Why Can't Obama Win Pennsylvania?*

OBAMA cannot close the deal. Why? Cause the "the new politics"is a lie. He's been more negative than Hillary. You totally lost me when you said the Clintons's were racist. I don't have a racist bone in my body and I still think Hillary is the best candidate.

MIke in Texas writes, "Obama had 6 weeks and a 3to4 to 1 spending advantage to re-introduce himself and "connect to the voters". He flat out failed!"

=====================
No offense Mike but you do realize there are people in this forum who are actually SMART enough to understand that he was 20 POINTS behind Hillary. Low and behold she wins by only 10 points without there being ANY change in the number of delegates, etc. The fact that you (and it seems others) can't grasp that is a little scary.

Why Can't Obama Win Pennsylvania? Real simple. Whether people want to accept it or not these blue-collar white voters in Pennsylvania won't vote for a black man. Simple as that. They are uneducated people who can't make a logical vote. They will vote for John McCain in the fall over Obama, which is a vote AGAINST they're economic interest, which is a FOOLISH vote!! Cut your nose off to spite your face blue-collar white voters because Barack will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. Also when John McCain does nothing to help your economic situation. I don't want to here you cryin' and whinin' about how bad things are for you. Nobody will care because you had a chance to CHANGE that. You won't vote for the man because he is black and that's the bottom line. That is FOOLISH, NOT USING COMMON SENSE, STUPID, DUMB etc.

Hillary can't catch him in the delegate count and the Democratic Party is not willing to risk the fallout of losing the voters that have voted for Obama.
Mainly the African-American vote.

If they take this nomination away from Obama and he has earned it fair and square you will see the Democratic Party lose its most loyal base.

Some White democrats are simply fickle and when they get mad then they protest by voting against what is best for them in the long run. THAT IS SOOOOOOOOOO STUPID!!!!

You're letting your emotions cloud your better judgment. Frail emotions change like the weather and when you come back to reality and realize what you have done then it's too late. It's like acting out in a road rage situation. You take the law into your own hands because your stupid emotions took over and clouded your judgment, now you do something stupid like kill someone and you go to trial and go to jail for 20 to life. Now was that decision better for you and your family? Or should you have used some logical reasoning and calmed yourself down, realizing that letting your anger get the best of you is going to put you on the losing end.

You will regret putting McCain in office. Then you will end up more bitter than you already are.

Obama's supporters are so heavily invested in his campaign that they grasp for any straw. Hence the continued she cannot win the nomination narrative.

Obama had 6 weeks and a 3to4 to 1 spending advantage to re-introduce himself and "connect to the voters". He flat out failed! Remember the long running chant of "everywhere he has the chance and time to personally campaign, he wins"! His campaign, despite such mantras, continued pronostications and wishing, seems to actually be imploding.

If Obama were everything he is proclaimed to be, HRC should be long gone by now. Yet she is still winning primaries, has a solid non-yeiding base, and shows more resilence and fortitude every day.

Pudits say "math" dictates HRC "cannot" win. Yet, I have yet to see a pundit delineate the "math" by which Obama "can" win the 2025. I have asked, and still ask, anyone of said ilk to produce such a concrete formula by which he can. Perhaps someone on this blog would be good enough to do so.

Right now, the truth as I see it, is that the only true formula for an Obama win involves HRC "quitting", and that seems highly unlikely.

Well, I don't know what the media is up to. However, I do know that the same media that sold us on Bush (not me!) twice and helped the Bush administration push the WMD story in Iraq and helped to push the war, are the same media that is desperately and visciously pushing Obama on us. Uh, no thanks! We would rather make our own choice since the media choices have been utter failures. Since the media loves Obama, they should give him an anchor job or make him one of their useless, bias pundits.

Hillary has already won the Democratic Nomination, since the hardcore, long term Democrats have consistently voted for her. Hillary is the OBVIOUS DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE. Obama has received votes from Republicans and Republican leaning Independents; which is highly suspect. 100,000 new Democrats in Penn. were Republicans switching over. Come on people...the Republicans have nothing to lose since they already have McCain. The question then would be WHY? Why do the Republicans want Obama? I know they don't want a Democrat. So what's up with that?

I have been involved in politics for over 50 years and frankly they are so sleasy so often that all of this is just hype.

First, Hillary Clinton should have won Pennsylvania by a larger margin than she won Ohio. All things being equal she has several major advantages.

1. It is a carbon copy in many ways of Ohio.

2. It is her home state and that is a very big advantage. People who pay no attention to politics will vote for a home state person. As will people who have something to gain by having a local become President.

3. Since she was going to win it anyway, it has been hyped as the only state that matters which will cost her in the General Election.

4. Obama has the most sensible plans that have the best chance of succeeding. Experience alone has never produced a good President. But the media is nothing if not shallow and vapid when it comes to a real debate.

All they are capable of doing is rerunning ads, doing polls and basically gossip the East Coast is so wound up in strategies they do not cover realities or long range objective issues. That favors Hillary as well.

However, the General Election is another matter. McCain is an adult. Hillary for all her experience is not mature or able to think long range.

She and her husband have always immediately and often erroneously blamed or claimed that their problems were those of their victims. Eight years of it got very old very fast and I was a supporter. One person committed suicide, Al Gore's chances were hurt as much by the Clinton games as the Republican impeachment. Frankly repeating that is depressing. And it has already started.

Hillary Clinton swift boated herself. In the General Election she is no match for McCain as Commander in Cheif to any voter who looks at the surface. Bosnia and her Red Phone ad were both monumental mistakes. Sometimes it seems the only game the Clintons play is how much can I screw up and still get away with it?

My son is a Democrat and guess what. He supported Hillary and is now supporting McCain. She damned the Democrats to extintion is his mind.

More and more people outside the state that is currently voting, are tired of the sandbox stuff and will not listen to or vote for a Democrat. They have tuned in turned on to the campaign and dropped out with the endless money spent and refusal of the pundits to cover or discuss issues. Or allow the candidates to really debate.

Meanwhile McCain looks better all the time despite everything at least he is perceived as an adult that is going about the business of government.

It is sad that the East Coast press is into strategy that they do not care about anything else. First, they brought us the War in Iraq and non exitant weapons of mass destruction,as well as George Bush the second. Now we get the next royal dynastic nominee which will make 28 years of mediocrity or seriously flawed candidates from only two families. That should not happen in a democracy.

With all his money, and all the star power, and all the media who clearly love him, Obama can't win convincingly in the states that will make the difference in November.

Why? Because his popularity is narrow. His wins in caucus states are being touted with equal weight as Hillary's wins in large states. That's problematic. By simply comparing a Win vs. Loss chart it doesn't tell the true story. Caucus wins reflect a miniscule slice of voters in a state.

The General Election looks much more like a primary election in Ohio or PA, than it does a caucus in Wyoming. Maybe the majority of Democrats are tired of the DNC and the media trying to shove this guy down our throats when we KNOW in our hearts he can't win the GE. He's not ready, and he has more baggage than a socialite on a world cruise.

The real blow came from that farse of a so-called debate the other night...that's why he didn't win PA.

Talk about piling on, ABC anchors Gibson and Stephanopolous, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Rendell, and Nutter.

Its OK, he will outspend her 6 to 1 next time, its not his fault those bitter people are so expensive! He just pulled a Romney, but what if it works next time...

I am so tried of the bias and un-objective reporting by the media. Do these guys only look at the cup as half empty or what? Why do we continue to hear -- Why Obama can't put her away? Well... WHY can't Hillary put him away? Look she has lead in double digits in every state and he has manage to cut her lead by more than half and in some cases actually winning the state overall (i.e., Texas -which incidentally no one acknowledges). Now please be objective, Obama is not running against someone un-established, goodness sake this woman's husband has WON the white house TWICE. Please ask the question, WHAT is wrong with HILLIARY? Why can't she put HIM away????

Obama likes to claim he has more political experience that Senator Clinton because of his time in the IL senate. OOn paper he may have but that can be debunked easily enough. The IL Senate meets for a total of 55 days a year.

He claims he has more foreign "policy" experience because he lived in Indonesia and went to Pakistan for 2 weeks. He discounts Hillary's experience and says it was teas, pre-arranged visits, etc....no...Hillary is the real deal

Hillary and Bill were $9 million in debt when they left the WH. Since that they have managed to overcome those odds and made a lot of money. Hillary connects to the blue collar worker because she really understands us.

Between my husband and I we make almost $100,000 per year now. We have 23 1/2 years of experience through our time in the Navy. I have a college degree. The schools we both attended in the Navy were the equivalent of electical engineering school. We live on God's 4 little acres in KS and we live on a dirt road.

Obama doesn't understand this. He doesn't get it. His arrogance and elitism pushes people like us away. We are the luchbucket Democrats in all to familiar Blue State that hasn't been red in 40 years.

Obama took Kansas. But as much as the Democratic Party thinks we will be red in the Red in the fall, they are wrong....we will be what we have been for 40 years. So there goes one of his statea right there.

Governor Rendell didn't say Obama could take Pennsylvania in the fall. He said he would do all he could in November if Obama is the nominee.

Last night just after the primary was called for Hillary she raised quite a bit of money and it is still growing. 80% of that money came from new donors. A tide has turned. People are listening.

Too many bloggers think that this is a race of "good" and "evil". It occurs to me that the media has not really given Obama's record of accomplishment at all.

And that is because he has little or none....A long term in IL with no real accomplishments. A community organizer? give me a break. I was a community organizer in the 80's and that is not real experience. I think Obama's greatest accomplishment in his early days was a phenomonal voter registration drive.

In IL In 1999, Obama voted against requiring school boards to put Internet
pornography filters on school computers meant for students' use. In
2001, he voted "present" on a bill to keep pornographic book and
video stores and strip clubs from setting up within 10 ,0 000 feet of
schools and churches. In 2003, he voted in the Health and Human
Services Committee for a bill requiring "age appropriate"
sex-education for students in kindergarten through fifth grade.

Despite his talk of promoting reading among inner-city youth, Obama
has repeatedly opposed bills designed to promote discipline in public
schools. In 2001, he twice voted "no" on a bill to let school
districts require unruly students to complete suspensions before they
can be shuffled into a new school district. he voted "present" on an
almost unanimously passed bill requiring adult prosecution for
students who fire guns on school grounds.

Obama has been markedly soft on crime. In 2001, he voted against a
bill that added extra penalties for crimes committed in furtherance
of gang activities. he also voted against a bill making it a criminal
offense for accused gang members, free on bond or on probation, to
associate with known gang members. In 1999, he was the only state
senator to vote against a bill prohibiting early prison release for
criminal sexual abusers.

And in the Senate he co-sponsered a bill that the media used to make fun of....it says that lobbyists can pay for anything as long as the government officials they are lobbying don't sit down. He also voted with big oil interests on the Bush-Cheney bill.

And since then he hasn't had time to chair the committee he was placed on or even vote near as much as Hillary has since this campaign began. His record is mainly this campaign. So we know he's good at fundraising...but we are going to find out if the historic spending levels can buy a state. From Romneys experience I don't think it's going to work.

Interesting task, add the delegates each candidate would get from the states they won if they were divied out "winner-take-all" as in the general election. The numbers are quite interesting. Hint, Hillary has won all the large states.

Anyone think that any democrat is going to win in states like Wyoming or any of the small states that Obama won in December. He can't win the big states.

I think Hillary won PA for one very simple reason: Bill Clinton. In interview after interview I've read or seen of Hillary supporters in PA, there was a common refrain: a sense of nostalgia for the era of Bill Clinton. A return to the idyllic economy of his administration. He is deeply popular among democrats in PA--as well as elsewhere. One must never, ever underestimate the name brand of Clinton among democratic voters. Afterall, would any other candidate who was insurmountably behind in the delegate math be allowed by the party to remain in the race if their last name wasn't Clinton?

I think we would have seen an entirely different outcome in PA if independents and republicans could've voted in the democratic race today. These two groups aren't predisposed to Clinton nostalgia.

Spending money...Give me a break! If Clinton was able to raise the money that Barack raised, she too would have spent it. Dont act like she has standards or integrity. She is a chameleon and changes her colors state by state.

Hillary won by 10%, much less than my prediction, but still a very convincing win. Obama can only win states that he will never win in a general election, so you know he is definitely not electable.

Wiht Pennsysylvania counted- Baack is still winning nationally in every category.Barack is still leading the delegate vote,which is the litmus test and will remain so long as the Clintons dont move the bar or change the game. The Clinton spin is the spin that the media follows. It boggarts and is bodacoius. It is absolutely amazing that Barack has maintained his lead against the Clinton Machine. As a Philadelphian, the Clintons own our Govenor Rendell. Philadelphia politicians are financially indebted to Clintons. Michael Nutter has be bought and sold. For Barack to go up against this established Clinton machine and still maintan his lead is amazing.

Hillary trounces Obama by 10 points and the CNN pundits are rolling out the “If Hillary takes this away from Obama the African American base will leave the party. Young voters will leave the party.” The PARTY need to be concerned that women will walk off and then who will do the work and send the money. Give me a break. This is not taking candy from a baby … or is it?

Clinton/Edwards 08. Let’s moveon!