Ohio Aftermath and the General Election

In the wake of Hillary Clinton’s victory in Ohio last night, it’s clear to see that Barack Obama “has a huge electability problem in the state,” come general election season. Obama “took a total of 5 counties,” and he “lost in 82 counties“:

o_c2.jpg

Take a look at that picture and ask yourself if that will bode well for Democrats in the general election? The answer is clear – no it will not bode well. Jerome Armstrong explains:

You don’t win a general election in Ohio if you can only win in 5 counties. I realize I’m speaking out against the other members in my tribe, the wealthy post-graduate male clique of punditry, in pointing out Obama has a problem in Ohio. So be it.

In Ohio, Clinton won the votes of Democrats by a 14 percent margin, 56-42. Clinton and Obama tied among Republican & Independent voters. I find it ironic that the most strident of “progressives” find themselves backing the candidate whom does the least well among self-declared Democrats.

And lets not forget that Obama outspent Clinton by a 3 or 4:1 margin, and had the union help. There’s no amount of money or youth organizing that is going to change the dynamics at work against Obama in Ohio in the November general.

Armstrong feels that we will “get about the same map coming out of Pennsylvania” in a month and “there is not a winning Democratic electoral map which doesn’t include either or both Ohio and Pennsylvania.”

Wyoming is next, and it is a state that “Bush won 70 percent of the vote in 2004 and where Democrats will lose handily again in 2008.”

Neither Clinton or Obama will even return to the state past its caucus in a few days. It’ll have about 20,000 people attend caucuses, and let Obama fans say that Ohio’s win by Clinton doesn’t matter, that Obama gained just as many delegates in Wyoming.

The bottom line here in this “process-powered politics” primary season is that “it may figure out well enough to take a lead in pledged delegates, but it’s not a winning formula for the general election.”

We’ve got a problem, folks resting on the laurels of Obama racking up delegates. He shows up poorly in the battleground states that are key to the general election. Taylor Marsh has more.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Ohio Aftermath and the General Election

  1. Pingback: Hillary Clinton Chronicles » Archive » Ohio Aftermath and the General Election

  2. Pingback: Barack Obama Chronicles » Archive » Ohio Aftermath and the General Election

  3. But it seems to me that the total of the Democratic vote being 2,186,831 versus 1,010,864 for the forces of darkness would be a good thing. In almost all four races Obama and Clinton each got more votes than all of the Republics combined. If you think that this is not going to carry over, it would make the subject of a interesting post.

  4. bjerryberg says:

    If Hillary can stick with the FDR theme:

    ‘You are not invisible to me,’ she will cream Bloomberg /McCain.

    Some among the Obama set will be cantankerous over the inevitable implosion of their Chicago-tainted rock-star, but they will come around because they are for the most part well-intentioned.