"Fratricidal maniac" seems to indeed have been an apt description of her, Jon. I'm also not surprised that the superdelegates are annoyed at her kamikaze mission. They can't be pleased with her insinuations that they risk their political careers and overturn the will of the people.

Many of us feel that four more years of a Republican administration in the White House will not serve the best interests of the United States.  We therefore support the election of a Democratic canidiate for President in the general election in November.  It seems pretty clear that someone must take leadership of the Democratic Party.  That person must try to persuade one of the candidates to give up his/her candidacy.  Otherwise, some will decide that the Democratic party , as well as its eventual candidate, is too chaotically disorganized to take the responsibility for redirecting our Government.  That decision could lead to a disasterous result.  I agree with the writer, but note that he does not sufficiantly emphasize the importance of political parties, as opposed to candidates, in our elections.  Many people vote for a party and not necessarily for an individual.

The poll also has Clinton-Obama tied -- and shows more of Clinton's supporters intending to support McCain if Obama gets the nod than it shows Obama's supporters switching sides.

And Obama's (and the media's) attacks on Hillary as satan incarnate surely won't harm Hillary (if she gets the nod).  I love TNR's balance -- more clear every day.

And you don't think the Republicans are itching to hurt Obama?  Where Clinton was attacked and derided for mentioning Wright, Republican PACs will happily go to town.  

"Satan incarnate"? No, just the anti-Christ.

"The poll also has Clinton-Obama tied"

Yeah, Obama has caught her.

"more of Clinton's supporters intending to support McCain if Obama gets the nod than it shows Obama's supporters switching sides."

I have faith that the vast majority of those Clinton supporters won't, in the end, decided to act like whining, petulant children and vote for McCain. Maybe not you, maybe not pccostello. But most of them will come to their senses. As will most of those Obama supporters, if HRC somehow manages to "kitchen sink" the nomination away from him. That's why that portion of the poll is pretty meaningless at this point. Right now I'd probably tell a pollster I would vote for McCain over Hillary. But I wouldn't really do it in November.

"And Obama's (and the media's) attacks on Hillary as satan incarnate surely won't harm Hillary (if she gets the nod)."

Well, that's just silly. It isn't Obama and the media that have caused HRC's numbers to drop lately. She continued her attacks on Obama, she got caught in a huge lie in rather embarrassing fashion, she teamed up with Scaife, she sent her gang of big-money flying monkeys after Nancy Pelosi, she's searching high and low for ways to game the system. She's strapped those devil horns on herself.  

"And you don't think the Republicans are itching to hurt Obama?  Where Clinton was attacked and derided for mentioning Wright, Republican PACs will happily go to town."

They're going to slime and smear either one of the Dems. They have a lot more to work with with HRC, though. The GOP machine is going to turn into the political equivalent of a golden oldies radio station.

scottlooper,

This is a kind of Hillarista blackmail -- nominate our minority candidate or we'll sink the ship.  It isn't going to work.  Indeed, as this piece suggest, the backlash is already hurting Hillary.

Exactly where and when does Obama attack Hillary as "satan incarnate?"  Any sort of reference will do.  I think he has treated her with kid gloves because he is the nominee and has therefore to think about not alienating Democrats for the general.  Hillary is desperate just to get the nomination.  With nothing to lose, she is willing to trash her own chances in the general to get the nomination because whatever she would, in theory, be left with after being nominated is still more than the zero chance she has if she isn't nominated.

I am very glad to see that there is push-back from the public.  I say trash Hillary at every and any opportunity.  Obama can't, but we all can.

I am a long-time Clinton supporter, defender and donor who supported Hillary with my words and checkbook until late January.

I have been appalled by both campaigns going negative. But it is clear that Hillary is the one throwing most of the bombs, mostly to impugn Obama's character, motivations, associations, and candidacy. I am particularly offended by the subtle race-baiting of the Clinton campaign, that is clearly working with less educated white Democrats. It divides our party. Hillary has good political values--helping the oppressed, children, families, etc. But her moral values are most foul, if her current strategy is any indication of who she really is.

I have now stopped donating to Clinton and started donating to Obama. I sincerely pray that Hillary drops out within a week. What she is doing is vicious and desparate. Fortunately all the latest polls show that she who throws kitchen sinks and slime and garbage suffers from serious splashback. Good. There is at least a bit of justice in this world.

A couple of points of clarification are worth adding.

First, the statement "Clinton can succeed in hurting Obama -- and, indeed, his lead against McCain has disappeared in most polls -- but she'll end up hurting herself even more," shows a fundamental misreading of Hillary's intentions. Hillary is not campaigning to win the general election. She'll worry about the general election when she gets the nomination. Until then, the nomination is the only thing. Seen in that light, there is no such thing as "hurting herself even more." She's already behind Obama, with miniscule-and-shrinking chances to seize the nomination. The only way she can possibly get the nomination is to poison Obama. Will trying to destroy Obama's electability work? Probably not, but it's the only chance she has, and so from her point of view "blowback" against her own reputation doesn't matter.

General-election viability? Hillary will burn that bridge when she gets to it.

Second, with regard to Hillary's sinking approval ratings and more slowly rising negative numbers, this isn't about Tuzla or any specific news item. It's simple regression to the mean. The default position for American public opinion is for about 55 percent of Americans to dislike Hillary Clinton. The campaign gave Hillary a chance to cause people, even her critics, to give her a fresh look. Unfortunately for Hillary, she's the same person now that she was prior to 2006, so all a second look does in the long run is remind most people why they thought she was an SOB in the first place.

Basically unpopular politicians have, in recent decades, shown that it's possible to create about an eight-month window of public reconsideration in which you get just enough of a second look to push your positives above your negatives. Think Reagan in 1984 (for those who don't remember, Reagan was an unpopular president for most of his time in office, save for the several months before and after the 1984 election and for his final months in office) or Bush in 2004. The problem for a basically unpopular politician is that the window of reconsideration only lasts about half as long as the modern presidential primary/general election process.

Jonathan,

I think a few weeks ago you noted (I'm paraphrasing here) how deeply depressing it was to watch the Clintons hold up three fingers and tell you they're only holding up two and defying you not to believe them. Maybe people are finally starting to catch on. I'm still bewildered that there's a large segment of the news media willing to play along with their game, but maybe we've turned a corner.

Woody, I've said it here before---in the off-chance that Hillary gets the nomination, I really will not vote for her. Unless McCain makes some sort of gaffe like saying "FUCK TEXAS! FUCKING STEERS AND QUEERS!" on C-SPAN, the general election is not going to be contested here, and it would be better, in my opinion, to go to the ballot box, vote for Democratic state and local officials, and write in the Green Party candidate for President. John Kerry didn't lose the 2004 election in Texas because I voted for David Cobb. (Now, as for Florida 2000, there's some ass-kicking to be done.)

"Right now I'd probably tell a pollster I would vote for McCain over Hillary. But I wouldn't really do it in November."

I love it.  I'm pretty sure I'd do the same thing on both counts.  I have no love for Clinton, but I can't imagine, and I'd love to indulge the fantasy that there is an alternative in maverick McCain, but at the end of the day, I'd rather have a center-left I dislike appointing new Supreme Court Justices and setting budget priorities, than a center-right, but rather far right on social issues, that I like.

guyminuslife,

The Supreme Court and keeping Crazypants McCain away from The Button are the two reasons I would vote for HRC. I won't be happy about it.

I might even do what you suggest if I lived in a very blue or very red state. Washington state is blue, but threatening to turn purple all the time.  

I'm a native Texan, btw - when will it be safe to come home? ;-)

Scott- you're right. They're tied in the polls. But he's ahead on pledged delegates and on total delegates and on total votes and on states won, etc. And the fact that they're tied in the polls make her odds of catching him even more prohibitive.

I think Hillary's reasoning is she is running against Obama now, but will run against the Republicans in November. I think she believes that after passions cool at her stomping Obama to bits all the Democrats will vote for her because the stakes are too high otherwise. She will take up Obama's call for change as her own and force McCain to either repudiate Republican rule, (and alienate the base) or embrace it (and alienate the center). She will treat McCain the same way Bill treated Dole.

It is an extremely dangerous route (white liberals might hold their noses and vote for her, but will blacks or will they stay home?) but I can still see it as a route that can take her to the white house. If it is over the wreckage of Obama then so be it. Better her to wreck Obama than McCain and so save the White House for the Democrats (I am not endorsing it, just see the logic in it)

guyminuslife, if McCain ever does give that speech on Texas you describe, he'll lock up my vote right then and there. About time a presidential candidate showed that he's willing to mess with Texas. Y'all owe us at least fifty years of humiliation for giving us George Dubya.

I think there is another side to this that Mr. Chiat and the press are missing.

Lot's of primary elections have had two strong candidates and they have gone on a long time.  But usually the one who is winning starts a conversation with the loser and cuts a deal.

Obama is really the one who has to take the high road here and make a decision.  Leadership requires careful compromise and negoitiation.  Imagine if Obama sent a feeler out to Hillary for her interest in a VP Position on his ticket.

Hillary has said she wants the top of the ticket, but think about this.  The VP can live in secrecy like Dick Cheney, but still have a lot of influence.  Hillary would still get all the trappings of power, but with a lot less headaches.  Plus it sets her up for the next election.  I think she would take it.

I agree with Marty Peretz that Hillary wants and needs the attention and won't go away until she is vanquished.  A VP Slot allows her to get her attention, but keeps her boxed in.

Obama does get something in return.  The Clinton Machine is pretty strong and campaigns well.  he could give her one issue, Health Care, to shepard through Washington to keep her busy and give him and arm's length denial if it fails as it almost surely will.  He gets a lot Clinton Back-Office personel on day one.  But it does have some risks.  How do you sell Change, with a Clinton on your ticket?

But there are a lot of risks out there.  It could go another 3 months and he may need to pick Hillary anyway.  But maybe he has better people in mind.

But my point here is that this issue is not just Hillary's.  A leader accepts the problems coming at him and makes decisions to solve them.  Maybe we should start criticizing Obama for not getting Hillary out of the way.

I suspect McCain would salivate over an Obama/Clinton ticket. He would love to be add her massive negatives to his negatives.

Someone, somewhere made a more reasonable proposition, and one that might assuage her vanity without recourse to all this electoral nonsense  - a Supreme Court nomination.

She is not going to get the nomination without bludgeoning Obama into a pulp so that his poll numbers go down enough to justify the supers swinging her way. But this tactic isn't going to work, because the more she bludgeons, the more HER poll numbers go down

Special annoyance for everyone: this is the dark side of the Scorpio - they can be like the scorpion, which will sting something else so hard it dies in the process.

She hasn't got the brains for the Supreme Court. Not saying everyone already there does, but she doesn't and shouldn't be there.

There are lots and lots of people who don't ever want to see Hillary Rodham Clinton or is it just Hillary now again on anything and might even vote against Obama for that one.  It would show a sign of really bad judgment.

Look lots of her core supporters are going to vote for McCain over her anyway given the choice.  They are the Reagan Democrats, remember.

Hillary's problem is she does not understand that while we do not bring knifes to gun fights, we also don't bring guns to knife fights.  The superdelegates may have to reminder her, though I doubt she'll take the hint.

"guyminuslife, if McCain ever does give that speech on Texas you describe, he'll lock up my vote right then and there. About time a presidential candidate showed that he's willing to mess with Texas. Y'all owe us at least fifty years of humiliation for giving us George Dubya."

Hey, Connecticut gave him to us first!  Anyway, we have some payback coming when Bush comes back to Texas and plays the hokey cowboy role for the next twenty years.  We will get ours.

CRS9TNR, I don't entirely agree with you (Obama-Hillary would be a lousy ticket I think, for reasons you and others mention), but you are on to something.  Hillary can't just pull out.  She would dismay and disappoint her ardent fan base who, after this polarizing nomination process will be the only pals she has left.  Perhaps she's trying to play hardball just because she has to look like a true believer.  If she drops out, she's essentially a has-been.  If she stays in as long as she can, she can hold on to her power center.  Not necessarily because she has a realistic chance of running in 2012, but because it's nice to have someone else to talk to besides Bill.  

Maybe by picking a fight with the DCCC, she's trying to get them to end her campaign while still maintaining her never-give-up image?  How the hell else is she going to leave this thing without working up more campaign debt?

Clinton and Obama are not tied. The race is over. The Super Delegates are going break hard to Obama the day of the NC primary.

news.yahoo.com/.../poll2008_national

Bob Casey to endorse Obama!!!!!!!  

"Bob Casey to endorse Obama!!!!!!!"

How about them apples, Wandrey?

Earlier this week CNN was doing a story on the likelihood of Clinton dropping out of the race and whether her staying in would damage the party.  When they talked about damaging the party, they played a video clip from a Godzilla movie showing Tokyo getting flattened yet again.  The point could not have been made more plainly.  

Then today I noticed that Slate has started a Clinton Death Watch.

I'm sure these developments are being greeted with great joy over at HillaryHub.

I believe all of the hate expressed toward Hillary on this blog is a terrible shame.  Many of you are Democrats and you fail to see that she is a very prominent part of our party who should be respected.  You also are ramping up your ridculous calls for her to step aside because you;'re afraid of what will happen to Obama's "claim" on the nomination after PA.  You need her to step down before then becuase when she wins that state by a huge margin, your guy Obama will be in big trouble.  Best to force her out now.  Very Democratic of you, NOT!  Obama mamipulated to disenfranchise two major states with millions of voters.  How can you claim he has a rightful claim to the nomination?  Obama is playing the same game, not a different one than her.  He contradicts himself whenever it suits him politically.  So much for his charge that super Ds outta back pledged D's; he acepted Kennedy and Richardson's endorsement.  Obama is nasty to Hillary with his fliers, has his surrogates play the race card (see the story posted here a while back) or launch ad hominem attacks.  Relax people.  Find something else to do with your time for the next few weeks.  Let the democratic process take its path.  They are essentially tied.  Let the voters do their thing.  That is what's good for any party.