05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
05-04-2018 02:59:17 PM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

Why Barack Needs Hillary

When you look at Obama's electoral map, the supposed new road he intends to draw to 270, the hill is a hard one to climb, with no proof even Barack Obama's 50-state strategy will do it, regardless of his die hard supporter's delusional dreams about "winning without Ohio and Florida." Thomas Schaller, someone I've interviewed a couple of times on the Democratic folly of courting the southern vote, recently wrote that regardless of what Obama's team thinks, The South Will Fall Again to Republicans.

... Mississippi, the state with the nation's highest percentage of African-Americans in its population, illustrates how difficult Mr. Obama's task will be in the South. Four years ago, President Bush beat John Kerry there by 20 points. For the sake of argument, let's assume that Mr. Obama could increase black turnout in Mississippi to 39 percent of the statewide electorate, up from 34 percent in 2004, according to exit polls. And let's assume that Mr. Obama will win 95 percent of those voters, up from the 90 percent who voted for Mr. Kerry four years ago.

If that happened, the black vote would yield Mr. Obama 37 percent of Mississippi's statewide votes. To get the last 13 percent he needs for a majority, Mr. Obama would need to persuade a mere 21 percent of white voters in Mississippi to support him. Sounds easy, right?

But only 14 percent of white voters in the state supported Mr. Kerry. Mr. Obama would need to increase that number by 7 percentage points - a 50 percent increase. Mr. Obama struggled to attract white Democrats in states like Ohio and South Dakota. It strains credulity to believe that he will attract three white voters in Mississippi for every two that Mr. Kerry did....

I've never been convinced of Obama's "new" map, worried that even though Senator Obama's strengths are real, he could win the popular vote down south, but still leave the majority of these states to McCain, which would have our side falling short electorally in a year that is the Democrats to lose. So if Schaller is correct and Obama can't turn the south beyond popular vote, one becomes even more convinced she's the one. See West Virginia, Arkansas, Texas, Ohio... and Florida.

Obama's got to be asking himself who can deliver what he cannot? A national security veep is important, but what state can he or she deliver? Bill Clinton can certainly coax out rural voters who love him, making them more comfortable with a President Obama. But as good as Bill is he's no Hillary, whose star has now risen to equal status of any other, especially since the race has opened out on to Hillary standing very much alone, without Bill, having found her voice, her stride, and full political independence from her president husband. Finishing at the top of her game with her power base still intact, not to mention grumbling, instead of dimming, Hillary's influence and importance is considerably greater than when she started. Nobody can talk middle class economics like Clinton who can attach a voter's concerns to real solutions she understands and can explain, something Obama can't yet match, with John McCain still hopelessly befuddled on the subject.

Clinton's recent speech in Unity, New Hampshire not only reminded everyone of what these two candidates bring separately, but how they stack up side-by-side as a team. It also re-electrified and reinvigorated her supporters, drove home to ambivalent Obama supporters what her substance adds to his star power, making it clear that even though each are strong in their own right, equals even, they look and sound unbeatable together.