I know why she lost and it proves that that name isn't golden there.
Unqualified widow loses in a bad year for her party by 1 point = name isn't an asset
Qualified incumbent loses in a bad year for his party by 18 points = good candidate for President
I wonder what Phil will do when Robin Carnahan wins in 2010.. maybe throw a temper tantrum?
He believes absolutely NO democrat can win Missouri, in ANY race, because Obama lost the state by 1/10th of 1 point in 2008. Despite the fact Democrats won most other statewide races. Obama lost the state because of race, not party.
First of all, Democrats CAN and did win in Missouri in 2008. Jay Nixon (D) was elected Governor by a whopping 19 points. Democrats held the Attorney General's office (which was vacated by Nixon to run for Governor) with Chris Koster (D) winning, and Democrats picked up the State Treasurer's office (which was vacated by Sarah Steelman [R] to run for Governor) with Clint Zweifel (D). Now, all but one of our statewide offices are controlled by Democrats (Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder is a Republican and he just
narrowly won reelection in 2008 over Sam Page). Democrats also picked up three seats in the Missouri House of Representatives, but to put that in perspective, Republicans also picked up three seats in the Missouri Senate. What this prove is that Missouri is neither a red state or a blue state; we are what we always have been, a purple/battleground/bellwether state.
Secondly, Obama lost Missouri not because of race or party; it was because of turnout. First, look to the Democratic Primary. Hillary Rodham Clinton (who
should be our President but alas that's opening another can of worms) won 109 out of 114 counties in Missouri and she still just narrowly lost the popular vote to Obama. Why? St. Louis County and City had an enormous turnout by the African American community which offset Clinton's margins in the rural areas and propelled Obama to victory (they still split the 72 delegates). Now, looking to the general election in Missouri, almost every single county in Missouri swung Democratic in 2008; as for the handful of counties that swung Republican, I guess one can argue that this is where racists are more prevalent (there may be some merit in that looking to Pemiscot County in the Bootheel, the county that swung the most Republican in a Democratic year but also voted for Jay Nixon and other statewide Democrats and also was the only county in Missouri to vote for the pro-segregationist candidate George Wallace in 1968). However, these are largely rural counties and the numbers could have easily been offset by the huge turnout in Kansas City and St. Louis, the Democratic strongholds in Missouri. To win Missouri, a Democrat also has to get at least 40 percent in Greene County (Springfield) in Southwest Missouri. Springfield is the third largest city in Missouri and is the largest "red" city in the state. This was the case up until this election. John Kerry only received 37.25 percent in Greene County in 2004 and lost the state by 7.2 points to George W. Bush; Al Gore got 39.92 percent in 2000 and lost to Bush by 3.34 points. Obama received 41.26 percent in Greene County and even managed to pick up two rural counties (Washington and Iron) in Southeast Missouri and he still just narrowly lost the state to John McCain. Why? If you go to the Secretary of State's website (
http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrmaps/20081104/) you will see the counties that had the largest turnout. St. Charles County, which consists of the exurbs of St. Louis, has been a Republican stronghold in the state for a while and had the largest voter turnout in the state. That, coupled with the fact that Greene County had a larger turnout than St. Louis County, inevitably led to Obama's narrow defeat. Now, some may make the argument that Jackson County (which consists of Kansas City) also had a large turnout. That's true. However, Obama only won Kansas City and lost the rest of the county, so it really depends on where more of the vote got out in Jackson County (i.e. the city, or the county).
To sum it all up, Obama did not lose because of his race or his party; the turnout was just a tad bit stronger in the Republican strongholds of St. Charles and Greene County. Some may want to make the argument that Jay Nixon won a lot of the rural counties that also voted for John McCain. It's not because Jay Nixon is white and Obama is half black; it's because voters in the state are more familiar with Nixon than Obama. I guarantee you that if Hillary were the nominee, she would have lost close to the same amount of counties as Obama, although I don't think the margins of victory would have been quite as strong because voters in Missouri know Hillary better than Obama (yes I do think she would have carried the state over John McCain). It's just the rural/urban divide that is so strong in Missouri like it is in almost every other state. Claire McCaskill (D) won some of the rural counties throughout Missouri when she ran for the U.S. Senate seat in 2006 against Jim Talent (R). Robin Carnahan should and will win a significant number of rural counties throughout Missouri when she runs in 2010, why? Voters in Missouri know her better than they did Obama in 2008. However, I am confident that now that voters in Missouri are getting to see Obama, if the nation votes for him, the Show-Me State will surely deliver for him in 2012 and will regain our bellwether status (unless he does something stupid or the winds change and Republicans get things going their away again, which I don't see happening). After all, "As Missouri goes, so goes the nation."
