Sunday Snapshot -- Should She Stay Or Should She Go Now?
The Sunday shows continued to discuss the odds that Hillary Clinton will capture the Dem nod.
Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid: "I think we have to play this out. ... President Clinton didn't get the nomination until June 2nd. So I think we should just relax a little bit. After that June 3rd date arrives, I think that [Barack] Obama and Clinton will have a few days to make their case to the uncommitted delegates, and then the decision will be made, and we'll have a five-month general election" ("This Week," ABC, 5/11).
DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen (MD): "That's a decision for her to make. And, you know, we'll have to see how this goes forward. Again, obviously Obama has a lot of momentum right now. But until you have a majority of the delegates, it's not over" ("Late Edition," CNN, 5/11).
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT): "As long as Senator Clinton is in there and Senator Obama doesn't have the pledged delegates he needs to clinch the nomination, it's not over" ("Late Edition," CNN, 5/11).
John Edwards: "I think it's very hard. ... In the last few weeks, I think she's become a stronger and stronger candidate. She's been making a pretty compelling case for her candidacy. The problem is, I think, you can no longer make a compelling case for the math. The math is very, very hard for her" ("Face the Nation," CBS, 5/11).
Chris Dodd, on Clinton staying in the race: "How the campaign is waged is more important than whether or not it's being waged. ... I'm confident, again, that Hillary Clinton understands how important it is that Democrats win this election, that we get back on track again both at home and abroad, that we have a candidate that the Democrats are united behind. And I know she wants to be a part of that, ultimately."
More: "Having been a candidate, it's awfully difficult when you're going 180 miles an hour in one direction and you have a rough night, as ... Senator Clinton did last Tuesday night, to expect to within 48 hours or 72 hours to reverse field, to stop everything and go in a different direction is asking way too much in my view. Give her a chance to breathe, to settle down, to recognize what's going on here. She'll make the right choice" (Meet the Press," NBC, 5/11).
More after the jump (KATHERINE LEHR).
Politico's VandeHei: "If you talk to anybody in the Clinton camp, they know they need a miracle. ... They need a scandal. They need an imponderable. They know they can't just win it by collecting enough popular votes and counting in Puerto Rico. But as long as she stays in there, anything can happen. And this is a family that has had a political career that's been built upon sort of defying expectations and coming back when people thought it was not possible to come back" ("Face the Nation," CBS, 5/11).
Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO): "I am assuming it's McCain versus Obama. Now, you know, I'm glad to see Mrs. Clinton stay in this race and keep that discussion going. I think that discussion, frankly, has been helpful for us" ("Late Edition," CNN, 5/11).
SPIN CITY
Clinton chair Terry McAuliffe appeared solo on "Meet the Press" and "Face the Nation."
McAuliffe, to NBC's Tim Russert: "Let me ask you -- I know it's your show -- you think it's impossible for Hillary Clinton to be the nominee? Impossible?"
Russert: "Look, look, I'm going to stay with the questions."
McAuliffe: "Did you count the Buffalo Bills out in 1993 when the Houston Oilers were beating them by 32 points in the third quarter? ... No!"
Russert: "But you will admit that she cannot overtake Barack Obama with elected delegates?"
McAuliffe: "Very -- highly unlikely. ... Nothing's impossible. You are talking to Terry McAuliffe. I don't believe anything in life is impossible."
McAuliffe: "It's not impossible for Hillary Clinton to win. A lot of people have said that. Big Russ, if he were sitting here today, nothing's impossible. Jack McAuliffe, if he were with us today ... they're probably both in heaven right now, Tim, probably having a scotch, looking down and saying, you know what, this fight goes on. It's good for the Democratic Party. Millions of people coming out to vote. It's exciting."
Russert: "Well, Big Russ is in the Barcalounger still watching this."
McAuliffe, on Flor-igan: "I would say the rule is 50 percent. That's the point I'd like to make. I had the right, the party, to take away 50 percent. The party took away 100 percent of the delegates. The rule is 50 percent. Had they only taken away 50 percent like the Republican Party did, Tim, you and I would not be having this conversation today."
Russert: "So you would accept that as a compromise, half the Michigan and half the Florida delegates?"
McAuliffe: "We certainly might, you bet. But in fairness, the Rules and Bylaws Committee will meet on the 31st to make that decision. The issue is 50 percent. They took away 100 percent" (NBC, 5/11).
McAuliffe, asked how far Clinton intends to take the argument that she is the candidate of "hard-working white people": "Where she wants to take this election is until someone wins the nomination, until someone gets one-plus what we need to be the nominee of the Democratic Party."
CBS' Schieffer: "Is that her strategy now, that she's the candidate of white people?"
McAuliffe: "No, absolutely not. She's reaching out to everybody. It's what we've done from the start."
McAuliffe, on Puerto Ricans not being eligible to vote in the general: "But they're voting in the primaries as United States citizens. So I mean, they certainly should vote in the primaries, and I think there's movement that they want to become a state and vote in the general election" (CBS, 5/11).
And Clinton comm. dir. Howard Wolfson was on "Fox News Sunday."
Wolfson, on Clinton staying in the race: "Look, if Barack Obama wants Hillary Clinton out of this race, beat her. Beat her in West Virginia. Beat her in Puerto Rico. Beat her in Kentucky. We have key states coming up. There is no reason why Senator Obama shouldn't be able to compete against Senator Clinton in West Virginia. It is, as I said, a key swing state."
Asked if the camp's debt is about $20M: "Correct."
On whether or not Obama helping retire Clinton's debt would affect her staying in the race: "Absolutely not. First of all, there haven't been any conversations. I don't expect there to be any conversations. This isn't about debt retirement or the VP. This is about winning campaigns in key upcoming states" (5/11).
A FOX FIRST-TIMER
Obama strategist David Axelrod made his first-ever appearance on "Fox News Sunday." Some highlights:
Axelrod, on superdelegates starting to break sharply for Obama: "I think you're going to continue to see that. I think that's a natural thing. We're coming to the end of the process. I think people saw the results onTuesday as very meaningful. And I think there's an eagerness on the part of the party leadership and activists across the country to get on with the general election campaign. ... So I think you're going to see people making decisions at a rapid pace from this point on."
Asked if the Obama camp will help the Clinton camp pay off its debt: "She hasn't asked, and we haven't offered. And I think that that discussion is way premature. And the truth is I think that Senator Clinton will have the capacity to retire her debt. I don't believe that Senator Clinton is looking for a deal. I don't think that's what this is about."
On reports Michelle Obama does not want Clinton to be Obama's VP: "That's false. There's been no discussion about vice presidential nominees and this whole scenario. Again, we have not made any overtures."
On the McCain camp saying Obama's "losing his bearings" comment was an obvious way of bringing up McCain's age: "Boy, I think they're awfully sensitive. I didn't read it that way at all. But when we say losing his bearings, we're talking about the fact that he promised an elevated campaign, a campaign on issues and so on, and he's been engaged in a series of kind of gratuitous, ad hominem attacks lately. ... One would hope that Senator McCain would live up to the commitment he made to run a more elevated campaign."
On the McCain camp suggesting a series of joint town hall meetings: "Let's do that. Let's do that kind of thing. I think the country is hungry for a serious campaign because these are serious times, but let's not engage in this kind of nonsense that he knows isn't the fact-that he knows not only demeans Senator Obama, but himself in the process" (5/11).
TEAM McCAIN
Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid was on "This Week," and was asked about John McCain.
ABC's Stephanopoulos: "In 2001, you counted Senator McCain as a possible crossover to join the Democratic caucus. Did you have any discussions with him about this? And what did he say?"
Reid: "Those are private in nature. But let me just say this -- John McCain was a different John McCain in those days than he is now. Those were the days before he wrapped his arms around George Bush. I mean, in those days he did a few independent things. ... He's a different person now than he was then, and that's a disappointment to a lot of us."
Stephanopoulos: "But you do think he indicated he might vote with the Democrats to you?"
Reid: "Well, listen. I reached out to a lot of people. Well, I shouldn't say a lot. There weren't that many to reach out to. I talked to a number of Republicans. I have to admit I only batted about .250. I got Jim Jeffords, and that's not bad, even in the big leagues today" (ABC, 5/11).
McCain Victory chair Carly Fiorina was also on "This Week."
Fiorina, asked if she can name one credible economist who supports the gas tax holiday: "No, I can't, but, you see, I don't think it matters."
Fiorina, on McCain supporting the Warner-Lieberman bill: "This is an area, as you and I both agree, where John McCain differs pretty substantially from the administration. But I think what John McCain has always said, whether it was the cap-and-trade legislation that he has supported and sponsored with Joe Lieberman or this current bill, what he has always said is that the United States must take a leadership role in addressing climate change and global warming, that we must apply some of the disciplines of the private marketplace to spur innovation in this area, as well as to incent companies to do better."
ABC's Stephanopoulos: "We also saw this week Cindy McCain, Senator McCain's wife, has refused to release her tax returns. In 2004, your predecessors at the Republican National Committee called on Teresa Heinz Kerry to release her tax returns. Eventually, she did release her form 10-40 and summaries of all of the taxes. Why shouldn't Senator McCain's wife do the same thing?"
Fiorina: "Cindy McCain has made her position very clear here, and I support it. She is in charge of a private company. She has disclosed information that's consistent with the disclosure rules for a private company. I don't think there is anything more to say here."
Stephanopoulos: "But don't you see an inconsistency between the Republican position in 2004 and the Republican position today?"
Fiorina: "Well, I wasn't part of the RNC in 2004. I can only talk about what we're doing now and going forward" (ABC, 5/11).
And Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) was on "Late Edition," where he commented on McCain's attacks on Obama.
Lieberman: "Senator Obama clearly doesn't support any of the values and goals of Hamas. But the fact that the spokesperson for Hamas would say they would welcome the election of Senator Obama really does raise the question, 'Why?' And it suggests the difference between these two candidates. ... One of ... John McCain's strengths as president, frankly, is that our allies and friends around the world will trust him. And our enemies like Hamas and Iran will fear him" ("Late Edition," CNN, 5/11).
UNITY '08?
There was also reaction to Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) saying an Obama-Clinton ticket would not happen.
Chris Dodd: "I think Senator Kennedy's got a pretty good ear to the ground. These are two great candidates who fought very hard, but my sense is today that that probably won't be the ticket. I can't tell you which one it's going to be, but I doubt that's going to be the ticket" ("Meet the Press," NBC, 5/11).
Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid: "Senator Kennedy and I can't make that decision. Only two people can make that decision, and that's Obama and Clinton. No one else can make it. If that happens, it happens, but it can only be with the two of them. ... If they are together on a ticket, I could certainly support it, but that is not for me or Kennedy" ("This Week," ABC, 5/11).
Politico's VandeHei: "I don't think it will happen. The reasons I think are pretty obvious. He doesn't want to carry sort of the Clinton baggage. He wants to be able to say he's a different kind of candidate" ("Face the Nation," CBS, 5/11).
ROUNDTABLE ROUNDUP
The "This Week" roundtable discussed WH '08:
Cokie Roberts, on HRC: "The tone, particularly of the columns ... is anything but respectful. That is also very offensive to women. The degree of just blatant sexism that has been evident in this campaign is really very high."
Sam Donaldson: "Oh, Cokie" (ABC, 5/11).
The "Fox News Sunday" roundtable discussed WH '08.
Weekley Standard's Kristol: "Hillary Clinton is going to play it out. You know, the Washington Nationals are probably not going to win the National League East, but they're going to play out the season."
Fox's Hume, on the McCain camp suggesting a series of joint town hall meetings: "I think it's a terrible idea. ... All your time is going to be in debate preparation, right? ... They'd have to keep to a debate schedule that would make the primary season so far look relaxed" (5/11).
The "Late Edition" roundtable discussed WH '08.
CNN's Yellin: "A number of senior Democrats who are very close to both the Obama and the Clinton campaigns and have been talking to both throughout and have been having conversations among themselves about whether it's possible to encourage Senator Clinton to announce that she's dropping out after the West Virginia primary. Their idea would be that she would come out on the night of the West Virginia election after a huge victory for her and stay on a very high note. ... So there's a lot of focus on what will happen here Tuesday night" (5/11).
The "Meet the Press" roundtable discussed WH '08.
CNBC's Harwood: "There's nothing Hillary Clinton can do to change it. Stuff could happen to Barack Obama. If we found out that there was a secret poker game when Tony Rezko was paying Barack Obama to write Jeremiah Wright's sermons and to organize Muslim English professors for a new Weather Underground chapter, maybe Barack Obama could be stopped. But that's a fantasy" (NBC, 5/11).





It is certainly entertaining to read comments of professional poiliticians and commentators about the democrat presidential race.
First, I guess the current democrat leaders suffer from permanent selective memory and have such a think skin that they cannot take personal responsibility for their own actions.
Aren't all the Kennedys, Reids, Pelosis, Deans, the ones heading the democratic party when they had that collossal debacle in the last presidential elections led by Kerry when they were supposed to win back the presidency easily for the democratic party? If they had at the time a little bit of respect for the american public and their own constituents they should have resigned then for being incompetent.
Now, they have a candidate that like the current president offers "change" and "hope" but lacks a track record. A candidate that is so full of himself that does not salute the flag nor likes to wear a flag pin. A candidate that has such an identity problem that changed his name from Barry to Barack, was raised by an agnostic mother and an ultra religious muslim fanatic stefather. A candidate that "found God" in a church that has a pastor like Wright that talks about division among races, and has delussional sermons where he attacks jew, italian americans, whites (AIDS creators? nobody but Wright believes that), etc, and Obama stays in that church for 20 years. Even people like Oprah resigned from that church years ago. A candidate that counts Ayers, a terrorist, as a mentor when he first ran for office. A candidate that when he ran for the Senate, his republican counterpart dropped before the elections.
In sum, a candidate untested, with no background, somoene that seems more like a liberal version of the current president that was a puppet in the hands of the ultra conservative --> Obama will be a puppet of the Kennedys, Pelosis, Deans, Reids --> A Manchurian candidate.
Is that what people want for president? A worst version of the actual President?
I sincerely hope that people starts looking thru these issues carefully.... McCain is not the answer, but Obama is even worst for the country.
Arturo...You've got SERIOUS problems. If you think wearing a "flag pin" (made in China) and having an atheist mother somehow makes you unAmerican I fear your stupidity is beyond repair.
You have willfully regergitated all the usual moronic crap that Obama-haters spew when the truth is too much to bear. 1) He ran a BETTER campaign. 2) He had a BETTER message. 3) His supporters gave MORE money. 4) HE WAS A BETTER CANDIDATE...PERIOD.
Your candidate squandered name recognition, two-term President, significant superdelegate lead, signifigant financial lead, the Black vote, and the title of Presumptive nominee. In essence...she BLEW IT!!!! Get Over it...Sore Loser!
Arturo...You've got SERIOUS problems. If you think wearing a "flag pin" (made in China) and having an atheist mother somehow makes you unAmerican I fear your stupidity is beyond repair.
You have willfully regergitated all the usual moronic crap that Obama-haters spew when the truth is too much to bear. 1) He ran a BETTER campaign. 2) He had a BETTER message. 3) His supporters gave MORE money. 4) HE WAS A BETTER CANDIDATE...PERIOD.
Your candidate squandered name recognition, two-term President, significant superdelegate lead, signifigant financial lead, the Black vote, and the title of Presumptive nominee. In essence...she BLEW IT!!!! Get Over it...Sore Loser!
Honor the will of the people, which seems to be “ nobody will have won at the end of the primary season”. Senator Clinton won the popular vote in Texas, I voted for Her; then I went to the caucus meeting. The number of Obama supporters who showed up to caucus was very large, so Sen. Obama won the caucus election, even though He clearly was the less popular candidate in the state. Where is the democracy of that result?
The Texas result shows that Caucus elections are totally undemocratic. The candidate’s campaign that can haul more of its supporters to the caucus meeting will win the caucus election, even though that candidate might be the least popular in that state. That is how Sen. Obama has taken the lead of pledged delegates over Sen. Clinton, by winning caucus states. Obama’s claim that nationally He is the more popular candidate is bogus, as Sen. Clinton has won most primary elections and millions of citizens didn't get to vote in caucus states.
Furthermore, the process to determine the candidate for president for the Democratic Party requires the winner to get 2025 delegates to obtain a majority and thus be the democratic presidential candidate next fall. Currently, neither Sen. Obama nor Sen. Clinton has obtained the required majority. It appears that neither of the two Senators will be able to obtain the required 2025 delegates from pledged delegates at the end of the primary election process to get the nomination, so they will be tied, neither Senator will be ahead nor behind, THEY WILL BE TIED, it will be a draw. That is, in spite of Sen. Obama’s campaign claims, no citizen who cast a vote in primary elections will be disenfranchised ( except maybe those from Michigan and Florida ) if his or her candidate isn’t picked in Denver, because NOBODY WON during the primary process. A runoff election will then take place at the democratic party’s national convention in Denver, where only delegates will vote. There, the superdelegates will end up picking the winner. This is the process, this is how it should be if neither candidate obtains the required 2025 delegate majority during the primary period.
So Superdelegates, pick the candidate most likely to win in November; pick the candidate best prepared to lead our country into the future; pick Sen. Hillary R. Clinton; Otherwise, we will lose NOT ONLY THE WHITE HOUSE, BUT CONGRESS AS WELL.
If Hillary wants to win the nomination she could have done it by getting the people to vote for her. But she could not and she lost.
Hillary supporters claim that the nomination was stolen.... quite the opposite, it was settled by peoples vote and she wants to steal it by convincing the superdelegates to reverse people's votes.
Hilary lost delegates, popular vote (even without including cacus states) and number of states won. Even if you keep changing the rules with including MI and FL, she still loses. And she is now losing the supers. Get over it and stop crying.