The talk of Clinton’s demise is premature — isn’t it?

The growing chorus isn’t exactly subtle: Hillary Clinton, loser of 11 consecutive contests, is now expected to bow out and allow us to all shift into general election mode. For much of the political world, the race for the Democratic nomination is effectively over, and Clinton isn’t doing anyone any favors, least of all herself, but dragging this out.

Instinctively, I still find all of this premature, but the wave is certainly hard to ignore. Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter has seen enough:

If Hillary Clinton wanted a graceful exit, she’d drop out now — before the March 4 Texas and Ohio primaries — and endorse Barack Obama…. Withdrawing would be stupid if Hillary had a reasonable chance to win the nomination, but she doesn’t. To win, she would have to do more than reverse the tide in Texas and Ohio, where polls show Obama already even or closing fast. She would have to hold off his surge, then establish her own powerful momentum within three or four days. Without a victory of 20 points or more in both states, the delegate math is forbidding. In Pennsylvania, which votes on April 22, the Clinton campaign did not even file full delegate slates. That’s how sure they were of putting Obama away on Super Tuesday. […]

The pundit class hasn’t been quicker to point all this out because of what happened in New Hampshire. A lot of us looked foolish by all but writing Hillary off when she lost the Iowa caucuses. As we should have known, stuff happens in politics. But that was early. The stuff that would have to happen now would be on a different order of magnitude. It’s time to stop overlearning the lesson of New Hampshire.

Hillary has only one shot — for Obama to trip up so badly that he disqualifies himself. Nothing in the last 14 months suggests he will.

This came the same day Bob Novak wrote, “[W]ise old heads in the Democratic Party [are] asking this question: Who will tell her that it’s over, that she cannot win the presidential nomination and that the sooner she leaves the race, the more it will improve the party’s chances of defeating Sen. John McCain in November?”

And yet, I still find myself thinking, “Not so fast.”

I think John Cole’s take sounds perfectly reasonable:

Why should she get out now? She has spent years preparing for this run, has millions of supporters who want her to continue, she still has a shot (albeit a small one, I think) at winning, and I think she owes it to herself and those who have sacrificed so much to get her this close to continue on. Should she lose the next few states and really start to trail badly in delegates, I think she should probably get out, but it should be on her own terms. Trying to pressure her out right now doesn’t sit right with me, though. What is so bad about letting the voters have their say?

To be sure, a lot of voters in most of the country already have had their say, but the margin is not so one-sided that the outcome is obvious. Hillary Clinton is not, for example, Mike Huckabee, clinging to nothing.

Marc Ambinder, noting that there’s a bandwagon for folks who still think Clinton can win, considers jumping on, but hesitates.

It is very difficult, from the standpoint of politics, of delegate mathematics, and of the news media, to envision a scenario where Hillary Clinton not only recovers her momentum but actually finds a way to obtain a delegate lead — just about the only way she can possibly convince the party that she deserves time to make her case for the nomination. […]

The Clinton campaign has been accused of moving the goal posts every time they fail to reach a previously promised threshold, but the goal posts, right now, are at the back of the stadium. They can’t be moved any further back without bringing the whole thing down. It’s unlikely that the news media, more pro-Obama than anti-Hillary, would give any credence to another attempt to push the contest into April. And, come to think it, there’s no energy left on the Clinton campaign to do, either.

Advisers figure that a loss in Texas is as likely as a win in Ohio; a large number of staffers appear to be willing to quit en masse next Wednesday if there’s a split decision and Clinton gives notice that she intends to fight for another month.

I don’t really have a point here, other than to say that Clinton really does have a week to fundamentally change this race. One could make an argument that Clinton still has a legitimate shot, but it’s getting increasingly less plausible every day.

Alter’s request that she drop out now seems far-fetched, but Texas and Ohio are seven days away, and they appear to be getting more and more Obama-friendly all the time. My inclination is to argue that all this “withdraw now” talk is premature — but only a little.

If Hillary Clinton should drop out now, then Obama should have dropped out back in December when he was trailing her badly and she looked like the invincible front-runner.

Clinton should drop out whenever she damn well pleases, period. And if I were her it wouldn’t be before March 4 (though it might be the day after!)

  • I think she is done and sometimes you hear her camp pointing to the big states she won early (Super Tuesday) as proof that she isn’t. But, if you contested NY and CA again, today, with Obama’s momentum, the results may be different.

    I think the delegate count is so close because she had a great campaign and money machine early and he peaked a little later than Super Tuesday.

    But, I could be wrong. 🙂

  • “My inclination is to argue that all this “withdraw now” talk is premature — but only a little.”

    Clearly by about one week and one day…

  • It is premature. Her strategy has been pretty unequivocal: Texas and OH are my firewall. I expect to lose until then, when I turn things around. So, give her OH and TX.

    I think she’ll lose TX, though. I live in the heart of the firewall, and Obama had 20,000 people pack the Toyota Center, and Hillary keeps holding impromptu, last minute rallies at union halls, etc. so people don’t compare the crowd sizes. They weren’t advertised, you see.

    Huge lines for early voting, which makes the lack of voting machines in Democratic districts less of an issue on election day.

  • If the shoe were on the other foot (meaning, it were Obama who was down 11-0 with faltering finances and media support) the cry for concession would be deafening.

  • “Clinton should drop out whenever she damn well pleases, period.”

    You said “period” — that is, like, sooooooo sexist….!

  • Everyone in the MSM chattering classes wanted to write of Hils in NH, but there were 48 more contests to go, money in the bank, plus the fact that she had large leads in the vast majority of Super Tuesday states and no one grasped how prepared Obama’s team was. It was premature.

    Now? Over 2/3 done. Hils is now low on cash. Her team in shambles and has no idea what they can do to take down Barrak. Her once large leads in her firewall states now gone or shrinking fast. I agree with Alter, she’s just about done. If TX goes Obama then even her lead in superdelegates won’t help her. If she loses OH or PA then seating FL and MI won’t help her at all. Where I disagree with Alter is If I were her, I would wait till March 5 and then decide telling her supporters/donors that she fought as hard as she could, but she lost to the better organized candidate.

  • Mark me as one who thinks Clinton could still win the nomination and doesn’t care if the election lasts a few more months.

    However, I think her campaign has been awful of late. Her team has managed to insult just about everyone she’ll need in November and is constantly harping on the idea that voter’s don’t know what’s good for them. Should she pull it off, she’s alienated many people who would have been in her corner in the general election and attacked the idea of voting itself. Geraldine Ferraro’s column yesterday is only the latest in a string of these screeds.

    They’ve opened up a line of attack that just might work for McCain.

  • The race is still a close contest looking at the numbers, though Hill has a wall of momentum to overcome that doesn’t provide a lot of hope. She should still compete hard through the early March primaries, though if she were to be swept away by what looks like an Obama tidal wave, she should have the political sense that her stature and position in the party will in large part be dictated by how she handles the endgame. If she gets bitter and rancorous she’ll be persona non grata, if she is gracious and reasonable she’ll cement herself as a party leader with power on par with her husband Bill.

  • For once I agree with JRS Jr.

    It’s too soon for Hillary to drop out, but it looks like her firewalls won’t hold. Even if she wins both Texas and Ohio by small margins, her only chance to close Obama’s lead will be gone. She has to win both states big next week to catch him, and the chance of that happening is small and getting smaller every day.

    By next Wednesday the race is likely to be over. Will she withdraw gracefully? Or fight on like Huckabee?

    She will withdraw. She doesn’t want to become a joke like Huck.

  • “…she fought as hard as she could, but she lost to the better organized candidate.”

    Yeah right. She might concede on 3/5, but she sure as hell won’t confess THAT.

    I’m with Cole. Much as I wish she’d go away, it’s not really fair to expect it of her. I DO wish she’d try not to salt the earth too badly on the way out…

  • She will withdraw. She doesn’t want to become a joke like Huck.

    Hopefully. She does have a job to go back to and an important role to play, whereas Huckabee is just stretching his moment of fame as long as possible…once this is over for him, he’s a trivia answer.

  • Hillary has to decide if she’s “in it to win it” for the Democrats, or for her. Hanging on will only hurt us, and her. She should be smart enough to realize that, but then again she should have realized in 2002 that Bush is a liar.

    Here in Texas we are rapidly putting an end to Hillary’s run. When I make calls, I run into one Hillary supporter for every three who want to join the Obama team. We have over 150,000 volunteers right now, working “the ground game”, explaining the goofy caucus voting system and getting people fired up for a blowout and coup-de-gras.

    You can thank us later.

  • While I wish that her campaign had more class (the ‘plagiarism’ incident was crass) and intelligence (just imagine how much worse her campaign would be if she had 8 million dollars worth of Mark Penn), I’m all for Senator Clinton staying in and fighting the good fight. There are several reasons for this:

    1) It keeps the race in the news. The more coverage the Democrats get as they go back and forth the better.

    2) It reemphasizes the Democratic narrative and pumps up the importance of Democratic priorities. The more people hear about having foreclosure relief and good health care, the more people are going to demand to have that from whoever wins the Presidency.

    3) It reenergizes the Democratic party–even in red states, even in blue states. These are states which under the ‘flyby’ standards of previous elections were ignored and taken for granted.

  • I’m an Obama supporter, no question, but I do feel a bit poignant about Hillary’s situation. I do think she could be an excellent president and if Barack had not been in the race I’m sure her nomination would have been as virtually automatic as her campaign obviously expected it to be.

    But there are tides in history that can’t be gainsaid, and this is Barack’s time barring any unforeseen catastrophes. And that’s all I have to say about that.

  • The growing chorus isn’t exactly subtle: Hillary Clinton, loser of 11 consecutive contests, is now expected to bow out and allow us to all shift into general election mode

    We’ve heard many choruses, but the fat lady has yet to sing.

  • “This came the same day Bob Novak wrote, “[W]ise old heads in the Democratic Party [are] asking this question:”:

    Bob Novak has conversations with Wise old heads in the Dem party? I doubt it. As Miguel de Cervantes (Don Quixote) wrote, “The devil lies behind the cross. Burn it.”

  • I have to 100% agree with MrFurious on this one. Also, as Obama has had a bit of a charmed political life, I think it’s good for him to garner the experience of taking it on the chin as he has been. He is in a comfortable position to learn a few lessons about hardball politics that we all know will be invaluable to him in the general election.

  • I wholeheartedly agree. Clinton laid it out on the line that Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania were her breakwater states. So any pulling out before at least the first two have had their say is ridiculous.

    Now, if Obama captures either Texas or Ohio next week, then I would agree with calling for her to pack it in– the delegate math would leave her with no legitimate shot after that point (illegitimate shots, sure, but we don’t want to see games like that played on this side of the court), and her own statements could then be justifiably used against her.

    But right now? Why? She’s still well in contention, and maybe has a shot next week. Let’s just have the pundits quiet down until the votes actually start showing up, not just the polls.

  • Time for Hill to give it up.

    Clinton’s main claim to fame, her tested ability to fight the right wing smear machine, has been blown to bits. Her campaign, bloated as it is with expensive and lazy do-nothing Clinton cronies and hanger-ons, has been beaten handily by a chain-smoking, coke-snorting black junior senator whose name rhymes with Osama.

    L-O-S-E-R!!!

  • The danger in her fighting on, even when victory is manifestly beyond her grasp, is that her remaining supporters will become so embittered at her loss that they will not support the winner. I suppose you could argue that’s a danger now; but I submit it would be less so if she conceded gracefully, rather than being stamped into the mud. If she were to pull out now and make an impassioned plea for Democratic unity, it’d be the polar opposite of what would be achieved if she made a tearful (please, God, no) speech after Ohio that said, “…we gave it our best shot, but we were beaten. BEATEN!!”

    Anyone who thinks Barack Obama has such a head of steam built up that he wouldn’t even need the support of Clinton Democrats to crush McCain has a short memory, and a childlike understanding of dirty tricks. The only people who truly believe this is the Democrats’ race to lose are Democrats. The Republicans expect victory, and every vote will be needed to keep it from their greedy, grasping fingers.

  • A little off topic but I’ll try anyway. I’m sure you have all heard of Resko/Obama land deal in IL and I know that most of you think that its nothing but if you all remember Whitewater was nothing until the republican thinking machine got together and made it a $40b scandal. Now I know that rethugs don’t control congress so investigations at that level will be limited for a while but for anyone that doesn’t think this won’t be a scandal just look a the republican playbook for the last 20 years and you see a pattern. Its not so much it being a scandal its the stench of being a scandal. Point one is already out there Obama said he never talked to Resko about the property only to say later that he and Resko toured the property together and discussed it before he purchased it. That was while Resko was under a federal corruption investigation. Makes me curious. Its best to come clean now because Resko’s trial started yesterday and if anything comes out about Obama all his smooth talking won’t fly. I hope theres nothing but I’m curious.

  • The most surprising thing for me would be to see Billary concede. The Clintons are always placed their own personal ambitions above everything and everybody else. Still, I could be wrong … maybe the Clintons will show some decency and quit, in which case I’d be the first one to salute them and eat crow.

  • Alex at #6 – I think the only way the NY Giants can end their season gracefully is to concede the Super Bowl.

    Isn’t Obama the more Giant-like candidate given his unlikely winning streak on the road? Clinton is more like thePatriots in that until only very recently, she was the expected winner.

  • Curmudgeon: Ditto. It can be easy to forget here on the tubal interwebs, what with all the angry arguments between the two camps, but the vast majority of democrats, at least 80% according to most polls, would be happy with either candidate as president. Count both me and my husband in that group. We both voted for Obama on Super Tuesday, but we like Clinton quite a bit also.

    I’ve actually wished from time to time that I could have voted for her. She received such terribly unfair and sexist coverage from most of the chattering class, Chris Matthews and his ilk. The incredible amounts of hate and smears directed at her made me more sympathetic for her and her candidacy.

    But I also agree with you on the tides of history. Obama promises real change. And if he makes it to the White House, then by non-existent God he’d better keep those promises.

  • The Clinton campaign has been accused of moving the goal posts every time they fail to reach a previously promised threshold, but the goal posts, right now, are at the back of the stadium. They can’t be moved any further back without bringing the whole thing down.

    Not for want of trying – see Billy-boy’s attempt to dismiss Texas.

    I don’t really have a point here, other than to say that Clinton really does have a week to fundamentally change this race. One could make an argument that Clinton still has a legitimate shot, but it’s getting increasingly less plausible every day.

    And the French Army could still have defeated the Wehrmacht after Rommel crossed the Meuse in May, 1940. And Nguyen Van Thieu had a good chance of reversing his fortunes after losing the Battle of Tay Ninh on April 25, 1975. And it didn’t matter when Chiang Kai-Shek had to evacuate Beijing in 1949.

    Hey, anything can happen, right???

    The only question now, as it was in the examples cited above, is how big her defeat will be.

  • The only negative I’ve seen from the continuing race is that the Clinton/Obama battle made it easier for the media to ignore the drip of McCain-as-hypocrite stories. At the same time, the old codger has been unable to land any blows on Obama since the media is consumed with the primary. Considering McCain’s on the verge of being broke, I’ve got no problem with Obama and Clinton continuing to suck all the air out of his room. Fact is nothing she can say about him will come anywhere near what the GOP will throw at him. It might even give him a chance to diffuse some potential problems, such as the dreaded photo.

  • Had Hillary been herself from the start this thing would have been over long ago some dimwit in her inter circle seemed to think that her being nice was the way to win the primary. I for one would have liked to see her fight like she is now instead of being all lovey dovey at the debates she should have went after Obama. Politics is supposed to be a contact sport I would like to have seen her come out of the gate with the slumlord thing and let Obama try to defend it when the MSM would have had to investigate it. Oh that wouldn’t happen would it that would mean they would have to do their job. God forbid.

    I HOPE HILLARY TAKES IT ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION

  • I HOPE HILLARY TAKES IT ALL THE WAY TO THE CONVENTION

    You and the other Hill-bots share in this sentiment alone.

    The rest of us – including the party Democrats – want this thing wrapped up soon so the nominee can begin training their fire on McCain.

  • Of course she has a “right” to continue – the question is, will party rank and file accept her “kitchen-sink-throwing” campaign strategy.

  • But either way the gap is narrowing in Ohio:

    Rasmussen Reports 2/25/08
    Clinton 48%
    Obama 43%

    Public Policy Polling (D) 2/23-24/08
    Clinton 50%
    Obama 46%

  • Jinchi (#10) said: Her team has managed to insult just about everyone she’ll need in November and is constantly harping on the idea that voter’s don’t know what’s good for them. Should she pull it off, she’s alienated many people who would have been in her corner in the general election and attacked the idea of voting itself.

    With a bit of difference for facts, but not strategy, does this remind anyone of someone’s defense of the invasion of Poland?

  • If she continues and runs an ethical and more or less cordial campaign and appeals to voters based on her strengths, I will respect her for her choice.

    However, if she turns to a strategy of savaging Obama with the goal of making him appear unelectable in the general, and then turns to superdelegates to win the nomination in the face of her destruction of Obama, I will be fairly angry and will do everything I can financially and with my time to defeat her at the convention and in the general.

    It’s a question of whether she is willing to draw the line somewhere between her personal gain and the good of the party and country. So far, she has acted pretty ethically. However, there are indications that may be about to change (the “kitchen sink” strategy, for one), and I do not like that. To be clear: she has every right to try to destroy Obama and the party for her own personal aggrandizement. However, I have every right to react strongly if/when she does.

  • Jim– figure on the Resko trial being a big flop. Like many other ‘scandals’, the trial balloon was floated a few months ago, and never got anywhere. Why? simple. There’s really nothing to it (and you’d better believe that if opposition researchers had been able to dig up anything substantial, it would have been all over the news).

    We’ve seen this with other things on Obama, like his admitted drug use as a teenager. Opposition groups try to bring up something, see if it takes wing, and eventually drop it if there is really nothing else to find in it.

    At this point, the guy has gone 14 months under the gun, with oppo guys digging into probably every detail of his personal life, and nothing has come to fruition. His published honesty, no doubt, saved his butt over the drug usage, but figure on that, at this point, if it hasn’t been exposed, it probably won’t be.

    The Resko issue just appears to be having a few ‘bad’ friends. Frankly, who among us doesn’t have that? I am sure most people, myself included, have friends and acquaintances who aren’t always totally on the right side of the law or morality.

    Maybe a poor choice politically, but then, if Obama chose his friends specifically for their political friendliness, there would be a lot less to like about him.

  • Jim (#24) – I think I would have more interest in what you have to say if you had the intelligence to be able to spell Rezko’s name right. Otherwise, you’re just another product of the American system of public miseducation with an opinion, and you know what they say opinions are like…

  • Clinton’s lead in Ohio as of this morning – just reported on NPR – has evaporated. It’s now a “1% lead,” well within the margin of error and therefore a dead heat.

    And there’s still a week left.

    She’s already lost Texas – even with Latinos – and is now losing Ohio.

  • I think the only way the NY Giants can end their season gracefully is to concede the Super Bowl. -Alex

    Unfortunately, if were resorting to sports analogy, though, Obama is the Giants up against the inevitible. We know how that turned out. Obama just avioded the tackle and he’s ready to make a hell of a pass.

    She’s done, she should quit, and every day she stays in and attacks Obama like a winger, she does more harm to the Democratic party. She’s insulted everyone who didn’t vote for her, and, instead of fighting agianst the widespread distaste for her, has only added fuel to the fire, making her less and less likely to be a successful candidate in the general.

    I’m starting to think she just wants to try to damage Obama and set him up to lose in November so she can have an ‘I told you so’ moment. She’s been acting like such a child lately with her ‘ashamed’ comment and sarcastic dismial of voters who support Obama that I wouldn’t put that past her.

    So any pulling out before at least the first two have had their say is ridiculous. -Castor Troy

    Not with the momentum that is building.

    Even if I say I’m standing my ground, I’m still jumping out of the way of a speeding truck.

    But Hillary would rather shoot out the tires and wreck the truck.

  • of course she shouldn’t drop out before texas and ohio, but if she loses that night, she go up on stage and endorse obama that very night and get the general election started on a bang

  • My middle class and primarily Catholic neighborhood in SouthWestern Ohio sure has a lot of Obama signs in the yard. Maybe Clinton’s field team hasn’t gotten her signs out yet but the election is just days away.

  • Ohioan @33 — [t]he question is, will party rank and file accept her “kitchen-sink-throwing” campaign strategy.

    The more pressing question is whether the uncommitted superdelegates will accept the “kitchen sink” strategy for seven more weeks between TX/OH and PA. More pressing than that is whether the donors will tolerate Clinton and Obama spending additional millions in a pointless battle against each other when that money can be used to hit McCain while he is on the financial ropes.

    March 4 is her decent interval. After that, she will not be allowed to go on. Once the superdelegates break heavily for Obama, her slim chance will move to mathematical impossibility, and she will only be destroying her entire career each day she goes on after next Tuesday.

  • Stop salting the earth, Obama-ites.

    What do we lose, keeping our candidates in the news, bashing the Republicans, and otherwise empowering more states to come to the table and feel like their votes were valid?

  • Jim said,

    “Had Hillary been herself from the start this thing would have been over long ago some dimwit in her inter circle seemed to think that her being nice was the way to win the primary. I for one would have liked to see her fight like she is now instead of being all lovey dovey at the debates she should have went after Obama. Politics is supposed to be a contact sport I would like to have seen her come out of the gate with the slumlord thing and let Obama try to defend it when the MSM would have had to investigate it. Oh that wouldn’t happen would it that would mean they would have to do their job.”

    Stringing together FOUR run-on sentences in a row may not be the best way to get your point across!

  • Tom Cleaver you aparently are one of those high educated Obamiacs that jumped on a dream and want him to float you away with him. The test will come when the republicans and the media are all over the scandal. Good luck with your 4 years of investigations. Read the Chicago Trib its all there. They all plead they did nothing wrong ie Duke Cuningham, Tom Delay the list goes on and on. Remember a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.

  • It is no longer possible for Clinton to win the nomination, and she knows that.

    If I use CNN’s count, she is behind by approximately 145 pledged delegates, with a little over 1000 left to allocate (including some already voted for, but unaccounted). That means she would need to get almost 57 percent of the rest of the popular vote, or to put it another way, a greater than 14-point lead in the rest of the contests in order to pull even in pledged delegates. That isn’t possible. She also knows that if the super delegates steal the nomination from the first viable black candidate, when he clearly won more popular votes, more pledged delegates, and more contests, it will destroy the Democratic Party, as well as her chances in the general election. I believe we would see riots – maybe not as bad as 1968, but real riots.

    Her only chance to become President is to withdraw from this race as soon as she can do it gracefully, and to shoot for 2012 or 2016. I’ll be surprised if she’s still in the race by March 8.

  • If [Hillary Clinton] continues and runs an ethical and more or less cordial campaign and appeals to voters based on her strengths…

    Too late. She lost my vote on Tuesday, and she lost my respect forever.

  • Crissa (44),

    What do we lose, keeping our candidates in the news, bashing the Republicans, and otherwise empowering more states to come to the table and feel like their votes were valid?

    It depends on how the campaigns are run. Hillary has been in crazed-attack mode ever since the debate (which is odd, because she was quite positive overall in the debate and received very positive press in return. Why didn’t she take the lesson?) That doesn’t help us at all, it just gives Republicans free ammo.

    On the other hand when she’s run a positive campaign, as in the last two debates, I agree it helps Democrats, no matter who ends up winning.

    And as far as “bashing the Republicans” goes.. Obama has been doing quite a bit of that, but I haven’t heard much from Hillary about McCain. She’s pretty much only been going after Obama.

  • …she lost my respect forever.

    Hear hear.

    Hillary has insulted the majority of the Democratic electorate by insinuating that Obama supporters are idiots for choosing him over her. She can go to hell.

  • What do we lose, keeping our candidates in the news, bashing the Republicans… -Crissa

    They aren’t in the news bashing Republicans. Clinton is in the news bashing Obama. Meanwhile, McCain’s transgressions are getting under rug swept.

    Is that what we want until Summer?

  • Stop salting the earth, Obama-ites.

    What exactly does that mean?

    In what ways are Obama supporters damaging Clinton for a general election run? In what manner are they tarnishing her image for the general in the same way Clinton is doing to Obama?

  • Hey, the general election is still 9 months away. What’s the big rush for a concession?

    Jon Stewart is right, the press is like a bunch of 8th graders at a soccer game. They all huddle around the ball, then it pops out of the scrum and rolls somewhere else, and the crowd rushes to surround it again. I’m afraid some of our posters are doing the same thing.

    Next week if Hillary wins Ohio and Texas, the entire MSM message of the campaign will be quite different. If Obama wins them both, of course they’ll say she’s buried and they’ll be right. But it hasn’t happened yet. In California the pollsters said it was a tossup and I think Zogby had Obama up by 8 points; he was only off by 20%.

    And as for the thank yous, well let’s wait on that. There’s a lot of time to save up “I told you sos” too.

  • When Obama has 2025 then you can all crown your new savior. At least until November

    I’m starting to think that all the savior-talk and cult-language of the Clinton people is nothing more than their own attitudes projected onto others.

    I’ve spoken with a lot of people who are pulling for Obama, and the savior thing I keep hearing from Clinton backers simply isn’t there. We all seem to feel that Obama’s a candidate with the broadest appeal, the best ability to run a 50-state campaign, and the likeliest one to ensure Democratic majorities expand in both houses of Congress. Simple as that. For my part, it’s cold-eyed political calculus, nothing more.

    But some — I stress “some” — of the Hillary backers are off the deep end. Go look at Hillaryis44.org for a taste of a *real* cult of personality. Those people are insane.

  • If Hillary wants to continue with an issues-oriented campaign, then I have no particular problem with that. On the other hand, if the upshot of her continuing is the kind of crap her campaign pulled yesterday (the photo leak to Drudge), then she should get out immediately. Neither the party nor the country needs any more of that. (We all get plenty from the Republicans.)

  • I, personally, don’t see this as really hurting us that much in the long run. The biggest reason to get out now would be to, say, become Senate Majority Leader, or setup for 2012 (should Obama lose to St. Grumpy).

    She could debate, then basically say ‘I am going to win Texas and Ohio, but not by enough, so I am telling the country right now, I am throwing my weight behind the man who should, for the good of the nation, be the next president of the United States…’ I think she snatches up Harry Reid’s job and does some healing.

    But she could lose Texas and still do the healing – ‘we fought the good fight, but it is time to come together against 4 more Bush years…’ The only difference is that she is just the gracious loser, not national leader putting the party and the country ahead of her ambition…

  • It’s sad media ( pundits) have hijacked this election. They have picked the nominee, and the voters have to go along. Who cares about Novak. Where’s his credibility? Alter is trying to throw this election in Obama’s favor. If Obama wins, I’ll support Nader or McCain. There are too many pundits and no real journalists.

  • The biggest reason to get out now would be to, say, become Senate Majority Leader, or setup for 2012…

    After the way Hillary has behaved (and continues to behave) in this campaign, I wouldn’t vote for her if she were running for dog-catcher…not in 2012…not ever. She can be as warm and “healing” as she wants to be, but it won’t work. She’s displayed more personalities than Sybil and demonstrated that she can’t be trusted.

  • If Obama wins, I’ll support Nader or McCain. There are too many pundits and no real journalists.

    Golly, that’ll show ’em!

    When President McCain cements the conservative majority on the Supreme Court and cements the Bush World View for all time, be sure to write to Jonathan Alter and let him know you did it to teach him a lesson.

  • George #58……the kind of crap her campaign pulled yesterday (the photo leak to Drudge…

    You’ve come up with some evidence we haven’t seen yet? Please share. Thanks.

  • Well, all I can say is I’m happy I voted for Clinton before her campaign became so sad and pathetic.

  • She should drop out. If Obama was down 160 on pledge delegates and 80 when super delegates are counted, he would be feeling pressure from Al Gore to Al Sharpton to bow out. She has lost 11 in a row, TX looks like a deadlock with early voting having favored Obama (they started voting a week ago) and she is up in Ohio by 5 (today’s RCP average). She needed big wins in both, then a big one in PA and the rest of the states favor Obama (caucuses, north carolina, oregon, the type of states he’s been winning). Still she needs MI and FL (probably would have to go to court) and still that won’t be enough because of the way democrats give proportional delegates. She STILL will need a convention fight. Now, that’s too many IFs. I voted for her, but this is OVER. The only person she is helping is John McCain and a Hillary 2012 candidacy. I think that’s it. She wants to destroy Barack Obama. I regret my vote for her. She is destroying the party!!!!!

  • Well, all I can say is I’m happy I voted for Clinton before her campaign became so sad and pathetic. -Lance

    I think the word you’re looking for is ‘regret.’ 😉

  • If Obama wins, I’ll support Nader or McCain.

    Yeah, this is exactly what I was talking about when I spoke of the cultlike obsessions of some Clinton supporters. If you’d rather vote for McCain over Obama, then your support of Hillary Clinton is nothing more than an investment in her as a person.

    You clearly don’t care about the issues, because Obama is almost exactly identical to Clinton on the main issues while McCain is almost diametrically opposed. Clinton and Obama both want to deliver on health care, roll back the tax cuts for the rich, get us out of Iraq, and appoint progressives to government positions; McCain wants to block health care reform, make the tax cuts permanent, stay in Iraq for 100 years, and put more Scalias on the Supreme Court.

    No, none of the issues matter. All that matters to you is getting one individual into the White House and if that doesn’t happen, you’re willing to go against everything that very same candidate stands for — just out of spite?

    Sweet Jesus, grow up. We have real problems to solve in this country, problems that both Clinton and Obama are ready to address and ready to fight to solve. If you want to help solve those problems, support the Democratic nominee no matter who it is.

    But if all you want to do is worship an individual, just build a shrine in your basement and let the rest of us get to work.

  • TR #57,

    Part of the problem with the cult thing doesn’t come from pro-Hillary folks. I was talking with my dad who is a moderate. I’ve been trying to convince him not to vote for McCain, since he’s in a swing state. His neighbor is pro-Obama. She tried to convince him to vote for Obama in the primary, not with policies but with an explanation of “how she came to Obama.” Apparently she was told by the higher ups that she was to avoid issues/policies and explain her conversion. Totally creeped my dad out.

    Like it or not, the cult aspect is out there and will get press, probably a lot of press as soon as Obama has the nomination.

  • It’s almost impossible, short of an Obama implosion, for her to come back. The only thing she’s doing now is hurting her legacy and the Democratic party with her “kitchen sink” tactics.

  • She tried to convince him to vote for Obama in the primary, not with policies but with an explanation of “how she came to Obama.” Apparently she was told by the higher ups that she was to avoid issues/policies and explain her conversion. Totally creeped my dad out.

    I’d heard they were trying to get people to explain why they decided to support him — much like Edwards did with that Iowa firefighter (?) ad — and in general, it can be an effective strategy.

    But “how she came to Obama”? Yeah, that sounds more than a little creepy.

  • @ 48: “one of those high educated Obamiacs”

    Oh no! Not education. Can’t have any of that in politics. That might lead to thinking.

    What is with you people, anyways? When did “educated” become a slur?

  • I agree. I do think she’s shooting herself in the foot with her recent attempts to put some strategy together — acting sarcasting about hope and associating Obama with a Christ-like figure hardly seems smart — but journalists in recent years always seem to be all about the rush to pile on to whatever the current fad is — probably a reflection of the way they do journalism, running after the car chase, etc. They told Kerry to get out when he was down, and he came back. They told Gore to get out when he had won the popular vote. We’ve got way too many political commentators who do a disservice to the country. There’s got to be a better way….

  • Racer X said:

    “Here in Texas we are rapidly putting an end to Hillary’s run. When I make calls, I run into one Hillary supporter for every three who want to join the Obama team. We have over 150,000 volunteers right now, working “the ground game”, explaining the goofy caucus voting system and getting people fired up for a blowout and coup-de-gras.

    You can thank us later.”

    No, I’ll thank you right now, and again in November. More than anywhere else in the country, the Republicans in your state need to be taught a terrific lesson.

    Nose to the grindstone, now, and don’t let up until the only red thing left in Texas is the face on Tom Delay when he sees his legacy gone up in a puff of blue smoke.

  • Steve: Markos at Daily Kos says this year’s campaign has been an enormous benefit for local Democratic party organizing in primary and caucus states. Today he offers several stories with examples of how it works. As long as the candidates want to keep at it, let’s keep it going.

  • You know, I was struck by one part of Steve’s comment:

    To be sure, a lot of voters in most of the country already have had their say, but the margin is not so one-sided that the outcome is obvious. Hillary Clinton is not, for example, Mike Huckabee, clinging to nothing.

    But Mike Huckabee has won eight (8) states on the Republican side compared to Hillary Clinton having won eleven (11) states on the Democratic side. And in the heavily contested Wisconsin last week, Clinton’s margin of defeat was the same as Huckabee’s: 17 points.

    To be sure, she has a lot more delegates than Huckabee does. But the only reason for that is because the Republicans use so many winner-take-all contests versus proportional delegate allocation on the Democratic side. However, the same proportional allocation that has allowed Clinton to rack up a lot more delegates than Huckabee despite only winning three more states than him… is the same system that makes it virtually impossible for her now to catch up to Obama’s delegate lead.

  • Matt (71) – Wow, thank you. That drives me insane when people use “educated” as an insult.

    and Elizabeth (60) – This has been said, but you are clearly voting based solely on personality. To be able to vote for Nader or McCain – are you kidding me? Did you know that they’re polar opposites? You must have no idea what either of them has planned for you and the rest of this country to have either of them on the table. I understand that you like Hillary a lot, but please actually figure out what you want to happen to the United States and then vote accordingly.

  • TR #67 – If you’d rather vote for McCain over Obama, then your support of Hillary Clinton is nothing more than an investment in her as a person.

    Hey! Like Obama is about something else? Cheezuz. Who do you think you guys are kidding? I’m interested in politics and I’m retired so I’ve been posting across a number of forums for years and, recently, I stopped counting the Obama fanboys that said we either had to vote for Oback Barama or they would leave the party they had so recently followed their American Idol to. Too bad he didn’t attract any new voters to the party beyond his groupies that will leave with a moment’s notice when their Taylor Hicks doesn’t win.

    Go your own way. Even though he’s pretty, his equivocating message didn’t resonate with me. Hearty congratulations to the Obama campaign staff that correctly determined the American Idol zeitgeist and have your “For a better way: Bill McKay!” moment. I hope it’s enough because it won’t last.

  • Stick a fork in her, she’s done. And not a moment too soon. After that performance tonight in the debate, desperation doesn’t suit her well. Get out soon (March 4?) with your dignity intact and carry on with your Senate career. But just a hint, Hill, you can abandon cozying up to the NeoCons now. Get back to those ass-kicking roots you claim to have, and maybe you’ll earn my respect again. (Not holding my breath waiting, however.)

  • If her last name wasn’t Clinton, and you didn’t have peripheral associations with members of her campaign team, you wouldn’t even be thinking twice about this. She’s lost in every way a candidate can lose, and to the extent that she’s still mathematically close to Obama that’s almost entirely due to her early name-recognition and party-insider advantages.

    Steve, she’s beat. She could win Ohio, she’ll probably win Rhode Island (which is essentially part of Massachusetts), but the delegate count isn’t going to be materially changed. I also think she’s gotten to the point where she’s embarrassing herself on the campaign trail, and that’s something nobody wants.

    Look for superdelegates and party officials to start streaming to Obama after TX and OH are decided, assuming she doesn’t take them both.

  • I don’t like Clinton.
    I don’t blame Clinton for holding out hope until it’s OBVIOUS her goose is cooked.

    As a bonus, if she drops out now, we might miss out on watching her go 16-0 on March 5th and perhaps crush the DLC’s credibility that much better.

    Help us out, OH and TX.
    Seal the deal.
    Make the DLC R.I.P.

  • Comments are closed.