« Credentials Committee: 186 Members | Main | The Daily Five: All Labor Edition (Almost) »

Clinton Campaign Memo: "Millions Of Votes"

01 Apr 2008 04:05 pm

Here's a first look at a memo the Clinton campaign plans to distribute.

This passage is interesting:

The last time that we were told we’d better cut the process short or the sky would fall was when the Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount in 2000. But Chicken Little was wrong. What was true then is true now: there is nothing to fear – and everything to gain – from hearing from all of the voters.
To: Interested Parties From: Maggie Williams Date: April 1, 2008 RE: Millions of Votes Still To Be Cast

2008 is shaping up to be a great year for democracy. The ride to the nomination has been competitive – I believe exactly as our founders hoped it would be.

In the Democratic Party, fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Democrats Abroad and 3 territories vote to determine who will be our party’s nominee.

As of today, the citizens of 42 states, the District of Columbia, Democrats Abroad and 2 territories have had an opportunity to vote – and they have exercised that right in overwhelming numbers. But the citizens in Pennsylvania, Guam, North Carolina, Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota have not yet had the opportunity to exercise that fundamental right. Together, this adds up to nearly 43 million Americans. Are their voices any less important than those of the citizens who have already voted?

Hillary Clinton respects those voters and their right to participate in this historic contest. Their votes, along with all the others, will determine when this contest is at an end. It’s the American way – everybody counts in this country.

The last time that we were told we’d better cut the process short or the sky would fall was when the Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount in 2000. But Chicken Little was wrong. What was true then is true now: there is nothing to fear – and everything to gain – from hearing from all of the voters.

The simple fact is that this election is too close to call.

After 46 primaries and caucuses, by virtually every measure, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are neck and neck – separated by roughly 130 of the more than 3,100 delegates committed thus far and less than 1% of the 27 million-plus votes cast, including Florida and Michigan. Less than 1%! With hundreds of delegates still uncommitted, neither candidate has reached the number of delegates required to secure the nomination. And either candidate can reach the required number in the coming weeks and months.

This is indisputable.

No amount of editorials, articles, blog posts, calculations, formulas or projections or friendly, but heated political conversations can change the basic fact that either candidate can win. We have all been there before when the pundits have proclaimed that Hillary had no hope of winning. Hillary Clinton has been counted out of this race three times before – and each time, with their votes, the American people asked her to stay in the race.

Elections are important because they allow voters to decide how they want the big issues confronting them addressed. Millions of voters are awaiting their turn to answer the questions:

Who is the best candidate to address the economic, health care, environmental and security issues confronting our country? Who is the best candidate to go toe to toe with John McCain? Which of the candidates is best positioned to win the 270 electoral votes needed to become the next president?

This campaign will wait to hear from all of the voters.

Comments (39)

If you were wondering what really happened during Hillary's first ladyship, here's an amusing theory:

http://ladycatherinebedamned.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-was-in-clinton-library-redactions.html

So does she think all the superdelegates who endorsed her acted prematurely? Because most of them acted before one single, solitary vote was cast.

You can't fight momentum and public perception Hillary. Looking back, I think we're all going to say that the Bosnia/sniper story was the tipping point of this election.

I know the media need to write about something everyday, but I think anyone who is allowing for the possibility that she can win is giving the Clintons too much credit for miracles. This gambit is really just about buying TIME through uncertainty-peddling so that she can justify staying in the race. It's akin to her caucuses don't matter gambit, her electoral votes are most important gambit, her popular vote gambit, her Florida and Michigan gambits. When she runs out of misdirection (ie, when the voting is over) her campaign will end. Or, it will end when she has no more money.

I don't think she should drop out, either. I think she'll lose no matter what. I just think she should run a more positive campaign and take the time to talk about issues. Not bloody likely however.

Of course, she had to include the votes from MI and FL to make her case and to throw in the superdelegates who have announced preferences so far.

I guess that the Clinton campaign really does want to disenfranchise the voters of MI and FL after all.

C'mon, already, Hillary. You're not going to get enough delegates to win. Please end this misery after Pennsylvania, so that our party can win in November.

She's now creating and fighting a strawman to try to look like she's doing ... something ... ANYTHING. She's fighting HARD for the rights that Obama, uh, er, never tried to take away. Smell the desperation.

This is a desperation move designed to hold back the super delegates who are unhappy that she and Bill have become intimate and cozy with the right-wing smear machine. What they've done is the Dem version of selling your soul to the devil. As I said before, short-term thinking without looking at long-term consequences. That's not a quality I want in my President.

Craig, I agree with you. That was THE moment. Her experience argument, the central theme of her campaign, totally collapsed and left people to look at two candidates, both with flaws, but only one of whom was at least answering to his flaws in a thoughtful, serious way.

"fundamental right"

I can't seem to find the "fundamental right" to vote in primaries in my pocket Constitution. Where should I be looking?

Florida in 2000 has nothing to do with this primary. But I'm sure memories of that episode riles up angst in Florida Dems.

She'll go broke soon enough.

I don't think that the founders intended the process of electing a president to drag on for nearly two years. Actually, I don't think they even intended for there to be political parties.

Ms. Williams can make whatever arguments she wants, but don't try to sell it as "exactly as our founders had hoped it would be."

This is so disingenuous. Super Tuesday was set up when McAuliffe was still in charge of the DNC, and it was specifically designed to enable Clinton to knock everyone else out early. If she felt so strongly about letting all the states vote, why did she have no plan beyond Super Tuesday? And as the de facto party leader in 2004, why did Bill Clinton not speak up when the media practically anointed Kerry after Iowa, if he felt so strongly about all the states getting a chance to vote? As a late state voter in 2004, I sure would have liked the chance to vote for Dean, but it was already decided long before I got a chance to weigh in.

Think of it as the British at Gallipoli.

All Hillbilly need on her staff is a William Scurry, who invented a way to fire a rifle by using water dripped into an empty tin can to set off the trigger. These occasional rifle shots giving the Turks the impression that the British defense lines are manned when in fact, they have disembarked.

Hillbilly is now salvaging as much of her resources, and (deities forbid), dignity as she withdraws the troops and start to worry about the NY state governor race starting real soon.

Then there is the problem of finding Chelsea a sinecure so she can take over her Senate seat in a few years.

With no further comment this amounts to lending them your space for free.

Senator Clinton's disingenuousness knows no bounds. She respects the importance of every state so much that she made no plans to campaign in any state that was scheduled to vote after February 5. Are we to believe that, if she had swept the early primaries, she would have vociferously insisted that all other candidates remain in the race so that the remaining states could have an opportunity to alter the outcome? Are we to believe that, had Clinton won 11 consecutive contests and amassed a 4-6% delegate lead, she wouldn't be insisting that continuing the process would damage the party?

I just had a mindboggling discussion with a Clinton supporter who suspects she'll vote for McCain in the general election if Obama is nominated because of her personal distaste for the Illinois senator. She added that she thinks that most Obama voters don't know anything about his policies, and are drawn only to his rhetoric. Mind you, she said this after admitting that she knows very little about either Democratic candidate's policies herself. She also explained that a great deal of her antipathy towards Obama is based on his association with Rev. Wright, but noted that she had not taken the time to read or listen to Obama's speech responding to the Wright situation. I encouraged her to read more about both the specific context of some of Wright's remarks, as well as the historical parallels between Wright's condemnations of America and, for example, Martin Luther King's in 1967. She said that I am not going to convert her. So, to sum up, she admits to unfamiliarity with the candidates' policies and refuses to dig deeper to learn something that might better inform her view, but it's Obama voters that are superficial.

Correct me if I missed something, but if she suspends her campaign everyone still votes, just as they would have if she had actually wrapped things up on Super Tuesday. We hear from all the voters. And we don't have her warmly explaining how qualified John McCain is, and how unqualified Obama is, and desperately searching for a way to destroy the Democratic nominee before he can formally take that mantle. (I'm sure that if Biden or Richardson were beating her, they would be equally unqualified, and she would feel just as morally driven to save the voters from their foolish selves.)

People seem to have given up calling on her to drop out and are resorting to waiting around and mocking her failure to actually pay for health insurance--her camp is behind the times again. As others have pointed out, you stop running when the money runs out: Is she willing to spend millions of her own money? I'm now hoping she can damage herself enough going down to destroy any remaining power the Clintons hoped to wield. A necessary purging before the general.

A commenter on TNR has the pledged delegate count from March as 205 for Clinton, 205 for Obama. A month for momentum.

To turn to sports: it's not the fourth quarter of a football game, when scoring 8 touchdowns is technically possible in Maggie Williams's mind. Unless Ickes has found a bunch more states, there are only a few hundred pledged delegates left to alot in these contests. It's like running a marathon, and Obama is now a mile from the finish while she's a mile and a half. And they've run at the same speed for the last few miles. That's faster than she ran through the middle of the race, yes indeed. Maybe she has a super awesome burst of speed coming on, but it won't help her at mile 25 the way it would have at mile 1 or 2.

Hey, how about those tax returns? What happened to being vetted and all that?

Her arguments are nonsense. Nobody is asking for the remaining primaries to be canceled. All the voters in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, and the other remaining states will get their chance to vote. What people are saying instead is that she should end her candidacy because she can't win and she's only going to hurt the inevitable nominee by continuing her kitchen sink/Tonya Harding campaign. But stopping people from voting? Nope. That isn't happening. Popular vote is irrelevant to winning the nomination anyway. Obama is leading by roughly 6% among pledged delegates and that's ultimately what will win him the nomination. The superdelegates aren't going to overturn the choice of a majority of the pledged delegates barring some scandal far more serious than Rev. Wright.

Talk about needing to chill.

Whether she drops out or not, the primaries and caucuses in these states will STILL BE HELD! What it will become is like every other competitive primary season ('72, '76, '84, '88, '92 and '00), in which the later states hold their elections after the last opponent to the future nominee has conceded.

There is nothing new here. In those late-voting states, with the nomination settled the emphasis can be placed on the Senate, House, Gubernatorial and other races of equal importance to our society. So there's still incentive for Democrats to turn out in record numbers.

Finally, it's not like Hillary's name won't be on the ballot in PA, NC, IN, etc. If (God forbid) Obama implodes, the people could still vote for her and put her over the top.

Hillary, her campaign and the idiot bloggers her swoon over her every word no longer matter.
It's over, Obama wins.

"Looking back, I think we're all going to say that the Bosnia/sniper story was the tipping point of this election.

Posted by Craig"

You are funny.

It's dishonest to include Florida and Michigan in calculating Hillary's popular vote totals, because a lot of voters relied on the DNC's declaration that those primaries would not count, and didn't vote. Either those were valid costs or they weren't; and everyone knows they weren't. And you don't determine your nominee on the basis of invalid contests. That's dishonest. As Bob Dole would say: you know it, I know it, Bob Dole knows it. And even Hillary Clinton knows it.

I don't get why the political press loves reprinting press releases by the presidential campaigns. They're uniformly unreasonable and snarky--why bother? You're only encouraging them, Marc.

I agree with this memo from Maggie Williams.
Let's hear from the rest of the states.

Let's see who is the strongest candidate now that the media is finally starting to vet Senator Obama. It's in the party's interest for both candidates to be vetted now instead of later.

Obama has not won this primary- he also needs the super delegates to reach the magic number. This race is very very close- less than one percentage point.

If it were Obama falling behind by less than one percentage point, I am sure he would also be battling on.

The Clinton campaign reminds me of a bad football team that starts complaining about the rules of the game when they fumble the ball in overtime. Give me a break Maggie Williams! The math is insurmountable.

Oh my gosh I am tired of all this silliness. Enough of the straw men and phony hand-wringing from the Clinton campaign, it is getting so old.

And conveniently, it is a distraction from their glaring lack of transparency:
* Where are Hillary's tax returns?
* Where is the Clinton library donor list?
* Where are Hillary's earmark lists?

As an Oregonian (primary, May 20) I would be perfectly fine if the nomination were wrapped up and my vote didn't count for much--just like it hasn't in every other primary I can remember! Big whoop. If need be, however, I'll work my butt off for Obama and, I am confident, he will win quite handily.

Isn't analogizing the situation to the installation of Dubya the Democratic equivalent of a Godwin's law violation?

Obama won Texas.

exactly as our founders hoped it would be? our founders didn't even believe in parties, let alone long, drawn out, nomination fights for parties.

Hey Evelyn,
You're funny! Is Hillary going to win Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, Montana, and South Dakota by 20%?
Is Hillary going to win 70% of the remaining super delegates?
The answer is no, give it up.

Obama has not won this primary- he also needs the super delegates to reach the magic number. This race is very very close- less than one percentage point. --Evelyn

No, it is not. He leads by about 5% points in pledged delegates. She is not overcoming that unless she wins every single remaining state by approximately 65% to 35%.

Bring up 1 of the 57 different popular-vote metrics all you want--when 57 different metrics give different answers, you will not succeed in moving the agreed-upon metric to the single most-favorable calculation of the popular vote, over the original measure of pledged delegates. If we had one popular vote tally it might fly, but with 57 she needs to win by all 57 before anyone (besides you and Maggie Williams) looks seriously at her argument.

Obama's supporters conceded a month ago that if he had lost 11 primaries in a row and fallen behind by a logically (if not miraculously) insurmountable number of pledged delegates, they would have expected him to face reality and bow out, not whine about how the rules were unfair and the supers needed to give him special do-overs. Clinton just maintains a curious ability to raise/loan herself money past this point in the contest.

Marc: Every day you share with us a Clinton campaign email. Seldom do you post the Obama campaign daily email...I don't recall any. So, clearly you are on the Clinton email list. Are you receiving Obama Camp emails? Can you share them with us, or are they just not pithy enough?

I think Marc posted the picture of Bill in redemption with Rev. Wright from Campbana. This said, he does seem to lean to HRC. This is undoubtedly a result of her favorable gravitational profile.

Okay, that wasn't nice at all.

Hillary's new song - Rocky' Gonna Fly Now

Trying hard now
it's so hard now
trying hard now

Getting strong now
won't be long now
getting strong now

Gonna LIE now
LYING high now
gonna LIE, LIE, LIE...

Remember when Hillary refused to stand on a podium with Bush in 2000 at the inauguration? Or how hard the Clintons faught for the Florida recount?

Me either.


Hey, according to Hillbilly, them OBammBammm votes only count for a maximum of three fifths.

So whats the big deal?

Why wasn't Hillary concerned about her staff trying to disenfranchise heavily black communities when they turned up to vote in the recent Texas caucus meetings? It is well documented that her staff did exactly that...trying to challenge literally every caucus attendee and disenfranchise them?

We all know that Hillary is just motived by her own selfish desires. She does not care about the people.

To Whom it may Concern.

Please just look at her !! (Hillary ) Tell the truth
if she GOT the lok and the behavior of a President
Hillary is Nasty and very Crude.

It doesn't matter What she like or NOT !! She got to
know that. President Bush is her President...even she did not vote for him.
Pay some respect !! If she did not respect her own
President in duty...What the "HELL" going on with her.(Called The President names and Disrespected )
Think and think harder !!That why she GOT lots of Problem right now ..People turned awy from her ..
Because she's lying and very LOW in manner >

Concerned American.
Julie
====

I think Bosnia has nothing to do with the end of this election. It was over by Wisconsin at the very latest, and probably by the Potomac primaries before that. Saying Bosnia had a role in determining the nominee misses that the math was already basically impossible for Clinton.

There's only one reason for the Obama side to pressure her to quit -- they want to stop the game while their guy is marginally ahead because they fear what might happen if he is forced to go the full course.

The Obama camp should stop whining about Obama having a competitor still holding her own in the race, and start figuring out how to talk to those voters whose votes he is so consistently losing.

For starters, I can give him a hint about how to talk to them that his supporters would never think of; with respect.