Can vs. Will

So, CNN showed more of Hillary Clinton's speech, which got pre-empted by Barack Obama's speech, and I was intrigued by a line I haven't heard her say before. Unfortunately my attempt to tape it was thwarted by my DVR receiver, which has been acting up lately, so if you know the exact line or have video of it, please let me know in the comments. But the gist was essentially that "it's not good enough to say you can do something, I'll make sure we will do it." Seems like A fairly good play off Obama's 'Yes We Can' line that also sums up her claim that he offers promises while she offers solutions. It seems a little late to start trying new things -- it's notable for example that Obama's speech relied on a patchwork of stump speeches rather than new flourishes; if it ain't broke... -- but seems like a good one-liner all the same, one I suspect we'll be hearing a lot more of in the coming weeks.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

114 Comments

Re: Can vs. Will

Get some sleep, Todd.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Here's the WaPo article about "Yes We Can!!"

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail /2008/02/15/flexing_her_rhetorical_will. html

by KnowVox 2008-02-19 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

That was four news cycles ago.  She's trying everything anyone on her conference calls can think of and none of it seems to be working, does it?  Political and military campaigns have a lot in common and when you are fighting a rearguard action against a strong opponent with a winning strategy ad hoc tactical combinations rarely result in victory.  Mere footnotes to history.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Please note that I am NOT breaking Godwin's law here - and let me say upfront there is NO similarity between the Germans in WWII and ANY candidate in this year's election....

....but if you've ever seen the movie 'Downfall' -- I'm reminded of a comment by a general as the Red Army closed in on Berlin, "He moves around armies that only exist on his map"

by zonk 2008-02-19 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

The analogy which springs to mind was the fall of France in 1940 when, after the initial breakthrough at Sedan, French generals confidently assured their masters that they would 'make a stand' on successive positions which were inevitably overrun by the invaders before their telegrams had reached Paris.  Whole corps evaporated without the High Command even being aware of their loss and the only explanation these incompetent, tired strategicians could offer was 'treason.'

The French army was numerous, well-equipped and highly regarded but abysmally led and totally collapsed in the face of a modern, capably handled force, one of the most embarrassing and unprecedented defeats in modern history.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

I can do it vs. I will do it?  If Obama says he can do it, then why wouldn't he do it? Doesn't make sense. She shouldn't expect this line to win her voters.

by mecarr 2008-02-19 06:27PM | 0 recs
Because we don't know that he CAN

because he is too green.  He has no track record that he really can get stuff done.

by Molee 2008-02-19 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Because we don't know that he CAN

Unfortunately neither does she.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Because we don't know that he CAN

snap!

by HSTruman 2008-02-19 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Because we don't know that he CAN
One thing we know: Obama CAN run a much better campaign than Hillary.
by jmr1948 2008-02-19 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Makes sense to me... Obama simply doesn't have the requisite experience to "do it."

The Rethugs will massacre him in the General with their characterization of Obama as an "eloquent but empty call for change."

by KnowVox 2008-02-19 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Seriously, I'm getting tired of this narrative, I can see Mccain claiming this, but Hillary-- what has she gotten done?

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Yeah the guy who wants 100 years of war and more tax cuts is really going to be successful at that one. That's the whole point of the argument. He's not destroyed by Washington like so many inside and outside the bubble. Neither are most Americans but they can see that Washington is crap. That's why the message resonates.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

After his flip-flops on taxes and now torture (!!), not to mention his outright lies about Obama's statements tonight, we can come out and hammer McCain hard on this.  

The potential power is corrupting him, and he's rapidly morphing into a say-anything, do-anything candidate.

by Nissl 2008-02-19 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Yes he will! Say just about anything to get the job. He had to veer so far to the right that the independents will shun him as if he had the plague.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:23PM | 0 recs
the problem

With this frame is the same since iowa - it conceeds obama the status as the true outsider - and as a result cements the perception that she is a status quo politician.

SHe has to find another frame.

The simple truth is the clinton campaign has misjudged the times - people are willing to take a chance on obama because they think the times are so bad they warrent the risk.

Clinton needs to junk the experience line and do what bill could - explain why things are bad and her solutions to these problems.

Bill never ran on experience - and neither should hillary.

by fladem 2008-02-19 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Maybe she should be saying "can vs. theoretically could have" because "will" is not an option for her anymore. She lost.

by alvernon 2008-02-19 06:27PM | 0 recs
substance vs. word games

She has got to stop reacting to Obama and trying to find cutsie word twists to out clever him - she is not capable of doing that.  She needs to explain why her health care plan is better, why her foreign policy is better, what she learned from watching her husband make mistakes (NAFTA), what she learned from watching him do something right (EITC).  She's always on the defense now and she's very very bad at it.

Not a single one of her consultants and senior strategtists should ever work in politics again.

by eRobin 2008-02-19 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Experience v. Hope

Frankly, she's explained herself very well to most folks who are listening. Can't really help the folks who are chanting for the Messiah with cotton in their ears.

by KnowVox 2008-02-19 06:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Experience v. Hope

Not well enough in Wisconsin by the look of things.

Obama is no messiah. He's a politician and he's proving himself to be a better one that she is.  No harm in that.

by swarty 2008-02-19 06:48PM | 0 recs
Disagree

I think she could have taken WI had she barn storm campaigned rather than sending ads in from OH an TX. It reinforced an out of touch inside the beltway image.  Chiding an opponent for not meeting in a state she wasn't even in seemed to underline that she hadn't landed yet.  People in the mid west are touchy about the east and west coast "fly over" mentality.  

There's a huge difference between being able to hear and meet a candidate in person.  WI is big, but she had time to make some serious in roads. I know the weather screwed her a bit, but she'd already lost days to Obama events statewide.  

I've never supported Hillary Clinton for the nomination, but I do and did believe it was hers to lose.  I think she's had terrible advice and made a series of bad choices.

Now the tide has turned and it's Obama's to lose.  I can't see how he'd manage it, but he's cursed.  You see, I voted for him and I've never voted for a candidate who actually got the nomination.

by mijita 2008-02-19 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Experience v. Hope

It's the Scooby-Do campaign!

We would have won it, too -- if it weren't for you nosy voters!

by zonk 2008-02-19 07:04PM | 0 recs
Project much? nt

by Dave 2008-02-19 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Personally, I think its telling that she has now used about 20 slogans during this campaign where as Obama's theme has been the same throughout.

by HSTruman 2008-02-19 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Which plagiarized themes?

by KnowVox 2008-02-19 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Keep pushing that angle if it's all you've got.  

by HSTruman 2008-02-19 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Do you actually know the definition of that word?

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Give it a rest.

by rfahey22 2008-02-19 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

I did want to comment on your thing about Obama using Republican speech. He was actually opposing Republican ideas on trade and free enterprise when he did that earlier. He was saying he believes in that idea, but in fact that's not what's happening in America right now, that's not what the Republican Party is standing up for.

by Progressive America 2008-02-19 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

The problem is that Clinton has never accomplished anything.  She botched health care.  When we needed leadership on the war, she got on the Bush bandwagon.  Some unnamed sources say she opposed NAFTA.  Except for some earmarks for New York what has Hillary ever done?  Her campaign since South Carolina has been based on throwing cold water on Obama's "hope" & "change".  That negative strategy is a loser.  How many more defeats will it take for Mark Penn to get the message?

What we will hear more about is Obama's specific plan to end federal income taxes on low income Seniors with incomes under 50k.  Tonight, Obama was serving up policy.  It might have been too long for the diarist, boo hoo.  The beef in Obama's specific plans to match his soaring rhetoric will continue to deflate Hillary's negativity.

by howardpark 2008-02-19 06:31PM | 0 recs
She did not "botch" healthcare.

She tried to accomplish a major change in healthcare that 2 centuries of male US Presidents have failed to do - what has Obama tried to do that is equally difficult?

by Molee 2008-02-19 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not "botch" healthcare.

Yikes. That's not really a great selling point. I'm sure she has substantive accomplishments as a Senator.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not "botch" healthcare.

Obama helped name a post office once.

by KnowVox 2008-02-19 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not "botch" healthcare.

I was one of the voters who gave Bill Clinton a mandate to reform health care.  Hillary took that mandate and failed.  Maybe it was unfair, but her secrecy and terrible political strategy tossed that mandate away.  She failed in 1993 as did President Clinton.  I remember.  I revere the Clinton's but let's admit it, she is part of the failed policies of the past.

by howardpark 2008-02-19 06:58PM | 0 recs
what's the hardest thing you've ever

done? think about it.  Usually doing something hard doesn't work the first time, just like a boxer's punch doesn't yield a KO the first time.  My point is that universal healthcare is an important goal to HRC, and I think not to Obama based on his weak plan.  If 2 centuries of male presidents have not achieved this -  we need some serious CHANGE - to crib a noun the Karaoke Kandidate Obama himself.  I think this issue is fundamentally more important to the > 50% of the population - women - who have never darkened the door of the oval office as president.

I think Hillary can do this - I seriously doubt Obama can.

by Molee 2008-02-19 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: what's the hardest thing you've ever

Yes, we can.  The Clintons had thier chance.  They had big margins in Congress.  They failed.

by howardpark 2008-02-19 07:14PM | 0 recs
Let's Not Revise History

I like Hillary but as someone who worked on the 1993-94 health care reforms, she, Bill and Ira Magaziner botched them pretty badly by having a closed process.  It setup the opposition and the Harry and Louise ads.  They all learned from the mistakes.  I do give them a ton of credit for trying to tackle the issue which very few politicians have tried to do but let's not pretend it wasn't a major black eye for the early Clinton Admin.

by John Mills 2008-02-19 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not "botch" healthcare.

Beat her for the Democratic nomination for the presidency?

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not "botch" healthcare.

I guess her slogan should be "Can vs. Try."  ;-)

by Weirdsmobile 2008-02-19 09:30PM | 0 recs
"Yes, We Will! Yes, We Will!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhCikLeXb 7c

by midvalley 2008-02-19 06:32PM | 0 recs
This is really wild

I remember very clearly when Bill Clinton came to Kalamazoo, Michigan in early September 1996. I was a photographer for the local university's student newspaper. We were treated very, very well and I was thrilled that I was going to get to see one of my heroes, Bill Clinton, in person.

It was a hot day--about 90 degrees--and most people had been waiting for hours to see the President. He was not yet halfway through his remarks when something happened in the crowd.
__

"We cannot go forward together as a country, a country where it works for all of us, unless we have a shared commitment to protect the environment. And unless we want to protect everybody's environment, in the end, no matter how wealthy and powerful we are, the quality of our lives will be undermined."

[At this point, an audience member required medical attention.]

"Do you need a doctor over there? Are you okay? Over here? Where's my medical team? We got to have somebody.

"Now, you think about that. It doesn't matter - I don't care if you have got a billion dollars, if you live in America, in the end, the quality of your life will be undermined unless we save the environment for everybody."
_
_

President Clinton continued his speech and then made his way around the crowd. I got to shake his hand AND got a great shot of him, although my editor didn't use it (curse you, LeFevre!), while the secret service folks warned the crowd to be careful of the children.

Fast forward to this evening: I clicked on the link above to the YouTube video of HRC's speech tonight. About a minute in, I heard her say, "Oh, we need a doctor right here? ... Mr. Secret Serviceman, would you hand that water--over--here?"

[Cheers from the crowd.]

"... Is there a doctor or EMT? A para-? Here comes somebody. Thank you very, very much."

I'm not saying either of these events were staged. It may be just some bizarre parallels. However, I do recommend Team Clinton dropping the whole "plagiarism" bit.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2 889/is_n35_v32/ai_18827952/pg_3

by lucky monkey 2008-02-19 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

"The question is not whether we can build the future we want, it's whether we will.  We will do it!  We will!"

Now... Todd your reporting on somewhat objective topics is too heavily biased towards Clinton.  You're finding rather shaky logic to justify Clinton victories or bash Obama.  It could be just me, but it's really turning me off to anything you're writing.  
I hope that the worthwhile articles you're writing will be taken over by other more objective authors so I can get a better perspective on the news.

by umcpgreg 2008-02-19 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

I disagree with e Robin on " Not a single one of her consultants and senior strategists should ever work in politics again." I honestly don't think they could do anything with the candidate they had. She lost momentum the minute Obama entered the race and people saw him and heard him.  How can you run against Hope when your husband's campaign was based on Hope?  

In the end, she was not liked or trusted by the elite and whomever else was exposed for her for too long a time.  People came out of the woodwork in the primary season to the benefit of the Democratic Party (and Obama).  Obama is a once in a lifetime movement and perhaps in any other cycle, Hillary could have won but not this year.  The more exposure Obama gets, the more votes he gets.  

by shoeshine boy 2008-02-19 06:36PM | 0 recs
Leetle late to keep trying on new messages

for size...

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Leetle late to keep trying on new messages

Message testing for Puerto Rico :-)

by zonk 2008-02-19 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Leetle late to keep trying on new messages

Sweet. I hear it's a nice place!

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:42PM | 0 recs
Plagiarizing Howard Dean in 2004

Full-text of Dean's post-New Hampshire 2004 speech:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/27/politi cs/campaign/text-dean.html?ex=1203570000 &en=957e744cd4192133&ei=5070

by Luigi Montanez 2008-02-19 06:39PM | 0 recs
Can vs. Will

With 80% of Wisconsin reporting, it's now 58% to 41% for Obama.  That's a 17-point blowout in a state where the demogaphics supposedly lined up pretty good for Hillary.  And Hawaii is still to come later this evening, where the margin is going to be even greater.

-------------------------

Here's some wise words on the matter by writer Sanford Horwitt:

Friendly Advice for Hillary:  The Best Way to Play a Losing Hand

When stuck with a losing hand, even good professional poker players often don't know when to drop out, because they've thrown so much of their ego along with their chips into the pot.  But the greatest players don't fool themselves.  They swallow their pride, conserve their capital, and fold their cards.  They start thinking about a new opportunity to win.  That's the kind of thinking and decision-making Hillary Clinton needs right now, before the next round of primaries in Ohio and Texas.  She'll never have a better time to call it quits and play for another day.

The conventional wisdom inside-the Beltway is that Hillary Clinton, as fiercely competitive as Roger Clemens, will do whatever it takes to win.  At this late stage, however, after yet another big loss in a presidential battleground state like Wisconsin, a successful comeback that ends with her party's nomination in Denver would require that Hillary draw the equivalent of four aces and a wild-card joker.  That's essentially what it would take for her to: win all of the remaining primaries and contested delegates by sizeable margins; yank the majority of superdelegates onto her sputtering bandwagon; capture most of the heretofore disqualified delegates from Florida and Michigan after the Clinton campaign helps the Democratic Party rewrite the rules. Yes, indeed, she would need the joker to pull off the last one.  And if she somehow did, the furor it would unleash among millions of Barack Obama's African American and young supporters--the next generation of Democratic voters--would doom Hillary's chances in November.

With each passing day, an ultimately successful Clinton comeback seems less like a plausible storyline and more like--as Bill Clinton might say--one of the biggest fairytales in modern American politics.

Before the "it's-still-a-horse-race" storyline is washed away by political reality, Hillary Clinton should move quickly to get the maximum political gain out of her impending loss.  Fair or not, a big part of Clinton's problem is her image as a scheming, conniving unprincipled politician.  To be sure, the image is strongest among non-Democrats, but it's a huge liability in the general election when independent voters determine the outcome.  Hillary's high personal negatives are the big reason why political handicappers think Clinton would not fare well against John McCain.  

Taking the high road is Hillary's best bet.  An unexpectedly quick, gracious and magnanimous departure from the race could serve as the first step in her journey to becoming a "new" Hillary Clinton.  At a news conference in the next several days, she might say something like this:  "I have been privileged to be part of a great watershed in the history of our country.  For the first time, a woman and an African American became the leading candidates for the nomination of one of our two great political parties.  But ultimately, both my campaign and Senator Obama's are not about gender or race.  Both campaigns are about changing the direction of the country, repairing the damage that has been done by the current administration, and restoring America's democratic ideals as a beacon of hope around the world.  I ran for my party's nomination because I thought that I would make the best president.  But in our democracy, that's a decision, of course, that is in the hands of my fellow citizens. And it is becoming increasingly clear that more of them believe that Sen. Obama will be the party's best choice to run for president.  A prolonged, drawn-out and potentially contentious ending for the party's nomination is not in the best interests of either our party or, most important, our country.  The urgency of electing a Democrat in November could not be greater.  I pledge my full, enthusiastic support to Senator Obama, and I will do everything I can to help him become the next President of the United States."

Although her passionate supporters will be shocked and disappointed, they'll get over it.  In the eyes of important Democratic constituencies, especially African Americans, her unforced departure will repair and enhance her reputation.  Her stature as a party leader, including her influence in the Senate, will get a considerable boost, as will her standing with independent voters, especially those who backed Obama in the primaries.  And even a jaded, cynical national press will probably have to give Hillary at least a left-handed compliment, calling her surprise announcement "unClintonian."

To be sure, this is not the jackpot Hillary Clinton was after.  But it's the best she can do under the circumstances.  Perhaps nobody will even notice that in dropping out now, she has also begun to position herself for a better result four or eight years down the road.

---------------------------------------- ----------

Sanford D. Horwitt is the author, most recently, of Feingold: A New Democratic Party (Simon & Schuster).  He also wrote the biography, Let Them Call Me Rebel: Saul Alinsky, His Life and Legacy.  He lives in Arlington, Virginia.      

by global yokel 2008-02-19 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Senate Majority Leader Hillary R Clinton.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

THAT would be a wonderful sight to see.

by JDF 2008-02-19 07:15PM | 0 recs
I'd prefer Majority Leader Feingold

personally.  Hillary can have an illustrious career as the DP Moynihan of the 21st century.

by Dave 2008-02-19 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Perfect job for an aggressive policy wonk. Terrible job for the bag of mush currently holding the position.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Exactly.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

That is the biggest load of malarky I've heard since McCain's speech earlier in the evening....

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

She can either be Clemens, or she can be Pettitte.

by swarty 2008-02-19 07:10PM | 0 recs
YES WE WILL -- YES WE WILL

Oh man, I felt embarrassed for her. It MAY have been effective 9 months ago, but now it sounds like a dying gasp.

by MJPacino 2008-02-19 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

She tried to reform education in Arkansas and failed. She tried to reform healthcare and failed, but I will give her a pass on that as the right wing hate machine would have done the same to most demcrats. But what about education? She or Bill havent really made any real difference in education despite both having some good ideas and good intentions when they went about trying to reform it. What it requires is the ability to persuade others to buy instead of caving in like Hillary has done with the teachers unions. Obama may be the same, but then again, he may not be. That is why I am supporting Obama.

She actually had good ideas. So yeah, I agree words are only words. Actions matter. But a few passed bills do not make for a great leader.

Is Obama clearly better than Hillary? Quite frankly, I can't commit to that at this point. That is why I have finally come to peace in case Hillary wins the primary, I won't be rooting for McCain  in the General Election. Hillary will be far superior to McCain. Obama will be far superior to McCain.

by Pravin 2008-02-19 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

McCain has now flip-flopped not only on Bush's tax cuts but on torture.  He stood up on national TV and lied about Obama's position on Pakistan tonight.  

This is not the good ol' Maverick we used to know.

by Nissl 2008-02-19 07:07PM | 0 recs
Tipping Point

This has been a close contest that has travelled many states and brought out an amazing number of people. The turnout for Dems is just astounding.

Wisconsin is the tipping point. Obama has the momentum and the traction. Even if Hillary wins in TX & OH the margins will be too small to matter. The tide has turned and it will take Obama to the nomination.

In time the Demcratic party will unite in a historical and super-energized general election campaign. With the tsunami approaching we will see many more Repubs call it quits.

For the first time in a generation we will see a wave of popular support providing a majority vote and the Dems firmly in control. It's even possible for a 60 seat majority in the Senate or enough Repubs shell shocked by the Nov results to support a mandate to get some serious things done after 8 years of unmitigated disaster.

Its a season to be hopeful! And finally fun to be on the winning team.

by ab initio 2008-02-19 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Tipping Point

That "turnout for Dems" has actually been a bunch of  rightists trying to stop Clinton from getting the Dem nomination. I can't believe how many don't get that. Those crossovers will vote Repub in the general election.

Oh, well, that's what the Democratic party gets for allowing open primaries and caucuses. We all get screwed, and universal health care will go down the toilet once again, and people will continue to suffer and die because of it.

by splashy 2008-02-19 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Tipping Point

Well if this is the case then we were doomed form the beginning, after all if indies would crossover just to deny HRC the nom. then she would have little chance of breaking 40% in the general.

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 07:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

It would have a bit more credit if her experience claim wasn't an illusion, seriously what has hse done legislatively that leads credence to the "yes we will" crap, (don't claim Bill's stuff here please).

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 06:46PM | 0 recs
Yes She Will

When Democrats vote in Ohio and Texas, as opposed to Democrats and Republicans and Independents, then yes she will!

I refuse to believe that Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents (read: Bill O'Reilly types) who are crossing over and voting for Obama will continue to support him in the GE.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

She beat Clinton among DEMS in Wisconsin.

by mecarr 2008-02-19 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Clinton won white Dems to the tune of 51%.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

To the tune of 51% OOOOOHHHHH

What a massive win!

by JDF 2008-02-19 07:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Thank you! But it proves my point: when Democrats vote, Hillary wins.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:20PM | 0 recs
Obama won Dems 51 to 48.
See the exit poll:
here.
by Dave 2008-02-19 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama won Dems 51 to 48.

I am referring to the CNN exit poll.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:30PM | 0 recs
CNN Exit Poll for Wisconsin

Among Democrats, Obama won 53% and Clinton 46%, a 7 point gap in favor of Obama.

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Exit Poll for Wisconsin

I don't know what exit poll you're looking at, but Hillary carried white Dems to the tune of 51%.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:38PM | 0 recs
Yes

Non-whites also vote. (Thank goodness for the Democratic Party they do.) You are factually correct, and I am factually correct. Among all Democrats, Obama won by 7 points according to the exit poll.

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Exit Poll for Wisconsin

So only white democrats matter?

And even if that were, in some bizzaro world, true she won by a whopping 2% thats not exactly a landslide.

by JDF 2008-02-20 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

white dems = dems?

by Wes 2008-02-19 07:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Shit. I'm not a Dem cause I'm not white? Well at least I live in a state that counts.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Yeah, really...I have the opposite problem myself--I get to be a dem, but my state doesn't count.

by Wes 2008-02-19 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Perhaps if we pool our votes it will equal one vote..

Well 0+0=0 so probably not.

That sucks.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Maybe we can engineer a 3/5 compromise...there's a precedent for that....

by Wes 2008-02-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

In a state that is predominantly white, we can say that.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Fine.  But when you factor in Dems of all races--he won that demographic.  So your point above about her winning dems is only correct if white dems= dems.  Even in a predominantly white state that is not true.  CNN now shows in their exit poll that Obama won democrats 53 to 46.  Even if you meant no harm by it, privileging the white vote as the vote that counts is wrong.  That is how it came across.

by Wes 2008-02-19 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

I'm not privileging anything. I said she won white Dems and everyone got offended that Hillary won a substantial demographic. I don't see that stat re: all Dems, so I can't take your word for it. But my point is that if we take this stat re: white Dems forward to Ohio, where Hillary is actually waging a spirited contest, we will see a substantial win for her.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Untrue.  You mentioned that she won white dems and then you said immediately after that this proves the point that when dems vote, she wins.  Then you went on to say that this is justified b/c Wisconsin is a predominantly white state.

Since it is not true in this case that when dems vote she wins
(see http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primari es/results/epolls/#WIDEM)

You must be equating the white vote with the dem vote.

Or you are just wrong on the facts.

by Wes 2008-02-19 07:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

The party id is on page three of that link (right above party id and race)

by Wes 2008-02-19 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Look, absent of Republicans and Independents, Hillary does better. And she won the white Dem demo.

My point is that among Democrats in the Democratic Primary, Hillary is still doing quite well.

I hope that that fact doesn't offend you.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

For god's sake are you retarded, the fact that Hillary lost the Dems 53-47 would make you wrong, unless in crazy zeitgeist world only white Dems can vote.

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Retarded! Wow, you'd think Hillary had won white Dems or something....

This is a demographic that Hillary will build on in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania. And which she will carry to victory.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

I am not offended (I just assumed you were mistaken about Wisconsin).  I can accept your more heavily qualified point, as well.  Take care.

by Wes 2008-02-19 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

I wouldn't say that to the non-white Dems in that state.

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Hillary won white Dems. The fact that Obama has not overtaken Hillary in a key demographic should not be offensive!

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

But when Americans vote, Obama wins.  That is who votes in the Fall.

by swarty 2008-02-19 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

My nomination for 'quote of the day.'  Well said.

by Shaun Appleby 2008-02-19 07:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Americans don't vote, the electorate votes.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:32PM | 0 recs
The Electorate Does Vote

And it votes for Obama presently, with record turnout.

Want to try going in a circle again? :-)

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Did you miss the part where the OP said White Dems, or do you just not count Minority dems?

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

We're discerning the Ohio vote through Wisconsin's numbers, and I'm saying that among white voters who identify as Democrats, Hillary does best.

We are the Democratic Party and conducting our national nominating contests, so I'm just focusing on those numbers for now....

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

Um, you do realize that while TX doesn't ahve smae day reg. it is an open primary.

by Socraticsilence 2008-02-19 07:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes She Will

I guess that's why Obama is playing his Texas hand at the moment.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-02-19 07:18PM | 0 recs
I guess only Dems vote in November.

Screw the independents, right?  Hillary WILL. NOT. WIN. in November.  She should have some grace and bow out now for the good of the party.

by Dave 2008-02-19 07:23PM | 0 recs
He Can Win Primaries. Will She?

No, Clinton's criticism of "can" v. "will" is silly. It plays into every stereotype of the annoying schoolmarm. What next, she complains that Obama ends too many sentences with prepositions?

The first test of whether Clinton delivers is if she wins primaries. She isn't, so that moots her argument right away. Also, Clinton's most memorable effort was her attempt to enact healthcare reform in the mid-1990s. She didn't deliver. And now she promises she can get it done in 2009? Well, maybe, but maybe not.

On top of all that, I think voters are tuning out the stupid word games and banalities. If that crap had worked, she wouldn't have lost Wisconsin by 17 points (and counting, with 85% reported).

No, the silly stuff isn't going to work, and her advisers coaching her to try it are dumb and incompetent. I think we can all agree she's been ill served by her campaign leadership, starting with the disaster named Mark Penn. It's probably too late, but she needs a clear, cogent, and positive argument why voters should choose her. I'm not hearing it right now. "Let Hillary be Hillary."

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

While Hillary made a direct appeal for money right upfront in her speech, Obama has quietly pulled in more than 7,000 new donors tonight.  I've been watching his website counter taking huge jumps all night from 468,000 to now over 475,000.

by Piuma 2008-02-19 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

sounds like a bunch of BS from a campaign in desperation.

by sam2300 2008-02-19 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Oh yeah, THAT'S going to really turn things around for her!

Time for mydd.com to take a Reality Check(tm hrc)

Stick a fork in her, she's done.

by hrcisthemachine 2008-02-19 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

Todd: really, is spinning this "can" vs. "will" thing all you have left?

It's beginning to look embarrassing.

by EricNola 2008-02-19 07:15PM | 0 recs
She was cut off?

Sounds typical, a woman being cut off by a man, as though what she is saying is irrelevant.

Guess that's because he has won there? I hope that is all.

Geez, it looks as though if Obama wins, we can kiss health care for all goodbye. It will be the same 'ol BS we are dealing with now, with 18,000 a year dying from lack of basic care.

by splashy 2008-02-19 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: She was cut off?

Clinton's speech started late.  Politico.com thinks she delayed it deliberately to spoil Barack's victory.

by Dave 2008-02-19 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: She was cut off?

She apparently moved her speech time to a later time.

Do you think a health insurance plan with 100% mandates would pass in Congress?

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: She was cut off?

If it isn't 100% of the people it WILL fail. EVERYONE has to participate, or it just won't work, then the Repubs will point to that and it will die.

by splashy 2008-02-19 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: She was cut off?

Well that might be true. I'm not going to disagree with ya but as far as your comment below you think the Bush Dogs will join against the GOP filibuster?

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: She was cut off?

Oh, and to answer your question, if there are enough Dems there, it could.

by splashy 2008-02-19 07:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Plan with Mandates

No, such a plan probably would not pass unless the Democratic Party had a filibuster-proof margin in the Senate. And maybe not even then. It's a very tricky policy point to defend.

However, there is some merit to "shooting for the moon" and then compromising only as much as necessary. I don't think either candidate's healthcare plan is in that spirit. But either one could change strategy quite easily and introduce a "new and improved" plan in Congress.

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Plan with Mandates

I'd prefer that "shoot for the moon" meant single-payer but I guess that's not going to happen in the next few years.

However, if the argument is that mandates are required for any plan to work and mandates are negotiated away then isn't the plan doomed to failure anyway?

by illlaw1 2008-02-19 07:45PM | 0 recs
No

There's a school of thought that suggests incrementalism works. Some would say that's the school of thought shared by everyone except Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, who both vote "nay" unless the bill is "perfect." :-)

So if a president can get 98% of Americans covered, that's a lot better than the status quo. And that helps millions of Americans, now. Then it could be a lot easier to come back and fix the 2% problem, perhaps with a more amenable Congress after the next election.

This is why certain interest groups don't like the "nose under the camel tent" when it comes to new legislation. A lot of people think that Medicare was that nose under the tent, and even George W. Bush had to add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. (You can bet the next president will try to fix the shortcomings in that benefit.)

Personally I preferred the Edwards healthcare plan which had a very strong nose under the tent. One could see how it would naturally evolve into single-payer over time. I also think Duncan Black is correct when it comes to mandates. If you're forcing people to purchase healthcare and pay for it out of after-tax income, why not just give it to them out of taxes? This is a case where the mandate is actually a whole lot more politically scary than the tax. (We already pay a Medicare payroll tax.)

by BBCWatcher 2008-02-19 07:59PM | 0 recs
Maybe, just maybe...

if HRC hadn't moved her speech time in an attempt to preempt Obama...

and maybe... had she had the grace to publicly congratulate him on his win in WI, prompting him to push back his own previously scheduled speech...

she wouldn't have been cut off, and her frantic supporters wouldn't be casting "sexist!" aspersions at the media.

As she was classless, she deserves the big fat 17 point blowout loss she got along with a media blackout on her negative rant.

by hrcisthemachine 2008-02-19 08:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Can vs. Will

The next great distinction from the Clinton campaign: "would" vs. "could."  You know they'll try that at some point soon.

by rfahey22 2008-02-19 08:37PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads