Some Hillary Advisers Worry About Staying In Past New Hampshire; Others Urge Her To Fight On

[babylonsister]

Some Hillary Advisers Worry About Staying In Past New Hampshire; Others Urge Her To Fight On
By Greg Sargent - January 7, 2008, 3:53PM


Here's some detail on the internal discussions going on inside the Hillary campaign as they brace for the real possibility of a loss to Obama in New Hampshire tomorrow.

According to a Hillary adviser I spoke to today, Camp Hillary insiders who have been with her a very long time, such as Patti Solis Doyle, are worried about the long term damage that could be done to Hillary if she decides to fight on after a New Hampshire loss, though there's no indication they are yet urging an exit.

"People who are close to Hillary personally are worried about what this is doing to her, what it might do to her career," the adviser says. "This is about protecting her future. That's the way it's being presented. You have a number who are saying to her, `Consider the Senate career.'

"They're worried about the way the media might characterize her -- a woman being on the attack, that kind of thing," the adviser continued. "There's a real debate going on within the campaign." (Solis Doyle didn't immediately respond to a request for comment left through a spokesperson.)

Meanwhile, another camp of insiders -- what the adviser characterized as the "political warriors" -- is urging her to fight on in the event of a defeat in New Hampshire. The people in this camp include pollster Mark Penn and top communications adviser Harold Wolfson, the adviser says.

more...

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/some_hillary_insiders_worry_about_staying_in_past_new_hampshire_others_urge_her_to_fight_on.php

[ingac70]

1. Mark Penn urges her to fight on?

What nasty crap does he plan to make up about Obama, I wonder?

[Renew Deal]

14. He needs to protect that paycheck.

[KennedyGuy]

2. the rest..minus the selective editing

The political warriors are telling her to hunker down and stay in the fight," the adviser confided, adding that this faction believes that the new "talk versus action" message could work if given the time. "Give the message time to sink in,'" the adviser says this group is urging.

According to this adviser, the second group's argument seems to be taking hold for now. We'll see what happens

[babylonsister]

3. Bite me. That's not selective editing, it conforms to DU rules. nt

[KennedyGuy]

4. you sound shrill

are you a shrew?

[babylonsister]

7. No, that would be your gal. nt

[KennedyGuy]

8. and catty..

[beachmom]

5. Where is the discipline in that campaign? Why so many loose lips?

Look, she's not my choice, but only one state has voted, anything could happen. Instead of whining to the press, why don't these people get to work? If I was a Hillary supporter, this would really make me mad. It reminds me too much of the Clintonites who gossiped to the press about Gore, and then Kerry -- I thought they did that because they wanted the Clintons back in; now, I guess I have to realize these people are just careerists who don't care about anybody or anything except themselves.

[caraher]

6. Isn't this kind of talk ridiculously premature?

I mean, she finished 2nd in Iowa and probably will be #2 in NH. That sounds like a viable candidacy to me, even if she's not taking the world by storm

[Bluestar]

9. Uh, let's be accurate--she finished like third in Iowa

I'm a Hillary fan, but John Edwards deserves the credit for finishing #2 in Iowa.

[caraher]

11. DOH!

it was close but, yeah, sorry!

That does bring up another point though... it's not like anyone is saying Edwards should quit, either! Let's let the process run its course rather than just trying to see how fast we can settle on someone.

[truedelphi]

10. Normally a number two spot would be heavenly

But our current auction system, oops election system, usually means that those with the most dough are expected to come in first.

That is why the corporations gave you the dough, so you would win.

If you got those wads and wads of cold hard cash, and even so, the people can't be persuaded to vote for you, well, the corporations are going to back out.

Clinton's past history shows that she likes to stockpile money. I have heard it said that she has enough for quite a while yet.

So if she is in big trouble already, maybe she is considering whether she wants to blow this money on a losing bid, or save it for her next Senate race.

[AtomicKitten]

12. It could incite a lot of resentment if Barack continues to win and

he's still being pummeled by his adversaries, one particular campaign proficient in gutter politics.

I predict much soul-searching and consultation with advisers over all this.

[Jim Lane]

13. "Continues to win" could mean only a handful of states before Feb. 5

Clinton is my least favorite among the Democratic candidates, but I really can't see the logic of withdrawal. Someone who has a substantial national following, as evidenced by the polls, shouldn't be forced out just because of not winning the first two states. She has every right to continue her campaign, and shouldn't be attacked as divisive or a spoiler for doing so. (Of course, particular campaign tactics by her or any other candidate may be objectionable.)

It's bad enough that scores of millions of Americans who vote after February 5 may well be effectively deprived of any voice in the process. Please, at least let those of us in the February 5 states (California, New York, and a bunch of others) weigh in.

Another point to consider: Obama and Edwards were able to overcome Clinton's name recognition and campaign war chest by campaigning intensively in Iowa. New Hampshire has been getting the same treatment. They can't do that for February 5, though. Clinton's advantages will weigh more heavily then. John Edwards visited every county in Iowa, but he can't visit every county in the 22 states that vote on February 5. Clinton has endorsements from many party regulars who can be surrogate campaigners for that coast-to-coast brawl where all the candidates will be spread thin.

At this point, despite the Obama fervor and the Edwards surge, I must reluctantly conclude that Clinton is still the most likely nominee.

For those of you intrigued by the idea of markets as accurate predictors, I'll note that the online bettors don't agree with me. At World Sports Exchange -- http://www.wsex.com/ and click on "Politics" -- Obama is favored over Clinton by about two to one, with Edwards as a 19-to-1 long shot. On the Republican side, McCain is the favorite, but his edge over the second-place Giuliani is small.

[AtomicKitten]

15. I think the field will start to collapse in a domino effect

if he keeps winning, state by state.

But as we all know, anything can happen. ;)