Archive for the ‘Dean’ Category

Last night, Jim Moran held a townhall meeting on health care reform in Reston, VA. Officially, his invited guest was former DNC Chairman Howard Dean. Unofficially, his invited guests were Organizing for America:

President Obama’s own campaign spinoff organization on Tuesday descended on a town-hall meeting in Northern Virginia, handing out hundreds of hand-painted signs that said “reform now” and “vote yes on HR 3200,” the massive health care bill tabled in the House before its summer recess.

Several workers passed out the homemade signs at the back of a high school gym shortly before a town hall featuring former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. “The signs are from Organizing for America,” said one woman handing them out, but she would not give her name, saying, “I don’t feel comfortable doing that.”

What a stand-up bunch. They’re attending these meetings. They’re handing out signs. They’re making their voices heard. When it comes time to identify themselves, however, these cowardly Democrats won’t identify themselves by name, signifying that they know their priorities aren’t popular.

Mr. Moran sought to explain the legislation now under consideration, but was booed repeatedly. “No one will lose their health care,” he said before being drowned out by boos. “No one will be required to join the public option,” he said, breaking off as the crowd’s booing reached a crescendo.

“Liar!” someone shouted. “Shut up!” others yelled.

When he tried to explain the cost, at least $100 billion a year, some estimates say twice that, Mr. Moran declared “that cost is fully paid for.” The crowd burst out into loud laughter, again drowning out the congressman.

It’ll be interesting to see whether pushing this health care reform will prevent Rep. Moran’s re-election. I don’t have the answer to that but I’m guessing that it isn’t helping.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Gov. Tim Pawlenty struck the right message during his appearance on Hannity Tuesday night. He said that the raucus townhall meeting Rep. Jim Moran held showed America “the sights and sounds of American democracy in action. I think that that should be applauded and we should say thank you to the people who are standing up to a bad idea.”

By contrast, Rep. Moran behaved like a child. When protesters got upset with Howard Dean’s comments, Rep. Moran said that he would ask them to leave. This isn’t surprising to anyone who knows Rep. Moran. He’s one of the most anti-semitic bigots in DC. But I digress.

Gov. Pawlenty also said that it’s troubling that elected officials don’t want to hear from their bosses on this deeply personal issue. Frankly, I’d add that it isn’t just troubling but cowardly to not listen to dissenters.

What I found impressive with Gov. Pawlenty was that he stayed focused on what’s at stake with this debate. He didn’t stray into whether the public option was the pre-cursor to single-payer. He didn’t stray into whether co-ops were the same stepping stone to single-payer that the public option is.

He’s clearly throwing alot of red meat to conservatives, saying that having Democrats watch over health care “is like trusting Michael Vick to take care of your dog for the weekend.” He also said that reform should “be fixed with consumers in charge, not the government.”

With each impressive interview, Gov. Pawlenty is raising his visibility should he run for president. With each impressive interview, he wins over people for his ability to connect with people in a way that only he and Sarah Palin can. (President Obama once had the ability to connect with people but that’s disappeared.)

For the liberals who will yap about Gov. Pawlenty’s interest in national politics, I’d just suggest that putting pro-growth economic policies in place, something that President Obama hasn’t done, would help Minnesota. I’d further suggest that gov. Pawlenty’s guiding principles for health care are much closer to the American people’s principles.

Sarah Palin and Gov. Pawlenty have been the most effective opponents of the Democrats’ health care reform legislation. They’ve focused their criticisms on policies, not personalities. They’ve both done a good job not getting involved in a tit-for-tat fight. Those fights don’t serve a useful purpose. In fact, they’re a distraction at a time when we need to keep focused on our principles and priorities.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Stories about the Democrats’ discord aren’t exactly scarce. Still, the one that stands out from all others is Gov. Ed Rendell’s criticizing MSNBC for being in the tank for Obama. Here’s how he unloaded:

Ladies and gentleman, the coverage of Barack Obama was embarrassing,” said Rendell, in the ballroom at Denver’s Brown Palace Hotel. “It was embarrassing.”

Rendell, an ardent Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter during the primaries, now backs Obama in the general election. Brokaw and Rendell began debating campaign coverage, including the on-air comments by Lee Cowan, and when MSNBC came up, Rendell went after the cable network. “MSNBC was the official network of the Obama campaign,” Rendell said, who called their coverage “absolutely embarrassing.”

Ed Rendell is exactly right. MSNBC’s coverage of Sen. Obama wasn’t just biased. Their two most prominent hosts, Chrissie Matthews and Keith Olberman, were slobbering fools for Sen. Obama. (It should be pointed out that being the most prominent hosts on MSNBC means you attract as big an audience as Red Eye gets at 2:00 am CT on FNC.)

As difficult as it is for Obama to spin that story, here’s another story that must rankle Team Barry:

A number of Sen. Hillary Clinton’s top advisers will not be staying in Denver long enough to hear Barack Obama accept the nomination for president, according to sources familiar with their schedules.
Clinton will deliver her speech Tuesday night. She will hold a private meeting with her top financial supporters Wednesday at noon, and will thank her delegates at an event that afternoon. Former president Bill Clinton will speak that night. Several of Hillary Clinton’s supporters are then planning to leave town. Among them, Terry McAuliffe, Clinton’s campaign chairman, and longtime supporters Steve Rattner and Maureen White. Another of Clinton’s top New York fundraisers, Alan Patricof, did not make the trip to Denver.

Rest assured that we’ll see Howard Dean hopping around from one network to another talking about how cathartic this week’s convention is and how united Democrats are in preventing another 4 years of BushHitler’s policies, etc. They’re empty words. There isn’t much in the way of unity in the Democratic Party these days. This McCain ad is proof of that:

When a former Hillary delegate agrees to do an ad for John McCain saying that she’s planning on voting for him instead of Sen. Obama, that’s the ultimate proof that the Democratic Party is in bad disarray.

That isn’t the way to win big races. I’ve said before that I won’t say that Sen. McCain is a lock to win this November. What I’ve said instead is that it’s his race to lose. With this many Hillary voters either staying home or voting for John McCain at this point, it’d take a serious mistake on Sen. McCain’s behalf to stop his momentum.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Powerline’s John Hinderaker has an interesting post up about June presidential polls and how accurate they are compared with election results. John makes this observation:

In other words, the June polls have come closer to predicting the actual result in every recent Presidential cycle.

This may be because improved polling techniques are giving a better read on the electorate, earlier. You could test this theory by checking later poll averages against actual results; I haven’t tried to do that. Another possibility is that our politics have become increasingly polarized, so that fewer voters change their minds over the course of a campaign. Either way, recent history suggests that we Republicans shouldn’t take too much comfort from the memory of Michael Dukakis.

John’s point about Republicans not taking comfort in June polling is worthwhile. My question is whether this year is an anomaly because of the volatility caused by high gas prices.

John’s point that we’ve become a more polarized nation isn’t arguable. That’s certainly happened. That said, I’ve often thought that the energy issue is one of those rare instances that a single issue moves people from the blue column into the red column. It’s an issue that’s changing turnout, too.

2008 isn’t like 2006. In 2006, people didn’t switch from Republican to Democrats as much as Republicans just stayed home. In 2008, alot of Democrats will likely switch their votes simply because they can’t afford to the Democrats’ energy policies. At minimum, that issue has the potential of moving independent voters.

I think it’s also important to note that the polling isn’t the only indicator that this will be a better year for Republicans than first imagined. I’m not predicting retaking the House and Senate by any stretch. What I’m ruling out are the dire predictions that Republicans will lost a dozen seats in the Senate and 40-50 seats in the House. Those numbers are mindbogglingly stupid at this point.

Another indicator that I’m paying attention to is the fundraising numbers of Obama and the DNC. Cash isn’t flowing into Obama’s coffers the way it used to. In fact, it’s been cut in half since his high water mark of $50 million. The DNC has had a miserable time raising money all year long. The DNCC is well behind in its goals.

Still another indicator that I’m watching is how reticent Hillary’s supporters contribute to Obama’s campaign. If those numbers lag, then Obama will be fighting uphill the rest of the way, expecially since he’s spending money at an alarming rate.

This race has a chance of turning volatile for several reasons. The energy issue is heading in the wrong direction for him. Fundraising is drying up, at least to the point where he won’t have a substantial advantage. That’s before we start talking about the poor recruiting year Democrats had with House candidates.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Time Magazine’s Jay Newton-Small is noticing that the (not so) Democratic Party isn’t having an easy time uniting. Here’s a captivating two paragraphs that capture the Democratic Party’s dysfunction perfectly:

Suddenly it dawned on the Hillary Clinton supporters in the audience that the committee was not going to go their way. “I was incredibly proud to come down here as a student on the mall and listen to Dr. Martin Luther King talk about civil rights,” said Germond, as the crowd simultaneously began to hiss, cheer and shush, her voice being drowned out by the roar. “We are not the current administration who plays lose with rules,” Germond continued, her voice rising a little desperately to dampen down the onslaught of outrage that was just beginning. “I’m feeling very badly that we can’t seat Michigan and Florida in full,” she virtually yelled over shouts of “Shame on you!”

The noise they made was the sound of the Democratic Party fracturing: one third for Obama cheering, one third for Clinton booing and the rest, including the chagrined members of the panel, frantically hushing both sides as if to say, ‘Don’t go there, don’t show the Republicans how dysfunctional we are.’ It was also a cry of desperation, because the panel’s ruling virtually ensured that the door was slamming on Clinton, who with three races to go now has little chance of overcoming Obama’s lead. The meeting only went downhill from there, with committee co-chair Alexis Herman pounding the gavel in a vain attempt to restore order and Harold Ickes, a senior Clinton advisor and member of the committee, claiming the panel was “hijacking” democracy and threatening to appeal the ruling well into the summer.

In her Boston Globe op-ed, Geraldine Ferraro talked about the embarrassment of riches Democrats had starting the nominating cycle. I’d argue that what they really have is an embarrassment. Barack Obama is an embarrassment because he’s got tons of skeletons in his closet and because he’s a lightweight. Smooth talker? Definitely. Gravitas? You’re kidding me. He’d likely have to look in the dictionary to learn how to spell it much less define it.

Hillary? She’s the woman everyone learned how to distrust. Republicans learned that in the 1990’s. Democrats are just finally figuring it out. What’s new? They’re just figuring it out because she’s set her sights on their Chosen One who’s supposed to deliver the White House into their clutches. NOW they’ve figured it out that the Clintons are shameless and that they play hardball politics with brass knuckles and bazookas. If there’s a Republican standing in their way, then it’s time to set their sights on the Republican and demolish him.

Democrats thought that they were exempt. That’s because they never stood in the Clinton’s way before. Now they know. Hillary still hasn’t answered this important threshhold question: How do you unite a group when half of them hate you on a personal level?

The answer is that she can’t unite the group because the types aren’t the compromising types. After all, it’s their party. They bought it. They aren’t about to give it back without a bloody fight, especially to a DLC ‘Republican Lite’ type like Hillary.

Does this sound like the sound of unity?

Instead, the panel’s lunch turned into a three-hour closed-door session, during which the members finally agreed on a compromise — though it was basically the position taken by the Obama campaign, not to mention the one Republicans smartly came up with for their side long before the disputed primaries took place: seat both delegations but grant each only half a vote per delegate as a penalty. In what the Obama campaign called a “gift” to Clinton they agreed to seat Florida’s delegates based on the results of that state’s January 29th primary, yielding Clinton a net gain of 19 delegates. “A concession? Give me a break. Under their formula Hillary Clinton loses delegates,”scoffed Ickes. “It’s just a perversion of words to call it a concession.”

Rest assured that Hillary won’t go gently into that good night. So much for blessed unity.

UPDATE: More articles are being written about the Democratic Party’s strife. Here’s what Michael Tomasky wrote about the Democrats’ strife:

So this is what party unity sounds like. Alice Huffman, a member of the Democratic party’s rules and bylaws committee, which met on Saturday to decide the fates of the Florida and Michigan delegations, was explaining herself. She had just sought to allow all of Florida’s delegates to vote at the Democratic convention in August, despite the disputed scheduling of the state’s presidential primary. But that motion failed, and she was explaining to her 29 fellow committee members and the rest of us in a Washington hotel ballroom why she was now, in the interest of party unity, going to support a second motion that would seat the delegation at half strength.

A woman in the audience yelled: “You just took away votes!” Huffman: “We gave you some back, too. We will leave here more united than we came.”

The room, or that portion of it dedicated to Hillary Clinton’s advancement to the White House, burst into mocking laughter. She tried to keep talking. A man yelled: “Lipstick on a pig!” Huffman countered: “Please conduct yourselves like proper men and women.”

At a later point, committee member Everett Ward was trying to speak. A woman in the audience yelled, apropos of what I’m not sure: “What about Iowa? New Hampshire? South Carolina?” Another woman countered: “Shut up!”

Here’s what Texas Demomcratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie said about this weekend’s Texas Democratic State Convention:

Texas Democratic Chairman Boyd Richie, who endorsed Obama last week, said he expects a spirited rivalry to exist between the delegates if the presidential race is continuing. “Politics in Texas is a full-contact blood sport in some quarters,” Richie said. “People are passionate about their beliefs and their candidates.”

Richie said his goal for the convention is to get delegates focused on putting the internal rivalries aside to look ahead to winning the White House in November, instead of continuing to argue over Obama and Clinton.

“You’re going to have a lot of people who are disappointed. You’re going to have a lot of folks who are elated,” he said. “We’ve got to find a way to get those to mesh and understand our common goal is not to be fighting with one another.”

This stuff won’t be settled anytime soon.

Technorati: , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

After reading this article, it’s safe to say that the NY Times is delusional. Here’s the opening paragraphs of the article:

The big drama now facing the Democratic Party in the presidential contest is how, when and even whether Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will depart the race.

The contest is coming to a close as Puerto Rico votes on Sunday and Montana and South Dakota on Tuesday, finishing a process that began five months ago in Iowa. Even if those results do not put Senator Barack Obama over the top, aides to both Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton said they expected enough superdelegates to rally behind Mr. Obama in the 48 hours after the final primaries to allow him to proclaim himself the nominee.

The key to deciphering whether Hillary was planning on getting out is found in this paragraph:

Mrs. Clinton has kept her counsel about what she might do to draw her campaign to a close. But when the rules committee of the Democratic Party divided up delegates from Michigan and Florida on Saturday night, Harold Ickes, a committee member and Clinton adviser, said she was reserving the right to contest the decision into the summer.

Anyone who thinks that Hillary is now satisfied with the DNC’s ruling and will now ride off into the sunset is kidding themselves. It’s more likely that she’s upset with the decision and that she’ll fight onward. I certainly wouldn’t rule out Hillary taking the fight to the Credentials Committee.

People have said that this won’t happen because it would hurt party unity. forget that nonsense. Party unity has been greatly diminished, if not destroyed. Anyone thinking that the Democratic Party will be united after Denver isn’t paying attention to the fierce fights that’ve happened.

As I pointed out here, the Democrats have some serious issues to resolve. how those problems gets resolved will tell about who the next chairman of the DNC will be. I’m betting that the Deaniacs’ scorched earth patterns won’t earn them much applause. That’s why I said the first thing that’ll happen after the election is the obligatory circular firing squad.

Don’t be surprised if Dr. Dean is the guest of honor at that event.

Technorati: , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

This Hillary suppporter thinks that the DNC is treating Hillary’s supporters like second class citizens.

To say that Harriet Christian is upset is putting things mildly. when she says that “the Democrats are throwing the election away”, it was obvious that she didn’t think too highly of Sen. Obama. By the time she called Sen. Obama “an inadequate black male”, it was abundantly obvious that she wouldn’t be cutting the DNC a check anytime soon. when se said “God damn the Democrats”, I was fairly certain that she wouldn’t be on Howard Dean’s Christmas card list. When she said that “they think we won’t vote for McCain. Well I’ve got news for you. McCain will be the next president of the United States”, I’m relatively certain that Ms. Christian will be on John McCain’s Christmas card wish list.

I said here that there’s some serious divides within the Democratic Party. This is proofthat those divisions run deep and that they won’t easily be healed. The next step is the circular firing squad.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Earlier today, I said that it was ironic that Democrats had gone from the mantra of “Count every vote” in 2000 to making votes count little in 2008. Now it’s official: the DNC voted to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations before ruling that each delegate’s vote would count as 1/2 a vote. Here’s what the AP is reporting:

Democratic party officials said a committee agreed Saturday on a compromise to seat Michigan and Florida delegates with half-votes after Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to get enough support to force their positions through.

Clinton’s chief delegate hunter Harold Ickes angrily informed the committee that Clinton had instructed him to reserve her right to appeal the matter to the Democrats’ credentials committee, which could potentially drag the matter to the party’s convention in August.

“There’s been a lot of talk about party unity, let’s all come together, and put our arms around each other,” said Ickes, who is also a member of the Rules Committee that approved the deal. “I submit to you ladies and gentlemen, hijacking four delegates…is not a good way to start down the path of party unity.”

It’s predictable that Hillary wouldn’t accept such a deal because it essentially cedes victory to Sen. Obama. That said, there’s definitely merit to her argument. Here’s what TNR is reporting on the unity front:

Howard Dean may hope that the “healing will begin today,” but two blocks away from the northwest Washington Marriott where the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee is meeting right now to try to figure out Florida and Michigan, the Hillary protesters are occupying an utterly alternate (and healing-free) universe: a universe in which one of the big lawn rally’s speakers yells that the Democratic Party no longer is in the business of “promoting equality and fairness for all”; in which a Hillary supporter with two poodles shouts, “Howard Dean is a leftist freak!”; in which a man exhibits a sign that reads “At least slaves were counted as 3/5ths a Citizen” and shows Dean whipping handcuffed people; and in which Larry Sinclair, the Minnesota man who took to YouTube to allege that Barack Obama had oral sex with him in the back of a limousine in 1999, is one of the belles of the ball.

Based on that report, I think it’s a stretch to believe that healing is a priority with Hillary’s supporters. Rather, I’d say that their mission is simple: winning isn’t the biggest thing; it’s the only thing.

I referenced the troubles within the Democratic Party in my earlier post. This is a perfect illustration of that divide. When they were deciding who would succeed Terry McAuliffe as DNC chairman, Eli Pariser made it known what the wing wanted:

“For years, the party has been led by elite Washington insiders who are closer to corporate lobbyists than they are to the Democratic base[.] But we can’t afford four more years of leadership by a consulting class of professional election losers…In the last year, grass-roots contributors like us gave more than $300 million to the Kerry campaign and the DNC, and proved that the party doesn’t need corporate cash to be competitive. Now it’s our party: we bought it, we own it, and we’re going to take it back.”

It’s an established fact that hates the DLC wing. It isn’t just that they see things a bit differently; it’s that sees things through a completely different lens. To people like Eli Pariser, the DLC is nothing more than GOP Lite.

Another troublespot for the DNC to deal with is the rift between the limosine liberal elitists and the blue collar Reagan Democrats. Remember all the exit polls showing Hillary supporters as unwilling to vote for Obama? Check this out:

Of the eight Hillary supporters I quiz at the protest (six of them women), only one says she’d even consider voting for Obama in the fall. “It’s sad. I’m a lifelong Democrat and the party’s been taken over by these Obama people who say they want ‘change,'” gripes Linda of Horseheads, New York, outside the Marriott as a honking car decorated with a painting of Hillary, a glued-on bust of Cleopatra, and a tampon drives by. Linda, she says, has already gone to the state Board of Elections to learn how to write Hillary’s name in in November. “So much has been stolen from her.”

That’s got to worry the Obama campaign. If that’s how Hillary’s supporters see him, then he’s toast. I’d be surprised if that is representative but even if it’s halfways accurate, it’s still awful news for Team Obama. If Hillary’s Democrats stay home or Reagan Democrats vote for John McCain, then that makes Obama’s job awfully difficult in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Less than eight short years ago, Gore-Lieberman attorneys argued that every vote should count. It was so repetitive that “Count every vote” became a punchline for comedians. Against that backdrop, it’s ironic that Sen. Obama’s people will be arguing against seating the entire Michigan delegation. Here’s what the Detroit Free Press is reporting:

Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer is delivering the argument for restoring the state’s lost delegation to this summer’s nominating convention, saying the state has already suffered a penalty from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton not campaigning in the state during the primary.“Michigan’s Democratic voters have already been punished enough for what has occurred over the last year,” he said.

Brewer also argued that not restoring Michigan to full strength puts it at risk of being captured by Republicans. In the last four elections, Michigan has gone for the Democratic presidential candidate but there are worried it could be lost if the delegation, lost in a scheduling dispute with the national party, is not restored in full.

Said Brewer: “Michigan has been completely bypassed. Every time (presumptive GOP nominee) John McCain visits Michigan or Republican officials campaign on his behalf, they never fail to remind the voters how the Democrats have ignored Michigan.”

Several points must be made. From the Democrats’ standpoint, Chairman Brewer is right that the state has been punished by Hillary and Obama campaigning there. That said, they’ve been punished because Howard laid things out in a very straightforward way what would happen if Florida and Michigan moved their primaries up before SuperDuper Tuesday on February 15. At the time, it was obvious that he’d have to revisit that decision. It was equally clear that he got painted into a corner because he tried pandering to New Hampshire and Iowa.

Which leads to this day. Had Dr. Dean not pandered to New Hampshire and Iowa, with 4 and 5 electoral votes respectively, we might’ve had Michigan and Florida first. Or possibly Iowa, followed by Michigan the next Tuesday, with New Hampshire and Florida next in line.

Now the DNC’s decision is back to haunt them. If they don’t seat the Florida and Michigan delegations with full voting rights, the DNC will be correctly accused with being hypocrites. Many of the people that continuously chanted “Count every vote” in 2000 will be the same people saying in 2008 that not all votes are created equal.

This isn’t the only war happening inside the Democratic Party, either. It’s just the one that’s the highest profile right now. (I’ll have more on the Democrats’ other problems in another post.)

The bottom line is that Democrats could’ve proven that they’re for change, thereby voting for a different schedule. Instead, they chose to accept a status quo schedule which they now have to defend.

One final irony must be pointed out. If Michigan’s and Florida’s election results are counted, Hillary will have garnered more votes than Obama, yet Sen. Obama will have more delegates.

Whatever happened to the principle of one person, one vote?

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Barack Obama is really acquiring a whiny tone to his statements. It isn’t appealing for the supposed unifier of all things political to have such a negative tone. This time, he’s whining that Hillary is stirring up trouble with the Florida delegation to the Democratic Convention. Here’s his latest whiny diatribe:

“The Clinton campaign has been stirring this up for fairly transparent reasons,” Obama told reporters on the plane from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to Chicago, adding she had not done so earlier in the race when she did not need the delegates to win.

“Let’s not…pretend that we don’t know what’s going on. I mean this is, from their perspective, their last slender hope to make arguments about how they can win, and I understand that,” Obama said.

It’s rather slick that Sen. Obama didn’t talk about the legality of not seating the Florida delegation. that’s the last thing he wants to talk about. It appears as though winning is more important to Sen. Obama than is the potential disenfranchisement of almost 2 million voters. That’s a pretty partisan move for THE postpartisan candidate, isn’ it?

What’s obvious to me is that Sen. Obama knows his momentum has disappeared. Sen. Obama knows that his momentum disappearing is making him look mortal, which can’t help him this fall. The more mortal he looks, the less chance he has of winning this November.

He didn’t get serious questions when he was the messianic candidate. The minute he started looking mortal, though, he started getting grilled on a daily basis. Since the grilling started, he’s lost ground with blue collar workers. If that doesn’t change, Obama can’t win the November election.

Based on this article, it’s obvious that Bill Clinton isn’t about to stop pressuring Obama, either. Here’s how he kept the pressure on today:

Speaking to a crowd of about 200 in Fort Thompson, S.D., Clinton seemed slightly subdued during his 30-minute speech, which largely focused on the issues important to the Native American community. As he wrapped up his remarks, a woman in the audience asked him a question about voting for Hillary Clinton.

“If you vote for her and she does well in Montana and she does well in Puerto Rico, when this is over she will be ahead in the popular vote,” Clinton said. “And they’re trying to get her to cry uncle before the Democratic Party has to decide what to do in Florida and Michigan because they are claiming that it only takes 2029 votes on the first ballot to win, and it takes a lot more than that if you put Florida and Michigan back in. Well, they will have to unless we want to lose the election. I mean, look, so there is that that is going on.”

The former president was strong in his assertion that his wife has the best chance to win against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, arguing that many electoral map predictions have his wife winning more electoral votes than Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., the Democratic frontrunner, in a general election.

“She is winning the general election today and he is not, according to all the evidence,” Clinton said. “And I have never seen anything like it. I have never seen a candidate treated so disrespectfully just for running. Her only position was, “Look, if I lose I’ll be a good team player. We will all try to win but let’s let everybody vote and count every vote.'”

It must be frustrating for the Clintons to not get all the adoration in the press. I know that they got slapped pretty good for their scandals but they got kid glove treatment during his re-election campaign.

Now they’re finding out what it’s like every day to be the GOP candidate. This isn’t anything new for Republicans. It’s what happens daily.

The funniest thing is that Billary is whining about the press coverage, Obama is whining about Hillary not rolling over and playing dead and John McCain just stays positive while he’s campaigning.

Is it any wonder why John McCain is doing better than expected?

Technorati: , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative