Four Things the Obama Campaign Couldn't Resist Doing To Anger Clinton Supporters

The follow are four things that the Obama campaign couldn't resist doing to anger Clinton supporters, supporters that Sen. Obama needs in the general election if -- if -- he is the nominee.

1. Couldn't resist waiting one day after Sen. Clinton won West Virginia by 41 points to announce John Edwards endorsement.

2. Couldn't resist waiting to win majority of ALL delegates (not just pledged delegates) to do victory lap speech in Iowa the night Hillary won Kentucky by 36 points.

3. Couldn't resist waiting to win majority of all delegates to announce Jim Johnson as VP search committee head -- the first candidate in my memory ever to do so while his chief opponent is still fighting for nomination -- and winning in last primary in crucial border state by 36 points (Kentucky).

What's the rush?

Obama wouldn't confirm or deny the that Mr. Johnson has been appointed to head the VP search effort. That makes many Clinton supporters feel uneasy about Senator Obama.

4. Couldn't resist listing Bill Richardson as under consideration for Veep - the one Red Flag name that infuriates even moderate Clinton supporters the most -- not because he chose to endorse Sen. Obama, but the way he did it, i.e., his inability to avoid making negative comments about Sen. Clinton while doing so -- another person who sometimes can't resist the temptation of not being gracious when he should be, a great disappointment to many of his former close friends from the Clinton camp and which will not be forgotten.

Comments

[RaymondLuxuryYacht]

Come on, Lanny, if Hillary is still actively pursuing the nomination as she professes, you have to expect Obama to do things that lessen the impact of her wins. What's Obama supposed to do, tie his hands behind his back and just take a pummeling? This is one of the most absurd pieces I've read. Complete, unmitigated twaddle.

I suspect that the Clinton folks are throwing out pieces like this to convince their supporters that they need to fight all the way to the convention.

[bygollymissmolly]

No, they need to throw out twaddle like this to convince her supporters that Obama didn't play fair with her. The thing that is sickening is that Mr. Davis is trying to say that Hillary should have been given some kind of special consideration. Why should she get special consideration? Because she is a woman? Gasp....Mr­. Davis. Are you being sexist here?

[Marketingal]

Why on earth would Obama wait to tout his successes in order to give Clinton a 24-hour news cycle to spin her primary wins. Has she ever been that courteous to him? I think not. If she had the same types of announcements and milestones in her back pocket, she would certainly use them to disrupt his momentum. Isn't that what candidates do?

You would do yourself a big favor by looking internally at all of the problems within the Clinton campaign to determine why she didn't win the primary election. Clinton certainly had all of the advantages going into this campaign: 1.)Clinton brand, 2.) inevitable nominee status, 3.) more money (initially), 4.) political establishment support (initially), etc, etc, etc.

Perhaps you should come out of your self-denial and see the real problems that led to her loss. Had she not relied on her own inevitability, she probably would have won. Overtly divide the party and creating clear rival camps has been a real stain on her candidacy, and frankly you've done a fine job of perpetuating that divisive mentality here with your bitter post.

Bottom line: When you don't take responsibility for your own mistakes and errors in judgment, yet insist on blaming the other guy, you will never be successful because you've, in effect, missed the opportunity for self-reflection and improvement -- a sad but true reality for your candidate.

[zstroud]

here's another one Lanny, add arrogant Obama bloggers to your list, because THEY have done more damage to him then anything he's done.

[Marketingal]

That's silly to base your opinion of Obama on his supporters. Arrogance aside, my opinion of Clinton is solely based on what I've seen in her as a candidate in this election. I could frankly care less about the way her supporters view her. She alone has done plenty for me to form a lasting impression.

Furthermore, why do you constantly feel the need to emphasize that you are an African-American when you make negative comments about Obama and profess your undying support for Clinton. Do you think it somehow lends a measure of credibility to your statements?

[DEK12]

Plouffe and Axelrod never did have the finesse or skill of Rove.

[CaliforniaDem]

I continued to be stunned by the vitriol of Senator Obama supporters. Why can’t you have a meaningful conversation without demeaning people? How the heck do you think you are going to win in November without some of the 17 million plus people who have voted for Senator Clinton? Can you come up with any possible calculation that says you don’t need us? I would be interested in hearing that – not another rant against supporters of HRC.

[Darnamell]

I continue to be stunned by the racism, and now lick-lipping hopes of assassination, from Senator Clinton supporters. Why can't you have a meaningful conversation without insulting voters and bringing racial divides to the forefront? How the heck do you think you are going to win in November without caucus states, red states who want to change, African-Americans, and others who have voted for Senator Obama? Can you come up with any possible calculation that says you still have a chance to win? I would be interested in hearing THAT, not another rant involving impossible odds and wishes of death against Barack and supporters of Obama.

[DXP]

Darnamell, you work very hard to not understand the comment. You work hard at thinking in either/or boxes. The comment was about how can Obama win without the old dem base? Do you think the neodems are strong enough to carry the GE? That is the question. Forget your Clinton hate for a moment, if possible.

[Darnamell]

I continue to be stunned by the racism, and now lick-lipping hopes of
assassination, from Senator Clinton supporters. Why can't you have a
meaningful conversation without insulting voters and bringing racial
divides to the forefront? How the heck do you think you are going to
win in November without caucus states, red states who want to change,
African-Americans, and others who have voted for Senator Obama? Can
you come up with any possible calculation that says you still have a
chance to win? I would be interested in hearing THAT, not another rant
involving impossible odds and wishes of death against Barack and
supporters of Obama.

[zstroud]

I am an African American military veteran from the south, and I cant stand Obama and his arrogance. Am I racist too?

[veridicalperception]

I absolutely agree. The four points made were proof that the NEW Democratic Party no longer has any need for those 17 million plus people (OLD core Democrats) who voted for HC. I will never vote for Obama, unlike all those who say they wanted HC but will vote for Obama in November. I will change my affiliation to Independent and send my old registration card in shreads to Howard Dean directly. I am sick of Obama supporters portraying anyone who votes for HC as a racist, redneck with no education. Obama does not deserve my support, all they want is my money and now get neither.

[Syco]

once again the Dems defeat themselves

[queotic]

"I am sick of Obama supporters portraying anyone who votes for HC as a racist, redneck with no education. "

Obama supporters? Are you sure about that? Last time I checked, the good people of West Virginia said, with their own voices, that they wouldn't vote for a black man. And an exit poll question often asked after primaries is, 'Is race a factor?" and the overwhelming majority of people who said "yes" voted for Clinton. Last time I checked, Hillary kept talking about how she has more support amongst non-educated people. The "racist redneck/no education" comments come directly from racist voters and Hillary's mouth, so how can you blame Obama supporters?

"Obama does not deserve my support, all they want is my money and now get neither."
Funny. I receive both Obama and Clinton emails and Clinton is definately the one who wants your money. Obama's emails vary between fundraising, phonebanking, canvassing, his speeches, endorsements etc. while almost every single one of Hillary's is about fundraising.

If you truly cared about this country and the horrible condition it's in right now, you would know that this race is not about Hillary, or even Obama. You'd know that we have too much at stake to actively or passively allow McCain to serve a third term of Bush.

[RaymondLuxuryYacht]

That vitriol flows both ways. Go take a look on taylormarsh.com. The anti-Obama vitriol there is every bit as nasty as anything I've seen directed against Clinton.

Personally, I'll vote for whichever Dem gets the nomination but, like you, I'm amazed at the lengths some people are going to vilify their candidates opponent. It's particularly ironic as both candidates have virtually identical positions on the issues. Both sides better wake up to the reality that their divisiveness is going to throw the GE to the GOP. Given the ages of the judges on the SC, that would be a disaster.

[timm0]

I'm stunned at the incredibly thin skin of hillary supporters who are "stunned by vitriol."

I'm stunned by how hillary supporters like you lump everyone and everything who isn't a hillary supporter into a bigotry-based group - just like dubya's infantile and over-simplified, "you're either with us or against us" outbursts.

And I'm also stunned at how many people appear to be planted on blogs and other comment pages to participate in a coordinated effort to try to legitimize the illegitimate claims made by the clinton campaign.

[DXP]

Cute, often a response to a real question is just being cute. After you are finished with the 'stunned' jokes, can you maybe think about how the neodems will fare if the old dems are alienated? Not about Clinton or Obama, but the GE.

[paganmist]

This shameless bait is just another spectacularly transparent example of how your inability to avoid negative campaigning has dimmed Hillary's natural glow.

Yeah, some voters'll think Obama is "out to get them." They won't wonder why a presidential hopeful would deliberately try to alienate them. They're angry. They'll bite. But they'll realize what pawns they've been. You won't be remembered fondly, if at all. A Wikipedia footnote.

Manufacture tension, generate outrage, cry victim in response. This formula turned a landslide campaign against a no-name into a wash. Have you learned nothing?

--That's right. This isn't about Hillary winning. This is your last-ditch effort to remain relevant.

Oh, what Hillary could've been without the likes of you. What she could've done with an Axelrod behind her. She'll figure it out, though. She's a sharp lady. She's Hillary Clinton. Who's Lanny Davis? Oh, that guy that got hazed by G. Dubya in college. I hear George went on to become President. What's Lanny up to, again?

The only people this'll sway are already in kamikaze mode. But blind loyalty is a poor thing to hedge bets on. I'd start looking for another campaign to help ruin, if I were you.

All your base are belong to Obama. You did it to yourself. Mostly, though, you did it to Hillary. Great job!

And next time you need a perch to fling crap from, please pick some place other than HuffPo. We are so over you.

K thanx bi.

[timm0]

I was with you for most of your comments about 'remaining relevant.' However, I don't think we can hang the loss so easily on bozos like davis.

The clintons have been working with many of these same people since the early 90s. Many helped through her Senate campaigns. None of them were unknown characters that she was forced to adopt and use. Hillary put them into their positions and kept them there from the beginning all the way thru to now.

If the Penns of the world are incompetent clowns, you cannot absolve the ultimate hiring authority - you know who - from being accountable for bringing them on board. And by that virtue, she should rightfully wear the stain of their incompetence, cowardice, and moral turpitude.

[Anie]

Many newspapers and tv news programs are now reporting she is currently able to easily beat McCain today, while Obama is, overall, losing to McCain in electoral college polling.

http://hominidviews.com/?p=1560

Clinton: 100% probability of winning (May 26)

Mean of 322 electoral votes

http://hominidviews.com/?p=1561

Obama: 37.3% probability of winning (May 26

Mean of 264 electoral votes

Alternate electoral-college polling:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/May28.html

Electoral Votes: Clinton 327 McCain 194 Ties 17 (May 28)

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May28.html

Electoral Votes: Obama 266 McCain 248 Ties 24 (May 28)

===

Add that she will almost surely have the popular vote lead, including the caucuses and of course Michigan and Florida (for without them, the Democrats will lose).
Certified Total votes are countable regardless of delegate-seating decisions

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Latest polls - at RealClearP­olitics.Co­m

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

[paganmist]

There's no such thing as "certified total votes" in a primary campaign because of caucuses. The numbers coming from caucuses are estimates at best - this is why "popular vote" isn't the metric to win this, delegates are.

Given how shaky any popular vote count is during a primary, unless there is an overwhelming gap in the number of voters, the Superdelegates aren't going to overturn the response.

This is a primary, not the general. This campaign strategy was geared for winning the primary - the electoral predictions based upon this campaign are all crap. With a single nominee, those numbers will change with more accurate margins.

When there's an official nominee campaigning for the GE, I'll pay attention to the electoral polls. Until then, the only polls that are relevant (keeping in mind that "relevant polls" is an oxymoron) are the primary polls.

What do those say?

[Dustee]

Many newspapers and tv news programs are now reporting that Obama will most likely wrap the nomination up in 10 days. Is it true or not? I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

They told Obama when running for the Illinois state senate that no black man had ever won and he probably is wasting his time, not to mention the heartbreak of it all.

They told Obama that if he runs in the primary against the Clinton machine, he would most certainly lose.

They told Obama that he would never be the POTUS. Is it true or not. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[ErinBerin84]

Chuck Todd was talking about this the other day, and says that Edwards, Bill Bradley, and McCain (in 2000) all started polling better than they had been when they were running virtually UNOPPOSED. The other candidates knew that their campaigns were pretty much over, so they starting ignoring them and turned to the real enemy. All Clinton is to Obama and McCain right now is a a gnat.

[Dansden]

Erin...:
One can brush a gnat away......
A gnat cannot win the states that are necessary for Novemeber election..­.
A gnat cannot win over 17 million votes from Democratic Americans.­.....
A gnat cannot continue winning where Obama cannot....­.
Gnat...?

GNAT buying it, Erin......­....

[gnostic19]

Easy to say this now...Obam­a has had to play Mr. Nice Guy the last month so he doesn't upset all the sensitive Clinton supporters(such as Lanny). No wonder his numbers have slipped a bit. Clinton can hammer him but Obama can't say anything back. The Clintons have their perfect opponent. Too bad the nomination is already over. When they were on level playing field we saw who got the most votes.

[MikeB08]

gnostic19, you are kidding, right? Obama has not had to "say anything back" because the MSM (not to mention bloggers) have done that for him. He's had it easy and should be polling way ahead of Clinton. Even Fox's political web site has a big glossy of Obama's smiling face 9 times out of 10. Give me a break.

Lanny, you are absolutely right (as usual). While Obama and his supporters could at least start to attempt to bring Democrats together, they continue to divide by doing the things you've listed. I think they expect to lose the GE "IF" he is the nominee and they want to make sure they can blame it on disgruntled Clinton supporters.

[standforpeace]

Anybody that gives any candidate a "100% probabilty of winning" as one of your sources apparently gives Clinton needs to be discounted out of hand. Is there anyone out there who is not a raving maniac that believes that McCain has 0 percent chance of winning in November? Why don't you at least offer something plausible if you want to tear down the nominee of the Democratic party -- Barack Obama.

[timm0]

Why is a picture leaping into my head of a 3-year old writhing in a screaming tantrum on the floor of the supermarket, enraged because he didn't get the Good-and-Plenty he demanded in the candy aisle?

Lame and pathetic are adjectives that aptly describe all you cry-babies who can't stand not being given what you wanted. You're [slightly] above a seizure-like episode in public, but your wailing and silly written aspersions aren't much better.

[Faye12]

We are a family of five. No one watches the news anymore or listens to talk radio. It is all trash and you can't believe any of it. Obama is not who people believe he is. I feel sorry for all of America when it finally comes out just what a bad person he is. All the dreams - POOF are gone. He has
divided America horribly.

[lynnn]

Why listen to "talk radio" when you can read the internet and form your own opinions. That is the problem there has been one generation that has been going around in circles for 40 years, bc they were so easily controlled by media and fads. You don't see bc you don't want to see. There is a willful ignorance of facts (and both right and left have it). Also that generation is selfish, they want things given to them (how should I view this information) they don't like to go out on their own and do. They want government to do for them (again right and left).

Again, some people will open their eyes and see, others will remain willfully blind, and never see the new world that is about to be created.

The internet is like the printing press. We are in a time of a paradigm shift..

[paganmist]

And you know he's a bad person... how?

And you know Hillary's a good person... how?

Both of them have amazing records. Both of them have been proven to have dedicated time, money, and energy to society and country. Both of them have made gaffes, and have shady and controversial associations.

So what exactly are you basing this observation on except emotion and disappointment?

The only division here is between the Democrats who want to win against the Republicans, and the Democrats who want Hillary to win at any and all costs. One side's got their heads on straight, and the other side is letting personal disappointment guide their behavior and decisions.

Obama hasn't divided America, Americans have divided themselves. You can't fault an American for running for office. You can't fault him for doing so successfully. No man or woman who wants to run for President has to "wait their turn", because no man or woman is entitled to "go first" when it comes to this.

If Hillary loses, it does not make you, personally, a loser.

Detach.

Breathe.

[timm0]

Weak.

If there is any divisiveness, it's been generated by the clinton camp. There can be no objective analysis that can support your delusional claim. You're living vicariously through clinton. You chose your hero unwisely. Get over it and take the blinders off. We need to move forward. If Obama doesn't get the job done, we'll deal with it in 2011, OK?

[acanthus]

How has he "divided America horribly"? By running for President?

[bygollymissmolly]

And you know this how? What has happened to prove to you that Obama is a bad person? Nothing...­Oh, it must be because Clinton says so and we must all believe what she says, or else!

Sheesh...y­ou sound like a two year old.

[hwebb54]

They also couldn't resist twisting the facts about Hillary's "June" remarks (or as the media calls it, the RFK remarks) They send out Keith Olbermann's "Special Comments" about it even after they say that they take Hillary at her word and she was taken out of context. i guess Obama really wants to lose this election or they wouldn't be pushing away OVER half of the Democratic Party. What is sad about this it the media knows it not to be a true "controversy" but they try to make it one for the Obama campaign. McCain is looking better and better to all of us Hillary supporters. Don't say you weren't warned.

[paganmist]

What precisely do you expect out of a political campaign?

Okay. So Obama shouldn't send out e-mails to his supporters about the other side. Shouldn't point out media that supports him or disparages his opponent.

He shouldn't attack Clinton's policies. Shouldn't point out when she's lying. Shouldn't take offense at anything she says. Shouldn't tell people who's supporting him until Hillary finishes doing her victory laps.

Meanwhile, Hillary's allowed to chide him, bait him, suggest he's a wuss for not debating her, tell everyone that McCain the Republican is better than him, allow her surrogates to attack his masculinity, his wife, and his patriotism.

Hillary's allowed to change the metrics. It's the delegates. No, it's the popular vote. No, it's the superdelegates. No, it's the popular vote. Don't need MI/FL. Do need MI/FL. Give me most of the MI delegates. Give me ALL of the MI delegates. And if Obama protests, he's a cheater and he's picking on her.

In other words, Obama's not allowed to do anything that hurts Hillary's chances of winning.

Okay... thanks for the clarification.

[zstroud]

not while at the same time he assails her for doing the same.

[bygollymissmolly]

I've been looking for someone to do this for me. Perhaps you are the one. Can you tell us one thing that Keith Olbermann said in his special comments that was not true. Just one thing is all I'm asking for.

Also, Obama had nothing to do with how people interpreted what Hillary said. He gave her an out, he made excuses for her. We the people, listened to what she said and made our judgments about it. And most of us took her at what she said. She referred to Robert Kennedy's "assassination" not to Robert Kennedy's "campaign". We simply took her at her word, words she had used on other occasions, so they couldn't be a "misspeak".

The "media knows it is not a true controversy", but what Wright said was? My how convenient.

Don't say you weren't warned??? Oh, I'm so scared....­.

A vast majority of Hillary's supporters will vote for Obama. Those who don't should leave the Democratic party and become Republicans. They won't be missed and will be replaced by new enthusiastic voters.

[RoboA2008]

Oh he is is he? Go ahead and let the Republicans dupe you again. It isn't about the candidates because both can beat McCain. Unless you let them divide us. We fought hard. Someone has got to lose. We started out wanting to reclaim the White House. The only way we can lose is if you do what you are proposing to do. We should not beat ourselves.

[Dustee]

Lenny, the Hillary Clinton campaign was a complete failure.

Stop looking for others to blame and look with in.

[DEK12]

On the contrary, the fact the Hillary is still here and fighting shows the great success of her campaign.

[Syco]

if its so successful when is she in second

[jp5472]

You have to be kidding! Her campaign will be a case study for decades on how not to campaign unless you want to go from "inevitable" to second. There is not one aspect of her campaign that anyone can claim was an asset. This is like one of those many George Steinbrenner Yankee teams of past years: the top payroll, top names - mediocre execution, mediocre play, mediocre results - no championship.

[shadowbox]

Johann,
Clinton supporters need to update their stats. Current polling shows Obama winning in Michigan vs. McCain. (This is even with the current delegate situation, so clearly Michigan voters aren't too concerned about their primary vote being "disenfran­chised.") He is also winning in Ohio and Penn. vs. McCain. Obama is ahead of McCain in Wisconsin and Ohio where Clinton would currently lose to McCain. (see realclearpolitics.com and fivethirtyeight.com)

Bottom line? Either Clinton or Obama will beat McCain in November. And Obama's margins in these states will only get bigger when he becomes the nominee. If Clinton campaigns with him in Florida he will win Florida. If you think McCain is the better candidate, then by all means vote for him. But don't vote for him out of spite. Obama is going to win in November. The only question is will he win with a wide margin--which he will if Clinton supporters go on to support him. Or if he wins in another squeaker, keeping the country divided just like 2004.

[NCMan]

you need to check your electoral map polls again

Obama does NOT get to 270
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May28.html

Clinton beats McCain
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/May28.html

[paganmist]

Obama's electoral polls had him at 205 in April.

Thanks for letting me know that his margins are closing. At this rate, he'll overtake McCain in no time!

[aftershock]

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Electoral Votes-

Obama- 270.8

McCain 267.2

Look at that, I can post random electoral map polling too...

[cincyr]

"another person who sometimes can't resist the temptation of not being gracious when he should be"

I remember when Hillary Clinton slammed Obama on his "bitter" comments during the Compassion Forum no less. She couldn't resist the temptation of not being gracious on the one evening she should have been.

[Yohomegirl]

I think Edwards wanted to come out for Obama when he did to distance himself from the anger caused by Hillary's 'white working class' statement.

[jetgirl]

You forgot the most important 5) Win more states and delegate then HRC and messing her up inevitability. I would go and list the things the Clinton camp has done to anger Obama supporters, but it's at least a dozen reasons long - and that's just from this last couple of weeks. Everything listed here is the basics in running a campaign. When there is bad news (big loses in two states) get out better news or try to spin the media narrative. You honestly think they should have allowed her excellency the proper time to celebrate? Laughable. Richardson is his own man and can of course do what he wants. Bill and Hillary Clinton do not owe him or his endorsement.

[pkohan]

More Things the Obama Campaign Couldn't Resist to Anger Clinton Supporters:
1. Enter the race.
2. Be so damn likable and inspirational.
3. Be a better candidate.
4. Win election contests - even in states like Iowa, Maine, Idaho, Wyoming, Minnesota, and Wisconsin where hard working White people live.
5. Encourage real people to send him money.
6. Be so solid on women's issues that NARAL threw their support behind him.
7. Draw huge crowds.
8. Appropriate hip-hop gesture from Jay-Z and not look stiff doing it.
9. Establish meaningful grass roots campaign organizations in all 50 states and U.S. territories
10. Win in the South.
11. Win in the Northwest and Mountain states.
12. Win in the Midwest.
13. Always look unflappable.
14. Play by the rules of the DNC in Michigan and Florida... just like the other Democratic candidates other than Hillary.
15. Win over superdelegates, including many formerly committed to Hillary.
16. Not cheat on his wife.
17. Give citizens hope for the future.
18. Call Hillary out on that STUPID gas tax idea.
19. Write his own game-changing, law-dropping speech on race relations.
20. Not hire Mark Penn.

[pkohan]

Whoops - meant to write jaw-dropping, not law-dropping.

[Dustee]

Actually you could have stopped at number 1. ;)

[pkohan]

I could have, but since the Clintons can't seem to stop, then neither can I.

[Charmed]

I think #1 covers the biggest problem the clintons have with Obama. He had the Audocity to Run for POTUS.

[bygollymissmolly]

Brilliant!

[mthespian]

He forgot the most relevant action. #5 (on the list but #1 in their hearts) Winning!