(2/7/2008) The people movement for Obama might doom the Clinton campaign, after all...
Post-Super-Tuesday commentary by Sam Mishra, President, Franteractive
Mitt silver-spoon Romney has thrown in the towel, after doing poorly in the super Tuesday republican primaries, notwithstanding his own contribution of $35 million to his $90 million campaign fundraising. Well Mitt, thanks for contributing $35 million towards our economy, which has seemed heading for a recession for more than a year now, thanks to the sub-prime meltdown / foreclosure carnage. Now, what is equally amusing is a mail I received from the Obama campaign asking for a donation, to counter an apparent injection of $5 million of Clintons' own money into the Hillary campaign. I wonder how two people, who have spent most of their lives in public service, amassed so much wealth. Well, for one, Hillary was a lawyer for a while, and made good money from that? But that can't be. It has to be all the money Bill earned in the lecture circuit after his presidency, and from his book appropriately titled "Giving." And from the proceeds, they are giving to their own campaign. Wow! Well, whatever be the means, the end is that the Clintons seem desperate to get into the white house, as much as the Romneys did. Where as the Romneys could not, the Clintons might. But is it in the best interests of this great nation that the Clintons get back into the white house again? Let's analyze...
First of all, in a previous article, I have mentioned how during the Bill Clinton presidency, things were good, and then they turned bad. President Clinton was mostly a free-rider, but could not do much when the bubble burst in 2000, the stock markets crashed, and people lost their jobs. By early 2001, we were definitely in a recession, and that should be the economic legacy of Bill Clinton American people should do well to remember.
American people have every right to be pissed with the Bush presidency, and remember the Clinton times with fondness. But past performance is no guarantee of future bubbles, if you are focusing on the Internet bubble era of 1995 to 1999. The global economic dynamic today is different, with the rise of the BRIC economies, the fall of the dollar, etc. Our trade imbalance demands us to keep the dollar devalued so that we can boost our exports, but by the same token, we can't win, since a consistently weakening dollar signals a weakening American economy to the outside world, specially to Europe, where the Euro is strong, and getting stronger vis-à-vis the dollar. In these perplexing times, there is no clarity as to whether Hillary will be best for the economy, or whether it will be Obama. One thing is clear: either of them will be better over McCain for the economy, because a McCain presidency will budget big dollars for the Iraq war in perpetuity, a truly bad thing for millions of Americans, who can put that money into better use, be it relief for foreclosures, or be it universal health care.
This brings us to what got me writing the article...Obama seems to be able to match the Clinton financing machinations with small $25 contributions from countless Americans. Now, that is a revolution. People love him, and they contribute $25 from their hard-earned cash for his campaign. When people get involved en-masse as how we see it happening now, it becomes pretty difficult to stop the people juggernaut. And that might, in the end, doom the Clinton campaign, and their own $5 million won't be able to help them. Just like Mitt's $35 million in spending has not swayed the conservatives enough to make him a winner in these primaries…
... Also, the pundits / CNN political analysts got it partially right when they professed that Hillary will win in urban areas in California. The data below shows who won how many votes in which county in both the SFO Bay Area and the greater LA area (Obama victories are highlighted in bold):
-----
Alameda ---------- Clinton (102,039 or 44.6%), Obama (115,525 or 50.5%)
Contra Costa ----- Clinton ( 82,978 or 49.9%), Obama ( 73,532 or 44.2%)
Marin --------------- Clinton ( 22,517 or 38.6%), Obama ( 32,076 or 55.0%)
San Francisco --- Clinton ( 78,744 or 44.5%), Obama ( 92,098 or 52.0%)
San Mateo -------- Clinton ( 49,963 or 51.4%), Obama (42,267 or 43.4%)
Santa Clara ------ Clinton (113,032 or 54.8%), Obama ( 80,946 or 39.2%)
Santa Cruz -------- Clinton ( 20,742 or 40.5%), Obama ( 27,881 or 54.4%)
Los Angeles ------ Clinton (658,937 or 55.0%), Obama (496,192 or 41.4%)
Orange ------------- Clinton (141,668 or 55.4%), Obama ( 96,967 or 37.9%)
Santa Barbara ---- Clinton ( 22,456 or 42.7%), Obama ( 26,375 or 50.2%)
Ventura ------------- Clinton ( 50,903 or 53.8%), Obama ( 38,069 or 40.3%)
(Source: San Jose Mercury News, Feb 7, 2008)
-----
It is clear that whereas Hillary was the victor in southern California, Obama beat Hillary in four out of seven counties in the SFO bay area, including the city of San Francisco. In other words, Obama had his victories in California, and Clinton had hers.
Two tips for the Obama campaign going forward:
Tip #1: Hillary won in LA because the Latinos voted for her. Find a way to win over the Latino voters in Texas. The educated democrats are voting increasingly for Obama, but the Latino pockets need to be swayed, if Obama wants the nomination. Ask ALL the Latinos in Texas for $25, may be (problem --- this can be a Herculean task, considering that most of the Latinos may not have an email id where an email can be delivered)?
Tip#2: Obama should pack his campaign schedule with more public rallies, because people love him once they see him speak, his speeches definitely inspire.
Advice for the Hillary campaign:
1. Don't ask for $3 million from me in the mailer. Be specific like the Obama campaign, ask for a specific $ amount, ask for $25 from me, for example.
2. Don't be insecure with your blogs and don't moderate comments from readers! My comments don't get published in your blogs, because I am critical of your ways… People don't like insecurity, it sucks in blogosphere. Be more like the Obama blogs, which have 10 times more comment volume throughput, and they don't ration / moderate the comments like you do. Please!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
