About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Another Response to the " Red State Primaries Don't Matter Much" Claim

by: jdblanch

Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 15:46:42 PM EDT


Hillary Clinton's "Red State Primaries Don't Matter Much" Claim is bad for the Democratic Party.

The new voters that Obama has drawn into the Democratic Primaries across the country are voters that may not have voted for any other candidate.  For instance, young people have been inspired and motivated by Barack Obama and voted for him.  

Likewise, Hillary Clinton has inspired many people, notably traditional Democrats.

The debate rests on this point:  People who Obama inspires to vote may not vote for another candidate, especially one who, in an attempt to win the nomination herself, questions the integrity of the candidate whom they support.  Hillary's supporters, like noted above, are consistently voting Democrats and will most likely vote for Obama if he is the nominee.

Bottom line is this:  

If Obama is nominated, he keeps the new voters who he has inspired, many of whom are youth and independents - people who we can recruit into the Party permanently.  He will also get the support of the traditional Party establishment who trend to have voted for Hillary.  With Obama you get the his supporters PLUS most Hillary supporters.

If Hillary is nominated, it will most likely be because of the Super-delegate vote.  This will most likely alienate those Obama supporters who are already alienated by the political system and see Obama as someone who can rise above that corrupt system.  If the system undermines his candidacy, these Obama supporters, mostly young people, may be lost to the Democratic Party forever.  Hillary will sustain her support, but not pick up much additional support from this new voting block.

Lastly, looking down-ticket, an Obama nomination will better benefit the Party as a whole.  Hillary is to the Republican party, conservatives and moderates alike, what Bush was to the Republicans in '04. "ANYBODY BUT HILLARY!"  Currently, the conservative base of the GOP has yet to fully embrace a McCain nomination.  The best way to motivate them to work for a McCain campaign is to nominate Hillary Clinton.  We have a better chance of winning our down-ticket races by having the alienated GOP voters stay home, than by motivating them to get to he polls with a Clinton candidacy.  

Those are my thoughts...  Responses?

jdblanch :: Another Response to the " Red State Primaries Don't Matter Much" Claim
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The claim that Obama voters will not support Hillary (0.00 / 0)
but Hillary voters will support Obama is noxious and harmful to his campaign. It makes his supporters sound like spoiled whiners, ready to screw their country in a fit of pique.

But I'm walking a fine line here. (0.00 / 0)
I've suggested elsewhere that Clinton is risking exactly that result by going increasingly negative. So I'm not comfortable in pretending there is no cause for concern, either.

I think Obama made a mistake when he personally floated this. He may want pundits to make that observation; he should not make it himself.


[ Parent ]
Everybody, say "hi" to Josh Blanchard, the Manchester Regional Field Director for the Richardson campaign. Welcome to BH! (0.00 / 0)
Onto the diary, I'm with you.

I think it's patently obvious that the reason a lot of Obama's supporters won't vote for Hillary is that many of them are either independents or, in any other year, non-voters.  They like Obama, a Democrat, better than they like McCain and better than they like Hillary; that doesn't mean they've signed over their lifetime loyalty to the Democratic Party, and it doesn't mean they're honor-bound to vote for our nominee.  If you have a problem with that, take it up with the American people, because Barack Obama doesn't own those votes, and he's not the one who decided Hillary is less likely to beat McCain in November.

You don't win elections by telling voters they're being childish by not supporting you, and that's exactly what the Clintons (and particularly their surrogates on the 24-hour news networks) are doing.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner


Richardson staffers come together on BH (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
We shall overcome. (0.00 / 0)
Bill Richardson will be on the ticket.  Nonbelievers, take note!

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
Thanks for outing me guys! (0.00 / 0)


"He who loves correction, loves knowledge.  He who hates reproof is stupid." - Proverbs 12:1



[ Parent ]
shoulda (0.00 / 0)
had a less obvious username... only one jdblanch i know...

'When I say Governor....'


[ Parent ]
Oh please, Google yourself, haha. (0.00 / 0)
Smile, you're on p2008!

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
Missing the point. (4.00 / 1)
I think you're missing the point.  What Hillary Clinton is expressing is the belief that democracy is merely a selection process which involves rulers being chosen from a larger and slightly more diverse pool of candidates than heredity or ecclesiastical designation would provide.  Also, from the perspective of the ruling elite, while it enjoys the opportunity for more of them to compete for a position, increasing the size of the electorate is a negative. It just increases the number of people they have to persuade to make the "right" selection.  "Democracy is hard work."

Hillary Clinton is a Republican in the sense that she believes that the role of government is to tell people what to do, rather than that the agents of government are to do what the people want.  She's an authoritarian but, according to Bill, she's willing to limit her authority to those people who "need a president" to tell them what to do or do for them what they are unable do for themselves.

Elitism tends to be accompanied by disdain for the majority of the people.  Hillary Clinton's got it in spades.



Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox