New York Times Editorial Page Calls on Clinton to Drop Out

[Puppycow]

April 23, 2008
Editorial
The Low Road to Victory

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.

If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.

On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11. A Clinton television ad — torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook — evoked the 1929 stock market crash, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis, the cold war and the 9/11 attacks, complete with video of Osama bin Laden. “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” the narrator intoned.

If that was supposed to bolster Mrs. Clinton’s argument that she is the better prepared to be president in a dangerous world, she sent the opposite message on Tuesday morning by declaring in an interview on ABC News that if Iran attacked Israel while she were president: “We would be able to totally obliterate them.”

By staying on the attack and not engaging Mr. Obama on the substance of issues like terrorism, the economy and how to organize an orderly exit from Iraq, Mrs. Clinton does more than just turn off voters who don’t like negative campaigning. She undercuts the rationale for her candidacy that led this page and others to support her: that she is more qualified, right now, to be president than Mr. Obama.
. . .

When you've lost the New York Times editorial page, you've lost Middle America. ;)

ETA: Sorry. I think I misunderstood the editorial, and hence the title of this thread is misleading. It is a call to end negative attacks, and also a suggestion that the superdelegates hurry up and end this thing, but not a call for Clinton to end her candidacy. :blush:

[arthwollipot]

Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race.

:confused:

[Puppycow]

:confused:

In layman's terms: to change the ballgame. It wasn't a game-changer.

[arthwollipot]

In layman's terms: to change the ballgame. It wasn't a game-changer.I've heard about the complicated electoral math, but I hadn't heard that it was calculus.

I actually assumed that it was a typo for caucus.

[Nitpick]

I've heard about the complicated electoral math, but I hadn't heard that it was calculus.
I actually assumed that it was a typo for caucus.

[non-native-speaker-guess]
I suppose "calculus" is used here in its meaning of "calculation" rather than differential/integral calculus. :)
[/non-native-speaker-guess]

[Nitpick]

BTW, here's a link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/opinion/23wed3.html

Quote:
"If she is ever to have a hope of persuading these most loyal of Democrats to come back to her side..."

The superdelegates are the most loyal of Democrats?
The most influential, maybe.

Some 80 year old person living in a republican neighbourhood, who's voted for the democrats all his/her life, that's someone you might call "the most loyal of democrats"...

[Puppycow]

[non-native-speaker-guess]
I suppose "calculus" is used here in its meaning of "calculation" rather than differential/integral calculus. :)
[/non-native-speaker-guess]

Yes. It's one of those words that has taken on a new meaning. "Psychic" is another one, which I often see reporters these days use not in the paranormal sense of the word, but as something like "psychological."

[BPSCG]

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; Evidence? Has the New York Times been taking polls? They had a record primary turnout in Pennsylvania yesterday; is that evidence of an electorate that's "tired of it"?


it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. Again, evidence? It's a stupid claim, in any case:

1) It works for some people; surely there's at least one voter out there for whom it works.
2) If the NYT means more people are inclined to vote against a candidate because of negative ads, where's the evidence? If that were actually true, wouldn't someone's campaign have picked up on that by now and gone on to sweeping victory by taking the high road?

It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. More like 3-1, closer to 4-1, by all accounts I've read.

On the eve of this crucial primary, Mrs. Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11. A Clinton television ad — torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook — evoked the 1929 stock market crash, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis, the cold war and the 9/11 attacks, complete with video of Osama bin Laden. “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” the narrator intoned.
This is really funny, in light of this:

By staying on the attack and not engaging Mr. Obama on the substance of issues like terrorism
So she should discuss terrorism without mentioning Osama bin Laden. Should she discuss the economy without mentioning unemployment, inflation, and Social Security also?

[KoihimeNakamura]

I tend to agree, but I'm also really mad at a friend of mine who keeps going "Operation CHAOS IS A SUCCESS!!!!!!!"

.. mutter mutter.

[Puppycow]

So she should discuss terrorism without mentioning Osama bin Laden. Should she discuss the economy without mentioning unemployment, inflation, and Social Security also?

I saw that commercial and I thought it was reasonable. No flagrant foul there.

Actually, one might argue that the NYT is doing exactly what it is criticizing: slinging mud.

[dudalb]

Wow the New York Times, one of the mouthpieces for American Liberalism,calls for Clinton to step down.How shocking.
The NYT is not the major force it once was after a damaging series of scandals that has pretty much removed it from it place on top of the American Newpaper Pyramid. It is no longer the force it once was.

[T.A.M.]

ummm...I think they called for her to stop the negative campaigning.

Did they actually call for her to drop out??

TAM:)

[Cain]

ummm...I think they called for her to stop the negative campaigning.

Did they actually call for her to drop out??


You'll have to forgive DoodleB... in addition to being one of our most incisive and informed critics of The Gray Lady, he's a headline reader.

[Kaylee]

ummm...I think they called for her to stop the negative campaigning.

Did they actually call for her to drop out??

TAM:)

Highly unlikely that The New York Times would ever tell a New York politician, who's likely to continue to be a US Senator, to drop out of the race.

I think it was gutsy of them to tell her just to stop the negative campaigning. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if she makes them pay by not being as quick to return their phone calls, reduced off the record remarks, etc.

[Cello Man]

I tend to agree, but I'm also really mad at a friend of mine who keeps going "Operation CHAOS IS A SUCCESS!!!!!!!"

.. mutter mutter.

You know, it'll be funny if Hillary somehow wins the White House. Well, funny in a sick and twisted sense of the word, because those Rush Limbaugh listening "Operation Chaos" guys will be partially to blame. They're gambling that Hillary will lose to McCain in the general, and she probably would. But it's still a gamble, so what if they're wrong? These are people who would prefer to elect Hitler's dead dog over Hillary Clinton. What would happen to the suicide rate among Limbaugh listeners?

At that point, seppuku is the only honorable choice.

[Puppycow]

At that point, seppuku is the only honorable choice.

In that case I can confidently predict that not one of them will commit seppuku.

[jsfisher]

You know, it'll be funny if Hillary somehow wins the White House. Well, funny in a sick and twisted sense of the word, because those Rush Limbaugh listening "Operation Chaos" guys will be partially to blame. They're gambling that Hillary will lose to McCain in the general, and she probably would.

I was under the impression the purpose of Operation Chaos was to keep Senator Clinton in the race for as long as possible to prolong the intra-party squabble. McCain is unlikely to sling much dirt at either of the potential Democrat candidates, so why not let them sling dirt at each other?

[ConspiRaider]

I don't post links often because I'd rather give ya what I got (which is damned little).

But this is a great site, and he comically analyzed MoDo's descent into Dr. Seuss wishiness to disappear the person MoDo hates most - Hillary Clinton. I seldom miss The Daily Howler:

This is the April 23rd (Wednesday) entry:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/

[T.A.M.]

yah that was rather juvenile...sure she doesn't secretly work for Hillary?

TAM;)

[ConspiRaider]

yah that was rather juvenile...sure she doesn't secretly work for Hillary?

TAM;)
No, Doc. :)

MoDo hates Hillary Clinton with a passion that makes one stand back and marvel - at its intensity. Same as Randi Rhodes (the "****** whore" proclaimer). I think it's personal but I don't know the root reasons.

This is how sick - how absolutely sick our U.S. Democratic Party has become. On the day after Hillary wins Pennsylvania - MoDo is using all her "journalistic" tools to demand she leave the race. Hillary wins - therefore she should quit. What a great example such a mindset displays to the kiddies of America.

Hillary Clinton has just raised TEN MILLION DOLLARS in a single day, following the PA win. I know you hate her - I know you won't watch it - but I think it had a lot to do with her extremely well done victory speech. Not a missed note in that 16 and a half minute speech.

[Cello Man]

I was under the impression the purpose of Operation Chaos was to keep Senator Clinton in the race for as long as possible to prolong the intra-party squabble. McCain is unlikely to sling much dirt at either of the potential Democrat candidates, so why not let them sling dirt at each other?

Well of course that's the original purpose. My post was simply musing on the possibility of it backfiring. It's like this:

1) Most Republicans think Obama would fare better in a general election than McCain, hell, he might even win. But Hillary would most likely lose against McCain, and lose hard.

2) They know that the longer Clinton and Obama duke it out, it might damage the Democratic party as a whole.

3) So, to ensure Republican victory in the general election, large numbers of them briefly switch parties and vote for Clinton in the primaries. This further divides the Democrats and gives their guy the advantage of running against the weaker candidate in the general election.

But what happens if Step 4 bites them in the rear? The unthinkable happens and Clinton wins over McCain, and all the Operation Chaos guys will be partially to blame.

[Darth Rotor]

Color me confused, folks.

Football analogy.

Hillary and Obama are playing in the AFC championship game, McCain having already wrapped up the NFC title, and she enters the fourth quarter a couple of scores behind. Being played on a real turf field, it begins to rain during half time. Undaunted, she engineers a drive and scores a field goal, leaving nine plus minutes on the game clock.

She should quit, NYT editors, just because you don't like to see a close night game played in the mud?

FFS, NYT, you guys forget that this game is played to win, and you get no prizes for second place. Hillary is playing to win. You got a problem with that?

DR

[Cicero]

These are people who would prefer to elect Hitler's dead dog over Hillary Clinton.

Blondi didn't pick her owner. By virtue of the fact this dog was actually under fire, she leaves Hillary in the dust.

[TriskettheKid]

FFS, NYT, you guys forget that this game is played to win, and you get no prizes for second place. Hillary is playing to win. You got a problem with that?

But that is PRECISELY the problem.

Short of Obama dropping dead tomorrow, having his name removed from all remaining ballots, and no one voting for him in any of the remaining states, she has no hopes of catching him in either pledged delegates or popular vote.

[BPSCG]

The Washington Post makes the case for continuing (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/23/AR2008042303073.html?hpid=opinionsbox1):

The lengthy primary contest may not be in the best interest of the Democratic Party, which would rather be gearing up for November, but it has served to clarify the two candidates' strengths and weaknesses -- matters that would come to the fore in the general election anyway.
That first phrase is what's behind the Times's unhappiness, because in the view of wise men at the Gray Lady, what's good for the Democratic party is good for the country.

Apparently the Times isn't interested in "clarifying the two candidates' strengths and weaknesess." What if Clinton were to drop out now and between now and the convention, the super-delegates find out that Obama has a half-dozen more worthy friends to stand alongside the America-haters and terrorists he already hangs with? Oops.

[T.A.M.]

No, Doc. :)

MoDo hates Hillary Clinton with a passion that makes one stand back and marvel - at its intensity. Same as Randi Rhodes (the "****** whore" proclaimer). I think it's personal but I don't know the root reasons.

This is how sick - how absolutely sick our U.S. Democratic Party has become. On the day after Hillary wins Pennsylvania - MoDo is using all her "journalistic" tools to demand she leave the race. Hillary wins - therefore she should quit. What a great example such a mindset displays to the kiddies of America.

Hillary Clinton has just raised TEN MILLION DOLLARS in a single day, following the PA win. I know you hate her - I know you won't watch it - but I think it had a lot to do with her extremely well done victory speech. Not a missed note in that 16 and a half minute speech.

CS:

Hate is too strong a word. I think there are alot of things about her, that make me dislike her overall. Some of them may be my misinterpretation, but none the less they contribute to how I feel over all about her.

I actually liked Bill Clinton. Compared to George W...well there is no comparison. With respect to dislike of Hillary, I have described my reasons on this forum many times before, so I will not repeat here.

On the issues, I find Hillary right where I am, with the exception of me leaning a little more right on pure economic issues. Obama the same.

To me, yes, it is about perceived charisma, personality, leadership qualities, diplomacy, negotiation ability, that IMO separates the two, and makes me side for Obama.

I think in the end, as much as I like McCain for the above reasons c/w Hillary, I have now decided that I would like either of your Democrats in there, over him, purely because of his WAR stance.

TAM:)

[ConspiRaider]

CS:

Hate is too strong a word. I think there are alot of things about her, that make me dislike her overall. Some of them may be my misinterpretation, but none the less they contribute to how I feel over all about her.

I actually liked Bill Clinton. Compared to George W...well there is no comparison. With respect to dislike of Hillary, I have described my reasons on this forum many times before, so I will not repeat here.

On the issues, I find Hillary right where I am, with the exception of me leaning a little more right on pure economic issues. Obama the same.

To me, yes, it is about perceived charisma, personality, leadership qualities, diplomacy, negotiation ability, that IMO separates the two, and makes me side for Obama.

I think in the end, as much as I like McCain for the above reasons c/w Hillary, I have now decided that I would like either of your Democrats in there, over him, purely because of his WAR stance.

TAM:)
Good stuff, Doc. And I couldn't even begin to use the "H" word upon Barack, because in fact, I like him. I just don't think he's yet qualified to be the Big Chieferino - and these associations of his that are coming to light raise doubts and questions about exactly where and what he is.

I don't even hate McCain, not by a long shot. I sure as hell don't want him as President, but he also has his likable qualities.

Only Boy-Bush - when he was running in 1999 and 2000 - caused me swift and immediate dislike of him, because I instantly "read" him as dangerous. Hoo boy, did he ever deliver on that "read".

[dudalb]

To me, yes, it is about perceived charisma, personality, leadership qualities, diplomacy, negotiation ability, that IMO separates the two, and makes me side for Obama.


I would say his ratings for diplomacy have to take a big hit in wake of his remark about Small Town voters in Pennslyvania. I don't think he meant to be insulting,but the point is a diplomat would be much more careful about the way he phrases things.

I can see preferring Obama to Hilary or McCain, but I have a real problem making him such a paragon of virtues.

[T.A.M.]

I would say his ratings for diplomacy have to take a big hit in wake of his remark about Small Town voters in Pennslyvania. I don't think he meant to be insulting,but the point is a diplomat would be much more careful about the way he phrases things.

I can see preferring Obama to Hilary or McCain, but I have a real problem making him such a paragon of virtues.

I will grant you, it was perhaps not wise, sloppy, but...

1. It was in a private setting where he was addressing people of the exact opposite status.
2. Diplomats, even top diplomats, as part of there jobs, play to their audience. That is how they work.

TAM:)