Matt Yglesias steps up to the plate and predicts Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination.
I think the college educated men who dominate punditland have spent a lot of time missing the fact that there actually are enthusiastic Clinton fans out there -- they're just mostly working class women and thus mostly not in the room when this CW gets hashed out. On top of that, I think Clinton's succeeded in managing the expectations savvily. If she wins anywhere at all between now and March 4, that counts as a win for her, then Ohio is mildly favorable ground for her and Texas is extremely favorable ground. That, I think, will seal it for her as the anti-Obama backlash brewing in the press hits full stride.There's a lot to be said for this, especially the prospects for an anti-Obama backlash—I started worrying about this the other day when I saw the "naive cultist" meme. It still worries me. But as I just wrote in his comments, I still have to give the edge to Obama:
The meat of the prediction is how Matt thinks she wins it. Does she get a natural lead in pledged delegates, without seating MI and FL? That doesn't seem likely to me. And if not she can only take it if superdelegates break overwhelmingly for her, which I don't think they would do against the person who *has* a natural lead in pledged delegates; or if MI and FL are seated, which I don't think they will be unless they are no longer relevant; or if MI and FL get a redo that breaks overwhelmingly in her favor, which could happen, but isn't a lock.I made a second comment in the thread here, in response to scornful laughter at my trust in the Democrats' sense of self-preservation.
To believe that the superdelegates will give Clinton the nomination even if she doesn't have a delegate lead is to believe that the Democratic Party will cut its own throat for no reason. I just don't see that happening.
The margins of victory (or, God forbid, loss) in the contests today and Tuesday, and the way the press responds, should give us a good sense of how the race will look on March 4, which has become the next key date on the calendar and the next date from which to launch a Clinton comeback: Rhode Island, Vermont, Ohio, Texas. If Barack can hold his own or win there, and then in Pennsylvania on April 22, I think he goes into the convention with a lead in pledged delegates—in which case I really don't see the superdelegates breaking so overwhelmingly against him to tilt the nomination back to Clinton. There's just no reason for Big Boss Democrats to willfully destroy their own party in that way.
Regardless of who has the nomination, though, I think we can be certain at this point that Obama will be on the ticket. It's just about Clinton's only hope to pull the party back together; she just has to get him to take it.
UPDATED: More support for my predictions in a pair of Daily Kos diaries. First, the new Survey USA polls (traditionally not very favorable to Obama) show him with twenty-point leads in Virginia and Maryland (scheduled to vote Tuesday), including strong leads across basically all demographics—this is important not simply for those delegates but also as evidence that he's finally making big cuts into Clinton's base of support.
In Virginia, Clinton leads in seniors, Obama in voters under age 65. The two candidates are tied for white voters; Obama leads 7:1 among black voters. He also leads among both men and women.Meanwhile, Nick A tries to do the superdelegate math and says that Clinton will need a 5:2 superdelegate split in order to come back from second-place. Maybe I'm just overly optimistic, but I don't think there are that many suicidal Big Boss Democrats in the pool.
...
In Maryland, the two candidates split white voters, with Obama leading 4:1 among blacks. Clinton leads among seniors by 15 points, Obama leads by 39 points among voters 35-49. SUSA cautions: "If younger voters do not vote in the numbers here forecast, Obama’s margin is overstated."
Posts
|