The Win-Win-Lose Scenario for Hillary
It wasn’t enough that Bam halved Clinton’s lead in California, or that he has won 15 states to her 10 (Michigan and Florida not included), or that he has won eight of those states by more than 60 percent while she has only won one of hers by that margin, or that he won in nine red states while she won in five: Hillary Clinton won yesterday.
Here is how I see she wins the nomination, a nomination DNC Chairman Howard Dean wants decided sooner rather than later, within the next few months rather than waiting for the convention at the end of August. The same forces that some on these pages say will corrupt Obama—-the DLC, the money-changers in the Potomac Temple, and the power-brokers on K-Street—-will form a cabal with the mislabeled “super delegates” (they see themselves as the “superior” delegates), drawn from many of these same groups and other Clinton 1 loyalists, to give her the nomination. This win is further guaranteed because of Hillary Rules. She was the only candidate who filed in Michigan and Florida against the rules of the Democratic Party and the rules the other candidates agreed to play by. And having won both states, uncontested, she will now make sure that those delegations are seated and counted by a Credentials Committee made up mostly of her supporters. Does this sound familiar, reminiscent of how we got George Bush in the first place back in 2000?
But she looses the election to McCain in another red-state/blue-state cliff hanger. Here is why, in my judgment. Hillary’s core voters, as she demonstrated again yesterday, are older, poorer, less educated, Hispanic, and women. Unlike Obama she does not attract younger voters, Blacks, white males, better educated or independents. As I see it right now, the younger voters will be disillusioned and see politics as usual with Obama out of the race and probably stay home on election day or vote for an independent, if there is one. Blacks will vote for Clinton reluctantly, but many may not show up because of what the Slick One did to their Kid. And Independents, approximately 30 percent of all voters, will flock to McCain, a group that has always been his base of support, going back to 2000.
A Clinton/Obama Ticket: To Max’s post below, and the expressed hopes of some of you itching for a Clinton/Obama ticket, as I have said before, I don’t see that happening. However, I am retinking my position. I am starting to think this may be possible if there is a private deal that Hillary will only run for one term, not likely, but possible, and that she will closet Bill Clinton for the general election and marginalize him in her administration. Such a deal, private or otherwise, would give Obama the respect and visibility he has earned and enable him to serve as Vice-President on the platform he has built, not serve as some marketing director the Clintons think of him as. Such a deal, while not necessarily made public, would be transparent immediately as Bill Clinton goes back to New York, back to his former president and foundation roles.
Posted: February 6th, 2008 under Uncategorized.
Comments: 17
Comments
Comment from timr
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:00 am
Obama IMO will never agree to run as Clinton’s VP. Why? because of Bill, and because he does not want to. He doesn’t really like Billery, and I believe that this will not happen. What if St John does win the repig nomination early? So what. If the Dem nomination goes to the convention, that would, I think, be a good thing, because it will keep the dems first in the news for months, while St. John, because he has already won, becomes yesterdays news. Balance, repigs have less money, dems get lots of free stories in news, repigs lose, dems win.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:08 am
Howard Dean is getting all worked up about this one. He claims that the Dems will not have enough time to run an effective campaign if this is not “settled” before the convention, leaving them with about 8 weeks to do so. But you have raised an interesting notion here. Waiting also means that the Pugs can’t start beating up on Hillary or Bam.
Comment from Blackdogred
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:55 am
Clintobama is still a real possibility, Obamahillary, no.
Brokered convention? Gorebama?
Comment from timr
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:57 am
Josh, this chart from Crooks & Liars is very interesting. Click on each state to get the numbers. Something that really jumped out at me was the final totals for each side in each state. Take Ca as an example. With over 95% of votes counted, looks like the dems got over 1 million more people voting for them than the repigs did. This trend seems to hold across all of the states.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/05/spokesuper-tuesday-open-thread/
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:06 am
Anybody have any ideas on how Gore would wrangle this one? Who could pull this off on Gore’s behalf? Carter? George Mitchell? Bob Graham of Florida (that would be an interesting irony)? Howard Dean?
The Clintons would fight it, but Obama might go along with this sooner rather than later. Obama has the most to gain here, I think.
Comment from timr
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:16 am
Josh, except for Az, the TOTAL number of voters for each side shows dems up, in Ca(update) the difference is almost 2 million voters, in most of the other states, it is 25 to 50% more voters for dems over repigs.
Re your reply to me. If the fight lasts until the convention, the dems not only get news stories(free publicity) but also get rising excitement every day, the dem convention could become the most watched program in the US. and the repigs will have no way to counter it, because st john is the winner earlier. So the repig convention has no surprises and limited energy, while the dems have a huge amount of energy and the big “MO” coming out of the convention with a short time frame so they can build on it. Remember, the typical american does not have a very long attention span, so the more that you have all the MSM going on about the dem contest, the better. Remember how bad it was in 04? The excitment generated for the convention could bring as many viewers as the super bowl(or maybe half, I don’t want to get carried away) Sounds to me as if Dean is getting advice on how to lose with a winning hand. Shrum & company giving him advice? If so he should do the exact opposite.
My kids, ages 21 to 32, are all very excited about this election. Never heard them even a tiny bit interested before. So lets not let Dr Dean screw this up. A convention fight would be the best thing for the party. Or are we just going to fold and walk away. Its all up to the party bosses, but I say, GO FOR IT. fight all the way.
Comment from Blackdogred
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:30 am
I vaguely remember a rumor that Harry Reid went to HRC and said he’d step aside as Majority Leader and assure HRC she’d get it if she’d not run for potus. I have no idea whether that was apocryphal or not.
Wonder if Gore offered HRC Sec of State (or something juicy) in a brokered convention to get her to sign on she would. I doubt it.
Fun speculation? Sure! She’s going to be the nominee no matter how much blood she has to shed to get it.
Comment from Sasha
Time: February 6, 2008, 11:35 am
Who on earth would want such a ticket? It is madness. Really, what fantasy island are folks on with this speculation? Gore would be nuts to come off of his pedestal and dirty his hands with any of this.
Comment from Blackdogred
Time: February 6, 2008, 12:05 pm
C’mon. S’fun to recklessly speculate.
Hmmm. Pedestal or Emperor of the Known Universe? S’not like he hasn’t been running for preznit since 1984 or anything.
Clinton INC will cheat, maim, and destroy the party before he isn’t re-elected. Poke.
Comment from Sasha
Time: February 6, 2008, 4:18 pm
Actually the new news changes the picture considerably. We now know that Clinton INC had to “loan” the campaign $5 million of their own money last month, a month in which Obama outdrew them in contributions three to one. I’m thinking we may not get to the convention. Unless, of course, she wants to make a deal with Mittens. (Poke yerself.)
Comment from Blackdogred
Time: February 6, 2008, 4:35 pm
It’ll be interesting to see the ratio of Obama to HRC ads in the Baltimore/Washington media over the next week.
Sure hope Bill isn’t dipping into his charity to fund his/her race, but I guarantee if she ends up winning they’ll certainly be accused of it.
As for the machine, now that they’re spending their own money, they really aren’t going to give up.
Or Obama either, to be fair.
Comment from Nosebetter
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:14 pm
Josh: The republicans have a fractured party and know they are in trouble even when functioning as one unit. McCain doesn’t want to be in the spotlight while he pulls the party together. Besides, several more months of infighting would tire the American people. The republicans will pull the party together, come out refreshed, and be a force to be reckoned with.
When Obama was trailing last Fall, people kept telling him to take the gloves off and go negative on Hillary because it would be his only chance. He even got that advice from this very website. He did go negative and moved up with her in polls and elections. Whoever is behind (whether Hillary or Obama) will go negative. It happens every election because it is effective and the person who is behind has nothing to lose. If this goes on all Summer, the American people
will be bored with the whole thing. Meanwhile, the republicans come out all refreshed.
Comment from suzanne
Time: February 6, 2008, 10:52 pm
Is anyone else offended by the line “older, poorer, less educated, hispanic and women”? Based on some of the women who have openly supported Hillary (Maya Angelou, Gloria Steinem, Janet Reno, Sen Patty Murray etc.), I think it’s safe to say that a large percentage of her electorate are highly educated - which makes your deduction that her voters are less educated rather moot. Is is just me or is the writer a misogynist wanker?
Comment from Amos N. Handy
Time: February 7, 2008, 12:42 am
He only says things he wants to hear Suzzane, he’s our projectionist, as for hating women, we know he has a huge dislike for Hillary. As to the other matter, “it beats me”, no pun intended.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: February 7, 2008, 7:58 am
Suzanne, these are not categories that I invented. These are standard demographic categories that everyone is using. It is also true that there are voters in all these categories that vote for the other candidate. For example, about 20 percent of Blacks voted for Hillary on Tuesday, but that is not considered one of her core voting blocs since 80 percent voted for Obama.
It also happens that Maya Angelou fits four categories: women, old, black, well educated. Gloria Steinem and Janet Reno are not exactly spring chickens.
More white males voted for Edwards than either Clinton or Obama, both of whom attract white males. But with Edwards out of the race, Obama is getting more white males than Hillary, a voting bloc the Republicans usually carry.
Too bad there isn’t a voting block for name callers. Maybe you could start one.
Comment from Amos N. Handy
Time: February 7, 2008, 11:16 am
How in the hell do you know who voted for who, you, or the media for that matter? If anyone were to ask me who I voted for, the answer will always be, ” none of your bloody business “. If you have a fail proof method of knowing who a person casts a ballot in favor of, please inform us.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: February 7, 2008, 11:54 am
Amos, if you don’t believe in exit polls, then nothing I can say will make a difference. Regardless of your personal disbelief in exit polls and my belief in exit polls, I can guarantee you that all the candidates, Hillary included, are making major investments in the results of these polls and adjusting their strategies accordingly. Hillary’s chief strategist, Mark Penn lives on this stuff, and Hillary had to dip into her own account to continue to pay him for his analysis and change in strategy based on these exit polls.
Write a comment