Clinton's Collateral Damage

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Hillary Clinton celebrates with supporters in Columbus, Ohio on March 4, 2008

(Edited for length)

By KAREN TUMULTY AND DAVID VON DREHLE, Time Magazine

An Arkansas state legislator once said of Bill Clinton that he would pat you on the back while he urinated down your leg. The corollary for Clinton's wife Hillary could be that she will tell the world how honored she is to share a stage with Barack Obama even as she's gearing up to smash him. When it comes to politics, the Clinton philosophy is simple: It's war, and wars are for winning. Bill put it this way, back in 1981: "When someone is beating you over the head with a hammer, don't sit there and take it. Take out a meat cleaver and cut off their hand."

With her presidential hopes at stake in Texas and Ohio, Hillary Clinton reached for the cleaver. Her campaign made good on its promise to throw "the kitchen sink" at Obama, and that paid off with clear popular-vote victories in both states. What's more, she said, "I'm just getting warmed up."

Even for some of her supporters, those are ominous words. Democrats now face a reality they were hoping they might avoid: a knock-down, drag-out struggle between two strong candidates lasting at least seven more weeks and possibly all the way to the convention. For the party that was assumed to have the advantage in November against a G.O.P. that was unpopular and riven by infighting, this turnabout is both depressing and distressing.

....

For months, the Democratic candidates, including Clinton, devoutly observed that any of them would be a better President than another Republican. But in leveling her charge that the first-term Illinois Senator would be unprepared in a national-security crisis, Clinton went so far as to compare him unfavorably with McCain. "I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House," she told reporters the morning before the contests. "And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2002" — a reference to Obama's declaration against the Iraq invasion that she and McCain had voted to authorize. Obama has repeatedly referred to that speech as proof that his judgment is superior, even if his résumé is shorter.

At the same time, the Clinton campaign stepped up its attacks on the media, insisting that Obama has been receiving kid-glove treatment. The theme sank into the broad public consciousness when Saturday Night Live returned from the writers' strike to make a recurring theme of the fawning press. Perhaps eager to prove that they can be equally tough on Obama, journalists filled that week with stories about Obama's Canada problem and his ties to an indicted Chicago real estate developer, Tony Rezko.

The numbers tell the story: it worked. And so, Howard Dean or no Howard Dean, there is going to be more of it. Indeed, the Clinton campaign has been trying to go on the attack since Obama's win in Iowa kicked off their epic struggle. Early attempts by Bill Clinton to scrape off some of Obama's smooth persona backfired, and later barrages — like the charge that Obama plagiarized parts of his speeches — failed only (a Clinton campaign official maintains) because the hectic calendar of primaries and caucuses allowed no time for them to "seep in." You could fill an aquifer in the long stretch between now and the April 22 Pennsylvania contest.

And Obama has no intention of taking it without hitting back. "If she starts asserting that somehow I'm not ready and that one of the reasons that the Democrats or superdelegates should not vote for me is because 'we don't know enough about him' or 'there may be things in his past or his character that make him vulnerable to Republican attack,' then I think it's certainly fair to compare our track records to see whether or not I am more vulnerable to these kinds of attacks."

...

Democrats know well how hard a Clinton will fight when everything is on the line and have learned from experience that they have reason to fear the consequences. In 1993 Bill Clinton's economic plan passed the House by a single vote, with Republicans waving their hankies at the Democrats whose votes put it over the top. Sure enough, the following year, most of the party's more vulnerable members were gone — and with them, the Democratic majorities in the House and the Senate, which had also fallen victim to the resounding rejection of Hillary's health-care plan. And while Bill Clinton's tenacity got him through the Monica Lewinsky scandal in 1998, one of the consequences was Al Gore's defeat two years later.

This time, say some Obama supporters, the Clintons' win-at-all-costs mind-set could cost the party the November election. "The Clinton campaign strategy is simply going to be to try to run a scorched-earth campaign," says Obama campaign manager David Plouffe. "Which would be catastrophic for the party."

It all comes down to one thing, as Hillary Clinton made clear in her last press conference before the Tuesday primaries: "Winning. Winning. Winning. Winning. That's my measurement of success," she said. "Winning."

With reporting by Jay Newton-Small/San Antonio

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...19899-2,00.html

[Yoink 7]

I think it is great that the political system works so well that even after this many rounds of voting the verdict is still out. McCain may have time to formulate a strategy against either opponent but it is still a world of mess out there create by republicans which everyone remembers.

I see the biggest problem is that people are taking sides in the Clinton/Obama debate so fervently that if thier candidate loses they will have built up such animosity towards the opposition that they couldn't ever vote for them in the presidential election. But in reality... both candidates on the democratic side are about 95% similar in thier beliefs and people are nitpicking about experience.

I think momentum is clearly on Hillary's side and that might win her a re-vote in Michigan and Florida... Neither candidate will have a majority of the delegates to win the nomination. Even if one candidate has more it will be a senario where the leader has no more than 100 pledged delegates which is less than 5% of the +2000 delegates required for a majority.

The superdelegates will then have to make a decision based on many factors such as how thier constituaries voted... and the likelyhood of a Democratic candidate winning against MCcain

In the primaries and Caucases Clinton carried most of the blue states for pres elections while Obama carried most of the red states in pres elections. That means that Clinton would most likely carry the big blue states in a pres election while Obama would have more competition in those states. McCain would love to face Obama and not Clinton... Simply cause he would expect to carry the traditional red states (even though Obama won them convincing over Clinton... expample is a state like Wyoming..Obama won decisively but repubs out number dems in the state more than 2 to 1).. and have a better shot at traditional blue states to rake up electors. Ohio, and Florida which are swing states went Hillary remember and in the last two elections were pivitol in determining the president.

I am not advocating CLinton I am mearly stating some observations and opinion. I think Clinton would defeat McCain while Obama would not... I think that Clinton has a 50-50 chance of defeating Obama and even more depending if the DNC allocates delegate from FL and MI or those states re-vote. I think if things stay close and FL and MI don't get seated... superdelegates will gravitate towards Clinton cause of the presidential election senarios...

If Clinton and Obama chose to form a joint ticket... well I think there will be a land slide election...

[Peikko 1,575]

The whole thing is a game of manoevering, I just think Hilary admits it, while Barack is continually trying to pretend that he's somehow above it all. That he is suggesting that if the campaign continues, Hilary would be responsible for chaos in the Democratic party and perhaps losing to the GOP's in the election just shows me how good he is at the game that he claims he doesn't like to play.

Oh, and if that's meant to be a 'neutral' picture of Hilary???

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Don't worry, I'm sure if Obama is the nominee McCain will go easy on him.