By Benjamin van der Horst
Barack Obama had a clean sweep yesterday winning Washington, Louisiana, and Nebraska by large margins. He could very well win every contest between now and March 4 (when Ohio and Texas, among others vote). That would mean Hillary Clinton would have gone almost a month without a victory. Her campaign is being dismissive of these losses claiming that Obama is expected to win in these states. This may be true, but you cannot just dismiss all of these states. They are still real states with real delegates and Hillary’s loses are very much real.
She is waiting for March 4, when she feels she can win Ohio and Texas, the two largest states left. Because she is focusing on these states, she claims not to care about these loses. This is the exactly same strategy Rudy Giuliani pursued before he dropped out of the race.
Giuliani spent all of his time in Florida, ignoring his losses in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and South Carolina. By the time Florida came, the other candidates had more momentum and he barely came in third in Florida. That was the end of his campaign.
It can be argued that Clinton is making the same mistake. By conceding DC, Virginia, Maryland, Washington, Maine, Nebraska, Louisiana, Hawaii, and Wisconsin, Obama might have so much momentum by March 4 that he could win Texas and Ohio. Only time will tell, but this seems to be a big gamble for Clinton. After all, a loss is a loss, no matter how dismissive you are of it.