The primary vs. general election fallacy

[babylonsister]

The primary vs. general election fallacy
Winning a state in the primary doesn’t mean you’ll win it in the general

Mark Murray
Deputy political director



After 43 Democratic nominating contests, including Tuesday’s primary in Mississippi, Sen. Hillary Clinton now trails Sen. Barack Obama in both state victories and the number of pledged delegates won.

That’s unlikely to change between now and the last scheduled primary in June.

But Clinton and her campaign have seized on an argument, hoping to sway enough superdelegates over to her side.

They contend that because Clinton has won primaries in important battleground states like Ohio — and perhaps Pennsylvania next month — she is better positioned to win those states in the general election.

After her triumph last week in Ohio, the Clinton campaign issued talking points for its surrogates.

They included this statement: “She’s won in states that Democrats need if they are to succeed in November” — referring to states like Ohio, New Mexico and Florida. It's worth noting, however that neither Clinton nor Obama campaigned in the Sunshine State after the Democratic National Committee stripped it of its delegates for moving up its contest before Super Tuesday.

more...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23591347/

[unpossibles]

1. if anything, it's likely to be the reverse

I don't know, but I would guess quite a number of "Clinton supporters" in Ohio's primary will vote Republican come fall.

Edited for clarity.

[islandmkl]

2. pretty much historically true...

but that does not equate into the loser in any state primary would carry that state in the general, either....

and it looks like ALL the states may come into play this year...

[Vincardog]

3. So that is the new "Targeted States" strategy? I am so tired of the DLC deciding where democracy

will be an alternative to the GOP's fascism.