D
Dr. Jai Maharaj
Guest
Hillary Clinton campaign talks about possible California defeat
Los Angeles Times BLOGS
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
This could all be just so much manipulation, an attempt by
Hillary Clinton's brain trust to reduce expectations for
today's results to give her a little more oomph should she
sweep the big states, including California.
But it could be they're genuinely nervous. Clinton is
calling for more one-on-one televised debates with Barack
Obama, a rare move for a front-runner and one that could
signal the campaign thinks she's in trouble. Clinton has
done well in earlier debates, while Obama has been
inconsistent. Clinton has accepted four debates: one on
ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" this Sunday;
one the next day on Fox in Washington, D.C.; and one more
each in Texas and Ohio.
In a conference call a little while ago with reporters --
including our colleague Peter Nicholas -- Clinton
strategists said Obama could win more delegates nationwide
today than Clinton, a remarkable reversal of fortunes for a
campaign that a few weeks ago was trying to paint Clinton
as the inevitable nominee.
In fact, two months ago Clinton told supporters at a
Sacramento fundraiser that ...
... it "is all going to be over by Feb. 5." At least she
didn't guarantee it.
"We're confident we're going to win a diverse mix of states
today, but the results are going to be close and
inconclusive due to the proportional allocation of
delegates under the Democratic Party rules," said Howard
Wolfson, Clinton's communications advisor. "We do expect to
maintain the overall lead in delegates tomorrow when we
wake up that we do today.''
Clinton's strategists said they could see the fight going
through March and possibly onto the convention floor in
Denver in August -- great sport for political junkies but a
test of nerves for the candidates. And even if Obama gets
more delegates today, Clinton's advisors said her lead
among "super delegates'' -- party leaders and elected
officials who are free to vote as they choose -- would
still give her the overall lead. But that would just add to
the perception that she's the mainstream choice, and fuel
Obama's contention that he's the candidate of change.
So how did Clinton lose her dominant position in
California, a state she once led by 16 poll points?
Wolfson: "Sen Obama has put considerable resources into the
state. He's had large rallies, he's had great surrogates
coming out to urge his supporters to vote.... Much to their
credit the state is close. I don't think we're going to
know who has won California until very late into the night.
That's just the way politics is. The election wasn't 30
days ago. It's today. And as of today it's very close.''
Check back after as the evening proceeds to see how much of
that was spin and how much was prediction.
- Scott Martelle
More at:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/hillary-clinton.html
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Los Angeles Times BLOGS
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
This could all be just so much manipulation, an attempt by
Hillary Clinton's brain trust to reduce expectations for
today's results to give her a little more oomph should she
sweep the big states, including California.
But it could be they're genuinely nervous. Clinton is
calling for more one-on-one televised debates with Barack
Obama, a rare move for a front-runner and one that could
signal the campaign thinks she's in trouble. Clinton has
done well in earlier debates, while Obama has been
inconsistent. Clinton has accepted four debates: one on
ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" this Sunday;
one the next day on Fox in Washington, D.C.; and one more
each in Texas and Ohio.
In a conference call a little while ago with reporters --
including our colleague Peter Nicholas -- Clinton
strategists said Obama could win more delegates nationwide
today than Clinton, a remarkable reversal of fortunes for a
campaign that a few weeks ago was trying to paint Clinton
as the inevitable nominee.
In fact, two months ago Clinton told supporters at a
Sacramento fundraiser that ...
... it "is all going to be over by Feb. 5." At least she
didn't guarantee it.
"We're confident we're going to win a diverse mix of states
today, but the results are going to be close and
inconclusive due to the proportional allocation of
delegates under the Democratic Party rules," said Howard
Wolfson, Clinton's communications advisor. "We do expect to
maintain the overall lead in delegates tomorrow when we
wake up that we do today.''
Clinton's strategists said they could see the fight going
through March and possibly onto the convention floor in
Denver in August -- great sport for political junkies but a
test of nerves for the candidates. And even if Obama gets
more delegates today, Clinton's advisors said her lead
among "super delegates'' -- party leaders and elected
officials who are free to vote as they choose -- would
still give her the overall lead. But that would just add to
the perception that she's the mainstream choice, and fuel
Obama's contention that he's the candidate of change.
So how did Clinton lose her dominant position in
California, a state she once led by 16 poll points?
Wolfson: "Sen Obama has put considerable resources into the
state. He's had large rallies, he's had great surrogates
coming out to urge his supporters to vote.... Much to their
credit the state is close. I don't think we're going to
know who has won California until very late into the night.
That's just the way politics is. The election wasn't 30
days ago. It's today. And as of today it's very close.''
Check back after as the evening proceeds to see how much of
that was spin and how much was prediction.
- Scott Martelle
More at:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/hillary-clinton.html
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
DISCLAIMER AND CONDITIONS
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
