Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island: 3 Out of 4 Isn't So Bad

Senator Clinton's victory in the above states have set the stage for the final showdown for the Democratic nomination going into these final primaries. 

 

It was not only a great win for Senator Clinton, but a great win for the American people, because these victories proved talking about the issues and solutions were more important to the country than a message of change that has yet to be defined.  Senator Clinton has talked about the issues and what she would do if elected President since day one.  

 

Journalists and pundits on MSNBC, Fox News, and some on CNN were openly talking about Clinton dropping out the race after the primaries Tuesday night.  They did not even give her a chance and were openly supporting and pushing her opponent.  Mike Barnacle said on Morning Joe this past week that journalists should not be in the business of urging candidates to drop out.  Rather, they should stick to their jobs of reporting the news.  He is so right, but journalists as a whole will never change.  Just remember Yogi Berra's golden rule, " It ain't over till its over".

 

This has been a great Democratic race and there should be no rush to conclusion just because the Republican nominee is already chosen.  The people have a right to have their voice heard and when the general election rolls around, the Democratic nominee will be strong and prevail.

 

Lets see how television journalists handle the rest of the Democratic primaries.  I will be willing to bet their presentations will continue to be negative concerning Senator Clinton. 

The Daily Dose---2/27

And the Race Continues

It's two days later and I'm still shocked (and pleased) that Sen. Hillary Clinton pulled out three larger-than-expected wins in the Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio primaries.  Although many Obama supporters are crying foul (I'm not sure why, she did win fair and square), the losses in these three states open up some serious questions about Obama's efficiency as a candidate.  First of all, with all the momentum and wind at his back, why couldn't Obama win Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island?  Secondly, why did Obama perform so poorly in these states compared to how he was polling in recent days?  Most polls had Obama losing by only 5-8 in Rhode Island (he lost by 18), losing Ohio only by 1-4 points (he lost by 10), and winning Texas by 2-4 (he lost by 4).  This tells me several things.  For one, Obama is not a strong of a candidate as many claim.  Secondly, Obama performs poorly under attack.  And lastly, simply put, Clinton, not Obama, had the message which resonated with the voters.

Exit Polling and What it Portends in the Keystone State

Exit polling from Tuesday's contests tells the story on Clinton's success. For one, Clinton won over white men significantly in Ohio and Rhode Island, and by a little less in Texas.  That is a major improvement as she has been losing white men in almost all of the contests since Super Tuesday.  Clinton also expanded her lead among Latinos, which allowed her to run up huge margins in Southern and Western Texas.  Also important to note, Latinos are a key swing group in the general election.  They could deliver New Mexico and Nevada to the Dems.  Clinton can carry them.  Can Obama?  My feeling is that Latinos would vote Republican again, as they did in '04, if Obama is the nominee.  Clinton also won those blue-collar workers by a larger margin than almost any other contest to date.  These are the "Reagan-Democrats". They would vote for Clinton come November, but again I'll ask the question, will they vote for Obama?  Hopefully, but McCain does have appeal to them.  Clinton also won seniors and those over 55 by her largest margin yet.  

So what does this mean for Pennsylvania?  It means that if Clinton can do what she did in Tuesday's contests, especially Ohio, in Pennsylvania, she can win, and win big.  Pennsylvania is more Ohio than Ohio is, if that makes any sense.  Pennsylvania has fewer African Americans, many more seniors, less young voters, and is even more "blue-collar".  The Pennsylvania primary is also closed, which means no Independents or Republicans can vote on April 22. These statistics don't mean we should count Obama out in Pennsylvania, but it does mean that he has a tough seven weeks ahead.  If things continue on the current path, Clinton could win on April 22 by a significant margin.

A Personal Note

I must say that I'm really getting sick and tired of listening to Obama supporters on other blogs talk about how if Obama isn't nominated, millions of people who voted for him will sit the election out.  Therefore, in their logic, we must nominate Obama or face certain defeat.  

Well, news flash to them, millions of people have also supported and voted for Sen. Clinton.  Is there any basis for believing that Obama supporters are more likely to be pissed come November than Clinton supporters?  It's almost as if, in their mind, they think that their candidate is so great, that if he is nominated no one will be hurt, but if he is not nominated, the whole world will be hurt.  

Listen, this isn't about me.  I prefer Sen. Clinton and I think she would be a better President, but if Sen. Obama is the nominee, I will support him and work my hardest for him.  But to imply that Clinton's supporters won't be hurt if she doesn't get the nomination is ridiculous.  At the end of this, we are looking at a 50.1-49.9% split for one candidate over the other.  That means that almost half the party won't have the candidate they supported as the nominee.  Trust me, I've talked to many people, especially women, who tell me they would be absolutely devastated and sit out the election if Obama is the nominee.  I try to tell them otherwise, but they are adamant, just as adamant as any Obama supporter. 

So my message to Democrats out there is this: One candidate is not going to lose any more support than the other would if nominated.  Regardless of who the nominee is, some will be hurt, but not a disproportional number for one side over the other either.  Our work, as Democrats and as Americans, is to unite this party and unite this country to elect the best person to the Presidency.  And although some of us may support Sen. Clinton, and others Sen. Obama, I think we can all agree that either of them would be better than McCain.  So let's have a great campaign and choose a nominee, but let's remember that there is always another view.  I think we would do ourselves and each other a great deal to keep that in mind. 

What a Night!

All I can say is wow.  I'll be back later tonight for a full analysis concerning last night's results, but let me just say that last night had to be the most thrilling night in recent history for any and everyone who loves politics.  Many doubted Sen. Clinton could win Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island, I admit I was one, but she came through from behind, and I couldn't be happier.  This race continues.  And until I come back later tonight, here is Sen. Clinton's victory speech in Ohio. Enjoy! (Note: the speech had to be divided into two videos due to the length)

Comeback Kid, Take 2!  

The Daily Dose---2/25

March 4: How It Looks As Of Right Now

March 4, the date when voters in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont cast their votes for the Democratic nomination contest, is shaping up to be a split decision, at least according to new polling released today.  In Texas, which I predict as of right now going to Obama, a new CNN poll has Obama up by 4, while a new Rasmussen poll has Clinton with a 1% lead. Vermont, as expected, is heavily expected to go to Obama and it is the one state I can 100% say will go for him.  Rhode Island, on the other hand, is a state which I can confidently say will go to Clinton. She has maintained anywhere from a 10-15% lead there, depending on which recent poll you look at.  Ohio also appears to be leaning towards Clinton, but in the same way that Texas is leaning for Obama---meaning neither candidate really has a significant lead in either state and the races are still too early and close to call.  But, if I had to say right now, Clinton would win Ohio and Rhode Island.  Obama would win Texas and Vermont.  That's just how I see it currently.  Ask me about the race on Friday, and I'll probably be able to confidently predict the winners in all 4 states.

Am I Losing My Mind?

As I was eating a snack this afternoon, I tuned in to MSNBC's Tucker, where Tucker Calrson was interviewing Presidential candidate, Ralph Nader.  To my shock and horror, I actually found myself agreeing with Ralph on all the issues discussed, especially energy.  With that being said, I still disagree with Ralph on several of his positions that were not discussed, but it was a little shocking to find myself actually nodding in agreement with Nader.  But, let me be clear, this does not mean in anyway that I would support Nader in the election.  I firmly believe that a vote for Nader is a vote for a Republican.  It's that simple and I hope America realizes that this time around.

Absolutely Ridiculous Memo From Obama

I'll admit, Obama is growing on me, probably due to the fact that he will be the nominee, but today his campaign released a completely idiotic memo that blamed the Clinton campaign for distributing a photo of him wearing traditional Somali dress.  They accused the Clinton campaign of "fear-mongering" and said that they should be ashamed of themselves.  This is such a ridiculous thing because, for one, the picture wasn't even that bad, and two, why does it have to be the Clinton campaign who sent out the memo?  Obama needs to wake up and realize that he's not just facing the Clintons anymore, he's facing the right-wing slime machine.  As Maggie Williams said in a press release,

"Enough.  If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely.

This is nothing more than an obvious and transparent attempt to distract from the serious issues confronting our country today and to attempt to create the very divisions they claim to decry.

We will not be distracted."

In Defense of  Hillary...

Hillary has been slammed on the blogosphere for "mocking" Obama's message of change.  But, at least in my opinion, she has a point.  I have yet to get an answer from an Obama supporter about what exactly Obama will do to solve all our problems.  Sure, Obama is an excellent speaker and knows how to get thousands of people fired up, but what about when this campaign is over.  What about when Obama sits down in the Oval Office, and the friendly crowds are gone, and it's time for Obama to be President, to be Commander-in-Chief.  Can he handle it?  I certainly hope so, but I honestly don't know.  In fact, I can draw another potential comparison between Obama and Deval Patrick.  Patrick was a great speaker and knew how to energize a crowd, but as anyone in Massachusetts can tell you, when it came to get down to business, Patrick fell a little short in his first months as governor.  His inexperience prevented him from being ready "on day one".  With all the challenges America faces, I just can't help but feel that we need someone to be ready, "on day one".  

Columbus Dispatch Endorses Clinton; McCain

With the March 4 Ohio primary growing more and more important each day, there is no doubt that every little bit of support helps.  Today, the widely read Columbus dispatch endorsed Senators Clinton and McCain for President, emphasizing the experience both bring to the table. Here is some of what they said:

"The 44th president should have a strong resume of government experience. When the nation's voters go to the polls in November to choose that leader, the major-party candidates should be those who require the least on-the-job training. Of the contenders remaining in the Republican and Democratic races, the most experienced are Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton...

Clinton's background also features years of public service. She has been in the Senate since 2001, winning election in New York as she was reaching the end of her time as the nation's first lady. In addition to what sometimes was characterized as a co-presidency with her husband, during his two terms in office, she was first lady in Arkansas for 12 years.

She hopes to become the first woman to win a major-party presidential nomination. While her husband was president, she was one of the most politically involved first ladies in U.S. history. Her activism on a variety of issues earned her the kind of loyalty and opposition usually reserved for presidents.

In the Senate, Clinton serves on the Armed Services, Environmental and Public Works, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committees as well as the Senate's Special Committee on Aging.

Her opponent, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, has mounted an impressive campaign for the nomination, but Obama, who was an Illinois state senator before his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, lacks his rival's experience."