Hillary Clinton Wins PA and Accomplishes Three Important Goals

Tonight we saw Hillary Clinton, outspent by 3 to 1, pull off a key victory. The winning results are the proof that she is becoming a better, more personal candidate each day. With a 10% margin of victory, as of 1am Eastern time, Senator Clinton has accomplished three remarkable goals:

A: Stop the calls for her to drop out.

B. Boost her online fundraising as detailed in Pamela’s post. As of 11:30 PM Eastern over 2.5 Million had poured in over the Net. Online fundraising is one of the keys to her continued financial viability.

C. Highlight a deficiency in Senator Obama’s campaign: Barack Obama seems unable to connect with the base Democratic constituency of white, working class voters. Can Barack Obama beat the electoral math and John McCain if he can’t connect with this swing voter group?

USA Today, hours after the first results were called, used as a portion of their analysis a WSJ poll taken on March 24-25, prior to many of his recent gaffs about bitterness, guns and religion. USA Today goes on to note two key presidential election facts :

In the past two presidential elections, Democratic nominees Al Gore and John Kerry lost to George W. Bush in part because they lost white working-class voters by double digits. Democrats took control of Congress from the Republicans in 2006 in part because they narrowed their losses among this group. Obama would almost certainly have to do the same to beat Republican John McCain.

Hillary Clinton has won 7 of the major election battleground states, and 9 if you include Florida and Michigan. It is proof that she does connect with many different people on a very personal level.

Yet, there is a steep delegate battle to be fought in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Hillary Clinton Wins PA and Accomplishes Three Important Goals

  1. J. Diamond says:

    yes, there is a bradley effect, but i’m calling it a reverse bradley effect. my experience in PA says that the 92 pct number of african americans voted for Obama is wrong.

    many more were voting for Hillary, but not telling their friends, family, neighbors, or POLLSTERS. i met many african americans who whispered to me that they were voting for Hillary as i canvassed door-to-door for Hillary. as i stood on busy street corners holding signs for Hillary on monday and tuesday car after car with african americans waved, honked, nodded, smiled… and my favorite response of the entire time was the big truck making a commercial delivery as the two african american workers prepared to unload their merchandise, one of the workers gave me a “low wave” so that his co-worker couldn’t see… this is the untold story… believe me it’s out there even if no one is telling you. this is one reason why the early PA exit polls were wrong (again)… it is not about whites telling pollsters that they would vote for obama and then not, it’s about african americans doing that!

  2. J. Diamond:

    That’s an important insight! It’s also the basis for a good article. I have wondered about the concept, (“I don’t want to admit I’m for Clinton”), from the beginning of the Obama crusade.

    I don’t think you’ve hit on something that’s just in the African American community. I believe it’s a larger issue.

    I also believe, based on decades in and around the political reality, that there is only one reason this concept has not been explored. Everytime the subject is broached by a media person it’s labeled a RACIST question. So do news people want to be labeled racist? Of course not.

    Consequently the subject lies hidden beneath the surface of the entire campaign.

    Great insight. Please continue to report.