Exit Clinton... Just Before the Screaming Starts

Hillary Clinton is tenacious. Indeed, she is up-to-the-last-possible-moment tenacious.

But she is not politically suicidal.

And she certainly did not want to keep on campaigning for president until the titular leaders of the Democratic party – Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – started screaming: "Enough!"

Since there was a very real possibility that Dean, Pelosi and Reid would have started screaming on this Sunday's morning talk shows about the absurdity of continuing to campaign after the last primaries, when Barack Obama finally and formally secured enough pledged delegates and super-delegate endorsements to assure that he will be nominated at this summer's Democratic National Convention in Denver, Clinton has decided to suspend her campaign on Saturday.

After Congressional Democrats made clear to Clinton in a telephone conversation that her time was up – continuing the campaign, said ticked-off New York Congressman Charlie Rangel, is "inconsistent with wanting a Democratic victory" -- a chastened campaign communications director Howard Wolfson announced on behalf of the candidate that, "Senator Clinton will be hosting an event in Washington... to thank her supporters and express her support for Senator Obama and party unity."

Clinton is expected to use the suspension tactic to maintain loose control over her delegates so that she will retain a measure of leverage going into platform debates and some influence over convention planning.

But even her most loyal supporters are saying that it is time for her to accept a supporting role in the 2008 campaign.

And they are not talking about the vice presidency.

While most seriously ridiculous backers – led by former White House aide Lanny Davis and Black Entertainment Television founder Robert Johnson – have launched petition drives designed to pressure Obama to select Clinton as his running mate, cooler heads in the Clinton camp are saying that it is time for the soon-to-be-former candidate and her more wide-eyed supporters that they had better back off.

"There's no bargaining," growled Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a former DNC chair and long-time Clinton backer, who explained to Davis, Johnson and other dead-enders in the Clinton camp: "You don't bargain with the presidential nominee – even if you're Hillary Clinton and you have 18 million votes, you don't bargain."

Rangel, Clinton's fellow New Yorker and a key player in the process that made her a senator back in 2000, echoed Rendell's sentiments.

"You don't force a candidate," said Rangel, "and you don't put him in a position to look like he was forced."

Comments (39)

1. When she lost Rangel (on the Veep angle)...she must have known she had lost any real shot at it.

   And again, there's little "upside" for Obama to pick her as Veep. Except for a lunatic cultish fringe of her supporters (i.e. FRANKGRITS)...most of the sane ones will realize that 4 more years of "Bush" under the name "McCain" is a no-go.

   Just on Justices and judges alone. Hard to see any rabid fans of Hillary on the feminist side of the aisle who want to risk two, possibly THREE more "Alitos, Robertses, Scalias, or Thomases".

   Time for Harry Reid to start checking six (as the combat pilots say)...

   HRC may be gunning for Majority Leader!

   Posted by Mask at 06/04/2008 @ 10:27pm

2. Clinton could hardly do worse as Majority Leader than the sniveling Reid. At least she has a spine. Someone needs to remind Harry he is MAJORITY leader.

   Posted by Hman23 at 06/04/2008 @ 10:31pm

3. out, without a bang......

   just kinda driftin' away......

   the bushclinton machine is getting rusty.

   Wednesday, June 4, 2008 10:31:51 PM

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/04/2008 @ 10:31pm

4. poor ol' harry....

   not really a ramblin', gamblin' man.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/04/2008 @ 10:33pm

5. I could handle her as Majority Leader, especially if she is willing to work with a President Obama or (Allah forbid) whip the Senate into line over President Grandpa. Either way she will have a greater chance to guide the course of this country there. But it's also possible she gets HHS and reforms the Medicare system and gets her precious universal health care. She's not out of options, she just won't be number one or number two.

   Posted by yutsano at 06/04/2008 @ 10:39pm

6. At this point, wish she'd just continue her crankpipe coronation odyssey. A reality tv perfect storm. Denver! Denver! It'll be hard not to vomit Friday.

   Posted by winyahn at 06/04/2008 @ 10:56pm

7. She could get Majority leader and get the clout to run again after Obama's Presidency is up. If she is Senate Majority leader and she works with him and together get this country whipped into shape she would have A LOT of clout to run for Presidency again and that time she might actually reach true inevitability.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/04/2008 @ 11:31pm

8. Can we all just appreciate what is happening Saturday. For the first time in American history a black man is going to be a Presidential nominee.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/04/2008 @ 11:32pm

9. Whether he makes into the Presidency or not, this is an epic moment in American history.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/04/2008 @ 11:35pm

10. The curtain is descending on the Clinton era. Their play is over. A new show is moving into the theater. The king is dead, long live the king. Obama rules the roost, get used to it. The party's challenge now is to give him the longest, strongest coattails possible, and that includes a vp choice who brings to the table what none of the others, including Obama, can bring on their own. The constituency who can be addressed in their mother tongue by a candidate with immense experience, Gov. Bill Richardson. He also has a fine sense of humor, and that will be needed. Richardson may be able to swing TX & FL, putting the lock on the Electoral College.

    Posted by sloper at 06/05/2008 @ 12:14am

11. *Can we all just appreciate what is happening Saturday. For the first time in American history a black man is going to be a Presidential nominee.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/4/2008*

    Small point of order 3C: Obama already IS the nominee.

    Posted by yutsano at 06/05/2008 @ 12:58am

12. Speaking of VPs ... judging by McC's exceedingly lame performance in NOLA the other night, before a sparse audience of a few hundred, McC's choice of VP might find himself in the top slot even before Election Day. My, what Mitt wouldn't pay with his own checkbook for that shot.

    Posted by sloper at 06/05/2008 @ 09:52am

13. My, what Mitt wouldn't pay with his own checkbook for that shot.---Posted by sloper at 06/5/2008

    If LVLIB is ANY indication at all (not sure he is)...McCain picking Mitt would seal up his doom!

    Seems a contingent (again not sure how many LL actually represents) of the Religious Right....fear and HATE Romney because he's a "Temple Mormon", which to them means he "hates Christians" and they'd never see him "a heartbeat away" from the Oval.

    Posted by Mask at 06/05/2008 @ 10:04am

14. I can't see Clinton being a good VP. I see her doing something to help out, when she gets over her ego. But she would always be trying to upstand Obama and that's not something that we can have. Obama represents real change and he needs the freedom to run with that!

    Posted by anichick25 at 06/05/2008 @ 10:51am

15. Clinton as Majority Leader? Hmmmm...intriguing, but I doubt it happens. She's pissed off a LOT of people adn shown her true colors throughout her campaign, and especially on Tuesday.

    Posted by Balrog at 06/05/2008 @ 10:59am

16. Easy solution to calm her down: let her speak at the convention (2nd nite), give her the chance to shepherd her health care plan through Congress (hers is better than his), lastly (big drum roll), quietly promise her a seat on the Supreme Court. (ScaliaThomas is fat, and looking pretty bad--that's what hate does to you). It's a win-win.

    Posted by Hamiltonian at 06/05/2008 @ 10:59am

17. This is not an Ambassadorship to be handed out as a plum; this is a key position that interprets the law of our country. I want someone well-versed in the law, experienced (ie has served as a judge), calm, open-minded, and rational as a Supreme Court Justice.

    Hillary fails on all counts. She has no business being on the Supreme Court. I can't believe it's even being discussed.

    Posted by Balrog at 06/05/2008 @ 11:13am

18. Hillary fails on all counts. She has no business being on the Supreme Court. I can't believe it's even being discussed. Posted by Balrog at 06/5/2008 |

    She also failed the DC bar exam, well known as one of the country's least difficult.

    Posted by sloper at 06/05/2008 @ 11:17am

19. Someone who has shown her lack of understanding, lack of altruism and lack of self-control MUST never, EVER be considered for a bench position, on any court.

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 11:54am

20. This is all about her feeling ENTITLED to something. She actually thinks that America owes here something.

    Wake up call to all: We, The PEOPLE do NOT owe you, Hillary Clinton, ANYTHING.

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 11:55am

21. digit***Someone who has shown her lack of understanding, lack of altruism and lack of self-control MUST never, EVER be considered for a bench position, on any court.

    I'm not sure I want her anywhere in our Government. We know her for what she is now.

    Posted by Balrog at 06/05/2008 @ 12:02pm

22. The Supreme Court IS a political institution. Some of the worst justices have been politicians, and some of the best have been politicians. Some of the worst justices have been distinguished lawyers and some of the best justices have been distinguished lawyers. Political positions count not expertise. John Marshall, Hugo Black, Earl Warren, William O. Douglas, Roger Taney, Salmon P. Chase, John Marshall Harlan I, Charles Evans Hughes, Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas--all politicians, but different results. Byron White, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, John Marshall Harlan II, William Rehnquist, David Souter, Warren Burger--all distinguished judges, but again, diffent results. After November's tidal wave, conservatives better get used to it. Her nomination would go through. Don't forget, she's a member of the club. Even Orin Hatch would ok it.

    Posted by Hamiltonian at 06/05/2008 @ 12:18pm

23. Hillary Clinton is no Earl Warren.

    Call me naive, but shouldn't a judge have good judgement? Hillary's judgement, as she has shown over the last few weeks and especially on Tuesday, is suspect.

    Posted by Balrog at 06/05/2008 @ 12:35pm

24. I must say I'm really SURPRISED!

    I went to the Nation's main page this morning and didn't see a single story about sexism.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/05/2008 @ 12:41pm

25. Hamiltonian***Her nomination would go through.

    I'm not so sure. I think she'd be a horrible SC Justice. We can do better - much better.

    Posted by Balrog at 06/05/2008 @ 12:54pm

26. Frankly, I'd want Obama to nominate a long-haired hippy to the SC. Someone who favors the legalization of marijuana and other drugs, who's opposed to the death penalty, who's opposed to the idea of judicial review, and who'd favor federal marshals arresting Bush & Cheney on charges of war crimes.

    Now THAT is the kind of Supreme Court Justice the country so desperately needs.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/05/2008 @ 12:58pm

27. If, as one blogger put it, sad that HRC campaign ended on such a depressing note, it is because of her campaign itself and its' scorched earth tactics...her OWN comments are what GOP is using in its' commercials.....SHE CANNOT BE VP BECAUSE OF HER OWN ANTICS...if it is disgraceful sexism, she is the cause...she is very shameful for all younger women who look at her bitter, negative attacks and say "I can either use sex to get power or I can be a bitter women like Hillary"...there is no middle ground...HRC has herself set back women's rights...not mccain, not obama.....not the DNC....herself,....and another thing, GROW UP and BE RESPONSIBLE for your own remarks, tell the truth......make your own decisions, think for yourself....etc. etc...these are all things all of us should have learned in kindergarten.....I think McCain is very evil, but the only reason anybody at all likes him is he is supposedly a "maverick" who thinks for himself, this is also BS, but HRC was always the "establishment"......which is synonymous with bush/rove...etc......SHE WILL NOT BE VP BECAUSE OF HER OWN ACTIONS!!!!! IF she grows up any time soon, she can have some influence on the Obama administration appointees...I live in NY State...don't even start telling me about her "accomplishments" as Senator....or I will have to start talking about people in my congressional district supporting Hillary being "disenfranchised by the county dem committee and five boroughs in NY City where all the absentee ballots got thrown out....which would have, with 99% probability, gone to Obama...these tactics are representative of HRC experience and is not what America needs more of.....HRC has very bad campaign managers who are power hungry, don't care about stepping on others, and are in denial of reality...sound familiar?????

    Posted by jrs112 at 06/05/2008 @ 1:08pm

28. Posted by KSP556

    exactly.

    Posted by mikecope at 06/05/2008 @ 1:24pm

29. -by jrs112-

    Though you'll be likely to admit later that you were 'a bit' too incendiary in your approach...

    I think you are right.

    Anyone who thinks a vote for Hillary is a feminist call for the 'empowerment of women' just hasn't been paying attention.

    Posted by ttr at 06/05/2008 @ 2:30pm

30. Posted by mikecope at 06/5/2008

    Thank you.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/05/2008 @ 3:00pm

31. VP is just the wrong place for someone with strong political aspirations. While I do not fault Reid the way some others do, Majority Leader would be a pulpit for her that no other office would offer.

    Richardson is on the current "A" list, but I am leaning more towards Sibelius or Napolitano to, hopefully, assuage some of the more rabid feminists in the Party.

    This was never, for me, about gender or race, but about trust more than anything. That and the adminstrative competence to put together such a crack campaign team. They are only getting better with time.

    Posted by libraridan at 06/05/2008 @ 3:00pm

32. Posted by Balrog at 06/5/2008

    Strangely, it's not without precedent. What qualifications do you think Clarence Thomas had - one year on an appeals court? Take a look at who he replaced, his career and tell me why you think he was selected.

    Similarly, Obama could put Clinton on an appeals bench, wait for an opening and appoint her - perhaps in an effort to maintain gender "balance" when Ginsburg decides to retire. Although, Hillary might not be as liberal as Ginsberg. Still, it is not outside the pale.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/5/2008

    You're more likely to get that kind of Supreme Court Justice from Bob Barr than you are from Obama.

    Posted by srjenkins at 06/05/2008 @ 7:46pm

33. >>Frankly, I'd want Obama to nominate a long-haired hippy to the SC. Someone who favors the legalization of marijuana and other drugs, who's opposed to the death penalty, who's opposed to the idea of judicial review, and who'd favor federal marshals arresting Bush & Cheney on charges of war crimes.

    Now THAT is the kind of Supreme Court Justice the country so desperately needs.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/5/2008 <<

    I second that motion and move to pass such nomination without delay!

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 8:02pm

34. >>I must say I'm really SURPRISED!

    I went to the Nation's main page this morning and didn't see a single story about sexism.

    Posted by KSP556 at 06/5/2008 <<

    Ah...but, there is one now...though the article itself is sexist....

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 8:04pm

35. BTW - someone mentioned HRC's health care plan as being the best of all proposed ones. I'd have to disagree.

    The first step would be to eliminate the blood-sucking leeches, AKA Ins. companies from the equation, everything else is a trick, no different that the gas tax moratorium proposed to help us with the rising gas prices.

    Greed must be called for what it is and ERADICATED at the source.

    Forcing people to BUY health ins., as HRC's plan would suggest, doesn't help.

    What would help is a single payer program where we all pitch into the same pot. The administration costs would also be considerably cut and we would all benefit from pitching into the same plan.

    Everything else it's just to placate the masses but, it's not a real solution.

    As long as INS. COMPANIES are allowed free rain nothing will change.

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 8:20pm

36. Next thing to turn over to HEAVY regulation are the banks! The credit cards charging up to 30% interest was a give-away courtesy of the GOP-controlled Congress. That must STOP NOW! If they don't like it, the gov should take over their business. End of story.

    The corporate welfare will stop here and now.

    They need to WORK for their money, like the rest of us.

    Posted by digit at 06/05/2008 @ 10:08pm

37. I saw Katrina on Larry King saying that Obama was the smart candidate.

    I have to say I find something creepy about Obama supporters-including Katrina who I previously liked. The woman all seem to convert into Stepford wives on Viagra and the men all convert into cave men who hate women.

    I don't find a politician who elicits these emotions to be smart-I find it frightening.

    I have to say I have been waiting for this moment as a Hillary supporter for a while now. Now Senator Obama has to show his magic powers of unification and healing and change.

    Lets see him do it Katrina. Lets see how smart your side has been.

    :)

    Posted by behonest at 06/05/2008 @ 10:16pm

38. http://hcsfjm.com/

    Tell them how smart Obama is Katrina.

    You know last year I was wondering to myself-how will the democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this year-well now we know-they decided to impose Obama on us.

    Posted by behonest at 06/06/2008 @ 12:33am

39. behonest> your logic is astounding.

    Why, you can always find work at the "Healing Hillary Foundation".

    Obama was chosen by the voters, not imposed.

    However, the concept of voter's right is foreign to Hillary supporters such as yourself.

    I mean, how dare America pick someone other than Hillary!

    Sorry she lost - not only did Hillary lose the nomination but, most importantly, lost whatever dignity she may have had left, after refusing to give a concession speech at a time in which would have meant something. Now, it's too late.

    But, hey...when you trade dignity, honesty and fair play for power and self-serving purposes, that's what you get.

    Just because people did NOT vote for Hillary does not mean they hate women, it simply means the didn't believe in her.

    Your sexist assumptions are textbook example of the divisive, self-centered school of thought which wants to give one group special rights over another.

    We should protect the rights of ALL people, regardless of gender, color, religion and sexual orientation.

    Using words such as "Stepford wives" and "cavemen" serves no purpose other than prolong a bigoted and divisive way of thinking which brings nothing but hatred and discrimination into fruition. Which is precisely WHY Hillary lost. She's out of touch with TODAY's world!

    Welcome to the 21st Century, where we will defeat the concepts of bigotry, division and discrimination, once and for all.

    And yes, I am afraid that means you and others like will have to learn to respect people who disagree with you, who are of different gender than you, different race than you and who practice a different religion than you.

    Posted by digit at 06/06/2008 @ 06:25am