Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet?

Hillary Clinton said today, "I'm staying in this race until there's a nominee . . . ," which means that she intends to stay in the race until the Democratic Party officially selects its presidential candidate at its August convention, in Denver.    So, does Clinton meet the dictionary definition of "spoiler" yet?

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines the word "spoiler" as:

"one (as a political candidate) having little or no chance of winning but capable of depriving a rival of success"  Merriam Webster
The National Review called Al Sharpton a "professional spoiler" in 1992.   In 1996, calling the Democratic Party "the party of spoilers," Time Magazine said of Jesse Jackson and Ross Perot, "each of them could play havoc with the 1996 presidential race  . . .  each is a failed presidential candidate with no realistic chance to win the White House . . ."

Today, that's what virtually everyone is saying about Hillary Clinton.  The Hutch Report blog has said,

While it is a logical assumption that Hillary Clinton will drop out of the 2008 Democratic race if she does not win in Pennsylvania, that actual announcement will be hard for her to make. Hopefully, friends of Hillary Clinton have already been priming her for a potential defeat in Pennsylvania and telling her what the right thing to do will be if she is not successful there. If Hillary Clinton continues her campaign after a Pennsylvania defeat, then she and yes her husband too will become damaged goods in a political party that stood behind Bill Clinton through thick and thin when it came to his mistakes in moral judgment.

It is clear to most objective observers that both Bill and Hillary Clinton are very narcissistic and getting either one of them to admit they have lost a campaign is something that most people would not even attempt. That said, there is a time for the 'fat lady to sing' and if Hillary loses in Pennsylvania tomorrow night that lady's voice should ring loud and clear even in her own ears.  Hutch Report

Everyone, including now Hillary Clinton's advisers and ex-supporters, now agrees that it is virtually impossible for Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic presidential nomination.

Clinton advisers sketched out a scenario that they said could still deliver the nomination, though they acknowledged privately that the odds are long.

( . . . )

One Clinton adviser, speaking on the condition of anonymity to be frank, said: "If the supers weren't buying it before, it's hard to see how they'll buy it now.  Washington Post

She's just too far behind numerically.
Tuesday's results drastically reshaped the dynamic of the campaign, positioning Obama as the all-but-certain nominee and casting Clinton as a dogged but deluded also-ran. At least one prominent Democrat, Clinton supporter and former South Dakota Sen. George McGovern, called on Clinton to quit the race.  Yahoo News
Although Clinton was once known for running a notoriously tight ship that eschewed leaks, her own supporters are telling the media that she just cannot win, and needs to accept it and bow out gracefully.
Another Clinton supporter said privately that the candidate has but one option: "Withdraw gracefully and help unify the party to beat McCain."  Washington Post
And yet we're still, still reading headlines in the Washington Post such as, "Clinton Spurns Calls to Quit Race."

More . . .

Notice that, by definition, it is not necessary to have actually caused the opponent to lose to be a "spoiler".  It is necessary merely to be "capable" of causing the opponent to lose, which virtually everyone agrees is within Hillary Clinton's power, if she cynically sets her mind to it, with a Rovian determination.

Today, by definition, Hillary Clinton is a spoiler, by "having little or no chance of winning but [being] capable of depriving a rival of success", and staying in the race anyway.  When will Hillary Clinton stop spoiling the Democratic Party's chances of taking the presidency in November?

The author is editor of the Truth About McCain Blog.



Display:


Re: Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet? (2.00 / 3)

It's called Democracy.


by nikkid on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:28:56 PM EST

Re: Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet? (2.00 / 2)

She would only be a spoiler if she continues the negative campaign she has waged over the last 2 months and continues her campaign much past the June 3rd contests. As long as she continues to attract voters and donations there is little reason for her to stop her campaign, especially given that the final contests are less then 4 weeks away.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:29:46 PM EST

Re: Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet? (2.00 / 1)

The body's not cold and you're already kicking it ...


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:30:48 PM EST

Re: Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet? (2.00 / 1)

Yes


Jeremy Bentham sucks!!
by Forward with Feingold on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:36:06 PM EST

Re: Is Hillary Clinton a Spoiler Yet? (none / 0)

please, I can't believe you're citing a Time article which claims that Perot somehow hurt Bush in '92. He helped him. When Perot was gone from the race, Bush was still polling exactly what he got in the general election, upper 30's, and Clinton was polling in the mid 50's, and these polls were after Labor Day too, he was headed for an FDR landslide. It was only when Ross Perot came back that the race got close


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:37:07 PM EST

Could be. (none / 0)

We'll know within a few days, depending on how she (and her campaign) behaves.  As of today, I just can't honestly answer either way.


No Way, No How, No McCain!
by GFORD on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:10:16 PM EST

Have you heard this yet? (none / 0)

"that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."

What do you reckon now?


by kraant on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:18:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I reckon I'll give her one Mulligan. (none / 0)

But if she does it again, I call her a spoiler.


No Way, No How, No McCain!
by GFORD on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:00:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Of course she is... (none / 0)

Kinda...

Well you see it's like this, this is their calculus:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump /archive/2008/05/07/there-s-no-quot-i-qu ot-in-nominee-oh-wait.aspx

   A top Democratic source with insight into Bill's and Hillary's states of mind says the Clintons are convinced that a Democratic presidency is all but certain no matter how messy the fight for the nomination.

   In that scenario - which the Obama side and some Democratic elders worry is wishful thinking at best, delusional at worst - there's no downside for Hillary doing whatever it takes for as long as it takes.

Which kinda shoots big gaping holes in their electability arguments...


by kraant on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:13:55 PM EST

the management of MyDD (none / 0)

Out of the five diaries on the recommended list, all five are either pro-HRC or anti-Obama. TexasDarlin and alegre each have two diaries on the recommended diaries list.

I strongly suspect this isn't b/c they are the best diaries or even a result of the partisan leanings.

This is b/c there is a coordinated effort for certain HRC partisans to take over the site and the diary recommendation process.

It seems to me that it's a little inconsistent to whine about Blacks voting en masse being a corruption of the political process and corrupting the process of recommending diaries on MyDD.

I'm not going to write a GCW diary, but I am going to take a break from MyDD. I have reservations about how the site is being managed.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:15:55 PM EST

A lot of Obama supporters... (none / 0)

... can't rate or recommend.

That kinda skews the rec-list.


by kraant on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:19:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HELL NO (none / 0)

She's still running, and in a two man contest can't be a spoiler. She should be more positive, though.

We want her in the race, so that KY and WV don't ... really really suck for Obama.


His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?
by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:18:48 PM EST

In a practical sense, no (not yet anyway) (none / 0)

At this point, she has more of a potential to damage herself than to damage him.  I'm not sure why she is staying in but I don't think it is to be a spoiler.

If seeing Obama damaged is her primary goal, dropping out and conceding might be the best thing to do because the Republicans might then take the cue to get their anti-Obama and pro-McCain campaigns rolling into higher gear.

By the way, I'm glad to see that you have decided to give, at least temporarily, a breather to race oriented diaries.


by lombard on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:28:58 PM EST

Weird (none / 0)

"Today, that's what virtually everyone is saying about Hillary Clinton.  The Hutch Report blog has said,

While it is a logical assumption that Hillary Clinton will drop out of the 2008 Democratic race if she does not win in Pennsylvania, that actual announcement will be hard for her to make."

This seems like something that would be more apposite had Hillary lost Pennsylvania 2 weeks ago.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:34:19 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.