Hillary's Long-Shot Strategy -- Get Super-Dels To See Obama As "Paper Tiger"
The Washington Post's Peter Baker pulls back the curtain and reveals the Hillary campaign's long shot strategy for winning despite a seemingly insurmountable pledged delegate disadvantage:
The Obama camp remains confident that they will finish the primary season with a lead among pledged delegates no matter what happens today.Of course, there are nearly 800 superdelegates and the Clinton camp hopes victories today would give it enough momentum to keep those party elders from flocking to Obama at least until Pennsylvania. If Clinton could prove in the interim that Obama is a paper tiger and not up to the scrutiny a front-runner invariably attracts, her strategists think the superdelegates will decide they have to go with her for the sake of the party.
It's a big gamble and few at Clinton's headquarters in Arlington are fooling themselves about the odds. But this year has shown that anything can happen and politics are not so neat and predictable as we might think.
What this shows, I think, is that Hillary's bash-the-press strategy is partly targeted at the super-delegates. If the Hillary camp can scrape together a big enough win tonight, it can spend the weeks ahead bludgeoning reporters into getting "tough" on Obama, in hopes that the press will poke enough holes in him to sow doubts among the super-dels about his fitness for the general election.
This (or so Camp Hillary hopes) could theoretically keep them from bolting Obama's way en masse. I'm not saying that this is the only, or even the primary, aim of the Hillary campaign's smack-around-the-reporters game plan, just that it's clearly one of the strategic goals here.
of course then again if you win in that manner you might win the battle but you will lose the war, and McLame will be hugging Bush into the POTUS.
March 4, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine this succeeds ... How is she planning on winning in November ?
What does she think the millions of youngsters and African-American voters who came out are going to think of her winning by tearing Obama down ?
March 4, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right.
I'd also like to point out that TPM, including Josh Marshall, were just recently saying that the SDs wouldn't matter because this would be over today, and therefore worrying about the SD's was a big distraction and waste of time.
Way to go Josh!
Way to demonstrate your superiority to the MSM, by parroting them and hiring a staff of flunkies so you can spend more time running a business and less time on journalism or original thought.
All of which is reminding me of a pattern: whenever Josh gets too cozy with the MSM, TPM starts getting things wrong like Iraq, New Hampshire, the conventional wisdom being manufactured on healthcare, and so on.
March 5, 2008 1:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
About this:
Of course the Hillary camp will win tonight. The issue is how big the win is. And the bash-the-press strategy has been pretty effective, because when Hillary wins, the coverage is going to be even more favorable after a week of bash the press.
What's sad and pathetic is that the press is so easily manipulated.
And as an aside: could you please do a piece on the appropriateness of a major candidate wining and dining the very reporters covering him? Are reporters so blinded that they're unable to see how gullible and needy they look when they socialize with McCain at his home? And the rest of us wonder why he's St. John McCain....
March 4, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Texas is supposed to be close and according to CNN Obama has scheduled a victory party in San Antonio. Hillary is staying in Ohio. I don't think it's at all clear yet that he won't win Texas.
March 4, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the point is that Hillary is going to use any victory in Ohio to attempt and claim the day. Which is absurd considering they're about tying delegates today, and Obama still has an insurmountable lead.
That Hillary is saying, again, that her strategy is to win over SDs to throw the nomination away from the elected delegates, it's just disgusting.
March 5, 2008 1:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
is there some chance that in the future, the blogosphere's boys club will recognize that women bloggers aren't pushing for Hillary to get out of the race, and stop slanting their coverage in such a sexist fashion?
Seriously, how many prominent female bloggers do you know who consistent write about the campaign from the persepective that you, and kos, and josh, and sully, and cole, big media matt, and ackerman, and the entire pundit class of DC?
March 4, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
manufactured outrage is EXCELLENT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!!
March 4, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
did anyone see the Fox exit polls being announced on the Fox News Channel?
March 4, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see how this bashing can last another month and a half. It will get old VERY quickly. All they seem to press is Rezko which, as well reported at this site, is next to nothing. If HRC tries to keep up the same kind of campaign as she's ran for the last week, the press will get tired of it fast. Moreover, the superdelegates will see it for what it is.
What Obama needs to do tomorrow is buckle up, keep the chin high, and move to PA. For him, six weeks is a long time that can work to his favor. If his organization stays strong, PA very well could be his.
Again, I ask: If HRC has such a strong record, why isn't she running on it?
March 4, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has now started whining about the press. Why? Because they're no longer genuflecting at him. They had to take a good look at themselves. Even on liberal talk radio, the hosts have been all about Obama, but are now getting so many calls from Hillary supporters that they're lightening up a bit.
If Hillary ends up the nominee, the DNC will be right behind her (including Obama himself), and when she gets her campaign going against McCain, McCain won't have a chance. The polls taken right now cannot possibly reflect the reality of 6 months down the road. Remember...Clinton is a fighter and survivor. And that's why I'm supporting her. As President she'll have more clout than she did as first lady, and we'll see her agenda materialize.
March 4, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, he's pointing out how gullible the press is.
And I'm certain that if there's a next debate, Obama will be asked the first question, and then Clinton can complain about how he gets asked the first question. And so on and so forth.
March 4, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and it was Camp Clinton that made the press part of the story. Obama has a right to respond.
March 4, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you think that there will be another debate? I would not be surprised if no agreement for another debate were reached before PA votes.
March 4, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
If they both stay in the race, I can imagine the positions on debates being reversed: him suggesting one; her refusing.
Both thereby showing that they can learn from experience.
March 4, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would love to have one more debate, provided Senator Obama turns to Senator Clinton and demands that she both "Denounce and Reject" her own endorsement of Senator John McCain over Senator Obama.
March 4, 2008 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that this whole discussion will be a lot more interesting when we see how well, in fact, Hillary does in OH and TX.
March 4, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, no argument there. The discussion will be more interesting when we have actual returns to discuss.
March 4, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not looking at ANY exit data. It's meaningless. It's meaningless. It's meaningless.
March 4, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Faux news really is leaking exit polls, they need to be hammered and kicked out of the consortium. Rule is: no leaking exit polls for any jurisdiction until the real polls are closed in the jurisdiction.
I agree with Publicus H. that anybody who looks at exit polls will be wasting their time over the next two hours obsessing them. I think we are in for a big surprise around 10 PM.
March 4, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not nearly so pure as you. I was interested to see the leaked polls, but you are right that they tell us nothing. Clinton up by 2% in TX in one, the both of them tied in TX in another. Obama up by 2% in OH in one, Clinton up by 2% in another. Clinton up by 3% in RI in one, Obama up by 2% in another. The only really significant result is that both show him leading her 2 to 1 in VT, but I think that everyone expected VT to go strongly for Obama; no one is really biting his or her nails to know how the race will swing there. As far as the high profile races in OH and TX, the early exit polls tell us nothing of interest.
March 4, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Among the questions I'd like answered this week is how are the party insiders (SDs) reacting to HRC's increasingly Repub-like attacks of late? Many of the political junkies posting on the net are expressing increasing disgust. We can never assume that the average voter is paying much attention to the ins-and-outs of the Dem nominating contest, but we can be certain the SDs are playing close attention. Will we hear this week, if indeed several dozen are ready to move to Obama, that the tipping point for their decision was HRC's kitchen sink approach?
I have to imagine it's on the SDs minds, and I'd be very interested to see if it's a dominant theme in their thinking. Will it help push HRC to withdraw? What spin can Penn/Wolfson plausibly generate to explain how the kitchen sink is good for Democratics going into November?
March 4, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Their spin is that repugs do it, or will do it in the general -- in effect, they are saying they are hardening up Obama for the general but they can't exactly say that because Hillary is still in it to win steal it.
March 4, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mmmm, yeah, all except for the part of talking up McCain's years experience over Obama's. Hard to spin that as getting Obama ready for the GE.
March 4, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that one baffles me too. A lot of her strategies now will definitely be used by repugs against the dem candidate, regardless of whom that candidate is. It's surreal to see her arguing things that will be used to greater effect against her in the general. 3am call anyone?
March 4, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it likely that Dean is concerned to insert some sort of Party discipline into the mess? Surely some organizing is going on behind the scenes.
And in that connection, I'm going to stick my neck out:
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Gore, Pelosi, Richardson, and Edwards (unless he's tied up with his mother-in-law's funeral) in a press conference tomorrow noon announcing their endorsement, and those of many lesser lights, of Obama -- and thus the effective end of the primary season.
March 4, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark Halperine wrote about that on The Page this morning, listing Pelosi, Gore, Edwards and Richardson among 13 party leaders whose call for her to withdraw could have an impact. Interestingly, he then listed the 10 people Clinton will actually be listening to. I'd agree you have a good list of Party figures to come out together, but I really don't believe it will happen in a press conference. Should it get to the point where prominent Dems have to make their case through the media, directly to the voters, it will signal that a rather nasty fight occurred behind the scenes and that it wasn't sufficient to nudge her out of the race.
Dean has predicted that the race would be over this spring, so let's hope he and others initiate that back room discussion to bring this to an amicable close in the next week.
March 4, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
A first clue that tilted me to the notion that behind the scenes negotiations were already underway was noticing certain moments of Hillary's affect at her town hall meeting last night.....I could have sworn she was newly wistful in using certain words and phrases......anyway, that struck me as the affect of one who was putting down her intensity and enjoying some final moments in the spotlight in front of her supporters.
The second clue was Terry McAuliffe's hardly noticable but uncontrolled throat gulp while he held his face blank listening to the news that Obama had some 50 SD's in his pocket.
March 4, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, i hope so. That I could actually respect.
Ohio, including some of my relatives, did vote for her by about 55%-43% at last count. I don't begrudge her that support or wanting to exit on a good note.
But, what does absolutely infuriate me is her talk about appealing to SDs to throw the nomination, and her refusal to admit that she's already lost on pledged delegates.
That's not reality based. It's her threatening to refuse to drop out and an attempt to split the party for her own selfish desires.
March 5, 2008 6:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Certainly if Obama loses big tonight, and loses big in PA, and loses in any potential do-overs in FL and MI, and this despite enormous leads in money, it's going to be very, very hard to make out the case that he's the candidate with momentum going into the convention.
March 4, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You forgot to add if he loses every state tonight, the one this weekend, next Tuesdays, AND they decide to do overs for all the previous ones (because of the totally unfair bias towards Hillary, of course, in caucus rules and primaries in states that don't matter), Obama will have no momentum.
Keep your fingers crossed.
March 4, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's Long-Shot Strategy -- Get Super-Dels To See Obama As "Paper Tiger"
Translation, in screenplay form:
INT. COLUMBUS CONVENTION HALL - NIGHT
SUPPORTERS of Hillary Clinton wait patiently for their candidate to take the stage. HILLARY CLINTON, wearing a RAMBO-like headscarf and a tattered MILITARY UNIFORM, swings onto the stage from a frayed vine. CLINTON hoists a machine gun into the air, spraying bullets into the CONVENTION HALL ROOF. She shouts loudly:
You ain't seen nothing yet, muthafuckas!!
March 4, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a scorched-Earth strategy, and it needs to be stopped.
March 4, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg said "This (or so Camp Hillary hopes) could theoretically keep them from bolting Obama's way en masse."
Wasn't there a video clip up here or on TPM of an interview with McAuliffe and a second person where the second person said he heard from a DNC source that fifty (50, five-oh) superdelegates were on the brink of endorsing Obama? Soon, like this week? The sub-hed was something like "[Insert Name] Drops Bombshell on McAuliffe."
March 4, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah I think that was Tom Brokaw dropping the SD bomb:
Tom Brokaw Says Obama Has 50 More Superdelegates in His Back Pocket
March 4, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
niiiice !
March 4, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tom Brokaw claims a source very close to the Obama campaign says that Obama has 50 superdelegates in his pocket.
And I'm the tooth fairy.
March 4, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you think that this is wildly implausible? I agree that I will believe it when I see it, but I am not sure that it strikes me as wildly off the mark. After all, it is not too crazy to imagine that some superdelegates, seeing the handwriting on the wall and irked at the McCain-is-more-experienced remark, have come to Obama in a desire to end this quickly. If so, it would make sense that he would wait to make this announcement until after OH and TX, on the logic that it is a great way to recapture the media cycle spotlight if he has a bad night tonight. In other words, while I do not necessarily believe the claim, I am not sure that "and I'm the tooth fairy..." is an apt response either.
March 4, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Many of the political junkies posting on the net are expressing increasing disgust.
translation: The riders of the magical unit pony are up in arms over Hillary employing GOP frames, but are far from outraged when Obama does it to Hillary.
March 4, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I missed the quote from Obama that ranked McCain first, Obama second, and Clinton third in terms of, well, just about anything.
Can you provide the link?
March 4, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The video link is here... I think it was Keith...
http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/hillary-today-john-mccain-has-more.html
March 4, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not a tactic, it's the truth.
How will Hillary campaign on "experience" against McCain, considering:
1) It's a simple fact McCain has far more of the legislative and political experience of the type she's claimed is important.
2) The Rt Wing Republicans hate the Clintons as much as Dems now hate Bush after 8 years, and will turn-out exceptionally heavily against her. and no they won't turn out as heavily against Obama, just as Dems wouldn't turn out as heavily against McCain as they would Jeb Bush or some other Bush, after these past eight years.
3) If the SD throw the nomination to Hillary against the will of elected delegates, she'll have alienated moderates and a large portion of Democratic voters.
March 5, 2008 6:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
If this is the case, then it makes sense for Clinton to be trying to tar Obama with the general electorate.
How better to convince the superdelegates that he's unelectable than to actually work to make him less electable, no?
The question is how to put a stop to it.
March 4, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
re: "I'm not saying that this is the only, or even the primary, aim of the Hillary campaign's smack-around-the-reporters game plan"
I think another aim is to simply push the press to ignore the obvious, that is that she has no legitimate shot of winning (without the supers disrespecting the primary/caucus results).
March 4, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dubious strategy for HRC.
If she stays in after tonight his strategy is easy...
Answer any and all questions that the press raises and move past the "scandals." What can they throw at him? Rezko? NAFTA? Lapel-pins?
That won't last all the way to Penn.
In the meantime he keeps focused on the great ground effort in all of the upcoming contests and maintains his lead in pledged delegates.
While all of this is happening the super-delegates will come over to his side and she'll have to bow out.
March 4, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
NRO's Campaign Spot has the first horse race numbers I've seen. It looks like he's got first- and second-wave numbers, but isn't certain which is which. My guess is that the second bunch are the more recent figures:
"For the first set, Obama is up by 2 percent in Ohio, Hillary is up by 2 percent in Texas, Hillary is up by 3 percent in Rhode Island and Obama is up by a 2 to 1 margin in Vermont.
The second set is similarly close - Hillary up by 2 percent in Ohio, the two Democrats tied in Texas, Obama ahead by 2 percent in Rhode Island and a similar 2 to 1 margin in Vermont."
March 4, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fly! Nice to see you back...
March 4, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope these are close to right.
March 4, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
She can go to hell. If she wants a riot in Denver she can go ahead and try.
The superdelegates won't go for it though, so it doesn't matter.
March 4, 2008 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rest assured, the MSM and the staff here at HRC Election Central will do everything they can to make sure her message is heard. After all, it's still mathematically possible for her to win the nomination in a way that be seen as legitimate by Democratic voters.
Oh, wait...
March 4, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
remember, like she said over on FDL, no flinging poo at each other on the blogs! It's going to be a long, long night.
March 4, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder how many of those 50 SDs made commitments to Obama based on the results of tonights contests -- and before the Rezko thing started to stink to high heaven?
March 4, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is not ready.
She will win Texas and Ohio and will wrap it up in June.
March 4, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well if that's her game, then I'm with Booman: she's given us no choice, we've tried to wage this campaign on issues but if you want to start throwing dirt then it's time to start throwing it back.
March 4, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has won the nomination. We're just waiting for Hillary and the media to admit it.
Just sayin.....
March 4, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you are right.
March 4, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the fact. The only way Hillary can win is by throwing the SD.
It's getting ridiculous that almost nobody in the media, including Josh at TPM, has the guts or integrity to simply stand up and present the facts without waffling and encouraging delusions and discouraging any Hillary supporters take a "reality check" lest they hurt people's feelings.
As so many others have pointed out, look forward to the party splitting and protests in the streets if SDs throw this.
People can agree to disagree and still get along. People can lose with dignity knowing they played by the rules.
But, a healthy and peaceable democracy can't tolerate collusion to maintain a status quo by undemocratic means against the will of the people.
If it comes to that, I, and millions, have absolutely had it. We're stuck in a 50 state, 2 party, system of continual lesser of evils. At least 1 of those parties is supposed to represent the will of the people and uphold democratic principles, which I really don't think is asking too much.
March 5, 2008 6:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
How ridiculous that this scorched-earth strategy sounds perfectly reasonable to HRC's clamoring chorus of toadies. Never mind that whether her gambit succeeds or fails, it'll be poison to the Democratic party.
...Hey, Clintonistas, eliminate the middle-man and go vote for McCain! You'll save yourselves a lot of time and embarrassment.
March 4, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Off topic, perhaps, but I wonder if the "paper tiger" reference was actually used by the Clinton campaign or was an invention of the reporter, Peter Baker. In any case, those of us who have been around long enough remember that this classic phrase was used by Mao Zedong who called the United States a paper tiger.
In any case, here is what Wikipedia says (in part).
"Paper tiger is a literal English translation of the Chinese phrase zhǐ lǎohǔ, meaning something which seems as threatening as a tiger, but is really harmless.
The phrase is an ancient one in Chinese, but sources differ as to when it entered the English vocabulary. Although some sources may claim it dates back as far as 1850 [1], it seems the Chinese phrase was first translated when it was applied to describe the United States using propaganda tactics. In 1956, Mao Zedong said of the United States:
“ In appearance it is very powerful but in reality it is nothing to be afraid of; it is a paper tiger. Outwardly a tiger, it is made of paper, unable to withstand the wind and the rain. I believe the United States is nothing but a paper tiger."
End of quote.
The irony I find here is that given that Hillary started this campaign as the inevitable candidate and is now fighting for her survival (as a candidate), whether in fact the appellation "paper tiger" is more appropriate to her.
But again, I do not know whether the phrase came from her campaign, or was Baker's idea.
March 4, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
The irony I find here is that given that Hillary started this campaign as the inevitable candidate and is now fighting for her survival (as a candidate), whether in fact the appellation "paper tiger" is more appropriate to her.
Bingo. Just like her assertion that Obama can't close the deal. Both cases are indications that not all the press is going against her.
March 4, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If HRC has a good to great night, she has one person to thank and thats her new campaign manager, Maggie...
I have said it before on another post, since Patti left and Maggie took over, HRC campaign has gotten tougher in her attacks and stance. Maggie, thus far, seems more willing to "do what it takes" than Patti.
HRC should give Maggie a raise.
March 4, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
For what little my opinion is worth, I agree.
March 4, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's called steal the election.
Why do we even hold these elections if the party is just going to hand it to the pre-annointed insider who has the connections?
If they do that, it will be DNC RIP.
But I don't think they ever would. These superdels are largely elected officials, so catering to the public will is what they do best.
March 4, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
These stories are always lopsided in their presentation. They leave out the elephant (who's growing in size by the day) in the room, which is Hillary's own considerable vulnerability in the general election.
Since the press in this primary season takes on its face the ridiculous assertion that she's been vetted (let's face it, she hid behind her role as First Lady to keep from having to address any controversies head on), they seem incapable of pushing past the Clinton spin toward genuine fairness.
Hopefully that will change tomorrow, if the Clinton machine successfully spins the primary results as her comeback.
March 4, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
From the desk of:
Mark Poison Penn.
Breaking News. Stop the presses.
Our new campaign talking point will be:
It Takes A Clinton To Raze A Village in Order To Capture It.
March 4, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
perhaps Hillary "My Lai" Clinton will be appropriate should she continue on for another 7 weeks, or more, with her scurrilous campaign tactics of late. I would hope not -- and pray she finds a way to gracefully bow out soon -- but it's hard to put anything past Camp Hillary these days
March 4, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
"As President she'll have more clout than she did as first lady, and we'll see her agenda materialize."
I thought her agenda was to get to be president by whatever method necessary.
If she didn't have clout as first lady, why is she counting that as experience?
March 4, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
President Hillary will use her new found clout to deliver Fair Trade Pantsuits to hard working middle class consumers!
March 4, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Link to video is here:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/hillary-today-john-mccain-has-more.html
March 4, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
A first clue that tilted me to the notion that behind the scenes negotiations were already underway was noticing certain moments of Hillary's affect at her town hall meeting last night.....I could have sworn she was newly wistful in using certain words and phrases......anyway, that struck me as the affect of one who was putting down her intensity and enjoying some final moments in the spotlight in front of her supporters.
The second clue was Terry McAuliffe's hardly noticable but uncontrolled throat gulp while he held his face blank listening to the news that Obama had some 50 SD's in his pocket.
March 4, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, do you feel cheap & used?
March 4, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think your comments re: Hillary's press strategy is why Barack took on the press today, saying he was surprised they bought her story - he's pushing back, and letting the press know he'll call them on it if they try to overcompensate.
I don't see SDs agreeing to sit on their hands for six weeks until a race that is already at a single digit difference. If she were ahead by 30%, it might be different.
March 4, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and once those pigs start flying, all bets are off. I love the outrageous hypotheticals Clintonistas have been reduced to in order to bend logic.
Face it, she's done. Her Royal Clown is done.
March 4, 2008 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and once those pigs start flying, all bets are off. I love the outrageous hypotheticals Clintonistas have been reduced to in order to bend logic.
Face it, she's done. Her Royal Clown is done.
March 4, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely, it's a loose loose strategy. I hope the Super delegates start streaming to Obama to prevent her from committing a political murder-suicide/ Otherwise we're cooked.
March 4, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clintons are determined dig in and wage their racist campaign of entitlement to the bitter end. Never mind the issues, never mind the assault on civil liberties, never mind that our constitution is on life support or that the country is crying out for a new era of civility and constructive politics. It will be business as usual, this time with John McCain at the helm.
Or maybe not. Who knows?
My point is, IT SHOULDN'T BE THIS FUCKING CLOSE! Give Hillary a sword and let her cut the goddamn baby in half, or else get her ass out of the way and let the healing begin.
March 4, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>>I wonder how many of those 50 SDs made commitments to Obama based on the results of tonights contests -- and before the Rezko thing started to stink to high heaven?
I tend to agree about the 50 SDs and that we won't, after all, be seeing them in large number this week. They MAY have to deal with her as the nominee (damn! I hate to say that..) and at this point it would look like overcoming the voters' will. Shortly after Ohio went to Clinton last night, the Obama campaign sent out word that the accout of 50 SDs was not true. I think it became untrue with the loss of Ohio. Sadly, but probably wisely.
However, what do you mean by the Rezko thing starting to stink?? That horse was dead two years ago and, unless there is new information I haven't heard, there's nothing to be gained from beating it except dust. ????? Lord, I wish there was still a 3rd candidate who would drag out all the UNdead, stinky horses in Clinton's world. Obama can't; Edwards wouldn't have; and - damnit! - the Republicans won't because they want her to be the nominee (and then they'll use them to defeat her in the general).
I don't think Rezko affected anything. The stink last week came from "Goolsbee-gate," the NAFTA/Canadian thing. That went right to the heart of the main reason Obama is so special to so many: his honesty. When I heard the original (false) version, I had my first moment of just wanting to 'turn away' from it all, seeing him as someone not at all different after all. That's why I followed it so closely. Having seen it play out, I firmly believe, as I've said elsewhere, that it was a masterful set-up, arranged so that he would seem to be a liar, no matter what he said. ------- Anecdotal reports from Ohio (my son lives there and in other posts to blogs) tell me it was talked about by many people, most who don't even know or care about NAFTA .... but who DO care, a great deal, about honesty. That sickens me more than the primary results, to be honest, because it worked and it can, I suppose, work again. And the MSM and even the not-so-mainstream didn't get interested enough to find out who was behind it.
On the positive side, however, the actual voting results are still following -- with eerie precision -- the predictions on that Obama campaign spreadsheet that was ?accidentally? found last February ...... and the bottom line on that spreadsheet is that Obama wins!!
>>>What does she think the millions of youngsters and African-American voters who came out are going to think of her winning by tearing Obama down ?
Hey, don't stereotype! There are some of us older white women who are just as offended, no matter what the 'demographics' are supposed to be.
March 5, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink