The States That Don't Matter, The States We Need
| It is well known by this point that any state that Hillary doesn’t win, doesn’t matter, and its voters do not represent Americans as a whole. Voters in states that Hillary does win, on the other hand, matter very much, and are perfectly representative of Americans as a whole. Here is the latest installment of Hillary’s shit-on-35-states strategy, courtesy of Ben Smith today: | |
A co-chairman of Hillary’s Michigan campaign and has a line that’s sure to drive a whole bunch of red state governors up the wall:Of course this begs the question, does this mean that delegates from Texas and Oklahoma and Arkansas and Arizona and New Mexico are second-class delegates as well? What about delegates from Washington, Oregon, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, which also appear to be new “red states” if Hillary is nominated, since according to the most recent polls, Hillary would most likely lose them to McCain:
“Superdelegates are not second-class delegates,” says Joel Ferguson, who will be a superdelegate if Michigan is seated. “The real second-class delegates are the delegates that are picked in red-state caucuses that are never going to vote Democratic.”
According to today’s SurveyUSA poll, in the general election Hillary would LOSE WISCONSIN to McCain, 49% to 42%! This is a very blue state, and Hillary would lose it, and not by an insignificant amount, if there is such a thing in a winner-take-all system. In the same survey Obama easily carries Wisconsin 52% to 42%.
Hillary also loses Oregon to McCain, again, a state that should be safely blue. According to a Feb. 17th Rasmussen poll, Hillary loses to McCain 45% to 42%. Obama easily beats McCain, again, 49% to 40%.
Hillary also loses Pennsylvania to McCain, 44% to 42%, according to another Rasmussen poll from the 17th. Obama easily carries Pennsylvania 49% to 39%. Note, this is the same Pennsylvania that prominent Hillary supporter Gov. Ed Rendell recently described as too racist for Obama to beat Hillary in the primary.
And even though she narrowly won the Nevada caucus, she loses Nevada to McCain as well, 49% to 40%, according to a Rasmussen poll from Feb. 14th. Obama beats McCain again, 50% to 38%. Not even close.
Also, as I noted in a previous post, Hillary almost loses New Hampshire (43% to 41%), which she won in the primary, while Obama stomps McCain 49% to 36%. Hillary also loses Colorado 49% to 35%, and Obama wins Colorado (a fairly red state) 46% to 29%.
All of the most recent national polls also show Hillary losing to McCain in the general election, and Obama winning against McCain. The electability difference here is mind blowing to say the least…but what is more amazing is the fact that this isn’t issue #1. Regardless of what people think of Hillary or Obama, nothing could be more clear than the fact that Hillary cannot beat McCain in the general election, and Obama can. The only question on voters minds should be, do I want Democrats to win this election or not? If you want them to win, vote Obama, if you want them to lose, vote Hillary. The same question applies to Democrats at all levels, because the Obama Effect and the Hillary Effect show that whoever is on the top of the ballot will have a huge effect on the fates of Democrats down the ballots all across America.
This choice couldn’t be clearer. So why is Hillary fighting so hard, so desperately, so underhandedly, to win the nomination, when it is obvious she will just deliver huge defeats to the party? Simply put, she only cares about her own political power, and she will crap all over the voters and the party and the country in order to achieve that power. It also doesn’t help that it has become clear that Bill has made all kinds of promises of favors in exchange for lots and lots of money, so if he doesn’t make it back to the White House as expected, you can be sure many contributers will not be happy. As for me, I’m a bit more concerned about the welfare of this country and the party than I am about a couple’s political ambitions and sketchy financial dealings. But call me crazy.
Update: According to a new Rasmussen poll just out, Hillary also manages to lose Minnesota, the only state that didn’t vote for Reagan in 1984 (not counting DC), which is no small feat. She manages to lose in Minnesota 47% to 42%, while Obama whips McCain, 53% to 38%. At this point I’m not sure which states Hillary plans to carry if given the nomination…chances are she can carry New York, but aside from that, I wouldn’t say any other state is a sure thing at this point, since I haven’t seen any polls out for California, Massachusetts or New Jersey. It turns out nearly every single state in the union would be considered unimportant by the Clintons, which makes it hard to visualize how they would intend to win, short of a military coup.
Update (2/19): Add Iowa to the list of states Hillary couldn’t carry in the general election. Today’s SurveyUSA poll: McCain creams Hillary in Iowa, 52% to 41%, while Obama takes down McCain by about the same margin, 51% to 41%.
Update (2/19): We can add another to that ever growing list of states Hillary can’t carry, this time it is Virginia. According to today’s SurveyUSA poll, McCain beats Hillary, 48% to 45%, while Obama defeats McCain, 51% to 45%.
Update (2/20): Add Michigan. According to a Rasmussen poll out today, Obama leads McCain comfortably 47% to 39% in Michigan, whereas Hillary and McCain tie at 44% each. Anti-Hillary turnout would fairly easily tip this one to McCain.
