Even with Hillary's blow-out win in West Virginia and the amazing Democratic victory in Mississippi, for me tonight's going to be about Terry McAuliffe's tour de force moment when he turned projectile nonsense into something approaching the sublime ...
(
)Posted May 14th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Following up on the
last item, by any realistic measure, Hillary Clinton’s landslide victory in West Virginia, while impressive, has not changed any of the metrics of the Democratic race. Barack Obama currently leads in pledged delegates, superdelegates, popular votes, states won, fundraising, and poll numbers. Clinton won big in a state where she was expected to win big, but when it comes to the enormous deficit she’s facing, last night’s gains barely dented Obama’s lead.
<...>
Campaign hyperbole notwithstanding, Clinton’s
pitch in Charleston suggested she’s going to do everything possible to drag this process out as long as she can.
She started with a fundraising pitch…
“Now, tonight, tonight, I need your help to continue this journey. We are in the homestretch. There are only three weeks left in the final contests. And your support can make the difference between winning and losing. So I hope you’ll go to HillaryClinton.com and support our campaign.”
…and then moved the goalposts…
“his race isn’t over yet. Neither of us has the total delegates it takes to win. And both Senator Obama and I believe that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated. I believe we should honor the votes cast by 2.3 million people in those states and seat all of their delegates. Under the rules of our party, when you include all 50 states, the number of delegates needed to win is 2,209, and neither of us has reached that threshold yet.”
…and then went after Obama on electability.
“I deeply admire Senator Obama, but I believe our case — a case West Virginia has helped to make — our case is stronger. Together, we have won millions and millions of votes. By the time tonight is over, probably 17 million, close to it.”
These are not the words of a candidate looking for a soft landing.
Whether Clinton’s pitch is compelling or not, it’s worth taking a moment to consider precisely the kind of odds she’s up against. In addition to trailing in every metric, Clinton
does not have a realistic road to the nomination.
<...>
Clinton’s decision to ignore the landscape and keep fighting isn’t helping. It’s not helping her; it’s not helping the party.
In my heart of hearts, I genuinely don’t believe Clinton is on some kind of vanity exercise, or trying to sabotage Obama. My sense is that Clinton is absolutely convinced that she can win in November and Obama can’t, and that by staying in, she might convince others to feel the same way. Clinton, in other words, believes she should save the party from itself.
If uncommitted superdelegates disagree, they can end the contest today.
No it's arrogance, vanity and knowing in her heart of hearts that a Democrat, Obama, will be the next president.
Updated to add this from Hillary's site:
Bill Clinton did not predict Hillary would win 80% of the vote in West Virginia. He said that even if Hillary won 80% of the vote, it wouldn't make a difference
if only 100,000 people voted:
Last week President Bill Clinton told a campaign crowd that ”all this stuff you are hearing about is an attempt to discourage you. That's what this is, pure and simple, hoping, 'Well, Hillary can get 80 percent of the vote in West Virginia', and if only 100,000 people show up it is not enough. But if 600,000 people show up, and you say, 'We want a president', then you will see the earth move."
So the votes don't count unless they help Hillary win? Why is this important for her campaign to point out?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
