What Does Pennsylvania Tell Us?
Clinton has won Pennsylvania and the Democratic Primary lingers on unresolved. The Democratic Party, so energized and optimistic about the election a few months ago, now finds itself in somewhat of a political predicament. At a time when the Democratic Party should be coalescing its forces to support the selected candidate against the GOP nominee, the Party is having to deal with an unresolved primary. It seems improbable, but not impossible, that Clinton will get the nomination. Even after the 10 points defeat, Obama is still by far the favored Democratic candidate. If that’s the case, then, as Senator Clinton said so bluntly on Tuesday, “why can’t [Obama] close the deal?”
The answer is, ashamedly, race. White, Blue Collar workers — such as those that dominate the states of Pennsylvania (and Ohio) — are not inclined to vote for Obama because of his race. These voters showed the Democratic Party yesterday that, regardless of the situation of the primary, or the ramifications against the Party, they will vote Clinton over Obama.
If Obama does indeed secure the nomination at some point, this could be a potential problem. In a post-Pennsylvania primary article in the International Herald Tribune, a recent exit poll conducted by Edison/Mitofsky for the Associated Press is cited to have found evidence that Obama’s race could be a problem in the general election. “Sixteen percent of white voters said race mattered in deciding who they voted for, and just 56 percent of those voters said they would support Obama in a general election; 27 percent of them said they would vote for McCain if Obama was the Democratic nominee, and 15 percent said they would not vote at all.”
The GOP particularly benefits from the extensiveness of the Democratic Primary. McCain and his campaign staff are surely taking note of what’s determining voting patterns within the Democratic demographics in search for those unwilling to vote for Obama in the general election. The demographics that show a willingness to vote for McCain over Obama, who otherwise would vote Democrat, will be exploited in the general election, mitigating Obama’s electability. If Obama is able to keep his lead and secure the nomination, this will be a crucial area of focus for both the DNC and the GOP.
Clinton’s Pennsylvania win shows a specific vulnerability of Obama as the Democratic candidate. Unfortunately, with Clinton still in the mix it will make it all that more difficult to address this important issue of race. Best case scenario is a solid victory for Obama in Indiana and North Carolina, resulting in Clinton dropping from the race. The fact that the Democratic Primary is dragging on isn’t helping the Democrats. The rift caused by Clinton’s pledge to stay in the race is causing a rip at the seams for the Democratic Party. The sooner a nominee can be announced, the sooner the DNC can coalesce its energy into repairing any tears.
You’re right. It tells us bubba rules, as usual.
I’m sure ou’ve heard of “The Low Road to Victory” New York Times Editorial – April 23, 2008
The PA primary tells us that the Clintons campaign hard and dirty, and Obama better watch and learn because that kind of fight is going to happen as the Republican party takes over when Clinton leaves the race.
Obama is the ‘protest vote’.
Clinton is the establishment candidate and true power house warmonger.
The GOP already has their established warmongering candidate.
There is a whole underground story going on in the GOP of course. 16% for Ron Paul in Pennsylvania! 11% for Huckabee! Ron Paul and friends are crashing the party, but the mainstream isn’t reporting that just yet.
Could you imagine what would happen if Paul got the nomination or even came close in September?
Just look at what happend in Nevada!
We may face similar opposition here in Maine. We already have been. Hopefully the Convention doesn’t turn out to be such a floor fight.
Hopefully war with Iran doesn’t escalate too much further. This Middle East situation could help McCain’s candidacy. Of course, considering Clinton is all for “obliterating” Iran if they attack Israel…she is right up there with McCain in that respect.
Hopefully Obama has enough sense to back out of the Middle East if he gets the chance.
Don’t get your hopes up about Ron Paul, there, buddy. The total turnout for Republicans in this meaningless election was 28% of the number of Pennsylvanians who voted for Bush in 2004. That is compared to the turnout for the Demcrats, which was about 80% of the number of Pennsylvanians who voted for Kerry in 2004. We all know that Ron Paul supporters are hardcore and they never quit.
But perhaps this data is not completely meaningless. That is still a lot of people who are demonstrating that they are unhappy with McCain as the nominee, even though he is inevitable at this point. Perhaps that could cause problems for the Republicans in November. Do you think the Ron Paul supporters would eventually vote for McCain in the general? Or would they vote for Obama? Or would they just stay home/write in Ron Paul?
I’m having a difficult time believing that this “jesse” character is actually a real person. 16 percent in an uncontested primary deserves an exclamation point? “Could you imagine what would happen if Paul got the nomination”? Well, for that to happen every Republican officeholder above the age of 35 would have to die between now and the convention. Obama a “protest vote”? Clinton a warmonger? This classifies as perhaps the worst political analysis ever made.
yes, i know we are at odds jkkuwitzky.
what’s your point?
There may be some legitimacy in saying that Ron Paul and Huckabee have caused splintering to occur in the Republican Party. True social conservatives and true fiscal conservatives (Reganites?) don’t see the current (neo) Republican Party as representing their views.
Do you think the Ron Paul supporters would eventually vote for McCain in the general? Or would they vote for Obama? Or would they just stay home/write in Ron Paul?
I don’t see them voting for any one on the Democratic ticket. They will probably vote either Paul or no one.
no, reagan had the jargon, but he is definitely a neocon as well.
goldwater wrote the concscience of a conservative.
now paul has written the revolution: a manifesto
here is the intro
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0446537519/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link
Huckabee and (to a lesser extent) Paul represent a splintering in the GOP coalition, but I don’t think its correct to say that they caused it. The Reagan coalition has been coming apart for some time now, and if not for 9/11 that probably would be much more apparent today.
My point, jesse, is that we do not have merely a difference of opinion. You seem to believe that there is a chance (however tiny) that Ron Paul could get the nomination and that he represents an emerging movement within the Republican Party. That simply is not true. It is beyond delusional.
I think there is an emerging libertarianish streak among a lot of younger voters (something that I think is, in the long run, a good thing). However, it will not manifest itself as an embrace of the gold standard, radical government slashing, and isolationism. Whatever impact it does have is likely to be seen most clearly in cultural terms.
*They caused the current splintering because of the mouting dissent amongst Republicans.
The issue of more political significance is the upcoming Indiana primary. If Hillary is able to pull away with the blue-collar constituency, as is her plan, the race will definitely go beyond Indiana and North Carolina; perhaps the race will go to the distance, all the way to the convention (god help us).
The RCP synthesis poll shows a virtual tie between Obama and Hillary. In order for Hillary to continue with a just cause she needs to win Indiana by more than a point or two. An 8-12 point victory would serve another blow to Obama, and it would give Hillary reason to stay in the race (unfortunate for the Party).
I think Hillary’s natural advantages in Indiana have been greatly inflated (perhaps a result of success by the Obama spin machine). Although it has some demographic similarities to Ohio and Pennsylvania, it is also more midwest than Rust Belt and almost a quarter of the state watches Chicago television (both things that favor Obama). Hillary definitely needs to win Indiana, but I think 5-7 points would be a very solid win (8-12 would be a very serious shot to Obama’s chances).
I feel like we are fighting too much. Please write a post about something we can agree on.
I think it’s more like teammates deciding which game plan to use.
But I did just write one. I hope you agree.
jkkuwitzky
both parties ignore the constitution, spend too much, tax too much, and support unsound monetary policy and dangerous foreign policy. policies that no candidate except for ron paul will fundamentally change. two establishment candidates and a possible closet establishment candidate. obama is not free of special interest no matter how many times he repeats it. paul is an entirely different animal in this respect. which is why he won’t win. he doesn’t represent the people it takes to get elected these days.
as michael scheuer says, ron paul is osama bin ladens worst nightmare. but who wants to talk about that anyway? we need an enemy (or some alleged noble cause) otherwise we have no reason to be in the middle east. couldn’t we just have a bounty on bin laden’s head for like….. a billion dollars? isn’t that a lot cheaper?
i don’t totally disagree and i am not going to try to claim that your opinion is wrong. there are many facts to support what you say
you are right, i am not voting because im “republican”, i am voting for someone, not against anyone. i am voting against policies that are not in the people’s interest, but only serve special interest. and policies that create contempt around the world and increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks.
and there was a chance to get paul the nomination, but the media (and apathy) really hindered this operation.
google trends
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZKBD7iNayU (2.5 min)
none of the above candidates will be my president. just as “bush is not my president”, neither will mccain, clinton, or obama be mine. so i can’t give any profound insight regarding the race anymore. i can only try to give some info on what you won’t hear. such as paul and huckabee getting a combined 27%. i guess mccain is definitely the “presumptive” nominee and he’s got the nomination a little less than locked up. hopefully he doesn’t lose those dems and independents. but of course, who else would they vote for? they’re voting against the other candidates.
how many “hard” delegates does mccain have?
isn’t it around 600? hmm…
republicans are DOA unless something obcene happens (possibly in the middle east?), might as well vote on principle (or start being honest about what they represent instead of luring people in with false rhetoric) instead of trying to win this year (which is futile)
what have they got to lose? what have they got left?!
(i’m really trying to keep my posts short, but there’s so much to cover)
You’re more than entitled to vote for whoever you want for whatever reason. I’m not disputing any of your substantive arguments (not because I agree with you, I just don’t feel like it). But there was never a chance for Ron Paul to get the Republican nomination. Not because Paul is wrong, but because he just doesn’t fit the beliefs of the party. He got plenty of news coverage for someone with such low polling numbers, and his fundraising got loads of attention in the political press. The whole “the press isn’t covering Paul” meme in totally bogus.
“the beliefs of the party” (today you mean)
check out the “betrayal of the american right”
the parties, both democrat and republican have changed over the years.
as reagan pointed out “libertarianism is the very core of conservatism”
“the press isn’t covering Paul” (i never said that, just showing some evidence)
i’ve watched ths whole race since the beginning. the bias and exclusion was undeniable. the way paul was treated in the beginning has evovled because the truth about the economy and the content of his words festered. i’m sure there will be a few documentaries about it.
“He got plenty of news coverage for someone with such low polling numbers”
polls? what polls? whose polls? i never got polled. what questions did they ask?
————————–
on the morning of the pennsylvania primary:
[Clinton] told ABC’s “Good Morning America” that, if she were president, she would “totally obliterate” Iran if Iran attacked Israel.
This foolish and dangerous threat was muted in domestic media coverage. But it reverberated in headlines around the world.
———————-
oops, here’s the link:
Hillary Strangelove
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/04/27/hillary_strangelove/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/25/ST2008042502033.html
“The nation’s top military officer said yesterday that the Pentagon is planning for ‘potential military courses of action’ as one of several options against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government’s ‘increasingly lethal and malign influence’ in Iraq. Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a conflict with Iran would be ‘extremely stressing’ but not impossible for U.S. forces, pointing to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force.”
Betrayal, evolution, whatever. The bottom line is that Ron Paul’s political constituency is not nearly large enough to be taken seriously as a threat to win a Republican nomination. If he wants to have his say in the national conversation he should run as a third party candidate. I’d be all for that. It would at least be interesting.
Did Paul get as much attention as the candidates with legitimate shots at taking the White House? No. But that doesn’t mean he was ignored.
On polls, you can’t possibly be that stupid. Ron Paul was included in every GOP primary poll in every state, and he never threatened relevance.
On Clinton vis-a-vis Iran, I’ve defended her comments elsewhere and don’t want to do it again.
http://www.markaelrod.net/2008/04/27/hillary-clinton-on-iran/
I’ve dealt with Clinton vis-a-vis Iran elsewhere.
http://www.markaelrod.net/2008/04/27/hillary-clinton-on-iran/
i still don’t understand how you “know” ron paul never had a chance.
im sure everyone knew mccain was their man, or that giuliani was going to drop out early in the race, or that romney was going to spend 60 million dollars for nothing. or that ron paul would get more money from the active military and be the leading fundraising candidate or the republicans.
the point is no one knew that, and the media didn’t help paul one iota. but some of the other candidates got all kinds of recognition and free air time for whatever celebrity status they had and not because of economic or political analysis.
how come in non exclusionary polling, like the internet he rocks the house?
but in restricted polling he doesn’t?
72,000 responses showing Ron Paul was the most convincing candidate receiving 45% of the vote
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18661804/
with over 40,000 votes Ron Paul came in second with 25% of the vote
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html
“His name leads in searched terms ahead of even Paris Hilton, his YouTube videos have been viewed over one million times and he has more Meetup groups than all other GOP candidates combined”
“biased pundits accuse Ron Paul supporters of “spamming” the votes”
“a much-cited Zogby poll admits that they only targeted 500 interviews and drew their samples randomly from telephone CD’s of a national listed sample”
“Washington Post article cited its own telephone poll that only reached 1205 adults, and that was used to say Ron Paul is only receiving 1% support.”
“elections are also based on self-selection and are only won and lost by those who choose to go to the polls: so shouldn’t the self-selected polling methods be more accurate?”
“When ignoring Ron Paul does not work, and removing messages about him receives backlash, the next stage is to call his supporters rabid, nuts, crazy, unstable. If you cannot attack the man, attack his supporters.”
the questions that are asked are important. and who they ask is equally important. did they ask dems ? no. i met a lot of people who weren’t republican, or not even registered to vote who liked what they heard. but they also know, like you and me, that paul is probably more than a long shot, so why waste their energy?
the point is that all of is in the ron paul crowd are making a point and a loud one,
you have to startt somewhere. we are giving a stepping stone for others down the road.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman1.html
Jennifer Haman [send her mail] is a 44-year-old attorney. She grew up in NYC, dropped out of high school, and then moved to Las Vegas to become a croupier in craps working at the Desert Inn for seven years. She obtained a GED and later attended Arizona State University receiving numerous awards and graduating Summa Cum Laude in 1996. She then went on to attend and graduate from Harvard Law in 1999. She is licensed in both CA and AZ. She practiced complex civil litigation and appellate work for 6 years. She is currently on sabbatical, living with her husband Adam in Mesa, Arizona.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” ~ John Quincy Adams
I “know” that because Ron Paul’s public policy positions are out of the mainstream, both within the GOP and in the body politic at large. That doesn’t mean he is wrong, it just means he is not a likely candidate for high office.
Non exclusionary polling? Are you really this stupid? Polling techniques are actually scientific. It certainly an inexact science, and it doesn’t always work. But internet polling? Really? Thats just retarded. Paul’s supporters skew young and technologically engaged. Actual voters skew in the other direction. You can’t possibly believe that internet polling is more representative than a properly executed sample.
Perhaps the Ron Paul movement turns into something real down the road. Go for it. Everyone is entitled to their own voice and their right to try and convince others to believe as they do. I’m dubious as to your odds of success, but you can certainly try.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/tramadol1st/ Tramadol