Hillary: Tuesday's Voting Will Be A "Game Changer"
Hillary, breaking with the time-honored (and unbearably hackneyed) tradition of depressing expectations in advance of elections, says on the trail today that she extremely bullish on her chances this coming Tuesday
"This primary election on Tuesday is a game changer. This is going to make a huge difference in what happens going forward. The entire country -- probably even a lot of the world -- is looking to see what North Carolina decides."
My understanding of the thinking inside Camp Hillary is that their best hope has been that Tuesday's voting in North Carolina and Indiana will end up effectively being a wash. In other words, Hillaryland insiders are hoping that keeping it close enough in North Carolina while winning Indiana would limit Obama's popular vote gains enough to make a popular vote win (counting Florida) still within the realm of possibility.
Keeping it close in North Carolina would also allow Hillary to argue that not only has she bested him in big industrial states, but she's also proven she can compete on his turf, too. That would allow her to further the "Obama keeps proving to be unexpectedly weak" storyline.
Predicting that Tuesday's voting will prove a "game-changer," however, would seem to be inflating expecations well beyond what I've understood to be Hillaryland's best case scenario for May 6th.
Why don't you write about the real story: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN_nQOHj__s
May 2, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Damn it, you beat me to it!
Let's keep the pressure on.
May 2, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, now First Read is reporting on it.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/02/972175.aspx
And so is freaking AOL!
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/05/02/clinton-advisers-indiana-comments-surface/
May 2, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
To quote Mr. Burns, "excellent" - hey, where is idiotic when you need him?? ;)
May 2, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
May 2, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't put too much faith in the video.
I think he really says "those polls are shit", and it makes no sense for him to say "white n***r" in that scene.
I think the video's been doctored just a bit, and I'm a big Obama fan. Let's concentrate on real issues instead.
May 2, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
AOL is now calling it a hoax. Sorry.
May 2, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except he never actually said that. Feel free to watch the video, though, instead of being fed something and running with it blindly.
May 2, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Karma.
May 2, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good try. The only people who are going to go for that live in the echo chamber and believe everything they real.
May 2, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
And we'll hear that bullshit caption repeated in the echo chamber until every one of them believes that's what he said. Do any of you know the source of that video? Do you know who shot that footage? Before your time? Thought so.
May 2, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even if he didn't call them "worthless white ni**ers, he said the people of Indiana are "shit." This is beyond dispute either inside or outside of the echo chamber.
May 2, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. He said "those people are shitting" meaning the Bush campaign was shitting over the poll they were looking at showing a 2 pt spread in Indiana. But, hell, man. All's fair in this campaign. If you spread the shit, spread it. I'm working South Bend now, and you people are going to need a bigger shovel.
May 2, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
As much as I'd like it to be real, I'd quit harping on the video until it's been proven definitively one way or the other. Doesn't someone have a copy of the original??
May 2, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hope you got a couple hundred pledged delegates over there. That's what you need.
And to everyone else: This video is bogus. No need to pile on a good Democrat who has been involved in public service for decades. We don't need shit like this to win. We're beating them without crap like this, no need to scrape the bottom of the barrel. Let's keep our eye on the ball here...the pledged delegate race and the SDs. That's how we roll.
May 2, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
My complements.
May 2, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
W3RD
May 2, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. I rarely, if ever, agree with your ignorant opinions, but you're right on this one. The clip is pure BS.
May 2, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The explanation that he meant even if they don't win Indiana, those people in the White House are shitting because the polls are close is perfectly plausible. It makes a lot more sense then him calling the people of Indiana shit on camera. The second comment is also clearly audible in the new clip, but not the original. If that doesn't raise a red flag, you need take a step back and get your head together. If someone brought this up in the 1996 campaign, would you be jumping on it as evidence that Bill Clinton disdains white midwesterners? Or would you think that maybe some GOPer was trying to make him look bad?
People need to drop this. Believe it or not, there are Obama supporters that will resort to dirty tricks. The important thing is for the rest of us not to legitimize them. You're letting yourselves get dragged into the mud with the Clintons. Obama will get the nomination, just take the high road. If this gets too much media coverage, it will only make Obama look bad.
May 2, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you. What confuses me, however, is if we are correct, why say the video is doctored.
May 2, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The video is now set to private. Someone needs to re-up it.
May 2, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
So that clip is gone, and the link on drudge to the ABC blog post is dead now too. I wonder what is going on...
May 2, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're better off with it gone. A) It is under suspicion of being doctored. B) Even if not doctored, what does it prove?
High road.
May 2, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
This link no longer works, jdw, and at digg, where the video had been available earlier, it has been pulled.
May 2, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The story was posted at Drudge as well, but when you click on it, the webpage cannot be found. The link that works on drudge is the one to Politico's story about the video sound track being alterd.
May 2, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this about the Mickey Kantor thing? That video is from 1992 and as far as I can tell Mickey Kantor is not connected to the Hillary Clinton campaign. Why would that have any relevance here?
May 2, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's working for Hillary's campaign too, but this whole thing needs clarification from the film's director (the original).
May 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mickey Kantor's dirty mouth tells me nothing about Hillary Clinton that I didn't already know. It's not a substantive policy issue. It doesn't speak to her governing temperment. And after the past month, are Obama supporters really eager to promote the notion of guilt by association? I understand that there's a degree of schadenfreude at play here, and that Obama fans would like the same standard applied to Hillary that was applied to their man. Personally, I'd prefer that this absurd and petty standard was applied to neither candidate. And oddly enough, that's precisely the stand that Obama himself has repeatedly taken.
Hillary's expectation-setting, though, is a real story. Just a couple weeks ago, her campaign was doing everything in its power to convince the media that NC was irrelevant and to redirect the focus to Indiana. Now, she's going all in. I suspect that's because she tried to freeze the superdelegates - and failed. Slowly, inexorably, they're announcing their preferences. Her campaign thrives on uncertainty. Once those preferences are fully declared, even if most of the remaining supers back her, the race is over. So she's realized that the next round is very likely to be the last round.
The problem is that even Clinton wins in both NC and IN won't be enough to deliver the nomination - because almost nothing can, at this point. So since she can't win enough delegates through the elections themselves, she's trying to invest the NC with epochal significance. The 45 prior state elections don't matter, says Clinton, everything rides on North Carolina. It's the tie-breaker. It's a "game-changer."
But it's not going to work. Even if she wins NC (and she won't) the supers are antsy. They want to end this thing, sooner rather than later. And no amount of expectations-setting can alter that.
May 2, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
When are we going to have a poll on what Indiana voters think of Mickey Kantor's statements?
Also, the game-changer is going to be supers flocking to Obama to end this awful primary.
May 2, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Odd how Greg and Josh have nothing to say about the devastating Kantor video, but plenty on Clinton's "game change" rhetoric ...
May 2, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
They won't say anything because they can see the caption is a fake.
May 2, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of Camp Hillary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN_nQOHj__s
May 2, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is weird.
I hear a candidate say this like this and the first thing that happens and happened this time and is still happening -
all the tiny little hairs on my body stand straight up and scream:
"Diebold!"
May 2, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree. There is no need to see anything ominous in this claim. If Clinton raises expectations that she cannot meet, she loses nothing for the venture. After all, losses in IN and NC would be bad for her even if expectations were kept low. The "expectations game" matters less and less the further one gets into it, because there are fewer and fewer future contests to be impacted by a failure to meet expectations. She has, by this point, more to gain from stirring up morale among her supporters in IN and NC than she has to lose from weakening morale among her supporters in WV, OR, KY, PR, SD and MT if she fails to meet expectations.
May 2, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, it is entirely possible to account for this sort of behavior without invoking nefarious schemes as an explanation.
May 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't say it was right - but I've been badly burned twice and once that happens, you tend to be a tad alarmist.
May 2, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I gotta say, Harold Ford from the DLC said repeatedly on Road to the White House (it was pre-PA) that whoever wins NC wins the nom.
I shuddered every time he'd say that.
May 2, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
We don't use electronic machines in NC. Most polling places have one for use by people with vision problems, etc., and anyone who wants to can use it, but we mostly use old fashioned punch cards and optical scanners.
And in all the years I've been here, I've never seen a butterfly ballot or a hanging chad.
May 2, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? I lived in Charlotte for several years up until 2003 and we voted with electronic machines then.
May 2, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure if touchscreens have been eliminated throughout the state (I don't think so) but this law did make verified paper trails mandatory:
http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2005/Bills/Senate/HTML/S223v7.html
Here in Wake County we pretty much all use optical scan, I think.
May 2, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, how about a post on Kantorgate?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN_nQOHj__s
P.S. - No, Greg, we won't stop bringing this up until you do a post.
May 2, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect she is right, only, it will be in Obama's favor. Especially after the video of her buddies and their Indiana's is sh*t and worthless white ni**ers comments.
May 2, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
"worthless white ni**ers "
When did it become a bad thing for a Democrat to use this term? Robert Byrd used it 3 times on national television and y'all didn't make a peep. Now if a Republican had said it, by all means break out the tar and feathers.
May 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
This video has been altered.
May 2, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Lars. Even blinded by flashbulbs you can see what the echo chamber can't.
May 2, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, I think you're gonna get spammed until you guys pick up this Kantor thing.
Hillary moving the goalposts before an election is about as newsworthy as a dog taking a crap on the sidewalk.
May 2, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
They'll never do it. They're too Washington insidery to push anything that makes Stephanopoulos and Carville look bad.
May 2, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. The goal posts have already been torn down and reassembled somewhere along the freeway about five miles outside the stadium. I keep thinking one of these days the media has to call bullshit, but they never do.
May 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Kantor gig is BS and unimportant
May 2, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I think things are going to look a little different for The Monster after this weekend.
Game changer?
LOL...
May 2, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it will be a game changer as well. One way or another, we are nearking the end.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/2/93316/53926/838/507664
May 2, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's over.
It's on YouTube - o shit. This is going to be a nuclear thermal meltdown -
O the fury! Watch out everyone - The Clintons are going to be utterly enraged.
May 2, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought you were a lawyer, Betty.
May 2, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sucker!
May 2, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, isn't she from Indiana too? She has been from every other state she has run it, I cannot keep track of all the states she "used to live in or grew up in"......
May 2, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I believe she spelled "Indiana" correctly in a spelling bee as a child and as such, she is now allowed to claim to be a "native daughter". Mr. Andrew, on the other hand, who endorsed Obama yesterday lost his claim to be a "Hoosier" through his endorsement even though he was born, grew up there, and owns a home there.
May 2, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jesus. According to this schizophrenic campaign, EVERYTHING is a game changer.
May 2, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Mickey Kantor, who served as campaign chairman during Clinton's 1992 run for the White House and says he has offered help and advice to Sen. Clinton, insisted that the tape was a fraud and that he was exploring legal steps against the individual who posted it online.
"I've never used that word in my entire life, ever, under any circumstance, ever," an angry Kantor told The Huffington Post, citing his and his parent's work fighting for civil rights. "I have listened to [the video] and so have you. You can't tell what it is I'm saying in that second sentence, you can't decipher that."
Back fired again. It is Obama and his supporters dividing the party.
How many times have you played the race card?
It is beyond pathetic.
May 2, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I expect nothing less than conspiracy accusations from Hillary's camp.
"We'll let the voters decide," as Hillary would say.
May 2, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right...perhaps we can't hear it because he whispered it (being that he was in front of cameras), but we can lip-read what he said. He's full of shit, just like her entire campaign.
May 2, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol; On the actual you tube video, you can definitely here him use the word. Regardless, he called Indiana voters "shit" and to quote HRC to gotalife, and all the other trolls here, "if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen".
May 2, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
You could leave the n word out of it and it still sounds awful - especially if you are from Indiana.
May 2, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, Tena. The pov is perfectly clear.
May 2, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly!
And if I may borrow the Clinton campaigns excuse: Besides, what's he so upset about? Doesn't he realize that this is the sort of stuff the Republicans are going to use against Clinton in the fall? He needs to stop whining and toughen up!
May 2, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a big Obama fan but after listening to the video numerous times I can't hear him say the n word and I do think he said "those people are SHITTING" - REFERRING TO THE BUSH PEOPLE. What does confuse me if my analysis is correct, however, is why would Kantor say the video is doctored?
Whatever, I hope this hit the MSM from till Tuesday.
May 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's doctored in that it has what appears to be an incorrect transcript.
May 2, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he said "shitting". That's what I recall from watching the movie....these people are shitting--referencing the Bush folks for things being so close in Indiana.
May 2, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard "nigger" and I heard him try to fade having said that the first time, and then turn around and do it again.
May 2, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sucker!
Now the Obamites have to resort to Dick Tuck methods when The Gelding just can't win.
Bwahahaha...SUCKER!
May 2, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
And there he is! An honest man! Thank you. I swear, sometimes one comment can redeem a thread. I certainly feel better about Obama knowing people like you support him. I was beginning to think only the body-snatched were left in the echo chamber. However. I have to warn you. You are going to make them crazy if you keep telling the truth.
May 2, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol!
May 2, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gota, thanks for the update!
This is good, Kantor has begun talking. He's going to need to answer a lot of questions in the coming days before Indiana and NC.
A Hillary press conference would be a good start, followed by questions. She has to nip this in the budd before the sharks really start to circle.
Chum, anyone?
May 2, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope, sorry, Daily Kos poster Jedreport is an expert at this type of thing and this is what he said.
I can 100% guarantee this is from the dvd no dubbing or editing of the clip was done.
there was clearly some dynamic range compression, and there was also some high and low pass filtering to eliminate background noises.
i've also listened this audio played at 90% speed which allows you to clearly here what's being said and there's no question about what kantor said.
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/5/2/93316/53926/684#c684
May 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I absolutely believe completely that Mickey Kantor is a lying sack of shit.
May 2, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you are?
May 2, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have a proper link for that statement? I can't find anything on hillaryclinton.com or anywhere else on the web...
May 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here ya go, Sparky -- rent your own copy of the War Room at Netflix and tell us if you think Obama's supporters edited every single DVD out there...
http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The_War_Room/1104072?lnkctr=srchrd-sr&strkid=108922494_0_0
May 2, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here we go again - Greg and Eric, I am really getting tired of the stenography bullshit every time the Hillary camp utters a word. For Christ's sake, give it a break, would you? This is NOT newsworthy - it is spin, pure and simple, and we hear this shit from her all the time. Why are you buying into this crap? She can't catch his delegate lead, Obama is picking up supers every day by at least a 3:1 margin, and all of her arguments are falling flat. Where is the post about the Kantor statements? Where is the post about Hillary's extraordinarily elitist "God Bless Us Rich Folks" statement? WTF????
May 2, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
calling this stenography is just deeply ridiculous. if anything I think I went out of my way to prove that they don't really think that.
May 2, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post the real story. No one cares about her game-changing nonsesne. All this damn Hillary spam and no reporting on the major story of the damn day. Are you even paying attention to the readers here or are you too busy collecting strands of Hillary's hair?
May 2, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, JDW - I was thinking about how to respond to Greg's response and you said it better than I could. And, while you're at it, Greg, do a post on the lying coming out of the Clinton campaign about what she really said on O'Reilly's show about rich people - Wolfson is trying to bullshit everybody that she said "God BlessED us" - she clearly and unequivocally said "God Bless Us". At least post the goddamned video in the "Latest Videos" list.
May 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am for Obama since before he declared but this is BS. It was and is clear in context that she was snarkily saying 'God bless us, we deserve to pay the taxes you are complaining about' There are many good reasons to be against Hillary or for Obama but this and the Kantor video (even if he called Obama the N word) are BS issues. Lets get back to what matters.
May 2, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's that supposed to mean? That Greg Sargent is supposed to tell you what you want to hear. Are you even paying attention to the polls?
May 2, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, not what I want to hear. He can cover it and then decide if he thinks it is real or fake, but at least acknowledge it.
May 2, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but this isn't The National Enquirer. You should be grateful that TPM tries not to go tabloid. If you want that kind of bullshit, go to Little Green Footballs. I'm sure they're covering it.
May 2, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez Greg. You avoided all other earlier posts about the Hillary damning video and harass Carol for her valid post.
If you have your own reasons for not putting a post which is spreading all over net (except here & Ben Smith), why don't come out with them like a man ?
May 2, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think I hurt his feelings with the word "stenography". Oops... ;)
May 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, he had it coming. There 1,293 Sen CLinton stories I can think of off the top of my head that are more newsworthy than this, and much more relevant to the process, and to her electability.
May 2, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally!!
May 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her keeping it close on "his turf" doesn't mean shit if she doesn't win a substantial amount of the African American vote. Of course, if this were conducted under Republican rules, we wouldn't have to worry about what African Americans think, which is probably what Hillary would prefer.
May 2, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
What has Sen Clinton got to lose in boosting expectations? If she predicts a big win and then loses on Tues, she has lost nothing more than she has already lost. As such, she has more to gain from building entheusiasm among her supporters than she has from looking embarrassed on Wed morning if her big talk does not pan out. This makes perfect sense in light of the situation.
May 2, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure you're right.
I have an irrational fear of stolen elections - or maybe not so irrational.
Bush v Gore scarred my little psyche for life. ;)
May 2, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which about the length of time Obama supporters will remember 2008 if Obama is denied the nomination, but remains ahead in delegates.
May 2, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which about the length of time Obama supporters will remember 2008 if Obama is denied the nomination, but remains ahead in delegates.
May 2, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess you don't take her candidacy seriously. She is not in it for the fun of eating chili peppers. She's not in it for the abuse. She's not in it for 2012. She's in it for 2008.
Greg, she's not going to lose on Tues. Say that 3 times every day for the next 5 days so it won't be a lightning bolt to your brain on May 6. I'm worried about you.
Um, it doesn't work that way.
May 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you going on the record as predicting Hillary wins both NC AND Indiana?
May 2, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I'm not going on record as predicting she'll win both states, SchrodingersCat.
But as a Hillbot, I've followed what the Clinton campaign says before each election. They've downplayed expectations right before every vote since Iowa (for obvious reasons!). I've thought it was an attempt to duplicate what happened in New Hampshire, where the CW was she got a big sympathy vote. This "game changer" language is unprecedented for them, so like Greg Sargent, I have to assume their internal numbers are dramatic.
If I were an Obamanaut, I would start bracing myself for a bad day on Tues. Hillary supporters are used to bracing ourselves, however, so that's easy for me to say.
The trouble with Greg DeLassus's (aka, A Missouri voter's) theory is this: Sounding bullish on the Friday before the election, Camp Hill risks energizing the Obama supporters on the ground in Indiana all weekend. Therefore, I truly think there's something specific Camp Hill knows that we don't. I don't think it's a mere pep talk to supporters.
May 2, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, that is a point against my thesis. I do not think that the flaw is fatal, but I agree that it is a worthy point against my claim.
May 2, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
None of your rebuttals really speak to the meat of my post, dear Readytoblowagasket. The "expectations game" ceases to be important by the end of the season. If one predicts a 5 pt victory and receives instead a 10 pt victory, there are no extra delegates awarded for exceeding expectations. If one predicts a 10 pt victory and receives instead a 4 pt victory there is no penalty exacted for failing to meet expectations.
The only reason that the expectations game matters is that it influences the perceptions of voters who vote in subsequent elections. Given that there are so few of these voters left (and so few delegates at stake from them) there is little to no penalty for failing to meet inflated expectations. By contrast, by talking big one can stir up morale among one's own supporters in the present contest. As such, there is much more to be gained here from big talk than is to be lost from failing to make good on it in these circumstances.
In such a situation as presently exists, it is only natural that a candidate should talk up his/her prospects. Therefore, it is not altogether sound to conclude from such talk that the candidate must have good reason to expect a big victory. It is entirely possible to account for such talk without ever invoking the reason-to-expect-big-victory hypothesis.
May 2, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
See my reply to SchrodingersCat just above for a little more about where I'm coming from. What I'm reading into the "game changer" language is that Camp Hill has something real to base that statement on. After her humiliating Iowa defeat, she has never raised expectations just before a vote.
In short, I'm assuming Hillary has two things: a) internal numbers that support high confidence about the popular votes in both states, and b) super delegate commitments promised for a good performance on May 6.
As I said above, I have nothing to base this theory on other than the campaign's past behavior in this primary.
May 2, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
But the past behavior is beside the point. It would not make sense to inflate expectations before because there was more to be lost than to be gain from such actions in previous races. Not so now. As I said, your rebuttal is not addressing my argument.
May 2, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can I "rebut" your "argument," Greg, when neither of us has any insider information or campaign psychology expertise? My opinion is just as valid as yours is. All either of us can do is guess about what the "strategy" is! Right?
May 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose that you have me there. I guess we will see whose guess is nearer the mark on Tuesday.
May 2, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't seem to know Marketing 101. Underpromise and overdeliver is the formula not the opposite.
This is a game changer because she's a shark and she smells blood in the water. Going in for the kill now. Let's get our popcorn and watch "Shark Week".
May 2, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh-oh.
May 2, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is like watching a basketball game.
Q1 : Knicks 20 - Bulls 20
Q2: Knicks 40 - Bulls 42
Q3: Knicks 60 - Bulls 63
Final: Knicks 80 - Bulls 83
...then the Knicks saying they won, because they kept the spread the same in Q4.
May 2, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty much. And gotalife would like you to believe in this scenario that the Bulls had a meltdown.
May 2, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gatalife believes that the Bulls will have such a melt down, that some of their own team members will complain to the refs so much that they will force an OT in order for them to switch teams and score a few for the Knicks.
May 2, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
perfection.
May 2, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Best analogy I've seen to date - those Knicks. Thank God they kicked Isaiah Thomas to the curb (finally!) How badly do they suck?
May 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a very good analogy, but not perfect. 'Cause while the Knicks and Bulls are playing games, Ralph Nader is running a campaign that is actually relevant to preserving democracy, the constitution, the environment, and consumer rights while disavowing imperialism and corporatism.
Shooting hoops ain't gonna end the war.
May 2, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Nader is not playing the game yet. This is just the finals.
See, Nader will play for the Suns in the championship game, but he is not very good and he never gets the ball so might just score 1-2 points. The thing is, he hates all basketball and he is only playing to prove how stupid the game is.
Suns win, 91-90.
May 2, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will win both States because folks are sick of your race cards.
You are to blame.
May 2, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your candidate is the expert on race cards.
Otherwise why would "[o]ne of the nation's largest Black American grassroots advocacy organizations" be protesting camp Hillary's actions?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/02/black-issues-group-price_n_99759.html
May 2, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Duh.
May 2, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is typical Rove tactics. The only one playing a "card" has been Hillary who herself has stated numerous times that she's been given a rough deal for being a woman.
May 2, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have yet to see anyone at TPM correctly identify what "Rove tactics" are.
May 2, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, how is Kantor saying Indianna voters in '92 are "sh*t" and "white n*****s" an example of Obama or Obama supporters playing the race card?
Seems more like an example of the Clinton campaign's attempts to deem everything that goes bad for Clinton as Obama's fault.
May 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you know? If Obama weren't half african american, his opponents wouldn't have to play the race card. Obama's birth FORCED them to do this. But they're ok with the white half.
;)
May 2, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol,
Look at it this way, the worthless bulls**t poll Greg posted below this makes this story seem like Pulitzer Prize material.
I understand that there is pressure to "feed the beast" and keep posting stuff up here, but every day I'm on here makes me more convinced that Greg is too inexperienced to know
1. Where the story is
2. How to contextualize the information he posts
3. The inherent bias implicit in most (not all) of his "analysis"
Good writing means more than knowing how to put sentences together and where the commas go.
May 2, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. One consistent failure I see in their writing is forgetting who their audience is. This audience can smell bullshit on the other side of the solar system, and resent being played in an important election season. And I'm reading many are tired of it, and will be exiting if it continues, leaving the whole diminished.
There are 473 stories more relevant to Sen Clinton's campaign than this post, most of which demonstrate why she is not qualified to serve.
Install a B.S. meter, and watch how much better your writieng gets.
Pax,
M.
May 2, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mickey Kantor just put Indiana seriously back in play for Obama. Thank you, Mickey!
When is Josh going to comment on this story?
May 2, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I imagine there is some discussion taking place in the halls of TPM Central.
The handling of a story like this is tricky business for an outlet that has been hammering Obama for not having the support of "working class whites."
Oh my.
May 2, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
A doctored tape from 1992 is hardly worth cheering about. It is regrettable that you are probably right, as not everyone will get the "doctored" memo.
May 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huffpo just reported that the video was doctored - although that is also a little misleading.
Apparently, Kantar didn't say the ni**er - that part was doctored. But the Indiana is sh*t bit is true.
May 2, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually if you read the article, HuffPo is only reporting that Mickey Kantor says it was doctored.
May 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, now that's unclear. Their headline seems to suggest it was doctored.
I've seen the original clip and it's not doctored, except for cranking of the audio.
But I still think he said "shitting". The second half of the clip is difficult to decipher but certainly sounds like he uses the n-word.
May 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah. And the people shitting were the Bush campaign. Obama knows what that feels like. He's shitting right now reading the Indiana polls. And maybe NC, too. Have you noticed how the undecideds have been breaking the last few primaries?
May 2, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently Arianna doesn't want to get sued.
May 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
HuffPo is reporting that KANTOR says it was doctored. Their headline about him being exonerated is misleading at best, and more likely sloppy journalism.
May 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I don't know why their headline reads that way - it's just the article about Kantor's denial (same one I read previously). The headline seems like a bit of "bait and switch" to me...
May 2, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have you seen the video? That's clearly what he said. No way it was doctored.
May 2, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kantor is lying.
I hope he denies it vociferously, nothing will get the story out there quicker than loud complaints from the principle. Then we have audio techs come in and verify it and the story will blow up again.
May 2, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "never" part I have a problem with.
May 2, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think she's saying this to give herself a graceful way out, personally.
But I'm having an optimistic day today.
Greg does just fine, IMHO.
"...would seem to be inflating expectations well beyond what I've understood to be Hillaryland's best case scenario for May 6th."
this could even be read as bias against Hillary. It's as much about the perspective from which you are reading as what is actually being written.
May 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that this post is fine, although I am getting a little sick of the "straight from Wolfson's mouth" reporting that goes on here.
Greg shows a lot of promise, but I think the weaknesses I listed are valid, because it is a fairly consistent pattern. I think I'm still a bit sour over the "didn't take on Fox" imbroglio, too.
That being said, I realize there is a lot of pressure to post things the second they happen, and sometimes he has to go with the information that he has on hand. There's just no way he can dig into every story and still manage to post 10 things a day.
I'm really not trying to be mean or unfair. It's not personal. How can it be? I don't know the guy.
May 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words:
Kantor is lying he said it, but Arianna doesn't have enough to fight his lawyer over it with so she is doing what he demanded she do.
Are y'all clear on that?
I think they jacked the sound because Kantor whispered, but he said it. And I recognize what I think is going on - she got a call from a lawyer.
May 2, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the story isn't that Arianna is saying it was doctored.
I will shut up until I figure out what the hell is going on! LOL!
May 2, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you ever shut up for even 2 or 3 minutes I'll be amazed.
May 2, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is the race card in calling the people of Indiana "shit"?
May 2, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
There isn't any race card in any bit of it.
Jeeeeezuz. It's white people talking about white people for the love of god.
May 2, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Sam Stein>>Clinton Adviser Exonerated: "White Ni***" Video Is Doctored"
You folks are pathetic.
Clinton should use this to show who is dividing the party and win the supers.
May 2, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is this "You folks" shit?
I've been sitting in my kitchen all morning.
I did not do one thing.
May 2, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except shoot your mouth off non-stop as usual, Betty.
May 2, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
why dont you drop the additional screen name. so damn transparent that youre posting under two names. if not more. look in the mirror this morning? like what you see?
May 2, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently this video has hit a nerve in Billy's own echo chamber.
HuffPo is playing this smart. You can't get the doctored version, but you can access the original video. It's libel to run the doctored version (except as satire) but running as original in a retraction is news.
May 2, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently this video has hit a nerve in Billy's own echo chamber.
HuffPo is playing this smart. You can't get the doctored version, but you can access the original video. It's libel to run the doctored version (except as satire) but running the original in a retraction is news.
May 2, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you actually read the article? The headline says he's exonerated, but the actual article states that KANTOR denies he said it.
You really need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
May 2, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her advisor called Indiana people shit. That reflects on Obama somehow?
May 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, God knows no one doctored the Wright vids.
May 2, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read the fucking article, asshat. Kantor is the only one denying that the video is real. He has not been exonerated - the headline is misleading.
May 2, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not so fast grasshopper.
The WHOLE movie is now available on YouTube.
Here's a version posted by a Hillary supporter on dKOS and Kantor still calls Indianans shit.
There's NO denying the first expletive is clear and damning.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/2/122435/6450/747/507763
May 2, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
She must have known Kantor's views all these years, yet she said nothing.
May 2, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need audio experts to look into this and report tonight on the news.
They should roll the audio over and over so that we can see what exactly Kantor is saying about the Indiana electorate.
We need to answer the question, do Hillary's advisors believe Hoosiers are "shit" or "White n******" or both?
Best would be to play the tape for television viewers and allow them to decide.
May 2, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I said this already, but I heard "nigger" though he barely said it the first time, was embarassed, but turned around and said again in an audible voice.
shitty is not the same thing as white nigger and that's what I heard.
May 2, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is the goddamn racism in 3 white men talking about white people in Indiana?
Where?
May 2, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Setting expectations of a potential win in IN and a close result in NC, once confirmed next week show confidence with the momentum. Importantly it builds on Clinton's positive message that she is the electable candidate moving forward with the election while Obama is spinning lies and explanations about his relationship with Wright.
Matthew
May 2, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama isn't talking about Wright. He is talking about how not to have a gas "holiday" that tricks Americans into thinking they're making money while actually the oil companies are raking it in (again).
I think the fact that she's talking specifically about NC (where she won't win) makes it seem more like she's backing away, giving herself an "out." But I could be wrong.
May 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew Weaver is an expert and he endorses the Gas Tax Holiday. He's the only expert that endorses the idea, but at least it's one.
May 2, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huffington's headline is misleading--Kantor CLAIMS it's been doctored.
The DVD is all over the country. Should be very, very easy to verify.
A loooong weekend for HRC until she comes out and dismisses Kantor from her campaign.
Then we can just have Obama vs. Clinton. Only the issues. Wouldn't that be nice?
May 2, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's on YouTube - enough said.
This is going to be world wide by tonight.
May 2, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cantor plans to sue YouTube to have it removed as libelous.
May 2, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Betty is a lawyer. Maybe she can defend YouTube and the piece of work that posted the crappy little video that has the echo chamber getting off.
May 2, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why bother? It's available on Netflix too.
And the only doctoring that's been identified so far was to turn up the sound on the whispering part.
No insertion or editing of words that weren't said took place.
May 2, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
You just got played by the Clinton machine to show how gullible and divisive you are.
Game changing indeed.
Hilarious.
May 2, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look for an ad to come out before Tuesday.
May 2, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I don't think you get this yet. But you will.
May 2, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The people he's saying are "shitting" are the Bush campaign, Betty. You'll know the feeling Tuesday night. Come around Wednesday morning and tell us how it felt.
May 2, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, he's not.
The pure "long" version has no such context. You're spouting the Clinton damage control, but what is clearly said right here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/2/122435/6450/747/507763 is that Kantor says "Those people are shit."
Whether either this OR the Wright story is worth a damn is open to question, but the video in either case does NOT lie.
May 2, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
My goodness, gotalife, I thought you had no respect for the Huffington Post because they were supposedly in the tank for Obama. Now all of a sudden Sam Stein speaks with the voice of angels? Hmmmm. Besides that, Kantor's denial really strains credibility when he says what he sasy is "Wouldn't it be nice if we were in the White House now...." Unh...please don't you or he insult my intelligence. If there's anything you know for sure it's that when someone gets on a high horse and starts mouthing off about getting a lawyer and suing, they're hiding something. I'd also like to note that having been active in the civil rights movement and working for the rights of black people's got nothing to do with calling a bunch of crackers white people "n----."
May 2, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bye, bye BILLARY!
May 2, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Indiana story about Mickey Cantor's remarks could be the game changer. What someone needs is an independent audio and film expert to verify this.
Wonder if Mickey Cantor has made other statements like this ? If it is an isolated incident, then maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
Mickey is acting a little overheated in his response... we'll get to the truth.
May 2, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
They changed the title at Huffington Post to say that Kantor denies it. They got rid of "Exonerated."
May 2, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well by god - GOOD!
May 2, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indiana and North Carolina are meaningless.
They are safe Republican states, and will stay Republican in November.
Get a grip folks. Even if Hillary wins both of those primaries, she still would have no chance of carrying them in the general election.
How the hell is North Carolina, the home of Jesse Helms, supposed to be an Obama state.
As for Indiana, it is more like Kentucky than it is like Wisconsins. Indiana is the birth state of the KKK.
Those two states have not changed much. That is why they will stay Republican, and they should not get to decide who our nominee will be.
May 2, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Grackles.
May 2, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Back to the topic at hand - let her call NC a "game changer" - we know that her folks dubbed 9.2% as a "big" margin in PA. I would bet everything short of the lives of my children that Obama exceeds that in NC. Count on it.
May 2, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
BEN SMITH
I just spoke to D.A. Pennebaker, the director of "The War Room," who said his film had been doctored to produce a widely-viewed YouTube clip.
In a clip from his film on the 1992 Clinton campaign, posted to YouTube today, Clinton advisor Mickey Kantor is -- according to subtitles -- seen referring to Indianans with an expletive and to his colleague George Stephanopolous with a racial slur.
"He does not say that. He does not say that," said Pennebaker, after viewing the clip.
He said the initial expletive referred to the anticipated reaction in the Bush White House to the fact that Ross Perot's polling numbers were holding strong.
"What he says is he’s surprised Perot’s numbers are holding," said Pennebaker in a brief phone interview. "He says they must be shi**ing in the White House."
The second expletive, he said, appeared to have been entirely fabricated, with new audio dubbed onto the original movie.
Pennebaker appeared surprised and amused by the video.
"A thousand people saw that film in theaters and didn't think" the second expletive had been used, he said. "It's very clearly understandable. It's not like it was in Bulgarian."
Once again, Ben comes through. That's DA Pennebaker talking. The guy who made the film. So take that little piece of video shit and stick it where it belongs, echo chamber.
May 2, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damage control all you want, kid. He said "Those people are shit." Plain as day.
Check the longer version, ~ 4:48.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_wKOgMNs0U
Truth hurts.
May 2, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually reviewed that film when it first came out. I know Pennebaker. He wouldn't lie about his film. He probably supports Obama. That you want to believe the phoney version says a lot about you.
May 2, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then, *assuming* what you say is correct and Pennebaker is not merely engaged in damage control, it is at least equally disgraceful for Clinton's people to edit 30 seconds of a preacher's entire career to smear Obama?
If you have such double standards, nothing you say can be believed.
May 2, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a defender of Reverend Wright. It's the Obamanauts who have flipped on Wright and are now damning him. Except for his comments on AIDS, which should have been metaphorical instead of factual, I can't find anything he's said that isn't true -- at least from the prophetic preaching point of view.
May 2, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cool. Thank you for sharing that. Good to know we agree on something.
I wish all Clinton supporters were as reasonable.
[And franky, I wish Wright had just gone away after the Moyers interview]
May 2, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
TROLL ALERT TROLL ALERT
This is some big-time spin right here.
May 2, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
This raises a question I've been mulling for a while. How do you tell who is a real troll (beyond the fact that they've received a stellar review from Troll Critic 3000, that is)?
May 2, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can tell who I think is a troll. I don't answer them when the reply to one of my comments.
May 2, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
You so-called people are a disgrace.
May 2, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
dont feed into gotalife. pathetic use of talking points. a little psychotherapy would go a long way in fighting that level of cognitive dissonance. i once found this site to be a comforting outlet for journalistic integrity. boy was i wrong. greg sargent is as intellectually dishonest as any right wing talking head, in my honest opinion. election central my ass. closer to an online clinton campaign office. ill still visit though. ill put it in the same folder as superdeluxe.com, bobanddavid.com, and ebaumsworld.com. all very silly websites.
peace
May 2, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget the 1.7% of the NC Dem vote that could be affected by the WVWV robocalls and mailers.
Anyone know if those mailers got stopped?
And why did this story just die?
Except of course by:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863
May 2, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would you point me to the part in what Greg wrote that you find intellectually dishonest? How do you want him to report on what Clinton says? Should he go get an opposing quote from the Obama campaign? Overall, I think he runs as many unrefuted statements from the Obama camp as from the Clinton camp. While I might do the story differently, I don't think he's being dishonest. He just works under a different set of standards. Apparently, TPM feels that the overall balance of the site is important, but that balancing each post isn't.
May 2, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a North Carolinian, I'm proud of the fact that it's my state that will force Hillary to bow out of the race.
That said, I think some of my fellow Obama supporters are way too hard on Greg. You sound borderline hysterical sometimes over the slightest possibility of bias. As a reporter, I like to think I can detect it, and I detect very little - if any - of it in Greg's work.
May 2, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure-- she's cutting against conventional wisdom re: expectations, but I think the campaign is going all in in North Carolina. Its all or nothing, they probably realize. Either she sewwps IN & NC (with a huge come-from-behind upset in NC), pull even at least, or very close to it....or withdraw, finally. I think she's gotten to the point where its all or nothg, therefore pump up your support as much as possible and hope to pull it out-- kind of like putting 3 wides in at the 50 yard line with a minute to go and hope for a Giants-like Super Bowl victory. The expectations game is consequently meaningless now, because its game over if NC-IN is a wash.
May 2, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
How in the world can NC force Hillary out. Indiana yes. But North Carolina. The only one NC can force out is Obama, if he loses there he can't win anywhere anymore.
May 2, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
a dubious statement, at best.
May 2, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get ready for it. If she beats him in NC, the Party will come down on him like a ton of bricks. The only question will be is he too damaged to run as VP.
May 2, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
what ifs, what ifs.....
May 2, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Keep dreaming. The party's behind Obama. The Clintons did enough damage to the Democrats in the 90s for them to have much sympathy.
May 2, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she beats him in NC, the situation will become VERY uncomfortable for the SDs, but I don't see her having the numbers to win. I'll give it up to her new campaign manager, they finally figured out they need to go head-to-head on the ground and with GOTV now in every state. But it might be too little too late. I know it's a cliche, but it actually fits this situation IMO.
Indiana, I must say I still don't have a strong grasp on what's going on there. Everything is going back and forth and it seems hard to grasp where everyone stands. I'll just have to trust Obama's campaign people there to win one for the home team.
In four days we get to step back, sweep out the ashes and see where everything stands. We'll see where we're at then. But things don't look good for Clinton atm.
May 2, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm on the ground in South Bend. It's GOTV now. We'll see what we see. North Carolina is the big deal. I wish I were there instead.
May 2, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, good luck...see ya on the other side!
May 2, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Billy, this is when you lose me.
Obama is ahead. He doesn't NEED to win anything, just break even or lose little in the remaining contests, and he still wins.
Hillary needs to win EVERY state by 20+ to even come close to beating Obama.
That's the reality.
May 2, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly, SC, I think I lost you long ago. Maybe we'll meet again around the bend.
May 2, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
She has to win first. He can lose Indiana and keep enough super-delegates to win the nomination.
I think, at this point, Hillary would do better that Obama against McCain. But I still think he gets the nomination.
May 2, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Last minute "game changers" all always bulls**t.
You never know who'd throwing what, and of course there's not enough time to figure it out.
But what makes sense is, if it were true, it would've been out long ago.
May 2, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because the media does such a GREAT job (eyes roll)......
May 2, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, those subtitles clearly aren't what he says. Listen to it with headphones on.
I'm a huge Obama supporter, I've worked for him.
But this is nonsense. He clearly says something to the effect of "Those people must are sh*tting in the whitehouse. How would you like to see numbers like that"
Why aren't we talking about the real issue? What the heck was Carville thinking when he bought that hat?
May 2, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep--I just watched the original and I think the last part was dubbed over or something.
I couldn't hear a thing, let along the "n" word.
The first part is still pretty offensive, but this shows there is a danger in petty mud-slinging.
The Clinton camp at least gets a taste for what gross exaggerations can do to your morning.
May 2, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is enough to make you cry, is it not. Who cares whether Kantor said "shit" or "shitting." I cannot make a word out of the video, but even if it could be proven beyond cavil that he was insulting Indiana, it would be every bit as uselessly irrelevant as Rev Wright calling Obama a politician or other such nonsense. None of this palaver pays my mortgage or turns my school district (recently decertified by the state of MO) around. I can understand why the republicans would want to make the race about these sorts of bread-and-circus distractions; they have no other case to make. Why, however, in God's own holy name would democrats want to indulge this sort of garbage? We are ceding a great advantage to McCain & al by trying to run each other through with pikes made of baloney.
May 2, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word To Your Mother NM,Whodathunk Ole Snakehead wuz kickin it Vanilla Ice style.
May 2, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
matthew weaver -
i've always thought that it was bad enough that each time you post here, you force people to look at you in that ridiculous shower cap. but i must say that reading the content of your posts is much more disturbing than your need to inundate complete strangers with pictures of you and two newborns.
question: what is the scenario that plays out in your mind (the one covered by your Jeri-curl rag) that gives hillary the nomination?
apparently, in the carefully-constructed fantasy land of the paranoid clintonite mob, the superdelegates (most of whom are white) are going to look democratic voters in their eyes and say, "well, those WERE the rules, but hillary and hillbilly have convinced us that the voters made the wrong choice. we have therefore corrected this mistake and will be going forward."
doesn't that strike you as oddly reminiscent of kissinger's explanation for the assassination of allende? "why should we let a country go communist just because its people voted irresponsibly?"
no one here is surprised that it's so simple to draw a line connecting the dying vestiges of the hillary-or-death camp and henry kissinger.
good luck finding a better cap with which to hide your baldness...
May 2, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indiana and North Carolina are meaningless.
They are safe Republican states, and will stay Republican in November.
Get a grip folks. Even if Hillary wins both of those primaries, she still would have no chance of carrying them in the general election.
How the hell is North Carolina, the home of Jesse Helms, supposed to be an Obama state.
As for Indiana, it is more like Kentucky than it is like Wisconsins. Indiana is the birth state of the KKK.
Those two states have not changed much. That is why they will stay Republican, and they should not get to decide who our nominee will be.
May 2, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm inclined to get behind this opinion here.
May 2, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harvey Gannt gave Jesse a hard time, came very close to winning. NC is a complex place, with native Sons, Yankee rustbelt imports, big college towns, and the rich-bitch beach set. Obama will win it.
May 2, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying that Democratic voters in red states should not have a voice in deciding their party's nominee?
Hate to say it, but that reminds me of the Clinton campaign dismissing the western caucus states that went for Obama.
May 2, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
what does she know that we don't?
May 2, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Game changer my big white butt. When she loses north carolina and the superdelegates continue to trickle to obama she'll be doing the same thing.
May 2, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Game changer
There she goes again, gettin all hysterical
May 2, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
As many have noted, there is only one environment in which Bill and Hillary thrive -- chaos. People often overlook the fact that it's not just Bill who "gets off" on his philandering --the whole ensuing drama must be magnetic, psychologically, to Hillary, as well. Otherwise there's no human reason she would stay with him through dozens of infidelities. Such a marriage is based on the thrill of secrecy, betrayal, disclosure, condemnation, guilt, forgiveness--and then it all starts all over again. It's the air the Clintons love to breathe. Do the Democrats really want to wade back into this marital psychodrama between now and November? Do we trust this bonkers couple with our party's future?
May 2, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Barack and Michelle are a breath of fresh air to watch. Not that I think that should determine anyone's vote.
May 2, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not? Wouldn't it be a bonus to everyone to see a healthy, AMERICAN traditional family in the White House?
May 2, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but it's kind of a "drink a beer" type factor. Shouldn't be a major determiner. There truly genuine marriage IS refreshing. Certainly do not see that from McCain or Hill n Bill.
May 2, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup. Cant see Obama spewing the C word at Michelle, or stepping out on her either. And why wouldn't I want to see good looking kids for 8 years --like the Kennedy kids.
May 2, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena: My exact thought, also.
May 2, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
. . . that is, your thought about Diebold (post went to wrong place).
May 2, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still think this is way more important than some stupid video from 1992:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863
May 2, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could Hill be talkin this bull to inflate expectatations for her supporters thus softening the blow when she concedes? I know I've had too much coffee but I'm just sayin.....
May 2, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was my gut reaction at first as well, and then I though, "Naaaaah, wishful thinking!"
May 2, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that Youtube has caved to Kantror's legal threats and pulled the video, here's a thought to keep handy.
Anyone want to bet that most all the SuperD's know the video is probably accurate?
The Hillfolks can cry "foul" all day long, but they aren't the Super D's who are all party insiders, and those insiders probably know whether this video is fake.
Lets see how the wind blows between now and Tuesday, but like I said, the toothpaste is out of the Youtube. Even if it's been taken down, the conversation has gone viral.
Viva La Blogs!
May 2, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a hoax. But clever in the final result.
It calls attention to what he did say before the the "n....." line. He called the people of Indiana "shit."
You can see and hear the undoctored version at HuffPo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/02/clinton-adviser-claims-in_n_99810.html
or YouTune
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_wKOgMNs0U
May 2, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
More important is....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863
er, no?
May 2, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely.
NPR doesn't have much of a demographic among working class Whites, but enough upscale Whites in NC will have heard it, hopefully, to make a difference.
May 2, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just watched the Kantor original clip. He does say, "Those people are shitting... in the White House." He then immediately says, "How would you like to be a worthless white n*****?"
I have seen nothing that explains that second comment. It's in the movie.
May 2, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't Hillary have to be running out of money soon? The 10 million she made in 48 hours or whatever shouldn've went to pay off her debt.
I heard the same day she got the 10 mill she also got a bill from Mark Penn for 4.6 million. What a class act! Wouldn't make me feel good if I contributed to the campaign....
May 2, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought it was Ohio and Texas, then PA.
And yet she lags behind in every metric, except the ones she makes up.
May 2, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
So when Hillary loses North Carolina next tuesday
does that mean she is ending her campaign?
May 2, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
It will be the end of the campaign because the Super-Delegates will have had enough. If she were to somehow win, that would be big trouble for Obama.
May 2, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
No it wouldn't. They know what he's up against. Hillary isn't the only one attacking him. He's being attacked by the RNC, the NRCC, Democratic and Republican 527s, among others. The fact that he's still standing is incredibly impressive. They're not going to be fooled.
May 2, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
It will be a game changer because if she loses badly, she will drop out.
She is not raising expectations only stating the obvious.
May 2, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
He clearly called the people of Indiana shit. They can spin this all day long if they want..the audio and video does not lie.
The Clinton campaign is full of scumbags, losers, and racists.
May 2, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Hillary expects to win North Carolina. But i think she expects to keep it within single digits and also carry the White Vote by huge margins. Thus, cutting into some of Obama's support. And if she wins Indiana, it will show Obama is tanking. Obama should win Indiana. He has been ahead there for weeks and he is from the neighboring state. If Hillary blows him out in Indiana, then Obama has real electability problems.
May 2, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
When you say "Obama is tanking" perhaps you mean the Wright affair has cost him dearly in White Votes. I agree. I'm an Obama supporter but think, at this point, she is more electable than Obama against McCain.
I still think he gets the nomination though.
May 2, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The same could be said of Clinton and Connecticut. She was ahead there for weeks going into Super-Tuesday and CT is largely a suburb of NY. Given that he beat her in CT, does that indicate that she has electability problems?
May 2, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you guys hear about the fundraising from the Clinton campaign?
Remember when they claimed they had raised 10 millions in 24 hours, and that April would be one of their best month ever. I am sure if it were the case they would have used it as a positive argument for the campaign, and to get more votes...
What do you guys think?
May 2, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
that's what i'm wondering. hillary is brokes-ville imho.
May 2, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
tired of this drama. Vote them all out and stop the restoration.
May 2, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary doesn't have a great night, I suspect she'll drop out. She's been hedging her statements lately in that regard, and I see her bullishness on the upcoming races as an all-in bluff. She's got a lousy hand and she knows it. She's bluffing.
May 2, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is Obama, Clinton is every where on TPM and on other bolgs...I am wondering why?
May 2, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because Obama is tapped out. He has nothing left to offer except the now trite "hope" and "change" canned speeches.
Clinton is in control of the dialogue and the process.
May 2, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some Obamahead got fast and loose with the truth in a doctered video! Oh thats rich. Lets watch the MSM play it over and over and over again to Obama's benefit. Pathetic lot all if they do. You Obamaheads are getting ready to see the Clintons bitchslap somebody! This should be good.
May 2, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Either the fix is in and Hillary knows that she' going to win an election that is most likely rigged or voters suppressed via the robo-calls, or she thinks her magic words will discourage Obama voters. For the latter to work, she needs a magic pony.
Sadly, it will not be a game changer. It'll some simply drag out the nomination process and cause more divisiveness amongst Democrats. Obama will still be ahead at the end of the day.
May 2, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, for the sake of playing into Hillary's nutty world, let's suppose she and Bill are 100% right: t
hat Obama cannot win against McCain.
My reply to that is: So what?
Obama is still the Democratic candidate chosen by most of those who have voted. Whether or not he "can" win against McCain is completely immaterial to the primary and caucus voting process, which has put Obama in a commanding lead. It's called "democracy," Mrs. Clinton. And it makes people feel good about America.
May 2, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is only behind 77 delegates and leads in the popular vote.
Last I checked FL and MI are still in the union.
They will be seated because Obama will smell the coffee and realize he need those delegates too. Except he can't wait too long to push for it so he will do it right after IN/NC primaries and that is when Clinton makes her move.
But they won't put him over the top because the winds have shifted and for Clinton it is fair winds and following seas.
May 2, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get thee behind me, troll.
No matter how many times you repeat your lie, Clinton does not lead in the popular vote.
Do you really think the supers are going to base their endorsement on a doofus with a chicken avatar? LOL.
May 2, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
URGENT!!!! OUR FAMI