No matter how you spin it (I'm circling so fast right now, I'll probably vomit before I'm done posting), Clinton lost Pennsylvania last night.
Huh?
Allow me to explain...bowing...twirling mustache...
Not too long ago, though already conveniently forgotten by the traditional media, Clinton was expected to wipe the floor with Obama in PA - 20 percentage point win! Huzzah for the white woman!
And yet, and yet, after six weeks of constant negative attacks by her against Obama and the spurious Rev. Wright and "bitter" controversies, he actually closed that percentage gap by ten points. Freakin' amazing, I'd say.
The media moronocracy is saying how incredible her win is, given that fact that Obama outspent her by so many millions, etc. But it's not incredible, it's not even a positive for her. She lost ten percent of her perceived base in PA. That's the story. And the numbers people say that Obama picked them up, from OH to PA, that his support in this area has increased. (That's them bitter white, older and rural voters who are supposed to love Clinton).
The infuriating aspect of this money argument is that it paints Clinton as the underdog. "Oh, she only spent such-and-such! But big bad Barack Obama spent millions more and still couldn't beat her! See what a better candidate she'd be?" This is an insulting position. If Clinton had had the money, she would have spent it. She didn't, because she's run a poor campaign and hasn't been able to garner the kind of financial support Obama has. Another reason why she is losing overall and why she lost PA last night.
And this morning, who gets another superdelegate? Hmmm. I wonder.
Vote Obama!
No comments:
Post a Comment