April 23rd, 2008
10:00 AM ET
6 years ago

Analysis: Did Clinton victory come in time?

 Did Clinton's win come too late?
Did Clinton's win come too late?

(CNN) - Hillary Clinton scored a big victory in Pennsylvania on Tuesday to keep her hopes for the Democratic nomination alive. The question is whether the win came soon enough.

Barack Obama's loss in another big state and the margins by which he lost among blue-collar and rural voters on Tuesday, on the other hand, may raise questions about his electability.

Some polls had shown Clinton with a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania. But in the weeks between the last primaries in Ohio and Texas, Obama had whittled down Clinton's advantage.

Full story

soundoff (130 Responses)
  1. gene

    Obama out spends Hillary by 3 to 1 and to the tune of $11,000,000 and she beats him by 217,000 votes. Exit polls indicate that the only groups he was able to carry was the young vote an the AA voter. Obama can not win the general election. He will lose all of the south and border states, all of the normal red states, Michigan for sure because his lawyers held up a revote, and one or both Ohio and Pennsylvania. David Brooks wrote and article this past week that he is only tied with McCain in New Jersey, Minn. and wisc. and could lose these in the fall.

    April 23, 2008 01:58 pm at 1:58 pm |
  2. Marie7

    Yes, because the American people have seen just how arrogant he really is. Not to mention that he is only where he is for the following reasons: The way the democratic party has set up the primary process=the caucases favor him because of his demographic (college students, and people who have so much time on their hands that they can just go and sit and wait as long as they need to-they aren't working a 9-5 job or have kids, etc), he has the majority of the African American vote (understandably), and the far left media has given him such lop-sided support on TV trying to get him in the White House, the far left giving him so much money.
    Now, people are getting to know what he is really made of: Rev. Wright (hates white people, blames Am. for giving Af.Ams. AIDS, blames Am. for 9/11-says our chickens have come home to roost, seems to have hatred for Am.), Will. Ayers(the domestic terrorist who says that they didn't do enough damage to Am. on 9/11), the most liberal Dem. in the Senate, his comments about small town Americans, his wife's comments about America ("For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of this country," because Obama won some states), his arrogance, big huge ego, and his contempt for average Am. working people. He thinks he is better than other people who are not like him (educated at Harvard, private schools, etc.). He even called his grandmother "a typical white person." Thanks Obama for handing Hillary the nomination.
    The only states you will continue to win will be: very liberal (left), or ones with a majority of African American voters. All the other states to come will be voting for Hillary now that we know who Obama really is.
    He does not deserve to be our President. Hillary Clinton does, and she will be our next President.

    April 23, 2008 01:59 pm at 1:59 pm |
  3. Jay

    WOW...Obama's "fans" are a bunch of babies today!!! Where is all the people who were posting that Obama would win PA?

    April 23, 2008 02:00 pm at 2:00 pm |
  4. Whiskey

    Lets see if Clinton could cut Obamas lead in NC. No chance in hell. Yet the clinton following fools declare this a great victory. A month ago her lead was over 30 points in Penn. State is comprised og her constituents. You will never make it Hillary, only bring the party down.

    April 23, 2008 02:00 pm at 2:00 pm |
  5. v.ananthan

    HERE ANSWER FOR "QUESTION".

    with 99% reporting
    Hillary 1,259,296 = 54,69%
    obama 1,043,332 = 45,31%.

    THE DIFFERENCE IS 9,38%.

    OK.

    April 23, 2008 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  6. Pamela-NC40wf

    Maybe it's just me and maybe I'm just anxious for what I feel to be the right thing, but:
    Clinton's base is the uneducated and less afluent. Why should people who aren't educated decide who our President should be?
    Not that everyone shouldn't have the right to vote, but the press is putting such emphasis on whether or not Obama can get votes from the uneducated base of Clinton in November.
    Seems to me that the fact that educated informed people want Obama and uneducated people who get their information from sound bites on the news and from what ever email they receive will vote for either a Republican or Clinton says a lot about why our country is in the mess it's in now.
    Yes, that's elitist, but is it wrong? I mean you don't hire an uneducated person to be a CEO, right? So why do we put so much stock in the uneducated vote? Is it because there are more people w/ only a high school education than there are w/ college degrees?
    Hum.

    April 23, 2008 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  7. Olivia

    If you were running in a presidential race, spent millions of your supporters' money,put thousand of hours of your own time and effort in, have great ideas of how to turn this troubled country around for the good, be pressured by your opponent's endorsers to drop out prematurely, and knowing there was still a chance to win the nomination........would you drop out?
    Her supporters want her to stay in.
    Her opponents want her to drop out and give up just like that.
    She has had everything thrown at her and her husband by the Obama campaign will he just stand by trying to look innocent, but there are complaints when she picks up the missiles and throw them back (his words, his actions, his missiles, not hers).
    Here is a candidate who is strong, tenacious, knowledgable historic for being the 1st female to run for president, and who is VERY COMMITTED to serve this country and it's people........and all the Obama supporters, some press and pundits and senators are trying to put her down.
    HILLARY MUST STAY THE COURSE! WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR HER LAST WAS SAYING?

    GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!

    April 23, 2008 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
  8. tidho

    I've seen two figures 8.6% and 9.4%. Just to clarift (and using the 9.4%) the "9" represents one digit while the "4" represents a second digit. Therefore "9.4" is a ouble digit victory. :P

    I can see why this inaccuracy is frustrating for Obama supporters, especially with guys like Rendel saying she needed double digits to continue. Even though she technically didn't get them she did perform well and she does have a case for continuing.

    Hillary can't make up the delegate, Obama will win more, but it does appear more and more likely that Hillary can redefine the term victory. Just a couple months ago it was unheard of to suggest the delegate winner wouldn't be the nominee, but the media seems to be softening on that which will give the Democratic leadership and opportunity to silver platter the nomination to Hillary.

    April 23, 2008 02:06 pm at 2:06 pm |
  9. Jim, Indiana

    Victory is the word of the day for Democrats and all Americans who want to change the country for the better and there is only reason for hope, now more than ever, since Hillary's outstanding triumph last night.

    Only Hillary can beat McCain in November because she is electable.

    April 23, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  10. Rosie

    News: Why Hillary loses winning?

    April 23, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  11. Dee

    WOW.... more states , more delegates, more votes. Still happy about second place?

    April 23, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  12. Stephen, Dallas, TX

    To most of those above... answer the question, people!

    No... it's not too late. While it's true that Sen. Clinton will not have enough (committed) delegates going into the convention ... neither will Sen. Obama. That, by definition, leaves it up to the Super Delegates.

    To the Super Deleagtes... consider the following:

    1. . If one counts the votes in Michigan and Florida (Oh, Democrats... remember that whole flap about counting all the votes in Florida?) then Sen Clinton actually holds the lead in popular votes.

    2. Of Sen. Obama's state wins, the majority came in caucus states, where a very small percentage of people determine the outcome.

    April 23, 2008 02:08 pm at 2:08 pm |
  13. Dennis

    For all you hacks saying that Obama won't have a chance in this election, just turn your attention to the one fact that the media is not talking about: In the Pennsylvania primary for the republican candidates, John McCain won with 525,000 votes. All the votes combined for republicans totaled a little over 700,000. Obama had 1 million votes in Pennsylvania last nite. Even if 30% of Hillary's supporters vote for McCain, Obama will still win by a large number with the remaining Hillary voters who would vote for him. The news affilliates don't tell us this because they wouldn't be able to sensationalize the election like they're doing. You guys, this is just for ratings, the primary is over.

    Obama 08

    April 23, 2008 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  14. RuthieM

    Clinton didn't win by double digits, look at the numbers, she won by single digit –8.5%-9%. Get it right folks!

    April 23, 2008 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  15. Johnny

    It is very interesting to see all the discussion about Obama having a clear advantage in this state because of his 3-1 in money spent. Everyone seems to be forgetting the fact that the Clinton brand is worth so much more then that. Obama has to spend 3-1 in order to have even a slight chance of comparing with that brand name. She should be destroying him in the #'s like he does when he wins states that our good demographics for him, but she doesnt. The face is that he has cut into her base more then she has cut into his base. In terms of the general election, many of the states that Clinton CAN win in, our for the most part guarantees with the exception of Florida and possibly Ohio. In the latest polls, it seems that Barack is beating McCain in Pennsylvania and Ohio + some usual republican states. It sounds to me that is the better deal!

    April 23, 2008 02:12 pm at 2:12 pm |
  16. Ramon Sison

    Hmmm facts people..... 1st woman?....1st black?.....who was Shirley Chisholm?

    The 1st black woman to run for President...she won 152 delegates.

    Fact- Obama is not going to win the presidency. He may win the nomination but this person is not presidential material. His becoming the nominee hands the election to John McCain.

    April 23, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  17. BJWL

    Please stop this silliness about some polls saying Clinton was up 15-20 points and Obama closed the gap. That would never happen with a competitive race in the state. I grew up in Pennsylvania. The only person in recent history to win by 20% was Ed Rendell (from Pennsylvania and wildly popular among Democrats and Republicans) running for re-election as governor against a pure neophyte. Under this perfect storm, Rendell won 60-40. In winning by 10% in competitive race, Hillary Clinton's in a fantastic feat.

    April 23, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  18. John in Virgina

    I'm with Sandy on this one. The elephant in the room is the old bigots who have never set foot out of Pennsylvania and never had any first hand experience with any blacks. Not one commentator took on that issue last night while they were busy painting Obama as the black candidate ("uhhh no African Americans here" "...uhhhhh the African Americans went for Obama 90%"). But you heard a peep about what Governor Rendell himself said just before the primary in his state: there are a bunch of Pennsylvanians who are not ready for a black president. That was one thing he had to overcome that Clinton did not. The other was running against a known political name (wife of a very popular former president). On top of that, Clinton had far more elected officials in the state in her corner, not to mention her grandpa being from Scranton. Obama had, since the last primary, the Wright issue, Ayers issue, and the bitter comment to contend with in a place where he didn't have much of a chance to begin with. But yet he only lost by 9 points (the news networks rounded 54.3 up to 55% for Clinton LOL! and 45.7 down to 45% for Clinton so they could say she got a doule digit lead). He did very well.

    April 23, 2008 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  19. GloriafromPA

    Buh-bye Hillary. If you cause Obama to lose the General, we will never vote for you when you try to run again.

    April 23, 2008 02:19 pm at 2:19 pm |
  20. Evan Bayh

    It not a question of Obama or Hillary. It is a question of having a
    Democrat elected to the Presidency in November. The longer this
    campaign continues, the result will be a candidate that has
    hopelessly damaged and weaken. The Democratic party will be
    hopelessly divided.

    You may believe that the candidates are being vetted, tested, or
    challenged before the general election. What is happening that
    campaigns are so divided that it will become impossible to unite the
    party.

    It is not reasonable to believe that the party would unite behind a
    candidate that did not win the majority of elected delegates. It is
    now apparent that Hillary cannot win a majority of elected Delegates.

    The question is not if Hillary has the right to continue her
    campaign. The question is should she? Even if by some miracle she
    should win nomination…would it be worth having. MCCAIN WINS!

    I encourage everyone to Email Senator Bayh and encourage him to save
    the Party by asking Hillary end her campign.

    April 23, 2008 02:24 pm at 2:24 pm |
  21. Anti Reaganess Big Talkers.

    OMG!!

    Obama should drop out, stop being selfish and save the democrtic party. He is too devisive and is tearing the party apart. The media/pundis will cry like the babies they are but it would be the best thing for the..... Party.

    In the end the pundits and media and Obamaphiles would be happy because they pain so deeply when they see Obama unhappy or not being ""given to him"" what he wants.... But it's ok all will get past it. To Match Obama against McCain is looking more and more like a sure way of losing the Election.

    The tied is changing, the Republicans are now favoring Obama to win because they feel he will be the most easy to defeat. Politics makes "strange bedfellows" but that has now become the conventional wisdom..... My how things change.

    April 23, 2008 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  22. eddie n. powellnye

    WIN IS A WIN. GIVE CREDIT WERE CREDIT IS DUE. THE POINT THAT MOST IS MISSSING. HRC WON A BATTLE BUT SHE HAVE LOST THE WAR.

    April 23, 2008 02:25 pm at 2:25 pm |
  23. Quinn

    Hillary's new strategy is really dangerous...

    This morning she went on virtually all of the networks and claimed that she is now "winning the national popular vote by 120,000 votes when you count the votes in Michigan and Florida."

    Even Hillary supporters would have to admit that it is not fair to count votes in a primary where you were the ONLY NAME ON THE BALLOT. Clinton wants to claim 328,151 votes in Michigan while Obama would get zero, zip, nada!

    ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT'S FAIR IS BEYOND CRAZY!

    Hillary's new math is...the real math doesn't matter!

    April 23, 2008 02:32 pm at 2:32 pm |
  24. Jesse - San Antonio TX

    Yeah I am a democrat and yes you are playing the race card.

    Would you rather that I typed elitist?

    Columbia and Harvard Law Grads who prefer Imported Spanish ham that retailes $99.99 per lb usually are.

    April 23, 2008 02:35 pm at 2:35 pm |
  25. TOM WITTMANN

    Of course it is too late abd the "Tide is not turning"

    Unless a victory by 10% in a state with so many Blue collar
    40% over 60 years and 60% woman, a optimal combination of HILLARY favoring groups, after it shrinked from 20% at OHIO time,
    and recuuperating 14 delegates from a deficit of 148 (which probably will be again lost in North Carolina, where the demography is just opposite,

    And of course, th Media will not say so clearly, as they want make more money bt continuing reporting each smear of one of the candidates to the other !!

    AND FINALLY, AS 'TIME' SAYS, THE REAL WINNER THEREFORE IS McCAIN !! DO NOT INCUR IN WISHFUL THINKING THE AS "IN THE PAST" THE DEMS WILL UNIFY BEHIND THE NOMINEE.

    NEVER IN THE PAST GENDER FANATICS AND RESIDUAL RACIST PERSONS (THE LATTER INCREASING PROPORTIONALLY TO THE AGE, AS HER SUPPORTER DO) WILL VOTE FOR OBAMA, NEITHER THE EQUALLY RACIAL MOTIVATED BLACK FANATICS WILL DO SO FOR HILLARY !!

    NONE OF THESE FACTORS WERE PRESENT IN THE PAST !!!

    TOM

    April 23, 2008 02:36 pm at 2:36 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.