Analysis: Facing losses, Clinton recasts (1 Viewer)

[Shawn]

Its no use with you because you obviously have not been keeping up the campaign. That is alright - but lets not act like you know what you are talking about.

Actually Jim, while I don't think he gets an award for how he said it, I kind of agree with him. Most of the time I agree with you, but in this instance, it seems like you're focusing a lot on the details of how such a thing would work--how Obama suggested he would communicate with these countries--rather than the broader question of whether cutting off dialogue with a country is fruitful. It made a lot more sense in a world with Soviet satellite nations. Today, I'm not so sure.

 

[JimEverett]

My criticism rests on something he said at least twice - once in a debate with Hillary. He said something to the effect that he would immediately set up a meeting with these people on day 1. He then criticized Hillary for her position that you cannot do that and her belief that you start out with low-level negotiations.
The former position suggests, at best, a lack of understanding of diplomacy.

And I agree about hte comparisons with the USSR. The Soviets were a world superpower, not some 2-bit piece-of-crap country.

 

[RABDOG]

Its no use with you because you obviously have not been keeping up the campaign. That is alright - but lets not act like you know what you are talking about.

i keep up everyday with the campain and i also read up on everyone in the race...i just know when i see some bull **** from people who want anybody but obama to be president for no "good" reason... you need something with substance to even make me think about changing my mind..i showed that your arguement was flemsy at best or just plain old made up...so the better was gotten of you, again...so let's not "act" like you know what "you" are talking about.

 

[Deuceistheman]

It doesn't matter if Obama or Hillary should get the nomination, because McCain being a moderate from the Republican party will crush either one. The overall voting public, will not vote for Hillary with Billie at her side and there is no way in ---- a majority of the voting public votes for Obama, no matter how much the media loves him and wants him to win the Presidency.

Come back to this post after election day and tell me I was wrong. It is quite simple folks.

 

[DMaestro]

It doesn't matter if Obama or Hillary should get the nomination, because McCain being a moderate from the Republican party will crush either one.

If you completely ignore the Bush Factor, then yeah. The challenge of the Democratic nominee will be to marry McCain in the minds of moderate voters to the obscenely unpopular policies of W. McCain will provide openings, given that he'll have to make some concessions to far-right conservatives in order to have a snowball's chance of solidifying their vote.

Besides that, he's old. And he's dull. And he'd want a blank check to continue the Iraq War indefinitely. There are plenty of vulnerabilities to be exploited. Of course, the Dems insist on cannibalizing themselves, as usual.

I'm not even gonna try to call this one.

 

[Shawn]

It doesn't matter if Obama or Hillary should get the nomination, because McCain being a moderate from the Republican party will crush either one. The overall voting public, will not vote for Hillary with Billie at her side and there is no way in ---- a majority of the voting public votes for Obama, no matter how much the media loves him and wants him to win the Presidency.

Come back to this post after election day and tell me I was wrong. It is quite simple folks.

I will, because you're completely and totally wrong.

I agree he will trounce Hillary. He won't trounce Obama. It's anyone's guess how an Obama/McCain election would turn out.

Whether you look at the polls, the trending, or talk to people anecdotally, many middle of the road folks are very receptive to Obama, and don't have a negative view of him. Hispanics have been trending towards Obama, and more women are trending that way as well.

NPR interviewed some people in a small town--I'm thinking maybe Kansas or Nebraska. A guy on ther who has always voted Republican said, "I guess I'm going to vote for the black boy." It was pretty hilarious.

I don't think an Obama/McCain debate will reflect well on the older McCain at all, and I'm a big McCain fan. With Hillary, it's a different story completely. You can't just lump Obama and Hillary in to the same category, simply because they're both Democrats.

 

[Severum]

It doesn't matter if Obama or Hillary should get the nomination, because McCain being a moderate from the Republican party will crush either one. The overall voting public, will not vote for Hillary with Billie at her side and there is no way in ---- a majority of the voting public votes for Obama, no matter how much the media loves him and wants him to win the Presidency.

Come back to this post after election day and tell me I was wrong. It is quite simple folks.

If you're that confident then I suggest you go take advantage of the low expectations at Intrade.

 

[LSSpam]

I actually think McCain has a good chance of losing. Obama is going to whip McCain in any turnout battle, McCain either has to dominate the independent vote or rally the conservative base, and that's an either/or proposition. Obama vs McCain isn't very good news for McCain. The longer Huckabee drags things out for McCain the worse it is for him as well.

Hillary is by far the best matchup because Hillary instantly solves McCain's turnout problem. But that isn't happening.

 

[JimEverett]

I actually think McCain has a good chance of losing. Obama is going to whip McCain in any turnout battle, McCain either has to dominate the independent vote or rally the conservative base, and that's an either/or proposition. Obama vs McCain isn't very good news for McCain. The longer Huckabee drags things out for McCain the worse it is for him as well.

Hillary is by far the best matchup because Hillary instantly solves McCain's turnout problem. But that isn't happening.

Its interesting to speculate right now.
I think with Hillary v. McCain you are guaranteed a map that looks similar to 2000 and 2004. Same battlegrounds - primarily in the midwest.
With Obama v. McCain - where does Obama go for electoral votes? Can he win those voters - so prevalent in the midwest - that are Democrats or lean Democrat and are blue-collar whites? McCain is almost tailor made for those voters. Of course, I am not sure how much better Clinton can do with them (the legacy of the Democratic Party being the Party of NAFTA). Can he win Florida? Can he create a new Democratic base in the west?
McCain being from Arizona hurts either Democrat's western strategy - since Arizona is a state the Democrats were eyeing. But Nevada and Colorado are right there for the taking. But if Obama cannot take Ohio or Florida (and if he loses Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin or Minnesota) then even those two states do not help him.

 

[LSSpam]

Its interesting to speculate right now.
I think with Hillary v. McCain you are guaranteed a map that looks similar to 2000 and 2004. Same battlegrounds - primarily in the midwest.
With Obama v. McCain - where does Obama go for electoral votes? Can he win those voters - so prevalent in the midwest - that are Democrats or lean Democrat and are blue-collar whites? McCain is almost tailor made for those voters. Of course, I am not sure how much better Clinton can do with them (the legacy of the Democratic Party being the Party of NAFTA). Can he win Florida? Can he create a new Democratic base in the west?
McCain being from Arizona hurts either Democrat's western strategy - since Arizona is a state the Democrats were eyeing. But Nevada and Colorado are right there for the taking. But if Obama cannot take Ohio or Florida (and if he loses Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin or Minnesota) then even those two states do not help him.

That's a good point and ties into Shawn's point. The one thing working for McCain vs Obama is the high potential for strategic error by Obama. For instance, does he try to put the Southern States in play because of their high African-American population? Can he afford to ignore working class midwest states like Ohio? I know he's picking up labor-union endorsements, but let's not kid ourselves, he isn't a labor union candidate and midwest states tend to be conservative otherwise. He can pretty much write off Florida to McCain.

The whole "battleground" landscape could drastically change which introduces a strong wild card element to the election. Honestly I think it would be a tremendous thing for America.

 

[RebSaint]

I will, because you're completely and totally wrong.

I agree he will trounce Hillary. He won't trounce Obama. It's anyone's guess how an Obama/McCain election would turn out.

Whether you look at the polls, the trending, or talk to people anecdotally, many middle of the road folks are very receptive to Obama, and don't have a negative view of him. Hispanics have been trending towards Obama, and more women are trending that way as well.

NPR interviewed some people in a small town--I'm thinking maybe Kansas or Nebraska. A guy on ther who has always voted Republican said, "I guess I'm going to vote for the black boy." It was pretty hilarious.

I don't think an Obama/McCain debate will reflect well on the older McCain at all, and I'm a big McCain fan. With Hillary, it's a different story completely. You can't just lump Obama and Hillary in to the same category, simply because they're both Democrats.

Pretty much what I'm thinking at this point. A couple points though to support this perspective.

The impending nomination of McCain will invariably I think compel some of the traditional Republican base to stay home--mostly social conservatives and those who are upset about McCain's position on immigration. Bush carried the last two elections because the R Party effectively mobilized and galvinized the base. I think in a related NPR piece, it made the point how upset many conservatives are about Romney's exit and McCain emerging as the frontrunner.

Secondly, Obama is much more appealing to swing voters than Hillary Clinton; further I think if Clinton wins the nomination, you'd see more social conservatives hold their nose to vote McCain.


So yes, I think the Democrats have a realistic shot in a general election with Obama the nominee because his appeal to swing voters and a Clinton nomination would likely galvinize the Republican base a lot more than with Obama.

Most close general elections come down to getting out the base, and swing voters.

 

[JimEverett]

Secondly, Obama is much more appealing to swing voters than Hillary Clinton; further I think if Clinton wins the nomination, you'd see more social conservatives hold their nose to vote McCain.

That is the rub.
I am not convinced that will hold true come fall.
Its hard to get a feel for it from the primaries and such - but one thing you will notice is that in caucus states - where the party machinery and activists rule - Obama has done better. his base is very clearly African-Americans and urban professionals - the latter being the most liberal element in the party.
Clinton is DLC, has shown more appeal to Latinos and blue-collar whites - clearly a more moderate candidate.
Its real easy for independents to have a favorable view of Obama right now because they hardly know the guy - if they know him at all. Once summer comes along can he position himself as a moderate before, and better than, the GOP positions him as a McGovern-candidate?

 

[Sabine]

Its interesting to speculate right now.
I think with Hillary v. McCain you are guaranteed a map that looks similar to 2000 and 2004. Same battlegrounds - primarily in the midwest.
With Obama v. McCain - where does Obama go for electoral votes? Can he win those voters - so prevalent in the midwest - that are Democrats or lean Democrat and are blue-collar whites? McCain is almost tailor made for those voters. Of course, I am not sure how much better Clinton can do with them (the legacy of the Democratic Party being the Party of NAFTA). Can he win Florida? Can he create a new Democratic base in the west?
McCain being from Arizona hurts either Democrat's western strategy - since Arizona is a state the Democrats were eyeing. But Nevada and Colorado are right there for the taking. But if Obama cannot take Ohio or Florida (and if he loses Pennsylvania or Michigan or Wisconsin or Minnesota) then even those two states do not help him.

Here's what I have so far in each state with 10 or more electoral votes (not including Arizona). The Dem candidate with the best chance per the #s to beat McCain is in bold. If any of you have recent poll data and would fill in some of the blanks it would be appreciated.

55 California - Clinton 57% McCain 38%; Obama 50% McCain 44%(SurveyUSA 1-20/21-08)
34 Texas - (don't have any data but guessing it's Clinton)
31 New York - Clinton53% McCain 40%; Obama 49% McCain 43% (SurveyUSA 1-20/21-08)
27 Florida - Clinton 42% McCain 44%; Obama 39% McCain 41% (Quinnipiac 2-14-08)
21 Pennsylvania - Clinton 46% McCain 40%; Obama 42% McCain 42% (Quinnipiac 2-14-08)
21 Illinois (don't have any data but guessing it's Obama)
20 Ohio - Clinton 43% McCain 44%; Obama 40% McCain 42% (Quinnipiac 2-14-08)
17 Michigan
15 New Jersey
15 Georgia
15 North Carolina
13 Virginia
12 Massachusetts - Clinton 49% McCain 45%; Obama 45% McCain 50% (SurveyUSA 1-20/21-08)
11 Missouri - Clinton 42% McCain 43% Obama 40% McCain 42% (Rasmussen )
11 Washington
11 Indiana
11 Tennessee
10 Wisconsin - Clinton 45% McCain 49%; Obama 44% McCain 46% (SurveyUSA 1-20/21-08)
10 Minnesota - Clinton 45% McCain 49%; Obama 42% McCain 49% (SurveyUSA 1-20/21-08)
10 Maryland

 

[Saintshizzle]

These numbers may as well be a year old. The week leading up to Super Tuesday, ST itself and the wins after has given Obama a bounce.

I would not stand behind any of this...there are some more updated information out there. Sorry, I do not have the time to research and post it for you .

 

[LSSpam]

These numbers may as well be a year old. The week leading up to Super Tuesday, ST itself and the wins after has given Obama a bounce.

I would not stand behind any of this...there are some more updated information out there. Sorry, I do not have the time to research and post it for you .

Within two weeks of posting updated numbers they'll be horribly outdated again anyways. Until the process of the general election begins and you have two consensus candidates actually going head-to-head it's horribly speculative. You've got to make guesses based on conjuncture, no "numbers" will be worth anything.