Comments on An Inconvenient Truth
Big surprise. Hillary picks three states she has big leads in and her campaign starts proclaiming they are the only states that matter, and then her supporters point to the leads in those states as evidence that Hillary is happening.
Meanwhile...
The latest Rasmussen Reports tracking poll shows Sen. Barack Obama opening up a 12-point lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton, 49% to 37%. Over the past five days, Obama has gained 8 points while Clinton has dropped 12.
Holy shit! A non-whiney post that is actually on the substance (of the horse race, at least).
That's such a welcome change, I can even forgive the long-since-dead-horse pun in the headline.
Perhaps just as inconvenient is the fact that there are weeks of campaigning to go in many of those states, and that Obama is a great closer.
As someone noted earlier, it ain't over til the fat lady sings, and that is not for some time yet.
WOOOHOOO! Listening to the news you'd think she was done.
I am going to go give her another $100.
I like Obama (and if he is the nominee I will go gaga for him like the majority of you SLOGGERS) but as the days go by I become more and more of a Clinton supporter. I think she has a way better chance of winning the general and I think she has a way better chance of getting a progressive agenda passed in Washington (DC) and restoring our credibility in the world.
If Hillary can win those states by 20+ points, she has a chance. If Obama can make it closer, it is over.
Stage One: Denial.
And what do you know? Instead of calling ECB names or dismissing her, the first comment engages her on the merits.
Here's hoping this a change and not just a blip.
"Arts"? This is "Arts"? Between the miscategorization, the blockquoting issues, the source attribution issues, and the fact-checking issues, I think you might need a bit more practice at this Slogging thing. You certainly have the cheap flamebaiting thing down quite well, though; I must give you that.
And while we're all obsessing over the Clinbama Clone Wars, our Democracy continues to dry up like a puddle in a parking lot:
Fine. So why hasn't Hillary repudiated the idea of seating Michigan and Florida's delegates?
For now, Erica. For now.
ECB, the biggest problem is that while leads are great, they are shrinking AND her margins of victory arent great enough to make up the deficit she is in
Um, these are basically things everyone knew already. If Barack wins those states, or if Hilary wins by more than 60%, it will then be news. As it is Hilary has about 55% in OH and less than 50% in TX. That MarketWatch article also talks about how Obama is closing the lead in Texas.
Pennsylvania doesn't vote until late April. It's way too early to really care about the polls there unless you're a Clinton or Obama operative in that state.
The more you talk up her leads in all of these states, the harder it's gonna be to spin a defeat in any of them.
I assume you can do basic math so look at the margins she has won by on average. its around 10% obama has won by a 20% margin on average. she cant just win, she needs to win big and she has only done that once in this primary season, obama has done it 11.
I think Hillary will win Ohio and Texas by a less than 10% margin and will lose Wisconsin by less than 10%. I don't think the race is over.
What's strange is I'm not opposed the the superdelegates deciding this if I really thought they were voting based on pure, unbiased belief on who was more electible in the general election. I also don't have a problem with their constituents calling, writing, petitioning them to reconsider their pledges and go with their districts and/or states. They can listen to them or not. It's their call. What I am kind of uncomfortable with is the fact a former president and first lady may start calling in favors, etc. I do really believe Obama is the more electable candidate and would hate to have a McCain president in the fall because the Clintons decided to cash in on some proverbial checks.
She is indeed ahead in those states, but the math is that she needs to win 60% in both Texas and Ohio to take the lead in delegates. In the meantime, he has two weeks to get things good and close, and possibly take the lead.
I'm thinking of the immortal words of Mark Twain (or Benjamin Disraeli, depending on who you ask): There are lies, damned lies and ECB.
This is my first time leaving a comment, so it may not be smart to do it in a post the author won't even read. Oh well, here goes...
First, I know ECB realizes this, but Hillary could still win in those states and still be behind in delegates. I don't see those states being blowouts for her.
Second, I see a lot of people on the boards talking in hypotheticals about Independents and Republican converts. I'd like to speak as one of those hypotheticals.
I'm 26 years old and probably everyone on this site's worst nightmare. I'm a Christian who lives on the Georgia/Alabama line and voted for Bush both times.
However, despite the fact we don't see eye-to-eye on several issues, I've been an Obama supporter since day one. I said from the beginning that he may not win, but he's my candidate as long as he's in it. Now that it looks like he may pull it off, I've never been more excited to be a part of the political process.
If Hillary is the nominee, though, I don't see that excitement carrying over on either side. I'll still vote, but it'll be for McCain, and with a heavy heart.
Now, feel free to tear me to shreds...
@4
BWAHHHAHAHHAHAHA
The only thing Hillary can unite is the Republican Party against her. If she somehow managed to win (granted McCain is the nominee) her agenda would be shut down faster than you can say Inauguration.
Why such a confrontational title? You keep doing this! Why must you insist on making yourself look like such an asshole? I've met you before, you were pleasant, funny, smart, and easy to get along with. What happened? This post could have easily been a simple post about polls, but with that title you manage to stick your tongue out and "pfftthh" at everyone "juvenile" enough to support Obama. Quit it!
For most of the past year Clinton has been way ahead of Obama in Wisconsin; the shift to an Obama lead is just since Super Tuesday. She can spin this as "competitive" good news if she wants, but I don't think anyone in her campaign believes it. The other races are narrowing as well.
.
In the Wisconsin poll you link to, he puts Obama's chances of winning the nomination at 74.7%, with Clinton at 32.0%. Spin that!
Hahahahaha
Keep it up Erica. If Hillary wins, then it is proof that God exists. Cause the only way she wins the nomination is if miracles exist.
If she gets the nomination, which she won't, then we will get President McCain. There is NO QUESTION.
I will blame Hillary supporters for that one so much, that it will make the "hate-nader" campaign look like a public service announcment for voluteering for the elderly.
So Erica, Why do you want McCain to win?
Is your yeast infection blooming again?
@19-I've heard that from a few people that generally vote Republican. Naturally as an Obama supporter myself I'm happy to hear it, but I'm curious as to what it about Obama that makes him your candidate.
Ok I kind of liked the title, Erica.
As long as it's a Democrat, whoever wins is cool with me. You people should calm down about elections and start worrying about volcanoes and global warming.
The Insignificant Truth: Hillary thinks that Washington doesn't matter.
Unless of course she wins the primary that everyone was told not to bother with. Then we'll be her cute little poster child.
HRC is an overwhelmingly polarizing figure. If she gets the nomination, there is a very good chance that McCain will win.
@19, I don't think anyone here will shred you. In fact, you prove the point that Obama appeals to middle of the road red staters more than HRC.
Hell, I'm a liberal queer Jew, and I kinda like McCain more than Hillary. But I loves me some Obama. Even if he hugs Donnie McClurkin, I trust him way more than I trust either of the Clintons.
Vagina O'Reilly is at it again.
Hey...if you think the one-day snapshot of those polls constitute the "truth" of what will happen in those states, go on over to Intrade and put some money on Clinton to win in Wisconsin, Ohio and Texas. :-)
Of course, I'll match you on the other side and put some money on Obama. :-)
Notice the trend on all those polls.
@24 - First and foremost, it's because of the reason everyone seems to be tearing him down for. He's an inspirational speaker, and he genuinely seems to believe what he's saying rather than reciting talking points.
Second, it's because the policies I read on his website make sense. He (or his staffers, or whoever) breaks them down in a way that makes them easy to understand, instead of relying on politi-speak. I may not agree with all of them, but I can't say they're not well thought out.
It's also because I think he's the guy with the best shot at winning. I agree with those that say a Hillary vs. McCain general election would be a blowout, simply because her many negatives outweigh his few positives.
In an Obama vs. McCain situation, I think it would be a repeat of the Kennedy/Nixon debates. People will see a young guy with fresh ideas talking about an end to the war. They'll also see a 72-year-old guy who's more of the same, who doesn't understand where new generations of voters are coming from.
Of course, that's just my "guy who thinks he knows way more about politics than he actually does" opinion.
Okay--gentlepersons? A little over the top, perhaps?
ECB does not warrant this level of criticism.
Unless she's talking about the Monorail or the Viaduct, of course.....
@35 - hils is the rebuild option.
#34, I think most of the criticism and seemingly-uncalled-for comments stem from reasons laid out in #21. The rest of us just aren't so polite.
This kind of snarky flamebaiting crap makes its way into just about every ECB post relating to politics and all it does is deter people from actually engaging with her on an intellectual level. It's like she's given up on actually bringing people to her camp, and instead settled on acts of righteous blogsterbation.
The real inconvenient truth is that Hillary needs to win BIG in these states. Like Massachusetts, for which ECB wrote a similarly snarky story about the Ted Kennedy endorsement, I don't think that Obama wins in these states were ever really a given. ECB knows this, for sure, so what's with the spinmeistering, acting like this throws a wrench in the Obama campaign's gears? It doesn't.
Even some of the more inflammatory comments related to ECB's sex life come from her obvious need for attention. How else are we supposed to interpret her incessant trolling?
Disclaimer: I don't support either candidate more than the other, so this isn't about that. I just hate this petty bullshit. All it takes is a nice neutral headline like "Clinton leading in Ohio, Texas" so we can have some discussion about what this might mean for both camps. Instead we get ECB injecting flamebait into every post and half the thread ends up dedicated to why this is bad for Slog.
I don't understand. I really don't.
On the one hand, I admire your ability to stick by your (wo)man.
On the other hand, I don't know how you're able to watch the Clinton scandals - and I do mean the scandals in this campaign - and still defiantly thumb your nose at us Obama supporters at every opportunity. I certainly hope your candidate isn't inadvertently teaching you how to take the low road.
It all comes down to Texas. And, to a lesser point, Ohio.
That said, giving up Hawaii and Wisconsin without a fight to Obama, may be the Guiliani move of the Dem side.
Allowing a continued sweep by Obama shifts the ground in the states further down the road.
Check out the trajectory of the Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin Democratic graphs
Besides, Clinton needs to not only win, but win big to really make a difference. Right now, with the exception of Ohio, things are moving in Obama's direction.
What else can I possibly add that hasn't already been stated here before me?
ECB .. seriously yo... Your long term reputation (whatever shreds of it are left) here are slowing fading away.
Give up the nonsense. Your foolishness is damaging what little respect anyone here has for you.
You might consider finding a new role out of the public eye...
Just sayin...
Happy Valentines
Reality Check
Looking at those trends in the pollster.com charts, if you continue current trends Texas looks like it might go for Obama, Ohio's a tossup, and Pennsylvania is comfortably for Clinton.
The thing is, if Clinton wins Ohio by less than ten points and loses Texas, she might not make it to Pennsylvania.
Thanks, Erica. I am slowly recovering from my weekend/Tuesday funk. Perhaps those seven wins in a row don't necessarily sound the death-knell for our candidate.
Those of you who rip on ECB for this post: there was absolutely nothing wrong with the information she posted here, nor with the style in which she posted it. You prove that there's nothing ECB can write on which you won't heap childish scorn. If she bothers you so much, go read something else. Your bile is boring.
Erica, I may be wrong, but I really get the impression from your posts that you're allowing internet trolls to frame this entire process for you. I feel like whenever you post about this election, it's like you're responding to a mythical Fanatical Obama Supporter you've made up in your mind. This is both off-putting and just sort of weird for a regular person to read.
Just in case these facts aren't completely clear:
1. A lot of people are sexist. A lot of people dislike Clinton because they're sexist. A lot of people say rude, offensive things to you on the internet because they're sexist.
On behalf of the millions of feminists supporting Obama, I want to apologize for these folks' bad behavior. Sexist comments are really not representative of the vast majority of women and men who are voting for Obama because we believe he is the candidate who best represents us.
2. Apart from the issue of sexism, are there people who are overly enthusiastic about Obama? Sure. Are some enthusiastic to the point of rudeness or arrogance? Of course. However, in my experience this attitude really isn't common at all, and in all honesty I find it a bizarre point to press for reasons I'll list below.
But first, I want to point out that Obama supporters hardly have a lock on rude or overbearing behavior. I saw some ugly behavior from Clinton supporters at my caucus. However, I understood that I was catching them at a bad moment, and that I shouldn't assume that their rudeness was representative of how they behave normally, of all Clinton supporters, or of the Clinton campaign.
I absolutely respect Clinton supporters who genuinely believe that she is the best candidate, and I wouldn't think to label them crazy or cultists. I expect the same level of respect to be given to me and to my educated opinion that Obama is the strongest candidate. None of us are LaRouche people, for chrissakes!
3. As for why "enthusiasm" is a weird accusation to choose: think for a minute if the Republicans had a candidate right now who was right-wing but appealed to indepedents, Democrats, and people who had never voted before, and who drew enormous crowds to speeches and record turnouts at the polls. They'd be peeing their pants with joy. I feel like Democrats are so used to losing that we figure we had better stay safe and undermine ourselves before we actually succeed. Winning can be scary.
Of course it's reasonable to be afraid of too much charisma, of people blindly following an all-powerful leader. But what a bizarre accusation to choose to level at Obama in particular, whose speeches are notably thoughtful, intellectually engaged, and consistently pushing the message that it's we the people, not him the president, who have the power to remake the world into what it should be rather than settling for what it is.
While I can understand why someone might not like HRC (or any Clinton), I find nothing quite so tiresome as Obama-supporters who take every word of support for Clinton as a personal affront. Getting emotionally attached to Obama to that extent is not doing him any favors. Every tirade against Clinton and her supporters adds fuel to the meme that he is backed by the sentimental, not the serious. It also does the DNC no favors as one would hope that some of those Clinton supporters would also be comrades in a general election.
@35
Actually, I liked ECB's reporting on the Monorail, transit, bicycles and the Viaduct. She also reported the local Republican party official disenfranchising large blocks (around 2,000) of Seattle voters through challenges and Norm Maleng never filing charges against her.
But somewhere between last fall's city council races and this Presidential primary season the wheels have come off. The stubborn loyalty to Maggie Thatcher – I don't get it.
I usually stay out of the political fray, but SL @44, that was so eloquently put.
People who have worked with HRC and share her politics tend to really like her. She's a political gladiator who prizes discipline and loyalty in her subordinates. She is also difficult to intimidate and can handles being besieged with remarkable equanimity. I can understand how those in her camp continue to be devoted to her.
I just have to jump in and agree with the "wtf" crowd...citing polls putting Clinton ahead in states she's always been ahead in (previously by wider margins) weeks before the races seems so....so positively January. Not to say she can't win those states. She can. And she HAS to, in order to compete.
But I do hope that you follow the trends, Erica, because those say a whole lot more than isolated polls. As evidence, I submit nearly every single state thus far. Not to mention the vast majority of election battles pre-2008.
@48, do you not realize those exact same things can be said about GWB? Loyalty and discipline are not exactly what the White House needs. How about competence and an open mind? Judging by the way Hillary has run her campaign, she's lacking in these qualities.
I recently saw Chelsea Clinton here in Eau Claire, (Wisconsin) and she drew quite a crowd. I definitely heard more than one individual claim that they were genuinely swayed by her appearance. This is good news for Hil… Oh shit… Obama is stopping in on Saturday. Sorry ECB, but Wisconsin will go to Obama by at least 10 points.
@51
You can "use a word that don't mean nothin', like looptid".
nice.
Also, right on @44.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).