Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis: Should we start talking about Hillary's negatives?

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Should we start talking about Hillary's negatives?




John Aravosis wrote an interesting post on Monday
Hillary's campaign has already said that they are throwing the kitchen sink at Obama. They will discuss, are discussing, all the bad things that the GOP will throw at Obama in the fall.

So, what will the Republicans throw at Hillary in the fall?...

...Well, come Wednesday, if Hillary doesn't win 65% of the delegates in Ohio and Texas, and still insists on staying in the race and ripping our party in two, it will be time to start treating candidate Clinton with the same golden rule she is using for candidate Obama. Why? Not for revenge, but for the sake of our party and the fall election. Hillary and her campaign are in the process of turning Obama into damaged goods in the fall. They didn't have to go there, but beating Obama became more important to them than beating John McCain. So, the first question for Hillary come Wednesday, should she decide to continue risking our chances of winning in the fall even though the math says it's over, will be the question she's asking Obama today: What negatives will the Republicans throw against you in the fall? And as I've noted repeatedly, there are some negatives out there that most of you don't even know about - but everyone in Washington knows about them, in detail. That's because even Democrats who don't love Hillary, don't go there, for the good of the party. On Wednesday, the good of the party may dictate that we do.

I think we should for several reasons:

1) Because, quite frankly, I don't want Barack Obama to go negative the way she has. Much better for the blogosphere and MSM to do it - if there is anyone in MSM who actually knows how to do the math.

2) "It's the math, stupid" - just check the chart in Open Left. If you want to have fun, play with Slate's Delegate Counter. After that, you will know what so much of the media hasn't figured out...that Hillary can't win the nomination through pledged delegates.

3) Barack is going to win Wyoming on Saturday and Mississippi on Tuesday - it's as inevitable as Hillary winning Pennsylvania. She's not going to be any closer to winning the nomination after Pennsylvania than she is now and I also don't believe she will be any closer to relinquishing her claim either. We MUST have a nominee and move on.

I believe that Americablog is staying true to their word with two of their posts this morning:

McCain is the nominee, time to wring Iraq around his neck. Oh, that's right, Hillary can't.

Why are Hillary and John McCain refusing to release their tax returns?

They are also repeatedly running this picture of McCain and Clinton together. Clearly, their (very wise) tactic is to paint Hillary as being no different than McCain.

Aravosis is an incredibly savvy and experienced politico, even having worked as an aide for Sen. Ted Stevens once-upon-a-time. He's also a Republican who jumped ship years ago. I'll happily follow his lead.


Blogger RS said...

Great video of Senator Clinton putting forth her "lifetime of experience" and Senator McCain's l.o.e. against "one speech." If it comes to l.o.e. and national security credentials, Senator McCain's got her beat...
But while the math may be on Senator Obama's side, he has to put together a story as well - and winning Pennsylvania will achieve that, putting the "no big swing state wins" dog to rest.
He's got seven weeks - and hopefully Pennsylvania's more open than Ohio to a Black guy with a weird name.
Wish I could say something substantial about the place I lived in for four years - but college campuses can be very insulating. Some ex-steel workers didn't like environmental folks for "driving the steel industries out of town," but that's neither here nor there...

3/05/2008 5:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home