Primaries
Clinton Looks Past Losses, to Texas
Updated 10:02 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut
EL PASO -- As news of a triple loss in the Potomac primary became official, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did what has become a new specialty of hers: She fled someplace else.
After flying from Virginia to Texas for a rally tonight, Clinton did not publicly acknowledge, even in passing, that three significant primaries had just taken place that day. Her campaign did not put out a statement.
Clinton has made a habit of dismissing contests that she has lost -- on Monday, she explained the Louisiana contest she lost as a result of the state's large African American population; at other times, her campaign has suggested that caucuses should be discounted.
But on Tuesday she did not even do that much.
"You know, there's a great saying in Texas -- you've all heard it, 'All hat and no cattle,'" Clinton told a massive audience here. "Well, after seven years of George Bush, we need a lot less hat, and a lot more cattle."
She continued, in an apparent swipe at both Bush and Sen. Barack Obama, the candidate gaining momenum in the Democratic race: "Texas needs a president who actually undersdtands what its going to take to turn the economy around, to get us universal health care."
When Clinton mentioned having differences with Obama over health care and the mortgage crisis, she drew boos from the audience. Her comments continued past 9:30 Eastern time, as the polls in Maryland closed and the race was called for Obama, but in the giant arena here it was as though the defeat had not happened.
"It's the first day of the Texas campaign," Doug Hattaway, a traveling campaign spokesman, said, when asked for comment.
Clinton is now staking her candidacy on Texas and Ohio, where contests will take place on March 4. She drew a sizable crowd here -- her campaign estimated as many as 12,000 -- and if ever she needed a pick-me-up, Clinton got the ultimate one here. She emerged into a darkened University of Texas stadium to a deafening roar from the crowd, cellphone cameras flashing. She was handed a large bouquet of flowers, joined onstage by a young boy in a black sombrero. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, who represents El Paso, then introduced her repeatedly as the next president of the United States.
Full Clinton remarks can be read here.
Posted at 10:02 PM ET on Feb 12, 2008
| Category:
Primaries
Share This: 
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Get This Widget >>
Posted by: election_watch | February 14, 2008 12:28 AM
I also seriously question the propriety of repeatedly "reporting" what did NOT happen.
Posted by: zukermand | February 13, 2008 1:19 PM
"She fled "
Can anyone seriously argue this is appropriate professional conduct for a journalist?
Posted by: zukermand | February 13, 2008 1:15 PM
Watching HRC's speech last night from El Paso, I immediately thought how she looked as if she had crying eyes. She looked as if she had just finished crying or was about to break down and cry right before the Texas crowd. I thought she was going to drop out of the race last night until she mentioned how she was going to spread her political cheer throughout Texas in the coming weeks. MS-NBC didn't bother showing all of the Clinton speech since it was nothing more than a regurgitated stump speech with no bearing on the Potomac Primary that she lost soundly.
Posted by: dionc9 | February 13, 2008 10:06 AM
Hillary is now looking certainly like the underdog:
Barack vs. Hillary- The Google Effect:
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=47
Posted by: davidmwe | February 13, 2008 12:08 AM
Lyndon Johnson Wannabe Without a Heart
Hillary Clinton has become the thing she once loved to hate: an old pol, a big kahuna in machine politics, part of a scheme that creates wars and perpetuates them. She says she is a Democrat. She dismisses the Potomac Primaries because so many blacks voted in them. She says she is looking forward to the Texas primaries.
What on earth would make this woman look forward to the Texas primaries? Texas is the home of real, not faux, Democrats.
Hillary and her husband are faux Democrats.
What real Democrat would be for NAFTA?
What real Democrat would discount the Potomac Primaries because so many blacks voted in them?
What real Democrat would have a mansion with a name, yes, a name, not an address, a name, namely "Whitehaven"? Lyndon Johnson had a house in Spring Valley but it merely had a street address, not a name.
What real Democrat would lose the endorsement of Carolyn Kennedy, daughter of JFK, especially after kissing Caroline's mother's derriere repeatedly on pilgrimages to Martha's Vineyard in the early nineties, pilmgrimages curtailed by the embarrassing spector of Little Miss Monica putting an end to the Democratic Party in the White House?
What real Democrat would have scorned the Democratic process,i.e., The Sunshine in Government Act, alienating any Congressional support for universal healthcare back in the early nineties so its advocates had their chance for passage of that legislation ruined for them for decades?
What real Democrat would inspire the takeover of a Democratic Congress by the likes of Newt Gingrich?
What real Democrat would pass TANF?
What real Democrat would have the newly elected Democratic governor of Virginia endorse another candidate for the Democratic primary?
What real Democrat would stoop to the politics of race in a primary?
While Miss Hillary's handlers have worked hard to create a new legislative profile for her, what truth is there behind the hype that she gets things done on Capitol Hill? Is that just so much more hype when examined closely?
Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act through a Southern-dominated Congress back in the sixties.
Lyndon Johnson felt bad that the people opposed his war so he decided not to run for office again. Would Hillary feel bad about any opposition she had to her political positions, let alone quit the presidency, because she took the opposition to heart?
No. Never. What heart? Lyndon Johnson had a heart but Hillary just has hype, hype, and more hype where a heart should be. Well, tough cookie, tough cookies for Hill in Virginia. Hillary's not fit to utter Lyndon Johnson's name, the man she loved to hate during the Vietnam War. What has she done for race relations in America lately? What has she done to advance the work in race relations that Lyndon Johnson started for the Democratic Party through the passage of the Civil Rights Act? With her remarks she has set back the cause of race relations another forty-plus years. A self-serving, selfish, useless old pol. That's Hillary.
Posted by: eyemakeupneeded | February 12, 2008 11:54 PM
NBC did the delegate math tonight: because of the huge margins in the last eight contests and the assumed Obama wins next Tuesday, Clinton will need to win Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania by margins of 60% or greater just get even. And, with Texas, delegates are proportioned in districts based on voter turnout in the previous election. In the Latino regions in the southern portions of the state where Clinton is counting on huge support, turnout was poor last election, so the delegate count will be low. In the areas where Obama is favored to do well, the reverse is true. So at best, Texas looks like it will be a split decision if the voters don't move en masse to Obama as they did in the Potomac Primaries.
Either way, a marginal-win or loss in Texas ends the contest, as the super-delegates will not overturn the will of the voters. Even with the Florida and Michigan delegates factored in as they stand today, Clinton would not be able to overtake Obama's lead.
Posted by: bbussey | February 12, 2008 11:46 PM
Just a slight correction. Hillary stepped into a University of Texas at El Paso stadium. Generally, refernces made simply to The University of Texas refer to the main campus in Austin. The other campuses, which are independent universities, usually go buy their initials (UTEP for University of Texas El Paso, and UTSA for Univ of Texas San Antonio). To call UTEP "The University of Texas" would be like calling the University of California at Santa Cruz "Cal."
I know you msm political correspondents don't make it down here very often, so I just thought I would help you out. Hook 'Em!
Posted by: daviddshank | February 12, 2008 11:14 PM
Hey, Ohio and Texas is all I hear about. On March 4th Vermont also elects 23 delegates and has, thanks to Howard, 3 votes on the credentialing committee. It's Town Meeting Day and the start of sugaring season in the last bastion of democracy in the US of A.
Posted by: Dennis12 | February 12, 2008 10:51 PM
Hillary is really flipping out. Now (in her own mind) she doesn't count caucus voters, or people who drink lattes, or AAs, or anyone with an education. These votes don't count because Obama is doing well there. Hillary never indicated that half of the populace didn't count until she saw they didn't vote for her.
Because HER base is now limited to uneducated, old white people. That is a very limited base! (Oh yeah, and some women who will vote for two x chromosomes regardless of the circumstances).
If she manages to make it to Nov., all of these people will be against her. In her own party!!
There is no better way to elect another Bush (McCain) than to nominate Hillary.
Rush recommends Hillary.
Help get us out of this crazy mess and vote. Obama!!
Posted by: platypus60 | February 12, 2008 10:51 PM
It is of little interest to me if Hillary or Obama offer or don't offer congratulations when the other wins a primary. What I want to see is an Obama victory in Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island on March 4th with Wisconsin and Hawaii victories on February 19th. A victory in Texas for Obama would be nice but we can live with a close loss in that state. If Obama carries 5 of the next 6 primaries, Hillary's money will dry up, and her spineless "super delegates" will be looking for a home with Senator Obama.
Posted by: NewEra | February 12, 2008 10:30 PM
Virginia, Colorado, Missouri, Iowa - all states that might legitimately flip red to blue in this election. All Obama victories. Even Kansas could be in play given their governor/congressional results lately and the fact that he was born there. What states that are open to flip did Hillary win? Arizona (probably not against McCain)? New Hampshire? Unless we want more of Terry McAuliffe's 18 state (losing) strategy - we better nominate Obama. Hard to say if he can win in the south if the conservative revolt against McCain continues.
Posted by: balthasar78 | February 12, 2008 10:30 PM
Majority of the states that Senator Obama won are Republican states. If he were the Democratic Party nominee, he will surely lose in those states. He lost in most of the so-called blue states except a few with high percentage of African Americans.
Super delegates should hint that they like to support Senator Clinton so that the lousy racist woman leaves Democratic Party forever as she threatens.
However, the super delegates should support the candidate who won their states as Senator Obama wanted. Senator Kennedy, Senator Kerry and many Obama supporters must endorse Senator Clinton. Hypocrites will then shut up.
Posted by: teak1 | February 12, 2008 10:23 PM
In Texas, Hillary go the way of Ghouliani in Florida.
Just watch!!
Posted by: alarico | February 12, 2008 10:21 PM
Hillary is discounting the importance of smaller states, and predicting that large-state wins will put her over the top. Why not, it worked so well for Rudy.
Posted by: ojordan3 | February 12, 2008 10:20 PM
Wow - you people are incredible. Go to youtube - you can watch almost all of his speeches, including the concession ones - and you'll see his congratulations. In particular, his extremely classy congrats after a very disappointing defeat in New Hampshire that he thought he would've won.
You Clinton supporters are starting to take on her traits. Just ignore things that you don't like or that are bad for you. If you plug your ears, maybe it didn't happen, then you can call other people liars. It's incredible.
Posted by: balthasar78 | February 12, 2008 10:19 PM
Quote of the Day:
"Cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom."
-- Sen. Barack Obama
Madison, Wisconsin
Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 12, 2008 10:18 PM
To MikeKF: Senator Obama extended congratulations on Super Tuesday to Senator Clinton on her wins in California, MA and other states. He was gracious and a gentleman in his public comments to her that night. Senator Clinton on the other hand, failed to acknowledge his win in South Carolina and refused to publicly speak until that "farce of a victory" in Florida. It was at that time that I lost respect for her as a candidate. I refused to believe some of the accusations hurled at her by Republicans when she was First Lady. What is horrifying is that much of those charges and accusations are being played out in this campaign. Does this country really need to go through that advsersity at this time? Yes, Senator Clinton is a bright woman. However there are many other female office holders that would be a better choice for President of the United States. At this time, given the field of candidates, Senator Obama is the best candidate- he is a gentleman, intelligent and he is willing to work to bring the diverse citizentry together for the common good. That is what this country needs at this time.
Posted by: jalexis55 | February 12, 2008 10:16 PM
The link that brought me here said:
"Clinton Speaks, No Congrats Yet for Obama"
In other news, no class yet for Clinton.
Posted by: bsimon | February 12, 2008 10:15 PM
To the forgetful, Google-less Clinton supporters who can't remember Obama "ever" offering congratulations.
Overlooking that it's just been that long since she's won a contest, a simple websearch would produce articles and video of congrats. Star with this Reuters following the New Hampshire primaries: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSWAT00866520080109
Or maybe there's a more important point being revealed by such nonsense: namely, that this type of insincere nit-picking reveals the existential threat felt within Clinton circles.
Posted by: eunomian | February 12, 2008 10:11 PM
She's reeling. Her camp thought it would be wrapped up by now. She's about to become the Tom Brady of Politics. Big wins and no ring baby!
Posted by: undered | February 12, 2008 10:08 PM
All hat and no cattle? How about a heifer in the White House Hillary?
Posted by: sperrico | February 12, 2008 10:01 PM
baltasar78, if anyone is classless is Obama. He has not congratulated Hillary Clinton for a single win, and she has congratulated him. Actually,
the image Obama's campaign presents of him is completely at odds with the behavior of his hate-mongering followers on the internet. Read more: http://katalusis.blogspot.com/2008/02/obamas-image-conflicts-with-hate-speech.html
Posted by: ichief | February 12, 2008 10:00 PM
Er, flip that around. You know what I'm saying dangit!
Posted by: ablackstormy | February 12, 2008 9:58 PM
Well... that may be how they say it in Texas, Sen. Clinton, but the rest of the country would like a president who is "More Class, Less A$$". Based on your conduct over the past few days, I'm sorry to say you're showing a surplus of the former and a defecit of the latter.
Posted by: ablackstormy | February 12, 2008 9:57 PM
You know, I can not recall Obama once publicly congratulating Hillary Clinton on any of her primary wins. Let's grow up, kids; this is a series of elections and in each one, despite the margin of victory by either candidate, they both get delegates. What's to concede or to congratulate anyone about? That will come when Hillary congratulates Obama for having run a good campaign, as she accepts the Democratic nomination at the convention!
Posted by: MikeKF | February 12, 2008 9:56 PM
It really shows no class on her part. This is the second time she's done that in less than a week. He always is very congratulatory of her. She's showing herself for not such a nice person.
Posted by: balthasar78 | February 12, 2008 9:48 PM
It's over for Hillary but she doesn't know it yet. She's so arrogant that it will take a while for her to notice there's no one around.
Posted by: wallygva | February 12, 2008 9:46 PM
Why did Hillary Clinton lose three primaries today?
Too many questions about why she won't release her taxes until after she becomes the Democratic nominee--if that happens.
(Doesn't Hillary trust Democratic voters to make informed decisions?)
A lot of anxiety out there, too, about her plan to garnish workers' wages as part of her mandatory medical insurance plan.
Parents in particular would probably like to know what Bill and Hillary have to offer young people in terms of messages about the importance of honesty and integrity--given all the scandals surrounding the former First Family.
And of course there is still a lot of anger out there how the Clintons engaged in racial coding on the eve of the celebration of the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.
Finally, the Washington, D.C. metro area is home to a lot of human rights activists as well as recent immigrants who came to the United States fleeing political oppression, many of whom were likely to be less than impressed with Hillary's flip flopping on the issue of torture.
With such fundamental questions hanging in the balance, what Democrat worth the name would buy a bridge back to the 20th Century?
MARTIN EDWIN "MICK" ANDERSEN
Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | February 12, 2008 9:43 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Ive been thinking about Senator Clinton's supporters who braced bad weather and showed support for her in the Potomac primary.
Why couldn't she at least acknowledge their efforts? Does that mean their support for her does not count because she didn't win the states?
I wonder how that looks for the rest of her supporters in states that haven't held primaries. Are You okay with that? Is it for the greater Good?
One thing im sure of is this: A strong General always makes sure Their ground troops are well fed and in high spirits that way when the time for battle comes they are unflinching in support of their leader.
I for one know i wouldn't like working for a boss who always made me feel like my contributions didn't matter......... sound familiar?
This is a competition For the LEADER of the free world......I for one see a contender lacking in leadership skills......
Now i understand what the frenzy around Senator Obama is....and it tells good for the future of America and the world.
Happy voting