Well, March 4th turned out to be quite an exciting night for Clinton. If nothing else, she scored a psychological victory. She scored victories in Ohio and Rhode Island, while Obama won Vermont. As I write this, CNN has just declared Clinton a winner in Texas.
However, Texas was about as close as it could be. The two candidates virtually split the vote evenly there. Obama carried the urban areas by large margins, and Clinton did the same in the more rural counties.
But the name of the game in the nominating process is delegates, and Clinton finished the night no better off in delegates than when she entered it. Obama still maintains a lead in both pledged and total delegates, and it is a large enough lead that it will be extremely difficult for Clinton to overcome.
I think the party was hoping this race would not come down to the superdelegates, but it's looking more and more like that's what will happen. That could be a disaster for the party.
If the superdelegates are seen as trumping the popular vote, it could make a lot of voters very angry (especially new voters). The party needs for these voters to return to the polls in November, but they may not do that if they think the "party hacks" have nullified their vote.
Texas is a good example of this. Tonight, in one of the reddest states in the nation, the Democrats had twice as many people vote in their primary as the Republicans did. If these voters come back to the polls in November, Texas could actually go Democratic (and elect a Democratic senator). If they believe their vote doesn't count and stay home, the Republicans will win again.
March 4th couldn't have turned out worse for the Democratic Party. Now Clinton and Obama will go on sniping at each other, while McCain begins his campaign for November. And the superdelegates are in the middle -- what a mess!
It's a beautiful thing to see all those Democrats voting in Texas!
ReplyDeleteMany were republican. Give me your opinion JS on why the dems have put fwd teo people who are socialist at best and communists at worst. Both have been involved in the US communist movement to some degree.
ReplyDeleteWhy did the dems no pick some of the more moderate middle of the road Dems, some such as Lieberman that even I would support to a degree. The dem primary is a mess and there have been many promises of violence if Obama is not picked already.
You guys had the best chance of winning I've seen in many years but have blowwn it by putting these two up.
I don't like McCain, I respect him but don't trust his unpredictability. But he's going to win and it will even possibly be a landslide victory.
Why these two inexpearianced radicals?
CT-
ReplyDelete1. If there is a communist movement left in this country, neither Obama nor Clinton have been a part of it.
2. Lieberman is NOT a Democrat.
3. What's wrong with being a socialist - I'm a proud socialist.
4. Don't count your chickens before they hatch in November.