Wolfson: "If they [Obama campign] fail to win in PA, they will have failed."

[ChrisFromNJ]

http://tinyurl.com/2nfnck

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I understand his job is to spin for Hillary. But does this seem ridiculous to anybody else?

[Verily]

"Obama is finished unless he wins both Ohio and Texas."

I seem to recall something like that.

[Gustaf]

That spin offers her the best chance at the nomination. Of course they're gonna try it.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

That's his job to spin things. Obama's staff has engaged in just as ridicules statements.

He has a point, though, that it's not good that the presumptive Democratic nominee is losing states by over 10% this late in the game.

[Ben.]

And so the Clinton campaign registers that for the first time they've let expectations get out of hand... lucky for them they have weeks to try and push the idea that Obama should actually be considered competative in PA.

[Eraserhead]

It's odd that Obama's people are finally winning the expectations game in a state. That is one of the few things they have sucked at.

[ChrisFromNJ]

This "expectations game" business has gotten out of hand. The Clinton campaign trotted the meme that if Hillary won both Texas and Ohio, Obama's campaign was done. As we all know, that is not the way it worked out. Momentum and expectations are not what have dictated the way this race has headed.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Yeah this isn't nearly the stupidest thing he's said or the biggest spinning quote either.  I'm yawning at this one with the rest of the world.

[MODU]

I guess it boils down to this...

Is the 4:1 spending ratio a strategic move by Obama in hoping to win a state that should go to Killary, just in the hopes that he can knock her out of the race all together, or is it a foolish waste of funds on an impossible victory in that state?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Spin, schpin, polls, schmoles. Shame that's all we have for a few more weeks, eh.

[Lunar]

I guess it boils down to this...

Is the 4:1 spending ratio a strategic move by Obama in hoping to win a state that should go to Killary, just in the hopes that he can knock her out of the race all together, or is it a foolish waste of funds on an impossible victory in that state?

Yeah foolish, I doubt PA will be important in the general.

[Lief 🗽]

I guess it boils down to this...

Is the 4:1 spending ratio a strategic move by Obama in hoping to win a state that should go to Killary, just in the hopes that he can knock her out of the race all together, or is it a foolish waste of funds on an impossible victory in that state?

Well, considering that, all told, he probably raised four times as much primary election money in March than Clinton, it's hardly foolish.

[J. J.]

Obama just has to get the margin down.

And in March, he raised $40 to Clinton's $20.

[Lief 🗽]

Obama just has to get the margin down.

And in March, he raised $40 to Clinton's $20.

Right, but generally, a significant portion (something like 30-40%) of the money Clinton raises has been for the general election. Obama rarely raises very much general election money.

[J. J.]

Obama just has to get the margin down.

And in March, he raised $40 to Clinton's $20.

Right, but generally, a significant portion (something like 30-40%) of the money Clinton raises has been for the general election. Obama rarely raises very much general election money.

I'm not sure about that; I don't think you can donate to a fall campaign at this point (though you can to a party.

[Downwinder]

Obama just has to get the margin down.

And in March, he raised $40 to Clinton's $20.

Right, but generally, a significant portion (something like 30-40%) of the money Clinton raises has been for the general election. Obama rarely raises very much general election money.

I'm not sure about that; I don't think you can donate to a fall campaign at this point (though you can to a party.

If I am not mistaken, an individual is limited to $2300 in contributions in both the primary, and the general election, for a limit of $4600.  Once an individual has contributed over $2300 in the primary season, any further contribution must be held for the general election.

Sen. Clinton's base of donor support has not grown like Obama's, and many of her donors have already maxed out for the primary.

[Democratic Hawk]

HALPERIN’S TAKE: What Hillary Clinton Has to Do to Really “Win” PennsylvaniaIn a world where “what is” trumps “what might be” (as Joe Scarborough might say):

http://thepage.time.com/halperins-take-what-hillary-clinton-has-to-do-to-really-win-pennsylvania/

1. She has to win the popular vote by more than 10.5% or the media will say she didn’t beat expectations (and her Ohio margin).

2. She has to cut into Obama’s national popular vote lead with a big Pennsylvania popular vote win and high turnout.

3. She has to net enough delegates to meaningfully slice into Obama’s lead (or you will hear the Obama campaign yawn loudly).

4. She has to sufficiently dominate the white, working-class vote (by beating her Ohio margin here too, according to the Delphic exit poll) to scare the bejesus out of the superdelegates — or Obama can claim to have proven that the Rev. Wright flap hasn’t hurt him.*

5. She has to frame her victory so that it appears she won based on a stronger appeal on the economy (and have the exit poll bear that out as well).

6. She has to harvest some superdelegates in the immediate aftermath.

7. She has to have the media (and, thus, the superdelegates) begin to truly buy into her “I can win the big states (and he can’t)” argument.

8. She has to bring the momentum from her win into Indiana and North Carolina, including through polling movement.

9. She has to see a spike in Internet and old-style contributions.

10. She has to give her surrogates something solid to offer the media, the donors, and the voters — so they can emphatically sell, soothe, and strategize, rather than anxiously defend, decry, and deny (and, on occasion, predict an Obama victory).

11. She has to give Bill Clinton something constructive on which to campaign — so he can happily pump his fist and make a strong case, instead of bitterly wag his finger and make angry accusations.

12. She has to hope the news cycle works in her favor so the media is not diverted from her victory as the undeniable story of the week.

13. She has to hope the results influence the Chattering Class/polls/campaign huddles/conventional wisdom/talk radio themes/conference call questions enough to shake Obama’s debonair poise — so he starts looking a little more worried about July, and a little less confident about November.

14.  She has to tweak her stump speech (and especially her victory speech) to project confidence and a winner’s forward-looking strut,  rather than her recent I’m-down-but-not-out forced cheer.

15.  She has to hope that all of the above silences the “drop out” chorus of doom-and-gloom pundits, frantic Democrats, and overwrought journalists.

And THAT’S why it is going to be hard for Hillary Clinton to really “win” Pennsylvania.

.....

Is it any wonder Wolfson is spinning, given that tall order?

Dave

[J. J.]

Obama just has to get the margin down.

And in March, he raised $40 to Clinton's $20.

Right, but generally, a significant portion (something like 30-40%) of the money Clinton raises has been for the general election. Obama rarely raises very much general election money.

I'm not sure about that; I don't think you can donate to a fall campaign at this point (though you can to a party.

If I am not mistaken, an individual is limited to $2300 in contributions in both the primary, and the general election, for a limit of $4600.  Once an individual has contributed over $2300 in the primary season, any further contribution must be held for the general election.

Sen. Clinton's base of donor support has not grown like Obama's, and many of her donors have already maxed out for the primary.

That limit is a "hard limit," however, or at least that is my understanding.  Someone can't give money now for the fall campaign.