27 Man Pile On!

[SaveElmer]

Great response to Taylor Marsh blog about the new PAC designed to attack Hillary from the left...

Let me get this straight!

For over nine months, Hillary has taken incoming from her seven Democratic opponents, as well as the entire GOP field. Yet, Hillary has more support than her seven primary opponents combined!

Now the panicking boys are calling for reinforcements!

The call to arms is being answered in the form of a 20-member PAC called “Democratic Courage” who shares the same goal of keeping Hillary from winning the nomination.

Does it really take 27 guys to out-tough Hillary?

And if it does, is it any wonder that she has more support than her seven male-opponents combined?

JoeCHI hit the nail on the head here!!!

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26448

[jgraz]

1. Yeah, Hillary's doing this all by herself

It's not like she's got a huge political machine, loads of corporate money and an ex-president in her corner. No, she's just a lone woman resisting the forces of evil leftism all by herself.




Oh, almost forgot: :eyes:

[cali]

6. Of course that's true

but even you, I'm sure, can see that she's hardly just a propped up figure. Whatever one thinks of her, she's running a smart campaign. And yes, she has a lot to do with that. And of course, it has zip to do with fighting "evil leftism" as there really isn't much to distinguish between the top 3.

I think all of you who have built up Clinton into this huge force of evil, should just start referring to her as She-who-must-not-be-named.

[MGKrebs]

7. Mybe if Obama had more corporate money he could have made it

back in time to vote against the Iran amendment.

[BootinUp]

8. I'm sure anybody could

build and run such a machine. /sarcasm

[Alamom]

2. Judging by the replies, most believe this will hurt Edwards & help Hillary.

there's this other stuff.......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-hurowitz/john-edwards-one-million_b_68465.html


Glenn Hurowitz
John Edwards' One Million Consultants
Posted October 15, 2007 | 10:26 AM (EST)
Pro-Edwards


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-hurowitz/barack-obama-worlds-wor_b_67922.html

Glenn Hurowitz
Barack Obama: World's Worst Negotiator
Posted October 10, 2007 | 02:50 PM (EST)
:thumbsdown: for Obama


http://mydd.com/story/2007/10/24/155058/33

Edwards-linked PAC to Swiftboat Clinton in Early Primary States
Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 03:50:58 PM EST

Here we go, it's official. An Edwards-linked 527 group will start to run attack ads against Clinton to derail her campaign.

A newly formed political action committee is aiming to stop Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary by calling into question her progressive credentials.

"We think there are other Democratic presidential candidates who are both more progressive and have a better chance of beating the Republicans than she does," said the president of Democratic Courage, Glenn Hurowitz.

He declined to tip his hand on the group's case against Clinton, but said the PAC plans a paid media campaign in the early primary states to make its position clear.

"We'll definitely have sufficient resources to make a significant media buy," he said, adding that their campaign against Clinton would be "edgy" enough to get attention. "We don't need to raise an immense amount of money to make a big difference."

Hurowitz and Goldman have both contributed to the campaign of former North Carolina Senator John Edwards, but Hurowitz said their effort is independent of any campaign.

No wonder Edwards is counting on his buddies to pony up when he does not have the money and guts to directly hit on Hillary Clinto

I predict this move will backfire badly on Edwards' campaign.

[durrrty libby]

3. I hope Hillary squashes that weasel Edwards like a bug

[pgh_dem]

4. Is it just me? (Re: the term "swiftboat")

Is it just me, or should any political commentator be ashamed to use the term 'Swiftboat' without full disclosure of their own definition of the term as it relates to the ACTUAL "swift-boating" of Sen Kerry during the 2004 election?

I see and hear commentators using this term in a context which only suggests 'organized political attack using a combination of internet and mainstream media', without adding the context "COMPLETELY AND DEMONSTRABLY FALSE".

I don't think it's false to suggest that Sen. Clinton is among the least progressive of the candidates. Arguable, maybe, selective in definition, sure. But it was and is *false* to suggest that Sen Kerry didn't deserve his medals.

That said, I don't see any point in an ad campaign attacking Sen Clinton as a candidate. Plus it strikes me as violating the 'spirit' of the 527-type rules where you're not allowed to advocate for a specific candidate, if you're going to advocate AGAINST a specific candidate.

Maybe they could achieve the same progressive ends by using the ad campaign to list how egregiously screwed up the US has gotten in terms of foreign policy, disaster recovery, infrastructure and health care, and ask 'Ask your candidate how they will FIX this'.

[madfloridian]

5. Oh, wait now. Let's not forget David Jones little PAC....it was ok then.

That when the consultants from the other candidates formed a PAC last primary and attacked Dean.....they were just fine. Ok, no problem

This appears to be no different.

[Cameron27]

9. This is going to backfire.

If the link to Edwards can be clearly established, this will hurt him.

[madfloridian]

10. Does it matter now? Just a suggestion is enough.

People told me that when the David Jones PAC made the Osama ad "to bring Dean down" it was ok, it was just politics, and the candidates did not know.

Oops, fixed it to Osama ad.

[Cameron27]

11. Could you explain the Obama ad problem,

because I honestly don't know what you're referring to.

[madfloridian]

13. My apologies...I changed it.

The Osama ad.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1526

Most people excused it. I have a feeling that this is really not that conected to Edwards, but it is so easy to say it is.

We should really excuse none of it.

[Cameron27]

16. I remember that ad,

no one should have excused that nasty business. I didn't realize how much money or the number of people behind it but the problem was trying to tie it directly to any of the candidates who were running against him.

You're right, it's easy to pin this new PAC to Edwards, but without a provable connection, I don't think it will get any traction.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

14. It might damage his third-place standing?

The Edwards campaign needs to either knee-cap Hillary in the next 90 days, or they might as well strike the tent and head back to North Carolina. The campaign is not gaining any traction through its current strategy. Unless Hillary stumbles (badly), Edwards has no chance.

[cali]

15. they don't have 90 days

by then super tuesday is nigh. They have, realistically, 45 days.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

19. 90 days (give or take) until Super Tuesday...

February 5th. There will be six primaries in the month of January (that we know of so far), including Michigan and Florida. If he doesn't show improvement in any of these, it's game over.

Forty-five days would be mid-December. That's crunch time, to be sure, but he would still have time after that -- but not much.

[Cameron27]

17. Well I agree with you,

but his recent efforts to bring down Clinton have the look of desperation and have cost him some support. If this PAC can be tied to his campaign in the next few weeks, it will only add to his problems.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

20. If it's cost him support, it's been pretty microscopic...

Curious thing about this election is how little substantial movement there have been in the polls over the past six months. In the Cook Report, Edwards has polled in a range of 12-15% going back to last March. And he spikes up and down (15% in April to 12% in May).

Obama has been 17-21% over the same period, with Hillary the only one showing noticeable improvement -- going from 30% in April to 46% in October. And almost all of that shift has been at the exense of Obama.

[Cameron27]

24. You've got a point.

Obama's been losing more support than Edwards so it looks like my assumption was incorrect.

[Tellurian]

18. Isn't that what M/M Edwards have been doing right along?

From the beginning of this campaign, I have never disliked Edwards. I can no longer deny what I see happening with the NC couple has become a big turnoff. They're in over their heads in a campaign they were ill prepared for to begin with. The Edwards' are fiscally irresponsible and never took this campaign seriously from the get go.

They have relegated themselves as common neighborhood bashers hurling insults and innuendo from the sidelines. Now that plan has failed, this is their last hope to put a chink in Hillary's armor.

This is totally disgusting to me, hiring operatives to fulminate nothing but smears against Hillary in the hopes of gaining a few points in the polls. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they have pooled their resources with Kucinich and Obama as a last ditch final effort to scale the walls of Hillary's impeccably run campaign.

May ALL of them fall flat on their ASSES in humiliation and defeat! Goodbye and good riddance.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

21. Blah, Blah, Blah

"May ALL of them fall flat on these ASSES in humiliation and defeat! Goodbye and good riddance"

Very mature...

Can I assume, then, that you don't want their support in the General Election? Given that Edwards' supporters represent 5-6% of the general electorate, you might want to be a little more moderate while taking your victory lap. You'll be wanting those votes later.

Speaking personally, I'll not hold your sophomoric behavior against our candidate come the General Election, but others might not be so generous.

[Tellurian]

22. I don't think you can assume anything..

All you can do is speak for yourself.

[Uncle Joe]

12. Do they refer to Hillary Clinton as a girl?

"Now the panicking boys are calling for reinforcements!"

I believe the corporate media are doing their best to make this primary all about gender, in order to take focus away from the critical issues of the day ie; wars based on lies, global warming, the shredding of the Constitution and the drift toward fascism. Their strategy seems to be working well.

[PurityOfEssence]

23. No mention of the truckloads of corporate money and battalions of apparatchiks for Ms. Underdog?

How can she be the spunky dark horse when she's the darling of the party machinery and the poster person for non-Republican corporate money?

This tiresome masquerading as the unyielding champion of the oppressed is just beyond ridiculous.

Let's look at this image of her against all these mean men, then let's take all these mean men with their entire staffs and line them up in an open field with her and her ENORMOUS legion of operatives and let's see who's really outnumbered.

Meanwhile, she and her husband twist every media arm they can with the threats of exclusion in order to get the story read the way they want. Fine; it's all part of the system, but the anquished tears of the aristocracy don't wash away all the stink.