Rats deserting the Clintons' ship

Once upon a time, Hillary Clinton was the "establishment candidate" in the Democratic presidential race. But Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama today is only the latest crack in that foundation, writes ABC's The Note:

It's not just the Kennedys who are falling into line for Obama, as the non-Clinton Democratic establishment...coalesces (along with with scattered red-staters -- and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, D-Kan., is next, after she delivers the Democratic response to the State of the Union) to try to steer a party into a new direction.

Obama spoke both for them and to them, in an interview on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" on Sunday. "There is no doubt that I think that in the '90s, we got caught up in a slash-and-burn politics that the American people are weary of," Obama said. "And we still see it in Washington today."

It's been a long time coming, The New Republic's Noam Scheiber reports in the magazine's new issue. "For people like [John] Kerry and [Tom] Daschle and especially their former advisers, the Clintons' continued presence at the center of Democratic politics has sometimes chafed over the last eight years," Scheiber writes.

"It may not be apparent beyond the Beltway, but the Clintons kept their grip on Democratic Washington long after leaving the White House. . . . If you've looked for a job in the Democrats' government-in-exile lately, chances are you've hit up a Clintonite."

How did the Clintons burn so much goodwill so quickly? Why is the establishment candidate facing a revolt from inside the establishment?

Start with persistent concerns that Sen. Clinton's candidacy would guarantee a revival of the pitched partisan battles of the past two decades. Sprinkle in Bill's performance of the last few weeks, which persisted right up through the primary in South Carolina with his comparison of Obama to Jesse Jackson.

Add to it a broader sense of how Hillary was running her campaign -- another factor that hurt her with voters in South Carolina every bit as much as it hurt her with party regulars in Washington, Bloomberg's Al Hunt writes.

"Hyperbole is a staple of American political campaigns. Senator Hillary Clinton has crossed the line into distortion," writes Hunt (hardly a Clinton basher). "She has flagrantly misrepresented her own and her opponents' positions or statements. The general tone, more than any specifics, of the Clinton effort contributed to Barack Obama's stunning 2-to-1 victory over her in the South Carolina Democratic presidential primary this past weekend."

Hunt's article is worth reading in its own right. It does a good job distinguishing between run-of-the-mill exaggeration, which all candidates are guilty of, and the Clintons' routine practice of out-and-out lying. He concludes: "Privately, some Clintonites agree that while the campaign is ugly, it's only a prelude to what Republicans will do in the general election. Perhaps, but Hillary Clinton is paying a price. There is so much to admire in her public life. Her whatever-it-takes campaign is debasing that value."

Meanwhile, echoing my "P.S." below, TNR's Michael Crowley writes, "If he wanted to, Al Gore could deliver something close to a death blow right now by endorsing Obama." I don't know about "death blow," but right now -- or, better yet, tomorrow evening, just in time to completely steal the thunder from Hillary's "win" in the beauty-contest Florida primary whose significance she is now trying to resurrect, in flagrant violation of (at least) the spirit of the party rules that she and everyone else agreed to -- would certainly be a great time for him to jump on the bandwagon.

Comments

[Angrier and Angrier]

People are already sick and tired of the games. I thought Bill Clinton was a good President, but even I was tired of seeing his face and hearing his voice the last two years of his Presidency. I think many other people feel the same way about Bill and Hill as they do about Dubya. Time for a friggin' change!!

McCain, Romney, Obama...at this point, I don't really care. Just no f-ing Hillary and Bill!!!!

[4-7]

I have to admit that the last few weeks that I've been going to drudge, I've been looking forward to some whatshillaryorbilldonenow.com moments. Siren or no siren.

Have to agree with Angrier on this one.
Anyone but Billary!!!

Oh, and I can't wait to listen to W attack earmarks tonight...hello kettle it's pot!

Maybe he can explain never vetoing one spending bill and how his admin allowed a multi-trillion dollar surplus to go POOF! As the WSJ and CATO have pointed out, to say he's a conservative is laughable. The dude loves big govt. and we (the never-will-be-born-again wing of the Republican party)have had enough! After 7 years of deficit spending (that our generation will have to fix) we might as well say "screw it" and put a dem in there...you know, change it up a little.

[GoldenBear]

Endorsements are nice but I still do not see how this will effect what could possibly be a very bad Super Tuesday for Obama. As mentioned previously, CLinton is counting CA, NY, NJ, AR, MA, OK and has an edge in AZ, CT, TN. As we saw in NH, Clinton has a way of shifting the tide almost over night and recapture anything she has lost due to losses (Iowa and now SC). Brandon, I appreciate your excitement but I feel like you may be a little to over anxious to see a clear path to Obama's nomination. A few rats may be abandoning the ship but Clinton has proven that she is a comeback kid in her own right - assuming she has something to comeback from which, despite your posts, I am not sure she does.

[Mad Max, Esquire]

Let's look at each race.

Iowa - Obama clinched it.

New Hampshire - Obama came in a close 2nd and early polling showed Hillary with a solid double-digit lead.

Michigan - Obama didn't even campaign because it didn't count.

Nevada - Obama technically won Nevada because he got more delegates out of it than Hillary by winning more districts.

South Carolina - Just a few months ago Hillary led.

Now if you look at the Super Tuesday states, while NY, MA and NJ may be out of reach for Obama, IL and GA look like locks. Also, Obama is within striking distance in CA. As for OK and TN, there are pockets of black voters in those states that could be enough to push Obama over.

I don't think Obama will clean Hillary's clock on Super Tuesday. But the longer he is in the race the more viable he becomes. He could still surprise you.

[Condor]

I agree with GoldenBear on this one. It's hard for me to see how Obama can possibly close the gap given numbers like this:

National: Clinton + 9.8
Florida: Clinton + 18.8
California: Clinton + 12.2
New York: Clinton + 22.9
New Jersey: Clinton + 18.0

[Andrew]

Al Gore endorsing Obama would be a death blow to the Obama campaign, given the fate of all the other candidates that Gore has endorsed in the past few years.

It's really amazing how much of the Democratic establishment is turning against Billary; Ted Kennedy even invoked the "politics of personal destruction" against them. What's amazing about this is, the Democrats are now beginning to understand the animosity many Republicans and conservatives felt throughout the '90s after being lied to, tricked, deceived, and slandered. It was fine and good when it was the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that was being denigrated, but now that the victim is a young, attractive black Democrat who has great rhetorical flair selling hope and unity to the country, libs and Dems are starting to wake up.

Sadly for the Dems, the raw calculations are still in Billary's favor, as the poll numbers above show. The primary structure both parties flocked to this year is woefully unhelpful to an Obama-type candidacy. The result may very well be HRC gaining the nomination by a narrow number of delegates, with a good portion of the Obama half of the party unable or unwilling to unite behind their presidential nominee. The result could be the Democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and keeping the White House elephant-friendly for the next four years.

[Brendan Loy]

Y'all are misunderstanding me if you think I'm confident that Obama will definitely win. I think I've made several comments in recent days that reflect my understanding of the long odds he faces. My initial post-Iowa exuberance ("Obama won't lose a single primary") counted on Obama catching a John Kerry-like wave of unstoppable momentum, which New Hampshire obviously derailed. Also, I underestimated the importance of the (now-eroding) establishment support for Hillary, and I didn't consider the degree to which Obama's Iowa win was a result of both candidates' spending a ton of time there, causing local voters to get sick of Hillary and fall in love with Obama. I have now come to recognize the advantage Hillary has in a "national primary" environment, where voters see less of her and are voting more on "brand name," versus an intensive individual-state environment like iowa. Anyway, I'd give Obama maybe a 25% chance of winning the nomination, and it's only that high because of: a) momentum, and b) the possibility of Edwards delegates + unpledged or waffling superdelegates creating a brokered convention. If I'm being honest with myself, it's probably more like 15% to 20%.

[Steve]

Brendan, even Carville would call that a crawfish....

[kcatnd]

Haha, Carville is crazy!

[Condor]

"The result may very well be HRC gaining the nomination by a narrow number of delegates, with a good portion of the Obama half of the party unable or unwilling to unite behind their presidential nominee. The result could be the Democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and keeping the White House elephant-friendly for the next four years."

?

[jc]

Hrm, my take on Hillary is that she's pretty vindicative. What happens to Teddy and crowd if she wins?

[Alasdair]

jc - I think Chris Muir has Hillary pretty much nailed with this cartoon, today ...