Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton Loaned her Campaign $5M

By Matthew Mosk
Sen. Hillary Clinton will announce today that she has loaned her campaign $5 million, a financial turn of events few could have predicted from the candidate who has for months been the Democratic primary money leader.

Clinton campaign sources confirmed the decision, one that they said suggests her own belief in the strength of the campaign. But the move also has another interpretation, said Joe Trippi, who served until recently as a top adviser to Democrat John Edwards's presidential bid: "She's broke."

What is known about Clinton's finances at this point is that she was substantially out-raised in January by rival Barack Obama. Obama will report having raised more than $32 million in January. Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe told NBC News this week that Clinton raised about $13 million last month. This came as
spending was at its pinnacle for a campaign that had already seen both Clinton and Obama burn through more than $80 million in 2007. By one estimate, Clinton spent more than $9 million on television ads alone in preparation for yesterday's Super Tuesday primaries.

"The loan illustrates Sen. Clinton's commitment to this effort and to ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win across this nation," the Clinton campaign said in a statement. "We have had one of our best fundraising efforts ever on the web today and our Super Tuesday victories will only help in bringing more support for her candidacy."

The loan should help. More money coming in online will also keep the Clinton campaign afloat -- campaign officials said they were seeing one of their best days of online fundraising today, though they would not release a number.

Still, that she felt a need to make the loan "means she's at a tremendous disadvantage moving forward," said Trippi. "The worst thing to be is an 800-pound gorilla who's out of money."

By Web Politics Editor  |  February 6, 2008; 4:16 PM ET
Categories:  A_Blog , Hillary Rodham Clinton , The Green Zone  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Evenly Matched Dems Portend a Long Race
Next: McCain Aide Crunches the Delegate Numbers

Comments

qcpdoivkm xbywc ytbmsxa hocdx kzwibc kpbalwq srimdnlp [URL]http://www.iechpnlbf.lxpj.com[/URL] crxw rfodetlq

Posted by: ynqf gcjmf | April 16, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

phviq ctebzjwxo cfsvokztl blqp zuqx yeqch fbgzho http://www.ezsvkaco.uotqwykh.com

Posted by: xvmutrqe utvoajf | April 16, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

phviq ctebzjwxo cfsvokztl blqp zuqx yeqch fbgzho http://www.ezsvkaco.uotqwykh.com

Posted by: xvmutrqe utvoajf | April 16, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

phviq ctebzjwxo cfsvokztl blqp zuqx yeqch fbgzho http://www.ezsvkaco.uotqwykh.com

Posted by: xvmutrqe utvoajf | April 16, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

oxcdb foejmyt reyo trde vwnm xolcyvhkt mhgkiqe

Posted by: ufan lhpumd | April 16, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

oxcdb foejmyt reyo trde vwnm xolcyvhkt mhgkiqe

Posted by: ufan lhpumd | April 16, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

If politics is run by the money of free speech, every woman is the 800 lb gorilla by virtue of the fact that men can afford to outspend women, whether as candidate or as voter.

By nature, that would qualify as gender discrimination because it ignores the relative poverty of women.

Posted by: pbr1 | February 19, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to know if the campaign will be paying back the loan with interest. Anybody know ?

Posted by: mcfruit | February 7, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Agree, the amount of money being spent on American political campaigns is obscene, by any measure. Lots of people cannot afford to run for office, much like many people can't afford health care. However, if Hillary can't muster the financial backing of her own political campaign, then how is she ever going to get the larger issue of health care costs under control?

Posted by: B628537 | February 7, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

I've been blogging for Obama since October. There are significantly fewer posts for Hillary (pro Hillary, against Obama) now than there used to be.

Posted by: kiku | February 7, 2008 3:23 AM | Report abuse

I read that Hillary had payed some of the SC ministers $200,000 as a "consulting" fee.

Obama knew that was the style of politics there, and offered $5,000. Guess who the ministers endorsed...So Obama set up a grass-roots campaign.

Bob Kerry, Shaheen, BET Bob Johnson, Taylor Marsh, Krugman, .... I'm loosing track....it's go to add up.

What I don't understand, is Clinton uses dirty politics, it bites her because people are tired of it, and then she does it again, and again, and again..

The internet has made it possible to easily debunk her.

Sometimes, I start to feel sorry for her, and then she does something nasty again. I keep thinking there has got to be an end, only to be surprised.

Posted by: kiku | February 7, 2008 3:16 AM | Report abuse

$6 million in 24 hours is impressive. More impressive is that most donations are small monetary amounts contributed by lots and lots of people. I love the power of the internet. I have given $200 in the last two months and I will give more when I get paid again on Friday.

www.barackobama.com

Posted by: skisb | February 7, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Well, Obama supporters just spontaneously raised $6 million in the 24 hours since the Super Tuesday polls closed.

Posted by: elroy1 | February 7, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

What I don't get is why Bill doesn't kick in some of the 31.3 million he got for his recent trip to Kazakhstan to '"oil" a uranium deal for his Canadian buddy who then kicked in the 31.3 million (pay-off) plus the promise of anther 100 million (perhaps after Hillary gets in the White House.

Read the story from the NY Times. Just google bill clinton kazakhstan. Unbelievable what Bill has been up to since he left office.

We don't need 4 more years of Clinton Mania. I just sent $250 to the Obama campaign and my wife kicked in another $100.

This is looking like the greatest crash and burn political story of my lifetime.

Next week we're heading for the Washington State caucus to cast our votes for OBAMA '08.

Posted by: cgarrity | February 7, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

What I don't get is why Bill doesn't kick in some of the 31.3 million he got for his recent trip to Kazakhstan to '"oil" a uranium deal for his Canadian buddy who then kicked in the 31.3 million (pay-off) plus the promise of anther 100 million (perhaps after Hillary gets in the White House.

Read the story from the NY Times. Just google bill clinton kazakhstan. Unbelievable what Bill has been up to since he left office.

We don't need 4 more years of Clinton Mania. I just sent $250 to the Obama campaign and my wife kicked in another $100.

This is looking like the greatest crash and burn political story of my lifetime.

Next week we're heading for the Washington State caucus to cast our votes for OBAMA '08.

Posted by: cgarrity | February 7, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA 2008!!!! YEAH BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: caligirl1 | February 7, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Can't she just get some Whitewater money?

Posted by: Holcombe1 | February 7, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Hey HRC supporters:

You have a great way of deflecting the focus from Hillary to Obama. Can you address why HRC has to loan money to her campaign and the ethics of that without attacking Obama please? Obama has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton's inability to raise, or manage, her campaign cash flow. He is not blocking her donations or planning her campaign spending. She bears responsibility, no?

HRC is of the old guard; he has come from the position of underdog because he was the outsider. It is ridiculous to now say that he is as rich or as rooted in the old guard as the Kennedys OR Clintons just because he won over the major endorsers. He was never "supposed" to be the "it" person; he was never supposed to raise the money, get the support, win the delegates, unite people-she was, after all, Bill Clinton's wife. She was the "sure thing." And now that he has upset her, those with sour grapes want to paint him as what? starting from the same place as her? -as if his ties and resources came as easily. what incredible spin and sour grapes! His victories and funds have been smarter and harder earned!

I'm giving another $5 tonight. It's not much, but it adds up! YES WE CAN!

Posted by: Marie4 | February 6, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Judging by the last time i saw joe trippi on MSNBC, that larger than life surrogate has eaten too many sour grapes.

Posted by: d_money | February 6, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

OK all you Hillary optimists please read this insightful opinion piece. It shows why your candidate is in trouble -- and that's not even talking about political substance:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8363.html

Posted by: bogbug | February 6, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

"Perhaps if she didn't spend so much on people who multipost on every political article of every newspaper in every state, she'd have some money to pay her huge team of advisors."

I have not seen any political posters for Hillary here.
______________________________________

svreader1 lives in California. S/he has over 100 pages of posts -- not posts, PAGES of posts, in the last 30 days. And that doesn't count comments like these, which The Post does not track. S/he often posts the same post in comments to different articles. S/he posted _to this thread_ 13 times.

Only two kinds post like that: a psycho or an employee. Though I do not doubt HRC attracts psychos, my money's on the latter.

Posted by: gbooksdc | February 6, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

alabsh,

"Even in the Commonwealth of Virginia - the greatest state in the Union and the ONLY one to elect a black governor - your vote never counts if you vote Dem for president."

-- don't count on it!
We will have 2 dem senators this fall and our last 2 govs were dem. You are in denial. I am not a party person but Barack vs. McCain will be a real good race -- even here in the "New Dominion"

Posted by: bogbug | February 6, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

svreader: "AND FYI..since you are counting bestselling books, Hillary has also written a couple,"

Yeah! That's right! Remember that philosophical treatise, "Dear Socks, Dear Buddy"? Really thought-provoking.

Jokes aside, I could see her as Sec Def or Chief of Staff... but she just can't compete with Obama in terms of leadership ability or perspicacity.

Posted by: drama_king | February 6, 2008 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Just ponied up my first 35 for Obama and will beat the pavement for him this Tues. Billary can not buy us in MD-DC-VA, which will be an Obama sweep. If you want to succeed with thuggish politics maybe you belong in Kazakhstan with Bill's friends!

Posted by: bogbug | February 6, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

This just silly. Where did Hilliary Clinton get the millions to lend her campaign? Doesn't anyone read? The taxpayers of this country spent tens of millions of dollars and what seven years work? getting to the bottom of that little thing called WHITEWATER. Read the report. It is all there laid out in exquisite detail how Bill and Hilliary Clinton made millions of dollars in a real estate land scam. I don't remember what page to find the exact amount of money the Clintons raked in but I'm pretty sure its in there somewhere.

Posted by: joee123 | February 6, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton fortune is listed at between $10 and $50 million. Don't anyone dare suggest to me that Hillary is supposed to be representing the little guy.

Sounds more like a Clinton-Romney ticket. Please.

To clarify: Obama "shattered previous monthly records" with donations from CITIZENS, not from The Indefatigable American Lobbying Machine.

On February 6th alone, Americans from all walks of life donated $5.5 million of their income to the Obama campaign. How you like THEM apples?

Yes we can. Damn straight.

Posted by: poortrekker | February 6, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Having the Clinton political network that is 16 years in the making at Hillary's disposal automatically puts her in front runner position for the entirety of the race. However, it is not a reassuring sign for Clinton supporters that she's managed to squander the bank while having her commanding lead disintegrate into the void. Her problem is that candidates must *excite* voters to raise money, and Hillary Clinton has always been a buck short of a dollar in the inspiration department.

Posted by: katefranklin60 | February 6, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

"I may not support Obama, but I found the comment about him harrassing law students to be incredibly crass. Please don't make comments like that unless you have some sort of citation or proof...

...I will vote for who I darned well please, for reasons of my own, that I have spent a lifetime forming. I won't vote for Obama because I do not like his platform or his message. Period. I'm sure he's a wonderful human being but the presidential race should not be a popularity contest...I will comfort myself with the reminder that we are blessed to live in a country where free speech - even if it from creepy people - is a right worth dying for."

Posted by: alabsh | February 6, 2008 10:07 PM

As an Obama supporter, let me say that I really appreciated your post. Like you, I cherish my vote. Thanks for keeping the debate substantive! And good luck to you--vote well!

Posted by: tellthetruth | February 6, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Hillary will never settle for being VP. It's a step down from the White House, it's not as much work and wonkery as the Senate, and it won't be a stepping-stone, because she'll be too old in 8 years.

So I have an idea: how about Hillary for Secretary of Defense? She knows this stuff cold, she's a detail nut, and it would be great to have a woman head that dept. up.

Just a thought.

Posted by: kparrparr | February 6, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

alabsh, I wrote a long and detailed response to your post, and this site apparently ate it whole. I'll try to recompose it later...

As for Hillary's loan to herself, it seems to have benefited Obama far more in terms of fundraising impetus. Obama's now raised $5,520,604 as a result of Plouffe's appeal to match the loan amount with contributions to the Obama campaign. LOL

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Top ten ways for Hillary to raise money:10)Get out and work for it, like everybody else. 9)Have Bill go get a real job. 8) Have Bill get a second job. 7)Have Bill charge for stud service.6)Pass the hat at the next burn your bra meeting.5)Get a better class of fans. 4)Stop voting WITH Bush. 3)Call Mark Rich and set up a pardon auction. 2) Start charging your brothers royalties on the pardons they are selling. 1) Do it Hillary! What we have all been waiting for! Show us the twins on a GO DADDY commercial!

Posted by: majorteddy | February 6, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

She is so jealous of OBAMA she smells of
fear, she will do anything not to let an African American become "President of The United States of America " whom I pray for the sake of this country will be OBAMA08*=
I campaign and donate what ever I can for his campaign, even if its only 25.00 dollars every donation counts because you America,are the ones going to make change for this country, please consider a small donation or campaign with his phone bank payed by BARACK OBAMA it costs you nothing to help in this campaign but believing and trusting a better person for our country!
BARACK OBAMA 08 *=

Posted by: USA2 | February 6, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

OK - signing off now as conditions are deteriorating rapidly and people are getting nasty.

I may not support Obama, but I found the comment about him harrassing law students to be incredibly crass. Please don't make comments like that unless you have some sort of citation or proof.

As for the last ding dong who said some of us will vote for McCain "because he got all Clinton's vote" - grow up. I will vote for who I darned well please, for reasons of my own, that I have spent a lifetime forming. I won't vote for Obama because I do not like his platform or his message. Period. I'm sure he's a wonderful human being but the presidential race should not be a popularity contest.

There really are an awful lot of weirdos on these blogs. I will comfort myself with the reminder that we are blessed to live in a country where free speech - even if it from creepy people - is a right worth dying for.

Posted by: alabsh | February 6, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

$5,258,618 to Obama.

The Clinton's want their money back no matter what.

Obama supporters don't want their money back.

Spin that, svreader.

Posted by: binkynh | February 6, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

mnjam --

Nice try, but you're twisting my words again.

Do you guys keep a full time topologist on staff?

Obama supporters are the ones that have been using dirty tricks and saying that they're going to support McCain if Hillary wins.

Clinton supporters want everyone to win and have suggested Clinton/Obama which would give Obama 16 years in the whitehouse, 8 as VP and 8 as President.

Everyone has got to face facts. The Democratic Party is split 50/50 down the middle and neither side will accept a ticket that doesn't include its nominee.

The only question left is Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton.

I think that Clinton/Obama is better, but I'll accept Obama/Clinton.

We need to quickly decide which one it is and then win this election!!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

alabsh, I don't see what's "pretty boy" about growing up poor and black, with a single mother. I don't see what's "pretty boy" about quitting your comfortable corporate job in your first year out of college to go organize on the South Side of Chicago for $10,000 a year. I don't see what's "pretty boy" about going from a stellar law school career to a low-paying civil rights job, making change instead of cashing out. I don't see what's "pretty boy" about someone who could have had $5 million years ago, but who instead was just paying off his student loans a couple of years ago because he wanted to make change for others.

I know Obama seems easy and natural. But he's had to fight for and earn everything he's ever gotten, and he's never been afraid to get dirty to do the right thing. Maybe that's why he wins the city of Peoria in every election.

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Now is the time for the press to find out just who Mr Obama is, not after the the primary season is over.

How many pretty young female law students are there out there that are going to come forward claiming that he gave them "private lessons?"

Its just "he said, she said" so what can he do?

Obama supporters have played hardball with Hillary while demaning she play patty-cake back.

McCain will take out his bowie knife and filet OBama.

If Obama supporters wind up forcing Hillary out of the race, they will piss a lot of Hillary Supporters off.

In fact, they already have!!!


Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 09:31 PM

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

Black Barack is threatening nubile law students. Yes, the Press must investigate.

McCain, a man who cannot even comb his own hair and needs his wife to hold his arm up at rallies, is going to use his "Bowie knife to filet Obama."

HRC can, of course, destroy the Republican attack machine with one cock-eyed cackle.

Her supporters will vote for McCain if Obama wins more votes and has more donors.

Nice.

So this is what Hillary for President has come to?

Posted by: mnjam | February 6, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

kevin --

Who let you out, and where from?

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

$5,124,705 in donations to Obama since the polls closed yesterday!

And that ain't a loan--it for keeps from Obama supporters.

Spin that, Billary fans.

Posted by: binkynh | February 6, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

it doesn't even matter. Obama's supporters already have donated 5 million in 24 hours to compensate for her "loan"

Posted by: jwagoner | February 6, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

dpchen, I understand that I'm not likely to change your mind, but ask yourself: Would you consider it a success if the next president can only get health insurance for 6 million more people -- leaving millions and millions more out?

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

svreader, please stop posting lies, innuendo and unsubstantiated accusations.

Keep your ridiculous delusions to yourself.

Posted by: kevinschmidt | February 6, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

davestickler,
Actually, I do consider it a success, but I don't want to take up more space on this board, because regardless of what it written, it makes no difference to either of us.

Best of luck to both of our candidates.

Posted by: dc210 | February 6, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

binkynh --

The only thing stopping you is the American People.

Americans will elect Hillary Clinton President.

Welcome to the future.
You can relax, you're home now.

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

The comparison of Bush with Obama is funny. The apt comparison is Hillary and Bush. Both rode a family name and coattails to get to where they are now.

Hillary was a corporate lawyer for 15 of those 35 years of experience. She worked for and defended corporations, not the little people she implies through innuendo. She worked full time for less than a year doing charity work.

Yes, she has experience. She has experience helping corporations rip off ordinary Americans. So which side of the economic tree will she help if elected? We don't need more corporate dominance in our politics. And Hillary's record surely points mostly in that direction.

Posted by: infuse | February 6, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

svreader wrote:I'm deeply moved that Hillary and Bill put their money in, but sad that all the free
PR the Obama's get made it necessary for Bill and Hillary to spend their hard-earned money.

Yes SHE can!!!

Vote for America!!!

Vote for Hillary Clinton!!!!
....................
"Yes SHE can" ????
Billary supporters are scamming Obama slogans now?

And "free PR" to Obama necessitated Billary's loan to their campaign? Wow, what transparent spin!

It's the people talking with their wallets, silly!

Rock on, Obama. There's no stopping us now!

Posted by: binkynh | February 6, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

dpchen, you should be expected to do big things when you're given big responsibilities. Hillary's job was to create health care for all, and she was given the full backing of her husband's administration, with all his considerable political talents. She came up about 35 million insured people short. I'm not sure how you call that a victory.

And, if you blame it on the insurance companies, I recommend that you reconsider the importance of good ethics and campaign finance legislation.

In law school, she gave legal advice to the disadvantaged in her free time. Barack Obama sacrificed the opportunity the make loads of money out of law school and went into civil rights practice.

Hillary worked for children's rights after college. Barack Obama actually got an increase in child care benefits and earned income tax credits in Illinois.

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

I just made contribution to hillary,and I will make contribution every week until maxed out, and I will even go to my friends and business associates, or even go to door to door to collect contributions for her campaign, I call upon every hillary supporters to start our own grass movement to seek contribution for her,we've gone too far to give up,it's time to put our money where our votes are. if we believe in ourself and in her,do what each one of us should do,collect $1000.00 each week for her campaign, we will pull it off.victory to us and to her campaign!!!!

Posted by: georgialu2 | February 6, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Wow! What happened to all that support she or they had? Why did she have to provide a loan to continue? Are all her contributions tapped out or maxed? If she can't raise it back plus much more, how are they going on...

Maybe it's false??? I would not put it past them. (Clinton's)

Posted by: QuietStormX | February 6, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I originally wrote that "new Southern strategy" post nearly a week ago. Since then Alabama and Georgia have had their primaries. Obama won both, with margins of 56%-42% and 66%-31% over Clinton, respectively. Yes, an Obama candidacy might indeed change more than just the direction of White House policy. He could also change the makeup of the Senate and the House in our favor.

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

whatmeregister, two things:

(1) I can't believe I'm posting multiple times to the same blog. I usually just read, seldom post. I have never responded more than once. This tells me the issue is much more important to me than I realized.

(2) you don't seem to know anything about the Deep South. Did you check the actual numbers of Democrats who voted? Bet it was tiny, all things considered, and won't make a blip during general elections. Ditto for the other southern states. The Solid South votes as one, like it or not. They don't vote Dem for pres. I always hope for a change, but it hasn't happened yet.

We actually elected a Democratic Governor in Alabama a few years ago. Guess where he is -- in jail! Just our luck! We finally win a big one and our guy crashes and burns. The Dems show up at the primaries because it's the only tme their vote ever counts.

Even in the Commonwealth of Virginia - the greatest state in the Union and the ONLY one to elect a black governor - your vote never counts if you vote Dem for president.

Glad to see you're such an Obama zealot. Me, I don't want to be a zealot for anyone. I fully expect my pres to have flaws. I was a child in Northern Virginia when Watergate happened. I'll never forget the shock and devestation experienced by all the adults around me. The backlash got President Carter elected. Carter is a very, very good and honorable man, but one of the least effective presidents we've ever had. That's because our president needs to be a little jaded, needs to know how the game works, needs to be a bit of an opportunist.

I will never, never vote for an idealist unless they show me they have gotten their fingernails dirty. Sorry- that's not Obama for me. He's a pretty boy with a fancy education who's trying to pull a Bill Clinton (even reusing the "hope" imagery) but not doing it nearly so well. He does not play in Peoria, as they say. He has as little in common with folks in Alabama as George Bush does. Primaries like that mean nothing but delegates. I can only pray - and I mean fervently, truly pray - that Senator Clinton can earn enough delegates to win the nomination. Otherwise I'm voting for McCain. I don't agree with everything he stands for, but at least he's gotten his hands dirty and knows how to play the game.

Posted by: alabsh | February 6, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHAHAHA - Clinton's campaign is on its last legs. First they tout her lead, she loses it. Next they tout her fund raising abilities and now she is broke and they are blaming her manager. And this is the person you want to be president?

Posted by: zendrell | February 6, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

The news about Hillary Clinton donating $5 million of her own money to her presidential bid struck me as odd.

How was it that someone of once modest means who claimed to have worked tirelessly for 35 years ("fighting for YOU!") in the notoriously badly-paid public sector had become so wealthy?

Sure there's been some financial scandals.

And as the late Sen. Everett Dirksen used to say, "A million here, a million there--it adds up to real money."

But why focus on the negative?

Then, suddenly, a tune entered my head and I thought, maybe if I offered a tailored version of it to the Clinton campaign, they'd use it to replace that awful Celine Dion song that used to be Hillary's campaign anthem.

And maybe they'd give me some of that moolah.

I wouldn't ask what account at it Clintons, Inc. it came from, or which lobbyist forked it over (I'm sure a gesture of sheer generosity--why think evil of people, K Street lawyers have hearts too, no?)

It's like Bill with that race card thing. Always leave just a little wiggle room, small enough to fit the word "is" through.

Anyway, remember that girls' song, "It's My Party," written by Wally Gold, John Gluck and Herb Weiner and recorded by Lesley Gore?

Well how about this version for HRC?

IT'S MY (DEMOCRATIC) PARTY

Nobody knows where my Bill has gone
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) left the same time
Why was he holding her hand
When he's supposed to be mine?

It's my Democratic Party, and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you
(For that's what victims do-o-o-o).

Playin' my constituents, flip-flopping like a Wallenda,
Leave me alone for a while
'Till Bill's dancin' with me
I've got no reason to smile

It's my Democratic Party, and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you.

(lead break)
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) and Bill just walked through the door
Like a queen with her king
Oh what a Dogpatch surprise
Monica (Gennifer/Kathleen/Paula/etc.) is wearin' his ring

It's my Democratic Party and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you.

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 6, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

This is why I will not vote for these two. Yes it two running for President. Lying like they are out of Money so she donated 5 MIL. BULL.


Former President Clinton stands to reap around $20 million -- and will sever a politically sensitive partnership tie to Dubai -- by ending his high-profile business relationship with the investment firm of billionaire friend Ron Burkle.

Posted by: MsRita | February 6, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

So, here is the message from the Clintons, yes YOU can. We, are going to feed off your back a little more by not only taking money from you but lending you money to keep your falsely placed hopes alive.

If they believed in their campaign and were so committed to doing whatever was needed for the Americans in need, why not do what they ask you to do which is to give. Not to loan. At what rate of interest?

To make a loan to themselves so that they can keep flying around the country to attend job interviews. How scary is that?

What is it that has prevented more than eight million Americans from missing the true message of the Clintons? The one that says in every word they speak. Keep feeding us. We want to live off you in the same way that every parasite feeds off it's host. Sure we will throw you a bone every now and then to keep the fires burning, to fertilize that seed of doubt. To feed your deepest fears. But the most important thing is that you yes you the American people put us, the Clintons, the ones who are held to a lower standard when it comes to the truth. You must put us in a position to reap the ultimate gain.
Thank you America. Thank you (big smile, fade out).

Wake up you sheep. They are grifters.

Posted by: matthew.fiori | February 6, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Now is the time for the press to find out just who Mr Obama is, not after the the primary season is over.

How many pretty young female law students are there out there that are going to come forward claiming that he gave them "private lessons?"

Its just "he said, she said" so what can he do?

Obama supporters have played hardball with Hillary while demaning she play patty-cake back.

McCain will take out his bowie knife and filet OBama.

If Obama supporters wind up forcing Hillary out of the race, they will piss a lot of Hillary Supporters off.

In fact, they already have!!!


Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

What is more important to the American people, making sure that 6 million kids have health care (Hillary)?

Or a transparency bill that makes requires the Federal Government to make publically available, how its spent its money (Obama)?

Sometimes it's not a question of quantity of bills passed, but the greatest effect of those laws in the lives of people. And sometimes its not necessarily about having your name the bill so that you can claim all the glory, but just making sure it happens.

AND FYI..since you are counting bestselling books, Hillary has also written a couple, and she was named the one of the top 100 most influential lawyers in America twice by the National Law Journal.

Oh, and her valedictorian speech at Wellesley was so impressive, she was covered in Life Magazine at the tender age of 22.

And as a law student at Yale, she served on the board of editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action and provided legal advice for underprivileged and abused children at Yale-New Haven Hospital.

The list goes on... but if you really wanted to know, you could have googled it just as easily as I did.

Posted by: dc210 | February 6, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

alabsh, the parallel between Bush and Obama is weak. Bush was a poor student and failed businessman who became the governor of Texas largely on the back of his family name. He, perhaps by chance, put together a string of six years of unobjectionable governing, at which point national voters were similarly taken in by the family name. But there were never signs of intellectual heft or any sustained record of accomplishment.

But Obama has been successful in everything he's done. I don't think Clinton supporters would deny that he's a tremendously bright person. But he's more than that too; he's a self-made man, someone who defied the odds of growing up black with a single mother to become an incredibly successful student, organizer, teacher, and legislator.

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

That's "lent," not (ugh!) "loaned." Can't her campaign get an infusion from the Clinton Library or Marc Rich? Also, where's Hsu when she needs him?

Posted by: filoporquequilo | February 6, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

Now is the time for the press to find out just who Mr Obama is, not after the the primary season is over.

Guess how many pretty young female law students are going to come forward claiming that he gave them "private lessons"

Its just "he said, she said" so what can he do?

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

What is more important to the American people, making sure that 6 million kids have health care (Hillary)?

Or a transparency bill that makes requires the Federal Government to make publically available, how its spent its money (Obama)?

Sometimes it's not a question of quantity of bills passed, but the greatest effect of those laws in the lives of people. And sometimes its not necessarily having your name the bill so that you can claim all the glory, but just making sure it happens.

AND FYI..since you are counting bestselling books, Hillary has also written a couple, and she was named the 100 lawyers in America twice by the National Law Journal.

Oh, and her valedictorian speech at Wellesley was so impressive, she was covered in Life Magazine at the tender age of 22.

And as a law student at Yale, she served on the board of editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action and provided legal advice for underprivileged and abused children at Yale-New Haven Hospital.

Posted by: dc210 | February 6, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

I'm deeply moved that Hillary and Bill put their money in, but sad that all the free PR the Obama's get made it necessary for Bill and Hillary to spend their hard-earned money.

Yes SHE can!!!

Vote for America!!!

Vote for Hillary Clinton!!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 05:41 PM

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

It's down right SEXIST that the more qualified and experienced candidate had to dip into her millions in book royalties to fund her own campaign.

It is a horrible abuse of th First Amendment that the Press is giving slighly more coverage to a less known candidate in an effort to acquaint the public.

WHY WON'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT HILLARY IS THE BEST -- THAT SHE IS ENTITLED TO BE PRESIDENT?

Posted by: mnjam | February 6, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

$4,843,969 donated to Obama since yesterday... still climbing!

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Bill Clinton just right a tomb of a book called "Giving"? I'm wondering if propping up your spouse's political campaign is one of the recommended activities in it.

Posted by: jag99 | February 6, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

alabsh: "I do not want another Bush, and for me Obama is just that."

Not to be argumentative, but how can you possibly compare a one-time professor of Constitutional law and former president of the Harvard Law Review to a drunkard C-student fratboy doofus?

As for the change that an Obama candidacy could bring to the fall elections in general, let me repost the following:

For those of you who prefer to think strategically instead of (or as well as) emotionally about this election, here are a few numbers based on facts instead of oxycontin-induced rage fantasies:

Alabama's African American population: 26.3%

Georgia's: 29.9%

Louisiana's: 31.7%

Mississippi's: 37.1%

North Carolina's: 21.7%

South Carolina's: 29.0%

Coincidentally, of these six Southern states where blacks make up more than 20 percent of the total population, five have Republican senators up for re-election this fall: Jeff Sessions (AL), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Thad Cochran (MS), Elizabeth Dole (NC) and Lindsay Graham (SC). Mary Landrieu (LA) is the lone Democratic senator up for re-election in these 20+ percent black Deep South states.

If you look at the larger picture for a moment, you can see that we're presented with a very unique situation: Five Senate seats that under normal circumstances would be considered very safe for the GOP incumbent could be put in play if Sen. Obama becomes the Democratic nominee this fall. Obama, after all, has demonstrated an obvious ability to electrify African American voters and get them to turn out in disproportionately high numbers.

If the astounding African American Democratic turnout in South Carolina is any indication, an Obama candidacy in the general election could well present a real threat to entrenched GOP Deep-South senators. Even if the Republicans were able to successfully defend all five of these seats, it would come at the cost of using precious resources that would otherwise be poured into other hotly contested races throughout the country. Howard Dean's 50-state strategy paid off in '06 even without presidential coattails to ride. With Obama actively campaigning throughout the South, firing up the black vote, we'd at least have the possibility of picking up a few seats in the Senate, and likely the House as well.

Just for grins and giggles, here's the breakdown of Republican and Democratic House members within those six 20-percent-plus black-populace states:

Alabama: 5 GOP, 2 Dem

Georgia: 7 GOP, 6 Dem

Louisiana: 5 GOP, 2 Dem

Mississippi: 2 GOP, 2 Dem

N. Carolina: 6 GOP, 13 Dem

S. Carolina: 4 GOP, 2 Dem

As you can see, of these six states, the GOP holds a majority of House seats in nearly all of them. However, if Obama runs and motivates a large number of African American voters to go to the polls, it's pretty obvious to me that some of these GOP seats would shift from safe to competitive, and at least a couple of them would switch hands. Again, the strain on GOP coffers from having to defend so many seats assumed to be uncontestable would mean fewer resources available to pour into other races throughout the country. An Obama candidacy will put the Republicans at a significant financial disadvantage, based on the scenario I've just laid out. Strategically, if you're a Democrat and want to defend and expand your Congressional majorities in the House and Senate, voting for Obama would seem to be the only logical move.

Now switch all this around and think of what happens in those same six states if Sen. Clinton becomes the Democratic candidate. African Americans who rightly or wrongly believe the Clintons played the race card to defeat Obama decide to stay at home (again), the GOP breathes a sigh of relief that it won't have as many competitive contests and can lavish greater spending on fewer races, Southern Republicans become energized at the prospect of being able to vote against their Public Enemy Number One and turn out in droves, and the Democrats go down to defeat and very likely lose their 1-seat majority in the Senate, and perhaps the House as well.

Like I said, if you're a Democrat, voting for Obama is a no-brainer. It's the only guaranteed winning move if you want to stay the majority party. But since we Dems have always been our own worst enemies, I still give Hillary an excellent chance of getting the nomination and losing everything for us.

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

Before we get all teared up about Hillary spending her own money for her campaign, please note the difference. She LENT the money to her campaign. She intends to take it all back.

But the bigger question is why did she use her own money for the loan? Best guess, she is charging max interest rate and intends to make money off your contributions which will be used to repay the loan. P.T. Barnum was right. GO Hillary supporters. She need more suckers.

Posted by: infuse | February 6, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

She had only to say the word. Who knew she was low on cash? I donated today. Somebody has to fight off the rich liberals with their bagsful of cash who think they know what is good for us. I shouldn't be surprised: money always flows most quickly to idiocy in this country.

Posted by: Chicago1 | February 6, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

How is Obama going to bring a change? What are his strengths? Any proven record?

Posted by: milton_dsilva | February 6, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

I will be donating more to OBAMA in the hope that he will finish off the race-baiting Clintons. It's time to turn the page. She's finished.

http://onemantruthsquad.blogspot.com

Posted by: cgg4 | February 6, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

$4,706,737 now...

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

adelepoe, you bring up a good point - I live in Alabama, and I can tell you there is NO WAY a Democrat will ever win the general election there. I've been a Southern moderate dem all my adult life and have never voted the way my states - Virginia, North Carolina and Alabama - have voted. The Solid South will just as likely vote republican once again this November.

I do want to lighten up a bit on my remarks about Obama. I do not think he is shallow - indeed, I don't know him as a person. I stand by my opinion, however, that his ideas are weak and not well thought out. I just don't have confidence in his experience or his abilities - I'm sorry. I wish him the best but I'm not even sure I would vote for him if he won the nomination.

The George Bush presidency has really shaken me to the core. We thought he was a fresh voice, too. We thought he was youngish and excited and that he appealed to the masses. We were happy he did so well with minorities and thought he was progressive in Texas. And he turned out to be a train wreck as a President. He may be a fine person, but he's a terrible President. I do not want another Bush, and for me Obama is just that.

Posted by: alabsh | February 6, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

drama_king: "When you're done, donate to the Obama campaign - we are in the process of matching the $5million infusion that Hillary gave itself. We've almost reached it, less than 24 hours after Super Tuesday."

$4,676,967 and counting...

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Svreader said earlier that Ankleless Annie (the waddling alien invader candidate from the Planet Duck) "has always been the underdog." Why the "under-"?
Then there's that obviously [ought-to-be-] committed gal who's "dontating" (her spelling, repeatedly) to the "Tear BAG"...as La Pingona herself "loans" (journalist-illiterate for "lends"), not gives, big bucks to the campaign! How oligopolistic! Don't be a sucker, madam; let the Senatrix stare for the rest of her life in Chappaqua ('tis rumored the manse lies atop the old Roaring Brook Farm pigsty) at the un-Pledged White House furniture while waiting in the wee hours every night for the husband to be brought staggering & stumbling home.

Posted by: sawargos | February 6, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Obama won a lot of states which in the general election will go Republican. Has anyone checked to see which primary party is donating the most to Obama's campaign. I strongly suspect it might be the Republican party.

Posted by: adelepoe | February 6, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who think that Obama's campaign is about empty exhortations to "hope," I invite you to go to pages of Obama's website where he discusses the nuts and bolts of his policy proposals.

This campaign takes place in numerous forums, some of which are good for demonstrating wonkishness (debates) and others of which are good for generating energy and enthusiasm for political engagement (speeches in front of thousands). The internet allows Obama to provide as much detail as you want to see about his policy proposals. Inspect for yourself. Kick the tires. This machine is solid, baby.

Download the entire policy doc, or look at each set of issues one by one:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

When you're done, donate to the Obama campaign - we are in the process of matching the $5million infusion that Hillary gave itself. We've almost reached it, less than 24 hours after Super Tuesday.

To continue to automotive metaphor, the Obama people have hit the NOS, baby. :p~

Eagerly anticipating the opportunity to Barack the House in Maryland Feb 12!!!

signed,
White Feminist for Obama

Posted by: drama_king | February 6, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

I am an independent voter from Austin, TX. After hearing about Hillary's money woes on ABC news today, I gave my first donation to the Obama campaign for $150 and I set up a bi-weekly run for the same amount. We have to stop Hillary in her tracks NOW. My friends and I in the great state of Texas cant wait for our turn to show Barrack that yes he can win convincingly in the South with WHITE MALE voters. Be nice Hillary and he may make you a VP to get more women voters

Posted by: SHOOMBIE72 | February 6, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

But Muddy Buddy, the health care program you're talking about was essentially a piecemeal reform salvaged from the wreck of universal health care. In light of the task she was given, I'd describe that as a singularly unimpressive accomplishment -- and one that relied heavily on Ted Kennedy actually doing the grunt work of getting the legislation passed.

That means we're left with expanding veterans benefits and some nebulous mentions of victories for children. Those are two good things, but they hardly constitute a major record of accomplishment over her 35 years of public service.

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I think both Clinton and Obama supporters need to take a breath and calm down here.

We're all on the same side people, we have a common enemy, let's not go too far in bashing each other.

Posted by: cha_michael | February 6, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

OK, you silly people who wonder where the Clintons got $5M -- can you say "book deals?" Honestly! Bill Clinton got one of the biggest - if not the biggest - signing endorsements in history. Senator Clinton's signing deal was also very lucrative. Additionally, President Clinton receives quite a bit of money from speaking engagements, and both were successful attorneys before they entered politics. In short, $5M is probably not a big stretch for them.

When Senator Obama spoke at the last Democratic convention I was blown away. I said to myself - he will be a major player in the Democratic party - and I was excited for that possibility. I could definitely see him as president.

Now, after hearing him speak for the past several months I am sad to say the bloom has worn off. While his presidency would mean a major coup for our fight for diversity in this county, I cannot support him as a candidate. He simply has no substance from what I can see. His ideas are childish and shallow. I truly thought he would be the next President, but now I am thinking I will vote for McCain if Obama wins the nomination. As someone earlier in this blog said, Obama reminds me a lot of George Bush - an idealist and a true believer, albeit on a different side of the political spectrum. I do not want another overly principled president, even if he is is more like President Carter (who is also a very good man) than the peurile President Bush. President Bush is probably a good man as well - just too much of a zealot for me. I am afraid Obama would be the same.

Sorry, Senator Obama - my support is firmly in Senator Clinton's camp.

Posted by: alabsh | February 6, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama seems to be showing a tougher side these days, and I don't know whether it comes off that well. He's been quoted as warning superdelegates not to dis his voters, and he's been seeming a bit too mired in the details of how he's going to win. It would be better, as some have suggested, to discuss what the American people are concerned about right now--the economy. Does he have a position on the $3.1 trillion budget proposal? Has he done something to signal the leaders of Tennessee and Kentucky that he is willing to help with their clean up efforts? He should have also congratulated Hillary on her great achievement on Super Tuesday. There's nothing wrong with a little admiration for the competition, just like in sports. Senator Obama, it has been reported, is a very charming, warm, and nice person. Right now, he's coming off as a little petty.

Posted by: Timeaftertime | February 6, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Not bad, having 5 mil laying around on a Senator's salary. hmmmmm

Posted by: kentduffy | February 6, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

There is no debating that Obama has created an impressive fund raising machine, which is fueled by small contributions from individual donors and which takes full advantage of the power of the Internet.

Hillary's fund raising activities are more old-school, more reliant on big donors and special interests, and now increasingly reliant on her significant personal wealth as well.

I ask you, which approach is more likely to bring about real change in our country? Which approach is more beholden to special interests and is more likely to maintain the status quo in Washington? I have been very impressed with Obama's ability to organize something of this magnitude when everyone was saying it can't be done and he could never out-campaign the Clinton machine. This 'inepxerienced' candidate surely has some impressive organizational skills which will serve him well if he is elected President. Go Obama!

Obama is the future. Hillary, although an extremely bright politician, is the past.

Posted by: jak2 | February 6, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

svreader: Will you remain with the campaign and work for free now?

Posted by: mytwokids78 | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what is happening here. Hillary voted for the war because she did not take the time to look at the cost side. Colin Powell tried to explain the situation to Bush what it would do to the budget if the USA took over Iraq. Bush did not listen, of course it was not his money. Hillary comes out of the same mould as Bush. She is ready on day one to bankrupt our country even further. She is without thinking putting 5 million in her campaign. She must have a deal with Bill or with Putin or someone who is going to give the USA another goose. How does she expect to get this money back?

Posted by: coatesmoe | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Uh-oh. Begala & Beelzebbubba (Mr. Matalin) will be out mugging in the streets, Reich will be picking pockets, Chelsea's taking bids on the White House furniture, Mr. Hsu's hawking his Little "Lead" Book and the husband's being forced to pay cash in advance at the Harlem "Score's" & having a helluva time discounting those fatcat hangers'-on Clinton Global Initiative "pledges."
Take THAT, "Tear BAG!" Ready, kids?....
"!CUIDAO CON LA PINGONA! !MANDONA_Y MARICONA!"

Posted by: sawargos | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

ISN't IT AMAZING how often the WP and others can breathlessly mention Obama's win in Alaska by 3 to 1 margin and somehow forget to include in the headline, or the first Paragraph the fact that Obama got 302 votes in Alaska. Or that 3 of the states he won generally give 90%+ of there votes to Republicans in the general election, and that the totals for both Democratic Candidates is far less than the 3rd or even 4th place Republican.

On What Senator Clinton has done.
1. Child Health Care Program for the Nation.
2. Vastly Improved Medical benefits for Soldiers, esp National Guard.
3. Several Child protection victories from her years with the Children defense fund.
....
Now What has Obama Done.
1. Enthic reform, you now have to stand up to eat your 1000$/pd cavier.
2. Voted Presence in nearly ever vote to defend Women's Reproductive Choice in Ill.
3. Made Undefined Change the Buzz Word.
4. Gave a really good convention speech.
????

Posted by: Muddy_Buddy_2000 | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

As a black person, I am really hard pressed why I would be voting for Obama. Sure, he makes great speeches, bringing America together and all that bull crap. Did't someone say the same thing when he was running for the presdency a few years abo? Yes, I remember it was George W. Bush. So, if Obama wins -- John McCain, you have my vote thank you!

Posted by: james30 | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

svreader: "Obama supporters better wake up and smell the coffee.

Their "Scorched earth policy" will backfire.

Together we can win.

If they keep up what they're doing, they'll lose, no matter what!!!"

If you believe that, then you should do the noble thing and show some of the unity you keep talking about. Close ranks and support the best candidate, Barack Obama.

Otherwise, stop berating others for what you refuse to do yourself, which is to abandon one's loyalty for a candidate he or she believes is best for America and instead start supporting an obviously inferior one. We'll get through this election either way, but voicing legitimate criticism of Hillary is not practicing a "scorched earth policy." It's called "politics."

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton has always been the underdog.

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

Although the Clinton campaign may truly be in need of an infusion of funds, I agree with the many posters who suggest that the campaign hopes Hillary's loan will spur sympathy among her supporters and cause them to reach for their wallets to make donations. And it also has the effect of manipulating public opinion (they hope) to create the impression that Sen. Clinton is the underdog.

Posted by: cpaustin408 | February 6, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters better wake up and smell the coffee.

Their "Scorched earth policy" will backfire.

Together we can win.

If they keep up what they're doing, they'll lose, no matter what!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

The Hillary supporters should really end the "electability" meme. There are issues of character and authenticity at stake, and that's why Obama receives tremendous cross-over appeal not only from Dems but from the Right and Middle. These are not made-up qualities. Perhaps you cannot see them, but they exist. The opposition sees them as well and respects them and will respond to them even if their establishment "attacks" Obama's allegedly nefarious "unknowns".

I know you all take it as Gospel that sleaziness and experience in administering it are pretty much the greatest assets a successful politician could hope for, but the November match-ups don't bear that out and they never do. Don't let your hatred for Republicans blind you to what the larger electorate will or will not respond to. After all, they looked the other way on Bill's impeachment, and Bill himself played a much sleazier role in that than Obama's played in his own alleged shortcomings. The electorate still thought the Republicans were sleazier and awarded Bill's relative casting of himself as the larger victim with high approval ratings. But they are really starting to see through Hillary with her knee-jerking willingness to throw out this sort of a card as if it were Christmas-Time.

At some point the Hillary supporters will either have to start using some logic or face the cold, hard reality when it hits them in November (or hopefully before). They are so jealous of Obama's rhetoric, because when you get right down to it - they have nothing but their own, much more self-serving and watered-down emotion and rhetoric. Obama just manages to merge more positive and inclusive emotions and rhetoric with a few facts and some reason every now and then. Jealousy and a sense of entitlement will not win you this election. It's not where the party or the country are going either.

Posted by: ejester_8 | February 6, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters, I ask again:

What has she done?

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

I tell you what folks. Many of you (who call yourself Democrats) need to get your thinking lined up in a way that will permit you to be a firm supporter of *whoever* wins the Democratic nomination. It's going to be a tough fight agst the Rethugs--esp. once the timely release and manipulation of "terror" news begins. If you think your way into hating HRC *or* BHO, you're going to risk handing the White House to the Fake Talk Express. It's time to be grown-ups.

Posted by: dsk61 | February 6, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Funny! The sociopathic mysogeny continues! This just shows Obama is the darling of rich white elitists. BTW, Utah, Idaho haven't voted blue in a presidential election in decades, wonder why they picked Obama yesterday? O right, because they're going to vote for him in November, NOT.

Posted by: DPoniatowski | February 6, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm dontating whatever I can to HRC online tonight. and, she doesnt have to be broke for me to do it. She is still the smartest girl in the class. If she wins, BO should consider himself lucky if she picks him for VP. more and more he's turning into just another politician...can't believe people are so taken in by his lofty rhetoric...makes me want to say....what else ya got??

Posted by: ogdeeds | February 6, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

I'm told big Republican money is being sent in to Obama to knock Hillary out in her own party because they think they cannot beat her in the fall. Romney ran a week of non-stop ads against Hillary in California trying to do the same thing. Dirty tricks - Republicans - what a shock! Investigate!

Posted by: DrSue

BALONEY!

You're told? You're told by whom? The White House Ministry of Propaganda? It is your dirty tricks won't work!

Besides you, it is the HillBillys who are playing the dirty tricks. This has been substantiated and reported on numerous websites, unlike your ridiculous unsubstantiated accusations of being "told.".

Posted by: kevinschmidt | February 6, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

I'm dontating whatever I can to HRC online tonight. She's my girl.

Posted by: ogdeeds | February 6, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

I know it's getting acrimonious, and we don't like that, but this is an important decision. It's one thing to be gratuitously personal, but it's another thing to care -- and care seriously -- about the differences between candidates, and what that would mean for the country.

I'm most concerned because I think Clinton supporters have gotten the vague notion that she's accomplished a lot in her life, yet, when challenged, they're unable to produce any list of her accomplishments. I posted a few of Obama's accomplishments above, largely in response to the idea that he's a lightweight -- an impression that, I think, arises because he's such a good poet that nobody bothers to talk about the prose he's written.

So I throw down the gauntlet to Clinton supporters. What has she actually gotten done?

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

OUCH!!! That's all I have to say. This is going to be devastating if it gets picked up more broadly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddgom0QWvLs

Posted by: CH1234 | February 6, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama raised over $41,000,000 last month and is in no danger of running out anytime soon, unlike the the HillBillys.

Obama has the money and he has the voters too:

'Campaign Manager David Plouffe said: "By winning a majority of delegates and a majority of the states, Barack Obama won an important Super Tuesday victory over Sen. Clinton in the closest thing we have to a national primary."

"From Colorado and Utah in the West to Georgia and Alabama in the South to Sen. Clinton's backyard in Connecticut, Obama showed that he can win the support of Americans of every race, gender and political party in every region of the country," Plouffe said. "That's why he's on track to win Democratic nomination, and that's why he's the best candidate to defeat John McCain in November."

The Obama campaign attached an Excel spreadsheet containing "state-by-state estimates of the pledged delegates we won last night, which total 845 for Obama and 836 for Clinton -- bringing the to-date total of delegates to 908 for Obama, 884 for Clinton."'

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8358.html

Posted by: kevinschmidt | February 6, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

nolen8r & richard
You're right! This is ridiculous and shows how much we need to change the tone of our politics. For right now, I'm going to take the dog for a walk.

Posted by: joy2 | February 6, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

@Caliguy75 - I happen to agree with you and others like you, wholeheartedly. Crying poverty @ this stage is a ploy, pure and simple. I won't believe that campaign's fallen on hard times unless I see the books myself - and then I'd have to be mindful that there could very well be another set of books hidden away somewhere else.

Also, let's not forget the TWO aces up Clinton's sleeves: (1)John Edwards has not endorsed anyone nor transferred his delegates yet (and while he loathes the idea of being VP again and "Billary" looms large in a co-presidential vein, I wouldn't totally rule out a Clinton-Edwards ticket); and (2) the Michigan/Florida issue re: seating delegates is still unfinished. The DNC will allow the Credentials Committee to determine (@ the Convention) whether those delegates will be seated, even though candidates deferred to the authority of the DNC and did not campaign in those states (except Hillary on election night in Florida - surprise; nor, did she take her name off the ballot). In addition, some of the committee is comprised of her "superdelegates"...see where this is going? Besides, I don't think Obama or any of the Democratic also-rans will challenge her to the point of bringing litigation, because they don't want to fracture the party any more than her candidacy already seems to have done.
But, I have to give it to her - she knows how to play all the angles, and she/her team are good at it. However, if someone wants to win so badly that they're pulling out all stops (and incorporating any and every trick in the book to win - underhanded or otherwise), please don't insult my intelligence when you're giving your acceptance speech at the Convention by saying "The American people were behind me" and "The people have spoken" and all that crap.

Posted by: Knathenak2 | February 6, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Has even one investigative reporter dug into Obama's fundraising sources? I'm told big Republican money is being sent in to Obama to knock Hillary out in her own party because they think they cannot beat her in the fall. Romney ran a week of non-stop ads against Hillary in California trying to do the same thing. Dirty tricks - Republicans - what a shock! Investigate!

Posted by: DrSue | February 6, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Sorry this was posted a few times, I thought it did not go through at all. Maybe site overview will delete all but one, I hope. Very sorry for the inconvenience.

Posted by: GrandmaDee | February 6, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

WOW folks. Talk about competitive inhibition. Lets just burn the our own house down and let McCain continue his 97 year war in the Middle East. Lets just argue if which dem is best while Huckabee rewrites the Constitution to better reflect his God's laws. We have been so angry for so long we are spoiling for a fight with anyone, even ourselves. That is just how poisonous the last 7 years has been. Lets keep our eye on the prize. And remember this is going to take all of us to get it done. Otherwise we will continue our wandering and wondering why we are own worse enemy.

Posted by: richard.d.young | February 6, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Former Presidents make money from speaking engagements and selling books.

And by the way, to those who want to villify Hillary, she donated ALL the proceeds from "It Takes A Village," about $850,000 to charity.

Posted by: dc210 | February 6, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

There's something I don't understand. She is LOANING her money to her campaign, vs. DONATING it? She needs and wants other people to donate to her campaign but wants to be reimbursed for her contribution? Why would anyone contribute to a candidate who won't put their own skin in the game. She and Bill have millions and are quite capable of generating more millions in the future (books, speaking fees, etc). I must be missing something here.

Posted by: lfahnest | February 6, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

thinker...
To say Obama "avoids debates whenever possible" shows you haven't been paying attention. There have been a ton of so-called debates. Hillary Clinton is already a known entity. Barack Obama was not. That's why he prefers to make personal appearances and meet people face-to-face. I'm glad I got to see/hear him speak twice here in Arizona and shake the hand of the next President of the United States.
OBAMA 2008

Posted by: joy2 | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

There's something I don't understand. She is LOANING her money to her campaign, vs. DONATING it? She needs and wants other people to donate to her campaign but wants to be reimbursed for her contribution? Why would anyone contribute to a candidate who won't put their own skin in the game. She and Bill have millions and are quite capable of generating more millions in the future (books, speaking fees, etc). I must be missing something here.

Posted by: lfahnest | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

thinker...
To say Obama "avoids debates whenever possible" shows you haven't been paying attention. There have been a ton of so-called debates. Hillary Clinton is already a known entity. Barack Obama was not. That's why he prefers to make personal appearances and meet people face-to-face. I'm glad I got to see/hear him speak twice here in Arizona and shake the hand of the next President of the United States.
OBAMA 2008

Posted by: joy2 | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

There's something I don't understand. She is LOANING her money to her campaign, vs. DONATING it? She needs and wants other people to donate to her campaign but wants to be reimbursed for her contribution? Why would anyone contribute to a candidate who won't put their own skin in the game. She and Bill have millions and are quite capable of generating more millions in the future (books, speaking fees, etc). I must be missing something here.

Posted by: lfahnest | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK ON OBAMA, AND THEY ARE LETTING HIM RUN FOR PRESIDENT! Geez, guess that job is not as important as some of our low level State positions. Amazing how the poor wounded sheep are listening to a slick salesguy like Obama. His daddy raised him well, slick, slick, slick! I guess in Hawaii he was so poor that he could barely afford private school -- private high school in Hawaii. Has anyone checked what the cost is to have your child entered into Punahou? Quite a private school. And of couse, he will not mention Granny's oil interests, old money in her home state. Yes, his Momma may have been on food stamps at times, but Granny raised him after the fact. Mamma had quite a different life than Granny and Obama had. And yes, I imagine his drug days and burnt out mind and morals may have been the reason he succombed as a "poor attorney" to allow his criminal buddy Rezko to lead him into crime, but as he said, I made a mistake!! Sure did, but look at that gorgeous 2million dollar home in Chicago. Yep, he pulled himself out of "poverty" by his hard working efforts (wonder how much ole Rezko spent on this sharp salesman before he was indicted?
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR MORE INFO INTO HIS LIFE. AND THE SHEEP ARE READY TO FOLLOW HIM OFF THE CLIFF! MAKES ME VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
BETTER WAKE UP PEOPLE AND REALLY SEARCH YOUR HEART NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DORM RALLY. IS IT TOO HARD TO THINK FOR YOUR SELF?

Posted by: GrandmaDee | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK ON OBAMA, AND THEY ARE LETTING HIM RUN FOR PRESIDENT! Geez, guess that job is not as important as some of our low level State positions. Amazing how the poor wounded sheep are listening to a slick salesguy like Obama. His daddy raised him well, slick, slick, slick! I guess in Hawaii he was so poor that he could barely afford private school -- private high school in Hawaii. Has anyone checked what the cost is to have your child entered into Punahou? Quite a private school. And of couse, he will not mention Granny's oil interests, old money in her home state. Yes, his Momma may have been on food stamps at times, but Granny raised him after the fact. Mamma had quite a different life than Granny and Obama had. And yes, I imagine his drug days and burnt out mind and morals may have been the reason he succombed as a "poor attorney" to allow his criminal buddy Rezko to lead him into crime, but as he said, I made a mistake!! Sure did, but look at that gorgeous 2million dollar home in Chicago. Yep, he pulled himself out of "poverty" by his hard working efforts (wonder how much ole Rezko spent on this sharp salesman before he was indicted?
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR MORE INFO INTO HIS LIFE. AND THE SHEEP ARE READY TO FOLLOW HIM OFF THE CLIFF! MAKES ME VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
BETTER WAKE UP PEOPLE AND REALLY SEARCH YOUR HEART NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DORM RALLY. IS IT TOO HARD TO THINK FOR YOUR SELF?

Posted by: GrandmaDee | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK ON OBAMA, AND THEY ARE LETTING HIM RUN FOR PRESIDENT! Geez, guess that job is not as important as some of our low level State positions. Amazing how the poor wounded sheep are listening to a slick salesguy like Obama. His daddy raised him well, slick, slick, slick! I guess in Hawaii he was so poor that he could barely afford private school -- private high school in Hawaii. Has anyone checked what the cost is to have your child entered into Punahou? Quite a private school. And of couse, he will not mention Granny's oil interests, old money in her home state. Yes, his Momma may have been on food stamps at times, but Granny raised him after the fact. Mamma had quite a different life than Granny and Obama had. And yes, I imagine his drug days and burnt out mind and morals may have been the reason he succombed as a "poor attorney" to allow his criminal buddy Rezko to lead him into crime, but as he said, I made a mistake!! Sure did, but look at that gorgeous 2million dollar home in Chicago. Yep, he pulled himself out of "poverty" by his hard working efforts (wonder how much ole Rezko spent on this sharp salesman before he was indicted?
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR MORE INFO INTO HIS LIFE. AND THE SHEEP ARE READY TO FOLLOW HIM OFF THE CLIFF! MAKES ME VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
BETTER WAKE UP PEOPLE AND REALLY SEARCH YOUR HEART NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DORM RALLY. IS IT TOO HARD TO THINK FOR YOUR SELF?

Posted by: GrandmaDee | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK ON OBAMA, AND THEY ARE LETTING HIM RUN FOR PRESIDENT! Geez, guess that job is not as important as some of our low level State positions. Amazing how the poor wounded sheep are listening to a slick salesguy like Obama. His daddy raised him well, slick, slick, slick! I guess in Hawaii he was so poor that he could barely afford private school -- private high school in Hawaii. Has anyone checked what the cost is to have your child entered into Punahou? Quite a private school. And of couse, he will not mention Granny's oil interests, old money in her home state. Yes, his Momma may have been on food stamps at times, but Granny raised him after the fact. Mamma had quite a different life than Granny and Obama had. And yes, I imagine his drug days and burnt out mind and morals may have been the reason he succombed as a "poor attorney" to allow his criminal buddy Rezko to lead him into crime, but as he said, I made a mistake!! Sure did, but look at that gorgeous 2million dollar home in Chicago. Yep, he pulled himself out of "poverty" by his hard working efforts (wonder how much ole Rezko spent on this sharp salesman before he was indicted?
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR MORE INFO INTO HIS LIFE. AND THE SHEEP ARE READY TO FOLLOW HIM OFF THE CLIFF! MAKES ME VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY.
BETTER WAKE UP PEOPLE AND REALLY SEARCH YOUR HEART NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DORM RALLY. IS IT TOO HARD TO THINK FOR YOUR SELF?

Posted by: GrandmaDee | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama sound likes a leader of a cult,with his supporters chanting his 'change' mantra.Change what?

Has he any real policies?

Im voting for Hilary.

Posted by: mark_29_ | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Wow people chill out a little bit, the tone has shifted over the last few weeks to become quite nasty. Regardless of whom I support, some Obama folks need to be little less self righteous and inward looking, and some Hilary people need to be a little less dismissive of a serious candidacy for the Presidency.

Posted by: nolen8r | February 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

I'm a lifelong liberal Democrat, and I'm inspired by Barack Obama's message. Today I finally made my first contribution of $100. I will be making weekly contributions.

If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, I anticipate sitting out the general election rather than vote for her. I find her to be inauthentic and cynical; the Clinton's race-baiting behavior in South Carolina really turned me off.

Posted by: MichaelH3 | February 6, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

By the way, the comments from Bill Clinton about how giving money to their campaign would violate the spirit of campaign finance is just another example of the Clintons saying and doing whatever they think will get them the win, regardless of whether or not they have any intention to follow through with it.

I mean, he said that *a month ago*. It certainly reminds me of how Hillary was for the Iraq war until it became inconvenient, for NAFTA before it became inconvenient, for allowing torture until it became inconvenient, etc.

Heck, she even both wants to be her own candidate and wants to take credit for her husband's administration -- at the same time!

I don't mean to sound like some right-winger, but what does she actually stand for? Where is her compass?

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

I hope the Clintons don't start dipping into all that dough Bill and Poppy Bush raised for disaster relief. (Even though they might consider this an impending personal disaster.)

Posted by: joy2 | February 6, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Let me repeat a line of one of the previous comments, because it seems quite accurate and to the point: "Now she [HRC] wants a debate every week to get free media exposure."

Posted by: pggowland | February 6, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

A poster, apparently named Jeff, asked here earlier what Obama has ever done in his life.

Well, in Illinois, he authored and passed the most significant ethics reform in a generation. He expanded health care access. He reformed the criminal justice system to reduce convictions of innocent people -- a politically hazardous proposition which involved his winning over legislators, police, and a governor who were all originally unwilling to touch the topic.

In the US Senate, he's improved our program to deal with what Kerry and Bush both said was the greatest security threat to America -- loose nuclear weapons -- and to lock down old Soviet conventional arms as well. He's worked on creating a plan for dealing with an avian flu epidemic. He helped write major ethics reform, and wrote and passed the "Google for government" bill that creates transparency and accountability in government spending. His record is deep and suggests someone who's both able to work across party lines, and is interested in taking on big issues, even if they aren't well-known or easy.

In his younger days, he was a community organizer, improving housing, helping create access to work for the poor, and registering thousands of new voters.

In law school, he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review, arguably the most prestigious position a law student can hold. Heck, he's even a best-selling author.

Point is, Barack Obama has been successful in everything he's tried. Contrast that with Hillary Clinton, who has no major legislation to her name in her eight years in the Senate; whose major responsibilities in the Clinton administration ended in a string of disastrous legal appointments and in the utter failure to enact universal health care; and who voted the wrong way on the most important vote of her Senate career.

If you want competency, your vote should go to Obama.

Posted by: davestickler | February 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton has taken so much garbage from so many for so long. Who are you people that think you can beat someone up who has given their life to public service and never needed to. No, I don't want to know who you are. Yes, to someone earlier -- Obama is running a Bush-style campaign: he avoids debates whenever possible, and saturates the airwaves with expensive TV ads (i.e., Super Bowl, etc.). No agent of change - he is total establishment politics. Black with a twang in his voice for South Carolina, White with a ton of relatives he never sees in Kansas. Let's stop pretending this is new or any kind of change but cha-ching cha-ching!

Posted by: Thinker | February 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton has taken so much garbage from so many for so long. Who are you people that think you can beat someone up who has given their life to public service and never needed to. No, I don't want to know who you are. Yes, to someone earlier -- Obama is running a Bush-style campaign: he avoids debates whenever possible, and saturates the airwaves with expensive TV ads (i.e., Super Bowl, etc.). No agent of change - he is total establishment politics. Black in South Carolina, White in Kansas. Let's stop pretending this is new or any kind of change but cha-ching cha-ching!

Posted by: Thinker | February 6, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

svreader- The irony is, Obama would not- and should not- take a VP to Hillary. No one in their right mind would, with Bill doing the back-seat-driving.

The best part- there's NO WAY Obama would ask Hillary to be VP.

HE DOESN'T NEED HER!

AHaHa Ha!

And to prabir1960, You're just gobbling up media BS.
Obama's candidacy relies on people like me- middle class. My husband and i both work full time. He works at a book store, and i work from home- and combined, we make about 40k a year before taxes. I haven't been able to donate alot, but I've given all that i can, and volunteered a ton.

Hillary has maxed out all her lobbyist buds.
BooHoo.

Good thing the Clintons have $52 million they can "loan" themselves to get back into power. They'll need it.

Posted by: julieds | February 6, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

That's rather interesting in its implications. I wish campaigning wasn't so expensive, but I think it's probably time I put some money where my mouth is and wrote Obama a check.

Posted by: SarahBB | February 6, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

rmanne: "What is the interest rate?"

I'd assume it would be interest-free. Can you see Billary charging interest that would be paid to them from contributions collected from their own supporters? That would sure go over real well...

"What happens if the campaign can not pay back?"

That's an interesting question insofar as personal finances are concerned. If I spent money on myself to run for office I don't think I could deduct the expense from my taxable income. However, if I make a loan to someone and it's never repaid I can write it off as a bad debt and treat it as a loss for tax purposes. So if Billary loans their own campaign money and it's never repaid, can they deduct it as a loss, tax-wise? That would hardly seem fair.

I know there must be at least one CPA in Washington who's encountered this situation before and can provide some insight. Whaddya say?

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

I donated $30 to Obama today because I want to be part of the surge he's going to get when they announce that he raised $5 million (or more) in one day after Super Tuesday.

I encourage everyone to go donate to Obama. He's the last candidate who is not accepting money from Political Action Committees and must be supported for only using true, honest grassroots fundraising.

www.barackobama.com

DONATE!

Posted by: thecrisis | February 6, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Now, her campaign has become a self-financed soap opera. I cannot wait to read another visceral NYT Dawd's op-ed piece.
Anyway, at least she is getting good at acting--misty eyes, crying, and coughing. Her make-up gets thicker as well.

Posted by: mkk0918 | February 6, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

You people are as naive as I thought you were if you think Mr. Obama didn't start this campaign LONG ago with his little book. And his donations come from BIG FOLK... 32million in one month doesn't come from the litlte folk. He's the wine and cheese guy. And he's gonna owe lots of people lots of favors. They are and have special interests. The boys in DC supporting him are going to want to run things for him. After all, he's only been there for four years! The Republicans are rubbing their hands together waiting for this little guy. Watch out. Here comes President McCain.

Posted by: Thinker | February 6, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm guessing that one reason Hillary Romney Clinton's campaign is running out of money fast is that far more of her staffers seem to be of the paid variety than are Obama's. For instance, when I drove up to Delaware yesterday to volunteer for that state's GOTV effort, the Obama operation in Wilmington was a mass of eager, fired-up (Ready to Go! ...oops, sorry 'bout that) and completely unpaid individuals, many of whom were like myself from out of state and drove hours to help out in any way they could. And this was not the first time I've witnessed this--I saw the same sort of thing when I was in North Charleston for the South Carolina primary.

Barack Obama generates excitement and hope, and he garners a level of dedication and loyalty among his supporters that Clinton has had to dish out tons of cash to keep up with. If I had been a paid (that is to say, Clinton campaign) worker who was pulling down just the minimum wage for the canvassing hours I've put in in Maryland, South Carolina and now Delaware, I'd have earned several hundred dollars by now. And that doesn't include expenses for gas, travel, meals, etc.

I and thousands of others are GIVING to the Obama campaign what Clinton has in many cases been PAYING for in hers. And I'll continue to give of my time as much as I can between now and the Pennsylvania primary in April. I'll be hitting the phone banks this weekend for Maryland (and maybe Virginia), and I'm taking off work for the second Tuesday in a row to help the GOTV effort. How many of the Clinton supporters on this board feel strongly enough about their candidate to do the same?

(BTW, to those fantastic folks I met yesterday in Delaware--Joe's Crab Shack was the perfect place for a post-election party!)

Oh, and before I forget, I'm heading over to barackobama.com and giving another 50 bucks now. After all, even a grassroots campaign needs cash. Lessee now, what's $50 times 650,000... hmmm...

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Willseattle --

If your purpose is to "fire up" Clinton supporters and get them to contribute money to Hillary, you're doing a great job.

Just how deeply do you want to bury any chance of Obama being offered the VP job?

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

On top of the reality that Super Tuesday resulted in Sen Obama winning both more delegates and having more total votes for him than for Sen Clinton, the reality that much of her donor base is maxed out while Obama has barely begun to tap his must really sting.

Combine that with the remarkable turnout for Obama in the caucus process and formerly Red states, and it's a wonder she doesn't realize that she's running on fumes.

Upcoming: three more caucus states.

Not going to be pretty.

Posted by: WillSeattle | February 6, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Its sad, we're in real danger of winding with another "who would you rather have a beer with" George Bush empty suit.

Obama is very pretty.

The problems we face are pretty ugly.

Hillary is tough as nails and smart as a whip.

She may not be as "pretty" as Obama, but she'd be a much better President!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

......someone didnt "know that Billary had 5M" Oh come now! Thats peanuts for them. Bill became incredibly rich doing nothing but politics all his life. HMMMMMMM wonder how he did that.....? And isnt that reeeeeaaaaaallly why they run so hard?

Posted by: davidesnyder | February 6, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Obama is the candidate of "change" alright. cha-ching cha-ching. This "new and different" candidate is going to be "beholdin" to many big boys - including the boys club in DC. They can't stand the thought of a woman as President - to the point they'd suffer our country with a total unknown four year Senator with very little to say one-on-one with Americans. What a trip. I just sent Hillary my donation. And, Mr. Obama nees to tuck in his ego - because not everyone does like him and not everyone will vote for him. He's a Pied Piper who never gets down off the stage to talk one on one with Americans. Let's see him do it. He won't. Too risky you'll see how flimsy he is.

Posted by: Thinker | February 6, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Actually I thought this was coming and I'm not supriesed... hillary never wanted to confirm how much money she raised for the primary contests, vs the general election.

She tapped every lobbiest she could, spent all of it, and they have reached their limits. Legal, or otherwise.

Obama has a near-bottomless pocket because he collected a few dollars each from millions of supporters who he can go back to for more - and back again if need be.

Hillary had to spend every dime to stay competetive. She is running a hollow campaign backed by the dinasaur dem party insiders.

Hillary is the "Democratic Romney"

Posted by: onestring | February 6, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Imagine, Hillary can't even manage her campaign finances ... and yet there are those who want her to manage the U.S. economy...! And just where did Bill and Hill get their $41 million from? Through their 35 years of public service?

Bill and Hillary are totally corrupt politicians, doling out promises of patronage and largesse to their union friends and "street money" to other minions who live off the poor and oppressed in our country.

The thought that this sleazy couple can even look the American public in the eye and suggest that eight more years of having them in the White House - Bill with his philandering ways, Hillary with her arrogance and malevolence to those who disagree with her, will constitute "change" - takes one's breath away.

Posted by: ingeandjoe | February 6, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Obama is the candidate of wine-sipping affluent liberals aptly represented by pictures of hugging Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. Imagine the fun the republicans will have with their ads showing how Obama sucked up to these rich liberals. Go Obama!!

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 6, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama has been getting a free ride from most of the press.

The NYT recently examined one of Obama's promised on the campaign trail in Iowa that he passed nuclear legislation to report even small leaks.

But the reality was he caved in conference to the Republicans and nuclear industry, watering down the bill until there was no legal requirements, only a voluntary recommendation:

"When residents in Illinois voiced outrage two years ago upon learning that the Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants, the state's freshman senator, Barack Obama, took up their cause.

Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was "the only nuclear legislation that I've passed."
"I just did that last year," he said, to murmurs of approval.

A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.

Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama's comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

From the AP - An analysis by the Campaign Finance Institute, which tracks trends in political money, found that Obama raised about a third of his money in 2007 from donors who gave $200 or less. Only one-third of his money came from donors who have given the legal maximum of $2,300, compared to Clinton who raised about half of her money from "maxed out" donors and only 14 percent from donors of $200 or less

Posted by: dlwags | February 6, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Lyn says: "Obama's message from day one has been clear, it's not about either of the candidates, it's about spearheading a movement that will fundamentally change the way that politics are run in this country."

I fell for this for a short time last fall.

Everyone talks hype like this Lyn. Bush talked about how he was going to change the tone in Washington and bring in a clear air to Washington. (His faith was going to be the way to unite us.)

Carter also had great vsion. He was a FAR better President that Bush was, but did not get as much accomplished.

Al Gore didn't have a vision -- like halting global warming. What happened to Al Gore is that he was bashed by 1) Ralph Nader who

Ah, but Gore did not have a great personality. It meant nothing -- the Right Wing bashed him anyway. (He never said he "invented" the internet you know. he said he "created" the internet in a context of giving it crucial financial funding.)

The Right Wing is going to bash Obama. He really has not experience (will give you an example next post to demonstrate his type of hype). Worse, the Right Wing is going to rip him on his Muslim connections (the name Barack Hussein, his preacher is a big Farrakhan supporter, his origins), his admitted cocaine addiction as a teenager, his lack of holding his hand over his heart when the national anthem is played. see Snopes.com video and tell me the Right Wing will be playing it non stop.)

The Right Wing is very powerful and have already run the Clinton through the attack ads.

After all, why is it, you might ask that adultery is only bad when it involves a Democratic politician?


Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love this nugget from a stump speech Bill gave in Iowa last December:

"[Clinton] railed against the Supreme Court for blocking some attempts to limit the influence of money in politics.

" 'We are very frustrated because we have a Supreme Court that seems determined to say that the wealthier have more right to free speech than the rest of us.'

"And he implied that he would not use his own funds to support his wife's candidacy.

" 'For example, they say you couldn't stop me from spending all the money I've saved over the last five years on Hillary's campaign if I wanted to, even though it would clearly violate the spirit of campaign finance reform,' he said."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7548.html

Posted by: whatmeregister | February 6, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

It will be useful for the readers if Post explains why a candidate would loan money to the campaign in place of giving it directly? Is this a normal practice when campaign needs money?

What is the interest rate? What happens if the campaign can not pay back? Could Clintons' raise money for some other campaign and get their money back?

I assume Clintons' are confident they can raise money and get back their $5m. Knowing thier history with pork bellies future trades, I would doubt they would give $5m of their money if they are not confident.

Posted by: rmanne | February 6, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is ahead in all the national polls about 10% over Obama.

Hillary won the most populous states -- New York, California, also New Jersey, Massachusetts.

And even more important of all: Hillary is the most qualified candidate.

I think anyone who puts faith that "charisma" is going to amount to a hill of beans in a worstening economy between haves and have-nots -- is in la la land. it will take hard work and experience to forge any real compromises.


Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse


Judging from this situation it appears as if Hillary is not beholding to as many lobbyists as Obama has made her out to be.

Was that accusation poor judgment or just embellishing on his part?

I was under the impression she was doing fine without donations, now that I know differently I will be sending cash and hope her other supporters will as well to ensure that lack of finances is not what keeps her from being our next president.

$10, $20 or even $1 donations add up if everyone pulls together.

Hillary 2008, America can not afford anything less.

Posted by: cjones210 | February 6, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Hillary running out of money is pretty embarassing. I remember articles that said how she was the inevitable Democratic nominee because she had all the establishment support and a huge fundraising advantage over the other potential candidates. Anyone else thinking Mitt Romney? Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Posted by: malcolmgkatz | February 6, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

"Yes SHE can!!!" - svreader

This is the fundamental problem that will ultimately cost Clinton the nomination. Obama's message from day one has been clear, it's not about either of the candidates, it's about spearheading a movement that will fundamentally change the way that politics are run in this country. The only way to enact change is to stand up as Americans and demand it from our elected leaders, otherwise everything will continue to be the same. Hence the slogan "Yes WE Can", not "Yes SHE Can". And you wonder why first time voters and young people gravitate to his message. It's because they're included.

Posted by: lyndonluk120 | February 6, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

To Preed:

What do you mean by "Tried and True" network of people? And...you must have support from "vessels" that can implement change? If you have something in mind just ask instead of being vague.

Are you saying that the network of people that's currently supporting Obama is not "tried and true"? You mean, they lack experience? In campaigning? What exactly?

Regarding "vessels"...are you saying that he lacks support or something from some kind of group? By vessels you mean the the Democratic establishment?

I was going to try to answer them but it hurts my head just trying to figure out what exactly you mean.

Posted by: ovwong | February 6, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Steve,

"Perhaps if she didn't spend so much on people who multipost on every political article of every newspaper in every state, she'd have some money to pay her huge team of advisors."

I have not seen any political posters for Hillary here.

Perhaps you are just a paid newspaper poster for Obama???

such mindless banter. Have you even bothered to looked at any issues?

Here's one:

Paul Krugman, chief economist of the NY Times explained why Obama's tax relief plan is quite conservative compared to Hillary's (actually looked more similar to George W. Bush's tax relief plan.)


"The Obama campaign's initial response to the latest wave of bad economic news was, I'm sorry to say, disreputable: Mr. Obama's top economic adviser claimed that the long-term tax-cut plan the candidate announced months ago is just what we need to keep the slump from "morphing into a drastic decline in consumer spending." Hmm: claiming ...that a tax cut originally proposed for other reasons is also a recession-fighting measure -- doesn't that sound familiar?

Anyway, on Sunday Mr. Obama came out with a real stimulus plan...but tilted to the right.

For example, the Obama plan appears to contain none of the alternative energy initiatives that are in both the Edwards and Clinton proposals, **and emphasizes across-the-board tax cuts over both aid to the hardest-hit families and help for state and local governments. I know that Mr. Obama's supporters hate to hear this, but he really is less progressive than his rivals on matters of domestic policy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/opinion/14krugman.html?scp=7&sq=krugman&st=nyt



Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

whoever susan is up above, that's the most heartfelt and stupid reason to give to a political campaign I've ever heard of. You just gave in to the reasons that hillary gave herself money, to garner sympathy. You've just been had by a political stunt

Posted by: BigB1 | February 6, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

This loan will let Hillary keep up the pressure until the next wave of donations comes in.

Hillary supporters, hold your heads up high! We can win. Don't believe the media's spin.

We've been suffering under the press's barrage for weeks, a carpet-bombing conducted against cool reason. We've been told that our candidate is dead, that the Kennedy endorsement was going to kill her chances in Massachusetts and California, that Obama is where it's at.

Well guess what. Not everyone is drinking that Kool-Aid!

Millions of people went out and voted for Hillary. They aren't "against the Black candidate," or "for the Woman candidate": they're picking the best candidate.

I repeat: Stop letting the media try to write you out of its story.

And that's exactly what the press is trying to do.

I've never before believed all that rhetoric about the press inserting its biases but examples abound. Trouble is, it's so borrrrrring to worry about. Wouldn't it be more fun to lose your head and get on the Obama bandwagon?!?! Who wants to think, when it's easier to buy the press hype!

It would be excruciatingly boring to list the many examples of "reporting" that bear out my claim, but they're there, plain as day. We heard all about Ted Chappaquiddick Kennedy's endorsement of Obama, but nothing about the endorsement of Clinton by Bobby Kennedy's children. Or of Clinton by the brother of Cesar Chavez. Or of Clinton by Maxine Waters (African American Congresswoman).

No, the media wants to tell you about Ted Kennedy. Well, look what the people of Massachusetts think of the Kennedy/Kerry endorsement!

Hillary supporters unite! We can win this thing for her, and for the good of the American people. America needs her leadership. It needs her smarts. It needs her to twist some arms, to fashion compromises, to fight back against GOP tactics (they're not going gentle into that good night, folks!).

Come out of the shadows, and put our gal in the White House.

Don't let Obama supporters make you feel like you're being "racist" for supporting Hillary. (And, oh yes, I have certainly and unfairly felt *that* heat lately.) The instant someone tries to make you feel inadequately progressive for not supporting a Black candidate, remember that they aren't feeling one iota of guilt for not supporting a woman.

Don't let them tell you she can't win. Yes She Can.

Don't let them tell you Obama polls "better" against McCain. Those polls feature an Obama whose negatives aren't known! By November 2008, the negatives will be known. Can you say Michael Dukakis?

Posted by: Antistrophos | February 6, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Do Obama supporters have any idea just how much ill-will they're generating on the part of Clinton supporters?

Just how deeply do you want to bury any chance of him being offered the VP slot?

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Here's what I'd like to ask Obamanites: How productive do you think Obama can be when he does not have a "tried and true" network of people on his team? The idea of change is a good one, but talk is cheap. In order to make real changes, you must have support coming from the vessels that can implement the change. Furthermore, does anyone believe that Obama is being pushed into place only to have the script flipped when it is time for the general election? What is wrong with change and experience!

Posted by: preed | February 6, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama loses Massachusetts after high-profile endorsements by Kennedys/Kerry, etc....go figure. The media loves this guy, although....ummm, what has he ever done? Is someone going to actually ask that question?

Posted by: jeffcoud1 | February 6, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Dumb question but where did the Clinton's get 5 Million bucks in disposible income?

Posted by: ljfamily | February 6, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Clinton is broke and while she won really only ONE of the big fish on Super Tuesday (NY doesn't count for godsakes), yesterday was NOT a big win day for her. In fact, I think Obama is much better position going into Ohio, Louisiana, Maryland, et. al. than she is.

And running out of money is just another in a series a serious morale blows to the "aura of inevitability" knows as Hillary for President.

Editorial Comment: Why in the name of God is the Post -- a great paper -- asking that village idiot Joe Trippi to speak on anything regarding campaigns. I mean...what incredibly USELESS F#$%#$%ING POLITICAL INSIGHT from a guy who has now lost TWO, count em TWO, winnable presidential campaigns. Well said Trippi...now go play with your blocks in the corner and let the adults work.

Frankly, I don't ever want to hear from that loudmouth, arrogant, headline hogging, politically retarded, self-aggrandizing moron ever again during the 2008 election cycle. He is the political equivalent of Helen Keller -- as blind and deaf as it gets to what the American people are looking for in political candidates. He is more self-promoter than political consultant -- which explains why he is on MSNBC so darn much.

Posted by: polcamp | February 6, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters may yet snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by destroying the Democratic Party.

Obama doesn't know how to win, just how to spread dirt to try to make other people lose.

He is quickly using up the goodwill Clinton supporters have had for him.

He's in real danger of winding up with nothing.

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Romney is flushing good money after bad, Hillary loans $5million, McCain takes out a loan against his health insurance, Obama rides hordes of small donors to flush coffers. Anyone who bases his/her vote for Hillary on the premise that she is the "electable" candidate may wish to consider the financial dimension thereof.

Posted by: priestd | February 6, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Hey truthseeker -- veneral disease really isn't so bad... looks like you caught it by hanging around some bad spellers.

I don't understand how anyone can classify Obama's campaign as "grassroots". After all, when you show up on "Oprah's Favorite Things" you've gone pretty mainstream.

There's no doubt that Obama's got great energy and charisma, but don't count Hillary out. She simply has more substance. The best thing Obama supporters can do to present their candidate favorably is talk about the issues and build Obama's credibility. Keep the childish and mean-sprited Bill Clinton barbs out of the discussion. They don't reflect well on you or your candidate.

Posted by: susan | February 6, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"Let's take someone I really admire, the mayor of New York City Mike Bloomberg. I like him, he's a really good mayor," Clinton said to voters in West Des Moines. "If he runs for president, he could spend $1 billion and hardly miss it. That's real money for most of the rest of us. Under the law there are no constraints."

-- Bill Clinton, December 23, 2007

see http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2007/12/page/3/"

Posted by: donahues | February 6, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's political machine began as a seven-series beemer with the V12 under the hood, and now in the middle of the race the machine becomes a hooptie in need of repair (if not major overhall). WOW!

Posted by: meldupree | February 6, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Bud0: yes poor people don't make it very far in politics.

"Obama and his wife were already flush with success when they went house hunting last year. Their combined income--bolstered by payments for his best-selling autobiography and advances for future books--topped $1.67 million. His wife, Michelle, had recently been promoted to a $316,962-a-year position as vice president at the University of Chicago Hospitals.
...
When Sen. Barack Obama decided to buy a stately $1.65 million home last year on Chicago's South Side, Antoin "Tony" Rezko and his wife wasted no time. The same day the Obamas closed on the house, the Rezkos closed on the purchase of the adjoining vacant lot, which once was the estate's lush side yard.

In normal circumstances, the two real estate transactions probably wouldn't have raised an eyebrow. There is, after all, nothing illegal or untoward about an aggressive developer buying hot property next door to a rising political star.

But these are not normal times for either Obama or Rezko, two longtime friends whose fortunes have taken sharp turns in opposite directions.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0611010273nov01,1,2716725.story


Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Obama keeps growing!!

Still a contested race, but when was the last time we thought Hillary was the inevitable candidate for the Democratic Party?

And he's got the volunteers and the war chest get a victory at the convention.

Time for new leadership.

Go Obama!!

Posted by: alarico | February 6, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

I'm deeply moved that Hillary and Bill put their money in, but sad that all the free PR the Obama's get made it necessary for Bill and Hillary to spend their hard-earned money.

Yes SHE can!!!

Vote for America!!!

Vote for Hillary Clinton!!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps I'll donate some more to the Obama campaign. After all, I can, since I am a small donor, one of 650,000, many of whom are not remotely near the campaign donation limit.

Can we continue to legally donate to Obama?

Yes, We Can

HRC is a good candidate. Maybe not so much as a money manager.

Perhaps if she didn't spend so much on people who multipost on every political article of every newspaper in every state, she'd have some money to pay her huge team of advisors.

Posted by: steveboyington | February 6, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Good to see Hillary putting her money where her mouth is.....shows she believes in her cause and will do what it takes to win.....

Posted by: leider3676 | February 6, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

I know some Obama posters are zealots but when I see so many hurtful comments made about Obama it reminds me about what we are fighting for.

We are fighting against an entrenched power base that think this nomination is owed to Clinton. Clinton thought this would be easy.

Here comes this inexperienced upstart and gues what. He beats you in more states, more delegates, and fund raising.

Why? Because you are the problem we are trying to clean up. Everyday I feel stronger and will support Obama even more.

Let me go and give him his next $250.

Everyone should do the same!

www.barackobama.com

Posted by: comingawakening | February 6, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton team is incorrigible. Obama avoiding debates whenever possible? There were about 20 so far.

Any truth to the rumor that the new HRC campaign signs say:

Will Campaign for Food

Posted by: steveboyington | February 6, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

I heard all the Clintons have veneral disease from Bill's fun raising activities.

Posted by: Phil5 | February 6, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

aepelbaum says: "you can't find worse place to invest your money than in Hillary, if you ever seek for the truth. But it is your money! I am though one hundred percent sure that you'd never ever really invest them now in Hillary, if you never did it before. She is on the obvious fall right now!"

TS replies: I see you are using the WP for your sources.

Hillary is 10% in the national polls. She won the most populous states.

Delegants are still based on the NUMBER of people and not the square footage in rural states like Idaho and Alaska.

Meaning we are a democracy and Hillary is ahead by the number of people.

Plus, I'd vote for her even if she's behind because she's the most capable candidate out there.

Obama is not showing any substance for me, and the "vision" thing sounds just like George Bush -- which we know how that went.

Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

I didn't even know Hillary Clinton HAD $5 million.

America really is a total plutocracy.

Posted by: Bud0 | February 6, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

i wonder if hillary CRIED when asked about her personal loan to her campaign...

*sniff*

*sniff*

you know.. i love my country so much, i had to use my own money... you realize of course.. i don't want to be president for me... i don't want my own air force one.. i don't want a helicopter landing on my lawn.. i don't want a presidential motorcade.. i don't want to have to eat filet mignon and lobster every night in the white house on 200 year old china as a string quartet plays softly in the background... i don't want everyone in the world to kiss my feet and salute me as the world leader... all i want is to help the little people of america live their lives as comfortable as they can...

*sniff*

*sniff*

oh boo hooo hooo... booo hooo hooo... i feel so bad now... is my mascara running? are you getting this on camera? maybe a close up... oh boo hooo hooo.... boo hoo hooo...

Posted by: presGWBfanclub | February 6, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Per your story today, where did Hillary get $5 million dollars? I thought her husband was
just a Governor and President with limited salaries.

Media, ask the tough questions.

Posted by: locherry | February 6, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

After reading this article, I was motivated to do something I've NEVER done before -- I made a contribution to a political campaign. I like Obama, but I really think the country needs a seasoned leader right now. Obama's time will come and when it does I will support him wholeheartedly. In the meantime, if Hillary is willing to stand by her campaign and put her assets on the line, well I guess I can spare a little too.

Posted by: susan | February 6, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Where is the Super Tuesday report on CALIFORNINA???

We were told that Obama was going to take it over from Hillary, but he lost by 10%.

Guess the W. Post doesn't think that is very relevant. But Alaska? That's huge

Huge that is, if you count SQUARE FOOTAGE and not POPULATION.

Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Truthseeker1, you can't find worse place to invest your money than in Hillary, if you ever seek for the truth. But it is your money! I am though one hundred percent sure that you'd never ever really invest them now in Hillary, if you never did it before. She is on the obvious fall right now!

Posted by: aepelbaum | February 6, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to Clinton's financial news, I just gave $100 to Obama.

Posted by: amymarie1 | February 6, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

I can't understand who and why is still giving money to Clinton's campaign

Posted by: aepelbaum | February 6, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Go Hillary!

Guess it's time to kick in some money to you! I've been playing it cheap.

Posted by: truthseeker1 | February 6, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

People with momentum are not giving money to ther campaign. Hillary DOESN'T have any momentum currently. She should and would lose. She is the deep past. Nobody wants the joined dynasty of Bush-Clinton, which caused so much terrible problems to the country for last twenty years. The joined ticket Obama/Clinton is the still born baby, and everybody understans it. So, if this ticket is forced during the democratic convention McCAin would win. I think that he would win in the case of the ticket with nominated Clinton, but this is slightly different, as I do not know, whether he would yield her or not. He yielded Bush once. So, it is kind of difficult with McCain, but Republucans, the same way, as all people around, understand that Clinton-president would be the major possible disaster. So, if democrats don't stop her, the general election would. However, I think that democrats stopped her on their own.

Posted by: aepelbaum | February 6, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

drfuller,

Great post!

What is so amazing about Obama's campaign, is that he is truly doing it at the grassroots level. He is raising money from people like me and my friends, who truly have little to give. We wait for our next paychecks and give $50. It is a campaign for the people, not big money donors, and we can expect a White House run for the people as well.

Let's go Barack! Last night was such a great victory, played almost entirely on Hillary's turf.

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | February 6, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is the ULTIMATE establishment insider. Her campaign was entirely built on the premise that she had the nomination "sewn up." (How lady-like.)

No claims of "underdog" will help to change that perception of her now except for those with the memory of a flea (and while there are clearly a certain percentage of those around the nation still voting in this primary season, they're a declining minority).

But Bill and Hillary's private wealth IS going to be a BIG issue if (BIG "if") she she still manages to get the nomination, ESPECIALLY now that their money (and its source) is clearly playing a part in her ability to compete on an even footing with the OBVIOUS favorite of the majority of informed Americans.

Posted by: miraclestudies | February 6, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

I see this as the beginning of the end of Clinton's advantage with Superdelegates. Obama raises $32 million in January while Clinton raises $13 million and lends $5 million to stay alive. Now she wants a debate every week to get free media exposure. Because her campaign is broke.

Posted by: seaflow | February 6, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is broke?! How embarrasing! What did she do to get the loan, crying? A nominee with the inability to raise money through the American voters should never be accepted! What America is a strong leader that can bring change! YES WE CAN!!!
Just take a look at the 8 states due this month. Nebr-Wash-Wisc-Haw-Louis-Maine-Maryl-DC Washington is questionable Maine with the least delegates will go to Hillary and the remaining 6 out of 8 to Obama, because YES WE CAN!!!

Posted by: sam_of_amsterdam | February 6, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

I suppose the real question here today about Hillary's $5-million 'loan' is where she got the money to donate in the first place? She hasn't held a 'paid job' (other than her Congressional position) since she was in her 20s (last I checked, 'first lady' slots carry no salary). The Clinton MACHINE was 'broke' during the Billy misbehavior episode of a decade ago -- and now there is $5-million in spare change to save her campaign? It just doesn't make sense to me -- but hubby Bill has been pulling in tons of money on 'speaking' engagements since his 'retirement'. I'm a Texan (a registered Republican for over 35-years) and I can't WAIT TO VOTE OBAMA on March 4th in Dallas to ride the TIDE.

Posted by: DRFJR | February 6, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

A lot of people are going to donate to Hillary. She deserves the best chance because America deserves the best candidate and the best President.

Vote For Hillary Clinton!!!

Find out what you can do to help, at www.hillaryclinton.com

Posted by: svreader | February 6, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Just be careful, folks. The Clintons are skilled manipulators and will use this to make them look like the underdog when they have all the credentials, connections, and the most # of superdelegates already committed. It's another way to play the victim card.

She staged this in her speech Tuesday night when she said she won't be "swiftboated" already setting the stage for her being the new underdog.

She's still the frontrunner and her lack of money despite having all these connections should be a wake up call to everyone and it only supports even more who the real candidate of choice is here.

We'll probably start hearing talking points that she's the "people's candidate" appealing to those who make under $50,000 and can't afford to give like Obama's supporters. . . That these are working men and women -- she'll pose herself as the Robin Hood of the Democratic Party taking on Obama the "establishment" candidate.

She already has stolen Obama's mantle of change, taking on special interests, and bringing people together. None of those things are who she really is or were part of her campaign from the beginning. She paid $7500 to a voice coach to alter the way she speaks so she comes across more likeable.

The good news in all this is that America is very slowly seeing through it all, but don't underestimate them. They will stop at nothing and have to win at all costs.

And don't forget what they pulled in South Carolina.

If you're on the sidelines and haven't given yet to Obama's campaign, consider giving a small amount. The stakes have never been higher.

Posted by: Caliguy75 | February 6, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton Campaign is "broke"???
Maybe they should call in a favor from their pardoned partner, Susan McDougal.

Posted by: Absolute_0-K | February 6, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

She's not going anywhere. They're just trying to scare up more money from her donors. She will have a great February that will rival or surpass Obama's fundraising for the month, and then she will claim that she has the momentum in the race, and that the "people are behind my campaign". It's all a political move. Don't believe the hype.

Posted by: associate20 | February 6, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton(s) machine is broken. It's pulled over on the side of the road, smoke pouring out and the hood is up. No matter how much The Clinton(s) pour into this campaign, it's over. Bring on McCain.

Posted by: nicholaslerek | February 6, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Billary can call her financer from Kazakhstan..

Posted by: TennGurl | February 6, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I know she has a First Amendment right to do this, but it seems to call for very careful scrutiny of Bill Clinton's wealth-generating activities, no?

Posted by: donahues | February 6, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Shades of Mitt Romney...

Posted by: priestd | February 6, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

OMG... Clinton is the front runner.. She is the former first lady..

Posted by: TennGurl | February 6, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

This is a potentially devastating headline. Clinton has staked her campaign on her "35 years of experience" argument. How do you now go to the voters, after having to dig your campaign out of a financial hole, and then try to sell yourself as a competent steward of the economy? There's just no good spin on this, especially when contrasted with Obama's astonishing fundraising abilities. (And he did it without the benefit of the Lincoln Bedroom.)

Posted by: blavery1 | February 6, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

And yet somehow Obama is still allowed to trumpet his "underdog" status? Obama is running a Bush-style campaign: avoid debates when possible, and saturate the airwaves with expensive TV ads (i.e., Super Bowl, etc.)

Posted by: cali_snowboarder | February 6, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

That's gotta hurt. When will we get reports of today's online contributions to all campaigns? Donations seem to spike on days after primaries.

Greg Sargent at TPM Election Central got confirmation from Howard Wolfson that the $5mil is over and above the $13.5 Hillary raised in January.

Posted by: kparrparr | February 6, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Wow.

Posted by: JakeD | February 6, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company