cast until August, making it impossible for him to get the absolute majority Hillary Clinton now pretends he should have. Once he gets that, Hillary will declared that he hasn't 'closed the deal' because he hasn't yet walked on water.
Obama does, however, posess an absolute majority of the votes which have been cast so far, leaving him with a lead that is now insurmountable by any means short of the miraculous.
Hmmmmm....I'm not so sure about that Zogby.
For one thing Obama lost by a lot less than predicted (hardly the double digit win that Clinton so desperately longed for)...in spite of the "perceived " gaffes and glitches in his own campaign,
and the very relentless hair-splitting by the Clinton team over Obama's "bitter" remarks...which happen to actually be true. (Bill Clinton said essentially the same things back in '91.)
In one year from now there will be whole lot more bitter God-fearing gun owning Americans. (Gasoline will probably be at $5 .50 or $6.00 per gallon by April '09. That will certainly have a devastating effect on food prices...making it increasingly harder for working Americans to "put food on their families" as George W. Bush one observed.
The People who voted for Clinton the other day are, I believe good people. They are also, unfortunately, largely ill-informed (some racist) who suffer from a inability to discern truth from bullsh*t...or they would instinctively understand that Hillary Clinton could not possibly care less about their long-term well-being.
For one thing, when Hillary sets out to "obliterate" Iran, it will be the sons and daughters of hard working, not so affluent families from places like rural Pennsylvania that will be doing the dirty work...coming home broken or dead.
Isn't the price of crude high enough without that hag threatening to nuke 20% of what's left?
Has that imbecilic wench even considered the global consequences of irradiating Iranian oil?
Is she planning to become President of the Thunderdome?
Americans are waaaay ahead of you on this one, Zogby. Obama doesn't have to prove a damn thing. The media, and people like you, have got to stop pandering to the Clintons' racist-run campaign. You place impossible goals in his way as the first black candidate -- A GUY WHO IS WINNING -- that no white candidate has to face. Explain the metric under which she can win at this point. What is it?
[Where is it written that only certain big states decide a vote? If only 25% of the people in the handful of big states vote during the GE -- the ones 20th C-thinking Clinton touts as the only ones that matter -- but 60% - 70% of those who occupy the smaller states come out to vote, which hasn't happened but very well could in this remarkable year, then what does that do to your metric?]
I'm as white as they come, but I am smelling racism now all over the Democratic nomination race, AND I DON'T LIKE IT. And what I find particularly galling is that I should somehow honor the covert racism of a bunch of 'older working white folk with a high-school education' as indicative of the strength of the Democratic Party. Excuse me, but no. That is not going to happen. I may be in their age group, but they dont set the standards of my humanity.
YOU JUST HAVE TO ADMIT THIS A RACIST COUNTRY I JUST GOT BACKK FROM ITALY AND THEY ARE LAUGHING AT US. THEY CALL THE REPUKES THE GAY OLE PARTY
John Zogby is being disingenuous when he said Obama brought the negatives on himself. Flag pins, patriotism, religion, and race are wedge issues. They always originate with the Right, play to voters lesser instincts, and are giving some legitimacy by MSM repetition, that's what we have here.
of course its difficult to fight someone sabotaging everything.
Balls, Zogby; you do have some balls. To post an article like this, accusing Obama of being negative, and also being the cause of all his recent "controversies". Reverend Wright, the "bitter" remarks, 60 radicals, the bowling, and any other B.S. that came up in recent weeks was 100% THE MEDIA'S AND HILLARY'S FAULT FOR PUSHING FORWARD! I mean, really, it's not like Obama lied like Hillary about Bosnia, or acted like a victim of the press any chance she could. It was the media who, during seven of the SLOWEST news weeks EVER, decided to suddenly roast Obama daily, for the simple mistake of him being popular. Look, there are NO, I REPEAT NO SKELETONS IN OBAMA'S CLOSETS. At least no more than your average American. It has become a sport in the press to expose any precieved flaw in Obama's past, even though everything that'scome to light has been extremely minor in the grand scheme of things.
You are absolutely right as the media feeding frenzy for negatives about Obama went through every detal they could. And what did they find? Rev Wright who has been denounced, flag pins that no other candidate wears anyway, Bill Ayres a man from Chicago, Tony Reizko another man from Chicago.
Where is the game changer?
And don't forget about Larry Sinclair. The guy that performed fellatio on Obama in the back of a limousine while Obama was sucking on a crack pipe. Or Obama's other gay lover, Donald Young----the one that was murdered. Obama is on the "down low" because Michelle refuses to do certain 'wifely duties'.
Speaking of people from Obama's past, whatever happened to Keith Kakugawa -- Obama's old high school pal who was homeless when last heard from? Kakugawa had said that the Obamas threatened to have him arrested for extortion. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325pseudonym-story,1,7150702.story
Has Kakugawa found himself some kind of benefactor, or is he sleeping with the fishes, like Donald Young?
Zogby, you've subscribed to the Clinton logic that if you tell the same lie over and over again, people will start to think it's the truth. Hillary didn't run a negative campaign? Are you joking? You must really think Americans are stupid. Hillary certainly does.
He's improving steadily. Kitchen sink and septic tank nothwithstandng.
Why, when he got almost half of the white male vote, are you talking about Obama, when Hillary, only got 8% of the black male vote?!
HILLARY is the candidate with the racial divide, not Obama.
It is interesting how the media keeps saying Obama can't get the white vote - Hillary's low black vote is quite significant - I guess black people don't count - Obama has everything required to be president but as they say black people have to be one hundred times better than white people -
Hillary and her backroom supporters don't have anything else to attack Obama with so they are going for his character - they knew that if they threw in non-political personal issues it would ignite bigotry in places in Pa. referred to by her supporters as Alabama - Frankly, because of all this bigotry, Obama can't win - Hillary won't win because she won't have the black support to win - McCain and his backroom supporters are going to continue the bigotry and McCain will win because the majority of america do not like Hillary -
First: let me congratulate you on getting the polling on at least one primary contest right, although it still doesn't come close to making up for your predictions about California and Ohio.
Second: Obama doesn't have prove anything to the Superdelegates. The results of Pennsylvania might raise some concerns about his ability to win white working class voters in the general, but that doesn't change the fact they are never going to overturn a pledged delegate lead of 100+ delegates because they know it would destroy the party.
The race is over. Hillary supporters can scream about popular vote, unfair caucuses and empty suits until they are blue in the face but unless they want McCain to win in November, it's time to support the Dem nominee - Obama.
>unless they want McCain to win in November, it's time to support the Dem nominee - Obama.<
Agreed. If Hillary put half the energy into supporting the Dem nominee that's she's wasting on her destructive and hopeless campaign, we'd have McCain beaten already. No one in their right mind would opt for another four years of George Bush.
Perhaps you can't see beyond the tip of your own nose, but the primary goal of Hillary supporters is specifically to "elect Hillary." It is not to "stop McCain."
We believe that nominating Hillary will stop McCain -- even if *you* do not.l
Also, I don't believe anyone with an open mind would accuse Obama as responsible for the negative tone of the campaign. I have heard the Clinton surrogates try to make this claim, but I believe that it is more of the Rovian tactics of deception that Clinton has been using. She's guilty of going negative, so she claims Obama is the one who has gone negative. It is a tactic that works with low information voters, which many of her supporters happen to be. It works with people who are ignorant and those who choose to be deluded. It is simply more evidence of her dishonesty.
Sorry. The above comment was supposed to go somewhere else. (I am very new at this.) But it's true anyway.
That's ok. I agree with you.
Luck!
You' r are wrong on several items. First of all Obama does not have to convince anybody about anything. The fact is that McCain is not electable. He comes across as someone who says good things on days when he is on his meds and bad things when he forgets to take them. I do not think anyone in this country wants a president who will go bonkers on us and push the red button. McCain is mentally unstable and that is apparent to a lot of people, even Republican type people. The second big fact is that Hillary will not be nominated because the Repubs will make mince meat out of her and she would not be electable. Thus the party will choose Obama to run against MCain to ensure a victory. So to sum up Hillary is not a good choice for nomination as that would only rally the Repubs to a victory. The only way to beat McCain is to nominate Obama. So that is what they will do.
Lets see - the Repubs would make mince meat out of Clinton, and Obama will make mince meat out of the Repubs, so Obama must be making mince meat out of Clinton right now, except that he's not. He can't even win the nomination against her without help from cowed superdelegates who fear another '68 convention blowup. McCain's mental instability is only apparent to Dem liberals who dislike his policies. Blue-collar Reagan Democrats - those gun-clinging rednecks that Axelrod dismisses - will flock to McCain over Obama and liberals will live to whine another day.
Do you honestly think pro-choice white women in PA and Ohio will vote for anti- abortion McCain with possibly two maybe even three SCOTUS openings in the next Presidential term? PA is one the states hit the hardest in terms of troop casualties in Iraq, do you think McCain has a snowballs chance in hell of getting those votes? Dems just registerd 300,000 new voters in PA, how many new for GOP? Better still, Mcain is running even or just behind both Dems in most polls. This is with both dems at each others throat. What the hell do you think is going to happen when either one of them gets to train their fire on him. Think Clinton has a husband problem, think again, A women running for president garners the attention of at least 52.8 percent of the population. Even if they don't like her, the vast majority of women will vote for her. Her advantage amoung all women will be something in the high 70%. That coupled with the AA vote in the urban centers in PA, OH, Missouri, MI give her the white house. Think Obama has a pastor problem? Think again. Hagee, Parsley, Falwell Robertson are all asses that Mcain has put his lips on to secure the ............
She's not going to get the vote of the black women or men - pro-choice is not a black issue - the issues important to the black people are those that Obama is running on - so good luck because McCain will win against Hillary -
>Dems just registerd 300,000 new voters in PA, how many new for GOP?<
Quite a few of those new Dems WERE Republicans. They switched parties in order to vote in the Dem primary. Wonder how many were following Limbaugh's call to switch and vote for Hellary so that the Repubs can run against her in November?
As far as the choice issue, I for one am not really sure Hellary IS pro-choice anymore. Her affiliation with that group of right-wing religious fanatics, The Family, has me concerned. Does anyone believe the likes of Brownback, Ashcroft and Santorum would allow a pro-choicer into their inner circle?
When Obama runs against McCain in the general election, Obama only need say one thing - "It's the economy stupid", and those flocks of racists will have ONLY their guns to cling to, because the trailer will be in foreclosure, the truck repossessed, and the old lady will be stripping at the Last Chance Bar & Grill.
nomination. He's a muslim. How the hell can you sell that when your pushing Rev. Wright. Thanx media, you reminded everyone that he is in fact a christian. Now add the AA vote, traditional dems woman vote, young voters and quite of few indies in he is in the white house. Relax Nathan Bedford Forrest in his grand wizard robe can beat the republicans this fall!
Posted April 23, 2008 | 02:21 PM (EST)