The Real Target Of The Argument Over Electability? The Super-Delegates
One thing to keep in mind about the Obama camp's electability arguments is that they're being amplified right now for a reason: It's the argument over who's more electable that could very well play a key role in what the super-delegates do when the voting is all over.
The super-dels are the real target of the Obama camp's pitch -- and Camp Hillary's, too. The Obama camp knows that Hillary advisers are currently, and will continue, to press the case privately to super-delegates that his failure to win key big states should make them nervous about his prospects this fall -- and that this should influence them even if Obama wins the pledged del count.
The Obama camp is now ratcheting up its public and private efforts to neutralize this argument, in hopes of persuading the super-dels to follow the winner of the pledged-del count.
For instance, the Obama campaign has just sent out another memo -- the second of the day! -- elaborating the case for his electability and attempting to debunk Hillary's "big states" spin. This one's signed by pols in non-"key" states Obama has won: Iowa's Chet Culver, Wisconsin's Jim Doyle, Washington's Christine Gregoire, Virginia's Tim Kaine, and Missouri's Claire McCaskill.
Key excerpt:
The Clinton campaign’s argument ignores relevant facts about how significant a role these [smaller] states played in determining the outcome of the presidential race in 2004. In fact, Obama has won 7 of 9 of the biggest states that were close in the 2004 presidential election and have already selected delegates to the 2008 Democratic convention.More than half of the votes that Senator Clinton has won so far have come from just five states. It’s also worth noting that polls in four of these five states show that Obama would be a stronger general election candidate against McCain than Clinton.
The full memo is here.
Comments (115)