How Obama Is More Electable Than Hillary

Shamanic of the Newshoggers in some final thoughts regarding Super Tuesday happens upon a very significant point that really points to where Obama has an electability edge over Hillary Clinton.

Here’s the money quote:

That wasn’t much of a thought. More of a flicker of a thought along the lines of: Why did Clinton concede so much of the deep south while Obama fought for (and won) our votes? I suspect it reflects her natural ceiling, and one that Obama may or may not be subject to. Georgia is a very, very red state at this point, but I swear to you, if Obama is the nominee, the GOP will have to drop some real money, time, and resources here to secure this state. And this year, this one time, money and resources are not the things that they have pouring out of their ears. This one year, we have a chance to flip a few red states, and Clinton can’t do it. I don’t know for sure if Obama can either, but Clinton already hung the “not bothering” sign and Obama didn’t. He’s also raising more money now than she is, and based on the number of states and delegates he won last night, I’d say his campaign knows how to get plenty of bang for the buck.

The effect she talks about here has wider implications that could make the difference between winning and losing in November.

Of course, on the surface, there’s the simple situation with fundraising.  Obama is outraising Hillary, and both are outstripping their Republican counterparts by an embarassing amount.  Granted, as Romney has proven, money alone can’t buy you an election, but a huge sum of money coupled with an ability to transform that money into actual voters is a powerful thing.

But as Shamanic points out, the coalitions that Obama is building in the South make him a competitive player right in Republican territory, possibly allowing him to turn some red states blue.  But this alone will have a ripple effect throughout the electoral map that can’t be ignored.

If Obama starts playing in red states, at a minimum, the Republican candidate is going to have to start expending significant effort and resources just to protect their own territory.  If you’re mind has started wondering to swing states, you get a golden star.

The Republicans are already strapped for cash, and if McCain is the nominee, I don’t foresee that changing any time soon given the lack of satisfaction party voters have for the Maverick.  If he has to spend anything above the bare minimum to protect his own electoral votes, that’s really going to hamstring any attempts to make a grab for votes in swing states.

In other words, if Obama wins the nomination and continues on his trajectory, traditional swing states are going to fall like dominoes for him.  This on top of him possibly turning red states including Georgia, and… get this… Kansas.

If Hillary wins, you can forget turning any of these red states, and the swing states are going to be a fight against someone with strong cross party appeal.

I know which fight I would rather have.

One Response to “How Obama Is More Electable Than Hillary”

  1. Bill says:

    Primaries are mostly party specific. Only in the non-caucus open primary are voters allowed to cross party lines. If race and gender matter, then in the general election, which is a secret ballot and not party specific, Obama will get all (three) of the Republican African Americans while Clinton will get some portion (a significant number) of the Republican women. Electability – you do the math.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook