Clinton's "Big State" Myth: Why Barack Obama Remains the Most Electable Democrat This Fall

The Clinton Campaign's post March 4th message is to forget about the delegate count and nominate Hillary because she can win the big states Democrats need in November. That argument simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Here's why:

1) Most of the "Big States" she has won are not battleground states in the fall. New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts and California are solid blue states where Obama would do as well or better than Clinton in a general election against McCain.

2) Of the states she's won so far, the big exception to this rule is Ohio. Ohio is in fact a critical battleground state where Hillary has demonstrated that she has a leg up among lower income whites and older voters. But the polling also shows that in a general election, Barack offsets this advantage in Ohio among young voters and college-educated independents. In a McCain-Clinton match up the later group could gravitate heavily to McCain in Ohio.

In an Ohio general election, Obama's ability to attract independents and mobilize young and minority voters will trump Clinton's advantages among non-college whites -- a group that will break heavily for either Barack or Hillary against the "free trade" McCain.

Just remember, in Ohio right now, "national security" is a job. The economy and trade -- not "national security" -- will almost certainly continue to be the overriding issues for non-college whites in Ohio this November.

3) Obama puts in play a panoply of states where Clinton would have a much tougher time. Obama could potentially win Virginia (13 electoral votes), Missouri (11 electoral votes) and even Mississippi (whose population is 40% African American -- 6 electoral votes). He would be considerably more competitive than Clinton in other battleground states like Colorado (9 electoral votes), Iowa (7 electoral votes), Wisconsin (10 electoral votes), Minnesota (10 electoral votes) and Michigan (17 electoral votes). The same goes for New Hampshire (4 electoral votes) -- a state where McCain will work hard to woo independents among whom Obama did much better than Clinton in this year's primary.

4) Even in states where Clinton could make a case for some advantages relative to Obama, these "advantages" are far from certain. Take Florida where she might assert an advantage among Latinos. Florida also has up to 500,000 newly enfranchised ex-felons -- many of whom are African American. The problem with these new voters is mobilization, not persuasion. Getting them registered and voting will be hard. Obama would obviously turn out many more African American mobilizable voters than Clinton. And when it comes to Latino voters, Obama's clear record on immigration contrasts well with McCain who has thrown Latino immigration reform aspirations under the bus in order to pander to his party's right wing.

5) Obama has the one quality that allows him to simultaneously motivate mobilizable base voters and appeal to persuadable independents -- the ability to inspire. This quality allows him to broaden the appeal of his candidacy to swing voters. At the same time it allows him to expand the electorate with new young and African American voters who otherwise simply wouldn't vote. Clinton is the anti-inspiration candidate. She will have a much harder time both expanding the electorate and appealing to swing voters. Obama's ability to inspire -- by itself -- makes him a much stronger general election candidate.

6) Finally, let's remember that the base of the Republican Party -- cultural conservatives -- is not so wild about McCain. They are accepting McCain with about as much enthusiasm as children take cough medicine. They know they need him, but they really aren't happy about it. The one thing that could energize the Republican base is their inveterate hatred for Hillary Clinton. Clinton would mobilize right-wing base voters the same way that hatred for Bush motivated Democrats in 2006. Why should we help galvanize the Republican base by nominating Hillary Clinton when we have another great choice?

All of these factors are born out in the consistent survey results that show Obama polls six to ten points better than Clinton against John McCain.

Clinton will have a difficult to impossible time winning the pledged delegate battle. Her only path to the nomination is convincing Super Delegates that she is the most electable. That dog won't hunt.

Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist and author of the new book Listen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight. How Progressives Can Win. The book is available at Amazon.com.

Comments

[SUNRAI]

Bravo!

This is RIGHT on the money!

[epstine]

An interesting, if unbelievably flawed argument, as it fails to reflect the respective candidates bases or the fundamentals of demographics. In reality, it is Clinton that is the more electable candidate, and the Republicans are salivating for Obama to win.

Here's why:

1. Obama's reliable base voters are largely African-Americans, younger voters (particularly under 30), and upper middle class liberals. All of these groups overwhelmingly votes Democratic. Although one can argue that the risk of a Clinton candidacy is that they'll stay home, it's unlikely. Urban and Rural African-Americans generally show up because of the importance of government services to many urban inner city and rural communities. Even for unexciting nominees like Gore and Kerry, the black vote went 89% and 92%, respectively, for them. Clinton, whose husband built up enormous goodwill with the African American community - and will be able to restore it - will get similar support. Upper middle class liberals show up out of civic obligation, and will also realiably support the democratic candidate.
2. Clinton's base is FAR MORE AT RISK of being split between Obama and McCain. Clinton is strongest among older voters (particularly voters over 65), working class whites (particularly women), white women, Latinos and Catholics. These are groups that value experience and stability (older voters), and have culturally conservative tendencies (Catholics, Latinos, older voters). McCain will be appealing to her base.
3. The Bradley effect. There are some voters who just won't vote for an African American. While that is also true for a female candidate, gender has a different off-setting factor: women are 52% of the electorate - their existence simply renders any sexist voter to a rounding error.
4. Mr. Creamer's article assumes states like Virginia and Mississippi are in play, but offers little rationale for it (and you can't use winning the primary as evidence - it's a democratic primary - a Democrat has to win. If South Carolina or Mississippi goes Democratic in November, I'll eat my hat.) Colorado is in play - as is most of the west, as it has been trending democratic and the margins in states like Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico have been close in recent elections. In reality, an Obama candidacy forces the dems to risk Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Iowa (all narrow wins in one or both of the last two elections) at the expense of fighting for Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, MIssouri, Florida, Arkansas, Kentucky and West Virginia because of the risk of HIllary's base defecting to McCain. Hillary, on the other hand, starts out with reliable states in MA, VT, CT, RI, NY, NJ, DE, DC, MD, PA, MI, CA, AR, IL, WA, OR, WI, MN - a base of about 240 electoral votes. She can make up the remainder with FL, or OH + IA, or NM+AZ+CO+NV, or a zillion other combinations.

[Calcutta]

Hey Epstine a reply to some of your points

1. OK, in regards to the AA vote, it's about the numbers. Simple and plain, Obama has brought out record breaking numbers of African Americans. Most AA supporters of Obama WILL sit out this election if they feel he was disenfranchised in any way ie: he having more pledged delegate votes and Hillary still receives the nomination. So, Hillary can still win 80-90% of the AA vote that actually turns out in November but that won't amount to squat when it's barely 50% or less of the turnout an Obama run would have gotten. As the saying goes, there's strength in numbers, without numbers..well I'm sure you follow me.

2. If it was any other popular white candidate ie: John Edwards, I would agree with you, but given the uniqueness of a Clinton Candidacy, I cannot and this is why: Hillary has the unique and uncanny ability to inspire pure unbridled hatred among republicans. You should hear some of my co workers and the venom they spew about the woman, I often end up taking up for her, but I digress. The point is this hatred translates into rightous indignation which translates to a mobilization of republicans and right leaning independents and those who are CULTURALLY CONSERVATIVE (older whites, working class whites, women and latinos) that comprise Clintons base against her in a General Election. After the repub slime machine gets ahold of her, John McCain will seem like the only option. He would have a much harder time pinning dubious moral judgement on Obama.

3. Bradley effect, I won't lie, that's a good one, the only thing I can say is that if we don't try we'll never know and things will never change if we never try.

4.If you look at the numbers, Obama's strongest in states like Washington as well as much of the Pacific Northwest, Minnesota, Colorado, North and South Carolina, etc. So the logic goes, if the Dem's want to guarantee winning these states that have been close in general elections they should go with the candidate that polls strongest there, right? Now, when you look at traditional dem strongholds like New York, California, New Jersey, Etc (basically every state in Hillary's big state argument) they would go blue , regardless of who was running on the Democratic ticket, just like GA or AL would go red regardless who was running on the Repub ticket. So the "Hillary wins the big states" argument doesn't hold weight.

[antirepublocrat]

Regarding 2), there's also a large number of us progressives who aren't really very excited by either Obama or Clinton, see little difference between either of them and McCain, and might vote for Nader to let the Democrats know we can't be taken for granted.

We've watched the Clintons and the DLC types sell out on progressive issues for the last 15 years. We watched Bill play the race card on Sistah Souljah, leave Lanie Guinier twisting in the wind, stab the Democratic base with NAFTA, welfare reform and omnibus crime. We watched him allow Benjamin Netanyahu to reverse the spirit of Oslo, wag the dog on Kosovo and set the stage for Bush with a policy of regime change in Iraq. Now we're watching Hillary run a despicable, whining, negative campaign, playing the race card and the Muslim card, distorting the reports on the Canadian NAFTA memo, even boosting the Republican nominee ahead of her Democratic rival.

There is no way I would vote for that woman for any public office, but there is some chance I could be convinced to go against my basic instincts and vote for Obama rather than Nader.

[dct19]

Bill Clinton will not be able to restore goodwill with black people. Older black people who understand the power of voting because they were disenfranchised for so long are pledging to withold votes for the first time in their lives, and many younger african americans who barely remember his presidency really don't give a damn about him. The group he managed to anger the most are the black people who supported him for years and voted for him in overwhelming numbers, they feel enormously betrayed and are tired of being taken for granted by the democratic party. Bill Clinton may think he can go on another apology tour and regain the support of black people but he is dead wrong because his decision to slap his most loyal supporters in the face will go down as one of the stupidest political moves in American history.

[scrltpmprnl]

Obama is running the same kind of campaign as Kerry did - above the fray. And Kerry lost.

[LBKN]

... and Hillary is running like GWB... and he won... so it follows...

What exactly are you advocating?

Have you got a call into Rove's office?... or is somebody else acting the part of "Hillary's Brain"?

[Amomma]

Did anyone watch the debates? She has a better grasp on all issues. She is a woman, that's the problem. She is in your face, strong, and not hot. Is that not OK?

[LBKN]

... she has a better grasp, alright.

Wouldn't "let-go" of her life-line to the insurance industry for 16 minutes.

[ObGyn]

running the presidency is not a college debate. it is a chief executive where cool, clear-headed decisions are the key. Not hysterical crying, whining, complaining, and sniping. I am surprised that I have to explain the qualities needed for a successful presidency.

[Amomma]

ObGyn, if you are still out there, my lord---is this how you perceive HRC. Man this sounds
almost misogynistic. I have not observed hysterical crying etc. Granted she is grating, and you may not like the way she comes off, but this sounds vitroilic.
Amomma

[CTtransplant]

It's her lying to win that is not ok...by ANYONE's standards

[nazgul]

Creamer's assessment is brilliant and puts the lie to yet one more Clinton lie. (How many before we can say "there, that's the last"?)

[LBKN]

Well, there's a sucker born every day... so I'd not hold my breath waiting for the last lie....

... 'bsides... she can't give-up an old tried and true habit.

... she just doesn't understand... Hill becomes more "yesterday" with each passing day.

Evolution is an inexorable force... and she refuses to move beyond her baggage.

[ocdemgal49]

Couldn't agree more - every time I heard Clinton's campaign team go on and on about 'winning the big states' - it just didn't make sense to me - why wouldn't they vote for the DEMOCRATIC candidate in the general election?! And the fact that Obama has energized so many new voters is priceless in the general....get real folks!

[Didi47]

nazgul:

Sorry Obama already earned the rights to being labeled a "liar". So far 3.... with more to come...

He said... Transparent - positive - race? LOL - Ooops... lie #4 ! ... with more to come...

[StuSargentJr]

Hillary Clinton is running on her 35 years of experience. I find it very interesting that for 8 of those years she was the first lady. She comes off like she helped Bill with all of the decisions and out of the three remaining candidates she's probably the one who came close to that 3AM telephone call. The question I would ask her, and I doubt if the media would ask her, is did she help Bill on the decision not to bomb Bin Laden? That to do so would look like he was trying to distract the US people away from the impeachment? I believe that Bill had 7 years experience when the phone call came. Was it good judgement? It was if you were protecting your name and not the American people. You would think that with all the experience that the Clintons have and with all the scrutiny of their past that they would stay away from any issues that would bring up past memories of Clinton investigations. WhiteWater, the Asian gentleman who raised money at the beginning of the campaign that everyone seems to have forgotten, and, how many good guys did Clinton pardon in his last days as president? You don't have to dig to find the baggage the Clintons have left all over the United States.Hopefully we will stick to the issues.

Stuart Sargent Jr

Dalton, MA

[leburg]

Hillary has had a wife time of experience. Barbara Bush for President!

Who do you want to answer your phone at 3am?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-david/on-the-red-phone_b_90338.html

[LBKN]

It started in the sixties... and has been accelerating since.

We have lived in a time where a person can move from relevance to dinosauric irrelevance in a single lifetime.

What most Hillasephalasaurus supporters don't get is that her fight... is an old and obsolete fight.

She embodies her self-fulfilling prophecy... "The entrenched special interests aren't going away without a fight."

She tells you who she is... but you aren't listening.

[mengwise36]

You call the candidate I support "Hillaseph­alasaurus" and expect me to support your candidate comes fall? You will be lucky if I don't go vote for McCain, whatever nasty name you call him.

[LBKN]

Ha!...LOLOL...

I'm not silly enough to believe that anything I say woiuld alter yoiur self-defeating course one way or another.

I have blogged with Righties for 3 years... and know the type.

You will do what you will do... and I couldn't change you with a stick.

[Krazime]

you don't have to support Obama. After this nasty campaign with hillarys distortions and lies, we are just preparing y'all for the inevitable loss.
Because she decided to campaign like Karl Rove, we already know the dems are done. Y'all idiots keep acting like she's going to win. I'm just here to tell you, she will not win, nor will Obama. You might as well say hello to President McCain.

Its that simple....oh, but wait....are you from Ohio?

[UrbanInterloper]

If you like Clinton better than Obama, you should vote for her. If you like McCain better than Obama, you should vote for him.

If you base your vote on a blog comment, or something said by a fellow voter, rather than the candidates' abilities and agendas once in office, well then, you will get the president you deserve.

Name calling is counterproductive, but so are threats and petty vengeance.

[CTtransplant]

LBKN, you are SO right! There are so many out there who really aren't listening - but will only have themselves to blame if Clinton gets into office.

[mamamay]

Hil should not be allowed to prey on the poor white, low income or any folks who are bound to be without regardless of Hil's false promises. What is this grandstanding with congresswoman Jones? is this some kind message being sent by these two? What's up with this? We do at a later date want to see a real WOMAN become Pres, but not Hil, and we do not intend to let Waters and or Jones bash Obama as an assist to Hil in her putting their kind beef on the Dem plate. Hil did not win any states while Obama was on the win of 12. Where were these folks then? Now these women who appear to be men bashers are going negative against Obama. They need everything big. win big states, anything little even states are not important to them. Well, when folks do the right thing, they don't have to worry about how are why they won. Hil needs to produce her records and stop preying on the poor. She does not have the class to be so high and mighty over poor folks. These folks have not and they all have hope for getting help. Hil is not being truthful to these people because she will do or say anything to win. Stop this drama and vote Obama.

[bookerone]

Barack can't even beat Clinton - a girl - Three times he had the chance to land the knock out punch and three times he FAILED!. Clinton is the only hope to take back the White House in November.

[LBKN]

... the dreaded "Playground Argument"...

If Barak snapped Hill with a rubber band... would you vote for him?

[Herrington]

Yep Obama is a pussy. It took a pussy to run for POTUS as a black man. Possibly the most physically dangerous thing I can think of a man chosing to do other than join the service right now. The man's got more guts than a Marine DI and is a gentleman too, walking the rope lines with a target on his back. I rather think you are just repeating talking points intended to bait him. When oh when will that finally work?

[LBKN]

(quote)..."Yep Obama is a pussy. It took a pussy to run for POTUS as a black man. Possibly the most physically dangerous thing I can think of a man chosing to do other than join the service right now."

You can say that twice.

The world has a long history of ventilating "effective" liberal leaders... then if you add his skin tone to the equation... it's just one more reason to respect his courage... especially in light of the apparent lax attitude the secret service has been displaying when screening for events... in Dallas, of all places.

Makes me wonder ... how "secret" do we want his "secret service" to be. I trust the black-ops about as far as I can spit on them.

[Krazime]

well wait now....tell me if I'm wrong....reverse this idiotic situation....would you vote for Obama if he, as a black man, if it was even PERCEIVED that he was beating up on this white woman???

[smayhew]

Right on Bookerone - he can't beat her even with the vulgarity of his supporters trying to kill her (and her followers) off.
Randi Rhodes talks about Hillary's 'Wilma Flintstone necklace', Ed Schultz talks about the Clintonistas - and if there's one bad revelation about his past - his blog mob rushes to his rescue and bashes Clinton once more - blaming her for Barack's weakness again.
Despite the sickness on the Obama side and the pandering (liberal white guilt) of the media, Clinton will win and we'll have an adult on charge rather than a sad, sick adolescent.

[user168]

Hillary: "You know, some people may think words are change. But you and I know better. Words are cheap."

~ Hillary knows best - HER words are cheap ~

Hillary: "we don't need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what can be delivered."

~ With "false" heart and soul, I "hope" to better fool our country ~

Hillary: "There"s a big difference between us"speeches versus solutions. Talk versus action,"

~ Thought is action in rehearsal; Hillary is acting with no thought ~

Hillary: "Together, we will turn promises into action, words into solutions and hope into reality."

~ Obama, may I borrow your words; I false-hoped my cheap words ~

Hillary: "I wouldn't be doing it if I didn't care deeply about changing our country and knowing that we could do better."

~ Hillary, you mean cheaping our country with "false hopes"? ~

Hillary: "But I also do realize that it's not going to happen because we wanted it to happen."

~ Hillary "false mind" vs. Hillary "false heart" ~

Hillary: "The job has to be just a daily getting up and doing it."

~ Raise you hand if you do not ~

[Stef1]

Sorry -- while your arguments are well-organized, the bottom line is you've forgotten one important thing: the nation now realizes that Uh-bama is simply not qualifed to be commander in chief.

[graffen48]

Just curious, how do you "qualify" to be commander in chief???

[LBKN]

... by being in charge of the White House Chef.... silly.

[Herrington]

Hillary said it today, McCain is qualified to be Commander in Chief. Obama, as of Tuesday, was only qualified to be one heartbeat away from being Commander in Chief. So which is it do you think?

[Garvagh]

Most people I talk to, of the highly educated sort, find Hillary Clinton to be increasingly tedious.

[Fernando]

Most people I've talked to, of the highly educated sort, find Bush to be a moron...

It didn't stop Bush from winning re-election.

[SensibleAmerican]

A lot of folks are overlooking the significance of the States won by either Obama and/or Hillary. So are you Mr. Creamer! There are many ways to look at this:

Just prima facie which puts Obama ahead: pledged delegates etc.
Electoral College significance: the states Obama has won add up to 193 such votes. The States Hillary has won add up to 263 such votes!
A majority of States Obama has won are “deeply Red”. Chances of a Dem winning SC or Georgia for instance in the General are VERY slim
The ones Hillary has won are crucial to the Dems in the General!
Much has been made about MI and FL. The fact is it was a level playing field as ALL candidates followed the rules. In THAT level playing field, the people of MI and FL voted largely for Hillary. One can slice and dice and be all officious about the rules, but the fact is people came out and expressed their fundamental right notwithstanding the fact that they knew their votes will not count. THAT, to me, is the real will of Americans being expressed and should not be brushed aside!
Lastly, just look at a MUST WIN State like Ohio. Obama got JUST 4 of the 88 counties!

Add up all the MUST WIN States for the Dems and/or the crucial “battleground” States and Hillary IS the better General Election candidate

[Gadrielle]

Yeah, you're right! McCain/Clinton '08!

[SkipHarv]

Sensible, can I ask you what was so sensible about Hillary's name being the ONLY ONE on the ballot in MI? All the other candidates voluntarily REMOVED THEIRS. Now as for FL what was so sensible for her supporters that was running for state and local office TO TELL THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR THEM TO ALSO CAST A VOTE FOR HILLARY!! Hillary also had a "VICTORY PARTY" in St. Pete. If you do not think that when the democratic nominees signed a pledge to throw out the results of the 2 states before the primaries began that HRC didn't have this "I WON FL. AND MI." contigency plan already in place? The DEMOCRATIC GOV. of MI moved the date so for her to now say the people of MI spoke and they voted for Hillary is a farce. and to borrow a phrase from Mr. Creamer "THAT DOG WON"T HUNT". Although FLA was a little different as the bill the REP. controlled state government passed the bill allowing it, BUT IF the Dems. in the state gov. had voted IN MASS against it maybe the DNC would have done the same as the RNC did and taken half of the delegates instead of none at all.

[smayhew]

Exactly - Barack has won states that Democrats lose. Much of his delegate support comes from caucuses small numbers of voters.
If the media weren't pimping this guy he'd be out of the race by now. (The majority of Obama supporters have little education or interest in detail ... this makes Obama's chance slim)

[LBKN]

...LOLOL...

We don't have.... never have had... a problem with the "highly educated sort".

NASCARophiles gave us GW...

and those well-meaning Dems that struggle first and get informed second are trying to give us Hillpocrit.

[markos]

Hence why her 'base' is largely composed of the highly uneducated sort (says the polls) ...

[Themo]

Senator Clinton is reputed to be fairly astute in her assesment of details and facts regarding her legislative and proffessional activities. You obviously are not one who cares about details, the foundation on which sound judgements and negotiations are made. You sound like you would rather just leave it to hope than do diligence. I'm glad you're not running.

[Janelynne]

Let me guess why Obama is the most electable: Because the HuffPO says so? Because the media have the microphone and want to shape the bandwagon? Obama is the most electable because his followers don't want to know how he works, it is enough to be mesmorized? "Obama is the most electable" is a sales pitch. Why not sell me something I can use?

[zenobiadarcy]

There is abundant information to judge Senator Barack Obama if one does the research. I am tired of hearing that it is only inspirational speeches that have gotten Senator Barack Obama this far. It may be the first impression that prompts investigation. Of course there are always some people in all parties who choose nominees for other reasons. But that is not even the point. We have primaries for the people to pick the nominee. It is not then an option to intervene using as the deciding factor the notion of who is the most electable. If that is so then just give up the primary selection process and let the most electable be chosen by the politicians. Since that is obviously ridiculous then the results of the primary should be the deciding factor and the candidate with the most delegates is the logical basis to choose the nominee. It is natural for those who support one candidate over another to want to find merit in the method they propose but since it is impossible to reach the 2025 then when primaries are completed the nominee with the most delegates whether it is one more or 100 more should democratically be the nominee.

[uncleT]

It's not a "sales pitch." Poll after poll shows that he performs better than Hillary against John McCain. He'll increase turnout among young voters and blacks (two groups that typically lag in turnout). And perhaps most importantly, he won't unify the GOP with McCain in the same way that Hillary would.

It even surprises me to say that he could outperform her amongst the groups that are supporting her over him. In a recent poll of my home state (MO) Obama performs stronger against McCain with both whites, and women! Among whites Obama loses by 9 (49-40) while Clinton loses by 12 (51-39). With women, Hillary beats McCain 50-38 while Obama wins 52-36.

Finally do Hillary supports find it troubling that Republicans came out and voted for Hillary on Rush Limbaugh's recommendation? Sure Obama has gotten GOP support in open primaries, but his support comes from Republicans who are fed up with Republicans. Hers has simply come from Republicans who recognize her to be the weaker candidate.

[LBKN]

Obama is most electable for a simple reason... no selling necessary:

Hillary is well hated... on two sides of the aisle... and with new recruits daily.

Haven't you been listening through your rose colored hearing aid?

[ljsfolly]

People voting for clinton insult my intelligence because you cannot have any argument with them or they think you are drinking something or under the influence of a cult and all of that insane crap that says we don't have an argument really but I can call you stupid names and insult you! I want to have hope and be inspired and there is not one f**king thing wrong with that. I am tired of a divided nation who is either laughed at or felt sorry for by the world. I want to have national pride again. I want a military that is not so used up they are killing themselves in record numbers. I want a military equioed with what they should have when they need it. I want to have the average citizen to have pride in owning a house and sending their kids to good schools again. I want to never ever have to be asked what party I support. I want national leaders that want to do their job for us and to unite us not to divide us and work only for what they can get out of what they are doing to us. Anybody with a nrain can see that if the clintons can do what divisive politics to someone of their own party what will they do to our nation? If they can lie cheat and steal for years and get away with it and consort with people like HSU and work with the republican party againest our country like they have while she has voted to support wars and taking our freedoms away from us what do people think she will do with the power she has helped give the president? It amazes me how many will vote for her because bill was lucky enough to survive his 8 years barely and with the dot coms come out ahead. Not all was roses and green grass but with bushes the memory is better than it should be. Everything I want will not come true if she or mac are eleceted and I know it so I will not vote for her nor him. I have not waivered from that all these months. She voted for war in Iraq and failed to read the intel and I don't care if Kerry says no big because the NIE report said no WMDs in Iraq and she would have known what she now says she didn't know. Also the NIE report on Iran kept Bush from invading there because it was published and we all knew what bush was trying to do. Why would one NIE report not be as important as the one that kept bush from making war again? I want our country to be able to heal to withstand the horrible economic recession we are in. Together we might beat it. Divided by hillary and Mac we can't heal and it will just stay the same until the country is no more. I don't have a crystal ball nor do I need one because all you need is to look back and see the reality of where the clintons have been and to take that and see how desperate they are to have the power she wants so badly. Makes me think Mr Bill has more shady deals to work and he wants the power and the fresh meat being back in the house will give him. She has displayed who she really is and a multiple personality disorder is a mental illness and we will have someone crazy as britney with the power to blow us all up.

[bish66]

I am sick and tired of all these Hillary bashers! Guess they never saw her in a townhall meeting, talking to voters, answering questions. She is clever, funny, warmhearted, a real person, even without a script or teleprompter. Nevertheless, it is the other guy who gets plaudits for his oratorial skills. What a laugh...

I hope that all you Hillary haters sooner or later get over your aversion, because you could be in for tough 8 years...

[LBKN]

Sadly... Hill's supporters are the Democratic version of GW's Republican sheep.

There is a huge number of people who insist that voting against their self interest is savvy.

There is an element of "keeping oneself in failure mode... because it's familiar."

Misery loves company.

[Fasolt]

Republicans not Democrats, control the Florida State Senate. Republicans, not Democrats control the Florida State House. A Republican, not an Democrat, is Governor. And Republicans, not Democrats, moved the date of the primaries. Therefore, naturally, the Democratic Party is telling me, a lifelong democrat, that my vote does not count. Well, bully for them. I will never vote for McCain, but I am perfectly capable of staying home in November and watching the whole farce unfold on TV.

[DietrichMoody]

Agree with your post. My theory. The Reagan Era is on its 28th year and has since, defined the Democratic Party. Continuing to make these "industrial states" seem more important, adds more juice to the Reagan Era myth and Republican importance. Remember, in perception - these states aren't perceived as "middle America" But lots and lots Republicans in middle America are frustrated. The Democrats have not held middle America since 1964. Democrats will solidly have the Industrial states, depending on how good the economy is. We don't want to take the chance of McCain possibly helping the Economy or the Economy getting better under his watch, which will mean the continuation of the Reagan Era. Hillary's campaign is whole Reagan Era blueprint. People say, "well Obama winning Red states is inconclusive to November result because Democrats will never win" But I think Wisconsin, Missouri and Virginia were very telling and a good sign. Nice that he won Utah, North Dakota and Kansas. There are frustrated Republicans their too. Id' rather take voters away from the Republicans than just keep the same-o Democratic voters. That is what Reagan did, and that is what is making his hold on politics so powerful. And one more thing, there is one thing the Reagan Era at it's inception did not have, and big block of Independent voters. It's time to end the Reagan Era.

[TishiJo]

Not to worry, Hillary Hypocrite is over. Senator Obama's supporters gave $55 million to his campaign in February, and he has maintained his lead, and won the Texas caucus.
•Texas Update
AUSTIN -- Obama Texas State Director Adrian Saenz issued a statement on the projected primary and caucus results that show Senator Obama won more Texas delegates than Senator Clinton.
“By fighting the primary to a near-draw and earning a resounding victory in the caucus, the people of Texas have moved Barack Obama one step closer to claiming the Democratic nomination for president,” said Adrian Saenz. “Texans in both parties and of all ages sent a clear message that the American people are ready for the kind of change that Barack Obama will bring to Washington, DC as our 44th President."
Because of the close finish, Senator Clinton will likely net only two delegates up-for-grabs in the Texas Primary. Based on a large sample of caucus results in all 31 state senate districts, Senator Obama is projected to post a substantial victory in the Texas caucus and, thereby, net at least seven delegates. This means that Senator Obama will win at least five more pledged delegates from Texas than Senator Clinton.
In addition, the next states to hold contests, Wyoming and Mississippi, are likely to increase his margin. Wyoming on March 8 holds a caucus, a type of contest in which Obama has generally prevailed. Mississippi, which holds a primary on March 11, has a heavy concentration of black voters. Neither state has big populations of white ethnic voters.

[RichLiberal]

Ok, so Obama out-fund-raised Hillary $55M to $35M in February. Wasn't he ready to crow about it as soon as she announced her success in this matter.

However, all the money is not going to do Obama any good since he outspent Hillary 3 to 1 in Texas and Ohio and still got clobbered.

All the money in world can't blow enough hot air into Obama's empty suit anymore to keep it afloat because simply too many holes have been blown into this suit for it to ever float again.

The caucuses are being discredited as undemocratic and by the time the convention arrives a caucus vote should be about equal to a regular vote instead of the 100 to 1 disproportion they have been given until now which accounts for Obama's lead. As the super-delegates come to realize this fact, they will exercise their judgement and vote for Hillary who has won her votes the old-fashioned way and still been able to hold Obama to a stalemate despite all of his tricky strategy aided and abetted by an all-too-willing to go along MSM. That is now ending as well, as we see just one Saturday Night Live skit pull the rug out from under the fraud that has been this whole campaign.