What the hell happened to Hillary Clinton

[pettypace]

I admit I felt so sorry for Hillary during her emotional episode in NH, a feeling which quickly subsided after her upset there (which I personally found devastating). I've used most of my posts to blast her rigorously all the way through Feb 5th as I felt the nomination was still a long shot for Barack....and now look at Hillary's losing spreads for the last 6 states:

21 pts Louisiana
36 pts Nebraska
36 pts Washington
18 pts Maine
20 pts Maryland
29 pts Virginia

Why has the tide turned dramatically against Hillary? And doesn't it seem the only path to victory for her will be through a deal with unelected delegates combined with reinstating ineligible contests?

She is the official underdog and either way I'm done with Hillary bashing going forward, and would like to share my sympathy for her backers here given the last 5 days.

[Trajan]

1. .

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

100. she's running for Pres. of "Big States", Obama is running for Pres of 50 States

Two things:

1. Their campaign is based on winning in the 90's,and focusing on a few very large states.
Obama has the 50 state strategy that Howard Dean preaches.

2. Bill did serious damage to their campaign when he denigrated Obama's win in SC, and later when Hillary insulted Obama's Louisian win. These insults were aimed at Obama, but were sorely felt by the voters.
Many democrats are offended by the coded messages used by the Clinton machine.

Democrats don't like it when the Clinton Machine is used on - Democrats.

[AJH032]

2. what I don't understand

is how she's still tied nationally (actually, up a point, based on averages) with Obama. I know, these states aren't necessarily indicative of the country, but you'd think they'd at least show signs of similarity, no?

[stillrockin]

4. She's counting on superdelagates and

don't feel sorry for her. She will destroy the party if she has to in order to win.

[TheDebbieDee]

11. Another Hillary mind-reader shares a pearl of wisdom.......

The only candidate destroying the Democratic party is Sen. Obama with his wave unrepentant repukes. These repukes can't face what they have allowed their party to do to this country, so they look to console themselves by crossing over and supporting Sen. Obama.

The Democratic party may just leave the real Democrats behind!

[stillrockin]

17. lay off the sterno

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stillrockin]

24. I'm rubber, you're glue . . .

:bounce:

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

58. Do you truly believe that Obama is winning because repukes are voting for the "weaker" candidate?

I've seen enough people post this that I'm starting to think they may actually be serious :shrug:

[salin]

75. if the repub primary had been decided like in 1972

then that scenario might be real (as it was in 1972). With the republican nomination being wide open up until last week - no dice. Republicans were worried about ending up with their own "weakest candidate" and wouldn't risk losing votes to go play dirty tricks in the dem races.

[GoldieAZ49]

112. Not true, it is the Clinton way of discounting a serious contender

it is their 'politics of personal destruction' as Kennedy put it, that needs to left in the past so this country can move forward.

But, alas, it is all the Clintons have. They are getting the rejection they deserve.

[awaysidetraveler]

114. It's the "I know you are, but what am I argument" right back at Obama.

Apparently HRC's supporters think that's a normal kind of argument.

It makes no sense though, given that the polls show the opposite.

Also, repukes had a plan to beat Hillary, and they've no plan for Obama.

If anything, HRC was the one the republicans were counting on to win.

[liberalhistorian]

93. Oh, yes, because we can win

the presidency by only Dems voting, we can afford to alienate an entire party (and look where that's gotten us in past elections).

And how dare any other candidates run against Hillary, the entitled one. And how dare people vote for anyone else besides her. What do they think this is, anyway, a democracy?

A real Democrat would not be bitter at any primary opposition, but would welcome the competition as giving people a choice and a voice. A real Democrat would not consider herself entitled to the presidency. A real Democrat would not have voted for the IWR and then continued to defend the vote years later, never apologizing for it or admitting she was wrong (whereas Obama's statments at the time as to what was likely to happen in the ME if we went ahead against Iraq have ALL proven true). A real Democrat would not have continued to unquestioningly vote for EVERY SINGLE war funding bill put before the Senate. A real Democrat would not be aiding and abetting the shredding of constitutional rights and principles without batting an eye. A real Democrat would have done SOMETHING to at least try to stop the bankruptcy "reform" bill that has been so devastating to so many desperate people. A real Democrat would not have voted for the PATRIOT Act. A real Democrat would not be an unabashed corporatist, pocketing money from insurance and drug companies, voting against worker's interests, etc., etc., etc. I could go on and on.

[formernaderite]

107. it's interesting, I've heard many repubs wishing they had our

system, of delegate apportionment rather than a winner takes all system. So although our system looks a bit messy right now...I'm starting to see the justice in it.

[snooper2]

94. I think the Repukes

Are busy voting for Mr. Wobble and Mr. Hick....or just staying home based on turnout...

[Blue_Roses]

95. and that's a bad thing?

:shrug:

[mckeown1128]

101. BS...big stinking BS...

My wife and my mother are both Republicans but they have crossed over to support Obama because they are tired of Bushco policies and are especially tired of divisive leaders...

Don't knock crossover voters because you don't like how they vote.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

102. right, the REAL democrat has Mark (BLACKWATER) Penn working for her n/t

[tandem5]

28. at this point its looking like neither will be able to pull a 50 + 1 win without super delegates...

and when we get to the end of the primaries it might not be that clear as to what constitutes a fair division of super delegates: shall they cast based upon their state's vote, shall they go with the majority of the pledged delegates, or shall they listen to the overall popular vote for all the primaries combined? Its quite possible that neither candidate will have the concurrent advantage in all three options.

[polpilot]

43. 2 things derailed her: (1) Her constantly bobbing head (2) Bill

Carville could have 'installed' her in the White House' as he did Bill. Bill believed himself to be so clever that he didn't need a real operative like Carville in Hillary's campaign. They did.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. It's uncomfortable to see her in this position,

even though I favor Obama, because I think she's a talented politician with a lot going for her. I think she has been very poorly served by that creep Mark Penn, who has taken a lot of money to do a shitty job as a campaign consultant -- though I suppose she has to take responsibility for hiring such a sleazebag in the first place. If she doesn't get the nomination, this would be not the first campaign to be brought down by incompetent campaign strategies and tactics.

[Botany]

5. It is over for Hilary

Helll Obama got 5% of his needed delegates from N.Y. ........

[loveangelc]

6. you forgot 50 percent in D.C. :p

[RoadRage]

78. Doh.. i was just going to post that!! actually, isn't it 51? NT

[SoCalDem]

7. Because until Barack started winning , people thought he could not

and she was the safe bet..

She was the sorta ok prom date( that you give a tentative ok/maybe), when the guy you realllly want to ask you, hasn't...but when he does call, all bets are OFF..

[Straight Shooter]

13. Wow, prom date vs. guy you really wanted. "Dated Dean, married Kerry."

I wouldn't be using that analogy, it brings back really bad memories for those of us who ended up divorcing Kerry because he couldn't consummate the marriage.

[SoCalDem]

18. Some of us skipped prom altogether that year

:evilgrin:

Kerry always seemed like he needed a nap..not very interesting at all.

I did vote for him, but actually NO candidate has "inspired" me ...for decades..

I liked Dean, but didn't buy all the hype..

Gore was ok, but not awe-inspiring..

I haven't admired any candidate since Bobby Kennedy..

Hell,, I voted for Anderson once..and that goofball Perot..

Never for Reagan..or Nixon... or Carter...or Ford..or any Bush..

[Bongo Prophet]

21. You voted for PEROT but dis Kerry, Gore and Dean. WHat was is that inspired you?

We know how batshit crazy Perot is here in texas, and how pro-military industrial complex and all that. Did you not know these things, or was the "clean out the barn" talk persuasive to you? Just curious, I remember a co-worker who like Perot, and we had some strange conversations. He also tried to argue to me that W would govern as a moderate.

[SoCalDem]

29. I was not enchanted with Clinton..and hated Bush

Clinton remined me of too many guys I knew in college :)

I did vote for Dean in the primary and Kerry and for Gore.. I just didn;t "love" them :)

[Bongo Prophet]

34. I don't question your votes, or "love", but just wondering about Perot's attraction.

I guess it was the positive for RFK, (who is also my first childhood political hero) - with a dislike for g,D,K - but liking Perot.
Is it a matter of a real sense of big change vs more understated policy "wonkery" or something intangible...that sort of thing.
since you are an eloquent and longtime DUer, I took the opportunity to ask, in the hope you would give me some insight on it.
I don't really fall in love, or at least don't frame it that way -though RFK, MLK, Gore, Kerry all have inspired me greatly in their time.

Since we are in GDP, I hesitated, because it seems everyone challenges each other all the time.
I prefer just exchanging points of view.
Also, though I do consider Perot a pretty strange bird, he got big numbers - always wondered if my Texan POV was an exception, and what others saw in him.

I have heard that exact thing about Bill, back in 93 or so...

Such a subjective and pretty intangible thing, political "love" and inspiration.
Like music, it is far more than the sum of its parts.

You can PM me if you like or not.
It's all cool.:)

[SoCalDem]

36. For me it was kind of a protest vote..(not liking either of the others)

and as a business person, I did like the fact that the guy knew money.. and the "giant sucking sound" of NAFTA sold me .. I knew even then that setting up US companies across the border would not help US all that much..

Truthfully, I did not pay all that much attention to politics until the '00 debacle.. I voted and I watched the debates, but after the elections, I just said.. "Okay..that's that"..and got on with my life..

I tend to be cynical and don't trust politicians to start with, since I know that they have to please many masters, and you cannot be all things to all people, so somebody's always gonna get the stale heel at the bottom of the bread sack..and I do know who usually gets that..if they get anything....but we DO have to have someone sitting behind that desk, so I always tried to vote for the one who seemed the least political..the least cloying..the least pandering.


the really odd thing is this.. my oldest son actually works for one of his companies, and is treated magnificently..whodathunkit:)

[Bongo Prophet]

40. Thank you for your POV - yes, he was largely correct on NAFTA, and is very practical in $$ terms.

Around here (DFW, home of TI) he was well known before any of that, and his relationship with nixon's buddy Gov Clements, etc pretty much defined him.
Like so many things, how one sees things depends on the viewing angle.

He used to make all employees wear similar clothes and haircut,some other eccentricities. Bizarro Billionaire.
I was shocked that he took off so strongly. strange times.
Glad your son is happy - I am sure those policies are but a remnant of the past.

Fellow cynic who still dares to dream - more painful, but it seems like the right thing to do.

[CTyankee]

69. "Turn up your Miracle Ear." Perot gave me that gem! I still use it

when my husband says he can't hear what I'm saying.

I never voted for him, but I do have affection in my heart for him because he totally unhinged my Republican BIL and it was fun to watch (he called him PEA ROT).:rofl:

[Astrad]

122. I don't remember much about Perot

but I do remember that one of his proposals was reducing the military budget to 100 billion. I remember it because at the time it seemed so radical that someone would propose that (still does.) I don't know anything about Perot but I know that that memory doesn't square with him being pro-military.

[OnionPatch]

23. I think you are spot on with this.

They just needed to see that he could win. That they had a real, viable choice other than Hillary.

[JVS]

30. You can't do that. It's dishonorable

But that's prom, and this is politics where such honor isn't required

[DiamondJay]

8. its called the caucus system

its open to shit-talking instead of real ballot casting.

[Mz Pip]

10. So what's tonight's excuse?

[wileedog]

15. Right

Because ignorant people pulling a lever because they are far more familiar with the name Clinton than Obama is a far more righteous demonstration of true Democracy than more passionate and involved citizens understanding and debating the issues to make a decision.

Well, unless your candidate is winning, then the system is fine.

[Quixote1818]

19. Yep, if the table was turned then Hillary supporters would love the Caucus and

the Obama people would hate it. Thats just human nature.

[ORDem]

16. VA was a caucus state? Better send out a press release! n/t

[donheld]

25. Have you been to a caucus?

[Occam Bandage]

27. So, er, what's the excuse for tonight? Too many blacks? Red states don't count?

[nonconformist]

32. 75% of the Republican vote. nt

[Occam Bandage]

41. Why is that bad? We need former Bush voters to win, obviously.

[New Dawn]

38. Obama has won big in primaries too

Such as in tonight's three primaries.

[Avalux]

68. There were no caucuses last night. Explain. n/t

[TexasObserver]

9. Her campaign was about name ID and positive feelings about the Clinton administration

When Bill entered the fight and became Mr. Negative, he damaged that positive memory and association, which created a wedge between blacks and her, and between those whites who liked Bill but resented the annoying behaviors and excesses of Bill Clinton.

The way she and Bill have conducted themselves is the reason her campaign is literally in nosedive. They stayed too long, and when people took a liking to the new guy, they got nasty and vicious, and we've had enough of that from them.

[havocmom]

81. We have a winner!

Something in the back of my mind keeps whispering that Bill's ego really couldn't stand the idea of two presidents in the family. His normally keen ear to what people want to hear sure as hell turned tin on him. He showed us all we were uncomfortable about with him in blazing neon. It didn't help Hillary.

Mark Penn also didn't help. And the fact that he is someone she hired, well, gives one legitimate reason to question her judgment. Sadly, it also give credence to those who have long insisted she will do anything to get into the Oval Office. Ambition is fine, and I am happy there are ambitious women, but for ambition to trump good judgment, well that is too much of a good thing. And My feelings are the same for men who make the same mistake. It isn't about gender, it is about what the basic driving force is in a candidate. Good work or win no matter which devil you have to pay? That tells me a lot and Hillary's choices of working partnerships leaves me unconvinced her judgment is what I want in the WH.

[TexasObserver]

116. Her candidacy was born on third base, but she thought she got there by hitting a triple.

The public rightly felt that Hillary's campaign acted as if she had a RIGHT to the nomination.

Bill wrongly overestimated his own popularity and its transferability.

[havocmom]

119. Been tryin to tell people here on DU that Clinton fatigue is real and widespread

Got called all sorts of names for my trouble. That's another problem with the campaign: too much lock-step and yes ma'ams, not enough reality based thinking on observations made from outside of headquarters.

That latter is one of the reasons the neocons are now hated by most of America. You cannot keep insisting a delusion is reality forever. Some of the people don't get hypnotized and they eventually wake up others.

[underpants]

88. I also think there was some sort of a revolt ala Ned Lamont and the 2006 elections

I am working an a post on that today.

I think that we aren't hearing about it because the punditry has no clue what is going on outside the castle walls. They had no idea the impact that the unprecedented corruption would play in 2006 and since they both don't want to bring that up as well as it really putting a damper on the dinner/cocktail parties they stopped talking about it 3 days after the election.

[NoBorders]

91. That and there was a positive alternative

And as his 'viability' has increased, so have his numbers, in a self-reinforcin cycle.

[earthside]

12. Hubris

Clinton(s) fatigue.

The 1990s were over eight years ago.

Bush/Clinton/Bush/not again

Contrast all of that to the fact that Obama's got "the vision thing."

[Tom Joad]

14. well, Big news in the campaign today... first, another top aid leaves....

Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's deputy campaign manager resigned today, the latest departure in a staff shake-up following a string of losses to Barack Obama.

In an e-mail message to staffers obtained by The Associated Press after Clinton lost the Virginia primary today, Mike Henry said he was stepping down to allow campaign manager Maggie Williams to build her own staff. Williams replaced Patti Solis Doyle during the weekend. Solis Doyle had recruited Henry to join the campaign last year.

"Out of respect for Maggie and her new leadership team I thought it was the best thing to do," Henry wrote. "As someone who has managed campaigns, I share the unique understanding of the challenges that the campaign will face over the next several weeks. Our campaign needs to move quickly to build a new leadership team, support them and their decisions and make the necessary adjustments to achieve the winning outcome for which we have all worked so hard for over a year now."

Bill Clinton seems to have already faded into oblivion, but this we did not really expect:
Then this rather startling piece of news:
Hillary Clinton, following Mike Henry's lead, today decided she was leaving her position in the campaign so as to make it possible for Maggie Williams to make a really, really, fresh start. "I think the campaign is ready for new faces, and according to internal polls we have conducted, it is my name and my past activity that is weighing down this campaign. I think the hillary clinton campaign can run best without the involvement of any Clinton whatsoever, given the unpopularity of the war we supported so fully." No word yet on who will replace Hillary in the Hillary Clinton campaign for President. Hillary has said she will spend the extra downtime with her family.

[calteacherguy]

22. The tide hasn't turned against her; it's simply turned FOR Obama. nt

[Uzybone]

26. Best

answer. I can’t really think of what she has done wrong in this campaign (apart from handcuff Bill Clinton to a radiator in a dilapidated bathroom), its mostly what Obama has done right. Obviously his message is resonating far better than most thought it would.

[AtomicKitten]

31. inevitability goes poof

oh, and Obama is kicking butt, something I don't think anybody really expected

[Stephanie]

33. It's her lack of authenticity.

I was outraged by the impeachment circus, and that's actually what got me politically active, and I even campaigned for Clinton on election day 2000. But she has disappointed me. The woman I saw on the recently aired documentary and the candidate I supported in 2000 are far removed from the establishment persona I see today. The Hillary I voted for in 2000 would not have approved the bankruptcy bill, would not have backed Bush on the IWR, would not have supported Kyl-Lieberman. My feeling is that she went to Washington and learned her lessons too well. She figured that the only way to play the game was to play by their rules.

[TexasObserver]

37. Agreed. She got the senate seat, and went right, went to the money.

If she had gone left, she would have won the nomination, but she betrayed the left and now she's the girl of corporatists, globalists, and lobbyists.

[harun]

86. I think her plan would have worked if Iraq had gone swimmingly (n/t)

[ShadowLiberal]

35. Hillary has run a terrible campaign, that's how

Hillary or her campaign have made a number of horrible decisions throughout the primary that have cost her dearly. Off the top of my head here's what I've got.

-Deciding to compete in Iowa, even though she had constantly lost in polls there.

-Standing back and doing nothing as the race bait controversy got started from stuff she and her supporters said that offended black people. It doesn't matter who's fault it was for starting it or exploiting it, she should have apologized for those statements right away and condemned them when other people supporting her said them. Instead she ignored the situation for the most part almost a week.

-She fails to have a consistent campaign theme needed to win a general election. Go back to Obama's first speeches in the campaign, and his speech at the 2004 DNC, he's very consistent, always talking about hope and change. Now listen to Hillary's, she's flipped flopped all over for why you should vote for her. "I'm tough and experienced", "We need to return the golden age of the 90's", "I have the experience to bring about the change we need", "I have 35 years of experience bringing about change". She switches campaign themes at the drop of a hat whenever the polls show that it's not what the public wants to hear.

-Not putting much effort into the caucuses in the Super Tuesday states.

-Not getting rid of the morons on her campaign who talked her into doing some of the stupid things she did (like Mark Penn, why is he STILL with her).

She's run a horrible campaign.

[Stephanie]

72. the worst slogan was a few days ago. Obama has the big CHANGE banner -

So she put one up that said SOLUTIONS. It was kind of ridiculous, kind of icky.

[Arugula Latte]

39. I don't think the pro-Hillary people realized how depressing the prospect of her candidacy

would be to many of us. I remember hearing two, three years ago that Hillary would be our nominee in '08 and having a feeling of doom and gloom descend upon me. "Gawd, no, please -- can't we have someone else?" That was my gut reaction. I realize I wasn't alone.

[MethuenProgressive]

42. The Obamas successfully Swiftboated her on Race in SC.

It was in the bag for the Obamas after the MSM and the voters fell for it.

[Botany]

45. Sure they did

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Barack crept into Bill Clinton's room after he was sleeping and drugged the former
President which made Bill bring up Jesse Jackson as a way to undercut Obama's big
win in South Carolina.

[MethuenProgressive]

54. I pity the victims of Swiftboating. Even you.

"The Clintons are racists!"
Yeah - right. Sure they are. :eyes:

[Botany]

62. It is illegal to own a hedgehog

[havocmom]

97. Then, there is the problem of HRC supporters who don't get it about the race card Bill played

No one here has said the Clintons are racists, at least I haven't seen it and I am here too much.

What people didn't like was Bill playing the race card, thinking since there really are racists out there in the real world, he could just nudge them along the road of using race to decide who to support. He used a very ugly tool in an attempt to win the votes of racists. Evidently, too many hours with the Bush family seem to have damaged Bill's formerly keen sense of how the majority of Americans really feel. Racism is still with us, but not as powerful as before. Bill didn't seem to notice that many Americans aren't racists.

THAT is the sin committed.

Add to that the fact that Hillary has a rove-like inability to admit to a mistake and apologize and you have a campaign that looks arrogant beyond what is acceptable by a goodly number of voters. The campaign has also given credibility to critics that have long insisted HRC has more ambition than real values.

The campaign did it to themselves. The principle players, center state and unapologetic, are most responsible.

And hiring Mark Penn of the Paint Pretty Colors on Blackwater PR effort? THAT was STOOOOOOPID. He's still on the campaign payroll? More that stupid.

[goldcanyonaz]

47. Yep, and the media hailed Obama the next Messiah.

[MethuenProgressive]

57. Really sad how often the MSM parroted lies like "Bill called Obama a Fairy Tale"

"Hillary said LBJ was a greater man than MLK! That's racist!"
"Bill said 'rolling the dice!' that's a racist!"
"Some Clinton guy in NH said the MSM will talk about BO's coke use! That's racist!"
"Two guys who worked for Clinton forwarded the same email a million people got! Hillary's a racist!"
:puke:

[goldcanyonaz]

70. Most here spread the hate in regards to Hillary Clinton, and I soon won't forget.

[blm]

48. If she could be swifted in a primary she could be swifted WORSE in a general.

Face it - the vaunted campaign machine was OVERSOLD and YOU bought it.

[MethuenProgressive]

52. McCain would Swiftboat Hillary on Race as successfully as Obama did?

:eyes:

[blm]

55. Looks more like her own LOUSY CAMPAIGN is sinking her - not Obama.

.

[MethuenProgressive]

59. Hey, if you run a racist campaign against a black candidate, you should lose.

But the truth is: she didn't.
Obama's just convinced enough Democrats that she did to win himself the nomination.

[blm]

64. Hillary's SPOKESPEOPLE shouldn't have made racially insensitive comments - that was POOR

decisions on their part.

[MethuenProgressive]

65. Who told you "racially insensitive remarks" were made?

Just because the Obama Camp send out a talking points memo instructing people on how to twist a handful of words into "LOOK HOW RACIST HILLARY AND BILL ARE!" doesn't make it true.
But, that's how Swiftboating works, and people like you end up with propeller scars.

[blm]

66. Baloney - I heard them myself. I don't GET talking points from anyone and think for myself

because I trust my comprehension skills over any media person or political campaign. I inform myself with FACTS. And YOU know NOTHING about what real swifting is.

[MethuenProgressive]

67. You never heard any racially insensitive remarks. You were told the remarks should be called that.

"Hillary said LBJ was a greater man than MLK! That's racist!"
"Bill said 'rolling the dice!' that's a racist!"
"Some Clinton guy in NH said the MSM will talk about BO's coke use! That's racist!"
"Two guys who worked for Clinton forwarded the same email a million people got! Hillary's a racist!"

[blm]

71. BULLCRAP - that's YOUR version. I heard the implications in Shaheen and Bill's

comments. YOU go sit on your stew - not everyone uses media spin to support their conclusions - and you will likely never see the day when you even COME CLOSE to my YEARS of fighting media bias against the left.

[MethuenProgressive]

77. "implications" And who implied? The biased against Clinton media?

[blm]

99. Bill referenced Jesse Jackson's win in SC for a POLITICAL reason - to appeal to racist

voters in the party that he believed would hear him.

You think Bill is naive? He knew exactly who he was appealing to during Sista Souljah and knew exactly who he was appealing to when he made the Jackson comments about SC. He was saying Blacks can always win SC, but white voters in white states won't let that stand.

Bill isn't racist himself, but the dirty campaigner he is chose to tap into the racism he believed still strongly existed.

[GumboYaYa]

I sure am glad we are on the same side this primary season.

I hope all is well with you.

[blm]

117. hey there - got your video in my video store.

It's right up there with all the New Releases.

I gave them an extra copy.

[GumboYaYa]

That's great.

I have been so busy lately that I haven't been keeping up with distribution, but I think it played in France last week and has a broadcast in England coming soon.

We are working on a really exciting new topic, but I can't say much about it yet.

[GumboYaYa]

120. That's great.

I have been so busy lately that I haven't been keeping up with distribution, but I think it played in France last week and has a broadcast in England coming soon.

We are working on a really exciting new topic, but I can't say much about it yet.

[GumboYaYa]

113. I sure am glad we are on the same side this primary season.

I hope all is well with you.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

105. its not the campaign, She needs a new candidate

:rofl:

[OzarkDem]

61. Yes, that one got very ugly

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

104. it depends on what the meaning of "is" is n/t

[GoldieAZ49]

115. IF so, it was Bill Clinton that Swiftboated her, they have no one to blame but

the Clintons.

Sweet, isn't it?

[boricua79]

44. Hillary happened...

and a little Bill too, cause he went haywire in the last months of campaigning.

[blm]

46. With all the advantages a Dem ever had, and they're running the worst campaign I've ever seen.

And these are the exact same people who undermined then sneered at Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004.

Karma?

[psychopomp]

63. Good observation

It really seems like it has come back around, doesn't it? In Jamaica they have a saying, "Spit inna sky it a drop pon shoulder."

[underpants]

49. They weren't planning on having to go door to door district by district

they were planning on doing a national campaign at this point and using all the free media and their friends masterful use of image (and they are usually quite good) but Obama happened. Actually the same thing that stung the Republicans in 2006 happened-the townfolk have other gripes and grievances that the DC punditry hasn't covered at the cocktail parties and, afterward, on the talk shows.

[NashVegas]

50. More People Picked Obama

And drove it home.

In addition to the media's heavy preference for Obama as a candidate, there's also the GOTV issue. I saw reports earlier that Obama's people worked to take better advantage of Dean's 50 state strategy.

[mtnsnake]

51. How nice of you to only bash Hillary when she's ahead (snicker)

I've used most of my posts to blast her rigorously all the way through Feb 5th as I felt the nomination was still a long shot for Barack

She is the official underdog and either way I'm done with Hillary bashing going forward, and would like to share my sympathy for her backers here given the last 5 days

OK, but what are you going to do when the tide shifts again? Resume using most of your posts to blast her rigorously again?

[BeyondGeography]

53. It's looking like the battleship had no course planned for post-Super Tuesday

All the money (and there was less of it than they needed) went into delivering a knockout blow that never came.

Because there wasn't enoungh money (or maybe because they're running a positively awful campaign), no resources went into red states, either for Super Tuesday or afterward. This is where her strategy (or lack thereof) looks completely flat-footed. Obama's win in Idaho was more valuable than hers in New Jersey from a net-delegates-gained perspective (16 v. 12).

Her focus on the big blue states isn't just coming up short, it's making her look like yet another 50+1 candidate who will have us up all night on Election Day waiting to see what happens in Ohio. Getting killed in states we must have like Minnesota and Washignton should set off alarms. Losing badly in winnable states like Colorada and Virginia should also tell you something about who should be the nominee.

And it's not just about money. Obama's ground game has been supported not only by paid advertsing but by armies of unpaid volunteers. She is getting exponentially less out of her people than he is, and the rot starts at the top. Mark Penn has been paid four times more than David Axelrod. She's loaded up on consultants, Obama isn't. Her field people are typically paid, Obama's aren't.

The community organizer is beating the insider. It's a good thing.

[berni_mccoy]

76. You nailed it. Excellent post.

They certainly seemed to be planning to blow Obama out of the water on ST. When it didn't happen, they've been wandering around shell-shocked since.

[Stephanie]

79. It is a good thing. Also he's spending on field where she's spending on image consultants.

His money went to field staff to direct that army of volunteers, hers went to Mark Penn. I sincerely doubt she has many campaign workers who aren't on payroll. She just doesn't inspire that kind of effort. But I know a lot of people from here who were inspired to travel to NH to campaign for Obama on their own dime.

[Medusa]

56. Piss poor performance combined with lack of planning

generally tends to lead to failure. And I do not think it bodes well for her ability to run a country if she can't even run an effective campaign.

[jasmine621]

60. Her performances were not poor by any standards. Issues, issues, solutions.

Obama: charisma, charm, hype.

Here is my take from my post earlier:

Unless the Dems come together within the next four years to change their election and campaign rules, the Republicans will be allowed to continue to select our primary nominees under the radar.
I saw it happening in my precinct. There are many people that I know who were Republicans who were asking for provisional ballots and many friends and former co-workers (including my own daughter) who have changed registration to Independent prior to this primary season. These folks overwhelmingly voted for Obama in my precinct yesterday. The Rovian strategy across the US is revealing as you look at the demographics of the electorate, where they are located and how they voted. Add to that the media's power to set in frenzy either the African American vote or the Hispanic vote by simply distorting the statements of candidates, inferring motives without basis, and creating icons by assigning powers and prowess beyond what is factually ascertainable and presenting a candidate as racist, anti-Hispanic, or anti-black and you have a "democracy" in less than name only. I see this happening for the foreseeable future unless the Dems understand and change their system soon.

The beginning was obvious to me. (1) Get Hillary at all costs because her ideas and solutions will sway many people to her side. Make her and Bill out to be racists by hook or by crook and you will pull the black vote from her, smear his legacy and they will never be able to claim black loyalties ever again. (2) Set up and exaggerate a schism between Hispanics and blacks and make it impossible for any Dem to garner the majority from both at the same time. (3) Get ultra-RW Republicans, actual bigoted Dems (Dixicrats), and politically unwashed young to register as Independents so as to be able to vote in open primaries for the opponent you are most likely to beat in a GE. (4) Have the RW-controlled media build up an icon that you can easily tear down when the time comes, and (5) push lies, distortions, half-truths about a sacred issue of the Dems (Hillary's IWR vote for example) and built it into a betrayal of the sacred trust (no matter who supported the idea at first) and BINGO!
You have a one-party system that no one can beat.

At this point, I feel the momentum is with Obama and that he will win the nomination. So I will readily support him in the GE, feeling that he is not the best we have to offer. And I will laugh my ass off if he actually wins the GE (which I do not believe is possible, knowing what I know) because it will mean that the Rovians overplayed their hand and this thing snowballed into something out of their control. Here's to HOPE!

[Strelnikov_]

126. Yep, she forgot the 6 P's

"proper planning prevents piss-poor performance".

[ozone_man]

73. She had the early name recognition lead

but her advantage there gave way to Obama's more likable personality and his inclusive message. As the campaigning season progressed, Obama seemed more and more a plausible choice. He's charismatic, something that Hillary is not.

Hillary is DLC and much of the left will vote for Obama just to get rid of the DLC. That in itself is a worthy goal. Anything beyond that is gravy, and I think there is more. I'm cautiously optimistic that once in office he will become less conservative, less corporate. A gamble I'm willing to take. I don't think he'll have a choice as the economy is collapsing, and some kind of New Deal reconstruction will be required.

[AlertLurker]

74. How large aof a spread will Obama have to have in order to win?

I figure that if it has to come down to superdelegates, there are probably more than enough DLC-Clinton types to sink Obama, so how big a win is necessary for him to take the decision completely out of their hands?

[Stephanie]

89. It looks like he is already ahead even including the superdelegates AND Florida/Michigan

MSNBC was just reporting that she needs to win 55% of the remaining races in order to win. At this point she is behind no matter how you slice it, including superdelegates AND the disputed states.

[AlertLurker]

96. I had thought that delegates in FLA/MI do not count?

Behind is NOTHING. The Clinton/DLC machine can be behind and STILL WIN, as long as they are not too far behind.

My main point is that Clinton already has nearly twice the number of superdelegate endorsements than Obama has, so:

If it HAS to come down to superdelegates, he's DOA.

How convincingly, then, is he going to have to win in the remaining Primary States in order to have either an OBVIOUS MAJORITY in delegates, or to sway enough superdelegates to forsake the Clintons in the final tally?

[Stephanie]

98. No, even if you count the superdelegates he is already ahead.

The FLA/MI delegates are not supposed to count but she will do everything in her power to make them count, including litigation, mark my words. But as I said above, even if you include the FL/MI delegates, even if you add in the superdelegates on top of that, Obama STILL beats her right now. He won so many delegates yesterday and over the weekend that the only way she can pull out of it is to win at least 55% of the remaining votes, and that's a long shot. So, in short, what Obama needs to win now is 45+ percent of the remaining states. At least that's what I gleaned from listening to MSNBC analysis this morning. And he is only trending up and she is only trending down so it looks like she is done for.

[AlertLurker]

108. You CAN'T COUNT them yet. Obama is only some 200 delegates ahead.

Superdelegates are not gcounted until after the Primaries, remember?

BUT:

749 superdelegates have as yet not endorsed anyone...and 248 have so far endorsed Clinton, to only 141 for Obama. It's a disturbing two to one trend, really. If it comes down to the superdelegates, Obama's history. That's whay I wanted to know by how large and convincingly large majority is he going to have to win for the Clintons to cut their losses? It's actually a trick question, because I believe that they ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT do so until the last delegate (and superdelegate) has declared their preference.

You also forget that Texas has 228 delegates, all on its own. Just winning Texas convincingly erases Obama's lead for Hillary.

I'm neither Hillbot nor Obamite, and as a Canuck, I can't vote, anyhow, but I find the entire process facsinating, however - almost ARCANE!

What a system...some days it seems like flipping a coin would be fairer, in some respects.

[GoldieAZ49]

118. Super Delegates are not committed, they can change

and they will go with the popular candidate. They are running down ticket from the nominee and they want the winner with the people.

They are being called DAILY by both candidates, most have remained uncommitted, an advantage for Obama, the Clintons have long standing relationships with most of them, being the head of the Dem Party for so many years. It shows a loss of power for them, something that doesn't sit well with the Clintons, hence their desperate tactics.

[AlertLurker]

123. If they "go with the popular candidate," why are they 2 to 1 for HRC?

She's got 248 declared superdelegates, Obama's got 141.

Is it ALWAYS this way? Do they ALWAYS follow the normal delegates? I cannot fathom why this would be, AT ALL. Why have a pool of 800 or so delegates that make this much of a difference (almost 1/3), and then expect them to vote with the common sheeple? It doesn't make any sense to me. I would actually have thought the opposite. These are the most politically connected and savvy Dems, who would be expected to mitigate a close result by voting for what the Party wants, not just the delegates of the Party.

I could be wrong, badly informed, both, or just plain confused, however...

I can't ever remember any race being this close, or one where the S-Ds voted differently (or HAD to) but I've only been interested in US elections since Reagan started screwing EVERYONE.

[GoldieAZ49]

124. Most of Hillary's SD's signed on before the voting actually started

and she was the presumed nominee.

The SD's have never played the roll of choosing the nominee, it has never been this close since this process was put in place.

Here is a link with info on how and why the SD's were set up:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18277678/

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

106. even those rats will jump from a sinking ship

:7

[Stephanie]

110. Absolutely

They are already starting to jump.

[goodhue]

80. 34 pts Minnesota

[Politicub]

82. Check out my signature line... I think this is what's happening

And an idea can be postive, negative or neutral. But unfortunately, I haven't caught Obama fever so I'm not swept up in the same kind of emotion that his supporters are feeling. It is palatable and exciting, and who doesn't want to back a winner? Most Americans don't like politics, and Obama is the candidate who speaks to them.

I'm more swayed by wonkiness than flash, and on a side by side comparison, Hillary's policy proposals are superior (IMHO) than Obama's. And yes, some of the other candidates who were in the race had proposals that appealed to me even more, but those folks are out of the running.

[Dawgs]

83. February 5th happened.

She put all of her eggs in one basket and it didn't knock out Obama.

[sniffa]

84. What happened to the 2007 NE Patriots?

Same thing.

[sampsonblk]

85. Poor strategy

She had a huge lead before the voting started. Then she started acting like the nomination was owed to her or something. Meanwhile, Obama kept working hard. Tortoise and the hare.

It didn't help that for the past several years, she kept taking pro-GOP positions, despite complaints from folks like us. Obviously, she didn't attract whoever she was going after with that garbage.

She could have gone full-liberal and had a better showing. But she didn't. In that respect, she really sold us out. She could have used her power and her prominence these last few years to really fight for our causes. But she chose not to, in an attempt to put herself in better position to win the GE. That was an embarrassing flop.

[Stephanie]

90. "She sold us out."

That is exactly right.

[Ino]

111. It's as though she was trying to make the repukes like her...

(anti flag burning?) because who else were the Dems going to vote for?! Arrogance just oozed out of her. Then she came in 3rd in Iowa, and suddenly realized she had to pander to Dem voters as well. All of a sudden she was saying, "Change? You want change? I'm the change candidate! I don't just hope for change, blah blah." All of a sudden, she & Bill were dropping the change word every chance they got. Too little, too late.

[sampsonblk]

125. Yep

Very disappointing because we could have really used her on our side. But in the end, she never used her talents for anything other than getting herself elected.

She aimed the moderates of 2004. But after years of war, scandal and a lopsided economy, those people on our side now. Her precious middle has moved. In retrospect, she should have just done what was right instead.

[Stephanie]

87. The WAR The WAR The WAR

Bottom line, that is what killed her campaign. In was that last debate, where she was laying on her newfound charm and Obama was pulling out her chair for her and she was really winning the debate, UNTIL the question of Iraq came up and she DID NOT HAVE AN ANSWER And the answer is, of course, that she approved the war resolution out of political expediency but SHE CAN NEVER ADMIT THAT. So she loses on the war, bottom line. The greatest folly, the greatest lie, the greatest mistake of our lifetimes and she was on the wrong side of it and remains there. That's why she's lost.

Here's a commentary from The Nation >

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080212/cm_thenation/45284094_1

The Nation -- I don't normally put much stock in Mark Penn's strategy memos for the Clinton campaign, which more often than not contain more spin than substance. But this line in particular, about why Clinton is better prepared than Barack Obama to defeat John McCain in November jumped out:

With Hillary, the Republicans' national security argument blunted and the election debate will shift to healthcare and the economy - areas of decisive strength for Hillary.

This is exactly the same argument top Democratic strategists made to their peril in 2002 and 2004. By voting for the war in '02, Democrats argued, Iraq would be off the table and the election would be decided on the economy and healthcare. Wrong. By nominating a war hero in '04, Democrats argued, John Kerry would close the security gap with George W. Bush. Aides to Kerry claimed as late as October that domestic issues were "stronger ground" for their candidate. "We know that there are a lot of people out there who are more worried about their jobs and paying their health care bills than worrying about what's going on the other side of the world," Kerry strategist Joe Lockhart said. Wrong again. Kerry never succeeded in making the election a referendum on the war in Iraq and likely lost because of it.

In '06, Democrats finally ran strongly against the war and picked up seats across the board. A lot of factors went into the takeover of Congress but Iraq was always central to the cause. True, we've spiraled into a possible recession since then and voters now cite the economy as the top national issue. But with 150,000 US troops overseas, Iraq can never be taken off the table. Nor should Democrats want the war to fade to the background until it ends. You'd think Clinton would've learned that lesson by now.

[The Stranger]

92. IT'S ABOUT THE WAR, STUPID.

That rustling sound is the pigeons coming home to roost.

Only -- it sounds as loud as jet engine.

[PassingFair]

109. All those perimenopausal women who are supposed to vote for Hillary without hesitation...

ever been to ANY local anti-war demonstration?

My husband was supposed to meet me one day at a
church on a busy street for an anti-war meet-up
during the Cindy Sheehan siege of Crawford.

He called me on my cell phone from a couple of
blocks away and told me he was just following all
the grey and white haired WOMEN!

It was his first protest with me, and he thought
there would be "hippies" there!

The point is, we 40 to 60-year-old women seemed
to make up 75% of the committed anti-war community
in MY town.

And we are NOT fond of Hillary.

You tangle with your BASE at your own risk.

I agree that as soon as the veil of "inevitability" had
been pierced, people started voting for Obama in droves.
They tried everything they could to FRONTLOAD so this
wouldn't happen....

Thank the STARS FOR HOWARD DEAN!!!!

We may be seeing the retreat of the DLC in our party!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

103. The main reason I didn't vote for Hillary is the war

gotta be honest

[ordinaryaveragegirl]

121. KS - 48 pts n/t