Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

Hillary was here in California for a 2-day swing during which she appeared on Jay Leno, taped Ellen and held several fundraisers, which reportedly netted her a cool million. Since last night's LA event was open to media I was lucky enough to attend. It was at a theatre in Beverly Hills and the media was confined to the back few rows in the center, which still felt close since it really wasn't that big a theatre. The fundraiser was relatively low dollar, ranging from $100 on up so you saw a sort of mix of minor celebrities and regular folks, a lot of women with their daughters, actually.

Before Hillary came on, she had a sort of opening act, which actually turned out to be a hard act to follow: the West LA Children's Choir. These kids absolutely brought the house down with a song that offered a bit of advice for Senator Clinton:

When the going gets tough that's when the tough get going
It's not if you win or lose it's if you play the game
Keep on going!
Keep on going!

I took a little video of it, although it's sort of hard to make out what they're saying, but thought some of you would appreciate seeing it.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa followed the kids and pumped the crowd up, praising Hillary for being a fighter, "a marathon runner" and "tough enough to turn America around." The place, as you would expect, went nuts. The clear message, as Rob Reiner put it in his introduction of Hillary a few minutes later: "We are going to keep on going and going and keep going!"

Hillary came out a short time later, spoke for about 15 minutes and then was joined on stage by Reiner, Ted Danson, Mary Steenburgen, Daphne Zuniga and Fran Drescher, who read questions submitted by attendees, which Clinton proceeded to answer townhall meeting style. Because she was on stage, literally with friends and because everyone there by definition was a supporter, you could sense Clinton was at ease, far moreso than she appeared on Jay Leno I thought. But really, any time I see Hillary Clinton do a townhall event like this I leave even more impressed with her. I sometimes get the sense that a lot of Obama supporters think "gee, if only Clinton supporters attended a Barack rally, they'd change their minds." That's sort of how I feel about what would happen if Obama supporters attended a Clinton townhall meeting. She was just a master up there.

Back to her opening remarks, though, other than sending the message about continuing on in the campaign, the talking point of the night was regarding Michigan and Florida. Both Rob Reiner in his intro and Hillary Clinton in her remarks framed the issue as the disenfranchisement of millions of voters, which really got the crowd exercised I have to say, especially when Clinton phrased it in these terms:

I thought it was Democrats who wanted to count every vote. If we had counted every vote in 2000 Al Gore would be finishing his second term.

She went on to make the case for seating the delegates per the January primaries:

It was a level playing field in Florida, we were all on the ballot...In Michigan we all had the chance to be on the ballot, my opponent chose to take his off.

As for what should be done now:

We have to either count their votes or allow them to re-vote.

She went on to accuse Obama of thwarting a re-vote in Michigan and got this little dig in:

I don't know what Barack Obama was afraid of, he would have done very well in Michigan.

This crowd -- granted, full of Clinton partisans -- was very moved by the enfranchisement argument and it's clear that Clinton thinks it's a winning one and will continue to make it by raising the spectre of 2000. But even if the delegates from these two states don't get seated as Clinton would like, Rob Reiner hinted at what's really going on here in his introductory remarks.

We're Democrats, we let everyone vote. If at the end of the process, there's a candidate who has more votes...When all the dust settles and Puerto Rico has voted, you're going to see that more people voted for Hillary Clinton.

Shorter Rob Reiner: Hillary's path to the nomination is the popular vote, stupid.

I have another video from the event, this one of Hillary during her opening remarks, at my You Tube page. The quality sort of sucks, especially the audio, so not really worthy of embedding here, but if you're interested check it out.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Democratic nomination, fundraiser, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

82 Comments

Its so amusing


   to see Clinton try and wrap herself in the cloak of "voting rights for everyone."

  She didn't give a damn about MI and FL's rights before IA....she agreed to the plan.

  President Bill Clinton actively complained and tried to stop a plan that would've MADE VOTING EASIER in Nevada.

  Now, all of a sudden, now that she's losing...she cares about MI and FL votes counting? It's a bit for that Senator! You had your shot at standing up for them...you chose to kiss ass in IA and NH instead. (in all fairness, so did everyone else) Unfortunately it didn't turn out as well for you. You reap what you sow.

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:32AM | 0 recs
She was the only one that did give a damn

she was the only one that left her name on both ballots (out of the leaders).  Whether you like it or not, that is a pretty big political statement considering our love affair in this party with the 'first in the nation' status of certain states.

Whats amusing is how supposed Democrats continue to obfuscate about actual DEMOCRACY.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: She was the only one that did give a damn


    she left her name on a ballot for an election that wasn't going to count. My, the leadership is just flowing from her!!

   Not to mention her soundbites in which she boldly declares that MI and FL wouldn't count.

   That's our Hillary...more faces than Mt. Rushmore!!

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:37AM | 0 recs
Count for who? You? Obama?

She left her name on the ballot to let the people in that state know that she didn't value IA over them.

Obfuscate, obfuscate, smoke in your face Obama supporters.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Count for who? You? Obama?


   she cared about them by leaving her name on a ballot? While in IA, she's going to diners, churches, community centers meeting and talking with thousands of voters? Included in those meetings were statements boldly declaring how much she honors their first in the nation status, and that's why MI and FL got punished.

  Nice try.

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:47AM | 0 recs
Obfuscate

thats all Obama and his supporters can do on this issue.  Makes me dislike him even more.

You cannot call yourself a Democrat and be against the votes of people.  

You still haven't addressed the point of leaving her name on the ballot.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:54AM | 0 recs
I have addressed it


   it was not an act of bravery or solidarity with MI voters...as she went to IA and NH and publicly stated, MANY TIMES, that she thought they shouldn't count.

  Which only proves that she left her name on the ballot b/c she's a political opportunist. She didn't believe they should count, but still believed she should be on the ballot.

  Two positions. Two faced. Not what I'm looking for in a President.

by southernman 2008-04-04 11:01AM | 0 recs
But you'd like one that

would disenfranchise millions of voters?

Cool.

by linc 2008-04-04 11:08AM | 0 recs
It doesn't disenfranchise anyone


   disenfranchisement means an injustice occurred. No injustice occurred here. They were told what would happen if they violated the DNC schedule. They knew what would happen, they did so anyway. That's not disenfranchisement.

  Purging legal voters from the roles is disenfranchisement. Setting up poll taxes is disenfranchisement. Two machines in a precinct with 5000 voters is disenfranchisement.

  The voters knew exactly what they were doing, they knew their votes were symbolic. It's not up to Obama to fix this mess. It's not his fault Clinton is trying to back peddle to take advantage of a situation that she didn't mind occurring at all.

by southernman 2008-04-04 11:12AM | 0 recs
A pedantic anti-democracy candidtate

and supporter.  Even better!

by linc 2008-04-04 11:13AM | 0 recs
So you agree

   that Clinton was anti-democracy too? At least, until she started losing?
by southernman 2008-04-04 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: A pedantic anti-democracy candidtate

there's nothing anti-democratic about following and adhering to the rules.

to hear otherwise is, to use your words anti-democratic.

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obfuscate

I don't think a "her leaving her name on the ballot"  point needs to be made.

She agreed to the fact that neither state would count under the rules set forth by the DNC while one of her lead staffers (ickes) voted in favor of not counting those votes.

She was very much against counting those votes before being in favor of it.

revote or do not allow FL & MI to count.

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:12PM | 0 recs
Re: She was the only one that did give a damn

Can you tell me the rationale behind Obama taking his name off the ballot in MI but not in FL? Both states were being sanctioned the same. Just curious, it seems illogical to me.

by Justwords 2008-04-04 03:21PM | 0 recs
If You Follow The Party Rules
that all the candidates agreed to, including Clinton, Obama clearly has an overwhelming significant lead in elected delegates and popular vote.
Only by changing the rules after 85% of the contests are over will Hillary have a chance to have her DLC party hacks, ward healers and fat cat donors steal the nomination and coronate 'her majesty'.
I hope she stays in for the rest of the primaries. Then Obama will win the nomination by even a larger margin than today's.
by toyomama 2008-04-04 10:47AM | 0 recs
Wow, you are so angry

and I don't want a bunch of angry fanatical trend followers choosing a losing democrat for the nomination.  The messiah has no cloths.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:50AM | 0 recs
I'm Not Angry At All

In fact I'm quite happy that my candidate is winning, and that the probability of him becoming our next President is so high.

by toyomama 2008-04-04 10:54AM | 0 recs
Keep telling yourself that

right up until the point where GOP associated 527's spend hundreds of millions of dollars destroying Obama on his 'associations'- e.g. Wright.

Just wait- assuming our party is stupid enough to hand a nomination to a candidate sure to lose.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:57AM | 0 recs
Oh, But The GOP Ads

wouldn't be showing the 3 different recordings of Hillary lying about sniper fire, followed by the tape of Hillary strolling of the plane and the little girl reading her poem to Hillary and Chelsea?

by toyomama 2008-04-04 11:02AM | 0 recs
Silly...

...the Clintons never feel worried about lying.

Repercussions for lying are for mere commoners, not for our noble queen.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-04 11:07AM | 0 recs
I guess that goes for the Messiah too then? n/t

by linc 2008-04-04 11:11AM | 0 recs
Whatever

all politicians are liars- even saint Obama.  I think an anti-white screed would shake up GE voters a hell of a lot more than telling them something they already know: ALL POLITICIANS LIE- yes, even saint Obama lies too.

by linc 2008-04-04 11:10AM | 0 recs
Wow!

That statement is a great endorsement for integrity as a worthwhile value.

by toyomama 2008-04-04 11:14AM | 0 recs
Its politics- there is no such thing

if you believe otherwise, you are being fooled.

by linc 2008-04-04 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Its politics- there is no such thing

That sounds like one of the principles of the Democratic Leadership Council.

by toyomama 2008-04-04 11:59AM | 0 recs
Its not

its called political realism.  If you and Obama start the ACTUAL revolution, I will be right there with you. But if all you are going to do is talk about it, well then you can forget my support.

by linc 2008-04-04 12:08PM | 0 recs
He Will
And you'll be welcomed to participate in his administration.
But there's along road ahead before the general election. And I'm not taking anything (or anyone) for granted.
by toyomama 2008-04-04 12:23PM | 0 recs
Wright isn't Obama

Perhaps you can't tell the the two black people apart, but I think most Americans will be able to.

Clinton lied. And not only that but she lied arrogantly and stupidly, and in a way that ended up making her a laughingstock.

If people don't care about the lies, they'll hopefully care about the stupidity and the arrogance at least.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-04 11:16AM | 0 recs
Why do you get to call me racist

for pointing out what the GOP will do to Obama via Wright?

In short, kiss my ass.

by linc 2008-04-04 11:44AM | 0 recs
Yikes
Such language!
But, as Bill Clinton used to say, "I feel your pain".
by toyomama 2008-04-04 11:51AM | 0 recs
I should have said a lot worse

Being called racist is much worse language than any swear.

by linc 2008-04-04 12:06PM | 0 recs
I merely pointed out the counterattack, no?

When you have people bash Wright in an attempt against Obama, the proper response is to MOCK them for not being able to tell two black guys apart.

You're not a racist. You merely place too much trust in the racism of other people.

Wright isn't Obama. Obama isn't Wright.

Scared white people might be afraid of the angry black man.  But portraying Obama as the angry black man himself is gonna ludicrously fail.

What GOP will do to Obama via Wright?
What they're gonna do consists of them saying "This nice black guy may be nice and calm all by himself, but he knows another black guy that's lived through things that have made him angry."

America's over the Wright thing already. Have the GOP attempt to use it again and at best they'll look as idiots and cowards scared of an angry black man even at acquaintance distance, and at worst they'll look like racists drumming up racial fear.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-04 12:55PM | 0 recs
You called me a racist
you ass and keep telling yourself all that bs, it will ensure we will have a group of idiots to blame when Obama is destroyed by the GOP. And just FYI, to most Americans, your pastor of 20 years is much, much more than just some guy you know. Get a grip and get real.
by linc 2008-04-05 10:18AM | 0 recs
Re: You called me a racist

"You called me a racist"

No, at the very worst I merely implied it.

"it will ensure we will have a group of idiots to blame when Obama is destroyed by the GOP"

Same way that he was destroyed by Clinton? You wish. His numbers keep going up and up and up. Wright lasted a week, against your every hope.

"And just FYI, to most Americans, your pastor of 20 years is much, much more than just some guy you know."

So, they're gonna say "his pastor is an angry black guy damning USA for white privilege, while our pastors are angry white guys damning USA for homosexuality".

Yeah, got that. Wanna bet it's gonna backfire on them?

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-05 10:43AM | 0 recs
Its a non-issue for democrats
it lasted a week in the PRIMARY because we are Democrats and if we don't agree with half of what Wright had to say then we definitely understand his position. The General Election is a far different place, one where the GOP and its friends won't hesitate to paint Obama as anti-American- they won't even have to go near the race stuff, God damn America over and over and over again will suffice. On another note, is implying that someone is a racist any lesser than calling someone a racist outright? Just curious what your explanation to that will be.
by linc 2008-04-05 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Its a non-issue for democrats

"On another note, is implying that someone is a racist any lesser than calling someone a racist outright?"

Well, it's a bit more cowardly, but also a bit easier to do unintentionally as part of general snarking.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-05 01:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Keep telling yourself that

"Just wait- assuming our party is stupid enough to hand a nomination to a candidate sure to lose."

Nah. If we were stupid, Hillary would be winning.
She ain't.

by jwolf 2008-04-04 05:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow, you are so angry

keep telling yourself that supporters of the winning candidate are "angry" at this situation.

keep telling yourself that you can only be a "trend follower" if you chose to back barack. It's a thin line of attack and you can only fool yourself.

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Its so amusing

Oh really?

On October 11, 2007 interviews with New Hampshire NPR. She noted that the election scheduled for Michigan would not "count" under the current DNC rules. But she added this, explaining why she kept her name on the ballot:

"I did not believe it was fair to just say goodbye Michigan and not take into account the fact that we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009."

Hillary has been stressing the importance of voters of Michigan for months. It's time for Obama to do the right thing for the Democratic party and join her.

by Newport News Dem 2008-04-04 10:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Its so amusing


    He has expressed support for MI voters. It's not his fault that Granholm and her ilk blew their shot at being counted. Clinton should be furious with the Governor and her crowd. Had they not pulled that ridiculous stunt, MI would've counted big time and Clinton would have several more delegates (assuming she still won with a full campaign mode and John Edwards also in the race).

  Truth is, Obama caused none of this. He agreed to the DNC rules, and for that Hillary wants him punished...forgetting that she also agreed to them, when it looked like she wouldn't need them.

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:41AM | 0 recs
As a democrat

especially one tied to and supporting a supposed grassroots campaign, you should be for the people, not punishing them for what their elected officials do or don't do.

Disgusting.  Not democratic.

by linc 2008-04-04 10:45AM | 0 recs
I am for the people


    they got to vote. It's too bad their own elected officials screwed up so badly that the DNC refused to recognize it.

   I'm all for a re-vote, but not with the parameters that Clinton demanded (which guaranteed a win for her). Of course Obama wouldn't agree to a revote structured to give Clinton the advantage (only those who particpated the first time can vote, or limiting it only to Democrats, which violates state election statutes). That's what Hillary tried to do. Obama would have to be an idiot to allow that.  

   Be mad at the Governor. It's not Obama's fault.

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:50AM | 0 recs
Re: As a democrat

obviously your line of attack about us not being "democratic" is a similar line that the GOP uses when we don't agree to war (unpatriotic). It's unfounded and immature.

democracy isn't a system where rule changes can happen at any point to help your candidate out.

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:23PM | 0 recs
Its called a fact
I have always been against the undemocratic caucuses, against not-counting the FL and MI voters, and against allowing a select few states get a bigger say in our supposedly democratic process. And since you obviously have a short memory, most Obama supporters agreed- ever Read Daily Kos circa 2007? I am not the one switching it up to help my candidate, you all are the ones forgetting your democratic morals to ensure that your candidate wins. I know that Obama supporters have a lot of... faith in Obama, but faith will not win back MI and FL in the general election. And why is it that every time an Obama supporter finds something they disagree with, they resort to labels and name calling?
by linc 2008-04-05 03:12PM | 0 recs
Heh.

According to Hillary, of course, you don't have to campaign in a state for its votes to still count (FL, MI), so why bother campaigning anymore?

by Adam B 2008-04-04 11:28AM | 0 recs
Its so misleading

I'm sick and tired of Obama supporters misquoting Hillary on Michigan.  Obama called her "disingenuous," claiming she only recently expressed concern about the voters of Michigan:

"Senator Clinton, I have to say on this, has been completely disingenuous. She said when she was still trying to compete with the votes in Iowa and New Hampshire that Michigan and Florida wouldn't count," he said. "Then as soon as she got into trouble politically and it looked like she would have no prospects of winning the nomination without having them count, suddenly she's extraordinarily concerned with the voters there."

Sen. Obama is referring to an October 11, 2007 interview with New Hampshire NPR. She noted that the election scheduled for Michigan would not "count" under the current DNC rules. But she added this, explaining why she kept her name on the ballot:

"I did not believe it was fair to just say goodbye Michigan and not take into account the fact that we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009."

Hillary has been stressing the importance of voters of Michigan for months. It's time for Obama to do the right thing for the Democratic party and join her.

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id= 6628

And here it is from an original source:

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange." "But I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101100859_ pf.html

Sounds a little different in context, doesn't it.  But hey, don't take my word for it.  
Listen to the New Hampshire Public Radio interview:
http://www.nhpr.org/node/13858
Cue to 21:55 for her MI response.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-04-04 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

I dunno, Puerto Rico is nearest to Florida, so they might not be able to count either.... people will have to wait and see what the boss of process says about them counting.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-04-04 10:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

what are you talking about?

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:25PM | 0 recs
Snark contained

The fundraiser was relatively low dollar, ranging from $100 on up.

But I thought that Barack Obama's $96 average donation made him the candidate of the elite.

Oh noes my head asplodes!

/snark off

by Student Guy 2008-04-04 10:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

How does she counter her newfound love of Michigan with the infamous soundbyte that Michigan wouldn't count for anything?

by thezzyzx 2008-04-04 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

Because of the Obama rovian campaign of stopping where you want to stop the quote.

This is from and October 11, 2007 interview with New Hampshire NPR. She noted that the election scheduled for Michigan would not "count" under the current DNC rules. But she added this, explaining why she kept her name on the ballot:

"I did not believe it was fair to just say goodbye Michigan and not take into account the fact that we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009."

Hillary has been stressing the importance of voters of Michigan for months. It's time for Obama to do the right thing for the Democratic party and join her.

Is that you posting Karl???

by Newport News Dem 2008-04-04 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

So did she lodge a protest with the DNC before hand or something?

by RLMcCauley 2008-04-04 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

First I like how your personal insult of me gets uprated but my comment that contained no insults to anyone got troll rated.

I'll grant you that she did make an argument for Michigan then, but IMO that's less important by the fact that she said that the vote wouldn't count.  People make decisions on what ballot to take (or whether they should bother to vote at all) based on the fact that they knew it wouldn't count.  Retroactively changing that decision is more dangerous (again IMO) than not counting the ballots because we'll never know what will count in future elections.

Fortunately this issue will resolve itself because there's no way that Clinton gets MI seated as is (and her only shot is the plan where Obama gets 0 delegates and/or look at a popular vote where he got 0 votes) without a floor fight and the more she talks about that, the more Superdelegates flock to Obama.

by thezzyzx 2008-04-04 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

You, along with Senator Obama, also missed the rest of the "infamous soundbite" where after she stated that Michigan wouldn't count, she stated that she kept her name on the ballot because we can't expect to ignore Michigan and win the general election in November.

Please stop the spinning and the lying. It's not complementary to yourself or your canidiate.

by zcflint05 2008-04-04 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

So basically she had her eyes set on November when she was keeping her name in, she wasn't keeping her name as an argument that the actual votes ought count.

I'm all in favor of that. I wish Hillary was still in favor of that too -- but again she changed her mind it seems.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-04 11:10AM | 0 recs
You are correct.

Yes, she did state a rationale for keeping her name on the ballot.  Richardson, Edwards, Obama, and Dodd thought the DNC agreement compelled them to take their names off; she was more calculating.

The argument since then has shifted to "counting every vote," but that was not Senator Clinton's original motivation.

by McNasty 2008-04-04 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

And it's not calculating that Senator Obama doesn't want the votes counted because if they were, chances are he wouldn't win the nomination? Senator Obama has dug his own grave on this one and given Hillary the argument that she is standing on the side of the voters and getting their voices heard--that's a burden he will have to deal with by forcing congressional supporters in MI to reject a DNC approved re-vote plan.

by zcflint05 2008-04-05 08:04AM | 0 recs
That's it Hillary


   keep moving the goal posts!! At first the delegates mattered...then the caucus states (except NV) didn't matter, now it's not the delegates that mattered, but the popular vote. Oh my I love a candidate trying to manipulate the rules.

  Except, that usually a GOP tactic.

  Hey, sorry guys, Clinton decided to link Obama with disenfranchisement...therefore she should be linked to her own GOP similarities...such as fear of a fairly won election!!

 

by southernman 2008-04-04 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

And if not the popular vote then the delegates should go with her regardless of the voters.

Very pro-democracy argument.

by RLMcCauley 2008-04-04 10:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

There is no way to make re-votes in either state fair. Voters in both states were told their votes would not be counted and therefore may have voted in the Republican primary, not changed their affiliation to vote for Obama or Clinton (see Pennsylvania), not registered at all, etc., etc.

In my opinion, the decision to strip both states of their delegates was a bad idea on Dean's part, but the time for a fair election in those states for this primary cycle has come and gone.

Clinton's constant use of this as a political hammer against Obama only weakens the reputation of the Democratic party in both states.

by SFValues 2008-04-04 10:54AM | 0 recs
Hillary - The energizer bunny

I suppose someone already noticed that the expression "Hillary is going to just keep going" makes her sound a lot like the Energizer Bunny.

by pwax 2008-04-04 11:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary - The energizer bunny

Let's just hope she doesn't start boiling bunnies after being spurned by the Party that 'owed' her the nomination.

by toyomama 2008-04-04 11:45AM | 0 recs
All this sniping at poor Hillary

Snipe here; snipe there; snipe everywhere.  How does she hold up under such fire?

More importantly, by this time in the campaign, when it is painfully obvious to even the moderately informed that there is no principle that the Clintons and Karl Rove Mark Penn won't abandon for their own personal gain, how can any progressive still support this woman?  (How any progressive would support a corporate lawyer and director in the first place is still beyond me).  

Every day, the fools who voted for Bush (twice) make more and more sense.  Blind cheerleaders.  Go Team!

by fiver 2008-04-04 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

I am so tired of hearing people blame Obama for the screwed up FL and MI situation.  Its such a load of nonsense factually and not an honest way to score points against him.

1. He had nothing to do w/ the elected officials' decisions in those two states to move the dates forward.

  1. He didn't create the DNC rules that decided the punishment for moving the dates forward.
  2. He wasn't the ultimately responsible for blocking revotes.  Once again, this was the fault of the elected officials in both states, much like number 1 above.

Yes, he may have opposed revotes, but he didn't create the situation in which revotes needed to occur nor was he the one truly responsible for preventing them from occurring.  

If the situation was reversed, I have no doubt that Clinton would also oppose revotes in those 2 states, but I would not blame her for killing them.  

The responsibility for this situation lies at the hands of the officials who voted to move the dates forward and then to subsequently block the revotes from occurring.

by sorrodos 2008-04-04 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

I really hope everyone in attendance didn't give more that $96.

by Rumproast 2008-04-04 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

I'm still confused, but I thought you needed delegates, not total votes.

by AnyDem2008 2008-04-04 11:19AM | 0 recs
Yuck


Look, the rules were written she agreed to them and now that she is losing she wants to change the rules.  Is she that INSANE with greed that she has tear the party apart for her own ambition?

Todd please explain to me how this type of talk is good for the party.

Quadruple yuck.

by gil 2008-04-04 11:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser
"Keep on going, and going, and going"??? Unless you're the energizer bunny, this is akin to running into a wall, standing up and doing it again--irrespective of the brain damage.
It's not "strength" to ignore reality, its called delusional personality disorder.
It's called being stubborn.  Do not confuse the desire and tenacity to compete, with any shot of winning or doing the greater good.  Finishing the marathon in last place may earn you respect in a long distance run, but it earns you scorn in a contest with fixed goals that go beyond intangibles.  Time is still now to quit, Hillary.
by jv 2008-04-04 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

I'm still waiting for the Clinton campaign to state that they won't cut-and-run from the campaign and will stay the course.

We have already seen how well such a level of stubborness and unwillingness to accept the truth serves a president.

by SFValues 2008-04-04 11:45AM | 0 recs
It's true, about Town Halls

Hillary truly is a master of the Town Hall setting.  I don't think that anyone walking away from a Town Hall meeting with her would have any doubts how they will cast their vote.  It is a setting that is small enough for her warmth to show through, and for her to demonstrate her encyclopedic knowledge of literally any topic the audience can think to put to her.

That's why I think the new ad in NC is brilliant.  It's a low-key, low-budget ad that simply invites people to ask her questions.  She promises to listen and respond in the next TV ad in the series.  It's a subtle play on words v. action (speaking at you vs. listening to you), but far gentler than pervious takes, and I think the new, more positive approach is going to work well for her.

by bobbank 2008-04-04 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: It's true, about Town Halls
FYI - It was a pay-to-play fundraiser.  
So of course they ate up every word.  
by gil 2008-04-04 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

It was a level playing field in Florida, we were all on the ballot

This kind of stuff right here is why I stopped supporting Clinton.  It was not a level playing field.  No one campaigned.  The voters were told that their votes wouldn't count in this contest.  Both candidates signed a pledge to not participate in the election.

It's a bogus election.  Clinton can try to spin it however she wants, but that's really what it comes down to.  It was bogus.  It was undeniably biased by voters thinking it wouldn't count, as well as the effect of townticket races/isses which shape the demographics of voters.

Anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows that the results in Florida shouldn't count.  Every time she claims otherwise I lose a little more respect for her.

by ChrisKaty 2008-04-04 11:58AM | 0 recs
I thought the expression was:

"It's not if you win or lose, it's HOW you play the game."

by lucky monkey 2008-04-04 12:08PM | 0 recs
She's sooo dishonest.

In Michigan we all had the chance to be on the ballot, my opponent chose to take his off.

So did everyone else.  It's what you agreed to, now you're saying "it's his fault for playing along."  More lies.

by McNasty 2008-04-04 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: She's sooo dishonest.

So did everyone else.  It's what you agreed to, now you're saying "it's his fault for playing along."  More lies.

no, not everyone else took off their names.  there were 4 democratic candidates on that ballot.

It was not mandated for candidates to remove their names.  Obama took his name off and then had his campaign tell MI voters to vote "uncommitted" if they were for him.

by colebiancardi 2008-04-04 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: She's sooo dishonest.

"It was not mandated for candidates to remove their names."

Merely not to participate in the election. One would think the two issues would be connected.

Either way his presence or not in the ballot doesn't really matter: first and firstmost the thing is that they weren't allowed to properly campaign. This gives benefits to the person with the highest name-recognition. Any election after such a no-campaigning rule would be automatically invalid by any measure of sanity.

Unless they were running for the presidency of Belarus, perhaps.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-04-04 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: She's sooo dishonest.

"Merely not to participate in the election. One would think the two issues would be connected."

but it wasn't connected.  

by colebiancardi 2008-04-05 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton Los Angeles Fundraiser

i can't imagine that 15 minutes of Hillary talking about FL and MI would ever get me to change my mind.

I've seen Hillary up close and personal and she's good. She's comfortable and funny, but combine her with Mark Penn and you've got a spiraling out-of-control candidate IMO.

by alex100 2008-04-04 12:28PM | 0 recs
Puerto Rico is a very significant State
I think I understand the Hillary logic....

Puerto Rico is a very significant state because it is big and because the path to the White House, in terms of electoral votes in the general election goes through Puerto Rico.

Oh, wait. Puerto Rico doesn't have any electoral votes, and therefore the Clinton people told us that such insignificant places shouldn't really count in the primaries.

I'm all confused. Can someone explain the Clinton campaign logic, please.
by xtrarich 2008-04-04 01:03PM | 0 recs
I Will Freely Concede

I am an Obama delegate to the TX state convention.  I have heard HRC townhalls.  I will freely concede that her knowledge, on essentially every policy point, is both wide and deep.  I will also concede that it is her best public format.

But I think there is more to a successful candidacy, let alone a successful Presidency, than just top-flight policy expertise.

by dell 2008-04-04 02:03PM | 0 recs
I was at the event too,

and I also was thinking "I should have sponsored an Obama supporter instead of coming myself".

As always, Hillary is so in command of the issues, and so at ease and so connected with the crowd.  I find her inspirational and a great role model exemplifying that it is not just intelligence that gets you ahead, but hard work and perseverance.

I want Hillary to finish this race out, and it was apparent that everyone there also wanted that.  I still think she can change minds and win this nomination, and I have no idea that she would be a phenomenal President.

My statement to Obama supporters is, please acknowledge the fact that each of the two candidates has the support of approximately 1/2 of the Democrats in this Country.  You are not going to change anybody's minds by telling us that Hillary has got to stop running now.  

Be confident in your candidate.  He may win.
Likewise, I will be confident in my candidate, because I believe she still has a chance to win, and given the 50/50 split in support, both she and her supporters should be respected.

by cjbardy 2008-04-04 03:52PM | 0 recs
One other line I really liked...

When Rob Reiner said (and I think this is an exact quote) "you don't quit the game when you are only 3 points behind."  That got a lot of positive response from the audience.

by cjbardy 2008-04-04 03:55PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads