Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Clinton Rules: Telling the Fat Lady When To Sing
Thanks to Eric Boehlert via MyDD for bringing up one more refrain of the Clinton Rules, in this case the sudden Concern Trolling of the MSM and so-called "Progressives" as to how Hillary's "destroying the party" and "why won't she quit?", conveniently forgetting that nasty primary fights lasting way too long have been quite the norm for Democrats, and somehow these were never a problem in former years, when say they were the whims of a candidate with no chance in hell still blasting away at Bill Clinton up to the convention.
Of obvious humor and irony is the chorus from people who not long ago were hoping for the endorsement of John Edwards and mulling over the appropriate compensation (or "Quid Pro Quo", as it's called in the in the payoff racket), who now feel that Hillary, who's so far mustered some 17 million people out to vote for her, is owed absolutely nothing. (Oh, okay, possibly some token appointment of Sibelius for those who didn't get the memo that identity politics is supposedly dead - and for those who haven't figured out that a lot of people who aren't 60 year old white women with enormous bank accounts are still voting for Hillary).
Actually, Eric is a little behind the times - a quick trip to the Daily Howler Archives from January & February 2007 shows that the same MSM and progressive punditry was already at work then - declaring Hillary washed up, she's really Bill's 3rd Term, how will she control Bill?, too divisive, doomed once Obama and/or Edwards enter the race, a ballcutter, will do anything to win, Monica, and so on. 16 months ago.
Hillary will continue to the convention for one simple reason - to get as much from the process as she can get - whether the nomination, the VP slot, or whatever other assorted combination of goodies is warranted for her huge stake of voters - a true Universal Health Care package? A sensible strong foreign/domestic security policy? More focus on women's issues? More fiscal responsibility? Less catering to Republicans? Because what some people don't get is that the "Party" includes Hillary supporters, and if the "Party" is demonizing half of its voters, it's hard to decide who's leaving whom. The outright slurs against the elderly and the "racist Bubba vote" have not been pretty. The widened rupture between white feminists and feminists of color, while understandable, is disconcerting in its vehemence and lack of marginal shared empathy.
Obama fans seem to have taken to heart Hillary's pledge to fight on as a Democrat whoever wins, even while tossing out rumors of Hillary & supporters joining McCain or in other ways going over to the dark side. What doesn't seem to be happening in any meaningful way is Obama reaching across the aisle to his own party. I suppose having effectively branded Hillary as a racist traitor to his own club this will be tough to do, but there's a certain amount of delusion in thinking that a Sibelius or Richardson VP slot won't be a significant come-down from an energy packed season. The fact that these two lackluster candidates are leading the Daily Kos/OpenLeft poll gives an idea how poorly most progressives do as effective campaign strategists - had Al Gore chosen a running mate with a modicum of personality on the campaign trail (instead of a legacy pioneer long past expiration date for most voters), we'd likely be having a completely different conversation these days. But if there's anything that "Clinton Rules" tells us, it's that vitriol will rule over logic in those who hate Hillary the best. What should be obvious is that most voters are not addicted to blogs - and will vote whatever way they feel. If the Democratic ticket does not excite them, they will stay home, vote for a 3rd party, or even vote for McCain. If Hillary supporters see their candidate dissed, it's hard to imagine a full base supporting the ticket. This of course works the other direction as well, but Hillary fans seem to grasp this, whereas the Obama side seems to feel like it's exorcising ghosts and slamming the door shut. This of course does not smack of the "inclusive" campaign once promised, and worse, it threatens both the Presidential aspiration as well as many down-ballot candidates and ballot initiatives. It is time for Obama followers to start seriously considering what is good for the party.
Comments (170)
I think you exaggerate greatly.
May 11, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did Eric Boehlert exaggerate? Did Daily Howler exaggerate? Did I distort the Daily Kos poll? Did I exaggerate that Obama fans seem to be saying no way to a Hillary VP? How about you just come out and list a few specific ways in which I exaggerate?
May 11, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...and if the "Party" is demonizing half of its voters, it's hard to decide who's leaving whom. The outright slurs against the elderly and the "racist Bubba vote" have not been pretty. The widened rupture between white feminists and feminists of color, while understandable, is disconcerting in its vehemence and lack of marginal shared empathy.
Obama fans seem to have taken to heart Hillary's pledge to fight on as a Democrat whoever wins, even while tossing out rumors of Hillary & supporters joining McCain or in other ways going over to the dark side. What doesn't seem to be happening in any meaningful way is Obama reaching across the aisle to his own party. I suppose having effectively branded Hillary as a racist traitor to his own club this will be tough to do..."
May 11, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
To clarify: 1) you take a statement made by one person -- e.g., Rendell -- and attribute it to the whole party. Exaggeration.
2) what slurs against the elderly you're talking about, I have no idea, so why don't you give me an example of widespread abusive comments about the elderly among Democratic leaders and then I'll judge. Until then I will continue to assume you're exaggerating. And fabricating.
3) Obama fans don't all accuse Hillary of going to over the "the dark side;" most of us hope Clinton supporters are rational and won't vote against their beliefs. So again. Exaggeration and gross generalization.
4) Obama isn't reaching across the aisle to his own party. Can't quite figure this out. Just seems a little off to me. I mean, last I heard on Friday, he was talking to super-delegates and trying hard to form a coalition. And if you mean here he's not reaching across to Sen. Clinton, again you've taken a part for a whole. Gross generalization = exaggeration again.
Besides that, would you actually like Sen. Obama to count Sen. Clinton out of the race and not treat her as an opponent anymore? I mean, last I heard, she was still running. Please advise me if this has changed. The big handshake usually doesn't come until a game is over.
Or is it that you think Sen. Obama should have written Sen. Clinton a check for her campaign debts, not simply offered to help her out with them?
4) Sen. Obama has "effectively branded Sen. Clinton as a racist traitor?" This rather goes beyond simple sexaggeration to the realm of outright lying and outrageous hyperbole (another form of exaggeration).
And the truth her is, Sen. Clinton has done her own branding her, of course, aided by a totally sensationalist media. So possibly you should complain to them about their coverage and analysis and leave the outlandish accusations against Sen. Obama out of it.
May 11, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Hillary has done exactly what to win back AA support? Support she and her campaign systematically squandered.
May 12, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
The liberal contempt for the Bubba vote is no secret, and the number of times I've heard comments saying old people don't count or just making fun of them in the last year is quite disconcerting. Presumably you've heard about the split amongst feminists, no?
For months we've been hearing about Hillary "destroying her party" by continuing to challenge for the nomination - even the head of the party, Dean, coming out and saying this and then retracting a bit. It was horrible that a former President would campaign for his wife, but perfectly okay for Carter to come out and say she should quit.
I've explained the blown-up bit about racism too many times, including that "Fairy Tale" was specifically a comment about Obama's position on the Iraq War, not on his candidacy, as well as Jesse Jackson Jr.'s campaigning for Obama in October in South Carolina based on the precedent of his father and what it means to "our (black) movement". There's an NPR interview out there that makes this even clearer. But Bill Clinton has been effectively branded a racist, and subsequently Hillary. Congratulations. Mission Accomplished.
Now, how do you make nice, or do you think it all just goes away on its own because Hillary's a good Democrat and no one has to do anything to mend fences?
May 11, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, one man's ceiling is another man's floor.
May 11, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't that "one man or woman's ceiling is another man or woman's floor?"
May 11, 2008 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blue dude, I think it's "one woman's ceiling is another man's floor".
May 11, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I walked into one the way anna just did, I'd be screaming, too.
May 12, 2008 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
One woman's squealing is another man's snore.
May 12, 2008 2:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
One woman's reeling from another man's war.
May 12, 2008 2:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
And Obama's team - especially Axelrod - did the branding. Good politics. As usual. And as usual, the left does as much or more damage than the right.
Sorry if you haven't seen continual insults against elderly - I have.
Regarding "going over to the dark side", yes, I've seen slur after slur that Hillary will support McCain, be his VP, etc., etc. I don't get the sense that Obama followers have any idea why Hillary supporters support her, and it all seems like "just give up" with appeal to party loyalty, rather than say trying to pull in Edwards supporters with arguments as to why Obama's their guy. My 2 cents, ignore as you like.
May 11, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
We will, don't worry.
May 11, 2008 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The liberal contempt for the Bubba vote is no secret,
Hard to deny. As one well-known Democratic candidate put it in 1995 (as confirmed by four people at the meeting), when talking about working-class white Southerners:
Who was it who said that (according to four people who were in the meeting)? Anyone remember?
May 11, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was I! I have said it many times. It's true isn't it?
May 11, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have not seen many who claim that hillary is tearing the party apart by continuing her campaign. It is the conduct of her campaign that I have complained about and heard others complain about. I personaly think it would hurt Obama if she drops out before the 21st. But her behavior in the meantime has been intended to hurt him in the general. I am beginning, however, to doubt that she can really hurt him. She just lacks the credibility to do so. He has moved on and is refraining from saying anything that is not complementary about her. I do not have it in me to praise her but I am no longer woried about her.
May 12, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said Desidero. It is shameful how Obama and his minions here and elsewhere have taken 8 years of peace and prosperity and turned it on its head for political gain.
Shameful.
May 12, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
All democrats resent Gov. Rendell's Bubba slur.
May 11, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
not sure on "all"
May 11, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
all real democrats?
May 11, 2008 11:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like those who've promised to campaign for the GOP?
May 12, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Unity Baby declares this the quote of the day.
May 11, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent, I'm back in the Allsburg contest, feeling fit and trim and ready to compete.
May 11, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good. I'm tired of coddling these wimps myself.
May 11, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
O...now you're back as Billy Glad.
Gee, thanks for messing up the Michelle Obama thread as Desidero, Billy.
Very uncool.
May 11, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you actually claiming that chimpo is Billy Glad? Come off it.
May 11, 2008 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
No,
You come offa the drug you use.
May 11, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
flower person
true, i once did drugs in another life, long ago before the two-step was replaced by the twelve step...
but flower thing , don't lay out crap without references.
It's abusive
May 11, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, I'm in awe of the chimp, the blue man, readytoblowagasket, the subcommandante, artappraiser, bslev, allsburg, elliotness, the lighthouse, the old guy, the bronx girl, beach girl, articleman and so many others I can't name them or in the case of the cat disguised as a bunny and some others won't name them. And I'd love to be any one of them, but I'm just me. Although some perverse part of me would enjoy leading you to think I'm really bionic soy.
May 11, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
You're not intelligent enough to be Bionic Soy.
But I will say that you do have more than one moniker that you use here. Sometimes at the same time.
It's sad. Because I thought you were cooler than that.
May 11, 2008 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah. I'm not smart enough to keep more than one voice going at a time. I'll admit I've kicked your ass so often it probably feels like more than one person.
May 12, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking from experience, being able to transmogrophy is no picnic. Even now I'm torn between regressive guttural noises, primitive signs of aggression, ecclesiastic proscription or light beam incineration, and that's after honing down my personalities to a bare minimum. Oh yeah, and hurling pea green soup at people, but I think I got that out of my system.
May 11, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
that would be a seriously long graphic file
May 11, 2008 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always thought it was guacamole.
May 11, 2008 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Billy, don't even think it.
May 11, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I tell you what.
That cute kitty with the bunny ears...don't take him lightly.
I've seen him put you up against the wall intellectually.
May 11, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
SO ! you ARE the bunny. I always knew it. Similar style of short word groupings.
May 11, 2008 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weak.
May 11, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK. Plant.
I'll have to deduct points for your lapse into crap-speak. A single word that is obvious, derivative and shows neither wit or charm is crap-speak like the dreaded LOL.
Stand down plant. You're too boring.
May 11, 2008 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me get this straight. You really think Desidero and Billy Glad are the same person? Wanna put forth a theory?
May 11, 2008 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're talking to a potted plant, which is somewhere well below a sock puppet on the evolutionary scale.
May 11, 2008 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, far be it from me to challenge you on theories of evolution. I'm choose Chimp over Fauna!
May 11, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, that was a bit dismissive - you can rip off its leaves and see some kind of rapid electrical impulse response that some people with fertile imaginations seem to infer as "pain". Don't want to be seen as insensitive.
May 11, 2008 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was it Mort Sahl who said fish just have a limited ability to express pain? How much less a plant? It could be in intense pain and we'd never know it.
May 11, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh...plants don't have a central nervous system.
Because...well, they're plants.
May 11, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Found that in Wiki did you? I read that thread. Too much fun, really.
May 11, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you're not a plant at all. You're a hand, handing flowers to another hand. Which appears to be other than your hand. Are you the flowers, the giving hand, the receiving hand? The person on the hand? Or on the other hand? Which one?
May 11, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
nor would the plant
May 11, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
And wasn't it Kierkegaard who once said "The greatest despair is not to know you are in despair."
May 11, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would you expect Kirkengaard to say otherwise?
May 11, 2008 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reminds me of Bergman movies. Thanks, Bronx girl, now I have one more thing to be paranoid about. Best line of the day.
May 12, 2008 3:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
plant
Seriously. You are ducking a specific question, avoiding precision, and seeming a bit disoriented.
You will be run out without ever having made a case other than playground epithets. I heard that happened to you earlier this day when your Wiki window closed.
Stand up up and fight like a plant.
OK I'm bored, I'm out. Chimp. Ya made my day.
May 11, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
chimpo, where you been? this place has been totally dead in the last few days.
give notice when you're gone so i can rent a movie or something.
no wild kingdom, chimpo, no priamal (primate) energy...
gotta have energy...
so look
THE PRIMAY IS KINDA DONE. Old fights seem too old.
What's next?
May 11, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy? what's next
May 11, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm going to contribute to Obama's defeat in Ohio just for grins.
May 11, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting by with a bit of primal scream therapy, letting my inner simian run wild.
May 11, 2008 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
swing it chimpo, sing it chimpo, reign among the trees beast thing
May 11, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the post, Desidero.
This is perfectly understandable.
Agreed. My concern is over the continued potential for weakening the Democratic voter coalition. I want to see an end to the pitting of different voting groups against each other. We obviously need everyone, and it isn't good for any group to feel they're being discounted.
This is unfair. Both candidates have said on record many, many times that, should he or she lose the nomination, he/she will enthusiastically support the nominee and work to bring the party back together for the general election.
Also, I don't recall ever hearing anything from Obama saying or even insinuating that Sen. Clinton is a "racist traitor." You're going over the top here, or you're confusing Obama the candidate with some of his over-zealous supporters, some of whom have indeed stooped to some nasty name-calling.
Once again, I have to point out that claims like this are ridiculous, unfair, and counter-productive. There's plenty of vitriol and anger coming from both sides. Using broad brush to paint Hillary fans as having done a superior job over Obama fans of mastering logic over vitriol is just silly. I'm sorry, but how can anyone take that seriously? It may seem to you that Obama supporters are vicious bullies over here at TPM because they simply outnumber Hillary supporters. It's easy to find the same anti-Obama nastiness at other websites that are dominated by Hillary supporters, believe me. Making claims like this will only inspire an (understandable) defensive response from the side being criticized, and your stated goal will likely go unrealized. Why do that?
May 11, 2008 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, that Daily Howler link seems to have died or something. But I take your word for it. All I can say is that I am shocked at how terrible our political commentariat is at providing any well-reasoned analysis or insight. Most of the chatter seems to focus on the laziest, cheapest, most vapid aspects of these political campaigns. It's an embarrassment.
May 11, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not sure why it didn't copy right: Daily Howler archives. Well worth the persual just to see how far we've come.
May 11, 2008 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fwiw, you used to be someone whose posts I would not bother to read. Not anymore. You're one of the good folks in my book--one of the unifiers. Thanks, and I hope you keep posting.
May 12, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Curious, wonder what I did wrong ;-)
Must be wholesome Christian living shining through.
May 12, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a crock of shit!
May 11, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"chimp shit" or "ape shit" or just the the foulest --human shit.
May 11, 2008 8:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that's funny, can you imagine sharing a cage with them? As for you, I assume you have some blue ozone deodorizing thing going on, though you probably still have to put your pants on one leg at a time.
May 11, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
lost my legs and shit through a tube.
not a whiff of human or animal dung
you can't imagine how much i miss that
May 11, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
My sympathies, must be offal.
May 11, 2008 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he's objecting.
May 11, 2008 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
This psychodrama is getting old.
May 11, 2008 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
not enough energy on the board for an actual drama in my view, flower person
May 11, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Careful, you're talking to a plant. Don't let it bring you down to its level.
May 11, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
ah....chimpo , you honor me
but i am lower that the plant
it sits on a table, while i, legless do push-ups with my tongue on the floor
May 11, 2008 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet you can do laps around it, oh humanoid aardvark. Much of my circumlocution comes with my arms anyway, and may I say occasionally I look on with perverse jealousy at the supple tail theatrics of our monkey cousins. Four arms good, 5 appendages better, I think I read in some book. Anyway, with space travel these body parts just become a bother - you have to lose them to make the monolith anyway.
May 12, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Once, I saw a legless beggar on the subway. Somehow he sat his torso on a skateboard and pushed himself along the floor with his arms while he held a paper cup in his mouth. The paper cup was for contributions, of course.
May 12, 2008 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's pretty standard. The armless guys playing Freebird guitar solos with their toes are more impressive.
May 12, 2008 3:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
1960, 1968 and who can ever forget Ted Kennedy's run in 1980 undertaken after consulting with his family and contesting that nomination to the convention and even there refusing to shake Carter's hand, this fund raiser for Obama who, after once again consulting with his family in a rage at Clinton's disrespectful remark about Jack endorsed Obama and is now sending letters to me asking for money for Obama, the unity candidate, letters sent back, stained brown.
There is plenty of precedent for Hillary taking it to the convention. I hope she does.
May 11, 2008 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel an Eagles song coming on, stop me, quick, anyone....
May 11, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hope she doesn't ask Obama for air fare to the convention.
May 11, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Kennedy is the ONLY precedent and not a particularly persuasive or constructive one
She can fight to the convention but by June Obama will have the delegates he needs. If she wants to be a bitch on wheels, she will do that. You'll be happy and the Clintons will be history.
Que sera sera
May 11, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If she wants to be a bitch on wheels, she will do that".
Wait, did you really write that? And I was taking you seriously below? Laugh out loud; you're a sexist piece of dirt. You think you speak for what's best for the Democratic Party?
At TPM Cafe, racism is not tolerated, but sexism is. Shame shame shame.
May 11, 2008 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just to clarify, lest anyone try and accuse me of condoning racism, I thank heavens that this progressive website, my posting home, rejects racism at the core. It should treat sexism the same way. Shame on us.
May 11, 2008 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It will be a cold day in hell when TPM rejects sexism. This is the home of the "bitch slap" theory of politics, man.
May 11, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
TPM made "pimping Chelsea" famous.
May 12, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
As far as I can recall, President Carter would have lost in 1980 even if Ted Kennedy had withdrawn from the race after his own impressive victory in Pennsylvania that year. The question is whether Senator Obama becomes stronger if Hillary Clinton withdraws now. I just don't see it. Without Hillary to bash, the MSM will be obliged to shift gears and focus on the other triangulators in the race.
Of course, Hillary's continued presence in the race could only be a problem for Senator Obama if she had more than superficial appeal to real voters. Imagine that.
Of course, I've read about 46,726 articles and posts and have seen lots of TV segments about how Hillary is destroying the Party's chances by staying in the race, but nobody has ever explained to me how that works. How is Obama helped if Hillary withdraws? Do we all of a sudden kiss and make up and not have these feelings about one another? Does the lion all of a sudden lay down with the lamb? Do we all of a sudden feel the love? Is that how it works?
May 11, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No,
You just go cast an informed vote.
May 11, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't make informed votes. I just reflexively vote Democratic, and I'll do the same this year, and I'll never look back. But still, I don't understand how getting Hillary out of the race helps Obama. And I don't understand how her visits to Mellon-Scaife and her clumsy at-best references to demographics hurt Obama--unless of course lots of folks want her to be the Democratic nominee. How does she make people feel the love for the good Senator from Illinois?
Of course, all of this is just plain nonsense, because, if Hillary's continued presence in the race is really a problem for the Democrats and the Nation, then the real culprits around these here parts these days are the weak and wimpy superdelegates. If things are so bad they should just all throw their support behind the good Senator from Illinois. Why do they not do that? Because they are weak, and because they fear 50 percent of the party that still supports Hillary Clinton. Well, if 50 percent of the Party supports Hillary Clinton, then 50 percent of the party continues to support Hillary Clinton.
The Party is weak, and Senator Obama is not strong enough to put the Party leaders in their place. That's not Hillary Clinton's fault. But in any event, I ask, how does it help Senator Obama if she leaves the race? And, further, how does it help Senator Obama if she festers without campaigning like she's not in it to win it. You don't tell a racehorse to just go through the motions at Aqueduct. And, if she offends people like the tough guy below me by talking to right-wing newspapers who have said nothing worse about Hillary Clinton than is said on this website every single day (see 93 percent of all recommended posts), doesn't that help Obama? Doesn't it help him if she sticks around to be hated? I guess the answer is it only hurts him if people still like her. even if people hate her. . .or something like that.
May 11, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. I refer to the tough guy below me only because he does look tough as heck in his avatar. That was not meant to offend.
May 11, 2008 10:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carter says as much and the Iran hostage crisis and stagflation were probably more important but Kennedy's convention antics were hardly a benign factor. At any rate, such questions are ultimately a matter of conjecture not objective fact and given the close races in 2000 and 2004, it is fanciful to claim that a Clinton knee capping job at the convention would not be a serious blow, perhaps fatal.
That really is the point. That is why even Clinton supporters like DiFi are getting antsy and some even bolting to Obama
May 11, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
She doesn't have to withdraw from anything. She just has to stop gratuitously bashing the presumptive nominee and start showing what a good democrat she is.
Stop kissing Mellon Scaife's ass. Cut out the race baiting "white people love me". Cut the crap about electability. Stay away from the O'Reilly show, muzzle Flubba and start attacking McCain.
Other than nuke Iran, a few minor differences on Health Care and her unseemly affection for the McCain gas tax pander, there simply aren't any serious policy differences she can claim to be advocating.
Stop being a bitch on wheels and start being the Republican killer she claims to be
May 11, 2008 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. She actually doesn't have to do anything she doesn't want to do. Half the Party is behind her, she's her own woman, millions of people will vote between now and June. Obama might even get up the nerve to get back on the stage with her. She can string this out as long as she wants. What difference does it make? He'll be running against John McCain for chrissakes.
May 11, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's doing something very simple. She's making it clear to everyone, including the super delegates who are going to put Obama over the top, that they are nominating the lesser candidate. Almost everyone except the hardest core Obamanauts can see now that she's the better candidate, undone by the math and the quirky Dem primary process. Technically, he's won. But buyer's remorse is setting in, even before he is formally nominated.
Another load of self serving horseshit. The SuperDelegates who are putting Obama over the top obviously do agree that he is the lesser candidate, that the most inclusive primary process ever by FAR is "quirky". Undone by what math now? Where's the buyer's remorse?
Your disappointment is evidence of your disappointment. Sorry for that. How can we help?
May 11, 2008 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right about Kennedy and Johnson. The point about the 1968 convention was that McCarthy kept the anti-war movement alive at the convention and the Chicago riots damaged a visibly shaken Humphrey. I suppose you could argue that the anti-war movement would have been in Chicago with or without McCarthy. But it was there with him. I'm not sure I'm claiming those races as precedent for anything except the precedent of a candidate taking their campaign to the convention.
I'll stick with my statement that everyone except hard core Obamanauts like you knows she is the better candidate. And that is just going to get worse for you as we go along. I feel your pain. Your guy turned out to be more of the same and boring to boot. You'll be able to google it soon. That should help.
May 11, 2008 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink