Hillary Clinton: Our Comeback Champion

(Cross-posted at MyDD)

This wasn’t supposed to happen yesterday. We weren’t supposed to be talking about this today. Weren’t we supposed to be talking about Hillary Clinton dropping out and “Hillary leaving for the good of the party“?

Whoops… I guess the media once again declared Hillary dead before she came roaring back to life. (Follow me after the flip for more on last night’s stunner…)

So what really happened yesterday? How did Hillary pull off a real miracle? Well, let’s take a look behind the wins and see the real numbers.

Take a look at Rhode Island. See how the women stood with Hillary? Take a look at Ohio. See how blue-collar “lunch bunket Democrats” rallied to Hillary’s side? Take a look at Texas. See how Latinos stuck with the one and only “Hilaria”?

Come on, everyone! We’re looking at the very coalition we need to win this fall! Latinos. Women. Blue-collar workers. These are the people we need to vote for our Democratic nominee en masse if we want to take back the White House this fall. And who’s been working hard this whole year to make sure these folks vote Democratic this year? Hillary is!

Who’s been talking about the real issues that our voters care about? Hillary has. Who’s always been fighting for quality, affordable health care for all Americans? Hillary has. Who’s ready to implement an economic recovery plan to help working families get back on their feet? Hillary is. Who’s proposed an energy plan that will actually do something to solve the climate crisis and make our nation energy independent? Hillary has. And who’s ready to end the Bush-Cheney era of “cowboy diplomacy” by hitting Mccain on national security… And winning? Hillary is.

So there you have it. This is why Hillary made her remarkable comeback last night, and this is why Hillary may very well keep fighting all the way to the White House next year. The polls now show Hillary gaining momentum. The primary is still far from over. Hillary made her comeback, and all the pundits predicting her ultimate demise today are now being forced to eat crow.

So what can we all do to help Hillary stay competitive in the upcoming primary states? We can contribute to ensure that Hillary has all the necessary resources to stay in this fight for us. We can volunteer to ensure that Hillary has the manpower AND the womanpower to keep winning all these important states. We can get active and stay active so that Hillary knows we have her back. Today may be a great day for celebration, but let’s also remember that we have a long road ahead of us to get to Denver this summer… And ultimately, to get to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. next January.

So come on, let’s do it! I’m sure we made a special someone originally from Texas prod last night. Let’s make this entire nation proud again by helping Hillary become our comeback champion.

  34 comments for “Hillary Clinton: Our Comeback Champion

  1. anon
    March 5, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    A miracle? LOL…you’re good with the hyperbole!

    Funny that you disparage the media…the very same media who’s declaring this a comback even though Hillary made virtually no progress closing the gap in delegates.

  2. Christine Ford
    March 5, 2008 at 2:41 pm

    Andrew, you hit the nail on the head, these are exactly the voters that will keep this going for Hillary. I don’t know why everyone is so surprised that the media is running this and not the people. I will say what no one else is admitting- if Hillary’s campaign was exactly the same except that Hillary was named Henry, she would be the undisputed front runner!

  3. March 5, 2008 at 3:06 pm

    I’m sorry, it still wasn’t the overwhelming victory she needed to put herself back into the running. Right now, as it stands, Obama will have to win 77% of the remaining delegates needed to win outright. Yes, that’s quite a number.

    Hillary needs 97% of the remaining delegates.

    Right now, I just see Hillary vetting not only Obama but herself. She was unable to come up with a nataional security crisis that she handled that qualified her to answer that phone at 3am more than Obama. She refuses to release her tax returns.

  4. Northcountystorm
    March 5, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    Heather, you honor your lament about Democrats attacking Democrats more in the breach then the observance. This is a typical example. Andrew puts up a totally positive post about Hillary, no attacks against Barack, and you just can’t resist the urge to launch. And the tax return hit was funny given your views about ” personal” attacks.

    I realize defeat results in frustration which often results in lashing out. i’ve been through that. And Obama got beat last night after going on a long streak of beating Hillary. But FWIW the first part of your post was pretty good and your cause would have been better served if you stopped at 97%.

  5. March 5, 2008 at 4:45 pm


    Because you are the monitor of spin on this site, it is surprising that you don’t call out the spin that is Andrew’s exuberantly positive post. Sen. Clinton’s wins last night did stop Sen. Obama’s 12 win streak. But to suggest that she has turned the campaign around is quite a reach. The delegate count has not moved in any meaningful way. The number of states won has not moved in any meaningful way. The total popular vote has not moved in any meaningful way. So to declare the Obama campaign stopped is inaccurate. Andrew’s entitled to be excited even if he does spin it quite well.

    Congratulations, Andrew, and enjoy it while it lasts. Even at this late date, the race isn’t over. It’s been 8 weeks since Iowa and there are 7 until Pennsylvania. And while I think it’s more likely Obama will prevail, the truth is that either one could win the nomination. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling him/her-self.

  6. Andrew Davey
    March 5, 2008 at 4:45 pm


    Try looking in the public record, where some 25 years of Bill & Hillary’s tax returns are available for everyone to see. And by April 15, we’ll all be able to see their current tax returns… In the mean time, you can always search the Senate records to get a good idea of Hillary’s finances. Really, this is a non-issue cooked up by the right. I’m just flabbergasted that so many “progressives” are falling for it… But then again, these same folks also always take right-wing smearmaster Matt Drudge at his word. Funny, ain’t it?

    Oh, and regarding Hillary’s history with world affairs… I have a good friend who’s married to an Irishman. She can tell you her own personal story of how Hillary helped bring about the Northern Ireland peace process. I have friends of a friend who are quite involved in military & security affairs… They know all about what Hillary did to call attention to the crisis in Kosovo in 1998. And did you know that as a US Senator, Hillary was the ONLY sitting Senator to serve on a select commission on military reform in 2004? Or that this year, Hillary has introduced a bill in the Senate that would stop Bush from signing an agreement with the Iraqi government that would enshrine a permanent US occupation there? Swell, ain’t it?

    NCS & Christine-

    Thanks! I’m glad I’m not the only one here who recognizes what really happened last night. Does Hillary still have work to do to win the nomination? Absolutely! But is it impossible? HELL NO! In fact, less than 100 delegates separate Hillary from Barack. And just as important, the popular vote is EXTREMELY CLOSE… Depending on how you want to count Florida & Michigan votes, either one can be shown with a narrow lead.

    So anyways, my whole point here is that Hillary’s still working hard to fight for the causes that we working people care about… Let’s not declare her “dead” just as she’s roaring back to life. 😉

  7. March 5, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    Candidates tax returns are not “personal” becuase it is often common for candidates to release this information. My understanding is my husband will have to do this and he’s running for State Senate. Why wouldn’t someone running for the nomination for the Presidency have to not do the same? It was not a “hit” it was a fair question especially considering that one of the biggest “hits” Clinton takes on Obama is his need to be “vetted”.

    It is a positive post but at the same time I don’t see Hillary’s victories as comebacks. I just disagree. You post something, it’s going to be commented upon, even if you may not like the comments.

    I am also tired of hearing how Hillary is the only one talking about the real issues that matter to people, it’s just not true. I feel that both Democrats are addressing the “real” issues.

  8. March 5, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    Thanks for all those points Andrew.

    Bill – I agree, either can still win it, I’m more concerned about otehr issues than just this though and because I say that it means I’m a hardcore Obama partisan.

  9. campskunk
    March 5, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    barack is all momentum and no policy. he’s like a water skiier- if he slows down, he sinks. and right now he’s dead in the water. he can’t shake hillary- she’s on him like white on rice.

    obama can’t close the deal.

  10. Northcountystorm
    March 5, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    Tax returns not personal? Very few things are more personal.
    You suggest they are not personal because it is not uncommon for candidates to release that information. So if a candidate is attacked for being a liar, that somehow is not a personal attack because it is not uncommon for candiates to lie? Please. And if you don’t see victories in 3 of 4 states following a string of 11 straight defeats a comeback, then you’ve sipped the kool aid. Like some of the CLinton people who dismissed most of Obama’s wins as insignificant red states. Somehow if it was John Edwards winning 3 out of 4 after 11 straight thumpings I think you’d be calling him Comeback Kid II.

    Did John Edwards ever make a personal attack on Hillary Clinton? Did Barack Obama ever make a personal attack on Hillary Clinton? I’m curious what you define as a personal attack other then those attacks made on candidates you support. My guess is that any attack on your husband will be deemed “personal.” Speaking of your husband, you might want to check again about what he needs to file. While he is free to send out his and/or if applicable, your joint returns, I don’t believe he’s required to do so as a candidate. He is required to complete a statement of economic interest which Clinton has completed as an officeholder.

    You may be tired about hearing about how HIllary is the only one talking about the real issues. I’ve grown tired of hearing about how Barack is the only one who is talking about change. It’s what happens when you listen to the statements of people you are not supporting. Sometimes only the starstruck never tire of hearing their own candidates repetitive speeches.

    Look, I’m not suggesting you don’t comment…in fact I paid you a compliment about the first part of your post which took issue with Andrews description of yesterday. I’m just suggesting the last part of your quote is inconsistent with your previously stated lament about attacking Democrats and, while you disagree, was IMHO a personal attack. If that’s where you want to go fine. Sean works the other side of the Attack River. Just understand that whatever you think about your comments, some of them come off as attacks, and personal attacks at that, to others. Maybe not in the myopic world of the Land of Kos, but for sure in the kinder, gentler land of the Liberal OC.

  11. rowjimmy
    March 5, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    >>The total popular vote has not moved in any meaningful way.

  12. rowjimmy
    March 5, 2008 at 6:10 pm

    Bill said: “The total popular vote has not moved in any meaningful way.”

    Uh, care to check again? She net 330,000 votes last night, which was about 30-40% of the difference between them. Wow. That’s not meaningful? Interesting metrics you employ. Note source below.


    With a 10% win in PA, she nets another 300,000-400,000 votes. A ten pct win in PA is conservative, since it’s a closed primary. If Ohio was closed, the margin would have approached upper teens. If she pulls out a 15% win in PA, she will take the lead in the popular vote count, even without FL votes counted (debate if the delegates should count, but the raw vote totals should as an indication of total popular vote support).

    And you need a new argument about “pledged delegates.” It’s getting old. Super delegates were *never* designed to follow; rather they were designed to lead. That’s why Kennedy, Patrick, and Kerry (aka the Three Stooges) can vote their conscience for Obama as superdelegates even though Obama lost MA by 17 points. I support that decision by those three, even if I don’t necessarily like it. Neither candidate can get to 2025 without superdelegates. It is not a historical fact that “pledged delegate lead = nominee.” There is a magic number to reach and neither can reach it. Read this for an opinion that differs from your own http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/4/1877/81070 When you read it, keep in mind that the author of that piece is co-author with Kos, someone who is a rabid Obama supporter. They don’t always agree, obviously.

    Maybe Obama can come back and surprise us and finally win a state like PA to put her away. But he’s shown us his inability to put this away three times now. Obama has choked with the chance to close this out THREE times now.

    1) After Iowa. With a win in NH and/or NV, he would have finished off her campaign. He lost both.

    2) Super Tuesday. He went into it with all the momentum and the Kennedy endorsement, which they all said (Zogby and other Obama supporters) would get him one of CA, MA, or NJ. He lost ALL three. If he wins one, race over.

    3) March 4. He went into those contests with a 4:1 spending advantage, the momentum of 11 consecutive wins, a wave of positive press, good debate performances, and all he needed to do was hold his lead in TX from 10 days ago (www.americanresearchgroup.com) and stay competitive in OH or win as Rasmussen and Zogby showed he might. He lost both! If he wins OH or TX, or better both, as he was expected to 10 days ago, game over.

    the fourth chance to end her campaign is PA, and we’ve seen Obama’s great success in large primary states that are closed (Democrats only) elections.

    Four downs. Four incomplete passes.

    Turnover on downs.

    The bottom line is that there is absolutely no guarantee that he’ll win the popular vote (FL and MI are talking about revotes today…two more losses for Obama) and his slim pledged delegate lead is not the sole criterion that determines the election. 2025 is what decides it and he needs more arguments than the pledged delegates one.

  13. Northcountystorm
    March 5, 2008 at 6:23 pm

    Bill, AKA Spinmesiter: No need for me to crack down on Andrews spin since I thought Heather did that quite well in the first part of her post. She just fell off the spinbuster bus and climbed on the attack dog express in the last part of her post.

    I think its a fair statement to say that the day was hers. That she did turn things around. Not 180 as perhaps Andrew might have suggested, but a bit more then 90. She has just lost 11 elections in a row(something programmed in to most Obama posts and comments for the past 2 weeks) and, for the 3rd time this year, you Obama folks were writing her epitaph and preparing to dance on her grave. One could just see the anticipatory saliva oozing out of the Kos site. As before, Obama overcame rather dated double digit poll defecits and was in the lead in Texas and a dead heat in Ohio. And 3 out of 4 states is a meaningful shift, especially when we’re talking about Ohio, a must state to win the White House and which all Democrats who have won the White House have won the primary there.

    I’d rather be in Barack’s birkenstocks then Hillary’s heels right now. Better ahead then behind. But I think he’s hearing her footsteps.

    So yes, to come back and do as well as she did I think she turned things around. Enough to win? Not necessarily, As you point out there is still an electoral defecit. But remember how the earth shook from the sound of Obamanation after the Iowa caucuses where he only got 1 more delegates then she. The earth moves and politics pivots on more then delegates. You remember the will of the people thing.

  14. March 5, 2008 at 6:38 pm


    Hm, it seems you are the one who is getting personal by being very judgemental of how I see this whole thing. If I don’t agree, it’s an attack. I just heard my husband say that we HAD to disclose our tax info. So it seemed strange that a Presidential candidate wouldn’t HAVE to. If I am wrong, that’s a completely different matter. But “personal’?

    There have been many personal attacks on Hillary that I think are completely out of line, just because I haven’t outlined them does not mean I don’t think that is the case. Questioning the cost of someone’s haircut is not the same as questioning on the way someone votes. I think there are very valid issues with Clinton as a candidate AND Obama.

    Personal attacks to others? Do you mean people here? You must not have been on the Daily Kos recently, it’s far from civil and I avoid it just for that reason. I never stoop to “personal” attacks on other posters, but many here are very liberal with their use of the “sipping the koolaid.” Personal in my mind. There is an implication that if someone does not agree with you there is something wrong with THEM.

    Maybe you need to reconsider what it means to attack one “personally”.

    “Please. And if you don’t see victories in 3 of 4 states following a string of 11 straight defeats a comeback, then you’ve sipped the kool aid.”

    I didn’t say it wasn’t a “come back” I just don’t think it’s enough to say she’s still got a chance of winning it, not much changed in the distance between the two.

  15. Andrew Davey
    March 5, 2008 at 7:06 pm


    Do we all need to settle down a moment so we can all drop the anger and give each other a group hug? You know I love you all… Yes, even you, Bill. But come on, Heather & NCS… Let’s not get into a fight here in my calm, happy Hillary thread. You know, I kept it positive for a reason. I prefer we discuss the issues rationally than engage in any kind of attacks.

    So NCS, I don’t take umbrage at what Heather says. Heather, I don’t think NCS means to attack you or your husband in any way. And everyone, can we please just celebrate what’s looking to be a good year for Democrats in 2008? Turnout records were shattered in Texas & Ohio & Rhode Island. Women, blue collar Dems, and Latinos turned out en masse… This is a GOOD sign for the fall. And yes, I did intend for this post to celebrate Hillary’s remarkable comeback (and yes, it IS one!)… But you know what’s more important to me than gloating over a nice win? Making sure all of us Democrats eventually get over our primary bickering to help our nominee and our other party candidates win BIG this year!

    So hey, do we all need to pause for a group hug? If so, I have my arms open wide. 😉

  16. March 5, 2008 at 7:16 pm

    Heather, Notice how Northcountystorm always either refers to or addresses me as a spinner regardless of what I say? Now, of course this is not meant as a compliment. It almost bothered me for a while. That is until I remembered I don’t give a furry rat’s ass what this person calls me or why. It occurred to me that what matters most to the storm in Northcounty is stirring the pot to get a reaction.

  17. Andrew Davey
    March 5, 2008 at 7:21 pm


    Calm down, please. I don’t think NCS is really trying to diss you or anything. Hell, should I get mad at NCS because he said that my stuff was “spin”? Cheese louise, don’t get angry over one remark from NCS! In fact, in some ways you should view his last remark as a “compliment”… hehe 😉

  18. Dan Chmielewski
    March 5, 2008 at 7:32 pm

    I have said this before and I will say it again people; eye on the prize. The Oval Office with a Democrat in it. Not just any Democrat, but a historic candidate. Focus. California has had its say. Now its up to the remaining states to have theirs. Support our nominee, whomever he or she may be. Either are preferrable to John McCain.

  19. March 5, 2008 at 7:40 pm

    Andrew, Relax. I don’t do drama. Not intentionally, anyway. Rest assured. I’m fine. In fact, if I were any calmer, I’d be comatose. This next one is not intended to be a challenge, so keep that in mind when I say Northcountystorm hasn’t worked hard enough to rile me. I don’t take the bait that easily.

  20. March 5, 2008 at 9:38 pm

    Andrew – I’m sorry, but I do have a right to defend myself when someone accuses me of personal attacks. I just don’t do that and it’s hard for me to not say something.

    It has nothing to do with your diary and I said nothing personal about NCS.

    I loved your diary and I always attempt to be respectful even when we may not agree.

  21. March 5, 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Pick up the new edition of Economist Magazine. It has a great look at Obama’s economic adviser. Turns out he is indeed coming up with great policies that are much better than Hillary’s tired schemes.

    Obama is still ahead and he is still going to win the nomination. If Hillary gets it, you guys will end up losing to McCain.

  22. Andrew Davey
    March 5, 2008 at 10:15 pm


    Of course, you have every right to defend yourself. I just got a little freaked out when things started to look a little too heated among you & NCS & Bill. That’s all.

    Oh yes, and looky here… I see Art stopped by to leave a comment on Obama’s economic team. I guess a true Republican at heart really would appreciate stuff like this…


    And that Obama’s economic advisers are quite far to the right… One’s called for Social Security to be privatized, and the other says it’s “good” that we don’t have universal health care. If Obama learned something from yesterday, it should be that he needs to dump these Milton Friedman acolytes and hire some folks that actually know stuff about the economy.

  23. March 5, 2008 at 10:48 pm


    Jeez. Will you never let it go that I was a Republican? BTW, the Economist is NOT a partisan magazine. You can read the article about his policies at this link: http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10766642&CFID=8007128&CFTOKEN=176bb583ba449300-82D7CA7E-B27C-BB00-01432D8EC6F3FBBD.

    Try it. I really enjoyed the article. And you will find that actual economists like what Obama is up to…and I am not referring to Milton Friedman, who I think is not even alive anymore.

  24. March 6, 2008 at 6:37 am

    Andrew – Your reference is to the site of a Clinton supporter, hardly impartial, and nothing in the post said anything about social security, hardly relevant to your assertion. Please know: I have heard Sen. Obama say live and in person – from his lips to my ears – that Social Security should not be privatized. Case closed.

  25. Andrew Davey
    March 6, 2008 at 6:55 am


    Nice try, but you can’t just talk this away. Sorry for the link confusion, but that story does talk about the disturbing facts behind Obama’s “NAFTA-Gate” and how they can’t handle something as simple as telling us what he really thinks about trade. And if you still want to say that Obama doesn’t have an economics problem, see this…


    It’s full of links to real facts on Obama’s economic advisers. And yes, one of them actually does want to privatize Social Security. So if Obama doesn’t believe in Friedman-style “capitalism gone wild”, then why does he have all these right-wing economists advising him?

  26. March 6, 2008 at 7:49 am

    Andrew, Your linked reference to a Clinton supporter is not worth reading. In fact I didn’t make it past the second line “Obama’s Right-Wing Economist Asshole #1: AUSTAN GOOLSBEE” that kind of characterization does not add credence to your argument. Pay attention, Andrew: Sen. Barack Obama (remember, he’s the only one on his staff that’s running for office) has said no privatization of Social Security. Sorry, pal. Case still closed.

  27. Andrew Davey
    March 6, 2008 at 8:22 am


    Wow. You’re not even giving me a real rebuttal to the facts mentioned in that diary. So what’s wrong? You don’t like the language? OK, try this one…


    Again, you can’t deny the facts mentioned here and in the other links I’ve provided you. Obama’s key economic advisers are to the right of what we’d call “mainstream” as Democrats. These advisers have been the ones helping him craft his sub-par health care plan, his “free market” economic proposals, and basically the rest of his domestic agenda… So to say who Obama’s advisers are doesn’t matter is not a strong argument, especially when your fellow Obama people here hit Hillary 24/7 for having key advisers that they don’t like.

    So sorry Mr. Bill, but your guy isn’t getting any slack cut from me. If he wants my respect, he needs to earn it. If he wants to tell me he’s “progressive”, he needs to prove it.

  28. March 6, 2008 at 8:44 am

    So sorry Andrew. the issue of Social Security is still closed.

    Let’s both of us move on. Don’t let’s get into a flame war, OK? Don’t let’s have Gila, Dan, or Chris smack us down for misbehaving.

  29. March 6, 2008 at 9:55 am

    Long time no see! Happy belated birthday! I hope to see you tonite at Drinking Liberally, if I can make it that is. Hope all is well, but judging by your post, you’re doing just fine! Happy 21st!

    sarah michelle

  30. March 6, 2008 at 10:27 am

    Art – I’d trust the Economist before I’d trust the Wall Street Journal, but that’s just me. It’s pretty fair and it actually covers a lot of global economic issues.

  31. March 6, 2008 at 11:41 am


    Absolutely! I often buy it when I travel as it makes a good read on a plane flight. It is news you quite often cannot get elsewhere. Their website is also great reading.

  32. Northcountystorm
    March 6, 2008 at 11:41 am

    Bill—I’s because I only respond to your comments when you are spinning. Spinmeister was not an insult–virtually everyone spins on blogs. It was a compliment because you are good at it. Subtle enough to crack a smile on my face. I’m certainly not trying to rile you and if I wanted to do that or stir the pot, you’d know it. I’d take a page out of Sean’s field manual and go after your guy.

    Heather–go back and re-read the comments. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

  33. March 6, 2008 at 11:43 am

    virtually everyone spins on blogs

    Now this we can agree on!

  34. March 6, 2008 at 11:47 am

    Art – Thank God for the web, I get so much fantastic information there when I can. I wish more magazines would make themselves available via web for a charge rather than having to subscribe to a paper copy which means not only wasteful glossy paper but shipping as well.

    More and more are offering amazing content online though and the Economist is certainly one of them! I find that it has a more balanced point of view on our national political issues as well. Crazy huh? But I also enjoy watching the BBC news and I think because it’s published in the UK it tends to have a totally different take on things for the better.

Comments are closed.