Is the Clinton campaign undead?
By mw | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Ohio, Polls, Texas
I have been back and forth with Justin over the last couple of months on the likelihood of Clinton overcoming Obama’s momentum and winning the nomination. After watching the post-debate coverage over the weekend, I realize now that the Democratic race is indeed over, and apparently only Hillary Clinton and her campaign is tragically unaware of this fact. As Justin said in a post today: “…this is why Obama’s winning and it’s why he’ll continue to win.”
Justin is certainly in good company with this assessment. There is a virtual unanimity of views in in the blogosphere and mainstream media. The meme of the day: The Clinton Campaign is dead, why doesn’t she just do the right thing and get out with dignity? Some samples:
Kristopher at The World Around You says to “Put a Fork in Her“, while Bill Quick of the Daily Pundit prefers the “stick a fork in her” phrasing as does pundit guy and the Hub Blog.
Doug Mataconis is attending to the “Hillary Clinton Death Watch” , while Kos says no need, she is already dead. Larry Kudlow also says it is over, over, over, and The New York Times metaphorically sees a darkening horizon (but I am not sure if they are invoking a setting sun or an approaching storm or – you know – that thing that always happens before the dawn). The Seattle times prefers a boxing metaphor, putting Hillary Clinton “on the ropes“. Andrew Sullivan finds that Hillary Clinton in the rear view mirror is still closer and larger than he would like.
Hillary Clinton is also getting a lot of advice. Gordo advises that “Clinton should back off” and Jonathon Alter at Newsweek wants her to “get out now“. The Zaftig Redhead wrote Clinton an open letter and posted it at TPM saying “Cease campaign operations — NOW. Call a press conference. Preferably before the Ohio and Texas contests.”
All this advice. All this certainty. All this unanimity. Perhaps I should just admit now that I was wrong all along about the Clinton campaign’s prospects. But that begs the question – What is Hillary thinking? Everyone knows the campaign is dead. Why would she continue to subject us all to this completely pointless campaign?
After all, the only way she could pull this out, is if she won in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Even Bill Clinton understands that and has said as much. There is just no reason to think there is any possibility of that happening, unless you want to put some stock in the meaningless fact that SHE IS LEADING THE POLLS IN ALL THREE STATES (although a virtual tie in Texas). Why does she not understand that she must get out of the race with dignity even though SHE IS LEADING IN PENNSYLVANIA, LEADING IN OHIO, and LEADING IN TEXAS? Nobody knows. After all, that outcome would only give her victories for EVERY SINGLE BIG CITY STATE IN THE COUNTRY INCLUDING NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, CALIFORNA, MASSACHUSETTS, TEXAS, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, FLORIDA*, and MICHIGAN*, excepting only Illinois. ALL OF THEM.
Not sure what is wrong with this Caps Lock key. It appears to be sticking. Whatever.
Now some silly, uniformed amateur political dilettantes might think that three big state victories in a row would bring the Obama “10 in a row” momentum to a full, four-wheel-lockup, tire-screeching stop. Some might think the momentum would then be in Clinton’s favor, just in time to provide political cover for the super delegates to “vote their [arm-twisted] conscience†about what is best for the Democratic party in November. You know, like winning all the big states.
Of course that would be a big mistake to think like that. Don’t pay attention to that scenario Hillary. Just get out. Don’t keep fighting. It’s all over. Please! Please! Consider these quotes and face reality:
Rasmussen says that Obama has an insurmountable lead in the polls, The Huffington Post says the Shaken Clinton Camp facing trench warfare after probable defeat and Keith Olbermann says “All right, if the polls are on the money there, it‘s Obama by at least a dozen… In that construction, what could possibly happen later on that would make this statement false: when the polls close… Barack Obama will have cinched the Democratic nomination?”. Justin Gardner adds “Obama Pulling Away In [the] Polls… The big bounce is upon us… This is extremely bad news for the Clinton camp.”
Oh wait. All of the links in that last paragraph were from just before the New Hampshire primary, which umm… Clinton won. My bad. No matter. That’s irrelevant. Just get out, Hillary. They will not all be wrong again. Just quit now for the good of the party and the country.
I guess I’ll throw in the towel also – Senator Clinton – let me add my voice to the chorus and net this out for you:
We don’t want a president that can pull off a come-from-behind, against-the-odds, back-against-the-wall victory using old fashioned hard ball politics. The Democratic Party does not want a fighter that might reverse the Obamentum at the end of the process with wins in Texas and Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Finally, we the American people don’t want a president that is willing to cut deals, trade favors, twist arms, and pull every trick in the book to win the nomination. If Obama has more elected delegates earned in a byzantine undemocratic nomination process that is over-weighted with caucuses and ignores Florida and Michigan, well that should be definitive, should it not?
I mean, in this world (It’s a small world after all), who would want a hard eyed, ball-cutting, arm-twisting, politically sophisticated, articulate, scary-smart policy wonk, who is a cutthroat negotiator, never gives up, figures every angle, a political realist and ruthless bitch sitting in the oval office and leading our country?
No, no, no – we don’t want that.
What we really want is the inspirational leader of a children’s crusade.
Can we fix it? “Yes we can.”
* You know what the asterik is for.
Excerpted and x-posted at Divided We Stand United We Fall
This entry was posted on Monday, February 25th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Ohio, Polls, Texas. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
If I’m going down, it’s with guns blazing.
February 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Billary withdrawing would be the best thing for the US.
But what about Saudi Arabia and all the $$$ they have given to the Bush-Clinton??
February 25th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Marilyn Manson for president!!!!
February 25th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Do you love your guns? Yeah
God? Yeah
And Government?
Do you love your guns? Yeah
God? Yeah
And Government?
Do you love your guns? Yeah
God? Yeah
And Government?
Do you love your guns? Yeah
God? Yeah
And Government?
Fuck yeah
February 25th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
It’s about time someone linked Bob the Builder. The first time I saw someone gushing about “Yes We Can” I was wondering how long it would take people to realize that the messiah had once again “borrowed” from a literary master far greater than him.
February 25th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Well – I’m not sure what Saudi Arabia and Marilyn Manson have to do with this, but there is a lot I don’t understand.
Rob,
I thought about doing a “Bob the Builder” mash-up but no need, several you-tubers beat me to it. There are some variations on the theme out there.
It would be funny as hell if Obama adopted “Bob the Builder” theme music for the campaign.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Just to set the record straight, the “Clinton Should Back Off ” post does not call for Clinton to drop out of the race. It calls on her to stop launching baseless attacks against Obama (and, I would now add, stop circulating photos meant to emphasize his ethnicity and alleged Muslim ties), and it calls on her to refrain from courting delegates who have been pledged to Obama.
Clinton’s tactics are very divisive, and they’ll greatly hurt the party if she continues. If she wins the nomination with her Swift Boat tactics, then she’ll have a much harder time fighting for the changes that we need to make in order to clean up the mess left behind by the Bush administration. So if she can win on the issues, fine. But she should back off from the strategy of using unfounded attacks and backroom deals to win the nomination.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
One question I’ve wondered about HRC is how will she make sure Bill’s pants stay around his waist and not his ankles if she’s elected President?
I can only imagine the honeypots that would be dangled in front of Bill by Republicans, let alone any country that wants to embarrass the USA. Or is that an issued that isn’t of concern?
February 25th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
wow, /snark_on ! But yeah, anyone who counts a Clinton out of a political contest should watch his/her/its back.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Clinton’s campaign has become a Sleaze Factory.
February 25th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Gordo,
Just to further set the record straight, my exact quote in the post…
… is completely consistent with your statement. I did not say you were calling for her to drop out. I did say that Alter was calling for her to drop out.
That said, you did use the “stick a fork in her campaign” phrase in that post.
Also I’d point you to my comment on Justin’s “give Clinton the benefit of the doubt” post regarding bloggers buying hook, line, and sinker into the Obama campaign’s much more effective smear of the Clinton campaign over this truly stupid picture. Do you really believe the Clinton’s are so stupid as to think that publishing that picture would change votes? On the other hand, smearing the Clinton campaign as sleazy will change votes.
February 25th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
Well, they thought that their ridiculous plagiarism charge would work, so I’d have to say yes, they are that stupid. Tellingly, the Clinton campaign failed to issue a denial.
And I don’t know if you could say I was offering advice. I was pointing out that an ethical person would not use the tactics that the Clinton campaign has stooped to in recent days. So in this case, I’m using “should” to make a point about ethics, which isn’t the same thing as giving advice.
February 25th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Adam–
If I thought Clinton was the best choice, I wouldn’t give Bill’s extracurricular activities a second thought. After all, I supported him back in 1992 even after he admitted to having affairs. So why wouldn’t I back someone who’s never been credibly charged with adultery?
February 25th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
The question isn’t limited to whether she can win Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, but how much she’d win them by if she did win. Since it isn’t winner take all that makes a big difference. Obama won Missouri, but by such a slim margin that the delegates were evenly split.
February 25th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Jim S,
My point, is that winning those three states changes the game, no matter what the margin.
If Obama still has more delegates after losing three big states in a row, but is still within a 150-200 delegates, then its a tie. The Superdelegates can, will and should decide. that is there job. That is why they exist, to make the best decision for the Democratic Party.
Clinton will have a great argument to make to the superdelegates, that she is the best candidate for the Dems in November, based on that finish. You can agree with it or not, but it is a good argument. If she takes those three states, I think she wins that argument and the nomination.
February 25th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Gordo,
Ok. But if someone told me that I “should” do something – I’d assume they were giving me advice. Unless they were threatening me. It’s all in the inflection.