Sponsors

Hillary's surprise strategy fallacy Email Print

By joan reports
03/21/2008 05:43:23 PM EST

The Clinton campaign wants desperately to woo primary voters – and swing superdelegates – with the argument that wherever she has led in the "big states" when she matched against Barack Obama she will surely carry the day in November in a faceoff against Republican John McCain. Her strategists cling to that hoped for scenario in states like CALIFORNIA, NY, FLORIDA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, and so on.

But the numbers that came out since mid-March, though overshadowed by Obama confronting the controversy of his pastor, expose the Clinton big-state falsehood. Obama bests her against McCain . . .

. . . in the very biggest states.

Through the mid-March weekend when the Reverend uproar was front and center in the presidential race, I looked at the state by state poll reports issued by RasmussenReports polling since last Friday. In the populous states that Clinton had won in primaries, Obama was faring better than her against McCain in most states reported – including her adopted home state of NY!


First California, the "big enchilada."
It's Obama 53 to McCain 38, a sizable 15-point advantage for Barack Obama. Clinton has a smaller lead of 46-39, a 7-point gap. (Poll released Mar. 14)


Ohio. Identical margins here for both: McCain 46 Obama 40; and McCain 46 Clinton 40. (Poll released Mar. 14)

NY. Obama 51, McCain 38.  But Clinton 50, McCain 38. New Yorkers do not feel more loyalty to the senator who serves them than to Obama.  Stunner. (Released Mar. 16)

Colorado (just released, Mar. 19). Tied up for Barack and John McCain, 46-46 even. But Clinton trails far behind the Republican. McC 52, CL 38.

New Hampshire right now has McCain ahead of Obama by 3, McCain ahead of Clinton by 6.

Same story in Florida. "McCain Leads Obama by Four, Leads Clinton by Seven" (released Mar. 16)

The Democrats have the advantage in Connecticut. Obama leads John McCain by 12. Hillary Clinton leads John McCain by 3. (released Mar. 15)

Pa.  It stands at M 44, O 43 and M 46, C 44. It's a highly competitive state, but Clinton's holds no advantage there against McCain at the moment. (Released Mar. 13)

The Rasmussen state-by-state summaries are here. Obama also bests Hillary Clinton by far, vis-a-vis McCain, in Nevada, Oregon, and Minnesota.

She is a stronger candidate only in Arkansas, NJ, Mass. and Washington. He fares best almost everywhere else in the states where Clinton is staking her claim to success.

You would expect she might do better in some of these states where she prevailed in the primary. It's surprising that it's not so. The explanation is that some Republicans and Independents are in Obama's column, but not in hers.


KEYWORDS: , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< An Interview With Lifetime Activist and Social Entrepreneur Charles Halpern | THE OBSCENITY OF THE "FREE" MARKET >
 Display:
Hillary's surprise strategy fallacy | 5 comments (5 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
McCain Beating Hillary, Obama--But Paul Beats All (none / 0)
It's interesting that McCain is leading both Mrs. Clinton and Obama in Ohio lately. McCain's genuine military service record is definitely a huge advantage in the Buckeye state, where we have unshakable respect for the US armed forces.

As an independent resident of this state, I would rather see McCain as our next president despite my misgivings with a number of his issue positions.  

No president has ever been elected without winning Ohio. If this rule holds true in 2008, and if McCain continues to lead either Hillary or Obama on Election Day in Ohio, then he'll be the winner and I'll be halfway satisfied.

But I'm not going to vote for any of these three musketeers. I proudly voted for Dr. Ron Paul in the primary election. Besides him, there's only one candidate who has earned my support and deserves my vote in November: "Average Joe" Schriner.

I think of these two candidates as the "Republican" and "Democratic" versions of my ideal candidates (although Paul is a devout Republican and Joe is Green-leaning independent). Paul represents me on the issues about 85 percent and Joe about 90 percent.

I'd strongly encourage all members and visitors of Political Cortex to vote for one of these candidates. If you're a devout Democrat and can't stomach some of Paul's positions, go for Schriner. He's pro-environment, pro-social justice, anti-death penalty, against big business, plans to abolish income taxes and institute a National Sales Tax, pay down the government debt, he's against the "War on Terrorism" and the war in Iraq but unlike Ron Paul believes in US membership in the UN and foreign aid.

In fair and unbiased opinion polls that ask clear-minded people across the political spectrum who don't sit in front of Fox or CNN for hours: "Among the presidential candidates currently running, which would you MOST like to see win the presidency?" Dr. Paul is still ahead of McCain, Clinton and Obama.

Go Ron Paul!

Justin

by Just060807 on 03/20/2008 10:35:21 AM EST

Is anyone calling cell phones on these polls? (none / 0)
Given the backing Obama has with youth, and given the tendency for cell phones over land lines amongst twenty-somethings, are the polls valid?  Perhaps Obama would have an even better showing if pollsters had access to our cell phone numbers.

by Newt on 03/20/2008 08:06:41 PM EST

That's quite true that cell phone users can be (none / 0)
overlooked, and they are weighted even more to young, dormitory voters than family-resident voters.

Young voters and 1st-time workers watching their wallet opt to be mobile only and not buy any land lines for their apartment residentce.

by joan reports on 03/21/2008 12:44:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The Meaningless Charade of American Elections (none / 0)
It is inconceivable to me that anyone with a shred of awareness could believe that all the bread and circuses of the campaign for president are anything other than meaningless shadow play.  These actors will dance and strut and babble and America will accept the act.  When and if the election takes place the corporate machine will choose the next president just as they chose the last.  The American people no longer have ANY say in their “government”.&n bsp; I will, in fact, be quite surprised if the ’08 election even happens.
NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51
HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20
 With these in place it will take very little, another false flag terrorist attack of much lesser magnitude, to put a permanent end to elections in Amerika.

by RW Posner on 03/22/2008 12:34:01 AM EST

huh/ yahooo mater....................... (none / 0)
Any  problems in mod converting videos？？
mod converter

by quinceseed on 07/02/2008 11:29:15 PM EST

Hillary's surprise strategy fallacy | 5 comments (5 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
 Display: