Creeping Doubts

Hillary Clinton's win in PA is "stoking concerns about" Barack Obama's appeal in the general. Obama's loss "reflected poor showings among white working-class voters and Roman Catholics," both key voting blocs. But for many superdelegates the "doubts" about Obama's "relatively weak support" among Dem voters "are allayed by the millions of new voters" he has brought to the party. Still, one Clinton adviser said Rep. John Tanner (D-TN 08) called the camp last week and said: "If she wins Pennsylvania, I'm with you." Later in the day on 4/22, the Clinton camp "announced" Tanner's endorsement (Calmes/Jacoby, Wall Street Journal, 4/24).

Are They Just Racists, Or What?

After PA, Dems are asking why has Obama "been unable to win over enough working-class and white voters to wrap up" the Dem nod? Lurking behind that questions is another one: are Dems hesitating "about race"? Obama adviser David Axelrod: "I'm sure there is some of that." Axelrod "said Mrs. Clinton's biggest advantage had been among older voters, 'and I think there is a general inclination on the part of the older voters to vote for what is more familiar." More Axelrod: "Here's a guy named Barack Obama, an African-American guy, relatively new. That's a lot of change" (Nagourney, New York Times, 4/24).

If I Had A Dollar For All Those Votes

Clinton "netted" 200K popular votes and "a dozen or so delegate votes" in PA 4/22, "enough to narrow the gap" with Obama. Clinton "would need all of the remaining pledged-delegate votes and then some to win the" nod outright. Still, her success in PA "gives her ammunition to press her claim that she is ahead in the popular vote" (Kronholz, Wall Street Journal, 4/24).

To reach the conclusion that Clinton is ahead in the popular vote, her camp "includes the votes she received in" MI and FL. With them, Clinton has 15.1M votes to Obama's 15M, but without those two states, Obama leads with 14.4M to 13.9M for Clinton. That difference "will be extremely difficult" for Clinton to overcome "in the remaining nine contests" (O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/24).

Nothing Wrong With Having A Wide Base

For all Clinton's "primary night celebrations in the populous states," exit polling and analysis shows Obama "could do just as well as" Clinton "among blocs of voters with whom he now runs behind." Obama advisers "say he also appears well-positioned to win swing states and believe he would have a strong shot at winning traditional" GOP voters in states like VA. Dem pollster Peter Hart: "Hillary goes deeper and stronger in the Democratic base than Obama, but her challenge is that she doesn't go as wide." More: "Obama goes much further reaching into the independent and Republican vote, and has a greater chance of creating a new electoral map for the Democrats" (Healy, New York Times, 4/24).

Swimming Through The Gutter

Time's Klein writes, the nod is Obama's "to lose," but the WH won't be won "if he doesn't learn that the only way to reach the high-minded conversation he wants, and the country badly needs, is to figure out how to maneuver his way through the gutter" (4/25 issue).

Three Choices

Time's Tumulty writes about the three ways the Dem race can end in the 4/25 issue.

•Clinton loses IN on 5/6 and pulls out: Clinton "will be putting most of her effort" into IN, and "her advisers concede that it will be difficult to continue in the race if she does not win there."

•Dem leaders end it 6/08: worried Dems "have been talking for weeks about the possibility of party elders conspiring to bring things to a close" 5/08. But the Dems are "leaderless," so it is "far from clear who actually has the clout to play that role, especially while there are states that have yet to vote." Al Gore, "assumed to favor Obama, has resisted those who have entreated him to make a public move," telling them privately" "Nobody likes an umpire."

•They fight all the way to Denver: "Resolving the unfinished business of how and whether to seat" the MI and FL delegates "could make the recent sniping between Obama and Clinton seem like back-fence chitchat." FL's situation should be the easier of the two, "because both candidates were on the ballot there and turnout was high." MI is "another story," because Obama's name didn't appear on the ballot. Clinton's team "is saying she won't agree to any resolution in either state that would dilute her delegate totals, a position that could lead to a summerlong brawl if her team sticks with it to the end." If it comes to that, "at least one person will be smiling:" McCain.

Kickin' It Old School

Wall Street Journal's Henninger writes, "does it matter" that Clinton won PA? Obama "is the nominee." The cement "set around the Clinton coffin" 4/18, when ex-Sens. Sam Nunn (D-NC) and David Boren (D-OK) "announced" they were supporting Obama. Superdelegates "with sway took notice" ("Wonder Land," 4/24).

Judas Confronted

Dem strategist James Carville and Bill Richardson appeared together on "LKL" last night to talk about their public argument over Richardson's Obama endorsement and Carville's Judas comments. Here are some highlights:

CNN's L. King: "Have you guys spoken at all?"

Carville: "No."

Richardson: "No."

Carville, asked if meant his Judas comments: "Yes. ... But if it would have been the Fourth of July, I would have said Benedict Arnold."

Richardson: "It's typical of the negativity that the Clintons right now are using against Senator Obama. And I think it's wrong. It's going to divide up the party."

Carville: "I have never criticized any other Obama supporter. ... I thought it was a unique situation. It required a response. I think I gave it the appropriate response and I've said what I had to say. And I don't take a word of it back."

Carville: "I think the best thing could happen here is ... for Governor Richardson and myself to exit and have Senator Clinton and Senator Obama take center stage in the form of debate. And that way, as opposed to whining about negative commercials, as opposed to whining about this or that, let the two of them have a debate."

Richardson, on Obama: "He's done over 20 debates. You know, if he's going to go to another debate where all he's going to be is attacked, I probably would advise not to do it. I'm not sure you're going to learn much in another debate. I mean we've got these candidates that have been campaigning for at least -- almost two years. The American people know them well. And the time has come, I believe, for Democrats to come together. ... I'll go off the stage with Carville and not do anything anymore. You invited me, Larry. And I, you know, I love your show. But my point here is the time has come for this bloodletting to end and for us to have a nominee because we need to win the presidency to change this country."

Carville: "I'm fine. I love being on your show. I'll debate anybody, any time, any place. But it really doesn't matter what James Carville thinks, or, for that matter, what Governor Richardson thinks. It matters what these two candidates think. And the party decided. People in Pennsylvania said we want this thing to go on. And the people in Indiana will decide."

Ex-WH spokesperson Ari Fleischer, following the interview: "To hear James Carville talk idiocy of Bill Richardson, and have Bill Richardson trash Bill and Hillary Clinton is, especially short term, music to Republicans' ears" (CNN, 4/23).

Dick's Take

Dick Morris writes in The Hill, Obama "should win" NC "by a lot" and IN "by a little," and their "combined effect should wipe out most of the gains Hillary got from her" PA win. By the time voting ends 6/3, Obama "will still lead Hillary among elected delegates by 100 to 150" (4/23).

Newt Plays Ten Questions

In an interview with Time's Halperin, ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich sized up Clinton and Obama's chances. Gingrich: "Obama is a bigger gamble for the Democrats. He could be a unifying national leader. He could collapse as well." Gingrich on Clinton: "She probably can't get much above 53% or 54% [of the vote] and she probably can't drop much below 47%" (Time.com, 4/24).

The Virtues Of Patience

Here's some wisdom collected from newspaper columnists and ed. boards:

•Stuart Rothenberg writes in Roll Call, "the math still favors Obama." But Clinton's "strong statewide showing" in PA "ought to start making undecided delegates very nervous" (4/24).

•Washington Post's Broder writes, Obama's "inability to win any of the major states" except IL and GA "is worrisome enough." His failure "to mobilize and deliver the votes of blue-collar," middle and lower-income white families that are "the backbone" of the Dems has to be "even more concerning to the superdelegates, as are the gaffes that have begun to mar Obama's personal performance." Dems "have to resolve this somehow." The longer this goes on, "the greater the costs" (4/24).

•Denver Post's ed. board writes, "We've known for quite some time that superdelegates will decide this race. We just don't know whose claim of invicibility they will buy -- Obama's or Clinton's" (4/23).

•Las Vegas Review-Journal's Neff writes, NV is holding its state convo. 5/17 in Reno. But "how exactly do you elect delegates to the national convention when a little more than half will be pledge to someone who isn't the nominee?" If Clinton "miraculously emerges as the nominee," Obama delegates "could easily revolt" (4/24).

•Bob Novak writes in the New York Post, McCain "privately warns key supporters to be prepared for a massive (if temporary) falloff in the polls once" the unhappy Clinton supporters return to the Dem fold after Obama wins the nod. "But not all will return, and that's" PA's warning to the Dems (4/24).

•Washington Post's ed. board writes, the lengthy primary contest "may not be in the best interest" of the Dems, "but it has served to clarify the two candidates' strengths and weaknesses." Information "now is better than information later" (4/24).

•Cleveland Plain Dealer's Sullivan writes, "Too much slime maby be bad for the nation's psyche," but if "some of that mud helps reveal to us what we really need to know about our next Decider, if may well be that we'll all be better off" (4/24).

•Los Angeles Times' ed. board writes, the contests in IN and NC "will help to clarify whether Clinton was engaging in victory-party hyperbole when she boasted that 'the tide is turning' in her favor." Even if it isn't, Obama "supporters will have to learn the virtue of patience" (4/24).

•Dallas Morning News' Leubsdorf writes, Obama "continues to show daily an appeal beyond" liberal Dems that Clinton "can't match." Obama's broad support in the primary suggests the kind of coalition that remains possible" for him to create in the general, "assuming he can survive the fierce challenge" of Clinton (4/24).

Follow The Money

Clinton "is pouring her money" into IN and KY, while Obama has focused on NC and OR. "Each candidate's distinct advantages in the remaining primaries make it likely that Obama and Clinton will split victories in the next several weeks" (Bolton, The Hill, 4/23).

Want to stay ahead of the curve? Sign up for National Journal’s AM & PM Must Reads. News and analysis to ensure you don’t miss a thing.