Obama Earns Decisive Three State Sweep

With most news outlets calling Louisiana for Obama, that concludes a three state sweep in the Democratic contest today.  Most had predicted that Obama would do well today, still, looking at the margins, hepulled off an impressive performance today with Nebraska in his favor by 36 points, Washington by 37, and while Louisiana isn’t shaping up to be as severe of a victory, he’s still looking to win by anywhere between ten and twenty points.

Tomorrow, Maine is supposedly in Hillary’s favor, but the beltway bowl is prognosticated to provide Obama with another sweep.

While the wins are expected, the sheer enormity of them is eye opening.  Further, if Obama performs as well on Tuesday, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that this could generate even more momentum for an already surging campaign–the one failure in most people’s calculus of the remaining states being that for some reason states will no longer have an effect upon latter states.

But there was something else I wanted to bend your ear with while I have your attention, and that is the game of expectations.  The way both camps have played the game of expectations points to an important theme. Hillary has, from the moment her image of inevitability was tarnished, lowered the bar of expectations at every opportunity.  She has sold her wins as amazing come back upsets, her losses as insurmountable obstacles put in place by “the establishment candidate”.

Shorter’ she is trying to win by lowering standards.

Obama has not played that game. He has not tried to win by lowering the bar for himself, and indeed, after his loss in New Hampshire, he was criticized as being too confident in the run up.

The disparity is a significant one on multiple levels.  On one, we see the Clinton camp trying to proceed through smoke and mirrors and intellectual dishonesty; by contrast, Obama is careful to explain the road ahead is tricky, but has never tried to mislead the voters.  On another, the Clinton camp seems to represent under achievement and the celebration of lowered standards, while the Obama camp aspires to greater things.

Among other things, it is this difference between reaching for greatness and settling for standard that has propelled Obama to such amazing wins today, wins that one hopes will continue.

(UPDATE) Thanks to US Divided for linking in.

8 Responses to “Obama Earns Decisive Three State Sweep”

  1. What's Going On Here? says:

    (Obama)… has never tried to mislead the voters.

    As a Southern Conservative who voted for Obama, I wholeheartedly agree with the above statement.

    Hey, we can agree to disagree on policy and ideas, be I can’t be lied to and about by the Clinton’s anymore.

    Hey Dems, thanks for waking up.

  2. S.R.S. in Washington State says:

    Great blog post. I agree, Obama is reaching for a higher standard and not settling with just what is expected or within the law.

    Excuse my wordiness, but here’s my sentiments:

    Just need to set the stage here.

    1. I’m a near lifelong Green party member. Though most of the time I do vote, many times I have felt disenfranchised by our political system.

    2. For years I’ve voted Democratic partly after being bombarded by Democrats saying I should vote for someone who could win who holds at least some of my Green party ideals verses voting for someone I felt was a much better choice but had no or much less chance of winning. Basically the lesser of two evils approach. I hate it, but with our entrenched Two Party system, it’s unfortunately a fact of life.

    3. With Obama, I finally have a candidate who I know isn’t perfect but who I would actually feel good voting for. He will be good for our country. Thankfully this time I’m not alone with those thoughts as today has yet again shown. Also, I don’t believe I will hear people saying they are voting for the lesser of two evils if Obama is a choice.

    So, with that, I’m appealing to all of the Clinton supporters who want to go with her regardless of all of the additional damage this infighting iscausing the Democratic party. Who needs the Republicans when many people in the party and many are in the Clinton camp are willing to win the Democratic nomination at any cost. Like I tell my kids, the end NEVER justifies the means. I believe it is clear right now that Obama has a much better chance of winning against McCain than Clinton. What I’m appealing for is for these Clinton supporters to realize and accept this fact and vote for Obama in the primaries and convention. I’ve had to accept this fact for too many years and the same people who told me I should accept that in the years past appear unwilling to do it themselves.

    I was at the Washington State Democratic Caucus today and swore to vote Democratic in the upcoming elections. I was blown away by the sheer number of voters at the caucus. The existing power base in Washington, which Clinton and McCain are deeply part of had their chance to fix things. They failed, and perhaps you can also say Obama in a way failed too since he’s been there for three years, but he is much less a part of that. I believe a lot of voters showed up today at the caucuses because of the positive messages of Obama and they not only want change, it’s clear they NEED change.

    I know it must be hard to finally have a woman candidate get this far and then not support her. I’ve wanted a woman president for nearly as long as I’ve been able to vote, but now we need to make the choice of going with the candidate with the best odds of winning against the Republicans. Read my lips, I Do Not Want Another Republican President for the next one to two terms. I would much rather have a Green president, but that isn’t going to happen, so Obama is my hope.

    You know I really like Obama. I mentioned he is the first Presidential candidate who I actually feel extremely positive about, so yes, I’m biased. But now I ask all of you who have told your friends, family and me to be pragmatic and vote for the Democrat with the best odds of winning to do the same thing this time for Obama. Let’s lay down the arms and focus on taking the Whitehouse. There’s a long road ahead to get Obama in the Whitehouse and it shouldn’t be littered with pieces of the Clinton and Obama, ripped apart by their own party. We need to bag this decision ASAP and MoveOn.

    Just in case you think I don’t like the Clintons, I was one of the first members in Oct 1998 of what has now become MoveOn.org. It was then named, Censure and Move On, and was formed to end the impeachment process against then President Bill Clinton. I am proud that MoveOn.org has endorsed Obama.

    I always liked the Clintons. It was Hillary’s few lapses of judgment and failure to accept the responsibilities of being a Senator that soured it for me. She is in congress to protect and serve the Constitution of the United States by carefully guarding and using its system of checks and balances. She and a few other Democrats clearly failed to do that with their vote for the Iraq Resolution and handed the decision to start a conflict (though not war) to President Bush that had no merit. For me, it immediately called into question her integrity. Voting for that Resolution (and a somewhat similar one recently on Iran) was a pure political move and for that I question everything about her. Sorry. She really should have been the first woman President, it was hers to lose, but blind political ambition has done her in.

    Let me also be clear that I don’t believe we should pull out of Iraq without fixing the mess we made. I’m for winning in Iraq only if it means we fixed our mistake and withdrew. The Republicans talk of winning in Iraq but never explain what that really means. No matter how morally wrong it was to start the Iraq conflict in the first place, it’s now our moral obligation as occupiers of Iraq to secure the country and make sure its citizens are protected by their own leaders before leaving. Unfortunately this will take some time. I hope with Obama’s positive approach we can achieve that in two years, but I will not hold Obama to getting out when he says wants to get out. Certain goals should be set even if they can’t always be achieved.

    A Green for Obama
    S.R.S, Fall City, WA

  3. S.R.S. in Washington State says:

    Excuse me for saying in my prior comment that your article was a blog post.

  4. Well… it was a blog post, it could pass for an article I suppose, either way I’m not offended.

    So, after years of being told, and at times ceding, that you should ditch your own preferred candidate for the more viable one, you are now the one saying that to Clinton supporters… Hehehe… I like you.

    Well, I’m glad you told your story, and you’re right on many different levels including the Iran vote, and there’ more to be frightened with when you see that Clinton has people like Michael O’Hanlon on her staff. So welcome aboard. For both of you and WGOH, I’m also going to recommend positivelybarack.com. My friend Terry runs it, and you can even get an Obama bumper sticker for telling why you support Obama. (Mine’s currently hanging on the Refrigerator. I got a kind of good luck, break with tradition thing going. I’ve never once put a bumper sticker on my car, so whenI got my Obama bumper sticker I was like, “Cool! Now what?” So I kinda made a promise to myself that if he won the nomination,I would fly the colors).

    And I’m going to end this comment now as I’ve just got up and am incredibly groggy and incoherent.

  5. Charles says:

    Obama can run a clean and truthfull campaign, he can win the popular vote, and could lead in the delegates, but if these so called “Super-delegates” dont back up what the people have said they want, then both the party and the system is corrupt. I say reform the campaign process, by first putting a cap on spending, and then revamp the super-delegates to ensure they follow the voters lead.

  6. Hey Charles.

    Two things. As far as reforming campaign finance, I think that’s a problem that is much more complex to fix. But I agree with you on super-delegates. It is really a pity that the Super Delegates are given as much latitude as they have…


    Wouldn’t that be funny if Bill Clinton was forced to cast his super delegate votes for Obama?

Leave a Reply to Charles Cancel reply

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

Connect with Facebook