Hillary Clinton and Her Loyal Superdelegates

Hillary Clinton's speech at the 2008 Democratic Convention urged the delegates on the floor to support, and vote for, Obama.
"Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our president...That is our mission, Democrats. Let's elect Barack Obama and Joe Biden for that future worthy of our great country."

While many state delegates at the convention are taking her word to heart, what is happening with those superdelegate holdouts who will vote for Clinton unless she tells them, specifically, to do otherwise?

There's more...

On to Denver:Obama is not nominated. He just says he is.

The path to Democratic Party Unity has one track.  It leads to serious party reform to try to undo as much of the Party destruction that has happened the last year as the leadership plowed further and further away from the basic Party values.  And the rest is clear in this open letter to Hillary written by an Independent, just the sort of Independent the Democratic Party needs to attract and have "unity" with. She titled it:

                   On to Denver!!!!

I am 44 years old, and was never much interested in politics. So, you know, when all this primary stuff started a year ago, I really didn't have much interest in any of the candidates specifically, only "let's get anyone else in there other than Bush". But, I started watching the debates and reading up on all the candidates.  In a perfect, ideal world, we wouldn't be voting for a person because of their "Party" and friends, we would be voting for that individual who has a track record of crossing those very lines and trying to get the important things we all want in life: health, wealth, harmony and happiness, regardless of, gasp, party affiliation. Quite quickly, I realized Senator Clinton was head and shoulders above Obama and the others, on every issue, on judgment, character and certainly experience. She frankly blew me away with her command of the issues. I found myself picking the person that has a track record of what I am looking for. That person is Senator Clinton. She has worked hard and diligently for all Americans, and spent years (35) building strong relationships because she has a passionate vision of what America can be. She became MY candidate. "Hill-R-We", became my mantra.

When I read that the "party leaders were tired" of the Clinton campaign bringing up the FL & MI votes for the past few weeks, I thought: well, E-X-C-U-S-E ME! I am tired of not having a say in a Presidential election, I am tired of not having my vote count, I am tired of no insurance, I am tired of little business in a struggling economy, and I am REALLY tired of some out-of-touch, well-paid, Washington fatcats deciding they know more than their constituents! The straw that broke this voter's back was the way the DNC mishandled the FL and MI votes. That is NOT democracy, NOT the values of the Democratic Party and certainly NOT my values! The media has mounted the most biased, blatant one-sided campaign for Obama that frankly reeks of more than just voter suppression. What happened to journalistic integrity?

There's more...

Why Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Is Wrong

Ben Smith at Politico reports that FL Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has suggested that Congressional supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton should write a joint letter to Senator Obama arm-twisting him to put her on a joint ticket as Vice President. Writes Ben Smith:

Members of Congress who support Clinton are weighing a joint letter to Senator Barack Obama pressing him to put Clinton on the ticket, a congressional aide confirmed.
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz of Florida has suggested the letter, which would aim to represent the voices of female members of congress and those from swing states and key demographic groups.

This only hours after the Democratic Party nominee emerged, with barely enough time to contemplate the historic threshold that he just crossed.

There's more...

Major Media Cooperate in Obama Deceit

At roughly 6:45 ET tonight, PBS's evening news hour reported that Senator Barack Obama went over the "magic number" (2118) of delegates needed to claim the Democratic presidential nomination. He went over with superdelegates, and a new total of 2123.

Minutes later Fox News reported the same story, and NPR affiliates were not far behind. AP had actually broken the story PBS reported.

However, the evening news casts on the air at the time on all three major networks -- ABC, NBC, and CBS -- were mysteriously silent. MSNBC and CNN continued for the next 45 minutes to report Obama as lacking 10 delegates.

Why? Obama had planned a stagecraft to occur after the polls closed at 8PM ET in South Dakota, and the news agencies were cooperating with the fiction that elected delegates and not superdelegates had put him over the magic number.

Sound familiar? Think of all the collusion between the media and Bush before and during the invasion of Iraq. Mission accomplished, indeed.

There's more...

What she gonna do?

Cross-posted at The October Protocol.

Clinton, tonight, that is.  Her camp's been sending out mixed signals all day, and the campaigns's message discipline has faltered as of late.  (Which makes perfect sense.  When the campaign ends, Ed Rendell will still be governor of Pennsylvania and Terry McAuliffe will still be Terry McAuliffe.  Harold Ickes and Howard Wolfson are losing prime shots at sick White House status points.  It's not hard to guess why they're sending the signals they are.)

Way I see it, she's got a couple of options.

1) She concedes and endorses.  Most likely to happen if his supposed cache of superdelegates collectively informs her campaign this afternoon or evening.  Against the advice of the most loyal, she congratulates Obama and ends the campaign.  This last detail is important--she has the Nixonesque need to believe she's making the decision alone, in the best interests of something larger, and against the advice of those who are helplessly loyal.

2) More realistically, she "acknowledges" his lead in the pledged delegate race, but holds up the fallacious parallel of her (disputed) lead in that non-metrical metric, the popular vote.  "He's leading in one metric, I am in the other." This will allow her to justify suspending, instead of ending, her campaign, and her non-endorsement of Obama.  Sadly, this will mean that she needs an excuse to keep going--fundraising and paying off debt and all that--so she'll probably trot out her appeal of the MI/FL decision to the Credentials Committee and suggest that she's waiting for superdelegates to stab Obama by switching to her at the last minute.  (Which, of course, they are technically free to do.)

3) She ignores Obama's passing the threshold, delcares Paul "General Bethlehem" Villarreal (my nickname, not his) her new campaign manager, and declares Stage III of the campaign: All Out War.  On to Denver!  You'll pry this nomination from my cold dead hands!  Did you know Obama is a muslim crackhead who got head from a male hooker in the back of a limousine?

Throwing the coins in accordance with Protocol guidance reveals Option 2 as most likely.  It's tough to give up the dream.  She'll use any argument she has, no matter how tenuous.  It seems obvious to most observers that, should she continue, her chances of wresting the nomination from Obama are tiny while those of torpedoing the party are huge.  But ambition and isolation work strange effects on highly public figures whose power plays work out across vast canvasses.  To succeed at the level Clinton has succeeded at requires a kind of doublethink, a comfort with cognitive dissonance: you've got to convince yourself first, even if all external indications point against you.  I will be the nominee. 

Before Clinton concedes to Obama, she'll have to concede to herself.

There's more...


Advertise Blogads