Legal Commentary

Hillary's Good Day Coming to a Close

By Jeralyn

With SEIU endorsing Obama, and Rep. John Lewis withdrawing his superdelegate vote from Hillary, her day is going to end on a less positive note than it began on -- her great showing in the OH and PA polls and her New Mexico win.

Mr. Lewis said he and other prominent African American party leaders had been moved by Mr. Obama’s recent victories and his ability to transcend racial and geographic lines. Though Mr. Lewis had praise for Mrs. Clinton and for her historic candidacy, he said he would decide within days whether to formally endorse Mr. Obama.

He also said he and other lawmakers would meet in the coming days to decide how they intended to weigh into the nominating fight.

...The comments by Mr. Lewis underscored a growing sentiment among some of the party’s black leaders that they should not stand in the way of Mr. Obama’s historic quest for the nomination and should not go against the will of their constituents.

So this ends up being about race? [More..]

Maybe not. It seems Mr. Lewis is more concerned about the race not being decided before the convention and he's offering to step in and play mediator. Maybe that's the reason he's taking his vote back from Hillary but not yet giving it to Obama.

Hillary has responded to Obama's momentum by changing her stump speech. Instead of "ready to lead on day one" she's emphasizing:

Specifically, Mrs. Clinton is hoping to gain political mileage by turning one of Mr. Obama’s attributes — his oratory — against him. She is warning voters about politicians who give great speeches and make big promises but ultimately do not deliver on them.

“Speeches don’t put food on the table,” Mrs. Clinton said at a General Motors plant in Warren, Ohio, on Thursday morning. “Speeches don’t fill up your tank, or fill your prescription, or do anything about that stack of bills that keeps you up at night.”

“My opponent gives speeches,” she added. “I offer solutions.”

I've been making that argument against him for months. While the experience argument is also valid in my opinion, it hasn't sold with voters. I'm not sure this one will either, it didn't sell well in the comments here.

Given that their policy positions are so similar, I think the question is which one is better equipped to get their agendas through Congress? Which one is more apt to fight, which one is more apt to compromise on matters of importance to Democrats? Which one has more clout in Washington and in Congress to use as a sledgehammer with Congress when needed? It's similar to, but not quite the same, argument as experience. If I were Hillary, that's the argument I'd be making.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on February 14, 2008 (boomark / email).