|
For those paying attention, the path to the nomination is all about the horse race. And the favored story is always the two horse race. That's why Edwards got knocked out, The story makers only told the story of the favorite versus the young challenger. In this simple-minded view, a third horse was too complicated.
Now, the talk is the "momentum" (btw, a mixed metaphor for a horse race). Obama has won 11 races in a row. He is leading and this story helps create more positive stories.
So what does this mean. It means that if his momentum continues on March 4 and he sweeps, he will win the story line, and be the de facto winner.
If Hillary Clinton comes back and wins (even by small margins) both Ohio and Texas, and possible even one, then the story is that the momentum has been broken and she has a real shot at the nomination. She'll get the positive press which may make a big difference in capturing momentum. Of course, a lot will depend on the margin of victory and the "spin" by the handicappers.
Although technically it's about the number of delegates, in reality it is just who is winning the horse race. Effectively, issues matter little, especially when the candidates have roughly similar positions. Personality may matter a little more, but only if one candidate is significantly more likable than the other to a large percentage of voters. Experience doesn't seem to matter much either, unless there is current crisis. Scandals could matter, but it's difficult to find a strong enough one to matter. Only the horse race matters. Should it be this way?
|