Kos has some good thoughts on Clinton v. Obama. First of all, he addresses the point of why left-leaning bloggers were unhappy with the Democratic Party prior to 2003. It’s not because the party wasn’t liberal enough, it’s because it was too anemic. When the Republicans had bad ideas, the Democrats wouldn’t fight. I think that’s what appealed to the Democratic blogosphere about Howard Dean. Not that he was far to the left — any review of his time as Governor of Vermont reveals that he really wasn’t — but that he was unapologetic about his politics. The Democratic Leadership Council seemed to be enemy #1 in terms of capitulating to the Republicans.
With that in mind, discussing Clinton v. Obama:
Clinton isn’t just a member of the DLC, she’s in their leadership. Obama, by the way, repudiated the organization three times (it’s a great story, which I tell in my forthcoming book).
Clinton hasn’t just rejected a 50-state strategy, she has openly attacked it.
. . .
“As [former Virginia Gov. Mark] Warner asks, how many more times will the Democrats run presidential campaigns where they abandon thirty-three southern and western states and “launch a national campaign that goes after sixteen states and then hope that we can hit a triple bank shot to get to that seventeenth state?“” Well, given Obama’s map-changing 50-state mindset, it’s clear that the answer to Warner’s question is “one more time” if Clinton is the nominee, and “never again” if Obama is the nominee.
Clinton didn’t just vote for the Iraq war and refuse to apologize for it, she voted to give Bush the same authority on Iran.
Kos goes on to state that Clinton’s only path to victory in the primary is “coup by superdelegate” in a way guaranteed to foment civil war in the Party, and she doesn’t care.
That’s why she has earned my enmity and that of so many others. That’s why she is bleeding super delegates. That’s why she’s even bleeding her own caucus delegates (remember, she lost a delegate in Iowa on Saturday). That’s why Keith Olbermann finally broke his neutrality. That’s why Nancy Pelosi essentially cast her lot with Obama. That’s why Democrats outside of the Beltway are hoping for the unifying Obama at the top of the ticket, and not a Clinton so divisive, she is actually working to split her own party.
Every time I check the Obama/Clinton delegate count,Obama has gained more delegates and there aren’t any contests going on just now. This article by KOS explains very well what is going on. When the Democratic leadership starts taking sides to stop you,then a candidate should realize she’s badly seen and in trouble.
I tend to think that, if any other Democratic candidate were in Hillary Clinton’s situation, they would have been pressured out by the Democratic establishment quite some time ago — of course, probably the “go to” guy for applying that sort of pressure would be Bill Clinton, as a sort of elder statesman of the party. Al Gore would be second on that list, but only for a non-Clinton.