Hillary's Bleak Outlook

[red states rule]

It is looking bad for Hillary (and Bill). Could it be the myth of the Clinton's is about to be crushed once and for all?

For years we have been told how the left loves the Clintons, and how the Clintons are unbeatable


Heilemann: Hillary's Bleak Outlook

snip

By now, of course, you’re savvy enough to understand that what really matters is the delegate count. And you know that, because of the principle of proportionality that governs the Democratic race, it’s hard for either side to pull away — except, that is, in the case of an absolute shellacking. But a shellacking is precisely what Obama administered to Clinton on Tuesday and in the elections over the weekend. Indeed, for the first time since Iowa, BHO is ahead of HRC in terms of committed delegates. He’s even ahead, by most counts, after superdelegates are factored in. According to Chuck Todd, the political director at NBC, for Clinton to regain her lead will require her to win more than 55 percent of the delegates up for grabs in the nineteen states that still remain to vote, which means carrying the states where she has a shot with roughly 60 percent of the vote.

That would be a tall order to fill under any circumstances — tall, but not impossible, in theory. The trouble is that the next two states on the calendar are Hawaii and Wisconsin on February 19. Hawaii is both a caucus state and Obama’s birthplace, so forget about that one. Wisconsin, by contrast, offers demographics that would seem to offer Clinton a chance: a big chunk of white working-class voters, a small population of African-Americans. Yet the Clinton squad appears, at the moment, to be writing off Wisconsin. While Obama is in the Badger State now, laying down his juju, HRC’s schedule for the next three days has her exclusively in Texas and Ohio, which vote on March 4.

The argument against the Clinton plan is easy enough to grasp: that with two more routs in Hawaii and Wisconsin, Obama’s already thunderous momentum may simply be unstoppable. The counterargument is that Texas and Ohio amount to the whole ball of wax: Unless Clinton wins both by substantial margins, she is toast. As a matter of fact, more than one Clinton campaign official said exactly this to me on the phone yesterday. My first reaction was, holy cow, talk about a bleak outlook — too bleak, I thought. But that was before the results rolled in from Maryland and Virginia. By the end of the night, staring hard at the delegate totals and working my slide rule, I realized the Clinton people weren’t being excessively grim. They were, for the first and maybe the last time, being completely realistic. —John Heilemann

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/02/heilemann_does_clinton_even_ha.html

[Black Lance]

The article pretty much says it all. With any kind of luck, Hillary "it's a vast right-wing conspiracy" Clinton will be crushed in Texas and Ohio, sending the Clinton machine to the bottom once and for all.

[Classact]

If the Republicans would vote across party lines for Clinton in TX giving her all the delegates in TX then a war would start in the Democratic Party and the super delegates to choose Clinton over the more popular Obama. This would end the youth support in the Democratic Party that has been energized by Obama and give the election to the Republican Party.

But, Republicans hate Clinton so much they will help Obama in TX destroying Hillary in TX like driving a stake through her heart and plans. My guess is Obama will be shot.

[Black Lance]

Given the current outlook, I think it would take more than deenergizing the youth vote to ensure a Novemeber victory for the GOP.

[retiredman]

For years we have been told how the left loves the Clintons, and how the Clintons are unbeatable

I have never been a Hillary supporter. Why do you persist in lumping everyone left of center in a giant pile?

Sounds like party before country to me! :laugh2:

[red states rule]

I have never been a Hillary supporter. Why do you persist in lumping everyone left of center in a giant pile?

Sounds like party before country to me! :laugh2:

But you sure kissed Bill's as on another thread. It took you many posts to even use the word perjury and Bill Clinton in the same sentence

And he is one of the reasons Hillary is losing so badly

[red states rule]

If the Republicans would vote across party lines for Clinton in TX giving her all the delegates in TX then a war would start in the Democratic Party and the super delegates to choose Clinton over the more popular Obama. This would end the youth support in the Democratic Party that has been energized by Obama and give the election to the Republican Party.

But, Republicans hate Clinton so much they will help Obama in TX destroying Hillary in TX like driving a stake through her heart and plans. My guess is Obama will be shot.

The Clinton's will revert back to their usual campaign tactics. When Hillary sees she can;t win fairly, she will toss the rules overboard and try to screw Obama out of the nomination

Now think what will happen in Novemeber if a majority of blacks stay home, or are so pissed at Hillary they vote for McCain

What is Howie Dean McGovern going to do? Will he bow to the Clintons of enforce the rules?

[red states rule]

The arrogance of the Clintons is what is sinking her campaign

Is It Too Late for Hillary?
Thursday, Feb. 14, 2008 By KAREN TUMULTY

snip

This is not the race that Clinton thought she would be running. Her campaign was built on inevitability, a haughty operation so confident it would have the nomination wrapped up by now that it didn't even put a field organization in place for the states that were to come after the megaprimary on Feb. 5.

Clinton's positions, most notably her support for the Iraq invasion and her refusal to recant that vote, were geared more to battling a Republican in the general election than to winning over an angry Democratic base clamoring for change. Not until last fall did she seem to acknowledge that she faced opposition in the Democratic primaries, so focused was her message on George W. Bush and the GOP.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the victory podium at the Democratic National Convention. While Clinton was busy running as a pseudo incumbent, Obama donned the mantle of change and built a fund-raising and ground operation that has proved superior to hers by almost every measure. As a veteran of Democratic presidential campaigns who is not affiliated with any candidate this time around puts it, the Clinton forces "get to every state later. They spend less. They don't get the best people."

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1713270,00.html

[glockmail]

She's losing for two reasons:
1. Race
2. Arrogance.

I'm hoping that she pulls a Florida, Michigan, or Superdelegate move on Obama at the Convention. That would cause race riots, and she'll lose the black vote for the general election. A lot of blacks will reconsider the GOP and the Democrats may lose that voting block. Now that would be a great Clinton legacy.

[retiredman]

She's losing for two reasons:
1. Race
2. Arrogance.

I'm hoping that she pulls a Florida, Michigan, or Superdelegate move on Obama at the Convention. That would cause race riots, and she'll lose the black vote for the general election. A lot of blacks will reconsider the GOP and the Democrats may lose that voting block. Now that would be a great Clinton legacy.

you aren't really "hoping" for race riots in America, are you?

[glockmail]

you aren't really "hoping" for race riots in America, are you?
Yes I am. I'm far enough away from urban centers to keep my family safe. And I've got enough guns and ammo. It will be hell for a few, for a short while, but if the end result is for blacks to turn away from the Democrat Party, they will be far better off in the future.

[Immanuel]

Talk about arrogance!

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/news/stories/2008/02/14/campaign_dems0214.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=15


After eight losses in a row and no victories in sight this month, Hillary Clinton's campaign renewed calls Wednesday for the votes in Florida and Michigan to count toward delegates that would help her catch Barack Obama.

Obama's camp said her demand was a blatant attempt to ignore the ground rules set when the national party stripped both states of their delegates for breaking early-primary rules. Last summer, all of the major candidates agreed to boycott the two renegade states.

"Now, when they believe it serves their political interests, they're trying to rewrite the rules," Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, told reporters in a telephone call. "Now, at the 11th hour, the Clinton campaign is trying to rewrite rules that were firmly established, and I don't think there's a lot of appetite for that in the country or a lot of appetite for that at the DNC."



I live in Florida. The rules were set before the election and Hillary agreed to follow them... when she expected to run away with the nomination. Now that she's losing, she wants to change the rules so that she wins. Why wasn't she so adament about this before she got behind?

The fact that the DNC has stripped Florida of its delegates stinks and it shows that the DNC does not believe in "every vote counts". Hillary was part of the lie but now when it can aid her fight she wants the votes to count?

Florida should never have been stripped of its delegates in the first place, but now that the deed is done it is too late for the winner to be crying, "every vote [cast for me] must count".

Immie

[JohnDoe]

Talk about arrogance!

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/news/stories/2008/02/14/campaign_dems0214.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=15



I live in Florida. The rules were set before the election and Hillary agreed to follow them... when she expected to run away with the nomination. Now that she's losing, she wants to change the rules so that she wins. Why wasn't she so adament about this before she got behind?

The fact that the DNC has stripped Florida of its delegates stinks and it shows that the DNC does not believe in "every vote counts". Hillary was part of the lie but now when it can aid her fight she wants the votes to count?

Florida should never have been stripped of its delegates in the first place, but now that the deed is done it is too late for the winner to be crying, "every vote [cast for me] must count".

Immie

Why did Florida insist on their primary this early and AGREE to give up their votes from their citizens in order to do such?

Sounds like the FLORIDA democratic party screwed the florida citizens?

[Immanuel]

Why did Florida insist on their primary this early and AGREE to give up their votes from their citizens in order to do such?

Sounds like the FLORIDA democratic party screwed the florida citizens?

I don't disagree with that at all, but it was the DNC (that's national) that made the threat and carried through with it. The State of Florida should not have pushed it. Personally, I think they should have moved up the primary to Super Tuesday rather than earlier but governmental officials think they are better than everyone else.

The arrogance comes from Hillary for accepting the penalty given against Florida and Michigan, but now that she needs us suddenly she wants to remove the penalty. She didn't stand up for us UNTIL she realized she needed us. Now that she needs us... well, we're her best buddies.

Immie

[JohnDoe]

I don't disagree with that at all, but it was the DNC (that's national) that made the threat and carried through with it. The State of Florida should not have pushed it. Personally, I think they should have moved up the primary to Super Tuesday rather than earlier but governmental officials think they are better than everyone else.

The arrogance comes from Hillary for accepting the penalty given against Florida and Michigan, but now that she needs us suddenly she wants to remove the penalty. She didn't stand up for us UNTIL she realized she needed us. Now that she needs us... well, we're her best buddies.

Immie

I was just looking up what the heck superdelegates were and the history of how they came about and who actually get this prestigious titles and all kinds of crud at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

It is quite interesting....but the bottom line i think, at this point is that the delegates from the caucuses and primaries count for 4/5ths of the vote at the convention and the superdelegates count for 1/5th of the vote at the convention.

Every Us Senator of your state and us house of representatives that are members of the democratic party are super delegates for your state, and other previous house or senate leaders if they live in your state or any ex presidents that may live in your state that happen to be Democratic Party members will be your super delegates representing the state of Florida, or something like that....

What I am wondering and have not touched on it yet, is will your state's super delegates count at the convention and if so, how will they vote?

As far as no candidate for president objecting when the Party made those decisions....as you indicated, no one thought that there would be a close race of any sort....everyone thought that Hillary would win the nomination at the time the decision was made.....no one thought it would be a problem because everyone expected florida to pick Hillary and everyone expected near every state to pick Hillary.....she had a huge, huge, huge lead in all the polls for the longest time...:dunno: Their arrogance, in thinking they all would not be affected by the DNC's decisions lead to where we are today....And the DNC is a joke!

good morning btw!

jd

[Immanuel]

I was just looking up what the heck superdelegates were and the history of how they came about and who actually get this prestigious titles and all kinds of crud at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

It is quite interesting....but the bottom line i think, at this point is that the delegates from the caucuses and primaries count for 4/5ths of the vote at the convention and the superdelegates count for 1/5th of the vote at the convention.

Every Us Senator of your state and us house of representatives that are members of the democratic party are super delegates for your state, and other previous house or senate leaders if they live in your state or any ex presidents that may live in your state that happen to be Democratic Party members will be your super delegates representing the state of Florida, or something like that....

What I am wondering and have not touched on it yet, is will your state's super delegates count at the convention and if so, how will they vote?

As far as no candidate for president objecting when the Party made those decisions....as you indicated, no one thought that there would be a close race of any sort....everyone thought that Hillary would win the nomination at the time the decision was made.....no one thought it would be a problem because everyone expected florida to pick Hillary and everyone expected near every state to pick Hillary.....she had a huge, huge, huge lead in all the polls for the longest time...:dunno: Their arrogance, in thinking they all would not be affected by the DNC's decisions lead to where we are today....And the DNC is a joke!

good morning btw!

jd

So is the RNC!

I have to ask this question, would Hillary be crying for Florida's delegates today if Obama won Florida? Hell no she wouldn't. That is why it is arrogant for her to suddenly care about us.

Immie

[jimnyc]

So is the RNC!

I have to ask this question, would Hillary be crying for Florida's delegates today if Obama won Florida? Hell no she wouldn't. That is why it is arrogant for her to suddenly care about us.

Immie

Hillary trying to bend the rules shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. She's looking more and more desperate as time goes on and now she's trying to go back on something she signed herself to help her dying campaign. It shows that her word is as good as crap.

[JohnDoe]

So is the RNC!

I have to ask this question, would Hillary be crying for Florida's delegates today if Obama won Florida? Hell no she wouldn't. That is why it is arrogant for her to suddenly care about us.

Immie

Yes, she would probably be silent, but i bet ya, that if it were Obama who won Florida etc, that he, and his team would be fighting for them to count right now too!

sad....

jd

[Immanuel]

Yes, she would probably be silent, but i bet ya, that if it were Obama who won Florida etc, that he, and his team would be fighting for them to count right now too!

sad....

jd

I AM NOT WILLING TO PLACE THAT BET! :)

But, I actually see Obama as a bit more classy of a person than that. Do not ask me why I feel that way, but he just seems more of the type to admit defeat and keep on trucking than she.

Immie

[jimnyc]

Yes, she would probably be silent, but i bet ya, that if it were Obama who won Florida etc, that he, and his team would be fighting for them to count right now too!

sad....

jd

You are implying that Obama would be going back on his word and signature, what do you have to base that on? Just because Hillary's word isn't worth a damn that means others would do the same?

[Immanuel]

You are implying that Obama would be going back on his word and signature, what do you have to base that on? Just because Hillary's word isn't worth a damn that means others would do the same?

Well, he is a politician! :D

Immie

[JohnDoe]

You are implying that Obama would be going back on his word and signature, what do you have to base that on? Just because Hillary's word isn't worth a damn that means others would do the same?Well, it is just conjecture on my part, and mainly for the reason Immie listed Jim.

But there is another reason, and that is because deep down in my heart, I don't believe the Florida Democratic citizens should be disenfranchised because of a decision some arrogant big wigs made....i believe in the citizen, over and above the super delegates, over and above some Party leaders, and over and above the candidates themselves.

There is a way around this and that is for the Party to fund a primary in florida, where it does count, before the Convention....and i read that this has not been ruled out yet....but who knows how that would go....i would bet at a later date than the first one, that Obama would get the vote of the citizens, just on momentum alone!

jd

p.s. read Maineman's blog on the debatepolicy blog site....man oh man, i got goose bumps and teary eyed at the same time! It was an awesome piece!

[Immanuel]

Well, it is just conjecture on my part, and mainly for the reason Immie listed Jim.

But there is another reason, and that is because deep down in my heart, I don't believe the Florida Democratic citizens should be disenfranchised because of a decision some arrogant big wigs made....i believe in the citizen, over and above the super delegates, over and above some Party leaders, and over and above the candidates themselves.

There is a way around this and that is for the Party to fund a primary in florida, where it does count, before the Convention....and i read that this has not been ruled out yet....but who knows how that would go....i would bet at a later date than the first one, that Obama would get the vote of the citizens, just on momentum alone!

jd


Absolutely the citizens of Florida should not have been disenfranchised. For the record, this time around the RNC was slightly more forgiving than the DNC. If I remember correctly they only penalized Florida half of its delegates. I suppose they felt that this would make them appear better then the Democrats. :dunno:

I don't think the big wigs in Florida (both parties are involved) should have gone this far. Florida's state leaders are just as bad as the national organizations. They did this despite the warnings from the national offices. They thumbed their noses at the rest of the country. In effect, the state offices cost Floridians their say in the convention.

The latest news I have heard is that they are talking about doing Caucuses here and to be honest with you, I'm not thrilled with that idea either. They said on the radio that it would be unfair to people who couldn't attend ie people that work nights, college students who go to night school etc. I'm not sure about that, but it seems to me that it is giving in to Hillary's whining. I don't think that should be done and I would feel that way if I was Pro-Hillary.

Immie

[red states rule]

Well, it is just conjecture on my part, and mainly for the reason Immie listed Jim.

But there is another reason, and that is because deep down in my heart, I don't believe the Florida Democratic citizens should be disenfranchised because of a decision some arrogant big wigs made....i believe in the citizen, over and above the super delegates, over and above some Party leaders, and over and above the candidates themselves.

There is a way around this and that is for the Party to fund a primary in florida, where it does count, before the Convention....and i read that this has not been ruled out yet....but who knows how that would go....i would bet at a later date than the first one, that Obama would get the vote of the citizens, just on momentum alone!

jd

p.s. read Maineman's blog on the debatepolicy blog site....man oh man, i got goose bumps and teary eyed at the same time! It was an awesome piece!

JD - this is the typical answer form Dems when they are busted, "Everybody does it" seems to be the #1 response

All the candidates agreed to the rules. Hillary thought she would crush this liitle upstart who dared to take her on.

Now when she is getting her ass kicked, she is desperate to try and change the rules

Whenenver a lib loses an election, they have to whine and make excuses. With the Clintons they have to find a backdoor way to cheat and take vistory from the jaws of victory

It is amazing how many libs want 4 more years of Clinton corruption - and they say how pres bush needs to be impeached

Liberal logic is a sight to behold

[Black Lance]

The latest news I have heard is that they are talking about doing Caucuses here and to be honest with you, I'm not thrilled with that idea either. They said on the radio that it would be unfair to people who couldn't attend ie people that work nights, college students who go to night school etc. I'm not sure about that, but it seems to me that it is giving in to Hillary's whining. I don't think that should be done and I would feel that way if I was Pro-Hillary.

Immie

Those citizens should be able to mail absentee ballots.