Clinton Faces Steady Erosion Of Support

With the Pennsylvania primary only days away, the New York Times delivers a look at the challenges the Clinton campaign faces with regards to maintaining support among past supporters and increasing its fund-raising capabilities.

Former Supporters:

After nearly two decades building relationships with a generation of Democrats, Mrs. Clinton has recently suffered a steady erosion of support for her presidential campaign from the party stalwarts that once formed the basis of her perceived juggernaut of "inevitability."

Some of it is just business, practical politicians putting aside ties to the Clintons to follow the will of the voters in their states or making a calculation about who seems best positioned to win.[...]

But there is something more wrenching at work as well, a reckoning of whether the Clintons, on balance, have been good or bad for the party. It has the feel of a very personal testing of loyalties to a former president who once always seemed to be adding to the "Friends of Bill" list, and to a sitting senator who, if not so driven as her husband to win over everyone, used her fame to help elect other Democrats.

Fund-raising:

Senator Barack Obama is swamping Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton with television advertising in their prolonged battle for the Democratic nomination, putting fresh pressure on Mrs. Clinton's fund-raising machine to find new sources of money to help her keep pace.

But her big-dollar fund-raising apparatus that was once the envy of the political world is encountering obstacles as many of those in its regular networks of donors have reached the maximum on their personal contributions or grown tired of the relentless press for donations.

The campaign is actively hunting for new wellsprings of cash, while tapped-out donors who want to give more are contemplating financing independent efforts on her behalf that are not bound by contribution limits. So far, however, the independent efforts have been halting at best.

Comments

[AnnieinOR]

FYI Michael Moore has endorsed Obama

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/21/45558/0824/481/499877

[army193]

Weatherman Underground figure William Ayers turned his-self in never convicted. The Pope belong to the Hitler Youth movement and was in Hitlers Army...The Pope is welcomed with open arms by the President and this country and a young man that made a mistake in the 1970s and has written about this and has changed his life for the better and is a Professor in good standings.­..Now if you would like to read something about that so called New York Times artical see Williams owe words at

A Letter to the Times Found Five Years Later…

September 15, 2001

http://billayers.wordpress.com/2006/09/26/a-letter-to-the-times-found-five-years-later/

I served in Army in 1968-1969 and Millions of Americans made many mistakes during the 60-70s but, what is most disturbing most American has done worst by agreeing with the Iraq war...I for one thought America would learn from the past...go figure that one out.

[VivaLaRevolucion]

Well said.

[ssmit98]

Breaking news! Hillary Clinton caught lying AGAIN!

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62012

[whathehell]

She's a liar, a shrew, and a disgusting human being. She lied? Well fuck me...

[several]

LOL. Don't be citing World Net Daily unless you want to be labeled a tin foil hat wearing loon. They have run crap like assertions that soy is making kids gay!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldNetDaily#Soy.2Fhomosexuality_link_claim

[ssmit98]

Oh okay, good looking out :)

Well is Fox News more credible?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351760,00.html

Or How about the Wall Street Journal?
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=65000531

Oh whatever, I give up! Its hard for you to face the truth, I see LOL!

[ssmit98]

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Warning: Hillary supporters this will hurt your feelings

Obama supporters this is breaking news about Hillary, she has terrorist ties!!!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,351760,00.html

[dajay]

ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZ

[aliceblue]

It's probably not a coincidence that Hill gets
a lot of support from Rupert Murdoch.

Murdoch was a Leninist at Oxford, then he went
to the extreme right.

Hill was a Goldwater Girl but after she passed
the bar exam she applied for a job with an
ideologically-left law firm and worked there
for at least a year.

I don't see Hillary as a moderate Democrat,
I think she's a lot further right than she pretends.

A book is coming out in May that connects
her to some powerful religious cult that has
both congressional and global connections.

Nevertheless, in spite of her attraction to
ideologies and in in Murdoch's case, ideologues,
I'd have to see some corroborating evidence
before I believed anything Dick Morris wrote.

[PDXTransplant]

Then ERODE already...­Pleaseeeee­e. Do us all a favor.

[RNdaSilva]

Lots of wasted space here. Anyone with a modicum of gray matter betwixt the ears knows that it's already over, regardless of Pennsylvania. Obama IS the candidate for the Democratic Party.

An Obama win in PA would hasten the process...­a loss will only prolong the agony for Clinton supporters­...they will not experience the thrill of ecstasy.

Get a calculator; educate thyself...

C'mon, the pleasing plump lady wants to get it over with...she­'s tired of warming up her vocals. Hopefully she can begin singing Tuesday night...if not, after North Carolina. The kitchen sink has had its' day...the party's over.

[dajay]

How about worrying why Obama won't win in Penn on Tues, another big swing state.

Newsflash, educate thyself...­..The chances are slim to none that Obama will be president, even if he gets the nomination.

Not being able to win states like Ohio, Fla, and Penn, doesn't bode well for him.

The fake, campaign of change has had its' day...your party will be over too.

[neocon666]

Hillary needs to win ALL remaining primaries, including PA, by over 60 percent to stay viable, which isn't going to happen. And while if it were soley up to her she would stay in the race until the convention, it's actually up to her AND her donors, who will be missing in action after Tuesday, when the percentage she must win remaining states by will be up to nearly 70 percent after she misses the 62 percent mark in PA.

[CeciliaBertrand]

Let me guess dejay - you haven't a clue how the wheel turns in the world TODAY. You really believe that old politics junk-line of a few states bearing the gold standard for the entire 50?????


The absolute ONLY way Hillary has won anything is through ballot box fixes -- the Clinton and Rendell machines are dying to try it again in Pennsylvania (just like Ohio)-- read between the lines on the concern for the accuracy of the machines in Pennsylvania. In fact Ed Rendell has been brokering with the undecided superdelegates to pave a new road for the fix. The only reason Florida and Michigan haven't made it in yet - after several tries is because the only offers came from the Rendell machine--and both states backed off of an obvious FIX for new count, et al. They chose to play it straight afterall - the noise is coming from the handful of dirty ones in Florida who like Clinton and Rendell are dirty.

[new logic]

oh....Brit­ain’s international business paper says despite Clinton being favored in Pennsylvania, after Tuesday’s vote the Dems should look to lock up Obama’s nomination.

“The Democratic party has waited an awfully long time for a politician like Barack Obama. Enough already.”

[RandyGaume]

ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ­ZZZZZZZZZZ

[speakingtruth2power]

I was telling them to pack it up a year ago.

America doesn't want any more; BCBCB,

It will only lead to JeeBush and the BNW!

[speakingtruth2power]

or the NAFU? - - The Norte American Fascist Union.

[dugan45]

Did you see in today's NYT that Ecuador has moved to expel the US's base there? Even our friends no longer want to put up with US (aka bush) hegemony.

http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?tntget=2008/04/21/world/americas/21ecuador.html

[qdog112]

Hillary will have to win big (12-15%) to get any money support to her rapidly dwindling campaign coffers. People are not stupid enough to financially support a lost cause. She must win big or it's goodnight Irene or Hillary. Tick tock tick tick.

[Nyland8]

What she needs to overtake Obama is much, much more than that.

8

[dajay]

How about saying Obama should be winning Penn in order to prove he is electable. If he loses Penn, HE LOSES Penn.

Keep the spin alive in the Obama Twilight ZOne.

[sniperfire]

this is for all those giddy clinton chearleaders who were so ecited she was up by a whopping one point in the gallup national poll.
lol, it lasted about 5 minutes. obama has actually increased his lead since the debate.

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample Obama Clinton Spread
RCP Average 04/07 - 04/19 - 49.2 40.7 Obama +8.5
Gallup Tracking 04/17 - 04/19 1252 V 47 45 Obama +2.0
Rasmussen Tracking 04/16 - 04/19 900 LV 46 42 Obama +4.0
Newsweek 04/16 - 04/17 588 RV 54 35 Obama +19.0
ABC/Wash Post 04/10 - 04/13 643 A 51 41 Obama +10.0
Reuters/Zogby 04/10 - 04/13 532 LV 51 38 Obama +13.0
AP-Ipsos 04/07 - 04/09 489 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0
See All Democratic Presidential Nomination Polling Data

[kaygee]

Your data is about as trustworthy as your spelling: the word is eXcited and, though I would not call myself a giddy cheerleader, I'm excited about the results in the latest polls in Pennsylvania because they point to a STAGNATION of Obama despite the megabucks he's been dropping for his Glitzkrieg ad campaign that he's been hitting the PA voting space with for weeks.
His poor showing will begin to convince people that he's not really presidential material at all but simply another inexperienced candidate that some behind-the-scenes advisor is trying to market into the White House.

[Mojane]

Going into PA, wasn't Clinton up by at least 17 points? How long ago was that? I'm not sure it's Obama's campaign is in stagnation, more like holding his own. Do you seriously think she would not be "Glitzkrieging" the media with ads if she had the money we've been giving him, 25, 30, 50, 100 bucks at a time? If she wins by less than 10 points, she will have theoretically lost, having been ahead from the get-go.

[Nyland8]

"His poor showing will begin to convince people that he's not really presidential material at all but simply another inexperienced candidate that some behind-the-scenes advisor is trying to market into the White House."

Even if that were true, what would it matter. Rodham cannot catch him - not in delegates, not in States and not in popular votes. He will be the nominee. Whatever you might think of him being "presidential material", whatever that means, he is more that material than either Rodham or McCain.

8

[sniperfire]

trustworthy data? are you that foolish. I got the "data" from the same place almost anyone interested in politics gets theirs.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html

are you that petty to point out a spelling error.
typical Clinton elixir drinker.
You cant handle the truth.

[Citizen08]

Excellent! Thanks for sharing that!

Team Clinton was trying to spin that into something, they are the masters of spin and con!

Hillary’s favorable rating is only 37%! Ouch!
Rating for: Is she honest & trustworthy 58% Said NO!

[dajay]

Wow, so much time on your hands. These polls are about as credible as this blog.

[RandyGaume]

ring ring ring ... this is reality calling ... oh I've reached fairy land, where wishful thinking rules ... your credibility for wasting your time here in this blog starts to come into question (LOGIC - it really will help you in your discussions with real people here on earth)

[Plowboy]

The contest is to detrermine who is most 'elitist.'
Barack Obama has lots of people like me making small contributions. Hillary Clinton has a few big donors who have been having their way, but now feel compelled to threaten the Democratic Party that any deviation from subservience to them -- and their pet candidate -- won't be tolerated.
Somebody added up the totals and found Obama way ahead. That allowed them to laugh in the faces of those would-be blackmailers.
Elitist? You can probably determine from this who has acted the part.

[MaBJ]

Don't know exactly what world you live in, but Obama has been on a trash and burn of HRC almost since the start of the campaign. That Obama's followers have followed suit certainly says something for *independent* thinking, ya?

ALSO: Both Democratic candidates have broken records in the amount of small contributions made to their campaigns.

ALSO: Check out USA Today, WSJ, WaPo articles on Obama's lobbyist/oil money donors...

ALSO: These *non* lobbyists Obama *doesn't* take money from have already influenced him -- on the 2005 Energy Bill and on the Class Action Fairness Act. If investigative journalists have this info and are now publishing it online, how long do you think it will be before they find other *influence* by these lobbyists that Obama *doesn't* take money from?

Any other criticism??????? Because trust me -- a lot of us have the goods on Obama, which is why he's getting his a** kicked now. That isn't going to stop...

[Nyland8]

All the data shows that whatever your opinion, it's too little, too late.

8

[sniperfire]

Obama already addressed all the donation issues you put forth in your post. He has not accepted any dirty money in his presidential campaign. Those are the facts.
That info you refer to that journalists have is about 4 years old and has been written about and answered by Obama.

[boddhisatva66]

Obama is getting his a** kicked? You must have never had an a**whooping, kicking or anything remotely associated with the phrase. HRC should remove herself as the superdelegates cannot/ SHOULD NOT change the popular vote. Obama is winning or should I say HRC is getting her a** kicked.

[Sparklez]

Now the polls on Gallup are saying Obama is ahead

So now those who kept posting that Clinton was ahead can shut up

Because these polls are designed to get you happy and to make it look like when the candidates win, they can then say, "Oh, according to the polls, we werent expecting a win"

[LBM]

Polls are a snapshot in time, they've gone up and down this entire election based on the reaction to events. The real poll will be on Tuesday when we'll see Hillary win PA.

[Anne1776]

So what if she does. She's still not going to win the nomination.

[Nyland8]

And it won't matter then, either.

8

[Testtubebaby]

No one doubts she'll win. She was up 30 points. She was suppose to win. Its about how much she'll win by. You know that...I know that, we all know that. It doesn't matter how you wanna spin it.

[nsiah7]

Clinton's candidacy was supposed to be a coronation. So it would not be a surprise for her to win PA.

[Kishadawn]

Can we support our candidate by pointing out the political reasons we support our candidate by not gossip or personality traits.

I was split between Clinton and Obama up until 2 days before my state primary. I chose Obama because of his Health Care and Foreign Policy points. If you do any real research between the candidates those are the ONLY places where they differ even mildly. Both candidates have a history of supporting Gay Rights.

Why don't we follow Obama's campaign and focus on those issues and stop using one word curse-words to describe the candidate we aren't voting for.

Yes Obama is very personable to crowds, but Hillary's does have a very good image with one-on-one interviews.

It's true that Obama is using attack ads now. But what is he attacking? POLICIES. Lets keep it to that as intelligent, responsible voters.

[JFyfe]

He also comes across as MUCH more trustworthy, and with more integrity. There is no doubt that he is a more unifying figure as well.

[foreffectivegovernment]

The margin of error in these polls is not the critical number in this election. How could anyone, at this late date, be "Undecided"?

The polls were wrong in New Hampshire because many voters who support Hillary Clinton had been demonized and intimidated by Obama supporters until they got in the voting booth.

The only polls that will mean anything in Pennsylvania are the exit polls which will tell Obama supporters their tactics only work in caucuses where intimidation and strong-arm tactics are effective.

If Obama does win the Democratic nomination with these tactics, his candidacy will be no more valid than George W. Bush's Presidency has been.

[Nyland8]

You write a great deal about a subject you know nothing of. It is not the polls that will mean anything, They will not decide who runs against McCain. If polls were taken the day before the convention that revealed that Al Gore should be the candidate, is that who you'd support? Nonsense.

it is the States, it is the popular votes, and most of all, it is the delegates accrued that will dictate who wins the nomination - and that has all but been decided. Obama's lead is insurmountable, no matter what happens in PA.

Moreover, your comment about caucuses is so much more nonsense, because 15 of the 29 States already won by Obama were primary states, NOT caucus States. Moreover, you labor under the delusion that Rodham has won even a single day at the polls. She has not. Even in New Hampshire, a State she claims, the 18 delegates were split 9 apiece. Her "win" was, in reality, a tie. She has not taken a single day. Even March 4th, when the media told us that she had "won" TX, the final results did not come in until March 30th, and Obama wins by 24 delegates, 108 to 84.

Mr. Obama now leads Ms Rodham by 183 delegates. Mr. Obama leads by millions of popular votes. And Mr. Obama garnered more than half the States a month ago.

It's over ... and has been for weeks.

8

[Anne1776]

And we also keep hearing about how she's "won" all the big states, but she won very FEW of them by more than 1 or 2 %. It's a stupid argument that since she's "won" more big states, she should be the candidate.

[MaBJ]

You know what? Clinton has wide support among Democrats - not Independents, not Republicans - DEMOCRATS! Independents are the least reliable voters. And as far as I can tell from polling, Independents drop Obama in favor of McCain, last time I checked.

The other thing that Obama has to worry about is the gender gap. He and McCain both have a huge gender gap problem and Obama has a big older voters problem. The young and AAs aren't going to put any Democrat in the WH. And Obama has a big Hispanic/Latino problem.

Clinton, OTOH, has at least four demographics that are key to winning WH: working class whites, Hispanics, older voters - Reagan Democrats, women. In addition, AAs are loyal to the Democratic Party, period. This is probably why Clinton's national lead against McCain holds steady and has held steady since March at +1 point. Additionally, she does better than Obama in key battleground states: OH, PA, FL. She also does better in MN, OR, CA, and MA. (Obama can't even carry MA in the GE -- something pretty seriously whacked there, when he can't even carry Kennedy/Kerry country, but Clinton can).

You can smirk and point to delegate leads, popular vote (which, BTW, will probably work out in Clinton's favor by 60,000 +/-), and every other trick pony you want, but electability is a far more important factor in SDs minds (as AP pointed out by interviewing 117 of them earlier in the week) than all of these

[sniperfire]

waah, waaah, another clinton whiner even while supposedly being confident the crybaby act continues.
of course bill had no problem with caucuses when he was running and winning them.
unbelievable the crap that gets posted here.

[dajay]

waah, waah, another OBama cry baby.

I agree, unbelievable the crap that gets posted here.

[Anne1776]

I'll tell you why Obama has won in the caucuses- it's fine for a republican to go to the polls and anonymously vote for Hillary in a democratic primary, but it's a whole other issue to show up and face people you know and sign your name to show "support" of Hillary.

Sadly, Hillary has done so well because she can't win against McCain and Republicans know that, and they've been going to the polls and voting for her just for that reason. Several conservative talk show hosts have even urged their listeners to do this. Hillary's numbers are an illusion. If she somehow wins the nomination, you can go ahead and count on 4 more years of Bush rhetoric.

[Marbles]

You are right. Several of the right wing pundits came out and said that the repubs are promoting their own party members to vote for Clinton because it was a sure win for McCain. Others did not say it but had that squirrely look on their faces when questioned and did not deny it.

Hey, what about her Diebold buddy? I haven't researched it. Just wondered how he has helped or will help her. Does diebold have anything to do with voting machines? Oh, I just remembered--they do.

[vernonbc]

"will tell Obama supporters their tactics only work in caucuses where intimidation and strong-arm tactics are effective.­"

Gee. Why has Obama won more primaries than Hillary if he can only win caucuses?

Whiner.

[foreffectivegovernment]

What has eroded over time is the number of Hillary Clinton supporters who are willing to express their preference for Hillary Clinton. They do not want to be bombarded by ridicule and intimidation that is heaped on them by the wild-eyed militant over-bearing Barack Obama supporters.

The Pennsylvana primary will show that the polls are wrong again when these voters express their preference in the voting booth. Unlike at the caucuses where the Mafia-like tactics of paid Obama supporters have dominated, Hillary Clinton voters will express their views loudly.

The fact that Obama supporters are "organized" will demonstrate to the public their similarity to "organized" crime, i.e. The Mafia.

[halyscomet]

That's rich! No ones has behaved more mafia-like than the Clintons. THIS is why they are losing and will ultimately lose.

Why else would people close to them like Reich and Richardson not support them? It's because they KNOW the Clintons and how bad they truly are. There is simply no other credible explanation.

[justobserve]

well said!

[MaBJ]

Wow! This coming from the unity gang. I love it: the unity, transformational politics, hope, change folk are the most despicable, hateful, nasty, cynical, obnoxious, creepy people I've had the mispleasure of having to deal with in recent political history.

I guess, though, 8 years of Bush turns some people into rage-a-holics. Either that or they have a serious case of Momism (actually I think this is probably a lot truer and closer to home than MOST O followers want to admit). Thus, the sheer hatred of Hillary Clinton.

BTW: Way to go. We couldn't get any better right-wing shills than you folks!

[GingerB]

Your libelous statements about Obama supporters aren't going to bring any converts to Hillary.

[mthespian]

Uh . . . Obama has won more primaries than Clinton. Obama has won more votes than Clinton. Obama has won more votes than Clinton. Obama has won more delegates than Clinton. And, yes, Obama has won more caucuses than Clinton.

I see a pattern and it doesn't look like the "intimidation" theory really explains the facts.

[dajay]

uh...and he still hasn't been able to secure the nomination? RIght?

[dajay]

LOL! The Mafia. But whenever I think of an Obama supporter, from what I have read here for months now, I see them more as the people who walked around on that old movie Night of the Living Dead.

[CTmom13]

http://www.prometheus6.org/files/liagra.jpg

lol lol

[suekzoo]

Thanks! LMAO!

[heal57]

I bet she has a patent on that!! LOL. Thanks.

[ExRepublican]

Not so funny. Not at all. But you being a mom at 13? (are you still 13?) would explain things.

Are you a far right nut? If not, you should be.

I'm not an HRC fan. But this type of junk, stinks. I hope you're not for BO because if you are, I (and many others) will rethink my position even more. Keep the trash coming ........ it's really helping BO (not)

[Sparklez]

So because someone else's actions, who BO 10 times outta 10 does not know would sway your vote to another direction

You my dear, dont deserve to vote at all if u are that easily swayed. Im voting on the issues and substance. What about you?

[Anne1776]

Maybe she has 13 kids? Maybe she's been married 13 years?