Thank God the Pennsylvania primary is over and done with. This particular end of the campaign was long, tiring and bloody. But the Clinton campaign train pulled ahead of Senator Barack Obama’s Tuesday with a ten percent edge. Senator Clinton received 55% of the total vote to Senator Obama’s 45%.
What does this victory mean for Hillary Clinton? It means that she can continue forward with her campaign until the Democratic convention in August, where it will be officially decided who the Democratic Presidential candidate will be. So all of the mud-slinging and down-low tactics of the Clinton campaign paid off. But with what long-reaching consequences?
The New York Times Editorial Board, who endorsed Senator Clinton early on in her campaign bid, has published a stinging rebuke on the way Hillary Clinton ran her Pennsylvania campaign. In an editorial to run today, the board claims “that the Pennsylvania campaign which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.”
The New York Times Editorial Board also made it clear that Senator Clinton’s campaign tactics could very will “hurt her, her opponent and her party.”
The next primary state is Indiana. The drama continues.