Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Charlie Cook: Clinton in "Political Purgatory"

April 24, 2008 5:23 PM

"The good news for Hillary Rodham Clinton is that she’s winning a lot of battles," the essay writes. "The bad news is that the war is pretty much lost."

The column is from well-respected Beltway prognosticator Charlie Cook.

"If this contest were still at the point where momentum, symbolism, and reading tea leaves mattered, Clinton would be in pretty good shape," he writes. "Everything she has needed to happen is happening now. Obama is getting tougher press coverage and critical examination. He’s also getting rattled a bit, and he didn’t perform well in the recent debate in Philadelphia. Clinton is winning in big, important places."

But, Cook notes, "it's happening about three months too late."

Cook says that in some ways "Clinton has spent the past six weeks in a horrible situation. How do you quit a race when you’re still winning primaries? ...But even in victory, she isn’t getting any closer to securing the nomination. This political purgatory will continue if she manages to win Indiana but loses North Carolina hard to drop out but harder to see winning the nomination. If she loses in both states, then her campaign’s donors and creditors, as well as superdelegates and party leaders, are likely to intervene. But that can’t happen as long as she continues to win."

Cook is of course not always correct. (Perhaps most glaringly, he declared Sen. John McCain's campaign dead prematurely, saying "the physicians have pulled up the sheet; the executors of the estate are taking over.")

But his occasional evidence of fallibility notwithstanding, he's pretty astute, far, far more than I am, it likely goes without saying.

And his harsh assessment will no doubt be widely circulated among superdelegates who know and respect Cook.

- jpt

April 24, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (135)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

If Obama is nominated the Republicans have it in the bag and they know it. It amazes me how stupid they think the American public is. Do you honestly think people with good sound common sense would vote Obama in. If you put him up against McCain....better hope McCain has a good VP. An elderly gentleman 80 years old, Veteran, white, told me he could never see himself vote for anyone that didn't respect the American Flag. He stated he's fought in two wars for this country and doesn't like Obama not because he's black but, because he's not patriotic. Said how could you trust a man to protect the United States if he doesn't even respect the United States. Now he is the voting generation. The faithful voter.

Posted by: Mgck59 | Apr 26, 2008 7:01:02 PM

At first I was very much & still disappointed with Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Kerry, Kennedy, in backing Senator Obama.

But the opportunity to really turn this country around and get back to doing the work of the American People has never been clearer.

We've currently have McCain & Clinton both with 35 years of consorting with Big Business & Lobbyist and amassing large fortunes just to prove it. While the rest of us have become part of their FOOD CHAIN. This clearly shows me what 35 years of experience can do for them and they're not complaining.

Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Kerry, Kennedy, are not without fault, but in reality are doing the right thing. McCain or Clinton just toss a coin - heads they win & tails you lose again. Our jobs are going overseas, higher costs for the consumers. We just can't afford either one of them to continue to guard the hen house.

Posted by: Fooled ya | Apr 26, 2008 6:06:09 AM

I understand that the Republicans want Hillary because they know they can beat her and have years of dirt on her. So the pundits say.

That in reality is only half right. McCain is in the same capacity. They both have 35 years of experience in Washington with similar ideologies. On their watch we seen our jobs go overseas, rising costs of living on their watch. Lobbyists love them both, the Media's darlings. The way they swindle the People.

Why would either one of them want a real change in the way business is done on Capital Hill. They've been doing quite well for themselves and lobbyist friends , thank you!

When Mr. Obama came to Washington and now has a chance to bring about a real change, they both become quite upset. Their big contributing Lobbyist Friends have put them under a lot of pressure.

So why have both Hillary & McCain come together fighting to keep Obama out of the White House? You've got it! Heads they win - Tails we lose! Just maintain the Status Quo at all costs. So SAD!

Posted by: Fooled ya | Apr 26, 2008 5:46:14 AM

The Republicans want Hillary as the nominee because they know they can beat her and have years of dirt on her. Any Democrat who can't see that and doesn't have the brains to have figured that one out need to be certified mentally deficient and put in a care home.

Posted by: Jeff | Apr 26, 2008 1:48:28 AM

Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Kerry, Kennedy, Leahy and Richardson are all "HAS BEENS". Their political careers have been placed on the line by their ignorance in backing a freshman senator with zero to no world experience; who has a 17-20 year history with his personal mentor who is a racist, bigot reverend; and hangs with guys named Rezko and Ayers.

Obama is too "green" behind the ears to succeed as the President of 2008 issues. He has NO strategic plans to address this nation and world's problems. In Fact, his policies now reflect the Hillary Clinton policies....how peculiar.

Just like his "second hand' speeches...he cannot think for himself. First he acts two-faced with no integrity re: Rev. Wright (or is it Wrong????) then he steals like a thief just to get elected. WE HAVE 50 STATES --- NOT 48.

Americans should not stand back silently. Silence is acceptance. I refuse to do this blindly and with just plain "HOPE" that it will be alright.

Hillary all the way!!

Posted by: Concerned American | Apr 25, 2008 11:49:12 AM

Shawn I'm a 52 year old woman I can say what I want... I am embarrassed to have the likes of an Obama and his bag of tricks represent me or my people and, don't you think I'm alone. They talk about the blacks supporting Obama but, what they fell to tell you is that 14% less voted in this primary than past primary's. I find him sickening to have even played my people in the media the way he has. Oh and Rev. Wright I know about him too. Have known about him since the 80's. That crap he's trying to feed the American people that those speeches were 15, 6, and 7, years ago is just that. I have heard tapes that were recorded as early as last year. I don't feel like this grown man playing with my intelligance. He needs to get over himself.

Posted by: Mgck59 | Apr 25, 2008 10:46:47 AM

Mgck, you sound like a child, what is with all the name calling. You call Michelle Obama a little, what is really going on with you? Does your mother know that you are on the computer?

Posted by: Shawn | Apr 25, 2008 10:37:56 AM

Hillary is unelectable

Obama08

Posted by: Thinking | Apr 25, 2008 10:30:02 AM

Catamandua--yes, I will support Hillary if she wins. I am sorry that I did not include the Obama supporters in my comments, but my concern is that there are so many Clinton supporters that are saying they will not vote for Obama, vs. the number of Obama supporters that say they will not vote for Clinton in the exit polls, but I agree that I should have made it clearer that all should be included in my comments. We all need to get behind the one that wins the nomination because if we don't, then we all lose.

Posted by: Ann, MO | Apr 25, 2008 10:20:20 AM

Everyone has an opinion. And my opinion FWIW is that Florida and Michigan will have to be counted/after a revote primary. Those people can not be left out of the political process. If that is done then once and for all this can be put to bed. As for Cook, of course, he has his right to say this but it is only his opinion.

In the long run we are known by the company we keep. No matter what we say, once the nominee is selected/elected that will reveal how americans felt about all these issues.

So far we have existed in a Patriarchical society, with Nancy Pelosi getting SOTH...that has caused some kind of a shift and for me, I want to see a female President ...Hillary has Brains, Beauty and Ballz and she has weathered many storms. Obama is still being tested, he is brilliant, a fine speaker,,,,even if using teleprompters, handsome, likeable but it bothers me that his name used to be Barry S........and then he changed it to Barrack Hussein Obama and decides to run for the highest office in the land and if his middle name is used we get anxious. How would this play out if he was elected POTUS. Would we ever be able to be critical of him without being accused of being racist. This to me is a huge stumbling block. And the other huge block is how the Right Wing Zealots will portray him if the nominee. You are known by the company you keep. Will some smarmy twit be following his every move, will some crazy go ballistic and do something horrendous, will the convention get ugly ala 1968, how is this candidate going to bring us together if his very candidacy is so polarizing.

Posted by: LL Barra | Apr 25, 2008 10:19:15 AM

In reality Hillary or Obama could both probably beat mcmore-war. No party has ever held onto the white house during an election year when there was a recession. More and more people are realizing that we are in a recession now and we don't want to head toward a depression. Obama is the best person to start cleaning up the mess the whole bush-league has caused. Obama 2008!

Posted by: pt | Apr 25, 2008 10:17:25 AM

Hillary and Bill are reaching for straws and trying to fool the people in NC and IN it wont work the American people are fed up with the Clintons, Bushs, and the old sneaky McCain Bush want-to-be politics as usual. The American people are to smart for that and will turn the page. The Talk Radio Conservatives "Shook Jocks" want the American people to believe that their for Hillary but they want the fight between Hillary and Obama to continue until November to try and make McBush look good that want work either.

Obama's state wins 30 lost 15, Delegate count 1715 +/-, Negatives are way down, Better nominee

Clinton's state wins 15 lost 30, Delegate count 1585 +/-, Negatives way up. Not a good nominee.

Fund Raising Obama beats Clinton or McCain Expediently.

Registering new voters Obama beats Clinton or McCain.

Bring the country together Obama beats Clinton or McCain.

Overall, Obama beats Clinton or McCain.

Race against McCain, Obama better nominee.


Obama all the way!

Posted by: Lookup | Apr 25, 2008 9:59:00 AM

David H

Who can beat Mccain?

Obama has beaten Hillary in the primary.

Obama BEAT THE CLINTON in the democratic party...where hillary's odds were a heck of a lot greater than the general.

He chances go down significantly in the genral with her favorabilities...
She could not beat OBama...and now you argue that she is better suited to beat mCCain

her strength was with dems... what happens to her chances when you intorduce independents and republicans...they go down.

This argument again... either it is oblivious shouting anger ...that skipped reason or again just dumb.

If she is such a great fighter why did she lose in her own party! where not a single scandal was brought up from her entire lists of scandals.

She had a low ceiling to begin with (just over 50%) and now she has pissed off half of her own party...how the heck do you make the jump that she is the better nominee to beat McCain

oh I see by trashing the only other candidate that will help end the war, fight to focus on the economy...the one candidate that people's all over the world will celebrate the night of the Presidency if we elect him.

but you all want your candidate elected so bad you feel you need to trash him however you can (including ways McCain the republican opponent has come out against) to bring him lower than your candidate.

Guess what it may work to bring him down...but he will never be less electable than Hillary...

Yeah it's about the welfare of the country and these issues...yeah right.

Posted by: dl | Apr 25, 2008 9:54:43 AM

Clintons are just using wishful thinking. Based on what is Obama not electable? Based on what is Hilliary more electable?

Obama is leading Hillary in the GE polls Is leading McCain In the Ge polls and is leading Hillary in the primary.

Based on what is Hillary doing better?

Come on give me some facts, some base on which to come to the same opinion as you.

Without some fact it is just an opinion, useless argument.

Obmama 08

Posted by: Thinking | Apr 25, 2008 9:44:25 AM

calli

most impartial pundits have said that despite hillary and her fans in the state and other... fanning the flames and her hypocrisy...

when the general comes yes ...Florida may screw up the dem vote but that has more to do with Florida's democratic leadership than it does with Barack Obama.

yes many of Hillary's supporters may sit it out...and that could hurt them...but it may make a difference when thew ar is being proposed to continue and it looks like we may be looking at expanding our military initiatives into other countries rather than shrinking

The Floridians aren't stupid as you all want to make them out to be.

and Michigan has almost an entire democrat system ...governor, and state officials...you think that a state like that is going to go for mccain? in this horrible year?

this is just again...dumb

are more afraid this year of being homeless or poverty stricken or destitute when they get older...and theri are too many reasons why Mccain's fear argument doesn't work for him (the nonfocus on Bin laden, that terrorist are recruitting faster ebcause of our image getting worse in the world and another bush foreign policy supporter is not going to get us away fromthat)

This argument will be a non starter...

Hillary has lost (and if she has lost in the dem primary with it being the one place she had strength in her favorability numbers...she would have never had a chance in the general fighter or not)...if you all want to tear down the one candidate who will get us out of this mess go ahead...

but it's dumb. yes as "elitist" as that statement may be...
it is dumb.

Posted by: dl | Apr 25, 2008 9:42:15 AM

You are right Calli, there is no place for rules in our society. People should just be able to make stuff up as they going along, or at least until it give them an advantage. Did Hillary voice any concern about not counting FL and MI at the beginning? End of discussion.

Posted by: Shawn | Apr 25, 2008 9:40:23 AM

David, if those same numbers that you are now discrediting were in favor of your candidate, you would not have any problems with them. Your opinion is that Obama cannot win, you are entitled to that. I respect you for it, this is America, we can have whatever opinion we desire. However, those numbers that you are attempting to discount mean the more people are of the opinion that Obama is the better candidate.

It is the Hillary campaign that is trying to distort numbers to make her the overall vote leader.

She wants to count Fl and MI, but not the caucuses. Wow!

Posted by: Shawn | Apr 25, 2008 9:37:44 AM

When they are not calling Hillary all kinds of foul names the Obamacans resort to "It's the numbers. She can't win because of the numbers." It's not about the numbers, it's about who can beat McCain. The delegate numbers we have come from a nominating process with rules more arcane than the rules for Dungeons and Dragons. (Dungeons and Dragons is a role playing game favored by teenagers, with incredibly complex rules that get argued over for hours.) How can the nominating rules makes sense if Hillary won the popular vote in Texas but received fewer delegates? Also, how relevant is the delegate count, or the popular vote count, if you do not count Florida? Yeah, I know, the rules say you cannot count Florida. Well, I say the rules are wrong. The rules are there to help nominate a candidate who can win. They are not there for the sole purpose of helping the Democratic party drive over a cliff.

Posted by: David H | Apr 25, 2008 9:33:14 AM

Hillary is unelectable

Obama08

Posted by: Thinking | Apr 25, 2008 9:32:14 AM

Calli, do you make this stuff up as you go along? Your responses are comical. Please provide one credible source to support what you just posted. Please know that the DNC and the candidates agreed to not count those states well a year before the primaries started. Hillary did not voice any protest at that time. She did not first mention any outrage until after super tuesday, coincidence? I think not.

Posted by: Shawn | Apr 25, 2008 9:29:51 AM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS