But she has to quit because nobody really wants her and she’s tearing the party apart!
From My DD:
The story of this election thus far has had three parts, and they’ve all played out about the same.
First act: Obama won a maverick-like victory in Iowa, upsetting both Clinton and Edwards. He went on the national covers, and lept to the lead in NH polls. Nevertheless, Clinton came back and won convincingly in NH.
Second act: Obama won a huge blowout in SC, and rode out of the state being declared the next JFK for Dems, with all the Kennedy & Oprah hoopla you could imagine, leading up to the Feb 5th states, especially the California primary. The polls and press said that Obama would win it all that day. Nevertheless, Clinton won the bigger contests, including the pivotal CA contest by 10 percent.
Third act: Obama had the best February past the 5th imaginable, winning every single contest, many by blowouts. He took the lead nationally against Clinton, and outraised her 2:1. Riding into the OH and TX contests, he only needed a victory, and with the help of outside forces, outspent Clinton by a 3 or 4:1 margin in OH & TX. Nevertheless, Clinton won, in Texas by 4 percent, and in Ohio by 10 percent.
Yes, there is a pattern.
If Hillary were a man, do you think the punditocracy would be demanding that she get out of the race? She’s obviously the choice of rank and file Democrats. She keeps winning, for chrissake. But the way the male media goes on, you’d think she was Huckabee.
15 Responses to “But she has to quit because nobody really wants her and she’s tearing the party apart!”
-
anna says:
If Obama lost 11 straight caucuses and was losing in number of delegates (total and pledged) you can bet Clinton would tell him to drop out. Face it-Obama has the delegate lead, Hillary cannot beat him in that unless she wins every vote from now on.
March 6th, 2008 at 4:05 pm EST -
The Ghost of Violet says:
Yeah, but Obama can’t seal the nomination either in elected delegates. The number of remaining delegates to be seated is less than the number he needs. Which is why the super-delegates will determine the race.
Bottom line is, the party is split. Hillary isn’t a spoiler; she’s the choice of half the voters, and she actually leads among registered Democrats. She’s got the lead in the big states, the strongholds, and the swing states.
-
blondie says:
I would agree the party is clearly split. Looks pretty much 1/2 and 1/2 to me.
I would suggest that this is the prime time for party negotiations. I think the Dem. ticket should include both candidates — one as Pres. and one as V.P. Of course, neither wants to be V.P.
But for the good of the country, tough. I have my personal preference, but on lots of the issues, the candidates have similar positions, which are far preferable to McCain’s. I don’t think our country can take another 4 or 8 years of Republican control. For one thing, the U.S. should not stand for torture, secret surveillance of its citizens, perpetual war, global warming, rendition, … it’s too depressing to go on.
I think by the time of the convention, the difficult negotiations should occur, and the candidates should join together. Who’ll blink first? I don’t know, but the party better figure it out.
Why not bring together the best of both Democratic worlds represented by the Obama and Clinton supporters, rather than battle each other to the death, while the Republicans click their hells with glee?
-
The Ghost of Violet says:
Why not bring together the best of both Democratic worlds represented by the Obama and Clinton supporters, rather than battle each other to the death, while the Republicans click their hells with glee?
I agree. I’ve always wanted a joint ticket.
And more and more, I think that’s what the party really needs to do. Obama has made a point of saying that *his* supporters won’t vote for Hillary, and god knows his fans aren’t shy about agreeing. On the other hand, Hillary supporters like me are not likely to forget the smug sexism and dismissive tone of Obama’s campaign, which is even more infuriating given that we actually have a serious female candidate and you’d think he’d make a tiny effort to reach out to women. I’ll vote for any Democrat, but on a personal level Obama has lost my support — and I know a lot of women feel the same.
And there’s also the simple fact that both candidates have constituencies who have pinned great emotional hopes on them — African-Americans, women, etc.
A joint ticket would make everybody happy.
-
Kim says:
Joint ticket seems the only way. Personally I like Hillary on top. Only thing is can Obama, be second fiddle. If it ends up being a joint ticket, I think I can vote for Obama. Otherwise, I just dont know. Its very hard as a life long democrat to think it, much less writing it. I have so many basic problems with obama, especially trusting him. It seems very strange to court indies and republicans during a primary. As a democrat this just rubs me the wrong way. As a woman, there are so many issues I have with him.
I have been in a unique position, I worked construction for many years. I worked with guys that were great and I also worked guys that actually hated women. Especially stubborn, extremely tough, take no shit kind of women. I know there are other fields that woman have it tough. I and other women that work these kind of jobs have to work twice as hard than men and still have to take a lot crap. This is why its really hard to over look misogyny.
So sorry for such a long post but its been a pure pleasure in finding a blog that I feel welcomed.
I have deleted so many blogs that I used to read. TalkLeft had posted a few blogs and I found my way here.Thank you
-
simply wondered says:
slight change of angle on kim’s question: would obama be any use as vp? clearly his ability is as a front man; the bit that is questioned (and i’m aware that may be as much of a myth as hillary as ball-breaker/weak and feeble woman/whatever the media want this week) is his substance. i imagine a vp as being someone who tidies up a lot of loose ends….
or is a dribbling moron - danforth quayle IIII or whatever his silly name actually was.
what should one want in a vp? -
The Ghost of Violet says:
i imagine a vp as being someone who tidies up a lot of loose ends….
Alas, no. An American vice-president exists purely to a) add appeal (balance the ticket, bring in another demographic, etc.) and b) continue breathing in case the President dies.
Obama would be a perfect VP.
-
The Ghost of Violet says:
Kim, welcome.
I know what you mean about sexism — there are women in my family who’ve worked construction jobs and other heavily male-dominated blue-collar jobs, and yeah. Misogyny runs rampant.
-
Aunti Disestablishmentarian says:
A joint ticket offers the best way to beat McCain. But will either stoop to it? No way. Not for the “good of the party.” Not for the good of the country, let alone of the world.
You’d think after their time in the Senate, they’d be accustomed to difficult compromise, but I doubt we’ll see it here. And they need to do it to win; we’ve all been screaming for this for months.
Instead, they’ll pander to the right with promises of cabinet appointments, and pick some milquetoast for VP.
But for us Progressives, it will be a good lesson– don’t expect Change(TM). Don’t expect Progressive ideas to take root as policy. Don’t expect much with a Democratic win in ‘08.
Now back to my regularly scheduled procrastinatory sulk.
-
julia says:
I wanted tio second what Kim said - great coment!
I also feel angrier every day that people swoon over to him, even some so-called ‘radicals’ that I know.
I would say Hillary has to be president on a join ticket, for all of the reasons listed over and over in this blog.I am not a democrat but the only way I’ll vote Dem is if she’s it.
I’ve had it with the phots of her in the newspapers, at least here in Oregon. They always show Obama as cute, poised, and elegant, while they take the worst shots of Hillary Clinton. -
anna says:
I just can’t see the superdelegates giving the nomination to someone with the fewest pledged delegates and who has won the fewest contests. You know Obama will say it is the will of the people that counts.
-
julia says:
Since when are our elections the ‘will of the people’ ? :)
-
The Ghost of Violet says:
Three things about the will of the people:
1. Michigan and Florida delegates aren’t being seated because that would give too many delegates to Hillary, whom the big boys are determined to run out of town. So much for the will of the people.
2. Obama won a lot of his delegates in caucuses, which are far less democratic than primaries, not only in disadvantaging the poor and less mobile but in terms of voter intimdation (see videotapes from Texas for examples).
3. I was reading somewhere yesterday that if the superdelegates all voted with their respective states — arguably the most representative thing for them to do — that would give Hillary the nomination.
-
gayle says:
Obama’s campaign is in a free-fall.
He should join the Clinton ticket as number two now before he damages himself so badly he’d hurt the ticket.
-
donna darko says:
He’s running off to Europe to get foreign policy experience or he’s running from Hillary. Either is unacceptable.
