The Same Old Story: Discrediting Hillary

Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary

Here we go again. Stomp on Hillary for winning.

Last night Hillary Clinton picked up the sixth big state out of the seven the Democrats need to win the fall presidential contest. Obama has only won one big state, Illinois -- and that is it. She has won California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas and now Pennsylvania (and, yes, Florida and Michigan). Yet in today's newspapers and partisan websites, the critics are downplaying Clinton's victory (even her erstwhile supporter the New York Times criticizes her in its lead editorial for running a dirty campaign), dismissing any triumph as meaningless because of Obama's lead in elected delegates, and suggest once again that she drop out so she does not further hurt the "inevitable" nominee, Barack Obama.

How many times have we heard these sorts of admonishments, starting back with the New Hampshire primary? But despite her stumbling start in the caucus states, Clinton has come on strong and has now created a solid coalition that Obama cannot, for all of his money and his eloquence, break into.

Let this drama play out now and let the Super Delegates make up their own minds in due course without interference from on-line critics or hot-headed columnists or TV prognosticators or panicky Democratic Party strategists. Let the delegates in Denver play their proper role in deciding the outcome of this contest. This is after all a democracy.

Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary

Comments

[sjl106]

Schlesinger has posted one of only a few intelligent articles on the Huffpo. There are too many that write on this site and respond who genuinely are clueless to the reality of what is going on here. Live in your little world, there will come a time when reality hits you in the face and its going to hurt.

[ReportThis]

It would be one thing if Hillary's campaign focused on the failed Bush policies. And McCain's endorsements thereof.

Hillary instead is running a scorched earth campaign -- against Obama. That campaign continues to involve Bill "Lust in his Lap" -- who yesterday accused the Obama campaign of "playing the race card" -- against HIM! Hours later, he falsely denied making the statement.

Hillary cannot and will not win the nomination. It's impossible, and that's what the pundits and analysts are trying to tell her. That, and the fact that her pointless refusal to concede defeat will deliver the general election to McBush.

[mcnairbo]

Obama and his tag team partner John Edwards were the first to start attacking their fellow democrat in order to make her stumble but not it's a bad thing because It's Obama who's in the sights.

[highlighter]

They attacked her policies and her record in contrast to their own. They didn't endorse republicans over her or insinuate irrelevant past associations as evidence of character flaws.

[OnceProudAmerican]

"Lust in his Lap'?
How long are we going to recycle this crap? Everyone knows Clinton got a head job, so what!
We need move on. When Clinton left office gas was cheap, Sons and Daughters were'nt dying and we had a Surplus!
Any man who says they would turn down oral sex is a LIAR, even if he's aPreacher!
This Country is going down in flames and all we're conserned about is someones sex life?
GET OVER IT!

[ddharder]

Oh please. This is just so silly . March out the same old talking points. In this case, spin on the big state win, as if that is any sort of reliable omen which direction voters will swing in the general election against a different candidate and against different issues.

What the author and his ilk continue to fail to address are the hard numbers. The only conceivable reasons she will stay in the race now are A) against all odds, O will melt down spectacularly as some unknown scandal takes hold (might as well buy lotto, the probabilities are similar), or B) she is disingenuously running for 2012 against the best interests of both her party and the country (probabilities here are considerably more favorable).

Either the author is a paid PR rep, in which case I find his morals completely reprehensible or he is a mind-bogglingly deluded true Hillary believer, which just makes me pity his intellect.

[hwebb54]

Is this the Huffington Post??? I could have swore I just read someone actually taking up for Hillary Clinton on here?

[RedBirdy]

Scroll down. The usual antics take place.

[LInusK]

It's always the same story: no matter how much Hillary wins, she's still a loser - according to the media.

If she wins by 8 points, she should have won by 10. If she wins by 10, it should have been 12. If she's ahead in the popular vote, she's not ahead in the popular vote.

If she tries to persuade the superdelegates to support her, then she's defying the will of the people. If the will of the people is for Hillary, then the will of the people doesn't count; it's the delegates. But if Hillary tries to persuade the delegates she's cheating.

I really don't care who wins. I like both Obama, and Clinton. But the media's ugly bias is disgusting.

I have to constantly remind myself that I actually like Obama, despite who's supporting him.

Hillary has every right to compete. And I'm glad that Obama, at least, acknowledges that.

[cinemaven]

"I have to constantly remind myself that I actually like Obama, despite who's supporting him. "
LInusK , that's also true of me. I have to work to remember that the Obama supporters are not Obama and although they make it difficult, I respect Obama and believe he deserves support if he gets the nomination­.... but I don't have to like what they're doing to Clinton, someone who has fought hard for all of us and who's husband had the most successful two terms in recent (or distant) memory.

I'm hoping Clinton can pull it out but not to the point that I'd toss out false allegations about a fellow fighter for democracy. I wish both of them the best and I hope everyone will rally around the nominee.

[highlighter]

None denies her right to compete. None i listen to anyways. It is quite clearly her tendencies to scorched earth tactics that have inspired such desire for the process to end. That and the fact that most significant measures of momentum are with Obama as well as, obviously, the math.

Before you say PA was momentum for Clinton, remember that opinion was steadily heading to Obama and the obvious goalpost reference. Even Clinton supporters were banking on a 15-20 point spread. And the supers just keep lining up behind Obama, a steady flow.

[Ontariocentric]

Thank you Stephen Schlesinger!!

I've been making that argument for weeks, and when I express it on this blog, Obamabots jump all over it and tell me I'm delusional for supporting Hillary who they characterize as a lying, cheating, racist, losing whore.

Hillary can beat McCain. The "big states" DO matter. It's funny how the left-stream-media easily discredits Hillary's base (like PA's blue-collar, white rural etc.) yet they say nothing about the fact that most Obama voters have never voted until now - and can't be relied on in November.

Others also accuse Hillary supporters of not being able to do math. Well I know there are 2025 delegates needed to win the primary, and Obama hasn't that number by any stretch. As this editorial says, with all Obama's money, popularity, fundraising ability, charisma and eloquence, he has not been able to really capture the vast chunk of the Democratic base. Hillary's win last night was a decisive win, whether it was 8.6% difference or 10% difference doesn't really matter.

[Sioen]

So essentially, you're saying, "this is a democracy, so let's let a few people overturn the will of the voters."

That's not a democracy, it's an oligarchy -- at best.

If she were more electable, why is it that the voters chose Obama?

[hwebb54]

Voters didn't choose Obama. They chose Hillary in the popular vote. Michigan and Florida count because they are in fact, no matter what the Obama campaign tells you, STATES. How can anyone say that we should leave Michigan and Florida out of the process? That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

[jeg]

Yes, but Howard Dean said it first, and the entire rules committee backed him up on it.

And before she needed their votes to bolster her claim that she should be handed the nomination, Sen. Clinton said that the Florida and Michigan votes were meaningless.

Sorry, didn't mean to throw facts into your fantasy there.

[LAJonathan]

Both primaries were deemed illegal. They DO NOT count. Illegal elections is not something the Obama campaign is telling people, its a legal issue whether you like it or not.

[KPinSEA]

Um, because the Party agreed it would be that way long before they knew the results, and the results don't demonstrate anything if the candidates lived up to their pledge not to campaign there (or even, possibly appear on the ballot).

Wanting to count Michigan and Florida now is like New England asking for each yard gained in the Super Bowl to count for .2 points ... after the game is played and the score tallied. Never mind the rules we agreed to before, let's have new rules!

Bill Maher gets New Rules ... not the Democratic Party mid-election.

[CellarDoor]

Excuse me...did you say Michigan counts? I agree it is a state, but considering every democratic nominee was pulled from the Michigan ballet except Hillary Clinton, how is it exactly that you and the author of the piece think otherwise? The delegates cannot be sat for Michigan unless you propose to tell all occupants of that state that they do not have any choice in the democratic nominee and MUST vote for Clinton? I'm sure her supporters wouldn't mind but what if you not? Sorry...no vote for you?

Are you now part of Rove's "unreality-based world" where facts are whatever you propose them to be?

I agree with the tenor of the article if not all of it's obviously bogus claims. Clinton is still viable in a very tiny respect and none of us have the right to deny her continued running. She still faces overwhelmi­ng...well, basically impossible­...odds but the process doesn't change because of 'odds'. We will all need each other before this is over...I hope we do our country proud.

[NYRalf]

I amazed at the ignorance of the HIllary supporter more and more with each passing day.

[SLal]

The media needs to RECUSE itself if it cannot tell a story the way it is, rather than the way they wish it would be. PERIOD.

This will undoubtedly become a case study for journalism schools after all is said and done.

The media will have a long way to go to rebuild trust its average reader.

[KOBISKING]

I don't know what Schlesinger has been reading and watching, but the media is acting like HRC has just solidified the nomination. A 10 point win was expected; just as Obama finishing ahead in Delegate count is expected. The donations Obama received from donors were well spent in Penn. It helped him cut a 30+ point deficit to a 10. HRC wins NC by 10; that will be a story.

[TurnThePageGA]

Hillary got 54.6 percent of the vote and Obama got 45.4 percent of the vote (99.5 percent of precincts reporting). That is a 9.2 percent win or 9 if you want to round off.

[rainbowblue]

Why can't we round 54.6 to 55? In any math and science (depending on the sig figs) it would be, as would 45.4 be rounded down to 45 (especially if you are going to round down your last calculation). Clinton won big, give it to her. Be disappointed that Obama's attack ads and money couldn't hand it to him. Hate Hillary for looking Presidential in her leadership ad, but don't discount her victory--and a big one it was.

[chery]

Poor Hillary! If she doesn't like the negative press, she can always adopt a new incarnatio­n... that of being a decent human being! She proved in Penn that she can turn herself into any character in order to get a vote, regardless of what she plans to do if elected! Iran was an interesting insight into her psyche! So now that we're convinced she's a man, baby... when do we get to see the real Hillary? With victimology, that never has to happen! She just sends out the minions to whine and complain about how unfair everyone is when they shout from the sidelines.­.. "the emperor has no clothes!".

[kizzie]

I am oh so sick of hearing that Hiillary voted for the war and Obamam didn't! Geez!!! Quit the blame game on the war. They were ALL given false information by the administration and had to make decisions based on this fact. It has been proven we were ALL lied to.
It is convenient that Obama misses voting on critical legislation when it's time to cast his vote. He wants to stay out of the "fray" when it is obvious that his decision could cast an opinion on where he really stands, and might influence our opinion of him. This makes me hesitant to join the stampede to suport him.
When this campaign is so close, why should Clinton drop out? This shows me that she is very viable. Quit??? Hell no! This means "We, the people" may have a real choice if we don't get sold down the river. What happens if he makes another gaffe on race or religion, or who knows what else. It made me stop and reconsider.
Let's let everyone vote in their prospective states and then decide who our candidate will be. It's called voting-- not hand picking by the higher powers that be. We all scream we want democracy, yet all we see is others trying to make our decisions for us. Enough.

[Jazzcomedian]

Very well said. She reviewed the intelligence and made a decision. Obama wasn't there to make that decision, so we really don't know how he would've voted in the crucible. Personally I'm not comfortable with all his "present" votes on issues. This is a war.for this nomination--and that's the way it should be. In fact as a citizen, I think that a balls out fight to the convention and credentials fight would be both fascinating and instructive about both candidates and our Democratic process.

[PioneerKing]

Hillary is the incumbent and should have been winning with greater numbers. She had nearly the entire political machine in PA working for her. Hillary should be worried that it is she who has not been able to put away Obama a freshman senator from Illinois.
Really people, Hillary has the "head of the democratic party former President Clinton," and nearly all of the democratic party establishment and old line funders supporting her as well as the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Richard Mellon Scaife supporting her. As for spending Hillary has folks spending through 527's for her. The real question that as the "most experienced candidate and as the candidate who has been working the scene for 35 years and planning this run for president as far back as 1996:
WHY HASN'T SEN. CLINTON CLOSED THE DEAL AND BEEN ABLE TO PUT THE CONTEST TO AN END? Why is it that a mere freshman senator from Illinois is doing so well in a fight against the Clintons?

[caral]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. Clinton knows how to fight to win when it counts and that's what we'll need in November against McCain.

Obama should decide how to play to win and stop blaming Clinton for doing that very thing. I expect her to go after every cast vote cast for her in FL and MI, so unless Obama wins over the voters he's losing, she'll have the most popular votes going into the convention. That will matter to the super delegates - who will decide on the nominee. Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing! - someone (I think Joe Paterno) once said.

[caral]

The paraphrased quote I used - Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing! - someone (I think Joe Paterno ) once said. Was used by Henry Sanders, Sports Illustrated, and may have been used by Paterno too.

[desmirl]

In other words, the Clintons should steal the nomination and ignore the voters. Good idea. And then watch millions of democrats (especially new democrats who got excited about politics because of the message of hope spelled out by Obama) stay home in November. This country produced the Clintons and will deserve the four years of McCain that Hillary's campaign guarantees.

[MaineMike]

Bush declared war on Science.

The Clintons have declared war on Mathematics.

[ohmercy]

how clever.

Your point is?

[Sioen]

The point is, we've seen what happens when you elect a president who can not or will not listen to reason. Who instead tries to bend reality to their fantasy. We don't want another one of those presidents.

[Arleang]

The math is that Clinton cannot win based on the numbers.

The other unfortunate fact is that because of the Clinton campaign "tactics" neither democrat is likely to win. For example, if she doesn't win, supposedly a huge number of PA women will vote for McCain.

If she does win, a whole lot of people will not vote, will vote for McCain, or in my case vote for Ralph Nader (almost the same as voting for McCain).

Hillary's negatives are not just large in number but personal affronts. I am a member of a large new camp who can't stand McCain, can't stand Clinton and if those are the choices will not our hold noses and vote for one or the other.

[Laprawler501]

This election will be decided by Super Delegates

[gerrylong]

OBAMA’S AMMUNITION

Regarding the Bosnia lie, Hillary said she made a mistake because it was late and she was tired.

Tim Russert brought up a clip showing her telling the same lie at 3:00 in the afternoon.

Obama has to get tough, or Hillary will win. Then McCain will get tough and beat Hillary.

Obama’s new theme should be:

“IF SHE’LL LIE TO THE PEOPLE AT 3:00 P.M.,
SHOULD SHE BE ANSWERING THE WHITE HOUSE PHONE AT 3:00 A.M.”

[RussnCA]

How about sticking to the issues like the economy, health care, world affairs and not getting bogged down in a campaign of character attacks and themes? He already has 90% of black Democratic voters on his side and a good number of elite, well-educated Democrats, he ought to work to earn the rest.

Lay off Bill Clinton, too -- after all, the major theme has come full circle... once again, "it is the economy, stupid!"

[ProfessionalGun]

Hillary worked to "earn" the blue collar vote. . . she knowingly mis-characterized Obama's statements, and failed to take a stand against ABC panelists who seemed dead-set on trivializing the election process rather than sticking to the issues you seem to agree are most important. Please don't fall prey to the Clinton tactic of playing a dirty trick and then immediately blaming the other side for doing it, instead.

[ReportThis]

People will "lay off" Bill Clinton when he stops his lies and ad hominem attacks on Obama.
Yesterday Slick Willie accused the Obama campaign of "playing the race card" -- against HIM! Later in the day, he falsely denied making the statement. There is no way on God's earth that the American public will permit that serial liar to reside again in the White House. (And that's without factoring in Hillary's own credibility problems.)

[hwebb54]

I pray that Obama does negative. It'll show him for the hypocrite that he has been behind the scene with his "media army" doing his dirty work.