Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton Campaign Manager Steps Aside

Patti Solis Doyle, the campaign manager for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (N.Y.) presidential bid, has stepped down from that post and will be replaced by longtime Clinton operative Maggie Williams.

"This week Maggie will begin to assume the duties of campaign manager," Solis Doyle said in a statement. "I will serve as a senior adviser to Hillary and the campaign and travel with Hillary from time to time on the road."

The Clinton campaign was largely silent about the change at the top. But with losses to Barack Obama in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington state and Maine over the weekend and uphill climbs on Tuesday in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, one aide suggested new blood was needed.

"The next few weeks are going to be brutal, never mind that the team is already completely exhausted," said the source.

Solis Doyle acknowledged as much in her statement of resignation: "This has already been the longest presidential campaign in the history of our nation, and one that has required enormous sacrifices from all of us and our families," she said.

Solis Doyle has had a long relationship with the New York senator dating back to the days when she served as scheduler for Clinton in the White House. Solis Doyle served as Clinton's fundraising and strategic guru during her early political career, then managed Clinton's leadership political action committee in the years leading up to the 2008 presidential bid. Due to that relationship, there was little surprise when Clinton announced that Solis Doyle would manage the effort.

Clinton praised Solis Doyle today. "Patti Solis Doyle has done an extraordinary job in getting us to this point -- within reach of the nomination -- and I am enormously grateful for her friendship and her outstanding work," the New York Senator said in a statement released this afternoon.

In the wake of a surprisingly large defeat at the hands of Obama in the Iowa caucuses, there was talk of a staff shakeup and Williams was brought in to coordinate the campaign's activities. That move came on the same night that Clinton scored a stunning come-from-behind victory in New Hampshire -- a win that quieted talk that Williams was being brought in to replace Solis Doyle.

Williams, who served as the first lady's chief of staff during Bill Clinton's first term, is seen within the Clinton world as a "Hillary person" -- loyal to the senator first and always. Insiders describe her as a forceful presence in the campaign and someone who casts a considerable shadow over the operation.

"Anointing new strong, smart eyes and leadership now is a signal of the steadfast commitment to what's ahead while millions of dollars continue to pour in," said one Clinton insider. "'In it to win it' has to be more than a slogan."

(Here's a 1994 profile of Williams by The Post's Ruth Marcus.)

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 10, 2008; 7:44 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Sweeps
Next: FixCam Week in Preview: Potomac Primary

Comments

According to a report on MSNBC Clinton hasn't paid the $7500 tab to a small cleaning business for cleaning her HQ in Iowa during Novemebr, December and January. Poor guy has been getting the runaround for months now. I guess they will blame Patty Solis for this too. Someone has to take the fall and it sure isn't going to be the folks responsibile for Clinton's poor campaign strategy.

Posted by: claffiteau | February 11, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

LOOK OUT FOLKS... Hillary's ship is beginning to sink, and Hillary's getting desperate. And when Hillary gets desperate, she gets mighty nasty. Expect more email blasts trashing Obama. Expect more Clinton lies and cheating. Expect more heads to roll in the Clinton campaign. Expect Billy-Boy to strong arm as many superdelegates as he can get his hands on. Expect it all. It's gonna be a very bumpy ride to the convention.

Posted by: TedBlase | February 11, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

spectator 2, I misquoted, unintentionally. Beyond that, the point stands. I think most Obama supporters will vote Dem in the general, irrespective of whom is the nominee. However, neither Dem nor Repub party faithful win elections - swing voters do.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

bsimon: "Spectator, I think you overstate what 'most' Obama supporters would do."

Now come on, I didn't think you'd stoop to the mibrooks game of putting words in people's mouths. I said "a large chunk." That's based on comments on these boards and what the Post has reported in campaign coverage.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 11, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

" say it an't so! "

I value integrity & predictability over policy. In MN-speak, I'm a Wellstone Independent.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

No, no, no!

bsimon say it an't so!

"I'm an independent voter who will vote for McCain if the Dems nominate Senator Clinton for President."

I, too, am an Independent supporting Obama. Looks like our votes would cancel each other out if Obama does not get the nod...

Posted by: AdrickHenry | February 11, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

spectator2 writes
"Most Clinton supporters have said they would have no trouble voting for Obama if he's the nominee. It's the large chunk of OBAMA supporters (probably including you, for example) who have said they would vote for McCain or stay home."

Spectator, I think you overstate what 'most' Obama supporters would do. Unless, of course, you have proof. I would believe that more Obama supporters than Clinton supporters would vote for McCain, if their preferred candidate is not nominated. This should come as no surprise, because Obama attracts more independent voters than Clinton does, so it stands to reason that more of them will be open to the GOP alternative.

And that is the crux of the problem that faces the Dem superdelegates. If neither Clinton nor Obama win a majority of elected delgates, do they support the candidate that attracts the most swing voters, or do they support the candidate that has more support among the party's base?

If they pander the long-term Dem voters & give the nomination to Clinton, they risk losing the swing voters to McCain, and - possibly more importantly - risk alienating the youth vote that has been inpsired by Obama in huge numbers, and possibly the african-american vote.

From where I sit, it seems obvious what the Dem leadership should do. But then, I'm an independent voter who will vote for McCain if the Dems nominate Senator Clinton for President.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

bsimon, good point and I am fully aware of the context of McCain's 100 years in Iraq comment...

My contention is that a permanent presence in Iraq is not in America's best interest.

Do the American People realize that it was the "temporary" basing of American troops in Saudi Arabia during Desert Shield, and then, Desert Storm that birthed al-Qaeda and turned Osama bin-Laden against us?

How much more do you think a permanent Western (read infidel) presence in a Muslim country will fuel Islamic Extremism?

If we put enough troops in Iraq -- say, a Super-Surge -- I believe we probably could subdue the country and reduce, or virtually eliminate, the killing of American troops. But how many troops would we need to do this? General Shinoseki seemed to think 300,000 right?

500,000 was not enough to subdue Vietnam. Perhaps, if we re-instated the Draft, and put about a million men in Iraq we could bury the insurrection.

My question is, whether the number is 300,000 -- 500,000 -- or one million, would this be a wise use of our resources? Would this be wise from a geostrategic vantage point? Would we be inspiring another generation of Enemies?

We need to fight the REAL enemy. Bush was right to go after the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, but the Invasion of Iraq was a disastrous diversion.
To stay in Iraq would be to continue pumping billions and billions of dollars into the WRONG THEATER -- and at the same time turning many millions more Muslims into Extremists. Extremists bent on killing Americans.

So, whether McCain is correct in asserting that the Iraq can be subdued if we persist long enough misses the point entirely. The point is, would this be a wise thing to do? Establish permanent bases in a Muslim country, when to do so, would not only drain away our much-needed resources, but would also strengthen our Enemy.

We need to get out of Iraq as fast as possible and go after the real enemy as quickly as possible.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | February 11, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

"It's very curious, this hold Hillary has over some of her supporters. If Hillary doesn't win, they will support McCain (or stay home) and thus, eventually, drive the last stake through the heart of Roe v. Wade.

An interesting legacy for Hillary Clinton's short-lived political career..."

What a crock of s**t. Most Clinton supporters have said they would have no trouble voting for Obama if he's the nominee. It's the large chunk of OBAMA supporters (probably including you, for example) who have said they would vote for McCain or stay home.

Nice try, liar.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 11, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

'I haven't seen as much venom towards Hillary or her supporters'

you must be joking, blarg. just read this morning's entries alone

Posted by: claudialong | February 11, 2008 09:35 AM

C'mon, drindl, look at svreader's posts - both sides have some pretty over the top attack dogs on this blog. I don't think either group is representative of their candidates. However, it is normal for primary contests between opponents with relatively minor positional differences to degenerate into personal attacks. Sad but true.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 11, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

If Obama becomes president, the Iraq war is going to go on for ever.After all the nice things he is saying about Republicans and Ronald Reagan and if he wins with the help of republicans, he will not have the strength to do any thing about Iraq, but to follow their strategy.

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 11, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

adrickhenry writes
"before you cast a vote for McCain, remember that he Wants to Stay in IRAQ for DECADES."

I don't think he "wants" to keep troops there forever. His point, if you bother to go check the context, had to do with WHY people want our troops home. Its because they're still taking fire (and bomb blasts), and thus casualties. We don't care that troops are stationed in the Balkins, Korea, Japan, Germany or the Phillipenes because they aren't suffering attacks there. McCain's point is that if we can stabilize Iraq to the point where we have bases there - for strategic reasons - we might station troops there for the foreseeable future. The problem, of course, is stopping the violence. McCain's real challenge, in the general election, will be twofold. First, addressing the pressing economic concerns that are becoming voters' primary concern; second, explaining how he can stabilize Iraq & Afghanistan after 6+ years of Bush failures.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

A Needed Reminder:

some Obama supporters are saying that they will vote for McCain rather than Hillary

and some Hillary supporters are saying that they will vote for McCain rather than Obama.

Now, think about this:

McCain wants to STAY in IRAQ.

McCain wants to continue to fight the wrong enemy at the wrong time in the wrong place.

This occupation of Iraq is Draining our Resources. It is also severely damaging our standing in the world:

It is:

1) eroding our relationships with our traditional allies
2) weakening moderate Arab governments in the region
AND
3) Strengthening the Real Enemy (Islamic Extremism of the Wahhabi type)
4) Strengthening IRAN (no friend to the U.S.)

and never forget about the thousands of young Americans who die -- and the tens of thousands who are maimed and/or psychologically damaged for life. Our society will pay for this...

So...

before you cast a vote for McCain, remember that he Wants to Stay in IRAQ for DECADES.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | February 11, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Hillary fired the wrong person. It was Mark Penn who designed the "Rudy Guiliani strategy" of waiting for the big states of Texas and Ohio, while loosing 11 in a row.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/clinton-fires-the-wrong-person/

Posted by: Trumbull | February 11, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

novamatt, if I lived in Arlington, I would have long ago eaten a bullet. (I do work there, when I decide to go into my offices).

I live in Western PW County, or Tom Davis country, to use your paradigm.

I did see a yellow Obama sign on 66 coming in this morning. So that's one. No HRC signs, no Paul signs (although my neighbor has a Fred Thompson bumper stick still on her car).

Posted by: JD | February 11, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

There is no party registration in Virginia. We're all independents, officially anyway.

I should pass along a district-by-district rundown/prediction of tomorrow's D primary in VA (not by me, so it might actually be accurate): http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2008/02/virginias-delic.html

My gut feeling, by the way, is Obama by 20 statewide, probably a little more in MD, and a blowout in DC.

Posted by: novamatt | February 11, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

JD, thanks for the comments. I live in Dave Albo country in West Springfield and work in the District. Think I remember you saying before that you're from Arlington. My sympathies. There must be about a dozen Republicans left there.

I've been sort of surprised by how few campaign signs there are anywhere. A few Ron Paul signs, a few Obama signs, and that's it. Think it's maybe an indication that no one thought the races would get this far.

Posted by: novamatt | February 11, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

'If Obama wins the nomination, me and many of my friends are not going to vote for him.'

then you will get 4 more years of exactly what we have now-- endless war and and endless debt.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Those Americans who voted for Bush because he was a nice guy while every one thought that Gore was stiff and did not have a great TV personality should remember what they are about to get if Obama wins. He will be worse than Bush! He will keep us in Iraq for ever just to be nice to republicans and just to show that he can work with them. Last night in 60 mins he said that the surge is working.

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 11, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I have been completely turned off by Obama's constant attack on HRC. Even in 60 minutes last night, I found HRC to be much more magnanimous than Obama. He knows he can't win on issues. I find the so-called liberals more offensive than even the Republicans. If Obama wins the nomination, me and many of my friends are not going to vote for him.

Posted by: prabir1960 | February 11, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

"And I AM in favor of ending earmarks. And gifts, trips, bribes and freebies of every kind from lobbyists."

claudialong | February 11, 2008 09:35 AM

Couple strict ethics with generous compensation and you might get leaders who spend taxpayer money more wisely. Pay house members $500k/yr, senate $750k, Pres $1 million. Also let them keep 10% of their unspent staff budgets. They might start taking pride in their gov't career instead of using it as a stepping stone to big bucks later on.

Posted by: optimyst | February 11, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

I'm not here to push either candidate into the limelight, I just want to make a point. The younger generation may not be old enough to remember this, but I came from the Jimmy Carter era...At the time he was voted in (I too voted for him!), he boasted about it being time for a drastic change, and people fell for the line. And look what we got!!? Present day Jimmy Carter is an asset to our country, too bad he couldn't have been an asset back then too. Think it over good before you vote.....

Posted by: dg55432 | February 11, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

'What is your definition of "affordable"? That could be the reason you are having trouble answering that question.'

Well, like many people, I am middle-aged and have a pre-existing medical condition. So I pay $1500 a month for health insurance for a family of 3. Of course, that will rise precipitously if I actually need treatment for something.

That's $18,000 a year for a middle-class family. I don't consider that 'affordable' for most families.

That is because I am self-employed-- but of course, fewer and fewer people who work for companies are insured by them now, a trend that will increase sharply over the next couple of years.

But yet, no one in the repubican party has any ideas on what to do about that.

'With that said, I'll mention that the reason I started posting on this site is the relative civility'

'relative' -- epsecially lately.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Stepped aside??? How about kicked to the curb?

james d granata

Posted by: jganymede | February 11, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Dave writes
"I though I would be seeing a lot more signage."

Likewise. I've now seen a total of two Obama signs.

The other day I almost missed a stopsign, a Fred Thompson bumper shocked me so badly. I think that's the only GOP sticker I've seen, other than legacy Bush/Cheney ads.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

lylepink - In VA, you can register for a party but in the primary, you are allowed to vote for anyone. According to the State Board of Elections, all registered voters may vote in either party's primary, but not both.

Posted by: dave | February 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

How can he lose, he is on our cable news 24/7, the media made him...you can have him...I don't like the man....I don't like he stands for spewing pretty words, with nothing to back them up...if he is what the dems give to me, I'll vote for McCain...EVERYONE IN THE MEDIA HAS GIVEN HIM A FREE PASS....IF YOU SAY ONE THING THEY DON'T LIKE I HEAR "RACIST"....

Posted by: rose48809 | February 11, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin,

Seeing as the Potomac primary is tomorrow, I though I would be seeing a lot more signage. There is none in my neighborhood. Based on my bumpersticker count of the last couple of weeks (and the trend continued this past one), Kerry should win. I saw 3 more Kerry/Edwards, one Hillary and (amazingly) one Sore/Loserman bumperstickers over the last week.

Virginia is an open primary so it will be curious to try to see about cross-over voting because there is little excitement for McCain or Huck. I kind of think Hillary will do a bit better than expected in VA because the CW here is that McCain would do a lot better against HRC in the general election than Obama and many R's are at a loss as to which R to vote for. That said, I personally can't bring myself to vote for a Clinton (or outside my registered party for that matter).

Posted by: dave | February 11, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

I think Hillary is in trouble. Her issues have been so over-analyzed that to do so here again would be meaningless, so I'd like to interject something that no one is talking about. It is the proverbial "elephant in the room."

Hillary can't dunk on McCain.

That's right. In order to win this election, the Democrats need someone who can rise up, arch their back, and hammer the ball through the rim with authority.

Barack Obama can dunk on McCain. Here's the photo to prove it (not even Drudge has this yet!)

http://inner-ninja.blogspot.com/2008/02/barack-obama-can-dunk-on-mccain.html

Posted by: innerninja | February 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

claudia, I'll agree with you that the tone of the Dem primary has really taken a turn for the worse. I've found myself skipping past more and more posts on this blog and I pretty much ignore the rest of them (ever see hotnuke's posts?).

I'm left guessing that some of the folks are just immature people trying to stir up trouble, some are actual supporters who seem to believe that their posts actually help the candidate, and some are probably in favor of the opposite candidate and want to make supporters of their opposition look bad.

With that said, I'll mention that the reason I started posting on this site is the relative civility of the discussion here in comparison with other places. People actually respond to other posts here! And they even agree at times!

Posted by: rpy1 | February 11, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Claudialong - "Now, what I want to know is, why is it that I NOW can 'go out and choose my insurer anywhere in America' but I --and 50 million other Americans --still can't get affordable health care?"

What is your definition of "affordable"? That could be the reason you are having trouble answering that question.

Posted by: dave | February 11, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

It's very curious, this hold Hillary has over some of her supporters. If Hillary doesn't win, they will support McCain (or stay home) and thus, eventually, drive the last stake through the heart of Roe v. Wade.

An interesting legacy for Hillary Clinton's short-lived political career...

Posted by: eemr | February 11, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

"Obama supporters are among the most rude, nasty, and immature people I've ever encountered."


Stereotype much?

.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

"And I AM in favor of ending earmarks. And gifts, trips, bribes and freebies of every kind from lobbyists."

'Are you calling for the end of Civilization, as we know it?'

resoundingly, yup.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Obama supporters are among the most rude, nasty, and immature people I've ever encountered.

You will reap what you sow. That's a fact of life that many of you are too inexperienced and naive to understand.

Posted by: niksiz | February 11, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

*************
I also notice that on both venues, NPR and Chris Wallace on Sunday morning, Williams is pushing the "racial" divide in the D primaries. Anybody else think that is peculiar? He seems unmoved, completely, by BHO's appeal in "white" states.
*************

Thank you, Mark. I heard Williams this morning talking about this (it was the first time I've heard him on this) and started shouting random states at the radio...

"Kansas! Minnesota! Washington! Maine! Iowa! Nebraska!"

Maybe I've been paying a little too much attention to this race...

Posted by: rpy1 | February 11, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

plathman | February 11, 2008 09:34 AM

Kerry was swiftboated.

Clinton will be hillarized.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin | February 11, 2008 09:30 AM

Donna Brazille also talked up the "black" voters a lot. Billary allies, I would say.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Mark writes
"I also notice that on both venues, NPR and Chris Wallace on Sunday morning, Williams is pushing the "racial" divide in the D primaries. Anybody else think that is peculiar? He seems unmoved, completely, by BHO's appeal in "white" states."

I heard a discussion including Williams a few minutes ago on NPR. He certainly seemed to be playing up the race angle with Obama & Clinton voters, while downplaying gender. Seems like both voting patterns are newsworthy. On FNS, Williams defintely fills the role of token liberal & seems to take that role seriously, while Liasson is more neutral. This leaves Williams working alone against Hume & Kristol, who get occasional backup from Wallace.

Posted by: bsimon | February 11, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

"And I AM in favor of ending earmarks. And gifts, trips, bribes and freebies of every kind from lobbyists."

claudialong | February 11, 2008 09:35 AM

----------------------------------
Are you calling for the end of Civilization, as we know it?

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

'I haven't seen as much venom towards Hillary or her supporters'

you must be joking, blarg. just read this morning's entries alone.

JD, anyone with a brain wants to end torture. It produces false results. All the many witchcraft suspects in the 15th and 16th century were tortured and every single one confessed to satanic deeds and plots, even knowing they would be executed. Do you really think they were all guilty?

Ditto closing Gitmo. Common sense. It has become symbolic of everything the US has done that repelled the whole world. We need to repair our relationship with our allies, so we can depend on them when we need them.

This election is about a lot of things for me -- Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, our own economy, the sinking middle class, our civil rights, my daughter's education and future -- a lot. And I find MCain too much like Bush in too many areas--even though I respect his character.

And I AM in favor of ending earmarks. And gifts, trips, bribes and freebies of every kind from lobbyists.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

this was the clutch move for john kerry's campaign in 2004. some people said it was too late to make that move because dean was surging, but it worked for kerry to win the nomination. since now the delegates are evenly split, more or less, it's as if the 2008 race were just beginning. this strategy may pay off for clinton. i hope it doesn't, but it might.

Posted by: plathman | February 11, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Jim, thanx for FT cite.
-----------------------------------
Thread jack: Many of us are NPR regulars.
While I consider NPR's reporting generally more accurate and much deeper than that of any commercial news electronic media venture, I get annoyed with Inskeep and Williams. In my opinion, Inskeep and Williams are the strident "liberals" as interviewers; Inskeep to the point that he cannot keep the sneer out of his tone of voice, and he will interrupt an answer he does not care for. I know that conservatives will think I am being kind here, but I wonder what liberals think of my sense of these two, especially Inskeep.

I also notice that on both venues, NPR and Chris Wallace on Sunday morning, Williams is pushing the "racial" divide in the D primaries. Anybody else think that is peculiar? He seems unmoved, completely, by BHO's appeal in "white" states.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 11, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

jimd52 | February 11, 2008 09:21 AM

The strange thing is that the blogosphere and youtube are an influence on reality. The Clintons never saw it coming.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Why I will never vote for McCain --he IS Bush:

THE CONSERVATIVE AGENDA FOR 2008: A THIRD BUSH TERM

BUSH'S THIRD TERM: 'MAKE THE TAX RELIEF PERMANENT'
BUSH: With all the other pressures on their finances, American families should not have to worry about the Federal Government taking a bigger bite out of their paychecks. There is only one way to eliminate this uncertainty: make the tax relief permanent.

McCAIN: We need to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which I voted for twice to do.

BUSH'S THIRD TERM: 'THE SURGE IS WORKING'
BUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among the terrorists there is no doubt. Al Qaida is on the run in Iraq, and this enemy will be defeated.

McCAIN: As the president said, we are winning. We have not defeated al Qaeda. But I am proud of the success of the surge and I am proud of the leadership we have.

BUSH'S THIRD TERM: 'WE WILL NOT REST UNTIL THIS ENEMY HAS BEEN DEFEATED'
BUSH: Al Qaida's top commander in Iraq declared that they will not rest until they have attacked us here in Washington. My fellow Americans: We will not rest either. We will not rest until this enemy has been defeated.

McCAIN: I think the president's assessment is exactly right.

BUSH'S THIRD TERM: 'EXPAND CONSUMER CHOICE' ON HEALTH CARE
BUSH: We share a common goal: making health care more affordable and accessible for all Americans. The best way to achieve that goal is by expanding consumer choice, not government control.

McCAIN: And they can -- and they will be able to go out and choose their insurer anywhere in America and they will be able then to get affordable health care in America.'

Now, what I want to know is, why is it that I NOW can 'go out and choose my insurer anywhere in America' but I --and 50 million other Americans --still can't get affordable health care?

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

claudialong | February 11, 2008 09:19 AM

Hard 'n ugly, just how we like it!

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Claudia, I guess I find it surprising that Rudy would actually hurt McCain in NY, since the guy did some pretty good things there (and did beat the Dems 2x in a pretty liberal town).

I doubt most GOPers would agree with you that McCain is a 3rd W term. He wants to end waterboarding, close Gitmo, give detainees extra rights, etc. His amnesty policy jibes with the Dems (and W's), as does his campaign finance reform thoughts.

I guess this election is pretty much only about Iraq/Iran for you. Or abortion. Because I *know* you're not in favor of ending earmarks...

Posted by: JD | February 11, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Mark, drindl

I agree that there is a great deal of anger expressed here. However, the Internet is famous for venomous expression. There are always people on the right and the left who are convinced that election of the other party will result in the end of civilization as we know it. I wouldn't take it as representative.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 11, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Excellent post, novamatt. I'm sick of people who think that supporting one candidate is about insulting the other. I've seen Obama supporters called some pretty nasty names on this site in recent weeks. I haven't seen as much venom towards Hillary or her supporters (not counting MikeB), but there's certainly been some of that. And it's stupid.

We are all Democrats. We all have reasonably similar policy goals. On paper, there isn't much difference between Clinton and Obama's policies. There are legitimate reasons to support one or the other. But if you're a Democrat and you believe in the goals of the Democratic Party, you should vote for whoever the party nominates. And if we're going to win, we need both Clinton supporters and Obama supporters to stand together. Insulting each other is counterproductive, and maybe even dangerous.

Posted by: Blarg | February 11, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

' if so many Americans are convinced that whomever they disagree with is the devil incarnate or an evil cartoon super-baddie'

this is why i find unlikely the idea that there can be 'bipartisanship' and 'unity' in this country at all, when there is so much even intra-party hatred. It really saddens me that we have the first woman and first black candidate for president, and all it means is a festival of misogyny and racism from both party's members.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin | February 11, 2008 09:10 AM

Mark, Mary Matalin said two weeks ago on Meet the Press that Hill was "duped by a dope(Bush)".

Hill is no slouch when it comes to demeaning and simplistic conclusions about her chosen opponents. Who could want an alledged dopee as Commander in Chief. Not me.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

hillary clinton for president!!!

obama for snake oil salesman of the year!!

Posted by: mikel1 | February 11, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

I must second drindl on the surprising, to me, anger among Ds on this thread. It rivals the anger among Rs on other threads, which also surprises me.

Most Freudian psychology has been supplanted by the dawn of neuro-biological /chemical understanding of the brain, but his phrase, "the narcissism of small differences" will live forever in describing politics.

It's going to be hard to find the common ground in America even for labor/management lawyers who do "common ground" for a living if so many Americans are convinced that whomever they disagree with is the devil incarnate or an evil cartoon super-baddie.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 11, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

And do remember that many of those who post nasty remarks are just posing as Obama or Clinton supporters.

It's reverse psychology and very common on the internet.

Also remember that Barack has not used a single negative ad. Nor has he used people like BET's Johnson as proxies.

Look to the candidate, not the supposed supporters who hide behind the anonymity of the internet.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 11, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

jimd52 | February 11, 2008 09:04 AM

Thanks, Jim.

Read the article this morning, too.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

'Not that it matters... if I remember, you live in NYState, and I don't think McCain could carry it even with Rudy as vice.'

Very funny, JD. you know I can't vote for McCain, which will simply be a third GWB term. Even though McCain has far more character and competence than bush ever will, he still has exactly the same policies, so I will certainly vote for Obama -- or Hillary.

Rudy as VP would be an anchor around McCain's neck in New York. He is about as popular here as is in all the states he lost in the primary. The more people get to know him, the less they like him.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Interesting:

"At the same time, the Clinton camp confirmed that Mrs. Clinton had met privately on Thursday with former Senator John Edwards in North Carolina. Mr. Edwards, who has dropped out of the race, has not made an endorsement. But Mr. Obama is scheduled to meet with him too, on Monday night, Obama allies say, and is also flying to Mr. Edwards's home in North Carolina."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/us/politics/11dems.html

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

I would draw a distinction between the hothead commenters here and the general public.

novamatt | February 11, 2008 08:31 AM

Amen

Here is an interesting column from the Financial Times that makes the strongest argument I have seen on why the Democrats should nominate Obama. I find it very interesting although I am leaning towards McCain.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4c003b86-d7ff-11dc-98f7-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

Posted by: jimd52 | February 11, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

I'm not sure, but I think Va. is one of the few states that you do not register for a party, or something like that, and can get a ballot for either party you choose. This should be a huge win for Obama, if my thinking is accurate about the ballet of choice.

Posted by: lylepink | February 11, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Orwell is alive, and the scriptwriter for the republican party:

"It's been more than seven years, but I still laugh when I look back at this classic satirical item from The Onion, in which George W. Bush assured the nation that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

"My fellow Americans," Bush said (in this fake-news item), "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."

Of course, this piece, written four days before Bush's first inaugural, proved to be rather prophetic. But in the meantime, whenever I see or hear references to "peace and prosperity," I think of The Onion, and the strength and success Bush squandered.

I was reminded of it again this morning, listening to Bush's speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

"My energy is up, my spirit is high, and I will finish strong. And in the meantime, we will elect a new President. We've had good debates and soon we'll have a nominee who will carry a conservative banner into this election and beyond. Listen, the stakes in November are high. This is an important election. Prosperity and peace are in the balance."

Really? Does George W. Bush seriously want to argue that the nation should follow his direction in order to maintain "prosperity and peace"?

Where is this elusive "prosperity and peace"? And why is it hiding so well?'

http://bluegirlredmissouri.blogspot.com/2008/02/oh-my-god-i-finally-get-it.html

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

novamatt | February 11, 2008 08:31 AM

I would draw a distinction between the hothead commenters here and the general public.

I, for one, am an election junkie. Sometimes I go over the line in my disparagement of the Billarys and will not apologize for it.

When Bubba and Hill sincerely apologize to the Lani Guineres and the long list of fall guys they threw overboard for the sake of expediency, I might apologize, maybe.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Hillary isn't the wicked witch of the north -- she's the manifestation of tendencies within the Democratic Party towards 51/49 incrementalism,

Posted by: novamatt | February 11, 2008 08:31 AM

Novamatt, your first paragraph was poetry. Even though you and I probably disagree on the issues more than Reagan vs Gorby, I thought you stated the issues very well.

Where in Nova are you? (I'm going to guess Arlington)

Posted by: JD | February 11, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

My mom and a few friends are supporting Hillary, and of course the game's not over, so I'm trying to be a gracious winner now that we're ahead. But man she and Bill and their horde of flying monkeys have made it hard.

Posted by: light_bearer | February 11, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

I really wonder if I want to continue to support Obama, if this is the kind of voter he attracts

Posted by: claudialong | February 11, 2008 08:07 AM

So Claudia, can we count on your vote for the conservative candidate in November? (Not that it matters... if I remember, you live in NYState, and I don't think McCain could carry it even with Rudy as vice... of course, if NY State is actually in play, then this is a landslide and it won't matter)

Oh yeah, who'd the conservative candidate be again? An indy run by Ron Paul?

Posted by: JD | February 11, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

rfpiktor, it's not about being nice. Conflict is an inherent part of the process. The tendency to personalize these conflicts is what I find dismaying. Hillary isn't the wicked witch of the north -- she's the manifestation of tendencies within the Democratic Party towards 51/49 incrementalism, towards a Democratic flavor of cronyism and corruption, towards a Democratic flavor of divisive campaigning and governing.

We need to rid the Democratic Party of those tendencies and move forward. *Not* destroy Hillary the person. *Not* demean and diminish those who support her. Especially now that the Obama campaign is having some success.

What particularly galls me is when Obama supporters speak with contempt about working-class Hillary supporters. If they don't give a damn about ordinary folks struggling to get by within an economic system designed to screw them over, what the hell are they doing in the Democratic Party?

Posted by: novamatt | February 11, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

Another thought on civility:

The Hillary Inevitable Coronation Tour was derailed because she didn't expect any real opposition.

Opposition she got and out came Bubba to unleash a tawdry fusilade of racial "factually accurate / factually distorted by the Media" below the belt cheap shots.

Just deserts and a lesson to all fear mongers who forgot we have a youtube comissar watching each and every little word uttered.

This time, we are all watching and listening, in full stereo and amazing Technicolor. Thanks, youtube.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

tlmck3job wrote:
"because out of the Senate, I think [Biden's] the only one with a kid in the active military."

Jim Webb's son served in Iraq - I don't know if Biden's son did or not, but Webb's son did.

Webb campaigned with Army boots representing his son. Also, remember when Bush asked Webb how his son was? And Webb's response to Bush was not particularly 'fit to print'?

Posted by: critter69 | February 10, 2008 11:15 PM

Biden's son's National Guard unit is due to deploy to Iraq sometime this year - can't remember when but I heard an interview with him on POTUS-08 in December.

I believe McCain has two sons in the military.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 11, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

novamatt | February 11, 2008 07:29 AM

Is there a nice way of decimating your opponent? Ask Bubba on the subject.

Hillary has to go down for the count, the sooner, the merrier.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 11, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Ugh. The hatefulness on this blog has just become overwhelming. It's really too bad that both the Obama and McCain supporters are this nasty and vile. I really wonder if I want to continue to support Obama, if this is the kind of voter he attracts I'm completely turned off by all of it. I have to say I really wonder what has happened to this country, that we have to spew this venom instead of talking about the problems we face--especially the sinking middle class:

"The Federal Reserve's dramatic rate cuts were expected to make it cheaper for consumers to use credit cards. But credit card interest rates remain high and in many cases have even climbed.

Bruised by a rise in foreclosures, banks have been reluctant to lower rates for cardholders who have missed payments or had their credit scores slip, analysts and industry watchdogs said. Yet even some cardholders who pay on time have not benefited from the Federal Reserve's recent actions, as banks raise rates and fees to make up for losses in their mortgage departments, analysts said."

That's right, the economy is sinking, so what to do the banks and credit card companies do? Why, they raise your rates to make up for the losses they incurred through greed and bad business practices. Just like always, the middle class takes the hit, because our politicians are owned by corporations.

Posted by: drindl | February 11, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Look at this string of postings.

The accusations against Hillary range from too much ambition, cold-bloodedness,
anti latino, crookedness, alignment with her husband's past etc.

I think this rage says more about us than about Hillary.

I am for Obama, I think he will bring out the best in all of us. And has the best chance of dealing with McCain. But
one reason I am not for Hillary is that right now, I believe any strong, intelligent woman (contrast her grasp of issues with our present
commander in chief) inspires and even more, energizes the misogynists......and there is some of that in too many of us. She just
cannot overcome that. But someday......a woman will make it.

In hope,

nfahringer

Posted by: nfahringer | February 11, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

I want to caution my fellow Obama supporters to win with class. There's nothing to be gained by being ugly towards Clinton, her campaign staff, or her supporters.

If we want to win big in November, the kind of big that can transform the system, we're going to need the votes and the passion of working-class whites and Hispanics and single women and old folks who have been tilting towards Hillary thus far. They aren't the enemy. We want them aboard the Obamawagon too. Remember that.

Posted by: novamatt | February 11, 2008 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Here's the headline in all the Latino media this morning: "CLINTON CAMPAIGN REPLACES LATINA WITH A SISTAH". That does not good in english or spanish.

Posted by: zbob99 | February 11, 2008 6:52 AM | Report abuse

THERE ARE MORE CLINTON BASHERS OUT THERE THAN EVER AND THEY ALL HAPPEN TO BE OBAMA LOVERS. AND THOSE PEOPLE PREACH 'UNITY'?? I GUESS 'UNITY' MEANS FOLLOWING OBAMA. LISTEN TO THE MAN THEMSELF BASHING CLINTON....

Posted by: mike-straight | February 11, 2008 6:29 AM | Report abuse

Not even the staunchest Clinton supporter can truly believe that Solis Doyle stepped down entirely of her own accord without being told to or asked to. They might say it, but they can't believe it. How many of Hillary's top aids have been sacrificed now. Her willingness to "throw others under the bus" as someone phrased it, is just one of the many ways that Hillary reminds me of George W Bush. Do people actually believe that Hillary's failure to do better than she has is anyone's fault but Hillary's? One has to wonder if the Clinton campaign wouldn't have made this move much earlier and possibly been a lot less gentle in dismissing Doyle if Hillary hadn't needed the Hispanic vote as badly as she did on Super Tuesday. She is the ultimate career opportunist.

Posted by: diksagev | February 11, 2008 3:29 AM | Report abuse

wpost4112 posted an interesting article that suggests a line of attack that Clinton and possibly the GOP will try to use against Obama (post-nomination):

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23182456-28737,00.html

The argument is that Obama is over-sold -- people think he will transform America and milk & honey will rain from the skies. Since that is unrealistic, he will necessarily fail. The nation will be disappointed and the Obama bubble will burst.

The problem with the argument in WA -- where he won 2 to 1 so if he's hyped anywhere, he's hyped here -- is that I didn't get any sense from voters that they thought he would transform America in the sense of eliminating all the problems, turn the economy into a juggernaut, and turn America into a land of racial tranquility. No, people think he will transform America because he will be able to beat McCain. They think his known ability to unite opponents and represent those who have different views will help pass legislation to broaden access to health insurance. They see that he inspires people especially young people and see a chance (not a guarantee) that he will inspire a generation the way that JFK did for the youth of the 60s. They believe that he will work to bring our troops home from Iraq and will not use force carelessly and rashly, the way that people believe Bush has done. And on an emotional level, they see a man who embodies what is good about America and they want that man to be the face that America presents to the world. These are realistic hopes.

BTW, I can't believe that the newspaper printed this article. It's basic argument is "Hey, Nelson Mandala was a cult-figure in South Africa. People thought he would transform their lives and all the poor blacks would have a washer-and-dryer. Well, Nelson Mandala's cult persona wasn't able to lift poor South African blacks from poverty. So that shows the inherent inability of the cult-figure to live up to expectations." Excuse me, but Nelson Mandala leadership and ability to inspire millions brought an end to 46 years of apartheid. And this writer has the gall to criticize him for not being able to lift poor black S. Africans out of the poverty caused by the apartheid system that Mandala was so crucial for stopping? Honestly.

Posted by: e2holmes | February 11, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Someone wrote:
The nearly 4 million votes cast in Californian are a million more than the all the votes cast in North Dakota, Utah, Colorado, Washington, Kansas Idaho, Alabama,, Misouri, Georgia, Louisana, Alaska, and Delaware combined. States that Obama won.

However, notwithstanding this, those states have 86 Electoral College Votes and California has 55. (In other words, you are better off winning those states and losing California even with the greater popular vote total.) The key is that Obama is doing well with independents and showing the ability to pull in voters in States that have not necessarily fallen into the Democratic Column. That makes him a stronger general election candidate as it is inconceivable that Obama would not carry those well established traditional Democrat states in which he did not win the primary. (New York, Mass, California and so forth). Claiming that his failure to win the primaries in those States is ultimately meaningless as they are going to go with the Democrat whether its Clinton, Obama or a Donkey.

Posted by: dcraven925 | February 10, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

You are such an idiot. If you graduated from Stanford with honor and got a Master degree from Oxford, you could get a six figure salary too. Too bad your little bird brain is only good for making fries.

I've never heard of anyone graduating with "honor" or getting a "master degree". Perhaps your study of the singular/plural was done in a chop suey restaurant.

In any event, I wasn't arguing how much money she made, I was arguing how she could get a managerial position in an equities firm without putting in the time to earn her way up.

I'm also glad you insulted me by saying all I could do is work in a low wage job. This clearly shows what kind of person you are and the type of person you support (Hillary).


Posted by: afgooey74 | February 10, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

McC's son, too.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 10, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

For gandalfthegrey, I wrote this assuming no "snowball" from February, but the elements are correct:

I am going to explain TX to you. Please pay attention.

1. Only 126 of 228 delegates will be selected by the Primary vote. It is likely that none of the 5 metros of more than 1.3m will split as much as 60-40 for anyone. Harris, Dallas and Travis Counties will probably go for BHO and Tarrant and Bexar for HRC. But neither candidate is likely to get a ten delegate lead among the 126. Call it 67-59. For the sake of argument, call it 67-59 for HRC on the assumption the Valley Machine supports her and actually gets out the vote down there.

2. 67 delegates will be elected IN JUNE.
But that is by the State Convention, which will have been filled with delegates from the County Conventions, which will be filled by delegates from the Precinct Conventions, run just like IA's CAUCUSES, after the Primary polls close! In other words, when you hear the TX Primary vote, you won't know anything about who won. Because if the BHO voters come back to the Precinct Conventions in big numbers, they can overwhelm an 8 delegate HRC lead from the Primary!
25 of the caucus selected delegates are supers, but "pledged" by their caucus vote.

3. Additionally, there are 32 unpledged supers, 12 of whom have endorsed HRC, 3 of whom have endorsed BHO, 17 of whom are waiting. These supers could tip the scale back to HRC or change their minds. Oh, there are 3 supers selected by the other supers at the end of the process - 35 total
unpledged supers.

4. Just in case you think this was EZ so far, let me add that the 126 primary elected delegates are chosen by State Senate Districts. The SSDs got votes allocated by how strongly D they voted in 2004.

Of the 31 Senate Districts, the 4 largest in terms of delegates are:

* Senate District 14 (Austin) - 8 delegates. Home to the University of Texas at Austin and an enormous young, vibrant D community.

* Senate District 13 (Houston) - 7 delegates. Home to one of the largest African-American communities in the state and Senator Rodney Ellis, one of two African-Americans in the Texas Senate.

* Senate District 23 (Dallas) - 6 delegates. Home to Texas' other African-American State Senator, Senator Royce West, this district includes inner-Dallas and has over 280,000 African-Americans and over 270,000 Hispanics, just in this single district.

* Senate District 25 (San Antonio) - 6 delegates. This contains southwest Austin, north San Antonio, and the rural country in-between (Guadalupe, Hays, Comal and Kendall). The only district with 6 or more delegates that has a Republican Senator.

So whoever thinks TX is going heavily for anyone, forget it. TX splits nearly even. Toward BHO if the Valley Machine sits out to make peace for Noriega, toward HRC if the Valley Machine works its tail off for HRC.

[The only Texas "Machine" is in the Rio Grande Valley. The Valley is overwhelmingly poor Hispanic, and will not have a 15% voter turnout in a General Election unless the RGV Machine makes it happen. If the Machine is more concerned with getting Col. Rick Noriega a shot in Nov. against Cornyn, it may not take sides in the March Prez race, to keep peace in the family.]

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 10, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Mark from Austin or Meld or anyone else who knows how the vote counting goes.
Do the absentee ballots (and ballots of people who voted well in advance) get counted before the ballots cast on election day. Watching California's vote, Clinton started with 54% to Obama's 32%. Obama's steadily rose to 42. Edwards took 4%. Is this the reason why Clinton won by more than the polls predicted. It was also claimed that in NH the Clinton machine had been getting thier people to pre vote for months. Again was this the reason why so many polling people got it wrong.

Posted by: martinor108 | February 10, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

By reading the Post you would think Hillary has one foot in the grave. Even after the weekend sweep she is only 60 delegates behind, yet she is ahead in the national popular vote by over 500,000 votes.

The nearly 4 million votes cast in Californian are a million more than the all the votes cast in North Dakota, Utah, Colorado, Washington, Kansas Idaho, Alabama,, Misouri, Georgia, Louisana, Alaska, and Delaware combined. States that Obama won.

Reporters keep touting the number of states as if it means something. Delegates are awarded proportionally by population. That's why Alaska only has 11 delegates up for grabs and California has 440. Only 405 people showed up to vote in Alaska and 17,000 in Idaho, which will go red in the general election even if Elmer Fudd is the GOP nominee.

So I wish the Post would quit playing up these little wins as ground breaking.

There is still along way to go until August-- Seven months, and half the delegates needed are still up for grabs.

While Obama scavanges the small game, Hillary will pass Obama in the bigger states of Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

This thing will see-saw back and forth up until the convention, and I hope the super delegates will consider the popular vote as well as the pledged delegate count in making their decision.

I would hate to see a Florida 2000 again where the nominee wins without the popular vote.

I will vote for either candidate in the primary, but the treatment of Hillary in the press could cause all those who voted for Hillary to switch to McCain should she lose the nomination.

As women earn 78% on the male dollar, they also only get 78% of the press coverage when running for office, even when they're ahead.

I might just be that mad with this whole process by then to defect o McCain if I feel the process was unfair to Hillary.

Posted by: dcmenefee1 | February 10, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

tlmck3job wrote:
"because out of the Senate, I think [Biden's] the only one with a kid in the active military."

Jim Webb's son served in Iraq - I don't know if Biden's son did or not, but Webb's son did.

Webb campaigned with Army boots representing his son. Also, remember when Bush asked Webb how his son was? And Webb's response to Bush was not particularly 'fit to print'?

Posted by: critter69 | February 10, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

By reading the Post you would think Hillary has one foot in the grave. Even after the weekend sweep she is only 60 delegates behind, yet she is ahead in the national popular vote by over 500,000 votes.

The nearly 4 million votes cast in Californian are a million more than the all the votes cast in North Dakota, Utah, Colorado, Washington, Kansas Idaho, Alabama,, Misouri, Georgia, Louisana, Alaska, and Delaware combined. States that Obama won.

Reporters keep touting the number of states as if it means something. Delegates are awarded proportionally by population. That's why Alaska only has 11 delegates up for grabs and California has 440. Only 405 people showed up to vote in Alaska and 17,000 in Idaho, which will go red in the general election even if Elmer Fudd is the GOP nominee.

So I wish the Post would quit playing up these little wins as ground breaking.

There is still along way to go until August-- Seven months, and half the delegates needed are still up for grabs.

While Obama scavanges the small game, Hillary will pass Obama in the bigger states of Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

This thing will see-saw back and forth up until the convention, and I hope the super delegates will consider the popular vote as well as the pledged delegate count in making their decision.

I would hate to see a Florida 2000 again where the nominee wins without the popular vote.

I will vote for either candidate in the primary, but the treatment of Hillary in the press could cause all those who voted for Hillary to switch to McCain should she lose the nomination.

As women earn 78% on the male dollar, they also only get 78% of the press coverage when running for office, even when they're ahead.

I might just be that mad with this whole process by then to defect o McCain if I feel the process was unfair to Hillary.

Posted by: dcmenefee1 | February 10, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

afgooey74,

You are such an idiot. If you graduated from Stanford with honor and got a Master degree from Oxford, you could get a six figure salary too. Too bad your little bird brain is only good for making fries.

Posted by: jsindc | February 10, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

"How did Chelsea snag a job with a six figure salary straight out of college?"

Yeah, did I read correctly that she is a hedge-fund manager? How the f*** do you get a job like that right outta college?

Then again, her portfolio must be in a freefall right now.

Posted by: afgooey74 | February 10, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Oh, BTW -

Mark in austin --- could you repost that very thorough and quite enlightening piece you did the other night about the distribution of delegates in Texas. That was really fascinating and quite complex.

I'd like Meldupree to see it and others who follow this stuff.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

The other night- at about 3 am, I found myself wandering around the blogoshere (SVREADER having retired for the evening - leaving me no one to pick on) and I came across a couple of great and subtantive post from people far more interesting than most of us hacks.

One person in particular had compiled a really nice compendium of information about Obama's legislative work. Naturally I purloined it and provide now a tidbit (a brief excerpt) of info that some may find useful.

Moreover, I'm now trying to coax SVREADER out of the dark hole into which he sometimes goes to sulk when we spank him too hard.

Here goes:

"...I follow some issues pretty closely, and over and over again, Barack Obama kept popping up, doing really good substantive things.

There he was, working for nuclear non-proliferation and securing loose stockpiles of conventional weapons, like shoulder-fired missiles.

There he was again, passing what the Washington Post called "the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet" -- though not as strong as Obama would have liked.

Look -- he's over there, passing a bill that created a searchable database of recipients of federal contracts and grants, proposing legislation on avian flu back when most people hadn't even heard of it, working to make sure that soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan were screened for traumatic brain injury and to prevent homelessness among veterans, successfully fighting a proposal by the VA to reexamine all PTSD cases in which full benefits had been awarded, working to ban no-bid contracts in Katrina reconstruction, and introducing legislation to criminalize deceptive political tactics and voter intimidation."

Interesting stuff, eh?

Chilmark was the poster.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

another desperate act by a desperate woman. when will the drama end? and this is the leading story, rather than obama's BACK-TO-BACK VICTORIES?! hillary clinton is DESPERATE, she is FEARFUL, she is LOSING, she can't WIN, she is FINISHED!

Posted by: caligirl1 | February 10, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: tlmck3job | February 10, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

I just googled Mr. Alonzo Cantu. He came a long way from picking grapes as a migrant worker to owning his own construction company (isn't this a great country or what). However, from what I glanced at, Mr. Cantu has given me reason to furrow my eyebrow. Another Norman Hsu brewing? We shall see, we shall see . . .

gandalfthegrey, I have to agree with your latest post regarding svreader. He seems very angry and disturbed; if he can't support Obama, then fine, vote for someone else. But his rants go well beyond the pale ( I admit I can be quite offensive as well, but I am not unhinged). I hope he gets help.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Gandalf,

You're right. Good timing on the firing, huh?

Posted by: camasca | February 10, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

sv reader, i'm worried about you. what did the republicans do w/the "i didn't inhale"? as i recall, that person was elected president, twice. you behaving in mean way. maybe you are a good person but you're really attacking people and not addressing at the issues. what people do in their youths generally stay there. that comment about cocaine is way out of line. i'm from arizona and can fill you on all of mccain's foibles and flaws, of which there are many, lest anyone forget the keating brouhaha. let those w/o sin cast the first stone. unless you're the second coming, i assume you are not w/o stain on the soul. quit being so mean. it will all turn out the way it will. hillary's people have shaken the life out of her. people find it hard to connect w/her. she's too afraid of doing the wrong thing. terrible comments have been made about her that clearly are sexist and very unkind. but that doesn't mean you should sink to that level and you are.

Posted by: frieda406 | February 10, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

I think that's it. With Maine's loss Obama is on track to win 10 states by feb 19. I supported Hillary all through, but I feel she will lose.
I will support McCain if she loses.

Posted by: Troglodyte | February 10, 2008 10:33 PM

*************

Well said, sir Troglodyte. And, well named.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

She doesn't know the word "quiet" either.

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

I think that's it. With Maine's loss Obama is on track to win 10 states by feb 19. I supported Hillary all through, but I feel she will lose.
I will support McCain if she loses.

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

Bsimon--

The NYT had the stories front page last night. And, they had the interactive county-by-county maps for all three states up and running well before midnight. I haven't looked at the on-line front page today, so I dunno how they are covering it. I run their rss feed on my home page, though, and that's where I got the Obama taking Maine story the soonest.

Mark in austin

RE: Hillary and torture.

She was for it before she was against it.
She and Bill did the usual "triangulation" thing--all kinds of tortured (pun intended) hypothetical "ticking time bomb" ruminations.

Then, when it became clear that McCain, Obama and Biden were ALL adamantly against torture, she changed her tune in a debate in NH in September.

This is the same approach I had problems with in the first Clinton admin and in the Gore and Kerry campaigns. It was my problem with Edwards, too. There is this fear of taking a well-supported-by-the-evidence ethical stand because the Cowboys out there will paint you as soft on ...whatever--crime, terrorism, communists in the past, etc. It's a real problem with the Dems--that Kerry let himself get painted into that corner by the likes of those well-known draft dodgers Cheney and Bush when he was a decorated veteran is testament to the sheer gutlessness of the party since Reagan. Mostly the party as a whole no longer has the courage of ANY convictions.

So, to appear "legitimate" and because having a substantive policy debate is politically risky-you vote for war in Iraq or for Lieberman-Kyle or you condone torture...UNTIL someone ELSE takes the ethical stand and not only gets away with it, but thrives....

McCain could take that stand out of moral authority--say whatever else you will about him.

So could Biden because out of the Senate, I think he's the only one with a kid in the active military.

Obama took it out of the same principle he took his stand on the war to begin with. A lot of his policy advisors come out of the research and NGO community that has been working on the ground on issues of national security, human rights law and rule of law in emerging democracies for the last 20 years or so. They're just not as stuck in the post vietnam, post cold war ideological arguments that make boomer candidates so squeamish.

Posted by: tlmck3job | February 10, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

An employee from lobbying law firm "A", which is relatively small, can walk around and have tell other employees to max their contributions to Obama. Of course, every contribution from law firm "A" shows up on the record. Same can be done for Hillary.

You see, Obama takes money from employees from corporations and firms that lobby. These firms can then collect once he's in.

Now Hillary isn't any better, but she's not hiding. She's up front about it.

Obama is no more a catalyst for change than Hillary. He knows are to play hardball, and how to "work" things in his favor.

Obama is a great candidate, strong skills, great intelligence. But when it comes to politics, he's no different than her.

So vote for change on the issues, VOTE FOR HILLARY.

She's not out, she'll fight on. She a successful woman who doesn't know the word quit.

Posted by: camasca | February 10, 2008 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Hillary supporter, Alonzo Cantu from Mcallen Texas, has been bundling "supposed" donations of hundreds of Hidalgo County residents, to the tune of $Millions$ of dollars. This in a county where the median household income is well under $30,000.

Cantu is now asking Hidalgo County elected officials and even County & State courthouse Judges to have their names placed as donors for Hillary at a private fundraiser in Cantu's house on Wednesday, February 13, 2008. The FBI in conjunction with the FEC are investigating Alonzo Cantu for money laundry into a presidential race and all while using the names of elected officials who clearly cannot afford such donations.

One must wonder how many of these instances of unexplainable masses of high dollar contributions bundled from poor and lower middle class populations will actually reach Hillary Clinton before serious arrests are undertaken by the Feds.

"'Mr. Cantu, I hope it was worth the ride. Your life is about to be turned upside down. Sleep tight while you still can; for now'!"


If this is true, then somebody (i.e., Mr. Cantu) got some serious explaining to do!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

svreader, surely you can agree that the clintons have been lightning rods for years. people love them or hate them. no one is indifferent to them. i voted for bill twice and am not sorry i did. however, i do not want the same families to continue to run this country as they have for almost the past 30 years. 30 YEARS. that's ridiculous. i want a woman as president as much as the next person. enough of the white guys. but not this woman. too much baggage. i'm sorry, but it's true. the republicans will eat her alive. do we really want to rehash the past? and that's what will happen. and i do have a problem that she has not released her tax returns. there has to be some sort of problem, conflict or issue, otherwise she would. that would make sense. i have not been this engaged in the political process for years. obama is incandescent, charismatic, smart, empathetic. sometimes experience isn't all it's cracked up to be. altho' he has over 20 years of it. i'm tired of all the hate, anger and divisiveness of the last 8 years. enough already. and if hillary is the nominee and even gets elected, there will be more of it. it will be endless. please. it's time for a real change.
p.s. does anyone remember when the red sox won fame 4 of the 2004 alcs after being down 3 games to 0 against the yankees? once they won game 4, it became a tidal wave, an avalanche. they never lost another game through the world series. i feel as if the same things is happening w/obama. momentum is not to be disregarded.

Posted by: frieda406 | February 10, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

You Clinton supporters should relax, you're among friends really. All of the meanest jabs at Hillary are being made by GOP trolls, not Obama supporters. DaTourist, for example, is clearly a Republican.

You have to expect that these vultures will flap in to gloat and croak on bad nights for Hillary. Their hatred of the Clintons has obsessed them for years.

svreader - thinking of voting for John McCain? That would be the man who said at a 1998 GOP fundraiser:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father and Hillary Clinton is her mother."

I really don't think he's your man. And you may not be crazy about Obama's healthcare proposals, but I suspect you'll prefer them to McCain's.

Posted by: Bud0 | February 10, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

SVREADER --- For several months you have been inserting on to these discussion boards your shrill and hysterical support for Hillary Clinton.

You argued for her experience -- and were refuted by the facts. And, Obama won.

You argued for her healthcare plan -- and were refuted by the facts. And, Obama won.

You argued that it was right for a woman to be chosen President - and insisted that it didn't matter about her spotty record. And, Obama won.

You told me that Hillary HAD TO VOTE YES on the War authorization because those who didn't were going to be called terrorist supporters. I said HOW COURAGEOUS OF HER. And, Obama won

You argued for a Clinton/Obama ticket and urged him to step aside -- you wrote (or copy/pasted) scores of posts extolling the invincibility of that combined ticket. And, Obama won.

Nothing seems to have worked for you... and very few joined in your frothing blather.

To some, it seemed that maybe YOU doubted your own sincerity, or were beginning to doubt your own candidate's values or your own candidate's policies choices.

Because lately, apparently in agony over your candidate's poor demonstration of her own "inevitability," you have started in on these scurrilous personal attacks on Hillary's opponent - the honorable Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama.

And, Obama won.

And further, when not spreading filthy lies about religion, race, and illegal activity - you have begun to whine piteously about what is going to happen to all of us because we are strongly supporting a different political candidate... as in the comments you have posted herein.

You seems to be projecting all your own fear and insecurity on the rest of us.

SVREADER -- you have no message and you have no credibility.

You've become unhinged.

You are attempting to use a tactic right out of the Republican bag (actually it is a book) of dirty tricks -- namely, trying to churn out lie after lie after lie on these discussion boards - in the distorted hope that over time you will begin to reduce the certainty that some potential voters have for our candidate.

It is a form of crude propaganda.

In this current comments section, like in so many others you now persist in this strangely pathetic slide from legitimate commentary - as when you used to post passionately against global warming and for Al Gore - into a cesspool of mindless posting and re-posting of increasingly vile and repulsive drivel.

Go back and re-read your own posts for the past two weeks. You are not engaging in intellectual discourse...you are screaming out curses and bitter distorted comments.

You have become unhinged from reality.

Seek help.

And, Obama wins.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

dear retcombatvet - so, are you part of a new swiftboat attempt to sink sen. obama's candidacy? at least obama released his tax returns. mrs. clinton refuses to release hers until after she gets the nomination. sort of like closing the barn door after the horse is out.
p.s. my family has served in every war in the country's history, starting with the american revolution and ending w/iraq. so don't try to muscle me w/some long windbag story, please. thank you.

Posted by: frieda406 | February 10, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Hillary supporter, Alonzo Cantu from Mcallen Texas, has been bundling "supposed" donations of hundreds of Hidalgo County residents, to the tune of $Millions$ of dollars. This in a county where the median household income is well under $30,000.

Cantu is now asking Hidalgo County elected officials and even County & State courthouse Judges to have their names placed as donors for Hillary at a private fundraiser in Cantu's house on Wednesday, February 13, 2008. The FBI in conjunction with the FEC are investigating Alonzo Cantu for money laundry into a presidential race and all while using the names of elected officials who clearly cannot afford such donations.

One must wonder how many of these instances of unexplainable masses of high dollar contributions bundled from poor and lower middle class populations will actually reach Hillary Clinton before serious arrests are undertaken by the Feds.

"Mr. Cantu, I hope it was worth the ride. Your life is about to be turned upside down. Sleep tight while you still can; for now!"

Posted by: screwclinton | February 10, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Geez. Obama got a net five (5) delegates for Maine. You need over 2,000 to win the nomination. Can we have a LITTLE perspective?

Posted by: lpeter59 | February 10, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Mark: A black friend of mine asked about Maggie Friday, and I had thought about her quite often wondering what happened to her. I think this is a good thing for the Hillary campaign, because Maggie is one of the best, as well as being among the best personal friends of Hillary. I think back to the time Starr and the Repubs went after her so hard and wound up with nothing. I got your drift on Texas, but still can't get a handle on how it will play.

Posted by: lylepink | February 10, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

It is time for the HRC followers to head to the life boats because your ship is sinking really fast. Barack is rolling up resounding landslides in every region of the country. His momentum is growing and is unprecedented in the history of American politics.

The verdict is in- the Clintons epitomize the dysfunctional, bitter polarization of the past. Americans of every persuasion have spoken that it is time to look to the future with a sense of renewal and optimism. It is time to sieze the moment and make Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

Posted by: ccoblas | February 10, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

veeve, got the primaries on tueday in dc, md and va (the potomac primaries), then we gotta get our sights on big TEXAS and Ohio. Press through through Denver at the convention. Ready to GO!! FIRED UP!! OBAMA! OBAMA!! OBAMA!!!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

yahhhhh President Barack HUSSEIN OBAMA!!!..huhhhh is dat a US President?! Sounds like Middle East to me....

Posted by: duglebugle | February 10, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

"Talk about BURYING THE LEAD."

Today's NYT barely mentioned yesterday's events. No delegate counts, no vote/caucus percentages, just a passing mention that events had been held & the delegate race is still tight. I was a bit surprised...

Posted by: bsimon | February 10, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

mel,

I'm fired up!

Obama 08!

Posted by: veeve | February 10, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't it just a month ago that you wrote Clinton Cash Machine Keeps on Churning and reported how the Clinton campaign was Ecstatic about their fundraising versus Obama and would have NO SHORTAGE of campaign cash for the Feb. 5th primaries. Hmmm so now we are supposed to believe what those same campaign people are saying about Patty Solis not being relieved of her command? Her power was taken away back in January when Maggie joined the campaign. Like the 5 million dollar loan and the lack of income tax returns, this is another piece of info that the Clinton campaign doesn't want to let people know about until well after the fact so taht they can limit the damage and give them time to spin the truth on its head. If their lips are moving then you know they are not telling you the truth.

Posted by: claffiteau | February 10, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

veeve, come on and let's get going. We got a long way to go and a short time to get there!!! The Clintons will not roll over at this point; but tonight the Obamanuts can take a victory lap (Grammy win included). But tomorrow, let's get to work and not waste daylight! OBAMA in '08!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama put his stuff out there, svreader, minus the Clintonian parsing and shading of words. That is one of the biggest differences between Obama and the Clintons -- the former is believable, the latter stays as incredulity. The Clintons are lying when their lips are moving.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

mel,

Man, you're cracking me up. Lol!

It's been a great weekend for supporters of Senator Obama, but we still have a very tall order ahead of us. I never thought I'd volunteer for or donate to a campaign in my life. I guess I never had a reason to before now.

Posted by: veeve | February 10, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

svreader and others, guess what. Obama won a Grammy for the spoken word catagory!! Man, is this a great weekend for his campaign or what? From the same people in Hollywood who loved (past tense) the Clintons. O GOT MO!!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

The thing that will sink Obama the fastest is the fact that he lied about Rezko on national television.

Obama isn't a saint. He's about the farthest thing from it.

People will see the truth as more comes out.

One thing is for sure. He's unelectable in a national election.

"Who should I vote for, the war-hero or the coke-head?"

Is unbeatable.

Remember what the Republicans did with "didn't inhale"

Imagine what they'll do to Obama.

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

svreader, I look forward to the propaganda from the Clintons. Sleep tight, don't let the bedbugs bite.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: InHarmsWay | February 10, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

Jim,

Washington, my friend! Go DAWGS!

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | February 10, 2008 09:04 PM

U-DUB MBA 1989 myself (that was 16 years after my BA from Boston College)

Posted by: jimd52 | February 10, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

No worries for Clinton. The Clinton campaign keeps telling us after each loss that they were expecting to lose, "they" are lending "her" campaign 5 million, and now they have demoted her campaign manager. Gee, why would anyone believe anything's wrong with that powerful Clinton machine. The Republicans will be terribly disappointed if she is not the nominee!

Posted by: RCFillmore | February 10, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

"Its going to be fun watching the press tear Obama to pieces.

Obama supporters have turned off 50% of Democrats so much, they have 0% chance of winning.

No Clinton supporter I know will vote for Obama anymore.

On election day, they'll stay home or vote for McCain.

I'm starting to think of doing it myself."

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 09:27 PM

svreader, I was wondering how fast you'd flip-flop back to voting for McCain. Methinks you are the real GOPer poseur in the blogs.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: toneye | February 10, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Talk about BURYING THE LEAD.

How is it that Obama taking Maine by double digits is noted on this blog which is ostensibly about the political process underway ONLY as a seeming afterthought in the second paragraph of a story about a personnel shake up in the Clinton campaign?

I frankly don't give a hoot about the insider baseball of the Clinton campaign. It may make me feel a little better because I simply prefer Obama's more grassroots organizing strategy and would be happy to see ALL of the "conventional wisdom" that has trashed our politics for 30 years (since the invention of "PACs") go out the window. But it's really not THE STORY of the day. Or shouldn't be.

I DO care who is winning primaries and caucuses and by how much and in what counties and how the demographics are trending. THAT is the real story that is unfolding, state by state and that is the "news" will affect ALL of us.

Blueboat: I can't IMAGINE how poisonous it must feel to be you. Fortunately, the overall arc of history is against your brand of hatefulness--as we are seeing in solidly White, protestant states all across the country.

THAT is the other "story" unfolding today--NOT the fact that Obama's middle name is Hussein. Or that he is Black. Or that he has Muslim family members in Kenya. People like you have TRIED to MAKE that the story and you have FAILED. Utterly and miserably.

One message of Obama's success is that the days are numbered for your kind of deeply hateful world view.

Posted by: tlmck3job | February 10, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

svreader wrote:
"Obama supporters are burning way too many bridges with the rest of us!!!"

svreader has been one of the leaders of the anti-Obama tirades here. Interesting that now svreader wants unity when several months worth of posting by svreader et. al. show they have been gleefully taking pot shots at Barack.

I came to this campaign as an Edwards supporter, and continued to back him until he left the race. On Tuesday, I'll be backing the candidate who I think most exemplifies the same qualities I saw in Edwards. The postings of people like svreader have shown me that that candidate is not Hillary (although from my own research of the candidates and their stands on the issues, I already knew that without the contribution of svreader's, et. al.).

The only thing I can say about the contributions that svreader et. al. have made to my decision is that I was ready to support the Democratic nominee in November with no hesitation and fully. If Hillary is the nominee, I will still support her, but not with a great amount of enthusiasm.

Thank you svreader, et. al. for helping me make up my mind with all the mud slinging YOU brought to the discussion over the last few weeks and months.

Oh, and DaTourist - your snide comments are not at all helpful in the opposite direction.

Posted by: critter69 | February 10, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

meld --

I just saw some fun stuff that will hit the papers about Obama over the next few days.

Sleep well. I will.

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

veeve, there is not that much chemical inducement for svreader. I recommend involuntary commitment (HillaryCare will pay for it, right?)

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

Its going to be fun watching the press tear Obama to pieces.

Obama supporters have turned off 50% of Democrats so much, they have 0% chance of winning.

No Clinton supporter I know will vote for Obama anymore.

On election day, they'll stay home or vote for McCain.

I'm starting to think of doing it myself.

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin, as much I like to think you're right, too many examples of "say anything, do anything to win" with the Clintons make many suspicious (myself included in this number). Solis Doyle outlived her usefulness and now Maggie's on deck as the lead token for Hillary. Ms. Williams better be darned careful; she'll get thrown under the bus and kicked to the curb if things don't turn around ASAP.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

svreader wrote:

I feel sorry about all the people who will lose their homes and even their lives because of the ego and hysteria of Obama and his supporters.

Its no skin off my nose. I've got health insurnance and don't need to worry about losing my home.

The people who will suffer are the poor.

Its too bad, but mass hysteria is hard to fight.

Obama supporters are like some sort of mob.

Its truly frightening.

I do not want that man and his cult running my country!!!

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

You're embarrassing yourself.

Hurling insults?

Cultists?

I highly recommend asking your doctor about Prozac or Zoloft; and fast!

----

Mark_in_Austin

Great city, man. I lived there in the 80's. Here is a link about Hillary flip-flopping on torture.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/09/28/2007-09-28_hillary_flipflop_on_torture_inspired_aft.html

Posted by: veeve | February 10, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

50% of Democrats support Hillary Clinton.

I wish Obama the best of luck trying to win with a history or repeated cocaine abuse, runnning against a war hero, and without half the democratic party.

As far as party loyalty goes, Obama supporters don't show any, why should Clinton supporters back someone who has been so vicious to their candidate?

As far as Obama goes, since his plans don't work anyway, and he wants to be puppet for the Republicans and (I love this one) he wants to figure out health care but putting "The Obama show" on CSPAN.

Why should anyone support him???

Obama is headed for a fall.

Mark my words.

There is no "there, there".

He's just an "empty suit"


Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

A response to svreader from meldupree:

"meld --

"I sincerely hope you reap what you sow." svreader, we all reap what we sow. I suspect the Clintonian/Rovian race-baiting done by Bill/Hill and their surrogates have come back to bite them on the arses. As the late James Brown crooned, "Ya betta git ready for the big payback!" Ah Godfather of Soul, how true, how true!

"You are one of the most vile people I've had the misfortune of interacting with." svreader, thanks. You are a peach yourself! ;) LOL.

"Every time I see one of your posts, I pray that karma exists, and that you feel the full force of it." I live life every day; will continue to do so until the day I die (which will be no time soon).

"Happy?" I'm delighted, svreader! Simply delighted! Obama and the 'Nuts must keep pressing forward and put pedal the metal because there is a nomination and general election to be won. HRC and McCain are not giving up this fight by any long stretch of the imagination; I suspect there will be more distortions, lies and attempts at character assassination and "knee-capping" by the Clintons and McCain. Other than that, I'm pleased as punch. Thank you for asking and sharing your concern.

"May you be haunted by those you have caused pain to!!!" Now that is such a sweet sentiment coming from you. Mind if I cut and paste it on my wall with a frame?

"You are a jerk." Svreader, you are such a special Clintonista. Is Hillary having fun yet? Please give Hill/Bill warm regards from this Obama supporter and tell her to keep up the window-dressing and tokenism and sheer panic in her world. Hillary, after her New Hampshire win, said in her victory speech that she was "in it for the long haul." Surely Hillary knew this was going to be a dogfight, right? Hillary didn't expect the subjects to genuflect and crown her Queen of the Dems, did she? Well, let the rebellion continue!!

OBAMA! OBAMA!! OBAMA!!! (not osama) OBAMA! OBAMA!! OBAMA!!!

Sincerely,

meldupree

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 08:05 PM

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

And you know what the joke is? The Clinton "Campaign Manager" title is a tootless tiger or shall we say: tigress... Now they simply change faces from a Latina to an African American woman while Bill and his shyster buddies run the show... Give me a break...same old Clinton...I WILL VOTE MCCAIN IF SHE"S NOMINATED

Posted by: fugeddabowdid | February 10, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Nervous minds within the Clinton camp as Obama racks up win after win after win...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl | February 10, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Martinedwinandersen, do you have a citation for your allegation that HRC has not taken a clear stance against torture?

Lyle, I posted a primer on TX last night on the previous thread. Absent a major snowball effect from February, the TX vote will be so deeply split that neither of them will claim a significant delegate lead.

JimD, optimyst, and rfpiktor, I think BHO may have an overall delegate lead right now, for what its worth.

HRC slammers, this Williams-for-Solis switch is NOT an ethnic cosmetics issue. These are two of her most trusted confidants - WaPo ran a great story on this last year. Williams is THE most trusted of all her inner circle. Neither is being dumped, nor ever will be. In a tough time, I suspect that HRC would want Ms. Williams closest to her. No biggie.

Back to the important stuff: has HRC waffled on torture? Anyone? Even svreader, if you have a citation.

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

Svreader, where you been so lo-o-ong? The fact is the press (or "mainstream media," as harrumphed by Rush, Lou & O'Reilly), while enamored of sleaze & Clintonism, doesn't particularly care for Ankleless Annie & the husband themselves, as the former hollered at them all the time, the latter didn't keep his appointments and both exhibited a cavalier and pungently obvious disregard for personal hygiene.
Remember that a year ago the media mutts were all a-titter about "Ms. Inevitability," not to mention later howlers about Giuliani & Fred Thompson; however, Obama gave them not only an
unexpected story but also results & confirmation, so they were only too happy to dump the harpy, not to mention go after the stumbling, staggering & insulting husband (the epitome in the South of white-trash noblesse oblige).
Now we learn a lot of those big bucks were squandered; maybe that's a GOOD sign, as the U.S. gov't is the most asinine squanderer in history: yup, La Pingona now has the, er, experience for THAT, along with the husband's own, er, experiences.
The press feels FREE; let it do its job.

Posted by: sawargos | February 10, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Jim,

Washington, my friend! Go DAWGS!

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | February 10, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary lost Maine for an enormous amount of other many and varied reasons and you can be certain that the latest influence of the way the entire world watched and listened to all of her thin-skinned, shrill and hissy-fitted ridiculousness by overreacting to the minor urban-language fiasco of that entire http://www.PimpChelsea.com didn't help one bit.
The 'woman' (i.e. "person" for all you people misogyny-freaked out defenders) just lost Maine for that big reason. Btw, it's all about "language" and not "gender".
All Hillary had to do was to http://www.PimpChelsea.com and have Chelsea solicit more votes and Super Delegates for her.
Naaaa .... not really. Shillary's going down with the ship. The "Ship of Fools".
I'm totally unimpressed with Hillary's Marketing abilities. Can you imagine how she'd "FREAK"~ if it was something "really" "global and worldwide" and important ?
She'd be having another hissy-fit and that'd be something none of us need to experience. (She b off da chats ;)
The bad news is...here comes Bill wagginn' his finger in everybodys face ... defending what ? Nothing."

Posted by: seasandand | February 10, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

This is not a story that will have great legs and will fade into the next set of primary results.

The interesting thing is that people use it to suggest Latino bias, which is just ridiculous.

Dirty little secret:

dlsxpatriate.blogspot.com

Posted by: caraprado1 | February 10, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

An abnormally large number of smarmy jerks, from both sides, are here tonight. Like the majority of posters who favor the Ds this cycle, I'm pretty satisfied by the way the race is progressing. I still have Clinton as slightly favored but think with the Maine win Obama has pulled almost dead even. Tuesday could bring up a surprise for Clinton (Maryland, and either DC or VA). If Obama sweeps with solid margins in all three, he moves into a solid lead. I'll gladly vote for either (but I'm keeping the option of letting McCain change my mind).

I like the way Pat Shiplett put it in his editorial cartoon this week:

___A woman...
___an African American...
___or a guy who won't torture people.
___Not Bad.

Posted by: malis | February 10, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama's movement is such a juggernaut, it may experience a backlash in the voting booth. Americans don't like mass movements in politics. Underdogs do gain lots of sympathy and Hillary has taken on the look and feel of the underdog

Just sayin.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary's delegate lead is soley based on super-delegates who endorsed her. Should the polls continue to show her losing to McCain and should Obama continue to roll, I would expect many of them to abandon her in the best interests of the party."

jimd52 | February 10, 2008 08:12 PM

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

The Obama momentum is beginning to look and feel unstoppable.


Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's victory in Maine -- and the ease with which it came -- actually exceeded expectations, even though he swept the caucuses held on Super Tuesday. Clinton had the backing of the state's governor, John Baldacci, and its proximity to New Hamsphire and Massachusetts, both of which Clinton has already won this year, led some analysts to expect a close race.

Even Obama's own campaign said they didn't expect to win Maine, according to a document the campaign said was accidentally leaked earlier in the week.

In the delegate chase, Obama has pulled ahead of Clinton, even when the support of uncommitted super delegates is figured in. According to CBS News estimates, Obama holds a razor-thin lead with 1,134 delegates overall to 1,131 for Clinton."

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Yo, Martin E. Andersen of Churchton! You've hit the obvious nail on the head, though there are still those who, incredibly, act as if the White House was the Tear BAG's & the husband's property, not the American people's.
Let us pray there not be a Vince Foster moment for Ms. Solis [de-?] Doyle, and that the Hag from Hell may get no closer to the White House than the furniture etc. she & the husband filched therefrom & scurried away at Chappaqua (the manse is said to be atop the old Roaring Brook Farm pigsty), in Chelsea's office at Goldman, and at the Harlem "Score's," where it's used for those fatcat & hangers-on CGI board meetings (chaired 'neath the Oval Office desk by Mr. Smug "hisseff" with his "see-gar").
Next on the promotion list: Rosie & Ellen?

Posted by: sawargos | February 10, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary's delegate lead is solely based on super-delegates who endorsed her. Should the polls continue to show her losing to McCain and should Obama continue to roll, I would expect many of them to abandon her in the best interests of the party.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 10, 2008 08:12 PM"

I don't disagree at all, just pointing out that there is work still to be done. And voters can be fickle. A fisherman doesn't celebrate until the fish is in the boat, not when the hook has been set. Many big ones have got away.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

DaTourist | February 10, 2008 08:16 PM

Yesterday I heard a rant by Bubba and in it he says Hillary is a "world figure".

World figures turn $10,000 into $100,000 in a year 'cause it figures.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

svreader, most democrats are perfectly willing to support Obama. Less than 2% of the population does not constitute "the rest of us".

WE THE PEOPLE are going to kick your butt out of DC, get used to it. Time to pack your bags.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | February 10, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Bringing in Williams was a smart move--not a sign of desperation. Read the news: Hillary is pulling in grassroots money like never before--and even the media is taking notice that her base is much more committed than his (check out WP poll).
Yes, she has to win. But don't count her out too quickly. This woman is made of steel.

Obama? Who IS Obama? This guy comes from out of nowhere, never having achieved much of anything. Yes, he's eloquent--but WHERE'S THE BEEF? His recovery plan for New Orleans--plaigarized almost word for word from hers. Not cool.

Also: he claims not to take money from special interests. So what was the $160,000 from Exelon--the nation's largets nuclear producer? A valentine?

This guy will get swiftboated so fast by the Republicans we won't even see the bubbles. He's a puffball

Posted by: spabeles | February 10, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Well svreader, I guess this weekend isn't working for you.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

What's up with Carville? He's almost as ugly as Chelsea.

Posted by: eco-pharm | February 10, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I've been thinking of why Texas should be a concern for the Dems in the upcoming primary. I can't seem to get a handle on how this will be played no matter the results.

Posted by: lylepink | February 10, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Well, if she's going to travel with her from time to time, I suppose the best place would be on the road.

Time for Hillary to start crying again?

Posted by: RossPhx | February 10, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Whilst "Beelzebubba" Carville & "Balloonbean" Begala scrounge for loose change & "Rumpelstiltstein" Reich picks pockets, Clintonite bundler & fugitive from justice Xu Beiren (Norman Hsu) has come up with a "Tear BAG" fundraising ditty based on Bobby Vinton's "I'm Mister Blue," called "I'm Mister Hsu":
Me Mistah Hsu.
She say dun you.
Obama sclew.
Him look like zoo.

Posted by: sawargos | February 10, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised Hillary didn't win in Maine. They have a history of electing left wing women. Was it Hillary's total lack of credibility or her long history of criminality that cost her the election?

Posted by: eco-pharm | February 10, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

How did Chelsea snag a job with a six figure salary straight out of college?

How did Hillary become a Presidential candidate?

Theories, anyone?

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

WOW!

The Clintonistas are now biting the hand that fed them, THE PRESS!

Now that is truly funny! Like sharks feeding on one another's guts!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I think there's an over reaction here to the weekend's events. Clinton still has a delegate lead. She still leads in daily tracking polls. Assuming a sweep on Tuesday night, there's a chance Obama will have a delegate lead then, but it will still be razor thin.

The Clinton campaign is just not going to give up so easily. And the Obama team needs to keep grinding it out. It is not time for celebrations. And it is especially not time to denigrate fellow democrats. I counsel some patience and more class from some of us.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 07:53 PM


Hillary's delegate lead is soley based on super-delegates who endorsed her. Should the polls continue to show her losing to McCain and should Obama continue to roll, I would expect many of them to abandon her in the best interests of the party.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 10, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

So, tell me!

Who's the caretaker of the Clintons' political boneyard?

Who decides which dead Clintonista gets a space? Who gets a pauper's grave?

Space must be getting kind of crowded about now!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

The problem isn't the candidate, its the press.

Just wait until they turn their fangs on Obama!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

The problem isn't the campaign manager. It's the candidate.

Posted by: eco-pharm | February 10, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

meld --

I sincerely hope you reap what you sow.
You are one of the most vile people I've had the misfortune of interacting with.

Every time I see one of your posts, I pray that karma exists, and that you feel the full force of it.

Happy?

May you be haunted by those you have caused pain to!!!

You are a jerk.

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

A BEACHED WHALE?

Nope! That's just Chillary, cast up on the beach of a desert island!

Marooned!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton campaign is just not going to give up so easily. And the Obama team needs to keep grinding it out. It is not time for celebrations. And it is especially not time to denigrate fellow democrats. I counsel some patience and more class from some of us.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 07:53 PM

I agree with this 100% . However it is worth pointing out that until Iowa the word from the Clinton campaign was that she was inevitable . So the fact that she is now firing staff and borrowing money is major news. Also the fact that she has lost 4 states by double digit margins is BIG NEWS. It's easy to dismiss these states as small and unimportant but im sure the citizens of these states would disagree . That said the Clintons will fight until the last dog dies. The question is how far are they willing to go and will it be effective. History has shown that those who attack Obama does so at their peril . History has also shown that when a candidate has more money , better organization and wins 7 , 8 states in a row , he's in pretty good shape. Obama will be the nominee. HRC will skulk into the darkness. Obama will pick a female VP and together they will storm the Republicans in november. Count on it. Go to the bank on it.

GOPhunter.blogspot.com

Posted by: brokenglassdemocrat | February 10, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

In the next debate between Sens. Obama and Clinton, I hope someone will ask Hillary the following question:

"Ma'am, your husband's presidency was marked by scandals running from the salacious to national security, you've run a campaign based on race coding, and both you and your husband have scant regard for the truth.

"Personal responsibility is the key to government accountability.

"What could you--or your husband--say to young people, what could you possibly bring to the table, for those who need to hear a message of honesty and integrity?"

MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN
Churchton, Maryland

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 10, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

GoHuskies2004 /ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#ME

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 06:47 PM

Which Huskies? Washington or Connecticut?

I'm a Washington Husky myself - went to grad school there.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 10, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Next Aunt Chillary will appeal to black folks wearing black face and a handkerchief on her head!

Aunt Hil-mina! Aunt Hil-mina! Why bless my soul!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton Campaign to smear Obama boomeranged big time, and opened black folks' eyes to how the Liberal Plantation operates!

Ol' Massa Bill apologizes and apologizes and apologizes and apologizes, but Ol' Massa Bill just keeps right on making the same ol' racist and sexist mistakes!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure HRC would prefer us to always try to predict their future behaviour by methods that avoid looking at her past behaviour. I'm sure many other criminals would prefer the same. I'm not sure what we are then supposed to base our speculation on . . . Magic?

Posted by: ruped24 | February 10, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I think there's an over reaction here to the weekend's events. Clinton still has a delegate lead. She still leads in daily tracking polls. Assuming a sweep on Tuesday night, there's a chance Obama will have a delegate lead then, but it will still be razor thin.

The Clinton campaign is just not going to give up so easily. And the Obama team needs to keep grinding it out. It is not time for celebrations. And it is especially not time to denigrate fellow democrats. I counsel some patience and more class from some of us.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

too bad Clinton did not bring in 0-8 Bob Shrum. The People over the Powerful! Wait, that would undermine much of Hillary's support.

Posted by: merganser | February 10, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I'll always have a soft spot for Barack Obama for cutting the Clintons and the Clinton Machine down to size!

Way to go, bro! May the force be with you, bro!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, gotta watch out for uppity black people in Maine who don't know their place. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

svreader, what up! Oh I saw a movie with my wife and just ate some ribs. Man they were GOOD! Nice weekend, four states and the Virgin Islands for Obama. Great Work by the voters and caucus goers.

Hey, I see Hillary sacked Solis Doyle and got Maggie Williams as the campaign head. How's that workin' for Hillary. How's that workin' for you? Replace the Latina (since she's no use to Hillary's window-dressing tokenism anymore) with an African-American female (who'll get the same shaft if she doesn't perform for her majesty). I'll tell you one thing: the tokenism bit ain't working for the America, regardless of race, ethnicity or class. The footsteps of change are now in quicktime and getting ready to shift into double-time with drumbeats getting louder and the clarion call of marching soldiers getting stronger!!! I like it!!!!

On 20 January 2009, we want to say "Barack Obama, President of the United States of America!!!" I'll see you at the inauguration!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Why does EVERYBODY hate Chillary?

Well, it didn't happen overnight, but it's easy to connect the dots from Bill and Hillary's Arkansas vendettas to the race-baiting of Barack Obama!

Posted by: DaTourist | February 10, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

kat7 | February 10, 2008 07:41 PM

She was also up for Maine, until the little people voted.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Strange but true:

OBAMA EDGES OUT CLINTON AND GETS A GRAMMY.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/obama-edges-out-a-clinton-for-a-grammy/

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

>>>> The In-Trade Prediction Market is weighing in on the Clinton slide. Current chance of winning nomination is 33.9%, which is a drop of 3.8% for the day. One week ago today, she had a 60% chance. She needs some good news to steady the ship.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 05:36 PM <<<<<<

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Polling:

Date Clinton Obama

02/10/08 49% 41%
02/09/08 48% 42%
02/08/08 47% 43%
02/07/08 44% 44%

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history

Clinton is up last four days.

This is BUY news for Intraders, not SELL news.

Posted by: kat7 | February 10, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

OK, enough jokes.

Didn't McCain do this about 8 months ago? How'd that work out for him?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/10/mccain.staff/index.html

Might be too little, too late.

I guess all those black folk in Maine are getting uppity again!

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 06:18 PM

Yeah, both of them.

Posted by: JD | February 10, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama's future if he beats Hillary:

1) Hillary will not join the ticket
2) He splits independents with McCain
3) Republicans vote for McCain
4) Half of Hillary's supporters stay home

Result = He will lose in 2008 and NEVER be president.

Obama's future if Hillary wins:

1) He becomes VP candidate
2) If Hillary wins, he is shoe-in for 2012 or 2016
3) If Hillary loses, he gets elected governor of Illinois and is the heir apparent in 2012

Result = He would likely be president some day.

Posted by: lpeter59 | February 10, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

dogfriend --

Your hatred for Senator Clnton and your glee at seeing her misfortune is disgusting.

I hope you find yourself without health insurance and with only your hate to comfort you!!!

Obaam supporters have a cruel streak that comes out every time he wins.

There's no way he's going to win a national election.

Obama supporters are burning way too many bridges with the rest of us!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

I think what is increasingly clear after this weekend is that, regarding caucuses, the Clinton campaign has been sadly wanting. They've been able to win the majority of the bigger state primaries, but have been swept in caucus states.

Obama's support in the African American community may be credited as reason for his decisive primary wins in the South, but that is no excuse in the caucuses. Obama scored lopsided wins in lily-white caucus states such as North Dakota and Idaho. He did that by making the attempt to seek the votes of those small-state caucusers. He had more staff in those states and made personal appearances.

The fact is Solis-Doyle was campaign chair. If the campaign suffers in strategy as badly as Clinton's has, there has to be fundamental change and new leadership. That staff leader takes the blame.

Even with Obama's victories, it's still neck and neck. The next big events are big primaries in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Because of the Democratic rule of proportional splitting of delegates, no one is going to come out of that one with a majority either. Clinton is hoping of course for "wins" for the bragging rights, if not delegate counts, that allow her to fire an answering shot to Obama's big weekend.

I'm just hoping it stays a contest until June 3 when Montana and South Dakota are the last primaries. I'm hoping Obama and Clinton hit both states hard in an effort to score the last win to impress the super delegates who may hold the balance here.

I have sugar plums dancing in my head at the prospect that Montanans and our South Dakota neighbors may have a chance to personnally see the candidates and even ask them questions, particularly about federal issues that are especially important to those of us in the intermountain west. These issues usually get short shrift in presidential elections. Land use, water use, conservation, energy development etc.. are issues Montanans would like to hear about.

Posted by: AlaninMissoula | February 10, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Solis Doyle better stay out of Fort Marcy Park.

Posted by: JD | February 10, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Hillary fires the Hispanic and hires an African American because she thinks she has the hispanic vote locked-up and can now go after african-americans? How stupid of her. Does she think people can't see through her tricks?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=au7dDRUV13pI&refer=home

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | February 10, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I feel sorry about all the people who will lose their homes and even their lives because of the ego and hysteria of Obama and his supporters.

Its no skin off my nose. I've got health insurnance and don't need to worry about losing my home.

The people who will suffer are the poor.

Its too bad, but mass hysteria is hard to fight.

Obama supporters are like some sort of mob.

Its truly frightening.

I do not want that man and his cult running my country!!!

Posted by: svreader | February 10, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

lylepink | February 10, 2008 07:21 PM

Good one, friend.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

The first sign of panic in a campaign - fire the campaign manager. LOL. Goodbye hillary.

Posted by: adrienne_najjar | February 10, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

gObama!

Posted by: Merican | February 10, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

rfiptor" Don't understand your ? Did I misspell "Caucasus" ??

Posted by: lylepink | February 10, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Crisis, we hear you.

Do you have any thoughts on Texas?

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

AMAZING interview of BamBam on 60 minutes. Just the kind of national exposure he needs.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is so full of it. She has not integrity and cannot be trusted.Check out this scathing assessment of here welfare reform plan.
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/034

In the hot and testy debate in South Carolina, Clinton countered Obama's correct assertion that she served on the board of directors of Wal-Mart (followed by years as a corporate attorney for the Rose Law Firm) by saying, in essence, that when Obama was wet behind his ears, she was working and being inspired by the legendary Marian Wright Edelman at the Children's Defense Fund. That is true until you get to the issue of results in public office.

In a July 2007 interview with Amy Goodman, Marian Wright Edelman had this to say about the "welfare reform bill" and Hillary Clinton:

MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN: Well, you know, Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics. We have to build a constituency, and you don't--and we profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so. We were for welfare reform, I am for welfare reform, but we need good jobs, we need adequate work incentives, we need minimum wage to be decent wage and livable wage, we need health care, we need transportation, we need to invest preventively in all of our children to prevent them ever having to be on welfare.

And yet, you know, many years after that, when many people are pronouncing welfare reform a great success, you know, we've got growing child poverty, we have more children in poverty and in extreme poverty over the last six years than we had earlier in the year. When an economy is down, and the real test of welfare reform is what happens to the poor when the economy is not booming. Well, the poor are suffering, the gap between rich and poor widening. We have what I consider one of--a growing national catastrophe of what we call the cradle-to-prison pipeline. A black boy today has a one-in-three chance of going to prison in his lifetime, a black girl a one-in-seventeen chance. A Latino boy who's born in 2001 has a one-in-six chance of going to prison. We are seeing more and more children go into our child welfare systems, go dropping out of school, going into juvenile justice detention facilities. Many children are sitting up--15,000, according to a recent congressional GAO study--are sitting up in juvenile institutions solely because their parents could not get mental health and health care in their community. This is an abomination.

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/034

Posted by: ne_voice | February 10, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

CLINTON WINNING NEW HAMPSHIRE WAS NOT A STUNNING COME-FROM-BEHIND VICTORY. SHE POLLED AHEAD THERE FOR MONTHS, ONLY BETWEEN IOWA AND NEW HAMPSHIRE, FOR A FEW DAYS, DID OBAMA POLL AHEAD, BUT NEVER BY THE MARGINS BY WHICH CLINTON LED FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS.

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT THANKS.

Posted by: thecrisis | February 10, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Its not over yet.

Clinton 08

Posted by: luv2Bluvd | February 10, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

lylepink | February 10, 2008 06:57 PM

"caucasus"?

MayaO, the strain is beginning to show...

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Bubba, tell us another distortion about your factually accurate "Hillary is great!" con job.

The Bubba Legacy Referendum will take place at a time to be announced by the little people. Your pathetic "It's about me, stupid" grasping for attention cought up with the Youtube reality death by a million views. You cannot, will not, weasel your way out of reality in this century, mister.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was going to read that Bill stepped down.

This is a surprise.....I think the problem is Hillary, she goes flat emotionally when she isn't in control, as in, not in the lead. Emotions can really get in the way; I think she has a lot buried.

Posted by: buzzm1 | February 10, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

I think Maine should go for Obama because the folks there generally fit the profile of his most ardent supporters. Don't forget these caucasus states are not very well represented in terms of the average voter turnout.

Posted by: lylepink | February 10, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to all those who posted the results. I see that the WAPost has finally posted the results as well. I could have found the results, but I felt that a newspaper should report the news. I am especially critical of the Post, because it's my paper of choice. I expect the Post to do the right thing, meaning first report the news, and then analyze it.

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | February 10, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

BamBam is on 60 minutes tonight.

Michelle is on Larry King tomorrow night.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

This seems very bad news for Hillary. I think she's going to lose Texas and Ohio as well. I bet BamBam does well in debates too.

History will not be denied.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

AP CALLS IT FOR OBAMA IN MAINE!!!

YAY!!

Posted by: afgooey74 | February 10, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

With 70% of precincts tallied, CNN and NBC are declaring OBAMA THE WINNER IN MAINE.

Posted by: miraclestudies | February 10, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

When a Clinton puts a Black in a position of authority - that is a sure sign of desperation. They need the Blacks, of course, but mostly in the position of kitchen help and personal servants. The Clintons have rarely trusted a Black with an important position, unless necessary to further themselves.

Maybe the readers here can list the Black cabinet members appointed by Clinton? State Department heads? Anything other than Ron Brown????

Posted by: VirginiaConservative | February 10, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama PROJECTED WINNER BY CNN.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Its about time. She should have been canned weeks ago. She squandered Hillary's money and lead.

It's too late now. They're simply rearranging deck chairs on the S.S. Clinton.

Posted by: dbroton01 | February 10, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Wow, once again I see lots of folks for Obama who apparently express hope, change and unity by viciously trashing the other candidate on every political site they can find. Nice.

Posted by: alyce_b | February 10, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

GoHuskies2004 | February 10, 2008 06:42 PM

GO HERE:

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#ME

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary dumps Latina Patti Solis". That's the headline in all Latino media tomorrow. Won't sound good in English or Spanish. More trouble in Clintonia.

Posted by: zb95 | February 10, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

The day began with the headline OBAMA SWEEPS 4 CONTESTS followed by a separate story warning Women Could Give Clinton the Edge In Maine's Caucuses. The day ends with word that in spite of snow and arctic cold temps, Maine Dems turned out in record numbers (with lines 3 blocks long in Portland) to give Obama a headline that should read OBAMA SWEEPS TO ANOTHER RESOUNDING WIN IN MAINE CAUCUSES and a Billary headline that should read HILLARY CLINTON'S HISPANIC CAMPAIGN MANAGER TAKES THE FALL FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE'S LACKLUSTER PERFORMANCE IN DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION CONTESTS WITH BARACK OBAMA. But don't worry about Billary, they are confident that Hispanic support in Texas will result in a win over Obama there next month. Yeah right,Billary for President RIP

Posted by: claffiteau | February 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama 58% Hill 41% with 70% votes counted.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

If my choice, Obama is wise, he will pick a strong woman governor as a running mate and she will ascend to the Oval Office in 8 years.


Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 06:05 PM

I absolutely agree and I have a suggestion . Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. She is extremely popular in Kansas. She also has a reputation for appealing to independents and Republicans. She has a demonstrated ability to bring Republicans to her side in fact her lt. Governor used to be the chairman of the Kansas Republican party ! Obama-Sebelius 08.

Posted by: brokenglassdemocrat | February 10, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Well, I would like to dance on the witch's grave but bad things always seem to hang around - like bad breath. COntrary to popular belief, the Clinton's made this all about sex and race and as a WHITE male I will vote for Obama, never for Hillary, Bill or their daughter they drag out from time to time for pubilicity photos.

We may need a woman president, but Hillary is not it.

Posted by: zendrell | February 10, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Why are the Maine results not posted anywhere on this newspaper, or at least on any accessible place on the paper? Report the news! This is ridiculous.

Posted by: GoHuskies2004 | February 10, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

That's fine. I don't know why the Washington Post is not covering it, maybe because you endorsed Hillary, however, the new todays is BARACK OBAMA JUST WON THE MAINE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS.

Posted by: ddraper81 | February 10, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

It makes me sick that a woman who has given her whole career to public service is getting this kind of treatment from the public and from the press. I know nothing about Sen. Clinton's private life, her tax returns, her personality traits or her alleged ambition. The only thing I (and, I argue, anyone else on this forum) can actually point to is her resume, which is impressive. She is the more qualified candidate for this office and I will continue to proudly support her campaign.

Posted by: VegetablesPlease | February 10, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse


Waterville likes Obama
The final tally in Sunday's Democratic Party caucuses for the 43 delegates to
represent the city of Waterville at the state convention was 26-17 for Barack
Obama over Hillary Clinton.


Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is the most divisive, polarizing, mean spirited, nasty politician our country has seen since Richard Nixon. If you want revenge against the Republicans and bitter partisanship in Congress, vote for her. Revenge and bitterness will take you only so far and will not solve any of the problems our nation faces. However, if you want a candidate who will reach across the aisle and get meaningful legislation passed to solve our nations problems with health care, the environment, the economy, immigration, and restore our nations values by improving our foreign policy and no longer making America a pariah in the world you have but one choice: Barack Obama. It`s very simple: if you want divisiveness and polarization choose Hillary Clinton, if you prefer our leadership working together to solve our nations problems choose Barack Obama.

Posted by: amitai | February 10, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton says that if she passes her health care plan, it will include provisions to garnish workers' wages.

Such confiscatory language shows she has not learned anything from the fight during the 1990s on health care, and how the Democrats will again lose the battle and probably the White House if she is leading the Party.

Experience is all well and good, but one should learn from it.

Clearly Sen. Clinton has not.

MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 10, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't any Democrat remember that Senator Hillary Clinton CO-SPONSORED a bill to make flag burning a federal crime? Hillary Clinton for Panderer -in-Chief!

Posted by: trace1 | February 10, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

This from Hillary:

"Emperor of the Gallactic Corporation, Your Imperial Highness, we Billaristas, are in deep do do, strike now with mighty fury!!!

The Obama is with the force, I'm not."

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Hey Everone,

Aren't you forgetting the brilliance of this move? Barack is winning another state and what are the media outlets talking about? Not Obama's resounding victories, but another internal drama within the Clinton campaign.

That's right! See how the major media outlets bite like fish? You gotta hand it to her...she knows how to manipulate the headlines.

If this gets top billing over "Obama wins HUGE" or "Polls Show Obama fares better against McCain," Clinton's ploy is brilliant.

Come on, Post folks...you know the real story, and oh how reluctant you are to report it. HA-ha.

Posted by: shabistari | February 10, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I guess all those black folk in Maine are getting uppity again!

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Woman Overboard!! The SS Billary is like a sieve.

Posted by: waterfrontproperty | February 10, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Oh and just a quick addition to what i said, above I feel like this because i think Hillary will not be the nominie, and i don't want to see Senator Obama damaged by anything as i personally think he is the slightly weaker candidate of the two but am desperate for him to win if and when he is the nominie.

Posted by: dhg1 | February 10, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

With 59% of precincts reporting, it's:

OBAMA 57%

HRC 42%

Looks like it may be a weekend-sweep by healthy margins.

Posted by: miraclestudies | February 10, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Clinton looses and of course she blames the Latina. Mark Penn is good ole boy, so he keeps to keep collecting his 5 million dollar checks.

Posted by: julian9682 | February 10, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

to frieda406,

I didn't mean to distract with my pro Hillary comment, I suppose the point i was trying to get to is that while vitrol is spilt on these sorts of fomrum (and thank you for the correct spelling there, i agonised over the e and was wrong) The world needs one of these people, i fully respect your coice and can easily see why you make it, it is not an easy choice and the crtisicms you make of Senator Clinton are valid, however, what i am trying to get to is why people like you are not dominant in this campaign... as wpost4112 points out mud slinging is a part of your democracy, i woudl dispute worlds greatest as i would for any FPTP system lol but that is beside the point. From outside the system the GOP look like a bunch of adults while the dems look like squabling children delighting in their own downfall. I suppose i was trying to make a plea for some level of co-operation between the candidates, take the attack on McCain, play to their own strenghts and let the remaining competitions decided based on that. Surely this would be better for both party and world in the long run. Thanks for the adult comments...

Posted by: dhg1 | February 10, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

...and drunk dialing for super delegates is unlikely to change the course of the Clinton campaign given Hillary's high negatives and electability issues in a general election against McCain. The future is looking very bright for Obama. After his sweep in the Potomac primary, he will really get to work campaigning in OH and TX...just imagine how well he is going to do with some real time to campaign in those states!

Posted by: michael | February 10, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Obama 57, Whatshername 42, 59% of votes counted

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

To paraphrase Voltaire: I look forward to the day when the last Clintonite is strangled in the entrails of the last evangelical Repubublican. Then we can return to politics as they should be conducted.

Posted by: ravitchn | February 10, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

To late to fire you Manager. Divorce your Husband. He is the one that turned the Black Community against you.

Posted by: MsRita | February 10, 2008 05:59 PM


Truer words have not been spoken. Bill has killed his wife's hope and the hopes of millions of women who justifiably want the glass ceiling shattered.

Unfortunately, Hillary is attached to a pig.

If my choice, Obama is wise, he will pick a strong woman governor as a running mate and she will ascend to the Oval Office in 8 years.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

It seems we are fast approaching a "Tipping Point" in this race. The news for the Clinton campaign could not be much worse: 1.) they are consistently losing state primaries in landslides 2.)they have dire financial problems 3.)they are polling lower by the day in a general election against McCain 4.) there are major staff shake-ups (who knows, maybe their people are actually jumping ship - either that or they are being scapegoated) 5.)they face the another landslide sweep in the Potomac primaries.

It has gotten to the point where they are no longer going to be able to spin the grim reality that they face. They are losing, plain and simple.

Posted by: michael | February 10, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

BARACK OBAMA IS AN OBVIOUS CHOICE FOR THOSE OF US WHO LOVE INTEGRITY AND CHARACTER. THE SS CLINTON HAS TAKEN ON WATER AND THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH BILGE PUMPS TO PUMP OUT THE WATER AND THE EVER GROWING SLUDGE. I COME NOT TO BURY CLINTO N THOUGH THAT DAY IS COMING SOON BUT RATHER TO PRAISE SENATOR OBAMA A MAN WHO STANDS FOR WHAT HE STANDS FOR. HE DOES NOT HAVE IRAQ BLOOD ON HIS HANDS SOMETHING I AM MY FELLOW VETERAN SON APPRECIATE. I AM A LATINO MARRIED TO AN AFRICAN AMERICAN SO DONT BELIEVE THAT BROWN AND BLACK CANNOT GET ALONG. OBAMA CAN LEAD US TO A PLACE OF ACTUAL COEXISTENCE IN THE WORLD. HE CAN LEAD US TO VAST PROGRESS IN HEALTH CARE, ECONOMIC POLICY, EDUCATION BECAUSE HE CAN WORK WITH THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE AND NOT BE DESPISED WHILE DOING IT.

GO BARACK GO.

YES WE CAN, SI SE PUEDE, YES WE CAN, SI SE PUEDE

BARACK AND ROLL IN 2008

Posted by: pedraza1 | February 10, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton says that if she passes her health care plan, it will include provisions to garnish workers' wages.

Such confiscatory language shows she has not learned anything from the fight during the 1990s on health care, and how the Democrats will again lose the battle and probably the White House if she is leading the Party.

Experience is all well and good, but one should learn from it.

Clearly Sen. Clinton has not.

MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN

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

Well if Hillary can't win in MAIN she can't win anywhere.

Total with 45% precents reporting

Obama 58%
Hillary 42%

To late to fire you Manager. Divorce your Husband. He is the one that turned the Black Community against you.

Posted by: MsRita | February 10, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Cathy Crowley on CNN is determinedly Clinton. Extremely annoying. As annoying as the anti-Clinton bias on MSNBC. Where are the non-biased professionals??

The only decent reporter is that guy on CNN who does all the charts. Keeps his ego to himself.

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton should be careful about saying that she could call John McCain out on defense and security issues in the general election.

John McCain, a war hero, has stood resolutely against the practice of torture.

Despite the Democratic Party's proud tradition of support for human rights, Hillary has flip flopped on the issue, showing little judgment and no moral center.

That is one more reason why to support Barack Obama for president.

MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 10, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

NO money, NO competent campaign manager and NO votes on Saturday. The HillBillys are in big trouble.

Here's one reason why, with Clinton at the helm, the government would exercise yet more control over your paycheck, stealing yet more of your money by confiscating a portion of your wages and turning them over to corrupt health insurance companies that do absolutely nothing to encourage real health.


That's assuming HillBilly can get health insurance passed. So far, there is no successful experience.

Posted by: kevinschmidt | February 10, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

C'mon, people! How about all the good things Hillary's done? She's been "making change for 35 years" and always can go back to being a bus driver.

Posted by: filoporquequilo | February 10, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Those who caucused in Gardiner and Manchester chose Sen. Barack Obama by wide margins today.

Unofficial totals in Gardiner showed 129 for Obama and 47 for Sen. Hillary Clinton.

In Manchester, 79 expressed a preference for Obama and 31 for Clinton.

Democratic Party officials use the totals to divvy up delegates.

Both towns had larger than normal turnout, and Augusta delayed the start of its caucus for about an hour because of long lines of people waiting to register as Democrats. Their results will not be available until later tonight.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it makes a difference who they say is running the campaign. It's obviously the predator. I hope the rest of the country is as fed up with these two slugs as I am. Must be that many of the democrats are, since the rookie is beating up on her majesty. Good riddance.

Posted by: LarryG62 | February 10, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

frieda406 and others advertising his clean hands and saying what he means:

www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-galesburg_obama_webfeb01,1,6024020.story

CAMPAIGN 2008
Obama's fundraising collides with his rhetoric
Union says senator did little to save jobs

By Bob Secter

Tribune reporter

12:47 PM CST, February 2, 2008

GALESBURG, Ill.

Maytag workers whose jobs were shipped to Mexico serve as consistent characters in Barack Obama's stump speech. He employs their stories in railing against corporations that use trade pacts to replace well-paid union workers with low-cost foreign ones.

It is a ready applause line for the Illinois presidential hopeful, one that he has been reciting almost verbatim since he was a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004, when appliance giant Maytag was in the process of shutting a refrigerator plant here, putting 1,600 people out of work.

But the union that represented most of those Galesburg workers isn't impressed with Obama's advocacy. It has endorsed his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. Its leaders say they wish he had done more about their members' plight.

What rankles some is what Obama didn't do even as he expressed solidarity four years ago with workers mounting a desperate fight to save their jobs.

Obama had a special connection to Maytag: Lester Crown, one of the company's directors and biggest investors whose family, records show, has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama's campaigns since 2003. But Crown says Obama never raised the fate of the Galesburg plant with him, and the billionaire industrialist insists any jawboning would have been futile.

Obama's chief political strategist, David Axelrod, said late Thursday that the senator did not know Crown sat on Maytag's board until the Tribune noted it last September in a story about the closing of the Maytag headquarters in Newton, Iowa.

As Illinois readies for its part in next week's Super Tuesday primaries, the high-profile treatment given the Maytag situation by the state's homegrown candidate is a reminder of the often awkward intersection of populist rhetoric, complex issues and the financial realities of presidential campaigning.

Obama's rhetoric on Maytag has been unswerving and underscored by the closure of other U.S. appliance plants by Whirlpool Corp., which bought Maytag in 2006.

In his victory speech after Saturday's South Carolina primary, Obama spoke yet again of "the Maytag worker who is now competing with his own teenager for a $7-an-hour job at Wal-Mart because the factory he gave his life to shut its doors."

Beyond such talk, there is little evidence that Obama went to any lengths to fight the Galesburg shutdown. Some analysts say his ties to the Crowns--Lester's son, James, is the Illinois finance chairman of Obama's presidential run--leave him open to criticism.

Charles Lewis, founder of the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, said in the era of big money politics there's often a disconnect between the passionate words of a politician and the financial interests of the wealthy benefactors who help bankroll their campaigns.

"It is hypocritical," said Lewis. "Democrats are often in a tricky position because they are close to labor and talk about the homeless and poor, but they need money and have to turn to the captains of industry to get it."

The Obama campaign said the Maytag workers' union never asked him to intervene with Crown and that he would have done so if they had. Union officials said they were unaware of the Crowns' ties to Maytag or to Obama.

In his campaign, Obama has not shied from condemning rivals for straying from their own populist images.

Locked in an increasingly personal war of words with Clinton, Obama has attacked her for long-ago service on the board of Wal-Mart, which has frosty relations with organized labor. Before John Edwards dropped out of the race this week, Obama hit him for financial ties to a hedge fund with investments in Whirlpool. The Obama critique stressed Whirlpool's role in closing U.S. factories, including Maytag's longtime headquarters in Newton, Iowa.

Crown family members are major Democratic Party donors. Some have given to Clinton's campaigns for the U.S. Senate in New York. But in the presidential run, their money is behind Obama, campaign records show. The Crowns and employees of their family-run holding company have given at least $195,000 to Obama's U.S. Senate and presidential campaigns.

Lester Crown made his first contribution to Obama, $2,100, last February and hosted a fundraiser for him last fall. But Crown's wife has pumped $16,100 into Obama' coffers, beginning with a $12,000 gift to his U.S. Senate campaign in 2003.The economic viability of Maytag's Galesburg operation is still in dispute. Obama wrote extensively about the plant in his 2006 best seller, "The Audacity of Hope," and clearly sided with frustrated union workers who insisted their plant was profitable and productive but was being sacrificed to corporate greed.

Maytag management announced plans in 2002 to shutter the Galesburg factory. In an interview, Lester Crown said the plant hadn't been competitive for years and that Maytag gave two years' notice of the shutdown to minimize the pain. "Barack can say whatever he wants, but this was not an example of corporate indifference. That's absolutely inaccurate," Crown said, though he stressed that his support for Obama is still unwavering.

In a statement issued late Thursday, the Obama campaign defended his record on standing up for American workers against special interests. "Because of Obama's history of working with Democrats and Republicans to get things done, our campaign has generated the support of voters and contributors with a wide range of policy beliefs," the statement read.

Most of the Galesburg workers were members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, whose national president has complained loudly this campaign season that Obama's support for Maytag workers was more show than substance.

IAM spokesman Rick Sloan, said the union's problems with Obama go beyond Galesburg. Sloan complained that Obama has not used his position in the Senate to help Illinois IAMAW members hurt in other plant shutdowns as well as the United Airlines bankruptcy. Obama also spurned the union's endorsement interview last summer, Sloan said.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and former U.S. Rep. Lane Evans, who represented Galesburg, aggressively lobbied Maytag to change its mind in 2004, Sloan said. Obama did not, Sloan said, adding: "He could easily have said, Lester my friend, there are folks hurting in Galesburg, you're on the board, what can you do?"Obama first took up the Maytag workers' cause in mid-2004 as they mounted a futile effort to save the Galesburg plant. Obama met with the workers and rallied with them there to fight the closing, but did not broach the subject with Crown. "I have never had a conversation with State Sen. Obama or U.S. Sen. Obama regarding the Maytag Corporation," Crown told the Tribune.

Maytag shut the Galesburg plant after Labor Day 2004. At the time, Crown owned nearly 4 percent of Maytag's common stock, according to company filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Another 5 percent of Maytag stock was owned by an investment group that included Crown's children and relatives, the filings show.A year later, when the company announced its sale to Whirlpool, the combined Maytag stakes of Crown and an investment group including his children and relatives were worth around $150 million.

Supporters of Obama note that he was still serving in the Illinois Senate in 2004 and was only a candidate for the U.S. Senate with no power beyond the bully pulpit to fight the closing. Since his election, he has backed legislation to combat the overseas export of American jobs. In May 2006, Obama wrote to the Secretary of Labor asking for assistance for displaced Maytag workers.

There still is little awareness of Obama's ties to the Crowns in Galesburg, a blue-collar town of 37,000 in western Illinois, and much admiration toward him. "I like Obama," said Mary Ann Armstrong, who lost her job inspecting refrigerator parts for defects when the plant closed. "He was new back then and probably did all he could do."

The factory's shutdown was a blow to Galesburg, but the withering of its manufacturing base began well before NAFTA's 1993 ratification. Galesburg has endured a slow bleeding of factories and blue collar job since the 1970s.

Maytag's closing caused undeniable pain in Galesburg. The tax base is down, as is school enrollment. But it wasn't cataclysmic. Obama has suggested former Maytag workers have been forced to scrounge for minimum-wage pay. Still, many have landed new factory jobs 45 minutes away in the Quad Cities and Peoria.Perhaps the most lasting blow from Maytag's departure is to the reputation of Galesburg, the birthplace of poet Carl Sandburg. At Dr. Mike's computer repair shop on Main Street, owner Mike Kroll sees Obama's frequent focus on Galesburg and Maytag as welcome but also counterproductive. "It would be nice," he said, "to see Galesburg as the feature of some other story than the death knell of manufacturing in Middle America."

Return to ObamaTruth.Org

Copyright © 2008, Chicago Tribune

Posted by: RetCombatVet | February 10, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

This sounds like a desperation move. When things get worse and worse, Hillary blames her own shortfalls on her manager. Pass the buck! How very Clinton!

Posted by: dunnhaupt | February 10, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Many Clinton people, not just Bill and Hillary, have legal troubles. Although it seems a "stretch," there's talk of ICE having a warrant out on Ms. Solís Doyle.

Posted by: filoporquequilo | February 10, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

That smell in the air around Hillary now is called "desperation". And nothing scares voters away faster. . .

Posted by: Christian_in_NYC | February 10, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Hey, it looks like Maine is going for Obama as well.

I guess it would have been too much to ask for her to reach out and appoint a man...

Posted by: rickedelson | February 10, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Fired your manager heh? A bit of panic here? Things not going your way? Seems your national lead has melted away, hasn't it...well look at the bright side...there is nothing worse than getting a job that you are unqualfied for....so today was really a good day for you...you are not going to have that problem...

Posted by: mcdcl2 | February 10, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Maggie Williams is black. The Clintons are trying to restore their credibility among blacks. It won't work.

Posted by: ravitchn | February 10, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

dear dhg1, i have no vitriol for hillary clinton. none. the experience of hers to which you refer comes not from being an elected official, but the spouse of one. her election as senator from new york is her first election. her campaign has not been well managed. in much the same way bob dole was stripped of his personality when he ran against bill clinton, so too has hillary been stripped of hers. that's unfortunate. as a democrat, i realize either choice is historic. i prefer to go w/one who has clean hands, as they say in the law.

Posted by: frieda406 | February 10, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Obama, ahead by 16 points with 44% of the Maine caucus votes counted

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/ME.html

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Despite the political rhetoric from the campaign of Hillary Clinton, the change in personnel is due directly to the fact that Barack Hussein Obama won the political contests in all 4 states on Saturday. The loss was understandable since political contests in 2008 have been dominated by the youth vote.

Now, look at hard, cold facts. 75% of adults between 18 and 24 (inclusively) years of age do not know that most people in Indonesia are Muslim. (Visit news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/0502_060502_geography.html for other shocking information about the utter stupidity of young adults.) The ignorance of young adults is disturbing.

Yet, Barack Hussein Obama and his supporters claim that the youthful voters are smart and that they can correctly pick the "best candidate". Obama certainly attracts the youth vote.

If a person is a dummy, he bases his decisions on emotion. He is drawn to the inspirational speeches -- of Barack Hussein Obama.

Political candidates in 2008 cannot win on the basis of experience and voting record. In fact, political contests since the dawn of the American nation have never been decided on substantial criteria.

These contests hinge on superficial criteria like skin color and emotion. In the Democratic party, African-Americans vote exclusively on the basis of skin color.

Further, Barack Hussein Obama has hired skilled speechwriters who write speeches that are in sync with the emotions of the current generation of under-30-years-old adults. They are ignorant ignoramuses. They know nothing about the world -- and cannot locate China on the map. However, they can "shuck and jive" to ghetto music like rap and hip hop.

Obama has, quite effectively, attracted the shucking and jiving youth voter.

So, Clinton must adjust her campaign in order to use emotion-laden speeches (and other approaches) to appeal to the ignoramuses in the Democratic party. Note that, in a general contest between Obama and her, she would easily win. However, the Democratic primary is not a general election. The Democratic caucus (with its racist pressure tactics to vote for the African-American candidates) is even less like a general election.

Clinton could lose the Democratic caucuses even though she would easily win a general election. That is the Ned-Lemont effect. Ned Lemont won the Democratic nomination for the senate seat of Connecticut in 2006. Joseph Lieberman left the Democratic party, in response, and ran as an independent. Lieberman won the Senate seat.

However, Clinton will not leave the Democratic party if she loses in the Democratic nominating process (which is dominated by various fringe groups and one large racist ethnic group).

Posted by: blueboat | February 10, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Dear Susan9:

Sorry to say it but you are just a little bit naive. Rather straight out firing her, Ms Solis Doyle has been given a token job. Happens all the time in the business world. Sooner rather the later, the fired person leaves.

Posted by: pbarnett52 | February 10, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

dhg1-the mudslinging is the dark side of America. The Clintons have been wrongly demonized by the media...they aren't perfect but they aren't criminals, like Nixon, Bush etc.

Hillary gets a lot of mud because America is still very immature when it comes to anything related to sexuality and women and power. No one said much when George W slandered McCain in 2000. Guess it's ok for men.

Imagine: we are the greatest democracy in the world and haven't elected a single female President yet...disgraceful.

3 black governors, ever. disgraceful.

Not a Jew or Muslim in the White House. Shameful.

We can invade othr countries for oil but aren't brave enough to keep religion in the home and reason in the government.

Hopefully, Barack or Hillary will begin to redress these injustices.

ok, kids, let your mud sling!

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

The In-Trade Prediction Market is weighing in on the Clinton slide. Current chance of winning nomination is 33.9%, which is a drop of 3.8% for the day. One week ago today, she had a 60% chance. She needs some good news to steady the ship.

Posted by: optimyst | February 10, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Es un hecho tipico de los Clintons. Hace varios lo mismo occurio con Lani Guinier y Jocelyn Elders. Despues de su utllizacion, entonces es la basura.

Posted by: ajtucker_7 | February 10, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Great news if you happen to like Obama:

"My parents braved the weather today and caucused in Scarborough (I voted absentee, along with a record 4000 others). Scarborough is a Republican-leaning suburb of Portland, which had a record turnout and went to Obama 401 to 283 (31 state delegates to 22). Demographically, it's the sort of town that Obama would need to prevail today--he carried the town over the opposition of state senator Peggy Pendleton, who, along with most of the state's party leadership, endorsed Clinton.

Turnout around the state appears to be very heavy: in Cape Elizabeth (next door to Scarborough, and one of the wealthiest cities in the state), the caucus had to be moved because of the high turnout. (Obama carried the city, 72 to 28 percent.) The Press Herald also reports very heavy turnout in Portland, which should be more good news for Obama. And the Illinois senator carried Yarmouth b a three-to-one margin."

http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/47229.html

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

FARMINGTON -- A standing-room only crowd at the Democratic presidential caucus in Farmington voted 185 for Barack Obama and 64 for Hillary Clinton on Sunday. Farmington has 20 delegates and Obama will have 15 and Clinton five in the Maine Democratic Convention this summer.

Industry Democrats, who also caucused at at the University of Maine at Farmington, voted 12 for Obama and 10 for Clinton, with two undecided. Industry has two delegates to the covention.

MADISON -- Democrats in Madison at their party's caucus Sunday went with Hillary Clinton.

With a record turnout of 90 voters, 65 voted for Clinton for president and 25 for Barack Obama, according to Robert Hagopian of Madison. Of the 11 delegates the town will be sending to the Maine Democratic Convention in May, eight will be for Clinton and three for Obama.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

it's been clear that clinton is fading and obama is getting stronger by the day, but if clinton can't win maine, then there is no chance in france she does anything else of significance in the primaries...all the big states are in play...obama could sweep.

Posted by: heatmiser | February 10, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Maine results:
Candidate Vote† % Delegates
Barack Obama 962 57.3% To be determined
Hillary Rodham Clinton 702 41.8
Uncommitted 15 0.9
Others 0 0.0
44% reporting | Updated 5:25 PM ET

Posted by: urban4 | February 10, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Looks like bambam is taking Maine.

57/42

Wonder if weather kept older women inside?

I get to vote for bambam on the 12th!

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting, as a european, to see the vitriole that Senator Clinton generates amongst americans. Personally if i were american i would vote for her over Senator Clinton for serveral reasons including experance and a more clearly defined policy platform, also the fact that, over here, we perceiver her as more gifted on the international stage.

However, the point i am trying to get to is, do Democrats actaully feel that mud slinging on either side is a particularily good idea? (plese try to avoid a s/he started it debate). Surely it would be better now for democrats to contiue their discussion without the extreems of response that we are seeing and to act as if you have 2 nominees and focus on McCain while slowly letting the nomination campaign play out in the background. In other words use the fact that your nomination process is fast becoming a shambles to your advanatge.

The rest of the world begs you to avoid a McCain presidency, like i said i favour Hillary, however, i would still be delighted with seeing senator Obama as president the world needs change, and the democrat will be that candidate, so please don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Posted by: dhg1 | February 10, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Now that Hillary is spent, and has been discarded into the dustbin of history, we should re-adjust our focus now to the real opposition, Senator McCain.

Posted by: johng1 | February 10, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Its the management stupid ! Hillary's campaign has been a case study in mismanagement. Her campaign reported taking in over 100 million dollars in fundraising, yet now she's had to loan herself 5 million. She has been unable to control a key asset, Bill Clinton , which has led to a terrible showing among black people. Now she's firing people. For all her " 35 years of experience " it has not helped her when it comes to the day to day of running her campaign. And if you can't run your campaign, how can you run the country ?

GOPhunter.blogspot.com

Posted by: brokenglassdemocrat | February 10, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

the timing couldn't be worse for this. she gets her seatrumpus kicked in louisiana, nebraska and washington and whoosh, the formerly invaluable campaign manager is gone. clinton's campaign started to go south (no pun intended)when Bill was unleashed in south carolina. the sly race baiting or whatever you want to term it, turned people's stomachs, people of all colors. it was as if a curtain had been drawn and for a brief moment, you saw the clintons as they really are. it was at that moment that my decision was made and i went for obama. and i'm a 55 year old caucasian female attorney. so there :)

Posted by: frieda406 | February 10, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

WORKING CLASS women are Hillary's last enclave.

WORKING CLASS WOMEN!! From a campaign that has maxed out for having raised $$$ from maximum allowed, $2300-a-pop, big wig donors.

CHANGE = Not fooling people to vote against their own best interest!

OBAMA 08!

Posted by: OBAMA08 | February 10, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

How come everyone is comming down on HRC. Many men before her have changed their Champaaign Managers. This is not something new! If I was running for an office and things were not going in the right direction I sure would make some BIG changes and so would many of you - Stop and think about it!!!!
Don't start throwing around the race thing - It does not fit here. It is just like a baseball team when they are losing the front office fires the manager and get a new one. Patti out, Maggie in!

Posted by: oldschul | February 10, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Ha ha. It is crumbling. For a visual, think of that old sci-fiction movie "Village of the Damned," when the wall comes crumbing down in the instructors mind. The brats do not notice it until it is too late and the bomb goes off. ha ha ha . Bye bye Hillary!

Posted by: johng1 | February 10, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

To the above posters: don't count Clinton out. Never count Clinton out, ever.

True, the Iron Lady this side of the Atlantic is showing chinks in her armor. But, paradoxically, weakness can also be strength for Clinton. (See: New Hampshire.) It's entirely possible---and I don't put this past them---that this perception of instability in her campaign is deliberately cultivated to make her planned "comeback" seem all the more momentous.

Posted by: AhhWoo | February 10, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Hey Mel:

I've been working the Maine newspapers..... I saw our boy on line early and I dropped a bomb on him...he disappeared.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Getting rid of an ineffective manager or two worked for McCain, as well as a loan -- hopefully it will work for Hillary. Too bad she didn't do it sooner.

Posted by: bghgh | February 10, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Er, how many caucases has Billary won?, therefore, today she feels she can win...

What the lady wants, the lady gets, I guess.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 10, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Toast.

Posted by: mdore1 | February 10, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

gandalfthegrey, there you are!! Where's svreader??? You see HRC kicked Solis Doyle in the arse to the curb! I wanna hear what svreader got to say about this!!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like no big deal to me. Watch out, in case Obama moves someone, will it mean the end for him too? LOL

Posted by: amadeus56 | February 10, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

"Maggie Williams is one of Hillary's oldest friends and colleagues, at least in public life--they worked together at the Children's Defense Fund many, many years ago. Maggie was Hillary's chief of staff during Bill's first term, and suffered through a lot of subpoenas and Republican BS over absolutely nothing, as it turned out. Maggie would have been campaign manager a year ago if she'd been willing to.

"Maggie is a person of extraordinary integrity, and if there's one person Hillary will remain loyal to, it's Maggie."

Posted by: jonfromcali | February 10, 2008 05:03 PM


Ms. Lani Gunier was a bridesmaid in the Clintons' wedding and a classmate with them at Yale Law School. Look how Clinton threw her under the bus when Congress balked at moving her nomination as the No. 3 at Justice. Long ties to the Clintons mean nothing to them if they impede the way to power.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like no big deal to me. Watch out, in case Obama moves someone, will it mean the end for him too? LOL

Posted by: amadeus56 | February 10, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

If she can't keep her campaign together, how am to trust she can keep her administration together. This doesn't look good, no matter how you spin it. Broke and disorganized is no way to run the shop.

Posted by: staxnet | February 10, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

CAPE ELIZABETH -- Sen. Barack Obama cruised to an easy win in the Cape Elizabeth caucus on Saturday, defeating Sen. Hillary Clinton by a vote of 72 to 28 percent.

More than 680 people turned out to participate in the caucus, more than double the number of those that showed up in 2004, according to Jamie Wagner, the chairman of the Cape Elizabeth Democratic Committee.

The large crowd delayed the start of the caucus by more than an hour.

Obama won by a final tally of 556 to 217. That total includes the 94 Democrats who voted absentee.

The Illinois senator also won in Yarmouth, defeating Clinton by a three-to-one margin. The final vote there was 484-139, Obama.

Democratic caucus-goers in Portland are waiting in long lines at Portland High School while a team of 30 registrars works to herd them into the event.

Organizers have assured the hundreds still waiting outside the high school that anyone in line by 4 p.m. will be admitted to the caucus. Voters waited in lines that stretched from the school's entrance on Cumberland Avenue to Congress Street as recently as 2:30 p.m.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | February 10, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Nice job Chris. I was concerned at first you might be biased toward GOP. You are the best right now at the Post, you give us the facts with minimal bias and spin.

As for Hillary, the commenters already said it all. The S.S. Hillary is listing. Looking more and more like Dukakais every day--a bunch of detailed policy positions but no overarching message and as likeable as a rabid skunk. Cue up the tank!

Posted by: merganser | February 10, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

The coronation has been put on hold indefinitely. This resembles the Bosox versus the Yankees for the pennant four years ago (since HRC became a Yankee fan when she carpet-bagged her way to NY). The Bosox, on the verge of elimination, woke up and told ole George, "Put that champagne away! We're not finished yet!" Neither is Obama and the Obamanuts!!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Maggie Williams is one of Hillary's oldest friends and colleagues, at least in public life--they worked together at the Children's Defense Fund many, many years ago. Maggie was Hillary's chief of staff during Bill's first term, and suffered through a lot of subpoenas and Republican BS over absolutely nothing, as it turned out. Maggie would have been campaign manager a year ago if she'd been willing to.

Maggie is a person of extraordinary integrity, and if there's one person Hillary will remain loyal to, it's Maggie.

Posted by: jonfromcali | February 10, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

As a Barack supporter, I'd like to remind true Barack supporters that we don't kick a woman or man when he or she is down.

What part of "change" don't you get?

Best wishes to Solis.

Let the games continue! GO BARACK!

Posted by: wpost4112 | February 10, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Burt, interesting point. Did Romney "loan" money to his campaign, or did he choose to "spend his own money on his campaign"? Subtle destinction, yes, but maybe a sign that HRH feels entitled to get her money back? Gotta confess, slowly but steadily shifting to the BO side of things, mostly because of HRH's original support for the Iraq madness which I feel was something that a) she too thought was madness at the time but b) went along anyways as a political calclation.

Posted by: hankd | February 10, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Ouch! Good joke by Maxmcgloin.

Posted by: Bud0 | February 10, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Actually Patti Solis Doyle served her purpose. Hillary paraded her around the Hispanic communities in California, Arizona and New Mexico as a symbol of her close connection to Hispanics. It worked well for Hillary--she got votes and won. Ms Solis-Doyle served her purpose well and so it was now time for her to go. After all, we must all sacrifice in the name of Hillary. Adios Ms Solis-Doyle, you've been had!

Posted by: NewEra | February 10, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

This deck chair goes here, that one over there, these two to the left. Meanwhile the band plays Autumn as the lifeboats depart.

Posted by: IndependenceEveWonderlandBallroom | February 10, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

This is a sure sign she is SCARED and her coronation is NOT going as well as the plan she laid out!

http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org

Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | February 10, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is coming under growing pressure to be more open about the sources of her family's wealth after she revealed that she had been forced to loan her cash-strapped campaign $5 million.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/09/wus609.xml

Why is she refusing to make her tax returns public until "AFTER" she becomes the nominee? People have a right to know about her conflicts of interest BEFORE they cast their vote.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | February 10, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

What's that great falling sound we hear? The falling of Wal-Mart prices? No, but the decline of Hillary's popularity numbers! The footsteps of change are in quick-time.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I think the problem has been than Bill and Hillary have been running the campaign more than the manager has been. No "pro" would have allowed Bill to be traveling around shooting the campaign in the foot. Sounds like the beginning of the end though. First the "loan" to her own campaign and now the are starting to assign some blame. A sweep on Tuesday would look really bad for the HRC crowd.

On a side note, anyone else find it strange that she "loans" her campaign that money? Is she expecting some sort of payoff at the end? Isn't the word "loan" usually tied to making your money back somehow? This dedicated public servant for her entire life (who happens to have 5 million lying around) wouldn't be expecting to profit from the Presidency would she?

Posted by: BurtReynolds | February 10, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

it will be interesting if this changes anything? Many credit Williams for the change in HRC's speeches the past week.

will the clinton team win a news cycle?

--

i know we all hate identity politics, but consider this: women (especially 45+), swooning independents, young people of all shades and creeds, Latinos and African-Americans en masse, wine connoisseurs and bud chuggers, latte sippers and dunkin donuts drinkers, the chattering class, and last but not least >> the media

sounds like a winner to me

http://www.whynotboth.com

Posted by: skhyle | February 10, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Hey what else can they do? It seems to late for them to replace Hillary.

;)

Posted by: maxmcgloin | February 10, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Aaand the Bill-Hillies (tm) are already spinning this faster than a tequila spin cycle.

Posted by: shagr123 | February 10, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

"People wishing ill on Clinton don't even bother to read the article! That's why the Washington Post should be more careful with its titles and photographs. This is not a big deal. She is taking on a different role. A more appropriate title would have been 'Clinton Campaign Rearranging'".

Posted by: Susan9 | February 10, 2008 04:41 PM

susan9, that's darn good spin!! Maybe you'd like to work for Hillary, no? Maybe a slot open, given this latest event.

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Wait till Obama goes after Hillary's empty promises, like 'freezing interest rates for 5 years' which isn't feasible and she knows it.

It is sad that so many uneducated poor people fall for Hillary's pretense that she understands their pain. She doesn't. She hangs out with NYC money people, not with poor people from OH, TX or PA.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | February 10, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Oh Susan9, really now. "Rearranging"? Sorta like chairs on the deck of the Titanic? I truly don't wish Hillary ill, but leave the spinning to the pros.

Posted by: hankd | February 10, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

svreader, iowatreasure, christianleft, and thinker (and other Clintonistas), what say ye to this latest event???!!! The Latina got thrown under the bus by the Clintons. That's Clintonian loyalty for you! Friend of Bill? Friend of Hill? BEWARE! BEWARE!

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Is this a sign that things are not as rosy as we are led to believe in the Clinton camp? Maybe Tuesday will hammer the last nail.

Posted by: shagr123 | February 10, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Well, it was her job to deliver the nomination to Ms Clinton on a platter by Feb 5, that was what was expected. Somebody has to take them blame, and it will never be Ms Clinton, so...... Besides, except for Tejas there are no more states left with large latino populations..... And I think they may already be starting to write-off Tejas, as well, and just focus on Ohio and Penna....

Posted by: krnewman | February 10, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow, The Fix was all over this one. Good job, Chris!

Could have figured this would happen, considering Clinton's sinking numbers.

Posted by: InHarmsWay | February 10, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

People wishing ill on Clinton don't even bother to read the article! That's why the Washington Post should be more careful with its titles and photographs. This is not a big deal. She is taking on a different role. A more appropriate title would have been "Clinton Campaign Rearranging".

Posted by: Susan9 | February 10, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

From the nytimes.com:
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has replaced campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, naming longtime aide Maggie Williams to the top job."

Man, HRC just summarily threw Solis Doyle under the bus! I ask Ms. Solis Doyle, "How's that working for you?"

Maggie Williams better be careful because the Clintons have a nasty habit of throwing people under the bus when they have outlived their usefulness. So much for loyalty from the Clintons (as if that ever existed).

Posted by: meldupree | February 10, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

So, last week we find out she ran out of money, last night she was swept in four contests, today we find out her campaign manager is stepping down . . . if she loses to Obama again tonight, I have to wonder how day after day of bad news for the Clinton camp can be "spun" positively.

Posted by: avalle | February 10, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

So much for Hillary's commitment to Latinos/as. She'd throw the first one out of her boat if that would mean winning her a victory.

Posted by: shirleylim | February 10, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Seems like the boat is sinking

Posted by: blowww | February 10, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company