Spinning is in full force the morning after the Pennsylvania primary.
Clinton is going with her "tide is turning" theme from her victory speech last night in both a new spin memo (text after the jump), and in fundraising pitches: "We won a critically important victory tonight in Pennsylvania. It's a giant step forward that will transform the landscape of the presidential race. And it couldn't have happened without you."
The Obama campaign is smartly unveiling a new superdelegate endorsement from Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry, and pushing a NYTimes editorial that takes Clinton to task for her tactics in Pennsylvania. Their spin memo, which appears a couple items below here, calls it a "fundamentally unchanged race," and they have a press call coming up.
We'll likely be hearing a lot about math, psychology and money today:
1. Raising money off the win is Job 1 for Clinton. They reported a surge as the results came in last night, and they'll need to sustain it. Indiana and NC are much more favorable ground for Obama, and they can't afford to be outspent 2-1 or 3-1 again.
2. The math of the race is, indeed, fundamentally unchanged. Clinton will net only 10 to 16 delegates. Obama's lead in pledged delegates will be at least 150. Her popular vote margin of about 200,000, give or take, slices Obama's lead to 600,000. But for her to overcome him is still a huge reach, barring a big upset in a state like North Carolina.
2a. But, it will add fire to the discussion of whether -- even if their delegates aren't seated -- the popular votes from Florida and Michigan should be counted in the informal calculation of who has won the popular vote. With those margins, Clinton could become competitive on the popular vote.
3. Now, however, Obama must play defense. He needs to perform well in Indiana and North Carolina. And his problem is not purely a demographic one with white blue-collar voters. He lost two suburban, upscale Philadelphia counties as well. In the struggle for positioning Clinton has subtly taken control of the center, and Obama is being pushed to the left.
4. If Obama can't win white blue-collar voters and Clinton can't win African-Americans, who wins the electability debate with superdelegates? Well, the numbers say that more Obama voters are willing to back Hillary than vice-versa. And Democratic power brokers will conclude that African-Americans won't go to McCain even if they're unhappy, while blue-collar Reagan Democrats will. That's not fair, but it's likely to be the way things are seen.
To: Interested Parties
From: The Clinton Campaign
Date: April 23, 2008
RE: The Tide Is Turning
The voters in Pennsylvania have spoken. America is listening. And the tide is turning.
By providing fresh evidence that Hillary is the candidate best positioned to beat John McCain in the fall, the Pennsylvania primary is a turning point in the nominating contest.
Despite making an unprecedented financial investment in his Pennsylvania campaign, including millions on negative ads in the closing days of the race, Sen. Obama again failed to win a state that will be vital to a Democratic victory in November and spurred new questions about his ability to beat John McCain. No candidate has ever had more resources or enjoyed the kind of momentum that Sen. Obama had in Pennsylvania.
With concerns about the economy paramount, voters decided that Sen. Clinton was the candidate they trusted most to deal with job loss, the housing crisis and health care.
And with both candidates under the microscope at the same time for the first time, Hillary took more than a few punches and came out stronger while Sen. Obama emerged weaker as voters learned more about him. The exit polls clearly show that Sen. Clinton gained strength in the final days when the campaign was most engaged.
The reason for the Clinton comeback is clear: voters want a candidate who will stand strong for them and work to create a better future.
STRONG ON ECONOMY: Pennsylvania turned on which candidate made the better case for fixing the economy. Exit polls show voters viewed Hillary more favorably on the economy - her leadership resonated across the heartland of Pennsylvania. Those who want change in the economy voted overwhelmingly for Hillary.
A DECISIVE VICTORY: According to exit polls, Hillary won voters most concerned about the economy by 16 points (58-42) and union households by 18 points (59-41). She won those with incomes between 100K and 150K by 20 points (60-40); white women by 32 points (66-34) and Catholics by 38 points (69-31). She won those who decided on the last day (59-41), the last three days (58-42) and the last week (54-46).
SEN. OBAMA PLAYED TO WIN & LOST: Sen. Obama played to win Pennsylvania outright, outspending the Clinton camp by a 3 to 1 margin while sharply attacking Sen. Clinton on the stump and in television, radio, and direct mail pieces. He understood what was at stake for him in Pennsylvania, had six full weeks to make his case, went for a knockout at the end and came up short. Sen. Obama’s failure to do well raises questions about his ability to win the large, swing states that Democrats need to win in November.
HRC WILL WIN IN NOVEMBER: Democrats must win the large swing states to beat John McCain in the fall, but Sen. Obama has struggled in states like Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. In addition, Hillary’s voters form the coalition needed for Democratic success in the fall battleground states: women, Hispanics, older voters, working class voters and Catholics. Sen. McCain is stronger than a typical Republican normally is among these groups while Sen. Obama has proven weaker among them. Hillary is also most likely to hold traditionally Democratic states and poised to expand the electoral map in the Southwest while also flipping a few traditionally GOP states like Arkansas.
OUR VICTORY HAS RE-ENERGIZED OUR CAMPAIGN & OUR GRASSROOTS: Sen. Obama may have outspent us 3 to 1 in Pennsylvania, but Hillary's strong supporters kept her in it. As news of Sen. Clinton’s victory spread, we received more donations at www.hillaryclinton.com and more new online contributors than after our wins in Ohio and Texas. In fact, this was our best night ever for online fundraising.
Comments (3)
Regarding this statement: >
Just to clarify, I know that the 600,000 vote figure you cite is without Michigan and Florida. Right?
Secondly, Obama won Illinois by about 650,000 votes, and about 3/4 of that margin came in Cook County, the most reliable Democratic county in the country.
So if you take away Illinois, they've basically fought to a draw over the rest of the country.
Now, if you assume that even in a fair fight Hillary would win Michigan and Florida -- and given the demographic consistency of where she's been strong, that's not a big assumption -- it isn't hard to conclude that Obama supporters touting his popular vote total are making a lot of noise about what, on analysis, has been created by a huge victory in one single county that is located in a state that the Democrats would win even if they nominated Donald Duck.
So anybody citing the vote total as the reason why Obama should get the nomination are basically just saying that they don't want to do the difficult job of picking a candidate, the way delegates used to do it. Democrats used to win a lot more when the rooms were filled with smoke. Maybe they should go back to that if they want to win in November.
And I'm not even a Democrat!
I don't know what happened to it, but my post was referring to your statement about Obama having a 600,000 total vote lead over Hillary. I meant to paste that in.
Interesting post from JayK.
Yes, the 600,000 (it's actually a bit less) does not include Michigan or Florida.
Obama's preferred metric is actually pledged delegates won. The popular vote test is one conceived by the Clinton campaign and others, because they have a chance of catching Obama and it would give superdelegates a plausible rationale for overturning the elected delegates.
You could take Illinois away from Obama. But why not take California or NY away from Hillary? Then he'd be ahead by 1 million. And they, like Illinois, are sure to go Democratic.