Florida provides a very interesting case study for us. They were eliminated from being involved in nominating the Democratic Presidential candidate. So to a degree they are an unvarnished example of Hillary’s starting point.
None of the candidates campaigned there (except for ads that were run there as a result of some national advertising package). As such, it is a good example of what Hillary started with in the bank. One of the memes that Hillary and Rush and a whole host of people with a vested interest have trotted out, is that Obama spent huge sums of money and still couldn’t put Clinton out of the race.
In Florida, Hillary pulled 49.7%, while Obama had 33%. So that is a reasonable starting point for our discussion. Without spending a dollar, Hillary had a 17 point lead. This is likely because she is one of the most recognized women in the country. As a result, Obama has had to make up ground at every stop.
I don’t know how to value that sort of name recognition, but we can make some educated guesses. In Ohio, Obama had to spend $4.4M (Clinton $2.3M). That extra 2.1 million got him 6 points (Clinton dropped 4 points) and Hillary ended up with a net gain of 7 delegates (141 at stake).
One could make the argument that this is because his message isn’t catching on or whatever, but that is ignoring the assets that Hillary began with. Obama may have spent more, but Hillary already had millions of dollars worth of name recognition and a proxy message (guess who her husband is…). I would argue that Hillary had $10M worth of assets in Ohio before she set foot in the state.
To not acknowledge this fact is ignorance or perhaps it is understandable. Many of Hillary’s new supporters have been itching at another shot at disparaging the Clinton Presidency. These are people that compared Chelsea to a family dog and accused Hillary of being a lesbian, a murderer and a communist. So the next time you hear a right-wing pundit say that Hillary is the Democrats only choice, consider the source.