Posted on 02/13/2008 7:00:20 AM PST by jdm
After Barack Obama swept the Potomac Primaries last night, one might have expected Hillary Clinton to say a few words to her supporters to explain the losses. If so, the crowds that turned out for her in Texas had to manage their disappointment. They managed to let her know when they disagreed with her, however:
As news of her triple defeat in the Potomac Primary sank in, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did what has become a specialty in recent weeks: She headed someplace else.
After flying from Virginia to Texas for a rally on Tuesday night, Clinton did not publicly acknowledge, even in passing, that three significant primaries had taken place that day and her campaign had not issued a statement hours after results were announced. ...
When Clinton mentioned having differences with Obama over health care and the mortgage crisis, she was booed. Her comments continued past 9:30 p.m. Eastern time, as the polls in Maryland closed and the race was called for Obama, but in the giant arena, with a crowd her campaign estimated at 12,000, it seemed as though the defeat had not happened.
She talked about George Bush and Barack Obama being "all hat and no cattle," a rather strange reference for someone who has no executive experience at all. Her only public-policy leadership experience came from a task force that attempted to nationalize health care and lost her party control of Congress. In fact, the debacle was so bad that the Clintons have kept the records from going public for months.
It also might cause a few people to recall Hillary's history with "more cattle". Questions still remain about how she managed to turn $1,000 in cattle futures into a $100,000 profit. What was the wife of the governor of Arkansas doing in partnering with the head of a corporation in a state-regulated industry to turn an almost unheard-of profit from a minimal investment? Talk about all hat, no cattle!
Beyond that, though, Hillary still remains the favorite to win the nomination. She now trails in overall delegates for the first time, and in pledged delegates Obama leads by over a hundred, 1059-956. Without the 796 superdelegates, neither can win the 2,025 delegates necessary to get the nomination, and the primary map will soon start favoring Hillary. I doubt that the gap will get much wider, and it will likely narrow considerably. Unless Obama can keep widening it all the way to the convention, he's sunk.
Here's why. The superdelegates represent the elected and appointed establishment of the party. The Clintons have spent the last sixteen years putting most of them in power. They have campaigned for them, raised cash for them, and gotten them their jobs. Most of them are superdelegates because of the Clintons in one way or another. Barack Obama, on the other hand, just won his first national office three years ago, and has done far less for most of these elected and appointed officials.
When the Clintons come calling, which will most of these people choose to support? The people who put them in the position of casting this vote, or a candidate who hasn't done hardly anything for them? Will they select the candidate that wants to incorporate the establishment into the next administration, or the one that has campaigned on the promise to clean out the establishment?
Obama had better hope he wins everything between now and Denver. If he has less than a two-hundred delegate lead going into the convention, he won't win the nomination.
Spot on! Loved your whole post but that last line really highlights the changing loyalty aspect. It reminds me of the Seinfeld opening bit: "Some people cheat on the person they were originally cheating with. Which is kind of like a bank robber demanding money from a teller, "Give me all your money" then turning to their fellow robber and saying, "Now give me all your money too."
Now you're just flat out lying. I'm finished with you.
Not that I would put it past the Clintons to try but the Democratic Party would be even stupider than I thought if they allowed that to happen. It would ruin their convention and alienate millions of voters nationwide who now see Obama as the future of their party.
As for the super delegates, well the Democratic Party can do some serious arm-twisting too. They don't owe the Clintons anything.
Makes you wish for the days when, if they were bought, they stayed bought.
LOL. You just can't handle the truth.
Considering this hypothetical, if B. Hussein Obama wins the popular vote, and looses the nomination because of Rodham/Clintonian inside super-weasels...
(And, I'm absolutely hoping it does not occur)
...might there be worries of, ahem, some forms of civil unrest among the disenfranchised Democrat electorate?
Exactly!
Either way, a great deal of Democrats are going to be very angry and sit the election out.
The pro-Hillary people are not going to take their 'idol' losing gracefully and support Obama.
The fly in the ointment is that if OBama goes to convention with a delegate lead, and the supes give it to Clinton, there will be hell to pay among the rank and file. The Obamaniacs are not your normal 'rats --they are potential insurgents.
Should be REAL interesting at the rat convention, when Hillary is anointed and Obama is put to the back of the bus.
I bet Howard Dean is crapping his pants wondering what he will do to keep the convention from exploding.
Didn’t Hilly just fire her campaign manager? Or did the lady quit?
Hillary: “All calves and no ankles”
Well, HIllary is all fat... no mettle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.