Interesting Tweety commentary on Morning Joe re Clinton and the Democratic establishment

[bklyncowgirl]

Essentially Obama will win today but the Democratic establishment will circle the wagons, presenting a softer more appealing Hillary Clinton, appeal to ethnic and issue interest groups and try and put out the Obama brushfire. Matthews predicts that they will succeed--the establishment has too much to lose to let this outsider win.

Don't know if I entirely believe it but he has an interesting point.

[babylonsister]

1. Yes, I heard him, and I think he spoke the truth. I

support Obama, but he has a long, hard slog ahead of him.

[Redbear]

3. I support Edwards and I agree.

The party establishment will fight for Hillary.

[bklyncowgirl]

8. What's interesting is that the establishment does not hold all the cards

For example, a safe establishment type as DNC chairman would do a great deal to put out the wildfire. Instead they have to deal with a guy who understandably will have a problem with the establishment torpedoing an insurgent candidate's campaign. Howard Dean should be interesting to watch in the next few weeks.

[Olney Blue]

2. It was an interesting point, indeed.

:hi: Good morning, bklyncowgirl!

[City Lights]

4. I heard him, and unfortunately, I think he's absolutely right.

During that segment, did anyone else hear Joe say the NV Culinary Union endorsed Obama?

[babylonsister]

6. YES! That's good news! BUT

I read they're waiting to endorse after the NH primary, so Scar is premature.

[City Lights]

9. That's what I thought too, which is why I had to question what I heard.

Also, I can't find it in print anywhere. :shrug: Sounds like he was getting ahead of himself.

edited for clarity

[BeyondGeography]

5. That's cute...Problem is she has two more losses ahead of her

in NV and SC and about four weeks until her first victory, which will happen in a few of the Super Tuesday states. It's not as if Obama will be standing still in terms of building his support on the ground, either.

"Insiders" will not decide this election; in fact, they already have tried to, as evidenced by the amount of institutional party support that Hillary has relative to Obama and Edwards. That's a dated model that Obama will use to fortitfy his "status quo" vs. change argument. And it will be more gold for him with independent voters as he will be seen as standing up to things as they are.

In other words, bring it on.

[IndyOp]

18. They always have a final trick up their sleeves - using the superdelegates

to overwhelm the will of the people.

The Tyranny of Super-Delegates
by Katrina vanden Heuvel

Barack Obama’s stirring victory in Iowa was also a good night for our democracy. The turnout broke records and young people - who were mobilized and organized - participated in unprecedented numbers. And now that Iowans have spoken - the first citizens in the nation to do so - here’s the Democratic delegate count for the top three candidates (2,025 delegates are needed to secure the nomination):

Clinton - 169
Obama - 66
Edwards - 47

“Huh?” you say. “vanden Heuvel, you made a MAJOR typo.”

In fact, those numbers are correct: the third-place finishing Sen. Hillary Clinton now has over twice as many delegates as Sen. Obama, and more than three times as many delegates as the second-place candidate, Sen. John Edwards. Why? Because the Democratic Party uses an antiquated and anti-democratic nominating system that includes 842 “super-delegates” - un-pledged party leaders not chosen by the voters, free to support the candidate of their choice, and who comprise more than forty percent of the delegates needed to win the nomination. Many have already announced the candidate they will support.

In a clear attempt to protect the party establishment, this undemocratic infrastructure was created following George McGovern’s landslide defeat in 1972. It was designed to prevent a nominee who was “out of sync with the rest of the party,” Northeastern University political scientist William Mayer told MSNBC. Democratic National Committee member Elaine Kamarck called it a “sort of safety valve.”

In 1988, Reverend Jesse Jackson challenged the notion that these appointed delegates be permitted to vote for the candidate of their choosing rather than the winner of the state’s caucus or primary. He was right to do so. Twenty years later, when the word “change” is being bandied about, isn’t it time for the Democratic Party to give real meaning to the word? Strengthen our democracy by reforming the super-delegate system so that the people, not the party establishment, choose their candidate.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=266130


If state delegates HAVE to vote for the candidate that their state's voters selected, and if Obama and Edwards split a substantial sized pool of delegates, then Hillary could win with her state delegates + the lion-share of the superdelegates.

:(

[NoBorders]

35. They may try

But unless Obama cools off considerably or blows it somewhere between now and 2/5, it will be hard for 'The Establishment' to take him down without alienating a huge chunk of democrats.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Maybe IA And NH Will Change Things

But Hillary was beating Obama 2-1 to 3-1 among Hispanics and Asians...So far those folks have not had much of a chance to make their voices heard...There just aren't a lot of Hispanic and Asian folks in Iowa and New Hampshire...

There's also research that indicates that African Americans, Asians, and Hispanics are suspicious of one another:


http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=28501933d0e5c5344b21f9640dc13754

[BeyondGeography]

10. The first black president's wife hopes to benefit from anti-black sentiment

That's the kind of happy stuff you guys are reduced to now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. Nice Ad Hominem Attack...I Was Describing A Phenomenon Not Endorsing It...

Maybe if you educated yourself you could distinguish between the empirical and the normative...I am sure there is a good community college in your area...

[BeyondGeography]

17. Nice personal attack

Sucks to lose, doesn't it?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Must Suck To Be You

Doesn't it, sweetheart?


Keep em comin...I tried to be civil but I'm not a fucking doormat...

[BeyondGeography]

22. Post #13 is civil?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. OK

"That's the kind of happy stuff you guys are reduced to now."

-Beyond Geography

I made an observation...It's a fucking sad observation but an observation rooted in reality...You can see it anecdotally and you can see it empirically...

I suspect some but not all of the suspicion between the different groups is a function of them embracing the negative stereotypes perpetuated by the dominant culture...What is interesting is that the dominant culture , to some extent, now rejects the stereotypes they created...


on edit- If you won't impugn my motives I won't impugn yours even though I have not done that...

[BeyondGeography]

25. I shouldn't have personalized it

You are in fact better than the campaign you support.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. It Was Just An Observation

I am not saying any of the groups are racist but if you read that article and PDF you will see that large minorities within all three groups hold very negative stereotypes of one another...

[BeyondGeography]

30. I know that, and I also know that the Clinton campaign is counting on Latino support

because of it. She has a huge advantage right now with Latinos in states where there hasn't been active campaigning. Obama does well with Latinos once they get to know him. Based on what we've already seen from the Clinton campaign, we can count on them to engage in under the radar attempts to inflame opinion against Obama in those communities. Which isn't good for anyone at the end of the day, least of all for the legacy of a political family that has always profited from black support.

[bklyncowgirl]

33. Obama may well be hoping that Richardson stays in the race

Richardson will pull some Latino votes from Clinton simply because of ethnic pride.

[ruggerson]

48. Hmm.. Hell just got a bit colder

n/t

[rodeodance]

16. umm...

[cyclezealot]

11. I have opposed Hillary because I disagree with her on certain issues

I get tired of the tidal wave affect of US politics. They shift as if they were the shifting sands. So many here at DU two months back praised my candidate , Rep. Kucinich stands on the funding of the Iraq war and impeachment. Now that many Edwards backers demand unity, we are expected to abandon our favorite overnight to get Edwards the nomination, when many of us doubt Edwards' sincerity.
As to Hillary. I did not oppose her because of her personality but because or Iraq and her AIPAC speech and what she inherited from Bill's triangulation with Nafta, etc. Hillary was a shoe in. Now all the call for 'change' is nauseating; now, that O'bama has picked up a little steam.
Its about the tidal wave affect of personality clashes and the stereotypes used to slander H. Clinton have been effective. Enough to make her my second choice after Dennis Kucinich. If she would have only followed her instincts instead of let others market her past, I have every assurance Hillary would make a decent president.

[rodeodance]

19. Yes, she would make a very descent President--and I too wished she has just followed

her instincts more.

Maybe she can do a McCain--but then again, I really do not think the media will allow it anymore--they have chosen obama. sorry to be so pestimistic--I just see it that way.

[cyclezealot]

24. how cunning is the media.

They did all they can to foist O'Bama in the US. Maybe they know he can't win. Again, the herding instinct wins out. Sometimes just a couple months after a Democrat gets the nomination , we have buyers remorse. Over and over it happens. /Some critics say he is great at a speech, but if his lines are uncanned he does not do so well?? / Then we have to unfortunately admit, there is what they call the 'Doug Wilder affect' caused by our racism.

[Thrill]

12. The staus quo will attack agents of change.

[cyclezealot]

14. "agent of change.'

a useless phrase. I am sure I will get as sick of that slogan, as I did all that crap about 'into the 21st century.'

[Cameron27]

54. An empty, useless phrase

[bklyncowgirl]

15. You are right--and it will get ugly. nt

[EffieBlack]

21. I remember the MSM saying the same thing in 1992 about Bill Clinton . . .

That the "Democratic Establishment" was about to "circle the wagons" and draft someone else in order to stop Bill Clinton.

But the voters had another plan . . .

[ShortnFiery]

26. Yes, those insiders within the illustrious "democratic establishment" are pissed that their MONEY

and MEDIA CEOS (including smarmy Tweety) cant *purchase* the election for their candidate.

I'm loving it! May the votes continue to be honestly counted.

It's analogous to the horrific television programming we're having to endure. Not due to the writers' strike but mostly due to the fact that the bloated "money changing" CEOs insist on having everything their way ... even going so far as appearing regularly on in person.

Here's a hint: Neither corporate CEOs nor politically partisan insiders think for The Average American.

To all the big money political insiders and paid off media strategists: Be prepared to SUBMIT to the will of those whom you demeaningly refer to as "the chattering classes." In other words, welcome to the REAL world opinions of the Average *Wage Slave* American. :evilgrin:

[Sulawesi]

28. The Democratic Establishment will back whoever can deliver the WH...jeez..nobody will

fall on the sword for Hillary Clinton. It is a rough world, but they will drop HRC like a cold fish when they are sure she is done. Matthews is just voicing his private fears and trying not to get ahead of himself with his enthusiasm for Obama.

[bklyncowgirl]

31. The Democratic Establishment ain't what they used to be--witness Howard Dean

They were able to stop Howard Dean from winning the 2004 nomination but were unable to stop him from becoming DNC chairman. They tried to get rid of him again in 2006 but since it became pretty clear to all that Dean's 50 state strategy handed the Democrats majorities in both houses of Congress, they did not succeed.

My guess is they will try to take down Obama, but this time, unless something unexpected happens, they will not succeed.

Of course anything can happen.

[ShortnFiery]

34. "(Matthews) trying not to get ahead of himself" ?!?

Surely you jest?!? :crazy:

Mathews is the BIGGEST journalistic political insider within the entire D.C. establishment - both parties he can be found regularly schmoozing and socializing with the POWER ELITE.

Mathew's duty is to keep us "Pajama Hudeen" (Mathews coined term) of The Internet and other "chattering classes" at each other's throats ... Mathews politically spins like a whirling dervish whenever his masters say *JUMP.*

Chris Matthews serves the entrenched Political Power Players --> first, foremost and always. :thumbsdown:

[Sulawesi]

39. OK, you tell me then, you think he will help to bring down Obama in order to crown Hillary?

Not from what I've seen. This thread is about Obama being outside the establishment, and I think Matthews is on board with Obama, but he expresses his view (concern? expectation?) that the establishment will reach and and grab this guy. I think he doesn't want to get his hopes up.

[ShortnFiery]

40. I live within the beltway, nothing is simple save for the fact that Mathews, et. al.

will not ever, in the long term, CHALLENGE the political power elite.

This is a turbulent time ... that is, you know things are bad for the chance of a 3rd DLC staffed Presidential Cabinet when "Big Dog" loses control and makes inappropriate statements.

No, I don't wish to banter the political manifestations of an Obama ascendancy, but suffice to say if the foregoing materializes, "The PLAYERS here in D.C. will REMAIN anxious and as busy as a one legged man at an ass kicking contest. :blush:

GAWD! Their hysterical spinning ... well it's so much fun to watch aside from political preferences. Guess, it's the little things that keep me amused? ;)

[Sulawesi]

56. OK, I agree with that...but in the end they back a winner because that is where the power is.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. I Think Obama Is Too Powerful A Phenomenon To Be Stopped

That being said it will be interesting to see how he does in a state whose demographics truly match America...

[ShortnFiery]

36. So IA and NH are not in America?

<tease!> Perhaps you meant to say that the difference may be realized in states where there are far more Democratic vice Independent voters? :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Hispanics And Asian Make Up, What, Twenty Percent Of Americans

They make up about one or two percent of New Hampsire and Iowa...

I suspect there are more Hispanics and Asians in Greater Orlando than all of Iowa and New Hampshire...

[ShortnFiery]

44. And they're all (or great percentages) are going to NOT vote for Obama?!?

What's the logic behind the foregoing assumption? :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. I Didn't Make An Assumption...I Made An Observation...

Iowa and New Hampshire are two homogeneous states and are as representative of America as Malibu is of California and Palm Beach is of Florida and ...

[quickesst]

32. One thing is obvious....

from watching Morning Joe, and Washington Journal. The praise for Obama from the right-wing pundits is in full swing. If you watched either show, and disagree, you are either in denial, or lying to yourself. Point being, when any repug said anything positve about HRC, she was a right-wing Bush clone. Now that the repug praise is being heaped upon Obama in gigantic proportions, is he a right-wing clone? Of course not. He is an insightful visionary who will reach across the aisle to all Americans, democrat, and republican. Excuse me, I think I'm going to throw up. Thanks.
quickesst

[Sulawesi]

37. The bottom line here....

...is that some people, like me, see this as a real phenomenon. It is not just that Obama is a great candidate and speaker, or that his ethnicity makes him an obvious bridge candidate, but it seems that he has tapped into something that was already there, in both parties. He hit on it and is reaping the benefits, but it is a real frustration and a real desire to move on to better things.

On the flip side are people like you that see it as a media frenzy, flash in the pan, hollow, non-phenomenon. That people reaching out from the right are insincere. I have spoken to many right-leaning independents and they are hungry for Obama's message. I think that is real.

In a few months, maybe a few weeks, all this could blow over, and you may look back and be right on this. However, we might be right, and this might be a real political ground swell in a positive direction. If the former, you can gloat, if the latter, you will wish you had been on board from the start. Time will tell...

[quickesst]

41. First off....

I won't be gloating. What would be the point. Secondly, I don't have to wait till it's over to prove my assertion. Morning Joe, and the Washington Journal accomplished that this morning.

" you will wish you had been on board from the start. Time will tell..."

So, if Clinton loses, after supporting her since the beginning, you're trying to tell me that anyone worth his salt and convictions, will, with an Obama victory, regret the support given Clinton? Illogical. My support will stay with Clinton, win or lose, and I will still believe that less than a year into an Obama presidency, the buyer's remorse will not be mine. Even with all this, if Obama gets the nomination, I will support and vote for him. He is a democrat, and as the accepted rhetoric goes, any dem is better than the best repug. I will not, however, refuse to vote for him, and further aid the repugs in their victory. That in itself, distinguishes an Obama supporter from a Clinton supporter. Logic and facts are on my side. Thanks.
quickesst

[DrFunkenstein]

38. Yes, But Too Many Fear Clinton Would Jeapordize Their Own Seats

I think they'll run to Obama as soon as they don't fear the potential wrath of the brokedown Clinton machine.

[karynnj]

42. I think there is more than one Democratic establishment

I think the the Clinton wing of the party will circle around HRC, but they may not be able to stop the fire. I also think that they do not control all the local party people. Consider that many state parties have been rebuilt in the last 4 years because they were a mess in 2004 and before. Many people now high in those parties may have been brought into politics by Dean, as a candidate or as head of the DNC or Kerry.

The DLC has money, think tanks and influence from allied media people - but they very nearly lost control of the party in 2004. Kerry as President would have led to less prominence for the Clintons and the people allied with them. Many of us think that fear of that is why people like Begala and Carville did such a lame job as two of the top Democrats on cable TV. They made NO effort to get any of Kerry's positions out. All the 2008 candidates have platforms that owe a great deal to things Kerry spoke of in 2004.

What Matthews is missing is that the peak of Clintonian domination of the party was long ago. In 2005, they lost the fight to get their guy as head of the DNC. In 2004, they came close to being out of power - which a Kerry win would have done. Kerry was never a Clinton favorite - as can be seen by Clinton's book where he mentioned liking Weld - with no corresponding comment for the Democrat. (He also doesn't mention on Kerry's side of the ledger his foreign policy or terrorism credentials or that he and Kennedy had just written the bill, modeled after the MA plan passed over Weld's veto, that would become the basis of the S-Chip bill. It is pretty ironic that HRC used her smaller role on that as the example oif change she actually did last Saturday in NH.)

Obama won Iowa inspite of over 3 years of "HRC is the next President " being drummed into our head. The primaries is when Obama, who has done a great job so far can be seen as the alternative. That HRC seems to be falling apart helps too, but the main thing is that this is a windoe when people get to pick and they are not picking HRC.

[ShortnFiery]

45. IMNSHO: well researched and thought through commentary.

You put into words "an impression" that appears almost exactly what I was attempting to convey.

Yes, there are a number of powerful political factions operating in "the wilderness" right now.

We are living in interesting political times, no doubt. :blush: :hi:

[BeyondGeography]

50. The only thing I'd add to that is that the "establishment" used to beat the insurgent candidate

by delivering two things: labor and the black vote. One of those pieces is off the table and the other is hardly in the bag either. AFSCME leadership is already fighting over an anti-Obama mailing that went out in Iowa and NH, and the Culinary Workers Union is predicted to endorse Obama in LV tomorrow.

[Bullet1987]

53. Chris may have a point, but think about this

The Party Establishment could get away with it in 2004 because in the end, Dean didn't win. If Obama hypothetically goes 4-0 and sweeps the early states, with that wind at his back and the tremendous support he has in the Party now. Tremendous support with Independents...can you imagine the level of backlash and blowback the DNC will suffer from not only Black Democrats and White ones as well? Especially all these rumors now of Clinton trying to "broker" the convention. That's another term for BUYING the nomination. It could potentially even split the Party, and it would definently tarnish and dent the Clinton Legacy.

[karynnj]

55. Kerry was not part of the Clinton wing

The point I made was that KERRY winning would have reduced drastically the Clinton power. Kerry's platform in 2004 has more in common with the 2008 platforms than Dean's or Edward's. (In terms of 2004 - Edwards comes closer to playing the Dean role than Obama does.)

The problem is that you see only Dean as non- Clinton, in 2004 - now, Kerry was also very obviously not part of the Clinton wing. Kerry was not the party candidate in January 2004 when he won Iowa or NH. Bill Clinton said that only HRC and Wes Clark were stars in the Democratic party. Kerry got very little money from the party power brokers and self financed much of the December and January Iowa and NH efforts. Dean had the super delegate lead, not Kerry. The media mostly bet on when Kerry would drop out.

I know you will respond Kerry was DLC - but Dean was far more a part of the DLC than Kerry ever was - he was never all that accepted by them, his voting record was too liberal and he was never in their leadership. Al Gore was one of the founders. Gore and Clinton both were in favor of supporting the Contras - where Kerry was a chief critic. Kerry has a long term record of fighting corrupt money in government - from Clean elections/clean money to BCCI, that I bet Edwards would love rather than the one he actually has.

I think that Clinton may already have tarnished his legacy in this campaign. He risked it in 2004. He risked hurting the nominee by both claiming the stage for his book in July 2004 when it was critical for Kerry/Edwards to get airtime and because his book damns Kerry with faint praise.

[bigdarryl]

59. HOW many times are they going to try and do a Hillary MAKE OVER

[SaveElmer]

46. "Interesting Tweety Commentary" is an oxymoron...nt

[OHdem10]

49. Get real. Obama is supported by Establishment. He could

not be this far without their support. He is running as Centrist
New Democrat because he is using their methods, getting GOP voters.
The Elites believe his running as centrists keeps Bloomberg at bay.

[NashVegas]

52. I'm Interested to See How It Will Go

When we have a primary in a state where voters don't get to switch party allegiance for a day.

[K Gardner]

51. I heard it and I believed it. I'd like to find the transcript or video.

It was enough to make one stop and think.

[RamboLiberal]

57. Raw Story has the video

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Chris_Matthews_predicts_establishment_to_defeat_0108.html

"There's a battle in the Democratic Party between the idealists and the interest groups," Matthews began. "And in the beginning of every Democratic campaign for president, there's an idealist who comes forward ... and they do very well in the first offing. ... And then the interest groups get all called in, the meal tickets, all the people that get something out of the party are bussed in, trucked in from out of town ... and they blow away the idealist."

"It has been done so many times," he continued. "Kill the fire of insurgency. And when that's killed, then you go back to the same old interest group politics."

"Once in a while, someone comes along and shakes things up," Matthews acknowledged. "It's a phenomenal thing. And it's going on now. It'll go on through tonight. But at some time, it's going to be really challenged by the forces of the establishment, by the status quo, by the interest groups and the big-money contributors, and they're going to try to put this fire out."

"They will find some way to counter this power. You watch it. It's scorched earth, but the establishment in American politics almost always wins. ... All the people around the Clintons ... are getting together to try to figure out how to stop this. These are pros, who win year after year.

"They are under threat right now, because if Obama wins, they lose," Matthews went on, turning aside Scarborough's suggestions that this year the dynamics might be different. "If you think it's going to happen, then you are definitely a dreamer. Maybe I am too. But I've seen this dream die so many times."

[FrenchieCat]

58. Well I hope that the OBAMA tidalwave becomes a

TSUNAMI!

[JackORoses]

60. this might have been the strategy until the Establishment saw the crowds of new voters Obama brings

then they shucked the Clinton-scheme in favor of increasing our Majority in Congress

[Bucky]

61. This tactic will work so long as the vast majority of voters are complete maroons

Looking forward to the New Coke moment. There simply is no such thing as a "softer more appealing Hillary Clinton." She's nails tuff and razor smart and backpeddling on her core image is not gonna work. Democrats know her. They don't dislike her. If they're not buying the real thing now, they won't buy her with a pink bow on her head.