Feb

Is Hillary Finished?

Posted by: Mike's America @ 11:07 pm in Barack Obama, The Clintons | 0 views

Update: Clinton Reality

For those who think that the Clintons see the same writing on the wall as the rest of us, a reminder: Clintons create reality to suit themselves. And just like during the Impeachment crisis when Bill Clinton refused to resign for the good of the Party, it’s highly unlikely that they will accept defeat now.

Proof of that surfaced this morning with the release of a new web site funded by the Hillary Campaign: Delegate Hub. In it, Clinton reality is on display with an absolute insistence that they will fight this out to the bitter end no matter what! [end update]

Something to cry about?

She’s running out of excuses and time!

With a 17% blowout in Wisconsin, Obama rocked the Clinton machine and makes it appear that the firewall Hillary plans for March 4th primaries in Texas and Ohio may be more fizzle than fire.Obama won nearly every demographic group among Wisconsin voters except those over 65. He tied Hillary among white women, union members and among union households. That’s nothing but bad, bad, bad and WORSE news for Hillary in the big races to come. In Wisconsin, Obama picked up 42 delegates and Hillary 29. Obama’s delegate lead continues to increase.

Are The Clinton’s Up for A Desperate Gamble?

Even if Hillary wins in Texas and Ohio, it would only even up the score of their delegate totals. If she continues to lose, but by a reduced margin than the double digit loss in Wisconsin, she can still limp forward and hope.

It takes 2,025 delegates to win the Democrat nomination. Various news services have differing delegate counts, but Real Clear Politics has Obama at 1,342 and Hillary at 1,265. Reports of delegates available in remaining primaries and caucuses ranges between 716 and 941.

If Obama continues to beat Hillary, he may not accumulate the total number of delegates required for the nomination. At that point the 795 superdelegates (Democrat elected officials) may be the deciding factor. The Clintons are working those superdelegates, most of whom owe something to Bill Clinton, hard.

Tuesday also brought news in the Politico suggesting that the Clinton machine may try and turn pledged Obama delegates. Apparently, there is no rule in the Democrat Party requiring pledged delegates to vote in the convention for the candidate they were chosen to represent.

Such an aggressive move, combined with an attempt to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates excluded under current party rules would create chaos in the Democrat Party and even the Clintons, whose own lust for power knows few bounds, would likely not attempt it.

But when it comes to the Clintons, anything can happen!

Print This Post

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 19th, 2008 at 11:07 pm and is filed under Barack Obama, The Clintons. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

17 comments so far

Scott

She may be a loser, but she will not give up. This woman has worked her entire life for this moment, and it’s beyond comprehension to see her quit.

What’s really just a total wow for me, is that less than 50% of the Democratic Party wants her to represent them as their nominee. Less than 50% of the nation wants her to represent her as their President, and almost 50% of the nation says there’s no way in Hell they’d vote for her. How does this arrogant beeyatch think she can win? I suppose she doesn’t think about it. It appears as though she just assumes it as though it were a right or owed to her.

Keep on rollin the dice Hillary. Ohio’s comin, and I’m a votin for Senator Obama JUST so I can get the satisfaction of casting a vote against you and your husband.

side note….time for more tears

February 20th, 2008 at 3:54 am

jainphx

She’s not dead until you see her body, too bad there isn’t a Ross Perrot to divide the vote. I still think that there is something left unsaid or done that they will try to pull, but so far nothing has worked. Obama must stay away from Fort Marcie Park.

February 20th, 2008 at 5:26 am

Marvin

pass the popcorn,
this fight is going to get real bloody,

February 20th, 2008 at 7:26 am

David

I certainly agree that Hillary will quit and she’ll stay to the bitter end. Why not use all the chits that Bill collected. It’s meant to be used in situations such as this. And, there’s probably enough for a general election campaign as well. If anything, what Hillary and Obama will do to one another may have the same effect what Buchanan and Perot did to Bush 41 in 1992.

February 20th, 2008 at 10:42 am

David

Sorry, grammar correction. Should read “… Hillary will not quit, staying to the bitter end.”

And, an added thought, we haven’t seen how rough it can get. One of the certainties of politics is that it’s a bareknuckled and bloody.

February 20th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

ChrisG

David.

Reads much better now, but I understood before. I agree it will be surprising if she does quit. I fully expect there to be a very ugly fight coming soon (as if her campaign has not been ugly enough). The question is if she is willing to punish/alienate the democratic voters for not voting for her, even if it means losing in the fall election. She has a vicious temper, a long memory, and a terrible vengeance streak. I wonder if her pride and arrogance are even greater…

February 20th, 2008 at 5:15 pm

Skye

I hope this is not the end…I’m rooting for her!

February 20th, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Mike's America

Skye: As much as I would like to see her stick this out as long as possible, and even get the nomination, as she would be so much easier to beat than Obama, another side of me is rooting to see her repudiated by her own party and have that be the judgement on the Clintons that history records.

If we beat her in November, she’s likely to say it was because we “stole” the election. But if her OWN PARTY rejects her, she has no one to blame.

I’m wondering also if Obama might not just fold like a House of Cards at some point when the novelty wears off.

I guess I have to get used to saying El Presidente McCain!

February 20th, 2008 at 6:20 pm

Scott

Ya know, I kind of actually WANT Obama to win the nomination. For the past umpteen months we’ve been hearing about “change” and a new type of politics. A renewed spirit of bi-partisanship with Obamicans, RINOs and DINOs coming together; blah blah blah. While Hillary’s been focused on “HOW”(as in what’s the plan)…I think we might have all missed something deeper, and far bigger: WHY?

Ignoring that there is no plan to work in a more civil and bi-partisan way, and ignoring that he has absolutely ZERO track record of having done so, isn’t it interesting that this idea of getting away from polarization, spin, etc resonates so deeply with…DEMOCRATS?! Could it be that they believe a Democrat can force Philly Steve’s evil “conservatives” to end the alleged vast right wing conspiracy. OR, could it be that in their heart of hearts, most people know what reality is, prefer not to face the harder aspects of it in preference to American Idol, and those people who do see the DNC’s lies…are tired of having to make excuses for even pretending to believe them?

Could it be that the Democrats who HOPE for CHANGE in DC tenor are hoping to end the uberspun lies from the far left? It would seem so given that so much Obama support comes from the party’s moderates, center/left, centrists, independents, and so-called Obamicans? These people rebel against the acidity of DC partisan politics, and they could do so by voting D or R…so why D? Is it the message? Nah, it’s not much different than some R’s have had (particularly Huck).

I submit that the reason Obama is so strong is because he’s pulling in the people in the center who are tired of the BS that the DNC establishment has fed them, tired of the far left shenanigans (see also Code Pink, Move On, Kos, etc), and that these people see the D as a bigger part of the DC partisan blockade than the R.

And so it is that I wonder…what if Obama’s support is really indicative of the massive polarization in the Democratic Party, the unattractiveness of the Republican Party in GWB’s shadow and the rhetoric that makes it darker than need be? What if Obama’s bubble-like all hollow, empty bubbles-bursts? All it will take is for someone in a debate in the general election to ask not “how are you gonna bring about this change,” but “when have you ever even tried to work with the other party rather than march lockstep with the DNC?”

February 20th, 2008 at 7:23 pm

Mike's America

Interesting outlook Scott. One problem though: if this “change” is something similar to the “new tone” and people are attracted to Obama because he represents an end to the nastiness of the far left, then why does his wife Michelle go out and proclaim that this is the “first time in my adult life that I have been proud of my country?”

That’s just the same old, same old we’ve heard from the nasty left for the past 7 years.

February 21st, 2008 at 7:08 am

Scott

Mike, you hit the nail on the head. There is no CHANGE to be found. It’s campaign champagne and nothing more.
Hillary says if elected she’ll order troops from Iraq in her first year depending on conditions on the ground
Barack says if elected he’ll get his generals together to work out an evacuation plan depending on conditions on the ground
McCain says if elected he’s willing to keep troops in Iraq for 100yrs depending on conditions on the ground.

The positions are the same across the board. Everyone says they want to change things and make every single thing better; better healthcare, better tax system, better support for transvestites seeking equal rights in the workplace…whatever.

It’s worth noting, however, that my point about change hinges not on escapism from acidic partisanship as they claim, but on partisanship that compels people to willingly suspend belief (ht Hillary), and to in turn believe/support/promote things that are clearly not true. I don’t think they’re ready to actually do it yet, but I think people know what the truths are, and are tired of having to lie about them, to try and believe them etc.

For example (as if there’s a shortage!):
In the fall 06, Dems promised a new direction in Iraq that would end the war
In Nov06, they were elected, finally were asked what the plan was, and told their misled voters that they’d come up with something soon.
In Dec06 Dems went to Syria etc to ask what America’s enemies allies wanted America to do, then told people who voted for Dems to wait for a plan until after they were sworn in in Jan
In Jan, Dems officially took power, people still asked what the plan was that they voted for, and were told to wait a little longer
In Feb, Dems finally held a brainstorm conference to determine what the new direction in Iraq plan should be now that they’d been elected on the empty promise-voters were told to wait again
In Mar, Dems began a series of non-binding resolutions against the war-voters were told to wait & that the Dems needed unchecked, veto-over riding power (vote more of us to Congress, then we might do something).
In April, President Bush’s New Direction in Iraq made huge changes, and Al Queda in Iraq’s demise began in earnest while Dems…told their voters to wait longer & vote more into office.

People are tired of being told boldfaced lies from the left, and then believing in them. They want that to change imo

February 21st, 2008 at 7:34 am

Igor R.

Obama is a VERY dangerous man. Name one leader who spoke in soothing tones, avoided specifics, made sweeping and mysterious promises to the masses, was followed by adoring crowds, and when he came to power, did something good? It’s a lot easier to name several who wound up bringing great misfortune to their constituents. I’ve seen this movie before and it always ends badly.

February 21st, 2008 at 10:55 am

pagar

How loudly does anyone think an American has to say -We can not win-before the enemy killing American soldiers understands they don’t have to do anything to win, except get the American left to defeat America?

“”The United States is going to leave Iraq with its tail between its legs, defeated. It is a war we can not win,” he told private radio TSF in an interview broadcast here on Tuesday evening. ”

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,6119,2-10-1460_1338708,00.html

We had thousands of these statements from leftists duri ng the Vietnam War. In Iraq, since the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee flew to Syria in Jan 2002 to make sure they got the latest American Intelligence–

“ROCKEFELLER: No. I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I’ll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175433,00.html

American soldiers die because the American Left supports anybody but America, not once but over and over.

February 21st, 2008 at 11:49 am

Scott

I have HUNDREDS of quotes from Islamic Holy Warriors citing Democrats, endorsing them, praising them, and using the statements from Democratic Party leaders to bolster the Jihadi case for war.

“It is apparent to every watchful eye that recent events over the past few days have exposed a huge crack in America’s administration. With weak declarations from their leaders about events on the ground in Iraq just two months after the so-called “Baghdad security plan” commenced and a growing dispute about funds spent on the Iraq and Afghan wars, the American command has now said “The current security plan is the last chance for the American army and the Maliki government”.

As usual, this was followed by a swift visit by the new (American) Defense Minister “Gates” who said, “The American support to the Maliki government is not unlimited”, insinuating that the American administration is impatient with the Maliki government that is incapable of handling the strikes of the Mujahideen. This comes on the heels of an important statement by House Majority Leader Harry Reid who previously said, “The Iraqi war is hopeless and the situation in Iraq is same as it was in Vietnam.””
-Islamic State of Iraq (ie, Al Queda in Iraq) 4/07

February 21st, 2008 at 12:15 pm

ChrisG

Scott,

I remember that month. AQI and Iran both thought they could push hard one more time and defeat us even as they were losing. They miscalculated terribly in our favor. However, the islamofascists had no reason to believe otherwise when all they had were the statements from Reid and the “non-binding House Resolution” which passed on a Friday in the US…..

On that Saturday in the early afternoon, a rocket was partially intercepted above our compound after the jihadists chanted “allah ackbar” all night. Pieces landed on my area. Luckily the IBA vest worked, though did not protect from shock/impact injuries. 4 months of physical therapy fixed that, but at least I did not have to have shrapnel removed.

Thanks to morons like Reid, Pelosie, Murtha and their ilk, the islamofascists were able to maintain their moral even in the face of huge losses from our much more skilled Soldiers and Marines. Now we are succeeding despite the knives from the left and the islamofascists’ arrogance and feeling of “god” given invincibility is falling apart.

Every painful day I spent growing stronger after my shoulder injury I spent cursing the left more than I did before I deployed.

Now I have a deploy warning order and am looking forward to returning… though it may be in the heat of summer (I hate being hot)…. Maybe I will get Afghanistan which is, slightly, cooler.

February 21st, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Scott

Chris, I will forever wonder how things could be so much different if the left hadn’t decided to divide the nation and the world over the war in Iraq. What would things be like if millions took to the streets demanding Saddam come clean, screaming “Death to Saddam!”(ala Death to America)?

What would have happened if the anti-Bush/anti-war protesters had marched against the terrorists and the dictator instead of against the effort to attack the terrorists and remove a dictator?

February 21st, 2008 at 4:17 pm

Mike's America

Scott asked: “I will forever wonder how things could be so much different if the left hadn’t decided to divide the nation and the world over the war in Iraq.”

That’s a no brainer Scott.

The war would already be over and American and innocent Iraqi lives would have been spared. All the “peace” crowd does is enable evil monsters to think we will back down.

If there is any war crime against humanity in all this, it is the enablers of evil who would have kept us from finishing the job of restoring the Iraqi people to their God given rights of freedom and peace with justice. The left would have denied them that.

February 21st, 2008 at 6:44 pm