|
It turns out that Mark Penn was right after all… Ohio and Texas could and did stop the |
|
|
Tejas was a more complicated case, but my muchachas y muchachos delivered solidly for Hillary, leaving Obama with his two core constituencies — blacks and young, rich, white liberals. Looking at the district-by-district map is even more interesting — Obama takes the major urban areas where blacks and young, rich, white liberals live (aka districts the Democrats win anyway), but the rest of the state (aka the “red” parts”) went solidly for Hillary. Could she take Texas in the general election? Maybe not, but she certainly has a better shot than Obama does against Sen(i)or McCain. Vermont and Rhode Island split ways, with the uber-liberal paradise that brought you these hippies, falling solidly for the liberal candidate (hint: has a wang), with the more moderate New England state (you know, the one that doesn’t put a socialist in the Senate) going solidly for the more moderate candidate (hint: has bigger balls). One thing that worked in Hillary’s favor is her ability to kick Mr. High-Falutin’ Law Professor’s ass in debates. In all of the March 4th states besides Vermont, the folks who thought the debates were important all went for Mrs. Pantsuit instead of Mr. My-Wife-Never-Liked-America-Until-Now. The fact that she and Mr. Penn finally found attack ads that could stick to Obama certainly helped, not to mention the Chicago journalist field day on Barak (It’s Obama season… call Dick Cheney!). The latter leaves me with today’s Moment of Zen: Obama: “Guys, I mean come on. I just answered like eight questions.” To which I can only say: All hat and no cattle. |
|
March 5, 2008
Suck it Barak!
Posted by Angry New Mexican under Angry New Mexican Rants, POTUS | Tags: African-Americans, Angry New Mexican Rants, Cult of Personality, Liberals, Texas |[7] Comments
March 5, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Yippee ki-yay. Looks like Hillary is beginning to put Mr. Junior Senator in the right place.
March 5, 2008 at 4:22 pm
See, I see that district-by-district map, and I see crossover Republicans realizing that Hillary is the key to a Republican win in November. If you thought that the New York Times story was good for getting conservatives motivated behind McCain, just wait for a Hillary nomination. Having Hillary as an opponent would be the single best thing to happen to conservative unity since having Reagan as their own candidate in 1980.
Meanwhile, if the Democrats continue to believe that the least inspiring candidate is the most “electable”, then they’ll have no one to blame but themselves for not getting elected.
March 5, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Nice theory, Angry VirgCinian. Too bad it doesn’t hold water. According to the NYT’s exit polls, only 9% of Texas Democratic primary voters were self-identified Republicans, and they broke for Obama 53-46.
Nope. It looks like Obama lost fair and square… even with help from his Republican friends.
Hat. Cattle.
March 5, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Delegate count gained for HRC: +4, or something? Big victory, I suppose.
March 5, 2008 at 10:11 pm
I can here the superdelegates now:
“NOTHING IS OVER UNTIL WE DECIDE IT IS!”
Nothing like the wisdom of John Blutarsky to shed some light on this situation.
Lest we forget the best part of the quote:
“Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”
March 18, 2008 at 9:47 am
[...] Candidate Roundup, Democracy, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Liberals, Obama, Racism Despite the insane and mathematically challenged ramblings of some of my colleagues, Hillary Clinton is still losing, and badly. The end result of her [...]
March 18, 2008 at 5:48 pm
…(hint: has a wang)…
The Misses and I just read your column, and couldn’t help but notice which feature of Barack’s you seemed to notice the most…