« A Revote In Florida and Michigan? | Main | The Democratic Race: Onward »

I Sound Like A Broken iPod...

05 Mar 2008 07:20 am

A new Clinton memo is out... the one thing missing is... yep... a plausible delegate scenario. Read the memo after the jump. Hello, re-vote in Florida and Michigan?

March 5, 2008

To: Interested Parties

From: Harold Ickes

Mark Penn

Re: The Path to the Presidency

With last night’s victories in Ohio and Texas, one thing is clear: the momentum has swung back to Hillary Clinton. Voters in both states agreed that Hillary Clinton would be the best Commander-in-Chief and the strongest steward of our economy. In fact, according to last night’s polls, those who decided who to vote for in the last three days overwhelmingly favored Hillary [CNN exit polls, 3/4/08]. It’s time for a second look.

1. Ohio is the barometer: Hillary was successful in Ohio, the state that for the last quarter century has picked our president. As everyone knows: As Ohio goes, so goes our country. Historically, it’s one of the bellwether states and it decided the last election. And the demographics of the upcoming contests in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana and Kentucky closely mirror those in Ohio. Hillary looks strong in all four states.
* In recent years, every President has won two of the three following states: Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Hillary has already won two of those and, according to all polls, is leading in the third – Pennsylvania.

2. This race is extremely close and more than 5 million Democrats are likely to vote. After 28 million votes have been counted, the popular vote contest in the Democratic primary is within one-tenth of one percent. Applying the same level of turnout to the remaining contests, there are still more than 5 million Democratic voters – 17 percent of the total – who are likely to participate in this contested primary race. After 41 primaries and caucuses, the delegate count is within roughly 2 percent.


HRC (% of total)

Obama (% of total)

HRC Margin

Remaining (total %)

Popular Vote (incl MI and FL)

13,422,321 (40%)

13,455,140 (40%)

-32,818 (-0%)

5,758,698 (est) (17%)

Total Delegates

1,486.5 (37%)

1,584 (39%)

-97.5 (-2%)

950.5 (23%)

3. In the primaries, Hillary has demonstrated that she is the best positioned candidate to carry the core battleground states essential to a general election victory -- particularly the large industrial states of Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and the critical swing contests in Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, and New Jersey.

4. The vetting of Obama has just begun. The press has only begun to scrutinize Senator Obama and his record. The corruption trial of Tony Rezko is getting underway this week, yet many questions about Obama’s relationship with him remain unanswered. Hillary, on the other hand, has withstood fifteen years of substantial media and Republican scrutiny, including many months of sharper scrutiny as the front-runner. If the primary contest ends prematurely and Obama is the nominee, Democrats may have a nominee who will be a lightening rod of controversy.

5. Several of Hillary's base constituencies (women, Hispanic, labor, elderly and under $75,000) are key to a Democratic victory in November. Senator Obama has not brought these voters out in the same numbers.

· The two groups that fueled President Bush’s victory in ‘04 were women and Hispanics, and they are among Hillary Clinton’s strongest supporters. From 2000 to 2004, Bush’s support among Hispanics rose from 35% to 44%. And Bush’s support among women rose from 43% to 48%. That five point gain among women and nine point gain among Latinos gave Bush his victory in 2004.

· Women reached an all-time presidential election high of 54% of voters in ’04. As a factual matter, an outpouring of women for the first woman president alone can win the election. Hillary leads all candidates among women.

· These political and demographic trends project positively into the general election and strongly favor Hillary.

6. The Red States: The central strategic argument of the Obama campaign is flawed. Senator Obama argues that his success in Democratic primary contests held in long-time Red States means he will carry those states in a general election. In reality, there are no “Red States” in a Democratic primary – there are only Democratic voters who live in Republican states and represent a small percentage of the general election population.
* Of the eleven core Republican states that have gone to the polls, Sen. Obama has won ten: Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana. John Kerry lost each of these states by fifteen points or more.

· The last time a Democratic nominee won Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, and Alaska in the general election was 1964.

· Even if Obama is “transcendent,” as his campaign has argued, the historic electoral trends and the current political environment suggest that translating those primary wins into November success will be close to impossible.

· In short: Hillary is better positioned to carry the battle ground states that Democrats need to win in November and Obama’s victories in deep red states do not .

7. Hillary is the only Democrat with the strength, leadership, and experience to defeat John McCain. Senator Clinton is seen as the best prepared to be Commander-in-Chief.

· Nationally, 57% say Hillary Clinton is best prepared to be president, 39% Obama [CBS/ NYT, February 24]

· Hillary Clinton is seen as best able to take on the Republicans on their own turf – national security and terrorism. She is seen as a strong and decisive leader (a seven point advantage over Obama nationally).

· Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done – leading Obama nationally by 13 points [USA Today/ Gallup, 2/24].

Hillary is seen as the candidate to solve the country’s problems, leading Obama by 10 points [USA Today/ Gallup, 2/24].

8. John McCain will diminish any perceived advantage Obama has with independents. As has been widely discussed, one of John McCain’s key constituents is independents. And against McCain, Obama will be framed by the Republicans as too liberal (he was ranked by the National Journal as the most liberal Senator); untested on national security; and vulnerable on issues that would make him unelectable in November. These issues may be surmountable in a Democratic primary but will be an Achilles heel with independents in a general election.

9. The McCain Roadmap: McCain has already foreshadowed his campaign’s construct against Obama: His vulnerability is experience and judgment on national security.
* McCain: Obama’s ‘meet, talk and hope approach’ is ‘dangerously naïve in international diplomacy.’ “Meet, talk, and hope may be a sound approach in a state legislature, but it is dangerously naive in international diplomacy where the oppressed look to America for hope and adversaries wish us ill.” [McCain, NYT’s The Caucus, 2/22/08]
* McCain: Obama is an ‘inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists.’ “Each event poses a challenge and an opportunity. Will the next president have the experience -- the judgment, experience informs and the strength of purpose to respond to each of these developments in ways that strengthen our security and advance the global progress of our ideals? Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons? I think you know the answer to that question.” [Post-Wisconsin Primary Victory Speech, 2/19/08]

10. Steward of the economy. Hillary Clinton leads both John McCain and Barack Obama on the economy and health care. In the latest LA Times/Bloomberg poll (1/22), Hillary leads McCain 52/28 on health care and 43/34 on the economy.
* Hillary leads Barack Obama on health care by 21 points nationally [USA Today/Gallup, 2/24].

11. Florida. There is an additional reality that must be considered – the 1.75 million voters in Florida whose votes will not be represented at the Democratic convention. How we handle this swing state will affect our Party’s potential of carrying it in November (Democrats lost Florida in 2004). This is a state where the playing field was level – all of the candidates had their names on the ballot and none campaigned in the state.

12. Michigan. Nearly 600,000 Democrats voted in Michigan, but right now their votes are not being counted. Democrats barely carried Michigan in 2004 (by only 3% -- 51 to 48). If our party refuses to let them participate in the convention, we will provide a political opportunity for the Republicans to win both Florida and Michigan. Recognizing their importance to Democratic success in November, Hillary has called for the delegates of both states to be seated at the convention.

13. Hillary has the money to compete. In February, the Clinton campaign raised approximately $35 million – averaging more than a million dollars a day. This deep level of support gives Hillary the resources she needs to compete between now and the Convention.

Comments (38)

I think the useful thing about this memo is that it underscores that last night did not in fact give Clinton any significant new arguments to use--these are more or less just rehashes of the same arguments she has been making since Super Tuesday (and indeed, after next week I strongly suspect all of March will start looking to people like one big repeat of Super Tuesday).

If Clinton wants to play the "vetting game," lets see how she withstands sustained talk about:
--pardoning terrorists
--taking donations from people getting pardons
--payoffs and donations in exchange for lobbying and other political favors
--Bill's past infidelity
--Bill's current infidelities
--Hillary's "associations"
--The Clinton's financial and political associations with shady business ventures and regimes in the former Soviet Union
And so on.

Remember, every question, however problematic, should be asked to prevent -buyer's- liar's remorse.

The contest is defined as a race for delegates. The Clintons cannot redefine this.

It's just like the general election is a race for the electoral votes in the electoral college.

All campaigns understand this starting out, and the smart campaigns build their strategy around this.

Marc: it would be truer to say that the math for either to get to 2025 with pledged delegates is no longer there UNLESS one of them drops out.

So it's no longer a slam dunk who should drop out.
Obama was supposed to close the deal last night by winning and just like NH and CALIF he believed bad polls that said he was ahead and he lost.
So now he is MR. Can't close the deal and Hillary is both the underdog and the won with momentum.

Obama only won the least populous state of the night, and who's surprised that he carried Bernie Sanders' state?

The math isn't against Hillary: its against both of them delegate-wise.

What I find amazing is that even today after TX and OH, Obama still has an itty bit of a national pupular vote lead EVEN according to the clinton numbers, which, of course, have two HUGE shortcomings.

1) They include Michigan (in which Obama was not even on the ballot) and Florida (in which Obama did not campaign).

2) These numbers don't include votes from caucus states because those numbers are reported out as state delegates, not people.

So basically, under the most generous scnario, counting the votes of disqualified primaries and leaving out the popular vote totals of all the caucuses, Obama is still a little bit ahead.

What this means is that not only is it unlikley that Hillary will ever lead in pledged delegates, it's also unlikely that she will ever be able to claim a popular vote mandate for the super delegates to overturn the pledged delegate lead.

The media ought to really ough to think about this as they process spin that HIllary will be able to stake a credible mandate to the nomination. In June, even with MI and FL recvotes, Obama will almost certainly be ahead not only in pledged delegates, but in national popular votes that don't even include his caucus results. Do you really think the dem party wil overturn this?

Keep in mind that we have some strong states for Obama ahead: Mississippi, North Carolina, Oregon and others.

Hillary is intent on ripping the Democratic party apart. She cannot win this the real way; on delegates.

But Hillary only cares about herself; she doesn't care about the Democratic party. Bill Clinton's presidency was good for him, but not so good for the party. And Bill and Hillary didn't exactly help Gore or Kerry that much in 2000 and 2004.

I honestly believe that Hillary would rather have Obama lose now in order to run in 2012.

Oh, yeah...as for her national security experience...she has none. She never even had a security clearance as first lady. Bill had a failed record on combatting terrorism during his tenure. And as Senator, Hillary has shown GWBush judgement and decision making. Want more GWBush? Vote Hillary.

There's a reason why those Rush Limbaugh Republicans crossed over in TX and OH and helped her win; they know Hillary is the least electable; it's that obvious. In fact, in TX one could argue that it was this Limbaugh effect that delivered the state for Hillary.

She cannot win this the real way; on delegates.

Sure, she can. You mean she can't win this on pledged delegates--but so what? The Democrats didn't want to give that decision entirely to the people, precisely because states have such a wide range of primary methods, many of which aren't too bright.

A Former Muslim woman and proud American citizen familiar with Islam law, agrees obama is very dishonest man, here is why Obama is a Christian now. He was born a Muslim because his father was Muslim and his step father was Muslim. According to Muslim religion, the father’s religion determines the religion of the offspring. Therefore, Obama was truly once a Muslim although he denies he was ever a Muslim, which shows once again he doesn't have the backbone or honesty to recognize his heritage. When he came to the U.S to live with his maternal grandparents, is when he was introduced to Christianity. To hear him say that he’s never been a Muslim his entire life is truly a lie since he spent his first 10 years in Indonesia, a Muslim country, living with a Muslim step father and don’t forget the law in Islam called TAGIYEH which means you can lie about your religion in order to do good for Allah! My question to you is what good does obama plan to do for Allah! Since he has the public backing of Louis Farrakhan. Nation of Islam Minister, Obama agrees and highly respects the opinions of his spiritual advisor Rev. Wright who has recently awarded notorious Louis Farrakhan. Nation of Islam Minister with their churches highest award, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, in the form of anti-Semitism, record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road. Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the prestige of the leader of the Nation of Islam. His anti-Semitism and false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African Americans. Farrakhan has vilified whites and singled out Jews to blame for crimes. He talks of Jewish conspiracies and reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind. And yet Obama who HAS NOT distanced himself from Farraklhan as he wants the media to believe and Rev Wright heaped praise of Farrakhan. Applauding his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation. They praised "his integrity and honesty and called him an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose. And we should just trust our great country to a media made fairy tale which in last few days, several campaign financers, corrupt business and personal friends suck as indicted Rezko, former Dallas Mayor Hill, Rep. Rick Renzi and Mr. Auchi, leading supplier of arms to Saddam's regime convicted for corruption in France, the British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions and millions of dollars to Obama are coming out of the woodwork left and right, lies about side meetings with Canada going behind the American voters backs telling us one thing and them another. ALL this from the half black ex-Muslim man who touts change and claims to be a uniter of all people? Proof he is just another in-experienced Washington politician that the media gave a free pass at the risk of our great country!

OBAMA WOULD VOTE FOR HILLARY!
I think very highly of Hillary. I admire her. I think she's one of the most disciplined strong dedicated people I know. She's one of the toughest. She's got an extraordinary intelligence, and outstanding public service record, she's somebody who's in this stuff for the right reasons and no doubt would make an excellent “President of the United Sates”. She's passionate about moving the country forward especially on issues like economy, health care and children. “Barack Obama “
"Madame President of the United States...it’s an extraordinary thought. We truly are in a momentous time, where a woman’s potential has no limitations. "Hillary Clinton has already proven to a generation of women that there are no limits for success. She is driven by her passion for public service and her belief in the enormous potential of our country. Smart, capable and strong in her convictions, Hillary has transcended the dictates of what is thought to be possible for our time.
"Hillary is a powerful voice for change as we find our country at an important crossroads. Under her leadership, our country will regain its respect within the global community. She will prioritize issues of global climate change, universal health care and rebuilding a strong economy. After 8 long years, the public will once again have faith in their government.
"Another former first lady, Eleanor Roosevelt once wrote, ‘In government, in business, and in the professions there may be a day when women will be looked upon as persons. We are, however, far from that day as yet.’ More than 50 years later 'that day' is now upon us…and Hillary Clinton is ready to shatter through that glass ceiling for all women."HILLARY CLINTON MAKES HISTORY FOR ALL WOMAN OF EVERY RACE.

The majority of the American Black community claims that they want to live in a society where discrimination doesn't exist, but appears they are not practicing what they are preaching. when Obama continually pulls 90%+ of the black vote, it's obvious that most blacks are voting for a candidate because of skin color. The odd thing is people like John Lewis who marched for equal rights jumps on the prejudice bandwagon, I’m sure he realizes what it does to his credibility. Obama camp have been calling African-American superdelegates to target, harass and threaten,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate who supports Clinton. Cleaver said black superdelegates are receiving “nasty letters, phone calls, threats, being called an Uncle Tom. Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., also is receiving several e-mails from individuals saying they won’t vote for her if she doesn’t change her support to Obama, she should vote for him because she, too, is black. Rep. John Lewis, a black civil rights icon, sadly enough has given into the racial threatning politics of the Obama camp and switched his support from Clinton to Obama.JUST MORE OBAMA CAMP DIRTY POLITICS, LIKE BEING CAUGHT IN A LIE ABOUT CANADA MEETING! HE IS CORRUPT!

I guess it's all going to be all "negative" from here on out. My contribution...


WHY WON'T THE CLINTONS RELEASE THEIR TAX RETURNS...


http://thememlingindex.com/hillary_clinton_net_worth-wealth.html

.

The math isn't against Hillary: its against both of them delegate-wise.

This isn't true. Obama will need a far smaller percentage of the superdelegates to clinch the nomination than Clinton will. That matters. That makes Clinton's path to the nomination much steeper and more unlikely than Obama's path.

Unless, of course. you think it's likely that the superdelegates will act in lockstep against the pledged delegate winner...I have a hard time seeing that happening. At best for Clinton, she manages to convince a small majority of superdelegates to see things her way. But a small majority of superdelegates won't cut it for her. She'll need a large majority of superdelegates -- a much harder thing to pull off.

It is true that Obama cannot win with pledged delegates alone, but Clinton cannot win even if you include the superdelegates: she simply hasn't been getting enough of them so far, and it is highly unlikely the remaining uncommitted superdelegates are going to commit to her in the percentages she will need. The only real question is how long it will take the most loyal Clinton supporters to figure this out.

The only real question is how long it will take the most loyal Clinton supporters to figure this out.

My guess is August in Denver. The Clinton supporters tend to have a lot more fight than smarts. They seem to believe they can bully not just a majority of the superdelegates but a large majority of them -- >60 or 65%. That seems unlikely to most of us in the reality-based community.

Tonite's result was the nightmare outcome for both candidates and for the Democratic Party. For we are now left -

- one candidate who has been greviously wounded by negative attacks that have stuck and by sticking shown the GOP how to take him down

vs.

- one candidate who cannot be chosen as her party's nominee without destroying the party in the process

I'll say this much: we need a clear result in PA, not some delegate/popular vote split that sends us asking the voters of Puerto Rico to decide the fate of our country.

Obama's campaign has to show that it is agile and can respond to the smears (including some posted right above) and the concerns raised about his policy positions and experience.

He has ignored the very real vulneralbilities he has and really cannot continue to do this.

We know lots of people still believe the Muslim/pledge smears, yet what he has he done about it?

People I know and respect say that he hasn't been detailed in laying out policies. I tell them that this is not true, but if they believe it, it's because the campaign has not been effective in demonstrating this.

This prolonged primary/caucus season is demonstrating that although both candidates have strong and committed support, both also have important flaws that are preventing voters from coalescing around either of them with full confidence. I suspect that those who aren't committed partisans are experiencing real bafflement about who to support. This has been interesting and a bit predictable to watch. I had a bad feeling things would go this way once the influx of independents and youth voters were able to beat Edwards in Iowa. I'm watching in wonderment as democrats figure out how to snatch defeat from victory in an election year that should have guaranteed a presidential win. I can only hope that the extended primary "toughens up" the winner instead of presenting him or her as "damaged goods."

hmm...I'm thinking I'll make my first donation to McCain's straight talk express.

Hillary needs to bow out gracefully. But she won't do it. So she needs to be taken out forcefully in the next primaries.

Go Obama!

hmm...I'm thinking I'll make my first donation to McCain's straight talk express.

Hillary needs to bow out gracefully. But she won't do it. So she needs to be taken out forcefully in the next primaries.

Go Obama!

By the way, some quick back of the envelope numbers:

Right now, Clinton leads Obama among committed superdelegates about 240 to 196, which is about 55% to 45% (note this percentage has been steadily shrinking since the primaries began). That leaves around 360 superdelegates uncommitted.

That means if Clinton finishes behind Obama in the pledged delegate count by about 160 (a very charitable assumption--Obama will likely do better), she will need to net about 115 superdelegates from the remaining 360, which would mean getting about 238 to 122, or about 66% to 34%.

Now, people are free to believe the remaining delegates will start committing to Clinton at that rate, despite having committed to her at a much lower (and ever-shrinking) rate so far. But there is no more reason to believe that will start happening than there is reason to believe Clinton will suddenly start winning all the remaining contests by huge margins. In other words, given what we know at this point, it is no more plausible that the remaining superdelegates will save Clinton than that the remaining contests will save Clinton.

Incidentally, I never understand why some people seem to assume that when people vote for Clinton in these contests, it must be because Obama has some terrible weaknesses which are driving them over to Clinton. The equally plausible hypothesis is that they are voting for Clinton simply because they actually like Clinton, and indeed the polls have repeatedly confirmed that Clinton is well-liked by most Democrats (as is Obama).

So, the fact that Clinton has won some of these contests is not really a sign of Obama's weakness, but rather a sign of Clinton's strength. But Obama has been even stronger overall, and that is why he is winning overall, even though he has not won every single contest.

He is not stronger overall. His whole ballgame is blacks, liberals, and independents, and that won't win a general.

That reality makes Clinton's percentage of the superdelegates (as well as some switches) quite possible.

However, I suspect that the next Big Thing will be a do-over primary (not caucus) in Florida and Michigan. Clinton will win both, because no one is changing their mind and the demographics hand it to her.

DTM: Regarding the superdelegates, I would remind you that 76 of them are unpledged add-ons (UAD) and they are usually selected by the state party conventions. So far, 3 of them have been selected: 2 of them (Stewart Burkhalter in AL and Mike Panetta in DC) are committed Obama supporters whereas the third (Reggie Whitten in OK) is still uncommitted. So the pool of available superdelegates is much less than the 360; it's more like 276 as it now stands.

Hey Marc, maybe you don't realize this, but you live in America w/the rest of us, maybe you should tell your media brethren to report the news and stop trying to control people. Oh and tell them thanks for Iraq to.

Smears, Spears, and innuendo are not news. Talking points are not news. Walter Cronkite would never report on talking points.

His whole ballgame is blacks, liberals, and independents, and that won't win a general.

That's only his whole ballgame right now because he's running against Hillary Clinton, who is very strong with working class whites and Hispanics. That in no way means that's his whole ballgame against McCain.

Clinton will win both, because no one is changing their mind and the demographics hand it to her.

Clinton may win both, because of demographics, but Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, for God's sake. And greater than 40% of the population actually left the house expressly to vote against Clinton anyway. It's not implausible to believe that a significantly higher percentage will show up when they actually have someone to vote for, not just vote against.

Florida will be different also, because a campaign would actually take place there, and this time there won't be the artificial dynamic of Clinton seeming to argue for enfranchising Florida with Obama seeming to argue to disenfranchise it.

One thing to keep in mind here going forward is that while Hillary gained a little traction throwing the kitchen sink, Obama stil has ket his powder dry with regard to campaigning negatively. If HIllary decides to drag this into the gutter, she should be careful what she wishes for because there is a whole lot more potential for negative campaigning against Hillary then Obama...hence the Rush Limbaugh and Bill Cunningham endorsements of HIllary..

America, last night was a watershed, and is remarkable both for what is demonstrates and what is conceals!

Last night demonstrates that Mrs. Clinton knows how to get things done — by good old-fashioned intelligent hardwork, and we should all expect to see more of that in the homestretch leading to the Denver convention. I will give any job, especially the Presidency to "experience" before I give the job to "inspiration".

But last night also conceals, although poorly so, that the honeymoon with "sweet oratory" is all but over. America is now reaching out to someone who can get things done, here at home and abroad where our image has taken a severe beating under the Presidency of George Bush.

I think America will be proud of what this woman will accomplish (by God's grace) from 2009-2013. I can't wait, for her inauguration!

To: Obama Would Vote for Hillary

Your statement that American blacks are voting for Obama because of prejudice is false. Prejudice would be voting against Hillary because she's white. Prejudice is the 20% of Ohio Democratic voters who reportedly would not vote for Obama because he's black. Voting for a candidate who looks like you because you've NEVER before had the opportunity is not prejudice.

To: Obama Would Vote for Hillary

Your statement that American blacks are voting for Obama because of prejudice is false. Prejudice would be voting against Hillary because she's white. Prejudice is the 20% of Ohio Democratic voters who reportedly would not vote for Obama because he's black. Voting for a candidate who looks like you because you've NEVER before had the opportunity is not prejudice.

LMAO@ DOO. Smoke too much of your 'special blend' this morning? If you're deluded enough to think that a coalition of old women, people so ignorant that they actually believe Obama to be a Muslim (ex. the guy on '60 Minutes'), and the recently legal, can actually propel a person with the negatives of Hillary Clinton into the Presidency you're more of a dim bulb than your post above would seem to indicate.

OBAMA WOULD VOTE FOR HILLARY

This comment just underscores the breadth of ignorance by so many in this country. Interesting that a group of people who were officially given full citizenship in 1965 after agitating and fighting for it, are at fault, while the majority of "main stream" Americans laud a white woman riding on her husband's legislative laurels, who simultaneously plays the victim and the bully while pandering to the lowest commonalities inherent to the voting public. Black folk in this country vote in higher percentage numbers far more consistently than Hispanics and Whites. And you and any others pandering this racist rhetoric would do well to consider that the Hispanic voting bloc is mutable. This group overwhelmingly voted for Bush in 00 and 04 and a hefty chunk just may go for McCain in 08. As for Hillary, she clearly attracts a demographic of older, post menopausal White women (wow, just like herself!), overwhelmingly and in fact, this is rather symbolic of actual affirmative action of which White women are the majority beneficiaries.

Since we are quoting Mark Penn today:

Again and again, this race has shown that it is voters and delegates who matter, not the pundits or perceived "momentum." -- 2/13/08
Even a blind squirrel finds a few acorns, eh? For once Mark Penn was correct about something.

Could we please STOP referring to this as a comeback? Obama CAME back in these states. She won by less than 100k votes out of 2.8 million in Texas. He was behind by double digits in three out of those four states very, very recently.

Cal,

Care to explain how Clinton can win the general election WITHOUT blacks, liberals, and independents?

The obvious point is both candidates would need to expand their current coalitions in the general. It just turns out that Obama currently has a bigger coalition, which is why Clinton is losing.

Cal, Care to explain how Clinton can win the general election WITHOUT blacks, liberals, and independents?

I have no idea how this could possibly come to pass but Bill and Hillary seem to have magical powers.

RKA and Ban Johnson still live in this little Obama-centric view of things where every little thing should benefit their candidate or else its not fair, not democratic, bias, trickery, etc.

Mark Penn and Ploufe and Axelrod made statements a month or three weeks ago that were an angle of truth then but trying to use those words of Penn now is stupid and a waste of time because this dynamic race changes and so do the ways of looking at it.
RKA was beating up SNL sunday and now is still trying to spin it all Obama's way but we just don't look at the same statements against Hillary as his keeping his powder dry: from the viewpoint of many Hillary supporters Obama's whole tack against Hillary from early on has been sometimes unforgivably negative. He started out the late fall push saying she was part of some old washington that was broken. He then progressed to statements that nothing she said could be believed.
If any of our colleagues said these things outloud in the work place, we'd never trust that person again. These are negative statements designed to benefit his campaign.
He has consistantly mistated her opposition to the war and these are lies not dry powder.
Hillary can take this thing to the convention because in a large way his campaign failed last night. He failed to close the deal. He couldn't make the argument to end it. He outspent her two to one in both states with advertisements on American Idol and still couldn't close the deal.

The pattern of independents and republicans changed last night also: they went 50 -50 for each of them in Texas. This is a profoundly important thing because that is half of Obama's electibility argument against Hillary. She's neutralized that advantage: no small thing.

Obama fanatics were over confident all weekend, believing the polls: this shows they aren't ready either. A nasty pathetic bunch of bandwagon haters in some cases.
This is not over and it might not go the way you think it will.

The American Public is better informed than in any election before this. Senator Clinton has only proven that she can get the support of the Democratic Party establishment; win big delegate states that have republicans voting for her because she’s less electable, or are already firmly in the Democratic camp.

She’s also been successful in splitting the Democratic Party along demographic lines. Anyone who honestly believe that she's going to be able to unify the county is looking at the world through Clinton colored glasses... The status quo of four years of bitterly partisan politics under Clinton will do just as much if not more damage than four years with John McCain in the Oval office.

Someone actually hit the nail on the head; Hillary Clinton is the best thing to ever happen to the Republican Party! I’ll give her and her supporters credit for not giving up.

She likes to say, “I’m a fighter” yep she sure is. I honestly don't think the Senator Clinton and her supporters realize the amount of damage they have and are still doing. Thanks to Senator Clinton and her unwillingness to bow out gracefully the only way anyone can "win the nomination" has come down to circa 800 party insiders making the choice…

Every single primary and caucus was nothing but wasted time. To say I’m rather annoyed is an understatement to say the least. I’m from Nebraska our caucus took place on Feb 9 2008. I got up on that freezing cold Saturday Morning to participate. At almost all the caucus sites including the one I was at. The fire marshal locked the doors and people had to caucus outside. Keep in mind it was around 20 degrees that morning. To find out that it was all for nothing isn’t something I find easy to stomach.

I’m going to vote for the green party or libertarian if the general election major parties give me the choice between Clinton and McCain

Sincerely
SC Rose

http://www.kingipod.com

They're a cut above the rest.

Enjoy :)

iPod Parts & Repair

They're a cut above the rest.

Enjoy :)