Michael Crawford

Must Read: Markos on Hillary Clinton

Filed By Michael Crawford | March 18, 2008 8:15 AM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: Bill Clinton, Daily Kos, Democrats, election 2008, Hillary Rodham Clinton, primary, superdelegates

Kos on Hillary Clinton's slash and burn campaign strategy:

First of all, the only path to victory for Clinton is via coup by super delegate.

She knows this. That's why there's all the talk about poaching pledged delegates and spinning uncertainty around Michigan and Florida, and laying the case for super delegates to discard the popular will and stage a coup.

Yet a coup by super delegate would sunder the party in civil war.

Clinton knows this, it's her only path to victory, and she doesn't care. She is willing -- nay, eager to split the party apart in her mad pursuit of power.

If the situations were reversed, and Obama was lagging in the delegates, popular vote, states won, money raised, and every other reasonable measure, then I'd feel the same way about Obama. (I pulled the plug early on Dean in 2004.) But that's not the case.

It is Clinton, with no reasonable chance of victory, who is fomenting civil war in order to overturn the will of the Democratic electorate. As such, as far as I'm concerned, she doesn't deserve "fairness" on this site. All sexist attacks will be dealt with -- those will never be acceptable. But otherwise, Clinton has set an inevitably divisive course and must be dealt with appropriately.

To reiterate, she cannot win without overturning the will of the national Democratic electorate and fomenting civil war, and she doesn't care.

Emphasis in the original post.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


I wish we weren't starting this discussion from a point that assumes that we can possibly know what the Democratic electorate could possibly want considering the ridiculousness of the primary process, what with caucuses in some states, primaries in others, mixed caucus/primaries in others, different dates with people dropping out after 1-3 states, different weights for different states not based on size, some open and some closed, Michigan and Florida not being seated (not arguing against that), some on weekends and some on weekdays, asinine media coverage, delegates being counted instead of votes, superdelegates being created specifically to give party insiders extra voice, etc, etc.

I mean, his strategic arguments make more sense, but some kind of "will of the people" argument just doesn't.

But it's kind of annoying that Indiana hasn't even had its primary yet and people want this to be over. If March is too late for the primary, then what the hell is Indiana doing in May?

Now doesn't really seem like the time to complain about this process going on too long, considering that the system wasn't put together this year.

Michael, honey - you're great, but this is not a productive post. The contiuation of this "will of the people" meme is just not going to help either candidate in the end. Alex says it best when he says the sham of an electoral process we call the Democratic primary cannot possibly determine the "will of the people." Markos knows better - or he should.

This is nothing more than part of the Obama campaign to use the "we're in the lead" issue to sew doubt about the Clinton campaign. The truth is that NEITHER candidate can now win without a coup by the superdelegates.

The rules are the rules and the rules state a superdelegate gets to make their own personal choice - not the choice of the voters of their state or anywhere else. Just as the argument that the Clinton campaign is trying to change the rules in the middle of the game re MI and FL, the Obama people now want to change the rules re superdelegates. It's just political grandstanding and one is just as bad as the other.

Neither has a "reasonable chance of winning" without superdelegate. Either of them would have to win ALL of the remaining states by 70%+ to win without superdelegates. So until someone gets to 2025, with a negligible difference in actual delegate count and a negligible difference between the popular votes, I just don't think it's smart to throw in the towel in either camp.

So I think it's deceptive to keep perpetuating this "Hillary can't win" meme because it's going to do NOTHING but exactly what Markos says if she does end up winning - create a divide in the party. They'll say she "stole" the election. It is exactly what Obama supporters like Markos are doing that create the divide in the party. Clinton is doing nothing more than what the Obama people are doing - trying to win an election.

By continuing down this path, Markos and other Obama supporters are just setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's despicable and people should see it for what it is - political bullshit.

Oh - and that "slash and burn" language is just hyperbolic and silly. You haven't seen slash and burn until the Republicans turn loose.

I am so tired of gas bag / asswipe blog bullies telling us what to think. Kos and Americablog are both way too invested in the cult of personality (pro-O and anti-C) to be taken seriously anymore.

Not that this is the first time either of them have been ridiculously partisan.

Clinton is waging a civil war...well, ok, you can feel that way. Millions of people have voted for her even after all of the bloggy people have piled on the absolute impossibility of her victory.

I guess those people are also waging a civil war...or is it just the candidate that you don't like?

If there is a civil war (my how dramatic) brewing then it will only make the Kos's and the Aravosises of the world happy...they are the ones that need/love/crave the attention for creating tension out of the already overblown (and under examined) process.

Michael Bedwell | March 18, 2008 11:40 AM

Agree with all three comments, even that of mon petit Alex. :- )

Unless Michael Obama Volunteer and Daily Caustic can take enough time away from selling flowers for Obama at the airport to demonstrate how the nearly 13 million who have voted for Sen. Clinton are not part of the "Democratic electorate" or that, nationwide, he has even 51% of the vote, then this is just a shameless naked attempt at bullying their way to the White House.

Michael Bedwell | March 18, 2008 11:46 AM

On second thought, Obama might have 51%. I don't have the total votes for each before me. The basic question is still valid—does he have enough to define only him as representing the "Democratic electorate"?

I wouldn't be piling up on Kos about the primary process - he's been one of the few bloggers out there calling it stupid since 2004, before it got all this coverage.

He does have some good arguments in that post about the differences in the campaigns and why the netroots have supported Obama more than Clinton. I mean, he simply has a better online campaign and his politics are more in line with the netroots than hers are. Straight up not a surprise that Netroots is leaning Obama.

And I just wouldn't compare his Obama support to Aravosis's. At all - Kos is often critical of the Obama campaign.

Barack Obama is a liar,,,

To all
Obama speech ,,,, Not sure if you caught Not only did Obama,,, Refuses to denounce him,, but even More,, He say in his own words,,,
Barack Obama was in church when Jeremiah Wright,, was spewing Anti-American, Racist ism ,,,, Those were his own words,,, barack was there
After going on keith Oberman ,Show obama said he would denounce that if he heard that language he would leave and not tolerate it , and denounce it
After he went on MSNBC,, he went on FOX CNN ABC But Now today during his speech,,He states flat out Say's HE was there,,, Last week Barack Obama Lied,, went on all the news stations, and Lied,,
But your not reporting that,,,, You can rest assure,,, cnn ,,, Fox , ABC,,, Msnbc,, are getting more on this ,,, they will be reporting on this, and we will see
If you chose to report, Obama Lying on tv,,, If this was Hilary clinton lying and caught lying on all the new station,,, you can be sure,, you would talk about it every hour
people will be on your station debating this,,,, people analysing , if it is hilary clinton but it was not her it was Barack Obama, ,, it bad enought He lied, about being in church
With Jeremiah Write, when he said these anti american ,,,,,and still refuse to denounce him...all the news agency want to do is speak on how good his speech was,
Not that he lied,,, Last week on all the news agency ,, He was never there today in how own speech He say I was there,,,,should play all Obama videos from last week
stating he was not there,,, or heard any of the anti-american Jeremiah Write, said in his churc then play his speech today saying he was there and he did hear him in church and refuse to denounce Jeremiah Write,,,

Oh My! A politician has lied?

Why that is just so...

normal.

George Bush has been lying since he took office, as govenor of Texas. Hasn't stopped since then.
Name a politician and you will name a liar. They are all lying sacks of excrement, and if you believe anything any of them tell you when they are trying to get elected, well I can get you a good deal on some swampland or a bridge.

fomenting civil war?

Good lord. I had no idea the hyperbole knob went up to 11.

Michael, I'm assuming you agree with these quotes since you didn't add any commentary?

I'm gonna agree with Alex and say the whole election process is a scam. Voting has always been and always will be a joke.

And you gotta give Hillary more credit than that. She's not the evil succubus you're making her out to be.