Clinton tries to capitalize on Pennsylvania win
Hillary Clinton may have saved her presidential bid with her big win in Pennsylvania, but she also earned the enmity of her home-state newspaper -- which also happens to set the political agenda for much of the media -- for how she conducted her campaign.
The New York Times, which had endorsed Clinton over Barack Obama, slammed her today in an editorial: "It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election. If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction.
The Times specifically cited a last-minute ad that featured images of Osama bin Laden and suggested that only she -- not Obama -- was tough enough to handle crises as president. "On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11," the editorial said.
In the post-primary spin, meanwhile, Clinton went on the morning shows today to argue that her victory -- the latest in a swing state crucial in November -- shows she would be the stronger nominee. "The fair question is if you can't win the states we have to win in the fall maybe that says something about your general election appeal," Clinton told CNN.
But she didn't close the gap that much in delegates. Heading into Pennsylvania, Obama led by about 140. Clinton won at least 80 of the 158 delegates up for grabs Tuesday, while Obama won at least 66, with 12 still to be awarded, according to an analysis of election returns by The Associated Press.
Her campaign, however, claimed that her victory margin in Pennsylvania puts her ahead of Obama in total popular vote through all the primaries and caucuses -- but that is only if the disputed primaries in Florida and Michigan are counted.
And while that is Clinton's latest argument to superdelegates, the elected officials and party leaders who will almost certainly determine the nominee, the only one to declare his allegiance since the primary went for Obama.
Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry endorsed Obama, calling him an inspirational leader who can unite the country.
"I believe Senator Obama is uniquely positioned to unite our nation and move beyond the divisiveness and partisan skirmishes that too often characterize politics as usual in Washington," Henry said in a statement issued by the Obama campaign.
Clinton may be able to sucker stupid people into voting for her, but luckily the Superdelegates know what any smart person knows: with Clinton on the top of the ticket, the part is doomed for decades to come as they lose the black vote and the next generation of voters.
Obama will enhance downticket candidates' chances of winning, senate and house seats across the country, by using his vast ground game and intense fund-raising ability. With major Democratic gains in November, the party is poised to win not only Supreme Court appointments, but also will be in greater control of redistricting in 2010. The Supers are not stupid, and will not be hoodwinked by Clintons "big state" nonsense. Obama will not lose CA, MA, NY, etc.
President Bill Clinton redefined 'sex' and whether IS means is. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is trying to define 'win' and the rules of the DNC. So lets play by the DNC rather than Clinton-rules and what the facts are:
1. Sen. Barack Obama STILLs has more pledged delegates;
2. Sen. Obama still has won more states (30-14);
3. Sen. Obama still leads in the popular vote;
4. Sen Obama has closed the gap in superdelegates (and now ADD Oklahoma Governor); Hillary leads by 23. Since Super Tuesday over 80 have joined Sen. Obama and only 5 or 6 have joined Sen. Clinton.
5. Sen Obama and has proven himself to be a fundraising genius.
6. On top of all of that, he has inspired a new generation of democratic voters and reconfigured the electoral and electorate maps.
By any rational fair measure (or the math if you will) , and beyond the spin, Sen. Obama is well on his way to securing the nomination for the Democratic Party, despite the spin that only big states or late voting states should count and trump all other states. The NYT's has buyer's remorse.
As far as I am concerned, there is no difinitive candidate. Each lacks the majority, to claim victory. This needs to be played out with discretion. Each candidate needs to stay on task, address issues, convince the populace that the CHANGE we want is attainable. I believe that either candidate represents significant change. I admire each of their intellect.
Super delagates will assess the significance of Big States vs. incremental popular votes.
For my part, I want someone strong. Someone who is knowledgable about the process in Congress, someone who can approach crisis with logic and drive without condesending to special interests.
IT'S TIME AMERICA:
It’s time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.
Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have defeated her. And proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources. In all honesty. I felt some of that too.
But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.
Hillary Clinton say’s that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.
Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton’s have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.
If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.
Sincerely
Jacksmith... Working Class :-)
HILLARY CLINTON: LIAR
She repeatedly TOLD BOSNIA TRUSTING her WOMEN and WHITE VOTERS are so FOOLS.
BILL CLINTON: LIAR
He took VOTH on BIBLE and said "I DID NOT HAVE S3X WITH MONICA"
BILL CLINTON, THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT, repeatedly discouraged Black attraction towards HILLARY so he gets bigger WHITE group which is now more bigger due to Anti-BUSH.
Hillary VOTED for IRAQ WAR.
BILL crafted NAFTA
Hillary still has PENN to workout COLUMBIA
CHELSEY says "NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS"
Hillary: "I am honored to be with Obama"
Next day: "Shame on you Obama"
Hillary: "YES,YES,YES, Obama is electable"
Next day: Obama is not electable.
Hillary will support IRAN WAR (possibly nuclear)
Hillary is first ever known Person to have so much ANTI and HATE.
She manipulated DEBATES.
She questioned Why she gets the questions all the time like toddler. Is SHE READY?
Her 3AM AD: Her maturity? If a President really decides at 3AM (like when they are with Monica), America is dead meat.
The Superdelegates should and will not have any significance whatsoever with this election!!! When Obama wins the popular vote along with the delegates, it is over!!! This, of course, will not count the Michigan or Florida delegations. They should have thought of the rules first. Just like law-abiding citizens follow the laws, even if they don't like them. It can't be made any more simplier than that, but of course, the Clintons will try any thing-immoral or not!!!
TFFrost
I think that the main issue is that Obama doesn't have any plans for the future. He says he will unite the people, but what people is he referring to? The people who don't vote, thus are not interested in their future. The people who vote for him? what people is he referring to? What is his stance on healthcare, social security, etc? He is easy to like because he doesn't present any views at all. One can't argue with someone with no views, right? I don't believe in all that Hillary believes in but when given the choice, I do know who the stronger candidate is and it's Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Elizabeth,
You too are ignorant. Barack has done nothing but talk about issues but all you do is parrot what someone else tells you.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com
browse this blog
by categoryINside Boston.com