But then, Charles Blow destroys his own argument:
While a favorable opinion doesn’t necessarily translate into a vote, this should still give the Clintons (and the superdelegates) pause. Electability cuts both ways.
Is this statistics, or threats?
Still, Chris Bowers makes the better use of his stats.
All of this reminds me of “post-partisanship.” Clearly, many Democrats like to believe that they are engaged in a disinterested contemplation of the issues without regard to party, or character. As such, it is easy to see why claims of post-partisanship are appealing to Democrats. However, voting patterns in the Democratic primary reveal deeply seated identity based voting patterns that are not only partisan, but are partisan in a particularly base and unpleasant fashion. In other words, post-partisanship is ultimately a claim that we can move beyond identity, except that it is being made in a Democratic primary season with particularly gaping identity gaps.
The Economist blurs the line between race and character:
Indiana seems a good fit for her. It is whiter, less educated and poorer than the country at large—characteristics of her keenest supporters in previous contests. According to stereotype, Indianans are wary of change—Barack Obama‘s signature word—particularly when it comes from Washington; for decades they resisted moving onto daylight saving time. Mrs Clinton’s familiar face and recycled populism appeals to the state’s conservative Democrats, including Senator Evan Bayh, one of her most ardent backers.
Only war, or disgustingly heady prosperity, can keep Americans from demographic “partisanship”. All electoral victories will have to come at the margins. But, I appreciate the value of identity “mudslinging” politics. Reverend Wright’s egomaniacal tirades highlight what little divides African-Americans from the white fringe, and hopefully soon, Hispanic-Americans and the unclassifiable melange mislabeled “Asian“-Americans could mouth off like brats, too. And then, all the identity ghettoes could revile each other spitefully from the insecurity of their mutual, internationally broadcast petulance.
No one said democracy and equality had to be noble!