Concern-Trolling For Clinton

by: Chris Bowers

Thu May 08, 2008 at 13:43


There are various implications floating around right now that, if Clinton gracefully exits the campaign soon, many benefits await her. Specifically, there is talk of paying back her campaign debt, and even the $11M in loans she has made to the campaign. Also, the possibility of an influential Senate position awaits, possibly even majority leader. Tom Edsall summarizes the potential offer to Hillary Clinton:

One of the most inviting is the near certainty that the Obama campaign would agree to pay back the $11.4 million she has loaned her own bid, along with an estimated $10 million to $15 million in unpaid campaign expenses.

In addition, Democrats, both those who are loyal and those who are opposed to her campaign, say the odds of her winning a top leadership spot in the Senate would improve dramatically if she gracefully conceded now. The icing on the cake includes an improved political climate, giving Hillary and Bill Clinton the opportunity to heal the rift with the black political community.

Looking at the specific possibilities for a moment, paying off Clinton's campaign debt makes sense, because otherwise she will have to raise the money from Democrats. In other words, either the money is paid back quickly by Democrats, or slowly by Democrats while Obama and lower ticket Dems are still fundraising for the general. Best to get it over with, and build some party unity in the process. However, I agree with Josh Marshall that paying the Clintons $11.4M if they leave early is morally questionable, both because it looks like a bribe and because that isn't what Obama donors signed on to do. Obama can pay off the Clinton campaign debt, but not start wading into the realm of paying back Clinton donors themselves.

In terms of a Senate leadership position, that is unquestionably something that Obama and Clinton could work out if they wanted to do so. Both have a lot of supporters in the Senate, and their ties to Durbin (#2 in the leadership) and Schumer (DSCC head who will have brought about 15 freshman into the Senate), will basically mean they can do whatever they want with the Senate leadership. In this vein, I'd be in favor of some sort of deal, since Reid won't be the majority leader for much longer (he will probably step down either after this Congress or the next one). While Clinton is unsuitable for VP, using the Senate majority leader spot as a consolation prize for the primaries might bring some much needed transparency and popular input to such a byzantine, opaque, and generally anti-democratic institution like the Senate. Why shouldmn't the Senate Democrat most popular support among national Democrats become the Democratic Senate leader? Additionally, it is a powerful position, and would help her supporters feel a little better about the outcome of the primary, thereby building party unity. I would favor such a deal being worked out, and announced in public, this summer.

At the same time, I don't think Clinton should quit until June 4th. The problem we face is that she will win the popular vote in some upcoming primaries. Certainly, she will win West Virginia on May 13th (current polls show her ahead 56%-27%) and also Kentucky on May 20th (current polls show her ahead 59.0%--29.5%). It is pretty embarrassing for an unopposed candidate to lose a primary, and so actually it would be very damaging to Obama if Clinton dropped out now. However, on June 4th, the day after Obama almost certainly wins both Montana and South Dakota, there will be no more voting left. Let Obama close on a couple of big wins, pay off Clinton's campaign debt, do some deal on the Senate, and then call the whole thing off. The party will be unified, and ready to roar ahead.

But really, as an Obama supporter, I feel as though any suggestions I make for Clinton are basically just concern trolling. The bottom line for me is that I think it is fine that she hand around, Huckabee-style, for four weeks hoping for some sort of "Macca moment," but that I don't really care what she does as long as she drops all public attacks on Obama. The math shows the campaign is all but over, the media finally agrees, and Obama is consolidating the party. Given all of this, while some Clinton attacks will unfortunately continue, fortunately Terry McAuliffe is starting to strike a pretty conciliatory note now:

"It'll be over early June," McAuliffe said. "We've all said we'll be together at the end. If Hillary doesn't win, Hillary, President Clinton, myself, we'll be over there helping Senator Obama. And, likewise, Senator Obama will come together to help Hillary if she's the nominee."

Whether this means June 4th after Montana and South Dakota, or whether it means June 16th, the first weekday after the Michigan party convention, doesn't matter a whole lot. The campaign is now inexorably moving toward a focus of Obama vs. McCain, with Obama starting ahead and everyone wondering what Clinton does next.

What sort of Clinton exit are you looking for?

Chris Bowers :: Concern-Trolling For Clinton

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
May 23rd, 4PM (4.00 / 4)
Let her have her victory lap in WV and KY, give her lifetime supply of Rice-A-Roni, and get her off the damn stage. As long as she's in this race, the media will continue with the "Dems self destructing" theme while McCain holds a few more backyard BBQ's.

As an Obama donor (0.00 / 0)
I would be pissed to no end if Obama gave any of my money to the Hillary campaign. Let her supporters pay off her debt.

I don't want my money going to the campaign that said McCain would be a better president than Obama. I don't want my money going to the campaign that kept Ferraro on TV for a week, or that employs cretins like Lanny Davis and Mark Penn.

This is just another sign of Clinton's unbelievable sense of entitlement. Obama needs to use that money against McCain. Period.


[ Parent ]
Right On (0.00 / 0)
I've been reading Chris Bowers for years and I'm astounded that he would suggest that the Barack Obama Campaign pay $21.4M to $26.4 the Hillary Clinton Campaign so that the Hillary Clinton Campaign can pay off its debt to Hillary Clinton and other creditors.  That's the equivalent of completely wiping out the contributions of about 200,000 Obama supporters who gave $109 each to Obama's campaign.  Those 200,000 small dollar contributors would pay to make Hillary Clinton whole for her poor judgment that led her to pursue two months of campaigning after this race was already over.  

Chris, You've had enough brilliant ideas, tons of fine analysis, and plenty of illuminating commentary that I've already forgiven you for promoting this turkey.    

Saxby Chambliss, worse than disgraceful; he's reprehensible.  


[ Parent ]
We aren't going to have Bowers much longer. (4.00 / 4)
Someone is going to pay him far too much, we wont have him here with us and thats a damn shame.

Of course, where ever he goes, I'm sure progressives and citizens everywhere will benefit, so I dont feel too bad. But his rapidfire, calm, well researched, prolific articles in our little community will be missed.

Some of the best writing on politics in the country.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


I don't understand how it is possible (4.00 / 3)
How could Obama make a multi-million donation to Clinton's campaign?  It seems like that would be totally illegal, so I don't understand why people are discussing that possibility.  What am I missing?

Now, I thought that in the past there's a big fundraiser, where someone in Obama's position would help raise money for someone in Clinton's position.  That would be quite reasonable.  I thought that's what "retire the debt" meant in past cases.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


4 years back (4.00 / 1)
Didn't Howard Dean pay of Carol Mosely Braun's debts?

[ Parent ]
I don't know (4.00 / 1)
This article says Dean would put her on the payroll as a consultant and pay expenses when she campaigns. This CNN transcript speculates:

Somebody was just saying, well, maybe he promised her he'd help her retire her debt or something like that. You know how people like to talk when something like this happens

Neither of those is really paying off the campaign debt.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


[ Parent ]
How about Vilsack? (0.00 / 0)
I seem to remember Hillary promised to help him retire his debt.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
And as far as looking bad for Obama .. (4.00 / 1)
didn't Huckleberry win a primary or two after McCain had things all but sewn up?  Didn't Dean win Vermont back in '04 after Kerry was pretty much declared the winner?  Isn't it embarrassing now for McCain to only be getting 70% of the vote in NC?

[ Parent ]
I don't like Hillary as Majority Leader (4.00 / 7)
I'd settle for it if I absolutely had to, but I don't like it.  I'd much rather have Feingold or someone else who would be a LOT more progressive than Hillary.  I don't think anyone who hires the likes of Mark Penn should ever be allowed anywhere near the top leadership post at a time when so much as riding on it.

Yep (4.00 / 4)
I think either Feingold or Dodd would make excellent, possibly historic, Majority Leaders.  The idea of Hillary and her DLC cohort sitting on progressive legislation while Penn attacks them all as radical leftists really isn't something I'd be looking forward to.

[ Parent ]
Perhaps if she finally stops (0.00 / 0)
running to be president, she might drop the whole DLC uber-hawk centrist bullshit and strive for the kind of greatness that could be possible for her as a prominent Senator with a safe blue seat. I'd have to actually see some Dodd-esque show of political courage before I'd give her any benefit of the doubt though.

Having said that, after her recent shameful race-baiting, I just want her to go away.

miasmo.com


[ Parent ]
I love feingold, but... (0.00 / 0)
Apparently most of the other Democratic senators hate him.  Which really isn't that surprising.

He'd be much better off as a supreme court justice.  


[ Parent ]
But she's not hanging around Huckster style. (4.00 / 6)
She's trying to tear the party apart with blatant class & race appeals.

As far as paying her debt. They have plenty of money.  


There is no second prize (4.00 / 5)
I don't care what happens to Hillary Clinton. She's got more than a $100 million dollars and one of the best jobs in the world. Why is there is all of a sudden a consolation prize for finishing second in a first past the post election?

As for the VOTERS who support Hillary Clinton, they need to have their concerns addressed. I think Barack Obama already addresses their needs with policy so the only question is communicating that message in a way that resonates the VOTERS who backed Hillary Clinton.

He can do that by picking Gov. Sebelius as the VP and parking her in Midwest.

Hillary Clinton is out on the stump cutting and dicing demographic data and talking about older women and Catholics. Fine. Pick Sebelius. Sen. Clinton openly flouts the rules, pursues a strategy only Pat Buchanan can love, and somehow she's now entitled to a golden parachute? She gets a set of steak knives and the door.

She doesn't control the voters who are voting for her. These voters are expressing a preference for her over Obama. There is nothing wrong with that but it's ridiculous to suggest that A) these voters are controlled by Clinton and their support transferable and B) that there are no other Democrats that have a similar appeal (again, Gov. Sebelius).

John McCain


Uh, are you sure it's wise to give her a set of steak knives? (4.00 / 6)


[ Parent ]
It would be a horrible message (4.00 / 1)
To pay the Clintons for their $11.4 million donation to themselves.

Look at it this way:

Bill & Hillary -- $11.4 million
Mark Penn -- $5 million
Obama Fellowship Volunteers -- $0

Does that sound right to anyone? If Obama actually did this, there would be major blowback amongst his supporters.


[ Parent ]
May 23rd if not sooner (4.00 / 5)
Why is all today's spin only dealing with "What's in it for Hillary?"  What's in it for the people?

Hillary's current spin is that all SuperDelegates should wait until everyone has voted.  OK, I'll buy that, but if and only if she releases the more than 250 Supers who committed to her before anyone in any state had a chance to vote.  She can't keep having it both ways, or the way-of-the-week.

Yesterday we finally learned that she has been secretly self-funding again since April 11, denying it with "we haven't looked at the donation totals" until after this week's primaries.  Lies of omission.  

The more than 1,500,000 of us who contributed to Senator Obama did NOT contribute $5, $10 and $50 per paycheck so that Bill and Hillary don't have to dip further into their $109,000,000 cash on hand.  Pullease.

Let the 30 fat-cat Hillary fundraisers who publicly threatened Howard Dean and the entire Democratic National Committee host a fundraiser to pay off the Chapequa mortgage - just like the other party's fat-cats did for "poor" Ken Lay when Enron destroyed the lives of thousands of workers.  Let DWS be the chairwoman of this fundraiser, since she can't take time to support Democratic candidates in Florida.

The first three sentences you quote from McAliffe might be considered conciliatory, but not when followed with, "And, likewise, Senator Obama will come together to help Hillary if she's the nominee."  They are still holding out for some way to destroy both Senator Obama and his campaign.


Guam (4.00 / 3)
Obama's 7-vote win in Guam started the Tsunami that overtook Clinton. Why is the MSM missing this?

The Clinton exit I'm looking for (4.00 / 3)
A cave in Tajikistan would be nice.

Just get this meglomaniacal, race-baiting woman OFF the national stage. The farther away the better.

Besides all the harm she's doing intentionally, there's the simple fact that dislike of her is a great rallying tool for the Republicans, who have VERY little else going for them this fall....

Howard Dean in 2016


Not sure the uncontesed losses really matter... (4.00 / 3)
The media will basically ignore the upcoming primaries (particularly if Clinton officially drops out), and while there will probably be some dumbass talking-heads that make a mention of it the next day, it'll fade away within a day as people continue to look at the Obama-McCain matchup again.

Marc Ambinder said he asked an Obama aide about it and they said they would "take their chances".

I think the whole "embarrassing" thing is a bit over-worrisome, quite honestly.  And if Clinton does actually officially drop out before the next primaries, her margins would probably drop a lot as well.  Hell, they may still drop a lot.  WV was looking like it could've been a 30 point win for HRC, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if that dropped to under 20 now.  If she dropped out, it could go as low as 10.


We've had meaningless (0.00 / 0)
presidential primaries in PA for years* because we vote long after the nomination has been decided, and there's never been any concern about it...I'm wondering why Hillary dropping out before WV and KY would be any different.

*With the exception of the unprecedented bitterness of certain factions, of course.


[ Parent ]
Why ease the exit if she should stay in until June? (4.00 / 4)
I appreciate the effort to find a consolation prize, but I don't see either suggestion as appropriate. I don't know anything about the legality of Obama's using funds he's raised for the primary to retire Hillary's campaign debt. But many Obama supporters have objected to their hard-earned contributions being used for that purpose. Hillary has engaged in enough rhetoric on behalf of hard-working Americans earning less than $50,000 a year to understand how unfair it is to use their money to spare her the loss of a few million from the vast fortune she and Bill have made in the last few years and can expect to bring in in the near future. So, no, on the ground of basic justice.

I am willing to listen to evidence that Hillary would make an effective Senate majority leader (and hope someone will offer it), but as majority leader during an Obama presidency, the idea makes me nervous. It's obvious that Hillary wants the presidency very, very badly. If she harbors hopes of running again in 2012, what would prevent her from using the majority leader position to sabotage Obama-supported legislation and then using the resulting impasse to paint Obama as ineffective? Given the relative visibility of President and majority leader, when legislation doesn't pass, Obama will likely get the blame. As others have noted, Hillary's ties to the DLC worry me too.


Question (4.00 / 5)
I'm told the difficulty in fundraising for Clinton right now isn't a lack of ready money, but rather that Clinton's fundraising base is based on a small pool of large donors rather than a large pool of small donors and under the new campaign finance rules all those large donors are tapped out and can't give anymore.

Do those campaign finance rules change or relax any when one is retiring campaign debt rather than engaging in campaigning itself?

Incidentally, although it seems somewhat unproductive to complain at this point, I kind of have to say I'm somewhat staggered by the irresponsibility that Clinton is showing here-- running up millions in campaign debt, and then one way or another stiffing the rest of the party with the bill. This seems to be a new approach to campaign finance whose innovation rivals that of Dean/Obama's small-donor approach-- don't fundraise, exactly, just spend the money, and find a way to make paying for it someone else's problem. Aside from interesting parallels to certain philosophies of federal budgeting, if I'm not just misunderstanding what's going on this seems to be the most stark example I think I've seen of the sense of entitlement the Clinton camp seems to feel from the rest of the Democratic party.

I mean, 24 million dollars? Can that even be right? The Clinton campaign wasn't this much in debt in, say, March, were they? I seem to remember seeing the Clintons' debt number a month or two ago and it was a fraction of this. Has all of this debt been racked up since after the point most of us figured out Obama's lead was insurmountable? How much larger will this debt be once we're done going through the motions in WV/KY?


Personal loans vs. campaign debt (4.00 / 3)
Oh, I had almoset forgotten about all the unpaid campaign debts. I was thinking only about the money the Clintons had loaned the campaign. I think Obama's small donors are going to be really unhappy with the idea of their money going to pay Mark Penn. The whole idea of retiring her campaign just seems terribly unfair. Hillary raised a huge amount of money and spent it rather foolishly, as far as I've been able to tell. I'm sure she appreciates personal responsibility (a good Reagan Democratic value).

And, the idea sounds a lot like a bribe to keep her from more negative campaigning. If we accept the argument that Obama would by embarrassed if she left the race before WV, KY and PR, why does it matter if she would agree to exit earlier in return for paying her debts? Aren't there are other ways to persuade her to keep her campaign positive, and does it really matter? She's certainly done her level best to destroy Obama, and hasn't.

I agree with all who've praised Chris's thoughtful post.


[ Parent ]
Senator John Glenn (4.00 / 4)
Had $3 million dollars in debt from his presidential primary run back in the 80s, which took him several years to pay off. The Clintons are people of means and can pay their debt off by themsevles too. Let Senator Clinton start fundraising to pay it off in January 2009 after the Obama inauguration.

There is no reason for Obama (and us) to pay for Clinton's bad judgement in this overly long primary season.


who would donate to pay off someones debate (0.00 / 0)
I don't even understand that concept.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
s/debate/debt (0.00 / 0)


Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Im confused (4.00 / 3)
why the Dem party or anyone besides the Clintons would be paying any of her debate.

her value to Obama fads with each day as well, so I think it behooves Obama to just ride this out. The more Clinton goes on like this the more she only damages her image. I wouldn't offer her a thing for a few weeks. And she has to campaign for the party because if Obama loses she will be blamed by more than half the party and by the press and her reputation and career will be over.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare


Sigh... so much for that... (4.00 / 2)
http://tpmelectioncentral.talk...

Is there any hope... any hope at ALL that Clinton will drop out at some point when the most favorable delegate selection plan remotely possible for her (given that she faced no opponents on the ballot of an unsanctioned primary) is immediately dismissed?  Wtf is going on here...

Supposedly, Bill is privately urging Hillary to stay in through the convention now as well.  Expect to hear some new spin about how going to the convention can only be a good thing for Democrats and that it'll just make us even stronger in November.


more kitchen sink (0.00 / 0)
I don't expect her campaign to change at all. If anything, it will get worse as illustrated by her latest comments on how Obama can't win white votes. It will be up to the superdelegates to put an end to this as quickly as possible. Hillary as majority leader would be the surest thing to ensure that all of President Obama's legislative agenda gets filibustered to death. If we have to bribe Hillary to shut up and support the Democratic nominee, I'd rather give her the vice presidency. Barack can then send her around to all her favorite 80 countries to attend more funerals for 8 years.

VP would be terrible. (4.00 / 3)
The last thing Obama needs is a VP with her own massive powerbase competing with, undermining, and distracting him. That could really suck. That situation works for Bush, because he doesn't know anything or give a fuck and just let's Cheney actually run everything.

miasmo.com

[ Parent ]
As a secondary note, where are the supers? (4.00 / 2)
Obama was supposedly given the "Rock Star" treatment in the House today... Great, so... can we expect those undecideds to finally declare their support for him?  Can we get like 10-15 a day (or more) so that we can put the kibosh on Clinton's increasingly delusional idea that MI and FL are going to put her over the top?

Reciprocity (4.00 / 3)
Does anyone suspect for a second that if their roles were reversed, that the Clinton campaign would be magnanimous and just hand over a $10+ million check to their biggest rival to retire their debts, and install them as a high profile individual within the administration, as VP or Senate Majority Leader? I highly doubt it.  They would do everything possible to let him flounder about financially, and undermine them politically as much as possible.  Is there any reason we should extend them the same courtesy, especially with regards to debts incurred ATTACKING Barack Obama and large segments of the Democratic Party, and considering the fact that I can't imagine it would secure humility and gratitude for the next eight months, much less eight years?

As long as she continues her toxic race-baiting (4.00 / 2)
all stategery should focus on sticks and not carrots. She needs to cease and desist with the nurturing of racial resentment or face the prospect of being a scorned outcast by a big portion of the Party. That shit's just not acceptable, and there should be no rewards offered for heinous scumbag behavior.

miasmo.com

[ Parent ]
I don't suspect (0.00 / 0)
I'm pretty sure both campaigns would do what is in their own best interests, meaning either candidate might or might not retire the other's debts, depending on the circumstance.

[ Parent ]
The Clintons are loaded... (4.00 / 1)
I will never give the Obama campaign another dime if he pays off Hillary Clinton's debt.  She chose to loan her campaign money, and that's her problem.

I would rather see him spend that money on ad buys, donuts and coffee, or whatever he needs to campaign in the remaining six states.


Clinton's "entitlement" continues (4.00 / 1)
Why should Obama have to do anything for Clinton? She ran, she lost, it's her job to reclaim some dignity by finding a silver lining. I've sent some hard-earned bucks to Obama, and I don't want a PENNY going to the Clinton debt. If Obama pays her $10-20 million, after he's already had to spend tens of millions in this kabuki campaign for the past two months, I'd be royally pissed. I'd start giving money to the DNC instead, no money to Obama.

Obviously I'd work my ass off for him, but I'd really feel betrayed. McCain didn't pay Romney all the money he lent to his campaign. He didn promise Romney or Huckabee a powerful position. They lost, they are losers, they get whatever breadcrumbs the candidate chooses to give them. Get over it.

The only reason Clintonistas are bringing this stuff up is because of their unending sense of entitlement.  It's like "Okay, I'll let Obama win, but only if he gives me the VP slot and $20 million dollars". That's bullshit. Obama won, you lost, suck on it.


Hillary 08 - "I'm White" (0.00 / 0)
This is what the Wellesley graduate who once worked for a better future has reduced herself to. Standing on the back of a pickup truck, pandering to the last constituency unembarrassed to stand with her: ignorant racists in West Virginia.

Retiring her debt doesn't have to be an expensive deal (I think, maybe) (0.00 / 0)
Unlike, say, Vilsack and Carol Mosley Braun, Hillary Clinton is a Senator.  So can't she transfer funds (and debts) from her Presidential campaign to her Senate campaign?  (She did it the other way around, remember.)  Then she does a few fundraisers with people who love Hillary or want to get in the good graces of one of the (now) more powerful Senators and BOOM, no more debt.  Barack could even help hold a fundraiser or two, and none of this requires actually bribing her with donations.  Or do I have the campaign finance law wrong here?

reply to happycozy re: repayment of debt (0.00 / 0)
I will never give the Obama campaign another dime if he pays off Hillary Clinton's debt.  She chose to loan her campaign money, and that's her problem.

I agree - you should call them and tell them as I did. (www.barackobama.com)

I don't have $600 (what I've contributed so far) to pay for the vanity campaign of a multi-millionairess.


Uhhh... Excuse Me ... Obama Hasn't Won Anything Yet (0.00 / 0)
I have a question: if Obama really won it all Tuesday night like many here are acting, then how come the SD haven't yet rushed out and embraced the guy, ending this thing once and for all?

Also, considering Obama was supposed to WIN IN, the fact is, he LOST, so I think what we're seeing here is the same nonsense after losses in February.

Then there's the fact he ISN'T consolidating the party at all. You know those women, senior, working class and Latino voting blocs? I hate to break it to you guys, but if Hillary isn't at the top of the ticket? They're going for McCain. Beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The fact is Chris can write all he wants about the Creative Class - of which I would be considered a member but didn't know it until someone told me - but Obama isn't going to win anything this November without those groups.

There's also this to consider: women are PISSED at the all the concern of for the upset black and young voters without any concern to how they'll react if they feel the election is stolen. Or the qualified female having to play second-banana to the unqualified male. You also cannot scare this group with the Supreme Court canard, as they believe the Dems will either maintain or increase their numbers in the Congress and Senate. That being the case, a President McCain holds less terror for them than a President Obama. Their POV is that the Dems will then have to suck it up and do the job they should have been doing these past two years. (And I have to agree. Going by that logic, the Dems had the numbers to keep Alito and Roberts off the bench and didn't.) If the Dems continue to cave to McCain, it only proves their point the Dems are weak and not interested in anything other than protecting their careers. In other words, they've seen how the GOP played the Religious Right for suckers all these years, and they're not about to tolerate similar treatment from the Dems.

Considering women outnumber men and blacks when it comes to the voting booths, I'd seriously reconsider your analysis of the current situation. Reading many of the comments here, a lot of people are suffering from serious cases of denial if they think Hillary's voting blocs are going to fall into line simply because of a (D) after a person's name if that person isn't a Clinton.


Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search