April 23rd, 2008
02:57 PM ET

Lanny Davis: The Top Ten List of Undisputed Facts Showing Barack Obama's Weakness

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/04/23/art.obama.pa2.jpg%5D



Let's forget about the spin on all sides and not use any adjectives to modify the following 10 Facts that should not be in dispute:

1. Hillary Clinton won by 10%, 220,000 votes, despite after most of the polls in the last several weeks on RealClearPolitics, including its RCP all-poll average, showed her ahead by single digits and dropping. The exit polls showed her winning by +5. (It's easy to forget that she won if you listen to the Obama spinners last night and today. Believe it or not, Pennsylvania's Rep. Murphy, a freshman congressman who supported Barack Obama, actually said last night on Larry King that Senator Obama did so well in losing to Senator Clinton yesterday that he has a "wind at his back." I am not kidding.

2. Senator Obama tried hard to win the state, campaigned intensely throughout the state for most of the last six weeks - and was trying to win, not just lose a narrow margin.

3. He spent $11 million on media - about three times more than Senator Clinton.

4. Most of his ads were personal negative attack ads against Senator Clinton, meaning attacks on her character and integrity.

5. There were no personal attack ads run by Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania

6. Barack Obama hasn't won a single major industrial state that historically constitute the key "battleground" states for both parties, i.e., the states in the last three or four presidential elections have switched back and forth between the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates.

7. The reason that he lost can be found in the demographic data: He lost - and Senator Clinton won - by substantial margins blue collar and middle class white voters earning under $50,000 a year, senior citizens, rural voters, Hispanic voters, and women voters - all core constituencies in the Democratic base that must be won if a Democrat is to win the White House. For example, yesterday in Pennsylvania she won Roman Catholics by 32 percent (66034), union households by 18% (59-41), and those most concerned about the economy by 16 points (58-42). Only 60 percent of Democratic Catholic voters said they would vote for Mr. Obama in a general election.

8. Barack Obama has lost these same demographic groups in Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, California and New Jersey and other major states that Senator Clinton won. There is a factual pattern of his weakness among these demographic groups in virtually every primary state that cannot be disputed.

9. Barack Obama is in a statistical dead heat with John McCain in Massachusetts. A recent Survey USA poll of registered voters found 48% backed Senator Obama vs. 46% for Senator McCain - within the margin of error. The same poll showed Senator Clinton with a 15% lead over McCain. The last time a Democrat did not win Massachusetts by a substantial margin was 1980, when Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter. Even in the historic landslide election of Richard Nixon in 1972, when he won 49 states, only Massachusetts supported Senator McGovern. Senator Obama currently runs considerably behind Senator McCain in Florida and Ohio, while Senator Clinton is ahead in both of those key battleground states.

10. Current polls show Senator Clinton runs ahead of John McCain nationally or dead even - and Senator Obama runs only dead even. For example, in the most recent USA Today national general election poll, Senator Clinton leads Senator McCain by +6; Senator Obama leads by less than the margin of error, +2.

Those are the facts. To all superdelegates: you decide who is riskier as a general election candidate. The candidate whose negatives, driven by the right-wing hate machine in the 1990s in particular, are all out there and already taken into account. Or a candidate who is still virtually unknown to most of the electorate, with Republicans clearly looking forward to filling in the blanks with the facts about his record, of which many general election voters still are not aware.

Lanny J. Davis
Friend of Senator Hillary Clinton,
and fundraiser for her presidential campaign

Filed under: Barack Obama • Lanny Davis • Raw Politics
soundoff (85 Responses)
  1. Dana

    Christine... actually Rep's what Hillary to win. This has been know since the beginning. But they are expecting Obama to win.

    April 23, 2008 at 10:58 pm |
  2. Dana

    You know it's good that Obama declined the upcoming debates he was asked to join. They have already had 20 of them. And if it were to be anything like the last debate where they spent almost half the debate talking about nonsense, what would be the point. Hillary went on that debate and said Obama is absolutely electable and then soon after went back to the same politics questioning his electability. What is with this candidate? She is so contradictory I don't know what to believe with her. It's like she is not only throwing the kitchen sink, she is trying to throw the whole house. It seems like she would do anything to win even if it means destroying a fellow member of her own party. And that call that she would obliterate Iran if they attacked Isreal is just OFF!!! This is the first time I had ever voted and in the beginning I would have voted for either Hillary or Obama but now if Hillary won I would rather just stay home because I could not vote for someone I don't like and there's no way in HELL I'd vote for Mccain. Her personality turns me off and if it's true she is taking money from lobbyist then not only will she have to deal with BC trying to impose his policies in the white house, like NAFTA, she will also be beholden to the lobbyist because I doubt they would have given her all that money for nothing. That's also a shame she is now begging for money. She's a pretty well to do person. People should be donating money to her because they want to not because she asked.

    April 23, 2008 at 10:51 pm |
  3. Cynthia, Everson PA

    No attacks from Hillary? I received 5 phone calls from her campain, they were all negative and they are all on my answering machine. I received 6 phone calls from the Obama campain and none of them mentioned any thing about Hillary

    April 23, 2008 at 10:42 pm |
  4. Linda

    I am from Missouri and yes, Obama did sqeak out a small margin win here. Two large cities and a college town the rest of the whole state(small town blue collar voters) was won by Hillary.
    I heard on Lou Dobs show tonight how Obama's manager said Obama did not need the blue collar vote to win the election.
    I will make any bet he will not win Mo. in the gen. election!

    April 23, 2008 at 10:42 pm |
  5. Christie

    # 5 is CRAZY!!! I live in PA and I got many phone calls from the Hillary camp!! All negative...so saying that she ran nothing negative about him is a bunch of crap! Oh yes and let's not forget the the Osama Bin Laden ad that she ran as well!! That is her last resort! I am also a 25 year old white woman, and I support Obama. Also most of my friends and family members support him as well! So the media saying that he basically only won the black vote is wrong there are a lot of white people that support him as well! Hillary needs to give it up!

    April 23, 2008 at 10:41 pm |
  6. Harold

    Hey Lanny, SuperDelegates Matter!

    While Hillary picked up 10 pleadged delegates in PA (congratulations Sen. Clinton) did you noticed over the last 60 days, Obama gained 83 Superdelegates to Clintons 3.

    So much for Clintons own claim that this was a race about delegates.

    April 23, 2008 at 10:18 pm |
  7. Charles

    Some people keep saying "Why can't Obama can't 'close the deal' - why can't he put her away?"


    - 8 years as first lady
    - established DC insider
    - popular ex president as her spouse
    - well-entrenched political machine developed over more than a decade
    - support of most of Pennsylvania's political establishment
    - more than a 20-point lead over Obama only a few months ago

    RIGHT QUESTION: "Why hasn't Hillary put away this new guy - who came out of nowhere - long before now? And in Pennsylvania, a state tailor-made for her, why did she only win by 9.4%?"

    April 23, 2008 at 10:17 pm |
  8. Ledell

    Anderson, Why is no one mentioning that Obama closed a 25 Point Gap in the polls? Why aren't we asking, How did Hillary loose this lead with all of the mud she has slung at Obama? I don't get it. It appears the blogs and media has shifted to this foolish one sided question. Hillary is the known Democrat, Obama is a new comer. Why was this not a clean sweep for Hillary? Point is most of us just don't like her. I am sick of her and her campaign. She should drop out rather and drag our party through this. The longer she stays, the less likely we will beat McCain in November. It's time to take the campaign to the next level. Hillary will ultimately loose, there is no question about it. Unfortunately it appears the lose will come Later than Sooner.

    April 23, 2008 at 10:16 pm |
  9. Mr. J

    Over all Lanny has it right. Mr Obama's people will refuse to look at things clearly no matter how his sarogut spin it. Mr Obama is going to have a hared time the rest of the primarys. Just look at how negative his followers are. I think they see the writing on the wall and can't believe they couldn't buy the election.

    April 23, 2008 at 10:06 pm |
  10. Marcia, Bucks County, PA

    Rep. Murphy is the Representative in my district. He is up for re-election in November. I wouldn't be surprised if his support of Obama will result in his opponent beating him out.

    April 23, 2008 at 9:50 pm |
  11. Dixie

    I think I can speak for the elderly voters since I am 67. The problem I see with Obama and the reason he is turning off older voters is his juvenile way of responding when she points out their differences. He tends to take a 7th grader approach and poke fun and try to get his large rally goers to laugh. The class clown is laughed at but not often taken seriously on important issues. If he would grow up and learn to answer in a mature way he might convince us that he is a serious candidate. Imagine the way the terrorist would react when he started poking fun at their leaders. I don't see this as being a good foreign policy. If things don't go his way he gets a chip on his shoulder and that's when it all goes to hell in a hand basket

    April 23, 2008 at 9:46 pm |
  12. Luniam

    Why discuss all these negative things Obama. Can't you people cheer up a bit and read some positive news for a change?

    Like the following news from CNN Politics cheered me up earlier today:

    "Democrats soldier on in fight for nomination"
    Both Democratic candidates picked up superdelegates Wednesday,
    with Obama getting
    "the support"
    of Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry
    and Clinton receiving
    "a nod"
    from Tennessee Rep. John Tanner.

    Can't you see the difference, folks?.

    April 23, 2008 at 9:36 pm |
  13. Annie Kate

    The fight between Obama supporters and Clinton supporters appears to be more heated than the actual campaign itself. Just because you are sitting behind a computer screen with anonymity on these blogs does not mean that good manners can be thrown under the bus – it seems like the candidates (even Hilary) aren't divisive – its their supporters that are. Lets remember we are all in this together and respect each other's opinion – even Lanny's.

    Annie Kate
    Birmingham AL

    April 23, 2008 at 9:33 pm |
  14. Jodi

    Thanks, Lanny. Keep up the great work.

    April 23, 2008 at 9:32 pm |
  15. Michelle

    1. Clinton won by less than 10%. Obama closed a big gap in a state that was pro-Hillary from the start.

    2. Why wouldn’t Obama try to win the state while trying to close the gap. Everyone I know was hoping he would knock Hillary out of the race. We are sick of her negativity and smug selfishness. Hillary go away!

    3. He spent money that was donated by regular folks contributing $25 a pop…many of the contributors contribute each month, as I do. Obama has to spend more than Hillary in a pro-HIllary state because she is the favorite and she is getting free press on FOX news...her demographic's favorite station.

    4. Why shouldn’t Obama respond to her attacks on his integrity and character. She has no integrity and character. This has been proven by her offensive negative attacks on Obama, the way she and Bill have ignited racial bias, the way she has changed her persona, voice, appearance and message many times, etc. I have no respect for HC or BC. I was glad Obama finally brought up a few of her flaws. He left out a lot of mud he could have slung at both the Clintons.

    5. “There were no personal attack ads run by Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania” Yeah, right! That is the most inane statement I’ve heard in an election. Of course she ran personal attack ads…a T.V. ad with Bin Laden? Plus she and Bill know the subliminal code to use with racists. This is just like the high school female bully who always get away with cruelty because she is smart enough to hide what she is doing.

    6. “Barack Obama hasn’t won a single major industrial state” True…the states with the most uneducated, racial biased, older voters and economically "bitter" do vote for Hillary. Enough said.

    7. “The reason Obama lost can be found in the demographic data”. Yes, core constituencies are an issue. However, if Obama is the only democratic candidate I think those who are only marginally racially biased will vote for him against McCain. Everyone I know wants to vote for Obama and I live in the most conservative county in California. Obama will blow McCain out of the water. Plus 60 percent of the Democratic Catholic vote is a high number considering what has been playing in the press. The socially progressive Catholic church is pro-Obama and will back him 100%.

    8. “Barack Obama has lost these same demographic groups in Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, California and New Jersey.” True. See my points above. Clinton has lost almost the entire black vote and Obama has an incredibly loyal base of young people and “latte sippers” who will probably not vote for Clinton. Clinton made a mistake when she insulted white collar workers…they are computer savvy.

    9. “Barack Obama is in a statistical dead heat with John McCain in Massachusetts.” That will change when Obama is the only democratic candidate and can run against McCain.

    10. “Current polls show Senator Clinton runs ahead of John McCain nationally or dead even”. See #9.


    April 23, 2008 at 8:22 pm |
  16. Julliet

    I find it amazing how Hillary's supporters are all over the place buzzing as if PA is the only state in this country. Do you remember when Obama was sweeping 11-0. Where were the Hillary supporters? All the blue collar workers and whites who make below $50.000 will vote for Obama in the general election when all is said and done.

    Now who is being fair, Lenny has a vicious hatred for Obama. I doubt if he will vote for Obama when he is becomes the Nominee. The sooner Hillary realises that she can't win the nomination, the better for the democratic party. By the way see you in two weeks with the list of reasons why Hillary is gracefully bowing out.

    April 23, 2008 at 8:06 pm |
  17. shinesinthedark

    Looks like the people who will actually decide the election are sick of having Obama shoved down their throats by an adoring media. They love him the same way the loved the last "teflon guy". Remember him? He gave us a new vegetable – ketchup. That's because his only policy was "change".

    April 23, 2008 at 8:04 pm |
  18. Christine

    Megan from Canada loves Obama. I really wish she would leave her two cents out of our politics.

    The republicans want Obama to win because they know they will win the white house. Obama supporters are just too blind to see it. Hillary has already withstood the republican mud machine and is still standing. He will fall like a house of cards.

    April 23, 2008 at 8:02 pm |
  19. lb


    Barack Obama’s weakness isn’t his weakness…it’s the weakness of the American people who cannot look past race and elect the best candidate, and instead, continue to elect a “dynasty” into the office of President. The Bushs and Clintons have brought this nation to it’s lowest point ever, and I can’t believe they want to continue the downward decline built on lies, deceit, and dirty politics..

    Obama never stood a chance in Pennsylvania because Governor Rendell was correct in his opinion on race and politics in Pennsylvania. By narrowing the gap to 9.4% from near 30% of two months ago was a huge feat in itself.

    I live in Pennsylvania and almost all of the negative politics was coming from the Clinton campaign and their supporters.

    In my opinion, for Obama to “close the deal”, he must go just as negative as Clinton because unfortunately in this country, the lowest common denominator wins in politics. In other words, you have to play as dirty as your opponent because mud sticks, and people fall for it every time.

    ZERO (0)

    April 23, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
  20. OC Patriot

    Thanks so much. Finally, someone in the media is telling the truth. I am so tired of certain commentators/networks acting like Obama is the messiah. He's definitely not. And there are plenty of upper income, college educated, "typical" white collar, non-gun owning Democrats like myself who will not vote for him under any circumstances. I do, however, cling to God in both good times and bad if that makes me a stereotype. If Hillary is not the nominee, I will definitely vote for John McCain because at least I don't have to worry whether he loves our country or has some hidden agenda. We've all heard the term "fatal flaw"...well that sums up Obama's escapades in the eyes of most Americans. It will be a disgrace if the Democratic party is so wimpy that they back such an inexperienced, controversial and unelectable candidate. And it's them and not the Republicans I will blame for the continued war and bad economy. They have their chance and I hope they have the common sense and courage to support the only Democrat who can win and the only person who get get our country out of the mess we're in, Hillary Clinton.

    April 23, 2008 at 7:43 pm |
  21. Chris - Hemet, Ca.

    Lanny, let me give you my top ten reasons you're an idiot!!

    April 23, 2008 at 7:42 pm |
  22. Rob

    I am so tired of Hillary supporters bashing and calling Barack out on going negative. Lets not forget there is over 20 years of baggage in the Clinton closet without involving Bill. So if you want the Obama camp to go negative, are you ready for the can or worms that they can unleash?

    It is plain and simple that Hillary is not prepared to accept defeat at any cost. She is probably working on a scheme once all super deligates have voted and she is still; BEHIND IN TOTAL VOTES, BEHIND IN SUPER DELIGATES, BEHIND IN THE POPULAR VOTE AND BEHIND IN TOTAL STATES WON.


    April 23, 2008 at 7:42 pm |
  23. Jocely Emile

    For Hillary Clinton to say the republican will beat Obama just like George H. W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis show two things. Step one she don’t know her history or she is playing the American people to picture Obama with a picture in order to confuse the voters.
    I need to remind people George H. W. Bush was vice president of Ronald Reagan a very popular president who won two terms. George H. W. Bush was a third term of Ronald Reagan.
    If you go back you see in 1980 Reagan won 44 states against Carter. In 1984 Reagan beat Walter Mondale 49 states to 1 state you George Bush term was a Reagan third term.
    This is why an inexperience candidate like Bill Clinton was able to beat a seating president like George Bush because people come to the term George Bush was no longer Ronald Reagan.
    Michael Dukakis lost against Ronald Reagan.

    Fayetteville, NC

    April 23, 2008 at 7:41 pm |
  24. Jocely Emile

    I think Lanny J. Davis is having a senior moment.

    One thing Lanny need to know if Obama win the nomination which he will he will win the nomination fair and square.

    Fay, NC

    April 23, 2008 at 7:37 pm |
  25. Linda, Boulder

    Joseph: Obama ran negative ads in PA; not Hillary.

    April 23, 2008 at 7:36 pm |
  26. Pam Lewis

    Hillary has been taking notes from the Obama playbook. Have you noticed lately that she has stopped using her favorite pronoun, 'I". She sounds more and more like Barack, the more she campaigns. It would really be fun to run some of her earlier speeches next to the speeches she has been making of late. She is also learning how to use the internet to raise funds as Obama has been doing all along.
    It is too bad so many folks can't see through her. She will do whatever it takes to win – even become Barack Obama.

    April 23, 2008 at 7:18 pm |
  27. Joseph Kowalski, North Huntingdon, PA

    Barack Obama's weakness isn't his weakness...it's the weakness of the American people who cannot look past race and elect the best candidate, and instead, continue to elect a "dynasty" into the office of President. The Bushs and Clintons have brought this nation to it's lowest point ever, and I can't believe they want to continue the downward decline built on lies, deceit, and dirty politics..

    Obama never stood a chance in Pennsylvania because Governor Rendell was correct in his opinion on race and politics in Pennsylvania. By narrowing the gap to 9.4% from near 30% of two months ago was a huge feat in itself.

    I live in Pennsylvania and almost all of the negative politics was coming from the Clinton campaign and their supporters.

    In my opinion, for Obama to "close the deal", he must go just as negative as Clinton because unfortunately in this country, the lowest common denominator wins in politics. In other words, you have to play as dirty as your opponent because mud sticks, and people fall for it every time.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:43 pm |
  28. Marty

    Megan from Canada supports Hillary because Hillary supports CAFTA.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:35 pm |
  29. Patsy Rheam

    I support Hillary and I am a lifelong Democrat that will absolutely NOT vote for Obama. He is not ready to run this country and his wife is very offensive to me. She seems to talk down to us.
    All you Hillary haters don't even know why you hate her you just do.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  30. Margot Buchalter

    It's a doggone shame that Barack Obama did not win PA. BO supporters, be honest with yourselves and step back for just a minute and really digest these facts and stop hating on Lanny. He outspent Hillary by far and always have, in conjunction with all the free and very favorable publicity CNN and all the other TV networks invested in him in addition to the print media, he should have won, BUT HE DID NOT. Coupled with all that, the cable networks including CNN threw Senator Clinton under the bus many times over in order to maximize Barack's winning abilities, it's a wonder Hillary is still standing. Want to know why? she's resilient and a bonafide champion. Her resolve has been tested over and over, and yet still she keeps rising. No matter how critical the media is of Hillary, she takes it like a champ and still keeps on going. That's the kind of leader that America needs, not a whiner whose feathers get ruffled very easily when the tough questions are asked.

    So why are you hating on Lanny? He is only looking at the stark realities in this race. A very good and critical question for the super delegates - with all of the strong financial backing that BO supporters handed him, in addition to the heavy campaigning and the negative ads, why hasn't BO carry not one historical major state critical in this race? I still say BO is not ready. And if he does wind up with the nomination, then we might as well prepare the way for another four-year reign of terror in the person of the future President John McCain.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:28 pm |
  31. Larry

    It is really scary to see how much Barack has to depend on the African-American vote in his effort to unite ALL Americans.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:26 pm |
  32. Linda, Boulder

    The more time passes, the more people move beyond the, "Gee, he makes me feel warm and fuzzy when he speaks," and begin to look hard at him. People are asking the hard questions: Can he win? People are realizing he is not ready to campaign in a hard election (he has never had to), nor is he ready to lead this country.

    It is a crucial time in our country. We need Hillary this time around. Obama can mature a little, and try again later - he's young. This is too important to take a chance on not winning in November.

    April 23, 2008 at 6:25 pm |
  33. Marty

    Plain and simple though is that Obama is in a commanding lead in the delegate count for the nomination. And the honest truth is that barring something catastrophic he will be running against McCain in November. The only thing that the negative campaiging between Clinton and Obama is doing right now is dividing party. The last thing we need regardless of the nomination is resentment that causes people not to vote. I think these 2 on the same ticket in November absolutely 100% ruins any chance at a McCain victory. How did that saying go in "The Cannonball Run"? "If you're gonna be a bear, be a Grizzly"! HAHAHAHAHAHA

    April 23, 2008 at 5:27 pm |
  34. Tammy

    All this infighting in the Democratic Party is just sad. You people prove more and more each day that you will be the demise of your own party this November. Can anyone say political implosion?

    April 23, 2008 at 4:39 pm |
  35. Christy

    Because she only needs industrial states to win the general election. Have you forgotten about the 11 in a row she lost? Or wait...I remember those states and those demographics don't matter to Senator Clinton. Let's not forget Missouri and Wisconsin which Obama won.

    I see another Obama streak coming. She is already playing down how important North Carolina is because she doesn't stand a chance. Maybe you could write a top ten list telling the rest of the states why they don't matter and the 11 in a row she lost, you can explain that to them too. She has no money, she's 9 million in debt. Even if she does raise 10 million dollars in 24 hours, she's still only a million up with looonnnnggg way to go through her own selfishness and stubborness. There is always a spike after a primary contest and it will die down as it always has with her. Even taking money from PAC's and Lobbyists can't help her.

    Funny how Clinton can't get the people of America to invest in her, believe in her the way Obama can. She can save the whole "let's wait for the voters to decide" machine. We've spoken and she lost.

    April 23, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  36. Roger

    Wow, Lanny. Spin much? 4 and 5 almost made me fall from my chair. You're Billary bootlicking does nothing but make you look retarded.

    We'll see you in two weeks, when your saying how great it is to have Obama as our Democratic nominee.

    April 23, 2008 at 4:20 pm |
  37. Lisa

    Why not remain quiet on the subject until the final primary in June is held. That way, all the jostling can begin for who should be the Dem nominee. For either to drop out, it penalizes those states who have yet to vote.

    While I really don't care at this point which of the 2 is the nominee (and remember, Edwards has yet to throw his count to one side or the other), I strongly urge those in the DNC (and RNC) to review the primary process and truly make it fair to ALL citizens of voting age in this country. Usually by this time, as with the current Republican primary, the candidate has been "chosen". It leaves the remaining states without a say in who their party's candidate should be. As for superdelegates, they need to be done away with. There needs to be on 5 primaries (10 states at 1/month) or a Super Primary Tuesday where all 50 states vote at once.

    Let the primary run its course. At the end, after the convention, Dems will come together as we have a common cause - to defeat the Republican nominee. Regardless of how any of us feel about the candidates, another 4-8 years of status quo politics is not going to be good for us.

    April 23, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  38. Bill Oh Really

    Hillary is not up in the clouds like Obama but is down to earth and rolling up her sleeves to git the job done. Hillary is the candidate for the working people.

    April 23, 2008 at 4:04 pm |
  39. Paul Morabito

    The Democratic race is based on proportionate allocation of delegates by voting, but the Presidential race (and most GOP primaries) are winner take all. What happens when you take the Electoral Votes of the states Clinton has won vs that of Obama ? Who wins then ?
    If you take the states that Clinton has won vs Obama, and compare total Electoral College votes, she wins 284 to 197. If you then take only those states won by Al Gore in 2000, she still wins 160 to 93.
    If one thing that 2000 should have taught Democrats is that you need to win in the Electoral College. Not the popular votes. We are a collection of fifty State elections, not a national popularity contest.
    Clinton is a lot closer to 270 Electoral College votes needed to win that Obama is – plain and simple.

    April 23, 2008 at 4:03 pm |
  40. jeremy

    #4 and 5 are the craziest things I have ever seen written. I live in Pennsylvania, and I saw only one negative attack by Obama, and that was in response to some of the most ridiculous negative attack ads I have ever seen in my life. Perhaps you should open your eyes. Furthermore, Obama had to climb an uphill battle against a political base that was unlikely to shift much in the first place. Bearing that in mind, Obama crushed Billary...oh, and by the way, spinmeisters, it wasn't 10%, it was almost, about 9.5, but not quite there.

    By the way, of course he was trying to win, but coming from such a huge deficit is also a pretty good second place. The only way left for her to win is to steal it through SDs, who don't represent a constituency. And if that happens, I vote McCain.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
  41. Megan O. Toronto, ON, Canada

    Lanny, point number 5 is absolutely incorrect. That is not a fact and your list doesn't prove anything your bias for Senator Clinton. That's a fact!!!!

    April 23, 2008 at 3:45 pm |
  42. bob toano virginia

    Lanny your facts don't hold up

    1) She didn't win by 10% or double digits, or 220 votes. She won by 9.4% which isn't double digits and won by about 216k votes. Get your numbers straight
    2)Obama came from 20 plus points behind and narrowed it to just over 9 %. He spent 11 million to combat the Clinton and and Rendell machine. Nothing wrong with that , it's just a more complete story.
    3)His ads weren't personal or negative in comparison to Hillarys. The voters in exit polls said she was much more negative as did her hometown newspaper that endorses her the NYTs.
    4) So what if he hasn't won a key industrial battleground state. It doesn't mean he wouldn't win them in a general election against McCain. Why would Catholic voters vote for McCain when he accepts the endorsement of Catholic Leaders that call their religion a cult. Hillary didn't win Virginia, Colorado, or Wisconsin that Obama can put in play and no one suggests that she can.
    5) Her negatives are higher than anyone I can remember running for president. She cannot get above the 45-47 % threshold in the general election.
    6)Current polls (Gallup) show her running behind Obama by 10 points.
    7) Obama gets the independents. Gee that would have been nice if they could have been in play in Pennsylvania
    8) FACT – We are tired of the Clintons lies or I guess you call them "misspeaks" , or misspokes. Lanny is their a difference between a lie and a misspoke. Can't they just go home and get out of our lives. Our country would be so much better off.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  43. Too Much Drama!!

    Settle Down Lanny,
    Of course you are a friend of Billary. Why else would you be so biased.
    Please realize that the Republicans will eat Billary alive if she wins the nomination. Just as much as you don't want Obama to win, they don't either. There's a reason for that.......just go think about it.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  44. Debbie, NJ

    John McCain and the Rep are after Obama because he is a threat to the Rep getting back in office. They have so much dirt on Hillary and unlike Obama will throw it at her. She will loose the election in Nov.
    Also if Hillary wins the milliion of new voters, single moms, young voters and most of the African Americans will not vote for her. And that's a fact.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  45. Lorie Ann, Buellton, California

    All I hear is that the Democrats, in the end, will rally behind the Democratic nominee. That they just love both candidates.
    So I guess in the general election, all these pundits and camps, who tear each other apart, will have to claim they all "misspoke" when asked about their words of doubt?

    Lorie Ann, Buellton, Calif.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:31 pm |
  46. Debbie, NJ

    Well NY times tends to disagree about who was more negative. Here is part of the article.

    Fresh off her victory in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton is facing a stinging rebuke of her campaign tactics from her hometown paper, The New York Times.

    In the paper's Wednesday edition, the editorial board which endorsed Clinton's White House bid earlier this year says the New York senator's "negativity" is doing "harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election."

    "The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it," the board writes.

    The paper finds fault in Clinton's latest campaign ad, which includes an image of Osama bin Laden, and asks, "Who do you think has what it takes?"

    "Mrs Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11," they write, adding that it is a tactic that is "torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook."

    April 23, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
  47. Marty

    The whole Democratic primary really is too divided right now and I would like some persepective on an issue that holds some validity or at least I think so. If Obama wins the delegate count, popular vote and number of states, but Hillary gets the nod because of "electability". Being that I voted for Obama my first thought is "So my vote doesn't matter"? I am afraid to say there would be a very large number of people who voted for Obama that would be for lack of a better word "bitter" and not vote at all and how could you possibly blame them. I know I wouldn't. I think the numbers that are out there now showing Hillary ahead of McCain (6%) reflect her winning the Democratic nomination outright. Should she somehow be nominated with Obama winning the primary (stranger things have happened and this is a Clinton we are talking about), I really believe that Percentage would change because I do not think anyone has really addressed it in this aspect.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  48. Bernice Autry

    Why can't each canditate just say what their ideas of leading our country will be. How to get us out of the mess of the economy and gas prices. the people that need to pay for the forclosures is the people that got rich giving the loans to people with bad credit. The government does not need to bail out these people. They knew they could not afford to buy a house.

    I don't even want to vote this year they all make me unhappy with their lies and really no plan.

    Thank you, I feel a little better now that I am at least voicing my opinion whether it is right or wrong.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  49. Bev Tn of Tonawanda NY

    Lanny: I watched you last night on Larry King Live. It is so refreshing to see and hear someone who KNOWS HRC PERSONALLY and can rebute all the lies and negative media reports about her. Keep up the good work. I am sure you will be hearing from the Clinton haters shortly.

    April 23, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  50. Taj

    There goes Lanny again. Lanny you are stuck up with Hillary. Why?

    April 23, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
1 2