Sorry, but to think Obama is electable shows how out of touch you are. I suspect he couldn't get re-elected as a Senator from Illinois.
Bill and Hillary Clinton's not-so-secret argument that Barack Obama cannot win in November -- swallowed as a legitimate question by too many TV bloviators -- is based on a false assumption: that how Obama performs in primaries against Clinton in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania is a measure of how he would do against McCain in the general election.
It's a clever manipulation of some polling data, but it's bad social science and faulty reasoning.
Obama lost the Pennsylvania primary to Hillary Clinton exactly as expected and predicted. Yet in the wake of the vote there's been a constant stream of palaver from TV pundits about Obama's "problem" with working-class white voters who, it is almost universally argued, "he must win over if he hopes to defeat McCain in November."
Because she carried this demographic in the Democratic primary, Clinton is presumed by the blowhards to be better positioned among this salt-of-the-earth slice of the electorate than is Obama. But there is no evidence to speak of that demonstrates that Obama would do any worse in a general election against McCain than would Clinton, however their votes might be comprised.
In fact, according to Patrick Healy of the New York Times, one of the only political writers to take a serious look at the issue:
According to surveys of Pennsylvania voters leaving the polls on Tuesday, Mr. Obama would draw majorities of support from lower-income voters and less-educated ones -- just as Mrs. Clinton would against Mr. McCain, even though those voters have favored her over Mr. Obama in the primaries.
And national polls suggest Mr. Obama would also do slightly better among groups that have gravitated to Republican in the past, like men, the more affluent and independents, while she would do slightly better among women.
Comes now a Newsweek Poll by the respected Princeton Survey Research Associates (here) which puts some meat on the bones for those of us who do not have access to all the crosstabs from the Pennsylvania exit poll.
Lo and behold, we find that Obama runs exactly as well against McCain as does Clinton (47-44% for him; 48-45% for her) but that the composition of their vote is -- for now -- quite different.
Clinton does do somewhat better among Democrats against McCain than Obama does. She beats McCain 81-13 and he beats him 75-16 among Democrats. But Obama does better among Republicans (with 10-85% versus 7-89% for Clinton) and with Independents, among whom he beats McCain 45-43% while she trails 44-45%.
Importantly, while Clinton runs better against McCain among the poor and working-class whites who comprise about a third of the voters in the general election, Obama runs better against McCain among the middle- and upper-income voters who make up the other two-thirds of the general election voters.
This is what analysts like Ron Brownstein and Peter Hart have been talking about when they say Clinton's base is deeper in the Democratic Party, but Obama's is wider in the general electorate.
Moreover, while Obama's favorable/unfavorable rating is 53-40% among registered voters, and McCain's is 51-41%, Clinton's is a negative 47-49%. And while 40% of the voters say there is no chance they would vote for Obama in November, 43% say the same about Clinton.
On a variety of measures, Clinton does better than Obama among poor and working-class voters, while he does better among middle- and upper-income voters. However, even lower-income white voters say Obama is "down-to-earth" as compared by "elitist" by a margin of 53-25%.
But in testimony to the effectiveness of the campaign to refer to Barack Hussein Obama, 13% of all voters and 16% of lower-income whites think Obama is a Muslim.
If Obama wins the nomination -- which is the only outcome for the Democrats that will not leave their party in shreds -- McCain and his allies will not just throw the kitchen sink at him, they'll throw every sink they can find from the bathroom, the laundry room and the garage -- just as they would at Clinton (from Whitewater and the Rose Law Firm to Travelgate and Bosnian sniper fire).
But unless he is so crippled by Clinton before he has a chance to face McCain head-on -- and there's a real question about the Clintons' intentions here -- there is no sound basis on which to base the argument that he would be a less effective standard-bearer for the Democrats than would the much-despised former first lady.
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
Sorry, but to think Obama is electable shows how out of touch you are. I suspect he couldn't get re-elected as a Senator from Illinois.
There is nothing to prove you are right. Survey USA has Obama tied in MASS while Hillary is up 16 points there. That is scary. Real Clear Politics averages have (for weeks now) Obama losing Ohio while HIllary is up by five, tied in PA with Hillary up by five, McCain wins by almost 12 in FLA against BO whereas Hillary is tied-these are poll averages, and vert scary for the Dems. You mention Hillary's negatives, but those have nowhere to go but up whereas Obama's have been going down the more people find out about him.
You use very odd logic. HRC's negatives have been steadily going down, down, down, and you think that they have nowhere to go but up. Please tell us what you think will happen to her negatives if she manages to steel away the nomination from Obama, thus splitting the Democratic party, understandably alienating African American voters, and turning off the countless young voters who have been brought into the party by Obama"s run?
Bill and her surrogates publicly say Obama is unelectable. However, her high negatives and faulty "big-state" strategy (that only worked for Bill Clinton"s 92 campaign because Perot was, in effect, a Republican spoiler) make Hillary Clinton unelectable.
Real Clear Politics has Obama beating McBush by more than Hillary Bush. Also, if Hillary didn't keep telling people from FL that Barack is the reason their votes don't count, he wouldn't be doing so bad there. The hanging chad idiots in FL don't realize that Hillary is just as responsble for their votes not counting as Edwards, Dodd, Biden, Gravel, Kuchinich, and Obama. The DNC made that decision and all candidates agreed. Hillary is just playing the morons in this country for her advantage because that's what the Clintons are good at.
Also, Hillary was the front runner in every measure before the primaries began, and Obama has been gaining on her in every state and every poll. The more people find out about him, the more they like him. You are soooooo wrong on that point, it makes me want to donate more money to our education system.
Couple of key points that you overlook...
Obama does not have to win two of three among FL, OH, PA. He has other ways to win by putting states like CO, MO, and VA in play. Clinton doesn't have that option. She has to win the general the same way Gore and Kerry tried to. And we know how that worked out.
"You mention Hillary's negatives, but those have nowhere to go but up"
By what law of nature do you make that assertion? If Clinton is handed the nomination despite Obama's lead in elected delegates, her negatives will most definitely get worse.
He has other ways to win by putting states like CO, MO, and VA in play
=========
Yet there has not be a single poll in anyof these states that show he can beat McCain there.
Hillary Clinton's negative ratings are the highest of all the candidates. Conservatives don't like her and now, with her scorched-earth campaign, she has alienated a huge number of liberals.
Sure Hillary has high negatives, but she is still getting millions of votes. Counting FL she's ahead. So what's the big deal about negatives? You don't have to like someone to know they are competent, intelligent and qualified. The conservatives are starting to respect Hillary even if they don't like her. I don't like my boss, but I know he's run his business for 50 years. He is qualified for the job. So is Hillary. Quit looking at negatives. So you don't like her. She is more qualified than Obama. And besides, she isn't as divisive as him. He's likeable, but he's the one who attends a racist church.
Why again do white people only count in Pennsylvania when they don't vote for Obama? I could have sworn plenty of blue collar, middle class (what's left of us) , white people managed to vote for Obama in every state in the US that has held their primary. I mean come on do you really think Obama pulled off a 60/40 split in places like Utah by riding the black vote? Once you get past the polygamy, and retarded liquor laws, you realize that the numbers of African Americans in Utah could be counted on your fingers and toes. Thank you Pennsylvania for not making us look like the top racist, "we fall for stupid fear tricks" state in the US anymore. He won all the states he did because the campaign was still issue-centric then. Now it's about "Ready to make your ass afraid on day one " Clinton.
Here is why he will win without the racist element
If one counts the split conservative vote between huckabee and Romnee, add the Ron paul supporters, we have a large number of republicans, ready to jump ship or sit at home. Obama will win without racist low income, uneducated whites. I also do not see the over 50, post menopausal women going for McCain.
So Superdelegates, be confident that obama will win this election. Don't you let the Clinton people scare you. Remember, it is a pattern. And it is a trgedy that it is still selling: Caucauses do not matter, middle america does not matter, small states do not matter, young people do not matter, pople making more then 50000 do not matter, college educated professionals do not matter, AA do not matter and on and on it goes.
The current political spin is : What matters are working class Whites. If some of them do not like obama because of the color of his skin, or because they do not feel comfortable with him in a bar, or the fact that he eats salad,while they are ready to drop dead after a high fat meal, matters not.
Obama can win.
he deserves a chance to prove it. And I will wake up and listen to a great speech::::: They said it can never be done. They said it was not possible, . We have come to pass, and the change, that we seeked, us, has arrived.
Obama 08
If one counts the split conservative vote between huckabee and Romnee, add the Ron paul supporters, we have a large number of republicans, ready to jump ship or sit at home. Obama will win without racist low income, uneducated whites. I also do not see the over 50, post menopausal women going for McCain.
So Superdelegates, be confident that obama will win this election. Don't you let the Clinton people scare you. Remember, it is a pattern. And it is a trgedy that it is still selling: Caucauses do not matter, middle america does not matter, small states do not matter, young people do not matter, pople making more then 50000 do not matter, college educated professionals do not matter, AA do not matter and on and on it goes.
The current political spin is : What matters are working class Whites. If some of them do not like obama because of the color of his skin, or because they do not feel comfortable with him in a bar, or the fact that he eats salad,while they are ready to drop dead after a high fat meal, matters not.
Obama can win.
he deserves a chance to prove it. And I will wake up and listen to a great speech::::: They said it can never be done. They said it was not possible, and Thankyou america, today we have made the impossible possible. We have come to pass, and the change, that we seeked, us, has arrived.
Obama 08
Because Obama rushed to run for President before getting experiences good and bad he has no empathy for American problems in general. If elected he will make as many blunders as Bush and perhaps more. Both McCain and Clinton have been through the mill with their constituents and are more sensitive to the upside and down sides of every problem. If Obama had finished at least one term he would have had successes and failures to learn from. He would have gotten and earful from constituents. Without that he has no empathy just campaign skills.
You must really be Helen Keller..
He has more experience in elective office and lawmaking than Clinton!
Yeah, I mean, he's only substantially more experienced than Bill Clinton was in 1992...
He's lived in foreign countries, has relatives on three continents, earned admission to Columbia and Harvard (and had the debt to prove it), worked as a community organizer for a few years, a civil rights attorney, a senator in the Illinois legislature, and a US senator who's campaigned in 47 states-- Why should he have any understanding of the real world?
Sorry-- Your post is so naive it actually hurt.
He's lived in foreign countries, has relatives on three continents, earned
=======
Nice spin. My mom lived in 5 countries.....Mom for Presiden!
Bush finished several terms as governor of a large state and has made many blunders as you have correctly noted. Bush's experience didn't help him be a good president, or even a competent one. Obama has plenty of experience, just not as much in public service as his opponents, and as Bush's presidency has shown, having public service experience is no guarantee of competence in the White House. Obama has more empathy in his little finger than Hillary, McCain and Bush have combined.
No matter how hard you try, you can't blame Hillary for how the people in PA voted. Nice try, though.
He's not blaming Hillary for the vote, but for the spin her campaign is putting on it. Nice try at your own spin.
I'm not even so sure Clinton would win New York if we hadn't already had our primary in the comparatively sunny days before her campaign really committed themselves to the race-baiting tactics, praise of McCain, fabricated anecdotes and general nastiness.
She's lucky that Indies can't vote in the Democratic primary in our state. We'll be voting in the general.
Clinton carried 80% of the no-aligned (independents) in NY
I live in NY hhkeller, most voters hardly knew who Barack Obama was back in February. Today, the numbers would be a whole lot different. Clinton has done absolutely nothing for NY.
Your welcomed to your opinion. Until, I see Obama start picking up more votes wit elder,working class whites and latinos he's not the best choice. Who are the true swing voters. Kerry got 43% of white 91% of black, 60% of hispanic and asian votes. Yet,did Kerry win. No. Obama will have to get a higher percentage of white voters. His weakness with older voters(who get off their asses and vote) hurts him in 3 states. Penn,Ohio and Florida states democrats MUST WIN! Because large percent of black voters are in states Obama won't win. Try as he might Obama won't win any traditional southern states except Virginia. Only if he picks Sen. Webb as vp.
If, Obama is the nominee and loses it's not the Clinton's fault. It's Obama's and the loony left. The republicans know more about Obama than he does. They are good at opposition research and would have been ready for any of the democrats. They fight dirty. They fight to win. If, you think this primary is rough just wait... McCain will have right wing radio and FOX do his bidding. While he stands on stage decrying it. Standard Good cop/Bad Cop. I'm voting for the democrat no matter who wins the super delegates. I'm still pissed at the party for not getting re-votes in Florida and Michigan. It disturbs me how cowardly Obama is about re-votes. He has more money and name recognition isn't excuse now he has both now.
Elderly working-class voters: Now, there's a base to build on! The Clintons' base is literally dying. The Democratic Party's only future lies with the pre-menopausal set, the one that has clearly said buh-bye to Billary. Billary would not only lose in November (I think you realize this) but would screw the Democratic Party for many years to come. If there's still a Democratic Party, that is.
How many Republicans are wringing their hands because McCain didn't carry the evangelical vote in many primary states?? Let me help here ... ZERO. Why? Because primaries and general elections are apples and oranges.
You are incorrect about needing to win PA, OH, and FL. Democrats need one of these, and there are plenty of ways to win without the other two. I would suggest you do some research at sites where statisticians are keeping up with all the polls in all the states.
I think the author made many points that you didn't grasp. Look at the numbers, read about Independent voters. Also, take a look at working class votes in states like Wisconsin and Iowa, where Obama won. Use something like CNN exit polling to see the large amount of white voters for Obama in many states.
Palaver is right.
I deliberately skipped all the talking heads this sunny Sunday morning and I don't even miss it.
I did catch a few minutes on This Week in Politics where they dealt with the question of why the candidates were not talking about Mars since the Chinese apparently want to plant their flag on Mars!!!!!!
Both men looked completely ridiculous and foolish discussing such a non-issue.
Memo to CNN: Let's concentrate on this world's problems first.
The problem with the argument is that most voters have not had a chance to meet McCain in person. If you buy into the argument that Obama would have done better in Florida if he had campaigned there in person, then it is not a stretch to think McCain will sway a few voters once he meets them in person.
Once the Democratic nominee is selected and the Party elders begin telling demoralized supporters of the loser we have to unite, then voters begin to take a look at McCain. McCain's numbers will skyrocket as Party elders tell voters a Dream Ticket can't be done so they'll have to learn to live with it.
McCain trounced Huckabee and Romney, yet they are campaigning with McCain which lends itself to speculation by each of their respective supporters their candidate is still available to have an impact. When the losing Democrat is dismissed and sent packing, their supporters will realize the best way for their candidate to get back in is to vote for McCain and wait for 2012.
I find it hard to believe that there are really that many democrats who would throw out all of their convictions, vote for four more years like the preceding 8, all for some far fetched political calculation on how their candidate could get into power in 2012. If such people exist they are so despicable that they don't warrant consideration.
I am glad you said democrats. Because I am an Independent for Obama and would never vote for Clinton. It isn't personal, just count me as one of the 43%. I would not have considered voting for a Democrat, had it not been for Obama.
The very point I've been making for months. Hillary's negatives are and continue to be detrimental to her efficacy as a general election candidate.
I've also been mystified by why the media so readily accepts the Clinton formulation that when she wins a state, it automatically means that McCain would win it against Obama. Isn't she making the implicit argument that her candidacy is somehow identical to that of McCain's? Logic is a subject apparently absent from the curricula of journalism schools.
She is also guaranteeing that she will lose every state she's lost so far.
Today, Barack Obama posted a message to supporters on my.barackobama.com about the...
US News and World Report printed a short piece about GOP fears that the...
HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY! In honor of the great American holiday, Huffington Post has pulled together...
I've been running VoteVets.org for a couple of years now. In 2006 and in...
Tracie Egan, and Moe Tkacik, two writers from Jezebel.com were invited to appear on my show, Thinking...
On June 10,...
Lee Grivas, the 26-year-old boyfriend of Christina Applegate, was found dead in...
From Media Matters: On the July 2 edition of MSNBC's Verdict, during the...
Today the New York Times reports on a jaw-dropping addition to the medical spa trend. Now comes...
Even with the GOP convention nearly two months away, some in the Republican...
PARIS — A French judge ordered Continental Airlines and five people...
The bottom-up political movement that Barack Obama has been so fervently encouraging may have come too...
Posted April 27, 2008 | 01:36 PM (EST)