Why Barack Obama Has Already Won (and Hillary Has Become a Republican)

In spite of the Clinton campaign's latest outlandish claim that Barack Obama must win all four contests this Tuesday or he's in trouble, those of us still residing in a place called reality understand the actual picture is much different.

According to most major news networks, Barack Obama now has a 100 point total delegate lead. Among pledged delegates the lead is now over 150.

What does this mean? Barack Obama could lose every state this Tuesday and as long as he kept the contests reasonably close he would still maintain a commanding lead.

In this way, he has already won.

He is leading in all the latest polls in Texas by a margin of 2-6 points. He is blowing Clinton out in Vermont. And he has now drawn within two points in Ohio.

After these contests, there are simply not enough states or delegates for Hillary to catch up. The margin is now within 4 points in Pennsylvania.

Where else can she win and collect a total of 100 delegates? What big states can she rout by 20-30 points?

The answer is: she can't. She can draw this thing out, continue to make spurious attacks, continue to sell low expectations. But now that Obama has clearly established there won't be blowouts this Tuesday, SHE CANNOT WIN.

Meanwhile, before our very eyes, she is becoming a Republican. The latest example is this blatant manipulation of fear to convince voters that only she can make Americans safe.

Unbelievable. I pray Americans are smarter than this. Fear carried the day in 2000 and 2004. It's gotten us nothing but war, torture, corruption, secrecy, and abuse of power. Hillary might have different policies (though on foreign affairs I have serious questions), but her methods are really no different than the last eight years: she surrounds herself with bad people, she is a top down leader, she is resentful of the press, she is secretive, she can't admit mistakes, she uses fear and manipulation as weapons...

I think America is ready to turn the page. While Barack Obama technically doesn't need to win this Tuesday, one big state (like Texas) should be enough to close the deal. Then we can respond to the real Republicans' fearmongering and failed strategy in Iraq instead of this downward-spiraling, futile civil war.

Comments

[tabatha]

no

it's Vogel who's a republican, like bush and rove.....

total orwellian double speak in this so called "column"

Hillary has been unmercifully crucified by a misogynist press

Obama has been treated with kid gloves...

moreover, Obama carefully limits his time and exposure to the press

Vogel is just a Hillary hater

[radlib1]

Hillary, who voted to give power to the idiot George W. Bush to wage War on Iraq, is now suddenly to be trusted to do right by America (and its sleeping children)? Please forgive me if I vomit. This is the same Hillary Clinton who voted to give George W. Bush the authorization to declare War on Iraq when there was no proof that Saddam had WMD's, there was absolutely no connection between Iraq or any of its people to 9/11, and there was never any imminent or immediate threat of attack of the U.S. from Iraq.

This was, purely and simply, a stupid, bloody, expensive, preemptive and unnecessary attack on another sovereign country (and, like most wars, mainly for the spoils - in this case, oil). I knew in 2002, just from reading between the lines in the newspapers, that this was a War based on Lies. Surely, Hillary knew that, too. But she took the coward's way out and, not wanting to be seen as "soft on terror," voted with Joe Lieberman, assorted other temporizing Democrats, and the entire craven Republican Party.

Hillary can be forgiven for her moral cowardice, but she should not be rewarded with the Presidency.

[ginnypoo]

You remember what happened very strangly, did you forget the vote was after 18 months of Bush saying 9-11, Iraq, 9-11, Iraq every day, all those 935 lies happened then. he even manufactured intel to support his position, most of the country was for it, so were our allies. Millions believed Bush's lies...to place all the blame on Hillary for the war Bush manufactured in his basement is ridiculous. It was not a war vote, but you just pushing the neo-con rewrite Bush wants you to believe. How can you know about the 935 lies told to push the war, how he made up intel, and still say Hillary should have known better. Very few people actually "knew" better and they all worked for Bush. It is easy to know now what we know and judge the past, but it isn't realistic. Have you forgotten how everyone loved seeing saddam's statue fall? People wanted that war because they believe the lies. I know many people myself that believed them. I don't blame Hillary for it to let Bush off the hook for duping my friends/. I don't blame the victim of a lie for what the liar did. But I guess, if you all can blame Hillary it let's you off the hook for believing the lies, too. That's what i think it is...peopl­e are blaming her for not being omniscient and just magicly knowing. They blame to mollify their own guilt for believing the lies and being for the war themselves.

[goodsnservices]

That's right, play the victim card again, tabatha. Let's not look at Hillary's past, present, and potential future actions because that would be misogyny!

[2sleepy]

Remember the ad awhile back about 'working nights' with a cut away to a photo of HRC sitting at a desk wearing the same glasses? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7g0NxL2g-M I know she got beat up bad on alot of blogs for that one by women like myself who did work nights and raised kids and lived in a state of sleep deprivation for years...Ma­ybe she just likes the glasses so worked new ad copy around them? This one seems just as disingenuous as the other ad.

[hillarysupporter]

Obama supporters are using Fear to "Threaten and Pressure" black super delegates to switch
their votes from Clinton to Obama. Are we using Mideast tactics, now? This is not democracy. Democratic Party Officials need to step in ! How can this be a fair nomination process under these circumstances? As a Clinton supporter I absolutely will not vote for Obama now.

[andhakari]

What on earth are you talking about?

[flanardiente]

Do we have to keep listening to right-wing Trojan horses like hillarysupporter? "Obama supporters are mugging superdelegates in the alley! They're just like Arabs! Democratic LEADERS need to discipline their TROOPS now! I absolutely will not vote for (inexperienced just-this-­side-of-cr­iminal empty suit kumbaya-singing race-card-playing possibly-Moslem) Obama!"

It is my fondest dream that every Democrat, Republican or independent who doesn't want to vote for Obama.....­.votes for somebody else!

A man is known, among other things, by his enemies. Obama's enemies have so far convinced me that he's definitely the man for the job.

[SouthCentralDel]

Dear hillarysupporter regarding the 'Fear to Threaten and Pressure",

hunh?

[ginnypoo]

Read up on what has been happening to John Lewis....

[BikerJim]

First of all I do not think that we can hold the actions of a person's supoports against them. If that was so, the all of the the Hillary sup[ports would be held a testiment against Hillary character. But regardless, let's look at this issue of people threatening the SuperDelegates. There are two possibilities. 1) the people threatening them are voters that they represent. If this is the case then it is perfectly acceptable for them to tell them that they will support someone else, or run against them. After all they are suppose to resprsent their constitutes. However, if the other situation exist 2) they are getting threats from people that are not in their districts, then what possible threat is there really. They should just ignore them.

[envirossf]

Hillsupporter,

Do you mean tactics like agreeing to caucus placement in Nevada and then getting surrogates to sue against it? Do you mean agreeing to abide by dem party rules on sanctioning states that break the rules, then arguing to seat Michigan and Florida delegates? Do you mean abiding by the primary rules in Texas (that were also used by President Clinton) and then threatening to sue when it doesn't turn out your way? Are these th tactics you're talking about? Or maybe the tactics of having supporters imply Sen Obama was selling drugs on the street while Sen Clinton was standing on stage (without denouncing or rejecting it),? Or fear mongering about a Manchurian Muslim candidate to scare jewish supporters? Are these the tactics you're talking about? To state Sen Clintons's own words "LETS GET REAL".

[shamanbart]

While I generally agree with Vogel, that Clinton's use of the fear bomb is obviously the same tactic as Republicans use, we really should exercise some restraint. Labelling our friends, our associates as the enemy or the opposite of what they are really tends to polarize the sides.

The HRC camp may be desperate -- trying whatever might work. But she's a far cry from a Repub. Countering those tactics with blatant smears will only alienate her supporters, which are all needed for a Dem victory in the fall.

Let's be clear -- it's fine to passionately argue for your candidate, dispel false accusations, deride bad tactics, etc. -- but at the end of the day HRC has about 45-49 % of the Democratic support out there. We need to encourage all to get behind one candidate, and take on the REAL tough job -- convincing Independents and Repubs to either get on board or stay home on voting day.

We can only hope Nader barely registers a blip, but it will take all hands on deck to counter the falsehoods and cheap tricks of the RNC slime machine.

Can March 4 come soon enough? Doubtful..­.

[iburl]

"she's a far cry from a Repub." not in my way of thinking..­. She's probably shares 90% of the same views as McCain. She is a chickenhawk, just like most of them. All too eager to send other people's kids to die in a pointless war.

[Ork]

Not only that, she cannot get to admit her mistake.. a la bush 04!

[Roose]

She's morphed into a Rethug as far as I'm concerned. If I want to vote for a Rethug, I'll vote for the real thing. No at Rethug wannabe.

[goodsnservices]

I'd like to see a poll of Hillary supporters who would be willing to vote for Obama in a general election and vice versa. The admittedly small number of stories I have seen have indicated that Hillary supporters in general would be willing to support Obama, but that a smaller portion would vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination. The potential loss of democratic votes in a general election for Hillary should give us all pause. This is definitely an area where pollsters could help us now to determine who should get the nomination.

[LolaM]

goodnservi­ces..

WRONG!!!.. If you have access to AOL , go there they have Prez Straw Poll, Political Machine,and Hot Seat.... 98% of HRC supporters spew the most disgusting, vile , posts about Obama , ALL of them say they will vote for McCain ..if Hillary doesn't win..
So look around before you speak.. then take a shower after you read what your fellow HRC Fans are saying..

[researcher]

"Unbelievable. I pray Americans are smarter than this"

what planet do you live on. are you talking about the americans that bought into the trickle down theory.

the repubs smiled all the way to the bank on that one

or the americans that think a 700 billion dollar defense budget is really defense and not offense

or the americans that put george bush jr into the white twice and even after he started a war for profits based on lies and deception

or the americans that think everything american is the best in the world

or the americans that worry more about if the surge is working rather than the war was illegal

or the americans that think the fault lies in our politicans without realizing they are only a reflection of our society.

or the americans that have allowed 47 million to go without health care and think nothing of mading huge corp profits off the sick and needy

or the americans that think to solve our crime problems is to give longer jail terms

or the americans that have the lowest saving rates in the industrialized world and borrow huge sums of money from china commies to stay a float all the while thinking communism is evil.

or the americans that hate communism but shop at wal mart where most of the products are made by you guessed it communists.

or the america that thinks socialism is this terrible thing while the german auto worker works 38 hours aand has complete health care for him and his family

or the american that thinks our health care is the best in the world when we are ranked 35th.

americans smart dont think so we are like teenagers vain and selfish but then our country is a teen ager compared to other countries.

I have traveled europe and asia and we americans are not the sharpest knive in the drawer.

if americans looked into a mirror and could see themselves as they really are they would see imperialists and many would see a war monger and very arrogant people. at a park today with my grandchildren a guy had a shirt on that said the word arrogant. he was proud to be arrogant.

[mutron]

Researcher, hmmm......­....intere­sting post, you possess a charming naivete. Some of it i agree with but I must say that you fail to perceiver the true dynamic of what socialism is. It is a 19th century idea that failed miserably in the 20th century, this is the 21st century. Countries like France and Germany are unable to compete economically with powerhouse countries like China and the US. Look at how China is thriving as it embraces Capitalism. Are you aware of what the unemployment levels are in these European countries you admire for their socialism? Do you know what a gallon of gas costs in France?

[RileysMom]

Joe - Obama people -

I have a question, what exactly do you suppose is going to happen to half of the Democrats who support Hillary? When your Obama gets the nomination? Do you think your posts and distortions of Hillary's record are going to disuade our support for her? Do you think we will hang our heads and go quietly into the little back room and drink our kool aid before our big Obama rally?

It is not only Hillary's repsonsibility to unite this party once this is done - and mind you I do not think its done and god willing she will fight on just to spite those who have never hung their out there who are insisting it is the 'right' thing to do. What then?

There are alot of very good people who read the same blogs you do, know the same set of facts and have choosen Hillary. What then? They see her as the better choice - experiance does matter. They are not taken in by Obama and the rhetoric. What about them?

Fact - You can't win without us - remember that

Are we Republicans? Is that what you are saying? Are you telling us to vote for McCain? Where would that leave Obama?

[AsherLev]

We Obama "kool-aid" cultists would love to unite as a party. We think Hillary's tactics, however, reveal something disturbing. And some of Hillary's supporters are no longer seeing reality. If this were a Republican ad a few years ago they would be screaming about the fearmongering. Now it's fine. And now supposed Democrats are threatening to vote for McCain and prolong the war just because their candidate didn't win. It's pathetic.

It's time to move on, with or without the Clintons and their loyalists.

[ginnypoo]

Obama supporters came on this site and threatened us for days with 'fire in the streets' that is not the calm discussion of the candidates we tried to have. It was extremely off-putting. I saw after that Obama playing the race card which reinforced my feelings of not wanting to be any part of it. He admits it and you all act like we made it up. There are still many here saying it didn't happen. No one on Obama's side seems to even care that Rezko trial is being bumped back to monday and Rezko not being allowed to do interviews means Obama has enough pull to keep this stuff quiet. Now John Lewis is threatened for weeks and some guy enters his race to challenge his seat and is pro-Obama, just as he was told would happen, and if he doesn't switch he will be on thw wrong side of his election. This is happening all over the country, his campaign is calling the Supers and trying to intimidate them. Google John Lewis and read ALL the stories from the last few weeks. Those are repug tactics. I won't be voting at all if Obama gets the nom, sorry, I just can't do it. It's just like Bush ran, saying one thing and doing another.

[deb123]

You do raise a good point. We've all gotten a bit crazed during these campaigns -- myself included. When all is said and done, we must remember that either Democratic candidate is a far better choice than the alternative. I do hope that the passion these primaries have generated will carry over to the general election. This is an important time in our history when we can make a mark.

[goodsnservices]

deb123 said: When all is said and done, we must remember that either Democratic candidate is a far better choice than the alternativ­e." That is the current platitude, but I have to disagree for reasons that may surprise you. My reasoning is based on law and it goes something like this:

"The state of the nation is in shambles following two Bush terms. Not least among his 'sins,' Bush has managed an unprecedented power grab that undermines the very democratic foundation of our country. Whoever wins the White House in November will be faced with either confirming this power grab as legal Presidential Priviledge, or returning to an acceptible level of authority. I have no faith in either Hillary or McCain giving up such unprecedented power. If a Republican nominee wins the White House and refuses to return such power, we will still have an avenue of redress by stating that Democrats oppose the continuing power grab as illegal. However, if a Democrat wins the White House and fails to return such power to its proper authority, then that's it, folks. Damage done and our system will be changed forever."

Given the above, it would be better for McCain to win four years in the White House than Hillary. At least then we would still be able to cry "foul" and seek redress in the next election cycle. This may seem spurious, unless you understand the basis for law in this country. Part of our law is based on "common usage," which are practices that have become acceptible. The only way to keep common practice from becoming law is to object. to that practice until it has been addressed and redressed.

It would be better for McCain (shudder) to be president for four years than for Hillary to win the White House even once.

[Micah616]

As much as I would like to strike a nicer tone, it's hard to do so when threatened with nonsense. We can't win without you, and you can't win without us. So what? Maybe you don't realize that McCain and the merry band of Republican theocrats don't need any of us. Maybe you're fine with that. I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

If you're so shallow as to waste your vote behind some anonymous internet postings, then you rightfully deserve the imperial theocracy McCain's supporters want to give you.

Regardless of who is the Democratic nominee, I'll still be voting Democrat in November. Will you?

[flanardiente]

Riley'sMom asks: "Are we Republicans?"

Well, yes, I suspect you are.

[bellecloche]

I agree with you - we should be uniting as a party, absolutely, and we will need you should Obama be the nominee. But you will need us should Clinton be the nominee as you hope, and I do see a vast difference between criticizing the candidate - as Vogel does here - and bashing the candidates' supporters. The charges coming from both Clinton, her editorialist supporters, and now you that we are nothing more than a cult of kool-aid drinkers who are delusional, duped, starry-eyed, or lock-stepped is hardly a way to bring us over to your side. In fact it cements us in opposition to these insults. Vogel here has simply stated that he hopes all Americans won't give in to the fear that the new Clinton ad plays on - nowhere else does he refer to you as a Hillary supporter nor does he question your sanity as such. If Obama does win the nomination, I hope you will be able to be drawn to his merits and that the vast majority of his supporters welcome you respectfully, because unity is our slogan and you deserve to be treated decently. If Hillary wins the nomination, I will need time to forgive those of you who called Obama supporters like me kool-aid drinkers.

[Desiderata]

HRC will not be the next President of the United States simply because she didn't trust us enough to support her with our hearts and dollars. She wanted absolute certainty that, should we fail to love her, her BigPharma and BigHMOs and BigGlobalCorps and "they are people, too" BigTimeLobbyists and BigPolitic­alConsulta­nts would overwhelm any challenge to her destiny.

Funny thing about Destiny: the more you try to manifest it, the harder it is to make it real.

[marysandra]

It is dismaying, to say the least, to watch a former first lady disintegrate before our eyes. She has not been a remarkable Senator, and after being rightfully rebuffed with her health care plan as first lady, she just gave up..Of course, it was unbelievably dumb to appoint her to that position in the first place. I think she could have a good career in the Senate if she hadn't been always planning to run for President. Perhaps she could use her talent and smarts to the benefit of New York state now that she no longer has to tailor her votes to her aspirations for higher office.
Obama offers hope for change, and inspiration for people to join a movement for change,isn't that what leadership is about? He also seems capable of appointing seasoned people to positions of importance in his administration, he is obviously very bright. He can think on his feet, is unflappable and should not accept anymore challenges to a debate. Who needs it? These are really not debates anymore, just rants,and free t.v. time for Hillary..t­here is much talk about how "tough" she is, and how much has been thrown at her, maybe she should try to get along and be conciliiatory and open minded for a change. The "my way or the highway" attitude is a giant turnoff and only invites the attacks she then has to be "tough" about.

[PJay]

The poster "yeswecancan" put this great find up on another blog entry here at HuffPo. (Maybe Hillary's blog?)

"Now one of Clinton"s laws of politics is this: If one candidate"s trying to scare you and the other one"s trying to get you to think, if one candidate"s appealing to your fears and the other one"s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."

-Bill Clinton, 2004

[Notapathetic]

Maybe some of you guys can help me with this:

1. How is it that Hillary is assumed to be "smart"? Because her campaign says so? Because she can put on a bit of an act? I am not against Hillary especially, but I don't get it. She does not seem outstandingly smart to me. She is definitely not even average-smart when it comes to running a campaign. Obama outsmarts her every ten minutes, it seems. I just don't buy how smart and efficient and competent Hillary is...in fact I suspect she is not much better than average.

2. Why is "experience" a given with Hillary? She has very, very LITTLE experience as regards a Presidential level post. As Bill Clinton says, "She has never been elected to anything before she went to the Senate". Her claim to "know foreign leaders" is bogus because the leaders she visited as First Lady were in office 15 years ago....if they are still in office they must be dictators or their terms would be long-expired. Who exactly are all these friends she has around the world? Her experience working with poor children or whatever is no different than my Mom's experience as a community caregiver. That doesn't give her Presidential experience. Geez!

3. Commander-in-Chief. Come on! Hillary as the General of all Generals? That is just plain ridiculous as far as "background" is concerned. She doesn't have a clue about slaughtering a population with heavy bombing or sending a platoon of kids to their deaths!!! She may have read some bureaucratic, academic papers about this subject but she sure as hell does not have a shred of reality when it comes to her actually being the one who calls the shots militarily. This is an argument that is completely false! She has less experience than some private who served a three year enlistment in the Army.

Help me out here. I don't get it.

[TabysGrandma]

I totally agree with you. I never understood the "experience" line for Hilliary. She was First Lady and from what I understand she did not given have a security clearance while she was in the White House. If she met with foreign leaders I am sure it was not on national security issues.

My personal opinion is that no one has the experience on day one for the job of President. There is no one I know that is good at everything. That is why you need to have good advisors and good people in the cabinet posts.

From the looks of how Hilliary is running her campaign and the people she has advising her, I seriously doubt she is experienced to be President.

[PJay]

Great article. For all practical purposes, she sure is acting like a Republican -- a Neocon actually.
A Republican acquaintance of mine went to a Hillary event. She went with an open mind to see what she was all about.
Well, after the event was over, my friend left with an intense dislike for Hillary. She said that not only did Hillary do nothing to attract any Republicans but she was attacking them in a very mean spirited way. Some may think this "fighter" in her is a good thing, but when she has so much animosity for so many people, no, that's not a fighter for good causes. That's just someone looking for and perpetuating fights.

[kato1]

I have had the same feeling for a long time. From the beginning of this campaign she has acted in a less than honorable fashion reminding me of, well, your typical Republican. The red phone ad is yet another example of just how like Rove, Bush and Cheney, she and her people are. The Fear Card. Be very afraid. I think most of us are too smart to have fallen for that the first time around much less now, in her clumsy hands. I wonder how soon she'll be tossing the "H" (as in Hussein) bomb around.

She lies and and will say anything in attacking her opponent. When she is in trouble, she turns it around - Barack has to win all 4 states or else he's really in a pickle. Spin, lie, spin, lie and spin some more. Cry a bit, screech a bit, get mad, be sarcastic - none of it attractive. Proving to me that she isn't fit for the office on the first day or any other. Sure she knows her stuff but knowledge and wisdom should not be confused and she hasn't shown us much wisdom. Knowledge can be acquired but wisdom? I think not.

We don't need another Bush or another Clinton - it's time to move away from the people who got us into this mess in the first place. Let's hope she loses Texas and maybe, if we're lucky, Ohio and it's over. Then again, I don't really expect Hill to make a graceful exit. It just doesn't seem to be who she is.

[jsinclair]

She's run a Rove-inspired campaign with more on the way this weekend, I'm sure. (Three weekends in a row she's sprung "dirty tricks" to get free television coverage round the clock on otherwise slow news days).

The sense of entitlement ("It will all be over by Feb 5"), the complete mismanagement of campaign donations, the lack of disclosure of tax returns or library donors, the inept leadership of her campaign, AND the dirty tactics make her seem like an "old school pol", reeking of backroom deals and barely legal, but unethical, corruption.

[ajax2]

Hillary was given an impossible task by Bill and the DLC, run with the Bush crimes of aggressive wars and occupation, not in a general election but in a Democratic Primary. Not even Hercules could lift this turd.

[ACFG]

Thank you, Joe. My husband and I have been discussing nearly the exact same points for weeks. Maybe she IS a Republican, after all. We've been amazed at how her campaign ethos is so similar to that of the present administration's.
We hope, after nearly eight years of fear mongering, that the American public is shock proofed enough to see that the only thing we have to fear is having another fearmongerer for President.
However, what is worrisome to us is her continued denial of the reality of her loss in this campaign. Her bullying threats to file a lawsuit against the Texas caucus system could delay the delegate count, keeping her in the race until the convention, where she could use Clintonian leverage to garner delegates.
We see a real lack of imagination and stateswomanship in her overall presentation. Her vaunted health care proposal looks disastrous, as it would garnish income for both big pharma and the insurance industry, two entities completely disinterested in health promotion, disease prevention, alternative medicine, food supplements, etc.
However, at this point in the political process, her unabashed use of dirty tricks is so revealing as to be painful.

[teahead]

As Howard Dean would say...she'­s "George Bush-lite!"

[busybeez]

Terrific article. I proudly voted for Obama today in Texas and will caucus for him on March 4. Texas belongs to Obama!