Hillary Running Out of Time and Money

[Herb Schaffler]

From Commentis free.guardian.co.uk:

Clinton's success in Pennsylvania should not be entirely discounted. She did, after all, face an enormous fundraising disadvantage, with Obama having outspent her by as much as three to one. But demographically, Pennsylvania was tailor-made for the Clinton coalition. As such, her steady decline in support over the past six weeks is striking still. In the first polls taken after Texas and Ohio, Clinton led by as much as 25 points in the state.
For Clinton, trouble does not end with Obama's potential gain of new superdelegates. The Obama campaign launched a cold-war style arms race in Pennsylvania, spending so much money that he effectively bankrupted the Clinton campaign. As of April, Obama has $42m cash on hand to Clinton's $9m - and Clinton is $10m in the red. Like Reagan did to the Soviet Union, Obama spent the Clinton Empire to death. With the little money she had left, she needed to buy herself a much larger victory. She needed to buy herself a new rationale for her tired candidacy. Instead, all she bought herself was a little more time.
This campaign will surely continue on for at least another two weeks. But ultimately, without the money, votes, and delegates she needs, Hillary Clinton is out of options, out of scenarios and out of reasons to continue.

[nohil-billy]

You ought to teach a course in wishful thinking, Herb. Or maybe Spin 101.

[Herb Schaffler]

I think Hillary is the one who is engaging in wishful thinking if she thinks she can really pull this off. If Obama ends up with the most delegates in the end, which he will, the superdelegates are not going to disenfranchise the people who voted for Obama.

[nohil-billy]

Of course she is Herb, no doubt about it. The odds are about 95% against her but as long as there's a chance, she'll fight on.

As for disenfranchising the voters, what voters are you talking about? Blacks? Obama has garnered the same percentage of black votes as Kerry and Gore. The educated, liberal, college crowd? They're votes will be offset by the white working class who have become distrustful of Obama. How about the Jews and elderly in Florida? The blue collar workers in Michigan?

Seems like no matter what they do, the Democrats will be disenfranchising somebody.

Face it Herb, Obama's lost so much backing that she's actually looking like the most viable candidate and she will not quit while that's the case. The longer she stays in, the more the party becomes fractured. Maybe you can go to the convention in Denver and sign the cast.

[Herb Schaffler]

By disenfranchising, I mean if Obama ends up with the most pledged delegates and Hillary talks enough superdelegates into supporting her to win the nomination, people will feel cheated. Their candidate would have won in pledged delegates, but the Democratic establishment will have stolen it away from them in their eyes. I believe this will cause a mass exodus from the Democratic Party. Hillary will go down in history as the person who destroyed the Democratic Party.

"Face it Herb, Obama's lost so much backing that she's actually looking like the most viable candidate "

Not true! Hillary can never be the most viable candidate of the Democratic Party. If she is on the ticket, Republicans will turn up in droves to vote against her. She can unite the Republican Party more than any single person. Also bitter disenfranchised Democrats will not vote for her. She could end up losing in a landslide. Not only will she lose, Democrats will lose control of Congress as the droves of Republicans will vote for Republican candidates for Congress while they're there voting against Hillary.

[nohil-billy]

I know what you mean Herb, but my point is who hasn't been disenfranchised by one or the other and will it really make a difference?

I said at the beginning that blacks were going to overwhelmingly back Obama. The Clintons knew this and campaigned accordingly. They were going for that 10% or so that the Republicans usually go for in the general. Do you think they care if the blacks' feelings are hurt? And if you think about it, President Clinton was hailed by African Americans as the first black president and he even has his offices in Harlem, yet they turned their backs on Hillary as soon as a black man ran for president. Who was disenfranchised by whom?

The Democrats have been playing a game of Identity Politics for a long time now and it's come back to bite them in the butt. And I'm loving it.

[Herb Schaffler]

"they turned their backs on Hillary as soon as a black man ran for president. Who was disenfranchised by whom? "

That's not entirely accurate. In the beginning, they were more evenly divided between Hillary and Obama. It wasn't until after Obama won Iowa and then Bill made his race-baiting comments that the blacks started moving more towards Obama.

"The Democrats have been playing a game of Identity Politics for a long time now and it's come back to bite them in the butt. And I'm loving it."

You're right about that, nohil-billy. Just like they and the feminists have always supported sexual harassment laws, but it was a different story when Bill was caught literally with his pants down. The feminists who continued to support Bill, have destroyed all credibility.