wileedog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 10:37 PM
Original message |
HIllary as VP: Just the Math |
|
Before I start this, let me say I am an Obama supporter who is no big fan of the Clintons. Either of them.
That said, I see the vehement denial of the idea of her on the ticket from other Obama supporters, and on a gut level I agree with them. She:
1 - Goes against his message of change 2 - Has ready made ads for the GOP regarding his readiness and even mentioning McCain as better prepared to be CiC 3 - Ugh, Bill. Hide the interns.
And so on.
That said, 17 million people voted for Hillary Clinton this year in a PRIMARY. Thats insane. For perspective, 14 million people voted in the 2004 Dem Primary TOTAL. In a highly charged electoral atmosphere to boot that year.
Between Hillary and Obama, by the time the primaries have ended you will have 35 million people who have ALREADY pulled the lever for one of these candidates and will be highly motivated to not only do so again, but to drag their friends and family with them.
Say what you want, but Bush won the 2004 vote with 62 Million votes. We would already have OVER HALF that without spending a nickel or a month in GE campaign mode.
That's some some serious juju. The Repubs are not going to turn out those kind of numbers this year. Not to mention, whatever you think of her, it would be awesome watching her kick the snot out Mitt Romney in the VP debates.
Again, I understand the mixed messages of their campaigns. I understand the deluge of swiftboating to come and the negatives. I understand and actually really don't look forward at all to the Clinton's lurking in the background in the #2 spot - I don't think they are used to that or really wired well for it.
I'm just presenting the numbers. Despite the energizing of the Repub Base Clinton would bring, to START an election with 35 million votes in your pocket is a HUGE advantage, and perhaps shouldn't be tossed away lightly on the assumption that the majority of those votes will "come around".
I think we can win either way, just throwing it out for discussion.
|
David Dunham
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 10:43 PM
Response to Original message |
cliffordu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 10:45 PM
Response to Original message |
2. YEP - absolutely correct. |
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. How many would leave if they percieved change to be a ploy? How many |
|
Repos voted in Operation Chaos?
How many actual long time voting Democrats would vote Obama in Nov without Hill on the ticket, even if they voted Clinton in the primary?
Clinton doesn't bring all her votes with her, yet leave them out as unreachable if she isn't the VP.
So your numbers are rather linear and they are simplistic, and they make some assumptions that aren't true and others that may not be true.
There is no honest way you can say that an Obama/Clinton ticket starts out with 35 million votes.
Her endorsement of McCain over Obama is irrelevant unless she's the top of the ticket, by the way. In the #2 spot it doesn't matter. Of greater importance was her thrice repeated remarks about assassination and timing as a reason to stay in.
The #2 spot isn't much of a vote draw, ever, for anybody. It's of questionable importance. I think it helped Gore in Florida with Jews, for instance, but elsewhere and to what degree is always the subject of great debate.
I think trampling on a winning message is a bad idea. There is every indication it will also be a winner in the GE and I wouldn't reverse course now.
|
texas_indy
(432 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:17 PM
Response to Original message |
4. SHe doesn't want VP, she wants the top spot which is why she won't quit........nt |
dansolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The math doesn't work that way |
|
There is no synergy. There are Clinton supporters that will still not vote for any ticket that doesn't have Hillary on top, and also the Obama supporters who will not vote if she is on the ticket. Then you also have to factor in the net loss from the Republicans who would have sat out the election (or voted for Bob Barr) but who would cast their votes for McCain just to keep Hillary out of the White House, as well as any Independent voters who would have considered voting for Obama, but not for Hillary.
Let's be honest and say what this is really about. The only purpose of putting Hillary on the ticket is to avoid her, her surrogates, and her supporters disrupting Obama's campaign.
|
Colobo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Obama/Clinton is a winning ticket. |
woolldog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:30 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I think that's too simplistic. |
|
Do the 17 million she brings (assuming she brings that many and that is a BIG assumption) compensate for the difficulty that ticket will have with independents and republicans? will it compensate for the increased GOP turnout?
17+17 = 34 That is not enough to win. And her presence on the ticket may make it harder for the ticket to win those additional votes. And it might require the ticket to win more than it otherwise would have to given increased GOP turnout.
I also doubt that Clinton has this special appeal with blue collar voters. It's one thing to win blue collar white voters against a black man. It's another to win them against John McCain. Obama should get a VP who draws in those voters like a magnet and I'm not convinced Clinton does that.
|
wileedog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. That's also too simplistic |
|
14 million people voted in the 2004 Dem Primary. 59 million voted for Kerry in the GE. That's a 4.5 multiple.
Now obviously you can't do a straight extrapolation, but if you did that is the equivalent of 157 million voters in the GE for Obama.
Again, its not that 34+ million voters is enough to win outright - obviously not. But when you take Primary turnout as typically 1/4 of GE turnout that becomes potentially a huge number, even with the factors you site.
And I think there is a big difference between 17 million fired up Obama supporters and 17 million "okay fine whatever" Clinton supporters vs. 34 million rabid "Holy Shit We Are Going To Stomp McCain" voters.
Again, I'm not pushing this as the only option, maybe not even the best option. But I don't think it should be dismissed outright.
|
anamnua
(363 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jun-01-08 11:34 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Every few days this lame dog gets back to its feet |
|
Hillary is a woman of class, integrity, and principle. There is no way that she will organically entangle herself with the faux messiah.
|
musicblind
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-02-08 12:07 AM
Response to Original message |
10. I agree with you! Obama/Clinton would be a good idea :) |
AJH032
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-02-08 12:08 AM
Response to Original message |
11. I've said before, Obama is a shoe-in for the presidency if he chooses Clinton |
|
and if not, I think he'll have a very hard time.
|
BigBearJohn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-02-08 01:13 AM
Response to Original message |
12. The idea of the first black and first woman as a team seems very intriquing. |
vaberella
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-02-08 01:15 AM
Response to Original message |
13. You forgot one more thing... |
|
4. Nancy Pelosi (whom I adore) would probably cut someone.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 10:31 AM
Response to Original message |