Billy Richardson is set to endorse Obama in Oregon today. This is sure to help with the all important Hispanic vote in Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Oregon. No doubt his endorsement will also ring in many Philadelphian’s ears a month from now when they vote (and as soon as most of them figure out who the hell Bill Richardson is and why they should care who the governor of New Mexico thinks they should vote for).
Snark aside, I do think this is a sign of what Barack’s efforts this week are achieving. A major target of his speeches (especially the penultimate More Perfect Union) were the undecided superdelegates, since his popular delegate lead is nearly insurmountable. They are beginning to trust him on defense — specifically his own defense.
Carol
The real race now is for the superdelegates. A heavyweight like Richardson endorsing gives others who may have influence to start moving towards Obama. I haven’t forgotten the rumor that Brazile said that “we’ll have a nominee in two weeks”. Nor has it escaped my notice that a lot of Democrats want this wrapped up and would rather not waste much more money on the primary. With five weeks until Pennsylvania, this would be the best time for superdelegates to go endorse. There’s plenty of time and no need to worry that it could unfairly influence a primary. If enough endorse, the primary ends regardless of what Hillary does.
Conservatively Liberal
This is a great ‘payoff’ for his speech on race! I have always liked Richardson, and if Obama picked him as his veep, I think it would make a great ticket this fall. Imagine the wingnuts whose heads would explode if Obama and Richardson joined up and won this fall; the black president and his hispanic vice president. It would sound like a hot air popcorn popper running at full tilt across the country!
I bet it was doubly hard for Richardson because of his ties to Bill and Hillary. That just adds credibility to his decision, IMO.
TR
Heh, this was my reaction too, Tom. “Now?!”
But this is the first endorsement from a former candidate, and it could open the floodgates for ones who would matter in the state — Biden, Dodd and Edwards.
dslak
Richardson was the only of the major candidates who believes that the US needs to reduce defense spending. Oh, I just heard a wingnut head exploding in the distance!
p.lukasiak
Well, at least Oregon is 7% Hispanic, rather than 2-4% like PA, NC, and WV.
But I have the feeling that Obama is prepping Oregon to be his “Ohio firewall”. The Wright mess did a lot of damage to Obama, and we still don’t know if the greatest speech ever given by a human being will be effective in reversing/repairing the damage. States like NC and Indiana, which looked good for Obama two weeks ago, are probably tightening. WV and KY are also probably Clinton country now.
In other words, Obama could be looking at a potential string of defeats, and Oregon will be his best chance to change the narrative if the worst does happen.
Civilized Crank
‘First Endorsement by a former candidate’?
I thought Dodd already endorsed Obama.
Fruitbat
Waitaminit…
More Perfect Union…
Magical Unity Pony…
Peace on Earth…
Purity of Essence…
MPU…MUP…POE…
Obama has come to protect us from a terrorist plot to sap and impurify the precious bodily fluids of pure Americans!
TR
Jeez, I completely forgot about that. Whoops.
p.lukasiak
Hey Tom…. remember thos e 50 super-delegates that Obama had in his pocket before Ohio and Texas? Did Obama get a hole in his pocket, or what?
zzyzx
I don’t think the Richardson thing helps directly in PA. What it does show though, that the Wright thing isn’t spinning further and further out of control. It’s definitely stopped now and it’s reversing. Obama still has a month – twice as long as he had in TX – to close the gap here, and the gap is still smaller than Texas’s.
If Obama starts to regain his lead in the polls, I don’t know what Clinton will have left.
dslak
She’ll always have p.lukasiak.
John S.
Sheesh.
Firewalls are for people who are losing and nned a place to make a last stand. Obama doesn’t need a firewall as it is nearly impossible that Clinton will get enough votes and delegates to overtake him.
scrutinizer
Unfortunately for Clinton, the Wright story didn’t break close enough to the PA primary. There are weeks to go before the vote, plenty of time for Obama to make up ground. He’s already started with his speech on race, a brilliant piece of oratory, and his speech on Iraq. I can’t imagine what else Clinton might have, other than continue to try to go negative.
ZOMG!!1!1 No numbers? Is that really you, p.luk?
myiq2xu
Hey! Don’t forget about me!
myiq2xu
Firewalls are for stopping fires and it’s really hot at MUP headquarters right now.
Rarely Posts
Probably because Richardson isn’t a typical white person. /snark
Seriously, does the average voter even know he’s a Latino?
dslak
Your hackery will never match his. I know the truth hurts, but you’ll have to learn how to live with the pain.
myiq2xu
Seriously, does the average voter even know he’s alive?
Latino?Fixt
The polls don’t show it.
myiq2xu
p.luk and I have been called out by name together on an almost daily basis lately. You would think we were Uday and Qusay or something.
JL
Endorsements are nice especially when they come from such a high level and well respected person.
myiq2xu
It appears that Big O is distributing a picture of the Big Dawg shaking hands with Rev. Wright at a “grip & grin” session back in the nineties.
IOW – “Clinton did it too!”
scrutinizer
More like Dr. Evil and Mini-Me, I think.
dslak
Of course, just because someone’s political campaign does it doesn’t mean we have to. The fact that Clinton associated with Wright doesn’t exculpate Obama (if he needs to be exculpated, anyway).
But “Clinton did it, too!” isn’t a defense of Obama’s actions, anymore than “Obama did it, too!” is a defense of anything Clinton’s done.
Civilized Crank
Not to stir the pot any more, but I thought it was an independent group associated with Trinity that was circulating the photo to defend the church’s reputation.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Jeremiah_Wright_was_White_House_guest.html
dslak
Civilized Crank, this was added in an update to that article:
Napoleon
How about this picture of what appears to be Wright with Hillary:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/did-hillary-sit-next-to-rev-wright-at.html
myiq2xu
Ouch:
myiq2xu
How about it? If it is, what does it prove? That she sat next to Wright while someone else was talking?
Betty Ford was photographed one time with John Wayne Gacy.
dslak
Myiq, that assessment doesn’t make much sense, given that it shows only 3% more of voters who were less likely to vote for him than before. Without information on how he was polling both before and after his speech, it would be difficult to say whether it had any effect on voters.
If what was being touted as a story that made Obama “toast” only made 3% of voters less likely to vote for him than before, that shows that either most people didn’t take the Wright story all that seriously, or that many of those who did were brought back into the fold by his speech.
dslak
This is the salient part of myiq’s link:
If ‘less likely to vote for Obama’ translates into ‘more likely to vote for Hillary than Obama,’ then he’ll be in serious trouble.
over_educated
We will see how the narrative plays out over the next few weeks, but I certainly don’t see the Obama campaign imploding over this, and the fact that he is still picking up major endorsements suggests the worst has passed.
Right now Clinton’s only hope is the Superdelgates, and if that shot didn’t take Obama down, there really isn’t much left on Clinton’s side. She may pick up a few more states, but she can’t overcome Obama’s lead, superdelegates will go to Obama because they don’t want a rift in the party.
The math just doesn’t support Clinton at this point.
myiq2xu
The pdf link shows that people aware of the situation AND the speech were 3% less likely to vote for Obama than people who only knew about the situation.
ntr Fausto Carmona
over_educated
Oh and FYI…
Here is a YouTube of McCain’s “spiritual advisor”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMaaDbGgsKA
Media double standard much?
Xenos
AHA! Now it all fits together…
ntr Fausto Carmona
Wow did I screw up that blockquote tag.
Bingo.
Civilized Crank
Damn missed the second update… that’s what I get for going to sleep.
ntr Fausto Carmona
Hagee isn’t… y’know… *looks shiftily from side to side and whispers in a low voice* … an ‘uppity negro’.
Bob In Pacifica
John Wayne Gacy was photographed at a Democratic campaign event with Jimmy Carter’s wife. Betty Ford was sung about by Warren Zevon, in his ditty “Detox Mansion.”
Napoleon
Too funny – was Gacy dressed up like a clown?
The Other Steve
Her dignity?
Or is she willing to squandor that too?
bootlegger
Look for Edwards to be the king-maker. Whoever he endorses will see a landslide of supers follow. He may wait it out for just that reason, or maybe he’ll extract a cabinet post position and some policy issues before choosing sides. But his endorsement, if it comes, will produce the winner.
p.lukasiak
If Obama loses, PA, NC, IN, KY, and WV, after losing TX and OH, I don’t care how much of a delegate lead he had, he’s gonna be in deep doo-doo.
One thing that can be said about the Obama campaign is that they do look ahead — we still have no idea of the long-term impact of the Wright controversy, and the Obama speech in response to it, but Axelrod is smart enough to know that until the damage is assessed, he’s going to plan for any eventuality — and that means making sure that he wins Oregon (the state least likely for l’affaire Wright to have a deterimining impact) to put an end to any possible streak that Clinton might achieve.
Well, Indiana is a polling desert, and while there are numbers for NC, there isn’t enough post Wright controversy and subsequent speech to draw any conclusions.
dslak
It can’t possibly show that, because there’s no distinction in the poll between being aware just of the situation with the pastor but not the speech.
The Other Steve
I wonder if Mark Penn has considered how to micro target serial killers who dress as clowns.
After security dads and nascar moms, it’s one of the growing voting segments.
The Other Steve
I really don’t think Edwards has much signifigance within the party.
Al Gore would be a bigger domino.
The Other Steve
Funny. Didn’t Hillary lose like 11 in a row? I don’t remember you saying she was in deep doo doo.
And isn’t she behind by like 150 delegates?
There’s around 600 delegates remaining in primaries. For Hillary to win, and catch up with the 150 delegates she is behind, she would have to win 450 to 150… That is, she’d have to get more than 70% to 30% in all remaining races.
How confident are you that will happen? Remember, we noted that she’d have to win Texas and Ohio by 20 points and she failed on that count.
Again, unless Obama is found with a dead boy in his car, it’s over for Hillary. All she is doing at this point is torpedoing the nominee for the general election.
AkaDad
Like big states, this endorsement doesn’t matter.
dslak
Considering his experiences living under buses, I doubt he’d let a boy die in his car.
AkaDad
I wasn’t sure, but now I know, P Luk is just messing with us.
Timb
As a Hoosier, I take offense. Not really, of course, but vast swaths of Indianapolis are Hispanic and Northwestern Indiana (Gary, et. al) is not just home to Oprah, but to all of Oprah’s Hispanics servants!
There are plenty of Hispanics in Indiana. Trust me the immigrant backlash here among the good ol’ boys is strong (except the good ol’ boys now live in suburbs….I don’t understand why that’s as manly as working on the farm, but NASCAR ratings do not lie).
The Other Steve
Let’s do some wild guesses… Figuring in p.luk’s Obama is doomed!
Penn – 158 delegates… figure Clinton get’s 95, Obama 63
Guam – 4… Clinton 3, Obama 1
North C – 115… Obama 65, Clinton 60
Indiana – 72… Obama 36, Clinton 36
West Virg – 28… Clinton 20, Obama 8
Oregon – 52… Obama 30, Clinton 22
Kentucky – 51… Clinton 30, Obama 21
Puerto Rico – 55… Clinton 35, Obama 20
Montana – 16… Obama 9, Clinton 7
South Dakota – 15… Obama 8, Clinton 7
Out of this… Obama 261, Clinton 315
Totals… 1621 + 261 = 1882 for Obama
1479 + 315 = 1794 for Clinton
Oh dear, what happened?
John S.
Your hackery knows no bounds.
Who gives a shit if he loses to Clinton in those primaries? She still won’t beat him in any of the important metrics, not to mention that those results have no bearing on the general election since Obama polls better than Clinton against McCain in many of those states.
John S.
And she has to be seething over Richardson’s endorsement:
Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.
myiq2xu
Are you saying that those states don’t count?
over_educated
I think you will see a few more defections/enorsements over the coming weeks to Obama. Showing that he could whether the Wright controversy illustrates the man can take a hit and keep on going.
It wouldn’t suprise me if you see a groundswell to force Hillary out of the campaign in the next few weeks. I think Democrats have now reached a point where they want this to be over, and that doesn’t bode well for her.
over_educated
Sadly, no.
What he is saying, is, that even assuming Hillary wins all of those states, it still won’t push her over the top. Of course they count, but they just will not swing the overall momentum.
John S.
Yes, you ignominious ass, that’s exactly what I’m saying.
/rolls eyes
I’ll spell it out for you:
Primary/caucus performance has little bearing on a general election. Primary/caucus performance only has bearing on delegates awarded. In light of that, losses in the states your mental twin highlighted =/= deep doo doo for Obama since he will still be ahead in delegates given the margins in those contests and he also performs better than Clinton vs. McCain in many of those states.
Bring your A-game next time.
Wilfred
Clinton couldn’t bring an escaped convict and a crack whore together.
Richardson waited until now to support Obama because he knows it’s effectively over. Wouldn’t be surprised to see as Veep
Soylent Green
What’s cool about this is that Richardson is half Mexican, half white anglo, and although a U.S. citizen by birth, was raised in Mexico City. Sound familiar?
Gus
I realized something as I listed to a piece of a Clinton speech on the radio the other day. I don’t really have a problem with her, it’s her supporters I find revolting. While I’m riding the MUP, I’m happy to have Hillary as a backup plan.
John S.
I had never really thought about it before today, but Obama/Richardson really would be an intersting ticket.
Aside from the obvious ethnic angle, Richardson is a policy wonk in a similar vein as Clinton but without all the baggage.
What I really want to know is where the hell is John Edwards? Because he could pretty much end this thing.
Roonieroo
I just found out I get to be an Obama delegate at the Travis County Democratic Convention on the 29th. I’ve never been a convention delegate at any level so it will be interesting to see what it is like.
They are freaking out a little bit because this is going to be the biggest convention at the county level in decades.
John Cole
Doing what John Edwards always does- waiting until he can get the most benefit out of whatever. I still don’t know why you guys fell for his schtick.
Andrew
In fairness to lukasiak, he is referring to an alternate universe where Hillary won Texas, as opposed to our own, where Obama actually won. So, it may very well be the case that alternate-universe Obama will be in deep doo-doo. Also, I hear that alternate-universe Obama is a secret Zoroastrian!
Jake
O Rly? I guess “LOOK OUT HE’S A STEALTH ISLAHOMOFASCIST!?!” isn’t a rightwing smear. More of a friendly pat on the ass I reckon.
Do I want to follow the link? Not really. Oh, all right.
Oh for feck’s sake. I don’t assume this asshat meant Obama is of two different species. But it still translates into “I waited in vain for our presidential candidate of different races to say there is no such thing as race.”
People. Please. Shut your damn face for five seconds. If you don’t think there’s any such thing as race, don’t talk about race.
Speaking of untrained ears, I guess he missed the part where Obama talked about the so-called white experience.
And it’s kinda strange how he can’t stop talking about race. Must be clutching those pearls to hard.
I really didn’t want to follow that link.
4tehlulz
ZOMG IT’S A MECCA-MEXICO AXIS. OBAMA AND RICHARDSON ARE OBVIOUSLY ISLAMOMEXICANS TRYING TO DESTROY THE WEST AND TAKE OUR JOBS.
Cain
Fuck. Obama is in Portland today, and I didn’t have tickets. He must have decided to come in the past two weeks or something. I’m totally bummed. I was going to sign up to help or something but I hate calling people or banging on doors. I did enough of that as a kid trying to sell oranges or candy bars in Indiana. He’s on in 1.5 hours!!
Traffic is probably an utter mess.
Indiana will probably go to Obama. I don’t see that as a state that had a lot of love for the Clinton. Of course, my parents are voting for Clinton there because they’re nuts. They don’t seem to have any particular reason other than “it was great in the 90s with Bill”. It’s not Hillary they want, but Bill back in the White House. Bill is my parent’s magical pony.
Anyways, I’m hoping that Obama will come back to Oregon. He’ll have to come back here one more time I think.
cain
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
Getting Dodd and now Richardson’s endorsement is nice, but from my point of view the big one was when Obama got Paul Volker’s endorsement. We may need to bring the old guy out of retirement before this is over. It really is about the economy, stupid.
Sinister eyebrow
I disagree with your assessment of Edwards, John C. I think he is looking to benefit from using his influence but the benefit is not a personal benefit. I do think he’s trying to build the import of his endorsement so that he can influence one candidate to exert some greater effort at addressing the issues important to him (primarily economic inequality). There’s nothing wrong with that, in fact I think it is what power and influence really should be used for.
My first job practicing law was in John Edwards old firm (not the one he started, the one he worked at prior to that) and he was always considered an attorney of great skill and unimpeachable ethical standards. We could use more like him.
grandpajohn
You know its really time for all you masturbating political wonks to STFU with the self destruction of our best chance to regain control of our destiny . I am 70 years old relish the chance to once again put the adults in control of our future, not for me but for my grandchildren.
I live in a very red state (SC). But even though I am one of those lazy, uneducated ( BS, MA) southerners, I do intend come election day to go to the polls And I WILL proudly cast my vote for the candidate that
. I would hope that all you self proclaimed democrats ,liberals , progressives, etc would do the same. So dammit quit doing the republiscums work for them
myiq2xu
Are there any Democrats you like besides Obama?
Sinister eyebrow
At this point would vote for an inanimate carbon rod if it had a (D) next to it on the ballot. It could only be an improvement.
zmulls
I’m with Sinister Eyebrow on Edwards. He doesn’t *have* to endorse anyone. He’ll do it if he thinks it will be effective and if it will do some good. He’s rich and has a wife to take care of, so I don’t think he’s angling for a post unless it coincides with his goals….which may or may not include running for President again.
I do agree with John C. about Obama aiming at the superdelegates with the speech. They’re the ones who were listening the closest and they’re the ones who are going to be most impressed. A very visible shift of superdelegates to Obama might well be the beginning of the end.
John Cole
Sure, but you aren’t one of them.
John Edwards and Al Gore and other folks could step right in, right now, and end this. But they won’t, so fuck them. And let’s go for another month of identity politics while Camp Hillary does the GOP oppo research, jacks up Obama’s negatives, and cuts commericals for McCain before one of the rocket scientists being paid millions in her campaign realize they can’t fucking win.
myiq2xu
Don’t hold your breath.
They don’t vote until August. Let me repeat that:
THE SUPER DELEGATES DON’T VOTE UNTIL AUGUST!
The smart move for them is to lay low and wait until the primaries are over and the effect of this controversy can be measured.
There are two reasons for them to do this:
1. Self-interest. If they back Obama and he ends up flaming out, they will have to deal with Hillary as President. By waiting until the convention, they don’t make an enemy out of the winner.
2. Party-interest. If they force Hillary out and then Obama flames out, we will be repeating 1988 all over again.
OTOH – If Obama doesn’t flame out, they still get to select him as the nominee.
If y’all are so confident that Obama will win, why are you afraid to let the democratic process play out?
Most of the superdelegates have little to gain but lots to lose by deciding early.
myiq2xu
:-)
p.lukasiak
The circumstances are rather different.
Hillary’s losing streak was the result of atrocious campaign planning — her campaign was focussed on ST to the exclusion of everything else, while Obama’s organized in the state that were holding contests in the following two weeks. In other words, its wasn’t the candidate, but the campaign, that was the problem….and she was able to turn the campaign around and win in Ohio and Texas.
But if Obama loses NC, IN, KY, and WV, it won’t be because of problems in the campaign. It will be because voters now see Obama differently than they did before the Wright controversy.
*********
as for all this talk about “the delegate count” — it won’t mean shit to the superdelegates if Obama seems to be permanently damaged by the Wright controversy. They’ll be looking at Obama’s numbers against McCain — and if Obama goes on a losing streak, those numbers will be dropping as well.
p.lukasiak
In fairness to lukasiak, he is referring to an alternate universe where Hillary won Texas, as opposed to our own, where Obama actually won.
Well, I happen to live in the universe that is inhabited by most people — the one where the day-after headlines said
And its the same universe where, when the final texas caucus numbers come out, American’s are gonna say “but that’s not right…Clinton won Texas”
Jake
O/T: Looks like SD contractors got into HRC’s passport files.
dslak
Shorter p.luk: When Hillary loses, it doesn’t count; it only counts when Obama loses.
I rather like the spin that the failure of a campaign is somehow completely distinct from the candidate. A pro-Obama hack could just say, “Well, Obama’s campaign just didn’t have enough time to combat people’s misperceptions from the Wright controversy.”
over_educated
Simple, because at this point it is counterproductive for both the clinton and Obama campaign to drag this thing out.
The longer this bitter, divisive primary goes on, the more wounded the presumptive Democratic nominee will be going into November.
The Democratic process has played out, barring a “Christmas miracle” there is no way for Hillary to win that doesn’t cleave the party in two and make it impossible for her to win the general (fiat by superdelegate). The math is the math and as much as you hope the Wright thing is going ot sink Obama, the evidence suggests it hasn’t, especially considering the recent endorsement by Richardson(a man who by anyones standard has never been a profile in political courage).
A notorious fence-sitter and ex-Clinton aide publicly declares for Obama AFTER the largest Obama scandalette of the campaign? Game over.
ntr Fausto Carmona
I’m sure there are rocket scientists in the campaign that know she can’t win. But… Would you want to be the one to break that news to her?
Martin
Richardson endorsement isn’t about winning voters. It’s about the party standing behind Obama and saying that we move on with this guy. A lot of people have been saying that Richardson is the big swing delegate because he has good ties with Clinton but has stayed on the sidelines because of his own candidacy – he was Hillary’s superdelegate firewall, so to speak. Richardson is likely to serve as a proxy for a lot of the undecided supers and having a big name step up and endorse in this way, referencing the speech, making it clear that he’s endorsing with full consideration of the Wright situation is a pretty big deal. He opens the door to other people to step in now for Obama and if they are questioned on whether it is appropriate to do so with the Wright situation, they just point at Bill.
And the supers won’t decide in August. It looks like there is a fair bit of support for an earlier superdelegate meeting no later than June, assuming we get that far. With FL/MI off the table I think it’ll just take a renewed move of supers to Obama to make it clear that she can’t do it. Obama will control the rules committee, Pelosi is supportive of FL/MI not being seated. I just don’t see an opening for Clinton.
I know paul sees weakness for Obama, but he’s already recovering in the daily tracking polls. After losing 13 points on the Gallup poll on Clinton since the Wright story broke, he’s made up 2 points since the speech. Since it’s a 3 day rolling average, that’s only 1 day of polling included. If the other two days poll the same, he’ll have retaken the lead on her in that poll. With the new videos out and the other news, I don’t see anything to pull him down at this time. If Wright was a big deal, he’d be plummeting, but he’s not.
John S.
Right – Fantasyland.
Because they didn’t finish tallying up the votes in Texas for about a week and as the results currently stand, Obama has 98 delegates from Texas while Clinton has 94.
ntr Fausto Carmona
ntr Fausto Carmona
I’m a blockquote soopergenius, I tell ya.
myiq2xu
This kind of logic is why the New England Patriots are the World Champions.
Oh, wait . . .
over_educated
Way to completely NOT address any of the substantive points of my post.
Let me re-iterate the last sentence:
“A notorious fence-sitter and ex-Clinton aide publicly declares for Obama AFTER the largest Obama scandalette of the campaign.”
That sort of deflates the “Obama is getting buried by Wright” meme you have been pushing.
myiq2xu
Who got the most votes?
Hillary Clinton
Standard Response – “Delegates are what matter”
So if enough pledged and automatic delegates vote to make Hillary the nominee in August?
Standard Response – “That’s cheating! The “will of the people” is what matters!”
myiq2xu
A guy who barely registered in the primaries before dropping out.
dslak
Who here (or anywhere) has made that response?
ThymeZone
They will be looking at a lot of things, and you don’t know what they are, how they are weighted, or what effect they will have.
That’s the accurate truth, is it not?
When did you become a Democrat who runs away and hides under a rock when a few shitheads put up a YouTube video?
No wonder George Bush won two elections while being a complete frigging idiot. He was running against a bunch of pansy-ass chickenshits calling themselves a party.
Barack Obama will be fine, and no thanks to the poultry brigade that now infests our party.
myiq2xu
I remember how “HUGE” it was when Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama and so did his cousin Maria Shriver. Game over?
Obama lost Massachusetts and California.
dslak
Also, once Hillary concedes, will “automatic delegates” once again be referred to as superdelegates, or is that a permanent change?
Andrew
Shorter lukasiak: Once upon a time I called out people like Joe Klein on the same sort of bullshit that I’m now spouting.
Remember, paul, when you took the media to task for repeating lies about things like valerie plame and Iraq? Now it just looks like you were jealous of their bullshitting abilities.
The Other Steve
LOL! The only reason she’s been doing well in larger states is because she wins on name recognition.
You do realize that if Hillary has any hopes of taking this nomination now, she has to come out and negate the Wright stuff? She can’t use this to gain the nomination.
She had a lead in all demographics early on in the campaign. When she lost that, her campaign was doomed. She’s already established a history of trying to use racist attitudes towards her advantage(in South Carolina and so on). If she were to attempt to win the nomination on the back of racism, it would fuck the Democratic party for a generation as there would be a massive backlash and doom Democratic races in many states.
Martin
Oh bullshit. Sure the campaign had problems but after Iowa Clinton didn’t want to campaign in caucus states because she thought they were unfair. The staff tried to turn her around on that because of how the delegates work, but Clinton skipped every single caucus state other than Nevada (which she had already started) and a brief appearance in Maine.
The staff screwed up but the Clintons also want to hear what they want to hear. It’s well documented that Hillary didn’t pay close attention to the workings of the campaign. Staff can’t seem to get she or Bill to listen when they have to deliver difficult news. And the very decision to hire Penn and Co. was a terrible decision.
Those are candidate problems. She made it this far in spite of all of that which does show that she’s not undeserving, but she has many of the same character flaws as Bush when it comes to being insulated from the bad news, pushing loyalty over competence, and so on.
The Other Steve
I do not see how caucuses are unfair.
It seems to me that winning a caucus depends on the qualities of a candidate. How enthusiastic are the supporters, how well liked and respected the candidate is and so on.
Primaries are won based largely on name recognition.
It seems to me that Hillary recognized that she’s not well liked, but she has big name recognition and used that calculus to pick and choose where to compete.
ThymeZone
She hasn’t any such hope. The only thing that can give it to her now is an Obama catastrophe, and that hasn’t happened, nor has anything even close to it happened despite the Chicken Little squawking one hears around here.
Obama is going to be nominated, and give the chance to campaign on the big stage — against a totally inept and probably incompetant opponent — win the election.
See the adjacent McCain thread. The sooner we have a settled nominee the sooner we can begin to shovel the dirt in on the casket of John McCain.
myiq2xu
I guess they don’t have television/radio/newspapers/internet in the big states so they never heard of this Obama guy.
Why? She doesn’t have a dog in that fight.
She tried to intentionally piss off black voters in a state where over half of the registered Democrats are black?
Perry Como
Damn, you beat me to it. Richardson is the Reconquista Manchurian Candidate!!!!111oneeleven
TenguPhule
Is it September Yet?
Martin
It doesn’t matter whether they are or aren’t. What matters is that when you have to win caucuses to win the nomination, you can’t decide to take your ball and go home. We can’t have a candidate in the general election deciding that Diebold voting machines are unfair and refusing to campaign in Missouri or some shit. Like it or not, the candidates had to win primaries, caucuses, and weird-ass hybrid shit in between. They had to deal with crossover voters, blizzards, double bubble ballots and flooding. They had states receptive to and hostile to Democrats, to whites, to women, to Clinton and to Obama. But you have to win in spite of all that shit. ‘It’s not fair’ doesn’t cut it.
myiq2xu
I’ve been waiting 3 1/2 years for this election, and now I can’t wait for it to be over.
daryljhusseinfontaine
Michael Weiner Savage’s head writer, ladies and gentlemen. :D
Andrew
Except that you want your candidate to prolong the primary for as long as possible.
ThymeZone
We can’t wait for it to be over for you, either.
So we’re on the same page!
Martin
Agreed. The reason she did better in big states is that she cared enough about big states to campaign there. When she campaigns in a state, it’s a close fight. When she doesn’t, Obama generally thrashes her. Campaigning strongly benefits him in winning over new voters and she has to be present to counter that. It’s reasonable to assume that the general will work somewhat the same way with independents. Smaller population and in some cases not enough to win the state over, but it’s a good strategy.
Actually, she does. So long as the media is vomiting race on everything, Clinton is getting no coverage. She can’t make up ground if she’s invisible. She needs to end that news cycle as much as Obama does.
Intentionally? No. Not there or before. Those were stupid, but not intentional. Ferraro was intentional. The timing and the response point to it being such. Granted, Clinton had little to lose with the black community by then anyway.
over_educated
So what? Even losing MA and CA Obama managed to gain an insurmountable delgate. And that Ted Kennedy endorsement WAS huge, I think it was what pushed Obama into being a viable candidate.
So had Richardson sided with Hillary you wouldn’t have been all over the board declaring it was “ominous news” and that it was proof that “Superdelegates saw the truth and were breaking for Hillary?” Right….
The Other Steve
I doubt it was purposeful. Many of these racial stereotypes are just embedded in our social norms and a careless mouth can get you in trouble.
The Other Steve
I don’t think Ferraro was intentional.
I think Ferraro is just that stupid. She’s still trying to beat that horse. She just did another interview a few days ago where she accused the Obama guys of being racist.
John S.
Hey, remember that poll you were touting the other day from here in Florida?
Despite all that news on the television/radio/newspapers/internet, the majority of voters still didn’t seem to know what was going on. So perhaps it’s a little silly to suggest that because television/radio/newspapers/internet exist that the general population actually follows politics enough to know what is actually going on.
Martin
Clinton out of money?
Ferraro’s comments were timed to lead the media into a narrative on race. They were timed to the MS election which would show a split across race lines to support her assertion and they were timed to get Wright promoted from Hannity to ABC. The big media outlets weren’t about to follow Hannity into the abyss by accusing a prominent religious leader of being a racist without someone pulling the trigger for them, which is what Ferrarro did.
And if Ferraro is that stupid, why the slow-ass response from Clinton? No, the remaining races favor pushing white voters to Clinton. Maybe Ferraro went rogue on this with the staff, but it wasn’t accidental.
myiq2xu
Shorter John S.: vote 4 obama or ur stoopid
zzyzx
I’ve been watching the whole speech. Obama’s been a lot more fired up than I’ve seen him in a while. He’s been drifting a little bit since Wisconsin. The Speech (TM) was the first risky thing he’s done since he pretty much assumed that he had things locked up. Wright was a bit of a scare and now he’s fighting again.
Look out McCain. If Obama can keep this up, you’re doomed.
maggie
When Gov. Richardson was on cnn he told Wolf Blitzer he has to go with the voice of the people what happened?
Why did The Gov. send the state troopers to stop the Indians from going on their own land in Feb 2008That was illegal now this man goes out to endorse some one who listen to hateful remarks about our country
myiq2xu
He got a better offer from Obama
myiq2xu
Where’s the outrage?
DM
That’s because they’re fucking morons, not because Clinton really won. Day-after results mean next to nothing when the votes aren’t done being tallied until long after the MSN moves on to the next election.
Obama won Texas and, in the words of many a Clintonista, “get over it”.
The Other Steve
Apparently of the $35 million she supposedly raised, the majority of it was general election contributions.
She still runs old-school fundraisers, relying upon millionaires to give her $2300 checks.
The Other Steve
Wasn’t New Mexico tied?
p.lukasiak
dslak, all you need to do to understand what I’m saying is to compare the results from New Jersey and Tennessee to those from Maryland and Virginia (respectively). The MD and VA contests took place one week after NJ and TN — yet the outcomes were radically different. Hillary Clinton did not suffer a “Wright scandal” in the interim, nor did Obama being changing water into wine, so the answer must lie somewhere other than with the candidates themselves.
That’s not spin, its just cold hard fact. The Obama team has a much better ground game in general (and this is especially true in the caucus states — IMHO, the only reason Obama didn’t win in Nevada is that he didn’t make an effort there until too late, because he didn’t know he had a very good shot there until he got the Hotel Workers Union endorsement), and takes advantage of grassroots organizing in ways that the Clinton campaign has yet to match.
And while I understand the prospective spin of “not enough time to overcome the Wright debacle”, the Clinton campaign did get her act together in the month after ST, and won in Texas and Ohio as a result. Its a lot easier to fix a campaign in a relatively short period of time than it is to change people’s perceptions of a candidate in that same period (this is one of the reasons Clinton pretty much ignored a whole bunch of states on ST — she knew that she had work to do on changing her image in the states that would be key in November, and that was another focus of her campaign.)
Martin
Watch the full videos, please. Wright didn’t damn America (only God can bless or damn something). He said that God couldn’t bless a nation that continues to support oppression of its people in various ways and commit acts that the Bible says are wrong. It was a warning that if America wants to remain a great nation it needs to do better and pointed out that at times we do better (Clinton) than other times (Bush).
Ironically, the thing you mention about refusing to allow people to go on their own land is PRECISELY the thing that Wright was referring to in that sermon. Go watch it. It’s about 9 minutes long.
p.lukasiak
well, she has to say something — not necessarily “negate the Wright stuff”, just say enough to meet the demand that she say something.
I mean, if I were her I’d say something along the lines of “I don’t think that we should be questioning any candidates religious beliefs or affiliations, regardless of whether its me, or Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, or John McCain or Barack Obama. This campaign should be focussed on the issues, and our records on those issues, and our plans to deal with those issues, and who is best prepared in terms of both judgement and experience, to fix what George W. Bush has broken.”
p.lukasiak
more media idiocy. New Mexico held a primary election, not a caucus.
Perry Como
I can’t help but notice now a black guy and a Mexican are asking us for change. Dey took ur jobs!
over_educated
Outrage over what? Did Hillary Clinton take the lead in the popular vote and pledged delegate tally and I am unaware?
The issue isn’t whether Superdelegates vote against the state they carry, the issue is if they in aggregate overturn the will of the electorate.
Martin
It was a caucus, dipshit.
It might have looked like a primary, but because it wasn’t on the day the state selected but on a date selected by the party, it’s a caucus. Even the Democratic party calls it a caucus.
Martin
It was a caucus, dipshit.
It might have looked like a primary, but because it wasn’t on the day the state selected but on a date selected by the party, it’s a caucus. Even the Democratic party calls it a caucus. The primary is on June 3 which is when the Republicans vote.
Steve V
I think Edwards’ silence comes from a lack of stones, not any brilliant scheme. The lefty blogosphere thought he magically grew a pair during this campaign, but I always doubted.
myiq2xu
Did Gore lose because Bush was a better candidate? Or did he lose because Bush ran a better campaign?
I think Hillary has run a poor campaign, spending too much money for too little. I blame much of that on her campaign staff, although unlike some I don’t feel any loathing for Mark Penn.
Obama on the other hand has run an excellent campaign, at least until recently. But I don’t consider him a better candidate.
Luck, good or bad, plays a part. In 1988 Mario Cuomo gave a stirring speech at the Democratic convention that made him an early favorite for 1992.
But then on August 2, 1990 Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. George H. W. Bush led a coalition that drove the Iraqis out, and as a consequence Bush was enormously popular with less than a year to go before the 1992 primary season.
Cuomo decided not to run for what many saw as a symbolic candidacy opposing Bush’s virtually certain reelection. As a result, the governor of Arkansas was able to win the nomination and due to the unexpected free-fall of Bush’s approval ratings and the third-party candidacy of Ross Perot, Clinton won.
myiq2xu
So the automatic delegates (the proper term) from California, NY, Ohio, New Jersey, etc., should ignore their constituents and base their votes on what the people in other states decide? What about Texas, where Hillary got the popular vote but Obama got the most delegates?
tBone
One of these things is not like the other, Paul. And spare me the “day-after headlines” bullshit, unless you have a list of all of President Dewey’s accomplishments to share.
tBone
Nice job. You just gave Harold Ickes a boner.
Sasha
I can’t comment on Edwards, but give Gore a break. More than anyone, he’s in a position to really lord it over everyone about being THE kingmaker but he hasn’t. And God forbid that this whole kerfluffle goes to the convention, Gore would be very useful as an “honest broker” to sort everything out.
Yeah, it sucks he hasn’t endorsed yet, but he hasn’t been a dick.
John S.
What is this, your D-game?
Or has the fact that Hillary is a dead woman walking fried your brain for good?
Sheesh.