Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

***Another Lie Debunked*** Obama actually outperforms Clinton in the Big States***

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 04:55 PM
Original message
***Another Lie Debunked*** Obama actually outperforms Clinton in the Big States***
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:18 PM by grantcart
The last myth standing is that Hillary has outperformed Sen. Obama in the "big states that really count"

The only problem, is that with all most all the other Clintonian spin it is not true.


1)In the top Nine contested primaries to date Sen.Obama has outperformed Sen Clinton by 156,000 votes

Here they are:


State . . . . . Obama . . . . . . Clinton

California. . . .2,126,000 . . . . . . .2,553,000

Texas . . . . . .1,358,000 . . . . . . .1,459,000

New York. . . . .698,000 . . . . . . . 1,003,000

Illinois. . . . . 1,302,000 . . . . . . . .662,000

Ohio . . . . . . 982,000. . . . . . . 1,212,000

Gerogia. . . . . . 704,000 . . . . . . . 330,000

New Jersey. . . .492,000 . . . . . . . 603,000

Virginia . . . . . 627,000 . . . . . . . 350,000

Washington . . . 354,000 . . . . . . . 316,000


Total . . . . .8,643,000 . . . . . . . .8,487,000



2) One of the reasons for this is Clinton's relatively poor showing in her home state of New York where she got only 57% versus Sen. Obama's 65% in Illinois. This does not take into consideration that electoral questions still surround 80 districts with high African American population that recorded not a single vote for Obama.


quote
Human Error or Electoral Fraud?
The New York Times conducted a review of the unofficial results from the primary. They found that, among the city's 6,106 election districts participating, 80 districts did not record a single vote for Obama, including heavily black districts like Harlem, as well as districts next to others where Obama had very favorable results. City election officials were made aware of the problem, and are in the process of review the vote tallies. For example, in Harlem where Clinton led Obama 141 to 0, the current, uncommitted vote tally stands at 118 to 116, Clinton.<3>

Democratic leaders are blaming the discrepancies on "human error" due to weary election officials on primary day. According to ABC News, however, other candidates such as John Edwards did not have this problem; it seems to be almost exclusive to Obama.<4>
unquote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Democratic_primar...


This relatively poor performance by Senator Clinton with those that know her mirrors the fact that more senators endorse Senator h Obama's 15 leading Clinton's 13, despite the fact that she has had 25 years of interaction with these Senators to develop relationships.

3) It should also be noted that Clinton's results in the big states were heavily influenced by the very active assistance of local machines of Governor Ted Strickland in Ohio, Govenor Jon Corzine in New Jersey and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles who are all hoping for either Vice President considerations or major Cabinet positions in a second Clinton presidency.

In any case the myth of Clinton having a significant advantage over Obama in the big states is simply not true.


4) Let us recap once again where Sen Obama leads Sen Clinton

a) Delegates
b) Primaries
c) Caucuses
d) Money Raised
e) Donors
f) Votes from big states
g) Popular votes
h) Senator endorsements
i) Govenor endorsements
















http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_the_Union#List_o...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. Woops?? Excellent, Grant.. maybe we should mass email this to the SDs and the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. and to the Obama campaign
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Yes.. they really need to get out in front of some of this garbage spin and get their
people on TV countering it FORCEFULLY, and not give up the battle of the airwaves to Hillary and her surrogates.

I've often wondered what would happen if Obama just sent out an email via his "list" of a million, asking them to just email the networks and ask for fair coverage. Could they handle up to a million emails? Would that kind of action turn the coverage like Hillary's threats have turned it toward her?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
104. yes everybody send this info to the media
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. All the more reason to support primaries in all parts of the country...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
4. GREAT JOB! K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
powergirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. In the GE, Obama outperforms Clinton against McCain
Bottom line: this data shows that Obama has the best chance to defeat McCain. In the simulated match-ups he beats McCain 280 to 258 electoral votes nationwide, and is very close in several additional key states that could significantly boost his margin of victory.

Clinton beats McCain by 276 to 262 nationwide. But her margins in several key states are much thinner than Obama's and on balance, Obama substantially increases the number of states in play.

A couple of key results:

* Contrary to the "only Clinton can win big states" myth, Obama does exactly as well in Ohio against McCain as does Clinton. Each currently wins the state by 50% to 40%.

* Even though Obama lost the primary in California to Clinton, he polls 1% stronger in the general election survey than Clinton does against McCain.

* Obama wins nine states in the simulation that Hillary loses: Colorado, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Virginia, Iowa, North Dakota, New Hampshire. He also wins several electoral votes from Nebraska, which allocates delegates by congressional district.

* Hillary wins five states in the simulation that Obama loses: West Virginia, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Florida. But three of these five are heavily in play. In New Jersey he loses to McCain by less than one point in the poll. And in Florida, Obama polls within the margin of error (of four percentage points), losing the simulation 47% to 45%. The simulation shows him losing to McCain in Pennsylvania by 42% to 47%. Hillary wins 47% to 46% for McCain. But remember that Hillary is very well known in Pennsylvania and Obama is just beginning to campaign there.

* Clinton actually loses the big state of Michigan in the simulation. Obama wins.

* Hillary's performance in many key states is much weaker than Obama's. In Colorado, Obama polls eight points stronger than Clinton. He polls nine points stronger in Iowa, five points stronger in New Hampshire, eight in Washington, six in Oregon, seven in Virginia, 12 in Nebraska, three in New Mexico.

* And, of course, the survey does not reflect either the fact that Obama does better as people get to know him, or that his inspirational style expands the electorate through the participation by brand new motivated voters.

* In fact, If Obama overcame small deficits in Florida and New Jersey he would clobber McCain 322 to 216 electoral votes.

If the Clinton campaign is going to convince "superdelegates" to swing her way, these survey results show that they're going to have to come up with rationale other than "electability."

Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight. How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/the-clinto...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. It is a futile game to play at this time
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:58 PM by grantcart
But some will try - its so long before the final election a lot can happen






http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
powergirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. I agree with the OP. Why are you cussing me over the information in the article?
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:48 PM by powergirl
Please read the information in the article. And there are many other polls which show Obama has the better chance to win the GE. Many democrats when polled say this. Why are you resorting to profanity when I posted an article? Why is that so offensive to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #25
95. Why? because...
some HRC people are so insistent that she is entitled to be president, they have lost the ability to notice facts..

Just because she put up with a shitty husband, moved to a state where she could become senator & set the stage for her presidency..and then campaign for it for 7 1/2 years..she will NOT be denied..no matter haow many people she has to run down on the way.. The really odd thing is that after planning it so long, she did not plan from A-Z..she stopped at B....and then went into panic mode and started flinging shit everywhich way to Sunday.. (not what I want in a president)

Any criticism of her is automatically sexist, but she and her minions can (and DO) say terrible things about BHO and then scream like petulant toddlers when he dares to respond.

He was supposed to "wait his turn", and he didn't..and now even though he's ahead and HAS been since the start, he's still only being offered a seat at the back of the bus..and expected to be thankful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kukesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tresalisa Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
7. Excellent job!
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:07 PM by Tresalisa
When I click on your posts here, I know I'm going to get good info amongst the usual drivel and hysteria. Keep up the good work!

:hi:

Edited for a big ol' :kick: along with a rec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
8. Great post!
K&R :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
10. Interesting.
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:17 PM by Pirate Smile
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
11. Excellent post
recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
13. Great post
I agree that it should be distributed to other site and even the Obama campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
14. What's is with all this excellent post stuff? This is ridiculous spin, and there's way better ways
to support Obama.

You throw in Virginia and Georgia into a list of "big states" in which obama won by a disporportionate amount in with a list of key general election states that he didn't win and somehow make the argument that Obama "outperforms?" Common. This is the kind of stuff that makes us look like punks.

Calling Hillary's 57% (that's huge) win in New York a "relatively poor performance" is ridiculous, and comparing it to Obama's illinois win is meaningless - two completely separate states with completely different voter contexts.

If I were you, I would write an entire post about election fraud - that's where there are real questions that really deserve an answer.

Meanwhile, Obama is the best candidate for the nomination because he leads in pledged delegates, leads in the popular vote, has one the most states INCLUDING some key swing states, and has the most money to campaign in the general. He will have no trouble winning the "big states" in a general election with a unified and record turnout democratic party.

But let's avoid stupid arguments if we can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. thank you for your thoughtful criticism but my point is simply
aimed at the often repeated statements in the media and the Clinton campaign that she out performs Obama in the big states.

I agree that that is not a particularly compelling point, however, they keep making it and it simply is not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
27. Are you watching the MSM and reading the papers? If so, you'd
recognize this as an excellent rebuttal to the spin that is being spread by Clinton and her surrogates. We can't just let it ride.. if we don't bat it down, no one will. See Lanny Davis' comments on the below thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kikiek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #14
81. I actually chuckled at the list of states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ExtraGriz Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
15. add massachussetts, they have 121 delegates
it has more delegates than georgia which you included on the list...and hillary is ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Mass is only the 13th largest state in the Union
delegate size is not a reflection of poplulation. It is weighted also for democratic performance. Puerto Rico has many more delegates than many states in the union
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ExtraGriz Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. but mass is larger in pop than washington
so shouldnt it replace washington which is on the list? which would put hillary ahead?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_pop...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Washington is the 14th largest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavlovs DiOgie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
18. Excellent post!
Thanks for putting all of this information together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. Brwawawawawwaa..
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:36 PM by zidzi
Obama got more votes in Illinois than hilary got in New York and he got more votes in New York than hilary got in Ilinois.

And Obama performed quite well in the Big states where hilary squeaked by..thanks for this Grant. Priceless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
20. Let's Get This "Tell The Truth" Party Started


:bounce:
K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJSecularist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
22. Another Hillbot theory debunked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #22
71. Clintbots lie? Impossible!
:p

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-10-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #22
119. She's a martyr
Hill d'Arc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
24. Isn't it interesting that not ONE Hillary supporter has commented in this thread....
...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
28. Missouri needs to be on there.
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:49 PM by JackORoses
Obama 405,284
Clinton 395,287
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. thank you but Missouri is only the 13th largest state and was in effect a draw
as you point out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladywnch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
84. uh, I'm confused....a few posts earlier you claim Mass is the 13th largest
in the country.....which is it.....MO or MA?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
30. um uh Washington? Okay then, then where's Florida???
you're cherry-picking the so called "beauty contests"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. read carefully "contested" elections
I didn't cherry pick just picked the top 9 contested elections as listed by Wikipedia. sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whopis01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #31
55. Why do you consider Florida to not be "contested"? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PseudoIntellect Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #55
61. ...because it wasn't a contest. It was an exhibition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whopis01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #61
82. no, it was a contest. Both their names (and others) were on the ballot.
It is a bit hard to argue that it was not a contest when there were almost 1.75 million votes cast. That is almost 3 times the average for the 2000 & 2004 primaries.

Even if the "your delegates won't get seated" issue was not in play for the primary, I doubt that it would have significantly changed the results in Florida. I think Clinton would have walked away with the most votes, with Obama and Edwards splitting the rest.

Actually it really goes to point out the flaws in trying to say who should get the nomination based on the popular vote, or the most states won. It was not the same contest in each location. When Edwards was still in the race, he and Obama were splitting a portion of the vote that is now supporting Obama. Of course, it is impossible to tell exactly how that would have gone if Edwards had not been in the race, but I am fairly confident more Edwards supporters would have gone for Obama than against him.

So, it was contest and Clinton received more votes than Obama.

But, while there were 871,000 people that voted for her, there were 879,000 people that voted against her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. If you want take Washington out - the point is still the same
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. I think I'm going to just let your comment speak for itself. nt
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 06:09 PM by tandem5
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. well when you in fact have no facts that is the bes thing to do
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. you're so pretty
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. see now your not even batting 50%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. 50%? Oh no I never took a swing.
I'm relaxing at first base. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #44
58. calling me pretty counts for two outs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #58
72. so what now you're pitcher and ump in this metaphor?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ExtraGriz Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. wheres mass? they have larger pop than washington
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_pop...

so take away washington...add mass, and hillary would be ahead. sorry you didnt debunk anything but you did prove that cherry picking does help your cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Washington passed Mass
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 06:55 PM by grantcart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_the_Union#List_o...


This seems to be the updated number

6,468,424 versus 6,449,755

In any case it is irrelevent to the larger point. Take Washington off the list.

The larger point is that Clinton is asserting that there is this overwhelmingly huge difference between them in the large states. That is simply not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diane R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #35
76. Leave Washington on the list. We had about 96 delegates (I think). That's more than other 'big' st
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
semass Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #35
78. Comparing the links in the two prior posts
The population figures are the same for 14 of the largest 15 states. Why would someone go in and just change Washington, moving it ahead of Massachusetts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #30
92. Mccain's gonna win FL in Nov anyway
Edited on Sun Mar-09-08 03:10 PM by SoCalDem
and so far at least, their totals don't count
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
37. Illinois doesn't count...for starters there's too many black people there and not enough latinos
blacks only count for 3/5th's of a person in Hillaryland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. it seems that in nyc that might actually have been true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #37
66. ouch!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
38. Ouch! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
42. Sorry, you have debunked nothing...
You've included red states that no democrat will win in 2008.

With your red states pulled, even if you merely pull out Georgia, Hillary beats Obama hands down in the big states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Khaotic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. No, no, no, no, no. You dont' understand baby ...


Obama's a blues man, a Chicago blues man, who can unify the nation.

That's right baby, he's going to win the South in the general election. Everyone is going to come together under one great vision.

We are the change we've been waiting for.

You gotta believe us baby! We're gonna change the world!!!!!



Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, Hillary, Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. You forgot the 'on a mission from god' part.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Khaotic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Not from 'god'
... we're on a mission from us for America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VotesForWomen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
43. uh, georgia's not going blue in the GE. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeraldSquare212 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
46. Wow, nice work and very compelling - thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
47. my apologies if I missed anyone saying this, but...
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 08:46 PM by CitizenLeft
...a better argument against that "important states" meme is that big states won by Clinton like CA, NY, MA, NJ are states the Dem nom will win no matter what - the most shaky of those being NJ, but I don't doubt Obama can carry NJ as well. It's ridiculous to argue that because Clinton won them, Obama cannot. NONSENSE. Conversely, Clinton will brag about TX and OH, 2 states that I would put in McCain's column no matter what, though I will fight like hell to turn OH blue - the idea that Clinton would win TX and OH in Nov just because she won them in the primary is NONSENSE. And before anyone says "Obama can't win the small states" I'll concede that for WY, ID, and the reddest of the red states like NE and KS. But Obama can put some previously unreachable states into play ENOUGH to make them reachable for the 1st time in decades, states that Hillary has not a chance in hell of carrying. States like CO, VA, maybe even GA and others where Obama has gotten a lot of support. Hillary can't add a single state to Kerry or Gore's list - not a single state. And that includes FLORIDA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. Excellent point.
"It's ridiculous to argue that because Clinton won them, Obama cannot. NONSENSE. Conversely, Clinton will brag about TX and OH, 2 states that I would put in McCain's column no matter what,.."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. thank you!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #50
56. Yes really good point.
California being a good example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #56
75. thank you too!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #47
59. well yes it is so obvious
but we keep hearing the premise which isn't even true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #59
109. And this is the propaganda frame of the moment...
You hear it over and over on the M$M and it needs to be nipped in the bud. It is nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
49. Very interesting.
Hmmmm. And the question would be, what percentage of those 8 million votes that Hillary got would go to Obama if he were the nominee and what percentage of those 8 milion votes that Obama got would go to Hillary? I don't really buy the "big state" argument. Many of his votes were new voters. I doubt that Hillary could make the same claim? Recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
53. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
54. KR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Medusa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
57. Spin Clintonistas! Spin!
I know you can! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. yes we should give herman a few extra threads just for laughs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcollier Donating Member (887 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #57
62. 2 plus 2 = 4
Basic Math is not to difficult to grasp.... But lets keep the race going state by state.

Just don't throw your campaign contributions away on a losing campaign... Think People...

Obama is the Democrats best choice to win in Nov... And a great choice he is...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PseudoIntellect Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. delete
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 11:14 PM by PseudoIntellect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #64
70. now you gave me a headache trying to figure out what brilliant thing you said
you wouldn't let us see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
63. Add on Florida where both were on the ballot and you get
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 11:24 PM by wlucinda
Obama : 9.212,041
Clinton: 9,344,208

We can cherry-pick states and rearrange the numbers all day.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #63
68. we used the top contested states - no cherry picking
The Clinton's have the strongest brand in America politics going back 30 years when Bill and Hillary literally kept every business card they could get their hands on and started "FOB" Friends of Bill. They have been masters of networking and building up national connections. Yes in any uncontested state where Obama has not had the opportunity to work there is a substantial advantage.

Now think about this. Given the fact stated above - does that not elevate Obama's achievement even higher?

Thank you for adding an even stronger dimension to the Illinois Senator's amazing historical campaign to be our party's nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #68
79. Which is in play all over
Isn't this factor also a large reason behind Hillary doing better in primaries than caucases?

Caucases draws in the people that have spent time researching or feel passionate about politics and/or politicians.

Primaries, where you get a lot more people, also draws in those that have spent much less time, if any, getting to know the candidates. And then name recognition really kicks in. The fact that Obama, more or less in every primary, has been able to eradicate large leads once he starts campaining in that given state supports this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PseudoIntellect Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 11:15 PM
Response to Original message
65. Oh, but this doesn't count.
...because you included red states that Hillary didn't do well in. Such obvious bias. (TX and OH do count, though, because HRC won those)

We're supposed to win all the big blue states we won last election! And forget the red states, they're evil. That'll get us the win in the GE! Oh, wait...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frog92969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
67. Kick for President Obama
Get used to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigbrother05 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
69. K and R
Good evening Grantcart
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
73. Politically flawed analysis for several reasons.
Edited on Sun Mar-09-08 01:29 AM by McCamy Taylor
1. Delegates this fall are what matters, not vote totals. If Clinton's more moderates voters go to McCain, Obama could lose NY, Florida, Ohio, California---all states where McCain did well. That leaves Obama with just Illinois for the big states and some of the smaller liberal states. McCain is not going to run as a hawk in the general. He will pull sharply to the middle of the road. Obama's votes on the other hand will not cross Hillary and go to McCain. They will either go to her or stay home.

Re: Michigan and Florida---if these states believe that Obama prevented their votes from being counted, that may be enough to tip Florida and its important electoral votes into the McCain camp. Southerners get very upset at what they perceive of as Northern oppression.

2. Obama can not count on the support of the political machines that helped Clinton. Again, as 1972 showed, if the Democratic machine looks at the current behavior of people in the Obama camp (like some of the posts here which denigrate the Dem political machine) they may say to themselves "We are being disrespected" and they will not offer their support. Just as McGovern was on his own in the general election in 1972, Obama will be on his own, having burned too many bridges in the primary. It is up to his supporters to adopt a more polite attitude when dealing with Democratic Party officials who have working in cities across this country for years.

The final ticket MUST be a unity ticket---Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama. That way the nation gets both the OLD and the NEW,. It can take a chance on Obama secure in the knowledge that it is also getting a ton of experience.

The GOP fears this combo. That is why they keep doing things to create hatred between the two camps. For over a year the right wing has been saying "Obama is a Muslim---and Hillary made us say it." Get wise to their lies. This is a dirty trick right out of the 1972 Pat Buchanan playbook---smear about one Democrat that are attributed to another Democrat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #73
74. To begin with its not an analysis piece.
1)It is a simple refutation of the claim that has been repeated that Clinton has done substantially better in the large states than Obama. The truth is that it is basically a draw but if you get down to an exact computation Obama has in fact done a little bit better.

2)Obama has the delegates to secure the nomination. He only needs 45% of the remaining delegates to win.

3)A combined ticket is not a dream ticket it is a media creation.

4) Whoever gets the nomination is going to exercise their leadership and will not want a close competitor to be on the ticket to diminish their standing. This is normal. Calls for combining leaders on the ticket are perennial but almost never happen and are rarely successful.

5)Putting Hillary on the ticket doesn't add any balance. Obama will want somebody who has considerably more experience not basically the same. More importantly it will be somebody that could help make a swing state like Virginia or Ohio more secure. Hillary does not do that.

6)When you pick up somebody from the past you get "all of their enemies but only half of their friends".

7) Hillary is picking up $ 1 million a day and is spending only a fraction of it. She will end up with a war chest of $ 50 million at the end of the campaign (she has $ 29 million in GE funds). If she were to join the ticket she would (I believe) be required by law to use that money and not hoard it for future campaigns.

Her continuation in the campaign is a charade to replenish her campaign warchest.

In anycase the point of the Op was that taken as a whole Hillary Clinton has not significantly over performed Obama in the top most populated states. Neither your reply or any other in this thread challenge that assumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
golddigger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #73
98. Spot on McCamy Taylor, but unfortunately it will fall on deaf ears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourvoicescount Donating Member (251 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:59 AM
Response to Original message
77. EXCELLENT WORK! Thank You!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
80. You've cited numerous big states that "don't count."
Surely you know by now that if Hillary hasn't won the state, that state is not important. The silliest argument about "big states" is that Hillary seems to insist all the Democrats that voted for her will automatically vote for McCain if she isn't the candidate. That's a ridiculous argument since both candidates are nearly identical on the issues and McCain is the polar opposite. The fact is, most Democrats will vote for the Democratic candidate rather than risk Bush III and 100 years of war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #80
85. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #80
93. AND in a primary it's always dem v dem so of COURSE a dem will win it
Edited on Sun Mar-09-08 03:13 PM by SoCalDem
and if it's a traditionally dem state the winner of the primary will also win it in the general...UNLESS they have trash-talked and pissed off enough of their opponent's faithful to make them stay home..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
83. Kick for everyone to read .
It's obvious that the Hillary campaign is planning on running on the theme that only she can win the "big states". Obviously, when all the big states are taken together, Obama even wins the popular vote in those also. If you disagree, explain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kirby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
86. Nonsense...
I'm an Obama supporter, but this is nonsense. Elections are based on the electoral college, not popular vote, so your numbers are irrelevant.

I have a different theory. Hillary was always the DLC 'Establishment' candidate/presumptive nominee from day one. The larger more organized 'big' states have worked more for her than Obama, the outsider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
557188 Donating Member (494 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
87. WRONG
All I see is ridiculous spin and inflated numbers from Illinois added to the totals to push Obama.

Its a fact that Hillary is A LOT stronger in states like Ohio. All the spin you want doesn't change that fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACanadianLiberal Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. self deleted
Edited on Sun Mar-09-08 03:01 PM by ACanadianLiberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACanadianLiberal Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
89. Hello, are we going to count FL, MI, MA this time?
Good try, but, you just show how pathetic you are.

You want to help Obama, but not this way though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #89
96. Yes well we should definitely add Michigan since Obama's name was
not on the ballot. The OP clearly said contested elections

Mass has less population than Washington
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_the_Union#List_o...


But all of the nitpicking is irrelevant. Add Massachussettes take away Washington. Its pointless.


The point of the OP is that Clinton's assertion that she has some sort of commanding lead in the larger states where she way out performs Obama is FALSE.

Nothing in your reply or in the reply of anyone else in the thread challenges that basic premise.

The popular vote in the largest states is basically a tie. If you draw the line here Obama has more. If you add MA then Clinton has a few more. In anycase Clinton does not have a significant advantage in an area that she has been promoting as the singularly most compelling reason to continue her failed campaign. It simply is not true.

Resume nitpicking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACanadianLiberal Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #96
99. If this is a real debate, you have been totally smashed
like a small pile of hopeless mash patato.

Even that, you are admirable for the fact that you have the ball to bring up the topic.

Right, you have the ball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #99
102. Premise: HRC campaign has significantly outperformed Obama in the big states is false.
You are unable to respond to the issue so you offer flacid commentary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACanadianLiberal Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #102
118. Here is one more my flaccid commentary
Edited on Sun Mar-09-08 07:53 PM by ACanadianLiberal
Title: "Another Lie Debunked"

OK: There is a LIE supposedly. What is it?

The lie is actually not a lie, instead a myth: "The last myth standing is that ..."

Anyway in your book, a lie equates a myth, fine. What is the lie really?

The lie is: Hillary has outperformed Sen. Obama in the "big states that really count".

Let's check into those numbers in the OP:

Total . . . . .8,643,000 . . . . . . . .8,487,000

Obama actually outperform Clinton by 156,000 votes. Way to go. But wait a minute, let do a little bit more work.

What I found:

(1) The total # of votes for Clinton from those "big states" you defined: 8,488,000. Not big deal, for us who are less educated, it's not difference.
(2) How do you define so called "big states"? In common knowledge, MI, FL and MA are BIGGER states than WA though.
(a) Oh, you reminded me in MI Obama was "not on the ballot", so let us take that away.
(b) You don't want FL in the math, even O was on the ballot, and reportedly the only one who campaigned over there. Since you even don't count it. You are the king here, you make the call.
(c) You took MA out because it "has less population than Washington". Is it true. Since you MYTHED one time, I'd better do my own homework, trust myself. Following the link you provided, I amazingly found the following:

Washington-------------------Massachusetts
5,894,121--------------------6,349,097

WOW. am I wrong on this? I must be wrong because I am in the pool of less educated people. How could 6,349,097 be bigger than 5,891,121? You are piece of joke now. Mr. Obama deserves better follower than you.

You said: "Add Massachusetts take away Washington. Its pointless". Really? My head is spinning.


If putting Ma in your math,

State ---------- Obama --------- Clinton
California ----- 2,126,000 ----- 2,553,000
Texas ---------- 1,358,000 ----- 1,459,000
New York --------- 698,000 ----- 1,003,000
Illinois ------- 1,302,000 ------- 662,000
Ohio ------------- 982,000 ----- 1,212,000
Georgia ---------- 704,000 ------- 330,000
New Jersey ------- 492,000 ------- 603,000
Virginia --------- 627,000 ------- 350,000
Washington ------- 354,000 ------- 316,000
Massachusetts ---- 511,887 ------- 704,591
Total ---------- 9,154,887 ------9,192,591

Difference? Clinton outperforms Obama by 37,704, but you want people to believe it is a tie.

Fine, it is a tie. Again what myth do you want to debunk? "Outperformed". With your mercy, after MA joined your math, Clinton did outperform over Obama.

What do you want to debunk now? Ouch, this time, "significantly outperformed". Does anybody here see that magic word "significantly" in your OP? Oh, you forgot putting it in, didn't you?

What a slippery road we are walking on!

Man, you are doing no good to Mr. Obama.

BTW, this is my flaccid commentary.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACanadianLiberal Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-10-08 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #96
121. US States Population and Ranking
Just for your reference.

State Population Ranking Population
North Carolina 11 8,049,313
Virginia 12 7,078,515
Massachusetts 13 6,349,097
Indiana 14 6,080,485
Washington 15 5,894,121


http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/population....

Notes:

(1) This site is not run by Clinton.
(2) This site does not show political preference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damitajo1 Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
90. um,
i'm sure you have heard of the electoral college. big states give us big electoral votes, regardless of the splits within each state. the dems have a stupid nominating process that doesnt attempt to mirror the electoral college. what a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LulaMay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
91. Talk about propaganda. I guess she hasn't won most of the big states. Sheesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
94. Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Pennsylvania
He's lost all of them and Clinton has won them.

You cannot win the electoral vote without them, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #94
97. So, you think she will win OH and FL in the general election?
You don't win electoral votes in a primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #97
114. Yes, she will
and because she won their primaries, she stands much greater odds of winning them than Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #94
100. And the supposition that simply because she beat him there
that means that John McCain will beat them there is ridiculous.

But nothing shows how far you go to shred your self respect by including Michigan in the formula where Obama's name was not even on the ballot.

The basic premise of the OP is that the claim that Clinton has some huge numerical advantage in the big states is untrue. Nothing you have said or anyother responder has diminished that.

On the one hand

Obama has

More delegates
More primary victories
More caucus victories
Raised more money
Has more popular vote
Has more donors
Has more senator endorsements
Has more gubenatorial endoresements..

Clinton has




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestPerspective Donating Member (54 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
101. Generation Jones member Obama does win Big States
Excellent post here about the truth re. Obama and the Big States. We're surprised becasue of the misinformation spread by Hillary's old school polarizing Baby Boomer campaign techniques. It's different now, and Hillary needs to jump...fast...on that if she'll have any chance. We're now on to new school post-partisan Generation Jones style campaigning...which is what will work for Obama in winning.

Relevantly, there is a growing consensus in the media, and among experts, that Obama is not a Boomer, nor an Xer, but instead is a member of Generation Jones (the heretofore lost generation between the Boomers and Xers, born 1954-1965)

Just in the last month or so, several top media outlets, including The New York Times, Newsweek Magazine, and NBC, have all made the argument that Obama is specifically part of Generation Jones. I also heard a panel of generations experts recently on a national radio show discussing this specific issue, and four of the five experts conlcuded that Obama is, in fact, a GenerationJoneserthat his bio and political worldview closely match the GenJones archetype (the one dissenting expert argued that Obama is a Boomer).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
103. What one does in the preferential race does not always translate to the general election.
Anyone that tries to tie the two together does not know the difference and non-implication.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
105. It isn't what one does in the primaries/caucuses that matters.
It is what they do in the General.

Just because Hillary or Obama beat each other in a red state does not mean they will win that/those state(s) in November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #105
113. You would assume that to be so obvious that we wouldn't have to discuss
it especially with unusually long lead in time to the general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #113
117. Can you believe that posters here think that just because a candidate
wins primaries that they will beat the Republican candidate. Or that because they won in states that generally go Republican they will win those states in November. What about the primaries that McCain won? I'm sure he won a lot of blue states but that doesn't mean he is going to win those states in November either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
106. One would think that Hillary would have won the popular vote...
in all these states? Especially, since she had the organization and was the "inevitable" nominee. It's amazing that Obama was able to stay close in these states, let alone win the majority of votes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mainer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:48 PM
Response to Original message
107. What the heck happened in NY with Obama "zero" votes?
I hadn't heard this before about the zero votes for Obama in 80 districts. This sounds completely fishy and can't wait to hear the results of the re-count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #107
115. Its never been really explained. It was called human error and so forth
but I think that the real impact here is that it is going to add fuel to those areas where there is a predominately African American congressional district and the congressman has jumped early and endorsed Hillary when she was a front runner.

These guys are going to start feeling heat and maybe some primary competitors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
108. Nice work!
:hi: :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
110. Silly you-only certain states count!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-10-08 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #110
120. Rhode Island is always going to count
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
111. But Ohio and CA are the only big states that are important.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
parkeradison Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
112. Regarding "another lie debunked"
Thanks for those numbers. Obama gets her no matter how you slice it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-09-08 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
116. Absolutely
It is time put an end to this primary season and start in on the GE.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bagrman Donating Member (889 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-10-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
122. No votes for Obama in black districts. Caucus states go to Obama, Black box states, The Clintons.
Edited on Mon Mar-10-08 12:28 PM by bagrman
We are so Fucked up it's not funny. Now what if the Super Delegates of the states that go to their repective nominees, turn the tide. The black boxes get The Clintons close. Then the states where she got the most votes , their super delegates go to her en mass, to give her the nomination. She would't need to win the popular vote. LOL WE are so fucked.


Edited for seplinlg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC