Nice Point Hillary, Now We'll Just Wait for McCain to Make It

The legendary cartoon -- I think it was the New Yorker -- had a bunch of men and one woman sitting around a conference table. All eyes are on her, but it is the man at the head of the table who is speaking. "Nice point, Mary," he says. "Now we'll just wait for some man to make it."

Six months or more ago Hillary Clinton's campaign made two relatively obvious points about the candidacy of a young African-American, fresh from the Illinois state Senate and coming off a wildly popular televised address. She said he could not beat John McCain among key (read, white) demographics and she said his rhetoric filled orations to filled stadiums were empty calories.

For these relatively obvious observations, Clinton, and the people who supported her, were regularly treated as selfish morons standing in the way of the new millennium. Writing in these pages, Mark Kleiman said

"The hand-wringing about whether Barack Obama is "electable" has reached the point of absurdity. The claim that Hillary Clinton's 9-point win over Obama in Pennsylvania "proves" that Obama can't carry the Rustbelt in a general election is completely baseless. But that hasn't kept the Clinton camp, the Rightwingosphere, and a bunch of TV talking heads just parroting the currently fashionable line of patter from pretending to believe it." These people are so crazy they are thinking McCain might actually win. How ridiculous is that, Kleiman asks: "A McCain Presidency is indeed a horrible prospect, but then so is an asteroid strike."

As of this moment, the latest PA polls show Obama holding a 5 point lead over McCain with a 3.7 margin for error, and the national polls show Obama ahead by around 3 trivial points, half of last month's lead. And why is that? Why a man finally said what Hillary had been saying all along: he's not a good candidate for a crucial Democratic demographic and his charisma is no more substantive than a Paris Hilton miniskirt. Contrary to the dreadful Dowd, this is not, um, Hillary's fault. I have the strong feeling that the McCain campaign team could probably have figured out Obama's weaknesses unassisted. After all, they did manage to beat every Democratic candidate who's run for President in the current millennium. So there was no positive payoff to silencing all criticism of the primary candidate.

But by deligitimating criticism of Barack Obama his supporters did manage to silence a lot of people who might have been helpful. Case in point: When the Obama campaign announced its plan for a stadium-based acceptance speech weeks ago, long before the Paris Hilton affair, I emailed a bunch of people privately warning them that there would be images from Leni Riefenstahl's movies all over the Internet, and thus all over TV, and screw Michael Godwin. In place of a triumph, a Triumph of the Will. Now there's a great convention kickoff for you. Followed by the presentation of the millionaire conservative John McCain as, may he rest in peace, Harry Truman. But I did not write of this in public, despite my well-earned reputation as a flame thrower, because the blowback to criticizing Barack Obama is so distracting and also because, well, they would probably wait for a man to say it. But I have grown increasingly uneasy as the time approaches, so today I decided that someone has to say it, so it might as well be me. After all, I was the first one to speak ill of the dead after the unbelievably destructive Tim Russert departed the planet before he could singlehandedly determine the outcome of yet another election. This stadium thing looks like a really bad idea. At best no harm, at worst, a debate about why he's not Hitler, to succeed the debate about why he's not Paris Hilton. They'd better have a lot of footage of John Kennedy's stadium speech to run alongside it.

Maybe Mark Kleiman is right, and the gifted orator will make a speech so inspiring and the visuals will be so brilliant that the pre-convention fretting may all prove to be small-bodies-from-space-aphobia. Kleiman's biography says he's a professor of decision making under conditions of uncertainty and a government advisor and maybe a McCain victory is as unlikely as an asteroid strike. I'm not a professor of decision making. But in a country as closely divided politically as this one, all decisions are made under uncertainty, and one thing I'm certain of is it does not help the process to shoot the messengers.

Comments

[stageplay]

There are some supporters of Hillary who truly wish to sabotage Obama's campaign. To them, all I can say is that they should consider the ramifications of a McCain presidency: 1) He has always been very "pro-life" and he has said many times that if elected he will appoint Supreme Court justices cut of the same cloth as Alito, Scalia and Thomas which is tantamount to overturning Roe v. Wade; 2) He wants to bomb Iran; 3) He has repeatedly rattled sabres against Russia and would see us confront Russia rather than work for peaceful solutions; 4) He has stated repeatedly that the Bush economy is basically a good economy; 5) He wishes to make the Bush tax cuts (for the mega-rich) permanent; 6) He has said many times that setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is the same as "surrendering" and that it would mean we have lost to the terrorists; 7) He is against universal health care (one of Hillary's main issues). I could go on, but suffice it to say that Hillary supporters would do well to understand that we must elect Obama to prevent McCain from getting into the White House.

[Onit]

Oh the horror - America might get a president who is actually popular with AMERICANS and can actually fill a stadium full of them.

[Blain]

When will this talk of white women being victims end? The last time I checked it was not a disadvantage to be white in THIS country, male or female. It sickens me because when minorities do this white females are among the first to stand up and say stop whining, get over it! Well, it's time to take your own advice. Hillary Clinton is a US senator worth around 90 million dollars and she never has to work another day in her life. I don't hear Romney crying that he didn't get votes because he's mormon although clearly a lot of people had a problem with that. The reason why this race is close is because of this kind of divisive rhetoric going on within the dem party. Divided we will not win another election for 40 years.

[gwhizz]

Really? Where are you looking?

[learnsomething]

Blain.. well said.

[rmwarnick]

The answer is, if you want to compete with Obama get your own stadium and fill it, IF YOU CAN.

[GuidedByEwoks]

So did people compare Kennedy to Hitler when he spoke to a stadium? And there is also a thing called the electoral college. One should look into it, before calling this a close race.

[jazzman]

"I told you so and I now can't let go."

Hillary supporters eating sour grapes to their graves.

[wbgonne]

I have been reading through these and other comments. I have come to a conclusion that I will share for those also contemplating the problem of what to do about Clinton commenters who disparage Obama and thereby support MCain. There are, it seems to me, two possibilities. Either this Clintonista commentariat is comprised of 1) McCain/Republican operatives infiltrating to create strife; or 2) people so committed to Hillary Clinton that they would rather see Obama lose. Either way, they are not worth addressing because they are unpersuadable and will not vote for Obama. My own policy from now on will be to ignore the Clintonistas, whether they be Republicans-in-drag or Clinton kool-aiders (except for the occasional short uppercut when presented with an offer I can't refuse). My advice: Don't waste your time with these trolls. There are just 2 months to the election. Focus on the prize.

[Paganus]

Spot on wbgonne!

Why would I ever vote for a "Democrat" who caved to the administration on the PATRIOT act and voted to rubber stamp their stupid, stupid war in Iraq? No @%$! way. Not this year, not ever!

Let me be clear - I voted for Bill in my first election, and I thought he shepherded the economy along well enough in the 90's . But there was absolutely no progressive vision. In fact, his biggest successes came by flanking the opposition to the right. Hillary is cut from the same cloth - she even voted for the banking-in­dustry-wri­tten 2001 bankruptcy bill. I will not vote for a Republican dressed in Donkey-hide.

[Chad53916]

Absolutely right. It's simply an effort to drag down Obama. I'm outa here.

[Busterdawg]

You could always run around in a circle with your fingers in your ears shouting- "I don't hear you! I don't hear you!"

[ATL78]

So true! I need to take Steven Weber's advice and detach from the BS.

[ATL78]

NEWSFLASH: Should O lose, H will NOT be the nominee in 2012. Those pesky black and "far left" voters will not support her and all "yellow dogs" won't either. She didn't get enough of their support this time, so what makes you think she'd get them back in 2012? Especially after the performance of her, Bill and the campaign staff?

I know some are looking to change up the rules to drown us out, but they were put in place because we are the DEMOCRATIC party and we represent everyone…even the least of us. If you don't agree with those sentiments, you are not a Democrat!

The notion that we'd all fall in line in '12 seems as silly as O supporters expecting all of Hill's supporters to fall in line. Just as there are some who will never vote for O, there are many that feel that way about Hill. Did you check the latest NBC poll? When asked if they would like to see H as POTUS one day, 49% said NO. Talk about a steep hill to climb...

[ckfan]

Thank you for saying the obvious. There is NO WAY Hillary can motivate me or other Dems to go to the polls in 2012. Her time has passed because SHE BLEW IT. She ran a poor, unorganized campaign and her peeps are blaming Obama for being better organized than her. Hillary folks - shift your blame to your candidate - she deserves it.

[vsign]

That is why it could have been a "perfect" conspiracy to promote Obama as the Dem candidate to win against Hillary in the primary. Most Americans understand that Obama will not win with such a thin resume. His race becomes everything and its advantage is not enough. Divide the Democratic party and rule by Republicans for decades to come. Who said that the best way to control is to divide the masses?

[ATL78]

This is comical on many levels. I especially like the "most Americans understand..." bit. I guess the people I know aren't Americans. Which could be true because most are minorities and/or liberal.

[marylandtravelinman]

Thin resume? Like W or Kennedy? They had "thin" resumes and got elected. Even after Hillary lost you are still spouting her talking points. Let it go, you lost!

[Busterdawg]

hmmm... I see, you expect Hillary's Dems to support the O-Man but you and the other Obama-crats would feel zero compulsion to do the same for her in 2012.

[tasukibeth1]

If you are a Democrat, you are expected to vote for the Democratic candidate. If Hillary would have won, I would vote for her. But she didn't, so now I am voting for Obama. It's really as simple as that. This is why the Republicans keep winning elections - they put their self-interest aside and fall in line. I'm not thinking about 2012, I am thinking about November.

[ATL78]

I clearly said either side expecting someone to fall in line is silly talk. But, I hope people use facts and reason to make decisions. Going against O in hopes of HRC '12 is silly talk as well.

[demigod]

That's been the problem all along. The Obamans not only consistently disparaged the Clintons in Limbaugh-esque terms, they did the same for all senior party officials who they called "old school losers" - theirs was some holy crusade which had to be kept pure, with the dream that Independents, Republicans, and new voters would rally to the cause, the Democratic Party be damned. Obama himself said he could get Hillary's voters, but she could not get his. So all this talk about working with others was crap, because they could not work with their own idiological brothers without calling them racists. The Obamans always said if their guy didn't get the nomination, they were going home. Our appeals to them about the consequences of that were met with indifference. Now - the vast majority of Clintonites are voting for Obama, not because there has been any change among the Obamans, but because we are Democrats.

[vsign]

This has happened before.

ONCE UPON A TIME: A people elected a leader because they thought they could win with him. He seemed more powerful than he was because of new technologies. The microphone, radio and film made his voice seem more powerful than he was. Today there are new technologies that are influencing this election to propel an unprepared and untested candidate to the world stage in much the same way. These new technologies of the internet, 24 hour media sources, and the entertainm­ent/advert­ising industries have intersected with our culture to create this moment in time.

This has all happened before.

[southernman]

me doth believe she speaks of FDR, which only broadcasts her ignorance thru new fangled technologies

[ignrnthllblly]

Re: your rumor of an innuendo purporting to suggest an analogy

If true, then shouldn't you just go fall in a forest where no one can hear you?

Last time I checked, Triumph of the Will accomplished its purpose pretty damn well...

[RobBob]

Doesn't ANYONE here see the irony in the notion "Obama can't win an election... he's too popular!"?

[kiddub]

No. He may be popular, but that doesn't win the election. People like him and they like to talk about him, but that doesn't mean that they are going to vote for him; or that the people who aren't talking about him are going to vote for him. The majority of the democratic party are being syncophantic.

[marylandtravelinman]

It's coded language for, "he can't win, he's black."

[southernman]

I think the older you get the less tolerance you have for ignorance. I have been a Democrat since Kennedy, I was 12 then and 60 now. I was never gullible enough to swallow the bulls@#t of the Goldwaters or Reagans or especially the Bushes ( Poppa Doc or Baby Doc) and I consider myself Conservative to moderate but I also have a reasoning brain.

[southernman]

Rehasing the Dem Primaries , I have had enough of the if onlies(if only a frog had wings he wouldn't be bumping his ass on lily pads), we have a Democratic nominiee and it is Obama and if you can't support him wholeheartly then consider the alternative (McCain), I could have supported the old McCain but this new one scares me, and with the world situation today (Russia Afgan. Iraq and I worry about Pakistan now) we need a level headed leader not another cowboy who rides around the world singing bomb-bomb-Iran.Too many countries have nukes for us to be warmongers and not advocates of peace. We used to be able to negotiate from a position of strength and morals but the last 7 yrs have knocked our moral high ground into a valley of arrogrance.
Let Obama have his stadium speech and let the cards fall where they may , I'm not worried about winning over the 25% short bus crowd of neo-cons ( Lincoln said you can fool some of the people all the time) lets concentrate on the rest of us who are worried about the economy, the wars now or the ones to come, the enviorment and our freedoms.
I hope he has an overflow crowd at the stadium and I hope he has a wonderful uplifting speech to give to America and I hope the majority of American voters vote for him because they want a better tommorrow for our country.

[vsign]

Let The Thin Man with the thin resume rise to a thin cloud over Mile High stadium and rain on the parade.

[MoeB]

typical, vsign.

There's drought occuring all over the world right now, including the US, but your ambition is to have it rain during Obama's speech...because THAT will save the country from our current spiral into oblivion. Good talk.

[PaxMundis]

It seems like your point boils down to "Hillary was saying racist drivel about Obama before McCain, why doesn't she get the credit?"

What none of the Hillary supporters seem to realize is that there are many, many people who would NEVER vote for Hillary. People argue that Hillary has already been "vetted" and her skeletons have all been revealed. Well, there are always more, plus just because they're already out there doesn't mean they aren't still effective.

[londonrainbow]

that has always been my point. She will never win. She is lacking support from men, AA's and independents.

[DontEvenThinkIt]

Sorry, calling people who do not support Obama "racists" is racist. What, we have to support him because he is black, (half anyhow) and if we don't support him it must be because he is black? Think again.

And so much for you Obama supporters "falling in line" for the Democrats. What the Obama people needed to realize is that there are MORE people who wil NEVER vote for Obama, meaning independents and republicans who just might be racist. Look at the last two elections. The repubs and dems were neck and neck, almost even numbers in presidential elections. So you give them a guy like Obama to run against a moderate war-hero like McCain? Come on it is a no brainer. You handed the presidency to McCain when you elected Obama.

[zjr909]

What bothers me most about Obama supporters is their absolute refusal to see any criticism of their hero as anything other than "sour grapes." They apparently assume that all voters are hero-worshippers who base their vote solely on the personality of their chosen candidate - so that when their hero loses, they go off to sulk and whine and hurl barbs at the winner. This skewed view blinds them to all those who care infinitely more about messages than messengers. A lot of people were eager to get behind any candidate offering a change from three decades of non-stop corporate entitlement. Senator Obama, more than any other candidate, claimed to be for change; but the more he campaigns, the more he champions the very things he said he opposed (the war - which he wants to move from Iraq to Afghanistan; the economy - which he wants the Robert Rubin's who helped create the problem to "fix"). And, above all else, he championed a new style of politics. But the only thing "new" about his politics is his penchant for spectacle. A little humility wouldn't hurt one bit. At the risk of heresy, I honestly believe having his acceptance speech in Rev. Wright's church would win over far more voters than having it in a stadium. People respect loyalty every bit as much as they dislike criticism of America. Obama's throwing Rev. Wright under the bus may prove to have been far more damaging than anything the Reverend ever said.

[PaxMundis]

"he economy - which he wants the Robert Rubin's who helped create the problem to "fix"). "

Hmm... and who put Robert Rubin there in the first place?

[tattery202]

"so that when their hero loses, they go off to sulk and whine and hurl barbs at the winner. "

ummm......look in the mirror.

[Uberbah]

What bothers me the most about Hillary supporters are their tendency to project their flaws and their candidate's flaws onto others with a cannon. You didn't see Edwards supports acting with such immaturity after their candidate dropped out. Grow up.

[BADEN]

GEE, WITH FRIENDS LIKE THIS, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES...

Now, let's review:

Hillary states Obama won't get the White Cracker DINO vote that she can pull in as a past first lady of Arkansas with the lowest black population in the south.

REALLY? Who woulda thunk they wouldn't EVER vote for a "horse of a different color".

The Clintonian White Crackers vote consistently against their economic interests.
The Clintonian White Cracker vote really likes the DLC paradigm that is completely against their economic interest.

So, perhaps this 27% need to either start their OWN political party, or re-register as the Republican Lites they are.

Sometimes that Koolaide gets spread around for very shady political reasons.
Like, to keep your "base" of the oxymoron Democratic LEADERSHIP Council in power and keep the money flowing to the lobbyists always ready to lend a hand to a Chamber of Commerce shill.

"It's just business"
~HillBill channeling Michael Corleone

[dtd]

NBC, for whatever suspect reason, chose to poll Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head match-up against John McCain, and it's not surprising that she preforms better than Barack Obama, but what is surprising is by how little.

This poll and EVERY OTHER poll released this week was conducted while Senator Obama was on vacation; Senator McCain had the media to himself to assault Senator Obama's character relentlessly; and Senator McCain got a gift from Russia and yet Senator Clinton, who has been close to sainted by the media, her supporters and even Republicans since conceding, only peformas 4 percentage points better and more importantly doesn't crack the elusive 50% mark, which means she is underperforming the generic poll as well.

[Demsneed2win]

Gee....she has not been running. She has not been spending millions on ads.
The fact she is beating Obama is remarkable but not at all surprising.