8 comments for “Hillary wins New Mexico!!! Finally!

  1. February 14, 2008 at 4:52 pm

    Yes, Hillary did win New Mexico.

    She won by a whopping 1,709 votes. While that does add a state to her win column, it doesn’t translate into even a dimple in the lead Senator Obama has in both delegates and popular votes.

    I do have to wonder how much of an indicator of her possible performance in Texas this result is. If it was this close in a heavy Latino state like New Mexico, it doesn’t reflect well on her ability to secure the Latino vote in Texas on March 4th.

    But in politics, anything is possible. Just ask Barack Obama. :)

  2. Northcountystorm
    February 14, 2008 at 7:33 pm

    Something in the water you’re drinking Chris that forces you to minimize any good news for Clinton and bad news for first Edwards and now your new knight, Obama?

    Funny, a 2 delegate victory in New Mexico in your mind doesn’t “translate into a dimple” for Clinton and yet a 2 delegate loss by Clinton to Obama in Iowa for you translated into “Hillary tanked.” And while a 1,709 New Mexico margin gets a dismissive “whopping” moniker from you, not a positive word that I can recall from you on the 416,000+ victory margin Clinton achieved over Obama in your own state. Only a complaint about 94,000 L.A. County D/S ballots (50,000 according to the Sacramento Bee) that were not counted and which you think will break Obama’s way.

    As for Tejas, if you’re correct, that if Obama does not win he must be in trouble. After all, he’s on a roll and gots the big mo, he’s got the big money, people are saying the train is leaving, the delegate structure in the state favors Obama (senate districts in predominately African American areas of Dallas and Houston and upper-income Austin have up to 8 delegates while some of the predominately Latino districts have as little as 3). Also, 1/3 of the delegates will be chosen at precinct caucuses (known in the Lone Star state as conventions). And we know that Obama does exceedingly well at caucuses which-while they draw a miniscule portion of the Democrats in a state they do tend to draw a disproportionate number of upper income, college educated liberals (or is it progressives?), one of the backbones of Obama’s support. And of course we have you saying it doesn’t look good for her to get the Latino vote based on her New Mexico experience (56% of the Latino vote) while ignoring her getting 69% of California’s Latino vote on the same day.

    So thanks for setting the bar so low for Clinton in Tejas mi amigo.

  3. Andrew Davey
    February 15, 2008 at 7:38 am

    NCS-

    Ha! You’re good. And btw, do you think we should share this with Chris?

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/15/9509/88017

    I wouldn’t want him freaking out about the new Texas poll showing Hillary ahead 54-38. But then again, he may just ignore it. After all, I still haven’t heard him say a peep about Hillary winning California by a MUCH larger margin than the Field Poll suggested, or about Hillary winning Massachusetts DESPITE Kerry, (Ted) Kennedy, and Gov. Patrick endorse Obama… Or even about Hillary winning Arizona despite Gov. Napolitano endorsing Obama and Obama spening millions on offices and ads.

    But whatever, we’ll see what Chris says on March 5. ;-)

  4. February 15, 2008 at 9:18 am

    Andrew,

    We are both capable of cherry picking the results we find most relevant to support our chosen candidates. In the final analysis the only polls that matter at the ones where people actualy vote. (I’ll clarify for NCS I mean voting in DNC approved primaries or caucuses)

    To that end, I am sharing with you the latest total Delegate counts for both Clinton and Obama.

     

     

     

     

  5. Northcountystorm
    February 15, 2008 at 11:59 am

    Well, Chris, I agree that the only polls that matter are the ones where people actually vote. I just don’t qualify mine to exclude almost 3 million Dems and D/S who actually went to the polls and voted in primaries.

    Its good form to give credit where credit is due though. Example, I think Obama’s winning Missouri was a definite plus for him, even though it was by a narrow margin, even though it meant he only got 1 more delegate then Clinton and even though he got bombed outside of St. Louis and Kansas City. On balance it was a great pick up for him, especially since the Show Me State is also a big swing state. It gave him some swing state cred.

  6. RLG
    February 15, 2008 at 3:45 pm

    God bless America!

    And God Bless Hillary!!

    Nobama obummer. Not ready for primetime with merely platitudes.

  7. February 15, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    As of Tuesday’s Potomac Primaries, there are 8,228,785 people who disagree with that assessment, slightly more than the 8,028,607 who agree. The best news is 19,251,817 Democrats who voted so far far outnumbering the 12,957,817 Republicans.

  8. DLman
    February 18, 2008 at 1:39 pm

    Not to be rain on anyone’s parade but watching you guys argue back and forth is getting me worried. The Republicans are already gearing up for the general and we’re still fighting, arguing, and looking ahead to JUNE as when our nominee will be picked.

    I woke up today to find one of our candidates accusing another of PLAGERISM (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8570.html) and that even the local redcounty Reeps are already picking our candidates apart (http://www.redcounty.com/national/2008/02/obama-watch-barack-on-business/).

    WE MUST COME TOGETHER!

Comments are closed.