Letters to the Editor
-
In Response to John Hummel
You note that Hillary did worse in the towns where her husband campaigned. However, there's a very obvious reason for that. Clinton campaigned in predominantly black towns. He didn't go to white suburbs where she was going to do well in the first place. He was sent there to help her with black voters and in that, I'll grant you, he failed. But one certainly can't assume that, because Hillary did bad in towns where Bill campaigned, Bill's campaigning must have caused her to do bad. The whole state saw him on TV, it's not like those who were in a mile radius of Clinton talking were any more aware of his dastardly campaign tactics than anyone else. The fact is, among those who say that they didn't care about Clinton's campaigning at all, only 9% voted for Hillary, but among those who said his campaigning was very important, she won 48-44, so the logical conclusion is, at the least, that he didn't hurt. I'm also not sure exactly what Clinton said that was so awful. Probably the nastiest thing that he's said yet - comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson - came after the fact. Other than that, it's all been above the belt, really.