SNL: This Job Is Hard

Saturday Night Live is on a roll with their ’08 election campaign commentary. Check out this week’s “dramatization” of the future which opened the show last night (h/t TM):

Obama won the caucus in Wyoming yesterday netting him “seven new delegates,” and five new delegates for Hillary. 

The Obama team who has focused heavily on caucus states, had “opened 5 offices” in Wyoming and Clinton opened 2. The Obama campaign also ran more ads than Clinton on TV and radio. That Obama only netted 2 extra delegates over Clinton is hardly a “decisive” victory, in my opinion.

Meanwhile…

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s trio of victories over Sen. Barack Obama last week appears to have convinced a sizable number of uncommitted Democratic superdelegates to wait until the end of the primaries and caucuses before picking a candidate, according to a survey by The Washington Post.

On Tuesday, “Clinton and Obama will square off in Mississippi, with Obama heavily favored.” And then it is on to Pennsylvania, “whose April 22 primary offers the single biggest delegate haul of the remaining contests.” Pennsylvania is leaning Clinton.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to SNL: This Job Is Hard

  1. Pingback: Barack Obama Chronicles » Archive » SNL: This Job Is Hard

  2. Pingback: Hillary Clinton Chronicles » Archive » SNL: This Job Is Hard

  3. Pingback: Like The Old Days « The Krile Files

  4. alrudder says:

    People remember visuals more than scripts. Michael Deaver famously put Reagan in a factory on a day of bad economic news. Yet Deaver thanked the tv news for the stories even though they criticized the economy. They showed Reagan in a working factory, and that’s what people remember.

    The dialog in this SNL skit belittled Obama’s maturity. But if I’m a campaign manager, I’d rather have my candidate parodied wearing in a tie in the oval office than wearing facial cream and curlers.

    Score one for Obama

  5. proseandpromise says:

    alrudder,
    I agree. Also, the preface at the beginning seems to point to the whole thing being a parody of the narrative coming from the Clintons. I can see, though, how it could look positive for either candidate in the right context.