Can you say "firewall"?
You, meaning Hillary Clinton.
It's not too early for the Clinton machine to be pondering how and where to construct a Great Wall that can repel the hordes of Obama. Remember the 2000 Republican nomination battle? The George W. Bush, Inc. campaign designated South Carolina as the place to make its stand. Insurgent (then, not now) John McCain had beaten W. in New Hampshire. The Palmetto State became a cage death match, with the Bushies and their secret gnomes doing whatever they could to smear the former POW. (Faxes circulated claiming McCain had been brainwashed in Vietnam, had fathered a nonwhite child out of wedlock, and so on). It worked. The McCain firestorm was doused, and eventually this lion of a maverick was tamed and put on pathetic display in the Bush's three-ring circus.
I'm not predicting a Democratic version of that scenario. But with Barack Obama taking a 4-point lead over Clinton in the latest Iowa poll, the Clintonites have to have a plan for shutting the Illinois senator down should he win on the field of corn. Could they do so in New Hampshire, which will have its primary on January 8, a mere five days after the Iowa caucuses? In the most recent polls there, Clinton has maintained a healthy 14- to 15-point lead over Obama. But, as Howard Kurtz notes today, the winners of Iowa will get a big boost of MSM-generated momentum. That tide might carry the victors of Iowa quite far in New Hampshire. While the Clinton crew will look to slow him down in Live Free or Die land, they cannot count on doing so.
So where to smite? Michigan (January 15)? Nevada (January 19)? Clinton is clobbering Obama in the polls in these states. But most of the major Democratic candidates (except Clinton) have pulled their names from the Michigan ballot to protest the state Democratic party's defiance of Democratic Party rules. Michigan is a big state, but its primary results may not be viewed as all that significant. As for Nevada, its a newcomer to the early round of primaries. Perhaps a Clinton win there would appear as a major blow to Obama. But it might not.
Which brings us back to South Carolina, which will hold its Democratic primary on January 26, a week after its GOP primary. (Florida is scheduled to hold its disputed primary on January 26, too.) Will South Carolina do for HRC what it did for W.? Clinton has maintained a commanding lead in the South Carolina polls, and there have been many news stories reporting that black voters there are torn between Clinton, who is married to the "first black" president, and Obama, who would be the first black president (no quotation marks needed), with many tilting toward the missus. But imagine if Obama wins Iowa, gets on a roll, and it looks as if there's a real chance of a black guy becoming the Democratic nominee. How might on-the-fence black voters in South Carolina respond to that?
Of course, even if Obama were to win in South Carolina, there would be bigger battles to come, particularly on Super-Duper Tuesday--February 5--when California, New York, Colorado, Georgia, Minnesota, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah will hold primaries or caucuses. Could the deep-pocketed Clinton campaign wait that long to smother the Obama challenge? The answer: perhaps.
All this what-ifing is fanciful (and it does leave John Edwards out of the speculation). There's still plenty of time for HRCers to unleash a tornado in Iowa that blows Obama away. Remember, her campaign people tend to be meaner and more experienced than his. But if--if, if, if--Obama catches fire in Iowa and the flames start to spread, the whatever-it-takes operatives of the Clinton campaign will mount a whatever-it-takes line of defense somewhere. No doubt, the maps are already on the wall.
![[RSS]](http://67.192.49.194/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
Comments
Another word, HRC can blow away her Dem competition anytime, anywhere, and most importantly, by ANY MEANS.....no matter how many "But if--if, if, if--"!
Come on, David, go out on the MoJO limb and endorse Obama....there will be plenty of time before the general election to get back into Her Grace!
Posted by: HAPPY
| November 26, 2007 11:19 AM
Word on the streets of the Upstate is that many of those who intend to vote in the primaries STILL haven't made a choice. Edwards WILL make a strong showing, due to his "Native Son" status.
Obama is greatly admired and not only in the black community. A wind in his spinaker from an Iowa first place finish could be all the free publicity it takes to displace Hillary.
Still, the #1 political signs (from unscientific personal observation) , in yards and on bumpers are overwhelmingly "Ron Paul". #2 is Obama. Edwards follows closely behind.
All that Hillary support must be below see-level, if the polls are to be believed, I've not seen one yard sign, and only a single bumpersticker.
Of course, most sightings of ANY political signs occur across the river in Greenville Co.. Most of Pickens Co. will vote for Bush/Thurmond, just out of habit.
-T
p.s. Something smells kinda funny, but not in a "HA" way...
Posted by: Hajji
| November 26, 2007 1:34 PM
" Something smells kinda funny, but not in a "HA" way..."
Seems there are more "Impeach Bush" bumper stickers here in ABQ than anything else. It used to be about 50/50 W vs. Kerry. I have not seen any yard signs of a political nature yet. Come to think of it, I have not even seen a "W" sticker in years.
I read a poll that had HRC ahead of Obama here in NM but only by 3-4% - also about the margin of error.
Posted by: capt
| November 26, 2007 2:22 PM
I forgot to mention the "for sale" signs. They are popping up all over. With the failing economy the GOP should have an uphill battle trying to sell their wrongheaded ideology and poor policies.
The neocons had the perfect opportunity to show how great their notions are - of course it was in Iraq and not surprisingly their ideas fell like so many lead balloons.
Posted by: capt
| November 26, 2007 3:59 PM
Capt, come around here and you will find your share of W stickers. They are not as numerous as they used to be, but are by no means rare. :(
New poll shows Clinton trails top 2008 Republicans
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton trails five top Republican presidential contenders in general election match-ups, a drop in support from this summer, according to a poll released on Monday.
Clinton's top Democratic rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards, still lead Republicans in hypothetical match-ups ahead of the November 4, 2008, presidential election, the survey by Zogby Interactive showed.
So why does the media keep saying HRC is the most electable?
Posted by: eyes_open
| November 26, 2007 4:03 PM
Cheney experiences irregular heartbeat
WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney, who has a history of heart problems, experienced an irregular heartbeat Monday and will be evaluated at George Washington University Hospital.
Wow, Cheney has a heart?
Posted by: eyes_open
| November 26, 2007 4:54 PM
mechanical
Posted by: capt
| November 26, 2007 5:01 PM
"So why does the media keep saying HRC is the most electable?"
****
Here, watch the dangling pocketwatch swing to and fro - back and forth - back and forth - your eyelids are getting heavy - HRC is poised to win - She is the front runner - HRC it the most electable - you want to vote for a winner.
Now when I snap my fingers you will wake and feel refreshed!
Posted by: capt
| November 26, 2007 5:13 PM
SNAP
I almost forgot
Posted by: capt
| November 26, 2007 5:14 PM
The most popular media narrative says it's Hillary's race to win but Obama could catch fire with a win in Iowa and an upset in NH. The question I am interested is: Which one would make a better president? or better yet, which democratic candidate would make the best president? What do you think?
It smells like someone spent hours mucking stalls in their Iowa cattle barn and came in here without removing thier boots at the door. SHIT. If it stays, let's place bets on how long until the self-congratulatory praise begins to eminate from that pie-hole it calls a mouth.
Posted by: Neil
| November 26, 2007 9:07 PM
Neil,
I was thinking an egg...an old brown egg...buried in an ancient gym sneaker...under a chicken coop...
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| November 26, 2007 11:21 PM
I do not know what the hell you are talking about when you write ". Remember, her campaign people tend to be meaner and more experienced than his. "
It is Obama`s people who have engaged in a vicious over the top ad hominen attack on Hillary.It is only recently that Hillary has begun to respond. You must be getting your marching orders from the dimwitted Maureen Dowd who has a psychotic hatred of Hillary. The fact is that David Axelrod Obama`s guy is a vicious attack dog. The media has created a phony image of the Clinton`s that they have an over the top attack machine. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Clintons never attack anyone unless they are attacked and even then respond in measured tones.
Posted by: RebaShimansky
| November 27, 2007 9:17 AM
Post A Comment