05/07/2008
George Stephanopoulos: Hillary 'Toast'
Stephanopolous on the Clinton campaign: "Yes, toast. Hill needs a miracle. Even though this race is going to go on. Hillary Clinton will keep on campaigning. She's going to campaign in West Virginia today, but this nomination fight is over." (via americablog)
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 11:06 AM EST by Andy in Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, News | Permalink
Comments
Well George, at least you can say that you did EVERYTHING you could to help her out.
Posted by: Zeke | May 7, 2008 12:00:34 PM
This entire campaign has been manipulated by the media. From the beginning; rather than report on the campaign, they (as a general group) have predict, position, pressure candidates to quit, ignore candidates they haven't felt were going to win and generally obstruct the vision of the American populace from anything that does not fit with that the "pundits" and [supposed] reporters want to see happen.
Predictions are for election night. Reporting is what's been required and, overall, absent.
This behavior ramped up, significantly, as they began calling Bush "Presidential" and "stirring" on the heels of 9/11; playing no small role in fueling the momentum toward the national and international disasters at which the US is now at the center. Years later, the fourth estate copped to having been, perhaps, a tad sycophantically myopic and, as a result, sort of misleading the public and the public's perception of the Executive Branch (though, for anyone actually looking, it was there to be seen).
Yet here we are, years and miles down the road, and the press still thinks the job is to form opinion rather than provide information so that independent opinions might be formed. This campaign is a sham. A pretty long one...
Back to BBC News.
KO
Posted by: Kile Ozier | May 7, 2008 12:01:01 PM
wow, what happened to my grammar?
Posted by: kile Ozier | May 7, 2008 12:03:20 PM
" the press still thinks the job is to form opinion rather than provide information so that independent opinions might be formed"
Boy, you really don't know the history of journalism, do you.
Posted by: Gregoire | May 7, 2008 12:23:48 PM
Now the Clintons have an opportunity to make a strong statement to the American people, by uniting the Democratric Party behind Senator Obama...or they can destroy the party by fighting onward, wasting millions of your dollars and alienating 51%+ of the party who have already committed to Obama and helping John McCain.
PS I realize that many people think Florida should count, as both candidates were on the ballot. I agree....and it would not matter in both leads Obama has to date. BUT, if you think Michigan should count when ONLY Senator Clinton, Undecided, and Dennis Kucinich were on the ballot, I am unsure what you are thinking.
Maybe it is time that we all think about the Democratic Party first and what the people have voted for to date and not the Clinton's idea that they are the better candidate based off of polls, which change every week. And maybe, just maybe, if the Clintons fight hard for Senator Obama, the majority of people's choice (even when you add Florida voters) those polls may change radically in favor of Obama.
Senator Clinton is a strong agent for change and has been an excellent Senator, by all accounts, but Obama's message, like it/him or not, has resonated with Democrats more.
It is time to answer to the will of the majority of people, not political insiders and hypothetical polls on what "could be" or "what might be", that is just disingenuous. This is supposed to be a Democracy, isn't it?
Do the Clintons forget that at this stage in the election, over a decade ago, President Bill Clinton was losing by double digits in ALL comparison polls to President George Bush and running 3rd behind John Anderson and Bush? How soon we forget...or is it just convenient to forget.
The spin is over...unite the party!!! It is up to the Clintons and this time in history will be a true test to their character and resolve to do the will of the majority of those who voted in all of the Primaries and Caucus to date.
Posted by: Chip Arndt | May 7, 2008 12:30:29 PM
George Stephanopolous is a dick-twit. But, Chip is right. It's time for Sen. Clinton to get real, concede graciously and start the process that will bring victory to the Democrats in November. Otherwise, she and Bill are going to lose whatever remaining goodwill there might be towards them (and believe me, there's not much left).
Posted by: mike | May 7, 2008 12:49:29 PM
George Stephanopolous is a dick-twit. But, Chip is right. It's time for Sen. Clinton to get real, concede graciously and start the process that will bring victory to the Democrats in November. Otherwise, she and Bill are going to lose whatever remaining goodwill there might be towards them (and believe me, there's not much left).
Posted by: mike | May 7, 2008 12:50:01 PM
Well said Chip! Couldn't agree more.
Posted by: Rob | May 7, 2008 1:13:25 PM
I think the strongest statement the Senator could make is that she will not quit. I don't think too much democracy is going to destroy our party, this is America. We still have primaries to go and there is still quite a bit we don't know about Obama..the next few weeks will be very interesting...I'm curious what else about this messiah will come to surface. Your first mistake is to count a Clinton out. She's not going anywhere, we need change in this country and she can provide it... Hillary '08!
Posted by: daveynyc | May 7, 2008 1:22:49 PM
Chip: Clinton ran first in '92, sixteen years ago and had the nomination wrapped up by March, then faced the third party campaign of Ross Perot, but was rarely behind Bush in the polls. Perot led in the polls in the early summer, but sabotaged his own campaign with a series of gaffes. Bush didn't seem to have his heart in it--he was the sort of guy who felt he deserved things rather than having to earn them--and steadily lost ground to Clinton in the fall.
This election is more similar to Ford-Reagan in '72 or the Democratic race in '68, though I think without the potential for student protests or assignations. Remember that one went to June in California until Kennedy was shot, leaving only HH by default.
Posted by: anon | May 7, 2008 1:50:11 PM
Just let it go DAVENYC....let it go.
Posted by: D. R. H. | May 7, 2008 2:08:33 PM
Oh dear, and, spot on Zeke! But, does anyone here really think that the party can be united?????
Posted by: Sebastian | May 7, 2008 2:17:24 PM
God I am old...John Anderson ran against Reagan and Mondale...yes, I meant Ross Perot, sorry for that and here is some polling data to munch on...yes, indeed then Governor Clinton was behind double digits at this time.
I hope that the point I made still comes across adequately.
Clinton Vs. Bush vs. Ross Perot 1992
"In general-election match-ups, Clinton fell hopelessly behind both Perot and Bush—a mid-May poll found him registering just 25 percent support to Bush’s and Perot’s 35 percent. And in the late Democratic primaries, Perot racked up write-in votes by the tens of thousands, finishing with around 15 percent in the late-May Oregon and Washington primaries (both estimated figures, since write-in votes weren’t officially recorded). Nationally, Clinton’s favorable/unfavorable rating stood at a poisonous 42/48 percent."
As quoted by Steve Kornacki of The New York Observer March 7, 2008 in regard to April 3, 1992
"A Washington Post/ABC News poll finds Bush at 36%, Clinton at 31% and Perot 30%. The poll is deemed especially significant because it is the first one that puts Perot within striking distance of the major party candidates." Washington Post, April 28, 1992
"After months of steady gains in polls by undeclared candidate Ross Perot, the race for President has leveled off and stabilized for the past month, according to the Gallup Poll. Four polls taken by Gallup since May 18 have shown no significant fluctuations, measuring Mr. Perot's support at 34 to 39 percent, President Bush's at 31 to 35 percent and Mr. Clinton's at 24 to 25 percent." New York Times, June 19, 1992
Posted by: Chip Arndt | May 7, 2008 2:19:23 PM
Dave, I do apologize, but you're an idiot. She cannot win! And if she emerges, as if by "magic" from behind the curtain at the convention as the nominee you can certainly kiss Obama supporters goodbye because it will (rightfully) be perceived as theft of the nomination. How would one lose by all measures, and then still win? It makes zero sense.
Obama is going to have A LOT of work to do to bring back Hilary's supporters, but he can't do that with her still prattling on acting as if she still has a chance.
Posted by: Sean | May 7, 2008 2:21:37 PM
Sean
I must disagree with your comment about DaveNYC. Our candidate preference is different, but I respect his passion
The dems need that kind of
People are saying a lot about Hillary needing to unite the party.
That is 100% WRONG!
It is all of us rank and file Obama supporters who should, can, and will unite the party by being kind to our brothers and sisters who supported someone else. Understanding their pain and confusion at the moment. Being there for them with open arms and helping them to turn their passion into fire for Obama and against McCain.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 7, 2008 2:27:55 PM
I know that, Jimmyboyo. Clinton supporters need time to grieve.
My issue with Davey was his assertion that she can still somehow pull this out. I'm fine with a grieving process, but I'm not fine with someone making up facts. He's still in denial.
Posted by: Sean | May 7, 2008 2:45:38 PM
We'll let the supers decide Sean...
Thanks JB for having my back :)
Although, it's hard to take offense to someone who can't spell my candidate's name correctly...
Posted by: daveynyc | May 7, 2008 3:09:45 PM
There are only 28 days remaining in the primary process and Hillary has said that she will finish it out. She has zero reason to concede so long as Obama is not at 2,025. I think we are all quite aware that he will reach that threshold, but she will continue on in hopes that Florida and Michigan will be resolved which can only help the party in November and so that the remaining states get the opportunity to participate. There are only six contests left and four weeks left. Calm down. She will exit when it is over and will do so respectfully and with dignity.
The true test of character will come when Obama faces the decision of truly uniting the Democratic Party by offering her the VP slot. I am faily certain he will not and so if you want to discuss a question of character, the man who claims to be the candidate of unity will have an opportunity to prove it. In either case, I think Hillary will campaign and support Obama through to November even if she isn't on the ticket. Hopefully then people will get over their prejudices and misconceptions about her and start running a campaign for Obama that actually has something to do with him and less about marginalizing the Clintons.
Posted by: Banne | May 7, 2008 3:43:52 PM
How do any of you Obama supporters defend his refusal to have a revote in Michigan and Florida? If, as some of you posit, 51% of the Democratic party are behind Obama, what does he fear in a revote?
I, for one, fear a candidate who's majority support comes from those voting in their first election- this is the same electorate that bought millions of Ashlee Simpson records.
Posted by: dc8stretch | May 7, 2008 4:02:01 PM
uh. Chip Arndt. Didn't he once think Reichen was a good choice, too?
Posted by: ptownie | May 7, 2008 4:06:10 PM
You'd prefer a candidate whose base bought millions of Tom Jones records?
Posted by: 24play | May 7, 2008 4:06:40 PM
[Voters]
Yes, it's over, call it a day
Sorry that it had to end this way
No reason to pretend
We knew it had to end some day, this way
[HRC]
Guess it's over, the kids are gone
What's the use of tryin' to hang on
Somewhere we lost the key
So little left for you and me and it's clear to see
[Both]
Too much, too little, too late to lie again with you
Too much, too little, too late to try again with you
We're in the middle of ending something that we knew
[Voters] It's over
[HRC] Oh, it was over
Posted by: FunMe | May 7, 2008 4:37:38 PM
DC8STTRETCH
That isn't exactly correct. BOTH candidates refused a revote in both states because neither could agree on the method.
Hillary wanted primaries while Obama wanted Caucuses. Hillary REFUSED to revotes if they were going to be Caucuses. Obama REFUSED to revotes if they were primaries as vs caucuses.
Nobody with any sense saw any real validity on mail in ballots for either since both are much much much larger than Washington (does mail in ballots) and neither had ever performed a mail in ballot vote before in their history let alone one done on the fly.
No need to lie.
As I mentioned in another thread. BOTH FL and MICH will be sat. Howard Fineman last night said his contacts in the obama campaign are all saying that they will sit down to discuss seating FL and MICH because even if sat AS IS in favor of Hillary, Obama is still ahead with pledged delegate numbers by 100 and popular vote by over 200,000.
Please do not push misinformation.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 7, 2008 4:50:58 PM
What happens if you don't 'believe' in him?
What happens if the dem voters don't vote because they don't like him or believe that he can change anything with his lack of any sort of experience. And I have to say, the whole church thing was enough for me.
Seems like default and I don't think it's going to end well. I won't vote for him.
So then what? Just curious because everyone in here is so high winded today.
Posted by: Br!on | May 7, 2008 5:10:29 PM
BR!ON
Then tell your sisters and female friends to stock up on coat hangers
McCain has already stated what type of supreme court judges he will put on the bench
Expect your female friends and family to die bloody deaths by coat hangers puncturing their uterus when they try to stop an unplanned pregnancy
Expect sodomy laws to be ruled as constitutional again as vs unconstitutional as they were when Sandra Occoner was stil on the bench.
Expect marginalization of Jews since McCain has stated that we ARE a xtian nation
etc
That is just some of the things you can expect if you do not vote dem in 08
Expect
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 7, 2008 5:20:45 PM
As much as I admire Hillary, I have to agree with George's assessment of the situation. I don't see how she can get there.
Now I just have to get my sister and parents in PA to vote for Obama instead of McCain.
Posted by: jmg | May 7, 2008 5:53:10 PM
Jimmyboyo:
I object to your accusation of pushing misinformation, and stand by my original querie: How do you Obama supporters defend his refusual to have a revote in the Michigan and Florida Primaries? To your point, oth candidates did not refuse a revote in a primary- only Obama, because he wanted to change a primary to a caucus. So tell me WHY?
Posted by: dc8stretch | May 7, 2008 6:44:43 PM
DC8stretch
You are still putting forth misinformation.
Terry Mcauliffe, Hillary's own campaign person, put foreward Firehouse caucuses for both but she refused.
STOP already friend.
BOTH candidates refused revotes. Neither could agree on a set up.
Anyway; it is out of all voters hands now.
Last night a Hillary campaign staffer put forword VP and pay off her debts for her to drop out. Today through 3rd parties the Obama campaign counter offered with a full pay off her 20 mill debt (11.4 mill to herself and close to 10 mill in unpaid bills) and help with Senate leadership position as in Reid's spot.
It is done. The wealing and dealing is now going on. Time for dems to unite and go against bush part 2 mccain
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 7, 2008 8:06:14 PM
PS
1st female Senate Majority leader is not a small deal.
Byrd of WV once said to Obama "Why do you want to be president? Everbody knows the senate is where the power is."
The debt pay off is only unprecidented in the amount plus Senate majority leader is a great deal, though she might hold out for an ambasadorship to the Un for Bill (which would be cool)
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | May 7, 2008 8:10:51 PM
DC8STRETCH, as an Obama supporter I'll take a crack at answering your question.
I "defend" Obama's unwillingness to agree to a "re-vote" in Michigan and Florida as follows.
The Obama campaign AND the Clinton campaign BOTH agreed to the DNC rules AND agreed to the consequences that would be levied against ANY state who violated the rules to which they both agreed. Do you dispute these facts so far? The rules that THEY BOTH agreed to didn't say, "break the rules and then later in the year we'll throw out ALL of the rules and consequences that EVERYONE agreed to and we'll let those states that broke them have "re-do's" at GREAT expense to the party (money that will be needed in the general election). How about now; any disagreements?
Rather than asking Obama supporters to "defend" Obama's sticking to the rules that Clinton agreed to I think you should be demanding that Clinton supporters "defend" their decision to NOW want to CHANGE the rules right in the middle of the game.
And what exactly do you suppose we should do with MI where Obama wasn't even on the ballot (because like ALL the other candidates who FOLLOWED the DNC rules, HE didn't have his name on the ballot). Ask her supporters why SHE was the only candidate who had her name on the ballot.
I also think you should explain how you plan to enforce these primary rules in future years if we send the message today, "oh just break 'em, no problem, there'll be no consequences because if your candidate falls behind and has no way of winning by playing by the rules that he/she agreed to at the beginning we'll just let you have a re-do later and those states who DID play by the rules will foot the bill."
By the way, I'm a FLORIDA resident whose vote will not be counted so I think I have more of a pony in this race (on this particular question) than Clinton supporters who don't live in MI or FL. It's OUR votes, not Hillary's that are not being counted.
Hopefully that answered your question.
Posted by: Zeke | May 8, 2008 12:02:06 AM
despite the numbers, hillary is a stronger candidate than obama. that said, she and bill are true democrats. she will concede on or before june 3rd, and i have no doubt that the clintons will be on board for barack's run.
there will be a reconciliation, and obama absolutely needs to ask hillary to be on the ticket. whether she declines makes no difference. he has to make that overture. absent that, there will remain a rift. he is a smart guy; i think he gets it.
i am not suicidal. i have to hitch my wagon to obama's dimming star. what else can clear thinking queers do?
Posted by: nic | May 8, 2008 2:05:31 AM
Zeke:
No disagreements with you about the originally disqualified primaries. But things change. No one expected the two candidates to be separated by only a hundred delegates. Now every vote counts. THAT is why FL and MI must be considered.
And I again, stand by my original question which no one has answered: Why is Obama opposed to a revote in a FL and MI PRIMARY (as they originally were) not a caucus?
And as for enforcing DNC rules- they are made to be broken. I refer you the the 1968 DNC convention- where only George McGovern and Eugene McCarthy (since LBJ dropped out, and RFK was assassinated)where the candidates who had any delegates, yet the Dem nominee was Hubert Humphrey- who had never campaigned in any primary. I'd also refer you to the 1980 Dem Convention, where Obama supporter Ted Kennedy tried to get a resolution passed where Jimmy Carter's pledged delegates could be freed from their commitment in order to cast their votes for him.
Its politics. I want a strong candidate- the GOP is already swabbing the decks of Obama's swift boat.
Posted by: dc8stretch | May 8, 2008 10:33:23 AM
Sorry, mon frere Zeke, but Democrats Kucinich, Dodd, and Gravel were also on the Michigan ballot with Sen. Clinton.
Just because the nomination contest is over doesn't mean we can't try to keep the facts straight er gaily accurate.
Posted by: Leland Frances | May 8, 2008 11:09:52 AM
DC8STRETCH, I'll try this one more time in as simple a statement as can possibly be made.
BECAUSE THE RULES DO NOT NOW, AND NEVER DID, CALL FOR A DO-OVER.
If we set this "change the rules in the middle of the game when things don't go one candidate's way" precedent this year then NO rule is worth the paper it's printed on in the future.
You and all Clinton supporters, EVEN LELAND, would certainly undertand this if Hillary was ahead and it was Obama calling for a change in the rule that HE agreed to at the beginning.
I also think Clinton supporters should explain to America is this:
Terry McCauliffe in 2004:
“I’m going outside the primary window,” [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.
“If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses,” I said. “We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost.”
He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.
“You won’t deny us seats at the convention,” he said.
“Carl, take it to the bank,” I said. “They will not get a credential. The closest they’ll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it.”
Did you notice that there is NO mention of a re-do option later in case things don't go one candidate's way?
He seemed to be VERY certain of the importance of playing by the rules four years ago. Why is there a change of heart within the Clinton campaign now?
It's time to let go and start repairing and rebuilding our party. Continuing this MI/FL complaining is not good for our party. MY STATE and MI broke the rules. We were told that there would be consequences, but we broke them anyway. We're now facing exactly what we were told we would face. It's time to stop complaining; take our medicine; learn a lesson and move forward. It's really interesting to me that I don't hear Floridians complaining about our votes not counting. Not even from my friends who support Clinton. If ANYONE should be complaining, it's Florida and Michigan voters; after all it's OUR votes that are not being counted, not Hillary's.
I really appreciate NIC's attitude here; especially because I know how much he supports Clinton and how much of a sacrifice it is for him to shift support to Obama in the spirit of party unity going into the general election. NIC is a class act. I look forward to working together with him to win this thing against McCain in November. LELAND, I'll be waiting with open arms to welcome you as well my friend. You knows how much I luvs me some Leland. I REALLY look forward to fighting together again. Hopefully sooner than later.
Posted by: Zeke | May 8, 2008 7:26:54 PM
Yes, it's over, time to call it a day. I'm afraid it's over Hillary. I thought it was our turn... Evidetnly, it's not. I'd rather someone who's less qualified than you but who's on the same team be Presient over another GWB clone. Our Nation and it's reputation cannot withstand it. It's time for us to draw together and realize that all it will take is 4 years of Mr. Obama's
(i hope not) misdirection to prove that you were the right choice all along and then it WILL be your turn, Hill. History has a way of righting wrongs. Just as it proved that GW stole the election and that Al Gore would have made the better President. Let us not forget the words of the spiritual "We SHALL overcome. WE SHALL OVERCOME... WE SHALL OVERCOME SOMEDAY." Deep in my heart, I *do* believe we shall overcome someday. Hillary, There are many of us out here who still have faith in you and are thankful for you and Bill and for your hard work. I'm not sold on Barack but I will not demonize him as his supporters are so willing to do you as evidenced on this blog. I will have hope that things will change in his Presidency. I am willing to support him. I can see the forest for the trees. it's a damned shame that Mr. Obama's supporters weren't willing to give you that same shot. Truthfully, we were all the poorer for it. HILLARY 2012!
Posted by: Parker | May 9, 2008 5:17:49 AM
Recent Comments