Leading stories all over today are looking into the final statement by Senator Clinton last night. “I am honored to be sitting next to Barack Obama”. Some, dare I say most, political correspondents were saying it was the first draft to a concession speech, and a bridge to good relations after he wins the nomination.
I like the former, a bridge to form good relations so we [dems] can go into this national race to win it. I like this softer side of Clinton, and we’ll see if it stays.
I wonder if she was making inroads to a veep spot?
ABC showed the clip of President Clinton saying TX and OH are do or die for her campaign and the look on her face when the question came was … acceptance.
Am I reading this wrong? Do people think she will up the negativity in her campaign rhetoric or back off and let nature take it’s course? What say you?
I think the Clinton campaign has enough people who can make delegate projections and can see that there is no way she can pull close to Obama in pledged delegates. At some point, they got together to debate whether to pursue a scorched earth policy to try to win or steal the nomination by any means necessary or to gracefully bow out and hope for a run in 2012 if McCain beats Obama. It seemed to me that she has chosen the latter and is preparing herself and her supporters for her withdrawal March 5. She certainly seemed to pull her punches last night as did Obama. A month ago she would have hit those hanging curve balls out of the park but last night she just stood there like the house on the side of the road and let them go by.
I don’t see any way that he would choose her as VP nor do I think she would want it. If Obama falls short, then not being on the 2008 ticket would be better for her in 2012.
What seems odd to me is that she seemed to be playing from different angles in the same debate …
Part of the debate was trying to take the cheap shots - “Change you can Xerox”, bringing up the flubbing by the Obama supporter - and part was respectful discourse with that line.
Was the idea going into the debate to attack when she could, or could she not help herself when asked to? Was that final line part of the script or actual authenticity? Or both?
The news stories show the same indecision about her intentions… some use a headline like “Clinton jabs at Obama,” while others stress the overall “make nice” aspect of the debate.
Either way I think she is preparing for an eventual concession. And judging by Obama’s mannerisms last night, I’d say he’s going to hit the ground running full throttle until that concession speech is heard loud and clear from HRC. He needs to stay on top of his game and blast through March 5th. No doubt he will.
George Stephanopolos this morning basically said he thought HRC was preparing for the end, and the in all, Obama didn’t stumble, hit the key substantive points and when there is a tie the win goes to the frontrunner - Obama.
I think it was a silly thing to say, either way. She more or less sits “next” to him all the time in the Senate. Would she say the same thing about McCain just because he’s probably going to be the Republican nominee?
No of course she wouldn’t because McCain is a republican and she’s not running against him right now. She’s running against Obama, and he is a mountain she is clearly not going to be able to scale. Good on her for begining to take the high road.
Jesus. I almost have some respect for the woman now. I thought she had merely made a strategic miscalculation by not coming out swinging, but now there’s a real possibility that she and her advisers decided that Obama is going to win, and it would only hurt the Democratic party for her to step up her attack on him. Please! Someone give me a vile ulterior motive to attribute to her! My whole world is turned upside down!
She could be playing the role of vulnerable woman to elicit some sympathy votes. “Aw, she’s giving up. Let’s vote for her so she doesn’t feel so bad.” Then if it produces a big win, she can deny ever conceding.
Do you really think the voting public will see her that way? Not to mention a personal view here but my sister - [Hillary Supporter until about a week ago] said last night’s debate solidified her view that she will vote for Obama come Mar.4.
This is only one person, she doesn’t quite fit the Hillary demographic, she’s 40 with 2 kids and upper middle class.
I think the word is overzealous. No offense, I’m all about Obama, but we can’t get all petered out in February. We still have nine months until the most important election, we’ve got to save our energy.
It is like the senators referring to their opponents in the senate as esteemed and distinguished opponents, instead of the lying paid off assholes they are, It is a polite game with nice,nice rules that spills over .
Hillary is painted into a corner at this point. If she goes negative and aggresive she risks alienating people and also hurting Obama’s chances should he be the nominee by doing McCains’s work for him. Of course if she plays nice it just won’t be enough, she really needs to find a sweet spot, that is shrinking and harder to find and she actually needed to find it a few weeks ago.
Once the nominee is settled, I think you will see a drop off in enthusiasm for a short while. Just to recover. But the convention will get everyone motivated again.
