Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
You are absolutely right about the delegates. What I want to know is where was this kind of analysis when Hillary got one less delegate in Iowa. This goes into the current media, and national, easy ride argument I already mentioned. When Hillary came in third in Iowa everyone was calling lights out for her and talking about the scathing defeat she suffered in a third place showing (though she picked up one more delegate than the second place candidate Edwards). Isn't it a little telling that this 'big picture' analysis only comes out now that Obama is on the receiving end?
|
Frankly, I have no idea how the Obama campaign is spinning it. I was looking at delegate counts after both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
Also lets look at the superdelegates, if you want to measure the primary that way. All delegates currently accounted for gives Hillary 183 delegates to Obama's 78. Now I'm not saying that this is a huge difference, but the implication is that Obama needs to make up his deficit in superdelegates in pledged delegates. Simply tying Hillary or getting one more delegate is not going to cut it.
|
You're 100% correct. I think the superdelegates are immensely stupid and undemocratic, and they upset me, but the reality is still there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
The big picture at this stage in the race is NOT delegate count anyway, it's momentum. Hillary has effectively regained momentum, but not only that she can run with the image of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat which is a much bigger deal than a delegate count this early on.
|
Again, 100% correct.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
I hate to say it but your analysis, which is the Obama camps analysis as well, is the same that lost Dean the nomination. You want to rely on the caucus system which is out of sync with what actually get candidates nominated. Focusing on delegates means ignoring states like Michigan and Florida, which lost their delegates, even though the results of these states (especially Florida) will be what make up voters minds coming into Super Tuesday, which almost always decides the nomination. Momentum, surprise victories and losses, and, unfortunately, media coverage is what wins elections. Hillary is primed to strike now with most recent polls showing her leading Obama by 12% in Nevada and 22% in Florida. That was before her upset victory this evening! She is in a great position because she has the momentum, the national lead, and, perhaps most importantly, she has the media in a position where they can't just turn around and declare the race 'her's to lose' again. They are going to have to either continue portraying the race as Obama's to lose (which will make New Hampshire appear like a biting loss to him) or portray it as clean and even between them (which gives her an edge in fact because she is leading in the major remaining states because she ran a national campaign early on). This race is NOT over, but I strongly disagree with your analysis and believe that if the Obama campaign chooses to approach New Hampshire and the future campaign the way you do then they will lose. Obama will be reeling from tonights primary and to brush that aside would be more than foolish, if he is to win he is going to need to dig deep and stem the momentum beyond just South Carolina, but in every race up until Super Tuesday. Moreover, if the Clinton campaign can portray New Hampshire correctly then they can make that task a monumental task for Obama.
|
My "analysis" (and I don't really feel comfortable calling it that, because that implies that I was doing more than just typing some quick thoughts onto an internet forum
) was only in terms of how much of a direct impact the NH primary will have on the election. How Obama should move forward is a completely different story and you're right to factor in the challenge of Clinton's new-found and powerful momentum. As for the NV caucus, again I was strictly speaking in terms of direct impact. I'd hope that Obama's campaign wouldn't be stupid enough to count on the caucus system to save them. All I meant is simply that that's one state coming up where he has something to help him out. As for ignoring Michigan and Florida, he doesn't have a choice. The DNC has said that any candidate who campaigns there will not be allowed to receive delegates. All Obama can do is move on to Nevada and hope that the news coming out of there has an impact on Michigan.
Anyway, I feel like I'm coming off as an Obama supporter here when, in fact, I'm undecided among the main candidates, so I just wanted to throw that out there
