Report: Poor Hillary Performance In Wisconsin Will Raise "Big Questions" About Her Candidacy
The Associated Press raises the curtain on tonight's contest in Wisconsin and its implications for the rest of the race:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Wisconsin is almost the kind of state Hillary Rodham Clinton would have invented to win a Democratic presidential primary, brimming with whites and working class voters who usually support her. A poor performance there Tuesday would raise big questions about her candidacy....a poor showing in Wisconsin may underscore the New York senator's problems holding on to her cornerstone supporters.
"Wisconsin will be an important sign of things to come in what is likely to be a make or break day in the campaign" on March 4, said Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin, who is not working for either candidate.
The AP breaks down the state's demographics, arguing that they suggest that the state is "tailor made" for her -- meaning that a big loss here would reveal deep-seated weaknesses in her candidacy. The AP's analysis strikes me as being less fine-grained than the one offered yesterday by WaPo's Dan Balz, which took note of other demographic realities in the state that tilt towards Obama, and painted a more nuanced picture.
At any rate, we'll be blogging tonight's results right here at Election Central. Stay with us.















Exit polls are hinting at a win, at Fixed Noise, at NRO, and elsewhere, though it only seems the right has access to the polling data.
No word from Drudge.
CBS seems to hint at an Obama victory.
Politico reports, third hand (through Ben Smith), that WI is seeing a blowout.
Reports all over the place on turnout, including a dKos rumor that turnout in Dane County (home of my beloved UW) is extremely LOW.
And a large number of Krazies at dKos (myself included) believe that this one may just be in the bag.
I heard Wolfson was on MSNBC a bit ago, playing with expectations....
Anybody know anything?
February 19, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm taking the early information about a big Obama win via early exits as a sign that it's very close, probably with Hillary in the lead.
I get nervous that way...
February 19, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Large turnout. Larger than usual. They expect Milwaukee itself may have a 50% turnout, according to news reports here. And in suburbs of Milwaukee, possibly 40% turnout. Voting has been heavy all day in WI. They haven't had such a large primary turnout in 20 years.
But as for the outcome? Only guesses.
February 19, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to be too meta on this, but I find the timing on this analysis interesting.
February 19, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. Seems to me the AP might be setting up the "Clinton campaign in trouble" narrative they are looking to uncork.
February 19, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or the other way around: they could be setting the stage for a big "comeback" which is great for ratings too...
February 19, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I expect that you are right. I expect a lot of breathless headlines tomorrow about how "unstoppable" Obama is if he wins in WI tonight.
February 19, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not saying I think you're wrong, but if this were a NH setup they would have started building up the Obama expectations within days, not hours, of the polls closing.
February 19, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone care to lay a bet about how many comments will appear before the subject of this thread is also changed?
February 19, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
But doesn't your question change the subject of this thread already?
;-)
February 19, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
i think we have a winner.
February 19, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is, actually, a pretty old article (relatively speaking). As I recall, I read this earlier this morning whil ignoring my Evidence professor.
February 19, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh. When I clicked on the link just now, it was just posted on the Minneapolis Star Tribune web site.
If it was something written this morning, then you're right--there's not ulterior meaning behind.
February 19, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
National Review Online: Obama prevails, 60-40, based on the second wave exits.
Fox Exits (up on Halperin's The Page): Obama takes women 51-49%, families under $50k 51-49%, and independents, 63-34%. Clinton squeaks by in union households, 50-49% (but blows him out again among seniors, by 21 points).
So yeah, if that holds up, I'd say it raises a few questions.
February 19, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The key stat: "Obama takes women 51-49%"
If this is true, he absolutely wins tonight. I absolutely don't believe it though.
February 19, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
For a bit of fun, we could take umbrage at the racist subtext inherent in talking about a black man "taking women". And from a white woman at that.
I mean really, some of the hysterical coverage over the last few weeks has made me keen to enjoy absurdity where I can.
It's only going to get worse for real, anyway.
February 19, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you get the sense that Hillary's machine dropped the exit poll numbers?
If we expect a blowout, a slight Hillary win will be most unexpected... a lot of the numbers in the exit polls were on the 49/51 order, which I feel like is a bit of a preparation for us to see a 51/49 hillary win (I hope I'm wrong).
I remember similarly peculiar exit polls from New Jersey, New York, and Mass. on super tuesday...
February 19, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, before Obama fans start celebrating, here's this little nugget from National Review Online:
So.
Is this changing the subject of the thread?
February 19, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Point taken. I have not popped the cork on the champagne (or, as the case may be, the screw cap on the lemonade) just yet. I look forward to seeing everyone here tonight around 10 pm EST for the online victory party.
February 19, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Absolutely. Exit polls are flawed things. They come in multiple waves, and we're only seeing the first two. There's no predicting what the final wave will look like. They're also adjusted throughout the evening to match the actual returns - they're intended to show us, when all is said and done, why things unfolded as they did, more than to predict how they'll unfold. I wouldn't uncork the champagne just yet, were I David Axelrod, nor would I board the plane for Ohio, if I were Hillary.
On the other hand, the demographic breakdowns, in particular, tend to be reasonably accurate, even in the early waves. And there's only one race today. Part of what went wrong on February 5, as I understand it, was smaller sample sizes, because the operation was stretched a little thin. (I don't think the consortium is doing an entrance poll in Hawaii, or bothering with the Washington beauty contest). So there's some reason to pay attention to returns that suggest Hillary is enjoying no advantage among women or working-class voters. And it's very, very rare for an exit poll to predict a twenty point win, only to have the other candidate prevail.
But of course, the swing on super tuesday in some of the states you name was very nearly twenty points. So yes, some caution is in order.
February 19, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
But one other point occurs to me. Ordinarily, it takes two things for a network to call a race when the polls close - a consistent lead in pre-election polls, and at least a double-digit margin in the exits. In the races you cite, polling in the final weeks was extremely volatile, and many polls accurately predicted that Hillary would win by a wide margin. The exit polls were astonishing because they showed that the race was neck-and-neck.
Here, we have the opposite situation. The polling over the past week has consistently shown Obama with a small but statistically significant lead, and now the exit polls are predicting a 20-point rout. They may be exxagerating slightly, but that's two data points which reinforce each other. Moreover, as I've tried to explain on my blog and in various comments over the past week, there's reason to suspect that the polls in Wisconsin have been understating Obama's margin. That's because they first screen voters into "Republican voters" and "Democratic voters," and then offer them their choice of candidates. The problem with that is that Wisconsin uses a single ballot; every voter has the same choices. Since Obama runs well among independents and crossover republicans, it seemed likely that polls were effectively screening out some portion of his supporters.
All of this leads me to give much, much greater credence to these numbers than to the big-state exit polls two weeks ago. I'm not saying they've got the margin right, but I will say this - this race is going to be called by the networks as soon as the polls close. Count on it.
February 19, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember, Fly, people in WI can vote so long as they are "in line" at 8:00.... so some polls may not close till after the whole line votes.
This is quite hopeful, however.
February 19, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The polls are still open in Wisconsin for two more hours, so please stop with the exit polling crap that might deter some from going out to vote.
Stifle yourselves until the polls are closed. Is that too much to ask for.
February 19, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give me a break. DO you honestly think there is any WI voters who are such political junkies they are here reading through the comments on TPM but have not gone to the polls yet?
February 19, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not being civic, it's being careful. Who knows what the Primary Gods may hear. They have eeeeeevil senses of humor.
February 19, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually have no problem with people saying "don't jinx it" and so forth, even though I am not a superstitious person. I just find it funny that someone would seriously suggest that someone would castigate exit polls being floated on political blogs before the polls close as being somehow a corrupting influence on the process.
February 19, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think demographics measures what's going on here. Hillary has been a huge flop in the midwest and interior west. Wouldn't it be an irony if she loses it all because she chose to be a carpetbagger in New York instead of coming back home to Illinois and running for the Senate there.
February 19, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly... in true New Yorker fashion (albeit funny that she's not a new yorker) the people from that state delude themselves into thinking they embody America. Giuliani made the same mistake. Hillary was less regionally pigeon-holed than he, of course, considering she at least doesn't have a NY accent. But it was always very opportunistic-looking of her to go to NY instead of AR or IL -- the states she was connected to, and ultimately probably a much worse move politically. Then gain having the support of the second-most populous state always helps... and she certainly couldn't have become a senator just anywhere...
February 19, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"the people from that state [NY] delude themselves into thinking they embody America."
As a born and bred NYer I can tell you that most people from NYC consider themselves to be living in another country from the rest of the US.
February 19, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heck, if she had been gutsy and run in 2004, we'd allbe talking about re-electing Hillary and nobody would have ever heard of Barack Obama other than as a foot note as an African American Senator.
February 19, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've thought that too. Her best shot was 2004 but she thought she'd wait it out and take the cakewalk in 2008 rather than fight Bush.
She rolled the dice and didn't get the cakewalk/coronation she was expecting. Kind of sad for her, but that's the risk of triangulating rather than just going for it.
February 19, 2008 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say the fact that she can't win any states in the general election is a bigger question we should be asking about her candidacy, but hey, that is just crazy ol' me!
February 19, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Boy if these early exit polls hold and Obama wins by about 10 points.
It will be sweet victory. It's like a elephant walking on the streets and dogs barked all along.
February 19, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I hear you.
On to Ohio and Texas, at least after this go around. I hope BHO upgrades his servers so I can help calling voters.
February 19, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, please, stop with the conspiracy theories on the timing. This article moved early this morning. It's a set-up piece -- it holds a place until the results start coming in. Once we see results, all this speculation will be pushed to the bottom of the story, and be replaced by real news.
Besides, even if Hillary loses, I'm sure this will tell us nothing about her campaign, because there will be some reason that the results don't really count. I'm betting it's the weather that prevented all her senior citizen supporters from coming to the polls. Any takers?
February 19, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are missing the obvious fact that if she doesn't win any states in the general election, then states don't count.
February 19, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are we even talking about exit polls? How many times do we need to get burned? Sigh. I've got a bad feeling, but then again, I always have a bad feeling before an election having been let down way too many times. So whatevs. Go Obama!
February 19, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are we even talking about exit polls? How many times do we need to get burned? Sigh. I've got a bad feeling, but then again, I always have a bad feeling before an election having been let down way too many times. So whatevs. Go Obama!
February 19, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama win in Wisconsin?
I found this at TNR:
Wisconsin is almost the kind of state Hillary Rodham Clinton would have invented to win a Democratic presidential primary, brimming with whites and working class voters who usually support her. A poor performance there Tuesday would raise big questions about her candidacy.
You don't send something like that out a few hours before an expected defeat.
February 19, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
What might be more telling than the exit polls, is the fact that Hillary is scheduled to speak at 8:30pm tonight. BEFORE WISCONSIN POLLS CLOSE.
February 19, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm guessing that the internal polls weren't as close as the public polls?
Which state will she be speaking from?
February 19, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
One of the ones that matters of course.
;-)
February 19, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's in Ohio now.
February 19, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it's anything like her speech on the night of the Potomac Primaries, she'll be speaking from the great state of Denial.
February 19, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is that telling?
February 19, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Presumably because if she were expecting a win based on her internal polling/exit polls she would want to wait until results were out in order to bask in the glory of a much-needed win.
February 19, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
But if she is speaking from Ohio at 9:30 (Ohio time) I see nothing that telling about it at all really, just SOP.
February 19, 2008 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except that it was supposed to be at 8:30 p.m. ET, which is 1/2 hour before the polls closed.
However, she hasn't appeared yet, so who knows what's going on?
Interesting, though, that Obama has already rebutted the speech yet to be given:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/19/682714.aspx
February 19, 2008 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heavy turnout in Milwaukee. They have had to send out more ballots to the city polling locations.
Mayor Tom Barrett has endorsed Senator Obama, so the Milwaukee turnout bodes well for him.
Tuesday, Feb 19 2008, 05:30 PM
Several polling sites in the city of Milwaukee have asked for more ballots as voting appears heavier than expected in some spots, Sue Edman, executive director of the Milwaukee Election Commission, said this afternoon.
“We had to hurry up and get more ballots out to them,” said Edman, who said she thought the sites were on the city’s east side and near Marquette University. She wasn’t sure how many sites asked for more ballots. Other polling places, for instance on the south side, were reporting steady voting but no long lines, she said. During the last presidential primary, 137,000 people voted in Milwaukee. This time, officials were projecting 150,000 to 175,000 voters, Edman said. The only potential election violation Edman knew of was a report that Clinton signs were posted on county property at the polling site at the Boys and Girls Club in the 3000 block of N. Sherman Blvd. She sent a worker out there and hadn’t heard a report back.
February 19, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Little ones usually reflect what the are hearing their parents say at home.
By Journal Sentinel staff
Tuesday, Feb 19 2008, 05:51 PM
Presidential primary results are in at Nature’s Classroom Montessori school in Mukwonago, where Barack Obama forged ahead as the clear Democratic favorite, with McCain winning the Republican primary.
Elementary school children between the ages of 6 and 12 conducted their own election at the school today, but it’s the culmination of a process that began at the beginning of the semester. The students’ research included trips to both Republican and Democratic headquarters in Waukesha County, discussion in class about the issues and letters home to parents to stimulate discussion with their children about the election, said teacher Shella Schneider.
The minimum voting age was dropped from 18 to 6, and students signed up their classmates, teachers and parents.
Voter turnout was not perfect: 74 people cast ballots out of 82 who were registered.
One voter also tried to vote twice, but luckily, the fraud was caught by the clerks.
The results:John McCain – 18Mike Huckabee – 5
Barack Obama – 35
Hillary Clinton – 12
Dennis Kucinich – 1Ron Paul – 1
Trenton Smith (5-years-old; a write-in) -1
February 19, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Trenton Smith age five may be vice presidential timber. Somebody vet the kid's background though.
February 19, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Better check his kindergarten essays.
February 19, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
FOTW:
What does the phrase "first (or second) wave of exit polls" refer to? Is each "wave" collected at a different time?
February 19, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exit polls work like this. There are a bunch of people out in the field, handing the surveys to voters as they exit the polls. They tabulate the results at several points over the course of the day, and relay them back to the central HQ. Those results are then tabulated. Those are the waves.
The best primer on exit polls is available here
February 19, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Link?
February 19, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/19/clinton_will_make_early_speech_tonight.html
February 19, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
re: Hillary speaking at 8:30PM
I'm not quite clear bout this. Is it a good thing for her? or does that mean a concession speech like last week?
February 19, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she was going to win, wouldn't she wait to speak until after the polls were closed?
February 19, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, she can't talk about her great win, because the polls aren't closed. She can't even talk about how close it is because the polls aren't closed.
It's sort of reminiscent of what she did last week...(was it just last week?)...in her campaign speech that evening, she didn't mention a single word about the primary results.
And if you're not talking about something, there's probably a good reason.
The only thing that blows my whole analysis to bits is when this event (tonight) was scheduled...couple days ago? Today? When?
February 19, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
She wants to speak as early as possible so the contrast between her speaking and that of Barack is less clear.
God after the Potomoc primaries the contrast between Obama and McCain (who stupidly started his speech during Obama's) was UNREAL
February 19, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the 8:30 time is Central?
February 19, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, the spinning has begun already.
February 19, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
So I guess the plagiarism thing by our buddy in the ugly sweater didn't quite resonate with Wisconsin voters.
February 19, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
From tonight's speech:
Work, hard work, back to work. Sounds like a good motto for the state of the Clinton campaign right now.
February 19, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's plagiarizing from George "It's Hard Work" Bush/
February 19, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I remain vigilant- I CANNOT believe Hillary camp would concede an oppurtunity to beat a victory drum.
May be there Internal numbers don't auger well? At this point, if the Clinton camp says: Sun rises in the east. I'll wait until the morning to confirm if it's true.
The legendary Rovian gene in them mutated into a monster this week.
February 19, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking directly after or before Obama is not the best of strategies for either McCain or Clinton.
February 19, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you are an Obama supporter you had to love Hardball tonight. Tweety was in full effect. It makes me think he is trying to offset some negeatives that have happened to the Obama campaign this week.
February 19, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am an Obama supporter and Tweety makes me want to projectile vomit. So why would Obama supporters be so enthralled by what that pumpkinhead has to say?
February 19, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez. I'm torn between watching the results come in or American Idol. (2 hr show tonight)
Hmm. What to do...
Rae
February 19, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4308238
Watch this video from last night's abc news. on the second half of it you will see clear video evidence of Hillary having stolen John Edwards words from a debate five month's earlier, and she did not credit him with having first said the words.
The link works only with Internet Explorer, and not with Firefox, so you will need to switch to the IE plug in, if you are currently using Firefox.
February 19, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://election.cbsnews.com/campaign2008/exitPoll.shtml?state=WI&race=P&jurisdiction=0&party=D
February 19, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well if those polls are accurate it just shows Hillary support is among the retired people, which is the most constant stat in all the exit polling is that she wins the 65+ vote.
February 19, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
That age group are the most likely to have finished voting early today, so I wonder if they may be weighted a bit to much in the exit poll charts. Since the polls are still open, and I doubt that the retirees are still showing up, their percentage of the actual turnout may not be as large as the cbs exit poll shows them to be.
February 19, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is, with that demographic, Clinton's support has nowhere to go but down. You figure, it's eight months before the election. On average, a person over the age of 65 has a 4% chance of dying in any given 12 month period. So, in eight months, Clinton's support is likely to drop off by 3% as her supporters drop dead.
It's simply statistics.
February 19, 2008 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dang. If those hold true this will be a big-time happy evening for Obama's HQ.
February 19, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, one minute they were there and the next they were down. Guess they noticed they were getting hits.
I'm guessing someone's ass is getting thoroughly masticated right about now.
February 19, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, wait a minute! What's that HRC quote again?
"It’s about picking a president who relies not just on words – but on work, hard work...."
Do you think she may have appropriated GWB's lines from the Bush/Kerrey debates? Well, let's just go ahead and take a look-see, shall we?
1. "We're making progress. It is hard work."
2. "It is hard work to go from a tyranny to a democracy."
3. "Yes, we're getting the job done. It's hard work."
Bush actually used the phrase 11 times, but you get the idea. Quick, someone alert the media! Hillary plagiarized from Dubya, and didn't even give the guy credit.
I'm heading home to watch the returns. Hello, Wisconsin!
February 19, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone know why Michelle Obama is making jokes at the expense of John Edwards, a man who has added immeasurable substance and class to the national debate.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192008/gossip/cindy/sometimes_you_get_reel_lucky_98232.htm?page=2
February 19, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
They asked about her hair. Edwards is the $400 haircut candidate. I think it's more straight-forward refusal to discuss her hair than some giant attack on Edwards.
February 19, 2008 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4308238
I think you were asking earlier about the ABC new clip showing Hillary stealing the exact words that John Edwards said in a debate five months earlier. You will have to use Internet Explorer browser to view it, as it does not appear to work in Firefox.
February 19, 2008 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well it apparently isn't another blow out.
CNN just said its going to be a long night.
Translation: Too close to call?
Rae
February 19, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Possibly a long night if there are long lines at 8:00, since anyone standing in line at that time is allowed to vote. City of Milwaukee sometimes has lines for an hour or more. So it could be a while. Also, they count the "absentees" before sending over the count.
February 19, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, absolutely. If you wait for the caucus results come in from Hawaii it will be a long night. Otherwise, not so much.
Took CNN 23 whole minutes to call it.
February 19, 2008 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Poor Poor Richmond trying so hard to deflect from what is happening to his beloved Hillary by trying to steer us over to Rupert Murdoch's Yellow New York Rag.
February 19, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny thing. The older you get, the more value you place on "experience," whether real or presumed, and the less you put on anything else. The most fascinating break to me is the one between 50 - 65 demographic and the 65 and over.
I doubt there's ever been a time in history when 60 year olds had less in common with 70 year olds when it came to life experience and general outlook on the world. When they were young, Today's 60 year olds were forming communes and worrying about that brown acid they ate at Woodstock, where today's 70 year olds were worrying about Sputnik and Eisenhower's health.
February 19, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't believe it! Now that her attempt to smear Obama fails she downright denies it. THE NATION is calling her a blatant liar in print:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080219/cm_thenation/45287479
February 19, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice find. Even the press is getting tired of this!
February 19, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
The exit polls consistently show that Hillary's biggest support group are in an age bracket that is most likely not to stick around long enough to have to suffer through what they have wrought.
February 19, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
so well put! ♪♪♪
February 19, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
What the hell. Let us post it for all to read.
Clinton Lies About Plagiarism Attack [Updated]
2 hours, 17 minutes ago
The Nation -- Hillary Clinton flatly denied that her campaign was attacking Barack Obama for using the words of another politician, telling reporters on Tuesday that her campaign had not made the charge. The Chicago Tribune reported her remarks from an interview with KITV in Honolulu on Tuesday:
"Look, it's not us making this charge. It's the media. You know, the media is finally examining my opponent which I think is important because we're trying to pick a president, someone for the toughest job in the world [...] So, I think the media is going to be putting forth whatever facts and information it has for voters to assess on their own."
Obama Campaign spokseman Bill Burton shot back on Tuesday evening. "Senator Clinton knows full well that her campaign held a conference call with reporters to fan these flames and the fact that she suggested her campaign had nothing to do with it is exactly the kind of evasive tactic voters are rejecting," he said in a statement.
Clinton's claim is demonstrably false. Her campaign has aggressively and openly pushed the plagiarism attack, including a national conference call by senior campaign aides on Monday. Her aides also circulated a YouTube clip comparing footage of Obama and Gov. Deval Patrick.
Initially, Clinton operatives apparently did attempt to conceal their involvement. The first New York Times article about the clip reported:
The similarities from a passage of Mr. Obama's speech on Saturday and in remarks that Mr. Patrick delivered on Oct. 15, 2006, were highlighted by a rival campaign that did not want to be identified. Clips of both speeches are archived on the Web site YouTube.com.
Yet by Monday morning, Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson and Rep. Jim McGovern openly made the plagiarism attack on the conference call, while the campaign openly distributed the YouTube clip without requesting to only be identified as a "rival campaign." The story has now dominated campaign coverage for two days, so Hillary Clinton is obviously aware that her campaign is making the charge.
The Clinton Campaign's attack on Obama's use of the line "just words" was widely panned as a baseless and desperate ploy. Her cover-up might go over even worse.
Update 2: The AP reports that Clinton's claim is "disingenuous":
Clinton Fingerprints on Plagiarism Flap
Hillary Rodham Clinton says reporters, not her campaign, uncovered evidence of Democratic rival Barack Obama sharing speech lines with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.
She made the claim Tuesday despite the fact her campaign posted video clips on YouTube illustrating similarities in the speeches and has suggested in several instances that the shared lines amount to plagiarism.
THE SPIN: "It's not us making this charge, it's the media," Clinton told Honolulu television station KITV Tuesday. "The media is finally examining my opponent which I think is important. We're trying to pick a president, someone for the toughest job in the world."
She added: "I think the media is going to be putting forth whatever facts and information it has for voters to assess on their own."
In an interview with another Honolulu station, KGMB, Clinton noted that Obama and Patrick share a strategist, David Axelrod, "who is apparently putting words in both of their mouths."
She added: "I think that's a serious concern."
FACT CHECK: Any suggestion that the story had a life of its own, apart from the Clinton campaign, is disingenuous....
(First) Update: The Politico reports on Clinton's false assertion, though the article avoids directly labeling it false:
Clinton, in remarks to the ABC affiliate in Honolulu that were reported by the Chicago Tribune, asserted: "Look, it's not us making this charge. It's the media."
But on Monday, the Clinton campaign announced a conference call "to discuss a recent speech delivered by Sen. Obama" and included a YouTube link that showed Obama remarks side by side with similar comments by his friend, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.
On the call, Howard Wolfson, the campaign's communications director, said: "When an author plagiarizes from another author there is damage done to two different parties. One is to the person he plagiarized from. The other is to the reader."
February 19, 2008 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not so sure how tailor-made for Hillary, this state is.
Because there are a number of very large college campuses around the state. And not just in Madison and Milwaukee (where campus turnout has been very high). But also in more rural areas - campuses with 6000 or 8000 or 10,000 students. Which had often been ignored - until Nov 2006 when students came out in force to oppose the anti-same-sex-marriage amendment. (The amendment passed - but quite a few incumbent republican assembly & senators were defeated, largely on the strength of the student vote). It's also something that seems to have been pretty much ignored by all media, MSM and otherwise.
Since that's Obama territory, the question to me is - what's turnout in places like UW -Eau Claire, or UW -Platteville, or UW -Whitewater? (or LaCrosse, Stevens Point, Oshkosh, etc etc). If it's high on those campuses, that suggests a likely trend towards Obama.
February 19, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
looks like 55-45.
hope hawaii is bigger than that. (both % and delegate difference)
February 19, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
i am so nervous...the clintons are like vampires in those horror movies, whenever you think their dead, their not...
February 19, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that the NATION story about her bald-faced lie gets wide play, because it is so damning as to discredit her with any clear-thinking person. It's not that I want to demonize her, but we don't need another person with her particular demons in a position of responsibility and (gulp!) power.
February 19, 2008 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The stunning thing about what is happening is that Hillary has stopped trying to sell her vision and goals, and instead appears to be completely depending on the politics of personal destruction against Senator Obama. I do not understand that tactic. Even if she were to pull it off, the African American Community will not forget that in November, which would mean that she would go down to a huge defeat.
February 19, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its thinking about only the short game which has been a problem in her campaign since the start.
February 19, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Practically custom made for a commercial, I'd say.
February 19, 2008 9:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
9:11 pm....race too early too call.
February 19, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Waddaya mean 9:11? It's only 8:15 here!
February 19, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
NBC Exit Polls indicate Senator Obama has a "Substantial Lead" in Wisconsin.
NBC News said the Democratic contest between Sen. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton was too early to call. Its analysis of data from surveys of voters as they exited polling places indicated, however, that Obama had a substantial lead in Wisconsin, which offered 74 national convention delegates and an early test of support in industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.
February 19, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
possibly too early to call because people are still voting
February 19, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The problem is, with that demographic, Clinton's support has nowhere to go but down. You figure, it's eight months before the election. On average, a person over the age of 65 has a 4% chance of dying in any given 12 month period. So, in eight months, Clinton's support is likely to drop off by 3% as her supporters drop dead.
It's simply statistics."
Don't forget that her opponent will be facing the same odds, except they'll apply directly to him.
February 19, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep Obama wins MSNBC projects
February 19, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep Obama wins MSNBC projects
February 19, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
And... they called it for Obama
February 19, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
BREAKING NEWS!!
Bill Clinton campaigning for Obama: "Experience doesn't matter that much" -he says.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbHiw2jlwa4
Enjoy!
February 19, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finally, I can say now- Fuck media leakings, Fuck Negative Attacks and Fuck Last Minute Mailers- Obama Wins!!!!
February 19, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, kash79 -- I am so very, very happy to see those "techniques" finally lose their power. You'll never convince me that that isn't what happened in New Hampshire - all the last minute stuff including those damn, lying &^%$#@$% mailers. Thank goodness!! --- In my bones, I feel like this is the most important one. Now just to hope for a large margin.....
February 19, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone noticed chatter seemingly from a stray studio microphone on CNN during Obama's speech? Begala's voice?
February 19, 2008 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it was Mitt Romney.
February 20, 2008 2:04 AM | Reply | Permalink