The disappointment was palpable in the voices of the Obama-supporters on the BBC who had secured freebies to the United States to deliver inferior coverage of the Super Tuesday primaries. But the facts spoke for themselves. Hillary and Obama had done well in New York, Arkansas, Illinois and Georgia, as expected. But beyond that, the winner of the states that mattered was Hillary - California in double-digits despite those polls saying that the luvvies and Shrivers had done it for Obama; Massachussets in double-digits despite (or because of) the endorsements by John Kerry and Ted Kennedy; New Jersey by ten points despite it being such a 'close call'; big wins in Tennessee and Arizona, where the Democratic governor had endorsed Obama. Obama has had good results in medium-sized states like Missouri, Connecticut, Minnesota and Alabama. But much of the rest of his haul in places like Delaware, Utah and Alaska doesn't outweigh the fact that Hillary was the real winner last night. Moreover, in a close run contest, she could get her Florida delegates added in with the convention's support (another big state she won well). Clinton is currently well ahead in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas, the biggest states still to vote, and she has a great organisation in Texas. So Hillary should win the nomination, but the prospect of a Clinton-Obama ticket come the convention is an increasingly live and appealing prospect, not least because it could help to get out the younger voters in the Presidential election.
2 comments:
Actually, as Mr Obama responded when asked about the prospect of the two rivals forming a joint ticket, "In which order?"
In listening to the commentary from the BBC reporters on the US elections it strikes me that the majority have not got the first idea about the constitution, election process or indeed US politics. They are synthetically and systematically talking up the process to nominate delegates to the party conventions into the election itself.
Post a Comment