"Clinton is preferred in the relevant swing states"

Well, Obama did win Virginia, Colorado and Missouri, but point taken: that line of spin, however flawed, would be vastly more persuasive than the current stuff. Honestly, it's hard to tell the serious from parody in these Clintonite memos.

Senator Obama has campaigned hard in these states. He has spent time meeting editorial boards, courting endorsers, holding rallies, and - of course - making speeches.

That cheating bastard!

Wait ... where is the evidence that McCain has shot the mountain West strategy? I've seen polls showing Obama ahead in NV, NM, and CO.

"particularly now that Arizona's John McCain has shot the Interior West strategy to shit."

Is this really true? In my mind, the Interior West strategy has always been to win an Ohio- or Florida-sized chunk of electoral votes from the region. Obama locks up Colorado, and probably runs better in Nevada and New Mexico.

The thing is, everything they've thought should work/stick hasn't. So now they're throwing crap like this out there because, frankly, they've lost confidence in their own judgment.

Desperation is a tender trap. It gets you every time.

Wisconsin is absolutely one of the "relevant swing states." It went for Gore by 5,000, Kerry by 11,000.

The really stupid thing about the "Obama didn't win states x, y, and z" spin is that you can construct exactly the same argument from Obama's perspective, and it's exactly as relevant - which is to say, not so much. In what world aren't Minnesota, Colorado, Virginia, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Washington either important states to kreep or potential targets to pick up?

Ohio is important. It was really too bad that FL and MI screwed things over so bad.

And what greg said.

Winning a state in the primaries has little to no significance on winning in the general election. Those are two entirely different electorates.

silly press blasts abut how a loss in Ohio is an unexpected blow for Obama

Worse, a loss in Rhode Island is apparently a devastating blow for Obama.

There are actually very few Democrats who will vote against either Hillary or Obama in November, if the one they prefer does not win the nomination. Unfortunately, almost all of them spend their time writing angry notes to blogs.

rene magritte could have painted this:

barack obama walking down treelined street with kitchen sinks falling from the sky.

She's setting up the narrative to say exactly what you had in mind: "Obama may do well in South Carolina and Wisconsin, but Clinton is preferred in the relevant swing states, the states Democrats will actually need to win the election, particularly now that Arizona's John McCain has shot the Interior West strategy to shit."

She first needs to raise Obama's expectations.

To answer your question, Erza: the Clinton campaign thinks you're very stupid. I'm surprised it's taken you this long to realize it. The ridiculous spin they've been peddling for the last six weeks wouldn't convince a fifth-grader.

But sadly enough, no matter what happens on Tuesday, I'm afraid a major storyline on Wednesday will be that Obama's win streak was snapped. He might win Texas and lose Ohio by two points, essentially closing out the race, but the story line will be about her "comeback." That will give her everything she needs to stay in. Ugh.

So if Obama doesn't outright win the states Clinton is favored in -- if he merely closes the gap -- Democrats are "having second thoughts about him."

When the state is Ohio? Um. Yeah.

Look at the registered Democrat counts on March 4. I suspect Hillary will win or come very, very close in all of them, regardless of the overall.

So yes, this is a perfectly good case to make.

At some point, it's going to occur to the media that it's going to be really hard for Obama to win with the Democrat base, and Hillary's won it.

One poll stuck in my mind: Against McCain, Obama wins, but Hillary loses, Oregon. Freaking Oregon! Granted, it's not a big electoral vote state, but I can't really foresee a Democrat winning who does not sweep the West Coast. Even Gore and Kerry won all three West Coast States.

The non-denial concession speech?

what Ron said.

the election in November isn't to be a contest of HRC voters vs. McCain voters. it's going to be Dems vs. Reps, with a large number of independents choosing between the two. Obama does better with independents.

What does it say if SHE doesn't reign triumphant Tuesday night?

Oh, I forgot. It means she's lost this thing and should get the hell out before she destroys the Democratic Party any more than she and her husband already have. How much leash are those two permitted to have?

Paging Howard Dean.

LOL

This is exactly the kind of spin that has plagued Clinton all along. Even when she won, it was reported that she lost because she didn't win "big enough."

Looks like the Obamabots don't like it used on him. That SNL debate skit gets truer all the time.

Democrats, the majority of whom have favored Hillary in the primary contests held to date

I thought Obama was ahead in the Primary count? A quick look at CNN's election data shows him with 13 primary wins to her 12.

Yeah, AZ is off the table with McCain, but CO, NV and NM certainly aren't- not to mention there's VA, WI, IA, MO as swing states for Obama to run in as well.

Also, I think FL is a very touch nut to crack, given the high proportion of military/ex-military there, and the trends haven't been trending blue at all. I think McCain runs pretty well there.

You're missing the New Spin, tom.a. Obama does better in open primaries, so apparently those don't count either.

At some point, it's going to occur to the media that it's going to be really hard for Obama to win with the Democrat base, and Hillary's won it.

Posted by: Cal | February 29, 2008 1:36 PM

The "Democrat" base?

Sorry, Cal. But thanks for playing.

No this isn't the same spin that Obama people used. When they lost New Hampshire unexpectedly, they acted graciously and moved on.

And the experience argument is ridiculous. Give me one example of Hillary managing something successfully? (or John McCain).

Who's built and kept a more disciplined campaign?

Democrats, the majority of whom have favored Hillary in the primary contests held to date

I thought Obama was ahead in the Primary count?

The jibe is that Clinton wins among Democrats, as opposed to Obama's support from independents and Republican crossover voters. So even when Obama wins, the story goes, he's losing in the category of Democrats, then topping it back up with non-Democrats.

I don't know if it's a convincing retort, but that's presumably what the line is alluding to.

Give me one example of Hillary managing something successfully?

Hillary successfully managed to get her butt kicked by a political neophyte despite having the most experienced and organized Democratic political machine in 30 plus years.

Gee, Hillary need not have worried about the right slinging mud.

So many "liberals" have been all too happy to do it FOR them.

Look, I will support whomever wins the nomination, but I have seen some pretty nasty sh*t on so-called liberal blogs.

From both sides.

Let's fight the real enemy please. John McCain wants to turn this entire earth into one big graveyard unless he is defeated and defeated soundly.

The Other Side hears us trashing our own and they must be having quite a laugh!

At some point, it's going to occur to the media that it's going to be really hard for Obama to win with the Democrat base, and Hillary's won it.

That's probably true. Hillary probably has captured the Democrat base.

Unfortunately for Hillary, though, it's the Democratic party that will vote Tuesday.

At some point, it's going to occur to the media that it's going to be really hard for Obama to win with the Democrat base, and Hillary's won it.

At some point, it's going to occur to the Hillarybots that Hillary is fairly unpopular among the independents. Last I checked, John Kerry, another liberal senator from a north-eastern blue state who's had second thoughts about Iraq, and basically ran an election about being more competent than the other guy, did awesome among Democrats.

Tell me, what happened to him?

"If he cannot win all of these states with all this effort, there's a problem."

Ah yes, Hillary, the candidate who will win by not trying so hard.

When I first saw this on the internet, I thought it was a clever bit of humor, ala SNL-type humor. But if it was actually released to the press, as you say, then there should be some wholesale firings in the Clinton campaign team (not that it wasn't already justified).

When I first saw this on the internet, I thought it was a clever bit of humor, ala SNL-type humor. But if it was actually released to the press, as you say, then there should be some wholesale firings in the Clinton campaign team (not that it wasn't already justified).

The target audience is ME. Every time I see something like this--or Harold Ickes' "locking down the nomination" comment from Tuesday--I get even more fired up, and, as an Obama precinct captain, become determined to make even more calls in Dallas County precinct 4640.

The Clinton campaign: pissing on our legs, then telling us it's raining.

I think they're trying to start one of them there "Microtrends" I keep hearing so much about ...

The ridiculous spin they've been peddling for the last six weeks wouldn't convince a fifth-grader.

Did somebody say Petey?

This is their way of clicking their heels together and saying "There's no place like home."

I'm starting to think that either 1) lots of die-hard Clinton supporters are really dumb; or 2) lots of them play dumb on the blogs because all they have left is the ability to irritate Obama supporters.

I'm looking at you mara.

Once upon a time I worked with Harold Ickes and to trot him out demonstrates that desperation isn't "a tender trap," but gets "stuck on stupid." HI will manage to alienate more people than he is able to con---by factors of ten.

Jake,

So you deny that Clinton faced this same sort of crap throughout the entirety of this campaign?

Check out some Super Tues footage if you can find some. Every state Obama won, he "won," whereas after every Clinton victory, the pundits were sure to mitigate with, "of course delegates will be proportioned between the two byt district..."

He takes Texas, she takes Ohio.

Florida and Michigan become an issue briefly, then she and her cohort give it up (wisely). I feel the candidacy decision will be over by this time next week.

I like her - and she is (and will be even more) a valuable commander in the Senate, but for the campaigning, the debates, and November - let Sen. Obama take that job. I believe that true Democrats will see that if she bows out/is defeated in the primaries, it's not the end of the world.

Tip to both sides:
Quit yer bitchin and google around a bit and see who the 'Jewish Wing' of the Democratic Party prefers. THAT'S who will be the nominee!

"...and of course, making speeches..."

Is this supposed to be an insult? Seriously. He's a politician. Hill's a politician. They are both in the habit of making speeches. Obama appears to make better speeches. Why would we hold this against him?

Because of what Yglesias calls the law of conservation of virtue. Obama may work harder, speechify better, raise more money, and look better doing it, so there must be some catch.

I voted for Senator Clinton twice, and I will be happy and proud to have her continue to represent me in the Senate until 2012. Unless, of course, President Obama gives her a cabinet post.

thank you, wendell,
for all your hard work.
(fellow precinct captain)

What will we do without Mark Penn to kick around anymore?

Hillary should have paid more attention to Bill. Back on October 25, 2004, he said:

"One of Clinton's laws of politics is, if one candidate is trying to scare you, and the other one is trying to make you think, if one candidate's appealing to your fears, and the other one's appealing to your hopes. You better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."

It was true then, and it's true today.

Hear him say it at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZW0m2nWB_M

Does anyone else get the impression Mark Penn is the Black Knight? No arms, no legs.

Merely a flesh wound!

It's pretty simple really: ignore the Clinton campaign stuff, or ridicule it as unintentional satire. Her campaign is deader than Ronald Reagan.

She is less attractive to Democrats and far less attractive to crossover Republicans and independents.

She trails in money, organization and in the passion of her followers. (Not to mention that she also trails in the intelligence of her operatives, which I did just mention.)

She will go into the convention, if she's still in the race, trailing in the delegate count.

Everything else is just noise, which you can, and should, tune out with a simple >click!

People who are disputing Ezra's spin are, I dare say, missing the point. Its not that his interpretation of events is "true". Its that its good spin. This is evidenced by the fact that people's first impulse is to dispute it rather than mock it.

all the nasty jibes against Hillary from obamabots on this thread. if you think Hillary supporters and life long staunch Democrats are going to fall in line behind your messiah, you've got another thing coming. his right wing framing and his sucking up to the media hatred of the Clintons is bad enough but this Clinton supporter has had it with the Obama supporters. you all sound like you should be posting your comments on Freak Republic. nasty only begets nasty and I ain't heard no new tone from obama world. you can't even get unity with true Democrats and you think Rethugs are going to flock to your guy? I'll have to see some big changes in Obama's positions and the behavior of his supporters before I consider casting my vote for him. I have never voted for a Repuke in my life and I won't start with McLame but I will sit this one out and many Hillary supporters feel the same way (the point of the campaign message - Hillary wins Democrats). so stop the hating obamabots and start figuring out how to win over the Democratic electorate (particularly Latinos like me) if god forbid your savior wins the nomination because right now you don't have me and I am representative of millions of Dem voters who don't hear your guys dog whistle.

Mara said "That SNL debate skit gets truer all the time."

To quote the entire United States of America, "Huh?"

Viva Hillary:

Do you expect Obama supporters to vote for your candidate if she wins the nomination?

Thrasymachus:

Of course not. Obamabots won't vote for Hillary, or anyone. Once Obama is gone, we'll all hilariously explode -- or just fall down dead like at the end of zombie movies.

Remember: Obama supporters just don't UNDERSTAND how foolish they are yet. The Clinton strategy of yelling that at us is going to work any day now.

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!!

Ezra dear,

Post-debate we had 4 days of Farrakhan spin while McCain warmly received (actively sought and received) the endorsement of a man equally guilty of the kind of hate speech that people were worked up over Farrakhan about.

I think Hillary's campaign has sized up the media (collectively) pretty well on this one.

"That SNL debate skit gets truer all the time."

N LoL, Hillary can not fail. She can only be failed. By the media, by her supporters, by mean and nasty voters.

Never is anything her fault. Ever.

Viewing Farrakhan as a great guy should obviously disqualify one to be President of the United States. Apparently, it does not make one unfit to be close spiritual advisor to Barack Obama. The judgment to look to someone who praises hateful demagogues for one's personal spiritual guidance is exactly the type of judgment we need in a president.

"nasty only begets nasty"

followed by:

obamabot...

rethug...

repuke...

Freak Republic...

McLame...

...representative of millions of Dem voters.

How sad.

How did we go from Bill saying "Hillary needs to win Texas and Ohio to stay in the race," to "If (Obama) can not win all these states.. there's a problem."

Really?

So lets say he wins 3 out of the next 4. Hillary winning 1 out of the last 15 states means "Deomocarts...have their doubts about Senator Obama and are having second thoughts about him as a prospective standard-bearer."

I hope nobodys buying into this.

Well, I don't know how dumb the Clinton campaign thinks Ezra is, but I have to say, this week, I think Ezra is kind of dumb. He wrote on a post the other day that Obama voted against the Iraq war when he did no such thing. If he can fall for Obama spin, why not fall for Clinton spin?

The pundits seem to keep setting the bar for Clinton anywhere they feel like it: "She has to win X and Y by a huge margin or it's all over for her." They never explain how they come up with these rubrics. Evidently the campaign fears Clinton may not do so hot in the anointed X and Y states this Tuesday (a reasonable concern, given that it is actually not possible to predict the future.) So, they've turned the tables on the pundits by making up their own arbitrary rubric - lower the bar for Clinton, and give Obama's campaign something pointless to worry about for a change. I'm not generally a fan of the Clinton campaign's tactics, but in this case, I can hardly blame them.

Wow:

http://acropolisreview.com/2008/02/endorsements-of-barack-obama.html