Hillary Clinton, Fratricidal Maniac

The New Republic: Hillary Clinton's Continued Run Is Damaging The Democrats' Chances

(The New Republic)  This column was written by Jonathan Chait.

---

The morning after Tuesday's primaries, Hillary Clinton's campaign released a memo titled "The Path to the Presidency." I eagerly dug into the paper, figuring it would explain how Clinton would obtain the Democratic nomination despite an enormous deficit in delegates. Instead, the memo offered a series of arguments as to why Clinton should run against John McCain - i.e., "Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done" - but nothing about how she actually could. Is she planning a third-party run? Does she think Obama is going to die? The memo does not say.

The reason it doesn't say is that Clinton's path to the nomination is pretty repulsive. She isn't going to win at the polls. Barack Obama has a lead of 144 pledged delegates. That may not sound like a lot in a 4,000-delegate race, but it is. Clinton's Ohio win reduced that total by only nine. She would need 15 more Ohios to pull even with Obama. She isn't going to do much to dent, let alone eliminate, his lead.

That means, as we all have grown tired of hearing, that she would need to win with superdelegates. But, with most superdelegates already committed, Clinton would need to capture the remaining ones by a margin of better than two to one. And superdelegates are going to be extremely reluctant to overturn an elected delegate lead the size of Obama's. The only way to lessen that reluctance would be to destroy Obama's general election viability, so that superdelegates had no choice but to hand the nomination to her. Hence her flurry of attacks, her oddly qualified response as to whether Obama is a Muslim ("not as far as I know"), her repeated suggestions that John McCain is more qualified.

Clinton's justification for this strategy is that she needs to toughen up Obama for the general election-if he can't handle her attacks, he'll never stand up to the vast right-wing conspiracy. Without her hazing, warns the Clinton memo, "Democrats may have a nominee who will be a lightening rod of controversy." So Clinton's offensive against the likely nominee is really an act of selflessness. And here I was thinking she was maniacally pursuing her slim thread of a chance, not caring - or possibly even hoping, with an eye toward 2012 - that she would destroy Obama's chances of defeating McCain in the process. I feel ashamed for having suspected her motives.

Still, there are a few flaws in Clinton's trial-by-smear method. The first is that her attacks on Obama are not a fair proxy for what he'd endure in the general election, because attacks are harder to refute when they come from within one's own party. Indeed, Clinton is saying almost exactly the same things about Obama that McCain is: He's inexperienced, lacking in substance, unequipped to handle foreign policy. As The Washington Monthly's Christina Larson has pointed out, in recent weeks the nightly newscasts have consisted of Clinton attacking Obama, McCain attacking Obama, and then Obama trying to defend himself and still get out his own message. If Obama's the nominee, he won't have a high-profile Democrat validating McCain's message every day.

Second, Obama can't "test" Clinton the way she can test him. While she likes to claim that she beat the Republican attack machine, it's more accurate to say that she survived with heavy damage. Clinton is a wildly polarizing figure, with disapproval ratings at or near 50 percent. But, because she earned the intense loyalty of core Democratic partisans, Obama has to tread gingerly around her vulnerabilities. There is a big bundle of ethical issues from the 1990s that Obama has not raised because he can't associate himself with what partisan Democrats (but not Republicans or swing voters) regard as a pure GOP witch hunt.

What's more, Clinton has benefited from a favorable gender dynamic that won't exist in the fall. (In the Democratic primary, female voters have outnumbered males by nearly three to two.) Clinton's claim to being a tough, tested potential commander-in-chief has gone almost unchallenged. Obama could reply that being First Lady doesn't qualify you to serve as commander-in-chief, but he won't quite say that, because feminists are an important chunk of the Democratic electorate. John McCain wouldn't be so reluctant.

Third, negative campaigning is a negative-sum activity. Both the attacker and the attackee tend to see their popularity drop. Usually, the victim's popularity drops farther than the perpetrator's, which is why negative campaigning works. But it doesn't work so well in primaries, where the winner has to go on to another election.

Clinton's path to the nomination, then, involves the following steps: kneecap an eloquent, inspiring, reform-minded young leader who happens to be the first serious African American presidential candidate (meanwhile cementing her own reputation for Nixonian ruthlessness) and then win a contested convention by persuading party elites to override the results at the polls. The plan may also involve trying to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations, after having explicitly agreed that the results would not count toward delegate totals. Oh, and her campaign has periodically hinted that some of Obama's elected delegates might break off and support her. I don't think she'd be in a position to defeat Hitler's dog in November, let alone a popular war hero.

Some Clinton supporters, like my friend (and historian) David Greenberg, have been assuring us that lengthy primary fights go on all the time and that the winner doesn't necessarily suffer a mortal wound in the process. But Clinton's kamikaze mission is likely to be unusually damaging. Not only is the opportunity cost - to wrap up the nomination, and spend John McCain into the ground for four months - uniquely high, but the venue could not be less convenient. Pennsylvania is a swing state that Democrats will almost certainly need to win in November, and Clinton will spend seven weeks and millions of dollars there making the case that Obama is unfit to set foot in the White House. You couldn't create a more damaging scenario if you tried.

Imagine in 2000, or 2004, that George W. Bush faced a primary fight that came down to Florida (his November must-win state). Imagine his opponent decided to spend seven weeks pounding home the theme that Bush had a dangerous plan to privatize Social Security. Would this have improved Bush's chances of defeating the Democrats? Would his party have stood for it?

[pvperson]

Hillary is down by what, 5%? It depends on who''s counting I guess. This article says that it''s "4,000-delegate race", that puts her down 2 and a half percent. Why doesn''t OBAMA give up? He''s hurting the party, he may cost the democrats the White House, and blah, blah, blah. It amazes me that everyone automatically assumes that Clinton should throw in the towel when she still has a chance to win.

[dinslc]

Hillary basically endorsed McCain. Any democrat should absolutely denounce AND reject her. She doesn''t care about getting a democrat into office, she only cares about getting herSELF into office. Hillary is a disgrace.

[mcvet]

Hillary basically endorsed McCain. Any democrat should absolutely denounce AND reject her. She doesn''''t care about getting a democrat into office, she only cares about getting herSELF into office. Hillary is a disgrace.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by dinslc at 12:49 PM : Mar 07, 2008
+ report abuse

Hilary did none of that!! Look you are obviously one scared Fascist and you should be but the Democrat Party will decide which it will be and we''ll all get behind that person and move the nation forward. What OTHER choice do we have. The guy opposing them want''s to keep everything the same... that''s a non starter that''s for sure. Sieg Heil Bush

[jon2012-2009]

"Imagine in 2000, or 2004, that George W. Bush faced a primary fight that came down to Florida (his November must-win state). Imagine his opponent decided to spend seven weeks pounding home the theme that Bush had a dangerous plan to privatize Social Security. Would this have improved Bush''s chances of defeating the Democrats? Would his party have stood for it?"

Please don''t compare Republicans and Democrats when it comes to political maneuvering and shenanigans. The Democrats don''t come even close.

I agree it''s a lost cause for Hillary but that''s her call. The fight for the nomination can''t get any more damaging to the chances of either candidate come November than it''s been from the beginning. Your concerns about the Democratic Party getting the short end of the stick in the general election as a result of this prolonged process seem a bit exaggerated.

[susanvoigt]

This article expresses my sentiments.
Hillary is "being" exactly what we have.
Her "quality" and "tone" is just "more of the same."
Her "fight" stance is precisely why we have wars.
Her "fight" position pushes people to fight back.
"Fight" is how America is seen and how America is seen is in need of an overhaul.
Obama''s "quality" and "tone" stabilizes.
A steady, consistent, firm, positive pulse.
I don''t think we should allow Hillary Clinton to destroy.
I think she needs a very firm "No."

[hotelguy60]

Every Democrat better understand that the goal is to win in Nov. I (and You ) better vote for that person. Show me the pol where Clinton beats McCain in Nov.

[spiderpaz]

CNN''s front page article right now, "Invalid vote keep Clinton, Obama stuck" is absolutely stupid. They basically claim that because FL and MI aren''t being counted that neither can reach 2,024 delegates to clinch the nomination without superdelegates. And that somehow the party "must" figure out how to count them to break the deadlock. But they conveniently omit the fact that a) neither of them are likely to get enough votes to actually pass the mark even if FL and MI *do* get do-overs, and b) the mark is no longer 2,024 if FL and MI are counted. So it looks like either their reports don''t understand how the system works, or they are trying to put pressure on the Dems to count FL and MI (maybe for HRC''s benefit, maybe for McCain''s...who knows).

[spiderpaz]

She is the Democratic Party''s biggest liability. We couldn''t have possibly found a worse candidate. She is trying to sabotage Obama''s general election campaign even though he will most likely be the candidate and She is almost certain to lose. Way to back stab your own party Hillary! The Clintons are such scumbags.

[hotelguy60]

I have not seen one pol that shows that Hillary beats McCain. You must be dreaming. Every Democrat better understand that we must vote for the person who will beat McCain. Not one pol has her doing that. Show us and tell us which pol shows her winning. Every pol shows her about 10 points down. He is up 10 to 12 points. Show me the money (pol).

[Marie Zarankevich]

Dear Jonathan Chait, thank you so very much for your article. It''s about time somebody began to state the truth of what is happening in this primary process. Our dear Ms. Hellary is currently making a shambles of our entire election proceedings. It is, at the very least, embarrassing before the world. She is becoming a loose cannon that someone ought to reel in.

GOD BLESS YOU, MR. CHAIT! As a Dem-leaning Independent, Clinton''s show of boorish behavior simply serves as a reminder of her past abhorent behavior. I find it remarkable how short our collective memory is. Hillary is about Hillary and her drive for power. God help the American people should they stand in her way.

[crusherking]

Thanks Hillary!! You are making our(conservatives) job so much easier in keeping the white house. I knew I could count on you to completely destroy the Democratic parties chances of winning. For once, I applaud your efforts.

[nobama-2009]

From all the debates it is apparent that Obama lacks the "charm" when not on stage and in front of his own crowd reading from a prepared speech. Too bad it is taken this long or people to see that it takes more than pretty speeches to run this country. Also we have had a inexperienced president for the past 7 years do we need another one.

I think Mccain will win the national if Obama is the nominee. We already know everything about Hillary...and the Bill jokes are way over-tired. But I think we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg of Obama''s skeletons. From Nafta to rumors of gay *** with limo drivers to charges of his wife being a racist.....c''mon the Republicans can''t wait to get ahold of this guy.

Most people will vote based on emotion and not reason...so we will probably get the slick talker!
I will vote for Nader if Obama is the nominee and order my bumper sticker...."Don''t blame me I voted for Clinton!"

NOBAMA ''08

[hillsangels1]

People need to get updated across the board. New polls are indeed showing that Hillary beats McCain in the fall. Sorry, but she has won the states that the dems will HAVE to win in the fall. And CBS should have issued a disclaimer about this article from The New Rebublic (staunchly anti-hillary) because it is full of holes, all over the place. CBS, publish responsibly please.

[cathryn48]

Imagine had Obama chastised Clinton as she did him "Shame on you Hillary! Shame on you!" His campaign would''ve been over, the public would have smacked him down....the result of her yelling at him like she was his mother? nothing...plain and simple nothing. It is disgusting that she gets away with her venomous attacks.

[xzonz]

democrats, you know what you have to do and what you want, who you want in the WH. this article is from a very credible source this has been the best year for the democrats in years

what i will do is i will vote for Barack, let come what may. voting for Hillary is like voting for rep

after 8 yrs or say 20 coz the rep controlled the house.this election could easily go to the reps- is it because we cant do something about it? i think not
democrats your vote has never been more important-use it wisely

[boulderex]

Interesting! Many people have forgotten that the only concern that many of us have about Senator Clinton is that she is a Clinton. I believe that most of us learned a lesson from the Bush''s that families can carry baggage from father to son, or husband to wife. Surely we can look to great leaders outside of a few families? My hope is that Senator Obama is our nominee and he selects a women other than Senator Clinton.

[xzonz]

People need to get updated across the board. New polls are indeed showing that Hillary beats McCain in the fall. Sorry, but she has won the states that the dems will HAVE to win in the fall. And CBS should have issued a disclaimer about this article from The New Rebublic (staunchly anti-hillary) because it is full of holes, all over the place. CBS, publish responsibly please.

Posted by hillsangels1 at 01:51 PM : Mar 07,
-------------------------------------------------

i just have to google info from goverment sites to know what i want and i have been closely fwollowing the campaign. i saw how she won Michigan and Florida and i see how she comes demanding for the delegates to be seated and all sorry im not for Hillary. im sure you are a republican as she is, join her in praising john Macain

[xzonz]

People need to get updated across the board. New polls are indeed showing that Hillary beats McCain in the fall. Sorry, but she has won the states that the dems will HAVE to win in the fall. And CBS should have issued a disclaimer about this article from The New Rebublic (staunchly anti-hillary) because it is full of holes, all over the place. CBS, publish responsibly please.

Posted by hillsangels1 at 01:51 PM : Mar 07,
-------------------------------------------------

i just have to Google info from government sites to know what i want and i have been closely following the campaign. i saw how she won Michigan and Florida and i see how she comes demanding for the delegates to be seated and all sorry im not for Hillary. im sure you are a republican as she is, join her in praising john Macain

Yes, polls do show she beats McCain.

They also show 20% of White Demcrats will vote for McCain rather than Obama. The evaporation rate for Obama is great while low for Hillary.

Also, I agree, Republicans would love to go after Michelle Obama''s verging-on-racist comments.

Read the recent New Yorker articles on her.

[edebrewer]

What people on the left need to remember is how strongly Hillary evokes emotions out of the right. Any real conservative regards her as a villian. There is no way to overstate how distasteful she is to me or my idealogical brothers. Most true conservatives are hoping that she is the dems candidate in the fall specifically so this election can humiliate her and show her how intensely she is not liked. In order for either party to win, their candidate must appear to be moderate, and Hillary will never appear to be moderate to those on the right.

[presence32]

Jonathan Chait is exactly right in this article.

Worse yet, Hillary thinks this is good. It is obvious that as far as she is concerned, it would be just fine to destroy Obama''s chances this year. It would simplyallow her to say "see, you should have picked me'', and come back in 2012.

My fiance and I were initially favorably inclined towards Billary, thinking of some possibility of capitalizing on Bill''s good foreign reputation. But their unethical, amoral, scorched earth policy in this campaign has turned me 100% against her. If she wins the nomination I''m working for McCain. If she wins the election, we''re moving to another country.

[latinovoter1]

NAFTA-GATE, has Clintons fingerpfints ALL OVER IT. After, seeing the UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE OF OHIO, boo hoo about Nafta, they turned around and voted for her. I hope all the Steel Workers and Factory Workers in PENN STATE, dont fall for her ruthless campaign tactics.

[xzonz]

PLEASE PEOPLE ARRANGE FOR HER TO BE GRILLED PROPER AS TO HOW OBAMA BRINGS SPEECHES. ITS AN INSULT TO ALL OF YOU HARVARD GRADUATES, LEGISLATORS AND SENATORS-

[xzonz]

Yes, polls do show she beats McCain.

They also show 20% of White Demcrats will vote for McCain rather than Obama. The evaporation rate for Obama is great while low for Hillary.

Also, I agree, Republicans would love to go after Michelle Obama''''s verging-on-racist comments.

Read the recent New Yorker articles on her.
----------------------------------------------------
mICHELE APOLOGISED AND SO DID mACAIN WHEn the radio show hos was apparently "working up people" before his arrival at a campaighn venue-how easily we forget

[presence32]

Jonathan Chait is exactly right in this article.

Worse yet, Hillary thinks this is good. She obviously sees no problem in destroying Obama''s chances this year. If she wins then great, if not, she just comes back in 2012 and says "see, you should have picked me"...

My fiance and I were initially favorably inclined towards Hillary and Bill, thinking of some possibility of capitalizing on Bill''s good foreign reputation. Even after becoming impressed by Obama''s substance and thoughtfulness, she seemed like a good option. But her unethical, amoral, scorched earth actions in this campaign have permanently turned us 100% against her.

If she wins the nomination I''m *working for* McCain. If she wins the election, we''re moving to another country.

[trevorbsmith]

I find it interesting that you suggest Mrs. Clinton must convince superdelegates to "override the results at the polls."

However, the fact is that currently, including Florida but NOT Michigan, nation wide Mrs. Clinton has approximately 49.5% of the popular vote while Mr. Obama has approximately 50.5%. In over 26 million votes cast, there is a difference of less than 300,000 separating the two. Pennsylvania is slightly larger than Ohio and due to the increased importance of its primary it seems reasonable to believe it will have at least as much voter turnout as Ohio did. In Ohio, Mrs. Clinton beat Mr. Obama by about 230,000 votes.

He may have more pledged delegates but it is far from a certainty that Mr. Obama will have the majority of the popular vote at the convention.

I do NOT include Michigan because Mr. Obama''s name was not on the ballot so the results in that state are not properly measurable.

I include Florida because to ignore their votes is to see Mr. Obama''s lead from a rules-based, technical viewpoint, rather than a true, will of the people viewpoint. To adhere to a strict, rules-based viewpoint requires that one allow the superdelegates to do exactly what they are supposed to do, and support whichever candidate they want to, regardless of how other people have voted. To force them to vote as "the people" have voted makes their votes worthless and renders them irrelevant. Clearly this is what Mr. Obama hopes for and Mrs. Clinton wants to avoid.

[beinformed]

CBS, I applaud your ability to bring to light some of the reasons that Obama has said that he will take the high road and not run a negative campaign. The media and his supporters do it for him so well. He does not have to stoop to that level because he has people like Jonathan Chait and the media out there doing it for him.

I can not believe how irresponsible our media has been in reporting the truth about Obama. People, if you think Hillary has been hard on him for asking valid questions about his ability to be the next commander-in-chief, wait until the Republicans get to sink their teeth into him. There are important issues about him that have not been widely circulated in the news (they are not tabloid fodder). GET INFORMED before you name-call and tear others down, at least then you won''t sound foolish and you won''t make your candidate of choice more unappealing to intelligent, informed voters...

Some people could claim that Obama is tearing the Democratic party apart. Just think about it... and think with a cool head, not like some zealot that buys into slogans, pretty speeches and propaganda.

Our country''s future depends on an educated electorate. Get out there and demand better reporting from the media, and learn as much as you can about your candidate before we confirm the rest of the world''s idea that Americans are just a bunch of idiots.

[presence32]

Jonathan Chait is exactly right in this article.

Worse yet, Hillary thinks this is good. She obviously sees no problem in destroying Obama''s chances this year. If she wins then great, if not, she just comes back in 2012 and says "see, you should have picked me"...

My fiance and I were initially favorably inclined towards Hillary and Bill, thinking of some possibility of capitalizing on Bill''s good foreign reputation. Even after becoming impressed by Obama''s substance and thoughtfulness, she seemed like a good option. But her unethical, amoral, scorched earth actions in this campaign have permanently turned us 100% against her.

If she wins the nomination I''m *working for* McCain. If she wins the election, we''re moving to another country.

[allamericand]

Your article is simply brilliant.

It''s so disappointing to see how some very very few journalists can pretend to fit that standard in country like the US. For an american who''s spent more than 20 years abroad I can tell you that we are one of the less sophisticated people on hearth, politically speaking. It''s not because we want to but because of the symbiotic relationship between corrupt politicians and ignorant journalists who evolve in an abject cretinism like the Jake Tapper from ABC, the Jessica Yellin or Wolff Blitzer from CNN (Clinton News Network) just to name the few.

It''s all about ratings. That leads us straight to a Jerry Springer format and it will get there sooner than we think.

Well I think Americans will have to watch less

[presence32]

Jonathan Chait is exactly right in this article.

Worse yet, Hillary thinks this is good. She obviously sees no problem in destroying Obama''s chances this year. If she wins then great, if not, she just comes back in 2012 and says "see, you should have picked me"...

My fiance and I were initially favorably inclined towards Hillary and Bill, thinking of some possibility of capitalizing on Bill''s good foreign reputation. Even after becoming impressed by Obama''s substance and thoughtfulness, she seemed like a good option. But her unethical, amoral, scorched earth actions in this campaign have permanently turned us 100% against her.

If she wins the nomination I''m *working for* McCain. If she wins the election, we''re moving to another country.

[oleander8]

We all know Republicans are scared to death to run against Hillary Clinton - and are praying the naive kid from Chicago gets the nod.

[allamericand]

To Cathryn48:
Indeed, the mianstream media would have waged a war against the big black guy brutalizing the gentle white woman

[xzonz]

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries. 1) Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. 2) Because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the votes showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals show. And her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama%u2019s.

Maybe the media, and some sharp, aggressive investigative reporters, and academics would like to look into this. I hear there has been an astonishingly high rate of this type of cheating of the DEMOCRATIC primary voters. Since few of these Republican voters plan to vote for Obama in November.

Sounds like a major scandal to me. And what can the DNC, and the super delegates do to correct this crime against Hillary Clinton supporters, and the Democratic party, and process.

Jacksmith...

Posted by herfan at 02:32 PM : Mar 07, 2008
-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
SPIN IT ROUND AND ROUND........................

[presence32]

sorry about the multiple copy posts -- the web site kept returning a mesage that "The Publish button is (offline) and will be available shortly...", but apparently it took the posts anyway.

[manner6]

What would be happening now if Obama had won Florida and Michigan and didn''t get the delegates? Well I''ll tell you--lots and lots of whining,accusations and race cards flying all over the place.

[presence32]

Where are Xzonz and oleander8 getting their information?

oleander8: the Rs want nothing better to run against HRC -- she is the weakest candidate by far. First, she has 47% NEGATIVE rating, i.e., 47% of all likely voters say they WIL NOT vote for Hillary UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Second, she is so polarizing that she will motivate every conservative to be sure get off their couches and vote AGAINST her. She is the one D candidate that the Rs can count on to generate an opposition turnout.

Xzonz: Rs voting for Obama to make trouble? You have it backwards. Rush Limbaugh agitated in the last weeks for the Rs to come out and vote for HRC to cause trouble, and the TX and OH numbers show that he had some success. The R-voting-in-the-D-primary voters were about even in TX&OH, vs about 60/40% Obama/HRC in other primaries. If you actually read the polls instead of making up stuff, you''d find that the Rs voting for Obama are actually impressed and are voting FOR him, not against someone else.

In fact, of the three, only McCain and Obama have the courage to take unpolular stands in front of crowds with opposing views.

[rynnegade]

Wow. What a freakish article. "Fratricidal Maniac"? "Repulsive"? Tell us Jonathan, what crawled inside you and died?

The fact that this guy is on an accredited news-site is frightening.

[jla8883]

This is the most one sided piece of *** story i have ever read i thought the media was supposed to be unbiased people like you are the reason why people don''t vote because you make them believe there vote doesn''t count you obama supporters are just scared because he is finally showing his true colors which is that hes a scared little kid who could never run against the big dogs of the republican party the day Obama gets nominated is the day the democratic party dies it will never survive having two of the worst nominees in party history back to back in John Kerry and Barack Obama

[amy_2-2009]

Mr. Chait,

Obviously you are an Obama fanatic, but you have to understand that POLITICS is now a very UNPREDICTABLE kind of game. Who would have thought that Hillary who used to be a strong frontrunning democratic candidate could stumble and had many times been near political death? November is still a loooong way to go and MANY things can HAPPEN. Nothing is certain anymore. Obama maybe riding high now but unforseen events may also derail his chances. His campaign maybe magical but how long can it be sustained? He doesn''t have a fallback on because HE DOES NOT have a record that is sooo REMARKABLE as to sustain him. My friends abroad were thinking that Obama may have done something HEROICS in the past to have merited this kind of adulation. But I told them that according to media reports he is very good at community organization. Then my friends commented : so a very good organizer can now be a very good credential to hold the toughest job in the world?

[kmkeeling]

I am really tired of these kind of attacks on Senator Clinton. The press may want Senator Clinton to withdraw from the race, but the voting public obviously doesn''t as evidenced by her recent wins. As far as electability, if McCain continues to align himself with President Bush''s policies while our economy worsens and there is no end to the Iraq War in sight, I don''t think there will a Republican President elected in 2008 or for a long time to come.

[lawyertom1]

Usual NR guano. No surprise.

[amy_2-2009]

Mr Chait,

This is amy_2. this is a continuation of my comments above: So I would say that Obamamania is just magic, which in essence is empty. If I were in Hillary''s shoes, I would also fight him to the end because "magic" is not REAL. With all the problems that America is facing, people may just wake up one day (not favorable to Obama if this happens before November) and realize that you don''t need magic, charisma and good rhetorics to solve America''s problems. Just like a newly married couple, when the honeymoon (magic) is over then you go thru the realities of life. Maybe reality had set in already with Ohio and Texas that is why they voted for Hillary (maybe the magic is starting to wane)

[StacyQ2007]

The fact is based on %u201Cthe math,%u201D neither candidate can secure the nomination without the support of super delegates. Furthermore, Clinton has a good chance of winning the popular vote, a factor that will and should influence the decision of super delegates. Mr. Chait, I know you want to generate controversy, but your statement %u201CI don''t think she''d (Clinton) be in a position to defeat Hitler''s dog in November, let alone a popular war hero,%u201D is over the top and disingenuous as the most recent polls show Clinton beating McCain in November.

[sosoe-2009]

I am a 54-year old female who has been a Clinton supporter, and a Democrat, all my life. I twice voted for Bill for president. Hillary was my choice this election year, UNTIL, she "mocked" Obama, and came out with the "sleeze."Hillary doesn''t care about the Democratic Party, she only cares about Hillary. She wants to win at any cost! That''s why I am voting for Obama! She COMPLETELY TURNED ME OFF!! Obama, to his credit, has tried to take the high road. And it''s funny, she didn''t start all this rhetoric about how the media gives Obama a pass, until she was 20 points behind! I don''t want her, as president, sitting at the table deliberating foriegn affairs for me. She''ll get mad because things aren''t "going her way," and start name calling! If she gets the nomination, I''m staying home in November!!!!

[legalgal1]

Mr. Chait: Talk about over-sensationalizing with a title like this one... Then to see that it was all a draw for your piece of highly biased for Obama, no facts, excuse for journalism. Tsk..Tsk...

This style of overly enthusiatic, biased coverage is exactly what has caused the problems with the MSM today. I''m completely dismayed and tired of those in the formerly respected field of journalism using their resources to influence the outcome of matters of such grave importance as a presidential election.

I''d urge anyone as equally disgusted with this type of coverage as I am to start writing your legislators for passage of Sen. Dorgan''s Resolution of Disapproval (SJ Res. 28) forthwith, as well as writing the FCC re: the same.

[Blondshag]

I support Hillary Rodham Clinton - President.

HOWEVER, I CANNOT vote for Barack Obama for president or vice president. Sorry.

If Hillary Rodham Clinton is the democratic nomination - she NEEDS to have a black, female for her running mate....NOT Barack Obama.

If the democratic ticket ends up as:
Clinton - President
Obama - Vice President

I will have to vote a republican ticket instead...I CANNOT vote for Barack Obama in any position.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford would make a great running mate for McCain.

McCain - President
Sanford - Vice President

[csantovena]

LMAO. These people don''t even know what real magic is. I said that about Hillary and now the Obama people have used it as their own.Obama was built up by the Republican media to take away votes from Clinton so he can loose his *** down the line to McCain. That''s what''s going to happen: another republic in office all because of a media puppet name Barrack Obama. All the weak minded who are the same ones who are in love with the vapid Britney Spears are the same people who have fallen for this political ploy named Barrack Hussein Obama. It''s sad how many sheep are out there and choose to follow whatever the media tells them because of their gullibility, inexperience, and easily *********** limited unextraordinary minds. Does Barrack walk on water or perform miracles? His "magic" comes from public relations people who know how to make the mundane look extraordinary. You know what is magical (I said this about Hillary many weeks ago know it seems Obama people have taken it along with every other Hillary slogan and platform) that Hillary won Texas and Ohio, Rhode Island with a ubiquitous mysygonistic media (like this article) with one fourth less the advertisements, nor the endorsments of Oprah and the Kennedy''s. People who call Obama "magical" don''t even know what magic is and are probably the same ones who are impressed by Britney Spear and clowns pulling rabbits out of hats at children''s parties.

[csantovena]

This repulsive article and posts supporting Obama are really Republicans building up Obama so he can loose down the line to McCain. THINK PEOPLE. Hillary would be a tougher more formidable challenger to McCain. Did you see in the Austin primary how Barrack talks about himself and his single mother childhood and that''s why he would make a good president, while Hillary pretty much said this presidency is not about me but about the American people who struggle everyday. Hillary is the one who cares about America and it''s people, not Obama who just talks about himself and gives smug arrogant looks like he is smelling sh*t all the time.

[frankbowers]

I feel as if Clinton does have a better chance of winning against McCain than a man who might be a muslim and has no means of stopping such thoughts.
i will vote for HRC or McCain no other.
Frank Bowers of Austin, Tx