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
Loading comments…
Most Popular on HuffingtonPost
VEZGfXYBSJNjbBL3MjwWqYeOeBY%2Ftq9O6hGL%2BkSLVKebuX650fteVe3Yma2y2KL8g%2FkyrYEofucyn7BHpk6zpg%3D%3D
UBxXl%2FeL0Q1Wwl3uHxGODDuV7gBrbNfc%2B%2FSZAeCVwJpvD%2BnU6ahX8XkFRRBaYJmDs%2FFhWW2UJyAuzmNQ8AX0Sg%3D%3D
1 of 2
HuffingtonPost Reporters
OvmhPpTEfxB0YBIfzxG6mJ%2BUDHly68eD
am%2ByUa0oyoMMk4Z0PeZrfg%3D%3D
1 of 2
Don't Miss HuffPost Bloggers
1 of 2
Huffington Post Apps and Feeds
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
Absolutely, this huge for John McCain. He should be the Bob Dole, instead his prospects look better and better every day.
There is no way Hillary could have ever won! But the Clinton's ego's and Obama's true colors have been a dream come true. Hollywood could not have written a better script.
Here Obama had every advantage, more money than god, an enthusiastic press, and guilt ridden liberals, he comes up against a wall that he cannot overcome. That wall will only get bigger in the general election.
Democrats are doomed.
Why is it Ms. Clinton is damaging the Party while Obama, who went negative first and continues to go negative, can use similar politics and not garner any criticism? It isn't fair.
It is called hypocricy, and it tskes many different forms, but at the core, it is the same.
I'll give you another, If Obama was behind by a close margin with a chance to win, would anyone dare suggest he get out.
Another, if Obama came to convention behind, you would hear all kinds of plausible reasons the super delegates could swing the nomination to Obama. With Hillary, a woman, behind, the story is, it is not possible,it would destroy the party.
The answer is as disturbing, as it is obvious
You have it precisely backwards.
When did Mr. Obama go negative AT ALL?
With Clinton at the top of the ticket, you are quite right.
ReVan, I think you areright and wrong on this. The press has a lot to do with this race going as long as it has. The Huff Post of Obama's bitter comment is a prime example. Network and cable news need ratings and its like the SuperBowl, if it's a rout, nobody watches and advertising dollars tank.
The fact MSM has been so roundly criticized about treating Obama passively, they have taken upon themselves to correct this misconception and are hammering Obama. Look at what Clinton said a few days ago about oblterating Iran and a missle shield over the Mid-East has barely received any press attention.
Talk about getting a pass from the media, you can easily say McCain is getting the preferential treatment because he is a POW and cancer survivor. To challenge beyond the emotion of what he represents is perceived left wing or unpatriotic If you want to get a sense of how die-hard Republicans perceive McCain, watch Mary Matalin and that pit bull tenacity she had defending the Bush candidacy just isn't there. Watch someone like Pat Buchannan comment, and what they are cheering is the strength of the Republican party, not their candidate. Buchanan has admitted as much. So, when somone like him can't get that into their nominee, then clearly the Republican candidate is seriously flawed.
Actually, James Carville, Ed Rendell and other high-profile Clinton supporters have come out publicly and said that if Obama is the nominee (and it still looks like he will be) that they will do everything in their power to make sure that he carries these "big states" in the General. If anyone actually believes that the Democratic power brokers will not support Sen. Obama in the fall, they are sadly mistaken. If Clinton does not vehemently urge her supporters to get behind the Democratic nominee in the fall, then many are correct and she is just another Republican. This election cycle is prime ground for a Democratic win and I think, after her 8.5% victory (NOT 10% as widely claimed by Clinton supporters and the media - check out the actual results from the PA Election Board) in PA, you will see more Supers going to Obama.
James Carville said as much on Meet The Press a few weeks back and my level of respect for him grew when he made that statement. Sure, he supports Clinton, as is his right to support whichever candidate he chooses but, when the game is on the line, if (when) Obama is the nominee, he will push just as hard to help him win the White House back. What many are realizing is that the Democratic Party has a chance to not only win the White House back, but also a strong majority in the House and Senate. That will be vital.
Is there any concern that Obama could not close in Pennsylvania? This is the area in which his message should prevail. You have a large blue collar population and two large metro areas.
Obama will win by staying on the high road and continuing to avoid negative politicking. Clinton is on a scorched earth policy which could damage the Democrats chances in a year they should be trouncing the Republicans. This was the one election where the American voter needed to send the loud and clear message that America is repudiating all of the Bush policies of the last eight years. Instead we are getting a dose of Karl Rove within our own party. Not very pretty.
I heard his speech, such rhetorical B.S.
A list of every problem in the the universe, not one solution.
The word change is just as empty as his suit.
Did he congratulate her?
I listened but I think I got distracted and drifted off so might have missed it.
She gave a very good speech yet I see people are characterizing her mentioning Obama's outspending her 3 to 1 as an attack.
WTF?
they are such a bunch of whining cry babies. No matter what she says they call it attack-- no matter how convoluted, no matter how much distortions and contortions they have to go through to twist the facts to fit.
It is ironic how much they project onto Clinton what they themselves are doing! Amazing that people can be that un self reflective.
You don't put in specific solution details in speeches. You will lose the audience. You make the false logical assumption that because he leaves those parts out therefore he must not have any solutions. You do know that's kindergarten logic right?
Yes, Obama has been using Rove tactics, but Ms. Clinton won anyway.
Yeah baby.
http://tin
Hillary victory party.
Nice atmosphere without the hate.
Are you serious? This is exactly the opposite of what is happening. Anyone with one foot based in reality can see the Clinton's have gone Rovian. Use your brain to think, not blindly accept the spin.
Clinton is on a scorched earth policy
Absolutely! He keeps scorching the earth under her feet... but she is so amazing, she just keeps moving on.
It amazes me how many people don't see how negative Obama's attacks have been.
Unbelievable. I don't get it. It isn't like being objective means you dan't still vote for the guy yet so many people have to prop him up as someone above and beyond anything human.
Sheesh.
Thanks for getting that.
they are doing the bidding of their zionist, corporate, fascist masters ----- and the fix was in . . . as scripted as the WWE last night.
This is one of the more foolish postings on HuffPo in quite some time. No facts. No honesty. Nothing of value.
ROFLMAO that's SOOOO rich coming from you.
Are you saying wrestlin's fake?
How Dare YOU!
this country's been seized, obama came along and threw a wrench in their storyline -- now they're going to take him out.
by the time the american public wakes up to how they've been doofed america will be gone.
a strike against iran before october and the end of democracy by 2012.
believe it.
Clinton's victory is a blow to Obama. Speaking of blow...any
Hillary kicked his butt in a real Democrats' state. What is the matter with Obama? Why is he so weak that he can't close the deal in a Democratic state like Pennsylvania? If he cannot win in a blue collar, working-class state like Pennsylvania then what is he going to do in November against John (Old) McCain? He gots a lot of work to do...
Obama is not weak, you guys know that the deal is. Don't act as if you don't.
Yeah, why can't Barack Obama win in a "Real" democratic state like Pennsylvania???
For that matter, why can't Hillary win in states like Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Vermont, Mississippi, Wisconsin, D.C., Alaska, Nebraska, Louisiana, Connecticut, Delaware..
By the way, ANY democrat is going to win California, N.Y. and other democratic strong-holds. What we need is someone to win the purple states.... but that doesn't fit into Hillary's dialogue.
Oh well, never mind.
Obama is going to get the nomination. Yet, he is WEAK. WEAK. Is he a Democrat or is he an Independent who has chosen to exploit the Democratic Party for his own ego trip? If he intends to win (like, what else is there?) then why can't he put the hurt on Hillary -a WOMAN with extremely high negatives - in a Democrats' Democrat state? Who is this guy...a latte sipping, big yapping, speechafying, back-bencher full of egocentricity? He needs to be a Democrat if he wants to win. He is looking like a looser right now.
First of all, DC isn't a state (we wish we were) and is 60% black who voted for a candidate with whom they can identify, but always goes Democrat because about 3,000 Republicans are registered here. MS, ID, WY, UT, AK, NE, won't go Democrat with either Clinton or Obama. WA, CT, LA, DE, WI, and VT will go Dem despite the candidate.
How will FL and MI swing? A McCain-Obama match-up yields a McCain victory hands down. McCain could easily take MI because the Dems in both states feel 'bitter' towards the Democratic party due to the Dems following party rules. The Dem leadership is in disconnect with the voters on that issue no matter what side one takes in that debate.
Other volatile states in November will be Ohio and Pennsylvania which both favor either Clinton or McCain. Additionally, NH is either Clinton or McCain NOT for Obama.
Dems need to carry the 20 states they won in 2004 and add an additional five to solidify the win which is where it gets harder for Obama but easier for Clinton because of states she can pick up like OH, FL, AK, and NV. The last one is up in the air. Obama cannot out perform that.
Enter the Superdelegates who need to do their job. That is why they were invented. Not to go with the lead of the delegates or the popular vote or both.
Best,
The Clintonista Post
http://cli
So do you really think...I mean really...w
Hillary won in PA because she is also a Dem...with the Demographics and machine in her favor. One-on-One against the old man....in PA...you folks are really grasping at straws with that Primary vs. the general argument.
Its like saying OHH Huckabee won Alabama...
He lost a Democratic primary to HILLARY CLINTON. So what? All it proves is that HILLARY CLINTON is tough to beat in a Democratic primary. Maybe because she's HILLARY CLINTON?
Or perhaps she wins if she and a complicit media carries out this high tech lynching.
By the way, the Republican party in North Carolina has announced it will role out an ad in time for the Democratic primary, highlighting Obama's "questionable associations" in the spirit of Jesse Helms vs. Harvey Gant. I'm very sad for the Democratic party. Very sad for this country.
Or perhaps she wins if she and a complicit media carries out this high tech lynching.
ahhhh, more race baiting coming from the Obama camp.
BTW, complicit media?
Certainly not with Clinton.
They are almost apoplectic on MSNBC because she didn't "lose" by winning with less of a margin.
Interesting how people started out saying She was up 20 points but he cut the lead so signifigan
LOL
Wow, do the math.
In fact do the math and see where he gets his money.
almost 50% are coming from billionaire, hedge fund, lobbyist bundelrs.
So he spends 3 to 1 and loses.
Hello?
Very interesting if you ask me.
YES, it is!!!! YES!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
