Sen. Clinton; About Your Win In West Virginia...
I hate to break it to you, but there's three things to consider about your well-deserved yet predictable victory:
- The demographics of West Virginia was highly in your favor: women older than 60; a majority with no college education; a state noticeably right-of-center. On top of that, the people of this state overwhelmingly believed that despite his words to the contrary, Sen. Obama supports the words and beliefs of Rev. Jeremiah Wright 100%. In other words: you should have won by more than 33-37%, more like 50-60%. Especially considering that your campaign supporters were being welcome with open arms while Sen. Obama's supporters were getting doors slammed in their faces and being sworn at.
- As Daily Kos diarist kubla000 points out, you margin of victory doesn't really compare to Obama's blowout wins. He won D.C. by 52%, but many dismissed it because of it's demographics. Why can't the same argument be used for your victory tonight?
- According to the Washington Post: John Edwards got 7%. Meaning, as much as the people of West Virginia disliked Obama, you still couldn't get them all to side with you. So ponder this: If it was still a three-person race, would you still be so confident about "changing momentum" or "having every vote count?" Or would you be pushing Edwards out of the race, hoping that you could get his leftovers? It's very likely that many of the votes both you and Obama have received in the past few months could have gone to Edwards, and you should be calling the former Senator every morning and thanking him for suspending his campaign.
Comments