John McCain has scored impressive early successes, and is piling on the votes that matter with actual or projected wins in delegate-heavy New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Arizona, Oklahoma, Delaware and Connecticut. Mike Huckabee has done pretty well too, for somebody thought to be about to withdraw; he has wins in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia and West Virginia (this last a clear case of tactical voting by McCain supporters). Partly because Huckabee has not collapsed, Mitt Romney is struggling. He has four wins so far. If he loses California and its haul of delegates to McCain--and with the polls just closed it seems to be going that way--it is hard to see how he stays in. On Intrade right now you can buy a Romney nomination for less than 5, down five during the course of the evening. McCain will cost you 90.
For the Democrats, it is all about managing expectations. It looks as though both sides are going to be able to claim success. Obama and Clinton are for the most part winning the states they expected to--with the edge to Clinton. She has won in Massachusetts: the polls consistently said she would, though the recent endorsements of the state's governor, Deval Patrick, and a clutch of Kennedys had given Obama hope. Her winning margin in New Jersey looks to be wider than expected too--at least, if one's expectations were based on the Obamania of the past several days. The polls have only just closed in California, but the signs are she is winning there too, thanks to strong support from Latino voters. Obama has done well across the South, and has won Connecticut (against the polls) and Delaware. Offered this a month ago, he would have accepted with gratitude. But a lot changed in that month.
To repeat, the delegate arithmetic for the Democrats is complicated, and way beyond me. Where that count will end up is anybody's guess. (Intrade prices Clinton at 63 right now, up 9 on the night; Obama is down 9 at 37. If if I were free to, I might still buy Obama at that price.) Regardless, at least for now, I'd say the Obama momentum has been checked.
If you are still undecided today then here’s a thought: If you want REAL change and we all do, you have to have a change agent that knows the system and has the contacts to create that change. Democratic nominee will be attacked by the Republican Party and, more importantly slimy political world that surrounds the GOP. These ‘independent’ organizations have a sole purpose: to attack relentlessly, in the most vicious possible ways. Who is best equipped to handle the vicious, continuous attacks that the other side will launch? So who could best stand up and fight? Hillary Clinton has, as she has said, taken this incoming fire for 15 years or more. She’s been unfairly attacked by mainstream media and men who fear a strong intelligent woman like Ted Kennedy. Shes been accused of everything thing the media and obama camp can think of and yet she’s still the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination. She’s proven after super Tuesday shes tougher than boot leather while having a human side. Those are assets that our candidate needs. Hillary Clinton has developed thick skin and the ability to remain calm in campaign combat. Yet, she also knows how to listen to the American people. Qualifications? She’s a successful, liberal US Senator. She’s won a Senate election that by fighting back and campaigning in the non-traditional places in NY. She went to conservative, Republican based northern rural areas and won them over with smart policies, substantive talk and the fact she simply listened! In that most unlikely of places, she won with 67% of the vote. And then in 2006 she won re-election.
I like that she sticks to policy and not continuous personal attacks when she talks, but I also like that she also takes the time to listen when she’s campaigning. (I can testify that having a candidate disciplined enough to force herself to listen to others when it would be so much easier to rush to the next event is unusual in itself.)
I am convinced that Hillary is strong where others, including Barack Obama, would be weak and inexperienced. She will fight the filth machine of the other side with vigor and calmness. She knows how to outmaneuver them.
She’s a warrior. It’s a term seldom applied to women. Yet being a warrior is what she’s been from her Watergate committee staffing experience, through several terms as the First Lady of Arkansas, working on multiple corporate boards fighting for equal rights for workers and women and during her years as First Lady of the US traveling the world. She learned first hand in those travels the foreign issues and realities. Hillary Clinton has made the personal contacts that are will be so valuable in the White House. She has consistently fought for the underdog and the American people. She was a warrior without anyone using the term.
Hillary Clinton knows how to form coalitions on Capitial Hill to get the job done! She has, that ‘bad’ word this election cycle, ‘experience’. JFK, perhaps one of the most inspirational speakers in his day, had 8 years US Senate experience and had taken a run at the Vice Presidency in 1956. He knew government from the inside.
JFK was not an outsider condemning the system and all those in it. If you want change in government you first have to learn how to operate from the inside to get the laws and policies changed. We learned this time and time again from JFK to Bill Clinton.
Posted by Clinton 2008 | February 6, 2008 7:45 AM