Clinton Aide: Primaries "Great" For Dems

Clinton, Obama Strategists Believe Differences Will Be Settled, Won't Hamper Party In November

(CBS)  In spite of widely-voiced fears that weeks of negative comments between the Democratic presidential candidates may lead to irreparable divisions that could hamper the ultimate nominee, Hillary Clinton's communications director said today that the primary contest "has been great for the Democratic Party."

Appearing on Face The Nation, Howard Wolfson told host Bob Schieffer, "We have seen record turnout in states that Senator Obama won and we've seen record turnout in states that Senator Clinton won, most recently in Pennsylvania. Democrats are enthused. They're excited. They want to send a Democrat to the White House."

Wolfson did not think that supporters of the losing candidate would fail to back the winner following the Denver convention. "I think that both the Obama campaign and the Clinton campaign are absolutely committed to coming together at the conclusion of this process, coming behind whoever the nominee is, and enthusiastically supporting that person."

David Axelrod, chief strategist of the Obama campaign, concurred: "We do have a party that is very, very focused on winning. We understand that a continuation of these Republican policies would be disastrous for people across Indiana, across North Carolina who are sitting there this morning watching this program and going through their bills and wondering how they're going to pay them and know that we can't afford more of the same Bush economic policies.

"But the question is how we get to that change," Axelrod said. "We do have to come together not just as a party, but as a country. We have to get past our divisions. We have to push back on the special interests in Washington.

"I think there's a hunger for change in this country. I think people are going to come together in a great coalition for change. I think it's important that that change be not just change of party, but a change of politics in Washington."

Schieffer also welcomed former CBS News correspondent Roger Mudd (author of a new book, "The Place to Be: Washington, CBS, and the Glory Days of Television News") to the studio, who discussed the evolving role debates have played in presidential contests, with the main change being their proliferation.

"If you remember, you didn't get a debate until after the convention, after the parties had picked their two nominees," Mudd said. "There was the Kennedy-Nixon great debate in 1960. Johnson refused to debate; Nixon refused to debate.

"It was not until Gerry Ford and Carter got together, and there was a series of debates and there was a mistake in each one of them that damaged that candidate: Gerry Ford said Poland was free, and Ronald Reagan came and said to Carter, 'There you go again,' and to Mondale, 'I won't use age as a weapon against you.' And they caught George Bush looking at his watch.

"But now the debates are all the time, and those debates now furnish the raw material of the coverage. The question is whether those debates are, in fact, genuine debates or whether they're practiced, professionally coached spinning. I mean, I watched you interview Mr. Wolfson and Mr. Axelrod, and they didn't lay a glove on you, Bob, did they?"

"No," Schieffer agreed. "They didn't get off the talking points. I mean, they were like little boys in Sunday school. They've been told to behave themselves on Sunday morning. I find that a little bit striking, because this campaign, how really harsh it has become."

---

Read the full "Face the Nation" transcript here.

[perceptions5]

Yeah right!

How could not recogizing the states of Michigan and Florida possibly "hamper" the Democrats in November.

I can see a lot of GOP ads being run in Michigan come October............a lot.

[texaslj]

Vote for a candidate I believe to be bad for this country in the name of party unity? I don''t think so.

[heartlight3]

I have to say I have been watching the way the media is manipulating the campaign, and I am very disturbed. They seem to examine everything to find the worst thing that is said, and then they twist it to support their agenda and then put it out there and beat it to death to whip up a frenzy of controversy. An example is the sound bite they have taken out of Rev. Wright''s interview with Bill Moyers, and made that what the interview was about. That sound bite was the very least of what Rev. Wright said in that interview, yet for many voters that is all they will get from the interview. Granted, we have some responsibility for not doing our own research and watching the entire interview ourselves, but the truth is, the theoretical purpose of the media is to inform the public, and that''s what people expect. It''s really too bad that is not what they get. And by the same token, some things that truly should cause concern are totally ignored by the media, and thus are not even noticed, much less examined. I fear for our country''s future if our politics is reduced to who can play "Gotcha" the best and what the media wants to emphasize, whether it really matters or not.

[PulSamsara]

I and -MILLIONS- like me will vigorously campaign against Hillary Clinton should she STEAL the Democratic nomination. Carve this in stone - she will NOT be elected after this display of Egomania at the expense of the American public. Carve it DEEP in stone !

-and I voted her into her senate seat. Fool me once... NEVER again. Never.

[rowdytexan2]

"But the question is how we get to that change," Axelrod said. "We do have to come together not just as a party, but as a country. We have to get past our divisions. We have to push back on the special interests in Washington.

"I think there''s a hunger for change in this country. I think people are going to come together in a great coalition for change. I think it''s important that that change be not just change of party, but a change of politics in Washington."

lol, Notice how many times he put change in there? Gawd he''s an advertising robot!

The trouble is Obama doesn''t represent change of anything. Unless it''s more extreme politics, more lying, more spending, more incompetent plans, more, more, just like Bush! And just as anti=American as Bush except in an extremist way! He''d be high fiving every anti=American extremist in the country!

Sorry, but we don''t want Obama change in our White House!

We want a democratic leader with the proven leadership abilities to get this country back on track!

[sgtrds]

I''m a life long Democrat who has voted in every presidential election since 1976. that said, if Obama is leading in total delegates and popular vote going into Denver and the supplicates overturn that and give the nomination to Hillary, then I think I''ll be sitting on my hands come November. There is no way I''ll ever vote for that senile loser McCain, but I don''t know if I can bring myself to vote for a Democrat that got the nomination by over-riding the democratic process and the will of the party members.

[sgtrds]

supplicates?

Durn speel chequer........

Superdelegates!

[sgtrds]

Half the Dem vote could well defect to the GOP if Hussein Obama somehow steals this primary.

Posted by sincityq at 06:39 PM : Apr 27, 2008


The above is what''s know as a lie. A plain unvarnished piece of cr*ap. the nomination is already his since there is nearly no way Hillary can take it from him.

[yourekiddin]

On Face the Nation, Bob was caught misquoting Rev. Wright as saying Obama was "just another politician." This is a serious misrepresentation of Wright''s remarks. Once again, the media experts (vanguards of truth?) show themselves no better than the political ads. Did you not have time to prepare, Bob? How can we expect our politicians to speak responsibly when we can''t even get it straight from you?

I can''t believe how shallow-minded and ignorant are the folks covering this Rev. Wright thing. They blast us over and over again with fragments of speech, refusing to give us the full context, because they know what makes a splash for their viewers. Why not give us the gist of Wright''s recent interview? He was simply defending himself from misrepresentation. He was speaking for himself as a pastor, and letting Obama speak for himself. They disagree on some things. Duh. You mean like we do in a democracy?

The coverage of Wright from all of you guys also belies your complete ignorance. Why not spend a few years in a church, then speak? Until then, shut up about what you know nothing of. Most of all, why do the media insist on making something so bland so loaded with earth-shattering significance? You''d think we gave up democracy and were living under a dictatorship. (Oops!) The media has stooped to the lowest common denominator of their viewing public in their hysteria and appetite for mud under every rock.

[yourekiddin]

On Face the Nation, Bob was caught misquoting Rev. Wright as saying Obama was "just another politician." This is a serious misrepresentation of Wright''s remarks. Once again, the media experts (vanguards of truth?) show themselves no better than the political ads. Did you not have time to prepare, Bob? How can we expect our politicians to speak responsibly when we can''t even get it straight from you?

I can''t believe how shallow-minded and ignorant are the folks covering this Rev. Wright thing. They blast us over and over again with fragments of speech, refusing to give us the full context, because they know what makes a splash for their viewers. Why not give us the gist of Wright''s recent interview? He was simply defending himself from misrepresentation. He was speaking for himself as a pastor, and letting Obama speak for himself. They disagree on some things. Duh. You mean like we do in a democracy?

The coverage of Wright from all of you guys also belies your complete ignorance. Why not spend a few years in a church, then speak? Until then, shut up about what you know nothing of. Most of all, why do the media insist on making something so bland so loaded with earth-shattering significance? You''d think we gave up democracy and were living under a dictatorship. (Oops!) The media has stooped to the lowest common denominator of their viewing public in their hysteria and appetite for mud under every rock.

[Stratmaster7]

Rev. wright is speaking on CNN right now

[Stratmaster7]

And dug the whole deeper right from the start I might add

[truthyness]

CNN......REV WRIGHT....SCARY

[Stratmaster7]

Wow. He is comparing a regional dialect (New England) to the way "Black People Talk" as a sing of discrimination. First he insults people from Boston, then his own race (insinuating Blacks primarily talk in urban jargon).

[yourekiddin]

Hope you all didn''t miss it... If you want more of a context for Rev. Wright, CNN is right at this moment broadcasting a very eloquent, brilliant speech by Wright.

[yourekiddin]

Come on, people! Listen to the man, for God''s sake, without pre-judgement. You''re falling right into the discrimination trap. Listen!! He is not dissing any other faith, party, or people.

[Stratmaster7]

Have you watched his speech from the start ? He thinks Barack has already won and the revolution has started. So far in this speech he has insulted Catholics, Jews, Protestants, people from New England and his own race. This is the wise man Obama held up as a mentor. The revolution Obama is planning is not at all the "change" he has been peddling.

[Stratmaster7]

Have you watched his speech from the start ? He thinks Barack has already won and the revolution has started. So far in this speech he has insulted Catholics, Jews, Protestants, people from New England and his own race. This is the wise man Obama held up as a mentor. The revolution Obama is planning is not at all the "change" he has been peddling.

[yourekiddin]

Yes, Strat, I heard the whole thing. I''m not pledged to Obama, and I don''t care who anyone is "supporting." I''m just trying to be fair to a guy who has been pretty scathed on the basis of a few snippets from a sermon. Is that how you wish to be judged? You''d have to be listening with a pretty twisted hearing aid to hear insults in those comments. Stuff the paranoia, man. Jeez.

[Stratmaster7]

paraphased the best I can "The Catholics find the Jews deficient, the Catholics find the Protestanst deficient". As if he speaks for the prejudices of everyone. Then he goes on to compare a regional dialect to ghetto slang, insulting people from Boston, and inadvertently his whole race at the same time. No, he is toned down slightly as he knows he is on national TV, but all the divisivness is still there.

[yourekiddin]

Sorry, I don''t see or hear divisiveness. I hear passion, intelligence and eloquence. His message is one of accepting one another in spite of the differences that are too often mistaken for deficiencies of one group or another. (Is that unspeakable? Oh, my.) If it scares people, too bad. Get out of your bias and prejudice, or you''ll never hear anyone fairly.... that''s his message. Maybe you need, we all need, to hear it. I fear ignorance of each other is the only thing keeping people apart... that''s his message too. But I think it''s too much for an stubborn and ignorant America that refuses change. Party politics still reigns supreme. How sick.

[Stratmaster7]

Yourekiddin, his message assumes the prejudices he states are fact. His approach assumes there is another hater around every corner. He should have stcuk to the whites hate blacks thing. at least there is some factual histroy behind that although I don''t see where that accomplishes anything. When he strays from that he loses all credibility.

Of course the singing and dancing like an idiot don;t help either.

[victimsof911]

Please oh please vote for Obama our blood shed at the world trade tower is insufficient to the call of Obamas pastor who carries the voice of America that Obama must win! We were D_A_M_N anyway according to Obamas pastor who we knew spoke with Obama often about what happened to us. They must of had a good laugh as one by one we jump out the window and hit the bottom with the sounding of bursting balloons. Oh they must of had a real good laugh for us white. Hey go ahead now and vote OBAMA!

[victimsof911]

Please oh please vote for Obama our blood shed at the world trade tower is insufficient to the call of Obamas pastor who carries the voice of America that Obama must win! We were D_A_M_N anyway according to Obamas pastor who we knew spoke with Obama often about what happened to us. They must of had a good laugh as one by one we jump out the window and hit the bottom with the sounding of bursting balloons. Oh they must of had a real good laugh for us whites. Hey go ahead now and vote OBAMA! He will laugh at you to! Will you laugh with him to in remembrance of us?

[shingles1]

Victimsof911, and according to that logic we shouldn''t vote for any Republican candidate either since both the Revs. Falwell and Robertson, who support(ed) solely Republican candidates, said that America''s sinfulness caused 9/11 (ie., it''s America''s fault). Since Republicans have accepted their support in the past, clearly these same Republicans must feel the exact same way and must also blame America for 9/11. And if they blame America for 9/11 then they are no better than the terrorists. Why oh why do Republicans hate America and love terrorism?

Of course Republicans don''t hate America - I''m just saying that your logic is flawed and leads to this kind of silly and unhinged statement.

[kaelinda]

Why is anyone in this blog talking about Wright? The Dems in this discussion didn''t even mention the man''s name? The subject is whether Dems will stay divided after the nomination or whether they''ll come together to support whatever Democrat wins that nomination. Or whether the Democrats will sit at home on November 7th and let the Republicans win by default - de fault of de fact that the Dems didn''t vote at all!

[craigh9]

It''s great in the eyes of Hillary because if the democrats really wanted to unite she would be on the outside looking in - she will be anyway, but she may quit too late for the party to come together for a national election

[craigh9]

The only good thing is that Hillary is totally wearing out her welcome with the party nationally - so once she finally quits - we will never have to deal with her again in a presidential election.

[jockh]

Hillary may have more political experience than Obama, but old Hillary, with 35 years of experience and the advice of an ex President behind her, still voted to go to war in Iraq.

Like Obama, and like millions of ordinary people, she knew that the Iraq threat was a pack of lies but the problem was that she had her eye on the future Presidency; and I think she did not want to be painted as someone who is afraid of war just because she is a woman, this would have damaged her future presidential bid; so she chose the political expedient thing to do, lets go with the flow, lets not rock the boat.

So, to fulfill her personal ambitions, she now has the blood of 4000 US servicemen on her hands and she can never wash that away, no matter how she spins it.

Even to this day, she never uses her own judgment; she says whatever she thinks the audience wants to hear and changes her stance according to the state she is in. That%u2019s why polls show that voters consider her to be the most dishonest politician.

If Hillary is the nominee I would reluctantly vote for her; but I prefer to have a leader who has the integrity to stand by their beliefs rather than go with the flow, even if that means they have to stand alone in a crowded room.

[hofkurz]

Of worthy note is Mr. Axelrod''s question of how do you go from inevitable nominee to not winning 2/3 of the primary? Yes, indeed. What is inevitable about that after all?

[suzyku]

Clinton does NOT have this "big" political experience. It is another of her lies. Being first lady does not mean she''s more experienced or more ready than Obama! The long and drawn out primaries are hurting the party, she''s selfish and egotistical, has a sense of self entitlement. She needs to STOP and for once, think of the party and the people she falsely professes to care about. In reality she only cares about herself!

[libra127]

POLL: CLINTON HAS BETTER CHANCE THAN OBAMA OF BEATING McCAIN
By Liz Sidoti, Associated Press

Hillary Rodham Clinton has a better chance than Barack Obama of beating Republican John McCain, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable in the fall than her rival for the Democratic nomination.

The survey released Monday gives Clinton a fresh talking point as she works to convince pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.

Clinton, who won the Pennsylvania primary last week, has gained ground this month in a hypothetical head-to-head match up with the GOP nominee-in-waiting; she now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.

[jerry rubin]

I believe and even the revered Roger Mudd are wrong. The news is not the story any more, it is a distortion of the information that is important to the life blood of the American Constitution.

You play clips of Sen. HRC saying snipper fire and there was no snipper fire. You play a shortened version of Rev. Wright''s sermon which was a total distortion of the whole speech as seen on PBS with Bill Moyer''s the Journal.

So, I would say the "NEWS" is no longer a media of information it is a blog-o-shere of talkers. The information is the short version and corporate distortion of what someone''s agenda might be who owns your company, just like the blog-o-shere is a short rant of someone''s trivial pursue.

If you want news, don''t look at President HWB''s watch and make something about it, or Nixon''s sweating at the debates. Deal with real problems like the unemployment, loss of jobs, or healthcare, the War which you did a poor job to stop before it got going. You always seem to be to late at real news and too good at junk news. Maybe it is best if you just report on Cindy Lohan and Brittney Spears.

[carenza-2009]

The view in Europe about Americans is that a huge majority act dim....I don''t share this view myself as I actually quite like Americans (I am in the minority here), but I have to say you guys are living up to this "dim image", let me see if I get this right, Hilary has $109 million (that we know about), she is not convinced enough about her electability to use her own money like Rommney did, but she is asking poor uneducated people to fund her campaign while she gets interest @ 2% on the $5 million loan to her campaign....ingenious....a fool and his money are soon parted......

[acolton1]

I think that the primary contest "has been great for the Democratic Party."

The focus is on Clinton and Obama and it seems that McCain is getting no coverage at all. It does not matter anyway the Bush Administration has neglected the US Economy and not it has fallen into the toilet and George is just now addressing the Price of Gas and Housing issue. It''s all just LIP SERVICE from George W. Bush and shift the blame on to Congress. George Dousch Bag Bush is 100% TO BLAME in so many countless ways, good ridance to the Bushies and his Jacked up Administration. This election is going to be a LAND SLIDE anyway Just like Regan and Carter and this time a Democrat is going to win and YES taxes are going to go up, somebody has to pay for the Trillion Dollars that went to this failed war and for George Bush being such an IDIOT, I dont know who ever let George Bush out of his Group Home in Texas Anyway he is a total ****.

[acolton1]

When it comes down to election time and the vote it''s going to turn out to be Democrat because the Republicans have followed George W Bush with blinders on and he has just destroyed everything.