The sheer incompetence of that attack baffles me. Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he would have never even been remotely linked to something half-assed like that. A simple "independent" push-poll a few days before the election would've gotten the rumor mill to sink Obama. Now it's old news.

And I'm a liberal, for Christsake.

Obama winning the nomination over Clinton would be, in my opinion at least, the best thing that could happen to the Democratic party in a long time. Doubt it will happen though.

Javacrucian: Obama winning the nomination over Clinton would be, in my opinion at least, the best thing that could happen to the Democratic party in a long time. Doubt it will happen though.

i can certainly think of worse things for the company.

like Hillary winning.
Bush staying in office.
Jeb running and winning.
Rudy winning.
Huckabee winning.
Romney winning.

Although i seriously wouldn't mind if Kucinich won.

SilentStrider: for the company.

that was supposed to be country, not company.

The greatest trick the GOP ever pulled was trying to make sure Hillary Clinton was the person they would run against. And like that... *poof* their hopes for solidifying their base and retaining the White House were gone.

SilentStrider: SilentStrider: for the company.

that was supposed to be country, not company.


Given the corporate ownership of both parties, "company" works just as well =)

Doesn't the Hillary campaign at least TALK to Carville, Begala, et al, The War Room guys...see what they and their SUCCESSFUL push of a no-name governor to the White House history think of their campaign tactics?

I mean, I can't imagine Carville would've approved of "Obama's a liar because he wrote an 'I Want to Be President' essay when he was five!"

NewportBarGuy: The greatest trick the GOP ever pulled was trying to make sure Hillary Clinton was the person they would run against. And like that... *poof* their hopes for solidifying their base and retaining the White House were gone.

So Dick Cheney is Keyser Soze?

SilentStrider: ...

Although i seriously wouldn't mind if Kucinich won.

Obama I can vote for. Kucinich is just an absolute nut-job.

Afternoon_Delight: They're not finished yet, Obama fans...

Or so you hope.

If Hillary loses Iowa, she'll be in a power dive, not just free-fall.

She's starting to get flop-sweat, and it's really showing now.

If Hillary loses her shot she's gonna blow like the Chicken Lady.

The Clintons had an apartment in Berkeley for the summer of 1971, about 3 blocks from People's Park... I don't believe for a second that neither of them did any type of drugs.

FuriousGeorge945: The Clintons had an apartment in Berkeley for the summer of 1971, about 3 blocks from People's Park... I don't believe for a second that neither of them they did any every type of drugs.

FTFY.

Haha, that was a pretty clumsy attack subby. Although it did work for Bush against McCain in South Carolina in 2000.

This is either hypocrisy on Obama's part or (more likely) the Republicans, who have ABSOLUTELY nothing to offer the electorate.

The sheer incompetence of that attack baffles me. Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he would have never even been remotely linked to something half-assed like that. A simple "independent" push-poll a few days before the election would've gotten the rumor mill to sink Obama. Now it's old news.

And I'm a liberal, for Christsake.

How can anybody be shocked at her campaigns behavior? These people trademarked the politics of personal destruction.
The tone of a campaign flows down from the candidate and in Hillary's case, is simply a mirror for who she is. Someone who will destroy anything and anyone who gets in her way of getting power. Obama may have his flaws, but next to her, he looks like a saint.

So who else saw this Hardball segment (new window) with the three campaign managers? Hillary's manager (Penn) comes off looking and sounding like an absolutely repulsive human being in so many ways. The best part is the way that Edwards' manager is so obviously disgusted by him.

Best quote regarding the exchange: "The fire in the belly that Trippi exhibited on Hardball yesterday reflected perfectly Edwards's populist fighter persona, just as Axelrod's mellow above the fray style echoed Obama. What does Penn's slimy shiftiness say about his candidate?" Link (new window)

Obama bin Laggin

in other news, i completely forgot the primaries are coming up in like 3 weeks...

SilentStrider: SilentStrider: for the company.

that was supposed to be country, not company.

Works either way

I've got five bucks that says if Obama wins the nomination, she pulls a 2000 McCain and does not officially endorse him.

jojostan:

How can anybody be shocked at her campaigns behavior? These people trademarked the politics of personal destruction.
The tone of a campaign flows down from the candidate and in Hillary's case, is simply a mirror for who she is. Someone who will destroy anything and anyone who gets in her way of getting power. Obama may have his flaws, but next to her, he looks like a saint.

d'art's point, it seems to me, was that he was shocked at the level of incompetence displayed by Hillary at running a campaing of personal destruction and NOT that said dirty campaign existed.

Basically, we all thought she'd be better at this.

/also a liberal

Sheesh Hillarys campaigns attacks are really hurting her cause that coupled by Oprahs getting on the stump for Obama has lead to her curent straits.......Wow what a colossal blunder on her part critiquing the 5yr old essay on wanting to be president and the drug dealer smack talk.....Her best bet to turn things around is to play to her strengths...meaning Let Bill loose get the old clinton machine out where the hell is james carvile and george stephanopolis? are they involved this go around or if so been have they been marginalized?....I think a significant amount of her voters would vote for her because they relish the idea of bill being back at the reigns and the prosperity it would bring...
If i were her advisor Id bring back her husbands campaign vibe are you better off today than 8 years ago shtick and you get 2 for the price of one etc etc also if willing Id court al gore to stump for me if hed do it youd think he might since hes not running himself all shed have to do is ask nicley.........all and all though I really wish Biden would get the election....Obama is a nice guy but biden seems to have real answers to goverment bloat

Jennifer:

Bill Clinton has been unleashed - he's been hitting the campaign trail talking about himself for weeks now. :-) I have wondered if the old Clinton team isn't getting behind Hillary(!) because she's an unpleasant harpy and they hate her guts.

Too many guys are afraid to vote for Kucinich just because he has a bigger penis than them

You know, the one thing you couldn't take away from the Clintons, no matter what else you may think of them, was that they were experts at getting the W when all was said and done.

But... guess that only applies to Bill, it turns out.

Gosling: You know, the one thing you couldn't take away from the Clintons, no matter what else you may think of them, was that they were experts at getting the W when all was said and done.

But... guess that only applies to Bill, it turns out.

Hillary really latched on to Bill's success and reputation and has used it to try to get herself into the oval office. Everyone makes a big deal about what great politicians the Clintons are, but it just doesn't carry over to Hillary. The thing that set Bill apart from most politicians is that he was charming, personable and charismatic. Hillary is the polar opposite of this, and now its becoming pretty apparent that the whole belief that the Clintons are some kind of unstoppable republican crushing machine really only applies to Bill. Regardless of the scandals and everything else, I still think that Bill would win in a landslide if he were able to run in 2008.

Maybe what we should take away from this campaign is this: whatever Hillary's strengths were involved in making Bill Clinton president, and I don't doubt that she was a crucial element in both the 92 and 96 campaigns, she does not fare nearly as well in the spotlight as Bill. There is a reason why the Carvilles and the Roves of the political world do their work behind the scenes rather than running for office themselves.

Hillary may have miscalculated her place in the scheme of things.

Hilary's campaign has got to be the slimiest since...well...Bush. Let's just hope things don't turn out as well for her.

Aarontology: I've got five bucks that says if Obama wins the nomination, she pulls a 2000 McCain and does not officially endorse him.


I think it'd more interesting to see what Bill does. My guess is he'll help, as he'll be an obvious asset for the Democratic nominee, but Hillary's silence will deafening.

mikeandeichmann: Hilary's campaign has got to be the slimiest since...well...Bush. Let's just hope things don't turn out as well for her.

Nobody wants to drink a beer with Hillary.

This story that Obama is leading now because of Hillary's attacks is false. Hillary's attacks against Obama are a symptom of a campaign that sees that it is going to lose. The fact is that Obama, as early as mid November, had a victory in the bag for Iowa.

Now you might have read that last sentence and think back and recall that Obama has only recently taken the lead in Iowa. What I refer to is a series of Iowa opinion polls, which received an unfortunately small amount of press. These polls asked for Iowa caucus voter's first and second choice, this is important because in the Democratic Iowa Caucus there is a re-vote. After all of the votes are counted, any candidate that does not make a certain threshold is deemed to not be viable, then everybody gets to vote again on the viable candidates. That poll showed Obama coming in first with nearly 50% of the vote, Edwards in second, and Hillary a distant third. The fact is that Obama and Edwards are the second choice of nearly all voters in Iowa (by a 55 to 45 ratio).

Hillary's campaign saw this, and they knew that if Hillary ended up third in Iowa, that her support through out the country would erode. They knew that the primaries were stacked too close together to recover from a loss in Iowa, when their message for the entire year was "the inevitability of President Hillary Clinton". They had already introduced Hillary to the voters, they had covered all of her policy stances, they had deftly dodged the pot holes, and shown a thick skin against the attacks of the right wing. What else could they do when they had a humiliating loss in Iowa not just possible, but probable?

The only choice for the Hillary campaign was to go on the attack against Obama. But all of the honest political attacks against his experience and policy choices had been used, and they had had little effect on the Senator from Illinois. The only arrow left in their quiver was personal attacks. They should have known that personally attacking the character of a candidate who has been presenting himself with an unparalleled honesty and forthrightness was going to back fire. But they had no choice, and in their attacks they proved something about Obama... he will be practically unassailable in the general election.

Hillary has with her some of the best opponent researchers in the political game. She has proxies across the nation who speak with considerable authority. Her campaign is a skilled and brutal machine designed to chew up and spit out any candidate that dares challenge her... and they couldn't gain purchase on Obama. They attacked his ambition and looked silly, they attacked his early education at an Indonesian school and looked absurd, and finally they suggested that he might have been a drug dealer... and caused people across the country to fall silent in shock that they would even dare suggest it.

Hillary has lost the nomination, even before a single vote has been tallied. And in her campaign's attempts to climb out of the hole they found themselves in, they did nothing but prove that their opponent was going to be capable of handling the general election.

FeedTheCollapse: I think it'd more interesting to see what Bill does. My guess is he'll help, as he'll be an obvious asset for the Democratic nominee, but Hillary's silence will deafening.

I think he will help out Obama as well. If both of the Clintons shunned him, it would discredit them for years, possibly forever. Assuming Huckabee gets the nomination for the GOP, Bill will probably be spending a whole lot of time in Arkansas, causing Huckabee to spend valuable resources defending what ought to be a sure thing, at a net cost for Obama of nearly nothing.

thisispete: So Dick Cheney is Keyser Soze?

that is highly insulting to kevin spacey.

Elections are nearly a year away and I already have election fatigue. ...Just...can't ...give...a...shiat...
\yay america

Who is running Hillary's campaign, the ghost of Richard Nixon?

Code_Archeologist: Hillary has lost the nomination, even before a single vote has been tallied. And in her campaign's attempts to climb out of the hole they found themselves in, they did nothing but prove that their opponent was going to be capable of handling the general election.

And with that, we hear the sound of the RNC collectively soiling themselves... I haven't heard anyone pushing the "inevitability" thing as hard as the neo-cons.

Code_Archeologist: This story that Obama is leading now because of Hillary's attacks is false. Hillary's attacks against Obama are a symptom of a campaign that sees that it is going to lose. The fact is that Obama, as early as mid November, had a victory in the bag for Iowa.

Now you might have read that last sentence and think back and recall that Obama has only recently taken the lead in Iowa. What I refer to is a series of Iowa opinion polls, which received an unfortunately small amount of press. These polls asked for Iowa caucus voter's first and second choice, this is important because in the Democratic Iowa Caucus there is a re-vote. After all of the votes are counted, any candidate that does not make a certain threshold is deemed to not be viable, then everybody gets to vote again on the viable candidates. That poll showed Obama coming in first with nearly 50% of the vote, Edwards in second, and Hillary a distant third. The fact is that Obama and Edwards are the second choice of nearly all voters in Iowa (by a 55 to 45 ratio).

Hillary's campaign saw this, and they knew that if Hillary ended up third in Iowa, that her support through out the country would erode. They knew that the primaries were stacked too close together to recover from a loss in Iowa, when their message for the entire year was "the inevitability of President Hillary Clinton". They had already introduced Hillary to the voters, they had covered all of her policy stances, they had deftly dodged the pot holes, and shown a thick skin against the attacks of the right wing. What else could they do when they had a humiliating loss in Iowa not just possible, but probable?

The only choice for the Hillary campaign was to go on the attack against Obama. But all of the honest political attacks against his experience and policy choices had been used, and they had had little effect on the Senator from Illinois. The only arrow left in their quiver was personal attacks. They should have known that personally attacking the character of a candidate who has been presenting himself with an unparalleled honesty and forthrightness was going to back fire. But they had no choice, and in their attacks they proved something about Obama... he will be practically unassailable in the general election.

Hillary has with her some of the best opponent researchers in the political game. She has proxies across the nation who speak with considerable authority. Her campaign is a skilled and brutal machine designed to chew up and spit out any candidate that dares challenge her... and they couldn't gain purchase on Obama. They attacked his ambition and looked silly, they attacked his early education at an Indonesian school and looked absurd, and finally they suggested that he might have been a drug dealer... and caused people across the country to fall silent in shock that they would even dare suggest it.

Hillary has lost the nomination, even before a single vote has been tallied. And in her campaign's attempts to climb out of the hole they found themselves in, they did nothing but prove that their opponent was going to be capable of handling the general election.

It needed to be repeated.

Excellent post.

Ace Frehley's Ghost: Code_Archeologist: Hillary has lost the nomination, even before a single vote has been tallied. And in her campaign's attempts to climb out of the hole they found themselves in, they did nothing but prove that their opponent was going to be capable of handling the general election.

And with that, we hear the sound of the RNC collectively soiling themselves... I haven't heard anyone pushing the "inevitability" thing as hard as the neo-cons.

I agree with both of you.

good, out of all the people in the race Obama seems like he might help move the country in a good directions, although Fred Thompson seems like he might be the laziest do nothing president ever and that might not be a bad thing either...

Code_Archeologist:

I hope you are right, but this seems to contradict your claim about Clinton coming in third among Iowa caucus voters in November; showing Clinton with a narrow lead and Obama and Edwards tied for #2.

Link (new window)

QUESTION: If the 2008 Democratic Caucus for President were held today, which of the following candidates would you vote for? (ROTATED):
ALL MEN WOMEN


Hillary Clinton 27% 22% 32%

Barack Obama 25% 23% 27%

John Edwards 21% 23% 19%

gilgigamesh: I hope you are right, but this seems to contradict your claim about Clinton coming in third among Iowa caucus voters in November; showing Clinton with a narrow lead and Obama and Edwards tied for #2.

Did you miss the entire part regarding second-choice voting?

Sorry, its Clinton/Obama/Edwards.

Interestingly, among all voters, it also shows all of the democratic front runners beating handily any republican contender.

Shaggy_C: Did you miss the entire part regarding second-choice voting?

Oh... I think I misunderstood. Does that mean Obama has 50% if the second tier candidates are removed?

A link might help, Code.

Here's one. (new window)

Although this makes it sound like more of a toss up.

gilgigamesh: Here's one. (new window)

Although this makes it sound like more of a toss up.

Well, according to the Washington Post, "55 percent now see [Obama] as their first or second choice."

gilgigamesh: A link might help, Code.

Ask and you shall receive. A Washington Post article referencing the Iowa first and second choice voters from November 20th.

In another positive shift for Obama, 55 percent now see him as their first or second choice, an important trend in a state where a person's second choice can matter and voters often switch their support at the last minute. (new window)

Now it should be noted that Iowa polls are notoriously fickle things... but the common thread through out them has been that Hillary is the first choice of many voters, but Obama and Edwards hold the lions share of second choice voters. This is going to make a significant difference in the caucus since only these three candidates pass the viability muster. This will leave 15%-25% of the caucus goers up for grabs with the vast majority of them breaking to Obama or Edwards.

With hate crimes up 8% nationally, do you really think democrats are going to put a black man on their presidential ticket in place of a sure win with Clinton? Dream on!

Hopefully some of that fickleness will translate into a "go with the flow" mentality among the first timers and sway their support in favor of Obama's current momentum.

I am still calling it a toss-up. But a landslide for Obama in Iowa would really change the landscape.

Let's hope.