Wooden Stake in Hand

Yes, once again we are poised over the sleeping vampire with a stake in one hand and a mallet in the other. Will she awaken at the last minute and once again cheat death? Well it is Hillary and I won’t make the same mistake and count her out before I see the body. I need to see her feet curl up under the house. I am writing this today (2/13/2008) so that I can be on record as predicting the nastiness that I believe is coming.

Last night Barack Obama spoke here in Madison in front of a packed Kohl Center crowd with the overflow watching from the Nicholas-Johnson Pavilion next door. He took the stage a little late, because, I believe, they were waiting for the official results from the Maryland primary. He was then able to lead off with an announcement that they had just captured their eighth primary/caucus in a row. The experts have been putting the pencil to the scenarios unfolding and their judgment is that she is toast. She is apparently going to concede Wisconsin and Hawaii to Obama and try to make her last stand in Ohio and Texas. The problem with that strategy, they say, is that she is already in a position that says she has to win the remaining contests with at least a 55% to 45% margin. But with each additional primary she loses, that percentage goes up. After she loses in Wisconsin and Hawaii, that percentage goes to 57%. If she then loses the next group (Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota) it goes to 60%. Considering that she lost Virginia 63% to 37%, that’s looks pretty much impossible. He’s got all the momentum, which is even more important in politics than it is in football. He’s got, and is raising more money, and he is having a whirlwind romance with the media. And all of those are good reasons that he’d better double the size of his secret service protection detail.

I’m only half joking when I suggest she’d try to take him out physically. Her preferred method will likely be a sudden revelation about something shady in Obama’s past. They hinted a long time ago that they had a real juicy bit on Barack when they were trying to promote the idea that he can’t beat the Republicans. Of course it was always pitched that they, the Clintons, would never think of releasing that information, but they had no doubt the Republicans would when they thought the time was right. Which implied that would be right after he secures the nomination. See? Then it would be too late to have Hillary rescue the Dems. Clinton surrogates have been whispering for months now that “Well, we all know that there is a certain element in the American electorate who will simply not vote for a black man.” But the problem with that canard is that they never consider that there is also a large element who will never vote for a white woman either. And furthermore, neither of those two groups were ever likely to vote for a liberal Democrat to begin with! So you are really talking about losing votes you never had.

But look, the bottom line is Clinton is losing. And that is not acceptable to Clinton Inc. They may have gotten burned after going negative in South Carolina, but that won’t stop them because going negative is what they know and what they know works. I’m predicting that a “scandalous” issue will surface. It will not come directly from the Clinton camp. They will try to make sure their fingerprints aren’t blatantly on it, but frankly, that’s of secondary concern now. Everybody will suspect it came from them anyway, so they won’t be able to totally avoid any blowback. But they can see that if they don’t bring his train to a screeching halt, and soon, none of this will matter. I think (hope?) that she is not the least bit interested in the VP slot. That would require an eight year wait for her turn and God knows how she’ll be viewed by then. I said a year ago that she’d pick Bill Richardson as her VP, but now I’ve heard that Bill recently ripped Richardson when he wouldn’t endorse Hillary. Supposedly the comment to his one time UN Ambassador and Energy Secretary was “What? Two cabinet appointments weren’t enough?” God I hope that’s a true story. I think Richardson, like the Super Delegates, is waiting to see who comes out on top. In fact, he’d probably be more valuable as Obama’s VP than he would as Hillary’s.

I’m fully expecting to update this post once the scandal breaks.

2/21/08 Update:

She got absolutely trounced in Wisconsin and Hawaii so they uncorked the scandal.

So far the "scandal" has fizzled. About 5 days ago Clinton Inc. fed a story to reporters that Obama was plagarizing his speeches. They showed them clips of a recent Obama speech and then clips from Governor Deval Patrick's (D-Mass.) speech from two years ago using the same language. Oh, and then they denied that they were the source, naturally. It got no traction at all. It makes me think that they really don't have anything on him, or they would have used it. At this point even her most ardent supporters are admitting that she's toast, and are reduced to speculating on the reasons why she is losing. And the parade of negative stories just keep on coming. Lots of stuff about the profligate spending and their mounting finacial woes. But they just can't stop themselves from spinning the story. Check this quote from a Politico story:

" Clinton’s 2007 year-end report showed her owing more than $5 million to vendors ranging from phone bank firms and pollsters to charter airline operators and telephone companies. Her campaign last month dismissed those debts as a matter of bookkeeping. "These are not true debts accruing by (sic) the campaign, but simply unpaid invoices," said spokesman Blake Zeff.

Zeff pointed out the campaign at the end of 2007 had enough money in the bank to pay off its debts (it finished the year with $13 million on hand after subtracting the debt and contributions earmarked for the general election). "Sometimes invoices are not paid immediately because we need additional information for our records, or to verify expenses," said Zeff. "

Mr Zeff should take an elementary accounting class so that he might discover that unpaid invoices are exactly and precisely "true debts accruing to the campaign." But aside from that, does he really expect us to believe that they haven't paid $1,300 to Dunkin' Donuts because they need additional information for their records? Like how many were jelly filled?