The Expectations Game for Mar. 4
Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe comes out with this,
But the prize has to go to Mark Penn of the Clinton campaign.
Wow. So it's no longer "Clinton has to win in Texas and Ohio," it's now "if Obama doesn't blow her out, that's good news"?
Later: Take polling for what it's worth, but maybe this is why the Clinton camp is attempting to radically reduce expectations. (Rasmussen) Clinton +2 in Ohio. (One poll, but it's definitely getting tighter in Ohio, and Texas may already be gone.)
(Texas polling in the updated "Political bits" post below.)
“They have a huge task in front of them, which is to try to erase this pledged delegate lead,” Plouffe said on a conference call with reporters. “They are going to fail by that measure. … This isn’t whether they can skate by and win the popular vote narrowly.”
But the prize has to go to Mark Penn of the Clinton campaign.
Seeking to raise the expectations for for its rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign said Friday that Sen. Barack Obama needs to sweep the March 4 primaries....."If he fails to garner big wins, there's a problem," memo states.
Wow. So it's no longer "Clinton has to win in Texas and Ohio," it's now "if Obama doesn't blow her out, that's good news"?
Later: Take polling for what it's worth, but maybe this is why the Clinton camp is attempting to radically reduce expectations. (Rasmussen) Clinton +2 in Ohio. (One poll, but it's definitely getting tighter in Ohio, and Texas may already be gone.)
(Texas polling in the updated "Political bits" post below.)
posted by mikevotes at
11:01 AM
15 Comments:
HRC solutions de jour:
sue and lower expectations
By
Anonymous, at 1:15 PM
But there's lowering and there's lowering. Even people around her campaign have been saying she has to win both Texas and Ohio, and now the firewall is that it's okay to lose both if she wins Rhode Island?
By
mikevotes, at 1:43 PM
If Obama sweeps 4 March and ifHillary continues her assault to defeat Obama by any means necessary, she risks, I think, becoming a running punch line. Like the Black Knight from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
The Dem contest needs to end soon because the Clinton campaign is quickly become an adjunct to the McCain campaign vis a vis their character attacks on Obama -- both in acrid style and content.
By
-epm, at 2:19 PM
I think it will likely be far less friendly than a punchline.
(And Obama will not sweep Mar. 4. Rhode Island will go Clinton barring something incredible. Of course, it has just 21 delegates, less than either Houston or Dallas.)
By
mikevotes, at 2:22 PM
Yeah, I don't expect Obama to sweep. I was playing the "If" game.
A serious possibility is that Obama wins OH and TX. What then?
By
-epm, at 2:47 PM
IT's over then. If not Mar. 5 then soon after. The flood of over the table support to Obama and the back channel pressure would force Clinton out.
But again, I think that's "if."
Right now it looks like Obama Tx, Clinton Ohio with both being close enough turnout could flip them.
By
mikevotes, at 3:45 PM
it's as if the same person is running the campaigns of HRC and McCrazy...oh...nevermind.
By
Anonymous, at 9:11 PM
We've been over this.....
But in a broader sense, the same people are to some degree. They're both running the traditional campaign strategy, and the book says to do the same thing against Obama whether you're Republican or Democrat.
One of the stories I'm really waiting to see, likely years from now, is a true account of how the Obama core went about branding him and selling him more as a product than as a traditional campaign.
By
mikevotes, at 9:36 PM
I'm curious about that Plouffe remark concerning the popular vote. Is he talking about the overall popular vote, or just the March 4 vote? I haven't been able to find any recent figures about the overall popular vote. My impression was that Obama had pulled well ahead there, even counting Michigan and Florida, but does March 4 put that lead in play?
By
Anonymous, at 6:15 AM
I think he was talking just about Texas here.
Obama is ahead in the overall popular vote by a fair amount, haven't seen the numbers in awhile either, but my memory is that if she won Texas/Ohio/Pennsylvania by enough to close the delegate lead to about 20-30, she would take the popular vote lead.
By
mikevotes, at 6:48 AM
While I don't actually know how Ohio apportions pledged delegates, my hunch is Clinton could win the popular vote by +5 or 6 and it's still a draw with regard to delegates. Same in Texas.
In fact Texas is more arcane in it's delegate apportionment where, depending on which districts a candidate wins and loses, a candidate could win the popular vote by +10 or more and still come out even (or less) on delegates. Something to do with turnout in previous primaries and the fact that Hillary is considered strongest in Latino communities where the turnout has historically been low, and thus weighted less.
I don't know. It's all too confusing for me to figure out. But I do know that "winning" a state and "winning" delegates are not necessarily the same thing. Claiming victory for winning OH or TX popular vote could be an empty victory as far as delegate counts go, but it gives a campaign a strong spin-point for the headlines.
Barring an unexpected crushing loss for Clinton on 4 March, it looks like she's prepared to flog this limping mule all the way to the convention.
By
-epm, at 7:47 AM
Yes, in Texas (and to a lesser degree in Ohio) you can win the popular vote and lose delegates. It has to do with the way delegates are apportioned. In a four delegate district, winning 59/41 awards the same delegates as losing 59/41.
(Plus, you gotta figure obama wins the majority of the Texas caucuses which will not be considered "popular vote" in the Clinton argument.)
And, my hunch is that the post Mar 4 focus will be on delegates because, despite the pop vote argument, that's what she needs to get back into the race.
Plus, unless she pulls something substantial, the superdelegate flow to Obama will likely increase.
The pressure on her will only increase. She's not going to the convention. It would only make her a villain which would anger the very people she needs to overturn Obama's delegate lead.
By
mikevotes, at 11:01 AM
"It would only make her a villain which would anger the very people she needs to overturn Obama's delegate lead."
Hmm. Interesting. Given the recent, actual, shift of some super delegates from Clinton to Obama, I wonder if this "villain" or "spoiler" label is already starting to creep into the super delegates' calculus...
By
-epm, at 2:29 PM
(This is mike. Blogger's acting funny, so I don't know how this will post.)
I don't think we're there yet. I think were still at the bandwagon jumping phase.
If we get to a serious phase where they're jumping specifically against Clinton, we'll be hearing alot more noise about how she should be dropping out.
By
mikevotes, at 4:15 PM
hermes belts
ugg outlet
coach outlet
nike air force 1
ralph lauren outlet
ecco outlet
mlb jerseys
nike factory outlet
pandora outlet
ugg outlet
2017.8.22
By
raybanoutlet001, at 8:31 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home