Will Obama Do As Well As Clinton In FL, OH and PA in November?
By Big Tent Democrat
Obama supporter Publius writes (see also yep, Josh Marshall putting up his hands to cover the sun:
Other bloggers have, however, made the logical jump that Judis leaves largely to implication. I usually leave linking to "Big Tent" Democrat to John Cole, but here's what he said over at TalkLeft (unclear though whether he was talking only for him):
Obama can not win beer track white working class voters, women, seniors or Latinos. This is why Hillary is more electable in PA, OH, FL and MI.Florida, perhaps, but both Clinton and Obama will have struggles in the other states versus McCain. More to the point, the fact that Clinton is preferred to Obama among this bloc of voters within a Democratic primary is not strong evidence that she'll do significantly better versus McCain in the general.
I should be glad I suppose to get the "Florida perhaps" concession. But I am struck by the strange argument, I have heard it before, that how a candidate does in a primary with a demographic has absolutely no predictive power as to how a candidate will do in the general election with that demographic. Imagine this argument in reverse - Obama will not do better than Clinton in turning out and getting African Americans to vote for him in a general election. Or college educated white males. Or the vaunted "youth vote." If I wrote that I would rightly be ridiculed by these same "Creative Class" bloggers. But let's set aside the obvious unsoundness of Publius' argument. Let's look at polls on the flip.
In the Pennsylvania RCP Average, Clinton beats McCain by 6. Obama beats McCain by 2. If my math is correct, that means Clinton runs 4 points better in Pennsylvania. I believe that means Clinton runs better in Pennsylvania. Am I missing something? And the same is true for Florida and Ohio, where Clinton leads McCain and Obama loses to McCain.
In what demographics does Clinton run better than Obama? Here is how Quinnipiac puts it:
"At least for now, Sen. Clinton's argument that she is the better general election candidate in these key battleground states appears to have some validity," said Brown. "In this survey, her strength among white voters is why she runs better against Sen. McCain than does Sen. Obama.
(Emphasis supplied.) It so happens that I think, because of his Media Darling status, Obama remains the more electable candidate. I think he can expand the electoral map in the West especially. But I am not foolish enough to deny what should be obvious to any person able to view this contest objectively - Obama is a much bigger risk in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.
The "Creative Class" is intent to be the bulwark of Obama Fandom, apparently utterly incapable of discussing the political realities in rational fashion. The reality now is Clinton runs better in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania than Obama. That is not to say Obama can not win in Ohio and Pennsylvania (he can't in Florida imo), but rather it is to say that Clinton would be more likely to win in those states (just as Obama is more likely to win in Wisconsin, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Virginia, etc.)
Covering your eyes will not make these realities go away.
| < Innocent Texas Man to Be Freed After 23 Years | No Mirrors Handy? > |





