Photos
Blog
NewslettersSemi-super Tuesday
Today is a (insert cliché here) day for Hillary Clinton.
It could be a make-or-break day. Or perhaps it's her last stand.
Can you even say that with a straight face when the Texas primary is the subject?
This is the headline on CNN.com right now: Another make-or-break, do-or-die primary day
Wow, CNN got a two for one on that deal.
Or maybe this is where she becomes the come back kid. Heck, it worked for Billy boy.
Or maybe, just maybe, this is where she starts to fade into bolivian. Thanks, Iron Mike.
Whatever happens, as long as we keep getting screen shots of Eva Longoria, Political Pulse will be happy. Shouldn't there be some rule to not campaign with people that make you look like a wet mop? Don't know how McCain would get around that one.
But we digress.
So today is semi-super Tuesday. At least that's what we're calling it. It's not super Tuesday. And it's not tsunami Tuesday. By the way, when did it again become acceptable to use tsunami so freely? I thought that shelf life on a tragedy was at least 10 years.
But again, we digress.
So this is a big day. Obama has rolled off 11 straight wins. He's like the Houston Rockets of the primary season. He's a buzz saw. He's heating up. He's on fire. He's insane. Wait, that was Crazy Eddie who was insane.
Have I mentioned that I digress.
So what's going to happen when the polls close tonight?
Well my gut says Ohio is going to go to Clinton. This NAFTA flap couldn't have come at a worse time for Obama.
Vermont is going to go to the maple syrup industry, and Rhode Island is going to go to Peter Griffin. Seriously, that's how much Clinton and Obama care about those two states.
Then there's Texas and Eva. I don't know if the Eva/Tony Parker endorsement is going to be enough for Clinton. Maybe if she had Tim Duncan cleaning up the boards and Bruce Bowen tripping Obama on his way to campaign events she'd do OK.
And all that means I think Obama will take Texas and Clinton will live to fight another day, keep the faith, march on, push on, keep the flame lit..... (insert cliché here)
- ileslie's blog
- Login to post comments
- 305 reads
There is nothing stunning or unusual about one of the parties going to their national convention with the nomination up for grabs. It just hasn't happened in a while.
Just like 2000 taught a whole bunch of folks about the Electoral College, this year may teach some folks about how the convention process is supposed to operate. :)
I don't know, Teddy, I think the general rule of people not wanting to watch the sausage being made applies here.
Here are the negatives I see associated with going into the convention without a clear candidate:
* Democrat or Republican, if you go into the convention without a candidate you lose steam. The convention should be a party for that candidate. Each speaker should be better than the next leading up to a crescendo of people dancing to "Don't — stop — thinking about tomorrow. Don't — stop — it'll soon be here."
I guess convention wrangling worked for Jimmy Smitts on the West Wing, but I don't see it working here.
* Sure, we can explain to people how the electoral process really works, but they'll never understand. All it will do will create a further sense of confusion and voter disenfranchisement. Shoot, every four years how many people are there that you know who ask "electoral college what?"
Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm not hanging around the smartest circles.
* The additional cost to the newspaper industry. If we go into the convention without a candidate then every newspaper in the country is going to have run these full-page graphics explaining the whole process. Do you know how newspaper print costs? Do you?
On a side note, am I the only who gets the sense that someone flicked a switch yesterday and all across the country people suddenly realized: "Wait, what? We're gonna send Obama up against McCain? Nope. That's not gonna work."
I'm not drinking the Clinton Kool-Aid, but I really feel if McCain had the GOP nomination from day 1, this would be much less of a race on the Democratic side.
-Ian-
The 1968 Violence at the DNC aside, I think a convention like that helps the party in question because the news cycles stay focused on them.
In advertising, a Pepsi commercial may not make someone want to buy Pepsi directly, but it almost always makes folks think about wanting a soda. Similarly, the coverage leading up to an undecided convention may not help a specific candidate get a "bounce" per se, but their party will have gotten one due to the saturation of coverage.
Take this year. Now that McCain is done and decided, you cannot deny that 90% of the media coverage between now and the conventions will be on the Dems, as it isn't exactly news to say, "it's been fifty days since McCain became the nominee and he suggested again today that he thinks he'd be a good president."
Yes, yes, there will now be time for him to get the GOP all 100% unified behind him and yes, there could be some hard feelings left after the DNC if they don't play it smart, but as an outside observer, give me four months of almost blanket news coverage anyday for those risks.