Horserace
June 2, 2008 9:20 AM

Starting Gate: “Wheezing” At The End

A weekend of drama at the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee and another blowout win for Hillary Clinton in the Puerto Rico primary puts the race right back where it has been for some weeks now – all but over.

No game changers this weekend as the political world awaits the start of the final two primaries in South Dakota and Montana – and the flood of superdelegate endorsements expected to flow Barack Obama’s way soon afterwards. Just 50 delegates short of the 2,118 now needed to lay claim to the nomination, Obama is just inches away from the prize.

But for all the excitement about this election and the way it has energized the process, it isn’t exactly winding down with a bang for the front-runner. The New York Times yesterday noted that Obama is, in many ways, “wheezing across the finish line.” The paper notes Obama has won just 6 of the 13 contests held since March 4th and has gained about half a million fewer votes than Clinton over that time period. After Puerto Rico, it’s 6 out of 14 and a larger popular vote difference.

Sure, those states included West Virginia and Kentucky, but also Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana. Despite outspending Clinton heavily in that time period, he’s suffered some pretty big losses. If John McCain were losing primaries to Mike Huckabee by 40 points after effectively wrapping up the nomination, his campaign would likely be on life support.

Despite the tough talk from Harold Ickes at Saturday’s DNC meeting, few expect that Clinton will carry her challenge on Michigan to the credentials committee this summer or her campaign to the convention itself. There is no appetite within the party for that, as evidenced by comments by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last week. And, with the primaries ended, it will be harder for those still-undecided superdelegates to find reasons not to endorse.

But Clinton has made her argument crystal clear over recent weeks that she believes herself to be the strongest candidate for the fall election. And Obama’s resignation from his church after months of controversy about his relationship to it was certainly a reminder that Obama in many ways remains an untested – and unknown – candidate. More evidence of that came from CBS News’ poll in Puerto Rico where a full 34 percent of voters there said they didn’t know enough about the candidate to have an opinion of him.

Clinton’s insistence of the superiority of her candidacy, combined with her to-the-end campaign puts her in a position to pick up the pieces if the bottom should drop out of Obama’s campaign before the convention and stand by his side as the nominee at the same time. She doesn’t need to fight to the convention to remain relevant.


Around The Track

  • John McCain addresses AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, this morning in Washington where he’s expected to call for tougher sanctions against Iran and hit Obama over Mideast affairs.

  • “I do not believe that is happening. … It's not -- you know, I'm not aware of it." – Hillary Clinton, responding in a Washington Post interview to reports that her husband is pushing Obama to pick her as his running mate.

  • The Politico reports some of Clinton’s advance staffers are getting word that their role in the campaign is ending: “The advance staffers -- most of them now in Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana -- are being given the options of going to New York for a final day Tuesday, or going home, the aides said. The move is a sign that the campaign is beginning to shed -- at least -- some of its staff.”

  • The Los Angeles Times reports that some Clinton supporters are signaling they would part ways with the campaign if it chooses to fight on to the convention.

  • Clinton’s campaign reacted angrily to a Vanity Fair article exploring the questionable associations Bill Clinton has kept since leaving the White House. The campaign calls the article “a tawdry, anonymous quote-filled attack piece.”

  • Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, mentioned as a potential running mate for McCain, is profiled as a possible conservative cure for the the GOP ticket in today’s New York Times.
  • Tags:
    Obama ,
    Clinton ,
    McCain
    Topics:
    Starting Gate
    Add a Comment See all 19 Comments
    by londoninny June 3, 2008 3:47 PM EDT
    What Hillary has done is akin to winning when the other team leaves the field because the game is over. Obama has been running a general election campaign allowing Clinton to literally camp out in states uncontested to run up margins. The Appalachian Queen and her band of thugs fool no one on the right side of the bell curve with their divisive racist shennanigans. He is "wheezing" across the finish line because he has been playing on a different field since North Carolina & Indiana.
    Reply to this comment
    by tx2democrats June 2, 2008 11:26 PM EDT
    The Beauty that is Rove!

    Rove and his Repigs who dominate
    the media have supported Obama
    from the begining, it was obvious to those of us who are not part of the religious right that Rove would once again be using his
    devisive powers to split the country. They found their patsy
    and the church it would take to bring out a beaten up religiouls right. If Obama wins the nomination, it will be the Repugs in office again.

    If Obama is truly a smart man, he will be quick to ask Hillary to be his running mate.

    I almost wish Hillary will run as an independent just so that we''ll come out and vote, I think by then the country might have woken up.
    Reply to this comment
    by j810nts21 June 2, 2008 9:24 PM EDT
    Is there some doubt in the air? Is the SS Obama sprung a leak? When was the last time he has won a primary? Wasn''t it 500,000 votes that Gore had over bush but bush got the presidency? The Democrats, at least the power players, ought to stop, sit down and take a deep breath then, look at what is going on. Are they blind that they can''t see what is happening? Should we take out the US Constitution and re-read it slowly especially when it comes to the part of WE the PEOPLE? Not anywhere is Superdelegate written. Even if they don''t do that, can''t they see that Obama will not beat McCain. Obama has alienated himself from White people and White people don''t like it. He may have been afraid of looking like Uncle Tom to the Black people but, he couldn''t because he didn''t know how to balance the two. Right now it is he that is splitting the Democrats. I hope they wake up in time by the convention and do some very serious thinking. If the Democrats really want the White House, they must take off the blinders and look around themselves. They must look very deeply and decide who can beat McCain by a very safe margin not to have 2000 rear its ugly face again. Someone wrote "God watch over us" He or She will either it will be over the falls in a barrel or walking up the steps of the White House.
    There is some irony to this, all of a sudden Hillary has become the lesser of evils but, not to throw away your vote but, to win the election.
    Reply to this comment
    by taddles2 June 2, 2008 9:09 PM EDT
    "He can reflect on how he lost all the WHITE VOTE.

    Posted by bswalker12 at 12:49 PM : Jun 02, 2008"


    Not likely, considering the vast majority of Obama supporters are white.
    Reply to this comment
    by taddles2 June 2, 2008 9:08 PM EDT
    "Does the DNC really realize what they are doing to our country? Considering the
    total vote count

    Posted by PULTO1 at 02:17 PM : Jun 02, 2008"


    The total vote count does not include a correct count for Michigan since Obama''s name was not on the ballot, nor does it include the votes from several caucus states which Obama won by 60%.

    The primary is not about vote totals any more than the GE is. Please recall that Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 and lost the election in the electoral college.

    The primary is based purely on delegate count. If Hillary can convince enough delegates from the states and from the super-delegate pool to vote for her, she wins. I don''t understand why people always want to change the rules when they are losing.
    Reply to this comment
    by notopennshut June 2, 2008 6:25 PM EDT
    Since when has the party selected their nominee based on the number of popular votes? It states that the nominee who has the required number of delegates will be the nominee. Of course, the super delegates have the right to support whoever they choose, it does not force them to support one or the other. This independence allows them to select the one they see as the better candidate. This allow provides them a way out if by chance, an "unacceptable" candidate has the most pledged delegates on his/her side. So now Hillary wants to change the rules?? All those spewing poison and trash, led by the woman who claims the "throne" is rightfully hers, is just being led by a vindictive candidate who has shown that all she has done is divide the party, and will truly divide this country even more than GW. Mercifully, the super delegates will see the light and help lead us out of this hole that we find ourselves in. Cheaters and liars, we have had many in the administration, we do not need any more for the next years. The Clintons,without morals and ethics are surely not the right ones to lead us forward.
    Reply to this comment
    by notopennshut June 2, 2008 6:23 PM EDT
    Since when has the party selected their nominee based on the number of popular votes? It states that the nominee who has the required number of delegates will be the nominee. Of course, the super delegates have the right to support whoever they choose, it does not force them to support one or the other. This independence allows them to select the one they see as the better candidate. This allow provides them a way out if by chance, an "unacceptable" candidate has the most pledged delegates on his/her side. So now Hillary wants to change the rules?? All those spewing poison and trash, led by the woman who claims the "throne" is rightfully hers, is just being led by a vindictive candidate who has shown that all she has done is divide the party, and will truly divide this country even more than GW. Mercifully, the super delegates will see the light and help lead us out of this hole that we find ourselves in. Cheaters and liars, we have had many in the administration, we do not need any more for the next years. The Clintons,without morals and ethics are surely not the right ones to lead us forward.
    Reply to this comment
    by pulto1 June 2, 2008 5:17 PM EDT
    Does the DNC really realize what they are doing to our country? Considering the
    total vote count, {I believe the "people" should elect our President- not politicians) and all the other variables, why are you doing everything you can
    to try to get the most electable candidate to "quit"!! You are absolutely forcing thousands of Democrats to vote for the opposition. Then- who wins... May God watch over us.


    s
    Reply to this comment
    by reddog2113 June 2, 2008 3:38 PM EDT
    Whatever can they be thinking at the DNC and in the superdelegate crowd? Does any party in its right mind go into a presidential election with a candidate that has lost the popular vote by over 500,00 votes, and has lost New York, Florida, California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, etc. - and who didn''t win the white middle class working American vote either, in the states which traditionally "elect" the president? Something is wrong here. Someone is pandering to someone. Someone is not thinking. Someone is politically suicidal. Someone has been brainwashed. And it must be those Democratic politicians that we elected. I am going back to the Republican party.
    Reply to this comment
    by kcostell-2009 June 2, 2008 3:15 PM EDT
    One other thing worth noting...6 out of 14 is a statistic cherry-picked to leave out the states where Obama did well by leaving in those where Clinton did well.

    If we instead look at all the elections after Super Tuesday, we could just as easily say that Clinton only won 8 of 24 (33% since Super Tuesday) instead of Obama winning 6 out of 14 (43% since Obama won 10 in a row).
    Reply to this comment
    by kcostell-2009 June 2, 2008 3:12 PM EDT
    You claim that "If John McCain were losing primaries to Mike Huckabee by 40 points after effectively wrapping up the nomination, his campaign would likely be on life support" seems unlikely.

    In the first day of elections after McCain effectively wrapped up the nomination (by dominating super Tuesday), McCain took a plurality of 26% of the vote in Washington, lost Louisiana to Huckabee... and lost Kansas to Huckabee by close to 40 points. His candidacy survived just fine.
    Reply to this comment
    by renonv5 June 2, 2008 3:01 PM EDT
    Millions and millions of dollars and he is wheezing. I love it. Bet you didn''t expect that from a typical white woman.
    Reply to this comment
    by renonv5 June 2, 2008 2:54 PM EDT
    He has only taken 6 out of 14? And he still declares himself the winner?? along with 500,000 FEWER VOTES??? Makes you wonder who is really winning here? The DNC is destroying their own party.
    Reply to this comment
    by sandrawells June 2, 2008 2:38 PM EDT
    those people who wanted to run in that IL campaign ,in which Baaarack disenfranchised those black voters, did not leave their jobs, which were running for that state representative office, instead
    Baaarack used dirty , but legal, tricks to get them out of there

    then later -- in his US senatorial campaign -- got his HIGH placed political IL buddies to unseal an opponent''s SEALED DIVORCE RECORDS---and wow --- the way was made clear for him once again

    the only way this man can win is by dirty, old political shameful tricks -- want him for president --- ??? then be ready for what is really behind his smokescreen of niceness and fairness and change (HA-he doesn''t want change -- he wants POWER) I just hate it that his tainted character and politically fired decisions for churches and friends , etc may not be revealed until it is too late for America
    Reply to this comment
    by DCropp June 2, 2008 2:31 PM EDT
    After reading the Vanity Fair article, I now understand why so many Republicans have been pushing for Hillary to win the nomination.

    Bill Clinton would provide Republicans with enough advertising material for months.
    Reply to this comment
    by chinchin6 June 2, 2008 2:03 PM EDT
    TO SANDRAWELLS, I GUESS IF YOU LEAVE YOUR PRESENT JOB FOR A NEW ONE AND I TAKE YOUR OLD JOB AND THINGS DID NOT WORK OUT FOR YOU AT THE NEW JOB , I GUESS I SHOULD JUST MOVE ASIDE FOR YOU TO SNUGGLE RIGHT BACK IN!!
    Reply to this comment
    by sandrawells June 2, 2008 1:26 PM EDT
    Please, Expose Baaarack for his disenfranchising the black IL voters in his very first campaign

    a old time, dirty tricks political maneuver -- legal ?? yess --- right , fair, NO-O-O and so counter to the image he wants us to believe in -- he hides soooo much behind a smokescreen ---EXPOSE HIS SHAMS AND SCAMS BEFORE HE CAN REALLY HURT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
    Reply to this comment
    by craigh9 June 2, 2008 1:22 PM EDT
    That is exactly the problem with Hillary - she has no political accumen, only personal desire regardless of what lies in it''s wake. By continuing this campaign beyond she has polarized the party to the breaking point - and she doesn''t care, it''s her nomination of she will make sure whoever gets it loses so she can try again in 4 years - doesn''t say much for her love of the country or her leadership skills
    Reply to this comment
    by stirg June 2, 2008 1:00 PM EDT
    I suggest you go to the Hillary.com blogs and see the overwhelming support for Hillary to fight on to the convention. That is the truth-not just some wishful thinking for some Obama reporter. Also look at the numbers of supporters who will not support Obama.
    Reply to this comment
    See all 19 Comments

    About Horserace

    Description for Horserace

    Add to your favorite news reader
    google
    yahoo
    msn
    • MOST POPULAR
    Discussed
    1. U.S. to Seek Death Penalty in 9/11 Cases

      (375 recent comments)