Reply #41: I used to believe that. I don't think that's the answer. [View All]

I think you will find the answer by following the money in the fund raising results announced today. Let's recap what we know:

1) The nomination numbers are overwhelming. Obama already has locked up the majority of pledged delegates, and only needs about 25 more superdelegates to lock up the nomination outright, assuming a likely split of the remaining three contests. She is not running to win the nomination according to the rules.

2) She seems determined to screw up the convention. Most people attribute this to blind ambition, but I no longer believe that is the explanation. Nobody can be that blind. Even if she were able to grab the nomination somehow, she would be trounced in the general election because a) she can't raise enough money, b) 90% of the Republicans have despised her for decades, and c) a big percentage of the Democrats are now coming to that same place. She must understand that and she also understands the odds of stealing the nomination are practically zero, so that is not her purpose.

3) That leads to a very logical conclusion that what she wants to do is really fuck up Obama's changes, but leave herself in the "I told you so" position.

That is logical, but I think it is wrong. Here's why. If she did that, all the insiders would see through that. And she would be held in the same esteem the Party has for Ralph Nader. Actually, her treason would be far worse than Nader's, because this election is highly winnable -- our best chance for a major realignment for the past 30 years, and maybe for the next 20. People have a long memory of that. Combine that with the fact that she is not getting any younger, and I just don't see 2012 as the goal here. It may be a "back of the mind" thing, but I don't see it explaining her actions.

After all, we all know it is bound to be a very tough fight for Obama against the GOP Swift Boaters anyway. If she really wanted to posture for 2012, she would be far more statesman-like and gracious in her public stance, and the Clinton posse would be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo Obama's run. That would leave her in a very strong position to pick up the pieces if Obama failed.

What she is doing works AGAINST a 2012 run. If 2012 were the goal, she'd be playing it differently.

So what is she up to then?

It isn't really that complicated. It doesn't require a psychoanalyst. It is just about money. We know money means a lot to the Clintons. While Jimmy Carter and Al Gore have devoted themselves to selfless causes, Bill was out grabbing as much money as he possibly could on the legal-bribe-for-influence circuit, also known as the speaking circuit. If you follow that money, I expect you will find Bill has been getting his "speaker fees" from mostly the same forces that have funded GHW Bush. With the Clintons, money triumphs over principle. They rarely demonstrated much principle while in office, and even less out of office.

It is not complicated. Hillary today announced results that she compiled a STAGGERING amount of campaign debt in April. On the surface, that appears completely irrational. Why would a candidate do that in the very month when the numbers became impossible? It makes no sense to spend another $30M and go another $10M in debt when you know that the expenditure cannot possibly get you enough electors to win the nomination? If she had done this in the 30 days after Super Tuesday, that would be very rational. But doing it in April makes no sense whatsoever if the motive is to gain the nomination, or even to set up for 2012.

So how could that behavior make any sense? Simple. It isn't her money. She has assurances that the debt will be taken care of. She and Bill will find themselves receiving another $100,000,000 in laundered money, which is plenty to retire the campaign debt and still be $70M ahead. Would you sell your soul for $70M?

Would Hillary? Yes, I believe she would, and she has. It is no coincidence that the very month when this bizarre spending frenzy fired up, she was on air with Limbaugh, had private meetings with Scaife, and was a guest on Faux. That is what is happening here, folks. I know it is hard to accept that a person is not who we thought she was, but the facts tell the story. Bill was able to "earn" the $100,000,000 because his backers assumed there was a good chance that Hillary would be President and then their "generosity" would be repaid hundreds of times over. Now that it is clear the Hillary will never be President, Bill's stock as a "valued speak" is in the tank. There simply isn't another $100,000,000 in the cards for Bill. So Hillary has cut her own deal.

Hillary gets no political benefit from the course she is on. Quite the opposite. She is ruined for the rest of her life as a national politician. But she gets more wealth then she ever dreamed of. And the Scaife operation DOES get something of great benefit to them. Hillary gives them a very real shot at surviving the Bush meltdown and installing another friendly puppet in office in John McCain. $100,000,000 to these guys is nothing at all. So both Scaife and Hillary end up with something they value, and neither had to give up much in return. Scaife's mob had to give up what was pocket change for them, and Hillary had to give up her integrity. They both look upon this as a winning trade.