HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

The bigger point to that discussion Hillary had with the Argus Leader's editorial board is being lost here gang.  Her comments were made in response to repeated questions about the motives of her opponents in trying to force her out of this race.  She made the comments that triggered this sudden outrage to point out that this urgency to end the primary process is unprecedented, and that contests have gone on into the summer in the past.

What gets me is why folks are so suddenly outraged over something she's said in the past, but that's a topic for another diary.  I'm outraged too dammit - outraged over the way some people have twisted the words of this devoted public servant and Democrat to mean something hateful and totally out of character of the woman in question.

It's beyond disgusting.

Hillary's proven time and time again that she's on the side of the working folks in this country.  That she's fought for us and for our rights.  That she'll move heaven and earth to make this a better world for our kids - and for us.

She deserves better than this guys.  All of us deserve better than she's been treated over the past 15 years.  Especially over the past few days.

Hillary and her team have issued one press release after another - one expressing her regret for the statement - one from the newspaper where this all took place - and another from the son of Robert Kennedy ("I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.") - all saying her words have been taken out of context and that this outrage is unwarranted given the discussion and the woman in question.

Hillary posted the following to the New York Daily News today.  More after the statement...

Hillary: Why I Continue To Run

I am running because I still believe I can win on the merits. Because, with our economy in crisis, our nation at war, the stakes have never been higher - and the need for real leadership has never been greater - and I believe I can provide that leadership.

I am not unaware of the challenges or the odds of my securing the nomination - but this race remains extraordinarily close, and hundreds of thousands of people in upcoming primaries are still waiting to vote. As I have said so many times over the course of this primary, if Sen. Obama wins the nomination, I will support him and work my heart out for him against John McCain. But that has not happened yet.

I am running because I believe staying in this race will help unite the Democratic Party. I believe that if Sen. Obama and I both make our case - and all Democrats have the chance to make their voices heard - in the end, everyone will be more likely to rally around the nominee.

I am running because my parents did not raise me to be a quitter - and too many people still come up to me at my events, grip my arm and urge me not to walk away before this contest is over. More than 17 million Americans have voted for me in this race - the most in presidential primary history.

I am running for all those women in their 90s who've told me they were born before women could vote, and they want to live to see a woman in the White House. For all the women who are energized for the first time, and voting for the first time. For the little girls - and little boys - whose parents lift them onto their shoulders at our rallies, and whisper in their ears, "See, you can be anything you want to be." As the first female candidate in this position, I believe I have a responsibility to finish this race.

I am running for all the men and women I meet who wake up every day and work hard to make a difference for their families. People who deserve a shot at the American Dream - the chance to save for college, a home and retirement; to afford quality health care for their families; to fill the gas tank and buy the groceries with a little left over each month.

I believe I won a 40-point victory two weeks ago in West Virginia and a 35-point victory in Kentucky this past week - despite voters being repeatedly told this race is over - because I'm standing up for them. I'm standing up for the deepest principles of our party and for an America that values the middle class and rewards hard work.

Finally, I am running because I believe I'm the strongest candidate to stand toe-to-toe with Sen. McCain. Delegate math might be complicated - but electoral math is not. Our campaign is winning the popular vote - and we've been winning the swing states we need to get 270 electoral votes and take back the White House: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arkansas, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Michigan, Florida and West Virginia.

But no matter what happens in this primary, I am committed to unifying this party. Ultimately, what Sen. Obama and I share is so much greater than our differences. And I know that if we come together, as a party and a people, there is no challenge we cannot meet, no barrier we cannot break and no dream we cannot realize.

Now I have a few thoughts on why people are pushing so hard to force Hillary out of this race.  As people have noted repeatedly in the past, this is the first time we've seen such a massive push to force someone to drop out of the race for the presidency.

Is it a coincidence that this is also being done to the first woman with a real shot at the White House?

I doubt it.

What gets me is why she even needs to explain why she's fighting for the right to continue her campaign in the first place you guys.  She's leading in the popular vote.  She's within a couple percentage points of the lead re delegates.  She's running stronger in the states we absolutely have got to win in November and her numbers re electoral votes look better than her opponents against McCain.  She's won more states and votes in the past 2 - almost 3 months than he has and she's closing the gap.  She's still got time to convince enough super delegates to back her in this race and neither candidate can win this thing without them!

They've never pulled this shit on a guy - right?

Now why is that do you think?

A guy would tell them in no uncertain terms to feck off wouldn't they?  "Party unity" and "why can't we all just get along" wouldn't work and has never worked on a guy, right?  They'd go after the nomination with everything they've got and rightly so.  After 17 months on the campaign trail and only a few percentage points separating the candidates - and a lead in the popular vote there's no way in hell any guy in his right mind would give up now.

So why are they pushing so hard to force Hillary to drop out?

They're pulling this sh#t on Hillary because we women are brought up to be less selfish about such things.  To put our own needs, desires and ambitions second to a man's - any man's.  Especially the women of Hillary's and my own mother's (who's just a few years older than Hillary) generation.

They've never pulled this on a guy because men are a hell of a lot more ambitious and self-centered when it comes to this stuff than most women.  Even in today's political environment.  

They saw parts of her public life (like her fight to hold her family together) as a weakness and they're trying to exploit that perceived weakness by demanding that she drop out.  I'm guessing Hillary was thinking some of this as she repeatedly said "I don't know" when they tried to get her to tell them what she thought was their reason for pushing her out - or trying to.

This whole thing has me beyond pissed.  Add insult to injury the fact that they're ALSO trying to kick 2.3 million voters in FL & MI (my home state) to the curb.  The people who're trying to force her out are beyond reproach.  They're selfish.  They're sick.  They're in it for one thing and one thing only guys and it ain't the voters and it ain't us.

THAT IS NOT the kind of change and hope I'm lookin' for dammit!

TO anyone from Hillary's camp who might be reading this - or to Hillary herself... please please please take this fight to the convention floor.  Don't let the bastids push you out Hillary.

Over 17 million of us have voted for you in the primaries.  People all over the world are watching this race unfold (my inlaws in Ireland among them) and are counting on you to win this thing.

Hillary we need you in the White House.  For your dedication to reforming our broken health care system.  For your plans to rebuild our middle class and repair our broken economy.  For your plans to develop green collar jobs and start to reverse the damage done to our environment.

And for your ability to kick McCain's @ss come November.

I know you must be sick of the attacks and the BS, but please don't let us down.  Stay strong - keep fighting... for us.

We've got your back.  

Take this to Denver.  

Tags: 2008 elections, Hillary Clinton, president (all tags)

Comments

186 Comments

Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I don't care if this has already been written up.  I've got someting to say too and I'm saying it ;o)

Now play nice.

by alegre 2008-05-25 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

And remember to click on my sig line and do whatever you can to help her continue this fight.

by alegre 2008-05-25 06:49AM | 0 recs
Another $100 for HRC

keep fighting Hillary.....show us the fighter who will stick with it when the odds are tough.  Obama is in the top of the 9th inning, one run ahead, and wants to call the game.

Extra innings, Obama.  You haven't won the game yet.

And yes, take it to the convention.  The dems who give this to Obama are in for a rough ride, and the convention is not going to be pretty.  Obama cannot unite the party around him, not with the way he jumps on everything Clinton says as somehow related to him.  Sheesh.  The audacity of ego is stunning!

by 4justice 2008-05-25 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

Damn fine analogy - 9th inning and just one run ahead - wants to call the game.  I love it.

Mind if I use that some time?

And THANKS for donating again! :o)

by alegre 2008-05-25 07:01AM | 0 recs
absolutely

we are in this game to win, not quit in the 9th inning!

by 4justice 2008-05-25 07:04AM | 0 recs
Right on! We don't quit unless Hillary

quits. That's just reality. And all the HR and TR abuse, faux outrage, tantrums, threats, and demands are not going to change that. For people who keep telling us, ad nauseum, how they cannot lose at this point, a whole bunch of Obama supporters sure are acting pretty desperate around the internets lately. The cognitive dissonance of being absolutely sure of a win, while at same time pouncing like a starving lion on a supposedly mortally wounded opponent is astounding. Since sports metaphors seem to be so in vogue lately, this situation reminds me of a highschool basketball coach who, up by 50 points in the 4th quarter, refuses to bench his starters in order to run up the score. The problem with that is - and I've seen it happen - is the starters get tired, the losing team refuses to quit, and suddenly what was a sure thing, a humiliating defeat in front of a demoralized home crowd, turns into an exciting, nail-biting race to the finish. Hang in there Hillary supporters, no matter what the Corporate Owned Media or the Obama camp says, it is not over yet.  

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-25 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Right on! We don't quit unless Hillary

"The cognitive dissonance of being absolutely sure of a win, while at same time pouncing like a starving lion on a supposedly mortally wounded opponent is astounding."

What you don't understand is that the rest of us have our sights set on November. And nothing Clinton does has convinced us in the slightest that she isn't preferring a McCain presidency to an Obama one.

So there you have the solution to your dilemma: we're not angry at Clinton as a defeated rival -- we're angry at her for being McCain's right-hand.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-25 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Right on! We don't quit unless Hillary

>"The bigger point to that discussion Hillary had with the Argus Leader's editorial board is being lost here gang."

That is the whole point. The fact that capaigns have historically stretched into June seems to have been completely squelched in the media with NOISE.

They are very, very good at what they do. Obama has borrowed all the GOP tricks, and then some.

by architek 2008-05-25 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Right on! We don't quit unless Hillary

"The fact that campaigns have historically stretched into June"

Yes, they historically stretched into June back when they began in March. Not sure what that is supposed to imply, now that they begin in January instead. That Hillary again tries to deceive with half-truths, perhaps? Agreed - that's one of the things we should be focusing on.

And as a sidenote she never answered the question she was asked about why she was being pressured to exit the race. She just kept saying "I don't know, I'm confused, poor little me". A brilliant political perspective on the situation, don't you think? One we should also all be focusing on indeed.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-25 12:03PM | 0 recs
She obviously would be a far better President

New isn't necessarily better, in fact, statistically, its more often worse.

Obama has proven to be a brilliant obfuscator but he's clearly not as on top of the issues as Hillary when you look at the two side by side.

Hillary is tactfully not saying what she thinks and people like me are not saying what they really think about Obama's campaign.

Its not constructive at this point. What we are saying is that its really important for this country to have the best President in November, especially someone who is capable, and someone who can win over McCain who - although he is a Republican, and carries the Bush baggage and the GOP Reverse Robin-Hood philosophy of take from the common people and give to the rich, he is also smarter than Bush and in some ways is a strong GOP candidate, as they go. It speaks in no small way to the right's desperation after Bush that they would field a candidate who was not part of the core neocon/militarist wing, but McCain is still in every way a Republican.

I also don't put it past them to try to infiltrate the Democratic party, given that the Republican brand is failing. That might look like more of a winning strategy to them right now.

Lets hope they don't succeed.

by architek 2008-05-25 03:27PM | 0 recs
Re: She obviously would be a far better President

"She obviously would be a far better President"

I don't know if Obama would be a good president, but she most certainly would be a disastrous one -- her one big project in the 1990s was disaster personified. Since then, and unlike Obama, she's shown the self-destructiveness of her egoism, where she's so sure that she's inevitable that she doesn't even bother to plan for after Super Tuesday, and keeps stubbornly holding on with the justification of "Anything can happen".

If she were president, we'd once again see her plan without any attempt of compromise or backup solution, we'd be seeing her heading down deadends with the denial-of-reality justification of "Anything can happen", we'd see the same arrogance and lack of planning and lack of forethought and budget mismanagement that doomed her primary campaign.

I don't know why you believe she'd make a better president than she made a nominee.

"Hillary is tactfully not saying what she thinks and people like me are not saying what they really think about Obama's campaign."

Yes, you two have been almost as tactful as I've been.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-26 09:46AM | 0 recs
Both she and Obama have stated, categorically,

over and over that they will work to unite the party should they lose the nomination and work to see that McCain is defeated in November. There is nothing, and I mean nothing, in Hillary's entire career, history, or otherwise that points to anything other than that. What you don't understand is that you just "choose" not to believe her. I believe Obama...

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-25 12:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Both she and Obama have stated, categorically,

"Both she and Obama have stated, categorically, over and over that they will work to unite the party should they lose the nomination "

Yes. But then again she once stated categorically that the Michigan votes didn't count for anything.

So, yeah, I choose not to believe her. That's my personal estimation about the value of Clinton's statements based on the history of her and her husband's truthfulness.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-25 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: absolutely

Uhh, what happens again when the home team is up by one run in the bottom of the ninth again?

by Djo 2008-05-25 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

Except that he's actually 192 points (delegates) ahead.

by Gene In PA 2008-05-25 07:12AM | 0 recs
Hillary's just blowing smoke.

RFK didn't enter his first contest until May.

Bubba didn't enter his until late February.

Hillary's been in contests since early January.

Therefore, she has, in fact, been running longer than either of those two candidates.

by Bush Bites 2008-05-25 10:24AM | 0 recs
The PEOPLE don't agree with the PUNDITS

If you ask me, what the people want is FAR more important.

THEY are the ones who matter.

LOTS OF PEOPLE have made it clear that they
DON'T want Hillary to QUIT

So, you PUNDITS can blow smoke out of your butts
all day long - as it doesn't matter that much in the grander scheme of things if the PEOPLE don't think it does.

by architek 2008-05-25 03:33PM | 0 recs
And make damn sure

you ensure that a Democrat won't win in November.

by fladem 2008-05-25 07:57AM | 0 recs
Clinton's statements

are completely unacceptable for a republican, let alone a Democrat.  Utterly disastrous.  Mark my words, there will be a substantial number of delegates declaring for Obama this Tuesday.  This incredible bit of idiocy from an supposedly intelligent woman will be the final straw for a great many people.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:30AM | 0 recs
'Mark my words'

Why do so many of the Obama blog folks use these ridiculously pompous terms all the time?

1  : excessively elevated or ornate <pompous rhetoric>  
2  : having or exhibiting self-importance : arrogant ex. a pompous politician
3  : relating to or suggestive of pomp : magnificent
-- pomp·ous·ly adverb
-- pomp·ous·ness noun

by architek 2008-05-25 03:37PM | 0 recs
Re: 'Mark my words'

I'll try to dumb it down for you next time, such that even a person who can't spell architect will understand.  You should mark my words though, the delegates will be turning in bunches Tuesday morning.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 06:35PM | 0 recs
It is an excellent analogy...

It's the bottom of the ninth inning, Team Barack is up to bat, and Team Barack is one run ahead.  And in that situation, nobody bothers to play the second half of the inning...they just clear the field, because playing is pointless.

Great analogy!

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 08:59AM | 0 recs
Whoops, that should read...

"BUT it's the bottom of the ninth inning"

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 09:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

This is a bad analogy. You see, if the home team is ahead in the 9th inning after the visiting team has made 3 outs. The game is over. There is no need for the home team to bat again, even though it is the 9th inning.

by kdnla 2008-05-25 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

I'm a feminist but also an ironist, and there's a painful tension between the two when Alegre posts a diary decrying sexism then misapplies sports metaphors.  Let's not undo all the good of Title IX.

by deminva 2008-05-25 10:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

You mean the last sports analogy wasn't good enough?

by fbihop 2008-05-25 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

Mojo'd for mentioning Title IX.

by Djo 2008-05-25 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

Your metaphor is wrong.

It's the fourth quarter and he's up by two touchdowns with a minute left and he has possession.  All he has to do is take a few knees and it's over.  There's a remote but nonzero chance he could fumble the ball while taking a knee, but it's not bloody likely.

The clock works against Sen. Clinton as well as the math.  She's not going to win PDs, and the trend with superdelegates doesn't look good for her either  - and there's every indication in the world that they're going to want this to be over on June 4.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

Then would timeouts be appealing the Rules & Bylaws committee decision?

by nwodtuhs 2008-05-25 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Another $100 for HRC

That's her last timeout, I think.

And as any football aficionado knows, when you've got four downs to work with, one timeout with a minute left isn't going to do it.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Great diary.

You are so right -- no one would ask a guy to drop out. No one.

She should take it to the convention -- like all the other guys (who were a LOT further behind in all the metrics) have done in past presidential races. But they were guys, so putting their dreams on hold for someone else was unthinkable.

by cuppajoe 2008-05-25 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Perhaps you should educate yourself in political history.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 09:18AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Perhaps you should educate yourself.

Here are three examples (there are others)

1980 - Ted Kennedy, fighting a losing delegate battle, tried to get committed delegates released from their  commitment to Carter AT THE CONVENTION.
    Delegate tally:   
        Jimmy Carter - 2,129.02    
        Ted Kennedy- 1,150.48

    At the convention, when he finally lost his fight, he gave a speech in favor of Carter saying "For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end."

1984 - Gary Hart takes his losing campaign to the Convention
    Delegate Tally
    Mondale 2,191
    Hart    1,201       

1988 - Jesse Jackson took his losing fight to the Convention in Atlanta
    Delegate Tally
    Dukakis 2,877
    Jackson 1,219

by cuppajoe 2008-05-25 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

The only one that bears any resemblance to the present day is 1980.  In the others, the campaigns were basically suspended; they certainly were not active campaigns in the way that Clinton's is, nor were they trying to undermine the near-presumptive nominee.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

And I do not think that she is either.

by cuppajoe 2008-05-25 12:47PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I beg your pardon. Is this snark, or do you really think she's being asked to drop because of her sex?

by Falsehood 2008-05-25 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

No. Not snark. I'm saying that sexism plays a part in this. If you can't see that, then I wouldn't be able to convince you I guess.

by cuppajoe 2008-05-25 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

It really doesn't.  There would be questions raised to any candidate who is doing with Clinton is. Actually, I think there would have been a harsh and concerted push with a male candidate in the same position, having lost so many races in a row, being so far behind in the delegate count, and being in debt.  Clinton has had an exceedingly easy treatment because no one wants to piss off her supporters despite Bill and Hillary trying to stir up their resentments.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 12:29PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I don't agree with Alegre that sexism is the reason, but there is plenty of evidence that the pressure on Hillary is unprecedented.  From Media Matters:

History continues to unfold on many levels as the protracted Democratic Party primary race marches on, featuring the first woman and the first African-American with a real shot at winning the White House.

Here's another first: the press's unique push to get a competitive White House hopeful to drop out of the race. It's unprecedented.

Looking back through modern U.S. campaigns, there's simply no media model for so many members of the press to try to drive a competitive candidate from the field while the primary season is still unfolding.

SNIP

And the fact is, the media's get-out-now push is unparalleled. Strong second-place candidates such as Ronald Reagan (1976), Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson, and Jerry Brown, all of whom campaigned through the entire primary season, and most of whom took their fights all the way to their party's nominating conventions, were never tagged by the press and told to go home.

"Clinton is being held to a different standard than virtually any other candidate in history," wrote Steven Stark in the Boston Phoenix. "When Clinton is simply doing what everyone else has always done, she's constantly attacked as an obsessed and crazed egomaniac, bent on self-aggrandizement at the expense of her party."

Indeed, even after Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary convincingly last week, she awoke the next morning to read an angry New York Times editorial, "beseeching her to get the hell out of the race," as Howard Kurtz put it at washingtonpost.com. On the Times opinion page that day same, Maureen Dowd actually turned to Dr. Seuss rhymes to make her point: "The time is now. Just go. ... I don't care how."

The article goes to list more examples.

by psychodrew 2008-05-25 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I will agree that there has been sexism, just as there has been racism. However, saying that she's being asked solely because of her sex seems dishonest to me.

That was how I read you post.

Just because I think sexism isn't causing her to be asked to drop doesn't mean I deny its existence.

by Falsehood 2008-05-25 05:29PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Beg,Beg,Beg

by telfishbackagain 2008-05-25 12:39PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

If they donate, how are they going to afford to pay for their gas? Heh heh.

And I wonder why you couldnt afford Obama the same courtesy when Obama had to deal with overblown controversies. You had no problem fanning the flames here.

by Pravin 2008-05-25 02:33PM | 0 recs
The mutiple lies in this diary

simply astound.

The idea that the pressure on her is unprecidented is plain flat absurd.  I suggest you go back and read about the primary fights of 1976, 1980 and 1984.

In eash instance there was enourmous pressure on the candidates to quit (see for example the 1980 primary)

Of course, Clinton flat out lied about the prior primary fights in her statement - she couldn't even be honest about the 1992 primary fight - which did not go on to June.

Ane the lies she tells about Florida and Michigan have now been so thorougly demonstrated it is simply astounding that people seriously repeat them.

Lies. Lies. Lies.

by fladem 2008-05-25 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary

the biggest difference is that none of those candidates had anything like the Ken Starr report behind them that found them guilty of nothing yet was used as the basis of a pattern of hate.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-25 08:25AM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary

What does that have to do with Hillary? The Starr report was about Bill.

And if there was nothing problematic, why did Bill surrender his law license?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary

wow, so unlearned you are. Starr covered Hillary as well since they were supposed partners in non-crime, including her options trading, the whole Travel Office BS, and her every action at the law firm she worked at.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-25 09:45AM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary
I meant this http://thomas.loc.gov/icreport/
not the other Starr investigations, since that's what's commonly called the Starr Report.
by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 10:17AM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary

Lies. Lies. Lies.

Aren't we being a little dramatic here?  Even if you don't agree that she is being unfairly hounded out of the race, there is no reason to accuse Alegre of lying just because she doesn't agree with you.

Is the Democratic Party?  Have we really sunk this low because of a competitive primary?  Somebody diagrees with you so they must be lying?

I don't agree with Alegre that sexism is the reason, but there are plenty of journalists and commentators who are making the same observation that Alegre is making, that the pressure on Hillary is unprecedented.  

From Media Matters:

History continues to unfold on many levels as the protracted Democratic Party primary race marches on, featuring the first woman and the first African-American with a real shot at winning the White House.

Here's another first: the press's unique push to get a competitive White House hopeful to drop out of the race. It's unprecedented.

Looking back through modern U.S. campaigns, there's simply no media model for so many members of the press to try to drive a competitive candidate from the field while the primary season is still unfolding.

SNIP

And the fact is, the media's get-out-now push is unparalleled. Strong second-place candidates such as Ronald Reagan (1976), Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson, and Jerry Brown, all of whom campaigned through the entire primary season, and most of whom took their fights all the way to their party's nominating conventions, were never tagged by the press and told to go home.

"Clinton is being held to a different standard than virtually any other candidate in history," wrote Steven Stark in the Boston Phoenix. "When Clinton is simply doing what everyone else has always done, she's constantly attacked as an obsessed and crazed egomaniac, bent on self-aggrandizement at the expense of her party."

by psychodrew 2008-05-25 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The mutiple lies in this diary

Even if you don't agree that she is being unfairly hounded out of the race, there is no reason to accuse Alegre of lying just because she doesn't agree with you.

Agreed. Why fight over opinions when there are other verifiable lies in Alegre's diary? You know, like how Hillary leads in the popular vote, that she is closing the gap in delegates, etc. Let's focus on those actual lies instead, OK?

by jdusek 2008-05-25 02:48PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

You're not getting the bigger point of the discussion, either.  Her OPPONENT(S) have NEVER called for her to drop out.

"My attitude is that Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants," Mr. Obama said at a press conference. "Her name is on the ballot. She is a fierce and formidable opponent and she obviously believes she would make the best nominee and the best president." Barack Obama, Johnstown, PA - March 29, 2008

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-05-25 08:42AM | 0 recs
Shhh. Don't taunt alegre with facts.

It only encourages her to lie louder.

by tbetz 2008-05-25 10:36AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Alegre, I think you've been very angry at statements made in the past, and taken a specific interpretation to be used as defence (like Keith's comments).

I feel like you're being a little hypocritical here, and it makes it harder for me to respect your work.

by Falsehood 2008-05-25 09:35AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

The principle of reversibility would be helpful here in further developing the theme of Alegre's hypocrisy.  

Imagine if you will that Clinton were ahead, and Obama had said he didn't think he should drop out--that, for instance, Bobby Kennedy had been assassinated in June.  Would Alegre be "disgusted" by anyone who impugned Obama's motives?  Or would she devote several diaries to linking his words to violence against women?  

Given that, in this diary, she's just making shit up about male candidates never being pressured to leave primary contests, I have a clear sense of which path she'd take.

Note, too, that when Obama used the word bitter and Clinton subsequently campaigned on it for two weeks, Alegre thought that was fine.  Now, Clinton used the word assassinate, the Obama campaign has called it regrettable and moved on, and Alegre is disgusted! disgusted!

by deminva 2008-05-25 10:06AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I think you have several great points here, but remember, Obama supporters aren't nearly so desperate right now.

by Falsehood 2008-05-25 05:30PM | 0 recs
Stop lying.

She's leading in the popular vote.

According to your own rule, she isn't.

Any metric by which Hillary Clinton leads in the popular vote requires that Obama receive zero votes in MI.  Yet recently you said:

Democrats include EVERY VOTE - according to the wishes of the voter.

(Source, emphasis mine)

Now, according to Michigan exit polling, Barack Obama was the clear choice of 35% of the populace.  That means his floor is 35% of the popular vote in Michigan.  But wait - according to the exit polls, only 46% of voters wished to vote for Hillary Clinton.  The other votes she received were from Edwards supporters (30%) and Obama supporters (18%).

So, following the Alegre Rule, we should apportion the popular vote in Michigan according to the wishes of the voters - 260,579 votes for Hillary Clinton (46% of 566,477 votes) and 198,267 votes for Barack Obama (35% of the same number).

Factoring that into the popular vote count that includes FL and the caucus states, that gives us...

Clinton: 17,580,569
Obama: 17,790,587
Obama +210,018

According to the Alegre Rule, Barack Obama currently leads in the popular vote by 210,000.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop lying.

Wow.  Why all the troll ratings?

Care to address the argument instead of just trying to make it go away?

by mistersite 2008-05-25 06:56AM | 0 recs
You KNOW Why You Got TR'd

Stop playing the victim - when you stop accusing people of lying when they've repeatedly provided back up then you'll stop getting trs.

Meanwhile, I notice you completely cherry picked this one point out of everything I've posted.  Care to address the other points?

by alegre 2008-05-25 06:57AM | 0 recs
Re: You KNOW Why You Got TR'd

You have yet to "repeatedly provide backup" in reply to my comment.  I have yet to see you address the fact that any popular vote metric in which Clinton leads requires that Obama receive zero votes, thus disenfranchising Obama's supporters in Michigan.

If you have addressed that elsewhere, then you should have absolutely no trouble going into your comment/post history and pasting your rebuttal to my argument right here in this thread.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: You KNOW Why You Got TR'd

This is really something. If you disagree with the poster's logic, answer it with logic and evidence.  Don't try to make it disappear.

Let's have some intellectual discourse and honesty, not silencing people by ratings.

And why don't you include MI? Make an argument for it if you think that's the best way to count.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:00AM | 0 recs
This comment is beneath contempt

The Clinton position on Florida and Michigan is completely bankrupt, and is based on trying to deny the CLEAR INTENT OF THE VOTERS in Michigan.

As such it is fuindementally immoral, beneath even the Kathleen Harris position in the Florida recount.

BUT YOU DON"T CARE THAT THE WAY YOU COUNT IS SO EASILY DISPLROVABLE.  

by fladem 2008-05-25 08:00AM | 0 recs
Care to address his point?

Or mine, further down the thread?

Is it that you can't answer questions, or that you won't?

And don't try to say "I've answered this before" as a dodge.  If that's true, then provide a link to where you've answered it before, and we'll accept it.  But if you can't, then you're going to have to find another line, because if you yourself can't find where you've given an answer, how are we supposed to find it?  Common sense, alegre dear.

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 09:13AM | 0 recs
Gave this mojo



Though we basically disagree about everything...

I guess people 'round here troll rate people who obviously aren't trolls -- Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

by Maryscott OConnor 2008-05-25 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: You KNOW Why You Got TR'd

The poster isn't playing victim, he/she is making a point and backing it up with facts and did a good job of it, and it's a major point of argument they're addressing. Furthermore, I doubt that you, Alegre, are going to get much sympathy from people when it comes to only addressing only particular parts of an argument.

by Djo 2008-05-25 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop lying.

Wish I could uprate you, mistersite, but for some reason I am unable to.

by awobbly 2008-05-25 07:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop lying.

gosh, payback really is a bitch huh, maybe if BHO'ers were not so organized with their TR's and HR's you might get a spot of sympathy.

by zerosumgame 2008-05-25 08:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop lying.

maybe if BHO'ers were not so organized with their TR's and HR's you might get a spot of sympathy

Let's see your evidence for your claim that Obama supporters have an "organized" effort to HR/TR.  Provide credible evidence of actual organization - not just correlation - or retract your claim.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 08:36AM | 0 recs
I'm Not Lying

Stop accusing me of it.

I've provided backup on this point repeatedly.

by alegre 2008-05-25 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm Not Lying

You have?

It seems pretty clear to me that your rule, that all votes be counted according to voters' wishes, requires that Obama receive votes in MI equivalent to his support there.  Where have you indicated that the Alegre Rule doesn't apply to Michigan?

by mistersite 2008-05-25 06:58AM | 0 recs
Care to Address The Main Points in the Diary?

No?

Didn't think so.

Buh bye.

by alegre 2008-05-25 06:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Care to Address The Main Points in the Diary?

Sure.  I'll address it.

I think there are more Clinton supporters complaining about Clinton supposedly being pushed out, than there are people actually trying to push her out.

Stop kvetching and tell me how your candidate plans to take the nomination, and then tell me how your candidate plans to win back the votes of the African-American voters whose anger will be more than palpable.  No Democrat wins without AA votes.  How's she going to win them back, after telling them "your candidate, who followed all the rules and won a majority of pledged delegates, didn't deserve the nomination"?

by mistersite 2008-05-25 07:03AM | 0 recs
She may even have trouble staying Senator in NY

I'm in NY and can say that she will never win back many of her former supporters after how her campaign has acted in the past couple of months.

Check out this article about her looming troubles among African Americans in NY: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la- na-clintonblacks25-2008may25,0,2206514.s tory

And it's definitely NOT just African Americans.

by casperr 2008-05-25 07:11AM | 0 recs
Interesting article but

you have to admit that much of it is anecdotes.  I have no doubt that if she is not in the WH she will easily win a reelection to the Senate.

Paterson may not be viable governor material for long - he is in a HUGE budget fight with the state universities (something the LA Times seemed to miss).

http://media.www.theracquette.com/media/ storage/paper1301/news/2008/05/09/News/N y.State.Cuts.Suny.Budget-3367919.shtml

He is in the process of angering an enormous range of people just months into the job, including pulling revenue from hospitals, etc... It is ugly and unprecedented.

by Molee 2008-05-25 07:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting article but

She would have a LOT of work to do to regain support in NY. Many people who voted for her on 2/5 would not vote for her if the primary were held today.

There's already talk of finding a good, strong primary challenger. As I said, let's see what she does in the coming months and then she can come back to NY and start trying to mend fences.

by casperr 2008-05-25 07:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting article but

not going to happen. No one of consequence will challenge her. It just doesn't happen in NY races.

by Mayor McCheese 2008-05-28 09:24AM | 0 recs
The article you quoted

The author doesn't seem to think it's so dire:

The Rev. Clinton Miller of Brown Memorial Baptist Church in Brooklyn said that any hurt feelings left by the campaign could be easily overcome.

"There are wounds, but I don't think they necessarily have to be that deep," Miller said. "They're deep wounds for people who never liked Hillary in the first place."

by psychodrew 2008-05-25 01:33PM | 0 recs
I'll tell you how

1) She wins the popular vote
2) SDs, who will decide the nomination in any case, recognize that they want to see this

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Cl inton/Maps/May25.html

NOT this

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Ob ama/Maps/May25.html

so they move in large enough numbers to her column between now and the convention.  Note that this needs to go to the convention because that is when the actual nomination happens (and of course, we all know that winning a majority of pledged delegates is meaningless)

3) In the general you ask how would she get AAs because we see AAs going to BO and working class whites going to HRC.  True, now we have two polarized voting blocks, the nominee has to heal that rift.  She could do this in several ways. She could pick him as VP and they could unite the party.  Or if he refused, she could get to work with that community (something she has a long history of)  and work to win their votes.  BO on the other hand has no particular history of hard work and no significant legacy of winning working class whites in the past.  For this reason I think she is much more likely to win back AAs than he is to for the first time win working class whites.

I'd like to win in November and this is how it can happen.

by Molee 2008-05-25 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: I'll tell you how

1) She wins the popular vote

At this point, the only way she can (narrowly) win the popular vote is if turnout in PR is over 1 million and she wins by at least 20%.  If we assume (I think safely) that SD and MT are going to be pretty much a wash popular-vote-wise, she remains down 210,000 votes including Florida and Michigan according to the Alegre Rule.  She's going to need astronomical turnout in PR, when most forecasters are predicting 5-600,000 or so, and a huge victory, when the only poll done in PR, two months ago, only has her up by 13%.  To say with certainty that she will win the popular vote, based on pretty baseless speculation of an astronomical turnout model and a blowout victory in PR, is pretty tenuous.

2) SDs, who will decide the nomination in any case, recognize that they want to see [electoral maps] so they move in large enough numbers to her column between now and the convention.  Note that this needs to go to the convention because that is when the actual nomination happens (and of course, we all know that winning a majority of pledged delegates is meaningless)

First, a majority of pledged delegates isn't meaningless, at least not to the numerous superdelegates who have said that whoever is leading in pledged delegates after all the primaries are over will receive their endorsement.

Second, superdelegates are smart enough to know that polling six months away from the general election, with one party in the midst of a brutal primary fight and still yet to unite behind their nominee, with any number of things that could happen between now and then, is all but meaningless.  If you're inclined to think otherwise, take a look at polling from December 2007; is that the map we see today?

Third, if enough superdelegates endorse Obama to put him over the top on June 4, the only thing Clinton can hope for is that he gets caught with a live boy or dead girl, or that he gets hit by a stray meteor.  There's really nothing else that's likely to sway them.  But she should continue campaigning until the convention, causing us not to unite behind our nominee, because...?

3) In the general you ask how would she get AAs because we see AAs going to BO and working class whites going to HRC.  True, now we have two polarized voting blocks, the nominee has to heal that rift.  She could do this in several ways. She could pick him as VP and they could unite the party.  Or if he refused, she could get to work with that community (something she has a long history of)  and work to win their votes.

I think you underestimate how pissed off many in the African-American community are at Sen. Clinton now - to say nothing of if she takes the nomination.  The African-American candidate has followed the rules and won according to the rules; do you think Clinton has a prayer of receiving significant African-American support if she says "that's not enough" and steals the nomination away from the African-American candidate (which is certainly how it would be perceived by many African-Americans)?  If she's our nominee, we lose African-Americans for a generation.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 07:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Care to Address The Main Points in the Diary?

You entire "diary" is garbage.  When people respond to it, then ask you to defend it, at which time you tuck tail, troll rate and hide.  Per your usual MO.  On the bright side, each of your "diaries" is funnier than the last!

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-25 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Care to Address The Main Points in the Diary?

to bad you lose credibility from the actions of your fellow-travelers

by zerosumgame 2008-05-25 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Care to Address The Main Points in the Diary?

huh?

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-25 09:55AM | 0 recs
The poster questioned one of your points...

and you ignore it by saying they should address only the points you say they can, AND TR them to boot? Pathetic.

Care to address why you're ignoring the gaping hole in your logic that the poster displayed with facts?

by Seeking Cincinnatus 2008-05-25 07:16AM | 0 recs
TR abuse in place of argument

Is really not very compelling.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: TR abuse in place of argument

lol love seeing a BHO'er arguing that, such rank stinking hypocrisy

by zerosumgame 2008-05-25 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: TR abuse in place of argument

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, or are you just here to piss people off?

If it's the former, you can start anytime now; if it's the latter, please just don't.  You aren't doing your candidate any favors with this.

by mistersite 2008-05-25 10:18AM | 0 recs
Re: TR abuse in place of argument

A known troll who collects troll ratings by the handful accuses someomne of hypocrisy, lol!

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm Not Lying

Your "backup" is garbage.  She isn't leading in the popular vote UNLESS you apply selective criteria.  She FAILS in leading the popular vote when you apply the currently accepted metrics.  Just because you choose to NOT LOOK at the whole picture doesn't mean people don't see it, or more to the point, see your propaganda laden "diaries" for they are.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-25 07:02AM | 0 recs
Then provide a link.

If you've answered this "repeatedly," then you should be able to find one example and link to it quite easily.  Right?

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 09:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop lying.

Don't be silly.  Exit polls aren't votes.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-05-26 02:23AM | 0 recs
Re:Disgusting

You are right.  The whole disgusting country owes Hillary a huge apology for misinterpreting her assassination comment and causing her to be "deeply dismayed and disturbed."

by rf7777 2008-05-25 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re:Disgusting

I wonder why Hillary apologized for making the comment.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:01AM | 0 recs
C O L !!!! Yer Kidding - Right?

Damed if she does and damned if she doesn't.

Give it a rest.

by alegre 2008-05-25 07:02AM | 0 recs
you raised the subject

This is the subject of your diary. If you didn't want the statement discussed, why, exactly, did you write a diary about it!

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:03AM | 0 recs
&quot;My 2 Cents&quot;
and in my opinion, it's simply due to her ego.

A recent example:

TO anyone from Hillary's camp who might be reading this - or to Hillary herself... please please please take this fight to the convention floor. Don't let the bastids push you out Hillary.
And because she likes seeing her diaries on the Recommended list.
by DemsRising 2008-05-25 10:41AM | 0 recs
As someone just said on Stephanopolis

"My wife always says that an apology that includes the word 'if' is not an apology."

by casperr 2008-05-25 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: As someone just said on Stephanopolis

My partner always says:

An apology where you blame the offended for being offended is not an apology.

by rf7777 2008-05-25 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: As someone just said on Stephanopolis

Yeah, that too.

Shame on her.

by casperr 2008-05-25 07:48AM | 0 recs
Good one

Casperr.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:36AM | 0 recs
Obama now trailing Hill in favorability ratings

http://rezkowatch.blogspot.com/2008/05/i s-obama-no-longer-odds-on-favorite-in.ht ml

Obama has been declining since his high water mark in mid February, and Hillary slowing improving.  They're both at 47 (yea) 50 (boo) for a minus three rating.  But Obama's highly unfavorable rating is higher.

by katmandu1 2008-05-25 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama now trailing Hill in favorability rating

Cherry pick away. It doesn't stop the process.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:01AM | 0 recs
Given Your Comment Above Re Her

statement of regret, you've just lost all credibility in this discussion.

by alegre 2008-05-25 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Given Your Comment Above Re Her

What do you mean? Be specific.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Given Your Comment Above Re Her

i·ro·ny:  An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-25 07:08AM | 0 recs
Rezkowatch?

You are citing a site called Rezkowatch????  

This blog has become so entertaining in a Shadenfreude sort of way.  Kind of reminds me of the tryouts for American Idol.  

by rf7777 2008-05-25 07:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Rezkowatch?

No, no, rezkowatch is as completely unbiased and factually-based as this diary.  Honestly Obamabots, give it a rest!

by minnesotaryan 2008-05-25 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Rezkowatch?

Hillaryis44 wasn't available for comment, apparently.

by fbihop 2008-05-25 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama now trailing Hill

Also according to Rezkowatch, not a single human being voted for Obama in Michigan AND that would still hold true if a revote were held today. Thats telling it like it is.  Also, they have irrefutable evidence of Leprechauns.

by Iago 2008-05-25 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

"Her comments were made in response to repeated questions about the motives of her opponents in trying to force her out of this race"

The fact that she has been asked the question so many times is all the more reason why she should have had a better rehearsed answer and not trip over her tongue.

She will not be able to persuade superdelegates that she will be a better general election candidate while she makes such rookie errors.

by My Ob 2008-05-25 07:02AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Allegre,

You know damn well that 99% of the asking for Hillary to drop out isn't sexism, just as the opposition to Obama isn't racist.

The calls are fueled by MATH and FACTS, neither of which isn't sexist.

I have a question for you:

If Obama was behind by this amount at this time and his supporters were still uncommitted to voting for Clinton, would you be asking for him to drop out so that the healing process could begin?

My belief: OF COURSE you would. Hell, you have asked for him to drop out after winning a primary before.

Of course you won't answer this, because anything logical or questioning of your supposed facts is not worthy of your response...

by Darknesse 2008-05-25 07:03AM | 0 recs
It is sexism - and it flies in the

face of how the press has behaved towards male candidates in the past.

Open a can of Boehlert

http://mediamatters.org/columns/20080430 0001

Thank god Media Matters does some real scholarship on these issues.  Boehlert's whole archive is here - plenty of documentation on the sexism.

http://mediamatters.org/columns/archives /boehlert

by Molee 2008-05-25 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: It is sexism - and it flies in the

That is an extremely dishonest analysis.

Because we haven't been in this situation in a long time, you know before cable news. If the same thing happened today between 2 democratic males or even 2 democratic females they would do the same thing.

by Darknesse 2008-05-25 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: It is sexism - and it flies in the

Forget about wondering if Hillary would ask Obama to drop out if the roles were reversed.

Bill and Hillary were offering Obama the VP ticket, when Hillary were nearly hopelessly lagging in delegate count.

Imagine the the calls of sexism and all sorts of -isms if Obama had done that when he was behind.

by SunSon 2008-05-25 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: It is sexism - and it flies in the

Yeah, but Obama never said that Clinton wasn't prepared to be sitting in the White House.  How can you expect Obama to pick someone who essentially said that the GOP candidate would be a better pick?

by iowa dem 2008-05-25 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Obama would have been forced out before the end of February if the roles had been reversed.

by casperr 2008-05-25 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

No question whatever about that.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:39AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Hillary Clinton is our best chance of having a Democratic president in 2009.  Just that reason alone is enough for her to keep going strong. Hillary has done an enormous amount of good for the Democratic party and if she wins the presidency that will be one more benefit to us Democrats and all Americans!

by Nancy Kallitechnis 2008-05-25 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

The only reason why Obama is not further ahead in GE polls is because Clinton hasn't endorsed him. Should she do so, he will move ahead decisively.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:08AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

" The only reason why Obama is not further ahead in GE polls is because Clinton hasn't endorsed him. Should she do so, he will move ahead decisively."

- LOL , thats the most bizarre thing I have heard in a while now . Is that a subtle way for laying the groundwork for blaming her if Obama is the nominee and he loses.

If Clinton went away and lived in a cave as an eskimo , she would no doubt still be blamed for one thing or the other by some people.

by lori 2008-05-25 07:48AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

No, it's just the most common pattern that occurs following one candidate becoming the presumptive nominee. The same thing happened with McCain.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 10:18AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)
No, our best chance to win is for Democrats to vote for the Democratic nominee in November.
     Obama will win the nomination.  He will win in November if Hillary supporters vote for him.  
     Denying this in the face of facts and logic is incomprehensible.  
by haremoor 2008-05-25 07:18AM | 0 recs
where the race stands

Of course, Hillary should run as long as she wants and I salute her and her supporters for continuing to be engaged in the democratic process.

But here's a reality check.

Projections through Puerto Rico

1. Changes in the delegate count for Saturday: Obama 4, Clinton 0.

Obama picked up a GA superdelegate, a WY superdelegate, and an Alaska superdelgate.  In addition to those three, there was a reallocation at the Alaska state convention based on final numbers, so Obama gained one pledged delegate.

Clinton picked up a GA superdelegate, but lost a pledged delegate in the Alaska reallocation, giving her a net of zero for the day.

Source: http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/

2. Further changes over the weekend
-Hawaii choses three delegates at their state convention. These will probably all go to Obama, who handily won the state.

3. Puerto Rico is Sunday, June 1
I must admit that I don't know much about PR politics. However, most think Clinton will win.  There are 55 pledged delegates.  Based on a 55-45 split, Clinton would get 30 delegates, Obama 25.

TOTAL projected AS OF POST-PUERTO RICO
Currently (and this includes today's delegate shifts, described in point 1):
Obama needs 52 delegates to clinch the nomination
Clinton needs 246 to clinch the nomination.

If the numbers in points 2 and three are correct and neither gains any other delegates before PR:
-- Obama would need 52 minus (3+25) or 24 delegates to clinch
-- Clinton would need 246 minus (30) or 216 delegates to clinch
Please note that these are very conservative projections, since there will very likely be other superdelegate endorsements before PR. Also next weekend is Maine's state convention and the add-on will be an Obama supporter, but is not added into the numbers. That said, the number of delegates needed to nominate may very well increase after the Rules committee makes its decision.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: where the race stands

You do know the using fact and reason will get you troll rated in an Alegre diary?!

by rf7777 2008-05-25 07:24AM | 0 recs
Oooh! Evidence!

Look the other way, peoples.  There's nothing to see or hear in the above post except a little uncomfortable reality.  Keep singing, and keep those fingers in your ears.  

by kellogg 2008-05-25 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: where the race stands

Please don't bother us with all that numbers and logic shit. We will still be saying she has won when Obama is in his second term.

Go Girl, please

by telfishbackagain 2008-05-25 01:55PM | 0 recs
Take this to Denver. A plea for the destruction

of the party. Excellent. You're a real good Democrat.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-25 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Take this to Denver. A plea for the destructio

There is no world where taking this to Denver means that the nominee would have time to campaign against McCain and win the GE.

Taking it to Denver would destroy the party, and would be Hillary's fault.

by Darknesse 2008-05-25 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Take this to Denver. A plea for the destructio

Even if there was 6 months to campaign against McSame after getting the nomination from a floor fight Clinton would still lose in the GE. She'd lose by a landslide,

by heresjohnny 2008-05-25 07:15AM | 0 recs
Why I Will Not Vote for Hillary

- if she's got BO next to her good name on the ballot. (Unlikely event, now that BO has a good excuse to say she's not qualified to be near his throne).

I will not waste gas money to go vote for anything with BO on it.

by observer5 2008-05-25 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Why I Will Not Vote for Hillary

Your choice.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Why I Will Not Vote for Hillary

If you were ever a Democrat, I assume you'll be leaving the party now. Is that correct?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-25 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Why I Will Not Vote for Hillary

Whatever - we can now happily disregard all your comments here.  See ya.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-25 07:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Why I Will Not Vote for Hillary

How can we as a party win the nomination, rationally, with such irrational thoughts?

Someone help me because this is all fairly new to me.  Is this normal during a Primary?  How did Kerry manage to even get as far as the General election if this was what happened in 2004?

by Chelseain32 2008-05-25 10:05AM | 0 recs
It's best to ignore these silly diaries

The diarist responds to facts that refute her false assertions with troll ratings, and flounces off, clinging to her fairytale.

This is not a rational person. The roi in trying to engage her in a productive exchange is nonexistent.

by Bee 2008-05-25 07:13AM | 0 recs
Friday was a bad day

Read the whole piece, which makes it clear that Clinton certainly did misspeak. At the same time, the remarks were politically damaging.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/ 05/24/on-the-road-clintons-very-bad-day/
Friday might have been one of the worst days of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's political career. Her campaign, as everyone knows, was already struggling. But on Friday, she made a reference to Bobby Kennedy's assassination -- a terrible choice of phrase in a presidential campaign that features an African-American candidate.

. . . .. . . . ..

After a day like Friday, it is hard to imagine how she keeps going, not just with her campaign, but emotionally. Even if she wanted to let off steam, she can't, at least in public. She may have little heart for carrying her race forward, but she has committed many times to doing so, at least through June 3. She told her audiences in South Dakota that she and her husband and daughter would be back before the primary.

But the day obliterated the arguments she had made in an earlier part of her interview with the editorial board -- that she was "more progressive" than Mr. Obama and would be a stronger candidate in the fall.

And it may have shattered any strategy for trying to win over superdelegates. The question is, did this episode alienate those who would have helped her to find a graceful way out.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:16AM | 0 recs
Tapper: Obama a &quot;one-man gaffe machine.&quot;

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/05/what-the-farc-w.html#comments

"The man has been a one-man gaffe machine."

by katmandu1 2008-05-25 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Tapper:

What a funny piece. Obama mixed up Sioux Falls with Sioux City and that's a major gaffe, as compared to talking about a candidate getting assassinated when you have Senator Obama getting more death threats than any other potential nominee?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 07:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Tapper:

Its grasping at straws. This will be over in two weeks. Enough Obama supporters have extended the olive branch to these people, and gotten their hands bitten off.

At this time, it's up to them to deal with it. If they're going to vote against their best interests and vote for McCain, then thats on them. But I hope those who advocate it are given the kick and ban across all progressive blogs...

by Philly Ed 2008-05-25 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Normally I would get worked up about this diary and point out its various inaccuracies, but at this point the only thing that that would do is further antagonize the people who won't listen anyway - you can't argue with people who adopt a candidate's stand 100% and refuse to question their biases.  The race will end in a few weeks, and that will be that.

by rfahey22 2008-05-25 07:29AM | 0 recs
Campaign Propaganda

Tucker Carlson in 2000 on Bush propagandist Karen Hughes, submitted without comment.

I've obviously been lied to a lot by campaign operatives, but the striking thing about the way she lied was she knew I knew she was lying, and she did it anyway. There is no word in English that captures that. It almost crosses over from bravado into mental illness.

by map 2008-05-25 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Campaign Propaganda

And Tucker refuses to hold that same acute ability of judgement to himself when it comes to accepting the basic fact - which has been established - that Valerie Plame was undercover and her outing was a breech of our national security.

by durendal 2008-05-25 08:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Campaign Propaganda

Yeah, Tucker is a tool.  Back in 2000 he had some shred of integrity left, but has since abandoned that as he's tried to hold on to his career instead.

by map 2008-05-25 08:02AM | 0 recs
Carlson is a tool.

I don't know why anyone takes him seriously.  He and Lou Dobbs are two people I absolutely cannot bear to listen to.

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 09:05AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I'm tellin' ya, allegre - there's folks here that are obsessed with you. How dare you not think like them by coming to the same conclusions they've arrived at.
There seems to be a mindset that says to me - 'I'm not partisan, so therefore my fact based conclusions are more valid than yours.'
Which is human nature too, I'm guilty of it.

Hell, whether we like it or not - the vast majority of us here at MyDD right now are staunchly partisan.

I'm not sure why they don't spend a major portion of that time writing their own diaries and why they support their candidate as opposed to telling you you're wrong.
Anyway, great job and thanks for the diary.
You'll always rock in my book.

PS The Red Wings won last night.  ;)

by durendal 2008-05-25 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)
And the Pistons in seven..
(note: the above comment is an opinion, not fact and expresses the wishes of a Pistons fan.)
by durendal 2008-05-25 07:55AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

The Pistons look like they're in trouble.

by rfahey22 2008-05-25 08:03AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

We'll see. Boston has a great team. It's a great time of the year if you're a sports fan.

by durendal 2008-05-25 08:23AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Your two cents is a ripoff

by Pat Flatley 2008-05-25 07:38AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Your two cents is a ripoff

Baghdad Bobbi?

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:44AM | 0 recs
The new Hillary

Now she's running for the 90 year old women, the hard working men and women of the Swing states, the infirmed, the interned, the dead, ladies and gentlemen,and anyone living or dead who is still listening to this bilge water, I give you Hillary Rodham Clinton, candidate to all Americans. A true Patriot, who fought with your husbands in the big one WWII, First off the boat at Anzio,HRC All American. What a bunch of crap. Now she's also staying in the race to unify the Democratic Party, by bringing up Robert Kennedy's death.Nothing says unifying the party like dissing the Kennedy Family. The woman is a walking time bomb. Ever ready to say the wrong thing at the wrong time, and if she doesn't succeed her husband will.She is ill fit to run 7-11 let alone the country. And this Diarist only proves that HRC appeals to the uneducated because she can't even spell Bastard

by johnny sexton 2008-05-25 08:12AM | 0 recs
Thanks (again) Alegre

Take it to the Convention......

by nikkid 2008-05-25 08:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks (again) Alegre

That will never happen, and shouldn't.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-05-25 08:45AM | 0 recs
Alegre, I still have some questions.

And I'd appreciate some straight answers, if you have them.

You said in a previous diary that halving Michigan's delegate total would be unfair to your family in Michigan because their votes would only count half as much.  Yet, with the delegate total halved, one Michigan voter's vote would still count for 1/9361 of a delegate...whereas my vote in Wisconsin only counted for 1/15,044 of a delegate.

So my questions are these:

1. How is that at all unfair to your family in Michigan?
2. When are you going to start crusading on behalf of us poor, disenfranchised Wisconsinites?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/23/1944 11/195#readmore

I anticipate hearing from you shortly.

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Alegre, I still have some questions.

And after that, perhaps she'd be kind enough to provide an answer to the question I posed in the "She's won the second half" diary last night:

Phrasing it as "she's won," not "she's going to win," assumes facts not in evidence - to wit, that Obama will lose all three remaining contests in PR, SD and MT. (If he wins two, the "last half," as incorrectly defined in alegre's diary, will end in an 8-8 tie; if he wins all three, he "wins" the "half" by a 9-7 margin.)

Don't THOSE voters in Missoula and Ponce and Rapid City have the right to have their votes counted, too? Or do they not matter? Which is it?

I'll be sitting here patiently waiting for the answer that's sure to be provided any...minute...now.

by ipsos 2008-05-25 11:13AM | 0 recs
Looks like we'll be waiting for a while. n/t

by Elsinora 2008-05-25 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)
She is losing her Hispanic support..
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/ story/38408.html
by nogo postal 2008-05-25 09:14AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

You should split this off to its own diary...

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-25 10:06AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Obama has 3 cents.

by xdem 2008-05-25 09:30AM | 0 recs
Thanks for Posting This!

We need Hillary Clinton to keep running until every last voter is heard, and every ballot is cast.  To do anything less is to let down 17 million people who stand behind her.

by izarradar 2008-05-25 09:33AM | 0 recs
You know what pisses me off alegre?

What pisses me off was not her comments.  I found them distasteful and unnecessary, but they didn't ruffle my feathers that much.  What pisses me off is that every time someone says something bad about Clinton, you cry sexism.
"Is it a coincidence that this is also being done to the first woman with a real shot at the White House?

I doubt it."

That REALLY pisses me off!  I did not vote for Obama because he was black, nor did I note vote for Clinton because she is a woman.  I voted on merits and merits alone!  It is this type of language that is divisive in a time when our party, yes, OUR party, needs to heal.  Do I declare Clinton supporters racist?  No.  Do I think the Clinton campaign is racist?  No!  

Please please PLEASE stop reducing every complaint aimed at Clinton to sexism.  Its an injustice to those who have made the complaints and it sows the seeds of hate within our own party.  Lets move on from this.

by iowa dem 2008-05-25 09:44AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I don't think most people are asking her to drop out.  They are questioning her reasoning for staying in...By all accounts of delegates and the recent history of SD's she will not win the nomination by that measure. She could suspend her campaign and should something "bad" happen to make Obama unelectable she would surely be the choice.  However, by staying, in IMO, she is strengthening the negative opinions of her by Obama supporters and she is reinforcing the divisiveness of her supporters toward Obama.

So again the question is why is she staying in..

1. Not to disappoint her supporters.

  1. Wants to give everyone a chance to vote.
  2. Waiting to seat MI and FL.
  3. Waiting to see if she captures the popular the vote.

So the question is will her reasons to stay in make it harder for the Democratic Party to unify after all is said and done?

I believe if she was only staying in for #'s 1 & 2 it wouldn't be a problem.  However, the way Clinton is arguing the seating of MI and FL issue makes it look like only she wants a solution and Obama doesn't, very divisive. And if she does gain the popular vote and implies that Obama's nomination is faulty, extremely divisive.

Just my two cents..

by hootie4170 2008-05-25 10:08AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

And i'll see and your cabal of neocon shills there.

by Adept2u 2008-05-25 10:17AM | 0 recs
Her analogies aren't apt.

RFK didn't enter his first contest until May.

Bubba didn't enter his until late February.

Hillary's been in contests since early January.

Therefore, she has, in fact, been running longer than either of those two candidates.

by Bush Bites 2008-05-25 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

This is America and we are a free country. If HRC wants to run, she can. If BO supporters want to harrass her, they should'nt, but they can. The only thing which is accomplished here is the more Senator Obama supporters harrass HRC, the more entrenched will HRC supporters become. The November election will not be a caucuse, so BO supporters will need HRC supporters come November, and from the way it looks now, BO supporters have alot of work in mending fences that may not be mendable. So, why can't we try and get along with each other for now?

by hidesrtdav 2008-05-25 10:24AM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

"They've never pulled this shit on a guy - right?"

Whoosh!  Your credibility got yanked away so quickly, I felt like I'd slipped on a banana peel.

by zizzybalubah 2008-05-25 10:24AM | 0 recs
Pure crap

Seriously, it's because she's a woman? Weren't people telling Mike Huckabee to drop out after it was clear that McCain was the leader? There has never, ever been a primary like this under the new post-1972 system, so there is not a case where it is directly applicable whether Hillary is simply being asked to leave the race due to her status as a woman.

She is being asked, unlike Jerry Brown in 1992, because she is constantly attacking the clear front-runner, because she has a platform from which her attacks are constantly heard, and because she is spending millions to broadcast those attacks. Oh, and there's another thing, it is impossible for her to win this thing, even with MI and FL seated.

That's the truth, guys.

by irish09 2008-05-25 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Pure crap

Weren't people telling Mike Huckabee to drop out after it was clear that McCain was the leader?
Yeah, but do you know who he's married to?  That's right.  A woman.

by semiquaver 2008-05-25 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Pure crap

Best. Comment. Ever.

by fbihop 2008-05-25 11:31AM | 0 recs
At least it's positive.

Go Hill!!!

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-25 10:59AM | 0 recs
HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

I say let her run.  She has every right to.  Still doesn't change the fact that many people viewed her comments on Friday as not only misleading, but tone-deaf.  When and if the time comes, that a nominee has clenched the 2026, then it'll be time to ride into the sunset.

by venavena 2008-05-25 11:00AM | 0 recs
Why I have a problem with Hillary staying in

First, I was an Edwards supporter coming in to the campaign, but was incredibly pleased that with Obama and Clinton we had a field of three strong, progressive candidates, any one of whom I was happy to support as nominee.

That said, there are a couple of different ways you can run an end=game campaign.

It can be about issues - this is what Jesse Jackson did, and also Edwards. With this strategy, you stay in (or suspend but don't end your campaign), and continue to use the bully pulpit to motivate supporters and raise awareness of important issues, like social and economic justice.

Or... it can be about "Me Me Me". With this strategy, you continue to go around the country telling everyone how great a candidate you are, and talking down your opponent. Telling everyone how lame they are, how inexperienced, how un-electable.

And I'm sorry, but that is inexcusable.

It was a terrible tactic when Kennedy pulled it against Carter in 1980 - and at the time I have to say that I agreed with the sentiment, but disagreed with the tactic. Everyone forgets how close the 1980 election was right up until the month and even the week before the vote. Reagan only got his blowout win at the last minute, and I believe a big part of that was because the wounds of the primary campaign divided the Democratic Party, and there was no chance to heal.

If Hillary wants to keep running a positive campaign on the issues that matter to her supporters - and all Democrats! - then that is a wonderful thing.

But with Obama within a handful of votes of being the nominee, the time for tearing him down is past. All she's doing now is handing ammunition to the Republicans to use in November. And I really, really, really wish she would stop doing that, and get back to being the brilliant, positive, issues-oriented candidate that I have so admired for the past 16 years.

by Victor Laszlo 2008-05-25 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Why I have a problem with Hillary staying in

On the same theme, from Ezra Klein:


Clinton can, and should, finish the campaign. She has come too far at this point to drop out. The issue is the content of her continuing campaign. Were she running on her issues and blasting McCain, most would probably think that a boon -- more free media for Democrats, more focused criticism of McCain. But what Clinton is actually doing is giving wildly misleading speeches trying to poison the well in Michigan and Florida, opportunistically telling the voters of two major states that a decision she supported until it become inconvenient is a reason to believe that Obama and the Party dismiss or seek to repress their votes, and only Clinton cares for their democratic rights. As a message, it's a mixture of toxic lies and scorched earth campaigning. It doesn't help her win the nomination, but it makes the nomination worth a little bit less for the likely nominee.

Put simply, it's her message, not her presence, that's attracting criticism. She shouldn't leave the race. But she should stop using her presence in it to rip apart the party and try to push major states out of Obama's column.

by Victor Laszlo 2008-05-25 11:44AM | 0 recs
AxelRove's Handiwork

Hillary is running a positive campaign.  It's Obama's campaign pouring gasoline on this small spark to set it ablaze.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/ 05/25/clinton-defends-rfk-remarks

George Stephanopoulos, the host of ABC's "This Week," asked David Axelrod, Mr. Obama's top strategist, about the e-mail:

Mr. Stephanopoulos: You say you're not trying to stir the issue up.  But a member of your press staff yesterday was sending around to an entire press list -- I have the e-mail here -- Keith Olbermann's searing commentary against Hillary Clinton. So that is stirring this up, isn't it?"

Mr. Axelrod: "Well, Mr. Olbermann did his commentary and he had his opinion. But as far as we're concerned."

Mr. Stephanopoulos: "But your campaign was sending it around."

Mr. Axelrod: "As far as we're concerned, George, as far as we're concerned, this issue is done. It was an unfortunate statement, as we said, as she's acknowledged. She has apologized. The apology, you know, is accepted. Let's move forward."

Mr. Axelrod: "There's so many important things going on in this country right now, George, that people are interested in that we're not going to spend days dwelling on this."

Remember that scene in Gladiator when Joaquin Phoenix's character embraces Russel Crow's and stabs him in the back?  
It's like that.
Obama is like that.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-05-26 02:35AM | 0 recs
recommended diaries?

I am rather perplexed at how this diarist's diaries always [i.e. every day] make it to the rec list. The content of the diary is essentially the same day-on-day, and raise exactly the same points of contention. However they are churned out with daily regularity, and reced automatically. How does this happen? Do the same people line-up each day to recommend her diaries, as if carrying out some form of religious observance. Even taking account of the fact that during political campaigns people have blind commitment to their candidate, I cannot believe that the daily recing of this diarist's diaries is not the product of some arrangement/co-ordination.

by diranuk 2008-05-25 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: recommended diaries?

I'm not sure either. These diaries all include some variation of gang, guys, etc. and how Hillary really, really needs our support. It'd be nice if there was more diversity in the posters of recommended diaries.

by irish09 2008-05-25 11:19AM | 0 recs
Re: recommended diaries?

Agreed.  There doesn't seem to be much of substance in these.  At least, there's not enough to warrant two per day, cross-posted at three other sites.

by ihaveseenenough 2008-05-25 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: recommended diaries?

She's part of a team called Hillary's Bloggers. http://hillarysbloggers.soapblox.net/fro ntPage.do I think they e-mail each other as to when to go the site to re the diary.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: recommended diaries?

Ah. That explains it. It's all rather manipulative then. I suppose, that's part of campaigning. However it does rather undermine the whole integrity of a "grassroots/netroots" site like this. I suppose it was inevitable that this would happen, but it's "not quite cricket", as they say in England.

by diranuk 2008-05-25 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: recommended diaries?

I really feel like the site admin should decide to remove the recommending capabilities of the offenders. They seem very willing to do so with Obama supporters.

by irish09 2008-05-25 12:41PM | 0 recs
Obama supporters?

You mean the 400?

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-05-26 02:37AM | 0 recs
by politicsmatters 2008-05-25 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

by JJE 2008-05-25 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Alegre, I'd like to raise a point for discussion with you.

You believe Clinton is the stronger candidate for the GE.  At the same time, the length and bitterness of her campaign is taking a toll on her ability to mobilize the base.   I believe a floor fight at the convention would be the undoing of the nominee, WHOEVER it is... that the base would be so divided, we would not coalesce around either candidate.  This would doom the party in the general, no matter who's nominated.

To take Clinton's 1992 reference, Tsongas dropped out for this very reason... and the primary elections in June did not represent continuing competition at all.  Everyone had gotten out of Bill's way already, not wanting to screw him up as the party's likely nominee.  (I don't know if anyone called for Tsongas to do that, but I'm guessing that if he considered it an important reason to drop out, many others did as well.)

How do we evaluate where is the point of diminishing returns - when Clinton's campaigning hurts the party, and her own candidacy, more than if she just gets out of the way and helps the party unify around Obama?  I mean, obviously she's already hurting her own candidacy in many ways - given the number of supers who point to her campaigning as a reason to choose Obama, or who criticize her campaigning even as they maintain their support of her candidacy.

Many people believe we've already reached the point of diminishing returns.  It looks like you blame us of sexism.  I resent that, because I think it's a very fair issue to consider - for the success of the Democratic ticket.  And I think it's disloyal to the party to smear anyone who disagrees with you about it.

I'm about to go to work, but can respond later tonight.

by Matt Smith 2008-05-25 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Yes sexism made Hillary justify her campaign by referencing the assaination of her opponent.

You do all woman who are actually subjected to sexism a disservice.

by FinneganOregon 2008-05-25 01:52PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

They've never done this to a guy ?

Remember John Kerry ? Michael Dukakis ? The first run of Bill Clinton's ? Bittergate ?

by Benjaminomeara 2008-05-25 01:54PM | 0 recs
Hillary is still obsessed with death?

Hey, ObamaNation, Hillary today said "People who deserve a shot"!!!!
As in SHOOTING? AGAIN??
Here:

Hillary: Why I continue to run
BY HILLARY CLINTON
Sunday, May 25th 2008

... I am running for all the men and women I meet who wake up every day and work hard to make a difference for their families. People who deserve a shot at the American Dream - the chance to save for college, a home and retirement; to afford quality health care for their families; to fill the gas tank and buy the groceries with a little left over each month.

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

The nerve, huh?

by observer5 2008-05-25 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)
"if you can't stand the heat..."
Now WHO said that?
by haystax calhoun 2008-05-25 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: HILLARY: Why I Continue to Run (My 2 Cents)

Yes, Alegre, Yes. This needs to be said over and over again. I wonder how this wonderful candidate can be doing so well when just about every pundit, journalist and talking head seems to be out to get her. I have concluded that the only explanation is that it's the people who want Hillary Clinton. I know, how quaint, to think the people count in this so-called democratic election...Yes, Hillary take it to Denver.

by susanclare 2008-05-26 05:44AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads