Whither Hillary?

I think it is a bit crazy that some feel Clinton is "entitled" to this chance. She was no more "entitled" than Edwards or Richardson or anyone else. Obama had no reason not to run just because Clinton decided she was running. I think anyone with a vision and a plan should run.

Clinton camp keeps repeating (stupidly) that Obama outspent her in this state and that state, as if it is something negative. Who is preventing the stinking rich Clintons from spending their 110 millions lying under their own butts?

Obama campaign is owned by millions of ordinary folks, and they give a $25 here and there.

She can't even manage her own campaign Finance...and which Hilry idiot wants to give control of this country's troubled economy in her hands?

Clintonites keep drinking her coolaid!

For all her 35 yrs of so-called experience and all that loud crap, she is a total waste, an inefficient liar and a cackler! She had it all, and lost it all. Obama is hired and she is Fired! (Unlike Bosnia, at least now, she is under real fire!)

Duck it girl and get lost!!!

Here is the bottom line. Hillary has proven she has 1/2 the voting bloc. Obama has some serious problems in the general election.

He sticks her on the ticket and he is GUARANTEED to win the white house.

There inst really a rift between them. Whomever says so is just trying to split the democratic party.

Hillary Clinton will solidify all the democratic vote for Obama. He will be president if he puts Hillary on the ticket.

If Obama wants to go with someone else and leave all the Clinton supporters out in the cold, he will win some of them back, but some will still end up defecting.

So Obama has a real dilemma. There is nobody else besides Al Gore who could provide that much high profile democrat support and give Obama an air of legitimacy .

@SJ: True enough, he would have probably been more prepared in 2012. However, he does seem to have a sense of Zeitgeist and my guess is he probably thought he wouldn't get a chance until 2016 if he passed this time around.

I agree completely that the danger of any candidate is that they are bullied by their advisors. I ultimately think this is Bush's main problem.

@MIguy good idea but I don't think you will see that.

The worry I have with him is just that the lack of experience on this stage and the blunders he will make rightly said not by his own design but by others due to the fact of their needs and hunger for political importance.

If he is nominated he has to be smart of they will push him in every direction for their own purpose and it will cost him big time, I hope good sense in that camp will hold or they will make a mess of things.

His experience and judgment factor is a bit weak he should be learning now getting ready for 2012 but it is what it is now and he is in front, so we will see how it goes from here on.

@SJ: No argument there except that I think the problem is more his advisors/supporters than him. I think humility is a good idea in general and, at the convention, Obama supporters should be buying the drinks for Clinton supporters if he gets the nomination.

@MIguy let me add also this cocky way he has of saying he know Clinton supporters will vote for him if he win, just does not sit well with some.

At this stage it is better to be humble and encourage them to do so, you cant have your camp trying to push her out then telling voters he knows they will come around to him in a GE, no people don't accept that kind of slam, that make them defiant and resolve in proving him wrong.

If he was a seasoned politician he would know this, and if he is beginning to feel he is unstoppable he will also face a very embarrassing defeat.

@SJ: No doubt about it, he needs Senator Clinton's supporters to win. And, if he does win, he needs to thank her for toughening him up a bit in the primaries and making him a better debater.

I cant speak for Senator Clinton but she seems to have the party at heart and will do what it takes to hold it together, but with saying that this responsibility lies not only with her because I have heard several AA on the media saying they want to unity with her, and Obama should not even think of it.

She on several occasions have said she would assist whoever the nominee is Obama is not that vocal in this regard, and even his wife was reluctant to support Hillary if she is the nominee.

This kind of attitude will not fair Obama well unless he feels that by some imaginary calculation he wont need the Hillary supporters come Nov if he is chosen, it is wishful thinking to believe that a strong AA presence is all that is needed to win a GE, or the young vote which we all know is very fickle and things get rather dull to them in time.

People enjoy this run off because its democrat against democrat and a lot of factors play with persons crossing the line to vote and so on, but it will not be the same in a GE, the media will not be the same, the attacks will not be the same, and all the good press Obama is getting now will surly be different then.

It will be a difficult fight the GOP does not want to lose, they will pull out all the stop, and the Obama camp weather they like it or not is going to need everyone on deck to buy into a Obama presidency, if they feel they can win without that well I don't think so.

@SJ: I think Gore lost for 3 reasons: a) backlash against Clintons, b) Lieberman, c) seemed too much the politician ('invented the internet', etc). You are right that divisions need to be healed within the Democratic party. I think if Senator Clinton plays her cards right, she ends up being a huge power broker if Obama wins the nomination and presidential election. The only way I see her 'losing' is if she loses the nomination but is perceived as a 'spoiler' by the party.

Gore won MI and he still lost, and at that time Gore did not have bitter voters in the mix the democrat party was not split as it is now.

That is the problem Obama is overlooking there are a lot of angry supporters out there and will be harden as time pass and nothing is done to fix this split.

What the democrat party is facing at this time is a different scenario, lots of angry voters that will just not either come out, write in Hillary or vote McCain, so I don't feel its as safe as his camp feels it is.

Mrs. Bud:

I agree about playing politics and using the media.

What Clinton may be teaching Obama, though, is that the general is all about WINNING. Republicans, for the most part, have understood this better than Democrats since 1980.

Don't worry - once the primary is over, we'll get to where we need to be.

@SJ: Michigan will go blue again this year. Our economy is awful up here; McCain can't win without help; maybe Romney could pull it his way, but it would be awful close.

@BMR: Nice summary on the VP choices. I think Condi Rice would be an absolute disastrous pick for McCain. In fact, any attempt on his part to keep any of the Bush/Cheney yes-men/women around will doom his campaign.

SJ: I think you'll find that Obama will run better in the Deep South and the West than anyone has seen a Democrat in quite some time.

Don Cazayoux has already shown this. Louisiana's 6th just had a special election. The GOP spent a TON of cash on ads negatively connecting Cazayoux to Obama and Pelosi.

LA-06 has been a Republican seat for 33 years. Cazayoux won, despite the ads.

BMR- I agree with everthing you said, mostly...

My grandfather served in Vietnam. He supports Obama. He was a regular blue collar guy who eneded up special forces in the Marines.

Now, you say it is all politics, but like my grandfather says- politics and the media is what got us into all this bullshit.

The sooner folks understand, the sooner we can bput the mainstream media and the candidates in their place.
It is about more than this election, and folks who say a new guy doessn't deserve a chance because he is not like HRC and McCain- WELL, I'd like to lock them in a room with my grandfather for half an hour. He's been where McCain has, he see's the same transitional lies coming out of Hillary's mouth.

If he can trust the new guy, so can I.

SJ: Michigan is not going Republican this year, just like Florida is not going Democratic.

There are a lot of major population centers, all of which will be Democratic. Also, the down-ticket prospects for Republicans are especially poor.

Well if Obama don't need FL or MI where does he expect to get the needed 270 from?

SJ: I don't think Democrats are counting Florida anyway.

They'd like to swing it, but won't count on it - not after the last two national elections, plus the primary debacle this year, and given the fact that Republicans control the entire state government.

A thought I posted on a couple other blogs: I really do expect the Obama campaign to announce their support for the Florida plan to seat half their delegation, apportioned via the January vote. It only gives Clinton an additional 19 delegates, and gives the Dems more time to repair relations there.

FL 25 MI 18 = 43, His camp will need more than a plan B to get back that loss from some other place.

BTW, Mrs. Bud, I agree about Florida being a pretty safe Republican state.

However, I expect the Dems to put a lot of money into it - if for no other reason than it forces the Republicans to spend money defending it. Also, there's an important shift this year. Registered Hispanic Democrats now outnumber registered Hispanic Republicans there. This shift could possibly swing the state.