« Controversial Clinton Guest: 'Osama for Obama' | Main | Clinton Wins, Obama's Still Ahead; What's Next? »

On to Pennsylvania...

Share

March 05, 2008 7:57 AM

ABC News' Kate Snow Reports: Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., will campaign in Pennsylvania as soon as tomorrow, according to senior staffers. Details of the Senator's schedule are still being worked out.

Clinton is wasting no time planting the flag in the Keystone State.

The campaign has not decided exactly which ads it will run on television in Pennsylvania but her top strategist Mark Penn says she will strike two themes in the coming weeks.

"We will press the twin ideas of commander in chief and steward of the economy as what people are looking for," Penn told ABC news Wednesday.

In a memo out this morning, Penn and senior adviser Harold Ickes write that Clinton's success in Ohio bodes well for Pennsylvania.

"The demographics of the upcoming contests in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana and Kentucky closely mirror those in Ohio. Hillary looks strong in all four states," they write.

Clinton already has the support of Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and the campaign will be quickly shifting resources into the state now that they're sure they will battle on to that state's primary on April 22nd.

"We live to fight another day," said a senior member of Clinton's team last night.

A February 27 Quinnipiac Poll showed Clinton with a 6-point lead over Obama among likely Democratic voters in the state, down from the 16-point lead she'd held two weeks before.

A surge among Pennsylvania's young voting bloc moving support from Clinton to Obama is responsible for closing the gap.

March 5, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary | Permalink | User Comments (30)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26806394

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On to Pennsylvania...:

User Comments

Chavez is a jerk and the guerrillas they are supporting are no pack of boy scouts. He's been annoying for years. One of the reasons McCain would be better, he actually has a plan to build more domestic energy so this dorf in Venezuela is less of a problem for everyone. Even Hillary talks about new energy, though her plan is less feasible than McCain's. Obama needs to think on that too and he really needs to consider the problem Chavez poses. And stay away from Representative Kennedy who is Chavez' tool bag in the US. I would like to hear Obama denounce Chavez for his idiocy. All the remaining Presidential candidates should do so.

Posted by: Jersey Dave | Mar 5, 2008 8:57:33 AM

I do not understand if we all know Obama people has strong arm delegates to support Obama .Why isn't this begining allowed.It there rightto support there delegate of choice and a honor to be a superdelegate.But to have people threat you to vote a certain way.Shouldn't be allowed.And those delegates should be taken away from Obama.You can't stand up tall and claim you have the delegates.When you are forcing people to vote your way.

Posted by: Sarah | Mar 5, 2008 9:01:43 AM

You should have heard last night's CNN analysis - Gloria Borger Boreshead was stating how Obama had 'planned to roll out 50 Super Delegates' following his wins.

Of course those wins were pared down to win - singular (for a change). There was also direct and sudden attacks on Obama from the Republican set. Amy Holmes slammed Jamal when he tried to tip toe through the Nafta and Who Needs Experience Tulips. She also said that it is clear - neither can win without Super Delegates and to make a decision, coming out on TV to tell the world. They desperately want to fall into the bandwagon, but with no bills but the Congo passed for Obama, and his tenure as Oversite Chair having NOT ONE SINGLE OVERSITE CHALLEGE, they have nothing to base their move on - if it isn't pride of race, then what is it?

If you have no accomplishments - concrete, real, touchable accomplishments, and your resume is basically fiction, like your book is fast proving to be, then what to base your overwhelming knowledge on? You can say hope and you can say dreams and you can la tee da your way around, but you are about to see the Republicans slam this guy right and left, NOW that they have their guy picked and nominated. The gloves are off, so Obama is about to get a looking at from one of history's most negative, wealthy, and successful political party machines.

Even Roland Martin - who would marry Obama if Michelle weren't in the way - even he said - wow, if he withered this quickly after one week of negative press, that really wasn't that negative - he is in deep trouble. And one of the lovely Republican commentators said "You got that right!"

They are going to hammer him to pieces, on factual things. Much as I don't like Republicans. They are going to force the story to come out. They own a bigger chunk of the media than you think. They didn't want to help the Dems by attacking Obama, they wanted US to attack each other, which we have. But now the party is over - and they are going to force him, in press conference, news story, magazine article, and sound bite, force him to answer those questions he refuses to be direct on. And if he doesn't answer, they are going to do to him, what they have done to the Clintons for years - Answer For Him Then.

Posted by: 2009 Where Are You? | Mar 5, 2008 9:20:19 AM

Hillary Clinton is nothing more than continuation of the Bush/Clinton dynasty--a globalist puppet. She and her husband ran "Poppy" Bush's CIA drug smuggling operation through Mena in the 80s. Between Mena and the OKC cover-up, the blood of many silenced witnesses is on her hands. The Bushes and Clintons vacation together. She is totally blackmailed and controlled and that is why she is being shoved down your throats--to ensure the agenda continues. She will not end the Iraq oil occupation or the fraudulent "war on terror."

Respect yourselves and your Constitution and stop enabling criminals to govern you.

Posted by: puppetmaster | Mar 5, 2008 9:21:50 AM

The surge in youth vote!!
the avg. in Pa is 50 baby boomers who have never left the state . And it is a closed primary.

Posted by: Bishop | Mar 5, 2008 9:31:52 AM

Some tidbits about an Obama speech 3/4/2007:

Fiction: Obama stated his grandfather heard the call of Jack and Bobby Kennedy to send his son to America.

Truth: Based on birthdate, the so-called words that "sent a shout across oceans" had to have been said by Republican President Eisenhower.

Fiction: Obama inferred President Kennedy spoke and established the airlift program for Kenya.

Truth: JFK did not assume office until 1961 and therefore could not have been responsible for an airlift program in 1959. As a Senator, JFK did arrange a grant for scholarships a few years prior which is hardly the same. The grant was from the family foundation not a government program.

Fiction: Obama stated the reason his father was able to marry his mother was because some folks had the courage to "march across a bridge" in Selma.

Truth: Obama was born in 1961 and the first march across the bridge in Selma was in March 1965.

What's the point of this post? I think it is important that we scrutinize the speeches to see if they are political and pandering by misleading the audience with fiction or altered facts. If so, that brings into question character issues like integrity, honesty, and judgement. It's your call!

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 5, 2008 9:42:57 AM

The momentum has swung...

Now that John McCain has won the Republican nomination and Mike Huckabee has dropped out, the Republican machine will begin its march to the November elections.

Senator Clinton notches a needed win in Texas and wins decisively in both Ohio and Rhode Island.

Senator Obama wins decisively in Vermont, the most liberal state in the union.

In the states that are left, Clinton's strength lies in Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, and Kentucky, states where the demographics strongly resemble that of Ohio.

Obama looks to support in low population states like Mississippi where the demographics support his bid.

Meanwhile, the delegate count is now reduced to an 85 delegate lead for Obama.

In what would secure the nomination for Senator Clinton, a CNN poll from this morning reveals what will likely be an emerging and likely scenario for Democrats in Michigan and Florida, states where Senator Clinton won by huge margins:

CNN POLL QUESTION

Should Florida and Michigan Democrats

*Have their votes counted?...58%

*Not be counted?...25%

*Have new primaries or caucuses?...17%

Thus, the Democratic candidates will continue to battle until the convention in August.

Meanwhile, the Republicans will continue to monitor the Democratic elimination process...with amusement...

Posted by: ken | Mar 5, 2008 9:43:14 AM

The momentum indicators on the web have turned as well. Per Alexa, which provides traffic indicators for websites, Clinton's website as of February, has a daily reach two times that of Obama's website. The trend to date (for both) decreased some but is proportional.

Posted by: DCVoter | Mar 5, 2008 10:08:01 AM

I'm a Republican, but I must say that we do in fact need a change in Leadership, not the status quo. If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, my vote will be for McCain. If Sen Clinton wins the nomination, my vote will be for her. She has the experience, the advisors, and the determination to take our country out of the mess we're in. Sen Obama would be wise to stay close to Sen Clinton if he plans to make another run at the Presidency. Maybe accepting the Vice Presidency for him would be just the experience he needs to launch a successful bid 8 years from now.

Posted by: Gil | Mar 5, 2008 10:44:51 AM

Following are Obama's "Over-simplistic" approach for governance that put him in trouble:
1. Not understanding the "Blue Collar" issues properly and why healthcare and economy is important to them

2. Delay in decision making. Waiting for NAFTA issue to die itself to avoid making decision. This combine with Clinton's Red Phone Ad makes it worse.

3. "No Accountability" for his advisors. His naive Advisors need some training.

Posted by: Humm | Mar 5, 2008 10:47:05 AM

What would each nominee's delegate count be today if all contests were winner-take-all? Superdelegates should consider this perspective since winner-take-all is the nature of the general election in Nov.

Posted by: esvida | Mar 5, 2008 10:50:26 AM

I support Hillary and I would like to know way more about Obama His mother was a teenage mother? Did he have a poor childhood and why does he not say much about his white relatives my Husband is Native American and white he talks about both.

Posted by: Bishop | Mar 5, 2008 10:54:09 AM

ok...its time to sit back and watch the fireworks, Obama is gonna give lieing hillary a little taste of Chicago politics

I wonder if the media will take the innuendo to clinton like they did Obama....hmmmmm

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 11:01:08 AM

Looks like a former President has the best advice for he who would be king:

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson-


Posted by: ken | Mar 5, 2008 11:11:25 AM

2-1 bet the people in Ohio will still be in the same economy status if Hillary Clinton is elected President. Just like she did not bring jobs to New York City, how is going to bring them to rest of the country. They lost 30,000 jobs when she promised 160,000. Superwoman Clinton is not going solve this country's problems on Day one people no more than Obama can. He is all talk and she is a bunch of Empty Promises. Think about it America with all that experience and solutions why doesn't New York City look any better? Why did her healthcare plan fail? It will fail again..John McCain is going to be president however if I was Obama I would not go down without attacking her back. He is not the one running on all this experience, she is. He needs to start questioning her experience. Make her back it up. She can't, because she is solely running on Bill Clinton's life as the President. She is attacking him and he is taking it.

Posted by: Karen | Mar 5, 2008 11:31:16 AM

there is something very "real" about ohio.

Posted by: tony | Mar 5, 2008 11:32:17 AM

Hillary's only chance is to discourage and disenfranchise Obama supporters.

She will, however, destroy the new emerging democratic coalition for a generation.

Millions of new and engaged members of the party will be switched off if she succeeds in recasting Obama as a well-meaning incompetent.

Scorched earth?

Time for Barack to mount a rigorous counter-offensive, beginning immediately. Has he got what it takes?

Posted by: Gorgon '08 | Mar 5, 2008 11:58:24 AM

Take away the caucuses (small states)
and have instead the primaries, HUSSEIN
OBAMA would not even be in the race.
Thank you AMERICA for WAKING UP!

Posted by: baccarattwo | Mar 5, 2008 11:58:41 AM

Hillary is a fighter and she will fight for working families in Washington.

Posted by: onenibble | Mar 5, 2008 12:02:55 PM

Is Rezco going to be Obama's vice president if he wins?

Posted by: onenibble | Mar 5, 2008 12:06:44 PM

Why is it that Ohio & Florida are always screwing things up? In 2004 Ohio went for Bush. In 2000 Florida couldn't punch their chads properly. This year Florida & Michigan screwed up by going against the rules. Double Yoi! (For those that know, yes I am from PA, and it's gonna be interesting) Obama 2008!

Posted by: pt | Mar 5, 2008 12:56:46 PM

Is Norman Hsu gonna be hillary's vp? oh, that's right, he's in jail....how about, what's his name? Peter Paul?

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 1:05:46 PM

five years of denial hillary....c'mon, even you can do better than that.

On Dec 29, 2005, the FEC notified Peter Paul that it had concluded its 4 1/2 year investigation into his complaint regarding hillary clinton's false reports to the FEC which intentionally hid his identity as her largest contributor and the full amount of his more than $1.2 million cash in-kind contributions to her 2000 Senate campaign.

aiding and abetting, conspiring, colluding....oh yeah baby, what a great president queen hillary will make.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 1:15:15 PM

and for those that argue that this is old....so is Rezko, but that hasn't stopped you from pounding out his name.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 1:28:06 PM

let's talk about those earmarks....
or better yet, how 'bout that bill clinton dubai port deal....

ooooohhh, wait, the FALN terrorist clinton pardon, can we discuss that one?

the kazakhstan uranium deal, that should be a good one....

the white house papers....the donors to the presidential library

RELEASE and ye shall be set free
or is it possible they have something to hide???

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Mar 5, 2008 1:36:54 PM

Wanna hear something funny? Eventhough Hillary had a pretty good night, Obama gained 3 Superdelegates today. So, while the voters of Ohio and Texas might be living in a dream world, I think the Supers wanted to send a message...... Afterall, she won but what did she really win besides bragging rights? In fact, he gained delegates. Now that is something I think is very funny.

Posted by: Hank | Mar 5, 2008 3:53:56 PM

I keep hearing about all these great and decisive victories by Clinton last night .. and she nets 3-5 delegates for the entire night? About half of what Obama got in the District of Columbia alone. And momentum has shifted? Clinton could win the rest of the remaining states by 60% and still barely crack a dent in Obama's pledged delegate lead.

It's astonishing to me how little American's know about their electoral process. They actually believe a 51-48 win by Hillary is as decisive as the Yankees beating the Red Sox 2-1. Last night was nothing short of catastrophic for Hillary. She had to deliver a knock out to have any hope of winning the candidacy and all she could produce are a few love taps. It's a virtually a mathematical impossibility that Hillary wins the nomination now, and her supporters are jumping up and down talking about momentum? (and Obama's voters are labeled the naive and uninformed ones?)

Posted by: Cary | Mar 5, 2008 6:17:50 PM

We drove by and saw a yard sign:"PLEASE GOD NOT HILLARY!"

Posted by: plainsm | Mar 5, 2008 6:56:29 PM

I couldn't help but laugh last night watching CNN, commonly known as the flip flop gang around here. Did you notice how they never even mentioned how Obama kicked her butt in Vermont? Also in previous states when Obama won they were sure to point out by how much...not last night. She squeaked out a win in the big state of rednecks that gave birth to GW but that didn't matter . All of a sudden it's she won and thats all that matters. What a joke. You are being lead around by the nose by spin put on things in the media and you don't even see it.

Posted by: Greg | Mar 5, 2008 8:17:24 PM

Does Hillary even care that there are other states than the ones she "thinks" are likely to go for her. I guess the people of Wyoming and Mississippi don't even deserve at least a token attempt to get their votes. What do you think that means about a presidency under her? It means if you didn't support her, your SOL for 4 years.

Posted by: mike | Mar 5, 2008 9:01:55 PM

Post a comment