Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The myth of Hillary's momentum...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
GumboYaYa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 12:53 PM
Original message
The myth of Hillary's momentum...
Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 12:56 PM by GumboYaYa
Holding primaries and caucuses over a period of months in states with significantly different demographics can create a myth of momentum. Hillary's campaign is currently riding that myth, but closer analysis of the results in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island show there is no real momentum for her campaign coming out of these contests.

All three of these states are demographically extremely favorable for Hillary. Ohio perhaps has the largest concentration of her core demographic (working class white voters) than any other state in America. The Hispanic vote was key to her victory in Texas. Hispanic voters are also part of Hillary's core constituency. Rhode Island was also tailor made for Hillary. All three states are states that she should win. The fact that Obama was able to close her immense lead in Texas in a couple of weeks, should really scare the Clinton campaign going into PA.

In all three of these victories, Hillary did nothing to take away any of Obama's core constituency. She did regain her constituency, which is really more stopping the bleeding than gaining momentum. The other thing she did was stop Obama's momentum. He had real momentum, meaning that he was not just winning his core supporters, but taking away Clinton's core supporters. Stopping Obama's momentum, however, did not translate into gaining momentum for her own campaign. To gain any real momentum, Hillary needed to start taking away Obama's core voters, and she didn't do that, despite throwing the"kitchen sink" at him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. I do not understand anyone who votes based on momentum, anyway.
Who are these people? Why would they be more affected by momentum than by issues? It's so strange. I simply don't get it. Do people wake up one morning, and say to themselves, "Oh! Let's check and see who has momentum, so I know who to vote for?"

If people really do vote that way, all I can say is, sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GumboYaYa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. It is perverse, but there are a lot of people who want to "vote for the winner."
They need to be validated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. It enables them to perceive themselves as "winners" by association.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. I think part of the phenomena of momentum comes from the fact that any candidate takes
on a different demeanor when winning. It is obviously much more fun to give a victory speech with all your people cheering you on than a concession/re-motivate the troops speech. (Obama's awesome thoughtful speeches are not typical - to get what I'm saying think back to earlier races you followed. - For instance, there are few more naturally ebullient politicians than Edwards - yet even when he pulled off a not anticipated second in Iowa in 2004, his speech, did not compare to the complete joy the Kerry people had, led by Kerry saying with a huge smile that he loved Iowa.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. But those are AFTER the elections.
Again, don't they pay attention to the speeches in their own states leading up to the races? (I personally don't care for Obama's victory speeches, but that's just a matter of personal taste).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Sure - but for those of us not in early states,
Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 02:05 PM by karynnj
the early view of the candidates is the debates and those televised victory speeches. It's also a case of the tone of the campaign. It is far easier to be upbeat and project happiness when you are winning. (Again, Edwards after NV was not the Edwards of pre- Iowa or of early 2004. You could see the difference in his face.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. Everywhere Clinton had 20-40 pt lead it was surpassed or gap significantly closed by election day.
I certainly do NOT want that bad a campaigner representing Dems into the general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JimGinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Only Momentum She Has Is In The M$M
Did you happen to catch the Obama camp's "primary gameplan" Russert got his hands on? Every primary prediction was eeriely accurate except Maine - where they thought HRC would win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GumboYaYa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. When the demographic trends for candidates are as entrenchedas they are
in this election, it gets very easy to predict the races. That is why any experienced campaign operatives know that Hillary can not win the pledged delegates she needs to take a lead in that category in the remaining contests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. She won likely she always does: gender, age, and latinos...
prejudice based on sex, age, and race.

Sorry folks, I know it doesn't sound pretty but that's what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. If Half The Democratic Party Is Prejudiced We Have A Real Problem
Prejudice is strong stuff... I would assume they wouldn't vote for an African American under your scenario under any circumstances...


How will Obama make up the defecit in the General Election?

Are there that many enlightened color-blind Republicans and Independents?

Actually, I think folks vote for a host of reasons... I suspect a lot of her supporter admire her toughness and remember she was involved in an administration that brought us the best economy in the history of the republic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. DSB, here's a little something you wouldn't want to miss...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-coryell/racism-and-clintons-vict_b_90219.html

Racism and Clinton's Victory in Ohio

Fourth, racism played a bigger role in Ohio than other states because the Clinton campaign went negative. Commentators have noted that Obama fared less well among white Democrats in Ohio (27% to 70%) than in earlier states. There has been some chatter (see for example the comments here) about this showing that Ohio is more racist than other states. I don't think this is the story, or at least not the whole story. I think that the racial divide grew in Ohio because Clinton's attacks on Obama were more negative than in earlier contests.

________________________________________________

Let's face it, Clinton not only benefitted from racism, she exploited it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. I Avoid Huffington Post...To Me It's Every Bit As Hateful Toward Ms. Clinton As Free Republic And
Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 02:20 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
Lucianne.Com...

Am I racist?

I voted for Hillary...It was probably the first time there was a white candidate and a black candidate in a race where I didn't vote for the black candidate...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. That's just silly. There are articles both for and against Hillary there.
Perhaps you might want to make yourself aware of both sides her candidacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
8. Didn't Obama wind up winning the delegate count coming out of Texas?
If so, she didn't really win Texas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GumboYaYa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Good point. But the demographic trends in the primary are still
as to performance in the future states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-06-08 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. She didn't win TX. That was typical media Clintonhype.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC