Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« What Does My Shirt Say? | Currently Hanging »

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania

posted by on March 25 at 10:30 AM

Clinton is still ahead in the polls (she’s been up by as much as 26 points in PA recently), and is now on the air with this ad:

The primary in PA is April 22.

RSS icon Comments

1

I am *so* done. If she manages to wrest this nomination away from Obama, I'm starting a drive to vote for "None Of The Above".

Posted by bma | March 25, 2008 10:36 AM
2

There's still 4 weeks. A long time in this election.

This waiting sucks. The remaining states should be punished for not moving their contests up and making us wait.

P.S. That was a joke.

Posted by Mike of Renton | March 25, 2008 10:42 AM
3

Um, EVEN IF she somehow wins Pennsylvania 60-30, she's still got to win ALL of the remaining contests with 65% or more of pledged delegates to catch up with Obama.

Pretending like Pennsylvania will make a difference in that fact at this point is just wishful thinking. The race is close, yes, but it's damn near over at this point and there's just no way she can close the gap.

Posted by David | March 25, 2008 10:59 AM
4

Clinton will easily win PA and many of the remaining contests. Neither she nor Obama will have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination.

Face it. The nomination election is a statistical tie. Democracy flounders in these situations. TH]hus we will turn to the pledged delegates.

They will turn their votes to Clinton en masse. You know it, I know it, and the American people know it. It's just a matter of time.

But this endless primary has made both candidates stronger. In the end, the only vote that matters will be the vote AGAINST McCain.

Posted by fluteprof | March 25, 2008 11:00 AM
5

I'm enjoying this. I'm pretending I live in a country where Obama and Clinton represent the entire mainstream political spectrum and the Republicans are some nutty fringe that nobody pays attention to.

Posted by elenchos | March 25, 2008 11:05 AM
6

I'm going to try to be more like Elenchos. Otherwise I think I'll go insane with all the back and forth non-issue crap.

Posted by Mike in Iowa | March 25, 2008 11:11 AM
7

fluteprof @4:

Face it. The nomination election is a statistical tie. Democracy flounders in these situations. TH]hus we will turn to the pledged delegates.

fluteprof is right. Close only counts in horeshoes, hand grenades, and Hillary. It's time Hills wrested this nomination from the man who will wind up with more pledged delegates and more popular votes. Even if she fails in her quest, she can still mortally wound Obama, thereby handing over the general election to her buddy John McCain.

I can't wait for Hillary 2012. You go, Hills!

Posted by cressona | March 25, 2008 11:13 AM
8

no, it is not a "statistical tie." the term itself is often misued [and in reality doesn't mean much], but it is used only when data from a small sub-population is extrapolated [with uncertainty] to a larger group, and the percentages in the two [or more] comparison groups are within the margin of error.

but elections are not estimates, they are actual counts that represent 100% of the people who voted. notice how no margins of error are reported with election results? that's because there aren't any.

by any standard of democracy, she is losing. and with only a few contests left, she has little to no chance of catching up. yes, of course, the super delegates can throw it to her if they so choose. but she would have one hell of a case to make. how can someone who has lost an election prove themselves "more electable"?

Posted by brandon | March 25, 2008 11:17 AM
9

are people actually EXCITED about a hillary clinton candidacy? 63% to 37? really?

WHAT are they excited about?

i pretty much feel that the future of our republic hinges on DEFEATING her.

Posted by max solomon | March 25, 2008 11:20 AM
10

If this protracted contest doesn't help Obama (or Clinton, for that matter) to become a better general election candidate then there is something seriously wrong with his campaign and the media's coverage of it.

Posted by josh | March 25, 2008 11:26 AM
11

I really don't think that averaging pre race speech polls with post race speech polls is anyway to get an "average". If you look, the only recent poll has Clinton with a 10 point advantage, which means she is already losing momentum, and there's still a month to go.

Posted by jkjk | March 25, 2008 11:28 AM
12

She usually seems to start with a big lead because she has name recognition and the majority of people, who watch more American Idol than CNN, take awhile to start paying attention to Obama and see him coming through on the local news.

Eventually, people start thinking about it and the gap closes or disappears.

I can't wait for the next debate. It's gonna be a good one.

Posted by Clint | March 25, 2008 11:41 AM
13

Yes, the statement "she's been up by as little as 10 points" is just as accurate as "she's been up by as much as 26 points". I presume it will land somewhere in the middle. Her campaign is over.

Posted by Fnarf | March 25, 2008 11:41 AM
14
They will turn their votes to Clinton en masse. You know it, I know it, and the American people know it.

No, I don't know it. Keep dreaming, buddy.

Posted by keshmeshi | March 25, 2008 11:45 AM
15

Excellent ad - up beat - good messages about helping real people - she is in control - smart - articulate - vigorous - hugs and warmth - nice work

Hillary is on a roll, obviously good under pressure

Posted by John | March 25, 2008 11:45 AM
16

Clinton is now using Pastor Wright to beat on Obama, and is faulting Obama for staying with his church.

Apparently, the HRC campaign is abandoning even the pretense of taking the moral high road.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 25, 2008 11:59 AM
17

Dozens of faces, but only one non-whitey in that whole ad.

Posted by DOUG. | March 25, 2008 12:04 PM
18

@8 thanks for the correction. But I don't think my linguistic blunder obviates my point. Notice how you didn't try to argue that Obama can "win" this in any real sense of the word.

@16: why is it the inherent low road to raise questions about the rants from Obama's spiritual advisor? Seems to me it goes to the core of what he believes, and, given that loon's sermons, is very revealing.

Posted by fluteprof | March 25, 2008 12:05 PM
19

It just tells us that HRC is playing to lose.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 25, 2008 12:07 PM
20

Considering she needs a 30 point win to even have a chance, that means she's toast.

Besides, as always, most of these polls are "likely voters".

This is not the year of "likely voters".

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 25, 2008 12:13 PM
21

it's the low road because it is either subtly calling obama a liar, or it is holding someone else's words and ideology against him.

you seem to think that obama is lying when he says he varies in opinion. clinton suggests this as well -- because those offenses are so great she would leave that church. so obama must, you know, kind of agree or sympathize. if not, he clearly doesn't care about america as much.

Posted by infrequent | March 25, 2008 12:14 PM
22

18 - wha'?

if my previous post wasn't clear enough, let me try again: if we are to use the democratic electorate as our gage [as we should, this being a democracy of sorts], SHE CANNOT WIN. there are not enough delegates left for her to overtake obama's lead without crushing defeats in eaach of the remaining states. the superdelegates may give it to her, but that would be a FUCKING RETARDED SUICIDE MISSION FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

it's become pretty clear that hillary doesn't care about the democratic party, but i'm guessing a lot of the superdelegates do. she can stay in the race for all i care, but she's not going to win. it's not an issue of whether or not obama "can win." when the dust settles, he WILL.

Posted by brandon | March 25, 2008 12:25 PM
23

NapoleonXVI @14:

Clinton is now using Pastor Wright to beat on Obama, and is faulting Obama for staying with his church.

Apparently, the HRC campaign is abandoning even the pretense of taking the moral high road.


I hate to say it, but I'm really disappointed in Hillary. The way she raised the question about Obama remaining in Wright's congregation--she was being perfectly reasonable. It's a legitimate concern. This whole Wright controversy has definitely thrown Hills off her game.

Posted by cressona | March 25, 2008 12:27 PM
24

I thought that up by 10% poll was a recent (post O race speech) one. I realize it's, at present, an outlyer but does it show a trend toward narrowing the gap?

Posted by Jersey | March 25, 2008 12:36 PM
25

that annoying as fuck triumphant-sounding trumpet line alone might make me vote Obama.

Posted by KR | March 25, 2008 12:43 PM
26

@18

Are there any spiritual advisor's out there that are NOT loons? Every one of them I have ever met or listened to have said some pretty out there stuff. I thought Wright was right with about 95% of what he said.

Posted by Clint | March 25, 2008 1:13 PM
27

So tell me, Mrs NAFTA, how exactly do you plan to stop the export of jobs? Wasn't it YOUR campaign that reassured the Canadians of business as usual? Hmm?

Posted by banjoboy | March 25, 2008 1:35 PM
28

for obama to quit his church over those remarks would alienate him from those who agree with the sentiment. it's easy for some of us to swallow wright's preaching because we kind of agree with where he's coming from. where we disagree is in how he wants to solve the problem. but obama doesn't want to make wright president -- he wants to solve the problem in a different way.

Posted by infrequent | March 25, 2008 2:40 PM
29

Wal-Mart Board of Directors. 'nuff said.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | March 25, 2008 4:19 PM
30

wal-mart board!

Posted by Bellevue Ave | March 25, 2008 4:27 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).