MyDD :: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card

Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card

by Todd Beeton, Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:06:15 PM EST

Looking at the polling and reading reports such as Matt Stoller's diaries from the ground (here and here,) there just doesn't appear to be any evidence of an impending Clinton comeback in South Carolina a la New Hampshire. As Stoller writes of Obama:

Obama's people want this one and have done the work.

And of Clinton...

I didn't see the same signs of organizational depression that I saw in Iowa. They probably think they are going to get second, but feel well-positioned going forward.

This is precisely the message the Clinton campaign is spinning via its latest campaign memo from Howard Wolfson (Ben Smith has it):

Despite Senator Obama's large lead, Senator Clinton has campaigned across the Palmetto State, reaching out and asking for each and every vote. She has heard directly from South Carolinians about their concerns and their hopes for a stronger, more prosperous America.

Regardless of today's outcome, the race quickly shifts to Florida, where hundreds of thousands of Democrats will turn out to vote on Tuesday.

Despite efforts by the Obama campaign to ignore Floridians, their voices will be heard loud and clear across the country, as the last state to vote before Super Tuesday on February 5th.

This remains a delegate fight, with 1,681 delegates at stake on February 5th, and 2,025 needed to secure the nomination -- and we are ahead in that fight.

As Senator Clinton has said from the beginning, we have built a national campaign with the resources to compete and win across the country.

A couple things. First, as Smith notes, it is "funny how whoever is losing in a state starts talking about delegates." Let's not forget that after Nevada the Clinton team tried to downplay the importance of delegates as much as they could. But also, notice how Wolfson segues onto the subject of delegates via a reference to Florida. This is round two in the Clinton camp's don't forget about Florida blitz (round one was her statement yesterday pledging to seat Florida's delegates and calling on her opponents to do the same.)

One purpose of this focus on Florida is a simple attempt to shift the media narrative, as TPM reader RR observes:

I speculate that she raised [the issue of Florida's delegates] to heighten the profile of the Florida Dem primary on Tuesday. Hillary will almost certainly lose SC today, and possibly wash out to third: a negative media cycle for her. If she had her way, South Carolina would vanish into N-space before the polls close, and not re-establish contact with the outside universe until February 6. Since she can't arrange that, she is aiming for the next best thing - a rapid shift of media attention to FL, and heavy coverage of her probable big win there. She wants the FL win, not the SC loss, to be what resonates through the echo chamber during the week leading up to Super Tuesday.

But this isn't all they are doing here. First take a look at the language from Clinton's statement yesterday:

"I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.

And now today from Wolfson's memo:

Despite efforts by the Obama campaign to ignore Floridians, their voices will be heard loud and clear across the country...

They're cleverly framing the issue over seating Florida's delegates an an issue of voter enfranchisement, Hillary being the inclusive one, Barack being the exclusive one. As Smith notes, this "seems aimed at throwing the voter suppression charges Obama cast in Vegas back at him" but on a more subtle level, it's tapping into some deep residual resentment from 2000 that Florida Democrats, particularly minorities, feel, at having been disenfranchised whether by a butterfly ballot, The Supreme Court or the purging of voter rolls.

I think I have to second RR's conclusion:

As so often in this last three weeks, one gets the impression that Hillary's team is playing a move ahead of both Obama and the media.

Tags: 2008 presidential election, democratic primary, south carolina, florida, hillary clinton, barack obama (all tags)

Permalink :: 76 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

If the Democratic party seats the delegates from Florida or Michigan BEFORE a nominee is chosen, I will immediately leave the party and register as a Green.

Rules and the rule of law should have meaning otherwise there is anarchy with no accountability, might as well just install the Bush family as monarchs.

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:13:25 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

The rules expressly provide that the final decision gets made by a vote at the convention. There's no violation of the rule of law here.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:19:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

The vote is made by the delegates.

So if those delegates matter, what would happen is that Obama would have to instruct his delegates to vote for him, thereby disenfranchising FL and MI, or vote against him thereby handing the nomination to Clinton.

Obama would know he could never win the general if he willfully disenfranchised millions of voters but I think this situation would more than likely guarantee a Clinton/Obama ticket.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:37:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Please provide a link to support this claim.

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:47:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Florida is rapidly becoming a nightmare for the DNC and could very well mean the end of Howard Dean.

The DNC simply cannot permit a candidate to win by disenfranchising MI and FL and essentially putting a loosing candidate on the ballot in November.

On the other hand, there would be a huge outcry from the supporters of the loosing delegate if they did sit the delegates.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:25:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

That's why many of us long-time observers of presidential politics were screaming our heads off for the DNC to fix the damn promblem BEFORE the primaries. This was so obviously a disaster in the making.

What they should have done is stripped the delegates until the primary calendar was set (keeping sacred cows Iowa and NH happy) and then quickly come up with a "compromise" that allowed the Michigan and Florida primaries to be contested for delegates.

Howard Dean screwed the pooch on this one and the Party may end up with a nightmare on its hands.

by hwc on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:49:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Well, Clinton's disenfranchising argument is rather disingenuous, considering that Clinton's name was the only one on the Michigan ballot, despite a clear agreement by the candidates to not do that. I think TPM has a good post on the problem.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/06 4801.php

by pseudo999 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:25:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

There was no such "clear agreement." That's a tall tale that gets told on the blogs.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:29:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Chin puller is full of it (none / 0)

Josh "Chin Puller" Marshall is full of it. Hillary never "agreed" to pull her name from the ballot in Michigan, nor did she "agree" that the delegates should not be counted. She only agreed not to campaign in Michigan, an agreement which she scrupulously honored. Some of the other candidates (such as Obama and Edwards) decided on their own, for whatever reason, to withdraw their names from the ballot. That was their choice, and, if the delegates are eventually seated, their error.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:23:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tired, empty threats (none / 0)

Why don't you go register as a Green right now. The self-importance of some people is amazing. Do you really anyone cares what will do or dont do? I'm sure Hillary is shaking in her boots over you. Not!

And, could you be any more pompous with that "rule of law" crap? That's a meme spawned by the dirtbag Republicans during their partisan prostitution of constitutional procedure known as the impeachment of Bill Clinton. And, as has been pointed out, it's not even remotely accurate. The 2008 convention, like every convention before it, will decide for itself the outcome of disputed delegate questions. The "rule of law" is not implicated in any way.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:16:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tired, empty threats (none / 0)

Tired maybe. empty, not a bit. I dare say I have most likely been around a lot longer than you and have watched my party, the party of Roosevelt slowly destroy itself from within.

The institution of "Super delegates" after the 1972 nomination of McGovern was designed to take small "d" democracy out of our nominating process.

The creation of the DLC and the triangulation principle of politics. The continued rise of the modern third, fourth and fifth party involvement in our elections. Most notably Perot 1992, 1996 Nader, 2000, 2004

There is an ever increasing move away from the Democratic party caused in my opinion mostly by the utter disregard of the platforms the party was founded on.

I'm glad you are ok with this destruction of the party, I just wish it was not so easy for you to disregard the rules that were established before the primary season began.

keep talking though, keep alienating the very people you need to win a general election. You might find you won the battle but lost the war. after all we all know Ralph Nader had nothing to do with Al Gore's loss in 2000

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:48:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tired, empty threats (none / 0)

Are you suggesting there was more small-d democracy before 1972?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:02:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tired, empty threats (none / 0)

I'm suggesting that in 1972 small "d" democracy was in place, it was the maturation and evolution of the big "d" Democratic party. Only after seeing the party base select George McGovern overwhelmingly did the party install the undemocratic super delegates. it was a move backward and a move for the worse, there is no doubt in my mind that without the "super delegates" we would have been spared the de-evolution of our party and would quite possibly have avoided the entire Reagan fiasco.

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:23:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

(1) You may or may not be older than me. Either way, that's no guarantee that you're wiser than me.

(2) You talk about "democracy," but your position is that the primaries held in two of the largest States in the country shouldn't count. I wonder what George McGovern would have said about that.

(3) Despite the rhetoric to the contrary, all three top Democratic candidates are centrists. So spare me the "DLC" and "triangulation" crap.

(4) The Democratic party has been around for 170 years or more (depending on how you count it). It's platform was once pro-slavery. So, I'm glad that its platform has changed and continues to change.

(5) To repeat, "the rules. . . established before the primary season began" did NOT categorically state that the delegates elected in Michigan and Florida would not be seated. The convention this year, like all previous conventions, will decide for itself the outcome of delegate disputes. The candidates agreed not to campaign in the two states, they did not agree to withdraw their names nor to refrain from taking the positiion that the delegates should be seated.

As an aside, for someone who claims the legacy of George McGovern, and who threatens to turn Green, you seem awfully subservient to what the national bureaucracy of the DNC decided.

(6) Go ahead and vote Green. Throw the election to the GOP. Cut off your nose to spite your face because Howard Dean's preference that elections in two of the country's biggest states be disregarded ends up being overturned by the majority of delegates chosen in the other states. Whatever.

I guess any excuse to bolt the party because you can't have your way, no matter how preposterous, is good enough for you.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:13:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

1. With age comes experience which usually translates into wisdom.

2. There is no democracy when the rules for elections are disregarded. PERIOD

3. I suppose all three could be described as centrists, the same does not hold true if you use the term corporatist.

4. Indeed it has changed, steadily and progressively until the mid 1970's when it took a sharp turn to the right. This was not a good change for our party and directly led to the rise of Reagan Republicanism.

5. Parsing "rules" when the implication was clear is the most Bush like BS I have heard today.

6. Florida and Michigan had every opportunity to hold their primaries at a time approved by the party, they chose otherwise and should pay the price of their short sighted decision.

Your insults belittle only yourself.

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:31:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

(1) The opinions of old people, unlike away goals, don't count "double." You will be evaluated on the strength of your arguments, not the date on your birth certificate. So far, you have shown very little "wisdom."

(2) You can bleat all you want to about the "rules," but the only rule that matters is that the convention will decide which delegates to seat. Also, that is what "democracy" dictates, not that Howard Dean and the DNC get to make the decision.

(3) All 3 can accurately, it uncharitably, be described as "corporatist."

(4) In some ways the platform has moved to the right, and in others to the left, since the 1970's. I don't see any of the top 3 candidates changing that.

(5) Hillary is not "parsing" the "rule." There is no "rule." There was an agreement not to campaign, and Hillary has honored it. Get your facts straight.

(6) Again, if you knew the facts, you would know tha it was the GOP in Florida that decided to move up the date for its primary. Florida Democrats had no choice. And, in any event and for the umpteenth time, there is no "rule" that says their delegates shouldn't count and your punitive attitude is 180 degrees contrary to your otherwise McGovernite, "power to the people," Green party vibe. The "rules" you refer are not rules, they are an "establishment hassle" decided on by Howard Dean and a bunch of other bureaucrats to placate the crybabies in Iowa and New Hampshire who continue to insist on their anti-democratic primacy.

Your positions are so internally contradictory that they make my head spin.

(7) As for "insults," again, I find it odd that a self-professed McGovernite, Green party supporter should be so offended by a little robust debate. What insults? I haven't called you any names. If you can't take a little disagreement with your views, then don't post them in a public forum.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 07:09:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

1. If I have shown little wisdom, you have shown none.

2. No one has yet published anything definitive regarding your claim. in fact quite to the contrary it seems clear that the decision has been voted on and made already that FL and MI will not be seated until their is a nominee and in fact only the eventual nominee could seat those delegates.

http://www.coxwashington.com/hp/content/ reporters/stories/2007/10/10/BC_FLAPRIMA RY_PELOSI10.html

3. Not even close!

4. Again, not even close!

5. YOU are parsing the rule, that is what i said.

6. There has been already a vote of the DNC rules commitee, the governing board and they say the delegates will not be seated.

7. I never pronounced myself to be a McGovernite nor a Green party supporter, those claims came directly from your imagination. Names are not the only way to insult someone. Or did you just not comprehend how simplistic your own argument was?

Understand that?

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:41:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

What Pelosi means when she says that the "nominee" will decide whether to seat the delegates or not, is that the candidate with the most undisputed delegates going into the convention will instruct her (!) delegates how to vote in the "credentials fight" dispute. In any event, this is a far cry from your original position that the "rules" clearly and categorically stated that the delegates from Michigan and Florida were simply not to be seated. Nice back pedal there.

And, of course, this makes a complete hash of your forlorn, repeated claim (in number (5)) that Hillary is "parsing" the rules. If the rule is to be made by the nominee, then, obvioulsy, there is no rule to be "parsed" now, when there is as yet no nominee. O, the burden of keeping one's arguments straight!

In number (4), you go back again to pretending that the DNC had the final say, but your opening paragraph shows that even you now know that this is not the case. Once again, you cannot keep your argument consisitent for even one post!

Finally, if you are going to continue to claim that I am "insulting" you, please cite to a specific statement that I made that you object to. As of now, it just sounds like whining.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:59:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "democracy" and "rules" (none / 0)

A large part, in fact the most important part of "reading" is comprehension. You apparently failed in both.

It serves no purpose to waste any further effort on you.

Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016

by Its Like Herding Cats on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:34:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary (none / 0)

I have no doubt Hillary will win Florida big. The Florida Democratic Party is sending out press releases for Hillary saying she is the hero and will seat our delegates. The media is also playing into this, so I'm guessing she wants it for momentum and since she's already leading it doesn't hurt for her to push Florida even more. Of course don't expect her to waste any of her time here, she would rather do that in Feb 5th states. This is a big joke.

And does anyone notice how Hillary pushes an excuse on election day in every day, just in case things go bad?

by Progressive America on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:14:08 PM EST

If Floridian delegates are seated then I predict (none / 0)

an all out war between Obama and Billary at the convention.

It will be no holds bar battle and may PERMANENTLY fracture the Democratic party going into the general.

One shouldn't change the rules in the middle of this.

This could get very ugly folks.

by puma on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:23:53 PM EST

Re: If Floridian delegates are seated then I predi (none / 0)

The Obama campaign knows quite well that there's going to be a vote at the convention, that those delegates may very well get seated, and that all of this is well within the rules.

If they allow their supporters to think there's some form of election theft here, which I don't believe they will, then we'll know who is to blame for any resulting unhappiness.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:26:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If Floridian delegates are seated then I predi (none / 0)

If the DNC reneges on its decision to refuse to allow the delegates to be seated, forget about controlling the primary schedule in the future. They might as well start scheduling a national primary the day after the election.

Clinton's move is, at the very least, dishonorable. The arguments about why she isn't really doing anything wrong here are too clever by half and suggest a very legalistic way of parsing any agreement or statement. Fair or not, given the reputation of her husband, these aren't characteristics she wants to emphasize.

I say this, by the way, as someone who is very nostalgic for Bill Clinton's Presidency.

by mhojo on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:50:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If Floridian delegates are seated then I predi (none / 0)

The DNC is not going to disenfranchise half a million voters and nominate a loosing candidate so as to maintain discipline in the future.

You would quite possibly destroy the party with something like that.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:02:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not up to the DNC (none / 0)

The DNC will not "renege" on anything. Because it is not the DNC's decision to make. A committee (I believe it is called the credentials committee) at the convention will make an initial ruling, which will then be ratified (or not) by the full convention.

And, there is nothing in the least "dishonorable" or even "legalistic" about what Hillary is doing. Hillary has scrupulously honored her committment not to campaign in Michigan or Florida. She never agreed, either explicitly or implicity, to take her name off either ballot or to take a position against seating the delegates from these States.

If anything, the hypocracy in this episode resides with Barrack "No voter should be disenfranchised" Obama and with John "the People's choice" Edwards. There was a primary in Michigan. There will be one in Florida. Why do these two alleged "progressives," purveyors of supposedly "new politics" and "fighers for the little guy" not want to seat the delegates resulting from those primaries? It couldn't be because Hillary kicked their asses in Michigan and is poised to do the same in Florida, could it?

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:35:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is tiresome (none / 0)

The "holier than thou" approach only works if you actually are holier than everyone else.

Barack Obama hinted during a Tampa fundraiser Sunday that if he's the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, he'll seat a Florida delegation at the party's national convention, despite national party sanctions prohibiting it.

Obama also appeared to violate a pledge he and the other leading candidates took by holding a brief news conference outside the fundraiser. That was less than a day after the pledge took effect Saturday, and Obama is the first Democratic presidential candidate to visit Florida since then.

Does that mean that Obama is also dishonorable? He did this in September, by the way. Were you complaining about dishonor then?

According to Sanchez and Tom Scarritt, Obama was asked during the event about making sure Floridians have a role in the nomination, despite the DNC sanctions and the pledge. Scarritt said Obama responded that he'll "do what's right by Florida voters."

"It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for subtlety". Salvor Hardin

by Denny Crane on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:30:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If Floridian delegates are seated then I predi (none / 0)

except Obama said he would seat FL delegates

vote blue in 2008

by sepulvedaj3 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:01:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If Floridian delegates are seated then I predi (none / 0)

Billary Billary

by danIA on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:46:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Two things to note (2.00 / 1)

Two things to note:

1. Matt Stoller is very Anti Clinton. He's not a scathing Andrew Sullivan-esque blogger but there's no doubt that he has some serious bias

2. According to reports on the ground from TPM, voter turnout is barren in South Carolina, at least in his location.

I don't know what the final turnout will be, but its worth keeping in mind the rule of thumb when it comes to campaigning. The perception of negative campaigning can depress voter turnout. I wonder if all the media's talk of race and gender and trumping up the back and forth between Clinton and Obama might have turned some voters off.

3. I'm also curious to see how many independents and Republicans will vote. Someone on MSNBC speculated that the GOP primary a week ago might have experienced low turnout due to the number of independents and republicans planning on voting in the democratic primary.

by world dictator on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:29:15 PM EST

Re: Two things to note (none / 0)

Matt Stoller is canvassing for Clinton in SC

by inexile on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:08:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two things to note (none / 0)

no he's not. He's tagging along with a friend. In fact in is clarification he said he doesn't even support Clinton.

by world dictator on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:44:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Some of us have been speculating for a while that Florida would play big in the mo' game. We will see if it comes true next week. If Clinton had not picked up momentum in New Hampshire, either though a win like she had or a 'perceptions win' by getting close, then I think Florida would have been even more important.

I think that narrative is an expected win for Obama in South Carolina and so that will blunt his momentum gain. CNN has been going back and forth all day, alternately saying that SC is "vital for all three candidates" and "crucial for Obama." Well, it can't be both...

If there isn't a big momentum pick up for Obama from SC, Florida will play big next week in large part because of the delegate gambit here. Todd et al are right that Clinton has played this a step ahead.

What is Obama supposed to do? His camp will be hounded by questions about seating the delegates and either have to ignore the questions, go on record saying they are pro-disenfranchising Florida voters, or play catch up to Clinton and say he thinks they should be seated, something for which Clinton has already gotten most of the points.

How will Clinton's position as possible front runner play into media outlets' coverage of the Florida delegate count?

Clinton has done a good thing here for general election strategy that will pay dividends of good will in Florida.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:31:26 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

After reading this it sounds like I am in Florida, which I'm not.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:33:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Momentum (none / 0)

Is "momentum" anything more or less than an artificial construct of the media? I'm not saying that it doesn't have an effect -- voters definitely head for the bandwagon. But, it seems to me that a candidate has "momentum" if the political pack of journalist says so.

by mhojo on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:53:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Momentum (none / 0)

I think there are few other factors, such as the enthusiasm the candidates' supporters feel, the blogosphere, etc. But essentially, yes, it is about perception, but of course perception is a tangible strategic element in politics.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:56:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Toe Sucker Morris was predicting this a week ago (none / 0)

This guy makes his living from trashing the Clintons but he's not a total idiot like Barnes say. He knows exactly what was going to happen here and predicted it a week ago. I'll look for the link. I also saw him on a talk show maybe Tweety or Faux and the Clinton trashers were all prancing around with glee about SC and he said "So he wins SC, so what, she's going for Florida and Super Tuesday"

by ottovbvs on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:39:22 PM EST

Intrade (none / 0)

Obama is 4 points down on Intrade today. What does that market know that the the rest of us don't?

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:43:05 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

If the Clintons win the nomination by seating FL and MI, I will not vote for them. This is complete BS. If there had been no pledge on FL and MI, Obama and Edwards would have campaigned and would have their names on the ballot.

by mainelib on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:44:55 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

If Obama hand't been running a dirty politics trick against Clinton, his name would have been on the ballot in Michigan. Who's fault is it that his trick didn't work?

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:52:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dirty tricks? (none / 0)

I am an Obama supporter but I doubt that the Obama camp is doing "dirty tricks"...LOL!

Although I prefer Obama, I think that the Billary camp is two steps ahead of Obama in terms of campaigning.

by puma on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:12:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dirty tricks? (none / 0)

Yes, Clinton is running a campaign two steps better than Obama's strategically. Obama tried to force Clinton to withdraw from both Michigan and Florida because he didn't think he could win the states without being able to campaign there. No one has argued against me on that one.

Clinton called his bluff and stayed on the ballots.

Just because it didn't work doesn't me it wasn't a dirty trick.

And that is how where we got where we are today. Obama put himself in a box of arguing for disenfranchisement and putting out statements like the one I just posted below belittling Florida. He and his camp have just been consistently outmaneuvered.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:17:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

They took their own names off the ballot in Michigan. Nobody asked them to. They got together and decided to ambush the Clinton campaign by removing their names. Their choice. So let's not have any whining about that.

by hwc on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:53:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

What's the point of having your name on the ballot if the delegates aren't going to be seated?

by mhojo on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:56:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Voters can still show up and vote for you and feel invested in your campaign. Plus, you have vote totals to demonstrate momentum (see above).

Also, I don't think any of the campaigns have ever been under the impression these delegates would not be seated. That is a fiction.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:57:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Does one really have to explain it (none / 0)

Can't you just figure it out for yourself. Get out of the Obama bubble and relate to the real world.

by ottovbvs on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:38:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

I'm not really into a lot of metaphysical navel-gazing. This is an election contest. The point of an election (in a democracy) is to let the voters express their preference.

Now, we could do it like they do in third-world countries and not count votes from certain regions. But, that's not how we do it in the United States. Everybody is supposed to have a vote.

by hwc on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:40:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Well they could have refused to sign the pledge. So lets not pretend they had no choice. While I personally think the DNC should never, ever, ever have allowed that pledge to happen and should have come out and told the candidates not to sign it, in the end the candidates each made a choice about needing those 4 early states.

And Obama and Edwards are both on the ballot in Florida. They decided, on their own, to remove their name from the ballot in Michigan without anyone asking them to do that. So again they helped create this situation.

Clinton can not seat the delegates on her own. She is simply spinning. That Obama and Edwards are not responding is a problem with their campaigns. Clinton can not re-enfranchise (is that a word?) the voters from either state. Clinton had no problem pledging to ignore Florida and didn't raise one word against having all our delegates taken away. And because she says a few pretty words now, some people are acting like she's either a god-send or a curse. And yet nothing has changed since last August.

I'm in Florida. I'll be voting Gravel on Tuesday and not a damn one of them in November.

If Dems take away my primary vote, they don't deserve my general vote.

by Step Beyond on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:16:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mainelib:Obama/Edwards took their own names off (none / 0)

Their choice. No dirty tricks. They tried to outmaneuver Clinton and she out maneuvered them as is now becoming apparent. I also believe MI was a hell of a guide to what is going to happen in Florida and on super tuesday.

by ottovbvs on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:42:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Another would be kingmaker (none / 0)

Good, don't vote for Hillary.

You don't even know what you are talking about. Obama and Edwards ARE on the ballot in Florida. They were not on the ballot in Michigan because they, on their own initiative, decided to withdraw their names. The "pledge" you are referring to was only not to campaign in the two states, which Hillary has scrupuously honored. No one "pledged" to withdraw their name from the ballot or to refrain from taking the position that the resulting delegates be seated.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:43:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

To be fair to all, the DNC needed to make a firm decision and stick by it no matter what. It's not fair to tell candidates -- after weeks of NOT campaigning there -- sorry, these states count after all.

But the DNC was clear: Screw Florida and Michigan. They knew the rules, they shouldn't have broken them, and now they have to pay the price. Period.

Who's winning this war? The GOP.

by wolff109 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:52:08 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

If Obama win's big mid double digits

AND

Rasmussen poll is followed by others:

Clinton 36
Obama 33
Edwards 18

Momentum will be towards Obama AND THAT WILL BE THE MSM SPIN.

by BDM on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:59:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

There will be no new polls until after FL. The current poll averages, taken over the last week give, Clinton a double digit lead.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:05:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

If Obama gets less than 20% of the white vote, he is toast. Let me put this another way, if he gets less than 30% of the white vote he is toast.

Also, I'm not sure at this point Obama will even match Jesse Jackson wins at 11 primaries. If he doesn't, then that is pitiful from my standpoint.

by lonnette33 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:04:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not up to the DNC (none / 0)

Fair or unfair, the decision is not up to the DNC. The convention will decide whether to seat the delegates from Michigan or Florida. There are no ironclad "rules" such as you refer to.

by freemansfarm on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:45:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card (none / 0)

How is ignoring FL and MI supposed to help us in the GE? What is the DNC thinking? FL is a must win state and I agree, this is only helping the GOP.

by Scope441 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:57:45 PM EST

Re: Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card (none / 0)

Yes, this has been a fiasco brewing for a while. The DNC cut off its nose to spite its face and the Florida GOP has been laughing all the way.

In Michigan there was a 250,000 vote deficit between the dem and and rep vote totals, which is not good in a blue-trending state with a big electoral college delegation.

I only hope that Florida will not repeat this. There are some encouraging signs from the past week, in terms of early vote numbers out-pacing the 2004 general election numbers. So I am hopeful but very worried.

I think Clinton has done a great thing with her statements this week to help generate good will in the GE.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:00:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card (none / 0)

I think the voter turnout will be good in Florida. Partly because there's a tax amendment on the ballot and partly because there's been a lot of spin in the media about the delegates being seated (even before the Clinton announcement). I think it has left a lot of people not really understanding that their vote doesn't actually count.

On the big downside, when they do find out that their votes don't count either through the election results, during convention coverage or through Repubs ads, they may not be happy.

If Dems take away my primary vote, they don't deserve my general vote.

by Step Beyond on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:32:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card (2.00 / 1)

You allude to a very important point. Most people think this is about DNC rules, and "rules are rules" kind of stuff.

They also dismiss this as ultimately insider baseball.

IMO, this will be a major attack used against the Democratic nominee by the Republicans or their allies in Florida and Michigan.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:36:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Playing The Dis-Enfranchisement Card (none / 0)

According to Dean it is because we will care more about Iraq than disputes between politicians (how he thinks of it not me) come November. Basically, its a what else they gonna do approach.

If Dems take away my primary vote, they don't deserve my general vote.

by Step Beyond on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:34:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp (none / 0)

Nobody, save the anti-Clinton MSM and the Obama camp, gives a Fig Newton about results from South Carolina.

At best for Obama, it is an African-American base racial primary voting for an African-American.

All the possible spin out of it does nothing for Obama; indeed it HURTS him.

Because this reenergizes non-African Americans in the remaining primaries, not any of whom are thinking like South Carolina.

And Florida will be a BIG win for Hillary Clinton; a state that is far more representative and far more important than South Carolina.

South Carolina hasn't gone Democratic in many a moon, whereas Florida is very much a bell-weather, Bill Clinton having carried it before in a general election.

And yes indeed, Senator Clinton will rightly champion the disenfranchised voters out of Michigan and Florida. And both will champion her in turn.

The Clintons are 24-carat masters; the Obama camp--and their MSM apologists--are in way over their heads.

by lambros on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 03:59:03 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

N-space is a concept from physics (or science fiction, take your pick), a space with more dimensions that our standard three, up to "N," into which objects can disappear from our three-D space and then quickly reappear very far away via a short cut through N space. See also, the science fiction concept of hyperspace, etc.

by InigoMontoya on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:06:31 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Update from the Obama campaign:

UPDATE FROM OBAMA CAMPAIGN: "It should not be surprising given recent events that the Clinton campaign would in one breath say the election is about winning delegates and then tout their success in states that don't award any delegates in the next breath. The DNC has made clear that the winner of the contest in Florida will not receive any delegates, so the next step in this nominating process is February 5th. If the Clinton campaign's southern strength rests on the outcome in a state where they're the only ones competing, that should give Democrats deep pause," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton. "Again, no one is more disappointed that Florida and Michigan Democrats will have no role in selecting delegates for the nomination of the party's standard bearer than Senator Obama but he looks forward to vigorously competing for their votes in the general election."

!!!!!!!!!

Apparently Obama is not even competing in Florida. I wonder how all of his grass roots supporters and donors feel about that. This is a big middle finger to Florida and I think the worst of the three options Obama had which I listed above.

They are so eager to slam Clinton and spin South Carolina that they put this junk out. Frankly, this is just another amature hour tactic. Sorry to be blunt...but what does a statement like this even get them?

Not to mention the premise is ridiculous --- everyone who would rather have a Dem who can win South Carolina than a Dem who can win Florida, please raise your hand. With or without delegates, the Florida race is incredibly important.

Lastly, as Todd quotes Ben Smith "funny how whoever is losing in a state starts talking about delegates." Interesting that in spinning his presumed win in South Carolina, Obama is even talking about delegates. What does that say about how he sees his position in the overall race?

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:12:01 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Again, no one is more disappointed that Florida and Michigan Democrats will have no role in selecting delegates for the nomination of the party's standard bearer than Senator Obama

rofl

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:16:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

I wonder what made Obama change his mind? When he campaigned in Florida in September, he suggested to his audience that Florida's delegates would be seated.

by hwc on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:44:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

It's hardball, baby! Everybody can play.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:46:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

Well, everyone can try.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:52:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (none / 0)

This spinning is annoying for an Edwards supporter like me, but Clinton clearly knows how to manipulate the media. I wish Obama and Edwards had that talent.

Jim Oberweis

by cilerder86 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:17:57 PM EST

I tend to disagree with Barack (none / 0)

in that Hillary is extremely disappointed that Florida and Michigan delegates are not being counted. And the spin she is in...is very evident today.

HRC thought she had this nomination locked up and that is simple not the case and she does not like it one bit.

by Lizzy on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:21:13 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss (2.00 / 1)

This is why I am a Clinton supporter, they know how to play the game and how to win. The republicans will come at us with everything they've got and I believe that only the Clintons know how to play the hard way. Staying one step ahead of your competitor is exactly what we need.

by Scope441 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:23:16 PM EST

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss (none / 0)

The Clinton's know how to win themselves, but are horrible at governing and party building. Just look at the 1990's.

by Toddwell on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:11:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Camp Spinning A Loss, Playing The Dis- (2.00 / 1)

And can anyone explain to me why I should vote for Obama and his iinept campaign when the Clintons are the only campaign that actually knows how to use every advantage and win as this post shows?

Watching Obama flail from attack, non-attcak, racism, no racism, hope, less hope more issues, black candidate, white candidate.

He is undefined raw meat for the Republicans.

No thanks Obama.

by GregNYC on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 04:47:03 PM EST

The Clinton's are damned good. (none / 0)

You have to give it to them they run rings around everyone else just like they did when Bill was being impeached. He made Hyde, Lindsay and co look like dweebs with sexual hangups. That's why the country never went along with it. Even better was the Gingrich shut down of govt. Clinton made him look an utter jerk and he never recovered.

As for this campaign I don't think for a minute they set out to play the race card but when Obama gave them an opening boy did they take it. And then there was the Reagan gift. Obama for all his gifts is a bit lacking in savvy when it comes to street fighting. Of course all his supporters whine as if they have no idea that this is just what it will be like in the general.

by ottovbvs on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:11:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Clintons are winners... (none / 0)

...And that's what we wanted, right?

We wanted winners, right?

We wanted candidates who would fight for every vote and take it to the Republicans, didn't we?

Well, we've got those fightin' champions from Hope, Arkansas and Park Ridge, Illinois. They don't take no cheap shots. If you hit them, they're going to hit you back and hit you back hard.

Obama's best shot to knock out Hillary was right after he won Iowa. When you get your opponents on the ropes, you go with that 1-2 punch that puts them on the mat for the ten count. Obama didn't do that and allowed Hillary to get her second wind.

Now the blows are raining down on Obama left and right, and he's struggling to put up some sort of a defense.

by andrewalker08 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:37:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good, now let's get down to super tuesday. (none / 0)

-Obama's people want this one and have done the work.

I should say so, Obama going around SC using Malcolm X verbiage, "bamboozled", I suppose all in a days work. huh?

I agree wholeheartedly with Seymour, why didn't the media cover that speech. I am getting sick and tried of this crap. All I can say is, what goes around comes around Obama.

by lonnette33 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:42:31 PM EST

early exit polls: (none / 0)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/2 6/politics/main3755303.shtml

57% say Clinton campaigning was a factor

I say this goes 62% for Hillary which gives her a solid base of 35 percent and moving.

we'll see.

by yellowdem1129 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 05:59:55 PM EST

Nelson to Endorse Clinton (none / 0)

Sorry if I have been sleeping under a rock on this one...but U.S. Senator Bill Nelson is going to endorse Clinton next Tuesday. That's a pretty big deal. I guess after running tv ads in Florida, Obama now wants to run the other way and claim Clinton "is the only one competing" in Florida.

by rcipw on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:17:53 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.