Win somewhere before Super Tuesday. Best chance: Florida. The media Obama backlash should be on by then.
Wumpus
· 1 year ago
-Cry..no, that didn't work -allege that he is a secret Muslim..no, that didn't work -bring up that Tony Montana was based on his life, no that didn't work
Get into Al Gore's time machine, either have Jack! grow a pair or have the IL GOP not bring in Keyes. Thereby, that will stop him from going on tou, raising money and building his rock star status without much merit outside of "he can talk reeeel good" and make him work after he won the nomination. While she has the time machine, tell Blair Hull not to hot/threaten his wife and then act like it was nothing when confronted by the media.
Special thanks to the ILGOP who brought in Keyes outside of a decent candidate (not Oberwies) who would actually make a race out of it.
pickles!!
· 1 year ago
She needs to focus on his lack of experience. He's done really nothing except come in with a rock-star like persona and be a likeable person.
If she's going to win, she needs to point out his inexperience. What does Obama know about the economy, the enviornment, world issues, how does he combat terrorism, ect.
Maybe she can't get momonetum back. after 20 plus years of a Bush-Clinton White House Dynasty, it might be time for someone new.
Southern Right
· 1 year ago
The media won't allow anything to slow down the Obama train. If next months Rezko trial reveals any mention of his name, then the feeding frenzy begins and Obamas future is in doubt. Edwards moves to the front and loses to any Republican that runs against him in November. The Dems need to keep HRC in the race.
Bluefish
· 1 year ago
I don't think Hill can stop his momentum. Her negatives are just too much to overcome. Outside of her base, she is unable to pick off anyone while Obama has been capturing the indepenent and youth votes at a very high rate. She's toast.
Edwards, on the other hand, can still make this a race. He needs to focus on picking off the Hillary supporters who are realizing she's toast. Between Hillary and Edwards, they captured a bit more than 60% of the Iowa vote and will probably garner the same tonight. He must stand up in SC and steal emough from Hill to top Obama. But if his funds are getting as low as it appears, he may be toast too.
Just Asking
· 1 year ago
Keep saying that change is a concept. "Great Obama, you are for change, what are your ideas for change?, what have you changed?," She has to go on to the attack when he counters that she is just attacking him.
He is capitalizing on the fact that he is extremely likable and charismatic. The media is giving him a pass. If you see the times he has faltered it is when he has to get off his talking points and actually think on his feet.
Hillary needs to get in his face about what his idea of change transpates into the everyday comings and goings of this country. Otherwise his fluffy feelgood concept is just that.
ABolt243
· 1 year ago
IMHO, he's won one poll among a few 100 thousand people!!! (Iowa caucases) performed in a questionble manner. What momentum does he have except that manufactured for him by the media?? When he's won primaries in 50% of the states or has %51 of the delegates tied up, that'll be momentum. The media will elect our next president. With any luck HRC/BHO/JE will beat each other up and allow the (R) to win!!!
babs
· 1 year ago
Not sure she can. Obama did the one thing that Cuomo, Hillary, Bradley, et al didn't do - he struck while the iron was hot. This should be a lesson to all future candidates (presidential or otherwise) - Don't wait. Go for it. We will just have to wait and see if it continues to be a good idea. Things can change.
Rob_N
· 1 year ago
Wordslinger,
Is Obama even on the Florida ballot? (I know he's not on Michigan's ballot.)
Delegates from Florida and Michigan are currently not going to be counted at the convention so a "win" in either state is likely to have as much impact as Romney's recent "win" in Wyoming.
--
I don't think she can stop the momentum. South Carolina is going to be huge for Obama.
He's already got an answer to her charge of "What are your ideas for change?" in the form of all his thick policy proposals. He noted this in a speech yesterday -- it's already there.
orlkon
· 1 year ago
I continue to be amazed by the references to "Obama's lack of experience" I may be niave but other than Hillary Clintons advantage of more time in the U.S. Senate what else has she done in government besides be Bill Clinton's wife? Her attempt at domestic policy during the Clinton administration was a bust! Experience should be placed in a better context than being the spouse of an elected official
Carl Nyberg
· 1 year ago
If Hillary Rodham Clinton wants to block Barack Obama from getting the nomination her best move is to quit the race.
Edwards has a slim chance of convincing Dem voters he's more of what they want than Obama.
HRC's campaign has failed. It's not like she's going to create more goodwill than she has. People have decided about her.
Her attacks against Obama have fallen flat or boomeranged.
And a bunch of Dem activists see the Clinton years this way. Bill Clinton did stuff that contributed to flipping Congress to the GOP. And then he established his popularity by contrasting himself with an obnoxious, overreaching Republican Congress. He did little for Democrats as Democrats. And his handling of Iraq set-up the pins for George W. Bush's excellent adventure in Iraq.
So, a whole bunch of Dems don't especially want to "go back".
HRC failed to nail down support among women. She's got nowhere to go.
If HRC stays in the race past when it's clear she's got no chance, I richly hope she gets whacked in the next Dem primary. Accountability is tough.
Carl Nyberg
· 1 year ago
I agree with orlkon, HRC talks like she's accomplished great things in the Senate, but has few actual accomplishment.
What has she accomplished that's as significant as the Obama-Coburn bill that allows online research of federal spending?
Downstater
· 1 year ago
The Dems are toast. Hillary knows what's coming in the General Election for Obama and there's nothing she can do to stop it.
She's got a likability problem. She was the attack dog for Bill during his campaign and white house years. It's tough to transcend that image to one of a woman of vision and compassion.
Hillary faces the same problem that Bob Dole faced in 1996. Bob Dole, as Ford's VP candidate in 1976 was the attack dog against the Democrats. He could never overcome that image when he ran for President himself.
Hillary's only hope was having others raise the issues of Obama's drug use, experience, etc. However, within 12 hours of attempting that, the blogs were all over her. She had to distance herself from those efforts....and fast.
The Clintons perfected the "war room". Either they or their surrogates could quickly and easily carve up an opponent, a bimbo, or reporter who they didn't like. That worked in the 1990's when it might take six days to track down the source and legitimacy of the attack.
Unfortunatley, this time the Clintons are working against their own war room, in reverse. Now, hundreds of bloggers and pajama media are watching their every move and word- ready to pounce on a miscue, planted question or simulated tear.
Case-in-point - Hillary's Sunday School teacher just "happened" to show up at an Iowa event with a copy of Hillary's Confirmation Certificate. Within six hours, reporters were laughing up their sleeves at the weak attempt by Hillary to try to shore up her religious credentials. It went out over the web and Hillary gained exactly ZERO from the effort.
Hillary is a victim of her own creation. I love the irony
Ghost
· 1 year ago
I think Clinton can stop him, the key is the super duper tues states. She need to hit hard CA, NY and few of the other big delegate states. She already has a huge number of super delegates. Then she needs to abandon certain states and oncentrate on a few key big ones. She needs to stop trying to attack obama and instead run adds highlighting her accomplishments domestically and abroad. Send the message of exp and her abilites without making reference to Obama or complaining he lacks exp, i.e. highlight her achivements.
Ravenswood Right Winger
· 1 year ago
1) Attack him for lack of specifics 2) Attack him for lack of experience, esp. his naivete on foreign policy matters, as she did in the debate where she said "retaliate" and he gave some policy wonkish answer. 3) Mention Tony Rezko 4) Ask Obama why he's been silent on the corruption issues in Springfield where the Dems control everything (ah never mind, that is for the GOP in the General Election)
that said, I think she is in real trouble and Edwards is the only guy who can knock Obama off in the primary.
take it easy
· 1 year ago
She needs a time machine. She can then go back in time and run in Illinois for Senate or governor. Hillary would have won easily and she would have given the DNC speech instead of Barack. Had she done that, the nation would have never heard of Obama.
Jon Shibley Fan
· 1 year ago
"The Dems are toast."
Really. Toast. Just like that. National polling and a GOP primary that is an utter pack of dogs with no clear lead dog be damned.
Great analysis.
bored now
· 1 year ago
both obama and edwards are on the florida ballot. the secretary of state kept them there.
OneMan
· 1 year ago
Ummm, No.
Not even Superman would want to step in front of the Obama Train of Manifest Desteny...
wordslinger
· 1 year ago
Florida is a beauty contest with no awarding of delegates. The state party got into trouble for going before Super Tuesday. Still, everyone's on the ballot.
He makes Ryan Look like a Sain
· 1 year ago
Announce that Gov Rod will be his running mate.
Edwards is history
From James Carville's playbook
· 1 year ago
To knock out Obama, it will take family -- the Clinton family.
Specifically, while Bill is distracting Barack, Hillary will crouch behind him. Then Bill will push Barack over. And while Barack is lying dazed on the ground, Chelsea will kick him in the head.
Problem solved, Clinton-style.
KenoMan
· 1 year ago
Hillary is done. The Empress has no clothes!
Let's watch how she handles her ten point defeat in New Hampshire tonight. Will she blame the "vast right-wing conspiracy"?
Just Sayin'
· 1 year ago
She needs to inspire people. "Being ready on Day One" is hardly a rallying cry. The experience thing only helps her if they're both equally convincing that they have a vision for America that people want to live in, and then voters have to choose who will get them there.
But until she shows the vision thing, she just has a bunch of boring-sounding policy ideas. Good for people? Maybe. But not exciting enough to get them out to the polls.
Jon Shibley Fan
· 1 year ago
On topic - I think the whole "experience" thing is not going to get it done. It certainly hasn't yet, no reason to believe it will start working now.
Going negative won't either - someone who has personal negatives as high as HRC can't really afford to go too negative, as it will only drive her own negatives higher. Focus group folks on WMUR were really down on her attacking in the debate.
The "Ready from day one" message isn't cutting it either. I think she can certainly rebound, but it's tough. Maybe steal the best of Edwards' populism and the best of Obama's "hope" and see what happens. It lacks credibility - but if she says it enough time, people might buy it (see: "compassionate conservative," "reformer with results," etc.) But she's burning cash fast, and losing isn't exactly the best fund raising tool.
Edwards can try to out-Obama Obama. His populism message is good, but it is so dour. It may well reflect the reality of the country, but after a certain point, voters do not want to hear a litany of everything that's wrong repeated ad nausea. He needs a little "hope."
I don't say that by way of fawning on Obama. One of the greatest campaign lines I remember was "There's nothing that's wrong with America, that can't be fixed by what's right with America." But the guy who said that's wife just can't pull off lines like that and look sincere.
Little Egypt
· 1 year ago
It will take more than a village to stop Obama. Hillary, quit the race and donate your campaign money to charity before you lose even your own state of New York.
lake county democrat
· 1 year ago
Make it Carter vs. Clinton: point out that Obama resembles the Carter campaign both in policy (not as committted to paygo, Zbigniew Brezeniski as foreign policy advisor, running as "outside the beltway).
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
· 1 year ago
She still has a chance, unfortunately. Even if he wins NH and SC, she could wallop him on Super Duper Tuesday.
This is why the Rezko thing won't work as an attack. Obama is bringing in droves of young voters and first time voters who are voting for him because of his message and because they've been inspired by him as a person. Bringing up some questionable land deal with some guy who means nothing outside of Illinois, a deal which Obama alredy admitted was a mistake, wouldn't really affect those people's votes. Plus, it's such a rinky-dink story that any opponent who brings it up looks like a catty mudslinger. Plus plus, Hillary certainly can't bring it up without looking like a complete hypocrite - she being no stranger to shady land deals.
Obama can only hurt himself. The best strategy for Edwards and Hillary is to keep prodding him on policy issues and wait for him to make a huge gaffe.
Ghost
· 1 year ago
KenoMan Bill clinton has implied that Obama is winning becuase he is young ane male (Bill said he could nto make her younger or a man) So your close. They are bringing in the age and gender card cliaming her inability to attarct young voters is ageism (if yah dont vote for Hiliary your discrminating) You can cut the irony of an argument that asserts the lack of support for Hilliary by giuving it to Obama is a form of discrminiation.
You either support older white women of privledge or you discrminate!
Downstater
· 1 year ago
Jon Shibley Fan:
Okay, fair criticism on my "toast" comment. Let me elaborate. The Democrats have run against George Bush the past two times. A candidate that a willing media was happy to portray as "simple minded", "stupid", and "evil". (In fact the Democrats are continuing to run against GWB, even though he isn't on the ballot). And they lost each time.
While they were succesful in the 06' elections, it was all due to the status of the Iraq war. They don't have that issue to run on in 08'. Sadly, they will be forced to talk about issues like taxes, nationalized health care and the like. The country is slowly and steadily becoming more conservative. (Germany and France are showing the same effect in their national elections).
So, as the Dems, who have only won on the issue of Iraq face 2008, they also face a different candidate than George Bush. The R Candidate will presumably be a better speaker than GWB and won't have his baggage.
At the same time, the Dems will have a candidate trying to dance around the issue of Iraq, while talking about the need for tax increases. As one commentator put it, "the Democrats don't get it. As they rail against the wealthy, they don't realize that the majority of American's don't hate the wealthy, they want to BE wealthy."
The Democrats have a difficult message against a much tougher opponent than GWB. That's why I think they are toast.
Cassandra
· 1 year ago
The Clinton Restoration may have to wait for Chelsea.
She may have to make some staff changes; it will be interesting to see if she is tough enough to do that. She can't run the whole campaign herself and she needs staff who can produce victories. Ideally, they would resign, but that might not happen without a big push. Given the vagaries of world and national events, it is impossible to tell exactly what conditions will be when voters vote in November, so she needs a staff that is both smart and flexible. So far, they have missed the boat big time.
A Citizen
· 1 year ago
It is not prudent to underestimate the clinton machine's enormous capability to launch negative attacks. It simply may be too early in the battle to use up too much of your cannon powder. Down, yes, but out - it would be fatally dangerous to conclude that.
babs
· 1 year ago
Here's the big question for HRC. Does she really want to be the person to quash the hopes of all the young people/African Americans who are finally fired up for a candidate? That would be her lasting legacy if she COULD pull it off. And that's a toe tag no one would want.
RBD
· 1 year ago
This election --probably every presidential election -- is about the way the candidates make the electorate feel. Don't you remember that's how we got W.
The way people feel about Senator Clinton is not changeable. (That's what 35 years of experience gets you: a reputation.) Edwards has no mass appeal either. Mostly he's known for his $400 haircuts and big house.
My guess is that most of the responders on this blog are not old enough to have personal experience with a candidate that makes voters feel that the country's direction can be changed.
It is not often you get a choice that is not the lesser of two evils. I couldn't vote in the 60s (when you had to be 21) but I remember what it feels like.
Pat Collins
· 1 year ago
You either support older white women of privledge or you discrminate!
Or you appreciate the irony of "live and govern PC, be shot down by PC".
This election could be a twofor. We get rid of Hillary (if she doesn't win the nomination, she won't be able to run again) and if Obama loses the general, we get rid of him as well.
babs
· 1 year ago
Pat Collins - Why can't she run again?
Pat Collins
· 1 year ago
Of course she could, as could Obama. But in "real life" terms a failed candidate in the general isn't taken seriously the next time.
USUALLY you can, as a candidate, NOT win the nomination and be a credible (or even front runner) for the next time.
BUT if Obama wins (ugh) then she'd be too old at the end of his second term. And she'd still have all her negatives.
If an R wins, she'd have to take on an incumbent. Possbile, but she has minimized her risk taking all along. She may be the "bob dole" of 2012. I could live with that :)
Her real mistake was believing SHE was inevitable, and not whacking on Obama early and often. She woke up to the danger too late.
I would LOVE to know if she took Bill's advice Oct~now, or not.
plutocrat03
· 1 year ago
HRC is not likely to ba able to stop BO with the current stat of a media which is critical of her record and shamelessly fawning over BO's record.
When I listen to BO speak, all I hear are platitudes and generalities. As Long as the media hives him a pass then no one can stop him.
This is playing into the hands of the Republicans....
North of I-80
· 1 year ago
Go into great depth on his record of accomplishments [or lack of] in IL legislature and in US Senate. Bring up his voting record, his "Present" votes as a way of ducking responsibility, his absenteeism while on the job [they ALL should have 100% attendance]; focus on his "I won't run for president" and then his flip; Rezko; what Obama's regular Chicago church stands for; Obama's lack of experience ever running anything at all, govt OR private; Obama's lack of involvement in IL budget/financial mess [Durbin has been vocal]. Tax issues and experience should do it... Young people think he's a John J Kennedy but forget that Kennedy was a war hero, a House Rep for 6 years, Senator for 6 years with long record of tax, foreign affairs, labor issues] and voted to cut and again as Prez, to CUT taxes. Bill Richardson cut taxes in AZ and turned economy around there but who noticed?
Some flock around Obama because he is an outsider, a fresh face, an unknwon, untested but if she reminds everyone what Jimmy Carter did to us, they will rethink. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton's record and experience pretty much matches Obamas, with exception of witnessing a lot of her husband's doings.
RBD
· 1 year ago
Babs - This is the last presidential campaign opportunity for people in HRC's age group.
Downstater - You need to talk to conservative commentator George Will and his peers: They have agreed for most of this year that the next president will be a Democrat. Their only question is how badly the Republicans will lose in November. Their comments this weekend were that the Rep. Party will get behind McCain because he will get about 48% of the vote and, thus, not wipe out the party. (All of the other candidates would take the party down with them, or so they state.)
VanillaMan
· 1 year ago
Now that HRC has been beaten to a pulp, today's loss will remove expectations for her to win future primaries. This will give her new opportunities to "come-back" when Democrats, Republicans and The Media start picking at Obama and questioning Mr. Hallmark Card's credibility.
As the GOP narrow their candidates between McCain and Giuliani, this will focus on Obama's puffery of his negligibilities by contrast. Within two weeks, this will cause HRC's stock to rise as Democrats start to worry about The Eloquent Facade they have on the verge of being nominated.
Clinton needs to only wait for voter's remorse to start kicking in. There have been real reasons she has sat on top of the heap for all of 2007, and Democrats will take another look at her soon.
Clinton needs to only get to a tie with Obama. She has The Establishment to put her over when she does. After all, she is a one-term Senator to Obama's no-term senator, and she had eight years to build strengths within the Democratic Party.
It is not over, unless she decides it should be. She needs to smile, charge ahead, and let time and The Media start tearing Obama down.
Very interesting. I wonder what part of it was bad.
North of I-80
· 1 year ago
Hey BIG R.PH. did Chicago PD ever get a handle on Trinity United choir director Donald Young's death? Never heard a reason or motive or suspect.
Jon Shibley Fan
· 1 year ago
"A candidate that a willing media was happy to portray as “simple mindedâ€, “stupidâ€, and “evilâ€."
Or a candidate a willing media was happy to let slide with erroneous statements and faulty logic?
"And they lost each time."
Kerry was an awful, awful candidate, and a prime example of why an establishment Dem like Hillary is a liability. And let's face facts, Gore was no prince of a candidate, and if there is dispute of the electoral outcome, there is no dispute that he won the popular vote, and that race could have gone either way.
"The country is slowly and steadily becoming more conservative."
That is a myth, propagated by "a willing media."
"As they rail against the wealthy, they don’t realize that the majority of American’s don’t hate the wealthy, they want to BE wealthy.â€"
First, among the viable candidates, only Edwards is "railing against the wealthy" (and by extension, himself, I guess).
Second, Americans may well WANT to be wealthy, but after eight years of a Republican president, they aren't, are they?
Americans also want a little accountability, and maybe access to health care. And even if it isn't issue #1, they DO want us the heck out of Iraq. And if you don't believe it, wait until the Republican field spits out which ever candidate it spits out - they'll be talking about it too.
And go ahead and print this: Republicans will fall back to "terr'sts gonna gitcha" - and it will not work.
Pat Collins
· 1 year ago
Please ingore 12:52. My bad.
Anonymous45
· 1 year ago
so glad VM wrote my post...I am in total agreement
North of I-80
· 1 year ago
Govtrack http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=4... Voting Record: Clinton missed 143 of 2394 votes [6%] since Jan 23, 2001 Obama missed 177 of 1086 votes [16% - rated "very poor relative to peers" by GovTrak.US Bill Sponsorship: Obama sponsored 129 bills, of which 120 did not make it out of committee [Average] with 1 enacted. Clinton sponsored 350 bills since Jan 2001, of which 304 didn't make it out of committee [Very Poor] but 2 were enacted.
Ghost
· 1 year ago
Vm I agree that HRC definetly has the establishment, and looks to be adding Carville to her team, so yah cant count her out.
Her biggest mistake is trying to fight Obama in the couple off States before super duper tuesday. She is setting up one on one battles which play to his strenghts in states he can exert influence over with his presence. Teach fight and loss causes her national campaign damage. She could ignore, and should ignore, neveada and stop this one on one skirmish and get to the meat of winning, the block of States and voters who will not be meeting with Obama before they get to vote.
wordslinger
· 1 year ago
I think you'll find the Clinton strategy in action here.
Ghost, don't forget S. Carolina. He may trounce her there.
thomas paine
· 1 year ago
Hill should follow Hitchens' lead on Slate today about Obama's interesting choice in religious worship in Chicago.
amy
· 1 year ago
if it's words he wants, words he gets. go back to Obama before the current packaged, air brushed version. what did he say, what did he do on issues that matter to average people. Clinton is starting to do this by looking at Obama and crime. he's a far left politician from the people's republic of Hyde Park who goes old school good old boy when it comes to deals.....the Alison Davis stuff is good too....when he wants to get money.
limo liberal, not man of the people. and bash him for his ageist sexist stuff. we should not forget that his consultants did this.
Rich Miller
· 1 year ago
===bash him for his ageist sexist stuff===
Please expound.
wordslinger
· 1 year ago
thomas paine, she can't do it, but you can bet the GOP will if he gets the nomination.
RBD
· 1 year ago
Ghost - Even the HRC staff says Obama wins SC by a lot; half the Dem voters are black.
And wasn't there a funny moment at one of the recent Dem debates where someone pointed out that there are a lot of old Clinton Establishment campaigners on the Obama staff?
What Obama's early success will do is allow the people who signed up early for Clinton (and Edwards) to back out of that commitment and save face in their local community. During the last year I've been asking the people who are party activists around the country about their candidate preference. Everyone one said their first choice is "unity behind a candidate" over any given individual. That doesn't mean the individuals aren’t helping a specific candidate now but it is weak support compared to “get rid of the right-wing Republicans for good.â€
Thus, back to Rich’s original question: To beat Obama, Clinton and Edwards have to look like they are bigger winners than he is. The fact that Clinton’s Inevitability didn’t play out takes her out of the race. And if Southerner Edwards can’t win in the southern states, it makes it hard to explain how he can win elsewhere.
While the younger voters may be in a Obama-or-nobody mindset, the middle-aged Dems just want to win.
Independent
· 1 year ago
Hillary's best chance is to simply tread water through January. After Obama is frontrunner for a while the media will get bored and look for ways to bring him back to earth. The story will shift to his lack of experience or connections with Rezko and his ilk.
McCain stayed afloat as Republicans flirted with Giuliani and then Huckabee and now they appear headed back to the safe choice in McCain. I see the same with Dems and Hillary if she can live through January.
amy
· 1 year ago
what, you've been missing the references to tired and old for weeks now? how about the [deleted by Miller] anger that she's trying to play the woman card? what that means is the media follows the lead of his campaign and goes on about "cackle" (wonder who came up with that) and Kass is allowed to expound about the White Witch.
Ghost
· 1 year ago
Rich yah I think he will torunce her in S. Carolina as well. her best strategy is to not fight him there. She can spin it as not having been present in the state to fight him, which gives her the best chance to call hisvictory hallow and downplay it. Its not, but this is her best was to handle and spin it. Abandon S Carolina and Nevada and let him roll through unopsed. She can use the time to work the SDTues States.
Rich Miller
· 1 year ago
Amy, I seriously doubt that Kass is taking marching orders from Obama.
Ghost, that's a good idea, but she was claiming she'd win S. Carolina just a few weeks ago. Still, it's a thought.
Jon Shibley Fan
· 1 year ago
Wow, so now I've read in the comments section that Obama is both a Regular Democratic Machine candidate, and a puppetmaster for John Kass.
The Obama story as told by some on this blog has more plot twists than an episode of Scooby Doo. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting to see what happens next. I've got my fingers crossed that the Illuminati and the World Bank are involved.
Sacks Romana
· 1 year ago
Ghost mentions something that may not stop Obama's momentum, but would do well enough to stop his nomination: Superdelegates.
Superdelegates are people like elected officials and other "special" democrats whose vote is equal to any delegate bound through a primary or caucus. Now that may not sound like much. So big deal if a Mike Madigan equivalent or a Dick Durbinesque official from another state gets to be a superdelegate to the DNC. Haven't they earned that right through their years of service to the party? Except here's the kicker, OVER 40% of the delegates at the DNC are superdelegates. OVER 40% of the delegates at the DNC are completely unbound by any primary or caucus result, ie the will of the voters.
And this is where Bill comes in. His cute speeches for his wife may not be putting her over the top at all the campaign stops, but what superdelegate is going to resist doing a favor for a former president and soon-to-be first-husband. Or maybe they already owe a favor from several years back, that time the president came through and endorsed them, helping to launch or further their political careers.
Needless to say it's a hugely undemocratic system (irony!), and something the media completely ignores and forgets about when talking about the primaries. Clinton could theoretically lose to Obama by 10% in every state, but if she has 15% more superdelegates, she still wins the nomination.
Papa Legba
· 1 year ago
Well, from the comments here, I will start the effort to craft a golden statue of Barak. You can send to me the donations it will take to build it. Only cash or credit cards, please, and minimum donations are $500. Thanks.
Ghost
· 1 year ago
Sacks, cnn is reporting that HRC has 169 total delegates so far (to Obama's 66) to somehwat highlight this super deleate effect.
Setting aside Bill, who is definetly a part of it, most of the superdelegates are your establishment cor democrats. That is HRC big base and support group. She can potenialy get the nod from the core dems, and only have to bring in a few big state wins to carry the day.
However if she wins this way, look for a lot of pot shots about how she never had the dem support, and a number of voters voting repub over anger at such an outcome. Like Obama or hate him, he is not juct turning out the vote, he is churning out voters in huge numbers. Something the dems should be looking at and considering as important if they want to beat the repubs. Both Bill Clinton and Kennedy were critized for their lack of exp, and both won their elections.
ArchPundit
· 1 year ago
Actually, Obama should win South Carolina unless he's completely incompetent--and that was true before Iowa--Iowa just cemented it. The biggest issue for African-Americans was can he get white people's votes. Given Iowa went for him and all indications are New Hampshire is going for him, that problem is taking care of.
The African-American vote had been breaking his way in South Carolina, it started breaking harder over the weekend and I'd expect that to continue until election day there. African-Americans make up about 51% of the Democratic electorate so South Carolina is the last place I'd challenge Obama if I were her.
HappyToaster
· 1 year ago
She's going to try and wedge him from the Hispanic vote on Super Tuesday.
Something like a Dukakis 1988 long march but against a much tougher candidate and with no spoilers winning key states.
Pat Collins
· 1 year ago
go back to Obama before the current packaged, air brushed version.
I am sure a TON of Clinton people have been doing that already. All the way back to Kindergarden :)
Bail on SD
Not a bad idea, but she should have declared it by now. If she loses NH and then bails, it looks like desperation.
Super delegates
And you think these super delegates will dump a vote winning Obama to shore up Hillary? More likely they'll bail on her to climb on the bandwagon.
biggest issue for African-Americans was can he get white people’s votes. Given Iowa went for him
So, lily white Iowa isn't such a bad thing after all? *^^*
Hillary Rodham Clinton can try to change the subject back to experience, but that hasn't been working so well. Casting herself as change plus experience hasn't worked to well either, nor has redefining herself as the real change.
Now, she can try to tear Obama down over the next four weeks. George H.W. Bush tried to tear down Bill, and we all saw how well that worked. This election is not about who inhaled and who didn't. And as Clinton proved in 1992, it isn't about resumes or platforms either.
A real Catch-22.
Hillary Clinton is a great partisan, and if she really cares as much about beating the Republicans as we all know she does, she should recognize that Barack Obama's candidacy is the best thing that could happen to the Democratic Party, not attack him, and let the chips fall where they may on Feb. 5th. He can unite Democrats, Independents, and even moderate Republicans. Next to her (but probably not for long), he's the best fundraiser in the country, and a much better campaigner. By his very persona, Obama embodies the hope and future of the Democratic Party and the nation.
By supporting Obama, she can reinvent her own public image, and would be next in line to assume Ted Kennedy's role as the conscience of the Democratic Party in the U.S. Congress. And that's not such a bad gig.
"The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change."
"For too long we've been told about 'us' and 'them.' Each and every election we see a new slate of arguments and ads telling us that 'they' are the problem, not 'us.' But there can be no 'them' in America. There's only us."
- Bill Clinton
Thinking without the box
· 1 year ago
She doesn't stop him. She can't run from her past it will find her and has. Obama isn't killing Hillary, Hillary is killing Hillary. Clinton has so much negative baggage she can't even get out of the starting gate. One thing she might do is muzzle her husband his old song and dance will send voters racing to Obama. In the end Edwards will be the big surprise and Obama will get run over by the Democrat political machine.
Ghost
· 1 year ago
YDD, in sum, we used to have Reagan Democrats, now we can have Obama Republicans.
Leave a light on George
· 1 year ago
Bill S. Preston - Rezko is a rinky dink story? It is going to take down the Gov. of Illinois. I think it could do some real harm to a presidential candidate. Hell Gary Hart just had a girl sit on his lap for a picture and he was gone.
===A panicked and cash-short Clinton campaign is seriously considering giving up on the Nevada caucuses and on the South Carolina primary in order to regroup and to save resources for the massive 19-state mega-primary on February 5.===
wordslinger
· 1 year ago
Hilary has spent $80 million of $100 million. Shades of Howard Dean. He blew all his money before New Hampshire, too.
Doesn't speak too well for her whole experience/competence argument. Lot of fat and happy staff, though.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
· 1 year ago
Leave a Light - The Rezko story in-state is a big deal, as his close ties to the Governor are obvious. But Obama had nowhere near that kind of connection with Rezko. He didn't benefit politically from Rezko. He didn't hurt the state or taxpayers, no pay to play, etc. He bought some property. He said it was a mistake. Let's keep in mind that Rezko hadn't been indicted yet - who cares if it was widely thought that he might be under investigation? It's widely thought now that the Governor is, or should be, under investigation - are people supposed to ignore him as a result?
I just think if the story gets any more than 3 days play in the national media then the entire system is broken. Plus, I still think that young voters won't give a crap.
Rich Miller
· 1 year ago
I'm gonna close this thread becase I've opened a fresh one here.
All Comments
-allege that he is a secret Muslim..no, that didn't work
-bring up that Tony Montana was based on his life, no that didn't work
Get into Al Gore's time machine, either have Jack! grow a pair or have the IL GOP not bring in Keyes. Thereby, that will stop him from going on tou, raising money and building his rock star status without much merit outside of "he can talk reeeel good" and make him work after he won the nomination. While she has the time machine, tell Blair Hull not to hot/threaten his wife and then act like it was nothing when confronted by the media.
Special thanks to the ILGOP who brought in Keyes outside of a decent candidate (not Oberwies) who would actually make a race out of it.
If she's going to win, she needs to point out his inexperience. What does Obama know about the economy, the enviornment, world issues, how does he combat terrorism, ect.
Maybe she can't get momonetum back. after 20 plus years of a Bush-Clinton White House Dynasty, it might be time for someone new.
Edwards, on the other hand, can still make this a race. He needs to focus on picking off the Hillary supporters who are realizing she's toast. Between Hillary and Edwards, they captured a bit more than 60% of the Iowa vote and will probably garner the same tonight. He must stand up in SC and steal emough from Hill to top Obama. But if his funds are getting as low as it appears, he may be toast too.
He is capitalizing on the fact that he is extremely likable and charismatic. The media is giving him a pass. If you see the times he has faltered it is when he has to get off his talking points and actually think on his feet.
Hillary needs to get in his face about what his idea of change transpates into the everyday comings and goings of this country. Otherwise his fluffy feelgood concept is just that.
Is Obama even on the Florida ballot? (I know he's not on Michigan's ballot.)
Delegates from Florida and Michigan are currently not going to be counted at the convention so a "win" in either state is likely to have as much impact as Romney's recent "win" in Wyoming.
--
I don't think she can stop the momentum. South Carolina is going to be huge for Obama.
He's already got an answer to her charge of "What are your ideas for change?" in the form of all his thick policy proposals. He noted this in a speech yesterday -- it's already there.
Edwards has a slim chance of convincing Dem voters he's more of what they want than Obama.
HRC's campaign has failed. It's not like she's going to create more goodwill than she has. People have decided about her.
Her attacks against Obama have fallen flat or boomeranged.
And a bunch of Dem activists see the Clinton years this way. Bill Clinton did stuff that contributed to flipping Congress to the GOP. And then he established his popularity by contrasting himself with an obnoxious, overreaching Republican Congress. He did little for Democrats as Democrats. And his handling of Iraq set-up the pins for George W. Bush's excellent adventure in Iraq.
So, a whole bunch of Dems don't especially want to "go back".
HRC failed to nail down support among women. She's got nowhere to go.
If HRC stays in the race past when it's clear she's got no chance, I richly hope she gets whacked in the next Dem primary. Accountability is tough.
What has she accomplished that's as significant as the Obama-Coburn bill that allows online research of federal spending?
She's got a likability problem. She was the attack dog for Bill during his campaign and white house years. It's tough to transcend that image to one of a woman of vision and compassion.
Hillary faces the same problem that Bob Dole faced in 1996. Bob Dole, as Ford's VP candidate in 1976 was the attack dog against the Democrats. He could never overcome that image when he ran for President himself.
Hillary's only hope was having others raise the issues of Obama's drug use, experience, etc. However, within 12 hours of attempting that, the blogs were all over her. She had to distance herself from those efforts....and fast.
The Clintons perfected the "war room". Either they or their surrogates could quickly and easily carve up an opponent, a bimbo, or reporter who they didn't like. That worked in the 1990's when it might take six days to track down the source and legitimacy of the attack.
Unfortunatley, this time the Clintons are working against their own war room, in reverse. Now, hundreds of bloggers and pajama media are watching their every move and word- ready to pounce on a miscue, planted question or simulated tear.
Case-in-point - Hillary's Sunday School teacher just "happened" to show up at an Iowa event with a copy of Hillary's Confirmation Certificate. Within six hours, reporters were laughing up their sleeves at the weak attempt by Hillary to try to shore up her religious credentials. It went out over the web and Hillary gained exactly ZERO from the effort.
Hillary is a victim of her own creation. I love the irony
2) Attack him for lack of experience, esp. his naivete on foreign policy matters, as she did in the debate where she said "retaliate" and he gave some policy wonkish answer.
3) Mention Tony Rezko
4) Ask Obama why he's been silent on the corruption issues in Springfield where the Dems control everything (ah never mind, that is for the GOP in the General Election)
that said, I think she is in real trouble and Edwards is the only guy who can knock Obama off in the primary.
Really. Toast. Just like that. National polling and a GOP primary that is an utter pack of dogs with no clear lead dog be damned.
Great analysis.
Not even Superman would want to step in front of the Obama Train of Manifest Desteny...
Edwards is history
Specifically, while Bill is distracting Barack, Hillary will crouch behind him. Then Bill will push Barack over. And while Barack is lying dazed on the ground, Chelsea will kick him in the head.
Problem solved, Clinton-style.
Let's watch how she handles her ten point defeat in New Hampshire tonight. Will she blame the "vast right-wing conspiracy"?
But until she shows the vision thing, she just has a bunch of boring-sounding policy ideas. Good for people? Maybe. But not exciting enough to get them out to the polls.
Going negative won't either - someone who has personal negatives as high as HRC can't really afford to go too negative, as it will only drive her own negatives higher. Focus group folks on WMUR were really down on her attacking in the debate.
The "Ready from day one" message isn't cutting it either. I think she can certainly rebound, but it's tough. Maybe steal the best of Edwards' populism and the best of Obama's "hope" and see what happens. It lacks credibility - but if she says it enough time, people might buy it (see: "compassionate conservative," "reformer with results," etc.) But she's burning cash fast, and losing isn't exactly the best fund raising tool.
Edwards can try to out-Obama Obama. His populism message is good, but it is so dour. It may well reflect the reality of the country, but after a certain point, voters do not want to hear a litany of everything that's wrong repeated ad nausea. He needs a little "hope."
I don't say that by way of fawning on Obama. One of the greatest campaign lines I remember was "There's nothing that's wrong with America, that can't be fixed by what's right with America." But the guy who said that's wife just can't pull off lines like that and look sincere.
This is why the Rezko thing won't work as an attack. Obama is bringing in droves of young voters and first time voters who are voting for him because of his message and because they've been inspired by him as a person. Bringing up some questionable land deal with some guy who means nothing outside of Illinois, a deal which Obama alredy admitted was a mistake, wouldn't really affect those people's votes. Plus, it's such a rinky-dink story that any opponent who brings it up looks like a catty mudslinger. Plus plus, Hillary certainly can't bring it up without looking like a complete hypocrite - she being no stranger to shady land deals.
Obama can only hurt himself. The best strategy for Edwards and Hillary is to keep prodding him on policy issues and wait for him to make a huge gaffe.
You either support older white women of privledge or you discrminate!
Okay, fair criticism on my "toast" comment.
Let me elaborate. The Democrats have run against George Bush the past two times. A candidate that a willing media was happy to portray as "simple minded", "stupid", and "evil". (In fact the Democrats are continuing to run against GWB, even though he isn't on the ballot). And they lost each time.
While they were succesful in the 06' elections, it was all due to the status of the Iraq war. They don't have that issue to run on in 08'. Sadly, they will be forced to talk about issues like taxes, nationalized health care and the like. The country is slowly and steadily becoming more conservative. (Germany and France are showing the same effect in their national elections).
So, as the Dems, who have only won on the issue of Iraq face 2008, they also face a different candidate than George Bush. The R Candidate will presumably be a better speaker than GWB and won't have his baggage.
At the same time, the Dems will have a candidate trying to dance around the issue of Iraq, while talking about the need for tax increases. As one commentator put it, "the Democrats don't get it. As they rail against the wealthy, they don't realize that the majority of American's don't hate the wealthy, they want to BE wealthy."
The Democrats have a difficult message against a much tougher opponent than GWB. That's why I think they are toast.
She may have to make some staff changes; it will be interesting to see if she is tough enough to do that. She can't run the whole campaign herself and
she needs staff who can produce victories. Ideally, they would resign, but that might not happen without a big push. Given the vagaries of world and national events, it is impossible to tell exactly what conditions will be when voters vote in November, so she needs a staff that is both smart and flexible. So far, they have missed the boat big time.
The way people feel about Senator Clinton is not changeable. (That's what 35 years of experience gets you: a reputation.) Edwards has no mass appeal either. Mostly he's known for his $400 haircuts and big house.
My guess is that most of the responders on this blog are not old enough to have personal experience with a candidate that makes voters feel that the country's direction can be changed.
It is not often you get a choice that is not the lesser of two evils. I couldn't vote in the 60s (when you had to be 21) but I remember what it feels like.
Or you appreciate the irony of "live and govern PC, be shot down by PC".
This election could be a twofor. We get rid of Hillary (if she doesn't win the nomination, she won't be able to run again) and if Obama loses the general, we get rid of him as well.
USUALLY you can, as a candidate, NOT win the nomination and be a credible (or even front runner) for the next time.
BUT if Obama wins (ugh) then she'd be too old at the end of his second term. And she'd still have all her negatives.
If an R wins, she'd have to take on an incumbent. Possbile, but she has minimized her risk taking all along. She may be the "bob dole" of 2012. I could live with that :)
Her real mistake was believing SHE was inevitable, and not whacking on Obama early and often. She woke up to the danger too late.
I would LOVE to know if she took Bill's advice Oct~now, or not.
When I listen to BO speak, all I hear are platitudes and generalities. As Long as the media hives him a pass then no one can stop him.
This is playing into the hands of the Republicans....
Young people think he's a John J Kennedy but forget that Kennedy was a war hero, a House Rep for 6 years, Senator for 6 years with long record of tax, foreign affairs, labor issues] and voted to cut and again as Prez, to CUT taxes. Bill Richardson cut taxes in AZ and turned economy around there but who noticed?
Some flock around Obama because he is an outsider, a fresh face, an unknwon, untested but if she reminds everyone what Jimmy Carter did to us, they will rethink.
Unfortunately, Senator Clinton's record and experience pretty much matches Obamas, with exception of witnessing a lot of her husband's doings.
Downstater - You need to talk to conservative commentator George Will and his peers: They have agreed for most of this year that the next president will be a Democrat. Their only question is how badly the Republicans will lose in November. Their comments this weekend were that the Rep. Party will get behind McCain because he will get about 48% of the vote and, thus, not wipe out the party. (All of the other candidates would take the party down with them, or so they state.)
As the GOP narrow their candidates between McCain and Giuliani, this will focus on Obama's puffery of his negligibilities by contrast. Within two weeks, this will cause HRC's stock to rise as Democrats start to worry about The Eloquent Facade they have on the verge of being nominated.
Clinton needs to only wait for voter's remorse to start kicking in. There have been real reasons she has sat on top of the heap for all of 2007, and Democrats will take another look at her soon.
Clinton needs to only get to a tie with Obama. She has The Establishment to put her over when she does. After all, she is a one-term Senator to Obama's no-term senator, and she had eight years to build strengths within the Democratic Party.
It is not over, unless she decides it should be. She needs to smile, charge ahead, and let time and The Media start tearing Obama down.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITI...
Vince Foster anyone?
Or a candidate a willing media was happy to let slide with erroneous statements and faulty logic?
"And they lost each time."
Kerry was an awful, awful candidate, and a prime example of why an establishment Dem like Hillary is a liability. And let's face facts, Gore was no prince of a candidate, and if there is dispute of the electoral outcome, there is no dispute that he won the popular vote, and that race could have gone either way.
"The country is slowly and steadily becoming more conservative."
That is a myth, propagated by "a willing media."
"As they rail against the wealthy, they don’t realize that the majority of American’s don’t hate the wealthy, they want to BE wealthy.â€"
First, among the viable candidates, only Edwards is "railing against the wealthy" (and by extension, himself, I guess).
Second, Americans may well WANT to be wealthy, but after eight years of a Republican president, they aren't, are they?
Americans also want a little accountability, and maybe access to health care. And even if it isn't issue #1, they DO want us the heck out of Iraq. And if you don't believe it, wait until the Republican field spits out which ever candidate it spits out - they'll be talking about it too.
And go ahead and print this: Republicans will fall back to "terr'sts gonna gitcha" - and it will not work.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=4...
Voting Record:
Clinton missed 143 of 2394 votes [6%] since Jan 23, 2001
Obama missed 177 of 1086 votes [16% - rated "very poor relative to peers" by GovTrak.US
Bill Sponsorship:
Obama sponsored 129 bills, of which 120 did not make it out of committee [Average] with 1 enacted.
Clinton sponsored 350 bills since Jan 2001, of which 304 didn't make it out of committee [Very Poor] but 2 were enacted.
Her biggest mistake is trying to fight Obama in the couple off States before super duper tuesday. She is setting up one on one battles which play to his strenghts in states he can exert influence over with his presence. Teach fight and loss causes her national campaign damage. She could ignore, and should ignore, neveada and stop this one on one skirmish and get to the meat of winning, the block of States and voters who will not be meeting with Obama before they get to vote.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
back to Obama before the current packaged,
air brushed version. what did he say, what
did he do on issues that matter to average
people. Clinton is starting to do this by
looking at Obama and crime. he's a far left
politician from the people's republic of
Hyde Park who goes old school good old boy
when it comes to deals.....the Alison Davis stuff
is good too....when he wants to get money.
limo liberal, not man of the people. and
bash him for his ageist sexist stuff. we
should not forget that his consultants
did this.
Please expound.
And wasn't there a funny moment at one of the recent Dem debates where someone pointed out that there are a lot of old Clinton Establishment campaigners on the Obama staff?
What Obama's early success will do is allow the people who signed up early for Clinton (and Edwards) to back out of that commitment and save face in their local community. During the last year I've been asking the people who are party activists around the country about their candidate preference. Everyone one said their first choice is "unity behind a candidate" over any given individual. That doesn't mean the individuals aren’t helping a specific candidate now but it is weak support compared to “get rid of the right-wing Republicans for good.â€
Thus, back to Rich’s original question: To beat Obama, Clinton and Edwards have to look like they are bigger winners than he is. The fact that Clinton’s Inevitability didn’t play out takes her out of the race. And if Southerner Edwards can’t win in the southern states, it makes it hard to explain how he can win elsewhere.
While the younger voters may be in a Obama-or-nobody mindset, the middle-aged Dems just want to win.
McCain stayed afloat as Republicans flirted with Giuliani and then Huckabee and now they appear headed back to the safe choice in McCain. I see the same with Dems and Hillary if she can live through January.
and old for weeks now? how about the [deleted by Miller]
anger that she's trying to play the woman card?
what that means is the media follows
the lead of his campaign and goes on about
"cackle" (wonder who came up with that) and
Kass is allowed to expound about the White
Witch.
Ghost, that's a good idea, but she was claiming she'd win S. Carolina just a few weeks ago. Still, it's a thought.
The Obama story as told by some on this blog has more plot twists than an episode of Scooby Doo. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting to see what happens next. I've got my fingers crossed that the Illuminati and the World Bank are involved.
Superdelegates are people like elected officials and other "special" democrats whose vote is equal to any delegate bound through a primary or caucus. Now that may not sound like much. So big deal if a Mike Madigan equivalent or a Dick Durbinesque official from another state gets to be a superdelegate to the DNC. Haven't they earned that right through their years of service to the party? Except here's the kicker, OVER 40% of the delegates at the DNC are superdelegates. OVER 40% of the delegates at the DNC are completely unbound by any primary or caucus result, ie the will of the voters.
And this is where Bill comes in. His cute speeches for his wife may not be putting her over the top at all the campaign stops, but what superdelegate is going to resist doing a favor for a former president and soon-to-be first-husband. Or maybe they already owe a favor from several years back, that time the president came through and endorsed them, helping to launch or further their political careers.
Needless to say it's a hugely undemocratic system (irony!), and something the media completely ignores and forgets about when talking about the primaries. Clinton could theoretically lose to Obama by 10% in every state, but if she has 15% more superdelegates, she still wins the nomination.
Setting aside Bill, who is definetly a part of it, most of the superdelegates are your establishment cor democrats. That is HRC big base and support group. She can potenialy get the nod from the core dems, and only have to bring in a few big state wins to carry the day.
However if she wins this way, look for a lot of pot shots about how she never had the dem support, and a number of voters voting repub over anger at such an outcome. Like Obama or hate him, he is not juct turning out the vote, he is churning out voters in huge numbers. Something the dems should be looking at and considering as important if they want to beat the repubs. Both Bill Clinton and Kennedy were critized for their lack of exp, and both won their elections.
The African-American vote had been breaking his way in South Carolina, it started breaking harder over the weekend and I'd expect that to continue until election day there. African-Americans make up about 51% of the Democratic electorate so South Carolina is the last place I'd challenge Obama if I were her.
Something like a Dukakis 1988 long march but against a much tougher candidate and with no spoilers winning key states.
air brushed version.
I am sure a TON of Clinton people have been doing that already. All the way back to Kindergarden :)
Bail on SD
Not a bad idea, but she should have declared it by now. If she loses NH and then bails, it looks like desperation.
Super delegates
And you think these super delegates will dump a vote winning Obama to shore up Hillary? More likely they'll bail on her to climb on the bandwagon.
biggest issue for African-Americans was can he get white people’s votes. Given Iowa went for him
So, lily white Iowa isn't such a bad thing after all? *^^*
WHAT NEXT FOR HILLARY
Hillary Rodham Clinton can try to change the subject back to experience, but that hasn't been working so well. Casting herself as change plus experience hasn't worked to well either, nor has redefining herself as the real change.
Now, she can try to tear Obama down over the next four weeks. George H.W. Bush tried to tear down Bill, and we all saw how well that worked. This election is not about who inhaled and who didn't. And as Clinton proved in 1992, it isn't about resumes or platforms either.
A real Catch-22.
Hillary Clinton is a great partisan, and if she really cares as much about beating the Republicans as we all know she does, she should recognize that Barack Obama's candidacy is the best thing that could happen to the Democratic Party, not attack him, and let the chips fall where they may on Feb. 5th. He can unite Democrats, Independents, and even moderate Republicans. Next to her (but probably not for long), he's the best fundraiser in the country, and a much better campaigner. By his very persona, Obama embodies the hope and future of the Democratic Party and the nation.
By supporting Obama, she can reinvent her own public image, and would be next in line to assume Ted Kennedy's role as the conscience of the Democratic Party in the U.S. Congress. And that's not such a bad gig.
Read the rest here.
BTW, if you want to read a great story, read Jonathan Alter's "Obama: Bill Clinton's Real Heir" in the next edition of Newsweek.
Some great quotes for you:
"The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change."
"For too long we've been told about 'us' and 'them.' Each and every election we see a new slate of arguments and ads telling us that 'they' are the problem, not 'us.' But there can be no 'them' in America. There's only us."
- Bill Clinton
===A panicked and cash-short Clinton campaign is seriously considering giving up on the Nevada caucuses and on the South Carolina primary in order to regroup and to save resources for the massive 19-state mega-primary on February 5.===
Doesn't speak too well for her whole experience/competence argument. Lot of fat and happy staff, though.
I just think if the story gets any more than 3 days play in the national media then the entire system is broken. Plus, I still think that young voters won't give a crap.