I hope Obama has the guts to reject the insane calls to take Hillary as his running mate. If Obama chooses Hillary, it will be one of the greatest acts of political cowardice and will prove that he has the spine of a jellyfish. Hillary"s campaign has set a new standard for character assassination. Using fear-mongering and race-baiting, she has redefined gutter politics. Her supporters have made crude remarks regarding Obama"s masculinity and she hasn"t denounced or rejected them. Obama has denounced personal attacks against her and his supporters have apologized for crossing the line. If Obama picks Hillary, he validates and legitimizes all her venomous attacks on his character, integrity, and manhood. Republicans will say if Obama can"t stand up to Hillary, how will he stand up to Al Qaeda? If Obama takes Hillary as his running mate, he deserves to lose.
Clinton's Hail Mary
The 2008 Democratic Presidential primary is down to the short strokes today, and unless you have the luxury of hanging out in front of a laptop and cable news all day, you're likely to miss the rapidly evolving or devolving (depending on your perspective) conclusion of this fascinating race.
As I write this, Obama's on the Hill meeting with "a swarm" of "completely star struck" Superdelegates and party insiders -- a hero's welcome. Earlier today, Obama met with a group of "Blue Dog" Congressional Democrats -- anti-progressives, every one, and not normally in the same camp as the "most liberal Senator," but eager to associate with a winner and critical to a candidate who seriously intends to actually win Southern states that in the past have gone Republican but this year have registered recordbreaking Democratic turnouts. John Edwards's campaign manager has just endorsed Obama, and Edwards himself -- the last challenger to drop out of the race and an important voice -- is appearing on "The Today Show" early tomorrow morning, possibly to finally pick a side. The new "Time" magazine cover shows Obama grinning, with the headline "And The Winner Is..."
In the last 24 hours, a probable deal has materialized that would resolve the Michigan primary debacle by giving Obama just ten delegates fewer than Clinton -- an irrelevant dent in his huge delegate lead -- instead of denying him any Michigan delegates whatsoever, as the Clinton campaign still insisted upon just yesterday. Obama has even appeared on his campaign jet in blue jeans for the first time -- not cravenly reaching out to blue-collar voters, since he wore them on his own plane and not while standing in the bed of a pickup truck, but rather a sign that he's relaxing a little before shifting into full-blown general election mode.
Obama's chillin'.
Meanwhile, Clinton's self-destructing. An unidentified campaign insider has admitted she can't hold out past mid-June. One of her key supporters, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, has started questioning her support. Yet another Clinton superdelegate has switched his allegiance to Obama. Former President Jimmy Carter has gone public with a call to wind things up. All the pundits -- even George Stephanopolous, the longtime Clinton supporter who tilted the last debate so far her way that his career as a journalist was endangered -- are calling the race over. (On MSNBC, Chris Matthews just told Clinton's communications director Howard Wolfson, "you guys are like those Japanese soldiers, still fighting in 1953.... After the Battleship Missouri signing ceremony [ending WWII], you're still holding on.") Facing a campaign finance disclosure deadline, she has been forced to admit loaning her campaign over $6.4 million in the last month -- bringing the total to over $11 million -- and hasn't ruled out more self-administered life support.
And now, she's even managed to undercut one of her few remaining liberal credentials by explaining her loss in North Carolina and her slender win in Indiana in expressly racial, even racist, terms. In a press conference yesterday, her top campaign staff boasted of her performance among the "white electorate" and described whites as the key to Clinton's "electability." Then today, in a short clip that's now repeating endlessly on cable news, Hillary Clinton herself repeated and even amplified their misstep, saying, "Senator Obama's support among working, hardworking Americans, white Americans is weakening again, and ... the whites in both states who had not attended college were supporting me...."
If the Clinton campaign was unsure whether their strategy of making Bill Clinton their official Ambassador to Bubba had succeeded in destroying any remaining fondness of the black community for the Clintons, or wanted to start driving non-black minorities out of their shrinking tent as well, this new, express focus on "the white electorate" was just the trick. This is not the kind of ham-fisted P.R. we expect of a Clinton -- or of a candidate whose hopes depend on convincing superdelegates that she's more electable than the guy she's losing the election to.
And so earlier today, faced with the prospect of their Michigan card going away, and with indispensable Congressional superdelegates literally sitting in a meeting with Obama and deciding which way they'll swing, the Clinton campaign has scrambled -- I'll tell you how we know they scrambled in a sec -- to release, very publicly, and in electronic form suitable for beaming to Superdelegates' Blackberries mid-meeting, an open letter to Obama, daring him to support the seating of the Michigan and Florida delegates according to the results of those states' flawed primaries, which both candidates previously swore to discount. That letter is a picture window into the post-rational mind of Hillary Clinton in the waning days of her lifelong dream.
The letter was hastily prepared. We know this because, in a game where letters like this are planned and stockpiled weeks ahead of time and then magically appear in reporters' emails when the timing is exactly right like Athena springing full-armored from the head of Zeus, this key letter has not one, but two typographical errors. I can't remember any other Clinton press release, even the workaday ones reporting the candidate's schedule, containing a typo -- but this one, intended for broad public consumption at a critical juncture, has two. It obviously was cranked out in a hurry, more like the work of a pajama-clad blogger trying to scoop the Associated Press from his parents' basement than that of a Presidential campaign paid to plan every move like chess champions on the national stage. Athena's armor is on crooked.
The fact that letter was hastily prepared means that it is a response to unforeseen events -- specifically, the prospect that Michigan will be resolved sooner, and more evenly, than Clinton expected.
The possibility that the Clinton campaign hadn't seriously considered the possibility of an uncontested resolution in Michigan is stunning, and suggests how deeply out of touch with political and mathematical reality the Clintons have become.
Every other significant party leader and respectable (!) pundit has said all along that Michigan and Florida's delegations will be seated by August -- just not in any way that would alter the outcome of the nominating contest. The DNC has even reserved hotel space in Denver for those delegations. But Clinton has been saying, with increasing fervor, that not only would Michigan and Florida be seated -- but seated exactly as they voted in January, with Clinton receiving a large majority of Florida's delegates and Obama getting no Michigan delegates at all, since his name wasn't even on the ballot. (That disingenuous Michigan math, by the way, is how Clinton was able to claim, for a brief period, that she had won more popular votes than Obama had nationwide: she didn't count caucuses, and she gave him no votes in Michigan since, technically, someone not on the ballot can get none.)
In the past, when Clinton stood firm on her "Obama gets no delegates from Michigan" stance, I assumed she was merely being tough and calculating. No sensible person reasonably expected the party's elders to give Obama zero delegates if they seated Michigan. And Clinton's own campaign staff seemed to admit yesterday that she could not win the race for elected delegates even if Michigan and Florida were counted the way she wanted them to be. Of course I didn't believe that Hillary Clinton herself could believe her own press releases.
But now I think that maybe she did. If today's desperate open letter to Obama reflects panic that Michigan may be seated in a fair rather than disproportionate way, then perhaps she actually has believed until now that Michigan would save her. Which means she actually has believed, until now, that the superdelegates will flock to her at the last minute. Which means she actually has believed, until now, that she really is the only electable candidate, and perhaps that fate has willed her to be President the same way George W. Bush believes God willed him to be President.
Remind me: which candidate has the Messiah complex, again?
It's unreasonable to believe Clinton can still win in 2008. Given the political savvy she's usually credited with, I've assumed she understood the math and the practical politics, and so have concluded that her recent actions were early groundwork for her 2012 campaign, not sincere efforts to salvage her 2008 campaign. But maybe I've been giving her too much credit. We've already seen that, as a campaigner, she's no Bill Clinton; maybe she's no Hillary Clinton, either. Maybe, just maybe, she's sincerely deluded. Today's flawed Hail Mary letter suggests she is.
Of course Clinton's letter isn't exactly accurate: for instance, last Fall Clinton herself said this about the Michigan primary: "It's clear: This election they're having is not going to count for anything. I personally did not think it made any difference whether or not my name was on the ballot." There was no revote in Michigan primarily because powerful Michigan Senator Carl Levin opposed it, not because Obama did. And, of course, Clinton campaigned stealthily in Florida after swearing -- literally signing a pledge -- not to compete there, yet later began insisting on recognizing the results of that election and even opposed a proposed caucus re-do in Florida to that end. Her hands aren't clean, and the intelligent, politically sophisticated Democrats in Michigan and Florida know full well that today's letter is simplistic and misleading. But it's the timing of the letter, and the otherwise-unremarkable mistakes it contains, that tell the real story here.
Here's another way of understanding today's letter, with its typos and factual misrepresentations and flat-footed play for the sentiments of Michiganders and Floridians who already understand the complexities of the issue in far more depth than Clinton's letter assumes: football.
I know that sports cliches get old, but Clinton has portrayed herself as Rocky, battered but unbowed. (She forgets that after Rocky and Apollo Creed batter themselves insensible, Rocky loses.) Bill Clinton has said that if Obama didn't want to get hit, he shouldn't have suited up. They're right that sports are a good analogy; they've just got the game's situation wrong:
It's late in the fourth quarter; maybe a minute to go. Obama is up by three touchdowns. All he really needs to do is drop to a knee four times to run the clock out, and he wins. The police are restraining the fans from coming onto the field; the announcers are naming the production staff. But Clinton doesn't believe it's over. She believes she still can win - after all, it's not mathematically impossible for her to score on a Hail Mary, kick the extra point, successfully recover an onside kick, then do it all twice more, all in one minute. It's never been done, but it theoretically could be.
And then she does what all inferior quarterbacks do under pressure: she tries that Hail Mary pass - today's letter, trying to salvage a lopsided delegate count from Michigan - but, under pressure, she isn't paying attention to fundamentals any more. She isn't watching for the secondary receiver; she isn't using her peripheral vision; she isn't making a firm plant before releasing the ball; she throws away Latino and Asian and black votes by repeatedly emphasizing the importance of "the white electorate"; she isn't even running SpellCheck on important documents. There's not enough time! There's not enough time! The candidate herself repeats her staffers' racist blunders; the important "open letter" is issued to thousands of media outlets with two typographical errors. The ball leaves the quarterback's hand with a slight wobble... the defender wants to end the game, and his eyes and his reflexes are sharp....
Or we can return to Clinton's Rocky analogy. There's a reason fights have referees, and fighters have trainers who are authorized to throw in the towel: the boxer who's high on adrenaline and dizzy from being pummeled doesn't always realize how badly she's being beaten or how much she stands to lose by continuing. In some fights, when the fighter won't quit but should, it's completely proper -- humane for the fighter, and healthy for the sport itself -- for someone to stop the fight. Not because they're afraid of the fight continuing, but because they see, even if the fighter doesn't, that it's actually already over.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"will prove that he has the spine of a jellyfish"
I think he's already proved he has more spine than any other pol you can name. I don't want him to pick Hillary either -- I think it would be a huge mistake -- but if he does, it'll only be because he has somehow come to believe it will help a Dem win the White House, and he cares more about his party and his country than he does about his ego. My fear is only that he'll mistakenly believe his ego and his country's best interests are in opposition in this case -- when in reality they're perfectly consonant.
Apparently the only voters that matter to Hillary are white voters only from those states she won who don't have college degrees. That's quite a coalition! Oh, and according to her, the only "hard-working Americans" are those same white people with no college degrees. The rest of us--you know, asians, blacks, latinos, native Americans, college-educated whites, lawyers, teachers, doctors, nurses, engineers, software developers--are all just a bunch of slackers.
She's starting to remind me of the character of Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny." You know, sitting there obsessed, paranoid, rambling, all the while rolling those marbles around in her hand as she plots her next move. And to think that she actually came close to having access to the nuclear codes. Yikes!
For his own personal safety I hope that Sen. Obama does not choose her as his running mate. In fact, a few nights ago on CNN they were discussing whether Hillary would accept the VP slot if offered, and David Gergen had the best line: "There are many of his [Obama's] supporters who think if that happens, he'd better a keep food taster around." Indeed.
and according to her, the only 'hard-working Americans' are those same white people with no college degrees
On the other hand, she "knows what it's like to work the night shift", as she put it -- but when asked, she said because she sometimes works at night at home.
Bwa Haa Haaaaaa. she works the night shift at home. It's turning into a comedy.
Well if this is true, we can proceed onto the general.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/05/10/obama_aides_victory_is_10_days_away/9313/
Hillary may be self-destructing but the fallout is harming everyone who hopes McCain will not win in November. Having canvassed for Obama in Pennsylvania I know there were many volunteers who were white, blue collar workers and you only had to attend a rally to see the diversity the supporters represented. Knocking on doors I found many Clinton supporters said they wanted Obama on the ticket as VP. Most said they would vote for Obama in November if he were the nominee. Most liked him and felt he was honest, trustworthy and would move the country in the right direction. To be honest their only worry seemed to be his possible lack of experience. Often this was because they did not know what he had done. They didn't necessarily think Hillary had more experience but thought she would have Bill to advise her. There were Independents and Republicans who thought they would vote for Obama in November but many of these people were very anti-Clinton, so if she is on the ticket those votes will be lost. Montgomery County (where I live) was won by Clinton by only 1.5% in a primary in which only registered Democrats could vote. I'm a white, 61 year old, woman.
This is a very helpful and clearheaded report; thank you. I especially like the point that some of Hillary's backers think Bill can advise her; I hadn't considered that angle, but it makes a lot of sense given the age of Hillary's demographic; I've found that a surprising number of women over 60 or so still have prefeminist ideas about how much wives need to rely on their husbands. I don't want to paint with too broad a brush here, but it sheds a little light on yet another angle of the equation. So, again, thanks.
Five Stages Of Grief
Denial and Isolation.
At first, we tend to deny the loss has taken place, and may withdraw from our usual social contacts. This stage may last a few moments, or longer.
Anger.
The grieving person may then be furious at the person who inflicted the hurt (even if she's dead), or at the world, for letting it happen. He may be angry with himself for letting the event take place, even if, realistically, nothing could have stopped it.
Bargaining.
Now the grieving person may make bargains with God, asking, "If I do this, will you take away the loss?"
Depression.
The person feels numb, although anger and sadness may remain underneath.
Acceptance.
This is when the anger, sadness and mourning have tapered off. The person simply accepts the reality of the loss.
I HAVE TO STRONGLY CAUTION ALL OBAMA SUPPORTERS WHOSE STATES HAVE NOT YET VOTED, PLEASE GET OUT AND VOTE WHEN YOUR VOTING DATE ARRIVES. THE RACE IS NOT OVER, SO DO NOT BUY INTO WHAT THE MEDIA IS SAYING. THEY ARE GIVING OFF A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY.
IF THE MEDIA ARE ABLE TO GET OBAMA'S VOTERS TO STAY AT HOME, WITH THE FALSE SENSE THAT OBAMA HAS ALREADY WON, HILLARY WILL WALK OFF WITH THE NOMINATION, BECAUSE YOU BETTER BELIEVE THAT HILLARY IS TELLING HER SUPPORTERS TO GO OUT AND VOTE.
OBAMA SUPPORTERS, THIS RACE IS NOT DONE UNTIL ALL THE VOTING IN EVERY STATE IS DONE.
SO OBAMA VOTERS GET OUT AND VOTE, NO MATTER WHAT THE MEDIA SAYS, OBAMA NEEDS ALL YOUR VOTES, THIS RACE IS NOT OVER UNTIL ALL THE STATES HAVE VOTED!!!
Can you really not find the "unshift" key? Do you think we're dolts who need to be shouted at? Have more respect, please.
You are right, but even if that did happen, Hillary can't win the nomination on the last few states that are left.
A number of people have pointed out (citizens that is ... rarely the corporate media) that the Camp Clinton previously agreed to the rules of the DNC regarding MI and FL.
The rest of this is just theatrics and bad theatrics and worse ... very dangerous politics.
This is desperate. Precisely the attribute we least need in a president.
It also wreaks of dishonesty of criminal proportions.
Now even some former Hillary supporters are feeling as though they dodged a bullet.
We still consider the Clintons to be collaborators that assisted the NeoCons in taking over the Republican Party and thus doing great harm to our country. We wrote about it today.
Binx101
The Almost Daily Binx
http://binx101.wordpress.com
I agree and am appalled that her insane attitude towards Michigan isn't being called for what it is in the MSM more strongly. How much more unPresidential could it be to swear not to participate in the primary -- and then refuse to remove yourself from the ballot -- and then disavow the results and THEN demand they count? Really? And she's the best candidate for the toughest job in the country? Really!
Good points. Could we say the Clintons have "Type-O" problems?
IT'S ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT NOMINEES, STUPID. AND THE JUSTICES ARE AGING. ARE CLINTON FANS REALLY GOING TO GIVE THE ELECTION AND THE ABOVE TO THE REPUBLICANS BY STAYING OUT OF THE ELECTION PROCESS OR VOTING FOR MCCAIN? IF THEY CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS CHARLATAN THEY WILL NOT ONLY DESTROY THE PARTY BUT ALSO THE NATION. ROWE VS WADE IS VULNERABLE.
MRS CLINTON IS SIMPLY NOT WORTH THIS.
Neither is it worth it to read a comment from someone who can't find the unshift key and insists on shouting! If you can't play nicely, get out of the sandbox!
And please, Senator McCain, continue to go around supporting the GOP abortion plank (NO exceptions, not for rape, or incest or the mother's LIFE). You are helping Hillary voters reconcile themselves to Obama. Many women of Hillary's cohort REMEMBER the days before legal acknowledgment of reproductive freedom. Yeah, I've been known to say "if candidate X is the nominee I'm staying home" but when I think of Justices Stevens and Ginsburg and wonder how long they can hang in there.
I you are miffed that Obama is going to be the nominee, bear in mind that we are now ONE justice away losing Roe v. Wade. And listen up to how some of these conservatives talk of Griswold v. CT being "the road to Roe." That's right. They'll be coming for your BIRTH CONTROL next.
That's absolutely right. McCain's "how I'll pick judges" manifesto basically says "I'll pick judges who will reverse Griswold." For those who don't know about Griswold, Connecticut made it a crime for anyone -- including married people -- to buy birth control. A married couple challenged the law -- if I remember right, they bought condoms from a pharmacist who also disagreed with the law, then all 3 turned themselves in. The Constitution says nothing about a "right to birth control", but Justice Wm. O. Douglas wrote an opinion that said basically, "the Bill of Rights isn't just freedom of speech, religion, assembly, bearing arms, etc.; those are just examples of a broader right to privacy that's implicit in the whole thing -- a basic right of people to tell the government to get its nose out of things that are none of its business." And a married couple's right to use a rubber was one of those rights.
Three or four current justices want to reverse all cases back to Griswold. One or two more -- which McCain will appoint -- would pull it off. States could make crimes (again) out of gay sex, oral sex, birth control -- and abortion.
Example #1 of why it has to be ANY Democrat in November. We can't hold grudges.
I'm still amazed that any rational person would still support Hillary. The interview she gave where she said Obama can't appeal to white people is offensive. Not only should it offend all the white people who supported Obama, it should also offend the non-black minorities who supported her. Is she telling them they're not as important to her as the Archie Bunkers of the world? And her insistence on getting all the delegates from Florida should everyone's sense of fair play. Obama wasn't even on the ballot. How can you deem that a fair election when you're the only one on the ballot? Obama, and John Edwards, showed class by removing their names. They showed that they honor the rules of their party and don't think they've better than their party. But clearly, Hillary thinks the party is there to serve her, not the other way around.
We're no longer dealing with logical perception here. Hillary's defenders sound as though they have been caught up in and identify completely with her malestrom of self-proclaimed victimhood. When you're hurting yourself, an enormous coping mechanism kicks in to find others to band together with against a common enemy. It legitimizes your own pain and the anger gives the illusion of strength.
To then see that cause's champion lose the high ground must feel like defeat multiplied to the nth degree. And it may be impossible to not take it personally -- and apply it to one's own struggles.
I've been thinking about this phenominon since Edwards dropped out but his blog when on. Over and over the bloggers plotted and, yes, whined about his defection when they weren't mounting campaigns against the new common enemy: trolls. Fortunately, Edwards finally shut the blog down after a few weeks.
In other words, one's personal story and needs and coping mechanisms are of course going to be the filter through which political alliances are forced. I think it's fortunate (in fact wondrous!) that we have the choice of a candidate who inspires unity instead of providing a rallying point for one's personal grievances.
Today a Huffpo blogger talked about the history of women's suffrage, saying that Susan B. Anthony and Eliz. Cady Stanton set back feminism 50 years by putting forth the argument that white women's votes would help counter the black male vote. Is Hillary any different in her divisiveness?
From ABC News this morning, Obama heads Clinton in superdelegate count by 7.
This is not a reply, could not post directly. Anyway, shouldn't "Rocky" have quotations around it?
Good Q. If I were referring to the movie, I'd add quotes. Since I'm talking about the character himself, though, I treated it as simply a proper noun. I think my old Strunk & White would back me up on that (if I could find it!). Thanks!
Both of the Clintons have lost their minds....they presumed, wrongly, that the party would hand this nomination to them on a silver platter from 'day one'. The truth is that the "party" would have handed the nomination to them gladly, no questions asked but then this thing called 'voters in a democracy' showed up.
Two typos in a letter does not surprise me. Her campaign, from 'day one', has shown to be a disorganized affair - they....did not understand party rules, did not understand the caucus process, spent themselves into the red, paid people (Mark Penn) salaries like major CEO's from Fortune 500 companies, did not keep a running tally of pledged delegate count accurately, did not understand or use the internet to their advantage, relied on the party base without a care about new voters, allowed Bill to marginalize the African vote, did not pay their bills to small business owners, thought voters wanted to be pandered to, 'endorsed' McCain over Obama as Presidential, planned as if the contest would be hers after Super Tuesday, etc. etc. So 2 typos? hmmmm, seems to me the Clinton campaign has been running on nothing but TYPO problems but the party and the 24/7 media has given them a pass until all the while the 'voters in a democracy' found THEIR voice at the ballot boxes.
Since tuesday, I've been searching for a post as well thought and well written on this subject as yours. Thank you. Thank you very much.
This is also worth a read:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1738331,00.html
Tiny URL works better:
http://tinyurl.com/433tr6
mr bellows,
you're probably get a big head by now (!) however, i'm afraid i'm going to have to join the chorus congratulating you on this blog.
great read.
here's a cartoon on the subject from my side of the pond, which may give your and your readers a chuckle: hillary - a one-woman band
http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,,2279044,00.html
I heard the letter had a couple of typos. Do you know anything about that?
Sure -- the text of her letter is here; the typos are followed by "[sic]" notations. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/m.s.-bellows/clintons-open-letter-to-o_b_100861.html
Posted May 8, 2008 | 06:56 PM (EST)