Clinton Way Ahead in W. Va., and That Raises Questions About November

| | Comments (4)

That Hillary Clinton is waaaay ahead in West Virginia, which votes tomorrow, is not news; but the news might be that there are signs this is a state where Barack Obama could have problems in the general election (although with only 5 electoral votes, that may not cause too much sleep to be lost). A Suffolk University poll, conducted May 10-11, says Clinton leads Obama 60 percent to 24 percent with 8 percent undecided and John Edwards, who is still on the ballot, at 4 percent. Two-thirds of West Virginia Democrats said she should stay in the race and 72 percent said she’s not hurting the party by doing so.

West Virginia’s tourist slogan – “wild and wonderful” – might also apply to its voters extraordinary faith that Clinton will be the next president. Thirty-one percent said Clinton, 27 percent said Obama and 26 percent said McCain. Only 40 percent said they would still vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election if their first choice for the nomination lost.

David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, said, “Barack Obama may have to write off West Virginia come November…If (he) can't even garner thirty percent of West Virginia Democratic Primary voters, what does that say about the West Virginia general election?"

On this point, check out a CQ Politics video with a West Virginia political analyst.

    Comments

  1. This is what I have been thinking all along. Now there's some data to back me up!

    Posted by: Mary Kitt-Neel Author Profile Page | May 12, 2008 5:26 PM

  2. Wow, Craig, it's amazing that you are one of the only main stream
    political analysts who is pointing out this incredible story--that Obama,
    the presumptive Dem nominee, is losing West Virginia at such a huge
    margin. He will probably lose Kentucky at just as high a margin.
    This is shocking!

    Craig, please tell me why no major media is mentioning this
    newsworthy narrative?

    Also, why has the media almost stopped coverage of the presidential
    primary, comparing Clinton to Huckabee, when Clinton has won
    so many votes and would be tied with Obama if Florida votes were
    counted?(Huckabee had nowhere near the votes Clinton has now).

    Craig, do you find anything troubling in the way all major news sources
    have nearly shut out all balanced coverage of the Clinton and the primary? It scares me.

    Posted by: prof marcia Author Profile Page | May 13, 2008 12:18 AM

  3. I meant to write "shut out all balanced coverage of the Clintons and the
    primary?

    Posted by: prof marcia Author Profile Page | May 13, 2008 12:20 AM

  4. Craig,

    Is this notion--the fact Obama is not connecting to a huge number of
    voters in States like Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Kentucky, and that
    this is a big problem for Obama, what you were trying to convey to
    Chris Matthews on MoJo?

    What do you think is the disconnect between Obama and working class white
    folks in these States and others?

    Posted by: prof marcia Author Profile Page | May 13, 2008 12:25 AM

Post A Comment


(for verification only; will not be published with your comment)