Wed. Apr 02, 2008
Dear Hillary
I know you’re very busy, but I felt the need to respond since you said something about me the other day:
“My take on it is a lot of Senator Obama’s supporters want to end this race because they don’t want people to keep voting,” she told CBS affiliate KTVQ in Billings, Mont. “That’s just the opposite of what I believe. We want people to vote.”
msnbc.com: Clinton: Obama wants to stop votes
First, a Media Note. Notice how Clinton’s statement about “Obama’s supporters” wanting the race to end morphed into a headline that reads “Clinton: Obama wants to stop votes.”
That’s not what she said. Or else I wouldn’t be writing this. She specifically said that Obama’s supporters want to end the race because we don’t want people voting, as opposed to Hillary, who says “We want people to vote.”
Unless it’s in a caucus, because, well, you know, they’re not democratic and are dominated by extremists, and, oh yeah, Hillary has not had any luck winning one. So, other than caucuses, and states that are supposedly permanently “red” (like Texas, since she just lost the final delegate count there), or states that have a higher than average percentage of African Americans, or states that are “population challenged,” Hillary would like the voting to continue.
At one point someone counted up 20 some states whose votes “were insignificant,” according to the logic emitting from the Clinton campaign. And, let’s not forget, the Clinton campaign strategy relied on the concept that it would all be over by February 5th. In other words, their entire failed plan was based on the idea that none of the votes after February 5th would matter. That’s partially what put her in this fine mess. Because, clearly, she was wrong. For the entire remainder of February, in fact.
Senator Clinton may be comfortable making a sweeping generalization about what is on the minds and in the will of tens of millions of Obama supporters, but I can only speak for myself. This Obama supporter welcomes the votes to come in each of the ten primaries left. I think it’s great that some states that normally get no attention at all during the waning days of already decided campaigns get more “throw weight” this year.
This Obama supporter also welcomes the continued candidacy of Hillary Clinton, for multiple reasons. Primarily, because that’s a decision that only she can make. Also, because the recent public pressure on her to drop out is most certain to have the opposite effect. She’s not the type who will bow to such pressure, quite the opposite, she’ll dig in her heels against it. That’s exactly what we’ve seen over the past week.
Whenever the time comes, it will have to be of her choosing. I’ve come to think all the talk of taking it to a floor fight at the convention in late August is bluster. There will come a moment, perhaps even right after winning Pennsylvania by a smaller than hoped margin, when she’ll withdraw. That moment is likely already chosen in her mind, or at least, the alternatives. April 23rd? May 7th? Surely by mid-June when the remaining uncommitted superdelegates start falling into one line or the other.
That’s the positive side. On the negative, look what’s happened since the Rev. Wright scandal broke and the Clinton campaign had its first “She Lied” moment. Obama opened up a nine to ten point gap in the daily tracking poll by Gallup. So, please, Hillary, keep throwing the kitchen sink, keep diminishing your own stature with wild swings at your opponent, spin-filled denials of your campaign’s obvious state, and keep insisting you’ll be in the race until the last dog is hung, no matter what the delegate vote may be.
Each day that you do so, you ensure the outcome many have begun to speak publicly about, forcing you to spin even more furiously.
But take your time. I’ve come to realize you are hurting yourself more than anyone else. And after this campaign performance, you might as well use up whatever Clinton Capital you have left now, because at this rate it’s going to soon be a worthless currency within the Democratic Party.
2012? Give me a break. Were the masses pining for Al Gore in 2004 after losing in 2000, or for John Kerry this year after losing in 2004? Multiply that effect by ten, and you have Hillary in 2012, after this performance in 2008.
It’s now or never. She’s got to play it out until there’s nothing left to play, and may well end up with no “legacy capital” left to back a hardball ploy to swipe the nomination at the convention.
She’ll pick her time. But it won’t be when everyone is on her back to get out. That’s why I think she may drop out after a slim win in Pennsylvania. And if she doesn’t, every day she stays in, the picture gets clearer. And in this picture, she will not be the photogenic one.
But I’d really appreciate it if I wasn’t treated as if I was [1] stupid enough to believe some of the mammoth spin coming from her camp, or [2] part of some generic hive mind that wants the voting to end.
The only thing I want to end is the insulting treatment. But that’s a change for which I am not filled with hope. Based solely on experience.
Published 10:14PM, Wed, Apr 02 2008
Category: Politics
Previous: «« Mandatory Music Tax ««
Next: »» Shut Up And Drive »»
Peanut Gallery
“that might make Bill Clinton a little grumpy”
Well, his red-faced finger-pointing tirade was directed … at one of Hillary’s supporting superdelegates. At least, she was before he opened his mouth. Wouldn’t be so sure today. Nice job, Bill!
I’d be tempted to say that Bill Clinton’s anger management and passive-aggressive issues have cost Hillary’s campaign as much or more than any of the actual candidate’s attributes.
This election has become the glaring example of how the system really isn’t in the hands of the ‘common man’ any longer. From Clinton’s bald-faced admission that she’s going to end-run the entire process and attempt to get not only the superdelegates, but also the pledged delegates to change their votes:
It’s clear that Clinton considers the average American too stupid to vote- at least those that didn’t vote for her.
Today though, I found that this election is not about what the people want, it’s about how much you can grease a palm:
the printed version doesn’t have the good stuff, listen to the audio. Pay particular attention to the part where the guy explains why he’d cast his superdelegate vote for Clinton, even though his state went 2-1 the other way: when Clinton was First Lady, she put his name on the list for some White House functions, and now he feels his vote is a ‘debt that can be paid’ to the Clintons for that service.
Too bad Obama didn’t have the opportunity to give this guy a bunch of invites to cool events. Had he, maybe he’d have a few more superdelegates- those people who are ‘in the know’, who are so much more informed than you or I. Or, as we see clearly, are just people who were bought and paid for years ago.



from swimming freestyle:
“Barack Obama’s election to the presidency in November would put a serious crimp in Bill Clinton’s power, influence and resulting earnings. Obama and his Administration would, by virtue of their position, become the de facto leaders of the Democratic Party. Bill and Hillary Clinton will continue to be powerful forces in the Party, but the bulk of that power shifts from the Clinton’s to the new guys in town. They become a good deal less marketable.
One can understand why the thought of losing all that might make Bill Clinton a little grumpy.”
swimmingfreestyle.ty…