Clinton campaign working Wright with superdelegates

[Adelante]

Clinton Facing Narrower Path to Nomination
By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: March 20, 2008

-snip

Finally, Mrs. Clinton’s aides hope that disclosures about Mr. Obama’s past like the one involving Mr. Wright could give superdelegates’ pause. Mr. Devine said he thought that at least in terms of Democratic primary voters Mr. Obama had turned the furor to his advantage with his speech on race.

“Obama, confronted by an issue that was boiling, seemed to wade into it with a speech that was in many ways profound,” Mr. Devine said. “As a result, now these people who were so interested and awakened by his candidacy are back with him again. Instead of this being a setback, it becomes an opportunity.”

But the audience now is as much the Democratic superdelegates, who are especially attuned to politics and questions of electability in the fall, as it is rank-and-file voters.

Mrs. Clinton’s advisers said they had spent recent days making the case to wavering superdelegates that Mr. Obama’s association with Mr. Wright would doom their party in the general election.

That argument could be Mrs. Clinton’s last hope for winning this contest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20memo.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[babylonsister]

1. So much for Clinton taking the high road. I knew that was a dream. nt

[TwilightGardener]

2. She didnt' jump on it publicly--she's got Hannity and Scarborough to

help with the voters. But of course, she's on it privately. No class, no grace, no honor, no leadership, no decency.

[DemzRock]

3. Take the high road in politics?

har har...

Doesn't happen.

The Clintons have been smeared many a time, even by pro-Obama people.

We need someone who will fight.

I respect Team Clinton's fighting spirit.

[babylonsister]

7. This kind of fight you can have, buddy. This is gross and diminishes

her way more than it does Obama. My disgust is total, but you go ahead and enjoy it.

[JimGinPA]

13. That Sure Doesn't Say Much For You - Maybe You're In The Wrong Party

[Inuca]

31. There are fights

where winning actually means losing. And I am not only referring to Pyhrric victories where a short term win inexorably leads to a longer term defeat, but also to fights that you "win" only by giving up most of the reasons that you were fighting for in the first place. Many, much wiser than me, have said many times before, becoming that which you fight in order to win is not worth the win. The Clintons forget (or never knew or cared about) this.

[Citizen Kang]

39. Fighting for who exactly?

Clinton has received more money from oil interests than Obama or McCain. Clinton received the most money from HMO's and Big Pharma than anyone in the Senate. She supports the Military Industrial Complex's "Gift of Freedom" to Iraq.

She's fighting, but it ain't for you or me.

[ruggerson]

4. Obama's advisors would be doing the exact same thing if the roles were reversed

They'd be on the phones to the superdelegates before you can say "God damn America."

Clinton didn't create this story. Obama chose the church and made the decision to stay there. Putting aside the arguments over what Wright said and whether it was right or wrong, this is totally and completely Obama's story to own. It was his church, his decision to attend there, his life.

Hillary Clinton did not magically make him a member of this church.

She has not publicly said one word about this.

If her advisors are privately telling superdelegates that this controversy may hurt Obama in the general - oh well, that's politics. Obama would be making the exact same argument if the situation was reversed.

That's not pushing a story or creating a story.

That's privately arguing that a story you didn't create or have any part of could possibly damage your opponent.

(post dupe from another thread on the same subject)

[babylonsister]

9. She never 'publically' says anything but has her minions do her dirty

work. If you don't think they're using race as a tool to beat this man into the ground, you're not living in the real world. If you don't think that's disgusting, I don't know what to think about you.

[ruggerson]

19. It's not disgusting it's politics

and Obama's folks would be doing the exact same thing.

She is not using race. Her advisors are telling superdelegates (if this story is true) that the controversy hurts Obama politically. Which it does, there's concrete evidence that it does. Obama knows it does, or he wouldn't have gone out on three cable shows and done a major damage control speech on the subject.

She didn't create this story. They've done nothing to push it. And to suggest that they are "using race" because her advisors may be pointing out the obvious to superdelegates is just not factual nor reasoned.

[babylonsister]

32. Using race is not 'just politics'. Sorry, but I cannot agree.

She's not running on her merits, her campaign is applauding McCain, and now she wants to use this? She doesn't know where to draw the line because there is no line with her; that to me is disgusting.
And do you honestly think the SDs need a reminder?

[uponit7771]

44. RIGHT!! It's VERY VERY hurtful to a group of people HURTFUL!!!

[Texas Hill Country]

12. hell yes they would. does anyone think that Obama is not bringing up Monica, Genifer, Whitewater?

This is about friggin electability... and Wright IS a major issue, whether you people wanna believe it or not.

[dkf]

18. Monica and Gennifer aren't divisive, except vs. the pro-cheaters and the

anti-cheaters.

And I have discovered that there are a whole lot of people on this board who find cheating perfectly fine...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. Obama would have been forced out weeks ago,

confronted with 10 losses in a row and an insurmountable lead in delegates, popular vote and states won.

[olkaz]

51. This is ludicrous and you know it.

If the roles were reversed, Obama would have been forced into conceding by now.

Only the Clintons could have stuck around this long. Only them.

[MethuenProgressive]

5. The SuperDelegates Never Heard of Pastor Wright Until God Damn Hillary Told Them!

:eyes:

[joeybee12]

10. Please verify this rant with some facts...thank you. n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

17. See OP. It's Clinton's fault the SD's might factor PastorGate into their decisions.

It must be true. It's in the Times.

[ginnyinWI]

6. the same notion is being spread at DU.

In the real world, most people (65%) are telling pollsters that Wright makes no difference to their opinion of Sen. Obama. At least that's what ABC said.

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. I loved Obama's Race speech

The only thing critical I have to say about it is he should have delivered it sooner. I hope soon 95% of people say Wright makes no difference to them. But 35% of the public is a large number of people. That is roughly the equivelent of the percentage of the public who are not registered as Democrats or Republicans. The last two Presidential elections were extremely close. A shift of 100, 000 votes in Ohio in 2004 or of 10,000 votes in Florida in 2000 (and I am being liberal with those numbers) would have resulted in a Democratic President.

It the 35% of people in the real world who think Wright matters weren't going to vote for Obama anyway, than you are right, it doesn't matter. If that 35% are people who still plan to vote for Obama but now think a little less of him, that probably doesn't matter either. But without knowing who is covered by that 35% figure and how strongly they end up being effected by this controversy, it is premature to take great comfort from your 65% figure.

[phrigndumass]

8. Finally the MSM is waking up to this charade

The politics of manipulation, greed and divisiveness always come back to bite you in the ass (unless you're a republican) ...

[Bad Thoughts]

11. That's the deal-breaker for me

I would vote for Clinton in the fall. However, if the party took the Wright controversy as a reason to refuse the nomination to Obama (either voters or party members), I would have serious doubts about belonging to and supporting the party. African Americans have legitimate rage, having been given half-hearted apologies and been the subject of resentment because of it. Moreover, Wright's rhetoric is hardly out of line with the social justice tradition in Christianity (anyone read the Book of Jeremiah recently?).

More broadly, I would take it as a sign that most of the party sees minorities as dhimmis, to be protected but not political. And perhaps not even that. Standing up for the defenseless and disenfranchised does not mean courting their votes and giving them a few favors. It means empowering them. It means accepting that their political power is legitimate. Wright may seem extreme, but he is still exemplary of a political tradition that needs voice in this country. His rage may be out of control, but it emerges from a context that ought to find resolution within the party.

[Kittycat]

15. I completely agree.

Deciding on wright as a reason, is alienating he AA vote, and those supporters that view it as the sum of guilt by association.

[Bad Thoughts]

25. I should add this

There are people in my family who don't pass like I do. They live in areas where the Minutemen are active. The party needs to work to defuse racial rhetoric, not profit from it. Indeed, I can still accept Clinton as a nominee despite the things done and said by her campaign. But she also has to come out on the right side of this, creating an environment that promotes peace and empowerment.

[Adelante]

22. "accepting that their political power is legitimate"

That's it right there. The Democratic Party is supposed to be about empowering and legitimizing that power.

Well-said :hi:

[Bad Thoughts]

26. That's why I joined in the first place eom.

[dkf]

14. Maybe the Wright controversy was a Clinton plot after all.

All that stuff on Wright has existed for ages, and it pops up now, when Clinton needs to win based on Super-Delegates.

I'm guessing if we look at what stirred up the media pot, we will find Bill and Hillary at the bottom of it.

Which brings us back to reconciliation...Hillary isn't interested in healing if she can win by making it worse. That is why she is poisonous to this country.

[GumboYaYa]

20. Hillary's only hope is to fan the flames of racism. Her supporters are doing it

here on DU every day. The Clintons and all of their racist supporters (yes you DUers who are pushing Wright for political gains are disgusting racists) make me want to puke. We need to run the Clintons out of the democratic party forever. If they are victorious with these repugnant tatics, I am no longer a Democrat....the party will have left me.

All of Hillarys supporters who are helping spread these racists attacks are the lowest of the low.

[babylonsister]

27. Yep, and it's A-OK to fan those flames, because it's just 'politics'.

Not to me; this is way beyond politics.

[JimGinPA]

Wow! Look At All The HRC "Supporters" Here Rationalize Now!

Pitiful!

:puke:

[Raffi Ella]

21. She's right.

"...making the case to wavering superdelegates that Mr. Obama’s association with Mr. Wright would doom their party in the general election."


There is no denying this.Thanks for posting,it's good to know Hillary has The Party's best interest at heart.I hope the S.D.'s come around to her side and soon.

[cali]

36. She has every right to do it.

but you hillbots are delusional as always- and perpetually desperate. This is not going to sway SDs. Perhaps it would have if not for Obama's speech, but sorry, it won't work now. And don't forget, Obama needs far fewer of those delegates than hilly. Furthermore, he's got Pelosi and she doesn't come alone. Tough shit for hilly.

[jgraz]

43. She can do whatever she wants, but we should call it what it is: race baiting

Her latest strategy to slime her way to the nominating podium is to hope for a virulent racist backlash against a fellow Democrat -- and to help fuel the fire wherever she can.

Anyone who could watch Obama's speech and then cheer on these sorts of tactics is beyond help.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. There is absolutely no reason why her campaign shouldn't

This is a dupe thread but the other dropped off the front page so I will repeat my post to the first thread here and expand on it:

Accepting this story on face value; Doing so is a private lobbying effort behind closed doors aimed at a select few hundred people. This has nothing to do with trying to turn the public against Obama. These discussions are an insider version of a political argument that parallels the debates we have here at DU over whether Obama's association with Wright will make it harder for Obama to get elected, except that we have that debate in public along with most of the nation's media pundits. It is not swiftboating Obama to talk with a couple of hundred undecided Super Delegates about the possible political repercussions of a matter that they are already fully aware of and closely tracking.

Does anyone think for an instant that whichever Super Delegates who still remain uncommitted at this point in the race are not having their own discussions with political people in their own circles independent of the two campaigns about how the Wright controversy may play out in November if Obama is our nominee? Of course they are talking about it. Of course they are weighing whatever political implications it may bring. That is their job. We are doing the same without even having to cast a delegate vote at the Convention.

The discussion is a valid one. Opinions on it of course will differ but Super Delegates are supposed to weigh the political ramifications of possible political controversies. They also are supposed to weight whatever implications come out of Hillary Clinton's tax returns when they are released in a few weeks, and I have no doubt that the Obama campaign will be all over those Super Delegates explaining how this or that in those returns could damage the chances for a Democratic victory in November. Not only is that politics as usual, it is arguably politics the way it should be played. We are not talking about national attack ads, we are talking about private discussions.

If pictures emerged of Bill Clinton in bed with a new bimbo, let's say a Republican bimbo to make it even worse, and the Obama camp had evidence that the Drudge report had copies of those photos that were 100% legitimate and were planning to go national with that story as soon as Hillary won the nomination, it would be legitimate in my mind for the Obama campaign to have private discussions with Super Delegates about the impact that might have on Democratic chances to win in November. Hillary Clinton could be a completely innocent victim who has always done nothing more than struggle to keep her family intact while remaining faithful to her husband, but the political dimension of that new revelation would still be a legitimate topic of internal debate for those having to decide who the Democrats should have as our standard bearer in the fall.

And I am saying that about a hypothetical situation in which the general public isn't even aware of that specific pending political threat. Choosing a candidate is serious political business, it's not only about who one likes better, or even who "deserves" the nomination; it is also about choosing a candidate who can carry our party to victory. In this case Wright's church sold copies of his sermons on the open market directly to the media and the public already knows what is in some of those tapes. Clinton's aids privately talking to Super Delegates about the possible political ramifications of that does nothing to fan or spread this controversy. I can't say the same however about ADAM NAGOURNEY making this into a New York Times story or posters at DU and elsewhere insisting on a public round of discussions about private talks that were restricted to Super Delegates only.

[BeyondGeography]

28. You're comparing Rev. Wright with a bimbo eruption

That's 1000% foolish.

All Obama did was to continue to attend services given by a guy who was a mentor to him even when some of the things the old dude said were a little over-the-top.

You know, part of me wouldn't mind seeing Hillary succeed with this, just to watch her try to win in November with a depressed, demoralized and decreased black vote.

You go, girl!

[Tom Rinaldo]

That was the smallest element of my post

It was a throw in just to look at it from another angle. My post had nothing to do with looking at the merrits of a possible political controversy, just at the need for political people to weigh the political impact of whatever political controversy in their decision making. I brought up Clinton's income taxes also. I used a bimbo erruption as an example also because many people think that is plausible AND it is an example of a political controversy that can engulf Hillary Clinton through no real fault of her own, certainly through no fault of her own personal behavior.

[BeyondGeography]

40. There's no equivalency in terms of impact

If the Obama campaign lobbied the SD's on a new bimbo eruption and that was seen as helping to take down Hillary, the fallout in terms of votes for Obama just wouldn't compare. I would also add that Hillary's tactics risk long-term damage to the party if they succeed, as she is trying to use cherry-picked quotes from sermons in a black church to take down a black candidate.

[Tom Rinaldo]

45. I do not accept the premise of your post

"...she is trying to use cherry-picked quotes from sermons in a black church to take down a black candidate."

It can be argued that those are the cherry picked quotes that ABC News, and MSNBC, and FOX and Drudge, and all the other media outlets are using to bring down a black candidate, or it can be claimed they are just covering a controversy. But the tapes are public record sold by Wright's church and the media is mining them for controversy and ratings. Clinton's campaign talking to Super Delegates about the political ramnifications of that usage of those tapes is valid politics.

If there is fallout it is because the comments Wright made are actually controversial. I think Obama did a masterful job in his speech in dealing with that controversy head on. I sincerely hope it works, but appraising whether or not it does is a valid political exercise to take place behind closed doors.

[BeyondGeography]

52. Problem is, there is nothing mysterious about the process here

I mean, we're talking about it, for crying out loud.

Hillary has played this all wrong. She had a chance to come out over the weekend and stick up for Obama, not to save his skin but to support her own. If she is simply seen as having milked this thing she'll be forever marginalized by key elements within the party and will be fatally compromised as a nominee.

[Tom Rinaldo]

57. You have a point here

She is in a delicate situation and perhaps the strategy you suggest would have been best. But it still would have been appropriate for her campaign to ask Super Delegates in private discussions to hold back on endorsing Obama until it became clearer whether Obama will be able to negate serious negative fallout from this Wright controversy. That is the point of my post.

And the problem for Clinton is that had she strongly come out in public to defend Obama on this controversy, while her campaign was urging Super Delegates to hold off on moving to Obama because the Wright controversy may still lead to a significant drop in Obama's popularity and therefor his electability, she would have been torn apart by her opponents for being two faced and hypocritical even though those two actions would not have inherently been in conflict with each other. But the perception that she was saying one thing while doing another would have been damning.

And to be fair, earlier in this contest I never saw Obama come out and strongly defend Hillary for having gotten a bum rap from the constant attacks of the Republican Hate machine for the last 15 years. Instead I heard him say that it is unfortunate she has become so "devisive", possibly not of her own fault, but the resulting devisiveness would make it harder for Democrats to win the Presidency with Hillary Clinton as our nominee.

You read my earlier comments about Obama and how he has handled the "Wright controversy". I do assign him some blame for either not knowing he would have to get out in front of this issue earlier or for trying to skate by until now by intimidating his opponents from bringing up potential race related controversies that could hurt his chances of becoming President during the primaries, all the while knowing full well that the storm was surely coming if and when he won the nomination crown. I do however give Obama massive credit for the speech that he delivered on Race. He is not blameless on the politics of this controversy, but he is right about what he said in that speech and I hope America listens to it well.

[wileedog]

34. Its not just going to be the black vote she loses

Tons of new, younger Dems and converted indies who voted for Obama will be gone if their vote is just tossed out. She will be left with her "Big State Strategy" that has been failing so spectacularly for so long and not even a political mandate from her own party. Not to mention one of the worst campaign organizations ever assembled.

President McCain.

[Kokonoe]

24. So her argument to be the president is, America is racist.

I do not agree.

[jgraz]

46. She's counting on it.

And doing everything she can to promote racist fears.

[TwilightGardener]

53. Yes--and she will help that racist sentiment along. That's what she's been doing.

[CatsDogsBabies]

30. How pathetic.

[Voice for Peace]

33. That's a hopeful thought!

"That argument could be Mrs. Clinton’s last hope for winning this contest."

An extremely lame argument. Thanks for the post!

[CoffeeCat]

35. Hillary Clinton can only win the Dem primary....

...but destroying, tearing down and puffing up controversies into scandals, and
manipulating the Super Delegates.

She's behind in the popular vote.

She's behind in the delegate vote.

She's behind in states won.

The only way she can win legitimately, is by garnering 63 percent in each of the remaining states.

She knows that's not going to happen.

So, she behaves like a predator and a manipulator---grasping at straws and waging an underhanded marketing
campaign.

The Super Delegates are intelligent, seasoned, successful people who understand politics. They know
a con when they see it. They understand what Hillary is doing. She's ignorant to lobby this way, and
to believe that it won't leave a sour taste with the Super Delegates.

In a week, when this has all played out--and we move on to other issues--Clinton will be left with her
own deplorable, desperate behavior--and she'll be faced with the reality of being behind in the pledged
delegate and popular-vote count.

The SD's will not fall for this.

It's frustrating to watch one of our own Dem leaders act like such a weasel, but we just have to bide our
time through this primary process--until we reach the end and an Obama win.

[phrigndumass]

37. "They know a con when they see it"

YES! Thanks for that.

And "desperate" is very accurate. Last-ditch effort happening before our eyes.

:toast:

[babylonsister]

38. How legitimate would a 'win' be in your mind using these tactics? nt

[CoffeeCat]

49. A Clinton 'win'?

A Clinton win using these tactics is not only illegitimate, it's underhanded, selfish
and perverse.

The person with the most pledged delegates wins the contest. The Supers should follow
the will of the people.

Any other manipulation-fueled "win" by Clinton is undemocratic and a disgrace.

[Blomst]

41. Why Was Clinton Staying in the Race This Long?

Seeing how the American media, asks no in-depth questions, seeing how they facilitated Bush's dirty lies and his dubious wins of the nomination and, then, two presidencies, seeing how they participated in the swift boating of Kerry, no questions asked, I wonder if the Clintons were staying in the race for this long, waiting for the Wright controversy to blow. Were they counting on the media to do what they always seem to do? Then all they needed to do was to step aside and let the slaughter begin?

[babylonsister]

48. Welcome to DU, and I wouldn't be so angry if the Clintons HAD stepped

aside as they said they were. But to now know they're feeding the flames is intolerable to me.

[TwilightGardener]

54. Exactly. A unified party could fight this swiftboating, but instead, they're

allowing it to damage Obama--it's like they're all sitting back and watching a science experiment unfold, curiously detached, instead of behaving like a loyal political party. The party leaders disgust me.

[Bonobo]

42. Disgusting!

[slinkerwink]

47. her only hope is, "vote for me! I'm white!"

[cascadiance]

50. James Zogby said on his show last week that he's been lobbied heavily as a super delegate...

James Zogby, who himself is a super delegate, when asking a guest on how Clinton would appear to be left with lobbying super delegates to try and sway them to win noted that he himself had been called by Bill, Hillary, and yes, even Chelsea as well! Might be interesting to tune in today to see if he follows up on this at all. Maybe someone could call in to his show to ask him how he will vote, etc. to see if we have one more notch to go to Obama. He sounded like he was leaning away from Clinton with the tone of his comments there.

[SoCalDem]

59. Zogby Pollster is a super delegate???? WTF..

His polls have not been all that spiffy of late..actually for a few years now..

Until there's a way to incorporate cell phones into the mix, polls will NEVER be very accurate.. Even "old folks" are ditching landlines for cell phones..

To base support on calls to a bunch of white retired women is not very representative

[cascadiance]

60. James Zogby who is the show host is the super delegate... Don't know about pollster JOHN Zogby....

John Zogby is his brother who is the pollster.

But for more cannon fodder here, James Zogby, who is the super delegate, has his show produced by Dubai interests... You could certainly tell that this was in play when he voiced his opinions on the ports controversy a while back.

[Strawman]

55. Giving the nomination to Hillary is a lose/lose for the superdelegates

Either they alienate the people Obama has mobilized and lose a huge constituency they need, or they piss those people off so much that instead of giving up on politics they turn their sights on the establishment Dems, brooming their asses right out of power at the next opportunity.

[jackson_dem]

58. How DARE she point out Obama's electability has been hurt by his hypocrisy!

:sarcasm:

[Adelante]

61. Clinton refused to deny that her campaign was pushing the story

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has strictly maintained a public position not to comment on Sen. Barack Obama's relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Many times, questions have been answered with -- "you will have to ask Senator Obama about that."

However at a Thursday press availability in Terra Haute, Indiana after a report surfaced that the Clinton campaign was pushing the Wright story to superdelegates arguing that the relationship hurt Obama's electibility -– Clinton refused to deny that her campaign was pushing the story.

When asked, Clinton ignored the Wright portion of the question and said “well my campaign has been making the case that I am the most electable that I have said that for a year or more that I am the person best able to make the challenges that our country faces as commander in chief.”

When Clinton was then asked specifically if her campaign was pushing the Wright story –- she shrugged and took the next question, ignoring the reporter.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/03/clinton-doesnt.html

[JimGinPA]

62. That Really Doesn't Make Hillary Contemptible...

As far as I know.

[Adelante]

63. Another Clinton Surrogate & a Clinton Campaign Staffer Push Rev. Wright Story

Another Clinton Surrogate & a Clinton Campaign Staffer Push Rev. Wright Story

March 21, 2008 10:33 AM

Seriously, how can the Clinton campaign with a straight face claim it in no way is pushing the Rev. Wright story?

(Answer: practice.)

Former Ambassador Joe Wilson, who appeared with Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, Tuesday in Philly writes in the Huffington Post of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, that "Claims of superior intuitive judgment by his campaign and by him are self-evidently disingenuous, especially in light of disclosures about his long associations with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko."

Then this liberal blogger, Chris Bowers, writes that at a Philadelphia ward meeting, a Clinton campaign staffer "specifically listed Jeremiah Wright as an example of why Obama would be less electable in the general election. The context of his argument was that the Wright story demonstrated that Obama had not gone through the rigors of a presidential election before, and it was possible that more damaging stories like that would come out as the campaign progressed. Aka, the Wright story is demonstrative of how Obama is less electable.

"While we are not superdelegates, we are committee people in Pennsylvania, so the campaigns consider us very important right now. Maybe not superdelegate important, but important none the less…"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/another-clinton.html