Winning or losing a state's "PRIMARY" election ...

[Ganja Ninja]

doesn't mean you'll do the same in that state's "GENERAL" election. So can all you Hillary supporters stop repeating this false analogy? John McCain has won state primaries. Is that suppose to mean he can't be defeated in those states in their general elections? It's blatantly false and disingenuous to keep repeating something so ridiculous.

[frogcycle]

1. you are correct, but it works both ways

Obama has won plenty of primaries in states where he would not stand a chance in the general

The chant about "he's won more states" rings pretty hollow

[Mezzo]

2. perzactly. nt

[Ganja Ninja]

4. I agree 100%.

Hillary won the Texas primary but I wouldn't give her a snowball's chance in hell to win the general.

[TwilightGardener]

3. There's no logic to it. I don't get it either. If you have two choices

for a primary, one is going to win and one is going to lose--it has no bearing on the general election. Huckabee won some southern states--Romney won some western states. Does that mean McCain won't?

[DemGa]

5. If a candidate is not connecting with a certain segment of voters

it would certainly seem to be a problem. If there are deep divisions in the Dem electorate, there could be a problem

[democrattotheend]

6. True, but you could make that argument about either candidate

I don't think most African Americans will vote for McCain, but they might stay home if they feel Obama was cheated out of the nomination. I am tired of people acting like the preferences of blue collar white voters are more important than the preferences of African Americans. I understand the logic - African Americans have historically voted heavily Democratic, while working class whites, or "Reagan Democrats", have been swing voters for the past few decades. But I don't think that we should take any voters for granted, and I am tired of Obama being judged by his ability to connect with white and Latino voters, with the assumption that black voters can just be taken for granted no matter who wins the nomination.

[rox63]

8. So does this mean that Hillary can't win Minnesota or Wisconsin?

After all, she "didn't connect" there. :eyes:

[DemGa]

10. It sure could make a difference in OH and PA.

[City Lights]

7. They can't help themselves. It's all they have.

Pity them. Or not.

[BlooInBloo]

9. Digby's blog has a levelheaded summary...

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/friedman-units-election-style-by-dday.html

And I agree with Stoller, we're going to be fine. Democrats forced a runoff, and came within a hair's breadth of winning, in a seat in the middle of Mississippi (MS-01) tonight, an R+10 seat. The "Clinton/Obama voters will vote for McCain if their guy doesn't win" polling is about as relevant in the middle of a hotly contested primary as a national Paul-Richardson head-to-head (You might have noticed that Ron Paul got 16% of the vote in the GOP primary in PA tonight, and Huckabee 21% 11%. Does that mean core Republicans won't vote McCain? Uh, no). There were high numbers for disafffected McCain supporters voting for Gore over Bush in 2000. This is essentially a Parliamentary country among core party members, the kind who vote in primaries.

[SunsetDreams]

11. It's called desperation!