Klobuchar: Hillary Has "Every Right" To Stay In Race
Here's another sign that the Obama campaign is dialing back the calls for Hillary to leave the race: On a conference call with reporters just now, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, who has now endorsed Obama, firmly asserted that Hillary has "every right" to stay in the race.
"I believe that Senator Clinton has every right to continue her campaign," Klobuchar said, adding: "I don't agree with those who have said things to the contrary."
Klobuchar also broke with the claim, voiced by many Dems of late, that a drawn-out contest could harm the party, asserting that she had no doubt that the two leading Democrats would do the right thing for Dems overall.
This of course could be more a reflection of Klobuchar's stated respect for Hillary than of her actual views on whether the race should continue. But Obama himself said over the weekend that Hillary should not drop out, and one wonders whether we'll now see a drop-off in calls for her to exit.
Late Update: We're going to start posting audio of the full conferences here for your enjoyment. Here's today's Obama call with Klobuchar:
Too bad Kerry and Kennedy did not listen to their voters in Mass.
March 31, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Silly argument. Klobuchar didn't mention the voters of her state, merely that she preferred Obama.
Oh, and nice picture. Elevates the discussion.
March 31, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rep. DeGette (CO), Gov. Minner (DE), Sen. Inouye (HI), Rep. Boswell (IA), Gov. Baldacci (ME), Sen. Mikulski (DE), Rep. Cleaver (MO), Re. Jackson Lee (TX), Rep. Cuellar (TX), Rep. Hinojosa (TX), Rep. Reyes (TX), Rep. Green (TX), Rep. Ortiz (TX), Sen. Murray (WA), Rep. Inslee (WA), Rep. Dicks (WA), Rep. Baldwin (WI) need to listent to their voters as well
Works both ways... and VERY much to Obama's favor.
Are you SURE you want to continue to play that game? If we force DNC operatives to vote their states too, Hillary loses about 50 Super-Delegates (which I can list too if you'd like)
March 31, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
New avatar, same old irrelevant posts!
March 31, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
New Avatar because some obamite "plagiarized" his old one (which of course has to be denounced and rejected).
March 31, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, okay. In case nobody noticed, Obama is outpolling Hillary against McCain.
Um, not only that, he's outpolling Hillary in MICHIGAN and NEW JERSEY. Just thought I'd point that out. In case anyone was wondering who was more electable.
March 31, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well gee abotron, the republicans had no trouble painting John Kerry, a man who actually fought in the war and won medals as unpatriotic, how tough is it going to be painting Muslim born and raised, Rev Wright protege, no enlistment in the armed forces, Obama as unpatriotic? It is Obama who is unelectable.
March 31, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN's latest polling is an interesting addition to your post - showing that both Democrats and Republicans believe Obama would be the tougher candidate against McCain.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/31/poll-obama-would-be-tougher-candidate-against-mccain/
March 31, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen Clinton has the RIGHT to stay in, but the DUTY to do no harm to the party's chances in November - NO MORE KITCHEN SINK ATTACKS!
March 31, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama campaign got what it wanted. In the absence of any primaries, the Obama campaign wants to control each and every news cycle, but that's not easy to do without actual news. (No need to score a touchdown right now; just hold onto the ball and run out the clock.) So, they had a couple of days, including the Sunday talk shows, when the question was whether Hillary should drop out. Mission accomplished.
Expect some new delegate endorsements by Thursday, to help control next Sunday's discussion.
Whether or not they have the entire NC delegation, you know they have delegates ready to announce when the timing fits their schedule.
March 31, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
There was a backlash to the crescendo of calls from the Obama camp for Hillary to quit. It resulted in a spike of contributions to her campaign, and a number of women were starting to raise the issue of sexism. Immediately Obama, and now others, started suggesting that Hillary has every right to remain in the race. I find this sudden change in tone from the Obama camp disingenuous, but wise.
March 31, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, in some quarters, Obama's statement that Hillary "can stay in the race as long as she wants" was parsed as proof of misogyny. And of course if he had said nothing, that would be misogynistic, too.
March 31, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? Sexism again?
Maybe I'm obtuse, please explain that charge to me.
March 31, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to hear Hillary's had a spike in donations. There are some small businesses in Iowa, New Hampshire and Ohio waiting to get paid.
March 31, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Irony alert: Politico reports that the Clinton campaign is not paying its health insurance bills. Perhaps the campaign funds should be garnished? After all, "universal healthcare [sic]" is a basic right.
March 31, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
this is the tack they should have been saying all along. it's a backhanded kind of praise. it shows that the hillary campaign is not being taken seriously.
asking for her to drop gives her campaign the allusion of strength. saying she has every right to stay gives her campaign the look of a lost cause.
March 31, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
"But Obama himself said over the weekend that Hillary should not drop out...."
Really? Or did he just say that what Klobuchar said, i.e., that Hillary has the right to do whatever she wants?
March 31, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
She has every right, but not any good reason...
I love that line.
March 31, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
This story isn't about a back and forth of the Obama campaign, it is about a growing momentum to pressure Clinton out of the race. Some people will say it publicly long before others will; regarless of if the Obama campaign is weighing in with its supporters or not.
If Obama were to do better than a 10% loss in Penn, more people will call for her to withdraw; especially if she goes negative again.
The same thing after Indiana and North Carolina; especially if he wins both.
And then the momentum will continue to build for her to get out.
Maybe by June 1st
Probably by July 1st
March 31, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
So the important question to be answered (no doubt soon) is whether or not this makes Sen Klobuchar an arrogant prick.
March 31, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course not, everyone knows the traitor's state doesn't count...
March 31, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course not, everyone knows the traitor's state doesn't count...
March 31, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Chorus of 'Of Course she has every right...' is intended to convey just the opposite effect in the American people. Watch, I think it will work.
Don't forget, Obama is a Jedi.
March 31, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rather than say Obama is a Jedi, I like to say that he is possibly a Muslim planted by Bin Laden to take over the US. Once in office Obama with abolish the constitution and try and have us align with Muslim's around the world. It is more likely than the Jedi story and given how little is really known about Obama....
March 31, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You forgot to mention Rezko. You're slipping, bub.
March 31, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Christian Muslim? You left out the Wright factor in your mantra this time.
March 31, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
>>>"I believe that Senator Clinton has every right to continue her campaign," Klobuchar said, adding: "I don't agree with those who have said things to the contrary.">>>
This sounds so Bushy. Can anyone cite a source that has said Hillary has no "right" to stay in the race? It's one of those cases where you argue against a position your opponents don't really hold, in order to imply that they do hold it. I'm so tired of that.
Clinton has every right to stay in the race. She simply seems to the majority of people to have valid no reason to, at least none that puts party and policy above ambition. Of course this hurts dems for the general, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. And for what? Hillary says she has "millions of reasons" to stay in, meaning the people who voted for her. By that logic, she has MORE reasons to drop out. And since she has stated that she doesn't believe the person with more votes should neccessarily be the nominee anyway, she has a thematic conflict there.
I'm sorry, I can't see any path for her to the nomination that doesn't totally screw our chances for the general. I'd like her to talk about what that path is if she wants me to see her as anything other than a spoiler at this point. At best, she may do no damage if she loses gracefully. But that obviously isn't the plan.
March 31, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody has said she doesn't have the right to stay in the race. What they have said or intimated is that she should drop out for the good of party, which they have every right to do.
March 31, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Washington Post backs Andy Martin on Barack Obama's lies":
http://www.pr-inside.com/washington-post-backs-andy-martin-on-r509563.htm
Yup, "dembillc" is correct.
Obama is a fraud.
March 31, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep pushing this story, bro. All it does in call attention to the fact that the Kennedys were great philanthropists who supported the airlift of talented Africans to get an education in the United States. The fact that Obama's father was a recipient of that airlift one year before Kennedy funded it doesn't change the narrative.
And Obama's campaign has already acknowledged the slip-up. The story changes, the greater narrative does not.
But like I said, keep pushing this story. At the end of the day I'd say it shines a really positive light on Obama's family history and the role that the Kennedys had in bringing people to this country.
March 31, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama "lied" about which Kenyan airlift the Kennedys were involved in (though the fact that his family WAS part of the airlift is lost on you).
Clinton "lied" about her participation in NAFTA, FMLA, and most substantially...SNIPERGATE.
March 31, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you need a laugh, I invite everyone to visit that link provided so graciously by gotalife....I particularly like the bio of the site founder, Andy Martin, where it mentions he has a law degree, and provides a link to a website where you can purchase degrees online. The irony is just too rich considering the accusations that Obama is a fraud.
March 31, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
there is no problem with Hillary staying in the race. She has every right to stay in, especially in such as close race. And if she feels she is not getting the respect that she and her people deserve from Obama, she has every right to demonstrate her power.
From my position the PROBLEM with Hillary staying in the race is that she has chosen to adopt divisive identity tactics against Obama. She has chosen to appeal to:
1) RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE: insinuating that she doesn't know if Obama is Muslim or not (as if being Muslim is a negative)
2) RACIAL BIGOTRY: Identifying Obama with intolerant codes of blackness (like being Muslim) they are and making sure a certain segment of the electorate hear these codes for what they are.
3) NATIONALISM: By attempting to brand Obama as Unpatriotic
4) FEAR: with the 3am call
5) Lies: role in passing NAFTA, characterization of the Tuzla trip
Although the Democrats have always played racial groups against each other, Hillary's tactics are only new to national politics. And that is because Obama is a viable candidate. The Democrats are rift with these sh#$%* tactic at the local level. It is sh#$%* and ought to be condemned.
It if for using these loaded tactics that I truly believe ought to disqualify anyone from running for public office, and especially the Democrats ought to be embarrassed by this behavior. Unfortunately, Hillary has tapped into a truism about Americans. Americans clearly respond to intolerant nationalist bigotry with a shot of fear.
That is not the America I want to encourage. There is a huge gulf between the HOPE of Obama's America and the divisive message of Clinton's America.
So, as you can see I am a strong supporter of Barack Obama. I am tired of our county not accepting diversity, but quite the contrary, doing as Bill did with the "Defense of Marriage Act" and trading against diversity for the interests of the intolerant and gains for himself. I am tired of peoples in our country fighting over generations for rights that ought to be assumed in this Democracy with this constitution and these bill of rights. Not one more generation should be allow to pass away with out living under the assumption of having these rights protected. Imagine how much more productive our society could become when so much energy is no longer required fighting for these basic human rights.
March 31, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hoodwinked T-Frank writes-"There is a huge gulf between the HOPE of Obama's America and the divisive message of Clinton's America."
What a crock... Obama is campaigning on disenfranchising voters, leaning on an equivocal rule to cover his ass. This is a substantive difference between these candidates - one wants to win election by counting the votes, even if it means doing over the voting, and the other wants to win by disenfranchising voters who might not vote for him. These are not differences of degrees, or matters of opinion. Hillary will take her chances with the voters and abide by their decisons. Obama demands that we not count votes unless they are votes for him. He is arguing that we should not allow these Democrats to participate in anything to do with the party unless it is certain they will not endanger his front-runner status. That they have a right to vote and he has no right to win eludes him."
March 31, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amy Klobuchar stuck her finger into the wind and then decided. Very courageous of her. She will be a one term senator from Minnesota.
March 31, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
And she's a racist, cult-loving liar. Don't forget that.
March 31, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are the forces at play as SUPERDELEGATES attempt to navigate the endorsement game?
One unspoken but very important role of a top party leader - the President, is to provide cover for potentially exposed members throughout the country.
As the race between Obama and Clinton heats-up there is potential for one of the candidates to over-reach in their criticism of the other, creating collateral damage for other party leaders. A good example of this is when Hillary brought Rezko into the debate. Shining a light on Rezko potentially hurt Democrats beyond Illinois and may land several Democratic Leaders and Superdelegates in prison. This created a ripple effect throughout the party. Suddenly leaders worried that Hillary was either a loss canon or she intended to play hardball politics against those who would come out against her. Regardless, the message was clear "Hillary is to be feared." Carville's "judas" branding of Richardson is another example of hardball politics to stem the bleeding of supporters moving to Obama.
For many, unconnected to Rezko but potentially exposed to other unscrupulous dealings, fear that the escalation of these tactics could lead to a response by Obama's camp that would put them on the chopping blocks. This fear was shared by both Obama and Clinton supporters. Now we know that Obama chose not to respond in kind, but limited criticism that hurt Hillary's credibility only ("support for NAFTA", "TUZLA", etc).
When you review the potential risk for supporters of either candidate you quickly realize that Hillary's portfolio is more exposed. She has a broad network within the party faithful and longevity in national politics. Just as the candidate has a history, so too do these coalitions and supporters and those histories could come to haunt them if a candidate chooses to expose them for political gain. Obama's camp is just as aware of these histories as Hillary's camp. Before Rezko many expected Hillary to protect their interests and tactics, but now doubt lingers.
Her longevity, by its nature, creates additional uncertainty for long-term supporters and coalitions. They have to face the relevancy equation of a candidate's need of their support which is determined by the reality of demographics. Over the course of the Clinton's career the reality is that demographics have changed significantly. Also the demographic alignment of a Obama vs. Clinton race could expose them to abandonment by the Clinton camp when the race intensifies, as many in the African-American community have come to realize recently and gays realized during Bill's administration.
In the end it may turn out that the "confidence Level" for Obama is trading much higher among party faithfuls than for Clinton (whether they are supporters of Obama or Clinton). Thus, Hillary's challenge is to raise the risk potential for those who come-out for Obama. The trading of "risk" is like shorting one position on "confidence."
It appears that a Superdelegate, who is mindful of its constituencies, has to worry whether Hillary would retaliate against them through leaks, insinuation, impropriety, scandal, or even indictment. They know she is brilliant and she has taught them to fear her.
This is a tough time among thieves.
I live in a region of the country where the "Last of the Boss Mayors" was brought down after 32 years of rule by indictments of 12 his top officials. He is still a Superdelegate and has made his support of Hillary known. He is under the impression that if Hillary were to win, he would have a say in the appointment of the Federal Prosecutor. Hence, his machine would prosper again.
March 31, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"A good example of this is when Hillary brought Rezko into the debate."
I think you would credit the Chicago Tribune with shining the light on Obama's longtime friendship with the scumbag Slumlord Rezco. Interestingly enough though Rezco was to broke to provide heat for the residents of his slum buildings in Obama's district, he came up with big dough to enable Obama to buy his house. Interestingly enough that instead of trying to help these same residents of slums in Obama's district denied heat by teh slumlord Rezco, Obama was giving 30K last year alone to the Rev Wrigt who needed it to retire to his multi million diollar mansion Obama helped pay for in payback to Wright for slamming the Clintons from the pulpit.
March 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dem-Dillic,
Be-careful what you HOPE for. The Rezko story is a good example and good Theater. You will find that Rezko and his associates have been quite good at sharing much more of their LOVE with the Clintons and their top supporters. If you don't step carefully sometimes step on your own. I believe that is the moral of the Rezko story. Its kind of Mythic - isn't it. Almost like Macbeth. Then again, It kind of reminds me of a gang initiation.
I wonder how many of our public officials are going to fall victim to Clinton's scorch earth policy?
March 31, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Klobuchar also broke with the claim, voiced by many Dems of late, that a drawn-out contest could harm the party, asserting that she had no doubt that the two leading Democrats would do the right thing for Dems overall.
How is that "breaking with the claim"? It just seems like a more subtle and diplomatic version of the claim. Klobuchar just seems to be saying that this race won't hurt the Democrats because she is confident that Clinton will "do the right thing" before it comes to that. Rather than call directly on Clinton to exit the race, she is delicately appealing to Clinton to onsider the circumstances, and to do the right thing without so much blunt prompting.
It is not the role of the Obama camapign or its high-profile surrogates to call for anyone's withdrawal - they need to stay on the confident high road. Calling for Clinton to leave is our role - that is, the role of rank and file Democrats.
As for this issue of Clinton's "right" to stay in the race, a lot of the discourse here is a bit childish. Morally mature adults recognize that we all have the "right" to do many things that we nevertheless shouldn't do, because the consequences of exercising our right in the particular circumstances would be worse than the consequences of declining to exercise our right. Pointing out that Clinton has a legal right to run for President as long as she wants tells us nothing about what is the wisest and most responsible course of action she can follow.
March 31, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Rambo Clinton will fight it all the way. There is is no quit in the Sniper defying Heroine of Tuzla. Long after President Obama has been sworn in to office, Hillary Rambo Clinton will still be fighting to have only her delegates seated at the 2008 convention.
Hillary Rambo Clinton did not endure five long years of Water Boarding torture from Bosnian Snipers at the Tuzla Hilton in order to stop fighting now. Sinbad and Sheryl Crow may falter but never Hillary Rambo Clinton, the Heroine of Tuzla.
March 31, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like the posting of the news conferences, nice to have unfiltered news.
And I picked up a new quote:
"Between Barack and a hard place, I chose Barack."
- Amy Klobuchar
March 31, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow! How very white of the Obama surrogates to say Hillary can stay in the race a while longer!
April 1, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink