Why Hillary Carries On
When you’ve got a 42-day gap between primaries, you’ve got to fill it with something. So now we’re talking about whether Hillary Clinton should drop out.
In reality, the Clinton-Obama contest has basically been frozen in place since Clinton’s March 4 mini-revival. Obama leads in the pledged delegate race and the popular vote race, and will almost certainly lead in both categories when the primary season wraps in early June. But his margins are close. If Clinton was justified in pressing ahead on the morning of March 5, why is there a sudden urgency for her to quit three weeks later, when nothing has really changed?
Thanks to Obama surrogates like Pat Leahy, recent news coverage has been filled with stories about whether Clinton ought to just cut her losses and drop out. Officially, the candidate himself is keeping a distance from such comments—“Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants,” he magnanimously allowed over the weekend—but that’s largely immaterial: Leahy’s suggestion was more than enough to set off the round of media speculation that the Obama campaign was looking for.
There really is no precedent for demanding that Clinton withdraw at this point. If Michigan’s and Florida’s delegations remain unseated, there will be approximately 4,047 delegates at the August Democratic convention, making 2,024 the magic number for either candidate. Right now, Obama has 1,631 (including superdelegates), to Clinton’s 1,499—a difference of 132 delegates. And in the officially meaningless but symbolically important cumulative popular vote, Obama leads Clinton by just over two points—a margin that is basically cut in half when Florida is included.
This is—easily—the tightest Democratic nominating contest in the modern primary era. Never before has a race lasted this long without one candidate building an overwhelming advantage in delegates, popular votes, or both. And in none of those previous contests did the second-place candidate hear such loud and early calls to exit the race.
Take 1984, the last time a Democratic race stretched more than a few primaries without a clear winner emerging. The calendar was more spread out back then, but at this point in that year’s Gary Hart-Walter Mondale fight—that is, at the point in the primary process when about 75 percent of all delegates had been awarded—Mondale had amassed a seemingly insurmountable edge over Hart, 1,518 delegates to 886, with 339 officially uncommitted and 303 for Jesse Jackson. That left Mondale just 451 delegates from that year’s magic number, with primaries in big states like New Jersey and California still remaining. It was clear that he would either hit that number or come within inches of it on the last day of primaries in early June, in which case he’d only need a handful of superdelegates to go over the top. (It was the latter scenario that ended up playing out.)
But despite trailing by well over 600 delegates, the calls for Hart to withdraw were muted at best. He also lagged behind in the popular vote, a metric that didn’t receive nearly as much attention (and that wasn’t as easily calculated) in ’84, by about 500,000 votes. His campaign pressed ahead, arguing that a strong finish would sway superdelegates and uncommitted delegates.
It was no different in 1980, when Ted Kennedy was walloped by Jimmy Carter in most primaries. But Kennedy won just enough big states to maintain a sense of viability. At this point in the ’80 race, Kennedy was nearly 1,000 delegates behind Carter. He, too, argued that a strong finish to the primary season would send uncommitted delegates, and those previously committed to Carter, stampeding his way. And like Hart, he faced no concerted effort to push him out of the race before the last primary in June.
Clinton is pursuing the same basic strategy as Hart and Kennedy did, except the deficit she faces is far less imposing. In fact, there is universal agreement that Obama will end the primary season short of the 2,024 delegates needed for a first ballot nomination, and that he—like Clinton—will rely on superdelegates to nudge him over the top. By contrast, it was clear at this point in 1980 that Carter would secure enough delegates in the primary process to win on the first ballot, and that Kennedy’s only hope was to pick off already-committed Carter delegates (there were no superdelegates back then). And in ’84, it was considered likely that Mondale would claim a first ballot majority in the primaries, although he ended up falling a few dozen delegates short (a problem he remedied with some frantic phone-calling to superdelegates the morning after the final primaries).
And yet Clinton is being forced to justify her continued candidacy in a way that Hart and Kennedy never had to. There are several explanations for this this. For one, our understanding of the process is far savvier now than it was a quarter-century ago, when an extended primary season was still a new phenomenon. This may explain why so much attention has been paid this year to the potential of superdelegates to overrule the “will of the people” (as expressed by the popular vote and the pledged delegate count), even though this issue was never really raised in ’84 and ’80.
And it is the currency of the “will of the people” argument that has transformed the role of the superdelegates. In ’84, it was not at all scandalous for Hart to suggest that he’d wrest the nomination from Mondale by convincing superdelegates and uncommitted delegates that he would make the best general election candidate—even after winning fewer votes and delegates than Mondale in the primaries. Making that argument in 2008, as Clinton is discovering, is far more controversial.
This means that Clinton is most likely doomed. She has no mathematical chance of surpassing Obama in the pledged delegate race and almost no shot at surpassing him in popular votes. Thus, she will almost certainly have no claim to the loyalties of the 300 or so superdelegates who will provide the winning.
But that doesn’t mean this is the time for Clinton to quit. She has won nearly as many votes and delegates as Obama, certainly enough to justify participating in the remaining nine primaries and caucuses. Maybe in that time she will catch him in popular votes. It’s not likely, but it could radically change the attitudes of superdelegates if it happened. Or maybe something else will happen. She and her supporters have earned the right to hang around and see.
If she does play out the string and—as expected—still comes up short in both key categories, there’s every reason to expect the uncommitted superdelegates will quickly flock to Obama as soon as the primary season ends. That's when it would be time for her to go.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Please join Rush Limbaugh in Operation Chaos.
More details, go to rushlimbaugh.com.
Keeping the Democrats in disruption until the summer.
The candidates should stay in the race as long as they want - i do dislike when the candidates turn - unnecessary ugliness on each other; and here the Clinton camp- given their years of experience have a good lead;
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/31/us/politics/31clinton.html
....“I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today,” he wrote in an opinion article published Sunday, amid her campaign for president. “And it’s a very favorable one indeed.”
His sudden conversion from fervid Clinton basher to lukewarm Clinton fan occurred after Mrs. Clinton, a Democratic senator from New York, sat down for a 90-minute interview with reporters and editors of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a newspaper owned by Mr. Scaife, the billionaire heir to the Mellon banking fortune.
Pennsylvania will hold its Democratic primary on April 22, and the Tribune-Review, the second-largest daily newspaper in Pittsburgh, has yet to endorse a candidate. Given Mr. Scaife’s record, Mrs. Clinton could not have expected a rosy reception.
But Mr. Scaife, who attended the meeting, wrote in The Tribune-Review that the senator “exhibited an impressive command of many of today’s most pressing domestic and international issues.” Her answers, he added, “were thoughtful, well-stated and often dead on.”
His compliments left some Clinton aides and allies stunned. “I never thought I would utter these words, but I would like to shake his hands for keeping his mind open despite the predisposed prejudice toward her,” said Lanny Davis, a longtime Clinton supporter who served as President Clinton’s lawyer during the late 1990s.
At the height of his anti-Clinton days, Mr. Scaife donated $1.8 million to The American Spectator magazine for what became known as the “Arkansas Project” — an unflattering excavation of the Clintons’ personal lives in Arkansas.
His objective was to publicize, if not eventually validate, accusations about the supposed involvement of the Clintons in corrupt land deals and Mr. Clinton’s extramarital affairs, among other things.
But once Mrs. Clinton began running for president, Mr. Scaife — and his thick checkbook — remained on the sidelines, surprising many who predicted he would leap at the chance to dredge up new, potentially scandalous information about her.
That apparent indifference seems to have morphed into tepid enthusiasm for her.
During the meeting at The Tribune-Review, Mr. Scaife said in his article, he found common ground with Mrs. Clinton on the need to pull troops out of Iraq; on the bumbling federal efforts to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina; and on the “increasing instability in Pakistan and South America.”
Aides to Mrs. Clinton said they had not known what to expect from the March 24 meeting with Mr. Scaife and the staff of his newspaper. But sitting next to Mr. Scaife, Mrs. Clinton quickly broke the ice, remarking that she had agreed to the meeting because “it was so counterintuitive, I just thought it would be fun to do.” The line drew laughter from those in the room.
There is, of course, a healthy dose of skepticism over Mr. Scaife’s motives. Some wonder if he is rooting for the candidate whom some Republicans view as easier to defeat in the general election.
“I wouldn’t trust Scaife’s motives in this,” said Robert M. Shrum, a longtime Democratic consultant who is not aligned with any campaign this year.
Mr. Scaife could not be reached for comment Sunday. Asked about Mr. Scaife’s article, Kathleen Strand, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Clinton, said, “As she showed in New York and as a senator, Hillary Clinton is in the solutions business and has demonstrated the ability to bridge old divides and get things done. Winning over Mr. Scaife is just another example.”
Mr. Scaife wrote that he was not ready to endorse Mrs. Clinton over Senator Barack Obama of Illinois in the Pennsylvania primary. Mr. Obama, he noted, has yet to meet with the Tribune-Review staff.
Word of the meeting came as the Clinton campaign continued to insist that the senator would stay in the race, despite Mr. Obama’s lead in delegates. On Sunday, one of her top backers, Gov. Edward G. Rendell of Pennsylvania, said he would “love” to see Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton on a ticket together.
Michael Cooper contributed reporting.
The simple reason this time around is the insidious, unreasonable and blatant hatred of Hillary has consumed the media, pundits and white middle class liberals.
I have also noticed in my precinct convention here in Texas that a healthy part of the Obama contingency are white racists males who don't circulate or mingle with blacks and their counter parts, middle aged women who are so wound up that it is obvious they are there just to vote against Clinton. Come November they will guarantee McCain's victory.
This obvious trend is overlooked by blacks and their cohorts the liberal whites who welcome this invasion just to get Obama to win without looking ahead at November. The hostility between these groups is palpable. This is exactly what is wrong with the Democratic Party, they have no focus on what it takes to win in November. The blathering by endorsers who are just playing back room politics, to get back at Bill Clinton for sifting the Party to the center back then and taking away their thunder is why the Democrats will lose again and again. This time it will split the party.
Imagine the lack of vision Howard Dean has that he didn't have the insight to sit down with Obama and tell him that he needs more substantial experience beneath his belt. Dean threw Hillary to the lions without any party unity. The real losers are as always the voters since some really good candidates where thrown under the bus, e.g., Kucinch, Edwards, and Gravel. Instead of the losers past and present put their eggs in one basket.
Come November, Pastor Wright, Rezko and Michelle Obama's thoughtless tongue will be running against McCain. Welcome to any four years of stupid government. And why because this dog and pony show that the Democrats are running is just more of the same. Obama is just another sleazy politician and if his magnanimous statement this past week about allowing Hillary to run is as ridiculous as the rest of his dog and pony show.
This reveals the need for the Democratic Party as as whole to set rules down especially here in Texas that to vote in a primary you need to be a Party member. As an independent I voted Democrat and I know that a substantial number of Republicans here voted for Obama just to knock Hillary out of the race.
Also the delegate system here is easily manipulated to favor which ever campaign can bully their way, by cheating and changing the rules as they go, e.g., combining precincts under the pretense that some precincts are too small and creating chaos at the precinct conventions this I have witness first hand from the Obamaoids. A young white college male contesting an Hispanic older male for position as a delegate to the state convention, is just another example of these shenanigans. His reason "He's a first time voter and feels he has a right to participate nationally." What is that? Blatant arrogance.
It would be wise to nationalize the entire electoral system, one person, one vote.
The reason so many people want Hillary to quit is not that she's running, but how she's running.
Hillary is running a negative smear campaign to tear down Obama. It won't succeed, but it can hurt him. And if by some miracle she gets the nomination, her tactics will have turned off swathes of Democratic voters. She's going around talking up how much experience McCain has, accusing Obama of being "too liberal" and generally spouting Republican talking points. No wonder so many people feel her goal is to destroy Obama as a candidate so that she can run in 2012.
If Hillary wants to keep going, that's her right, but she should run as a Democrat, not as a McCain surrogate.
This democrat party division is very destructive to both Obama and Clinton for two reasons. McCain is a respected and straight talking man who has character and will be a formidable opponent in November. The democrat party is acting as though either Obama or Clinton will win an easy victory in November. That may not be a realistic assumption.
Second, the American people are looking for strong leadership and, as called at the Military Academies, "Unity of Command". The Democratic party is demonstrating the total lack of focus of the party that has defeated them before. The Gauls had about 500,000 fierce warriors against Caesar's much lesser number...the Gauls had no true unity of command...the romans did. The rest is history.
I say to both Democratic candidates that they may become history if they continue to divide the party while McCain grows stronger. Military history shows us the folly of ignoring opponents who are building their strength while we quarrel in vain. WW II! Any Democrats remember that folly of lack of focus on the opposition?
Like McCain, I was a military officer and had the same training and education as him and also fought the same war. He is concentrating on building his forces to win. He may!
Here, here. Let's hope McCain prevails over those two other buffoons.
"HOODWINKED IN AMERICA"
OBAMA HAS "HOODWINKED" AMERICA, WITH HIS LIES, HIS ANTI- AMERICAN FRIENDS, MANIPULATION AND BLACKMAIL.
OBAMA HAS "HOODWINKED" THE GOOD PEOPLE OF CHICAGO! ASK YOURSELF, WHY OBAMA DID NOT USE HIS INFLUENCE AND POSITION , TO STOP REZCO'S SLUM LORD PRACTICE? HE CHOOSE RATHER TO TURN HIS HEAD TO THAT DEPLORABLE PRACTICE, IN EXCHANGE FOR REZCO'S HELP TO PUT HIMSELF(AND MICHELLE) INTO A MANSION.( LET US NOT FORGET REZCO RAISED OVER THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR OBAMA (HE LIED ABOUT THAT AMOUNT ALSO))
HAS THE PRESS AND MEDIA BEEN "HOODWINKED" ? SEEMS THEY HAVE BEEN, WITH MORE OBAMA SMOOTH TALK AND PROPAGANDA. IF NOT "HOODWINKED"? PERHAPS WE NOW SEE HOW IT IS POSSIBLE TO BUY ENOUGH AD SPACE, TO PERSUAD MEDIA OUTLETS TO TURN THEIR HEADS WHILE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA GETS "HOODWINKED"
OBAMA BLOCKED RE-DO'S IN FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN HE "HOODWINKED" THE GOOD PEOPLE OF THOSE TWO STATES AND HE WILL "HOODWINK" YOU IF YOU LET HIM.
OBAMA "I NEVER HEARD ANY OF THOSE COMMENTS BY MY FRIEND AND PASTOR JEREMIAH WRIGHT," IN 20 YEARS "HOOWINKED"
OBAMA "THERE WAS NO MEETING WITH CANADA,OPPS "HOODWINKED"
OBAMA "I DO NOT AGREE WITH MY ANTI-AMERICAN FRIEND WILLIAM AYERS,(AYERS DECLARED WAR ON THE UNITED STATES AND PLOTED TO OVER THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT) YEA "HOODWINKED"
OBAMA " I ATTENDED TRINITY FOR TWENTY YEARS ,AND I DID NOT KNOW THAT JEREMIAH WRIGHT GAVE LOUISE FARRAKHAN A LIFE TIME ACHIEVMENT AWARD "HOODWINKED".
"FACTS ,FICTION ,MEMOIRS AND MYTHS OF A HOODWINKER" YET TO BE PUBLISHED, BOOK THREE IN THE OBAMA SERIES.
WHEN YOU THINK "OBAMA" THINK "HOODWINKED"
JUST WORDS : "OBAMA" , "HOODWINKED"
If Obama supporters insist on trying to strong-arm Hillary out, you'll see a "girlcott" of the November elections like you'd never want to see.
Although certainly not insurmountable with super delegates figured in, Obama's pledged delegate lead of about 160 or so is considerable. True, compared to the around 2700 total thus far, 160 doesn't seem like much. However, you have to remember the true significance of such a number when a comfortable primary win in a small state may give the victor 2 or 3 more delegates than the loser and a win in a larger state can result in a net gain of less than a dozen. Keeping in mind the way pledged delegates are assigned, 160 is a bunch. In reality, the pledged delegate race isn't even close to close.
Democrats NEED Clinton to stay in the race. OBAMA IS UNELECTABLE IN GENERAL ELECTION. Wright pastor of candidate Obama, says you don't have to wait for the afterlife for the mansion on the hilltop. Trinity United Church of Christ is building Rev. Wright a $1 mil house on a lot that was purchased for $345,000. According to his federal income tax return Obama gave the Trinity United church $22,500 in contributions. CBS Chicago has strangely not released video they have of Obama at Trinity United Church of Christ Service with Pastor Wright. According to a Chicago Tribune article, at the Service Obama spoke to the cheering congregation and the choir sang, “Hallelujah Barack”. After the service Wright and Obama sat together, laughing , talking and signing books. if ANY other candidate had this controversy swirling the footage would have found it’s way to the national and cable news networks by now! Obama who marched with Farrakhan”Obama AND OPRAHS Pastor Slurs Italians in Latest Magazine (CNSNews.com) Wright continues his Obama supported attacks on non-blacks now slurring Italians in issue of Trumpet Newsmag. Wright states, Jesus enemies had their opinion, Italians looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans, and Jesus death on a cross was a public lynching Italian style! This government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the KKKlan of white supremacy who is clearly in charge. Every issue published Wright's rant against white people in which he covers a world that is controlled by white supremacy, a country that’s on its way to hell in a hand basket because of lying politicians, in a culture that still thinks 'white is right! He said young African-American Christians are more concerned about 'bling bling' than about freeing their minds and still Obama says I could no more disown him than I could disown the black community. Trumpet Newsmagazine started 80s, Wright is CEO and Wright's daughter, Jeri Wright, is the publisher. Requests for comments Obama camp of course not answered. Trumpet Nov/Dec edition, featured Louis Farrakhan, recipient of the Lifetime Achievement "Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter" award. Farrakhan has called Judaism a "gutter religion" and said Jews are "bloodsuckers. Many of the biased cable news pundits try to make viewers believe Obama's speech limited damage of Wright controversy, but the general election will show voters strongly disagree, especially non-black voters. Obama refuses to explain to the public why he would have someone as such a close spiritual advisor and mentor and why he would expose two young daughters to such hatefulness against fellow Americans. The problem Wright's comments are not theological views, but political statements. This is a serious issue for Obama in general election. As with each new utterance on the topic of Reverend Wright, Barack Obama confirms his own moral obliviousness and he seems to have disdain for those who are troubled by his own unwillingness to break with Wright, even worse Obama still insists Wright is a brilliant man, So brilliant, apparently, that he has uncovered the plot by white America to kill African Americans, so insightful to perceive the 9/11 attacks caused by American terrorism and his discerning observation Israel is a “dirty” word, and still in Obama’s eyes, Wright is brilliant. This, we are told by biased cable news pundits like CNN Obamaphiles, is not supposed to affect voters’ view of Obama’s judgment. Perhaps voters are embarrassed to tell pollsters they are privately offended. General election Republicans as well as independents and democrats are irked by this moral obtuseness even though media like CNN or Hardball cover it up with bogus Clinton attacks.
Democrats NEED Clinton to stay in the race. OBAMA IS UNELECTABLE IN GENERAL ELECTION. Wright pastor of candidate Obama, says you don't have to wait for the afterlife for the mansion on the hilltop. Trinity United Church of Christ is building Rev. Wright a $1 mil house on a lot that was purchased for $345,000. According to his federal income tax return Obama gave the Trinity United church $22,500 in contributions. CBS Chicago has strangely not released video they have of Obama at Trinity United Church of Christ Service with Pastor Wright. According to a Chicago Tribune article, at the Service Obama spoke to the cheering congregation and the choir sang, “Hallelujah Barack”. After the service Wright and Obama sat together, laughing , talking and signing books. if ANY other candidate had this controversy swirling the footage would have found it’s way to the national and cable news networks by now! Obama who marched with Farrakhan”Obama AND OPRAHS Pastor Slurs Italians in Latest Magazine (CNSNews.com) Wright continues his Obama supported attacks on non-blacks now slurring Italians in issue of Trumpet Newsmag. Wright states, Jesus enemies had their opinion, Italians looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans, and Jesus death on a cross was a public lynching Italian style! This government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the KKKlan of white supremacy who is clearly in charge. Every issue published Wright's rant against white people in which he covers a world that is controlled by white supremacy, a country that’s on its way to hell in a hand basket because of lying politicians, in a culture that still thinks 'white is right! He said young African-American Christians are more concerned about 'bling bling' than about freeing their minds and still Obama says I could no more disown him than I could disown the black community. Trumpet Newsmagazine started 80s, Wright is CEO and Wright's daughter, Jeri Wright, is the publisher. Requests for comments Obama camp of course not answered. Trumpet Nov/Dec edition, featured Louis Farrakhan, recipient of the Lifetime Achievement "Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter" award. Farrakhan has called Judaism a "gutter religion" and said Jews are "bloodsuckers. Many of the biased cable news pundits try to make viewers believe Obama's speech limited damage of Wright controversy, but the general election will show voters strongly disagree, especially non-black voters. Obama refuses to explain to the public why he would have someone as such a close spiritual advisor and mentor and why he would expose two young daughters to such hatefulness against fellow Americans. The problem Wright's comments are not theological views, but political statements. This is a serious issue for Obama in general election. As with each new utterance on the topic of Reverend Wright, Barack Obama confirms his own moral obliviousness and he seems to have disdain for those who are troubled by his own unwillingness to break with Wright, even worse Obama still insists Wright is a brilliant man, So brilliant, apparently, that he has uncovered the plot by white America to kill African Americans, so insightful to perceive the 9/11 attacks caused by American terrorism and his discerning observation Israel is a “dirty” word, and still in Obama’s eyes, Wright is brilliant. This, we are told by biased cable news pundits like CNN Obamaphiles, is not supposed to affect voters’ view of Obama’s judgment. Perhaps voters are embarrassed to tell pollsters they are privately offended. General election Republicans as well as independents and democrats are irked by this moral obtuseness even though media like CNN or Hardball cover it up with bogus Clinton attacks.
obama's arrogance and condescension are appalling. many hillary supporters used to be willing to support obama if he became the nominee, but are no longer willing to do so. many, many hillary supporters have also become obama haters - myself included.
the party tells us that we will fall in line later. they are wrong. they apparently do not understand that the more they take us for granted, the less likely they are to win us over. i know that they will never win me over.
Hillary has different genitalia than Ted or Gary. Different rules.
President Bush's former chief strategist, who left the White House in 2007, pegged Obama as a do-nothing senator who talked big and achieved little. "What bills has he sponsored?" Rove asked. Easy to see the Republican attack ads against Obama, especially since he continues defending Wrights hateful Racism and attacks on white America Will open with videos of racist wife, Michelle, saying she was proud of America "for the first time" because of her husband's presidential run, next Obama explaining he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin or hold his hands to his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance because it is a substitute for patriotism, next clip Obama explaining that his Caucasian grandmother was a "typical white person, because she was afraid of black people. Finally, the coup de grace, video & pictures of Obama's angry, arm-waving preacher blaming the United States for 9/11 and shouting "God Damn America" to the rafters of TCC and preaching the U.S. government formulated the HIV AIDS virus to commit genocide against blacks. Obama continues to publically support Wright's shocking verbal assaults against the U.S and White Americans and financially supports Wright. All this and Obama was the first to publically demand Imus ouster for saying Nappy Headed? A true example of Obamas poor judgment continues to support racism at the church for more than 20 years, as he and Michelle feels it’s a good environment to expose their young daughters too is extremely sad. His opinions and issues change with the weather, he is UNSTABLE and proven he cannot make a decision or stay with one. As democrats WE WILL NEVER SUPPORT AN OBAMA NOMINATION! We agree with Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter who told ABC News, He Would Have Quit Church if His Pastor Made Such Remarks.
If that’s not enough, then you start showing his terrible senate voting record, Obama when faced with tough choices always gave in to pressure from the Bush administration or corporate lobbyists, Obama dealings with one of his largest contributors, Exelon, a big nuclear power company and the deals he cut behind closed doors to protect them from full disclosure in the nuclear industry. Obamas record shows he infact did support the war when he got to the senate, voted twice against bringing America's troops back home. He voted for war appropriations giving our money to Halliburton and Blackwater where Texas woman, was gang-raped by her co-workers at a Halliburton/KBR camp in Baghdad, His latest bit of posturing S 433 allows the Bush Administration to suspend any troop withdrawal, if not suspended, keeps the troops in Iraq for a long time to come, but in his camp stumps touts he wants to bring troops home, but as we have witnessed his recent lies to voters like Canada he cannot be trusted on his word and lastly ALL the corrupt indicted financial backers, like Rezko…Get out of the race Obama you are destroying the democratic party!
Obama needs to drop out
ToDanRemy: Since you, too, earned your Ensign bar at the Naval Academy, I hope you will be supporting John McCain, and helping unify this country in a way that no single political party can. We not only need unity of command, we need unity as a country....as we had in World War I and World War II. I salute your service and patriotism.
Curious how short our historical memory is...
http://www.slate.com/id/2187780/
... and we are still talking about if she should stay or leave...
I hope we do see a girlcott. The Dems are SO afraid they may have to go against the youth vote or the black vote if Hillary gets the popular vote...why aren't they afraid of us...the women, the majority voters for eons? I have given my money to Hillary and I keep emailing my response to the solicitations for the Democratic Party "general" fund as follows: let me see respect for my years of participation and my candidate's love of this country and gut-busting hard work (she exhausts me). I know it sounds selfish and we women are the first to think of others but not this time - sorry, not this time. I will do a write-in for Hillary as she is by far the most qualified and experinced candidate running.
"Mini-revival" on March 4th? Are you joking? Why does the media go along with this nonsense? Clinton only gained 7 delegates on March 4th, which she promptly lost in Mississippi and Wyoming over the course of the following week. Get real. Clinton should drop out.
Your analysis is fine as far as it goes; however, it ignores the 800 pound gorilla in the middle of the room. The negative campaigning that Sen. Clinton is engaging in is having a signficant impact on Sen. Obama's standing with many independent / have not made up my mind yet voters. Since she has virtually no chance of winning the nomination why does she insist on dragging the Democratic Party and the nation through this "tear down Obama" process. If she would place the interests of the poor, those without health insurance, those longing for an end to the Iraw war, etc. first then she should withdraw now and enthusiatically throw her support behind Sen. Obama.
If somehow Sen. Obama was to have a spectacular meltdown (i.e., he is a illegal alien from Mars), then of course the party would nominate her.
What she is doing now qualifies as a working defination of narcissism to the max and a form of insanity.
Obama is a master at raising money and runs his campaign with ruthless efficiency, I wonder if he will run the government the same way.
I wonder if the people who are supporting her, are still going to donate money. Even though she is going to blow it or mis-spend it on pastries and food.
Some of her bills tell the story (one-time expenses)
Enterprise Rent-A-Car - $171,675
Hertz - $46,319
Bellagio hotel - $25,478
A-Plus valet parking - $918
Donuts - $1433
Subway - $2500
Hyvee supermarket - $96,079
Keep feeding the hog. A fool and his money are soon parted.
Judging by the size of her pant suits and the size of the other women on stage with her at rallies they are spending far too much on cakes and pastries. Just look at the breakdown on how much she has spent on donuts !!! Size 20 + quit eating so much HRC save your money for campaigning.
Although I would like Clinton to quit now so we can lanch a Democratic candidate at McCain ASAP, I have been persuaded by the argument that she has the right to campaign throughout the scheduled primary season. However, threats to battle over delegate seating at the convention are not helpful; this ends in June, hopefully Clinton will see that.
Just BTW, the analogy between Hart and Clinton is rather weak, since Hart self-destructed and even before his scandal, his weakness was becoming obvious; the fight between Mondale and Hart remained rather civil throughout, unlike Clinton's viciousness, which has no parallel in Democratic Party politics but appears to be something she learned from the Goldwater/Rockefeller primary of '64 - although god knows why she thinks this is a viable model for a presidential election!
I think that for all her flaws, Hillary loves her country and doesn't want a Manchurian candidate who has deliberately sought out extremist American-haters for 20 years to get the Dem nomination by default.
How can your analysis not consider the impact of the internet and 24/7 "coverage". The difference of scale in terms of information and strategic dissemination of talking points is so vast between this election and 80/84. Your reference to "savvy" doesn't do justice to the differences between now and then.
Also, one doesn't have to even read the articles posted on RealClearPolitics to see how various pundits consistently promote a very strategic position.
Is the delegate lead slim or insurmountable? Is the popular vote easily within her grasp (picking up 250K margin in Puerto Rico, 20+% victories in Penn, Indiana, etc.) or highly unlikely? Was Obama's speech on race great or did he throw his grandmother under the bus?
Reading the comments speaks to why some might think the campaign is destructive
How can your analysis not consider the impact of the internet and 24/7 "coverage". The difference of scale in terms of information and strategic dissemination of talking points is so vast between this election and 80/84. Your reference to "savvy" doesn't do justice to the differences between now and then.
Also, one doesn't have to even read the articles posted on RealClearPolitics to see how various pundits consistently promote a very strategic position.
Is the delegate lead slim or insurmountable? Is the popular vote easily within her grasp (picking up 250K margin in Puerto Rico, 20+% victories in Penn, Indiana, etc.) or highly unlikely? Was Obama's speech on race great or did he throw his grandmother under the bus?
Reading the comments speaks to why some might think the campaign is destructive
Look, I hate Hillary as much as the next guy, but Pelosi's absurd comments about how the superdelegates shouldn't override the will of the people made root for Hillary in the contest. The Superdelegates, not the pledged delegates, ARE going to decide. As for overriding the will of the people... Obviously, the people haven't decided, ie., giving either of them enough pledged delegates to win. If Obama were the people's clear choice, we wouldn't be talking about the superdelegates now at all! The simple fact is that, just like Hillary, Obama has not, and will not be able to, line up enough pledge delegates to win. Why should Hillary pull out for the good of the party? For not doing what Obama hasn't been able to do either? They are equally entitled to see it through. Neither of them would do their consituents any good by resigning. If one of them wants to pull out, fine. But neither should be compelled.
McCain is easy to define you know the Straight Talk Express!
1. Your sons will get drafted for war with Iran, this how we get out of Iraq.
2. $12.00 a gallon gasoline for your Trucks and SUV’s, more wars for oil.
3. Your homes will loose 50% more of there value, that’s your dumb fault you bought it you can loose it.
4. Father of the next great Depression in America
5. If you get sick that’s your fault. No Health Care not the Governments Job.
6. Pardons Bush and Channey for lying about WMD’s and Al-Qaeda in Iraq
This piece makes a lot of sense. The issue of the popular vote is particularly interesting. A recent spreadsheet, posted on the web by Jay Cost, allows quick computations of the popular vote. And it shows something interesting: with reasonable assumptions for the remaining states (including a big Clinton margin in Puerto Rico) and including Florida and MIchigan, Clinton could quite plausibly win the popular vote. Then the argument will be simply this: who has more Democratic primary voters on their side? Will the super delegates override the popular will? Will Obama be able to fend off arguments that his candidacy is an exercise in affirmative action. The simple truth is that the vote is extremely close. And these so-called "elders" and "grown-ups" are so dysfunctional that they couldn't resolve Florida and Michigan. You can count on them to take actions that will maximize chaos. Good luck!!
Hillary Clinton will take Pennsylvania and if this had been a level playing field, she would also take Michigan and Florida and then she would be ahead of Obama. So it's so easy for all of the media to harp on the fact that Obama is ahead, but if this election had truly been carried out according to our democratic process, Hillary would be in the lead right now.
Bottom line is this. Obama is no longer surging ahead like he was two months ago. The American people no longer have any confidence in this man, except of course for the African American population in this country, who would vote for Obama no matter what.........I for one......hope Hillary sticks this out, because, I am just waiting for one more issue to topple Obama, and then let's see who gets the super delegates......Don't count her out, it's not over yet!