home

Hillary's Options

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:10:44 AM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

What are Hillary's options? The AP reports she lent her campaign another $6 million last month and George McGovern today called for her to drop out.

Hillary is campaigning in West Virginia today. The Boston Globe reports/p>

Her senior aides told reporters in a conference call this morning that her win in Indiana, however narrow, allows her to go forward.

Update: On CNN just now, Superdelegate David Parker from North Carolina said he's saying uncommitted. Taylor Marsh live-blogged the Clinton press conference today.

< The Morning After: Clinton Fights On | McCain on Judicial Appointments >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary's Options | 219 comments (219 topical)
    We'll see (5.00 / 8) (#2)
    by andgarden on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:17:58 AM EST
    There's no great way to end a political campaign.

    Watching Obama Lose WVA and KY (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by BDB on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:35 AM EST
    after Clinton has dropped out is actually starting to work for me.

    More seriously, I think Clinton should aim to try to wrap up the remaining contests in a way that doesn't damage Obama, but keeps her viable if Obama melts down over the summer.

    On the upside, if Clinton is really done, then we'll all be getting that gas tax holiday.  Because the minute it's simply a McCain proposal, everyone in the media is going to love it.  And the Republicans will get credit for it and it will be unfunded.  


    [ Parent ]

    Obama needs to win WV and KY (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:26:22 AM EST
    the way McCain needed to win MS. If Hillary's going to suspend her campaign, she should probably ask people in WV not to vote for her. They may nevertheless vote for her, which would be bad. . .

    At this point, I really kinda wish Obama had been able to knock her out in PA. We're muddling toward a disaster.

    [ Parent ]

    A disaster of his making (5.00 / 6) (#34)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:31:40 AM EST
    And I think Hillary should stay in this as long as she can stand to - hopefully to the Convention, where Dean & co. will have some sense knocked into them by members of Congress from purple states, who'll have to run with Obama if he's the head of the ticket.

    Obama is on track to destroy this Party and a lot of the supers know it, which is why they're not rushing to support him.

    [ Parent ]

    Not going to happen, I'm afraid (none / 0) (#47)
    by andgarden on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:36:22 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, I hear you (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:41:29 AM EST
    but at least the Clintons can afford to loan themselves money.  Look, we're almost there - three or so weeks till the primaries are over, and three of them will be wins for our gal.

    After that it's just machinations over MI/FL.

    If Hillary can stand down Ken Starr, you better believe she can handle a pipsqueak like Obama.  Actually, I'm feeling pretty good about her today (and going to give my mom some money to give her, since I can't donate any more.)

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, there is (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by misspeach2008 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:32:43 AM EST
    With a victory.  Look, I know that Hillary's chances are getting slimmer, but I live in Massachusetts and I don't have the luxury of casting a "protest" vote for John McCain that really doesn't change things.  My vote for John McCain may actually help put him in office.  I need to know that we did everything we could to get the nomination for Hillary before I resign myself to President McCain.  Particularly after Donna Brazile's performance last night, there will be no way I will vote for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    who is Tring this comment? (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Salo on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:35:01 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Menopause Meg (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:40:14 AM EST
    see4ms to be having a grand ol' time TRing.

    [ Parent ]
    Some BO supporter (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:43:52 AM EST
    downrating all the pro-Hillary stuff, most likely.  I wouldn't worry about it.

    [ Parent ]
    A newbie this morn, "Menopause Meg" (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by Cream City on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:42:06 AM EST
    who has done dozens of "1's" to many of us.  But no comments from the newcomer . . . or maybe someone we have seen before who played the dozens of "1's" then, too.

    [ Parent ]
    Meh (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:46:23 AM EST
    To trollrate without an explanation IMO is childish. If this person wants to engage in adolescent behavior so be it.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well Then (none / 0) (#223)
    by squeaky on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:40:46 PM EST
    Many more Clinton supporters trollrate here without explanation,  than Obama supporters, is what I have noticed.

    I can understand why that would not come into question for you though. Soon that will pass and we will get back to normal by  focusing on the GOP trolls and issues.


    [ Parent ]

    I' glad she is going forward. (5.00 / 13) (#6)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:19:54 AM EST
    I have gained a new respect for Senator Clinton this campaign cycle. She started out near the bottom of my list and I'll be darned if she hasn't won a place in my heart for the way she has doggedly pursued her goal. A lesser man would have quit already(Then again a lesser MAN wouldn't have known that she'd have to work twice as hard to go half as far.) Senator Clinton is a role model that I'd be pleased s punch t emulate or have mydaughter emulate. I think I'll send her a letter that says as much.

    I agree. She has impressed me with her... (5.00 / 8) (#18)
    by cosbo on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:24:34 AM EST
    tenacity and still standing after so much is against her. The media. The hate. Seriously...I'm still not sure I like her all that much. But damned if she hasn't won my complete respect.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm glad she's going forward too (5.00 / 6) (#56)
    by stefystef on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:41:01 AM EST
    Hillary Clinton is the only person running for President who actually earned the job.

    She is a role model for all Americans.  When this is all over, and November comes and McCain is elected President, perhaps  that is when people will finally have respect for the Clintons.  

    Perhaps.

    [ Parent ]

    Calls for her to quit again? (5.00 / 10) (#7)
    by Step Beyond on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:20:03 AM EST
    If Indiana was the tie-breaker and she won it, then why the renewed calls for Clinton to drop out? I thought these were the results people were expecting.

    We were expecting a 5-10 pt (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by andgarden on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:20:49 AM EST
    win in IN and a single-digit loss in NC. Didn't happen.

    [ Parent ]
    They were only expecting a single digit loss... (5.00 / 9) (#12)
    by northeast73 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:20 AM EST
    ....for about 4 days.  For WEEKS it was supposed to be an Obama blowout (due to the black vote of course) and 2 weeks ago he was 10 points ahead in IN.

    So she made up a LOT of ground and took IN...what is wrong with people?

    [ Parent ]

    Yeahbut (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:23:21 AM EST
    The demographic math doesn't change.  BO won because of the African American vote. Big fat hairy deal.  I understand there's some concern regarding his campaign tactics in IN as well....but why again is it a loss for HRC, when she wins BO's neighboring state despite his 5 to 1 fundraising advantage?

    Here's hoping she's got enough money to stay in a while longer.  I'd give, but I'm maxed out.

    [ Parent ]

    Its a Big Fat Hairy Deal (none / 0) (#60)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:42:49 AM EST
    Because we are at least 10% of the population and vote democratic year after year.  Why would you discount the black vote like that?  What is the point?  It sounds demeaning to me, though I am sure you don't mean it like that.  

    We have 2 great candidates, both have sizable groups behind them that are voting for them because they are (first off both very smart and accomplished) and secondly they are a women or they are black.

    Side note.  I am a Black/ White Jewish guy from Ca.  My mom who is a white jewish woman and I have great debates daily about this debate.  I have sided with obama, she has sided with Clinton, both us admittingly doing it over identity politics (which neither of us see any problem with), but the debate always comes back to thank god both of these people are 1 billion times better and more in touch then our republican opponent.

    Question to the moderator- was this side not acceptable for this thread (don't want to get thrown off again)  Trully and sincerely sam

    [ Parent ]

    Because (5.00 / 3) (#81)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:49:37 AM EST
    AAs are only 10% of the vote in this country.  BO can't win the GE with his current demographic profile.  Not saying AAs aren't important, just that they're not the only important voting bloc.

    I live in the South (TN) where I do a lot of work on local campaigns. Don't I just wish the AA voters in Memphis and Nashville could overcome the likes of Bill Frist, but it just doesn't happen.

    [ Parent ]

    Ten percent of the vote... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:05:22 AM EST
    ...in any given election in the swing states is decisive.  His demographic profile (as with Clinton) is a primary profile, not a GE profile.  

     Losing a larger percentage of the AA vote hurt us in OH in 2004.

     

    [ Parent ]

    women (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by jedimom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:20:19 PM EST
    we lost OH in large part because Kerry lost white women known that year as soccer moms

    I agree the AA vote is important as is EVERY part of the party, but Brazile does not think so

    AA votes are 12% of the total US population, Latinas is 15%, college educated advanced degrees is what 3%, working class whites is like 80% IIRC

    and dont get me started on Seniors and the assorted other groups that dont make Obamas meme, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans..

    Which of these groups can we NOT win the GE without? which of these groups traditionally swings the GE?

    white working class, including white women, that is the group we must have to win a GE, IMHO

    [ Parent ]

    But AA's already vote D at 90+% in GE's (none / 0) (#140)
    by davnee on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:24:58 AM EST
    Yes, AA turnout will go up for Obama in the GE, but the gravy will be purely from turnout not from the margins.  The margins of AA vote for D's against R's is already essentially maxed.  Can the AA turnout boost alone be enough to counteract white defectors from the Dem base (some unclear but inevitable percentage of disappointed older women, security moms, patriotic indie men, seniors and lunch bucket Dems) and can Obama prove himself suddenly capable of winning Latinos who have not yet solidified as Dem voters?  McCain will appeal to all these groups.  Yes any Republican faces an incredible headwind in this election, but McCain is not just any Republican.  

    Is the boost in AA turnout enough to compensate for all the possible defections above?  Especially in light of Ayres and Wright?  Remember the latte sippers are also already D voters.  Sure you might get a boost in their turnout as well, and their may have been some drift into the latte sipping camp over the last few years, but will that be enough?

    So when you assess Ohio, ask yourself if the boost in AA turnout will be greater in number than the lunch bucket defectors and the suddenly squeamish indies who are thinking twice about Obama post-Wright.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm referring... (none / 0) (#152)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:57 AM EST
    ...to a problem Senator Kerry had in 2004.  You're right, the margins are usually maxed out, but not in OH in 2004, where 16% of the African American vote went for Bush, compared to 11% nationally.  

     In OH, that could have made quite a difference in 2004.  In 2008, larger defections in more states could spell doom.  

    [ Parent ]

    You might want to talk to Brazile (5.00 / 3) (#83)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:50:17 AM EST
    SHE is busy as a bee alienating whites and Latinos who are just as big a deal in an election as the AA demographic. The GOP has managed to garner majority status without the AA vote. I wish the Democratic party lots of luck attempting to win without any other demographic besides the AA vote.

    [ Parent ]
    I heard a different message (none / 0) (#125)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:13:52 AM EST
    I watched this discussion and read the transcripts (thanks to talkleft), and didn't get this sense she was attacking whites and latinos that others are getting.  To me it seemed like unit discussiion.  Sorry that is what I heard.  Also, in terms of Gore, she got him more votes then Bush, she just wasn't as good a thief as the other side.  Lets give her a break on that one.

    Obama/ Claire McCaskill 08 (I have convinced myself she is the VP we need)

    [ Parent ]

    Can you take my word for it about what I heard? (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:15:37 AM EST
    As a Latina? I wouldn't presume to ever tell you when you should be offended.

    [ Parent ]
    Look at the live blog thread here (none / 0) (#131)
    by Stellaaa on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:19:41 AM EST
    We all heard it and felt it as it was happening.  Then Donna lied.  

    [ Parent ]
    Since you've managed to convince (none / 0) (#133)
    by Fabian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:27 AM EST
    yourself, how about you tell the rest up how you did that?

    Personally, I could vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket - Bill Clinton that is.  I can imagine the heads exploding all over the internet if that was announced.

    [ Parent ]

    Great day in the morning! (none / 0) (#209)
    by kenoshaMarge on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:29:10 PM EST
    If I would have a hard time voting for Obama I can assure you with absolute certitude that I would never in one million years vote for Obama/McCaskill.

    She is one of the major disappointments among the freshman Senators from 2006. I wouldn't vote for her for dogcatcher!

    [ Parent ]

    Sam for me it isn't about the African American (5.00 / 3) (#126)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:14:36 AM EST
    ...vote because, and I am sounding like a broken record but I take it seriously, Donna Brazile kicked my Latina ass out of the party last night. So right now I got to be thinking about my people.

    [ Parent ]
    If that he how you feel I need to go rexamine (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:44:31 AM EST
    I need to go re listen and re-read the statements. I certainly trust your feelings on the whole thing.  Wouldn't even think about trying to divide us (trully to cynism implied).  The whole black vs. latino thing I find absurd, it it like fighting for who gets it worse off.  THUS saying this I will go back and try to read and listen to this stuff with a different eye and ear.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks Sam.... (none / 0) (#175)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:12:02 PM EST
    ...again, maybe I am being too sensitive, but I have read a lot of Latino bashing on the web from so-called progressives lately and I don't like it. My spouse and kids are African American and we are a truly blended family....Jewish/Puerto nieces and nephews, plus several other varieties. Most of my family support Obama and I was inclined to do the same early on in the process until the Latino and woman bashing started. I know that it isn't coming from Obama himself, but Donna Brazile needs to own up to what she said, call it mispeaking, and apologize. That's my opinion.

    [ Parent ]
    AGREE (none / 0) (#186)
    by jedimom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:24:34 PM EST
    I agree with your take on what Brazile said
    she has been huffin and puffin IMHO since the discussions last year about the importance of the Latina vote for Dems for the next few generations

    IIRC Latinas are 15% of pop, AA 12%

    Donna also wouldnt allow gay rights to come on to the civil rights platform

    she is very driven by maintaining AA only civil rights platform IMHO and her comment that she would vote McCain if Obama were not the nominee last night should be enough for her to have to step down off the ROOLZ Cmte..

    [ Parent ]

    MAria (none / 0) (#192)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    We need to throw all the people that would divide us under the bus.  There is no place for them in America in the 21st century, where we people of color, will be the majority.  

    P.S.

    I think Se. McCaskill would be great running mate for a couple of reasons.

    1. she is incredibly articulate
    2. shw is from a swing state (I don't know her numbers in her own state though?)
    3)she helps with the olderwhite older woman demographic (just a sorta important group :).  I have thought for a while one of the problems with an Obama Hilliary ticket is that they are both reasonably good looking people.  This means that there could be unforuntate sexualization of the campaign (I know it is stupid- but so is deep seeded racism and sexism)
    4) she will be able to go and talk to Older White women and get them on the ticket.  I am guessing this a group he loses badly in.
    Negatives:
    1)she is not a white guy with military experience(e.g. Webb or Clark)
    2) she is not as smooth as Hiliary

    [ Parent ]
    You are right (none / 0) (#217)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:16:08 PM EST
    After watching the clip again she definitly dropped the ball. Words count, and she screwed up. Personally I still think the overall message she was trying to get across was unity. But it was a devisive screw up none the less.


    [ Parent ]
    Donna kicked a lot of ppl out last night (none / 0) (#213)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:40:52 PM EST
    you and me both.

    [ Parent ]
    my ppl vote democratic year after year too....so? (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:34:12 PM EST
    Because we are at least 10% of the population and vote democratic year after year.  Why would you discount the black vote like that?

    Oh yeah? Well your candidate is marginalizing the clear voting preferences of women, who are important to the Democratic party and have been loyal voters! He must drop out now, because the women of the Democratic party deserve to be honored for their lifelong loyalty.

    There...doesn't that sound silly?

    [ Parent ]

    Let me take a shot... (none / 0) (#134)
    by andrelee on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:57 AM EST
    Yes, we are 10 percent of the population, deep in some places but  only a smidgen in others... the big hairy is some of those places have lots of EV's. Enough one point victories in states with lots of EV's matter more than  being a million votes ahead, i.e. Gore. Bad performances in big EV states makes for last place in a two person race i.e. Obama v. McCain, but not Clinton v. McCain.' I hope all the folks like yourself and your momma who voted based on identity politics instead of voting based on who's better to win in the General using the voting system of these United States learn that voting only on what you see in the mirror is always a loser even though you might not be.

    [ Parent ]
    andrelee (none / 0) (#145)
    by Kathy on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:54 AM EST
    I mean you no offense, but please look at a current census.  There are not enough blacks in most southern states to give him the election, even if the voting age was dropped to three.  There are states in the NE and Midwest with less than five percent aa population.  Some, like MT and WY and the Dakotas have less than one percent!

    No one is discounting the aa vote--no one.  It is important and it always will be, but it is a faction of the party, and a shrinking one at that.

    Whites:  80.1
    Blacks:  12.8
    Hispanics: 14.8
    Asian/Pacific Islanders: 4.6%

    You know the candidates' demographics as well as anyone here.  Tell me who has the winning coalition.


    [ Parent ]

    But the problem... (none / 0) (#155)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:39:40 AM EST
    ...is that the AA vote has been close to 100% Democratic.  NO other vote, be it white, hispanic, jewish or gay, comes remotely close to that kind of loyalty.  Do you believe that loyalty is guaranteed if Senator Clinton is the nominee in 2008?  And what about MI, which has a large AA population where Obama was not on the ticket?

     The other problem with the primary coalition is that it is just that...a primary coalition.

    [ Parent ]

    census (none / 0) (#188)
    by jedimom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:26:37 PM EST
    I think you should review the census data, the big important EV states OH PA FL are not going to be decided by the AA voters, it is the white working class and women in those states that will make or break us in the GE..
    and without the Latinas in the SW and yes even CA we could still lose to McCain


    [ Parent ]
    So (none / 0) (#20)
    by Step Beyond on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:25:15 AM EST
    Is the problem with that the popular vote? Or just that people built up their expectations so that they are disappointed?

    [ Parent ]
    Expectations are the name of the game (none / 0) (#24)
    by andgarden on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:27:17 AM EST
    Supers and the media expected better for Clinton last night.

    I warned people not to predict a NC win. . .

    [ Parent ]

    Outside of the blogs (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Step Beyond on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:33:30 AM EST
    Wasn't Obama supposed to walk away easily with NC? And wasn't Indiana supposed to be close? If people were calling it a tiebreaker seems like it could have gone either way.

    The media seems pretty determined to hurt Clinton as much as possible. Since they get to spread the expectations, should anyone really base their opinion on them?

    [ Parent ]

    Pssssst they moved the goalposts (5.00 / 7) (#17)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:23:40 AM EST
    They are over THERE now. LOL The conventional wisdom seems to be she needed to win double digits in IN since Obama won by double digits in NC. The media likes to keep there narratives nie and simple.

    [ Parent ]
    OK (none / 0) (#25)
    by Step Beyond on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:27:46 AM EST
    I didn't watch last night and haven't read the threads so I thought I might have missed something.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't understand the point about the win in IN (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by fuzzyone on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:10 AM EST
    She can go forward because its up to her.  But saying the win in IN provides some rationale makes little sense.  Overall yesterday she fell behind about another 200,000 in popular vote and 13 pledged delegates.  That is a bad day.

    Does she have to drop out.  Of course not.  Should she.  I'm not sure.  What does seem clear to me is that Obama is almost certainly the nominee.  The process of bringing the party back to together needs to start and it needs to start with Obama.  No matter what happens from here on out he needs to do nothing that even faintly sounds like a negative attack and he needs to whip his surrogates into line.  He needs to stop running against Clinton and start running against McCain.

    Similarly Clinton, if she decides to stay in, needs to stick to the issues or to attacking McCain.  She also needs to cut anything even faintly negative, including questioning Obama's electability, ability to lead, etc.  And she too needs to get her surrogates in line.

    exactly! (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by Josey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:45:59 AM EST
    the animosity and vitriol from Obamamites is top down - emulating Obama's character assassinations on Hillary.
    Obama's hateful gestures toward Hillary (brushing her off the bottom of his shoe), his sexist comments attacking Hillary, and his bogus "change Washington" is code for "beat the bitch!"
    The media and Washington establishment support Obama - the same Establishment he claims he'll "change."
    Obama is a very successful bamboozler but he couldn't have done it without assistance from the media and Washington Establishment.

    Obama supporters will enjoy their beer with Obama.
    Mission Accomplished!

    [ Parent ]

    Oh please... (none / 0) (#92)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:53:46 AM EST
    ...I swear supporters see racism, sexism, reverse racism, reverse sexism EVERYWHERE. If "change" is code for "beat the bitch" when Obama says it, what in the hell does it mean when Clinton says it?

     What sexist comments?  He has been treading very carefully; you can't piss off women and expect to win a Democratic primary campaign.  And with a few exceptions from surrogates, she's been treading very carefully with race, because she knows you cannot win the primary without African Americans.  

    [ Parent ]

    Obama knows it too (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Josey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:36:29 AM EST
    >>>>she knows you cannot win the primary without African Americans.

    That's why he and his supporters have consistently smeared the Clintons as racists.

    Obama not only makes sexist remarks, but uses offensive gestures to signal hate for Hillary. And the crowd laughs it up! - demonstrating their racism and sexism.

    [ Parent ]

    And the MSM helped him (5.00 / 4) (#161)
    by stefystef on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:51:27 AM EST
    to smear the Clintons because the MSM have always been jealous of the Clintons.

    Obama has always been the one playing the race card, I've said it 100 times.  And when the race card is played on him, Obama won't know what hit him.

    [ Parent ]

    you'll see (5.00 / 2) (#185)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:22:36 PM EST
    you can't piss off women and expect to win a Democratic primary campaign

    Apparently you can, because Obama has pissed off an awful lot of women. And a lot of those women are really, really pissed.

    [ Parent ]

    Notice how we aren't even mentioned now. (5.00 / 3) (#193)
    by nycstray on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:34:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    nycstray (5.00 / 2) (#204)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:58:02 PM EST
    I certainly noticed.

    Second largest group of voters in the nation completely ignored.

    [ Parent ]

    there's a reason for that (none / 0) (#180)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:18:26 PM EST
    ...I swear supporters see racism, sexism, reverse racism, reverse sexism EVERYWHERE.

    no...only in places where Hillary nutcrackers are sold, people are buying all the lies and filth about Clinton that Obama has spread, and anyone not voting for Obama stands automatically presumed racist.

    Which pretty much means wherever Obama and his supporters are. Which is pretty near everywhere, but there are still a few clean places left.

    [ Parent ]

    Thank you for a perfect example (none / 0) (#102)
    by fuzzyone on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:57:01 AM EST
    of the kind of thing both sides need to stop doing right now.  

    [ Parent ]
    NO foul language (none / 0) (#173)
    by waldenpond on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:10:20 PM EST
    I messes with the filtering software.  Just replace with symbols... b!tch etc.  :)

    [ Parent ]
    What part of her winning (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by LatinoVoter on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:21:24 AM EST
    the state next to Obama's home where a large chunk of the voters are in the Chicago market that Obama predicted to win by 7 points, do you not understand?

    [ Parent ]
    The part where it has any impact (none / 0) (#219)
    by fuzzyone on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:42:40 PM EST
    on either the delegate count or the popular vote the two things that matter.

    [ Parent ]
    I think it should be done better (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by ajain on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:29 AM EST
    I dont think this kind of non-sense should happen. She should be let out the race on a high -note. She is after-all the first woman to have had serious shot at the presidency and this no way to push her out of the race.

    She will get out, just let her do it on her own terms. Plus, pushing her out is simply pissing off.

    Go the distance (5.00 / 7) (#15)
    by jjsmoof on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:46 AM EST
    She should (and will) go the distance.  Thats the fighting spirit in her I've come to respect.  Make the bama smear machine work till the very end.  I sound bitter...where's my gun and bible. /snark off

    One other thing, that $6 mil loan is bad news (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by fuzzyone on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:25:01 AM EST
    That, as much as anything else, may impact the view of the SDs who have to see Obama's formidable fundraising as a powerful reason to pick him.

    working class - dumped again! (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Josey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:48:46 AM EST
    The wealthy class supports Obama - the working class supports Hillary.
    Which class has more money to donate?

    Sure - there are blacks in the working class, but fewer than whites and hispanics.

    No doubt - McCain gained supporters last night.


    [ Parent ]

    True dat (none / 0) (#27)
    by Eleanor A on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:29:00 AM EST
    But at what cost?  I can just imagine the Dems around here (Tennessee) backpeddling like mad to distance themselves from Obama if he's the head of the ticket.  Can BO raise enough money from Oprah to win both the Presidency - and 2/3 of the Congressional and local elections?

    [ Parent ]
    Not so fast (none / 0) (#49)
    by goldberry on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:37:19 AM EST
    The BBC reported this morning that Obama sent out a memo pleading for funds after last night.  And if HE'S hurting, then the DNC is hurting too.  

    [ Parent ]
    The party just lost (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Edgar08 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:48:48 AM EST
    Half their donor base.

    Obama's truly on his own now.

    And we all know his supporters never would have had it any other way.


    [ Parent ]

    I heard that too, (none / 0) (#98)
    by Iphie on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:54:58 AM EST
    but not the whole thing -- were they really saying he's strapped for cash? I heard that he sent out a fundraising request, but what information did they provide that would indicate that he is experiencing a lack of funds? I just imagined that his email was standard procedure.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't Know (none / 0) (#174)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:11:48 PM EST
    but he's been spending like a drunken sailor trying to put it away.  He spent over $10 per vote in Pennsylvania only to lose by 10 points. He outspent Hillary 3 to 1 overall and 4 to 1 on the last weekend.  

    There's a point, a limit to how much any candidate can raise before the donor base just plain runs dry.  The maximum contribution during the primaries is $2,300.  How many people who can afford that level remain? How many of that group have already reached the limit?  How many small donors can still afford to give.  How much PAC money has already gone to the max.

    If Obama had the same financial limitations that Hillary had throughout he would have been beaten long ago.

    If he'd only had Edwards level money he would never have gotten off the ground.

    This situation applies to both candidates

    [ Parent ]

    The DNC has been thinking (none / 0) (#177)
    by litigatormom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:14:53 PM EST
    that Obama's vaunted fundraising prowess will keep it rolling in cash in the fall.

    Think again, Howard and Donna.  The DNC ain't seeing a nickel from me. Not after the MI and FLA fiascoes. Not after the DNC found punishing innocent Democratic voters in FLA and MI preferable to working out a re-vote process, letting Obama veto every possible solution, and now pronouncing the disenfranchisement of FLA and MI permanent by permitting Obama to claim he is only 200 delegates away from clinching the nomination.

    Hellooooo.  Clinching the nomination does not occur at 2025 -- not if you want to have a prayer of winning MI and FLA in the fall -- because 2025 renders FLA and MI irrelevant. The DNC needs to make clear that 2209 is the magic number. Obama can get there with or without FLA and MI, but he can't claim victory based on a lower magic number that can only be calculated by disenfranchising MI and FLA.  

    [ Parent ]

    She is expectd to win big in WV/KY- (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by kenosharick on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:25:48 AM EST
    enough to gain the lead back in pop. vote? I also never hear how she would do in delegates if she blows him out of the water there. And what about Puerto Rico? How many will vote, and how many votes can she pick up there?

    A few of important numbers-- (5.00 / 3) (#149)
    by wurman on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:32:55 AM EST
    WV has 39 delegates at stake.
    KY has 60 up for grabs.
    Puerto Rico has 63 delegates.
    If Sen. Obama got them all, he's short of the magical, mystical, fantastical made-up number of 2025 (he now has 1836.5) & a very long haul from 2209 (he has 1908.5).

    Thus, the calls for Sen. Clinton to quit.

    Obama cannot seal the deal.  His best hope is for 70 to 80 of those delegates.

    Sen. Clinton will pick up a majority of those 162 delegates & leave the Obamarama waaaaaaay short on the first ballot.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama needs to keep MI and FLA out (5.00 / 2) (#181)
    by litigatormom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:18:36 PM EST
    because he wants the magic number to be 2025, and thus only 200 delegates away.  If MI and FLA are counted, the number is 2209.  What needs to be driven home to him, his supporters, and the MSM, is that the magic number is 2209 whether MI and FLA are seated or not.  If he can get there without first agreeing to count MI and FLA, well, that means he's done a good job of sewing up all the SDs. But I don't think he can do it.  He NEEDS the number to be lower, and he thinks -- and apparently Howard and Donna and Timmeh and Tweety agree -- that he can justify the lower number by continuing the exclusion of FLA and MI.

    Sorry.  It doesn't work. The magic number is 2209. Period. No matter what.  Deal with it.

    [ Parent ]

    Correct. (5.00 / 2) (#207)
    by wurman on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:24:58 PM EST
    Until & if & when the Rules committee does something, the 50 percent + 1 is 2209.

    Actually, it may be higher!!!

    Somewhere got a bonus PLEO delegate &, I think, raised the total to 4417.

    [ Parent ]

    she'll win in WV and KY (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:25:06 PM EST
    Thus, the calls for Sen. Clinton to quit.

    To me, she is out when she gives her concession speech.

    Til then, I ignore the attempts at manipulation.

    [ Parent ]

    W VA, KY, PR (none / 0) (#179)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:15:07 PM EST
    "His best hope is for 70 to 80 of those delegates."

    And he ain't gonna get that many.


    [ Parent ]

    I looked everywhere for you last night. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Teresa on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:06:27 AM EST
    I owe you a huge apology for misreading one of your comments. I can't tell you how bad I feel. The thread closed before I could reply to you that I was wrong. Please accept my sincere apology. I feel terrible about it.

    [ Parent ]
    Teresa- of course I accept (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by kenosharick on Wed May 07, 2008 at 09:58:34 PM EST
    and I appreciate your apology.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm so glad you read this comment (none / 0) (#225)
    by Teresa on Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:02:27 PM EST
    I have felt worse about that than any other comment I've ever written. I was tired and really should have put my glasses on! Thank you so much for being so gracious.

    You're a sweetie and I feel so much better now.

    [ Parent ]

    Insult (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by nellre on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:26:10 AM EST
    This is an insult to everyone who voted for her yesterday.
    Boy some men a dense. I'm figuring this is (perhaps unconscious) sexism.

    the LAST person to be (5.00 / 8) (#29)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:30:02 AM EST
    giving advice to Hillary is McGovern.  It's his STUPIDITY that has this FUBAR of dividing up the delegates instead of winner take all.

    I was looking at the electoral maps of 1992 and 1996. I don't see HOW anyone could think that Obama could pull off what Clinton did those years.  Clinton took EVERY state that borders the Mississippi River...TWICE.  In a field of blue only Indiana was red (so who gives a shit if she didn't win big there?)

    Barack called NC a big swing state last night. Um, NC can HARDLY be called a swing state since the last time it went Dem was with Carter.  

    Maybe he's the low info voter.  Pick up a history book every now and then man.

    George McGovern (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by litigatormom on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:19:37 PM EST
    Oh yeah. I'll take strategic advice from him.

    I also believe in unicorns.

    [ Parent ]

    Interesting that McGovern only gets (5.00 / 2) (#184)
    by mg7505 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:20:40 PM EST
    major attention when he starts Hillary-hating. I'm not looking forward to the next few weeks of playing by the Obama Rules.

    [ Parent ]
    Much as I (5.00 / 3) (#191)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:29:51 PM EST
    respect George McGovern the man; on this issue he can keep his trap shut and kiss my ...

    It's not just the by district allocation.  The McGovern Commission, in the end, gave us our current system.  A system vulnerable to sticking us with candidates like Obama.

    A candidate with a resume so thin that calling him Presidential timber is like equating the Amazon rainforest to half a box of toothpicks.

    [ Parent ]

    Don't forget... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Alec82 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:55:39 AM EST
    ...President Clinton was running in a three-way race both times.  And political realities shifted a great deal in the interim.

    [ Parent ]
    Bill Clinton left office with 65% approval (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by moll on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:27:54 PM EST
    And political realities shifted a great deal in the interim.

    Yeah...Donna Brazile is now in a position to gut what used to be the Democratic Party.

    [ Parent ]

    he still had to do better than Bush... (none / 0) (#109)
    by Salo on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:02:43 AM EST
    ...and Perot effectively shaved of the NAFTA crowd that resides in the protectionist wing of the Dem party.

    So it's possible he might have flipped a blue state here and there if Clinton had been careless.

    [ Parent ]

    I dont think that she will get the nomination (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by ajain on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:30:40 AM EST
    So I think she shouldnt go crazy and make every effort to de-rail Obama. She should go out and promote the Democratic agenda. If she can afford to.

    I think she should be let out better. She has done enourmous good for the party and has in fact put health-care in center of the debate. She has forever changed the landscape for women in presidential politics.

    George McGovern is acting like a total douche-bag.

    A month of issues-only ads? (none / 0) (#50)
    by Fabian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:38:39 AM EST
    Sign me up!  Any time someone wants to talk issues  and substance, my tiny cult will support them.

    [dkos sig line reference]

    [ Parent ]

    Clinton's surrogates vs. Obama's (5.00 / 7) (#35)
    by pixelpusher on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:31:42 AM EST
    Besides Mark Penn, I don't know which of Clinton's surrogates haven't been "in line."

    It's Obama who hasn't got control over his.  Where do I begin?  Samantha Power, Joseph Andrew, his own wife, and of course the beloved Rev.  And then there are his nuthouse blogosphere groupies trying to project Obama's problem onto Clinton with their faux Mickey Kantor smear.

    The only way Obama can get all his people into line is to jack up the preacher act.  He hasn't got a coalition, he's got a personality cult.

    And PS:  How many of those Obama voters in the early primary states are still for him?  I know a guy who was truly torn between Obama and Clinton in the NY primary... he voted Obama (back in March) but I doubt he would do it again.

    And don't forget Donna Brazile.... (5.00 / 4) (#110)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:03:58 AM EST
    ..I'm starting to think that if the Dems want to keep me as a registered member, they are going to have to demote, if not fire, that woman.

    [ Parent ]
    Add to Donna our magnificent Speaker Pelosi (5.00 / 1) (#220)
    by TomLincoln on Wed May 07, 2008 at 08:39:38 PM EST
    who has been so gracious to Hillary throughout. I wish I had a chance to cast a vote against her.

    [ Parent ]
    The DNC has been stone cold stupid (none / 0) (#160)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:47:51 AM EST
    for playing favorites. They haven't been particularly good at hiding who they want to win the nomination. It's going to bit thm in the butt. They may have new Dems signing up but I'd say they have managed to alienate quite a few right on over to the Indy party.

    [ Parent ]
    Early on Obama labeled Hillary (5.00 / 2) (#200)
    by cal1942 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:46:32 PM EST
    as polarizing and divisive.  He stated unequivically that many of his supporters would not support Hillary Clinton.  These gems came out of his own mouth.

    When the first rumors of Obama demonstrators disrupting the convention he failed to speek out.  He's still silent in face of renewed rumblings of disrupting the convention.

    [ Parent ]

    Florida and Michigan (5.00 / 8) (#40)
    by Foxx on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:34:53 AM EST
    loom as the deciders of this race. Think how different things would be if she had the momentum from winning those when she did.

    I'm sure Brazile and the others knew this from the beginning. And so the DNC's and Obama's vile backroom tactics are the deciders in this race. It really doesn't get any uglier than this. He's an illegitimate candidate.

    That said, her money situation is the killer now.

    Very good point (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by ruffian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:43:18 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I tend to agree with that (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by Edgar08 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:46:50 AM EST
    Yesterday's results were bad news for Obama because it now means FL and MI were truly disenfranchised.


    [ Parent ]
    personally i think the fix is in for the (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by hellothere on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:51:51 AM EST
    convention. at least the dnc wannabes think so. now in politics anything can happen. stepping down and playing nice doesn't help her despite what mcgovern(who got to you, george) says.

    now since i am no longer needed or wanted per brazile and the dnc, then i can work for hillary if i choose and not feel guilty(i wouldn't anyway.)

    i despair because i think the backlash, which i have feared, is starting. talk about overplaying their hand! the coat tails won't be there. the repubs are happy i tell you. they are making a comeback without having to work for it. the arrogance of the dim leadership leaves me breathless. we just might lose seats you know. remember the newt revolution? the dims lost the south in the 60s. that couldn't be helped i think, but there is no excuse now. and guess what, once these folks walk, it will be a long time before the dims will see them again.

    [ Parent ]

    They've managed to do so little since given the (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by cawaltz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:54:15 AM EST
    majority in 2006 that I won't be surprised if races are closer.

    [ Parent ]
    Coattails (5.00 / 4) (#95)
    by cmugirl on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:54:17 AM EST
    The MSM and bloggers keep pointing out that Obama has coattails, but I don't see it.  State to state, Obama supporters were less likely to vote for other candidates or initiatives on the primary ballots, and in caucuses, they were less likely to stick around to discuss local party business.  Can someone PLEASE explain why the powers that be think he has long coattails?

    [ Parent ]
    if the DNC followed their own rules (5.00 / 5) (#96)
    by Josey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:54:32 AM EST
    they would have noted that Obama violated DNC rules by airing TV ads in FL and holding a small campaign rally.
    But NO! It's St. Obama - and he's been in the bag from the gitgo.
    Backroom deal is apt description.


    [ Parent ]
    I woke up wondering how much an endorsement (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by Angel on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:35:04 AM EST
    from Edwards would have helped Hillary.  Would it have made a difference?  Enough to change the results?

    But I have now resigned myself to President McCain.  

    Obama may have won last night but the Democratic party has lost.  He cannot win the general election.  

    I spoke with the typical hillary voter today (none / 0) (#55)
    by oldnorthstate on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:40:27 AM EST
    She didn't vote.

    She said she was going to vote for Hillary but didn't get around to it.  You have to realize, which many never did, that NC is a state that never liked Bill Clinton.  So when Hillary is needing these so called rural white votes on her side, she needed to get them fired up for her.  The thing was, they never were.  It was more of a "if I had to pick, I'd pick Hillary" kind of thing.  

    And no, I seriously doubt that an unpopular John Edwards would have helped much at all.  Hillary never had a shot in NC and frankly, the 14 point deficit is actually pretty good considering the demographics involved here.  If she could have run this well in other states like VA, MD, and GA like she should have, she'd be a lot closer to her nomination now.  It is too bad for her that her campaign was run so poorly early on.  

    [ Parent ]

    it also helps (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Josey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:59:52 AM EST
    that Obama, with the media's assistance, cast the "first black president" and his wife as racists.
    And of course, Oprah telling blacks to not think - but just vote for THE ONE - the black one.

    No leader in the Dem Party has stepped forward to denounce Obama campaign's false racist charges against the Clintons.

    Dean, Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, etc. can all have a beer with the empty suit they propped up.
    Mission Accomplished!


    [ Parent ]

    i agree that playing the race card (none / 0) (#121)
    by oldnorthstate on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:11:53 AM EST
     is troubling.  but with that said, the white house might be the final barrier we as a society need to cross where we can begin to even the responses to this sort of thing out.

    but then again, ethnic divisions are all over the world and always have been so i'm not sure why it should be any different here.  i guess the point is, if a black man earns the presidency, it might become more acceptable to fire back when such accusations are made.  living in the south, i really don't like the way this was played, but at the same time, i'm almost willing to give it a pass so we can get beyond it.

    it is kind of like when oj got off...people were furious but in a way, i think that decision helped smooth some things around the country that may have lingered for a long time had he been convicted.  something about sacrificing one thing for greater good or something.

    [ Parent ]

    oldnorth (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by Kathy on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:18:25 AM EST
    i'm almost willing to give it a pass so we can get beyond it.

    How in the world do you think we'll ever get beyond it?  We both live in the south.  We have both seen what these specious charges of racism have done to our neighborhoods, our people.  The disunity will eventually heal, but it'll only take one pick at the scab to pull it off.  Rodney King didn't put it behind us.  OJ didn't put it behind us.  Obama sure as h*ll ain't gonna put it behind us.

    All these white male pundits living and working in predominantly white enclaves calling people like you and me racist because we have the audacity to support Clinton make me physically ill.

    I am not going to change my vote or my allegiances in the off-chance that it might soothe some folks.  When in the f-ing h*ll is anyone going to worry about soothing ME?

    [ Parent ]

    your response is very important (none / 0) (#143)
    by oldnorthstate on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:29:21 AM EST
    Israel always fires back.  Where does that get them?

    An eye for an eye only makes the world blind, right?

    The best thing is to let it go.  Fact is, black people have a right to be pissed.  If I was black, I'd be pissed too.  Is it y