Wednesday, January 09, 2008
'That's why we play the games'
Maybe it was the tears. Maybe it was the machine. Maybe it was the Bradley effect. But it's pretty clear women went big for Hillary -- and Obama didn't have a similar built-in constituency in New Hampshire to offset it. ... Hub Blog was hoping NH voters would bowl a split yesterday: Knocking down my two least favorite candidates, Hillary and Mitt, in one shot. But at least the least favorite of my least-favorite candidates, Mitt, is probably down and out for good. Not a bad week, though I'm a little depressed that Hillary's dynastic candidacy is still alive. ... As for yesterday's highly impressive Hillary comeback in general, remember Bill Parcell's line, "That's why we play the games..." ... And that's why we hold elections. ... BTW: I do believe the tears helped a bit. I'm pretty cynical by nature. But Hillary's tears -- or teary eyes -- came across as genuine. I was moved and realized how much pressure she was under. Who would have thought that the most important question of the NH primary would be, "Who does your hair?” An authentic question answered in an authentic way. ...
Update -- Forget the tears. Reader No. 1 thinks it was an old-fashioned Democratic win for Hillary. Make sure to click on first link. From Reader No. 1:
The Real Clear Politics breakdown of voting trends in the first link adds this at the bottom, almost as an aside: "An additional ingredient to Clinton's success was a victory among female voters, 46% to 34%. Obama won male voters, 40% to 29%. But female voters outvoted male voters, 57% to 43%." ... An additional ingredient? Please. The female vote not only mattered. It was decisive by the look of it. ...
Maybe it was the tears. Maybe it was the machine. Maybe it was the Bradley effect. But it's pretty clear women went big for Hillary -- and Obama didn't have a similar built-in constituency in New Hampshire to offset it. ... Hub Blog was hoping NH voters would bowl a split yesterday: Knocking down my two least favorite candidates, Hillary and Mitt, in one shot. But at least the least favorite of my least-favorite candidates, Mitt, is probably down and out for good. Not a bad week, though I'm a little depressed that Hillary's dynastic candidacy is still alive. ... As for yesterday's highly impressive Hillary comeback in general, remember Bill Parcell's line, "That's why we play the games..." ... And that's why we hold elections. ... BTW: I do believe the tears helped a bit. I'm pretty cynical by nature. But Hillary's tears -- or teary eyes -- came across as genuine. I was moved and realized how much pressure she was under. Who would have thought that the most important question of the NH primary would be, "Who does your hair?” An authentic question answered in an authentic way. ...
Update -- Forget the tears. Reader No. 1 thinks it was an old-fashioned Democratic win for Hillary. Make sure to click on first link. From Reader No. 1:
Meet the New Boss. Or should that be, the New Deal?
One more suggestion as to why Hilary did well, despite all the slogan changes (and no, it wasn't her 'personal breakthrough', TV commentators and Andrew Sullivan notwithstanding): Everytime I saw her talking on CSPAN over the weekend she got in many good whacks at Bush 43.... simple but effective.
So does this make Obama a soap bubble?
The Real Clear Politics breakdown of voting trends in the first link adds this at the bottom, almost as an aside: "An additional ingredient to Clinton's success was a victory among female voters, 46% to 34%. Obama won male voters, 40% to 29%. But female voters outvoted male voters, 57% to 43%." ... An additional ingredient? Please. The female vote not only mattered. It was decisive by the look of it. ...
