Thursday, February 14, 2008

Rumors Of Clinton's Demise Exaggerated?

Don't get me wrong, I've argued that Obama is a good bet to win the nomination. However, I'm not quite ready to say Obama is a lock, Clinton is clearly finished. There are a few encouraging signs for Hillary, that at least dampen the euphoria. I guess what I'm saying, Clinton still has a chance, a pulse.

Tuesday's primary in Wisconsin is the last big contest before the Ohio and Texas primaries, primaries that even longtime Clinton strategist Carville calls "do or die". Wisconsin is actually looking very competitive, and the proof that can be found in Clinton's late focus on this state, both in ads and presence. The last two polls show a close race, the only caveat being, they were done without including the fallout from Obama's Potomac Primary rout:
Rasmussen Feb 13:

Obama 47
Clinton 43

Strategic Vision Feb 10:

Obama 45
Clinton 41

In the world of expectations, a close finish might actually be good news for Clinton, a win, well you know. The media are beyond fickle, I don't doubt for a second, they could potentially "over frame" a close result.

I can't seem to find any polling for Texas, it's assumed strong for Clinton, whatever that means. In Ohio, there has been some polling, all of which give Clinton a sizeable lead, AT THE MOMENT:
Rasmussen 02/13 Clinton 51 Obama 37

Quinnipiac 02/12 Clinton 55 Obama 34

SurveyUSA 02/11 Clinton 56 Obama 39

Millions of arguments why Obama wins, many of which I agree. That said, still a glimmer in the Clinton camp, maybe even a ray or two.

15 comments:

Dame said...

It is time to break the Hypnotic Fog what seems To descend on the USA... Obama Cannot Deliver what he is offering...

I always said Style over Substance ...

marta

Anonymous said...

I like Hiliary but dont dislike Obama but really in the end can a guy whose names are HUSSEIN OBAMA win the presidency.

RuralSandi said...

Well, the bigoted Anons are out and about today.

Some financial magazines in the US have analysed Obama's economic package and say it's undoable.

He is naive because there's no way on earth that he's going to be able to reach out to the extreme right wing.

I'm getting tired of his speeches - you can only hear so much before it becomes boring.

I think the Americans are feeling so down (rightfully so with the war and economy, weather disasters, etc.) that they want a saviour and think if Obama wins that all their troubles will magically go away. There's "hope" and false hope.

He sounds more like a preacher to me.

There's a line in a BeeGees song - "it only words and words are all I have to steal your heart away".

Either way - Obama or Hillary the US would be better off.

McCain is scary to me - he's a war monger. I find it obscene that he's using his war hero status for political reasons.

As Lou Dobbs said, why is it that no one can challenge Obama without everyone getting upset?

The real Messiah doesn't live in Chicago.

Anonymous said...

I am not a bigotted anon..I took that directly from Katie Courics' question to Michele Obama.

Steve V said...

Rasmussen released a Texas poll today that shows Clinton 54%, Obama 38%. This poll done after last Tuesday's Obama sweep.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

I fail to understand the simplistic narrative that Obama is more style than substance, or in Clinton’s words, “all hat, no cattle”. Obama’s JJ VA and WI speeches not only touched upon his usual themes but also tackled specific policy issues. They’re available at his website along with his platform, which has been there for a while. Vis-à-vis Clinton, the two main differences are health care and foreign policy. And to quote Andrew Sullivan, “compared with McCain, Obama is a wonk”.

As for TX, OH and PA, the polls indicate that Clinton has the lead. Even if she wins, she still needs a sizeable margin given the difficulty in surmounting the current gap in pledged delegates. Clinton is a step behind, but she is still in a strong position and can win this thing.

Steve, Good coverage on the American races and the Canadian election dare.

Steve V said...

tarheel

I'm not suggesting that Clinton will win, just acknowledging that she's still in it. People attack Obama for lacking substance, but I think it has more to do with Clinton needing that perception to highlight her strengths. The guy is not an empty suit, anyone who is paying attention can see this, if they are being objective.

Dame said...

Obama is a naive novice the more I watch him the more I am disturbed ..
just two days ago I heard something like
"let's first Clean up Afhganistan".. wow Just like that this short sentence /in his speech/ is telling how naive he is and how little actually he knows about this particular subject.... or even the Geography of this suject.

As RURALSANDY said he is a Preacher and god save us from preachers!!! I admit now I am getting Tired of his mannerism and yes even his arachnoid look..
Sorry we woman go with gut feelings combined with brain assesments .
I started to turn off even from his wife .... she has an air of the victim who fell into "something'
Anyway I believe if he is the Nominee... he won't get the presidency..so the Democrats will have to wait another time...

The whole media is against Hillary becouse she is in skirts....period and feel it is OK.
America is NOT ready fo women pres.yet
they slap them back to "their rightful Place "

Steve V said...

"The whole media is against Hillary becouse she is in skirts....period and feel it is OK."

Dame, watch now that Obama is the perceived frontrunner, you will see the media turn somewhat, they do it EVERYTIME. Build you up, then knock you down.

Mushroom said...

Colby,

Some will say the turning point of Obama's campaign was his speech at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner. It was at that speech in which he called for the Dems to break from the Clinton legacy and return to its roots. Helped build the momentum for the Iowa caucus victory.

Don't forget Obama's speech on foreign policy at the Wilson Center. He was attacked for supporting NATO forces going into Pakistan to go after bin Laden. This overshadowed his calls for a geopolitical realism approach in US foreign policy, supported by the likes of Brzezinski against the expansive internationalism of the Clintons.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

Steve, Please do not misunderstand me. My comments regarding the simplistic narrative about Obama were for Dame’s benefit and those who share such views. I should have posted my remarks separately so as to limit confusion. Sorry.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

Mushroom, Thanks. Duly noted.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

Dame,

Sorry we woman go with gut feelings combined with brain assessments.

That’s a rather loaded comment, eh? For example, what does your gender have to do with whom you prefer as a candidate? Are you favoring Hillary out of identity politics? Or are you implying that a woman’s preference, as opposed to a man’s, relies on both instinct and reason? Yikes.

I would welcome a discussion of why you believe that Obama’s policies are naïve. Indeed, I would eagerly engage on the merits of an American withdrawal from Iraq and a concentration on Afghanistan, as I’m sure wonks, such as Eric Martin would. However, I would request an explanation of how it’s naïve and how Obama is nothing more than a preacher.

While I appreciate the importance of impressions, I recognize that simply feeling something does not make it necessarily true.

The whole media is against Hillary becouse she is in skirts....period and feel it is OK.

I think that it has less to do with gender, than it does with our culture of building someone up only to knock ‘em down.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

BTW, I thought that I might share Ximena Ortiz’ recent article in the National Interest with respect to Obama’s foreign policy. While Obama’s prior stances and current policies are not impenetrable from legitimate criticism, they have been grossly mischaracterized by the Clintons and the Republicans, namely Bush. You may also enjoy Michael Crowley’s latest piece (TNR).

Dame said...

I made my assesment on a very careful slow process about Obama and Clinton mostly based on their debates .
Clinton was convincing Obama was not simple as it is. I assume Clinton would less likely to fumble the ball... and with Obama we would have a very bumpy ride../even here in Canada /

Women are more For security in life then go to reach for the sky...

I also think Clinton would have a better chance against McCain .

You can't deny a lot of sexism going on when she just moves around ... it is a natural thing.. It is just the sad fact.

I have the right to make up my mind independently I guess..
maybe I am much older ??? it can explain a lot .

marta