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

« Previous | Main | Next »

Obama-Backing Senator Hopes Superdelegates Focus on Clinton Scandals from 1990s

April 23, 2008 2:48 PM

On MSNBC today, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, said that as superdelegates consider the controversies that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, will be forced to deal with should he become the Democratic nominee, they should also think about the 1990s-era scandals that will come up should Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, earn the nomination.

Specifically McCaskill was asked about a report by the Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman that "a Democratic strategist familiar with the Obama campaign" said in the next two weeks the Obama campaign is "likely to turn to the controversies of Bill Clinton's White House years -- Hillary Clinton's trading cattle futures, Whitewater and possibly impeachment."

Would you support those types of tactics moving forward given how tight this race is? McCaskill was asked.

"Well, it's a really difficult decision," said the senator, who has endorsed Obama. "I mean, no one in the Obama campaigns wants -- I mean, Senator Clinton talked about her baggage in the debate last Wednesday. And everyone is very respectful and deferential to the Clinton family in our party and we don't want to do that.

"But, frankly, they keep throwing nails in front of the bus," she continued. "And as voters are considering whether or not some of the controversies around Barack Obama will be an issue in November, people do need to remember, there will be controversies about the Clintons that will also be an issue in November. And I think that's what we hope superdelegates also focus on."

- jpt

April 23, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (147)

User Comments

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

I know that Sen. Obama does not want to do negative campaigning, but it's do or die. Clinton is throwing nails in front of the bus. Obama will not win on being "nice". I have been wondering why Clinton's baggage has not already been airing. Please don't wait too late.... The Clintons are having a "field day" with Obama. If he really wants to win the Whitehouse, he has come out fighting.

Posted by: Laura | Apr 24, 2008 1:04:12 AM

I know that Sen. Obama does not want to do negative campaigning, but it's do or die. Clinton is throwing nails in front ot the bus. Obama will not win on being "nice". I have been wondering why Clinton's baggage has not already been airing. Please don't wait to late....

Posted by: Laura | Apr 24, 2008 12:59:38 AM

Henry

Obama said today he doesn't need older voters either. And his attorneys stopped the revotes in FL and MI so he obviously doesn't need them....

Actually Obama just needs a spin and a prayer...wonder if Wright will be doing the praying?

Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:57:03 AM

Good old Claire...and even as her fondest hope of being VP fades she just keeps up her attack dog rold.

I'm sure as always in an effort to play on the negatives that the Republicans opened up the Obama campaign will try to keep the Clinton scandals in the forefront.

Watch out Claire I think that the MSM has been really kind about the Obama judgement and experience...but they may tire of hounding Clinton and get tired of working Obama's talking points.

King Obama can whine and threaten and spend and fret....the truth Hillary is rising and he doesn't know what to do!

Remember Rezko!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Jackie | Apr 24, 2008 12:46:18 AM

God

How Hillary Clinton has found the personal courage to fight on in the face of such unmitigated hate and vitriol is astounding.

Indeed, her strength stands in stark contrast to the lack of moral courage Barack Obama repeatedly displayed when he failed - over an astounding 20-year period - to address the hate speech of his friend and pastor, even in private.

And his breathtaking willingness to rationalize and justify such speech should be a wake-up call to any Democrat who truly understands and the hard-won principles of nondiscrimination. Such a person is fundamentally unfit to lead a country as diverse as America.

I cannot imagine having to vote for a Republican, but if the party's superdelegates decide to run Obama I will have no choice but to do so as I will never - ever - vote for a racist sympathizer. Indeed, nominating such a person is something I would expect from the KKK or the Nazi Party, not the Democratic Party to which I have belonged for 35 years!

So thank you, Hillary, for standing up to the powerful cabal that supports Obama and for giving me an opportunity to vote for someone other than John McCain!

"Rise, Hillary, Rise" - Maya Angelou

Posted by: GPM | Apr 23, 2008 11:52:02 PM

If roughly 14 million people who have
voted have gotten over it, maybe its
time for everybody else to move on and
get over these non-issues.

Obama is unelectable, he will not be able to unite this party. He will lose
a lot of the Clinton vote, and aocording
to the polls she wouldn't lose as many
Obama supporters in the GE.

The superdelegates really do need to wait and let this play out, lets give every person the chance to vote and decide

Posted by: Melissa | Apr 23, 2008 11:43:35 PM

Missouri is called the "Show Me" state for good reason. Missourians don't often fall for rumor, innuendo and unsubstantiated facts. They're not cynical, but they are skeptical of wild claims. That's why Claire is popular: she calls it as she sees it. I expect if Missouri had its primary today, Obama would still win and by a larger margin than before.

Posted by: Tom J | Apr 23, 2008 11:25:58 PM

Regardless of the Rezko-esq scandals that surround Hillary Clinton, freshman Senator McCaskill would do well to consider what rural Missourians think about being called bitter, gun-toting religious zealots by a man who for 20 years stood by and listened as seeds of racial hatred were sown in his children and others but who not only couldn't muster up the courage to address it with his friend in private but who instead made excuses justifying such speech to the public.

There are more than enough Obama scandals to justify McCaskill's sppedy departure from the Obama bandwagon, and if she wants a second term it would greatly behoove her to do so as soon as possible.

Posted by: GPM | Apr 23, 2008 11:14:48 PM

Thinking:


"...but gets a scathing report from NYT who previously endorsed her."


Where WAS this report? Was it written in invisible ink?

Get OVER it!

Hillary is our best choice for effective
leadership at this juncture in time.

As for her color..... she can't HELP being white!

Get over it!

Posted by: eyes wide open | Apr 23, 2008 10:58:54 PM

Regardless of the spin put on by McCaskill, Hillary Clinton wins the electoral college in November against McCain.

Obama cannot.

Posted by: Jayhawk | Apr 23, 2008 10:14:17 PM

Marie, I'm glad to see you bought the spin job on Obama's comments. But really antipathy for people who aren't like you is calling them bigots. You can't spin thank. So, thanks but no thanks. P.S. His campaign basically back up his hubris towards middle class individuals by indicating they don't need their vote. Can't spin that one away either.

Posted by: Daniel | Apr 23, 2008 9:46:27 PM

Since Claire wants to remind people of the 90's, I thought she might like to be reminded of some her greatest hits:

Obama-backing Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said at a press conference courtesy of the Kansas City Star, HERE):

"What this man has done, Barack Obama, is, he, for the first time I think, as a black leader in America, has come to the American people not as a victim, but rather as a leader."

Maybe her daughter wrote that for her.

Posted by: cappamore | Apr 23, 2008 9:14:14 PM

Yes, we should all listen to the voice of reason from a twelve year old. I think her daughter should be VP since see knows 6th graders.

Posted by: Bell | Apr 23, 2008 9:10:05 PM


Claire McCaskill on Bill Maher:

McCASKILL: It wasn’t “Mommy please.” It was Maddy in my face saying, you know, “How can you look yourself in the mirror?” “You’re a slug.” “You’re playing it politically safe.” I – “You believe in this guy.” “I’ll never speak to you again, if you don’t stand up and have some courage.” It was pretty intense. And she was right. It was like a cold – cold bucket of water on my head. She was absolutely right.

Posted by: cappamore | Apr 23, 2008 9:07:41 PM

Why should white blue collar workers care anyway? Barama's campaign manager said today that don't need their votes.

Posted by: Henry | Apr 23, 2008 9:07:18 PM

McCaskill's a joke! Nails under the bus. Please bring up the Clinton baggage I'm sure by now it will be rosy fresh. By the way, Hillary was impeached and didn't make pardon's but go ahead McCaskill show your daughter what it's like to get down and dirty in the "New" politics Barack brings. Why if he is winning so big and is sure to win the nomination would he even consider stooping this low? Is he that embarrassed about his debate performance? Or is it all the foreign policy experience he got while in elementary school in Indonesia?

Posted by: Peaches | Apr 23, 2008 9:01:15 PM

If you count the states delegates as winner-takes-all, like in the in the general election, clinton is 1800+ and bho 1100+.
ugh, oh...

Posted by: pp | Apr 23, 2008 8:56:01 PM

Lots of you want Hillary to win, lots of you here want Barack to win. Barack looks like he will win based on votes and delegates. He may be a weak candidate--or not--but the rules were put in place before the primaries, and all the candidates said they would follow the rules. The Republicans have a winner take all system, which may strike you as "unfair" or "lopsided", but that is what the Republicans have chosen. Hillary cannot catch Barack. Every person on this board knows this. I guess if you want Hillary to be President, this fact is depressing. She should have done a better job at the beginning. She really screwed up. She did it to herself. No one put money on Obama for anything before Iowa. Even after Iowa, the prevailing view was that Hillary would right the ship like George H.W. Bush did against Dole in New Hampshire. Hillary supporters need to decide whether they want their party to win--and support Obama, or if they want their candidate and not the party, and are willing to assist the McCFain campaign. Hillary's finished.

Posted by: KJK | Apr 23, 2008 8:29:00 PM

It's about time! Thank you Sen. McCaskill! I can't believe someone has finally come out to say what I've been thinking for months now. Selling pardons to finance the purchase of their very first home is unethical and shows the corruption in the Clinton family! Lying to the American public about "experience" and she's still a candidate to become the leader of our country? What has America come to?

Posted by: Wendy, Denver | Apr 23, 2008 7:55:20 PM

Lots of you want Hillary to win, lots of you here want Barack to win. Barack looks like he will win based on votes and delegates. He may be a weak candidate--or not--but the rules were put in place before the primaries, and all the candidates said they would follow the rules. The Republicans have a winner take all system, which may strike you as "unfair" or "lopsided", but that is what the Republicans have chosen. Hillary cannot catch Barack. Every person on this board knows this. I guess if you want Hillary to be President, this fact is depressing. She should have done a better job at the beginning. She really screwed up. She did it to herself. No one put money on Obama for anything before Iowa. Even after Iowa, the prevailing view was that Hillary would right the ship like George H.W. Bush did against Dole in New Hampshire. Hillary supporters need to decide whether they want their party to win--and support Obama, or if they want their candidate and not the party, and are willing to assist the McCFain campaign. Hillary's finished.

Posted by: K. J. Klassen | Apr 23, 2008 7:44:44 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS