O h i o

[WarholPop]

I don't get it. The Clinton campaign insistently chants "Ohio" as if it's a magic mantra that will secure them the nomination notwithstanding that Obama has won more states, won more of the popular vote and won more delegates. It's as if Ohio is the only state that matters to Sen. Clinton, and the rest of the country be damned.

In light of her obsession with Ohio to hell with the rest of the country, why does Hillary Clinton not simply abandon her race for the Presidency of the United States of America and instead run for governor in the State of Ohio?

[leftofcool]

1. Ohio=swing state

Very important in the GE, one of the most important states indeed. Florida follows that

[julialnyc]

3. Obama can win without either of those states........

but I still think Obama could get Ohio (McCain will take Florida either way)

Hillary has a much more limited way to win (she'd have to go for the Kerry states)

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Forget Florida

Its possible to get Ohio, but don't count on it. States like Virginia, Colorado, and Missouri would be nice to have and Obama can get them IMO.

[BzaDem]

10. Obama cannot win without Ohio. Period.

The only theoretical way is if he wins a ton of red states that add up to Ohio's electoral votes.

Say he wins NM (1 point margin for Bush last time), NV (2.5 margin last time), and Iowa (1 point margin last time). Still no good. That only adds up to 17, which gets him 268.

He would also have to win VA (9 point margin), FL (5 point margin), AR (10 point margin), MO (7 point margin), or CO (6 point margin). The rest are hopeless. And we are assuming McCain doesn't take any of our blue states such as PA (2 point margin for Kerry), MI (3 point margin), WI (.4 point margin!!!), MN (3.5 point margin), OR (4 margin), or NH (1 point margin).

He must win Ohio. Plain and simple.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. Many states are swing states.

This is a specious argument. The country is not stagnant. Missouri also claims to be a "swing state" and even now, PA is claiming this. As time marches on, there is an ebb and flow of thought and even of literal people (there has been a continual exodous of people out of Ohio/Michigan/Iowa/Nebraska as the jobs move elsewhere) and eventually what once was is no more and something else takes its place.

[WarholPop]

6. Then why bother

to have primaries in the other 49 states? Heck, under Sen. Clinton's analysis, there only should be one primary for the nomination, and Ohio should be the only state that counts. According to her campaign, it apparently does not matter that Obama has won more states, more popular vote and more delegates than Clinton. If it's all about Ohio, then lets stop the charade of running a national nomination process in all fifty states; after all, according to the Clintons, those remaining 49 states do not matter.

[Occam Bandage]

8. Virginia, Missouri, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin = swing states.

[BzaDem]

11. Why do people keep assuming he can win Virginia, Missouri, or Colorado?

Virginia: 9 point margin for Bush last time.
Colorado: 6 point margin for Bush last time.
Missouri: 7 point margin for Bush last time.

He would have to win 2 out of 3 to make up for losing Ohio. And that's assuming that McCain doesn't enroach on any Blue territory, which is a possibility, considering 15% of democrats in a recent poll said they might vote McCain if Obama wins. We only won PA by 2 points.

[Occam Bandage]

12. Because polling shows he can. MO, VA, and CO all elected Dems in '06, and are all trending blue.

Just because Clinton/DLC politicians can't doesn't mean nobody can.

[sniffa]

13. Because he can

[BzaDem]

18. How can he overtake a 6-10 point Bush margin, when McCain actually appeals to 15% of democrats?

[WarholPop]

14. and why do

Clinton supporters keep assuming that she would win Ohio in a general election against McCain or that her primary supporters in Ohio would not support Obama in the general election?

[BzaDem]

15. Ohio was within 1 point in 2004. Hillary won huge in Ohio.

I'm very skeptical of taking primary results and projecting GE results out of them.

However, with Ohio, it was very, very close. 1 point margin, and that might have even gone blue if it weren't for all the Ken Blackwell tactics.

Therefore, the fact that Hillary took Ohio by a 10 point margin is important. We only need a slight tip in our direction in Ohio to win Ohio and thus the presidency. Nominating the candidate who won Ohio could very well tip Ohio in our direction. Especially since in a recent poll, 15% of democrats (and 20% of white democrats, more predominant in Ohio) said that they might vote for McCain over Obama if Obama were to win (and less than half of that for Hillary).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. The rest of the states don't count.

Odd.

She wants to be the president of this country and represent all of us, but she thinks most of us are second-class citizens who don't count.

[BzaDem]

16. Enough whining please.

Democrats actually need to win in November. No one is saying citizens of, say, Wyoming, are second-class citizens.

Glancing at Wyoming, you see, WOW! Obama carried that by over 23 points!

Actually looking closer, you see that Democrats make up 1/3 of registered voters in WY, and caucusgoers make up 13% of the registered democrats. So in an election where 4.4% of registered voters caucused, BO won.

We are not going to win Wyoming. The same logic applies to many red states that Obama has won.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. LOL

"No one is saying citizens of, say, Wyoming, are second-class citizens. "

actually, yeah, the Clinton campaign called them "second-class citizens." Their words.

[BzaDem]

22. Link? Or are you just being sarcastic?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

23. LOL, no I wouldn't make that up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/18/clinton-supporter-redst_n_87201.html

[BzaDem]

26. I would not call that "from the campaign."

Practically every official who endorses a candidate is made their "campaign co-chairman." Every single Republican elected official in Ohio was made a campaign co-chairman in 2004 (and probably all other states, though I haven't looked). There are some idiots out there who also happens to be elected officials. I doubt anyone who actually worked for her campaign would have said that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

28. Well if you want to split hairs..

be my guest.

[aquarius dawning]

19. God that meme is getting boring.

[dchill]

4. She forgets that Rush Limbaugh will not tell...

his listeners in Ohio to vote for her in November.

[julialnyc]

9. and there wouldn't be any Muslim boogey-man to scare them with

[BzaDem]

17. BO tied the repub vote in Ohio, and won it by 5 points in Texas.

[jenmito]

21. Yup-despite the Limbaughians' attempt to BEAT him so they can have their choice of Dem. to run

against. That's why fewer people caucused in TX. The Limbaughians went out and voted for Hillary as directed, but they didn't want to show their ugly faces in caucuses.

[BzaDem]

24. Wait what? A repub vote for BO is great? But a repub vote for HRC is bad?

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Especially when BO won the repub vote 70/30 in WI, which was a huge increase to his margin there.

[jenmito]

27. Yes. No hypocrisy. Repubs. really LIKE Obama. Limbaugh urged his listeners to vote for Hillary

and they DID. It's a FACT. http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/7/7116/66189

[dchill]

30. Thank you, jenmito - I couldn't have said it...

any better myself. Repubs who voted for Hillary want to vote against her in the fall. Those who voted for Obama want to vote FOR him in the fall. That's an incredibly important and vast difference.

[WarholPop]

25. At The End of the Day . . .

even if it is true that Ohio carries the most strategic value to the Democratic party in winning the general election, and even if it is true that Hillary Clinton has a better chance than Barrack Obama of carrying Ohion in the general election, isn't there still something to be said in preserving the integrity of the democratic primary process to award the nomination to the candidate who won the most states, the most popular vote and the most delegates? To assign more value to the winner of Ohio seems unconstitutional (or maybe just unfair) to the extent that a vote in Ohio counts more than a vote in any other state. I don't think Thomas Jefferson -- the Democrat of all Democrats -- would support some votes being more heavily weighted than others.

[BzaDem]

29. I agree -- I would be very conflicted if BO won the popular vote.

If BO won the popular vote (which it is looking like he will do now, though not positive yet), I would be leaning towards BO being the nominee because I highly value our democratic primary process. I still think though he has very little chance of winning this when it comes to the Electoral College, and thinking of an arch-conservative supreme court for the next 20 years just makes me want to barf. But if he wins it (and there isn't some huge revelation that comes out before the convention that damages him), that is very important.