Hillary Campaign Deathwatch

Oliver said:
So if the campaign pays 1,1 million per day - and she got 20 million in March, where does the missing 13 Million per month come from? :confused:
Click to expand...

Personal money and loans. They are quite rich, as a matter of fact. Bill gets huge fees for speaking.
 
Oliver said:
So if the campaign pays 1,1 million per day - and she got 20 million in March, where does the missing 13 Million per month come from? :confused:
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton's campaign spends 1.1 million a day?:confused: Wow, is there a source for that?
 
T.A.M. said:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/06/clinton-drops-hospital-story-from-stump-speech/

Apparently another story "fabricated" or "altered" by the mind of Clinton et al.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Your antipathy towards Hillary is strong.

The sheriff’s deputy, Bryan Holman, had played host to Mrs. Clinton in his home before the Ohio primary. Deputy Holman said in a telephone interview that a conversation about health care led him to relate the story of Ms. Bachtel. He never mentioned the name of the hospital that supposedly turned her away because he did not know it, he said.

Deputy Holman knew Ms. Bachtel’s story only secondhand, having learned it from close relatives of the woman. Ms. Bachtel’s relatives did not return phone calls Friday.

As Deputy Holman understood it, Ms. Bachtel had died of complications from a stillbirth after being turned away by a local hospital for her failure to pay $100 upfront.

“I mentioned this story to Senator Clinton, and she apparently took to it and liked it,” Deputy Holman said, “and one of her aides said she’d be using it at some rallies.”
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/u...=rss&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Yes, the Clinton campaign should have vetted the story better but it was related to her by a Deputy Sherrif. This hardly rises to the characterization you just made of Hillary fabricating or altering a story.
 
you are right, I jumped to a conclusion based on a pattern seen with the campaign, and a dislike for their tactics, but it was unjust, poor form, and I apologize.

I retract the words "fabricate" and "alter" and replace it with...

The Clinton campaign took hold of a story because it fit her narrative, without vetting it.

Thanks for catching me on that.

My Antipathy is strong towards anyone who thinks they should fair near "Inherit" a democratically elected position.

TAM:)
 
Lurker said:
Your antipathy towards Hillary is strong.



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/u...=rss&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Yes, the Clinton campaign should have vetted the story better but it was related to her by a Deputy Sherrif. This hardly rises to the characterization you just made of Hillary fabricating or altering a story.
Click to expand...

You are right. She did not fabricate or alter a story.

She did however, without apparently doing even the most perfunctory of fact checking, repeat an urban myth as part of her stump speech. Unfortunately for her, the story she was told was untrue in pretty much all of the details which were important to her campaign message.

So instead of getting across the message she wanted about healthcare, she is on the back foot defending herself because she has repeated misinformation.

What does that tell you about her judgement and her ability to run a campaign (did nobody think the story should be checked BEFORE being put into her speech)?
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
You are right. She did not fabricate or alter a story.

She did however, without apparently doing even the most perfunctory of fact checking, repeat an urban myth as part of her stump speech. Unfortunately for her, the story she was told was untrue in pretty much all of the details which were important to her campaign message.

So instead of getting across the message she wanted about healthcare, she is on the back foot defending herself because she has repeated misinformation.

What does that tell you about her judgement and her ability to run a campaign (did nobody think the story should be checked BEFORE being put into her speech)?
Click to expand...

I'm not a Hilary Clinton fan, but it turns out that this story was true after all:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/11/o...em&ex=1208059200&en=0b46a3c7707eeb78&ei=5087
 
According to the post-Pennsylvania pledged delegate count, I calculate Clinton will need to win the remaining contests by an average of more than 31% to pull ahead in pledged delegates.

Fin.
 
Kaylee said:
I'm not a Hilary Clinton fan, but it turns out that this story was true after all:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/11/o...em&ex=1208059200&en=0b46a3c7707eeb78&ei=5087
Click to expand...

Not the way Hillary told it, according to the man who told Hillary the story or the aunt of the woman involved.

http://www.mydailysentinel.com/articles/2008/04/09/news/news00.txt

“What I said is not what she said, and I told the truth.”

"Clinton has said Bachtel was twice denied service at a local clinic because she was unable to pay a $100 fee required before she could see a doctor. According to Bachtel's aunt, Susie Casto, Bachtel did not seek pre-natal care or emergency care at that clinic because she owed a bill there, and knew she would be required to pay up-front, even though she was insured.

Instead, Casto said, Bachtel received regular pre-natal care from another physicians' practice in the area."
 
mortimer said:
According to the post-Pennsylvania pledged delegate count, I calculate Clinton will need to win the remaining contests by an average of more than 31% to pull ahead in pledged delegates.

Fin.
Click to expand...

I just saw this analysis. Clinton can still win, but she'll have to do a bit more than that.

 
mortimer said:
According to the post-Pennsylvania pledged delegate count, I calculate Clinton will need to win the remaining contests by an average of more than 31% to pull ahead in pledged delegates.

Fin.
Click to expand...

Right, the margin in Pennsylvania eliminates the possibility of her making the delegate race close (her margin of superdelegates is only 28 now, and the Obama camp claims they're going to come out with more announcements this week).

Maybe more importantly, the close margin in Pennsylvania almost mathematically eliminates the possibility to make up the popular vote lead (she's still half a million behind, will fall further back with NC and IN looks like a wash). So that was her last argument to make to the superdelegates.

She'll drop after North Carolina. I'd put money on it.
 
If she loses Indiana and NC, she will drop, no doubt, if she wins Indiana, expect her to remain in to ruin Obama for the General, knowing McCain will be a one term president, and her a certainty for 2012.

TAM:)
 
I expect another full-tilt push by Clinton to get delegates from Michigan and Florida seated.
 
T.A.M. said:
If she loses Indiana and NC, she will drop, no doubt, if she wins Indiana, expect her to remain in to ruin Obama for the General, knowing McCain will be a one term president, and her a certainty for 2012.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

TAM, I remember you saying consistently that Obama was on the verge of losing the nomination. Was this to avoid jinxing it? I hear there is a certain witch around who has the power to do such things.. ;)
 
David Wong said:
Right, the margin in Pennsylvania eliminates the possibility of her making the delegate race close (her margin of superdelegates is only 28 now, and the Obama camp claims they're going to come out with more announcements this week).

Maybe more importantly, the close margin in Pennsylvania almost mathematically eliminates the possibility to make up the popular vote lead (she's still half a million behind, will fall further back with NC and IN looks like a wash). So that was her last argument to make to the superdelegates.

She'll drop after North Carolina. I'd put money on it.
Click to expand...


I agree. I cant imagine she has more than 2 million cash on hand after last night but before new donations. So at most she might have 5 to 6 million to spend on Indiana and NC. She has to fight it out in Indiana but that will not be cheap with ad buys in a top 3 market, a top 25 market a a few small markets. I would not be surprised if she just abandons NC or at most has a very small presences. This in all likely hood sets up NC to go even larger than the 20 pts to Obama which will most likely give him more delegates there than Hillary gets in Penn and might give him close to 175 to 200k edge in the popular vote. This will put her further in debt and she will be forced to end it.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
TAM, I remember you saying consistently that Obama was on the verge of losing the nomination. Was this to avoid jinxing it? I hear there is a certain witch around who has the power to do such things.. ;)
Click to expand...

lol...it was the pessimist in me...He still sits back there, from time to time coming out to let me know it will be a tough road for Obama, and that he will lose because of BS, rather then him not being the right guy to lead the free world.

TAM;)
 
According to my computations on CNN's delegate counter, even if she had a 20 point lead in each of the remaining states, she would still need to pull almost two thirds of the unpledged superdelegates to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom