Clinton's Swing State Advantage

[ElsewheresDaughter]

enuff said!

[tabatha]

1. Clinton won California.

If the election were held today, Obama would win.

It is too early for your quoted results to be valid.

[JimGinPA]

2. The Hillary Deathwatch

Clinton's RFK comment won't do lasting damage because there's not much left to damage.
By Christopher Beam
Posted Tuesday, May 27, 2008, at 1:54 PM ET

Hillary Clinton's ill-advised invoking of RFK's assassination might have damaged her campaign if there were anything left to damage. Meanwhile, Obama closes in on the current magic number of 2,026, bringing Clinton's odds of winning the nomination to 0.5 percent.

On the list of campaign no-nos, hinting at the possibility of your opponent being shot is up there. Yet that's what some people thought Hillary meant when she told the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, S.D., Argus-Leader that Democratic nominations often extend into June: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."

The New York Post led the way, blaring, "Hillary Raises Assassination Issue." Drudge quickly followed. The Washington Post fronted the story, albeit less sensationally. But little consideration was given to what Clinton meant. (Watch the video and draw your own conclusions.) Never mind that she had said the same thing to Time back in March and no one noticed. Never mind that her calendar argument is misleading in the first place: Her husband may not have mathematically secured the nomination until June, but he was the presumptive nominee in March; RFK was still campaigning in June because the primary calendar started so late. The focus was on the "assassination" comparison. "We have seen an X-ray of a very dark soul," opined the Daily News' Michael Goodwin. That or a very click-hungry media.

Luckily for Clinton, the "news" broke late Friday and appears to have run its course. The downside: She's nowhere to be found in today's top stories.


http://www.slate.com/id/2191998

[ElsewheresDaughter]

4. the GOP thanks you guys

[JimGinPA]

7. The GOP Is Hillary's Partner...

They have been promting her and voting for her in primaries since they realized she was the weaker candidate and McSame's only chance to unite their party.

[MadBadger]

3. She is running unopposed in her own General Election right now

Of course at this moment she is doing better than Obama.

[bunnies]

5. Who are you Clinton supporters trying to convince at this point?

I dont get it.

[marmar]

6. Exactly.....It's like trying to debate whether the Diamondbacks would have had a better chance....

.... against the Red Sox in the World Series last year....It's a moot point - they didn't make it to the World Series.

[AllentownJake]

11. I'm a San Diego Chargers fan

and I think the Chargers could have beat the Giants.

[otohara]

8. Exactly - It's Too Late

all the far fetched, unthinkable scenarios they've been contemplating just aren't going to happen.

[highplainsdem]

9. Link & excerpts from that Gallup article:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107539/Hillary-Clintons-SwingState-Advantage.aspx

In the 20 states where Hillary Clinton has claimed victory in the 2008 Democratic primary and caucus elections (winning the popular vote), she has led John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily trial heats for the general election over the past two weeks of Gallup Poll Daily tracking by 50% to 43%. In those same states, Barack Obama is about tied with McCain among national registered voters, 45% to 46%.

In contrast, in the 28 states and the District of Columbia where Obama has won a higher share of the popular vote against Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primaries and caucuses, there is essentially no difference in how Obama and Clinton each fare against McCain. Both Democrats are statistically tied with him for the fall election.

All of this speaks to Sen. Clinton's claim that her primary-state victories over Obama indicate her potential superiority in the general election.

The results are based on aggregated data from Gallup Poll Daily tracking from May 12-25, including interviews with more than 11,000 registered voters nationwide (including Alaska and Hawaii). Across this period, Gallup has found Clinton performing marginally better than Obama in separate trial heats for the general election against McCain. Clinton has led McCain by an average of three percentage points, 48% vs. 45%. Obama has trailed McCain by an average of one point, 45% vs. 46%.

Much more at that link.

[AllentownJake]

10. Polls don't elect Presidents

[GoesTo11]

12. Cherry picking the source article.

Of course Clinton does better in the states she won. So does Obama.

The article also says:

"Obama's swing-state victories include Colorado, Oregon, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Missouri (totaling 54 electoral votes). Obama leads McCain in these states by eight percentage points, while Clinton falls one point behind McCain -- a pattern similar to that in Clinton's swing states."

Clinton 45, McCain 46; Obama 49, McCain 41.

Just takes a small amount of detective work to expose this misrepresentation.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. the Population of 13 combined Obama win states don't even equal the Pop. of 1 major CITY Clinton won

[GoesTo11]

14. What does this have to do with anything?

I'm not sure this is true in the first place - did Clinton even win New York City?

The smallest states Obama won were smaller than the largest cities Clinton won.
The smallest states Clinton won were smaller than the largest cities Obama won.

So your point seems to be that small things are smaller than large things. This is true.

But if you're trying to make the argument that Clinton won the election, that's contradicted by the facts.