And while Clinton is creating and validating Republican lines of attack against Obama, it is important to remember how pointless her kneecapping is:
But we look ahead to next week’s vote in Pennsylvania a bit differently: How many delegates might each candidate win in Pennsylvania, which is the most populous of the states and territories that have yet to vote?
That answer will be mainly determined not by the sum of the votes Clinton and Obama win in Pennsylvania, but rather by the state’s parts. Pennsylvania will send 187 Democratic delegates to the party’s national convention in Denver this August, and most of them — 103 to be exact — will be allocated according to the votes the candidates receive in each of the state’s 19 congressional districts.
And a CQ Politics analysis of the political circumstances in Pennsylvania’s congressional districts, detailed below, projects an edge to Clinton — but by just 53 district-level delegates to 50 for Obama under the Democratic Party’s proportional distribution rules.
These numbers suggest that Clinton, even with a victory in Pennsylvania, would make only a small incremental gain against Obama’s overall lead in the delegate race.
Even if she blows him out (and I expect her to win by 6-12 pts), she won’t make up any real ground in the delegate race, which, as we all know (except, apparently, at Clinton HQ), is what matters. All she has is the hope that the super-delegates will give it to her, and the only way that is going to happen is if she absolutely destroys his chances at electability. And she has to do just that, because if the supers give Clinton the nomination under any circumstance other than one in which Obama is completely ruined, expect large swaths of Democrats to bail in the general. Forget the AA vote.
That is her gambit. That is her only hope. She won’t win North Carolina, Indiana will be so close as to give marginal gains, and all she has is this last hope that she can knee-cap him and get it from the supers. Of course, she most likely won’t succeed, and instead we will have a crippled Obama limping into the general against a united Republican party armed with a half year of Clinton video clips calling Obama elitist and out of touch and unelectable and stating she takes him at his word that he is not a stealth muslim. By the end of the week I fully expect her to be asking whether or not he is a Marxist.
What a clusterfuck.
some guy
“I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused.” For me, anyway, it’s better just to laugh at the TT’s latest flailing. And I’m not worried about the Repubs using video clips of the TT in the general–everyone knows she’s a liar. If anything, it would help Obama.
isit2009yet
All part of her strategy…McCain in ’08, Clinton in ’12. She’s not a Democrat, she’s another Lieberman…a party of one.
nightjar
Well, it’s all over for Obama now.
Teak111
The Clinton people must be really digging deep into the Obama files to find more ammunitions for knee capping. Meanwhile, the GOP and McSame sit back biding thier time watching the cracks grow bigger, pinching themselves for the luck. Christ, first Ralph Nader and the Supremes, then the undertaker know as John Kerry, and now Hillary. Why does this party continually destroy itself?
Dork
The superdelegates in July (August?) determine who’s the candidate. She thinks she can convince them to ‘switch sides’. If she can, all of this delegate counting is moot.
This is what she’s banking on, IMO. Thus, she continues to fight. To change the math.
Ugh
what isit2009yet said: toss enough dirt on Obama such that he loses to McCain so she can ride tot he rescue in 2012.
Jo Fish
This is HRC’s Ralph Nader moment. She must be (well, she is) so proud of herself.
ThymeZone
Welp, the morning news is trending toward “polls show Clinton elitist attack have little effect” stories, despite the best efforts of the MSM to gin up this completely phony controversy.
I stole this from DKos, it’s from the relevant front page post:
As I said to another thread, MSM has crossed the threshold from just being the dumb cousin in the basement, to being an actively evil and toxic force in our public life. It’s really time for citizens to do what they can to let these assholes know that enough is enough.
I’ve resisted this conclusion as long as I can, but I now totally agree with DougJ, this isn’t tolerable any more. The stakes are too high and the evil and willfully ignorant products of MSM cannot be tolerated any longer.
We now have a situation where the entire media has descended to basically the level of Rush Limbaugh, and will sit there and tell you to your face that they aren’t to blame for the fact that the country is in an ongoing train wreck, and how dare you accuse of them of having anything to do with it?
Well, I do accuse them, and I am out to find ways to defeat them, put them out of business, and marginalize them. And I am giving more money to Obama.
Dave
It just goes to show there is no political election the Democratic Party can’t fuck up. A brain-addled otter could beat McCain this year, but the Democrats will still find a way to throw the White House to the GOP.
tom.a
The superdelegates in July (August?) determine who’s the candidate. She thinks she can convince them to ‘switch sides’.
She is totally delusional. Hillary needs to convince 2/3 of the remaining superdelegates to support her, and considering how much crap she’s thrown at Obama since February she’s actually lost superdelegates and he’s gained (a lot). The media really needs to bring this to an end, the Clintons never will, not until the day after the Convention and even then it will be very soft support for Obama.
cleek
it was nice, wasn’t it, for all those months, when it seemed like the Dems were going to get the Presidency? it felt like things were going right, for a change. hope was in the air. and then Hillary decided she was more important than everything else. and all that hope was deflated.
i suppose the lesson here is to make sure you enjoy hope itself, while you can.
Stooleo
If this is her strategy, its pretty dumb. I think there will be a huge amount of blowback if she continues to hamstring Obama.
Wisdom
It has been interesting to watch the Dems’ bubbles burst. First Harry and Nancy were going to take charge and clean things up. All they accomplished was alienating their own base, making it safer for terrorists, and plunging Congressional approval ratings even lower. I won’t ever imply these folks aren’t rocket scientists – you have to really work hard to do all that.
Now the standard-bearer from NY is the new Hitler, reviled by JC even more than the guy he voted for twice, and Transcenderman keeps stumbling over crazy social and verbal associations.
Bring it on, guys, bring it on. The people are going to see you just aren’t a serious party with real ideas.
The Populist
While Clinton hurts Obama’s chances does she not realize she is hurting her own cause as well?
Nobody will come out of this cleanly.
Larime The Gimp
On the bright side, if there were any truly nasty skeletons in Obama’s closet we’d know by now.
My wife has come over from the Pink Side. If Hillary is pissing HER off, she done fucked up.
The Populist
If McCain wins, the voters BETTER make the GOP pay via Congress and Senate elections. It had better be an ironclad, veto proof majority or else we are fucked.
Rick Taylor
I really don’t think that’s her plan. If that’s what she was up to, her strategy would be to keep her attacks measured, get some private conversations leaked where her campaign worried about Obama’s electability, certainly eschew any talk of overturning the delegate count or the popular vote or pledged delegates changing their votes, and bow out gracefully, getting ready to say I told you so in 2012.
As it is, she’s burning her own political capital. I’m seeing posts by a lot of people like me who liked her when this started, and who are stunned at the lengths she’s gone to to win. I don’t think she’d be the nominee in 2012 after this election.
I really don’t see Hillary Clinton as an evil Machiavellian politician. In some ways I think it would be better if she was. She’s just almost mechanically pulling on anything she can find to try to win in 2008, even past the point where it’s possible.
isit2009yet
I read that two Supreme Court justices are holding on, hoping to retire with the new administration…Ginsburg is one.
cleek
“Wisdom” chose an ironic handle. i like that in a handle.
Face
Too bad that’ll make it a GOP Supreme Court until prolly 2028.
Tsulagi
What were the odds? There was this GBCH end to a long post….
Less than 24 hours later…
Svensker
Real ideas = torture, bombing countries that haven’t attacked us, making the President into a King, trashing the economy.
Maybe the American people are too far gone to realize that their leaders are not only war criminals, but jibbering incompetents.. But don’t pretend that the party of incompetence and war criminality is “serious” and full of “real ideas”.
Signed,
A Former Republican
crw
Here’s hoping Obama keeps it close in Pennsylvania. If actual voting proves all this crap to be as irrelevant as we think it is, I expect some high profile super delegates to finally weigh in and end this. Yes, I’m talking about Al Gore and John Edwards.
Ugh
could be, or could be she’s counting on people forgetting after four years (especially four more years of republican disasters).
But why else is she continuing to hang on?
Rick Taylor
Elitist! As Talk Left will tell you, it’s not the delegates but the popular vote that matters, as measured by ignoring caucus states and counting two states no one campaigned in, one in which Obama wasn’t on the ballot (but of course that was his fault, so no one should complain). By that count, Obama is only slightly in the lead so far. Should Hillary gain the lead by this measure, it would could very well persuade 80% of the superdelegates to cast their vote for Hillary regardless of the vote in their own states out of a powerful respect for the will of the people, as reflected in the popular vote.
johninpt
The silver lining of this nonsense is that Hillary has finally shown her true colors. I can only hope that under the Obama Administration the strengthened Democratic U.S. Senate majority will utterly marginalize Sheberman along with her scumbag role model.
Scotty
Gore could hasten the ending of the bickering fairly quickly by throwing his support behind Obama. I can’t see him doing it for Clinton at any stage though.
Bob
I was reading a BBC report that stated that Hills was still in the running as she was hoping to have more popular votes, whilst Obama had the delegate vote.
The idea was, that due to ‘Gore Guilt’ the Super delegates would be more likely to vote for the Popular vote winner, than the delegate vote winner.
does this make sense and is it accurate??
The Other Steve
I hope, and get the feeling that come May the super delegates are going to move.
crw
Scotty:
Exactly. My point is, Al Gore isn’t going to expend any political capital on this fight. If Obama can’t keep it close in PA (thus showing he’s a relatively safe bet and continues to have broad support), Gore will just sit back and let this play out to the natural end.
Cassidy
This has always been our election to lose. Unfortunately, the party is in fine form these days, doing what it does best.
A Different JC
The reason why FLOTUS (a.k.a. the Tulza Tiger) is still a convincing contender in this race is because her team has successfully re-written the narrative after every defeat.
Before every contest Hillary claims X will happen and it doesn’t. But they swiftly say, after the contest, that they expected non-X, in fact non-X means victory.
For example, she won Ohio but lost Texas. Before those primaries, we were told – by pundits, and Hillary people alike – that she had to win big to stay in the race. Well she didn’t win big, in fact she lost half, yet her group reframed Ohio-Texas as confirmation that she must keep fighting.
And who can forget the reframing – still ongoing – of Michigan and Florida.
What needs to be done NOW, before Pennsylvania, is for the DNC and the Associated Uncommitted Superdelegates Inc. to state clearly that if Hillary gets X in Pennsylvania, then she’s still viable, and if it’s non-X they want her to drop out.
If past performance is any indication, she will not get X and the pressure to step down will be hard for her to deny.
Stooleo
I’ve wondered why she has been so willing to destroy her own credibility. Perhaps when she was the inevitable one, she made a few too many promises and now with the election unsure, shes doing anything to win, otherwise shes totally fucked.
ThymeZone
Any bets on whether the HBeast will, after losing the Dem nomination, make an independent run for the White House?
kwAwk
Hi Folks,
It’s time to quit blaming Hillary Clinton for all of Barrak Obama’s shortcomings. I understand how you all are in love of Obama, but he isn’t perfect. If this hurts him it is his own fault and the constant attempts to protect him from himself only weaken him.
I can understand this from John, who apparently hasn’t been a Democrat all that long, but any of you other over the age of 30 should know by now that the absolute worst thing a Democrat can do is go bumbling about in the mine field of God, Guns & Gays in a clueless manner.
And of the talk about how Obama is right but just said it wrong is bullshit. People don’t turn to God, Guns & Gays because they are bitter.
The truth is the phenomenon he is describing is a case of Rural Values vs Urban Values. When Rural people think of guns they think of hunting, getting food and commraderie. When Urban folks think of guns they think of dead kids on the sidewalk.
Urban areas are by nature more cosmopolitan, thus if you live in an urban area it requires of you to develop a tolerance for people who are different from you, which is why gays are more openly tolerated. Rural areas tend to be more homogenous so people simply are not used to a mixing of different types of people so they are not as open to it.
This type of gaffe by Obama really is likely to lose the Democrats an election which they should win easily. These types of urban elitist comments very well have been used to define candidates for decades now and we should play Reagan’s stupid 11th Commandment game among ourselves.
*End of Rant*
kwAwk
Sorry, that should say ‘shouldn’t play Reagan’s stupid 11th Commandment game’.
Zifnab
kwAwk? Your spoofing is weak. Try again later.
J. Michael Neal
Eh. I’m still of the opinion that Obama is going to win in November, and do it fairly easily. McCain is a terrible candidate in a moment that’s highly toxic for the GOP. While I think that Clinton’s behavior is hurting Obama’s electibility, I don’t think that it’s going to make a difference.
kwAwk
Zifnab – Your attempts to pretend that Obama is something he isn’t is turning the Democratic party against itself. Hillary is responsible for making her own mistakes, but she somehow becomes responsible for Obama’s mistakes too.
Seriously, you guys perpetuate the stereotype of weak pansyass Democrats that can’t fight for what they believe in. Leave Obama Alone! Can’t you see how weak and defenseless he is?
Zifnab
Yikes. That really would be terrifying. I kinda doubt it. Hillary knows she can’t win without the Democratic Ticket on her shoulder. She would be literally handing the election to McCain. I think the party as a whole would actually move to stop her in that case. I don’t see McCain seriously winning more than the low forties in the popular vote, but that’s still enough to swing him.
That said, if Hillary was crazy enough to stay in, I’ve heard more than a few people – namely older Hispanics – claim that they’d vote for Hillary over McCain, but McCain over Obama. So she could actually peal enough Republicans to keep Obama alive. And it would be absolutely hilarious to watch McCain’s meager war chest try to wade into battle with a pair of political judgernauts. He’d have the base support, which give him a path to victory, but he’d be steam-rolled in any public appearance.
So even in this case, I could see Obama winning. I think there are enough swing independent voters to shore up the Hillary deserters. But I don’t see any path to victory for Hillary, herself. She might try to hamstring Obama after he’s secured the nomination, but I doubt she’ll actually make a run as an Indie candidate.
jake
That sounds familiar:
When we see a decrease of violence in Iraq we’ll know we’re winning! An increase of violence in Iraq means we’re winning!
I wonder how much Hill is paying Karl Rove.
PK
I think she is hanging on because she does not know when to let go and accept a dignified defeat. Fighting is what she does best. I think she has wanted the presidency for so long that she cannot and will not be able to accept defeat.
Can you imagine how furious she must be-losing to a two bit first term senator. After all she put up with, all the humiliation from Bill, all the crap from the right wing and how she was so close and yet she lost (because she cannot win this nomination, whatever the media or her people say).
I am almost beginning to feel sorry for her.
Rick Taylor
I don’t believe it. I still think she’s loyal to the Democratic party, she’s just talked herself into believing she’s the party’s best chance to win in November. I’m still expecting her to turn around and work to bring the party together behind Obama when she finally gives up or officially looses the nomination fight. Of course I’ve been wrong about her up to this point, so I’m not putting any money down.
ed
A Clinton campaign type question for the Obama camp to use, should they choose to stoop to a Clinton level:
So Hillary, is it true that the last orgasm you had was when you shot Vince Foster, or is Patti Solis Doyle still in the saddle even after her firing?
Just go away, sleazeball.
Pooh
This is like the perfect storm of Hilbot self-delusion, projection and outright idiocy. My cap is doffed to thee, sir.
MDee
I think a decent percentage will bail either way if she gets it. Especially the youth and many new Democrats that Obama brought on board. Oh, and forget the Moderates and Independents. The fundies will come out strong just for having the pleasure of voting against her.
Turns out the one shouting “he’s unelectable” the loudest turns out to be the one who is likely to be the most unelectable in the general.
I’d rather take my chances with Obama against McCain because with Clinton, I suspect her unfavorables have no where to go but up. The rib-sated, back-rubbed media will make damn sure of that.
I agree with this quote from 2006
Of course, he’s (Dick Harpootlian) now an Obama supporter so we can pretty much discount this observation (even if her unfavorables support it).
Turns out he was wrong though. She can change minds. Look at how hard she has worked to change the minds of Democrats who used to like and defend her. There are numerous Democrats finding themselves disliking her on levels they previously couldn’t even begin to imagine possible.
Even worse, some are suffering the indignities of their republican friends saying, “See, I told you so.”
It’s fucking depressing.
srv
Pooh, you need to comment more.
kwAwk
lol Pooh. You remind me the Democrats in the run up to the 2000 election. Man this will be easy! Surely nobody in this country will vote for George W. Bush, the guy is horrible and clueless. We’ve got this thing nailed! Wait what the hell just happened!
Okay, we’ll get our revenge in 2004, 2000 was just a fluke! Yeah that’s it! Nobody will vote for such a screw-up like George W. Bush again! They surely see what a pathetic loser George W. Bush is NOW! WTF? We lost again! VOTE FRAUD VOTE FRAUD!!!!!
Yep, its 2008 now, no more Bush. Whew!!! And we’re sure this time! Nobody will ever vote for an out of touch loser like McCain! We have this thing nailed!!! We’re a shoooo-in.
Pooh
They like me, they really like me…
A Different JC
The comparisons between Hillary and George W Bush are frightening. No, not similarities in politics but in attitude and tactics.
How many times did Hillary ignore a losing strategy just because she was too stubborn to admit failure?
How many stumblebum people has she kept on board because she treasures loyalty over competence?
The list could go on, but the similarities are manifest. The two share the same traits because they are both untalented people who have been thrust through circumstance and kinship into a leadership position higher than they would have attained otherwise.
The are the traits of shallow, scared people who bully others to make up for their shining inadequacies. I don’t think I need to convince people here that Bush is a bully, but Hillary is as well. Someone who attacks below the belt and then plays the victim card when counter-attacked is a bully.
When people say they will vote for McCain over Hillary it’s often because while McCain will have the same POLICIES of Bush, he has a different attitude: confidence, even honesty (which is a crock for McCain, but he projects it well).
A handy chart:
Bush – bad POLICIES, bad PERSONALITY
McCain – bad POLICIES, good PERSONALITY
Hillary – good POLICIES, bad PERSONALITY
Obama – good POLICIES, good PERSONALITY
Pooh
kwAwk,
I’m sure your point is germane to some comment somewhere in the blogosphere. Goodness knows there are enough of them. How it relates to me calling you a fool, I’m not sure.
To paraphrase P.J. O’Rourke, you believe that all blog commenters are tools, and then post yourself just to prove it.
Tom in Texas
I’m not asking to leave Obama alone. I say keep up the attack. Hillary needs to bring up her duck hunting days by her grandpappy’s cabin at every opportunity. She should slam the reliable Democratic base in San Francisco and Massachusetts that has supported her and her husband for decades at every chance.
This attack doesn’t change the narrative for Obama at all. He has maintained that McCain is awful and Hillary is awful lite. He can just keep hammering on his original theme, with this latest kerfluffle and every move Hillary makes encapsulating it as further evidence.
Kevin
Hillary Clinton is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.
myiq2xu
All they have to do is wait for him to open his mouth.
I find it highly amusing to see these mutually exclusive memes getting pushed here:
1. Hillary isn’t laying a glove on him
2. She’s “kneecapping” him for the general election
BTW – Hillary won Texas
A Different JC
She lost Texas. 94 to 99. Didn’t you hear? Or, to put it in words you may understand: Hillary ‘won’ Texas, depending on what the meaning of ‘won’ is.
Or, to echo jake’s point above, Hillary is winning the nomination in the same way the surge is working and Brownie did a heckuva job in New Orleans.
Rick Taylor
People are arguing that Hillary’s attacks have virtually no chance of causing Obama to loose the nomination because he’s already too far ahead in the delegate count, but that they could hurt him in the general election, by complementing the talking points the GOP will be using against him. One could disagree with one or the other point, but they’re not inherently contradictory.
Tom in Texas
Sometimes evidence of “opposing memes” is just two sides expressing their opinion, smart guy. Some feel this is a fatal blow for Obama. Particularly considering his handling of Wright (a much more toxic issue IMO), it is my opinion that this doesn’t hurt Obama much, if at all. He is openly mocking Hillary; while I’ll grant that’s not an effective way to gain her supporters’ trust, I think we are beyond the point of convincing them anyway. If they are hunky dory with Hillary running for the Democratic Primary as Sean Hannity, they are beyond the point of rational discussion — mockery is the only option left.
sglover
You call yourself “Wisdom”?!?! But then, the salient trait of right-wingers is a complete absence of self-awareness.
I want Obama to win, but all the chatter about HRC’s methods is verging on hysteria. What I see are are two competitors for party nomination trading pretty standard blows — which will be forgotten long before the main event in November. What’s more, Clinton’s really not doing herself any favors: Obama’s impressively adept at parrying her attacks, so that each one she tries makes her look smaller, more clumsy.
Right-wing dunces like “Wisdom” can gloat all they want. In fact, they should try to wring as much enjoyment out of every little pseudo-“controversy” as possible. Because the hard truth is that the Party of War, Theft and Stupidity is in for a 1932-scale stomping. A richly deserved one. No amount of plain-vanilla Dem intra-party squabbling is going to make people forget that the Republican Party has pissed away rivers of American treasure.
w vincentz
I don’t know when the next Clinton/Obama debate is, but whenever it is, all Barack needs to do is show up in a yellow sports jacket (flag lapel pin, of course), and a raggedy blond wig.
Game OVAH!
Jack H.
The only thing that makes sense to me is that Hillary is staying in to get the VP job. It’s probably her only chance at ever becoming President at this point.
Does anyone really believe that the Superdelegates would jettison the first black Presidential candidate after he won more delegates? Not going to happen. (Same would apply if Hillary were ahead as the first woman candidate). If Obama loses in November won’t a huge % of Dems blame Hillary for tarnishing Obama thereby killing any chance of her being the nominee next time round? I laughed at the nominee Gore idea when it was first floated, but if Hillary makes Obama unelectable she may simultaneously makes herself unelectable at the convention. Then again I’ve been drinking Glenmorangie all afternoon.
kwAwk
Pooh Says:
kwAwk,
I’m sure your point is germane to some comment somewhere in the blogosphere. Goodness knows there are enough of them. How it relates to me calling you a fool, I’m not sure.
To paraphrase P.J. O’Rourke, you believe that all blog commenters are tools, and then post yourself just to prove it.
______________________
Pooh – It relates to you and all of commenters here who want to make Obama into an untouchable. I was just about the biggest Hillary hater at the beginning of the election cycle, not wanting to return to the stupid games of the 90s. But now that it comes to a conclusion, Hillary is the best of the Dem candidates left standing.
What most drives me away from Obama is the nature of his supporters who act just like Bushies in that they excuse every faux pas he makes and irrational hatred of him. He isn’t responsible for himself apparently.
Is this really what we have to look forward to for the next 4 years if Obama is elected? Constant shrieks of pain if anybody dares criticize Obama? Another 4 years of explaining what the President really meant when he says something stupid?
Onto other things, can anybody answer me this? In the past year that has been the Republican primary cycle, can anybody point to me just one time where any of the Republican candidates has said that what really needs to happen to solve our nations problems is to work more with the Democrats and respect their point of view?
Obama’s vision of this election is a Win/Win situation for the Republicans. If they win the election they get their own point of view rammed through, and if Obama wins they get half of their own point of view rammed through. Obama has capitulated before the fight has begun and called himself a hero for doing so.
Cyrus
It feels really, really weird to be more optimistic than most in any given crowd, but I think you’re overthinking this. You could just as easily and accurately have said “… instead we will have Obama going into the general after months in which the Democratic Party got more press coverage than the Republicans, all the easy attacks on him will be old news, and most of them are so contradictory that only the wingiest of wingnuts will even take them seriously. By the end of the week I fully expect her to be inadvertently calling attention to the fact that she and McCain both come from an earlier generation whose politics are less relevant.”
PaulB
Since nobody here, or anywhere else, for that matter, has called for that, I’m afraid you don’t have a point.
You’re entitled to your opinion. I’m entitled to disagree.
Oh, for pete’s sake — take some responsibility for your own self! To pretend that Obama’s supporters have driven you to Clinton is both disingenuous and ludicrous. And to pretend that Obama’s supporters “act just like Bushies” is even sillier.
LOL…. Oh, you mean like the Clinton supporters who shriek in pain when you point out the stupidity of some of her recent attacks? It’s called “politics”; deal with it.
Tell you what: when Obama says something stupid, let us know.
John McCain.
Have you spent any time at all actually examining Obama’s track record? Had you done so, you’d not have made such a foolish remark.
LOL…. And this was even dumber. Nice job!
PaulB
I just don’t see it being offered to her and I just don’t see her accepting it (or even thinking that it would be offered to her). The inside story supposedly is that she really does believe that Obama is unelectable and that she has a better chance against McCain. So she’s sticking with this under the assumption that the super delegates will come around to her point of view once they see Obama constantly under fire.
nightjar
Yea, it’s got to be Hillary, the straight shootin’ oracle of truth, justice, and the American way. No one will have to explain what she really meant, they’ll just assume she made up the whole godamn thing, whatever it be.
PaulB
So you’ve said before. How’s that working out in the polls for you, moron?
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
I would actually shoot my TV if I thought it would do any good, but it won’t so I just stopped watching the morons. Their advertisers can shove it.
Winning the Presidency is the reward that you and I and the rest of the universe owe to Hillary for putting up with Bill for all these years, and especially for not leaving him or cutting off his junk with a bread knife during Monicagate. Please keep that in mind. We owe her. Big time.
Don’t be a welcher.
Noboby likes a welcher.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
NobobyNobody likes a welcher.PaulB
Um, if you can find me a single Democratic pundit, politician, or blogger who said anything even remotely resembling this, I’d love to see it. 2000 was a tough contest and everyone knew damn well it would be, even though Gore did win the popular vote.
Dear heart, you left out 2006. Remember that? The one that everyone said was going to favor Democratic candidates and did, in fact, favor Democratic candidates?
Nobody is claiming “shoo-in”. We’re claiming that circumstances favor the Democratic candidate this year. That doesn’t mean that they are guaranteed to win.
You know, we’ll have a lot more satisfying discussion if you respond to what people actually say instead of simply listening to the voices in your own head.
PaulB
No chance of that, I believe. She knows damn well that her only chance is right now and that once it disappears, it’s gone for good.
nightjar
Act two, curtain please.
Yep, can’t wait for when Bill get’s up to explain Madame Prez’s latest fabulism.
“Oh, it’s nothin’ really–didn’t mean what she said 5 times, she was just up all night chuckin’ silverware and skillets at me, and besides being over sixty, she’s crazy as a swamp chicken anyways”.
Dave
Hey John,
Do you spend much time at Al Giordano’s blog, The Field? Of all the election analyses I read, his has been consistently on the mark from day one. I always find it a comfort whenever NIAPS pulls out the shovel and starts throwing crap in her own face.
http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1057
betamu
Another commenter stated above “People don’t turn to God, Guns & Gays because they are bitter.” Well, actually I think some might, but that was not the point I thought he was making, and I think many people are willfully misunderstanding this.
In my mind, he was saying that after being promised relief and support from politicians about really large issues on health care, jobs, security and such, and after decades of being unable to get them to listen and really proved this relief, they realize, with some bitterness that they HAVE no voice with regards to these matters. They also realize that they DO have a voice on issues like “God, Guns & Gays” , so they often vote accordingly. The larger point was that, by electing him, they would realize that thay had indeed been heard, on these larger issues, by someone that would bring them, finally, some of the long-promised relief.
Now, nobody that knows me would EVER say that I was gullible or easily fooled by a politician’s promises, but I got a positive message out of his statements, and his comments and explanations after the thing blew up were reassuring.
oh really
Having voted in ten previous presidential elections; having taught in the public schools; having lived through two Reagan terms and two George W. Bush terms; and having closely watched this campaign and the behavior of the media and Clinton I no longer believe there is any hope for this country.
Brachiator
So its up to the voters in PA and IN. They have seen Senator Clinton and her campaign team at their craven, duplicitous worst. The question is whether they can smell what the Tuzla tigress is cooking, and whether they want a taste of it.
Or, they can put a stop to it. They don’t even have to be bitter about it.
Bob In Pacifica
Hillary is not going to win. She cannot gain appreciably in pledged delegates. After the add-on delegates are awarded she’ll have to pull in around 90% of the remaining superdelegates. And how have the superdelegates broken since Super Tuesday? Around 70 to 10 for Obama. After her abhorrent treatment of Al Gore over the weekend, I doubt he’ll ever endorse her. Rumor has Gore and Jimmy Carter endorsing Obama.
It’s all over but the sniper fire.
ksmiami
She really is a monster… sorry, but the longer this has dragged out the worse it has become for Hillary.
w vincentz
Hey MyIqX0,
I don’t usually respond to you, though I enjoy watching others tear you up.
That said, I’m kinda gettin’ a picture of what motivates you.
Did Hil-liar offer you a position in in her “upcoming” administration? Like, maybe “Public Information Officer”, or maybe “Spin Doctor”, or perhaps “Administrator of Truth”?
Is this the payback for the dates you’ve taken Chelsea on and not impregnating her?
What is the payback you expect from the Terror of Tuzla?
Soylent Green
KwAwk–Your logic is escapable.
We’re getting awfully worked up here about the alleged damage being done to Obama by the Monster and by the trivializing MSM, as though either will control the outcome in November.
I thought this election was going to be won by turnout more than anything else. If you poll 100 people and get a split — like the ones showing McCain ahead right now — that is not a measure of who will turn out to vote.
Also, and correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t pollsters still limited to land lines? Therefore skewing their results toward older folks and failing to record the views of the cellphone generation.
If the Obama phenomenon is for real, the Democratic turnout will wash over McCain like a flood, especially as he is a weak candidate with less than enthusiastic support from broad swaths of his party. That is, unless the Hillary deadenders are so bonkers that they stay home in large numbers.
Corner Stone
God. John Cole – shut the fuck up for God sake. Could you suck on the anti-HRC teat any harder?
Analysis from a guy who voted Republican – *REPUBLICAN* – his whole life is pretty much worthless. Tell us again – how many years did you swallow the anti-Clinton line from your butt buddies? And now we’re supposed to see your evaluation as unbiased?
You’re just another OFB.
Corner Stone
“She should slam the reliable Democratic base in San Francisco and Massachusetts that has supported her and her husband for decades at every chance.”
True. And Obama should keep doing everything he can to shut down votes in FL and MI. Good job Second Coming of Christ!
Corner Stone
Unity ponies for all!!!!
nightjar
Can you parrot any more wingnut talking points for us?
TenguPhule
Sometimes I envy the Iraqi political system.
Now is one of those times.
Soylent Green
Yesterday I watched Hannity and Rove repeating every word of Hillary’s latest spiel, as though her campaign had just faxed it to them.
Corner Stone, I think you owe your new comrades in arms a hearty thanks. You’re pissed that Cole used to be a Republican but you’re glad to have them on your team now.
Hillbots, please switch parties already. McCain/Clinton is the ticket you want.
JackieBinAZ
If Hillary genuinely believed that Obama doesn’t have a prayer in the general, she would have conceded by now with her political capital and war chest intact or at the very least withheld the bridge-burning kitchen sink approach. That would have put her in prime position to ride to the rescue in 2012 with a better plan and all the righteousness of I-told-you-so. She knows full well that he is electable and that if he makes a wise choice for VP, it could be as long as 16 years before she has another shot and by then she’ll be older than McCain is now. This was her only chance and she knows it.
Conservatively Liberal
What is pretty funny about the name Wisdom chose is that being called wise is something that others who respect you bestow upon you. It is not something you can say you are because you believe it is so. Well, you can if you want to, but that does not change a thing except in your own mind. I am willing to bet that if you wanted to change your name to “Fucking Oblivious”, I am sure that nobody here would complain one bit.
If anything, I think everyone would be more than happy to bestow that title upon you.
kwAwk
Soylent Green – I think the pollsters have shown themselves to be pretty adept at accounting for the limits to being on land lines. I also believe that more often than not it has been Hillary that has over performed at the ballot box and not Obama.
I think the description of McCain as a weak candidate is a pretty good illustration of the phenomenon I’m talking about of Democrats under estimating their opponent, much in the way we under estimated George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. We need to get away from this mentality that says we will win because we think all of their candidates are stupid, senile or a combination of both.
McCain would be a very weak candidate in a Democratic Primary, but he is actually a pretty strong candidate in terms the general election with a lot of appeal to moderates and independents. On the issue of Iraq, don’t trust the poll numbers that say 70% of Americans want us out of Iraq ‘NOW’. If McCain is able to present a convincing stance that says he will be able to turn things around in Iraq, you’ll see a lot of people gravitate towards him. The brass ring of ‘victory’ could very well trump the more rational and reasonable position.
Keep in mind also that the next President may just appoint two or more Supreme Court Justices. Don’t for a minute think that the far right won’t be keeping their eye on that prize come November.
PaulB
Oh, garbage. All you have to do is keep hammering home that he’s Bush III, in foreign policy and in the economy. He’s been getting a free ride thus far; that’s going to change once the Democratic contest is resolved.
On Iraq, he’s got nowhere to go. “The surge” has taken a beating with recent events and there are no signs that anything is going to be better in Iraq once we start withdrawing troops this summer.
Right now, he’s neck-and-neck with the Democratic candidates but I don’t see him going anywhere but down if matters continue as they are now.
kwAwk
Democrats always see the Republican nominee as going nowhere but down. Oddly enough though in 7 of the last 10 elections it just hasn’t seemed to work out though.
Saying that McCain will be the Bush Part III is pretty much the same strategy that failed us for Bush Part II.
Soylent Green
I agree completely. I think half of them can be turned by the persuasion that we can win the war (whatever that means now) because that’s really what they want. Americans don’t like to lose, and after they have done so, to admit it.
I also am not underestimating McCain’s chances, which are looking better every day. That’s why I think that turnout is the key to this election.
PaulB
Sigh…. This is neither 2000 (where Gore actually won an election that *nobody* thought would be close), nor 2004. This election is going to be more like 2006, since nothing significant has changed since that election. Let’s run through this, shall we?
– McCain’s position on Iraq is enormously unpopular. Even the polls that say, “Regardless of whether matters improve”, show that majorities want us out of Iraq. His “100 years” comment was such a gift that the Republican Party has been tying itself into knots to pretend he didn’t say it.
– McCain’s position on the economy is enormously unpopular. The voters don’t yet know what it is, by and large, but when they do, they are not going to be happy. More tax cuts for the wealthy, more deficits, more whaling away at entitlements, more war, initial indifference to the housing crisis — all of these things can be, and will be, used to attack McCain. He has no defense, since his economic policies suck.
– The GOP blew it with Latino voters with their highly-publicized “illegal immigrant” push. Bush had actually managed to make inroads into that demographic in 2000 and 2004. In 2008, they are projected to return to the Democratic Party fold. Even though McCain wasn’t part of that stupidity, he can be tied to it.
– Republican voters are, by and large, unenthusiastic about McCain and unenthusiastic about the election. Democratic voters, on the other hand, have been registering in record numbers, including in states where they have never been a factor before (e.g., Idaho).
– The economy is in the toilet and unlikely to fully recover in time for the election. Bush and the Republicans own the economy and McCain is going to take the heat for their mismanagement.
– At every level of the government, the public favors Democrats over Republicans. Democrats will make inroads in both the House and the Senate and those enthusiastic voters eager to “throw the bums out” are also likely to vote for the top of the ticket.
This is just off the top of my head; there are other factors, as well. And against this, all we have from you is falsehoods about the 2000 election, a failure to recognize that circumstances have changed, and general gloom-and-doom backed up by nothing at all.
Oh, rubbish. This is not 2004, where Bush had not yet achieved the level of unpopularity he faces today. He’s the least popular president in the history of polling and nothing is going to change that before the election because Bush himself is incapable of change.
PaulB
Damn… that should be “won an election that *everybody* thought would be close.” Proofreading is my friend.
PaulB
And to repeat what I said above:
Nobody is claiming “shoo-in”. We’re claiming that circumstances favor the Democratic candidate this year. That doesn’t mean that they are guaranteed to win.
You know, we’ll have a lot more satisfying discussion if you respond to what people actually say instead of simply listening to the voices in your own head.
mere mortal
Golly, I was told that the popular vote was the most important thing, when it favored Obama. Ignoring the popular vote was evil and wrong, and would split the party in twain.
Before that I was told that counting delegates was evil and wrong, and would split the party in twain if we didn’t strictly abide by the Will of the People.
But that was when Obama had a superdelegate problem. Remember when the superdelegates were evil and wrong, and their voting for Clinton would split the party in twain?
Now Obama has a healthy lead in delegates, so all of the sudden, that’s not so evil or wrong after all. Because “the delegate race … is what matters.”
Very strange, this race. Very strange indeed.