What Will It Mean If Pennsylvania Clinton Win Is Larger Than Expected?

News Type: Opinion — Wed Apr 9, 2008 2:03 PM EDT

politics, obama, barack-obama, democrats, clinton, hillary-clinton

For most today, the likely Pennsylvania win is single digit, and it may be in Obama's favor. Certainly, as in every other recent primary, the anticipation is that Clinton will not do well because of Obama's money and draw with younger voters.

But the signs are present that the win could be much larger than anticipated. The precise impact of the Wright controversy is not accurately reflected in the polling by many of the big pollsters, and the likely results of the Pennsylvania primary are muddled by the continuing play by big media over stories about Hillary Clinton that Obama is able to avoid the minute he responds. Moreover, one poll shows a huge and clearly insurmountable lead at this point in favor of Hillary Clinton.

The reason for this is that the electorate in Pennsylvania is well-aware of East Coast politics, the East Coast MSM, and their play for Obama votes and foreshortening Hillary Clinton's run. From NBC to CNN, the bias favoring Obama is palpable. And Pennsylvanians do not like this at all. Moreover, the issue of who is going to vote and how is an open question in Pennsylvania.

Santorum's past elections provide signs of the volatility of Pennsylvania.

In 1990, at age 32, Santorum was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Pennsylvania's 18th District, located in the eastern suburbs of Pittsburgh. He scored a significant upset, defeating a seven-term Democratic incumbent, Doug Walgren. Although the 18th was heavily Democratic, Santorum attacked Walgren for living outside the district for most of the year. He was reelected in 1992, in part because the district lost its share of Pittsburgh as a result of redistricting. In Congress, as a member of the Gang of Seven, Santorum worked to expose congressional corruption by outing the guilty parties in the House banking scandal.

In 1994, at the age of 36, Santorum was elected to the U.S. Senate, defeating the incumbent Democrat, Harris Wofford, who was 32 years his senior. Santorum was re-elected in 2000, in large part because his opponent, Congressman Ron Klink, was all but unknown in the eastern part of the state (he represented a suburban Pittsburgh district). Despite this, Santorum barely won, taking only 51% of the vote.

Is Santorum's rejection a sign of the way he moved steadily right, or a sign that Pennsylvania is an independent minded electorate that will vote for the least controversial candidate? And for that matter, who is the least controversial between Obama and Clinton?

This will be the first state to vote after Wright came to the fore. This will be the first state that will vote after the "under fire" misstatements by Hillary Clinton. And this will be the third state to vote that knows for certain that if it votes for Obama he will almost certainly become the Democratic nominee for President.

Forget for a moment who has the ability to get out the Democratic vote. Forget Obama's inability to win in big primary states that the Democrats must win in November.

Stick with only one question. If you were voting in Pennsylvania, and knew you could end Hillary Clinton's run, would you vote for her? And if you did vote for her, and she won by any margin, is that not more telling than anything else. With the MSM and Obama's millions making no difference, where does that leave you? For that matter, what has changed since Texas and Ohio made their voters' views public?

If Pennsylvania answers these questions by again voting for Clintons, the voters will again show that Obama cannot win the general election. The Pennsylvania voters will also support the view that the national electorate, no matter what the MSM and Obama surrogates say, is not ready for anyone as liberal and dogmatic as Obama.

14 Votes
Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Published to:

politicalcenter's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: none
Regions: none

Public Discussion (44)

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

5.5

3.6

{"commentId":1673061,"authorDomain":"galley-cat"}

galley-cat

If Pennsylvania answers these questions by again voting for Clintons, the voters will again show that Obama cannot win the general election. The Pennsylvania voters will also support the view that the national electorate, no matter what the MSM and Obama surrogates say, is not ready for anyone as liberal and dogmatic as Obama.

I believe they will vote for the one Clinton who is running (Hillary), not the Clinton(s) as you mentioned in your article, since the Clinton(s) are not running for president, but Hillary Clinton is!

galley-cat :-D ...who is getting a little bit weary of seeing the two viewed as one. Hillary is her own woman.

{"commentId":1673061,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"galley-cat"}

5 votes

#1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 2:44 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673459,"authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

Dennis P. McCann

I feel the same way. There are no "Clintons." Bil isn't running for anything, and Hillary doesn't get the credit (or blame) for anything he did as President.

{"commentId":1673459,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

4 votes

#1.1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:21 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673495,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

I see people arguing that "If you get Hill, you get Bill." .......I disagree with those people.

{"commentId":1673495,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

1 vote

#1.2 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:28 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673508,"authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

Dennis P. McCann

If that was true this campaign would be a lot closer.

{"commentId":1673508,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

2 votes

#1.3 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:31 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673753,"authorDomain":"objectivity"}

KEEPING IT REAL!

Hillary can't have it both ways because she uses her husband record towards her experience and talk about how better off the American people was during here husband administration and also in the beginning they was running the campaign as partners.

{"commentId":1673753,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"objectivity"}

2 votes

#1.4 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 5:41 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674077,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

I see people arguing that "If you get Hill, you get Bill." .......I disagree with those people

And I beg to differ

....you cannot really know who was calling the shots in the last Clinton Administration.....Therefore, since none of us were in bed with them.....it's anybody's guess.

Isn't it?

[Actually, this is not a question...it's common sense]

{"commentId":1674077,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

1 vote

#1.5 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 7:21 PM EDT

{"commentId":1675009,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

Btw....does anyone know who's gonna call the shots for Obama.....now or in the future?

No answer is necessary....because no answer is possible. Unless you're part of a Manage A Tois?

{"commentId":1675009,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

1 vote

#1.6 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 2:04 AM EDT

{"commentId":1675199,"authorDomain":"CCS"}

Doc CeCe

Another example of wanting it both ways: expecting people with loyalty to her husband to endorse her for President as if loyalty to one precludes loyalty to the other *cough* Richardson *cough*.

{"commentId":1675199,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"CCS"}

1 vote

#1.7 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:59 AM EDT

{"commentId":1676308,"authorDomain":"coryperry"}

CoryPerry

I find it odd that the Clintons want everyone to be loyal to them, yet they would drop being loyal if it meant political gain on anyone they had to.

Richardson is the perfect example of when loyalty should never trump what is right for this country. He made a decision based on facts, not loyalty to a party or candidate, which is exactly what he should have done.

{"commentId":1676308,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"coryperry"}

3 votes

#1.8 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:06 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677201,"authorDomain":"uncleandy"}

uncleandy

Well, steve, I think what Gally is saying that you will get both, but hillary is running for president, and she has been running things all along. It is just that point seems to get over-looked. For some reason, everyone seems to assume the reverse. Gally may have a point, looking back, didn't Hillary move into the Cheif of Staff Office, (the first door from outside the oval office) where you see everyone coming and going?

{"commentId":1677201,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"uncleandy"}

1 vote

#1.9 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:25 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677424,"authorDomain":"politicalcenter"}

politicalcenter

The reference to Clinton was to Hillary Clinton.

{"commentId":1677424,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"politicalcenter"}

1 vote

#1.10 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:17 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677639,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

Richardson is the perfect example of when loyalty should never trump what is right for this country. He made a decision based on facts, not loyalty to a party or candidate, which is exactly what he should have done.

And if you believe that....it explains why you are voting for Obama...:-)

{"commentId":1677639,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

2 votes

#1.11 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:22 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677655,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

Uh, how do you argue against it? Richardson's loyalty lay with the Clintons for years.

{"commentId":1677655,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

#1.12 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:26 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678040,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

Uh, how do you argue against it? Richardson's loyalty lay with the Clintons for years

I think he's [Richardson] full of crap...and that Obama offered him a job...but we will see.

{"commentId":1678040,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

2 votes

#1.13 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:38 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678046,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

So is that a baseless claim, or do you have some evidence? (Historical precedence counts.)

{"commentId":1678046,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

#1.14 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:42 PM EDT

{"commentId":1684926,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

So is that a baseless claim, or do you have some evidence? (Historical precedence counts.)

Richardson is the perfect example of when loyalty should never trump what is right for this country. He made a decision based on facts, not loyalty to a party or candidate, which is exactly what he should have done

baseless claim, or do you have some evidence

Btw...as it this claim.[your opinion]

...but we will see.

won't we?[ Ah!.... Indisputable]

{"commentId":1684926,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

#1.15 - Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:27 PM EDT

{"commentId":1690519,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

Did you confuse me with CoryPerry? Don't do that, if you did.

{"commentId":1690519,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

#1.16 - Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:09 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673265,"authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

jfxgillis

pc:

Nice try, but the expectations game was set weeks ago.

More than ten points is a strong win for Hillary and she remains viable. Less than ten, she clings on until NC and IN. She loses, she's out.

{"commentId":1673265,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

2 votes

#2 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 3:42 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673271,"authorDomain":"epiphany-sorbet"}

epiphany sorbet

And 10 points or more nets me $5 from a dreamer.

{"commentId":1673271,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"epiphany-sorbet"}

3 votes

#2.1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 3:44 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673364,"authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

jfxgillis

What a coincidence. Less than ten points nets me a fiver.

{"commentId":1673364,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

2 votes

#2.2 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:04 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673391,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

I wouldn't be surprised if either of you win, honestly.

{"commentId":1673391,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

2 votes

#2.3 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:09 PM EDT

{"commentId":1675202,"authorDomain":"CCS"}

Doc CeCe

If she wins by 10 percentage point, she'll gain no more than 25 delegates. How does that make her more viable?

{"commentId":1675202,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"CCS"}

1 vote

#2.4 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:01 AM EDT

{"commentId":1675329,"authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

jfxgillis

DfO:

Twenty-five is a lot considering Dem party rules. She needs to close ground on elected delegates in order to make the case to the convention that the primaries were effectively a tie. A big win in PA gives her momentum in the remaing primaries where she would presumably close the gap even more.

{"commentId":1675329,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"jfxgillis"}

2 votes

#2.5 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:56 AM EDT

{"commentId":1673327,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

If Pennsylvania answers these questions by again voting for Clintons, the voters will again show that Obama cannot win the general election. The Pennsylvania voters will also support the view that the national electorate, no matter what the MSM and Obama surrogates say, is not ready for anyone as liberal and dogmatic as Obama.

Come again? Man, I was on board with most of this until this little bit. Obama losing the Democratic primary is no proof that he would not beat McCain in November:

According to recent polls, 22% of either nominees supporters are all that would vote McCain come November. For all the stock you can put in those answers, given that it's only April and American voters are a fickle lot, and that polls can only be so accurate, your claim is nearly impossible to back up. Even if one state could be rightfully applied to the whole nation, and given the 51-49 split between Clinton and Obama, and given that the Democrats are far more energized behind the popular Hillary OR the mobilizing Obama than the Reupublicans under a frankly boring Mccain... more than 75% of Democratic voters will outweigh the Pubs with either candidate, if neither makes a major gaffe in the mean time.

{"commentId":1673327,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

2 votes

#3 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 3:56 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674279,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

22% of disgruntled Democrats added to 90% of Conservatives and Republicans ...with no place to hide but the basement....... from their arch enemy "the far Liberal Left" in Obama drag. Comes November.... = President McCain!...for better or worse!

Many Thanks to the Democratic Far Left! .....

.Comma to the wedding! .

..you're all invited!

{"commentId":1674279,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

3 votes

#3.1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:32 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674551,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

What exactly makes you think that Republicans are going to get out and vote in November in a force even close to big enough to beat the Democratic nominee, unless the Democratic party manages to alienate its voters?

{"commentId":1674551,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

1 vote

#3.2 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 10:08 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673450,"authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

Dennis P. McCann

She won't get a big win...she might not win at all, the way the polls are going.

But in the long run it isn't going to matter all that much. Barring unforeseen circumstances, like Hillary dropping out (heh), this is going to the convention, probably with Obama in the lead on delegates, popular vote and States won.

What happens there is anyone's guess.

{"commentId":1673450,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"paperdragon"}

3 votes

#4 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 4:19 PM EDT

{"commentId":1673781,"authorDomain":"agio"}

agio

Are you being paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign? I only ask because your only contribution to the Vine has been articles either bashing Obama or praising Hillary.

You do know that the purpose of this site is to encourage citizen journalism and commentary, and not for astroturf, don't you?

{"commentId":1673781,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"agio"}

1 vote

#5 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 5:47 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674213,"authorDomain":"headinthegame"}

headinthegame

go get em!

{"commentId":1674213,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"headinthegame"}

#5.1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:08 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674128,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

agio

Are you being paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign? I only ask because your only contribution to the Vine has been articles either bashing Obama or praising Hillary.

You do know that the purpose of this site is to encourage citizen journalism and commentary, and not for astroturf, don't you?

And how slanted are you?...to Obama that is! ....I haven't seen you say one good thing about Hillary in any thread...are you being paid?....in my view...you must be.

Take a seat ...and quit complaining.

{"commentId":1674128,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

3 votes

#6 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 7:39 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674153,"authorDomain":"agio"}

agio

Well I certainly support Obama, but if you look at my column it's quite obvious that I write about a lot of things, many of which have nothing to do with politics.

{"commentId":1674153,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"agio"}

#6.1 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 7:46 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674184,"authorDomain":"epiphany-sorbet"}

epiphany sorbet

agio,

I don't think you get to define another user's participation here . . . . thank goodness.

{"commentId":1674184,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"epiphany-sorbet"}

3 votes

#6.2 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 7:56 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674315,"authorDomain":"agio"}

agio

Oh, please. If I were trying to do something as quixotic as exert control over content on the Vine do you really think I'd start here?

What bothers me is not who this new poster supports, but the fact that they have, as far as I can tell, never posted a single comment. Rather they have simply submitted article after article supporting a specific politician, and bashing another.

In any case, it was a question and all Politicalcenter has to do is answer. But thanks for defending poor, defenseless little Politicalcenter against the big bad ogre me, lol.

And now, the miracle of the Stop Tracking button once again doest the trick.

{"commentId":1674315,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"agio"}

1 vote

#6.3 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:43 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674991,"authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

gpnavonod

And now, the miracle of the Stop Tracking button once again doest the trick.

Hey! Great trick!

bye-

{"commentId":1674991,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"gpnavonod"}

3 votes

#6.4 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 1:55 AM EDT

{"commentId":1674204,"authorDomain":"headinthegame"}

headinthegame

let's hope Clinton wins huge!

{"commentId":1674204,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"headinthegame"}

3 votes

#7 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 8:07 PM EDT

{"commentId":1674498,"authorDomain":"bondibox"}

bondibox

From NBC to CNN, the bias favoring Obama is palpable.

Uggh. Please back this up with a fact or two, or else promote it as your opinion.

bondibox :-D ... who is getting a little bit weary of unsubstantiated accusations of bias.

{"commentId":1674498,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"bondibox"}

#8 - Wed Apr 9, 2008 9:48 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677434,"authorDomain":"politicalcenter"}

politicalcenter

Please do your own research.

{"commentId":1677434,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"politicalcenter"}

#8.1 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:21 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678221,"authorDomain":"bondibox"}

bondibox

Please do your own research.

Yeah, sure. You make the wild ass claims, then tell the reader to research it?

It's your argument, hence it's your research to do.

{"commentId":1678221,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"bondibox"}

#8.2 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:49 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678227,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

Children!

This is a judgement call. There's no research to be done. PC feels an Obama bias, and bondi doesn't. Fin.

{"commentId":1678227,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

#8.3 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:51 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678233,"authorDomain":"bondibox"}

bondibox

SteveHouse, you say there is no research to be done - that would make it an opinion. PC says I should do the research, implying there are facts to back it up. If there is supposed research that backs up his (or her) point, it shouldn't be up to the reader to dig for it.

I'm not saying there aren't any biases in the media. Maybe there are. But this is newsvine and not blogspot and I expect a slightly more intelligent argument to be made here.

{"commentId":1678233,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"bondibox"}

#8.4 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:53 PM EDT

{"commentId":1678250,"authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

SteveHouse

That's just mean. I respond, and after I post your entire comment has been edited and changed.

That's a valid point, but I don't see where it was presented as fact before you asked for evidence. I guess you could take it as a statement of fact if you want, but to me it's clearly an opinion until PC says to research these "facts" to base a judgement call on.

Media bias is, actually, an intelligent discussion topic.... That is, if it's done as something other than a drive-by shout-out.

{"commentId":1678250,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"stevehouse"}

1 vote

#8.5 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:00 PM EDT

{"commentId":1675095,"authorDomain":"RuthGreene"}

RuthGreene

It would seem that we have a lot of desperate people that want to win. What would you win if Hillary Clinton was president? - just looking for real answers.

{"commentId":1675095,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"RuthGreene"}

2 votes

#9 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:13 AM EDT

{"commentId":1676499,"authorDomain":"opal713"}

chiku

This my opinion only: I support Sen. Obama, but Sen. Clinton has the right to stay in the race whether she wins or loses Penn.. This is the most exciting presidential race in my 62 years of life. While others had their excitement, this race has brought in more new voters and lots of people are actually listening to each candidate and reading. If Obama wins the nomination, I am sure he will be prepared for the mud slinging, that's a normal part of politics and he will be slinging also. Finally, if he becomes president, I expect for him to have an intelligent cabinet advising him, but in the end he will use their advice to make decisions as any president would.

{"commentId":1676499,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"opal713"}

2 votes

#10 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:54 PM EDT

{"commentId":1677108,"authorDomain":"thedagda"}

The Dagda

What Will It Mean If Pennsylvania Clinton Win Is Larger Than Expected?

Ken Blackwell staged a coup and became Secretary of the Commonwealth?

{"commentId":1677108,"threadId":"247714","contentId":"1420429","authorDomain":"thedagda"}

1 vote

#11 - Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:06 PM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"247714","isPrivate":false}

POLITICALCENTER

Backyard

What Will It Mean If Pennsylvania Clinton Win Is Larger Than Expected?

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF: