Painful Things Hillary Clinton Knows — Or Should Know

[BumRushDaShow]

From "The Page" by Mark Halperin | Sunday, March 23, 2008

http://thepage.time.com/halperins-take-painful-things-hillary-clinton-knows-%E2%80%94-or-should-know/

1. She can’t win the nomination without overturning the will of the elected delegates, which will alienate many Democrats.

2. She can’t win the nomination without a bloody convention battle — after which, even if she won, history and many Democrats would cast her as a villain.

3. Catching up in the popular vote is not out of the question — but without re-votes in Florida and Michigan it will be almost as impossible as catching up in elected delegates.

4. Nancy Pelosi and other leading members of Congress don’t think she can win and want her to give up. Same with superdelegate-to-the-stars Donna Brazile.

And there's more where that came from at the link...

Damn... I think this about sums it up! This needs to be sent to the SDs.

[rug]

1. Shall we cancel the next 10 primaries then?

[0007]

3. In a pigs big fat ass!

[cd3dem]

40. I have seen the train wreck of BO's campaign coming and it is deadly!

Hillary needs to stay in this thing so when people get off the sugar buzz of the kool-aid they have someone to beat McCain with!

[iamjoy]

4. Would Be No Different Than 2004, or 2000

The nominee was clearly decided before more than half the states had voted.

I agree with you, it sucks. Under our current messed up primary system, there is no way to avoid meaningless vote in most of the states.

BUT, I don't necessarily think Hillary Clinton should drop out until after either every state has voted or it gets to the point that even if she won every delegate in the remaining states it wouldn't be enough. Of course, SuperDelegates make that calculation hairy.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. It depends on whether a certain candidate thinks they count.

Certainly North Carolina won't count because there are "too many blacks".
Montana won't count because it's an "open primary".
Indiana won't count because that's an "open primary" too.
West Virginia has a Rash Limpball's dream of anything goes in the Dem primary, so that can't possibly count.
Puerto Rico changed from the non-counting caucus to an equally non-counting "open primary".

Geez... I've just eliminated 5 contests right there, so what's the big deal? :eyes:

[rug]

9. Why is it the Obama supporters calling for an end to the primaries?

[BumRushDaShow]

11. When Huckster dropped out, did the repuke primaries "end"?

Of course not. :eyes:

The elections continue until they are done. But without the tearing down of the party in a futile effort to cheat and steal the nomination. Even Romney had the sense to step aside for the good of the GOP.

[rug]

16. Wrong answer. Sounds like it is you who thinks those states don't count at this point.

[BumRushDaShow]

19. Sorry right answer.

The Clinton campaign, most notably through their toxic mouthpiece Mark Penn, has declared all things "caucus" or "too black" or "open primary where cross-over repukes would support Obama (not even considering them going the other way)", and other such nonsense as "not counting" or inherently unfair.



What was the excuse for pooh-poohing South Carolina? Or Virginia or Maryland or Idaho or Colorado or Utah or Washington state or North Dakota or Maine or even Iowa?

It boggles the mind. :eyes:

[rug]

22. You're mired in the past. There are 10 elections in front of you. Here's the 26% lead link.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/pennsylvania.html

[BumRushDaShow]

25. No, Mark Penn and the Clinton campaign clings to the past

which is why change is needed.

Thank you for your link. Here is another that contradicts it:

http://www.pollster.com/08-PA-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

The next 10 contests will not be won by Clinton solely with >60% of the vote. This is something that her supporters refuse to deal with.

[rug]

28. And all those polls show him down by double digits.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. And rising.

He is just now setting up shop in this state and only started running ads last week. The local office near me just had a grand opening yesterday.

The pattern is the same in almost every state he has been competitive in with Mrs. Clinton. It starts out with double-digit deficits and then the deficit narrows. Texas is a big example.

There are 4 weeks to go. Alot can happen during this time. Clinton is expecting Fast Eddie to run her ground game but ironically, the very people who put Rendell in office over repuke candidates who had the support of the rest of the state, are the people in Obama's best areas - the big cities, most notably Philadelphia.

[rug]

37. Oh yes, Obama's going to win Pennsylvania.

Maybe you should say Gobama louder.

[BumRushDaShow]

38. Still 4 weeks to go.

I don't profess to have a crystal ball. ;)

[wileedog]

20. You don't think anyone does, only SDs should decide

This is not a winning argument for you, I would find another tack.

[Lucky 13]

7. The last few elections haven't needed the other 10 primaries....

... because the candidate behind in the polls has been astute enough to recognize that they have no shot and have graciously dropped out for the good of the party. Hillary doesn't give a damn about the party. It's all about her and she will burn everything and everyone down around her to get the nomination. Proof that she ain't "the one".

She failed the King Solomon test. Willing to cut the Democratic Baby in half for her own selfishness.

[wileedog]

8. Why not?

If Hillary's can only win by tossing out the results anyway and having party insiders decide the election, what purpose exactly are they serving?

What purpose did the first 40 serve in that cirumstance?

[rug]

10. Considering Obama's down by 26% in PA and needs SDs to win, that's disingenuous.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Link to that figure?

Clinton would need to win > 60 - 65% of ALL the REST of the contests to even catch up. She has only won one state by anywhere near that. And forget FL & MI. Both states have essentially given up having a do-over.

[rug]

17. How does that show Obama gets 2024 without SDs?

[wileedog]

18. How does she get them without throwing out the entire election?

I can't believe you are the same people (maybe not you personally) who are whining about "disenfranchising" voters in MI and FL in one breath and then wanting to toss aside the ENTIRE election with the next.

So disenfranchising 2 states is a mortal sin sure to lose us the election, but disenfranchising EVERYONE is sure to win?

[rug]

26. How does he get them without relying on SDs?

Face it. In Denver all the numbers will be close. The SDs should have zero say but this year they do. If they believe 4 months from now that Clinton is better for the party, the rules give them that right. Neither Obama nor Clinton are entitled to them. This is not democracy, it's politics.

[ClassWarrior]

43. True, O can't win without a clean SD vote. Clinton can't win without a manipulated one.

NGU.

[BumRushDaShow]

21. I'm still waiting for a link to the fabricated "down 26% in PA" figure.

But I expect to hear crickets.

[rug]

23. Here it is.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/pennsylvania.html

[wileedog]

13. Bull-oney

He will enter the convention with the most pledged delegates. Period.

That is a fact.

Sure he needs SDs, but what he doesn't need is the SDs to overturn the voting process to elect him. THAT is what Hillary needs. And winning ONE state by 20% doesn't entitle her to that.

ANYONE but a Clinton would have been tossed overboard by their party weeks ago. This is just a damaging and frankly stupid process now that is helping no one.

Except McCain.

[rug]

30. The fact is he will enter convention without a majority. Deal with it.

[slinkerwink]

15. newest poll shows her up by 16 points

so she lost half of that lead.

[rug]

31. Up by 16 points is not a winning argument for Obama.

[slinkerwink]

34. she won't lose PA

but she won't get the delegates needed. In PA, she'll gain about 16 delegates on Obama, which isn't enough to overtake his lead in pledged delegates of 150.

[rug]

36. There are 9 others. You won't mind if the rest of our fellow Democrats are allowed to vote?

[ClassWarrior]

41. So you don't mind if the SDs make their own decisions too, without being manipulated?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

42. Hmmm... no answer?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

44. And you seemed so confident.

:rofl:

NGU.

[rug]

46. I took my kids to see a cartoon. Now, for a lesser endeavor,

are you referring to the same superdelegates Obama wants to use to win?

[slinkerwink]

45. she won't win them all, and still not catch Obama on delegates

[ClassWarrior]

39. That'd be better than manipulating the SDs into cancelling ALL the primaries.

NGU.

[randr]

2. Hillary and Bill are fostering false hope

among their many supporters. People who love Hillary and had a dream of the first woman as POTUS need to realize there is a larger picture and a more evil adversary in the form of John McCain.
Our friends/neighbors/family serving in Iraq, our environment, our national health, the very food/water/air of our existence is at risk.
Hope is manifested in the future and we need to secure ours by uniting behind the candidate that has amassed the most votes and delegates.

[slinkerwink]

5. the math is against Hilalry

[Snarkoleptic]

14. So true.

Click the link, page down, adjust the remaining primary results (move the arrows L or R).
She must exit the race before doing additional damage to our chances in November.
http://www.slate.com/id/2185278/

[MethuenProgressive]

24. BREAKING! Mark Halperin, wanna-be Obama Super Duper Delegate, writes hit peice on Clinton!

:boring:

[BumRushDaShow]

27. Thanks for kicking my thread!

:thumbsup:

:rofl:

[slinkerwink]

32. hey, you should do this

:pals: every time a Clinton supporter comments on the thread

[BumRushDaShow]

35. Good one!

:grouphug:

[slinkerwink]

29. Mark Halperin likes Clinton