Originally posted by: mflacy
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: conehead433
The results are that Obama gained more delegates on Billary who can only promise all the super delegates with new cars and gas for life to capture the nomination.
And of these 2 states, which is likely to vote dem in november and which isn't.
In 2004, Indiana went 60/39 to Bush while North Carolina went 56/44 to Bush.
Answer: North Carolina
I'm never one to translate election results so concretely, because I think a Democrat who ignores a group of voters can't be compared to a Democrat who may try to focus on those voters in a different election between different candidates.
I also don't buy the underlying argument here--that only blue states matter for a Democrat. Clinton may have won the primary in California for example, but those results are not at all transferable to the general election and polls show her then losing traditionally Democrat-leaning states like Washington and Oregon. They both have weaknesses across the electoral map. I think generally Clinton at best would win by a thin margin--using the Democratic backbone states of CA, NY, PA, etc. She also has less of a downside because she could lock up those states. Obama has more of an upside--a real shot to dominate the map with wins in VA, WI, CO, etc. At the same time he has a bigger downside--a shot at losing CA, NY, or PA and losing in a landslide by electoral votes.
edit: I just realized I said you can't transfer primary results to the general election, then I proceeded to do just that. so much for consistency