Was it a mistake for Obama not to campaign more in West Virginia?

[EffieBlack]

Discuss.

[tekisui]

1. Some 40,000 voters in the Democratic Primary.

Less than a drop in the bucket.

He was there, he went there a few times. No biggie.

on edit: It could be more, I'll wait to make a number statement again.

[islandmkl]

2. yes...he gave up about 1.2% of potential primary votes in his favor...

gonna cost him BIG....some say

[Oceansaway]

3. by the numbers, it doesnt look

like he needed too....she was expected to win...

he'll campaign there for the GE....jmo...

[ossman]

4. No. He needs the money to pay off the Clinton Mafia's debt to Jabba the Penn

[redstate_democrat]

5. It depends on the turnout.

If turnout is small, then no. If it was huge, then yes he should have spent a couple of days there. I don't think he could have improved his margins by much, but he would be setting up a tent for the fall in doing so. This is a dem v. dem race and Hillary Clinton gets the benefit of having Clinton has her husband, with that name familiarity, legacy they have. Then look at the demographics...these are people TAILOR made for Hillary.

[Thrill]

6. After hearing how some of the people talk there

I wouldn't of spent more than a day there

[thoughtcrime1984]

7. Hard to say, I guess I wish he'd had spent one more day there

and he should spend a day or two in Kentucky this week. I would like him to continue to work towards the 50 state initiative. She'd win by a ton regardless, but the message that he is interested in every nook and cranny in the nation is a sound message to send the electorate.

[David Zephyr]

8. No. He did campaign there. He's saving his money for McCain.

And Obama will wind up having to pay for Hillary's campaign in West Virginia which was run on borrowed money. How the irony of that? Obama bought Hillary's victory.

[MonkeyFunk]

22. How can you keep making that charge

when it's entirely made up?

[VeraAgnes]

9. Yes, he really should of spread some of that money around.

He can make an impression that way....he didn't and that insulted the state.

[Coexist]

10. no.

it would be a big loss no matter what. Better to focus resources somewhere else.

[Barack_America]

11. If Indiana hadn't turned out the way it had, yes.

It was a gamble.

He didn't stand a chance in WV, so it was best not to be seen trying.

[theHandpuppet]

12. Frankly, yes

I think it will make it difficult for Obama to now convince the voters in WV that he really does give a rat's ass about them. He should have gone, whether the numbers were there for him or not.

[Aloha Spirit]

13. At first I thought so, but he's taking control over the calendar. That's good right now.

[Austinitis]

14. Yes, and he's paying for it now...

[skipos]

19. Absolutely.

Hillary is going to have a lead in the pledged delegates soon of WV. When do yo think that will happen? I am not sure, but all I know is that the TIDE IS TURNING! And even though primaries have nothing to do with general elections, her win in WV means Obama will lose in November. And even though Obama demolished her in states like ID and KS and Utah, Obama has a problem with whites, and whites are the most important voters out there!

Hillary/ Baghdad Bob 08!

[book_worm]

15. Was it a mistake for Hill not to campaign in KS, MN, ND, UT, LA, NE, WA,

CO, ID, GA (as much campaigning as Obama did in WVA), WY and other states that she ignored? Discuss.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. I think it is as irrelevant as Hillary's win there.

West Virginia will be in the McCain column in November even if Hillary were to, somehow, win the nomination.

It's only important in the imaginings of the last-gaspers in Hillary's following and the media who see more sales of beer and toothpaste by drawing out a lost campaign of an also-ran.

[madrchsod]

17. waste of time...no one was going to vote for him in the primary

nor in the general election...they do`t like black folks in west virginia

[paulk]

18. it depends on how the press decides to spin it

If the MSM goes with the line that WV doesn't matter, then Obama's strategy will pay off. If the margin of victory gets close to 40 points, then the press may have to pay attention, and Obama's strategy of not campaigning there will look bad.

Obama did put a lot of resources into the state, btw. He outspent HRC, had more campaign offices and more staff instate. Still - him campaigning there would have netted him more votes probably than what he's getting.

[Gore1FL]

20. He campaigned in WV

Granted not much. What is to discuss?

[graycem]

21. I think not..

and if I were him, I wouldn't waste a lot of resources there in the fall either. I would go in, make a few stops, and make my case. There are other far more states he needs to devote his time and $ to, Florida for example.

[AllentownJake]

23. Nope

Selling change in WV is like selling Hillary nutcrackers on HillaryClintonforum.net

[sandnsea]

24. He's campaigning against McCain now

Going to WV would have forced the media to continue covering the "Dem Primary" if he were engaged in it. He isn't, so the media was able to move on. Very smart on his part.

[AtomicKitten]

25. He's gliding through the rest of this protracted nomination & turning his sights on McCain.

[Hansel]

26. No. nt

[Marie26]

27. IMO yes

He's going to have to try to win over these voters in the general election, & skipping the state just reinforces the impression that he doesn't care about working-class voters. Even if he doesn't win the state, appearances would help to gain more trust & show that this demographic is important to the Democratic Party. WV went for the Republicans in 2000 & 2004, and Obama needs to win them back.

[bicentennial_baby]

28. I think so, yes...If nothing but for the appearance

To me, it appeared that he was just blowing WV off. I mean, I know and he knew that he wasn't going to win, but he should have been there instead of in Missouri or whatever. I'm a little disappointed, to be honest.

[bigwillq]

29. No

He wasn't going to win it anyway, and at this stage in the game it probably doesn't matter.