From pretty much the start of primary season, both the Obama and Clinton camps have down played expectations ahead of the vote. Obama generally mentions New Hampshire and Hillary generally refers to the primaries as a marathon.
This is, of course, happening again, although it’s a bit different for Ohio and Texas.
The Obama camp, while being perhaps more confident than we’ve ever seen, are pointing out that Hillary needs a double digit win in both states if she hopes to come even close to catching Obama in the delegate count (this is true). They’ve also pointed out that just two weeks ago Obama was down by double digits in most polls in two states that are considered Clinton strongholds, as both went to Bill and Texas has a large Latino population.
The Clinton camp is saying that a win is a win (without mentioning delegate counts) and that Obama has yet to overtake Hillary even though his campaign is outspending her two to one. They’re also saying that if Obama can’t win Texas and Ohio in the primaries, then he won’t win them in the general.
It’s all spin, so none of it is to be trusted. But here’s the thing: math is math. And while I know you can get slight variations of delegate counts depending upon what source you go to, all of them have Obama up by more than 100 and all of them agree: Hillary needs to win big in both states to have any hope of catching up.
Honestly, at this point I’m beginning to think we’ll get a worst case scenario, one that I mentioned a few blogs back. I feel like Hillary will pull out a narrow win in one or both states, a win that will actually do nothing to help her standing in the race overall, but will bolster her to keep running and we’ll see a drawn out campaign.
The question, then, becomes whether a long primary season is good because it keeps the Democrats in the news or bad because it prevents Democrats from focusing on the Republicans. And I’m torn on that.
Then again, I just want Obama to win, so I suppose earlier works better for me.