Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Fix Pick: Crowley on Why Clinton Stays

Even as pundits everywhere declare the race for the Democratic presidential nomination effectively over, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) -- and her husband, former President Bill Clinton -- continue to soldier on with packed travel schedules that belie no sign of the daunting odds against them.

Answering the question of "why" has been the task of any number of political observers -- both those familiar with the former First Couple and those with even the loosest of affiliations.

As we wrote last week, endurance has been the defining word of the Clinton's political life, persevering against long odds to eventually triumph. The list of back-from-the-dead moments for the Clinton is extensive: Bill's come-from-behind in the 1992 Democratic primaries, his battle against calls for him to resign his office in 1998, Hillary Clinton's come-from-behind win in New Hampshire in January and a similar Lazarus-like performance in Ohio and Texas in March.

Michael Crowley, one of the most talented reporters and writers covering this campaign, has taken The Fix endurance argument a step further -- offering a compelling psychological profile of what the Clintons learned from the impeachment imbroglio and how it has come to impact their thinking in the current contest.

"Impeachment taught them that the specter of defeat could endear them to the public," writes Crowley. "It's no coincidence that, before several major primaries, Bill Clinton emphasized that Hillary's survival was on the line, or that Hillary's campaign has advertised rather than ignored efforts by pundits and party leaders to force her from the race."

The success of the Clinton's attempts to paint themselves as victims of a vicious and power hungry Republican party during impeachment have led them to view the current contest with Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) as a Manichean battle between good and evil, argues Crowley.

"The vileness of the Clintons' past enemies seems to have convinced them that their enemies always are, by definition, in the wrong," says Crowley. "And that Obama's candidacy is almost like another illegitimate attempt to steal a White House that, in some sense, belongs to them."

Understanding the Clintons is a life's work -- just ask Fix mentor John F. Harris.

But, in the near term, any number of reporters and analysts will take a crack at deciphering their motivations in these final week of the nomination fight. Crowley sets a high bar for those seeking to understand what happened and why.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 12, 2008; 5:34 PM ET
Categories:  Fix Picks  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Turns to the General Election
Next: West Virginia Primary Predictions!

Comments


No. It can't possibly mean less than I think it does.

Posted by: Chicago1 | May 14, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry to defect from this misleading media brainwashing, but to the author of this blog...how silly are you going to look when Hillary wins the nomination? You really think FL and MI will not be counted?

Why should the winning Democratic Presidential nominee drop out?

Posted by: don't believe the hype | May 13, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

It is a privilige to hear jerks like you tell us to leave the party and watch the exits polls tonight in W Va if you think I am alone in my sentiments. moveon, DFA, DFTexas and now every Obama supporter here has implored those who don't agree with their guy to simply leave the party.
Congratulations!
__________

agreed. I have been a college educated Democrat for 20 years. Due to "The Nation" and "Move-On" trying to force the Obama pipe dream down our throats...I no longer subscribe to these out of touch arrogant overly intellectual sources.

Why are these Obama supporters so rude and dismissive? That behavior is just one more reason not to vote for Obama. It's almost like they are spellbound cult followers. My vote is for Hillary no matter what.

Posted by: Say no to dru...Obama | May 13, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

LOL. Like we all don't know that Obama hates America and whites just as much as his preacher of 20 years does. This is why he doesn't wear the flag and we all know it. You know what, that's fine...we are all entitled to be angry unpatriotic racists BUT it has no place in politics and most certainly not for the President of the U.S. His church demands financial reparations for blacks! Where's my reparation for being men's property for the last 5,000 years?

Posted by: anon | May 13, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

b) you are a pathetically sore loser. "my candidate didn't win so I'm going home now"... Please, go. Now. The party can do without fair-weather types like you.

Interesting but idiotic post boutan. fair-weathered type. Right. That is exactly why I closed my law practice to work with the Kerry legal team in Denver and for GOTV at the Aurora campus and was constantly told by your wonderful, sanctimonious genY voters I don't have the time to vote against W.

That is why I worked directly with the Ted Strickland campaign manager to organize thousands of elderly Cleveland voters for Strickland/Brown and with their million dollar Bill Clinton fundraiser and legal voter protection challenges.

That is why I made 1700 calls for Jim Webb and worked with their IT person to help create their succesful virtual call center.

And why I flew back from Richmond Va in 2006 to go door to door for Nick Lampson and obtain funding for billboards, because i have not done enough as a Democrat. Perhaps many of us are simply fed up with smug, lazy, know it all genY voters who constantly shoot off their mouths, won't lift a finger to help setting up grocery store voter registration booths in poor neighborhoods like I have or simply calling their know it all college friends and ask them to take 5 minutes off and go vote.

It is a privilige to hear jerks like you tell us to leave the party and watch the exits polls tonight in W Va if you think I am alone in my sentiments. moveon, DFA, DFTexas and now every Obama supporter here has implored those who don't agree with their guy to simply leave the party.
Congratulations!

Posted by: Leichtman | May 13, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

volunteer: "Here's your AIDS ribbon."

Kramer: "I don't wear the AIDS ribbon."

volunteer: "Aren't you against AIDS?"

Kramer: "I'm walking, aren't I?"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Apparently Barack Obama is back to wearing an American flag on his lapel. It's such a seemingly minor matter, yet one that tells us something worth knowing about the junior senator from Illinois.


To begin at the beginning. ...This is from an October 4, 2007 Associated Press story:
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin because it has become a substitute for "true patriotism" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.


So Senator Obama declared those who wore an American flag pin on their lapel were relying on a "substitute" for "true patriotism," which apparently he alone embodied.

And in a Democratic primary that he thought would be decided by the hard Left, Obama manfully declared, "I won't wear that pin on my chest."

To top it all off, Obama and his campaign made sure that, having put this issue in play, none of his critics could say a word about it. If they did, they were guilty of trying to "distract us from the issues that affect our lives" and "turn us against each other."

Serious people don't care about trivial things like an American flag pin on a lapel-except when you're Barack Obama, who considered it a serious enough matter to first remove it and then proudly declare his courageous act of defiance to the Democratic voters of Iowa.

And now that he's essentially secured the Democratic nomination, Senator Obama is . . . once again wearing an American flag on his lapel!


Obama tacked left in the Democratic primary, ridiculing people who wore an American flag on their lapel, perhaps because it played well with that particular audience.

But now that he's going to be the nominee, it might not play so well-and gosh darn it, who says there's anything wrong with wearing an American flag on your lapel anyway?

What we see in this little episode is a man who is extremely smooth and skilled-he saw he had a potential problem and he's now addressing it-and also deeply cynical (even as he runs against, you guessed it, cynicism).

He is able effortlessly to put issues in play and then, with the aid of the MSM, declare those issues off-limits-until he decides to declare them legitimate again. Welcome to the wonderful, transcendent, sublime "new politics" of Barack Obama.

Posted by: peter w | May 13, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

The Challenge From China

As we content ourselves with the fallacy that never again shall we have to fight large, technological opponents, China is transforming its forces into a full-spectrum military capable of major operations and remote power projection. Eventually the twain shall meet.

By the same token, our sharp nuclear reductions and China's acquisitions of ballistic-missile submarines and multiple-warhead mobile missiles will eventually come level. The China that has threatened to turn Los Angeles to cinder is arguably more cavalier about nuclear weapons than are we, and may find parity a stimulus to brinkmanship.

Who will blink first, a Barack Obama (who even now blinks like Betty Boop) or a Hu Jintao?


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121063718854786789.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries


Posted by: MARK HELPRIN | May 13, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"You can conclude from EXAACTLY WHAT? your high school education?"

Are ad hominem attacks are all you people have left? Sad, but to quote a Clinton: "I feel your pain."

The fact is that this election is about issues larger than Obama; larger even than Mrs Clinton's considerable ego. I personally believe that this will be the most important election in my lifetime (and I am 52 years old.)

The facts are these:

We have a failing economy and the middle-class are hurting, we have a War started under false promises, which Mrs Clinton believed, and which I fairly think, is an issue that calls into question her judgment. We have sky-rocketing gas prices, a crisis that can NOT be fixed by a gimmick. We need more jobs, better educational standards, a switch from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy...all positions that BOTH Obama and Clinton support. So how is one to decide which of these Candidates to support?

I chose Obama because I believe that he will bring change. I support him precisely because he hasn't become part of the "old boy's club politics as usual" crowd that Mrs Clinton is an entrenched member of. It is as simple as that.

Look, I voted for Bill C., twice. I honestly think that Mrs Clinton thinks that she has the best vision for the Country; but the majority of voters disagree with her. Her campaign has not taken the most noble path; I could list all the ways in which she has played "dirty pool," but this is irrelevant at this point...she will not be the candidate.

Obama isn't calling for her to get out, and I think that we, his supporters,just need to "sit tight" the end is in sight, then the REAL work begins...

If I were Mrs Clinton's supporters I would start a grass roots campaign to give her a better, more lasting, and more influential source of power: an appointment to the Supreme Court. Now Mr Lawyerman, you can't deny that Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton wouldn't be a good fit.

Posted by: Hold_that_Tiger | May 13, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Great article Chris- post more insightful fix picks when you get the chance

Posted by: sfcpoll | May 13, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

i wonder how stirring up the racist sentiment here will play in Puerto Rico for Hillary?

Posted by: majorteddy | May 13, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

novamatt writes
"One of the more salutary effects of the presumptive Obama nomination ... will be an end to Clintonism as a political force in the party and the nation. All hail the mighty conqueror"

I would argue that 'the mighty conqueror' as a concept is not a person or a candidate, but rather the mass of unrequited guilt that afflicts a large portion of the electorate. It is the hope of guilt assuagement that is propelling one particular candidate, despit the fact that Clinton's cndidacy is equally as historically significant.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | May 13, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

re: "Dionne writes an excellent column today, describing HRC as having emerged in her own right. I think Dionne has a point."

Mark, Geoffrey Norman also has a point in an article I read yesterday...he proposes "Clintons" as a singular noun. A unitary force. A whole that is vastly greater than the sum of its parts -- Hillary and Bill.


http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmExMGI5NWQ5YmViMjE1NjJmMzMzZmE1YTc2OWZjYjI=

"Not everyone in politics becomes a household part of speech this way. It is difficult, in fact, to come up with many examples. There is "Nixonian," a modifier that has saved many a pundit the trouble of elaborating on some pol's shiftiness, lack of scruples, and chilly unlikability. "Nixonism" would be "Clintonism" without the charm."

It's hard to argue with that. :)

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | May 13, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's campaign has legitimized racism. If a Republican had made the racist remarks Hillary's campaign has, the Democratic party and Independents would easily rally against the Republican. But by having a trusted Democratic family raise the race issue, the Democratic Party will loose this edge in the general election. What a terrible legacy for the Clinton family; Harlem office or not. Rat

Posted by: Ray | May 13, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

PEOPLE.. YOUR MISSING A VERY IMPORTANT POINT... HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT TO STAY IN THIS RACE...AND SHE SHOULD. I AM NOT A FAN OF EITHER CANDIDATE BUT WE CANNOT ALLOW THE MEDIA TO PICK OUR LEADERS ...PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU SEE EVERY TIME OBAMA or HILLARY MAKES NEWS.. YOU WILL ALMOST ALWAYS SEE HILLARY WITH SOME NEGETIVE CONNOTATION Or "bad light" and CONVERSELY YOU WILL SEE OBAMA CAST IN A MORE POSITIVE LIGHT WHEN YOU SEE HIM.. PAY ATTENTION AND YOU WILL NOTICE HOW THE MEDIA IS SWAYING YOUR DECISION....

Posted by: Madgino. | May 13, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

PEOPLE.. YOUR MISSING A VERY IMPORTANT POINT... HILLARY HAS EVERY RIGHT TO STAY IN THIS RACE...AND SHE SHOULD. I AM NOT A FAN OF EITHER CANDIDATE BUT WE CANNOT ALLOW THE MEDIA TO PICK OUR LEADERS ...PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU SEE EVERY TIME OBAMA or HILLARY MAKES NEWS.. YOU WILL ALMOST ALWAYS SEE HILLARY WITH SOME NEGETIVE CONNOTATION Or "bad light" and CONVERSELY YOU WILL SEE OBAMA CAST IN A MORE POSITIVE LIGHT WHEN YOU SEE HIM.. PAY ATTENTION AND YOU WILL NOTICE HOW THE MEDIA IS SWAYING YOUR DECISION...

Posted by: Madgino | May 13, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

CLARIFICATION--When I mentioned "CLINTON" in the first sentence of my 9:08 post, I was referring to BILL.

Posted by: chadibuins | May 13, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is staying so she can inflict as much damage on Obama as she can. If Obama becomes president and Hillary takes Harry Reid's job, she will try to obstruct as many of Obama's policies that she can. She wants to do this so she might have a chance in 2012, and if she doesn't, she wants to make Obama look as bad as possible so she can say, "I told you so!" When she was the inevitable nominee, she voted along Republican lines to label the Iranian Guard a terrorist organization. She didn't care that the Democrats want the US out of the Iraqi debacle that Bush created. She assumed at that point she was above us all, and would do what she wanted. Hillary realized then what a great tool Bush had used to get reelected in 2004 and wanted to play the same fear game as well in 2012. I would be happy to have a civil discussion with any Hillary supporter. But it would have to be a two sided, intelligent conversation. Not one about hat pins and pastors.

Posted by: MikeMcNally | May 13, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

The problem with this line of thinking this time is it is counter to WHO they are, and what they have stood for. Obama is the candidate Clinton was without the "other women" baggage. He is the fruits of their labor and hard work. I do not and have never advocated HRC get out before there is a definite winner; however, I am very sad for what this race seems to have done to her personally. It is like SHE and Bill have lost their bearings and are so concerned with "come from behind" victimization, they not only ignore the success and strides they had and have made; but they cannot recognize they should and could be the champions of Obama's candidacy. Fight on Hillary, but don't lose touch with reality and don't forget when you are talking about being the underdog and complaining about Supers, that 2007 and until Iowa, this was a coronation and Obama has only JUST surpassed your lead in Supers, many who declared before ANY vote was made.

Posted by: chadibuins | May 13, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you blogged:

"As we wrote last week, endurance has been the defining word of the Clinton's political life, persevering against long odds to eventually triumph."

Now you are referring to two persons as one, Chris. When posters do it, other posters criticize their grammar. While you were later inconsistent in your usage, another sentence includes the phrase "The success of the Clinton's attempts...".

Thus I think you meant to treat husband-and-wife as one. Dionne writes an excellent column today, describing HRC as having emerged in her own right. I think Dionne has a point.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | May 13, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Well, if we're going to engage in armchair psychoanalyizing of the Clintons, here's my offering:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

From that:

DSM Criteria
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:[1]

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement
6. is interpersonally exploitative
7. lacks empathy
8. is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Sounds familiar, que no?

One of the more salutary effects of the presumptive Obama nomination and then Obama administration will be an end to Clintonism as a political force in the party and the nation. All hail the mighty conqueror.

Posted by: novamatt | May 13, 2008 7:21 AM | Report abuse

The old saying:

How do you remember your original objective was to drain the swamp when you are up to your 'fanny' in alligators????

Clinton, and those of us supporting her, know she IS focused on the present FOR REAL REASONS i.e., problems that MUST be dealt with, very directly and right now!

Obama comes to us with "ignore the alligators, they are a mirage", don't focus on the present, look to the FUTURE .....HOPE your way out of the swamp.

Nomination to Clinton, for OUR sake...our being AMERICA, unqualified by racial references....we are all in here together folks!

Vote CLINTON '08

Posted by: Sean McM | May 13, 2008 6:14 AM | Report abuse

"You can conclude from EXAACTLY WHAT? your high school education?"

Um... Leichtman...

a) you do understand that statistically speaking, Obama supporters are far more likely to have a College education than Clinton supporters right?

b) you are a pathetically sore loser. "my candidate didn't win so I'm going home now"... Please, go. Now. The party can do without fair-weather types like you. Your estimates of how many Hillary voters are as small minded as you to not vote Democrat is vastly overstated. And yes, Obama will make up the numbers with new voters. Some of them will be black. Some will be Gen Y. Some will be Republicans. All will be believers.

Posted by: Boutan | May 13, 2008 3:17 AM | Report abuse

Michael Crowley needs to quit hitting the bong before he writes. America loves a loser? The impeachment of Clinton was a typical hack job by the ultra right. Bob Barr who led the nonsense was rewarded for his failure by having his district redrawn and shamed out of the GOP. The Clintons with all their corporate sponsorship and party support were unable to overcome the political mistake of voting for the Iraq war resolution. If Hillary choses to stay in the senate after her failure to get the nomination, she most likely will gain higher status and power in the Senate.

Posted by: hammerdown | May 13, 2008 1:24 AM | Report abuse

I'll say it again...there are as many delinquents on the WashPo blogs disparaging Obama as there are disparaging Clinton. I can assure you that in no way are the people posting on a blog indicative of people in the real world. Go outside, get some air, talk to some real people.

Most of the Clinton supporters I've met are party loyalists who are very knowledgeable about the political theatre, and who are backing the Clintons out of wistful recollection for the prosperous 1990s. My view is that the country needs to look forward, that the bottom line result of the last 30 years is not so good, and that both parties need to reform their leadership, sweeping the divisive politics out ("our 16 million supporters", "your high school education?") in favor of working across the aisle on real, tangible issues.

Reasonable people can disagree. But to cite blog behavior as somehow indicative of an entire group of supporters is, well, idiotic.

Remember, everyone on the Internet is a 60 year old man pretending to be a 13 year old girl.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 13, 2008 1:06 AM | Report abuse

Dear America,

We see your future with the Obama candidate. Please see that this man is installed. We will embrace you!

Posted by: Italian Mama | May 13, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

"I wonder how long it will take Obama's media to report this? You are kidding, right"

oh yes and I guess that Keith Olberman, Rachel Madaus, and Roland Martin have all been perfectly unbiased political commentators. Any other fantasy to tell us about?

Don't expect any of us who have been constantly abused, insulted and instructed by Obama supporters to leave the party, to do anything less than honor those demands. We advised your side to stop months ago, and now all we hear is whining when we tell you to please not hold your collective cumbaya breaths waiting. Apparently your side is so smug to discount that there are some 30% of our supporters prepared to jump ship. Let's see how that and Michele's constantly derision of HC sits with our supporters in Nov. Apparently your campaign is so arrogant you have convinced yourselves that you can win with 16 million fewer voters b/c we will all be replaced by new genY voters who were such absolutely reliable voters in '04. Lets see how that works out for you guys in Nov.

even Bob Barr is now starting to look like a reasonable alternative.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

another idiotic egocentric comment from a new poster who has not been here like me over the last 6 weeks. I know personally of at least 10 HC supporters here who like me attempted to have conversations about their differences in healthcare plans, energy policies and the effect of the US dollar on those policies, foreign policy approaches towards Iran and distinct differences about sovereign wealth funds, mortgage policies, plans to end the war and environmental policies, that yes we as HC supporters have actually read and understand. All of the HC supporters here have left b/c every one of us was told we don't need your support or want it, leave the party. You are old withered and uneducated we were constantly told so leave the party which I have decided after 30 years of party involvement have decided to do. Cintonista, what kind of inane and condesedning and insulting comment is that? And it is those kinds of divisive comments that prove you practice a New Kind of Politics and want our 16 millions supporters to run to? Think Again.

And now the biggest insult from Obama worshipers even tonight to suggest we are old and only support HC b/c she is a woman. What an absolutely idiotic comment. I am a 55 year old man and lawyer, so what was that comment about other then to continue to be abrasive and divisive?
Very astute question; any Clintonista willing to tackle it? Probably not since I have yet to see any pro-Clinton posts that question Obama's positions on the issues in any capacity; not only that I have yet to see a pro-Clinton post that lays out her positions in any thoughtful fashion, I can only conclude that it is Mrs Clinton's gender that is selling her to many of her admirers (for the record" You can conclude from EXAACTLY WHAT? your high school education?


Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is staying in because the Obama campaign pulled a fast one on the country and she is attempting to undo the damage to her campaign.


We will have to wait until the memoirs come out to find out how much of this was planned.

However, the Obama campaign is really close to being guilty of fraud.


Obama was supposed to be running a post-racial campaign - to then turn around and actually plan to run a RACIAL campaign is no way to run for President. The whisper campaign the Obama people embarked on - blaming Bill Clinton for trumped-up charges of offensive remarks - has been a disgrace.


Obama has ceded his legitimacy - he has taken actions which are at odds with his post-racial campaign themes - adopting a strategy of false charges of racism and offensive behavior - making a mockery of the hopes of many Americans that race relations would advance.

This will be clear.

America will soon understand fully what has happened - the democrats will be stuck with Obama - and Obama will be stuck with hypocrisy as his legacy.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 12, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for nit picking Chris but your sentence "...continue to soldier on with packed travel schedules that belie no sign of the daunting odds against them" doesn't make sense. What you meant to write was that their packed travel schedules belie the long odds against them, i.e. their travel schedules run counter to fact that they are running against the odds, or in other words, with the long odds, you'd expect them to scale back but their travel schedule are running counter to that.

That said, you and John Dickerson are my favorite pundits and I read every column both of you write and am happy when you both appear on NPR and PBS.

Posted by: Brian Engel | May 12, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD: yea I have been here for 6 weeks and got into a discussion about the 15 million uninsurred in the Obama healthcare plan; his skiiping votes in the Illinois Senate on Juvenile justice and handguns and the Iran Senate vote he conveniently could not make and I was called evil,a R shill, a racist and hateful. Don't believe me DDAVID, ask those who have known me here over the last 6 weeks about those

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is staying in the presidential race for 3 main reasons:

1) Hillary is in "public" denial. One only needs to go back the onset of the Monica Lewinski scandal to understand the "public" mindset of Hillary. Hillary publicly and famously stated that the Lewinski scandal was a "vast right-wing conspiracy" to destroy her husband Bill. Bill had previously been accused of a sexual affair (Jennifer Flowers) and sexual harrassment (Paula Jones).

2) Hillary is trying to position herself for a popular vote argument even though she knows it is the pledged delegates that matter the most. If Hillary can win the popular vote with Puerto Rico, Michigan and Florida count included, this will be her only meaningful argument, even though Puerto Rico doesn't vote in the general election and of course Obama was not on the Michigan ballot and didn't campaign in either Michigan or Florida.

3) Last and most importantly, Hillary's campaign is in $20 million debt!!!!!!!!! Hillary's needs to fundraise to pay off debt because she is not donating her own fortune towards her campaign.

These are the reasons that Hillary is still in the presidential race.

Obama in 08!

Posted by: AJ | May 12, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is staying in the race for historical purposes. She will be the first woman to run for POTUS and come so close to making it.

Posted by: politicaljunkie | May 12, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is still running because someone is putting super ex-lax in her coffee every morning. That is the person we should be targeting.

Posted by: Takefuko | May 12, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

""beth you obviously are totally unfamiliar with the vile posts here over the last 2 months directed personally against EVERY SINGLE HC who has dared to question policy positions of Obama."

Can you give me an example of when this has happened?

Not the vile posts. Can you give me an example of a post that questions the policy positions of Obama?

?"

Very astute question; any Clintonista willing to tackle it? Probably not since I have yet to see any pro-Clinton posts that question Obama's positions on the issues in any capacity; not only that I have yet to see a pro-Clinton post that lays out her positions in any thoughtful fashion, I can only conclude that it is Mrs Clinton's gender that is selling her to many of her admirers (for the record, Obama and Clinton's positions are extremely close with only minor differences which is why Clinton has had to concentrate on extraneous issues to hammer Obama on.)

At any rate, Clinton's "dedication" to go on despite the huge financial hole she is digging for herself, and despite the almost impossible statistical odds against success have slipped her into the pathological catagory, IMO.

Despite her carefully crafted narrative of being the "underdog," Mrs Clinton, in fact, has always been a winner: Valedictorian at Wellseley, success at Yale; marriage to an equally ambitious high achiever, a job in a high profile Law firm, then first lady in Arkansas, and eventually on to the White House, from where she ultimately she carpetbagged her way into the position of Senator from New York. A truly inspiring biography for any woman to admire, but also one that has clearly not prepared Mrs Clinton for the failure she now faces.

And I am afraid that her much anticipated "triumph" tommorrow in WV will probably be more about that State's anti-Obama bias than a pro-Hillary "win." I find it curious that the old WV Lion Roberty Byrd hasn't said who he is supporting...

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | May 12, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama and McCain.Here are the Google ad headings:
1. Hillary Clinton Naked 2, Obama's SNL Sktech and 3. Pick McCain's VP.
I've checked this page about six times in the past half hour with the attack on HC appearing one third or more of the time. How widespread is this attack? The remainder of Ads by Google list normal headlines for all three candidates. This is extremely offensive. I hope Homeland Security is investigating this last misogynist media attack. The fact still remains that Clinton is far and above the best candidate. I don't think Americans want to elect a bully, in any event.

Posted by: aehawthonre | May 12, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

WHAT "WAVE" OF SUPERDELEGATE ENDORSEMENTS, AP?

It's just the opposite. Obama's slight lead in supers has NOT prompted a stampede to his side. A trickle is not a flood, AP. The bulk of the supers are waiting it out. After Hillary wins W. Va., Kentucky and the big prize of Oregon, they will still remain unannounced...

...because that's when they will send a delegation to Obama telling him to either throw his delegates to Edwards or Gore and run as the veepee pick, or the supers might decide to go with Hillary at the top of the ticket.

Obama still would end up in the number two slot under Hillary, but it would be a far more unpleasant experience for Obama than to join a compromise unity ticket under Edwards or Gore.

If I were a betting man, I would make book on the compromise candidate scenario. It's the Dems' only way out. And because the myopia of the pundits has skewed the odds, the payoff will be rich when it happens.

Now how will the pundits play Hillary's huge landslide Tuesday night? Do they really think she's thinking withdrawal as she continues to make her point against Obama? Hillary's victories are going to force a compromise candidate solution -- because the "third way" is the ONLY way to stop the BOTH of them from capturing a doomed nomination.

The pro-Obama bias of the mainstream pundits has become nauseating. If Hillary weren't so nasty, phony, pandering and polarizing, the media cheerleading would cause some folks to consider, at least for a moment, supporting her.

But don't be fooled. Her upcoming landslide victories represent a vote against Obama, and not necessarily a vote for a Hillary presidency.

Write it down. Call Vegas. It's going to happen... unless I am giving the superdelegates too much credit, which is always possible, considering the party's legacy of choosing the road to defeat rather than taking a bold path to victory.

Posted by: scrivener | May 12, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

This is beyond low. Directly below the box I am typing in is a box of ads on Clinton, Obama and McCain.Here are the Google ad headings:
1. Hillary Clinton Naked 2, Obama's SNL Sktech and 3. Pick McCain's VP.
I've checked this page about six times in the past half hour with the attack on HC appearing one third or more of the time. How widespread is this attack? The remainder of Ads by Google list normal headlines for all three candidates. This is American scum at its best. I hope Homeland Security is investigating this last misogynist media attack. The fact still remains that Clinton is far and above the best candidate. I don't think Americans want to elect a bully, in any event.

Posted by: Lea | May 12, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

But tis is a different era. Hillary lost because she was always looking towards the past. Voters - especially Dems - do not want that in the least. Dubya is the past for them, looking back only connects the Clintons to that sordid part of recent history.

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

Posted by: matrt | May 12, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

actually Beth it is the Obama campaign which has constantly yelled at HC and her supporters here and by interrupting OUR EVENTS that we are Evil. Can you imagine if our campaign had pulled that same stunt and sent our supporters out to heckle your candidate at one his public events what you would be screaming, likely racists? How about HC being called monsters by her her foreign policy chief and the totally inappropriate commenst from Axelrod and his spokesman that she should not be allowed to place a wreath at the tomb of the unkown soldier. Or Obama's UTube moment publicly giving HC the finger and her supporters cheering on like they were at a college football game. Certainly you approved of those Obama moments. Truly classy comments that we are fully aware of and will not forget. Machavillian is that what you incorrectly were referring to? How about the Gary Mayor deliberatly holding back the final results from Indiana until 2 am to make sure that HC could not announce at 9 pm that she had won Indiana, another Machivalian move. And did you bother to tune into CNN and hear the Lakeside County mayors(5 of them) proclaim that they had all turned in their results to the Gary Mayor and likely the teamsters at 7:30 pm within minutes of the polls closing that mysteriously did not get reported by the Obama state campaign manager to CNN until 2 pm when the Gary Obama Indiana state campaign manager felt he could accomplish the greatest damage to his opponent? Certainly as an Obama worshiper you praise such tactics along with his campaign's opposition to EVERY proposal to revote in Fla and Michigan even when agreed to by Howard Dean and the DNC under Obama's demanded precise voting terms: why b/c he is behind HC and McCain by at least 15% points in Fla and the unpolitical candidate, the MAN who claims that he is above politics and practices a New Brand of Politics, knew that when he was creamed in a Fla and Michigan revote that his campaign and nomination would have collapsed. And you dare to call us, and the boomers who were called OLD and dinosaurs here this morning by your supporters as being evil?

HillDemsforMcCain

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Yes JD,

The National Barrack Channel (NBC)

Posted by: tdl62 | May 12, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Hillary will be running well into 2010. What does she have to lose? Dignity? Her supporters' money?

Posted by: aleks | May 12, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Superdelegates put Obama within mathematical reach

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer 20 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's wave of superdelegate endorsements puts him within reach of the Democratic presidential nomination by the end of the primary season on June 3 -- even if he loses half of the remaining six contests.

The Illinois senator has picked up 26 superdelegates in the past week. At that pace, he will reach the number of delegates needed to clinch the nomination -- 2,025 -- in the next three weeks, when delegates from the remaining primaries are included.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's best chance to slow Obama is to move the goal posts. She will get that chance May 31 when the Democratic National Committee's rules panel considers proposals to seat the delegates that had been stripped from Florida and Michigan. ... Clinton desperately needs to have the delegates from Michigan and Florida seated in a way that greatly benefits her. ... The Democratic National Committee's rules and bylaws committee voted to strip all the delegates from Florida and Michigan because they violated party rules by holding primaries before Feb. 5. The same panel will consider reinstating them....Reinstating all the delegates and superdelegates would increase the number needed to claim the nomination to 2,209, perhaps extending the campaign. But even under the best scenario for Clinton, Obama would still be left with a lead of about 100 delegates, with fewer than 300 superdelegates left to be claimed.
_________________________________________

So, to sum up:
(1) the people voting to award delegates to FL and MI are the same ones who voted to strip FL and MI.

(2) Clinton will trail by 100, with 300 to go, even if all the SDs are awarded to her.

(3) SDs are breaking disproportionately for Obama.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 12, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how long it will take Obama's media to report this.

Posted by: tdl62 | May 12, 2008 9:25 PM

"Obama's Media"?

You're kidding, right?

Posted by: JD | May 12, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

As, we learn more about Obama it is evident that he is not ready to be President. He may have a Harvard degree but I want my candidate to be smarter than a fifth grader. During a speech in Oregon, he stated that he had visited 57 states and there were 2 he would not visit.

It was reported today that one of Obama's staffers met with Hamas. I wonder how long it will take Obama's media to report this.

I believe, Obama has promised Hillary something if she stayed in the race until West Virginia and Kentucky. Think about it, if Hillary had dropped out after Indiana, how would it look to the Superdelegates if Obama lost Kentucky and West Virginia and the only competition was against himself


Posted by: tdl62 | May 12, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Since we're talking movies here, go rent the 1964 political pot-boiler, "The Best Man" starring Henry Fonda, to see how this campaign SHOULD end. Then report
back to us here to discuss.

Posted by: scrivener | May 12, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

He he Yankees, you all vote McCain. Makee great partner! We have lots of money to lend for wars. Once again, Slickey boys, go vote now McCain.

Posted by: Kung Foo Sucka | May 12, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I don't get the people whining about the "vile" posts. Huh? Weren't the Hillary people gleefully enjoying Obama's whining about George Stephanopolous and the last debate?

Whatever. Hillary has lost. She is done. If you're tired of the past 8 years of incompetence, nepotism, and disdain for the Constitution, get on the Obama bus. Let's go beat John McCain and send the Republicans home to lick their wounds. The only way to force the Republican Party to reform itself is to make them lose everything.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 12, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

"I don't buy Crowley. I buy Bloomberg."

Who can say what goes on in the mind of a Clinton? "The rich are not like you and me."

Posted by: fzdybel | May 12, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

To understand the Clintons read David Maraniss, "First in His Class" and Joe Klein's "Primary Colors," No one has shown a better understanding of the reality of a political campaign than Klein (read the book rather than watching the movie). Then sit around watching cable news and reading political blogs "until the last dog dies."
Even then Clinton will keep on running.
Hellllooo Denver!

Posted by: Tobe | May 12, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Anytime your Washington Pundit class gets out the psychological profile where they interpret for their convenience anyone else's motives, stay AWAY, stay FAR FAR AWAY. I am imagine Crowley's "compelling psychological profile" of the Clintons will interest only those who like their news spoon fed.

Posted by: Christopher J. Emge | May 12, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

I don't buy Crowley. I buy Bloomberg.

Clinton Deadline Looms for Recouping $11 Million Personal Loan
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=as5a58KS7ky8&refer=home

$11 million her own money is a mighty strong motivation to stay in the race.

Posted by: urban4 | May 12, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

As long as we're reminiscing about movies, "Primary Colors" got in rotation on HBO last month and I probably saw parts of it about 5 times. The Kathy Bates character, the disillusioned true believer, pleads/berates the Hillary character by saying to her that Bill's cheating didn't ruin him -- it ruined her. That the cheating and lies hardened her and took all her goodness out (obviously a very rough recollection of the dialogue). I actually believe that's true -- the cheater that comes back is chastened and seeking forgiveness and puts the cheated spouse into an almost lose-lose position. Fail to forgive and you're an ogre; forgive and you're a fool and a patsy -- and you'll never be able to trust again. That's the dynamic that "Impeachment" covers -- not just the political machinations, but the sexual and spiritual betrayal that operated as its core. Hillary Clinton made a terrible pact with the devil back when she fell in love with Bill and put aside her considerable talents and dreams to stand behind him. I don't blame her -- their hubris is going to be the single most studied tragedy of our times. But at the close, having made the deal, she's the one ultimately paying the price. As a female Obama supporter, that gives me no glee.

Posted by: omyobama | May 12, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

What is the plan now, hope for Obama to go down in a plane crash?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

In denial - in a leaky boat no less.

It would be wonderful for the Clinton's world of Politics from Oz to implode and show them that the world is in fact a changing place.

Thank you for the newest WashingtonPost - ABC news poll just out. It really is over. Hillary can't claim to be "more electable by white people" when the numbers keep stacking up against her.

At least she can have one last hurrah in West Virginia. Change is good.

Posted by: DonJulio | May 12, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

What was Huckabee's reasons for staying on as long as he did?

Sen. Clinton has her reasons that are very different from any other candidates.

Why did Edwards leave so early? It has proven to be a wise choice that has enhanced his stature.

My guess for Hillary staying is Bill. Bill will play this out until the very end. A house might fall on Obama's head, or something. Also, it will look really bad if Obama loses the W. Virginia, Kentucky and P. Rico contests with no opponent to claim victory.

My guess is that after June 3 the superdelegates will kill Hillary's dream of triumph by superdelegate by flocking to Obama in sufficient numbers.

Posted by: piktor | May 12, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

"beth you obviously are totally unfamiliar with the vile posts here over the last 2 months directed personally against EVERY SINGLE HC who has dared to question policy positions of Obama."

Can you give me an example of when this has happened?

Not the vile posts. Can you give me an example of a post that questions the policy positions of Obama?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 12, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Crowley's point is well taken, but I don't think this started with impeachment. It doesn't apply just to the Clintons either.

An appeal for sympathy is as effective more many modern politicians as an appeal for support. George Bush's admirers in the Republican Party have sought to portray him as the victim of partisans in Congress and liberals in the media for years. Because this portrayal is presented to people inclined to distrust Democrats and liberals to begin with, it works.

Bill Clinton also worked hard to portray himself as a victim, well before he stumbled into impeachment in his second term. Throughout the latter part of 1995 he presented himself as the reasonable man persecuted by the extremist Newt Gingrich. This worked, too.

Deliberately trying to portray oneself as a victim would have seemed very strange indeed to someone like Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman or Dwight Eisenhower, who contended for votes at a time when many voters knew what real suffering was. American politics are different now, because Americans are different. We empathize with politicians who say they have been "disrespected" or had mean things said about them; we don't have the same feeling for the occasional politicians who have passed through a sterner trial, because their experience is outside the context of our own lives. And this is a two-way street. Neither Robert Dole in 1996 or John McCain in 2000 were any good at playing the victim. They wouldn't have known how (McCain still doesn't). To the Clintons, or to George Bush, it is second nature. I'll bet Barack Obama has a talent for it, too.

Posted by: Zathras | May 12, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

After watching Harry Reid dawdle along for 20 minutes on "This Week", I think it was, was painful. Hillary would be a phenomenal Senate Majority Leader (as would Jim Webb or pretty much anyone who can string a coherent sentence together). Reid is so milquetoast, that one has to wonder if he's a total pitbull beneath that exterior. It's hard to believe he's the standard-bearer for the Democrats (though, as a Republican, I relish it :-) ).

Posted by: P Diddy | May 12, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

A wee bit off topic, but "The Contender" is a brilliant film. If you haven't seen it, you need to Netflix it immediately. Joan Allen is stupendous.

Thanks, Maassive, for mentioning it. I'm going to watch it tonight.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 12, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

The place for Hillary's fight against the evil Republicans is in the Senate. Let her be Senate Majority Leader, she can lead the battle, stand strong against the forces of darkness, investigate the corrupt and criminal Bush sycophants and let Obama lead the nation out of the hole Republicans have dug for us (with help from certain un-named Democrats).

It's time.

Posted by: thebob.bob | May 12, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

"To me, there's no doubt, there's a movie to be made on this campaign, and made even objectively, Hillary would be the villain and Obama would be the hero."

That's a quote from an interview with Rod Lurie, director of The Contender and Commander in Chief, two of the most important films about women in presidential politics. The interview just went live at Film.com

http://www.film.com/dvds/story/qa-commander-chief-director-rod/20778341

Posted by: Maassive | May 12, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure armchair analysis of Clinton by an unqualified analyst (i.e., a reporter) is really useful. But if The Fix thinks it is, why not encourage an equal analysis of Obama's apparent narcissism? He certainly fits the profile, especially given the obvious narcissism of his parents, one almost entirely absent and one largely absent from his life. You could have a field day with that, if you chose. Obama and Bill Clinton share a number of narcissistic traits. I think HIllary, on the other hand, was fairly normal until she got sucked into Bill's worldview.

Posted by: ezr | May 12, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

"what the clintons learned during impeachment" - that's rich. Try what the clintons taught during impeachment. this is most assuredly the Dem chickens coming home to roost. why are the press and the Libs so utterly blinded by fact and truth?

Posted by: kingofzouk | May 12, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Good analysis. Now, can we move on? It is time to win the White House back. The Republicans have created such a tragic mess that we MUST unite and take our country back.

Posted by: Chuck | May 12, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

It's as easy to criticize the "entitlement" generation as it is to criticize the Boomers and their "conspicuous consumption" generation. It was, after all, the Boomers who raised the GenYers.

Let's stop arguing stupid things.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 12, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

P Diddy -- Amen.

Posted by: egc52556 | May 12, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Chris Fix -- Enough. It's taken 15 months to defeat the warped HillBill(y) duo. Do we need a post-mortem psychoanalysis too? I just want them to go away.

But -- sigh -- if we must: not since Napoleon, perhaps, have we seen egos the size of Hill and Bill. Richardson knows them both pretty well and his comment that they have a sense of "entitlement" surrounding them seems to drive straight to the bone. Hill and Bill are the megalomaniacs' megalomaniacs. Their entire lives are DEFINED by winning political power. To be defeated by a rookie must be a very bitter pill.

Posted by: egc52556 | May 12, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

I think there are just as many juvenile and immature Hillary supporters as there are Obama supporters. Let's grow up beyond the name calling. Sticks and stones, and all that jazz.

Fundamentally, we have a photo finish election where one candidate lost by a length. Losing sucks, I know. No manner of machinations will save the nomination for Hillary. She has lots this fair and square. It's time to move on.

Those of us who are sick to our stomachs with what has happened in this country over the last 8 years will move on and try and get Barack Obama elected. The rest can continue to stare at the good ol' days through rose-colored glasses.

We need to roll up our sleeves and fix what's wrong with this country. We are at a turning point in this nation's history, and whether the ideas come from Democrats or Republicans is irrelevant. We need to sweep out all the old political hacks who have enjoyed tremendous success with the politics of divisiveness and destruction, and sweep in with some fresh ideas and acknowledgement that (gasp!) the other side may have a good idea or two. And then we need to just get some *hit done.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 12, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

hey dueling do you tell your parents that you too disrespect any of us boomers not part of the genY, know everything, entitlement generation.

"Much younger, and btter looking" So what is that the intelligent argument you have come to to support sen Obama? Is that another of your genY aegist argument you are making to HC and most of her supporters which you have constantly insulted to the point of driving us to support John McCain?

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

beth you obviously are totally unfamiliar with the vile posts here over the last 2 months directed personally against EVERY SINGLE HC who has dared to question policy positions of Obama. Incidentally did you get one of those jan emails from moveon and DFA instructing you to either march in line behind Obama or leave. Apparently that is the attitude of the new Obama Party who disagrees with dissent, despises seniors, boomers and hispanics and demands purity to the far left dogma.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is so hell-bent on getting elected she would never give up. It also pisses her off that Obama is much younger, better looking, and more eloquent than she will ever be.

Posted by: Dueling Banjos | May 12, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse

"The success of the Clinton's attempts to paint themselves as victims of a vicious and power hungry Republican party during impeachment"

Republicans, no. That language has been directed to Bill, Chelsea and HC by Obama supporters who think it is just great to insult a 2 term ex President.

actually it is the Obama supporters who revel the impeachment and monica ordeal. I can count the numbers of posts here from Obama supporters who have posted monica, monica, monica and how great the impeachment proceedings were. In W. Va last week some of their supporters heckled the exPresident while holding up Obama signs and yelled expletives at Chelsea and HC which I wouldn't tolerate if they were from my children. And then their supporters come here and yell at HC supporters and have already started to blame us for Obama's upcoming Nov loss saying how dare you defect to McCain. They have made their beds they need to get used to lying in it now after months of screaming at us to leave the party if we don't get behind their guy.

Posted by: Leichtman | May 12, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

"The vileness of the Clintons' past enemies seems to have convinced them that their enemies always are, by definition, in the wrong," says Crowley. "And that Obama's candidacy is almost like another illegitimate attempt to steal a White House that, in some sense, belongs to them."

I think this warped psychology has been passed o n to some of the more die-hard Clinton supporters at Hillaryis44 and Taylor Marsh's web sites. It is a Manichean view of good versus evil.

Obama has pushed against that approach of demonizing those who disagree with you, and just one reason many of us are so happy to support him.

Posted by: Beth in VA | May 12, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company