Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

If Obama can't win PA, then...

avatar

he should bow out of the race.  He has outspent Hillary 3:1 in PA, as he did in TX and OH, and yet he still may not win.  That's really incredible.  This isn't the general election either.  This is the primary.  It seems unlikely that he will win over a majority of Democratic voters despite his money advantage and the media's love affair with him.  That is not good.  He is the frontrunner, the party establishment is behind him as is the elite, wealthy class of the Democratic Party and he still is unlikely to pull out a victory.  That forecasts badly on his chances in the general election.  Please Obama, do our party a favor and bow out.


Comments (27)

Yeah right. The guy who is ahead should drop out. Makes perfect sense. Lol.

avatar

Okay. Hillary can't win Illinois in a primary, so she should've dropped out two months ago.

If only Hillary had followed this advice in Iowa!

Such the comedian! "Mr. Obama, you're leading in every indicator, so I think it's time we admit victory and exit the race." HA!

avatar

Is this worthy of a rational retort?

The answer, sponsored by an old rene descartes joke:

A friend of Rene Descartes asked if he wanted some fruit.

"I think not" replied Descartes, then suddenly disappeared.

It's funny because Clinton should bow out. She had 20 years of name recognition (she was the first lady!!), the press buying into her inevitability argument, the entire democratic machine behind her, and a heap of superdelegates supporting her before the first primary and she still failed to close out Barack. It is almost laughable.

avatar

Very good argument!!

avatar

gary-

Clever joke. I don't think I've ever...uh, oh, wait (noooo!)

Ever think there's another reason he's outspending her? Bottom line: Obama is the frontrunner and it's beyond ridiculous to even suggest that he drop out.

"...media love affair with him." God, that was absolutely X-rated between him and Gibson/Stephanopolous the other night! Such love I haven't seen since I don't know when.

By the way, he won Texas.

It seems unlikely that he will win over a majority of Democratic voters despite his money advantage and the media's love affair with him.

You know, I think you're right, because...

No, wait--he's already won a majority of Democratic voters. Never mind.

The wise and snarky baby strikes again! Can't wait till Allsburg gets old enough to talk back to her/his parents ...

avatar

Hahahahaha that makes me laugh. Obama will win the Democratic nomination and win the Presidency in November...winning PN, NY, IL, CA, MI, VA, NH, IA, WI, MA, CT, VT, CO, NM, NV, WA, OR, ND, MN along the way and chances at OH, SD, NC, UT, TX, ME, SC, MS, GA, KS.

Shrilliary Clintjoke is just postponing the inevitable.

avatar

DemDave, what state is PN? Are you sure you're talking about the same election I am?

Slap fight!!!

avatar

Also, only Obama would make MA a possible loss for the Democrats.

As for the love affair, maybe you should read this: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9718.html

Or maybe this column: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120871712799529363.html?mod=fpa_mostpop

I think the better question - with the Clinton brand recognition, presumed victory before the primary ever started, supposed better campaign apparatus, starting out the campaign with more money and the list could go on. Why wasn't she able to close the deal on Super Tuesday? Like she promised.

avatar

jsfox, perhaps you missed the line from your boy Obama that he, too, thought it would be over February 5th. As for your better question, I think it's clear that no one anticipated how great a role the media would play in advocating for Obama and his campaign. The media has mud on its face after this campaign - I think that is clear. Now that the media has its nominee, everyone is praising Obama and his campaign as if no one else could ride the media wave like he did.

Actually, I'd like to see a source for both your claim as well as jsfox's claim. I don't recall either of those things being true. I'm sure they both wanted it to be over by February 5th, but I don't recall either one predicting it would be. A quick Google search reflects this. So, unless either of you have a source, I'm calling double BS on you both.

Ben, no fair picking on the freshmen!

TPM newbies should all be assigned an avatar with a beanie!

Nope, Hillary told Timmah it would be over by Supercalifragilistic Tuesday on a MTP appearance at some point after New Hampshire. The question was to the effect of whether she was worried a long drawn out primary would damage the primary. (No, really.) I remember it well. I'll find it once I get home because its worth bringing it up again at this point.

I believe that's what you heard, but let's check the tape again to see if that's what was said. By this, I mean that sometimes certain things are implied but not actually stated. Of course, sometimes they depend on how you define certain words. ;)

But seriously, if/when you find such a link, please provide it.

She did say something along those lines:
"So from my perspective, you get up every day and you get out there and you make your case and you reach as many people as possible. That's what I intend to do, so I'm in it for the long run. It's not a very long run. It'll be over by February 5th.”

It was on This Week back in December. Here's the video:
The comment is at the end, at about 6:30 on.

Sorry. Link:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=HexrafhffJc&feature=related

Sigh.

Okay, I know your mind is clouded by Mark Penn's wizardry, but, contrary to what you were told in Hillary School, this is NOT a race to see which candidate the Pennsylvania Democrats would prefer to McCain. That's not on the ballot.

No, instead, this is what we call a Democratic primary. Can you say that? Pri. Mare. Eee. Mmm hmm, I thoughtcha could. In a "primary," voters of the party decide which of the candidates they would prefer to get the nomination. Period. McCain's not on the ballot at all.

So, follow along with me here. If Hillary wins a "primary," (as we call it) that means that the Democrats that state would prefer her to be the nominee. It does NOT mean--and bear with me here, because I know that this is really tricky and hard to understand--it does NOT mean that those same voters would prefer McCain to Obama if Hillary is not the nominee. Instead, and I know this is really surprising, primary voters tend to be the kind of people who vote for their party's nominee regardless of whether their preferred candidate wins.

Now, if one were inclined to look at some actual data instead of just farting out whatever gas is injected into one's head by campaign spinners, one would find that Obama's approval ratings are higher than McCain's in Pennsylvania.

Hey.. it takes all types to make a world.. so what should you expect? Does this guy know that Hillary is in serious debt and that rather blog here he should be out raising funds for her campaign?

How much has he donated so far? Probably not a dime.

avatar

Oh, thank you, (formerly) NCSteve. You see, I'm an uneducated, Clinton supporter who clings to things like Obama said. Your explanation was very helpful, though a bit condescending. However, I wonder what you make of this interesting piece of information from the PA exit polls? It just seems not to fit with what you told me.
---------------------
Only 50 percent of Clinton voters in Pennsylvania said they would support Obama if he is the nominee. Twenty-six percent said they would back McCain over Clinton, and 19 percent said they would not vote at all.

Among Obama’s Pennsylvania voters, 67 percent said they would support Clinton if she is the party's nomine. Seventeen percent said they would back McCain instead, and 12 percent said they would stay home.
---------------------

Also, you should know, you educated, Obama supporter, that your comma before because is grammatically incorrect.

Hmmm. Well didja also see the flip side of those numbers? The comparable number of Obama supporters who wouldn't vote for Hillary if she stole, er, I mean won the nomination?

People are angry. I'm angry, you're angry, we're all angry. I've seen it before in Democratic primaries and, if you're anything close to my age, you have to. In the end, once there's a nominee, people get their noses back into joint and move on. Though I admit I've never seen one go this long and stay so ugly.

Of course, if your girl really takes it to the convention, we'll lose regardless of whether she manages to steal the nomination.

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe



Cafe Features


October 6-10

Book Cover

October 13-17

Book Cover

October 20-24

Book Cover

November 17-21>

Book Cover

December 1-5

Book Cover





Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Claire Wilcox



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address