So, when a talking point gets shot down because of its inherent stupidity, it just reappears months later as if nothing happened?  Evan Bayh would be proud.

You know who else won California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, and Ohio? John McCain. Yup. He won the PRIMARY in those states and consequently, by your flawed logic, he shall win them in the general election.

So your insinuating that since he didn't win these states in the primary he is going to lose them in the GE?

That is some fine logic Lou!

Great point.  President Kerry won all those states' primaries too.

She lost Texas. Obama will certainly win New York and California. Florida didn't hold a primary and I guess that leaves Ohio. I think I've got it about right. Carry on.

Hmmmm? She didn't have enough money!

Obama also outspent Clinton by 4 to 1 in Ohio & Texas.

This is a hopeless case.

The Liberal base within our party need this PAIN every time.

They never have & never will understand majority of american voters.

he's gonna deputize indiana as a big state, and outspend her there. the harder he tries, the worse he looks.

in OH, PA, TX, FL, MO - Clinton performed much better outside of the cities, The cities will stay D whoever is on the top of the ticket, its the suburbs and rural areas where we can pick up congressional seats. Since Hillary is stronger there it is something to take into account with the "Big states" especially in Ohio and PA.

YAWN,   this is only NOW an issue because HRC made it campain policy to drive down her negatives by raising Obamas.

This policy is at least 4 weeks old now, which is why wise senators encourage this to end last month.

Read this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

   CA hasn't voted GOP since 1988

  Texas hasn't voted Democratic for a couple of decades.

  New York hasn't voted GOP since 1984

  PA hasn't voted GOP since  1988

  IL hasn't voted GOP since 1988

  Not to mention that, according to your own logic, Hillary will lose 86 electoral votes of states that Obama won and that Democrats win in most general elections. Not to mention bellweathers like Missouri and Iowa.

  No elephant in this room...just a big load of bulls***.

  Bush lost NH to McCain...still won it in 2000. Gore swept all primaries..didn't mean squat for his general election strength.

  Primaries do not indicate general election strength. Nothing in our political history supports your argument...NOTHING!!
   

Obama has won more states, has more pledged delegates, has won more of the popular vote.  By all the metrics Obama is winning.

You might have some difficulty coming up with the "rules" that show that winning the primary is based on winning big states.

There is only one thing that matters and that is delegates. Today 158 are up for grabs and it looks like Clinton will win in PA by 10 pts and pick up about 10 delegates, cutting Obama's lead of 165 down to about 155.

And in two weeks, after NC, that 155 will likely be increased to 170 or more.

The real problem for Clinton is that the superdelegates have been breaking for Obama. Since 2/17, he has gained support from 70, while Clinton has gained support from less than 30.

So we should expect the next two weeks to have Clinton's lead in supers (24) to drop down to the mid teens. (It was 97 in January.)

Although it may seem unfair, the size of the states won, just like the electoral college, is probably not going to have much influence on the supers.

Patrick Bradish

What happened to Hillary's big knock out on Super Tuesday??

Da rulz > Clinton.

Sorry, friends but he is winning/has won by the rules that were set out at the beginning. It's like that sometimes. Sometimes you disagree with the rules, but since you agreed to play with them, there isn't anything you can do.

If we want to be really stupid about this...

And no, she can't catch him in this metric, either.

2295242.25 - Square miles (total of Obama states)

804580 - Square miles (total of Clinton states)

Alaska and Texas are tought to beat for land area.

Why is every pro-Clinton diary on this site feel like the old saying "Don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining".

Are these people who write these things really that out of touch or do they secretly know how full of shit they are?

By the logic put forth here - McCain won all the big states in the primary therefore he is going to win them in the general.  Especially California and New York.

Simple answer, she scrapes by in heavily Dem states because of entrenched Democratic machines, led by Clinton-era appointees, that turn out votes for her. In areas without such a machine, Obama wins.

The machine will not go Republican in November. It will work for Obama just like it's worked for Hillary in the primaries.

It's saying some states matter and some don't.

But caucuses - we really have to do something about caucuses.

Are you thinking superdelegates are reading this post and you're helping them make their decision? Because I can't think of ANY other reason for posting this kind of thing over and over. It isn't the way primaries are normally decided so unless SDs are reading this and going "man, I never thought of it that way" this post does nothing at all.

By reading these post the one obvious thing - it has truly turned into trench warfare.  Let's face facts, neither Clinton or Obama has been able to close the deal.

One can ask- what  with  Clinton's huge brand recognition, a huge Super Del. lead before the primary season even got started, presumption that she was going to win it by Super Tuesday - why hasn't she closed the deal? Also one can ask - after tying it up on Super Tuesday and then winning 14 in a row and out raising the Clinton campaign why hasn't Obama closed the deal?

There are numerous reasons in both cases, none of which matter. We will end todays primary still with Clinton behind Obama in delegates and probably closer in the popular vote. Result we will go one to Indiana and North Carolina primaries and the Guam Caucuses and probably all the way to June.

One of these two candidates is going to be the Democratic nominee. Right now the math favors Obama, however, we all know the Supers remaining could break either way. They are bound by nothing more than their own thoughts.

We can also argue until the moon turns blue whether the Democratic primary system is flawed or not, but it won't change anything. When this all started it was the system to which both candidates signed on - this includes the MI and FL mess.

Personally I think with this thing now 90% over we really need to start talking about how we are going to come together as a party no matter who the nominee. So we don't have four to eight more years of Republican mismanagement. That is, unless all anyone cares about is that their candidate gets the nomination and if they don't they will vote for Mccain.

I suggest if that is your position you were not voting on issues in the first place. You are voting personality, or some warped belief that it's someone's turn to be President.

Finally I will also remind you should McCain take the White House because you were married to your candidate and not your beliefs. No coming back on this blog and whining about the Iraq war, the terrible economy, The Supreme Court going further to the right, Roe V Wade being overturned etc etc.