More utterly dishonest Clinton spin

Argh:

Clinton’s ace-in-the-hole delegate counter, Harold Ickes...[a]cknowledges [the] campaign perhaps should have done more in caucus states, but belittles Obama wins in places like Idaho — says they aren’t general election battlegrounds.

No, they aren't. And neither are California, Massachusetts or New Jersey -- Hillary's supposed "big wins" on Super Tuesday. Is Ickes seriously suggesting that Obama would lose those states in November? The same goes for New York, another of Hillary's large-state victories.

On the flip side, although Bill won Arkansas in the 1992 and 1996 general elections, I think it would be a stretch to believe that Hillary can. Just as CA, MA, NJ and NY are rock-solid blue, AR is rock-solid red. The same goes for Tennessee and Oklahoma, also much-ballyhooed "big wins" for Hillary. These states are all little more than glorified Idahos.

So, in sum, that's seven Clinton wins that came in states that aren't "general-election battlegrounds," and therefore are not "significant," according to Ickes/Penn logic.

Even if we ignore the fact that this whole argument is transparently bogus -- winning a primary in a given state does not mean you'll win the general election there, and likewise, losing a primary doesn't imply that you'll lose the general -- the Clintons' argument defeats itself, on its own terms. To wit:

Excluding, as any intellectually honest person must, the states where both candidates agreed, in advance, that the primary didn't count... Hillary has won exactly two true "swing states" (New Hampshire and New Mexico), plus two "red states" that you could potentially see a Democrat competing in (Nevada and Arizona). Obama has also won two true "swing states" (Iowa and Missouri) and two "red states" that you could see a Democrat competing in (Colorado and Virginia).

So, the candidates are doing equally well in this (meaningless) statistic... unless you tally up the electoral votes in their respective "general election battlegrounds," in which case Obama is way ahead, 40 to 24. Are you listening, Harold?

Likewise, if you look at their popular-vote margins in those states' primaries, Obama wins by a mile, 16.7% to 4.4%. Or, if you prefer raw totals, it's still Obama in a romp. We have to throw out Iowa and Nevada, since those states don't report actual vote totals, but Obama's combined margin of 322,745 votes in MO, CO and VA dwarfs Hillary's combined margin of 42,604 votes in NM, NH and AZ.

So... what is Harold Ickes's point, exactly?

Comments

[Andrew]

More utterly dishonest Clinton spin

As Col. Jessup might say, is there any other kind?

[Brandon]

OH MY GOD!! This has turned into the most boring blog I've visited.

I'll be seeing you after November!!

[kcatnd]

"More utterly dishonest Clinton spin

As Col. Jessup might say, is there any other kind?"

What about the Bush administration: waterboarding and WMD? The changing mission objectives in Iraq? Did I really need to even bring this up? I think the Clintons spin too, but to say there isn't any other kind is dishonest and completely predictable for you, Andrew. Or is this just a light-hearted joke that excuses you from actually defending that statement?

[Becky]

Brandon, don't give up on it yet! Just wait for March Madness and watch Brendan's head explode as he tries to blog about politics and college basketball simultaneously. :)

I have to agree with you though. The minutiae of elections is as dull as Cast Away.

[Mad Max, Esquire]

I do agree with Brandon that the delegate/super-delegate stuff is starting to get old (of course, so is the race itself).

Whatever happened to the good old days when we could all join together to bash that Nifong asshole? I miss those days.

[Mad Max, Esquire]

Becky-

Do you think Cast Away was dull, too? I can't tell you how many people (including David K, I believe) think that is the greatest movie ever. Seriously, it is one of the most plodding and patronizing pieces of shit put on the screen. It had such a sugary sweet sentimentality to it that even Frank Capra was gagging in his grave.

[Brendan Loy]

I loved Cast Away up until the point when Tom Hanks returned to civilization. Then it became HORRIBLE. The "tomorrow the sun will rise" scene was quite possibly the single worst thing I've ever seen on the silver screen (because it ruined what I felt was an otherwise great movie).

Regardless, the volleyball should have won Best Supporting Actor. :) I freakin' love Wilson.

[Brendan Loy]

(This is a slight bone of contention between me and Becky... hehe.)

[yea]

the constant politics updates/discussions are the reason i check this blog 30928410924809123809124 times a day when im at work.

if other cool stuff happens im sure brendan will post about it.

[Tom Hanks]

F*&* YOU!!!

[Joe Loy]

Even Tom Hanks can lose a caucus (woops, sorry, borrr-ing! :) cook a Turkey once in a while. / But who's seen Charlie Wilson's War? I haven't. Is it good? I love the Idea of it. :>

"...little more than glorified Idahos."

Brendan, would you kindly quit kickin' Larry Craig when the poor man is Down? ;> btw I believe Obama has similarly been Touting his Redstate Demvote Wins, without necessarily distinguishing (as you correctly do) between the pale-pink Convertibles and the deep-scarlet, um, Monster Trucks ;]. But I Quibble with you only re Arkansas. I think Her Nibs could Take it, whereas Barack likely would Not.

kcatnd, I think Andrew was asking Is there any Other kind of Clinton Spin than the Utterly Dishonest kind? / To which the correct Answer actually is also Yes, there is, occasionally; but one Does have to keep a Sharp Lookout for to spy it. Arrrr. :}

[texasyank]

"What about the Bush administration: waterboarding and WMD? The changing mission objectives in Iraq? Did I really need to even bring this up? I think the Clintons spin too, but to say there isn't any other kind is dishonest and completely predictable for you, Andrew. Or is this just a light-hearted joke that excuses you from actually defending that statement?"

Thus, once again, we see one of the two Clinton fallback positions:

"They did it, too."

The other one, of course, is, "This is old news the American people are tired of."

[David K.]

Thus, once again, we see one of the two Clinton fallback positions:

"They did it, too."

The Bushies have been blaming Clinton for everything that went wrong on this blog and elsewhere since the day he was elected to office, I wouldn't try that argument if i were you.

[kcatnd]

Elder Loy, I see the clarification now. Many thanks!

texasyank, I'm not taking either of the those fallback positions. It's wrong if anyone engages in dishonest spin, Clintons or Bushies. I've just never heard Andrew criticize Republicans that way. For the record, I think Hillary is doing a lot of shoddy spinning at the moment.

To get back to the more important issue, I think Cast Away was ruined because the trailers showed you the entire film (you know he's going to get rescued). I think the film should have just ended when you see the ship entering into the shot behind Tom Hanks. End of movie.

Wasn't Brendan's post about Clinton's spin? How did Bush get brought into it?

[kcatnd]

Probably from my (mis?)understanding Andrew's comment to mean that the only kind of dishonest spin is the Clinton kind rather than the only kind of Clinton spin is the dishonest kind.

[Joe Mama]

The Bushies have been blaming Clinton for everything that went wrong on this blog and elsewhere since the day he was elected to office

Whatever.

The best part of this story is Clinton's campaign now calling the superdelegates, "automatic delegates".

[texasyank]

kcatnd: Problem is, nothing what you specified were Bush lies, strictly speaking.

I'd deal with them one by one, but I already have on this site to a great length, and besides this is old news the American people are tired of.

[texasyank]

"The Bushies have been blaming Clinton for everything that went wrong on this blog and elsewhere since the day he was elected to office."

And what exactly went wrong on this blog? I rather like this blog.

[Brendan Loy]

Heh.

[Andrew]

lol, texasyank!

kcatnd, your initial interpretation of my comment sure was a bizarre one. In any case, you don't see me criticizing Republicans for dishonest spin because, honestly, most of them just plain suck at spin. That, and Brendan doesn't blog much about Ahnold.

[Joe Loy]

and a big Wawhawhaw to you too, Andrew! :}

[Mad Max, Esquire]

Brendan-

I have to take exception to your comments relating to Tom Hanks and Wilson. Tom Hanks has also acted opposite Vin Diesel and Daryl Hannah, so acting with a volleyball really isn't that much of a stretch.

[Mad Max, Esquire]

According to a report in the NY Post, Obama apparently got zero...ZERO...votes in some black districts in Harlem and Brooklyn. Of course, voting irregularities are under investigation...

[Joe Loy]

Buncombe & Bologna, MMEsq :}. Which are of course prominent among the "journalistic" Specialties of the NY Post but here's the Real story from an actual Newspaper :>. There were no "voting Irregularities", nothing is "under investigation", and contrary to Rupert's Rag there isn't even a "recount" occurring: just the usual slow, methodical, veryClose-to-100%-accurate Official Canvass (i.e., the First Real count) as it is conducted in a jurisdiction which does Not yet use the vastly-Faster & even-Closer-to-perfect Electronic method of tallying.

All there is here Is, the stubborn persistence of a certain level of Militant Ignorance :] regarding the distinction between the quick-and-dirty Media-driven Election-night Unofficial "results", and the Real Returns as ascertained later, after the Tumult & the Shouting die. Give the article a thorough reading and by all means open, study, and contemplate the Implications of, the accompanying Interactive Graphic which Explains matters quite nicely.

{And yes, Yes, before you come Back At me with it let me acknowledge that I Did note, and hugely Enjoyed, the shrewd analysis of Jerome A. Koenig, a former chief of staff to the State Assembly’s election law committee and a lawyer for the Obama campaign, to wit ~

...Mr. Koenig said he seriously doubted that anything underhanded was at work because local politicians care more about elections that matter specifically to them.

“They steal votes for elections like Assembly District leader, where people have a personal stake,” he said.

:}

[Mad Max, Esquire]

Joe Loy-

This may be true. But the idea that NO blacks from Harlem and NO blacks from Brooklyn voted for a black candidate makes one think that something was going on.

[domer]

Her latest disgusting showing of caring about only what will get her elected pertained to a boxing fight. Jermain Taylor = Arkansas biggest pro sports franchise. Kelly Pavlik = Youngstown Ohio's latest sensation, friend of the Browns, Indians, and tOSU. She disowned Jermain Taylor, native son of Little Rock who wears an Arkansas razorback on his shorts for all fights and has had dinner with her husband on several occasions, and put on a pair of Kelly Pavlik signed gloves at a rally in Ohio. Not a big deal compared to the big stuff, but don't sell out your homestate boy.

[Joe Loy]

Fair point, domer, but ya gotta remember, Arkansas has already Voted :)

OK, MMEsq, but the trouble is that ever since FL 2000, all too often just about ANYTHING "makes one think that something was going on."

Btw the inadvertent unofficial Zeroing Out ~ which also occurred in some instances re Hillary's tally ~ was (naturally enough, given the nature of the error) at the microlevel of individual Election Districts (which is NYC's idiosyncratic term for Precincts :) ~ not the Macrostats of (saints Preserve us! :) entire Boroughs (or large ethnic Regions within boroughs) :>. I.e. even assuming arguendo the validity of the customary Conflation of unofficial with Official returns, the NYPost's smirky implication that these unProofread raw results suggested (in Your words) "the idea that NO blacks from Harlem and NO blacks from Brooklyn voted for a black candidate" was Absurd even on the very Face of the very Reports the dumb-bunny ( -wallaby? -platypus? :) Tabloid was using to Plant it in the inquiring "minds" of its "readers".

Harrumph :>