May 21, 2008
Blame Hillaryism (Armstrong Williams)
Bill Clinton’s odds of becoming the First Gentleman continue to dwindle this week, even as his wife opens yet another new shameless front in the campaign.
Last night, she grabbed the kitchen sink of sexism and threw that at Obama. HRC is clearly not thinking of how her late-primary actions are tainting her future political prospects. Blaming her poor performances on one more “ism” simply destroys party morale and denies reality. I think it’s time to acknowledge the reality and end this fool’s errand. She has no one to blame but her own brand of Hillaryism — a take-no-prisoners mentality where the end (the nomination) will ultimately justify the means, and they’ll pick up the pieces later.
Listen, Obama will be the Democratic nominee. This isn’t because America is not ready to support a woman for the White House. It’s not because America is too idealistic towards Obama. It’s because Democrats in America don’t want Hillaryism to extend any further! They’re tired of the scorched-earth politics that she has come to embody, and even though his liberal policies are conventional and well-known, Obama’s unconventional approach is appealing to the masses. As such they have pledged Sen. Obama over half of the total amount of delegates (sorry, Michigan and Florida — you still don’t count).
Now that Obamaism has plagued the nation, what is a continuation of this race going to do for Hillary?
Strain the fiscal energy of her contributors. Check. (something I don’t mind seeing, by the way.)
Damage the Democratic Party to ill repair. Check.
Lose respect from the party, thereby compromising a leadership role for her senatorial career. Check.
I’m not sure why I think pragmatism will hit Hillary this round of primaries, but maybe it will now that her own career is severely threatened. Voters have disregarded Hillary’s “ism” claims thus far, and her failure to realize this has cost her the nomination and is now threatening her senatorial career. It’s time for Hillary to bow out and chalk it up to Hillaryism.
Visit www.armstrongwilliams.com
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 22 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Excellent Post AW..but here is some more post mortem frim another post with quotes from an HRC insider
She had the wrong message: Experience vs. change
"Running as an incumbent, as the inevitable candidate, was probably our biggest mistake, particularly in a time when the country is really hungry for change."
Bad personnel decisions: Mark Penn and Patti Soli Doyle–clueless!
"Hillary assembled a team thin on presidential campaign experience that confused discipline with insularity; they didn't know what they didn't know and were too arrogant to ask at a time early enough in the process when it could have made a difference."
- Hillary should not have made her pollster her chief strategist: Mark Penn again..LOL
"It is impossible to disagree and have a counter view on message when the person creating the message is also the person testing the message."
- Mark Penn was incompetent: "In Iowa, Penn consistently would show polls that were of the eight-way. That was basically meaningless because it wasn't going to be an eight-way race. The candidates that were the second-tier candidates were not going to reach the threshold [of 15%]. The real race was the three-way. But he always focused on the eight-way when we'd start going over the numbers in Iowa. It was frustrating to the state staff and other people as well. It just showed a lack of understanding and a disconnect."
- Hillary did not develop an effective fundraising strategy:
"There was financial mismanagement bordering on fraud. A candidate who raised more than a quarter of a billion dollars over the years had to pump in millions more of her own money to stave off bankruptcy."
- Hillary did not execute an effective media strategy:
She pissed off the media!!
"The way we handled (the press) was a mistake on our part. What we're hearing is that we truly treated people badly and weren't accessible enough or open enough. We had bad relationships with reporters, and it probably bit us on the ass."
I could go on, but I think the point is made. Anyone who wants to learn about what truly went wrong with Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign needs to realize, first and foremost, that it was due to a string of missteps and management problems — and the effective, superior campaign run by Barack Obama — that had absolutely nothing to do with gender. And if we are to be successful in uniting all Democrats behind Barack Obama in November, comments that try to pin the blame for Hillary's loss primarily on sexism and misogyny are doing a huge disservice to the party, by inflaming the justifiable anger and resentment that many women hold about the sexism in our society and directing it in a counterproductive and misguided way."
Comment by Theard — May 21, 2008 @ 12:57 pm
AW and Theard;
Well spoken and the post mortem was spot on. Good to both of you.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 21, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
I don't know about this. Obama lost five out of the last seven primaries in a fairly dramatic fashion. If the Democrats are rejecting Hillary, they are doing it in a rather non-obvious way. And the expected flood of supers to Obama? Slowed down to a trickle.
Comment by Igor R. — May 21, 2008 @ 1:41 pm
Igor do u simply disregard facts when they don't align with your views?
Last seven primaries
Oregon-OBAMA
KY HRC
WV HRC
NC OBAMA
IND-HRC by a hare!!..lol
GUAM OBAMA
PA-HRC
If Guam doesnt make the cut, sub in MS, he won there as well.
supers are careful not too embarrass her, but have been steadily flowing towards Obama. She will be allowed to finish the race and afterwards, they will endorse Obama. I count 74 supers since her PA win.
Here see for yourself:
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/02/superdelegate-history-tracker.html
On 4/20 he had 230 supers and as of today, he is at 304.5
He only needs 62 delegates to clinch.
Not a flood yet, but a steady stream?
Comment by Theard — May 21, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
Igor;
Hillary lost 11 in a row in February and 15 of 17 before she won Ohio. She won the texas primary but lost the caucas which gave Obama the lead in delegates. Her victories have come much too late to matter now and so it is over. On top of that in those 11 contest, he beat her in some of them by 50 point or more.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 21, 2008 @ 3:35 pm
Yeah, just keeping singing the praises of Obama. The insiders at the top of the party know they have a real dilemma. Barack is unelectable and the bitter, bible thumping gun toters he insulted with his racist diatribe are moving away from him in mass. On the other hand, if the party leaders pull a fast one and incarnate Hillary, then blacks will leave the party in mass. On top of that, women, both black and white are getting mad that gender isn't trumping race. These people have no ideals or principles. They have reduced living and liberty to what is important to them, and to hell with everybody else. That is why the Democratic party is collapsing.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 21, 2008 @ 4:22 pm
Theard, yes I'm off by a married couple in Guam, I was wrong though. I'm sure Obama will win, but he is not winning with the "typical white" voters, and in a totally non-partisan way I think that that's a real problem for him.
Mike, absolutely, it's too late to matter for her, but it's just such an indecisive finish.
Comment by Igor R. — May 21, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
I too think that the attack on Clinton supporters as being racist that we are seeing from the talking heads will do greater harm to unifying the party than anything that Clinton can do.
I am amazed that the supporters of Obama see him so weak as to have to keep calling on Clinton to withdraw, for the good of the party, for her legacy, because out assumed nominee is looking like he can't win in the fall.
I signed up for Clinton early because I believe in National health insurance. The only Democrat to come out against a mandate for health care was… Obama. To add to that recently there was a proposal to suspend a Federal "user fee" a tax that disproportionally is paid by the lower class than the wealthy (compared to a progressive income tax that all good liberals believe in). Sure enough Clinton supports suspending the gas tax Obama calls a basic core belief of any liberal (opposing flat taxes) a gimmick.
I am sorry if the guy gets the endorsement I will support him but as Liberal Democrats go he just doesn't measure up.
Comment by Chuck R — May 21, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
Armstrong,
HRC is no longer running against Sen. Obama. As of today, she's running against the Democratic Party.
I heard her comments about Florida today; she is threatening the party.
In effect HRC said, If Florida delegates are not seated, her supporters will sit out the election - or vote for McShame.
HRC is promoting post-menopausal petulance.
This is desperation gone wild!
I just did the weekly shopping for my family. Prices are skyrocketing. Aren't people in Florida experiencing the same energy and food increases? The same dimminished quality of life?
Change is what is needed, now!
HRC lost because her strategy was, and is, inept, her husband contemptible, and her campaign has become too Strom Thurmond-lite. (Army, I understand how you feel about Ole Strom. Too bad.)
Actually HRC has fiscally run her campaign the way GWB has run this government's finances.
Comment by barbara day — May 21, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
RR;
Just like Igor you are wanting something that will not happen. Get use to saying President Barack Hussein Obama. I am going to love rubbing that in your faces. President Barack Hussein Obama. President of the United States of America.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 21, 2008 @ 8:43 pm
Rosencrans, get a grip! You're losin' it, man!
You don't know any insiders at the top of the party; your not even in the party!
It's you , not Obama, who is calling people bitter bible thumping gun toters, and you are to be condemned for trying to incite racial hatred where there is none.
What you rail against is democracy itself! Who are you to judge other peoples ideals and principles, you pompous winbag!
What is democracy but the right for people to vote for what is important to them.
What liberty would you "allow" people in your authoritarian conservative "democracy?"
The Democratic Party has added millions of new voters, including many former Republicans.
Get a life, loser.
Comment by smilinjack — May 21, 2008 @ 9:14 pm
How can anyone be sure that obama is not a member of a sleeper cell?
Comment by Metamusil — May 22, 2008 @ 3:26 am
Hillary is whining. But not only is she whining, she is distorting the facts. It was Clinton camp who TRIED to fuel this this into a racial and gender divide! Clintons made a big deal about Barack whining and said "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." I think they should take their own advice!
Comment by Angellight — May 22, 2008 @ 6:52 am
Robert, He didn't insult anybody, he spoke the truth. The media in it's quest to push Hillary to the nomination crushed Obama at every word he spoke. People in the Clinton campaign want to blame everybody and everything but their candidate as the reason they are losing. She didnt think the caucus states were important enough, but now she wants every voice heard except the ones that don't vote for her. The reason she is behind is because people are not voting for her. I am a professional woman and I think she is making things worse by having this 'If I can't win I'll destroy the party attitude' And Robert, blacks will not be the only ones leaving the party in mass. I don't know why everybody is being so concerned about letting her have her way in this. All women are not supportive of a woman who stays with a man who is guilty of numerous affairs and lies under oath. And by the way, the people in Michigan know that she said their vote doesn't mean anything. They will not vote for her now.
Comment by Yvonne — May 22, 2008 @ 9:27 am
If I was selling Fords, I can't imagine saying, "People who drive Chevys are bitter people who don't like my car." It's bad marketing. No, I would challenge the Chevy drivers to try my Ford, and they would see it is better. The Chevy drivers may not like Fords, and, after the drive, may not become a customer, but I gave them the opportunity to drive my Ford without insulting them. That's marketing. A good leader gets people to believe in themselves. Dr. Stephen Covey writes, "Leadership is communicating to people their worth so that they can see it in themselves." Barack Obama's statement indicates not only that he does not understand leadership, he does not understand people, therefore, he is unelectable.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 22, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
RR;
If you were selling Fords, you'ld be broke by now. That post was the most laughable piece of tripe I've ever read from you. If Obama is not a leader, how come he has legions of people who are willing to roll up their sleeves and get to work to make this a better country. If I was a Chevy Dealership, I would want you right next door to me cause I would get all of your customers with that last bit of RR speak.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 22, 2008 @ 1:36 pm
Mike, Barack Hussein Obama has an appeal to (a) blacks (b) terrorists (c) intellectuals who like to discuss terrorists as freedom fighters with inalienable rights (d) Marxists. This coalition cannot defeat the rest of the country.
Comment by Igor R. — May 22, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
Obama is only popular within the liberal Democratic party wing, not with the majority of Americans. If Barack was a Ford he'd be an Edsel. All of his followers, and they are following him because they have no clue what true leadership is, are interested in race, anti-American politics or are simply looking for the next version of government free cheese. Barack Obama doesn't offer leadership, he offers further entrapment inside the government maze of giving you just enough to get by, but never enough to be successful. That's not leadership, that's a form of dictatorship.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 22, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
How did things get so off-topic? The post was about charges of sexism in the campaign.
Theard - intelligent post and I completely agree.
As for my thoughts… I'm not a Hillary hater by any means, but this "it's all sexism" really strikes me as pathetic. If sexism was really the problem here, she wouldn't have made it this far. Quit whining Hillary, you gave it a good shot and you did great, but in the end Obama has done a bit better. Somebody had to lose.
Comment by Robert N. — May 22, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
Igor and RR;
I glad his appeal aren't to racist bigots like you two. For too long this country was ran by people like you and it gave us Jim Crow laws, segregation, separate but unequal schools and the like. Now we have someone who wants to bring the country together, work for a more perfect union and rebuild and the years of bush. So if you want to wallow in your ignorance and hate, do so, but there are lot of people, young and old that are tired of the way thing were. We are going to make this country live up to it's ideals for all people. You can join or you can stay behind, it doesn't matter.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 22, 2008 @ 6:56 pm
Mike Coleman: Each of those by products of racism you mentioned were the results of policies by the Democratic party and Democrats. Study your history. If anyone is wallowing in ignorance it's obviously you and if you follow the link at the end you can educate yourself. You need it. The Democrats are the party of Jim Crow and the Grand Kleagle of the KKK Democratic Senator Robert Byrd. Get your facts straight. As far as his appeal, it's an appeal to people who don't know how to think critically and you're a perfect example of that. For instance, his mantra of hope is totally worthless. Hope is what you have when you have nothing. I remember when Enron said, "We hope to get this resolved" right before they went out of business. Change is also a meaningless concept. Try as Obama fans might, they can not white wash the fact that his preacher was an American hating racist, his wife is an American hating racist, and he practices bigotry and elitism when he dismisses entire groups of Americans as anti-immigrant bitter bible thumping gun toters. Anyone who defends that bigotry is wallowing in ignorance and hate. And by the way Mike Coleman, that is you.
Here's the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 22, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
Mike, just the fact that he has had such appeal to idiots like you that you have never ever criticized one little thing about him proves that he is flawed. You only want to take from those who have more than you and have not interest in doing anything productive. Obama is a champion of people like you, that's what "community organizing" is: coercing the government to solve your problems for you.
Comment by Igor R. — May 23, 2008 @ 2:48 pm