Matthew Dowd
A Man in the Middle Looks at the Whole Wide World of People and Politics
Matthew Dowd has been a campaign strategist in races throughout the country. In 30 years, Dowd has worked for Democrats such as the late Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock, and Republicans including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and President George W. Bush, for whom he was chief strategist in 2004.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
« Opinion: Obama Will Win Nomination | Main | Race, Religion, Gender Didn't Matter »
Team Clinton Faces Fielder's Choice
February 21, 2008 7:26 AM
What happens when a baseball team near the end of a season goes 0-10 and each is loss is by an ever increasing lopsided margin?
New strategies are employed during the losing streak to try and win -- change the batting order, bring new players in, yell at the team, change up the practice schedule. Many, many things are done to simply try to stop accumulating losses.
But the longer the losing streak goes on, the worse it gets. Teammates begin questioning themselves and each other. Coaches are questioned and berated. Team members begin speaking out to the sports media about whose fault it is. And errors on the field increase as folks lose confidence . It is a seemingly inevitable losing death spiral.
When the losing team finally faces the situation and looks in the mirror in the midst of a streak like this, it is confronted with a key decision.
Either the team decides it still has a chance to get in the playoffs (even if that is improbable) and it looks for the first available opportunity for a victory, and throws the entire kitchen sink at the opposing team.
Or the team decides in this moment of key decision that the playoffs aren’t likely, and it begins to plan for the next season. In doing this the team rests key players, begins to rebuild positive connection and communication among all players and coaches and the league. The team finishes the season on a more positive, uplifting note so fans and other teams can remember the team fondly, even if it ultimately didn't fulfill its dream of victory.
After losing overwhelmingly in Hawaii and Wisconsin this week to Barack Obama, this is exactly where Hillary Clinton and her campaign team find themselves. And the key moment coming up is today’s debate in Austin, Texas (or, possibly, in a few more days, at the Feb 26 debate in Ohio).
So she and her team have, I believe, two avenues to choose between:
1 -- either they believe the can still salvage the season and make the playoffs, and thus I would see this being reflected in a take-no-prisoners and throw-the-kitchen-sink attacks at Obama in the debates, or
2-- they understand the season is lost, and begin to make nice, and not be perceived as sore losers. And thus end the season so it can be remembered positively by voters and the Democratic party.
The tone and substance of how Hillary Clinton conducts herself in tonight’s debate will answer which choice the team has made at this time. (Though Clinton’s inability to congratulate Obama on his Wisconsin victory may tell us which avenue they are headed towards). If not, the next debate in Ohio may give us a firmer picture -- since tonight's debate in Austin may simply be too soon for the Clinton team to understand the stark reality of the situation.
Play Ball!
February 21, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (188)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26349522
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Team Clinton Faces Fielder's Choice:
I think Hillary is running against the networks and not Obama. I have never seen such lopsided media in the recent history. The same anchors like Chris Matthews failed to ask Bush and the White House a single question during the last 7 years. MSNBC is more like the Burmese TV now.
Posted by: John Prescot | Feb 21, 2008 12:23:51 AM
John -- "have never seen such lopsided media in the recent history." -- All you Hillary supporters are just now feeling the pinch of what conservatives have felt for years.. the media is over 80% liberal.. If it woern't for partisan networks like Fox ( come to think of it - thats the only one) all the media would be terribly slanted to the liberal view... that sense of helplessness that you feel whenver you believe that Hillary is not getting a fair shake.. thats the same feeling Republcians get everytime they watch ANY national news network...
Posted by: givemeabreak | Feb 21, 2008 12:29:29 AM
Clinton's inability to concede when she loses, congratulate her opponent in her loser's speech OR thank and acknowledge her supporters who voted for her in states she lost has turned me against her. I was choosing between her and Obama for months and leaning slightly to Clinton, but in the past weeks, my choice has become clear. If Obama wins my state, obviously, we 'won't matter' to Clinton and her campaign will put some spin on why we don't count. Bullshit. Hillary, you are rude and have no class. Your dirty politics are also worse than any Democrat or Republican in this race.
My vote goes to Obama now.
OBAMA 08!
Posted by: rf | Feb 21, 2008 12:53:37 AM
People are flocking to Obama because he inspires. Hillary is capable of inspiring, but she tends towards moving into a modality of well-spoken lawyer language (senatorial speak), as opposed to getting out with her heart. If Hillary started showing nothing but heart, and laughing and having a good time on the stump, and hugging people the masses would stop, pause, and take notice. She still has a chance, but that tick-tock is getting louder. Right now, even on stage, she seems distant. She needs to connect, more heart, please.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Feb 21, 2008 1:00:41 AM
WestCoastMessenger, Hillary does all of those things at her speeches. I have been to more than a few. But there is a perception she cannot be trusted and is not sincere. Obama apparently is. But he has not proved that. Obama has been not so forthcoming about the donor. He releases the information when he is riding momentum. Obama using semantics as to whether he will accept public funding. He is saying his wife did not mean what she said. All the signs of a politican.
Posted by: Jim | Feb 21, 2008 1:08:31 AM
Well, seeing how there's now a $10m 527 anti-Obama/pro-Hillary organization being created, and a majority of the news stories on abcnews.com/politics is about the Obama-bashing by the Clinton campaign, I think it's obvious the sorry choice that they've made here...
* Clinton: "Did Obama Borrow Another Phrase? "
* "Slam Obama! Desperate Clintonistas?"
* "Clinton Blasts Obama Voting Record"
* "Obama Swiped for Thin Legislative Record"
* "Clinton: Choice Is 'Speeches' vs 'Solutions'"
* "Hillary Clinton: 'I Am Proud of the United States of America'"
Typical class-less Clinton campaigning.
Posted by: Allen | Feb 21, 2008 1:43:16 AM
Why don't we just wait and see Texas and Ohio first before declaring Obama as the nominee. Of course Obama has clearly been media's favorite, so they would like nothing better than to see Hillary step aside.
Posted by: Missmadeleine2002 | Feb 21, 2008 3:00:59 AM
HR Clinton HAS LOST!! She is a shame, non transparent. She has just survived to this stage by merely cheating and hiding her 'real context' as far as her funding resources are concerned. She is a poor planner already...loaning US$5mil for her compaign is yet a sort of her poor mismanagement. How can she manage a mighty US Economy/funds with repect to world economy. SHE WILL LEAD US IN A HUGE RECESSION..A GREAT DIPRESSION EVER TO COME under Hillary Clinton if any mistake is done to nominate her and if she would win US Presidency. Only OBAMA deserve voting; He can save America. Classic planning and Management gives him overwhelmingly wins over Clinton, and must be the same over McCain!
Posted by: Paul | Feb 21, 2008 4:23:11 AM
"He can save America"
Do you honestly think that one man, be it Obama, can save America.Is it realistic.. This's what really bothers me about him, he's just a man, not a messiah or savier. A politician who can give an inspirational speech, no more no less..
Posted by: Missmadeleine2002 | Feb 21, 2008 4:41:08 AM
No one likes to return to the past, its about moving forward by making CHANGES, moving the country towards the future. This is the message Obama is selling and many are following him.
Posted by: Peace | Feb 21, 2008 4:53:24 AM
US is still too racist a country to elect a black president.
In a general elections, McCane will defeat Obama in a landslide.
Obama would not have won Illinois senate race if two of his opponents were not involved in a sex scandal.
Republican smear machines will have a feild day with Barak Saddame Obama's muslim up-bringing.
If Clinton wins Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, Obama is unelectable losing 7 out of 8 largest states.
Furthermore, majority of the 1.5 million voters who voted in the democratic primary, will not vote for Obama; with Florida, Democrat can not win in November. Wake up and stop following a cult leader, for the coutry's sake...
Posted by: west | Feb 21, 2008 6:12:57 AM
Is media so blinded by their hatred of Clitons that they act in concert to undermine the Clinton's campaign?
Including votes in Florida and Michigan, Hillary Clinton has received more popular votes than Barak Obama.
Does media really want to alienate all those who voted for Clinton by being so biased toward Obama?
Is this another case of Democrats grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory with assist from the media?
Thank you media for another 8 years of Republican White House, and Iraq war.
Posted by: West | Feb 21, 2008 6:39:36 AM
Clinton's inability to concede when she loses, congratulate her opponent in her loser's speech OR thank and acknowledge her supporters who voted for her in states she lost has turned me against her. I was choosing between her and Obama for months and leaning slightly to Clinton, but in the past weeks, my choice has become clear. If Obama wins my state, obviously, we 'won't matter' to Clinton and her campaign will put some spin on why we don't count. Bullshit. Hillary, you are rude and have no class. Your dirty politics are also worse than any Democrat or Republican in this race.
My vote goes to Obama now.
OBAMA 08!
Posted by: dia20 | Feb 21, 2008 6:49:01 AM
Clinton's inability to concede when she loses, congratulate her opponent in her loser's speech OR thank and acknowledge her supporters who voted for her in states she lost has turned me against her. I was choosing between her and Obama for months and leaning slightly to Clinton, but in the past weeks, my choice has become clear. If Obama wins my state, obviously, we 'won't matter' to Clinton and her campaign will put some spin on why we don't count. Bullshit. Hillary, you are rude and have no class. Your dirty politics are also worse than any Democrat or Republican in this race.
My vote goes to Obama now.
OBAMA 08!
Posted by: dia20 | Feb 21, 2008 6:49:11 AM
Go Senator Hillary Clinton!
Don't give up AMERICA. You can still make it... TEXAS, OHIO, and PENSYLLVENIA will all be yours...
God bless you...
Posted by: ronald | Feb 21, 2008 7:06:11 AM
It obvious that Hillary can't this nomination. She will lose in Texas and Ohio. She must admit this fact now.Obama '08
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | Feb 21, 2008 7:31:53 AM
Newspapers Reported Obama's Support of NAFTA, Desire To Pursue Similar Agreements
2/16/2008 3:36:37 PM
Associated Press: Obama said the United States should ‘pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement.' "Obama said the United State should continue to work with the World Trade Organization and pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement." [AP, 9/8/04]
Decatur Herald & Review: 'Obama said the United States benefits enormously from exports under the WTO and NAFTA.' "While some people believe NAFTA has been good for U.S. farmers, the trade results could have been better, Keyes said. NAFTA negotiators said the United States might lose manufacturing jobs but would become a service economy, but now those service jobs also are being exported, he said. Obama said the United States benefits enormously from exports under the WTO and NAFTA. He said, at the same time, there must be recognition that the global economy has shifted, and the United States is no longer the dominant economy. 'We have competition in world trade,' Obama said. 'When China devalues its currency 40 percent, we need to bring a complaint before the WTO just as other nations complain about us. If we are to be competitive over the long term, we need free trade but also fair trade." [Decatur Herald & Review, 9/9/04]
Posted by: ronald | Feb 21, 2008 7:46:28 AM
IF CLINTON WINS TEXAS, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, SHE WILL WIN THE NOMINATION. SUPERDELEGATES WILL NOT SUPPORT CANDIDATE THAT LOST 7 OUT OF 8 BIGGEST STATES IN THE UNION. SORRY OBAMA, THERE'S ALWAYS 2012... UNLESS MEDIA GETS BORED WITH YOUR PRETENSE AND EXPOSE WHO YOU ARE, A CULT FIGURE.
Posted by: West | Feb 21, 2008 7:54:58 AM
If yu haven't viewed the Barack Obama: Walt Handelsman Animation you really should. It's delightfully funny! Just G**gle Walt Handelsman and scroll down to Barack Obama.
Posted by: enjoy the humor | Feb 21, 2008 8:18:18 AM
I.A.T Smith, the post that you made this morning at 7:31:53 AM is clearly a lie. You copied and pasted a headline and quote that was made by Alan Keyes, in favor of NAFTA. Then you attempted change the quotes to Obama, however, you did not change all of the quotes because you missed one and it stills says Keyes.
This is the problem with Clinton and her supporters. You all are intentially distorting the truth in an effort to make Hillary win. The vast majority of all Americans see though this. We want change and Hillary is not change.
You could say that this is just my opinion, however, based on the last 10 primaries, it is clear that a number of Americans feel the same way.
Posted by: Shawn | Feb 21, 2008 8:25:17 AM
America is sick and broken when people can give a standing ovation to a man blowing his nose in a tissue we have really reached the end of the line and have lost all sense of reasonable thinking. Sad to say the coming years with oil now $100 I see no hope soon on the horizon, but maybe WORDS will put food on the table, give people jobs, better health care and so on. If as time passes and things do not get better some can always sit and remember what a great time they had in the run off to election as they wallow in their sorrow waiting for a new messiah to come in order to ease their pain.
Posted by: SJ | Feb 21, 2008 8:25:57 AM
I was under the impression that 75% of the media was conservative!
Posted by: steve | Feb 21, 2008 8:30:24 AM
I was under the impression that 75% of the media was conservative!
Posted by: steve | Feb 21, 2008 8:30:32 AM
Oh. How stupid writer you are It's they way you making a life? Shame on you! All media are ugly and leading the country to the wrong direction as they did in 2004.
Shame on you media! You need find if you are really smarter as you think or you are just so stupid that you even never knew?
Posted by: bobforhrc | Feb 21, 2008 8:40:56 AM
It's refreshingly nice to see a positive change coming to America. Voters are rejecting the divisive Limbaughs, Hanitys and Clintons and voting for John McCain and Barack Obama.
However don't count the Clintons out. It's not in their nature to accept defeat without risking a Democratic Party schism reminiscent of the 1968 convention. The latest Clinton tactics to bring down the Obama campaign are straight out of the writings of Hillary's mentor and subject of her 1969 college thesis, Saul Alinsky. Mr. Alinsky's rules of political agitation include the following:
1) "Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy." Evidence: The Clinton campaign can't win on the high ground so they've gone negative to take the battle to the gutter.
2) "The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength." Evidence: The Clinton campaign has planted audience questions and seized the Obama campaign's "change" mantra as if it were their own and are marketing Hillary as the "change agent" while questioning the originality of Obama's rhetoric.
As a Republican-leaning independent, I will vote for Barack Obama if he is the Democratic nominee running against John McCain but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: John Patrick Smith | Feb 21, 2008 8:42:01 AM
I just can't see Hillary quitting. I think she should go with option 2, graciously support Obama, but this seems out of character for her. I hate the image that will probably be portrayed that as the last rat on a sinking ship.
Posted by: Alox | Feb 21, 2008 8:43:23 AM
Mr Dowd - You may not realize it, but your sports analogy when referring Hillary Clinton is another "gender" defining description. Although your analogy is not specifically sexist, you still view this election through the eyes of a "man's world" lens. Throughout this primary election cycle, I have been very disturbed at the covert and overt messages about what is acceptable in portraying the candidates - and I don't mean their platforms - I mean their individual characteristics. As the white male vote moves to Obama, it becomes more and more obvious that the media is still primarily a man's world and whether the voting public admits to it or not, they are much more afraid of gender differences in the White House than they are of anything else including another unknown and unproven candidate.
Posted by: Mary | Feb 21, 2008 8:46:32 AM
Look at today's situation. American is falling! Dollars was trashed! Now is only worth less 40% of Euro. China stock market value passed NASDAQ. And media and so called "high educated" votes like liberal and blinded to the reality. If it happened, I can say the America will not be a leader in 2-4 years. The voice of other country will be stronger. Wake up America and make the right choice!
Get my country back! Vote for HRC!
Posted by: bobforhrc | Feb 21, 2008 8:48:53 AM
Mary, I know you want a woman to be president now, more than anything else. It's like grabbing the first shiny thing that comes along. Hillary has so many past issues that labels her as untrustworthy. In a few years we'll see a good honest woman come along that will deserve the election. Not corporate owned Hillary, not now!
Posted by: steve | Feb 21, 2008 9:02:08 AM
So, Mary... how is this a sexist reference? Don't women play sports as well? I seem to remember watching many women's softball and volleyball games. Did I imagine this?
West,
the DNC stated that Florida and Michigan would not count, and the candidates agreed not to campaign there. So why, after knowing this and agreeing to it beforehand, should it suddenly count? Would you feel the same way if the positions were reversed and Obama needed those votes to be ahead? Clinton won those states because in one case, Obama was not on the ballot, and did not have the option to remove his name in the other state.
Wake up, and grow up.
Posted by: Chris | Feb 21, 2008 9:17:10 AM
Funny a problem in the Mccain camp I wonder if this is an Obama leak....Obama has had the press on his side and who knows who started the racial card could be Obama's camp to stir up the race ...statesments by Clinton were not racial...people don't think just rely on Media to make their decisions ...media is telling you to vote for Obama and there you go...
Posted by: dellee | Feb 21, 2008 9:17:45 AM
Chris - Obama removed his name from the ballot not because of DNC he made a deal with another group to remove his name ...he could have not made the deal and kept his name on the ballot ...I think it was with New Hamp and Iowa..that is why Hillary kept her name on the ballot and abided by DNC rules by not campigning but was allowed to fund raise in those states...now that is a person who can think ahead and out of the box..
Posted by: dellee@yahoo.com | Feb 21, 2008 9:21:41 AM
John: You are so right about the media. Chris Matthews and the rest of the team have been promoting Obama from the beginning because they do not want Hillary and Bill Clinton in the white house. MSNBC are rude and ignorant and there has been a lot of comments on this. Hillary is right the media ruined her. CNN is a far better network and they do not promote. I like Dan Abrams because he is fair in his questions. Obama is a sneak, liar, does not have the ability to create his own speeches, and is a good friend of Patrick who I believe he would choose as his VP. 8 years of Obama, after that Patrick would run as president, 8 years of Patrick, no longer the white house it would be the black house.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 9:24:35 AM
Do you need inspiration from the new president after election?
--Yes, so I will study harder to get better grades.
--Yes, so I will work harder to get a raise.
--No.
--Not sure.
Posted by: Mike | Feb 21, 2008 9:25:08 AM
Hey guys - I've played sports all my life, but realistically, the analogy Down used is masculine. He didn't mention a softball or volleyball game - he mentioned baseball. You can deny it, but it's true. Why not make references to delivering a child or perhaps the final moments in a who-done-it mystery? They are just as relevant to the situation from the eyes of women in the first case or even from the eyes of men and women in the second. I'm not calling Mr. Dowd sexist, I'm just pointing out the disparity in the treatment of the first woman to run for president. These are subtle differences, but any difference can provide slant -whether pro or con - to enforce a point of view.
Posted by: Mary | Feb 21, 2008 9:26:07 AM
With your sports analogy, you missed the most obvious ploy...somebody puts a needle of steroids in HILLARYS lower 40 , you chuck the dabates, and ask for a mud wrestling event. Sell tickets to pump the campaign chest, and its onto OHIO people...Boom shack-a-lacka-Boom-shack-a-lacka...
Posted by: daddyblue | Feb 21, 2008 9:32:55 AM
It's funny that so many people still don't understand why Obama is doing so well. He certainly is not doing well because of the media. They've been hacking at him for a while and had practically coronated Hillary in November before any elections had taken place.
Obama is doing incredibly well because of his ability to MOBILIZE (which is even more important than inspire). The majority of people who have actually gone to one of his rallies or listened to a few of his speeches, don't just go away "feeling good". They go away thinking "I've got to do something". And because of this, he has an army of volunteers and donors marching in harmony, knocking on doors, talking to their neighbors, making phone calls,caucusing and voting. It is on the backs of this effort that Obama has gone from being a huge underdog to a front runner. And it is this energy that will enable him to drive real change in America. As he reminds us, the work only begins with the election.
Posted by: ic | Feb 21, 2008 9:33:12 AM
From the start, the Republicans wanted to eliminate the strongest Democrat, i.e., "divide and conquer". In states like Wisconsin and Virginia Republicans can do mischief by voting on the weaker Democratic candidate. With McCain secure, lots of Republicans have voted against Hillary, to eliminate her. CNN and the others are wrong when they argue she lost the support of old voters, women and lower income. That conclusion is just not correct. She won in these demographics for the registered democrats. At one point during the counting in Wisconsin, Hillary had more than twice the total of McCain votes. Where were the Republicans? My point is these same voters will be Republican again in the election day. On the other hand, Obama may end up short because 20% of HiIlary supporters won't show up in the Election day, which may offset any independent gain. As they say, "you can fool most people most of the time but not all the people all the time." The Emperor should be naked by then. Don't despair, were Obama and Michelle to win we will still have what former French President Charles De Gaulle said to Brazilians: "Each Country has the government it deserves."
Posted by: cwu | Feb 21, 2008 9:34:49 AM
Comments about the media being too powerful escapes the real issue: those American voters who are persuaded one way or another by media (news, commentary, or even political commercials) are "non-thinking" individuals (regardless of political ideology) who should not be voting in the first place!
Comments that bash Clinton or Obama are foolish, especially if one either believes that "only" Clinton can "save" the U.S. or "only" Obama can: my God! What happened to "We the People?"
If we expect and demand our leaders to "save us," then we as individuals and as a society will forever be dissapointed and will forever be children (didn't Katrina teach everyone that government at all levels will fail us?).
God Help America!
Posted by: CASKEPTIC | Feb 21, 2008 9:34:55 AM
WestCoastMessenger: Obama practiced the speeches of RFK many times over and it was compared on TV. He doesn't have the integrity to do anything on his own. Even when he's talking he tries to act like RFK. If he wants to be him that bad then he should join him and you know where. He can't create a speech uses Patrick's speeches, but this generation is so dumb dumb they don't know dark from light. He has many of these college students fooled but he doesn't fool me one bit. He wants to make histiory that's all he is interested in. Do you really think he like white people. Get a life. He goes to an all black church that don't like whites. It has been a proven fact. Where have you been. He is using the whites and they are stupid enough to allow it. Didn't Oprah get rich from a white audience? She never campaigned for a white candidate. This is the dumbest generation of all times. No nothing and think nothing, go along for the ride and believe me Obama is taking you people for a good long ride.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 9:34:56 AM
The people who have drank the Obama kool-aid will be let down in the general election as the Messiah loses in a landside because of the independent and republican votes in the open primaries. The repubs don't want to face Clinton so they have done the next best thing and tainted the democrats nominating process. And don't think Rove didn't have something to do with this. All that will be left standing in november will be the empty suit of the Messiah.
Posted by: vnvet68 | Feb 21, 2008 9:39:28 AM
Dellee: Where have you been? Obama's name was on the ballot in New Hampshire, the state the media thought he was winning only to get a surprise. Obama is a very sore loser and when Hillary won all this big states there was no smile on his face. He is not the person he's claiming to he but its dummies like you that are dazzled by his speech that Patrick gave him. And Obama has been practicing the speeches of RFK and even imitates him. It was shown on TV. Get a grip on life and wake up to reality. That's the trouble with most of this dumb generation they can't see the light they live in the dark.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 9:42:17 AM
HR Clinton is VERY DIVISIVE, HAS LOST!! She is a shame, non transparent. She has just survived to this stage by merely cheating and hiding her 'real context' as far as her funding resources are concerned. She is a poor planner already...loaning US$5mil for her compaign is yet a sort of her poor mismanagement. How can she manage a mighty US Economy/funds with repect to world economy. SHE WILL LEAD US IN A HUGE RECESSION..A GREAT DIPRESSION EVER TO COME under Hillary Clinton if any mistake is done to nominate her and if she would win US Presidency. Only OBAMA deserve voting; He can save America. Classic planning and Management gives him overwhelmingly wins over Clinton, and must be the same over McCain!
Posted by: Paul | Feb 21, 2008 9:44:30 AM
Talking points and emotions aside, things look obviously bleak for Clinton. The mathematics and trends are simply inescapable. Certainly, there is still a mathematical possibility that Clinton could win more pledged delegates, but there is almost no realistic possibility of it happening. Trends show Obama's support growing from Super T through WI. When diverse states like VA and WI go for Obama with such high margins, coupled with endorsements such as Teamsters and SEIU, and the trickling of superd. switches, things look to be inevitable. The TX selection rules clearly place a Clinton win in doubt, and even if she wins OH, it's not enough, and PA is a long way off. It's likely Clinton will lose in TX (an open primary) and win OH. Thus, I hope that Clinton does not go negative and slash-and-burn. Here are some big IFs. If Obama is on course to win the nomination, so be it. If he is doomed to lose the General, so be it. Tomorrow is another day. Live to fight another day, not win at all costs. If it were meant to be, I think it would have been obvious by now. Good effort, now move on to the next enterprise.
Posted by: Kevin | Feb 21, 2008 9:45:34 AM
The Hillary gang failed mightily when they did not push for bush cheeny impeachments and NANCY PELOSI filled out the failed bushbaby term as our first woman President. The republicans had no guts to call for that either as they were busy in airport bathrooms. Case closed...next!! Our first black(50%) President and a very good one at that...RFK send his best wishes BARACK...and its onto the WHITE HOUSE to restore our integrity....YES WE CAN...YES WE CAN...
Posted by: daddyblue | Feb 21, 2008 9:45:41 AM
Jim: Michelle run of the mouth Obama really make a big mistake and she meant what she said but because of the media's attention to it she gave an apology. Who is kidding who. Obama doesn't have the integrity to create speeches. All candidates have a speech writer but the governor doesn't create their speeches. Patrick gave Obama copies of this speeches to practice. That was all set up ahead of time. Since when does a governor give a candidate his speeches unless there is something in it for him. Maybe a VP spot. Then we would never get them out of the white house that would become the black house in time.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 9:47:36 AM
HR Clinton HAS LOST!! She is a shame, non transparent. She has just survived to this stage by merely cheating and hiding her 'real context' as far as her funding resources are concerned. She is a poor planner already...loaning US$5mil for her compaign is yet a sort of her poor mismanagement. How can she manage a mighty US Economy/funds with repect to world economy. SHE WILL LEAD US IN A HUGE RECESSION..A GREAT DIPRESSION EVER TO COME under Hillary Clinton if any mistake is done to nominate her and if she would win US Presidency. Only OBAMA deserve voting; He can save America. Classic planning and Management gives him overwhelmingly wins over Clinton, and must be the same over McCain. You can see now he (McCain) starts to suffer from his lobbyists collusion...yet more are to come about McCain...Obama will just hummer him apart, out of the race !
Posted by: Paul | Feb 21, 2008 9:52:42 AM
Paul: You must be reading the wrong literature. Obama couldn't write out a check for 5 million because he is a pauper's millionaire with only 1.5 million to his name whereas the Clinton's have over 40 to 50 million. And didn't Romney use his own 35 million dollars to campaign. Wake up. Get real. If Obama was elected president this country would go down in a disaster like never before. He doesn't have the brains to create his own speeches let alone run the country. For being an attorney he is the dumbest candidate I ever seen campaigning. You and the rest of your generation can't see thru his fake smile but I can. Do you really think he likes white people? You better read more. He belongs to an all black church on the southside (he belongs there) that does not like white people. It has been a proven fact. He is not christian he is a Muslim. He was raised as a Muslim and that church has hate for the whites. Wake up and drink more coffee.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 9:54:26 AM
A person faith is theirs. Bush has had 8 year not because of his faith maybe because of his non color skin. Hillary Clinton did her best but the race will be McCain and Obama.
Posted by: Seeker | Feb 21, 2008 10:03:03 AM
daddyblue: Are you reading comic books again. You just can't impeach the vice president without a based reason. And they couldn't come up with one. I don't like Cheney because he is a sneak and a liar like Bush but their terms are almost over and we will have a new president in the white house. If Hillary does not win the nomination I as a democrat will vote for John McCain. Obama couldn't run a cleaning store let alone this country. Yes, this generation is fooled by him because a lot of them are in drugs and booze like he was if not medication. Wake up face reality. Obama doesn't like white people he uses them for his own benefit and this generation of fools believe everything he says. However, he uses the speeches from Patrick because he does not have any abilities of his own. He practiced the speeches of RFK and that's why he tries to act like him. They showed that on TV last week. If he wants to be RFK then he should join him.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 10:05:08 AM
The media has influenced This election
Posted by: seah | Feb 21, 2008 10:12:56 AM
Mariann Pepitone is a raging racist and an idiot. Literally, every point yo try to make is factually wrong, no matter how many times you write "It's a proven fact." Actually, they are all proven to be the opposite of what you claim.
I'm going t love seeing a black man sworn in a President while racists like you can do nothing except sit there and deal with it. Emjoy your misery, racist.
Posted by: Frankie | Feb 21, 2008 10:15:39 AM
Recent media coverage usually fails to make distinctions between "primaries" and "caucuses". They should. Caucuses have reflected a much smaller percentage of total democratic voters in those states than primaries. I'd like to hear more from voters in caucus states who turn out for the general election but don't (or can't) for the caucuses. As a voter from a Primary state, caucuses feel exclusionary, extremely unmindful or unsympathetic to those of us who want to perform our civic duty but have responsibilities to work and family that don't allow us to stand around in noisy halls for a couple of hours.
Is it that the media is so biased toward Obama or are they just lazy or underfunded that they can't provide this deeper analysis of caucuses limited participation vis a vis primary state participation?
The public wants to know.
Posted by: twinmom48 | Feb 21, 2008 10:15:50 AM
Missy Pepitone, the abc handlers like you because they removed my post for you, so I will try again. Gunther TOODY will be by to pick you up in his POLICE car, that is number 54 by the way, so put on some more red lipstick and he will drive you to your affair with RUDY. OOOOH OOOOH OOOOH
By the way I am a white Democrat and don't like you or the fact abc posts your imbecile drivel...
Posted by: daddyblue | Feb 21, 2008 10:20:36 AM
Todays generation hates the baby boomers and associates them with Bush. I have heard this to no end at work and this is the change they want. I have to hear the white boys club talk about having a black in the Whitehouse is better than that B**** in there. But, when you question them about their reasons it has more to do with sexists prejudices than race. These are the same little boys that mommy raised to be spoiled brats. You will see in the general election how much the baby boomers influence this election as the Messiah goes down in flames.
Posted by: vnvet68 | Feb 21, 2008 10:21:16 AM
Well, getting back to the original topic, it's rather obvious which avenue the Clintons are going to take. They are definately going to through the kitchen sink at Obama. If anyone thinks that the political group ALP 527 is a completely independant group of businessmen who simply want to get the Clintons back in office, well then you're just plain stupid. There is no doubt in my mind that this a group of people, set up as a front by corporate lobbyists, to protect their interests by getting/keeping the Clintons in power. If you think all of the negative things about Kerry was bad, you ain't seen nothin' yet. I just hope the good people of Texas are smart enough to see what's really going on.
Posted by: GaryB | Feb 21, 2008 10:22:00 AM
I AGREE WITH THIS:
I think Hillary is running against the networks and not Obama. I have never seen such lopsided media in the recent history.
... our news media has turned completely to "entertainment" news ... political news has been more "American Idol" hype than substantive news.
Posted by: Jackson | Feb 21, 2008 10:29:36 AM
Hillary must conduct her compaign in a genuine manner. If she keeps on critisizing Obama instead of riding her compaign smoothly, then she is doomed. No American,the middle class in specific will trust her with the dwindling economy. Wake up Hillary.
Posted by: kennedy | Feb 21, 2008 10:29:52 AM
John Prescot 6) How come the vote counting "Fraud" as the Mayor Bloomberg phrased, does not get a traction as it should?
Yes, I can see that the Media is lopsided.
Posted by: Philip, NY | Feb 21, 2008 10:30:47 AM
givemeabreak: If you think Castro was a dictator you haven't seen anything yet. This generation of fools would vote for anyone with a big smile and don't care that they are a liar, fake and a copycat. They are in the same league as Obama. A dumb attorney with no brains to create his own speeches and has to use the governor's speeches to win the nomination. If he wants to be like RFK and he does imitate him then he should join him and make us all happy. Hillary doesn't use her husband's speeches and does not use a governor's speech. Yes we can is a copy of a former presidents line. Hillary use the words "no you can't." When it comes to foreign policy Jhn McCain can throw rings around him. He doesn't know foreign policy but he probably is learing from Kennedy or Kerry two stab in the backs. Kennedy is in the senate too long and should retire. And it appears the public is afraid of the Clinton's getting in the white house again. What is the big deal. Bill Clinton cleaned up the mess when he was elected and another Bush made a mess. It will take another Clinton to clean it up again and Obama is not the one. He couldn't run a cleaning store let alone the country. You need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 10:31:21 AM
John Prescot : You are right. 1) How come the NYT has tarnished its respected reputation and journalism after endorsing a candidate? 2)How come in a presidential debate a network asked a candidate “Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?” 3) How come Hillary can insist upon not releasing her tax return and not covered by the media when running for the highest public office in America? 4) How come she can tout her "35 years of experience," which includes her years at the Rose Law Firm, the Cattle Futures, and the Whitewater, & not release her First Lady documents?
5) How come as Bloomberg.com reported that she is the queen of pork-barrel spending, that news does not get attention from other networks? -according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, placed $2.2 billion worth of earmarks in spending bills from 2002-2006- 6) How come the vote counting "Fraud" as the Mayor Bloomberg phrased, does not get a traction as it should?
Yes, I can see that the Media is lopsided.
Posted by: Philip, NY | Feb 21, 2008 10:32:25 AM
Lets wait and see what happens after Texas and Ohio. Hillary is not about to step down, nor should she. She is the real candidate...Obama is just the media darling for the moment and he lacks susbstance and credibility. The news, as mosty people have commented, is so one sided and so pro Obama its ridiculous. Yes he will be more able to manipulate so I guess thats why the media loves him. The Republicans also are praising him because they know they can destroy him, at the right time.
Posted by: jimbo | Feb 21, 2008 10:40:21 AM
GaryB: Ye, I hope the good people are smart enough not to throw their vote to Obama instead of Hillary. You must be in the same league as some of this generation of fools that cater to a liar, deceiver, fake smile and copycat. Obama could never do it on his own without Patrick. He is as dumb as they come and it comes to creating his own speeches. Yes, candidates have speech writers but not the governor's speeches. Is he going to choose him as his VP if he wins the nomination? Are we going to have those two in the white house for 8 years> Heaven help this country if that happens. We will have the biggest disaster in history. If Hillary doesn't win the nomination I pray that John McCain wins the presidency. He's a candidate that is well educated on politics and doesn't need help. WAKE UP TO REALITY.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 10:41:10 AM
Hillary Huckabee has proved that all the things that the Republicans hated about them are true...Look at all the negative drama within ONLY the last month! Starting with the fake crying, then politics of division in SC, moving onto claiming she won states where I know in Florida 1.7 Democrats were voting for a Property tax amendment NOT her and she was the only one on the Ballot in MI, Missing Votes in NYC, Classless unacceptance of her loses, staying married to a man only so she can win the presidency etc etc She is PATHETIC and as a former Hard Core Clinton Supporter I think it would be in their best interest to step aside because if they continue to publically remove their masks. They will absolutley shunned by the folks who spent so many years defending them while they proceeded to totally trash our party with their political games and arrogance!
I wonder what will happen then? Is she going to boil the rabbit? Maybe she will finally get divorced? I wonder who will file the papers? Probably Bill...
Posted by: Beka13 | Feb 21, 2008 10:41:48 AM
To believe the "media" is slanted toward Obama is to flirt with conditions psychiatric. Both the fanatical Hillary supporters and the drooling Right find it psychologically impossible to imagine that they are simply WRONG! Obama is doing as well as he is because of his message and the manner in which he delivers it. Fortunately, in this country we do not have a Nazi press which slants the news in only one direction. We have much more diversity than that. We have a press that slants news in many directions.
Posted by: Commonsense | Feb 21, 2008 10:41:54 AM
Hillary and the trashy CLinton Mob is behind the trashy New York Times article on McCain. The New York Times endorsed the corrupt Clintons. Don't you people realize what the Clintons are doing???!!! They HAVE TO DESTROY OBAMA AND THEY HAVE TO DESTROY McCAIN SO THAT HILLARY WILL GET THE NOMINATION AND BECOME PRESIDENT! THE CLINTONS ARE SICK AND THEY WILL DESTROY AMERICA!I believe they would even murder! It doesn't take too many smarts to figure it out! For God's sakes, the CLintons are despicable people. They will stop at nothing! WAKE UP!!!
Posted by: CS3539 | Feb 21, 2008 10:45:00 AM
How many people think the press should reveal the political party of serial killers and kids that shoot their fellow students, or bomb federal buildings???? I DO...
Posted by: daddyblue | Feb 21, 2008 10:52:02 AM
Bammy is going down in Texas and Ohio.
Posted by: Notoobama | Feb 21, 2008 10:52:22 AM
Thanks for an interesting analogy. I think it's a useful way to view the current situation. In terms of strategy, I would strong anticipate that Clinton will adopt position #1 - she is in this race to win it. Make no mistake about that. And rightly so. Why should she cave and concede to a sexist media and a woefully gullable public???
Under no circumstances must she accept this. She should fight to the end and the democratic party should get what it deserves if this end of a massive party split! Let's put a few things in perspective! The notion that Barack Obama has widespread national support across democrats is comlete nonsense. As at 2/20/08: 10,600,000 votes had been cast for for Clinton and 10,900,000 votes for Obama - yes, almost a 50/50 split and yet the media would have the public believe that Clinton's support has crashed to a grinding halt and that Obama is the national favorite crusing to victory. If the latter happens he has his buddies in the media to thank for that one!
Rest assured a large chunk of those 50% of people who voted for Clinton will not be willingly throwing their support around Obama. His behavior, and his campaign's behavior, has turned off many a Clinton supporter. Arrogance, sexism, dismissiveness. These are highly unattractive qualities and not those befitting of a leader of the democratic party. So I say - go for it Clinton - take this to the very end - you don't owe anybody anything after the way you have been treated during this nomination process.
Posted by: Muzza | Feb 21, 2008 10:57:07 AM
frankie: Its idiots like you and daddy blue that can't see the light of day. I am a white democrat voting for Hillary. The blacks vote for their own and I am voting for my own. Get a life. Did the blacks vote for Hillary in Wisconsin and South Carolina. NO! They voted for Obama one of their own.Both of you are complete idiots and I don't know how you got thru school of if you even finished. Are you afraid to admit that Obama is so dumb he can't create his own speeches and that he goes to a church that doesn't like white people. Have both of you been sleeping all this time? I guess so. Maybe both of you have been drinking too much like Obama use to do and he drank plenty in his time. I can say one think about Chelsea there is no smear on her like Obama's use of drugs and booze. Face the facts that he was an attorney for a crooked businessman who is now in jail. Obama still has the $100,000 dollars left over from the money he gave him to buy his house for $300,000. Why doesn't Obama visit his good friend in jail? He got enough money from him to buy a house and where do you think that Obama got 1.5 million dollars. Get real and wake up. This generation is facinated by his big smile and big teeth showing when he's making a speech.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Feb 21, 2008 11:02:17 AM
Hillary Clinton is running such a lame campaign. So far all we hear from her is "Speeches don't solve problems" while she doesn't offer any of her own solutions. Now she's getting help from a 527 to try to "swift boat" Obama. Fortunately for everyone, voters are sick of lame politricks like that. The voters have begun to see through Hillary "I stole Solutions for America from Newt Gingrich's Think Tank" Clinton and her weak attempts at bringing a better candidate down.
Posted by: Karl | Feb 21, 2008 11:03:58 AM
If you listen carefully for both of their speech, you can feel Hillary is sincere really care about you, although Media say she only care power, in other hand, although Obama speech is seems exciting and inspire, but you feel like its the show or movie you seems saw before, from Obama wife's "in my entire adult life, first time I proud of America..." remark to the push after the speech they address, they deliver message that if voter do not support Obama, they are not inspirational, they are not looking for hope,they dont have future or vision,... I'd like to say, detail minded person also can be inspirational and motivative too. the choice is America, do you wannt choose people speak rounder than they do OR choose Act more than they speak?
Posted by: BelieveinDreambut | Feb 21, 2008 11:12:50 AM
By just looking at the tactics the campaign uses, who would think it is coming from a Democratic candidate. Her campaign style is identical to that of Republican Party.
Posted by: Philip, NY | Feb 21, 2008 11:16:28 AM
Missy Pepitone must be in Federal Prison and somehow got computer privileges. Thank GOD she can't vote or may not even be a SHE. Can't even follow the news or would know that the latest swill, Brent Wilkes just got 12 years, so maybe Missy and Brent can pass close in the night for a KISSYPOO...
Posted by: daddyblue | Feb 21, 2008 11:38:49 AM
too dumb to write his own speeches???? seems i remember something about the harvard law review? maybe not. and sorry my "worthless generation" isn't as racist as the generations preceding it. not to mention, who RAISED this generation of "spoiled brats"? oh yeh, it was the spoiled brats before us, who are still trying to glorify the drug years as the greatest thing that ever happenned. and i can't believe everyone who is voting for hillary hoping to suck from the teet of "free" health care for working families? who is gonna pay for this? oh yeh, the working families who pay taxes. its just gnna cost more because the government will be mishandling all the money. 1 more point before i go... how can a