« Obama Campaign: Hillary Is Already "Waving White Flag" In Key General Election States | Home | The Real Target Of The Argument Over Electability? The Super-Delegates »

Hillary To Huddle With Her Top Donors In D.C. Today

We hear that Hillary's top fundraisers will be sitting down to a private meeting with her today for a pep talk and a wide-ranging look at the state of the race.

According to a copy of the invitation, which was sent our way, the fundraisers were set to start their day getting a policy briefing from top Hillary supporters like Senators Bill Nelson, Robert Menendez and Debbie Stabenow.

Following that is a private luncheon with the candidate herself, at an upscale restaurant in D.C.'s Union Station.

What with Obama's two victories in Mississippi and and Wyoming, his potentially-insurmountable pledged delegate lead, and the unresolved situations in Florida and Michigan, antsy donors will no doubt be asking a lot of tough questions. We'll bring you more on the meeting when we get it.


77 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Will any of them be telling her to stop smashing Obama down? Unlikely.

Honestly, does Hillary know something we don't know? How does she really think she's going to win this?

user-pic

She's playing for 2012. She wants to tear obama down so that he loses and then she runs again in 2012. That's the only logical explaination.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Nothing else explains the commander-in-chief "threshhold" and Ferraro's explosions, which have continued unabated. Anyone seriously believe she'd be keeping it up if Hillary asked her to STFU? I thought not.
This is truly shameless, craven, diabolical, you name it. I just wish more people could see it. She's getting away with political murder.

user-pic

Note that Sen. Bill Nelson of FL is attending. That's why we shouldn't listen to him whine about Florida's delegates. He's already taken a side in the race, so he's a biased observer.

She's playing for 2012. She wants to tear obama down so that he loses and then she runs again in 2012. That's the only logical explaination.

If she hasn't already crossed a threshold that would prevent her from ever again running as a Democratic candidate, she's very close to that line.

It would make more sense to suggest that she's angling to be McCain's veep and run against Obama.

user-pic

I'm already supporting whoever runs against her in this scenario, and I bet I'm not the only one.

That's presuming there's still a party in 2012.

I tend to hew toward the "hostage" theory expounded by a poster in a diary a few days back...Clinton is trying to stir up enough doubts/fears of an Obama presidency, tearing down his personal reputation on the way, that the party will just "have to" fall back on her at the convention this year.

user-pic

That's possible. The problem is that she will get hammered and the party will be torn apart if she robs obama of the nomination. Pelosi's statements yesterday were telling of where the party establishment is. I just wish that they would get off there collective a**es and stop the bleeding now.

I did find Pelosi's comment somewhat reassuring, but I second your frustration, Michael A.; why the heck are the party elders sitting back on this?

user-pic

I hope Pelosi crashes the party and talks some sense into her.

Throwing good money after Bad is EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!

You think any of the donor's will mention Ferraro? I hope so.

Sinbad, sadly, did not get an invitation.

However, if Sinbad had been invited, Sinbad would have two questions for Senator Clinton:

1) Do we eat here or at the next place?
2) Do you consider me "lucky" to have been invited to Bosnia with you?

Clinton/Sinbad '08 - Seriously, Hillary, you're embarrassing yourself.

user-pic

So, you're saying in the interest of party unity, we'll be voting for the Sinbad/Obama ticket in November? ;-)

They'll be talking about 527s, for sure.

Ah, crap.

Top donors are already tapped out.

Maybe they can find a way to cheat on FEC laws:

http://wonkette.com/365959/hillary-campaign-commits-credit-card-fraud-against-delightful-lady

user-pic

I once supported Robert Menendez as a possible Presidential candidate -- no longer. The man doesn't know when to take a loss and quit damaging his OWN party.

user-pic

I'll take that a step further - I live in NJ and have already sent his office an e-mail that if he keeps helping her trash Obama and damages the party he can forget my vote when he runs for re-election. I'll stay home. In fact, I'm about ready to dump this friggin' party altogether. After 30+ years. Never failed to vote - now I'm ready to bolt.

What I would give to be in that room today to listen to all of the spin about how Hillary is actually winning. Are her fund-raisers by and large kool-aid guzzlers or will they hit her with actual hard-hitting questions grounded in reality? Will they ask her what happens to the youth vote if she gains the nomination by any method other than an outright delegate win (now mathematically impossible)? Will they ask her why her campaign didn't use their money to plan a post-Feb 5th strategy? Will they ask her to get rid of Mark Penn? Or Geraldine Ferraro? Will they ask her how she gets out of her claim that McCain is more qualified than Obama while simultaneously offering Obama the VP slot? Will any of them ask her to drop out of the race? SOMEONE on her side, in this group of incredibly accomplished people, has to be sane and rational to the point of showing her that she is losing and that any method by which she could "win" the nomination would cause great damage to the party and possibly cost Dems the election in the fall.

She'll be able to point out how she's making major gains in the key demographics of crackers and racist old ladies. The other voters don't really count anyway.

Ha ha ha.

i can dream that her top donors will be adults and talk some sense into her campaign.

Hey, the journey to Pennsylvania Avenue goes through Pennsylvania, get it? That's the new spin and it makes awesome sense! I assume the party will shut down the race after she wins in Pa, since none of the other state count. SO the message of the meeting is six more weeks to victory!

Hey, GREAT NEWS!!! I re-checked on a current map and Phil Singer is wrong. Turns out 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is the address of the White House which is in Washington D.C. So, even if you start the path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Pennylvania, you have to go through Maryland (which Obama won 60-37) and then into D.C. (which Obama won 75-24). Alternately, you could try to go from Pennsylvania through West Virginia, but then you gotta go through Virginia (which Obama won 64-35) to get to D.C. Maybe you could sneak through Delaware (which Obama won 53-43). So, ipso facto, if the path to 1600 goes through Pennsylvania, the final destination is a decisive Obama win! YAAAY!!!

What can Hillary Clinton possibly tell them? Can she admit that she's running for 2012 now? I know she can't possibly say that she's trying to get Barack Obama defeated in November, so she can run again in four years,... but can she imply it? Her supporters must know that, don't you think? What other explanation is there? She can only win the nomination THIS year though dirty tricks, thus tearing apart the Democratic Party.

I see only three possibilities:

1) She really thinks she can win this year through dirty tricks, but that Democrats will have no choice but to vote for her anyway (unlikely).

2) She knows that Barack Obama will win the nomination, but if she can destroy his chances in November, she can say "I told you so," and be perfectly situated for the nomination in four years.

3) If she can stay close enough to Barack Obama, she can get the super-delegates to force him to accept her as V-P (not the other way around - you know that's not going to work). This will position her even better in four years, if Obama loses in November (no one will blame the V-P for that, even if she worked to bring it about).

It is possible, I suppose, that she DOES want to be V-P, as a consolation prize and a stepping stone to the presidency. If that's the case, she might try to win in November, but I suspect that she wouldn't try very hard. The really important thing, for her, would be to keep her on the fast track for the NEXT presidential nomination.

Well, it will be easy to tell if she really wants to be V-P. If she stops the negative campaigning, then she'll be willing - though not happy - to see Obama win in November. If not, she's set her sights on nothing but the presidency in 2012. But can't her supporters see that? Do they care?

You know, reading your comment, I did a thought experiment involving what a meeting with Hillary's donors would look like, if she had the audacity to admit to them that she was setting up a 2012 run. It wasn't pretty.

Setting: Bright, airy conference room, with Hillary and staff sitting at one end, with powerpoint presentations and handouts ready, and several dozen conservatively dressed men and women sitting facing them, briefcases and Blackberries at hand.

Hillary Clinton: Ok guys, here's the deal. We feel that we can still win this, but it'll get ugly, and frankly the nomination won't be worth a hill of beans after we're done. The best route for our campaign at this point is to kneecap Barack just enough now so that in November our core voters have serious doubts about him that we've planted and McCain can capitalize on. This will cause them to cross over and will sink Obama in the general, and we won't directly have blood on our hands. Then in 2012, we run the "We Told You So" campaign and sweep into power. But it'll only happen if you guys stick with us...


My first thought was, no Democratic donor would go for something like that. But then I thought, why the hell wouldn't they?

At this point, any donor that'll command a sit-down meeting with Hillary Clinton about "policy issues" has got to be a bigwig corporate investor. And any corporate investor who's donated to Hillary I'm sure has already hedged his bets with Mr. I-Don't-Sleep-with-Lobbyists McCain.

I don't think these guys would have any problems with a Clinton strategy that involved, either implicitly or overtly hobbling Obama for the general. They'll have bets placed on another horse long before then.

"My first thought was, no Democratic donor would go for something like that. But then I thought, why the hell wouldn't they?"

That depends on whether their primary loyalties are to the Democratic Party, the principles it's supposed to stand for and the people it's supposed to fight for, or to Hillary and Bill as individuals. If they stick with Hillary's help McSame strategy, then we know.

Come on donors. It's up to you now.

GET HER OUT! GET HER OUT! GET HER OUT! GET HER OUT!

You can do it guys. For the good of the party, get her out of this thing now, before the Fever of Ferraro spreads.

At least feeding them won't cost a fortune. They can send out for Chinese:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-donors19oct19,0,4231217.story

What they SHOULD tell her is to drop the f'ck out.

Of course, there's this 'boiling a frog' mentality in a set of donors who keeps on propping up a losing campaign as it gets... more and more into the realm of not even possibly ever winning.

So they will drink the koolaid and keep on paying out their fat butts.

user-pic

What's special about today?

And why did they make this known?

And these "top donors" have to be the same people who've been with her all along, right?

I hope someone brings up Ferraro...but I'm not optimistic. 'Cause isn't Ferraro herself a fundraiser?

God, this is getting ugly.

user-pic

Wow, Greg, I guess that you're going to be naming sources and all that, but it is curious that 'someone' sent a copy of the invitation your way.
I would think that her 'top fundraisers' would really want that powwow to be secret, so I cannot understand why the leak, if it was a leak. If it wasn't a leak, then news of this meeting may just be a prelude to yet another 'new image', or 'new message' Hillary.

In the 44 primary contests, she's a resounding 14-30 (or 15-30 if you want to treat the Texas caucus as a separate event).

14-30.

32% win record.

Think about that for a minute. She's lost over 60% of the contest. How she is still in this race is a testament to the efficacy of her media spin shop and the gulliability of the media. This thing is over. It's just a question of how much damage she and her supporters are willing to do to the Democratic Party in their vain attempt to make a show of it.

user-pic

Hey, but if this was baseball she would be the MVP batting 320. Maybe that's the next analogy, yeah that's it, baseball.

I wish the supers would pull the plug on this bullsh*t.

Not with her opponent batting .682.

user-pic

Got me, good one.

The problem with that theory is that she would probably claim that she's the clean-up hitter with the NY Yankees. Obama would be an so-so pitcher in the rotation, but have you seen that guy on the mound for the Red Sox? That McCain can bring the heat...

Ugh. Her donors need to just shut her down. Without cash, she can't complain about Super-Delegates, can't complain about Florida or Michigan, can't complain about big states or media bias and most importantly...the scorched earth campaign would come to an end.

Something she hasn't considered is that if she's trying to poison the waters so Obama loses, giving her another shot in 2012, how is that going to stop McCain from appointing one to three Supreme Court Justices?

The Country, Party and People of America are all more important than Hillary.

user-pic

Not according to the clintons. Look what they did to the country and the party in the 90's. The dems were devastated and it took an illegal war by a meglomaniac to bring them back. If the party allows the clintons to wreck the party again, we need to start a new party. This is outrageous.

IT'S HER TURN.

lol

user-pic

They need to pay more attention to the wisdom of Bill Bradley, than to the incoherent ranting of Geraldine Ferraro.
Former senator Bill Bradley, who is a leading supporter of Obama and ran for president in 2000, accused the Clintons of “lying” in pursuit of victory.
“The bigger the lie, the better the chance they think they’ve got. That’s been their whole approach,” he said. “She’s going to lose a whole generation of people who got involved in politics believing it could be something different.”
Bradley believes that Clinton will stop at nothing to tear down Obama even if it boosts John McCain, who was confirmed last week as the Republican nominee: “The Clintons do not do long-term planning. They’re total tacticians and right now their focus is on Obama, not McCain.”

Are you the real Sinbad? Or are you someone else using his name and avatar?

Either way, this is brilliant. Keep on posting!

The above post was supposed to be in reply to Sinbad's.

user-pic

Hey, but if this was baseball she would be the MVP batting 320. Maybe that's the next analogy, yeah that's it, baseball.

I wish the supers would pull the plug on this bullsh*t.

Baseball can give the campaign another inspiration. Florida fans are told, even before they buy the tickets, that the spring training games do not count in the regular season standings. I have nothing against Florida---good luck to the marlins and the devil rays-----IN THE REGULAR SEASON GAMES!

Geraldine Ferraro can organize some lucrative Klan fund raisers for Hillary.

This is about her muscling her way onto the ticket.

That won't happen, and it's a ticket she'd only lacklustly support anyway.

As Nancy Pelosi said yesterday in so many words, "That dog won't hunt".

They need to pay more attention to the wisdom of Bill Bradley, than to the incoherent ranting of Geraldine Ferraro.

You are kidding right? I mean Geraldine Ferraro, works for FOX news and is paid to go to speaking events opposite Bill Kristol! How could we not totally trust her judgement?

I don't think 2012 is what they're working towards. This is much bigger than that.

Under the Clintons, the DLC gained dominence over the party. Consequently,the party's leadership started turning towards Wall Street and away from traditional constituencies. Fundraising increased, but the party ceased to function as a cohesive organization as elected officials essentially became first and foremost business investments for various industries. We can all think of instances where we wondered where the hell the party was when Bush began consolidating power. The party was more of a brand name than anything else.

Howard Dean and MoveOn showed that candidates could be successful by using the internet to organize supporters and raise money with great cost effectiveness. They could go back to traditional grassroots organizing using this new tool. A candidate no longer needs to sell his ass to a pharmaceutical company for $50,000 to buy TV ads to capture votes.

Obviously, Dean recreating the party as chairman is driving the DLCers nuts. His 50 state strategy -- if not scrapped with a Clinton in charge -- is going to create a structure where they will be permanenty displaced. Obama is no lefty, but his victory will be a vindication of this populist approach.

The only reason why Clinton is still out there is because the stakes are so high. Her financial backers are still bankrolling this because: they're up against a movement and not just a person who will eventually go away; and they think they can win. If they can't own the party, they might as well destroy it.

I'm not counting them out. I saw what happened to Ned Lamont.

Niekro35,

I think you hit the nail on the head. They're not going to stop for any of us.

This is absolutely correct, and very perceptive. What I worry is, if there's a high profile loss by Obama and that populist base feels completely disenfranchised... Will the fall be bigger? Will this more grassroots, progressive movement be more crippled than ever before?

If Clinton wrestles the nomination away from Obama, the cultivation of a grassroots 50 state Democratic Party organization will certainly be killed in its cradle. The party will go back to being the organizational version of Alan Colmes.

I don't think people will turn away from politics if Obama gets rolled. They might try to organize outside of the party. But I think a first order of business for President McCain/Clinton will be to sell of the internet to Comcast in order to quell the public's ability to organize.

It really is getting bizarre isn't it. It's as if she's living in an alternate universe. Doesn't she have one good honest friend who can shake her back into reality.



100 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON


user-pic

Maybe Hillary is explaining to her tapped out donors
why she's stealing more of their money anyway.

Hillary's committee stole $3800 from a woman doctor which combined with the $2000 she initially donated voluntarily put her $1200 over the legal FEC limit. It also cost her $400 in overdraft charges from her bank.

After repeatedly being brushed off by Clinton's fundraisers she finally filed a police report. That got them to refund her money. Go read the whole thing, it's the same story Wonkette alludes to in the link above but from the horse's mouth.

http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7104

Hillary's campaign is out of money. These donors are probably bundlers. Cash flow through the Internet must not be enough.

DONORS: Mrs Clinton, please tell us why we must continue to support you? You are behind in the delegate count, you have lost more states, you are behind in the popular vote and the national polls show BO beating McCain by a wider margin than you!

Hillary: Well, you guys, if truth be told, i didnt major in math, i majored in miracles. Besides, as a woman of faith, i am praying and asking God to strike BO down with lightening before June. Remember, God doesnt help those who dont help themselves.

I wonder if Geraldine Ferraro is there? Maybe someone can ask for her input on winning elections...

All of us so called racists who are for HRC are for tearing down this party and starting a new party and excluding you folks. Slash and burn. 3rd party run. Let you bums have this party and we have our party.
When this is over we will win. That is what I hope she is saying. You can have this New party we will have the OLD party. See who survives.

The answer to that is easy.

John McCain.

All of us so called racists who are for HRC are for tearing down this party and starting a new party and excluding you folks. Slash and burn. 3rd party run. Let you bums have this party and we have our party.
When this is over we will win. That is what I hope she is saying. You can have this New party we will have the OLD party. See who survives.

You and Ron Paul go have a good time in obscurity. Try leading the country without any congressional support and see how far you get.

Good luck and good bye.

Maybe you could call it the "Hillary for America Party" and get Joe Lieberman run as VP.

"Hillary for America" is not sufficiently self-referential and petulant (as you get with CfL). Expect the "party" to be called "America for Hillary".

It would the motivations of her corporate underwriters well enough. Anything to derail Obama.

"Hillary's campaign is out of money. These donors are probably bundlers. Cash flow through the Internet must not be enough."

They are probably cheating with internet donations. Their big bundlers who are maxed out can contribute through shell voters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/21/AR2007102101069.html

"DONORS WHOSE addresses turn out to be tenements. Dishwashers and waiters who write $1,000 checks. Immigrants who ante up because they have been instructed to by powerful neighborhood associations, or, as one said, "They informed us to go, so I went." Others who say they never made the contributions listed in their names or who were not eligible to give because they are not legal residents of the United States. This is the disturbingly familiar picture of Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign presented last week in a report by the Los Angeles Times about questionable fundraising by the New York senator in New York City's Chinese community. Out of 150 donors examined, one-third "could not be found using property, telephone or business records," the Times reported. "Most have not registered to vote, according to public records.""

She's probably taking the cynical approach of trying to nasty up the primary enough to where people that are in Obama's camp are so disgusted with the whole process that they just pack their bags and let her, the establishment walk out with the nomination.

Quite frankly, this all has grown old. I don't know how much I would be able to stand a McCain vs. Hillary general election. It would be smear, smear, lie, distortion, smear, lie, lie from both sides.... I am a college graduate. I'm not going to sit by and listen to the ignorance (not to be an elitist, but give me a break).

I'll be the Republican here for today if I have to and say that I never liked her from the very beginning, even before the '06 election. I knew that all the stuff we've seen is what she was all about from the beginning and having her as a nominee wouldn't be enough progress in the right direction to make a vote for her worth my while.

babble, babble, babble.

mumble, mumble.

What if this is what they say it is, a state of the campaign meeting?

What if they're honest with themselves about the state of the campaign?

Her only path at this point is to attack Obama, factionalize the party and have the Super Delegates overrule the will of the people.

This approach has destructive short-term and long-term consequences for her. First, it would make her virtually un-electable in 2008, not because the Democrats would rally against her (I don't think most will), but because it would give the GOP a monumental gift: "doesn't trust the will of the people" or "will do anything to attain power." She'll be seen by Independents as the next iteration of Bush, instead of the "maverick" John McCain.

Her approach will also kneecap her in 2012, especially if she's seen as contributing directly to the election of a Republican president in 2008. Every Democratic primary opponent in 2012 will remind voters of this. She won't be able to hide from it and we'll have had four more years of GOP rule to be furious about.

All-in-all her best long-term winning strategy is to either clean-up her campaign and accept the consequences of the primaries (ala Edwards in '04) or to "suspend" her campaign. If Obama implodes (sex scandal, corruption, etc) before the convention, she'll be the legitimate nominee as chosen by the SDs. If Obama goes on to lose the general, she'll be considered the front-runner again in 2012 but won't be seen as the reason for Obama's loss.

Just a thought. A wishful, naive, self-deluding thought...

It's about dinner with (rich) friends. If you've ever suffered through one of those society get-togethers profiled in the NYTimes Style section (or whatever local paper you have) you have to understand this as just another party. These folks aren't going to shut her down, this is just a social gathering. Except instead of raising money for museums or hospitals Clinton is the poster child.

Ugh. Hopefully there will be some adults in attendance to shake some sense into her. She's fought a good fight, but she came up just shy of winning. It's time to step down while she still has some credibility intact.

I find it curious that the Senators who are providing the policy briefing to the donors -- Nelson, Menendez and Stabenow are among the LEAST distinguished Democrats in the Senate. Couldn't she get anyone with a little more gravitas? Reading between the lines, the only plausible explanation is they're making their case to donors on getting Florida and Michigan and holding the women's and Hispanic vote.

My fantasy is that they are going to cut her off. Her candidacy must be bleeding money and if they are business people, why would they want to continue to invest in someone who 1) Mismanaged her campaign and 2) doesn't look like will win.

She is not a sure bet as she was for them at the beginning of this primary and they have to know it. They can count as well.

Janeo

Hmm... How many lobbyists and Clinton library donors from Dubai can they pack into a room?

NOTICE to Obama supporters... I challenge you all to a donation by 5 pm Friday. I have given up my lattes until the dem convention. Come on, let's show the Clinton's that citizens own this campaign.

Uh Oh, too late already

I too am wondering about the 'party elders' - one would think that after proclaiming McCain is better than fellow Democrat Obama and now yelling for Florida and Michigan to be seated, despite party rules ( I won't even go into the negativity and racist overtones ), that DNC et al. would step up to the plate and stop the madness.
I truly have lost respect for Edwards and Richardson to name only two. Their silence is the same as condoning HRC's campaign destructive actions. However, the real question is why haven't they come forward (regardless who they are in favor of for nomination).

I wonder if it is possible to identify these donors. Given the unlikely prospect of HRC securing a lead in pledged delegates, and the difficulties attendant with a 'superdelegate upset', who stands to gain so much more from a Clinton victory than an Obama victory? Is it really in their interest(s) to potentially damage the Democratic Party and risk McCain winning?

I suspect that there are more than a few interest groups who are interested in derailing the 'change' that Obama promises, and would be quite happy with McCain as a second choice. The list of possible candidates is quite long; genuine change in domestic and foreign policy will lead to corporate bankruptcies or profit-margin-shrinking downsizing. Follow the money.

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address