2/10/2008

Hillary Clinton to do a Rudy Giuliani ?

Hilary Clinton's campaign to win the Democratic nomination appears to be in freefall after a change of strategy led to a senior aide resigning in disgust.

So stretched are Hillary Clinton's campaign finances that she is taking the risky step of putting in no real campaign effort in the smaller states, and will instead bet everything on winning big in big delegate rich states of Ohio and Texas.

This is the same strategy that Rudy Giuliani tried in the Republican race when he chose to sit out the early primaries with the intention of winning big in Florida. Instead, all that happened was that he lost big in Florida and made himself look like a prize idiot.

Obviously the Clinton Campaign would not choose to do this if funds and support were going their way, but after Saturday night's clean sweep of four states for Barack Obama, all with embarrassingly large margins of victory, the tide appears to have turned decisivly in Obama's favour.

As a keen watcher of American politics who feels that America's name has become a dirty word in George W Bush, I have to say I am impressed by Obama and hope this is the decisive moment in his campaign to win the Democratic nomination.

2 comments:

Lee Griffin said...

The difference here, however, is that the big states tend to favour Clinton already while the smaller ones are already pretty well Obama entrenched. Clinton is probably playing a smart move to ignore at this stage given that she can still keep in the news by winning big states (Wisconsin, then Texas/Ohio).

Will Obama have enough persuasion power to make Texas AND Ohio change their entrenched allegiances to ensure that Hillary doesn't take an additional hundred or more candidates than him out of two states alone and undo all of his good work this weekend, or will he too have to play a bit of a giuliani and ignore Ohio in the hope of turning the more evangelical Texas?

Thing is, I doubt that even after March's big contests the delegate numbers will be too different, this one is going all the way to the wire.

scott said...

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Freedom and Democracy
Regarding new elections in Florida and Michigan, Senator Obama said we should play by the rules, I contend. In other words, we should not change the rules in the middle of the game.

Senator Bradley and Senator Daschle--both Obamanites--said the same thing as Obama. Play by the rules.

Play by the rules even though the voters of Florida and Michigan have been disenfranchised.

Ok.

Well, the rules also say that superdelegates can vote for Hillary even though most pledged delegates are for Obama.

Those are the rules. And we should not change the rules in the middle of the game, says Senator Obama, Senator Bradley and Senator Daschle.

I wonder if the corporate media will remind them that they are sticklers for the rules and for not changing the rules in the middle of the game.

I would imagine if the senators forget their rulesmanship it will look to the public as if they will say whatever they have to say in order to win. In other words, it will look as if they are practicing that old style politics they say they are so adamantly against.

For example, you might hear them say that superdelegates should be punished by the voters if they choose the rules over freedom and democracy.

Hmmmmm?

Then I suppose Obama, Bradley and Daschle should also be punished by the voters because they defended the rules against freedom and democracy for Florida and Michigan voters.

Pages