Yeah it’s dumb, much as a lot of the public comments that come from Penn, but it’s not hostile, it’s overly DLCish.

If we look at the 6/2007 GDP figures in millions per state we see for the top ten states.

CA $1,727,355 Hillary
TX $1,065,891 Leaning very Hillary
NY $1,021,944 Hillary 284
FL $713,505 (Hillary)
IL $589,598 Obama
PA $510,293 Leaning very Hillary
OH $461,302 Leaning very Hillary
NJ $453,177 Hillary
MI $381,003 (Hillary)
GA $379,550 Obama

Total $7,303,618 of $13,149,033 in all US.

The 2nd set of ten states represent $2,827,132
The 3rd set of ten states represent $1,716,042
The 4th set of ten states represent $861,851 (includes DC)
The 5th set of eleven states represents $440,390

You’ll note tiny Washington DC has a GDP bigger than 16 states! And look at the drop off in economic power. The inequality of power in this country is truly staggering.

BTW I love very much Oliver’s commentary.

New York (#3) and Illinois (#5) cancel each other out as home states (and Obama did better in New York than Hillary did in Illinois, which actually is her home state).

There was no campaign in Florida (#4) and Michigan (#8).

Of the other states in the top ten: TX (#2), OH (#7), PA (#6), and NC (#10) haven’t voted yet. Obama won GA (#9). Hillary won NJ (#11). Obama won VA and WA (#’s 12 and 13).

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_leads_in_the_total_popul.php

And you’re right, I was being obtuse about the “large” thing. Still, HRC’s campaign isn’t going to make many friends trying to tell nearly half the nation that their states don’t mean squat.

Bad representation. They aren’t fighting they’re whining. Why is Obama winning? Because he’s fighting. Even in the states he’s lost, he’s fought and his supporters aren’t exactly whining, they are excited. He closed a huge gap, he won this vote, he squeezed out extra delegates…

Hillary has been playing the Prevent Defense since super Tuesday and it’s killed her chances. She hasn’t contested any state since and they’ve all gone to Obama.

I remember some Democrats using using the same kind of language after the 2000 election. “More of the nation voted for Gore than Bush, so Bush isn’t rightfully President!” Of course, we have an electoral college that is in place so that ‘significant’ states like California and New York don’t decided elections. This sounds kind of the same. I’m guessing that Hillary’s overall vote totals outnumber Obama’s.

That being said, I don’t see how it matters in relation to the general election. It’s not like Obama is going to lose California and New York against a Republican candidate.

This is the political equivalent of a fat one down the middle. It should take a competent speechwriter the duration of a light breakfast to come up with a response:

“My opponent seems to believe that only some of you matter. That some of you, based on your geography, or your history, or your economic standing, can be deemed ‘insignificant.’ But I am running for the office of President of the United States of America, and I believe all of you matter. I believe that the job requires me to respect all of you, not just the people who vote for me. I believe that the citizens of Virginia, Louisiana, and Kansas are just as significant as the citizens of California, New York, and New Hampshire.”

Etcetera.

But no, he had to insult half of America. Fucking retard.

And he’s making more than $5 million for that!