Reply With Quote
...a lot of insiders are saying the same thing...even that she should step aside for the good of party unity...one thing is for sure, she needs to win Ohio and TX big March 4th or it's over....
she's through.............
...a lot of insiders are saying the same thing...even that she should step aside for the good of party unity...one thing is for sure, she needs to win Ohio and TX big March 4th or it's over....
There's no reason for her to exit as of now. Wisconsin next week will be a good indicator of things to come. A Clinton win there at least stops the bleeding and makes her seem relevant again. An Obama win in WI and I think he takes Texas and Ohio, probably handily. After that it would probably make sense for her to exit graciously and prep herself to run again in 2012 should the opportunity present itself.
I also wouldn't be surprised to see some tawdry tidbit about Obama's past bubble up through the media between now and March 4th. Whatever the Clintons are sitting on, it better be good. Obama is winning every demographic handily, in primaries, with every slice of the electorate breaking his way. It's funny how once it didn't seem inevitable that she would be the nominee that his campaign has really taken off.
obama thread!
The one thing she could try is to somehow get the Michigan and Florida delegations seated at the convention (nevermind that Obama wasn't even on the Michigan ballot). Of course, that's months away. But even then, should Obama continue to rout her in primaries and caucuses those may become irrelevant. Still, I just don't see the Clintons accepting defeat until it's so painfully obvious that even a 2 year old can figure it out.
You'd have to think that if she loses Texas and/or Ohio, it'll be too far gone by that point. What could honestly save her campaign if she falls in such large states that she A) had sewn up and B) nobody gave a about before four weeks ago.
"get the Michigan and Florida delegations seated at the convention"
I also saw a suggestion of having those 2 states quickly organize primaries that the DNC recognizes.
It's is still amazing how her inevitability has evaporated like the fog that hid duyba's lies about Iraq.
Last edited by boutons_; 02-13-2008 at 02:45 AM.
The record is beyond broken.
its now shattered.
Fineman: Now "Virtually Impossible" For Clinton To Win More
Delegates
from HuffingtonPost by The Huffington Post News Editors
Howard Fineman just did a brief segment on MSNBC gaming out the delegate count and where it's likely to end up when the last primaries and caucuses are over. He said he based his comments on conversations with people in both campaigns. And the gist of it was that both sides agree that it's highly unlikely that Clinton can end up with more pledged delegates than Barack Obama. And the issue now is how close she can keep the margin.
If she can keep it within a couple dozen delegates, he argued, it would be credible to try to make up the margin with super delegates. On the other hand, if Obama's ahead by 100 or 200, the pressure against trying to make up the margin with non-elected delegates would just be too great.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...i_n_86352.html
===============
So even if she could win with superdelegates, she shouldn't do it if the losing margin overcome with superdelegates is so large that it would be seen contrary to voters' will as expressed through pledged delegates.
.......I bet she is one wicked to be around this morning.
Listen to me. That fat lady may be warming up, but she hasn't
sung yet.
The Clintons are not going to roll over and play dead. Did you
hear Obama yesterday talking about if he takes the delegates
by popular vote, he OUGHT to be the dimms presidential
candidate. He knows the score and what can happen. Billary
is a scheming , conniving witch who would cut your throat in a
NY minute to run for Prez. It isn't going to be pretty, no sirree.
And that fat broad, not Billary, when she starts that last song,
will be checking the wings of the stage for hit men.
I concur.
The Clinton Machine is gearing for an all out assault in TX, OH and PA. They now know they are up against the wall and must stop the Obamamentum that is growing in leaps and bound everyday.
Barack must campaign like never before in TX and OH and spread the news and as more people listen the better chance he has of at least diminishing Hillary's lead on TX and OH. If he can keep it close then he'll still come out ahead in delegates.
YES WE CAN!!! SI SE PUEDE!!!
.
James White!
Obama has to be the Clinton campaign's worst nightmare. A black candidate whose campaign is not built on redressing old wrongs. One whose appeal is not confined to African-Americans. One who appeals to the young, professionals, men, people who earn good incomes, and all of the standard liberal left cons uencies. One who isn't easily pegged as too far left. Plus the fact that he's a charismatic and telegenic candidate who now women are warming up to. Now he's doing well with working class Democrats and hispanics. He's basically taking apart her coalition. Maybe she still has some core base of union support. I think what we're seeing is that once the people realized they didn't have to vote for her due to her inevitability because there was something better she is getting kicked to the curb faster than her husband can take off a skirt.
I don't think Clinton can make the case that she's more electable in the general than Obama. Obama's been pretty deft in the debates at making the case that her support for the Iraq War and her subsequent obfuscation will be a big liability in the general election. The only outs I see for her are procedural, the wooing of the superdelegates and attempting to get Michigan and Florida's delegates back in play.
A great part of Obama's appeal is his character. People, surprise, surprise, like the idea of a fresh start, something new. The old guard can't compete on that field. What the old guard can do is to try to drive up his negatives, that the change Obama is advocating is somehow inauthentic so you should go with the devil you know.
I haven't seen the Clintons lose an election, but they've had some advantages in those four elections. 1992 you had BClinton as the voice of change and you had an opponent with a disenchanted base plus another challenger who took more votes away from the Republican opponent. 1996 saw a campaign with the advantages of being the in bent president, a weak opponent, and again another challenger hurting his opponent more. The 2000 Senate race saw the opposing party forced to replace their candidate and do so with a weaker one. As a sitting Dem Senator in NY in the '06 reelection wasn't that much of a concern.
But this is different. The Clintons are now the establishment, the old. What advantage they thought they might have with her being the first serious major party female presidential candidate has been trumped by the first serious major party black presidential candidate.
If anything is to come of this election, it will be the media playing up the notion that race didn't seem to matter as much as gender and that America is clearly still sexist and that is why it's still a horrible place to live. Of course, if there was a better female candidate that might not be the case.
Hows this?One who appeals to the young, professionals, men, people who earn good incomes
He's been winning those who make over $50K/yr while she's been taking those under that. Until yesterday.
Also he's been winning with independents and those holding at least one university degree.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
