Hi Joan,

David Gergen suggested Hillary say, "If you're voting for me because you have a problem with the color of his skin, I don't want your vote."

http://culturekitchen.com/liza/blog/david_gergen_and_cnn_pundits_challenge_hillary_cli

What do you think?

It's not so much Clinton's supporters, in my opinion.

They're passionate about the candidate they support -- and have every reason to be.

The problem is CLINTON is hurting Obama. Her (and Bill's) bizarre claims that she's "really" winning the primary (based on cherry-picked numbers and win conditions made up out of in air), the suggestion that the primary has been "stolen" (despite the fact Clinton agreed to the terms of the race) is what is dropping the numbers Koppelman quotes.

This is a big problem. Clinton is going to lose and she's going out of her way to insinuate and state that Obama's victory is not legitimate. Of course the people who support her with passion are going to believe this -- they go to her websites and get her emails which state these very things time and time again.

The issue isn't whether or not Clinton keeps running. If she wants to run, she should run. The primary will sort itself out. The issue is HOW is she running. And right now, by saying in fifteen different ways, "I'm really winning and this contest is a sham" she's going to fracture the party in a way I worry it can't be put back together again.

Because, of course, if she says after the convention, "Okay. Now we support Obama, it's time and that's what we should do," two reasonable responses leap to mind:

a) "You lied to me! You said he wasn't qualified! You said the nomination was stolen! How can I believe you now? I'm staying home!"

b) "That's right, Hillary. I know that's what you HAVE to say because of all these mean men who bullied and overpowered you. But we'll be back in 2012. I'm staying home!"

This isn't about how Clinton was mistreated by the media. (And she has been, no doubt.) Nor is it about obnoxious Obama supporters on the Internet. (Joan and others -- you all do know that the Internet posters are a self-selected slice of any group -- and usually the sub-group that is the angriest, right?)

No. This is about Hillary -- through her distortions about what happened during the primary and what is happening now -- is betraying people who have put their faith in her. And possibly cracking what could be an amazing Democratic victory because she thinks saying ANYTHING is reasonable political tactic.

I say no. Been there and done that with the Bush/Cheney/Rove years, thank you very much. Ready to move on.

Christopher

This Shawn character writes:

"It's been clear that nobody wanted them except blacks and liberal eggheads for months on end and that he had no chance in a general."

Now, I can't claim to understand what this Shawn character is up to, but I do want to address this idea he has tossed out...

The african american pop is only 10% of the country. (And 10% of the African American vote DIDN'T go to Obama.) Liberal eggheads can't possible make up that much of the population either. Yet Obama has over half the votes cast for either he or Clinton.

How is this possible? By the simple fact that Obama's appeal is larger than the African American base and the egghead liberal base. It's that simple.

There's a lot of nonsense being bandied about during this primary by people like Shawn. But that doesn't mean anyone has to believe it.

Remember, Obama does better the more he's allowed to get out and campaign.

He still hasn't cut loose, since he's not going to cut loose on Clinton, and his hands are somewhat tied till Clinton bows out. But once that happens we'll see what the guy can do when he:

a) gets to make a few more months of stops around the country and introduce himself

b) compete one-on-one with McSame.

It's going to be sweet.

Is there work to be done? Absolutely. That's why we call it an "election" -- not, 'The person I like wins."

Dude -- good points. I was a dolt to make that mistake.

But the primary process is the way it is to pick someone who appeals to that party -- and then launch that person to the general. For this Democratic primary it's a close race between Clinton and Obama.

And the truth is either one of these candidates is going to have to work like hell to win the general. Clinton has no lock on a general. At all. Her negatives are huge in the polls. The idea that she has a natural base that can extend easily into a general election is simply not true.

The issue who can campaign well enough expand the votes for the general.

Well, I suppose the other issue is, who does each of us BELIEVE can expand those votes. I happen to believe Obama would do a better job at this than Clinton. Others disagree.

After that -- no matter who wins the nomination -- we're left with finding out what actually happens. As has been pointed out many times, whatever the polls are now doesn't matter. What matters is what happens between now and the first week in November, with what happens the first week of November happening more than anything else.