What I percieve as Hillary's Texas strategy... and also its weaknesses

[Levgreee]

Obama has a long time to campaign in Texas, and Hillary could have easily campaigned for several days in Wisconsin, before moving on to Texas.

Therefore, her intention in going there was to get "the first impression", on the Texas voters. She is hoping they become attracted and attached to her(as you see, she's been giving very heartfelt talks and dramatic signs), making it more difficult for Obama to change those voters to his side. Also, she is likely hardening them to Obama's appeals and speeches, by undermining him with messages such as "talk rather than action", so the Texas people will be skeptical and hardened to him when he arrives.

Seems like a good plan, doesn't it? Well, I'm not sure.

Here are some reasons why I think this strategy is flawed:

1. The most important voters are the undecided voters. I believe these voters tend to have a very open mind, often not choosing a candidate until the last day or last 3 days. The people she will draw in, by getting their first, would have likely supported Hillary anyways.

In this sense, I think she is underestimating how difficult it is to give the undecided voters a strong enough impression that they will be biased against Obama... she is thinking them more easily swayed than they actually are.

2. Most of the Texans who are interested in the election have already seen a good deal of Clinton and Obama, on TV, in Debates, etc. Her strategy would work better against a 'fresh' candidate, but since they are already acquainted with Obama, if they hadn't dismissed him already, they won't dismiss him because Hillary goes first. They have already heard his message of change, so her attacking that message ahead of time won't make them more skeptical than they were/weren't, already.

3. Obama has inspired strong curiosity in people, and has a strong presence. It would be easier to undermine a less impressive speaker.

There may be some more, but those are 3 big points. I don't think her Texas strategy will have that large of an impact, maybe 1-3%. The other benefit is getting more people to be able to see her(because she has more time, obviously), but I think Obama will do plently well in that regard.

[BenDavid]

1. Clinton over Obama, 49 percent to 41 percent statewide-Texas

In a poll of likely Texas primary voters, Hamilton Campaigns, a Democratic firm, and Public Opinion Strategy, a Republican firm, have drawn a bead on the political landscape in the upcoming primary elections. The poll, commissioned by the Texas Credit Union League.

Friday, February 15, 2008 - 11:19 AM CST
Texas poll: Clinton leads Obama; McCain, Huckabee in dead heat

[KAZ]

3. Having a point might be nice,

[Melinda]

2. What about the fact that any registered voter of any party can vote in the democratic primary?

Do you think there will be a cross-over vote against HRC large enough to affect the outcome? I've heard this variable mentioned on RW radio lately, and I well remember how the cross-over vote helped cost McKinney her primary in GA not so long ago.

[Levgreee]

4. I think it will definitely have an effect, although not the defining one

I'd say that it would give 3-6% swing towards Obama. Republican's wouldn't vote "against Hillary", as I think they perceive her as the weaker candidate. Obama needs to attract them on his own merit, and there will be only a negligible amount of Republicans who will (.5-1.5%), and probably about the same amount of independents he has been getting. There might be some crossover "against Obama", which would slightly lessen Obama's advantage with I's and R's.

Of course, the advantage Obama gets from independents is largely determined by the demographics, the number of independents in the state of Texas. Finding that demographic(I don't know what they are) would give a better picture of the possible impact. Maybe it could be higher than 3-6%.

They key thing for Obama to succeed is to cut into Hillary's support(latinos and women, for example), and/or energize new (largely young) voters.
But, the latino's and women have a more dramatic effect, as a new young voter is +1 for Obama, while swaying a voter who would otherwise support Hillary is net 2, because +1 vote for Obama, and -1 for Hillary.

[catagory5]

5. Or it makes Texans (like myself) feel...

like she really needs us, as we need her. you know a mutual kind of thing. She hopped on the first plane out to here and got alot of people in Texas talking. She is gonna have a good showing.

[Levgreee]

6. most people don't vote because a candidate 'needs' them, it's because they prefer them

I would guess you, and other people who feel like she really needs your support, were already going to support her.

[Melinda]

8. Interesting analysis, thanks.

It's going to be closer than most here believe; so many variables in play leaves me to think that it will be near impossible for HRC to capture the number of delegates she needs in Texas.

I tried to find the independant voter statistics, but a cursory search left me empty. I'll check again in the morning.

Thanks for the post, and the food for thought.

:hi:

*edited for spelling

[ErnestoG]

7. Texas is going to de-bone Hillary Clinton.

[TexasObserver]

9. Hillary's problem is that she is KNOWN, and will not garner new voters.

Anyone who hasn't already made up their mind to vote for Hillary won't vote for her on March 4th.

She's in Texas trying to get the Hispanic vote UP as much as possible, and to pander to her elderly base a little. She's throwing in some promises designed to stoke lower income whites, but that isn't going to work. The women already support her, and the men won't vote for her.

If she had any sense at all, she'd know better than go into South Texas and use Alamo analogies.