SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Monday, March 31, 2008 2:13 PM

Clinton Now Vows to Continue 'to the Convention.' Is She Serious?

Andrew Romano

You have to love this loony, unpredictable Democratic circus--I mean, contest. Just when you think the end's in sight, for example, someone goes and gangs your best-laid schemes agley.

Unsurprisingly, that someone would be Hillary Clinton.

On Friday, if you'll remember, Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean delivered an "enough already" message to the superdelegates. "I think that there's 800 of them and 450 of them have already said who they're for," he told CBS's Harry Smith. "I'd like the other 350 to say who they're for at some point between now and the first of July so we don't have to take this into the convention." Coming on the heels of similar statements from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Dean's declaration was yet another reason, I argued, to believe that the Obama-Clinton battle would conclude in June. "There you have it, folks: a (loose) July 1 deadline," I wrote, "Mark your calendars." A report today in the Politico--"Dem Elite Working for June Solution"--only confirmed my hunch.

Advertisement

So I wasn't surprised this morning when I received a schedule from the Clinton campaign detailing Bill's plans to visit Oregon, a a May 20 state, and Montana, a June 3 state, over the next two days. Hillary has long said she intends to campaign through the end of primary season. But I did do a double-take when I spotted this headline in the Washington Post: CLINTON VOWS TO STAY IN RACE TO CONVENTION. Seeking to silence the mounting drumbeat for her to bow out and avert a party crisis, Clinton is apparently now claiming that she will not only remain in the race until end of regulation, but will fight through August--presumably even if the superdelegates break for Obama in June. Her rationale: the disqualified results from Florida and Michigan. "I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started, until we see what happens in the next 10 contests and until we resolve Florida and Michigan," she said. "And if we don't resolve it, we'll resolve it at the convention--that's what credentials committees are for."

Should we believe her? As the Jed Report notes, we've heard this "I'm going all the way to the convention" talk before--and it's almost always a "leading indicator of a doomed candidacy." First there was John Edwards, who told ABC on Jan. 6 that "he will stay in the presidential race through the party's convention in late August, even if he fails to win any of the early presidential primary states." After losing South Carolina on the 26th of that month, Edwards was still gung-ho. "This thing is going for a long time," deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince said on Jan. 28. But Edwards dropped out two days later. Then came Mitt Romney. Despite being overpowered by John McCain in the Feb. 5 "Super Tuesday" contests, Romney pledged that night to fight until the Republican convention. "We're going to keep on battling," Romney told supporters. "We're going to go all the way to the convention. We're going to win this thing and we're going to go to the White House." He also withdrew within two days. Finally, there was Mike Huckabee. On Feb. 22, Huckabee claimed that wins in Texas on March 4 would convince him to continue through the summer. "If we win Texas, I think it changes the dynamics of this race," he said. "It could well go all the way to the convention. If the convention delegates pick the president, chances are they would pick the most conservative. I would be the one they would end up picking." Instead, he bowed out on March 4.

Does this precedent apply to Clinton? Sorry Obamaniacs, but not really. A loss in Pennsylvania--highly unlikely, considering she currently leads by an average of 16 points--might spur a sudden withdrawal, but barring that, she's in it for the long haul. The best analogue is probably Huckabee, who plodded along until the math made victory absolutely impossible; he skedaddled the moment McCain hit the magic 1,191 majority. If Clinton's convention talk is anything more than bluster--and I suspect that it is--it now seems that she'll stick around even after Obama hits 2,025 (my previous point of no return). That's because 2,025 represents a delegate majority only if Florida and Michigan aren't counted. With the Sunshine and Great Lakes States included, that number rises to something like 2,208. So judging by her "convention chatter"--and her claim that "we cannot go forward until Florida and Michigan are taken care of"--don't expect Clinton to cave until the convention rolls around, or Obama snags enough supers to hit the higher mark. Whichever comes first.

That is, unless she has more surprises up her sleeve.

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: mjno (April 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM)

YES!!!!

As the late great ANN RICHARDS SAID, "We can perform, afterall, Ginger Rogers did everything Fred Astaire did but backwards and in high heels."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CsCXh8sgTJU


Posted By: WolfReview (April 2, 2008 at 12:44 AM)

If Howard Dean or any other Obama Supporter thought that having to wait until the votes of all Democrats were cast, and eventually have delegates show up to a Convention in August to vote for their choice for the Nominee, THEN WHY DIDN'T THEY CHANGE THAT RULE?

Why are they crying about pulling the Party apart. Why are they crying about dissention? Why are they crying about having to ACTUALLY HOLD ELECTIONS? Why are they crying about ACTUALLY COUNTING VOTES AND DELEGATES?

Get a grip people, THIS IS THE PROCESS. Hillary is simply running a real campaign, all the way to the convention. Hmmm, that's actually the way it was intended to be.

If they want to change the process, let them simply Crown Obama the King, to replace the one currently living in the White House. Because he's being elected by Independents and "Democrat-for-a-day" Republicans. He is NOT the DEMOCRATIC choice.


Posted By: nomsa1 (April 1, 2008 at 11:39 PM)

Ernie you exxagerate and using words such as ANYTHING and ALWAYS is an example of your bias. I am a Black person who finds Obama  to have shamefully played the race card to his advantage. He has won more states but states that Democrats will NOT win this fall. Obama has come up with excuses for his mistakes as blunders or lack in judgment. We do not need a president who gets involved in things as bad as he has and then say these were blunders then get away with it because he is Black and the media does not want to offend him. She has won states democrats normally win and MUST win to get elected. Obama has gotten votes from Republicans who thought voting for him would get Hillary out. Now some realize they might have made a mistake because he might win afterall and are now voting for Hillary. You also are stretching the truth here about Hillary she has thanked the states that voted for her and in those that did not, she thanked those who voted for her. Now, do you want her to hand around after the primaries are over or should she move on to the next state like ALL of the candidates to work on the next state? This is not a beauty peagent or rock concert...she has to fight for every state just as Obama has to.