[e_blazer1]

How about the theory that she's trying to weaken Obama to the point where McCain wins...leaving her as the prospective candidate in 2012? Is she that self-serving?

[HB]

^Probably

I thought she was going to go away quietly into the night, she and her supporters are getting more annoying by the day. If the democrats have any chance of winning come November, the super delegates have got to pull the plug on this thing before HRC destroys the party

As the Democratic primary nears its long-awaited conclusion, undecided superdelegates have been drowned under a sudden deluge of angry, sometimes vicious emails from Hillary Clinton supporters urging them to not fall in line behind Barack Obama.

Such campaigns targeting superdelegates have mostly been avoided out of fear that the party officials would react negatively to outside pressure. And at least four superdelegates on the receiving end of yesterday's emails suggested that they did more harm to Clinton's cause than good.

In one exchange, Donna Brazille, Al Gore's campaign manager and a stalwart of the Democratic Party, responded with frustration to a writer's threats of defection. "Honestly, this is the 9th email today," she wrote before 8:00 pm. "So I believe you're ready to not only destroy Roe versus Wade, voting rights, civil liberties and civil rights. Perhaps adding trillions more to the deficits through non-stop tax cuts to the wealthy and 100 more years in Iraq. Yes, please join Rush and McCain asap. The train has left. Catch it."

How can we elect someone who has never accomplished anything, refuses to take stands on issues, befriends anti-American terrorists, attends a church for 20 years with Wright, and denies ever hearing anything controversial, and then stages a *public fight* so he can finally denounce him, takes credit for bills in the Senate that he had nothing to do with, and is propped up as the candidate of change??" wrote one Democrat.

Added another: "Obama, in my opinion, will NOT survive the general election against McCain. But even if he does, he will be beholden to the old-time politics, politicians and bundling interests that raised him up to where he is. It's not new, better politics. It's a sales job that's been done by the old power guards... Look at the presidential loser's club that has lined up behind Obama: Walter Mondale, George McGovern, Gary Hart, Ted Kennedy, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, and John Kerry. Agents of change? Hope, Unity? A new way to do politics?"

I spent my entire life in the two reddest states in the entire U.S. so please excuse me if I fail to discern the nuances of the arguments sent my way this evening in what appears to be an orchestrated campaign to intimidate the remaining unpledged delegates by threatening to leave the party and vote for a third Bush term if I and others like me don't vote for Sen. Clinton," wrote the exasperated superdelegate. "I have been uncommitted throughout this campaign because I wanted to see how the candidates performed in a variety of settings. I am proud of them both. But I am horrified by this effort to threaten votes for McCain if super delegates don't vote for Sen. Clinton. I have received hundreds of emails from both sides - but I can say without exception that I have not received a single email from an Obama supporter that threatened a vote for McCain if I didn't support Sen. Obama. You really ought to be ashamed."

These people are truly fools. They act like this is a life and death situation, the guy who followed the rules and refused to stoop down to smear campaigns is the one getting all the flak. These fairweather democrats saying they will vote for Mccain come November should be banned from the party. At the end of the day, maybe race is still a problem. I cant think of any other reason why they would be so bitter about Obama getting the nomination, whats even more frustrating is the fact they think HRC and her skeletons in the closet, stands a better chance against Mccain come November.

[blazermaniaisback]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

How about the theory that she's trying to weaken Obama to the point where McCain wins...leaving her as the prospective candidate in 2012? Is she that self-serving?

Yeah and McCain's wife is paying her off which is why she wont release her taxes and Hillary can keep pushing on?

Do your really think Hillary would ruin the democrats chances of winning at a time they should utterly destroy the republicans in an election?

[It's_GO_Time]

Originally Posted by angrypuppy

I think she would have shot her wad by now.

I think you are mixing the Clinton's up.

[blazermaniaisback]

Originally Posted by It's_GO_Time

I think you are mixing the Clinton's up.

No I don't think so...

[e_blazer1]

Originally Posted by duckworthstolemylunch

Do your really think Hillary would ruin the democrats chances of winning at a time they should utterly destroy the republicans in an election?

It's not my theory. It's been proposed by Dick Morris, Bill Clinton's former advisor (who now seems to hate Hillary with a passion), among others. Personally, I don't believe that she's that Machiavellian, but who knows?

[stockfire]

Look, I think she's been slimy to the core this Primary season but let's be serious. If she had enough power to orchestrate a coup of the Party and White House in 2012, why wouldn't she flex that muscle now? She's got nothing in the bag and nothing to fall back on. That's why she's so insane about not quitting. It's all or nothing. She won't have another shot, Pelosi will be the highest woman in the Democratic Party and that has to be frustrating to her since there is no way she'll get that job.

[Fork]

Originally Posted by maxiep

I'll be interested to see the county breakdown between the two candidates. To win the Democratic vote in Oregon, all you need is Multnomah and Lane counties. It's my supposition those two counties are the core of the Obama support in the state. The Clackamas, Washington and Marion county tallies will be interesting to me, as I could see those voting blocs possibly swinging to McCain if he pulls more to the center.

Possibly they swing to McCain. But Multnomah plus Lane county is nearly half our population. And I doubt McCain does that well in Washington county no matter how centrist he gets.

For reference, last time around...

In 2004, Bush won Clackamas county by 2,000 votes. (on nearly 200,000 cast)

Bush won Marion county by 12,000. (on 140,000 cast)

Kerry won Washington county by 14,000 (on about 250,000 cast)

Kerry won Multnomah county by 160,000 (on over 360,000 cast)

and Kerry won Lane by 30,000 (on 200,000 cast)

(Benton, Clatsop, Columbia, Hood River and Lincoln also went for Kerry.)

It will be interesting though.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by stockfire

Look, I think she's been slimy to the core this Primary season but let's be serious. If she had enough power to orchestrate a coup of the Party and White House in 2012, why wouldn't she flex that muscle now? She's got nothing in the bag and nothing to fall back on. That's why she's so insane about not quitting. It's all or nothing. She won't have another shot, Pelosi will be the highest woman in the Democratic Party and that has to be frustrating to her since there is no way she'll get that job.

Here's the way I see she could do it, and it's a strategy more craven than I believe her capable of:

1. She bows out after winning WV and Kentucky in a landslide. She puts her support behind Obama. It appears to be full-throated, but that's just a facade.

2. She and President Clinton campaign for Sen. Obama and they make a few gaffes. Nothing serious, but just enough to provide some doubts about Sen. Obama to her core constituency (older women, blue collar Democrats) which the other side will exploit.

3. Behind the scenes, they troll Sen. Obama's history and through an intermediary send what they find to a Republican 527. The McCain campaign probably wouldn't use the info directly, but a 527 could fund an outrageous ad and McCain would look good for denouncing it while not rejecting the premise of the ad.

4. Sen. Obama loses, despite the "full" support of the Clintons. Where he falls short is in the swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Hillary Clinton then goes to the superdelegates who turned their back on her and says "I told you he couldn't win. We did everything we could to help him, but in the end he couldn't deliver the base I had because they had too many questions about him."

Her large base is still intact. McCain, if he wins, is likely a one-term president. Losers in the Democratic Party are rarely given a second shot (Stevenson I think is the last one). She reconsolidates her power base and becomes the presumptive nominee for 2012.

It would be an unbelievably Machiavellian maneuver, but it's conceivable.

[angrypuppy]

Originally Posted by e_blazer1

How about the theory that she's trying to weaken Obama to the point where McCain wins...leaving her as the prospective candidate in 2012? Is she that self-serving?

That's plausible, and seemingly within her character. I knew a couple of Columbia grads that worked on Bill's campaign back in 1992. Drawing from their perception, Hillary isn't evil, but she often rationalizes. The problem is that there is no boundary between self-interest and her perception of public interest; they are one and the same. As someone who studied and admired activists, it isn't a leap of faith to see Hillary rationalizing that the end justifies the means.

[stockfire]

maxiep

at the very least, we could get one heck of a screenplay going.

[MARIS61]

Originally Posted by maxiep

The racial breakdown of this election is striking. Sen. Obama is getting 90%+ of the black vote. If Sen. Clinton somehow gets the nomination, then that base probably won't vote for McCain, but will likely stay home. On the flip side, the numbers of Clinton supporters that would vote for McCain instead of Obama are running between 35%-40%, which is a stunning number. It's hard to conceive of a strategy where Sen. Clinton remains on the inside of the tent uninating out rather than outside the tent urinating in.

This election is the most favorable to the Democratic Party in my lifetime. To think that because they couldn't manage the primary process better they may lose it to a lukewarm candidate like Sen. McCain is stunning.

The focus on race here is in large part simply mis-direction by the ruling corporate-media machine to keep the general populace confused as always.

Racism will always be present in any society that refuses to educate it's populace, but this election is about the rich vs the poor. Hillary and McCain are among the wealthiest 1% of the country, that's who's interests they have always protected, and President Obama will most likely upset their applecart.

90% of blacks are not considered wealthy, so they vote for the guy closest to their interests. If you can't have Hillary, McCain is the obvious 2nd choice. Their actual voting records and accomplishments in politics are astoundingly similar, and they could easily wear each other's clothes.

McCain has changed sides so often in the past to get votes that I wouldn't be surprised to see him choose Hillary as his VP. Oddly enough, I think that would guarantee him victory.