The More Things Don't Change, the Less They Stay the Same

As a practical matter, last night's primary results changed very little: Barack Obama has a pledged delegate lead that is almost insurmountable (thanks to TPM for the link).

But politics can be as much about atmospherics as practical realities, and the new story line spinning out of the results seems to involve concepts like "reset" and "start over." This cannot change the hard math, but it will affect the coverage the three major presidential aspirants get over the next few weeks.

As Jack Farrell argues over on Robert Emmet, the atmosphere is about to get turbulent for the Illinois senator:

The late Sen. Eugene McCarthy once said that the press was like a flock of birds. When one bird lands to rest its wings, the other birdies join it. When one bird flies from the telephone wire, all the others follow.

So, buckle up Obama fans. Hillary Clinton's victories in Texas and Ohio and Rhode Island yesterday will send the flock in a new direction.

...

[The press] still love the idea of President Barack Obama. And they don't much like the Clintons. But Barack has let them down. Made them look tame, and soft and stupid.

So now they are grumpy. And so he will pay.

The press turning on Obama was an inevitability, it's the nature of the animal. The twin questions facing the Obama campaign were whether he could wrap up the nomination before the pack turned and once they did whether he and his operatives can handle a querulous press corps as well as they did a quiescent one. The answer to the first question was "not quite." The answer to the second is still developing.

Comments

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

There is one very logical way to look at this. The super delegates are going to decide this race. That is a fact. Neither candidate can get to the 2024 delegates needed to secure the nomination.

Here is a rational way for the super delegates to make a decision. Review all the states. Remove any state fom the equation that is going to vote RED or BLUE no matter which candidate wins the nomination. That means don't worry about NY, CA, MA, ID, UT, WY, AK, AZ, SC etc

Now, take the close states that could go either way and do some polls with Obama vs McCain and Clinton vs McCain. Match these results up to the electoral college and see who does better in a general election matchup.

Just for fun, do some more polls with an Obama/Clinton ticket vs McCain and a Clinton/Obama ticket vs McCain and see if that has any effect on the results.

Then if you are worried about congressional seats and senate seats. Do some more polls to see if any of the above tickets do better for gaining seats in congress.

Look at all of these results, keep doing comparisons over time to see if things change as we get closer.

Then the super delegates would actually have some data to use to make a rational decision.

[rkstarbuck]

30 seconds left in the game, she needs a touchdown and kicks a field goal. The press attention redirected onto Clinton may not be such a bad thing... It's only a matter of time before something unseemly shows.

[Emmaboverry]

If you think the press is going soft on Hill, form your own questions and send to MSM hosts and newspapers or copy these:

Dear Mr. Russert,

Questions I hope you and other respected journalists will ask of Senator Clinton: a

1) Please give specific examples of your participation in a) Peace talks in Northern Ireland b) The Kosovo refugee crisis How did you influence the outcomes of these events? In what official capacity did you act and what specific actions did you take in Ireland and in Kosovo? Please cite any specific decisions you made or paticipated in that you think will help Americans assess your foreign policy /national security experience and expertise as compared to Senator Obama's?

2) How does your speech on women's rights in China substantiate your claim to foreign policy experience or your readiness to respond with sound judgment to an international
crisis as you suggest in your red phone ad?

3) Please give us examples of your work on the Senate Armed Services Committee and instances of how your superior judgment was tested and employed in that work.

4) What do you say to those who argue that in the most crucial test of judgment bearing on your potential to exercise sound judgment in behalf of national security interests, you failed to demonstrate
a thorough enough consideration of all the evidence at hand so as to come to a decision you, and many other Americans, would not later regret-i.e. your vote to authorize the president to go to war with Iraq?

[Sketchartist]

P.S. As you asked, I looked back into the Nixon years and noticed Hillary was working for his campaign.

[soulstressed]

Please bear with me, I want to get this word out.

I still believe firmly in what we're building here, as do we all, and I think we can make a shift change that is not destructive, but furthers the cause of truth in politics.

Backed by Truth, Fronted By Obama

Though I respect the decision to 'not do nasty' on the part of Obama's campaign, it's not going to work. Clinton's map to the WH is routed via FLA, MI or intimidating SDs. This is not about getting nasty or attacking. It's about shining the light on Senator Clinton's own realties. This can be done with candor and eloquence because we are backed by truth, and fronted by Obama.

A new strategy has to be demanded by us, the supporters, so that Senator Obama will be pushed by his base, into action.
I'd like to begin an online petition of Obama supporters that addresses our wishes for 'our campaign'.
1st key points of this work in progress:
1. That we not get nasty, but that we answer negative attacks quickly and firmly.
2. That we call upon our surrogates, as Clinton does, to bring up things that are more than murky in Senator Clinton's camp. I.E., Bill's very interesting Dubai dealings, the Senator's own questionable campaign fund raising history scandals.
3. Debunking the media bias lie toward Obama. Clinton was the inevitable, the media darling for over a year. All it took was her complaining about a couple of positive weeks for Senator Obama, and the media now falls all over itself to repeat all her talking points.
4. Shed light on the obvious fact that Senator Clinton could not care less about the party and the country she decries to love. If she did, she would not imply that the Republican nominee would be better suited for the WH, she would not say that "as far as she knows he is not a Muslim", and certainly would not consistently suggest that all people and/or states that did not vote for her were insipid and inconsequential.
5. The voters must demand that she release the tax returns. This needs to be truly brought to bear. She is obviously hiding something, and we deserve to know BEFORE it's too late to diffuse a ticking bomb awaiting us in the general.
6. Release the WH papers. What DID she actually do during her tenure as First Lady?
7. Please confront her with the 35 years nonsense. Senator Obama has a longer legislative history than Senator Clinton. That is a fact not receiving enough attn.
8. What actual crisis has Senator Clinton diverted? How was this accomplished without proper security clearance?

If you're also interested in helping me formulate this petition, join me here:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/ipetition4Barack

[XYZ]

I want to add to soulstressed excellent analysis and points of action.

1) No need to get nasty the facts are against Hillary but obama needs to bring them to the forefront, also I like how he is starting to tie Hillary to McCain, you know the lather rinse and repeat it will start to stick. A vote for Hillary or McCain is a vote for 3 more years of the same. A firm parent tone should be addopted, as if Hillary is a little kid that lied about a homework assignment.

2) Shelf the Attack on McCain, he isn't relavent now he will probably go back to his cave for awhile, and if he tries to start uniting the right, he will alienate the center. So he really needs to walk on egg shells, plus he doesn't have much money.

3) Start claiming media bias, start holding back news from the media that supports the lies of the Clintons, first this does 2 things. One it will break the news cycles of Obama defending himself, he needs to drive the media conversation, instead of defense. Second it will reward the media that gives honest coverage. Remeber this is a grass roots campain, don't shy away from it use the bully pulpit to convice voters, don't get comfortable with the media carrying Obama's message. They cannot marginalize him, unless he lets them they tried at first but it doesn't work when your filling statdiums of 20,000.

4) This might not be a good plan to make Clinton out to be a "homewrecker", Obama might need Clinton for the VP if this primary fractures the party plus a Obama, Clinton ticket could be a real powerhouse against the McCain campaign. We need to attack her credentials, and her character.

5) Right on the money.

6) Make the argument that not releasing the WH papers, is like not giving an employer her resume, where is her experience, and why is she hiding it. This also dovetails into 7.

7) See 6

8) Drive home the fact she hasn't overted anything, and when the war vote came she didn't even do any homework on the whole thing how is this going to make for a good president.

Ultimatly Obama has to control the conversation he is the front runner, he doesn't have to be mean but he needs to be forthcoming, and honest. Like about the Rizko case he needs to tell the media look I returned the money, and release any documents he has with his dealings with Rizko, good or bad.. The NAFTA flap well he will have to offer up the Advisor for the media, and might have to let him go for now, this will absolve him from the Nafta flap.

[LeeScho]

I am a Obama supporter, and not all of his current problems are generated by Hillary. She did not do Rezko, she did not do that awkward contact with the Canadian consulate, and her 3am phone ad was harsh, but not below the belt.

So, would I change by support of Obama because of his dalliance with a man now on trial for fraud, etc. when there is no indication that Obama did anything illegal.? No.

Do I believe that he communicated one thing to Ohio voters and then contradicted that to the Canadian government? No.

Do I believe that Hillary Clinton is more qualified to take a 3am national emergency phone call to the White House than is Obama? No.

The press (media) did not sell me on Barack Obama - he did that. The press cannot sell me off of Barack Obama - only he can do that.

Congratulations to Hillary on her three victories yesterday. Informed Obama supporters expected no less. And we expect that by the time she gets to Denver, she will still not have enough pledged delegates even if she wins the remaining primaries and caucuses.

So the last time I saw the Obama flock was this morning - it was on its way to Pennsylvania and stopping to pick up a couple more primaries on the way.

[SShaw490]

Obama doesn't have any "current problems". He can win the nomination relatively easily - he just has to go as negative on Clinton as she did in the last week (which enabled her to do a little better in Oho than she'd been doing earlier). The "problem" is, a protracted negative fight kills the party in November. If Obama plays by the same rules that Hillary is using. he sinks both of them.

The party needs to get this worked out, and soon. When we get past Wyoming and Mississippi, and Obama starts talking about Hillary's tax returns, her donors, Bill's foundation's donors, Bill's pardons, Bill's carrousing, etc, etc, THAT'S when there are going to be some "current problems".

[LeeScho]

I am grateful that I am an Obama supporter without him having to be as perfect as you make him out to be. The moment that he "starts talking about Hillary's tax returns, her donors, Bill's foundation's donors, Bill's pardons, Bill's carrousing, etc, etc," is the moment that he will lose my support. If I want another Karl Rove/Lee Atwater Republican in the White House, I will vote for one. McCain will probably qualify as one by election day.

[accountability]

Thank you,
If more Obama supporters were as decent as you are in your reasoning I might still be a supporter.

Well I support both of them. I have my preference, I know who I think would be the better President. Our preferences come from what we value and feel to be the more important issues not because of something lacking in the opposition.

There is something fine and strong and committed and strong in both of these candidates. There are also flaws and problems that come with either of them. So what? We do not have to demonize one in order to support the other.

we were blessed with these candidates and it is terribly disappointing to see the amount of irrational hatred that is expressed against Hillary Clinton here.

Yes, I'm glad Obama is going to Pa. This is what we should be doing, this is the point of the Primary process. We need to be sure that our candidate can stand up to the pressure. I keep reading people saying how awful this campaign is, how dirty but this is nothing. This has been very civil. When the general starts the neo-con swift boaters are even now doing their research to find any little nugget they can use to distort and destroy.

Hillary Clinton is doing what she can to win as is Parack Obama. This is their job, what they are supposed to do and sometimes that gets rough. It should. It is supposed to.

I think there is this perception that Hillary is doing all of the attacking but in fact she just does it differently. Obama is gifted with rhetorical brilliance.
He does give beautiful speeches that are inspiring, moving, hopeful. However embedded within those speeches have always been several attacks on Hillary Clinton. Because these attacks are cushioned within the beauty of the speech they don't get noticed.
Its passive aggressive attack strategy. It is usually people who are good with words that are adept at it. This is not Hillary Clinton's strength. She has other strengths. She is more about going right into it "I'm going to take the lid off this and see what's in there." Some people see it as a fault, some see it as dirty. I see it as a survival skill.

Most women have been in relationships with men who deflect arguments with tactics that make them look like a bitch. You can't get your partner to engage, they diminish your attempts and escalation of ways to engage. They look oh so innocent and everybody on the outside believe you are over the top and unfair.

I do not know one woman who hasn't had this experience, repeatedly, with men who they believe are doing this purposely to push.

That is passive aggressive. No one else sees it. It can't be "called out." The person who is trying to engage looks like they are attacking but they are really trying to get traction and engagement and get past the manipulative above it all persona.

no one is perfect.
why do we think we need our President to be?

i'm rambling.
Up to late last night.
LOL

good Luck

[mcfried]

As a woman I object to your characterisation of all women. I am perfectly able to make myself heard and understood. I suggest you become more flexible it appears that if you don't get your way you believe that you are somehow wronged and men are sexist. As a woman the truth is I am not always right and I treat my relationships as one of equality and respect. This idea that if you don't agree with me you are sexist and dismissive is ridiculous. I don't agree with Hillary Clinton on a large number of issues - that doesn't make me dismissive or rude it makes me independant and strong.

[mcfried]

Please the truth is the press are %^%& scared of Clinton. She has convinced everyone that they are sexist and biased against her. If they say anything negative about her or bring up any issues or scandals, or ask a hard question she cries Sexist Biased Media Same with Bush as well, any criticism of him and he cried unpatriotic and look where we are. So now they just do what she wants because well honestly they are a bunch of pussies.
Before you all yell at me and call me names I am a white women in her 30's who honestly wants Clinton to explain he shady contributors, pardons for pay, donations to the clinton library, why she won't release her 1 year old tax returns, why she voted to allow cluster bombs in civilian areas, exactly what she told Canada about NAFTA and on and on. Biased against her please - you have got to be kidding me - Both Obama and McCain are asked these kinds of questions with less proof and based on pure innuendo. They don’t get to say well this is not important because I’m not the transparency candidate.

[patrice37]

Mcfried, I'm a white woman in my 50's who couldn't agree with you more. Gee, if I had known how easy it was to make men in suits tremble by calling them sexist, I would have tried it long ago.

[OozingStallion]

This whole thing is making me naucious. Before these latest primaries I would have been happy to see either candidate win the nomination. But after Hillary's tactics of fear it was clear to me that she needed to get schooled by Obama. It upsets me that those tactics work so well. I used to live in Ohio, and there are a bunch of nuckleheads that live there. They are the very definition of an uninformed electorate (see "60 Minutes). I am so very disillusioned now. I want to take a pill to knock myself until August. And when I wake up Barack will be the Victor. McCain Sucks McCain Sucks McCain Sucks McCain Sucks.

[ckdogs]

I'm posting and it's not appearing.

[Democrab]

You're right. I can't see it.

Maybe it's the blue ink.

[ckdogs]

I am sad that smear/fear worked again. I thought we were past that. Obama made a few mistakes ie Hillary was all over the free media - they played her ad a million times, she did the comedy shows, et.al. Obama was nowhere to be seen - and people watch tv. The Canada thing was stupid. He also needs to have a press conference, where he answers all questions about Rezko. Last, but not least, he has to state unequivocally that he will not accept the vice presidency. He can't stay above the fray, if Clinton is pulling Rove tactics. Time for some "kitchen sink" ads about her - truthful, but hard hitting.

[Billie]

Right, Countess.

But here's what's scary: it seems that a huge amount of people in the democratic party don't feel sick to their stomach about the slime. In fact, there's so much support for it that they actually get self-righteously angry if anyone calls them on it. If this were not the case, she would not be able to get away with not disclosing her tax returns. I think people have taken a real look at her experience (war voting, bankruptcy bill supporting, NAFTA supporting) and even the ones who've been hardest hit (like Ohio) still vote for her.

I have to think that most people don't consider morality anymore and don't read. And that willful ignorance rules.

[DJBrunner]

I'll put it a little more bluntly, there's way too many morons living in this once great country of ours, starting with the appointed POTUS.

[politicsnut]

Sad but true. I'm so disappointed in this country right now. Maybe these people don't deserve a president like Obama. I'm sure they voted twice for Bush before.

[Countess]

You cannot fight slime with kindness and you cannot fight racism by ignoring it. Obama must show people he is ready and willing to tell the truth about the Clintons. It will all come out anyway during the general election if there white trash campaign is successful. She talks about her experience so tell the whole truth. She won't even show her income tax returns surely for good reason and she has engaged in the dirtiest campaign we have seen in the democratic party in living memory. Let us take a real look at her experience.

[accountability]

In living memory? how old are you?

This has been the tamest and most civil campaign I can remember going all the way back to Jack Kennedy's.

Slime? Where the slime comes from is the supporters. I have never seen more hateful people than the Hillary Haters on the Progressive blogs. It has truly been an eye opener for many of us that worked our asses off to see a day like this when an African American and a Woman could be running for President. the first few days some of us were ecstatic, looking forward to an amazing primary with not one, but two candidates we were proud of and excited about and could support. YUP. Some of us want Obama to win, some of us want Clinton to win and all of us support them both. WOW, check it out. Look at what the Democratic party has done, look at what America has finally done.
Not one but two great candidates who are gifted, strong. Both with so much to offer.

Yeah, we were ecstatic until the reality of the ugliness of the Obama supporters on HuffPo became apparent. I don't know what kind of people support a candidate who runs on hope, change, elevating the conversation, leaving behind the old politics as usual, disagreeing without being disagreeable yet spew the most vituperative bile as if they are projectile vomiting their hate speech against this woman.

What a disappointment to read these mindless taunts and repetitions of the neocon fairytales about Hillary Clinton. The lack of objectivity and anything approaching common decency and fairness has been more than a little dispiriting.

THEIR white trash campaign?
Sounds a little racist to me Countess.

Calling Hillary Clinton a racist is just beyond ridiculous. How dare you?
You people who just mindlessly chatter accusations and throw shit around not caring who it lands on as long as you get to indulge in your petty and ignorant hatred.

I find it tragic that you people who are so self indulgent have such a belief in your own self righteousness that you sputter with indignation and call names, and point to "facts" that are just projections of your own ugliness. You project out onto others the very behavior you wallow in. One would need a modicum of self awareness to understand the depths of the hypocrisy you enjoy.

Yes, let us take a long look at her experience.
I wish you who keep carrying the neocon narrative water would do that. Rather than parroting the myth that the neocon's started well over a decade ago go back and research her experience. Google it.
Make sure you look back to the Nixon administration and even before.
You will find a lot of very old far right wing sites shouting and screaming and propagating the ugliness that you can see every day on the left sights. They were spewing the same poison that you all spew now. Isn't that ironic? Or suspicious? But those sites give you hints on where else to look and you will find out a lot of interesting facts and clues as to where and how this narrative that you so willingly perpetuate started.

But doing research on a Presidential candidate takes work and objectivity and why would you want to do that? If you were objective you might have to let go of your hate Hillary fetish and since it seemingly feeds the collective soul of those who love to hate her objectivity is not welcome. Self awareness, objectivity, rationality and critical thinking are enemies of unreasoning hatred. We've been watching ideological unreasoning hate at work for the last 7 years with our current administration. When I read the garbage that gets thrown out here about Hillary it always strikes me as so pathetically bizarre that there are so many mirrors, flip sides of that kind of stupifying, mind numbing mindlessness right here amongst us.

So please, go ahead and tell the whole truth if you could let go of your agenda of hate long enough.

go and examine both candidates fully and maybe you can grow up enough to be able to support both candidates as human beings rather than wasting so much energy demonizing one.

It isn't necessary to hate one in order to support the other.

It isn't necessary to see either of them as saints or sinners.
They both have wonderful qualities, they both have flaws.
this is what being a human being is. No one is clean... but keep throwing your rocks if it is what gives your life meaning and gives you a sense of identity and self worth.

Nothing personal of course. In fesponding to your comment I'm responding to thousands because it is always the same, over and over and over the same.

[kevinmcd]

But it is Hillary who is the hater. She is vicious in her attacks. She has recently said that Obama's whole campaign is based on a speech he gave. This is a vicious lie. She has recently failed to condemn the nasty rumor that Obama is Muslim (she knows that to call a presidential candiidate a Muslim in this day and age is politically fatal due to fear and bigotry). Her only response was well he says he is not a Muslim, he is not "as far as I know." She knew very well that she was leaving doubt in the minds of voters. Then she uses fear, showing sleeping childen and attempting to scare people into voting for her. She will do anything to win because she feels entitled. Like George W, she is where she is only by her family name and connections. Obama is there due to merit. This ia race between the jaded and corrupt vs. the idealistic and hopeful. Clinton can not win and bring us back to four or eight more years of scandals and disgrace and more secretive government. .

[Sketchartist]

People already see very well where the slime and insinuations have been coming from, and it's overwhelmingly NOT from Obama's side. Secondly, prefering Obama over Clinton does not instantly make one a "Hillary-hater". That in itself is the kind of thing the right wing has always says about anyone one who dares to express any criticism of "Decider" W. Bush.
All Democrats were disgusted by the way the Republicans treated the Clintons (and others) over the years. That has absolutely nothing to do with being for Barack Obama. In fact, it is Hillary Clinton's willingness to be so much like the Republicans in her campaign tactics (not to mention her Iraq and Iran votes and her readiness to sell out the Constitution with things like that anti flag-burning amendment) that has disappointed and alienated so many. I thought that being a Democrat meant believing in something much, much better. If she wants to run a campaign like a Republican, let her go ahead and just become one.
And like it or not, the Republicans are certain that they can beat Hillary. She is the perfect choice to energize their base and we all damned well know it.