That may be, but I equate Obama to the Giants. Work, work, work, work Prize. There’s wins and loses along the way but he’s got is eye on the prize.
Hillary should win in TX and Ohio, abd she’s likely hoping for a big win. That big win used to be a foregone conclusion, but Obama is doing better in those states.
Note that HRC is only behind by less than 100 delegates, and there’s still close to 400 Superdelagates unpledged. 1/4 of those get behind HRC and she’s in the lead. :eek:
It’s looking like a brokered deal at the Con more and more. I think Hillary would do better in any sort of brokered deal.
Hey, man, if only one quarter of those delegates get behind HRC, I think BO will consider it good news indeed.
In the suburban of Cleveland where I live, all I’m seeing are Obama signs on front lawns … and the odd Ron Paul signs mounted illegally on utility poles here and there.
I’m an Obama fan. My girlfriend is canceling out my vote thanks to classic identity politics; she supports Clinton mainly because of her gender.
Ohio is still in the air but Obama is leading in Texas now both in the polls and in how the state will allocate delegates. I don’t see her even carrying the popular vote there and almost certainly not a delegate victory. Forget about a “huge” victory.
Ohio she can still perhaps pull off but, delegate-wise, you’re probably looking at an essential tie. And, without Texas, her “large state” case is blown.
She’s already hedged her bets on that.
Expect her to argue, should she lose Texas but win Ohio, that winning Texas isn’t important since it tends to be a red state in the general election.
Too late:
Quoth HRC:
“I’d love to carry Texas, but it’s usually not in the electoral calculation for the Democratic nominee. Florida and Michigan are.”
And here I thought that Texas was super-important not because of its red/blue status but because it had a lot of delegates for Clinton to scoop up.
I guess if the Bush administration taught us (and Clinton) anything, it’s that it’s easier to play the game when you keep moving the goal posts.
That’s a little out of context though … that was regarding her argument for seating MI and FL and was talking about the general. Specious, yes, but not moving the goal post in the TX primary.
If Obama takes TX, RI, VT and it’s tied in OH - I’d expect a concession. If he sweeps, I’d count on one.
I second that. A loss in Ohio is fatal, a loss in Texas and a narrow win in Ohio might make her plod on to Pennsylvania. She has to be thinking 2012. If McCain beats Obama, she’s primed to once again be the odds on favorite to be the next nominee. If keeping the 2008 fight alive appears to threaten her 2012 prospects, she’ll give it up.
edit: Nevermind I goofed
Great, now I got nothing to say.
I forget which thread it was in, but somebody had Clinton with a big lead in RI. If she loses the other states and wins that, it prevents a sweep, but I don’t think it keeps her in the race.
It wouldn’t keep her in the race. I’m campaigning in RI this weekend heavily.
I posted that; I forget in which of the many Obama/Clinton threads in GD. Don’t forget, Rhode Island’s big brother to the north, Massachusetts, was a solid win for Clinton early on. I haven’t seen any recent polls showing whether there’s now a shift toward Obama in the Bay State.
Still, if Clinton loses Texas (very possible) and Vermont (a lock), essentially ties in Ohio and wins handily in RI, I look forward to witnessing her attempts to spin the Ocean State triumph into a national mandate.
One thing Texas **can ** do is provide a lot of money to the eventual Dem nominee. Sure, I know Texas will go Republican in the fall and California will go Democratic. But, there is an awful lot of money that liberal Texans and conservative Californians can donate.
That’s another reason why you want to win the state primary of a state that you’re not going to carry in the fall.
I’d wonder about the spin. I’m campaigning hardcore this weekend in RI and from what I saw last weekend, RI is a tough nut to crack in terms of switching voters. One thing I have not seen, are recent polls from RI after last tuesday’s debate. Today’s Providence Jounral has mixed reactions and Rhodey’s are flocking to the registration centers in droves. The 18-29 demographic are blowing up the Rhode Island registration centers. That is a historical strong suit for Obama.
Wow, good to hear that, but as of the polls I cited there was a helluva gap to be overcome and not a lot of time to do it. Keep us posted.
From what I’ve heard, RI seems to be a similar situation to here in MA, i.e. the Clintons have long been popular there and Hillary had a HUGE lead that Obama is whittling away at, but not fast enough. At this juncture, I am expecting a similar result to MA - a solid Clinton win. But the significance of RI is obviously much less than the MA win given the relative number of delegates earned.
At some point, though, she’s really only spinning herself.
Even if she wins Ohio by 6-8 points, and wins a squeaker in Texas (with Obama still coming out ahead in delegates in TX), her modest delegate gains will be canceled out by (40% Dem, 38% black) Mississippi the following week, with a slight assist from (12-delegate caucus state) Wyoming in between.
After March 11, there’s six weeks of nothing before PA. And she’s only 6 points up in PA, which is her very last chance to cut into Obama’s lead in a nontrivial way. (And Obama will strike back by winning NC handily two weeks later.) Barring bigger wins on Tuesday than I’ve allowed for here, she’s going to have to do one hell of a job of spinning herself on her prospects to keep going after March 4.
After PA, we’ll be in the political equivalent of a rook-and-pawn endgame in chess, where if you’re not already within a pawn or two, the outcome is self-evident. We’re already getting close - there just won’t be that many pieces left on the board after Tuesday.