Archive for April 1st, 2008
Apr 1, 2008 at 8:22 PM by David Pleasant
The emperor has no clothes. Greg Sargent has confirmed via Harold Ickes that Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been using the Jeremiah Wright controversy as a “key topic in their discussions with uncommitted super-delegates.” Needless to say, the breaking story has created a huge kerfuffle, but more importantly something needs to be done about it.
One or two public calls from a high-profile superdelegate each week for Clinton to quit are not going to accomplish anything productive. Instead, it pisses Clinton off and she only gets more entrenched. Her recent vow to take her fight to the credentials committee is ample evidence of how she responds to public opposition. Unfortunately, no one can expect anything but delusional and narcissistic behavior from Sen. Clinton. And that has to be factored in to what Democrats will do going forward.
It is important, and instructive, to remember that more that at least 270 superdelegates are our representatives in Congress. Sen. Clinton obviously cannot be truly held accountable for her actions at this juncture, but the 270+ Members of Congress can indeed be held accountable.
I firmly believe it is time for Democrats to focus on superdelegates and forget about Clinton. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that Sen. Clinton’s tactics are reprehensible and unconscionable. More importantly it needs to be emphasized that choosing to support Sen. Clinton is an unequivocal statement of approval and promotion of the same divisive, reprehensible politics. And it will be costly when it comes their own election.
Obviously a petition to the applicable Senators and Representative is desirable, but I do not have a clue how to set up an online facility to accommodate it. If you are interested in participating in an organized effort to fight Clinton’s blitzkrieg on superdelegates, or need support for an effort already underway, please let me know.
If you want to roll your own, a list of superdelegates is available here. In the interim, I will do some research to see if there is a quick way to set up an online petition or other applicable solutions.
If you have other ideas on how to help fight the Clinton Superdelegate Blitzkrieg and want to pass them on, please let me know.
Apr 1, 2008 at 6:08 PM by Political Chase
The Wall Street Journal has a piece today attributing Hillary Clinton’s high negative (or trust) ratings in recent polls to "the debate on her record." So, what is the strategy to overcome that issue? According to the Journal, Team Clinton intends to deflect voters’ attention from her record. (Emphasis added.)
Clinton campaign image maker Mandy Grunwald and Ann Lewis, head of women’s outreach, are working to re-establish voters’ trust in Sen. Clinton, campaign aides say.
The campaign is also trying to shift focus away from recent debates over Sen. Clinton’s record and toward the economy…Monday, Sen. Clinton held an economic roundtable in Harrisburg, and she talked about a tax-cut plan for the middle class at an event in Fairless Hills, Pa., near Philadelphia.
The Journal dutifully cares out its journalistic responsibilities by simply reporting a few comments from Team Clinton and a few anecdotal references from voters. And with that, they have completed their job. Nowhere do they demonstrate an attempt to look at the issue from an historical perspective and put it in context with Team Clinton’s response and forward strategy.
This is a quick sampling of what the Clintons have said about the importance of candidates’ records in the past.
January 10, 2008 – Hillary on Obama:
He was a part-time state senator for a few years, and then he came to the Senate and immediately started running for president. And that’s his prerogative. That’s his right. But I think it is important to compare and contrast our records.
January 8, 2008 – Bill Clinton complaining about media not comparing Obama and Hillary’s record. (Video of this quote at the end of the post. H/T Crooks and Liars.)
“Second, it is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, numerating the years, and never got asked one time, not once, ‘Well, how could you say, that when you said in 2004 you didn’t know how you would have voted on the resolution? You said in 2004 there was no difference between you and George Bush on the war and you took that speech you’re now running on off your website in 2004 and there’s no difference in your voting record and Hillary’s ever since?’ Give me a break. “This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen…So you can talk about Mark Penn all you want.
December 3, 2007 – In New Hampshire, Bill Clinton criticized the media for too much focus on "pure politics" and not on the candidate’s records.
Bill Clinton said Tuesday that if reporters covered the candidates’ public records better, his wife’s presidential bid would be far ahead of her rivals.
"Sixty-seven percent of the coverage is pure politics. That stuff has a half life of about 15 seconds. It won’t matter tomorrow. It is very vulnerable to being slanted and rude. And it won’t affect your life," Clinton said.
(emphasis added)
July 19, 2007 - Bill Clinton
"If you look at the record on women’s issues, I defy you to find anybody who has run for office in recent history whose got a longer history of working for women, for families and children than Hillary does," the former president said in an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America.
When in doubt or troubled, implement the Burger King strategy.
Apr 1, 2008 at 3:04 PM by Political Chase
Chris in comments helps clarify Hillary Clinton’s fundraising confusion:
Yes, you did misunderstand the e-mails. Clinton raised far more than $3 million in March.
Clinton raised $6 million online just from March 1 through March 6 alone (you can check bloomberg.com which shows the story with the quoted figure).
I do agree that the e-mails are rather confusing as to what the time period is for the $3 million goal, but my understanding is the goal was to raise $3 million from the evening of March 28 through March 31.
The Bloomberg piece Chris references states:
Clinton raised $4 million online after her victories this week and has raised $6 million so far this month, her campaign announced today.
I have to wonder how many people perceived Hillary being as financially strapped as her emails indicated. Giving the impression that the campaign was struggling to just meet $3 million for the month is a double-edged sword. Some would empty their pockets when presented such a tale of woe, and others would view it as a hopeless cause. My guess is, it would be more harmful than helpful.
Apr 1, 2008 at 12:43 PM by Political Chase
If you’re like most people who are wondering what exactly is the DNC’s Credential Committee and how does it work, Greg Sargent explains it all in "The Election Central Idiot’s Guide To The Credentials Committee."
It’s a rather confusing, complicated process and Greg’s post helps sort it out.
Apr 1, 2008 at 12:30 PM by Political Chase
AFP is an acronym for Agence France-Presse or on days like today it could be April Fool’s Press or April Fool’s People. I just read a post at Booman Tribune titled "Breaking News: Clinton to Suspend Campaign". Well, its definitely is not the Agence France-Presse, but I didn’t know that at first. I haven’t been suckered into an April Fool’s Joke to that extent in a long time (childhood maybe). I have to hand it Steven — he did a heckuva job.
Here’s how he begins the captive story:
April 1, 2008 Washington, D. C. Senator Clinton is set to suspend her campaign tomorrow morning, according to senior campaign advisers.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, two prominent campaign officials stated today that Senator Clinton, after consultations with officials at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and other party leaders, has agreed to suspend her campaign in exchange for an agreement to seat both the Michigan and Florida delegations, whose primaries were held in violation of party rules.
Senator Clinton has made it a point to state recently her strong desire to seat these delegations, both of which awarded her the lion’s share of the delegates at stake. Senator Obama’s campaign has consistently maintained that it agrees with the sanctions imposed by the DNC which stripped both Michigan and Florida of their delegates. It is believed that Clinton’s proposal to suspend her campaign was accepted by Senator Obama’s campaign late last night, according to a sources at the DNC, who spoke on condition that their identities not be disclosed, as they were not authorized to discuss the matter on the record. No one contacted within Senator Obama’s campaign would comment with regard to whether he had agreed to such a proposal from the Clinton camp. [...]
After reading through the second paragraph, and with my heart pounding, I clicked the source link which leads back to the post. OK, well that could have been an error in his post, so I went to the NYT, WaPo, and finally AFP’s corporate site — nothing there. It was not until then that I remembered what today is.
Great job. The Booman Tribune had me incredibly suckered for a few minutes. What’s amazing to me is the rush it generated. When I read the headline, I immediately thought about my post from last night about Clinton’s finances; the two just naturally and immediately meshed.
Apr 1, 2008 at 1:22 AM by Political Chase
(updated below)
Either I am misinterpreting something or Hillary Clinton is facing a fundraising crisis that is not fully conveyed in Politico’s reporting yesterday and today. Emails sent out by Clinton’s campaign indicate her campaign’s fundraising goal for March is only $3 million.
Since I seldom pay close attention to the pitch, I deleted some of Clinton’s fundraising emails and may not have the all the facts. However these are the facts based on the emails I have available. To my knowledge, there was no specific fundraising goal stated before March 28.
The following image is an excerpt of an email Team Clinton sent out Friday March 21. The email did not state a specific goal. (The Saturday deadline is a tad misleading because the FEC deadline is not until 10 days later, but that’s not the issue I’m raising.) Specifically, it states: "We need a massive show of support by midnight Saturday. Contribute now to help us win in Pennsylvania and beyond."
Click on any image to view a larger, more legible image.
March 21 Email
An email sent Friday March 28 states: "Contribute $5 today to help us raise $3 million by the March filing deadline at midnight Monday." The same email included a graphic, which eliminates the possibility of what I first thought was a typographical error.
March 28 Email
March 28 Email
An email sent earlier today (3/31) stated the same goal. I checked Clinton’s web site and as of 11:00 PM ET it also specifies a $3 million goal, so it can’t be just a mistake…multiple goals maybe, but they don’t make a clear distinction this is a one-day-goal or something similar.
March 31 Email
Clinton Web Site March 31
It’s hard to believe Clinton went from more raising more than $35 million in February to begging for 10 percent of that amount in March. If she cannot raise $3 million in a single month, the calls for Clinton to get out of the race are moot. Heck, she won’t be able pay Mark Penn his $2.5 million per month much less consider being competitive nationally or in a single state.
Either Team Clinton is grossly misleading potential donors or they are in serious financial trouble.
Update: See this post for an update.
