tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078662512777171745.post8771434338840949978..comments2008-03-08T15:11:03.437-05:00Scott Cavanaghhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18274607025849615002scott@scottcavanagh.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078662512777171745.post-40859029541779167902008-03-08T15:11:03.437-05:002008-03-08T15:11:03.437-05:00Ken, <BR/><BR/>From a mathematical standpoint, she's been in a deep, deep hole for weeks. After Obama's string of victories, the math indicated that Clinton would need a <I>60 percent</I> margin of victory in each of the following contests to catch up in the delegate count. Even a 10-point win (as was the case in Ohio) doesn't help her, and Obama <I>gained</I> delegates in Texas, so now her mathematical climb becomes even steeper. At this point, she <I>knows</I> she can't catch up, so her current strategy is to score wins in as many of the remaining primaries as she can, and then say to the superdelegates, "I've got the momentum. Obama isn't strong enough in a broad campaign. You need to pick me." And it could work.<BR/><BR/>Rudy Giuliani <A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/us/politics/30giuliani.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1205006941-gHpL2nS6Ly67K1faj8OINw" REL="nofollow">ignored any early contest</A> that didn't guarantee him an easy victory. He chose to let his rivals build up momentum with victories in these "less important" states while he established a "firewall" state as his contest. With each primary that his rivals won, their image grew as his lessened. He was roundly mocked for his strategy. The only difference with Hillary Clinton is that she had <I>won</I> something (N.H.) and her firewall strategy was reported with only moderate criticism, mostly from those who questioned her decision to let Obama rack up a couple of hundred delegates (and the resulting surge in fundraising). <BR/><BR/>If she had made more of a challenge in at least of two or three of the February contests, she'd likely be in a much stronger position.Ken Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13545923862917750773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078662512777171745.post-2033682672954760582008-03-08T10:21:51.002-05:002008-03-08T10:21:51.002-05:00One note -- that the press declined to "mock" Hillary for not dropping out of the race after losing 11 states in a row hardly seems to constitute "cushy treatment" of her. She was still mathematically very much in the race, still neck and neck, with good prospects looming in Ohio and Texas and now Pennsylvania. And to suggest that the press treated her differently than they would've treated, say, Rudy Giuliani in the same situation, well, I don't know where you're coming from on that. Rudy was never in a similar situation.Ken Burchnoreply@blogger.com