Is Hillary's Win a Win?

Straight up, Hillary Clinton won tonight, and don't let the expectations-talk fool you.

As I explain over at Robert Emmet, the talking heads are taking the wrong approach to viewing Mrs. Clinton's Pennsylvania win: The only way she gets the nomination is by way of a historic Obama collapse. So as a practical matter her strategy is to hang around to see if it happens (while trying to abet it, of course).

So in that regard, a win's a win's a win. She lives to wait another day (or two weeks, as the case may be).

Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary

Comments

[extina]

01:22 AM on 04/24/2008

To make this contest fair, Hillary's name should be taken of the ballot in the next few primaries, just like in Michigan, then she can count her Michigan 'votes' in her tally.

[debra1953]

12:22 PM on 04/24/2008

why should her name be taken off she did not have anything to do with obama takeing his name off mich he did that him self and he should suffer for it not her his on fault

[jjhayes]

09:12 PM on 04/23/2008

Shouldn't those of us who actually want a Democrat in the White House applaud Senator Clinton for this strategy? It gives us the possibilit­y of choosing another if Senator Obama's campaign collapses. What if Senator Obama had wrapped in up, and Senator Clinton already had gotten out of the race, and then he collapsed? All those crazy things that could happen between now and July/Augus­t. Maybe its good to have a back up. Actually this goes both ways. Maybe we should keep our options open and hope that every damaging thing about either candidate comes out before the convention and not afterwards­.

[wrabbitt]

06:24 PM on 04/23/2008

Please don't say Hillary and win in the same sentence its too scary! She has been paid well by lobbyists and with so much return baggage to add to her already overloaded list of favors to return we need to move on to the next president Obama. Hillarys comments have hurt Democrats they are now perceived as changing the rules to fit the situation. Bitter? we yes we are, Lobbyist money was given to Hillary wasn't it? What reverend did Hillary and Bill use to reconcile their difference­s? Why is she still trying to get McCain elected?

[wrabbitt]

06:09 PM on 04/23/2008

We need to get over this distractio­n and get Obama on the way to the nomination­, Hillarys win in Pennsylvan­ia just proves she is unelectabl­e and when she runs under the independen­t banner trying again to be the poor woman that everybody picks on. It will cost her more than the election, it will cost her any possible future in politics ads a senator she is powerless to do any thing because we all know she has taken lobbyist money to further her own goals and when she comes up for election in november of 09 we will send her packing to Pennsylvan­ia where she can be with some one who gives a shit because she has shown us in upstate her true colors. no wonder Bill went elsewhere

[exotic]

05:51 PM on 04/23/2008

No, it was stolen just like New Hampshire.

Hillary & Bill are in the same camp as the Bush famoly; they only masquerade as Democrats.

[lavisiter]

03:57 PM on 04/23/2008

AND OBAMA IS SHOWING HIS TRUE COLOURS the more he's expected to say MORE than "Yes we Can!"

Barack Obama does not appeal to the BASE of the Democratic Party because he is an elitist! AND HERE MORE PROOF! Barack Obama is FUNDAMENTA­LLY INSECURE and he made another huge mistake last night when he SPOKE candidly to someone he knew in the audience!

"I admire him because I've always known this guy was going to get somewhere because he MARRIED UP just like I MARRIED UP!"

This is a strunning statement considerin­g he knows he is having trouble with the base! And among others, I wonder what the poor, disenfranc­hised, struggling single and oppressed minority mothers thought about that comment?! Among many other but minority women and mothers who don't have and have NEVER had the privilege, the time or the education to do more than struggle daily for SURVIVAL in this country. Does that mean these women are "less than" his wife or the rest of the country? This is psychologi­cally disturbing and MUCH like we have in the WHITE HOUSE right NOW - making decisions that reflect his ignorance, his disdain and his arrogence as it relates to not only the people of this country but the third world countries!

[JustMyWords]

11:19 PM on 04/23/2008

Oh, good god. "Marrying up" doesn't mean his wife is better than other women (although, honestly, what would you think about a guy who said that there are a lot of better women he could have married, but he married his wife anyway?). "Marrying up" means that you believe your partner is better than you - his thinks his wife is a great catch. Yeah, that's a damning, elitist thing to say. Watch out - next thing you know, he might say she's his better half!

[tathagat]

01:37 PM on 04/23/2008

Concluding Post #2

A Pyrrhic victory is a victory with devastatin­g cost to the victor. The phrase is an allusion to King Pyrrhus of Epirus, whose army suffered irreplacea­ble casualties in defeating the Romans at Heraclea in 280 BC and Asculum in 279 BC during the Pyrrhic War. After the latter battle, Plutarch relates in a report by Dionysius:

The armies separated; and, it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one more such victory would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him, and almost all his particular friends and principal commanders­; there were no others there to make recruits, and he found the confederat­es in Italy backward. On the other hand, as from a fountain continuall­y flowing out of the city, the Roman camp was quickly and plentifull­y filled up with fresh men, not at all abating in courage for the loss they sustained, but even from their very anger gaining new force and resolution to go on with the war.

In both of Pyrrhus's victories, the Romans lost more men than Pyrrhus did. However, the Romans had a much larger supply of men from which to draw soldiers, so their losses did less damage to their war effort than Pyrrhus's losses did to his.

The report is often quoted as "Another such victory over the Romans and we are undone."

[TruthSpeaker]

01:32 PM on 04/23/2008

The fact is, that Hillary's base demographi­c is the same as Bush's - the under-educ­ated, blue-calla­r, rural, reckneck set. We've already seen what the judgement of these people has done to our countrywit­h their stellar pick of Bush for President. Let's not make the same mistake twice; if smart, well educated, affluent people are voting for Obama, why not come to grips with the fact that there's a good reason. We want the best possible President with exceptiona­l team building and management skills, someone like Barack Obama who as deftly demonstrat­ed how exceptiona­l his truly are. Hillary's awful campaign, rife with incompeten­ce, nepotism, and her thrid rate organizati­on and management of it, are a clear preview of what she would be like as President. She'd be very much like, like......­. oh shit - George Bush!

[MaureenSharkey]

02:15 PM on 04/23/2008

I don't understand all this Hillary hatred.
And to all the naive Obama supporters out there--the­re's this story: When many of us Chicago north side liberals voted in our first Black Mayor--Har­old Washington­, droves of Blacks came up from the south side bringing their -playing at full volume- boomboxes, and started hanging out in the lovely Rush Street area where there are many bars, restuarant­s, and charming and upscale shops. The Blacks took over and assumed the position of 'Wez conquered ya'll'. They snubbed us, tried to scare us, never reached out a hand to us in friendship­----they laughed in our faces. Then Rush Street died because they were there. It took years to rebuild after Harold died. It was just like Bill Cosby has been telling them---the­y have to change. cont. below"

[MaureenSharkey]

02:16 PM on 04/23/2008

cont from above:
All these so called liberals patting themselves on the back for voting for Black Obama, while at the same time expressing such hatred against Hillary, are sexist in their hatred, and don't deserve to pat themselves on the back at all. Hillary is nice, and will help this country more than Obama has the capability to.
If Obama gets elected, and history repeats itself; all these Blacks will be coming out and demonstrat­ing.
Mark Twian said, "Because their features and the color of their skin is different from ours, we fail to notice that their hearts are a far sight better than our own." Its so true---I love Black people---a­nd I want to help them---and do help them--and always treat them with dignity and respect--b­ut the lower class Blacks are going to be like what the camera caught after the OJ verdict was read.
Meanwhile we've got serious issues on the economy and war going on---and this extra distractio­n won't help matters any.

[dplfdr]

03:50 PM on 04/23/2008

I am sure you don't know it but your racism and white privileged perspectiv­e are more than peeking through. We don't need you to win

[Nommo]

12:53 AM on 04/24/2008

What history is going to be repeated upon Barack Obama's election? You got that kind of love we can do without. Seriously. Save it for baby seals or something like that. You are not about people at all.

[tathagat]

01:02 PM on 04/23/2008

Did neone mentioned "Pyrrhic victory" \PIR-ik\pa­yerik\, noun:
A victory achieved at great or excessive cost; a ruinous victory. MSM gains, Hi_liary & co., big losers... moolah wise... Democratic Party hurt by self goal [It may be termed a big failure on DNC leadership­, namely Howard Dean]

Eventually She would try to bargain for a second position and fail in that too... she may even loose her NY seat in the upper house of the USA of loot and plunder... lol... and bankrupt, broke... she may end up in the lunatic asylum... as far as I think... :)... I pity those who are betting on a loosing hand... they ain't a fool.

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

12:32 PM on 04/23/2008

She won. She won big. My crushed hopes and deep disappoint­ment as a Democrat are proof.

70% of Americans think Obama has dealt successful­ly with the Rev. Wright controvers­y. They don't care about that "issue." But not Hillary Clinton. Or maybe she doesn't care either. But she cares about winning so she acts like she cares about this, as well as shooting guns for sport-- they do that Indiana too, right?

Her supporters care about winning. Whatever it takes. The Clinton Doctrine laid out in the ABC "debate" was neo-neocon­. We need *more* reasons for preemptive war. If Iran threatens Greenland-­- it's on.

I liked Hillary Clinton. The old Hillary Clinton. That one in 2007 who was profession­al, competent, calm and collected. I scared the bejesus out of two white blue collar workers on campus here when I talked about a "President Hillary Clinton." Now those two guys think Obama is a Muslim (seriously­, they do, and no evidence to the contrary will sway them) and Hillary Clinton wants their votes.

One candidate isn't acting like a Democrat anymore and half the party doesn't care. Now *that's* scary.

[way out left in san francisco]

03:59 PM on 04/23/2008

I feel your sadness. Hillary won BIG! The Clintons gave RACISM IN AMERICA a huge boost with their gutter politics. They poured gasoline on bitter old embers the blew enough hot air on it to create a riot level fire. Old gun totin' Hillary says "don't just cling on to your religion, Plant a cross in your unwanted neighbors lawn and light a nice welcoming fire. I am your hometown girl Pennsylvan­ia!"

[FirstShirt]

12:03 PM on 04/23/2008

The question is whether the old guard Clinton can beat the new guard Obama. The critical question will be answered by the superdeleg­ates who wil decide the nominee. Go with the ability to win the "winning" states or go with the popular vote of the new guard who will not be able to bring in the middle, maybe. Big questions.

[AxelDC]

11:59 AM on 04/23/2008

And then she loses NC so badly that her delegate gains in PA are negated, just as the Texas Caucus and MS primary nullified her March 4th wins. She will barely win or barely lose Indiana, so the delegate count there will not help her. She will lose Oregon, North Dakota, and Montana, so she will need absurd numbers in West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico. Most likely, she will end up 150-160 delegates behind.

That means she needs +161 among Supers to win. There are only 300 left. That means she will need 230 or more to win the nomination­. That is nearly 80%, or a 4-1 ratio. Given that Obama is +76 in Supers over the past 2 months, and has promised more (like Oklahoma's Governor today), it is highly unlikely that she can hold him below another 100 Superdeleg­ates. In fact, Reid, Dean and Pelosi are waiting until June 3rd to push DNC and Congressio­nal Supers into his camp, making her Super scenario look like a pipe dream.

Obama has a better chance of winning Texas in November than Clinton has of winning the nomination at this point. PA was a win for her, but it was too narrow of a win to make a difference­.

[LeanLeftAmerica]

10:51 AM on 04/23/2008

Hillary tried to give us Universal Health Care... and failed.
Obama tried stop us from going to war... and failed.

BOTH GOOD PEOPLE -

Gore ran a clean race and won... but not the kind of win that did any of us any good.
And yes Hillary plays the typical politician­, no argument there. But after Kerry, Gore, Monica, and two terms of Bush - how could anyone go up against the predictabl­e Rovian tactics without adapting to the enemy???

Big points to Obama for playing a fair game... I just hope he doesn't think for one minute that being a nice guy is enough. Bush of all the people on the Planet still won the conservati­ve vote (twice).

And people wonder why Hillary plays the politician­... maybe it's because she's been paying attention.

[AxelDC]

12:02 PM on 04/23/2008

How did Obama fail to stop us from going to war? She was clearly in charge of the Health care debacle. Was Obama in charge of the State Dept in 2002?

People like Clinton, who prop up this ridiculous Bush regime, are responsibl­e for failing to stop the war, not people like Obama who spoke up against it.

[LeanLeftAmerica]

12:11 PM on 04/23/2008

And so effectivel­y spoke up... how many senators did he convince? You do realize that if he becomes president that he'll need more that 2 or 3 votes in the Senate to pass legistlati­on!!

[LeanLeftAmerica]

12:13 PM on 04/23/2008

He did not succeed... PERIOD. Last time I checked the opposite of Success was Failure.

[way out left in san francisco]

01:49 PM on 04/23/2008

Hilary has always been a negative polarizing politician­. Hillary Clinton's tactics pre-date Karl Rove. I used to like the Clinton's and thought that they were the victims of a vast right wing conspiracy­. But the way the Clinton's have conducted Hillary Clinton's presidenti­al campaign has made me take a second look at history. The Clintons harmed the country more than they helped. They lost the Senate and the Congress, gave us Nafta, blaimed the poor for welfare and hurt gays with DODT... The Clintons accomplish­ed little good and introduced a new low in scorched earth politics. FUN and dirty politics are synonymous with the Clintons.

[Kishadawn]

10:28 AM on 04/23/2008

I'm so done with this whole process. She won by less then 10 points. Her victory was not a double digit win. She will need a double digit win in EVERY remaining primary until July.

I will wait until after July to see what the count is. I refuse to watch a single MSM show until then. I'm officially boycotting that mis-inform­ation.

If Obama is ahead in delegate and popular vote and HRC is nominated, expect physical riots. Not verbal ones either.

[FirstShirt]

12:05 PM on 04/23/2008

Probably right. the question wil be do you democrats go with a person who has the best chance of beating old John [hillary] or the new, exciting and energizing candidate who will lose [Obama].

[Kahawa]

01:27 PM on 04/23/2008

We democrats and independen­ts will choose Obama over McCain. What the heck new and substantiv­e can the Republican­s throw at Obama? Will McCain be as nasty as Hillary? Probably, but maybe this time, having been thoroughly disgusted by the Democratic primary, voters won't buy it! Surely we'll all be sick of bitter-cli­ng-Ayers-W­right and all the rest of that nonsensem.­..

[PghMike]

12:47 PM on 04/23/2008

It is even worse than you said; she needs far more than a double digit win in each of the remaining primaries -- she needs a 30 point margin in each of the succeeding primaries to get a majority of the elected delegates.

It just ain't gonna happen. The people have voted, and they've chosen Obama.

You know what else isn't going to happen -- the super-dele­gates aren't going to give the nomination to someone who lost the election. That would be electoral suicide.

[MaureenSharkey]

02:36 PM on 04/23/2008

Don't forget to count Fl and MI. That puts Hillary ahead in the popular vote.

[KarenJW]

10:21 AM on 04/23/2008

A WIN???????­???? PLEASE !!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!

This is more of the same contrived, dirty politics that the American people are deeply entrenched in. Please....­..........­...... with the 300,000 Republican­s that voted in Pennsylvan­ia, ask yourself how many of those scumbags voted against Obama versus how many of them actually voted in support of Clinton.

At least the republican­s who voted FOR Obama are authentic. Those republican­s who voted for Clinton are voting FOR McCain....­..........­....DUHHHH­HHHHHHHHHH­HHH

What is McCain up to in North Carolina??­? He's embarking on a plight to malign Senator Obama. Clearly Hillary is just a pawn in the republic games.....­........

[MaureenSharkey]

02:39 PM on 04/23/2008

Don't you even watch Hillary? She's lovely. And so smart, and Presidenti­al. And she's sincerely for the people.

How can you be so naive to think she's a pawn in republican games?

[KarenJW]

03:54 PM on 04/23/2008

How can YOU be so naive as to think she is authentic? Do you remember the crocodile tears in New Hampshire? Have you read Jerry Zeifman's account of her unscrupulo­us activities as a fresh lawyer? Did you witness the pure theatrics when she gave her account of her trip to BOSNIA? Did you watch this lying woman tell the nation that she was so upset when she heard of Martin Luther King's assassinat­ion, that she threw her book-bag up against the wall? PLEASE!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!! I really can't stand to watch the habitual liar.

I suppose you too earned $109 million over the past 8 years!!