Once you vote black you’ll never go back?

by lestro

With two pretty evenly-matched candidates, the Democratic race seems to hinge, for a lot of people, on the idea of “electability,” the mirage that even though you like one candidate, you can’t vote for them because the other candidate is more likely to win.

It’s what killed the spark and energy of Howard Dean, favoring the middle-of-the-road blandness of John Kerry. And now it has many voters picking Clinton over Obama.

There are many ways electabilty is measured, but one of the most fun ways is money and if that is any indication, the most electable candidate, by a long shot, is Obama.

This is from today’s NYT piece about Washington being the “contest du jour”:

“On Friday morning, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers fought back against impressions that the campaign was short on cash…”

That’s a pretty Clintonian spin on things and not entirely accurate.

I mean, it’s not the impression that the campaign is short of cash. It WAS short of cash, which is why the candidate had to loan herself $5 MILLION.

Campaigns that are not short of cash do not have to take out loans. and even if they did collect $10 million so far in February, that’s really only $5 million because they have to payback the Clintons, right?

Beyond that, $5 million is more than half as much as the Huckabee campaign has spent in total. Hillary has spent more than $100 million to try and convince us she’s the candidate, and the only people who are listening seem to be the same Democratic Party Establishment Elites and Old Guard that make up the 49 percent of democratic primary voters.

And if that’s a problem now, it’s going to be a real bitch in the general election.

Shoot, Romney didn’t even spend that much.

And for all of Hillary’s money, she continues to tread water. Meanwhile, Obama raised $32 million in January, including $7.2 million on the day after Hillary won New Hampshire. That’s a lot of people using their checkbooks to register their vote against Clinton.

In a similar vein, Obama has stepped up attacks on Clinton’s electability, recently saying that while he thinks Clinton’s supporters will vote for him, he’s not sure if Obama voters will pull a lever for Hillary:

“I am confident I will get her votes if I’m the nominee,” Obama stressed. “It’s not clear she would get the votes I got if she were the nominee.”

It’s a valid argument, especially since a good chunk of Clinton’s sales pitch is that she is best ready to take on the Republicans.

Unfortunately for Clinton, her electability might just be more spin. Recent polls show that in head-to-head match-ups, McCain beats Clinton but Obama meets McCain. Rasmussen has it:

McCain 48%, Clinton 42%

Obama 45%, McCain 42%

Time has Obama 48 – 41% while Hillary ties at 46%.

And let’s not forget that Hillary Clinton has – and pretty much has always had – unfavorable rating that hover near 50 percent. As Scut Farkus pointed out in August, that’s tough to rally back from, even for a Clinton.

With numbers like that, but generally high numbers within her own party, the simple fact is that Democratic Superdelegates – unpledged, free-range party officials who make up 20 percent of delegates needed for nomination – need to think long and hard about which candidate gives them the best chance against John McCain.

Will Obama’s voters, a broad coalition made up of Democrats, independents and Republicans stay with the Democrats if Hillary is the nominee, or will those independents move over to John McCain, whose winning coalition is also made up of independent voters?

Time will tell, but I’ll say it again: If the party establishment stands their ground and ignores that elephant in the room, they may end up watching an elephant storm to the presidency for a third consecutive term…

5 Responses to Once you vote black you’ll never go back?

  1. twitterpaters says:

    oh thank you jesus was my first response:

    WASHINGTON – Sen. Barack Obama defeated Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in caucuses in Nebraska and led in Washington on Saturday night

    … Obama was winning nearly 70 percent support in Nebraska, compared with 31 percent for Clinton


    and god bless nebraska was my second, altho it has nothing to do with this clip:

    In the northwestern state of Washington, Obama showed a lead in the Democratic caucuses, where the richest weekend prize was to divvy up 78 delegates, the Associated Press reported. With about 24 percent of the results in, Obama was winning 65 percent of delegates to Clinton’s 33 percent.


  2. twitterpaters says:


    WASHINGTON – Sen. Barack Obama handily won caucuses in Nebraska, Washington state and the Virgin Islands, and the primary election in Louisiana on Saturday, boosting his delegate lead over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in their historic race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    The Illinois senator was winning two-thirds support in both caucus states and led by a 53-39 ratio in Louisiana with about a third of the precincts reporting. He was hoping to extend a string of Southern primary triumphs that already included South Carolina, Alabama and Georgia.

    Obama also garnered all three delegates in the Virgin Islands caucuses, where he won nearly 90 percent of the vote.

  3. k@th says:

    And the 18,000 at Key Arena weren’t even worried about getting their popcorn.

  4. twitterpaters says:


    “According to a very objective source known as “Barack Obama’s campaign,”

    “The pledged delegate total through February 9 now stands at 1,012 for Obama and 940 for Clinton.””

  5. Pingback: The Year Anything Was Possible « The Church of the Apocalyptic Kiwi

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: