Actually, I just said pretty much all I had to say in the headline.
Saturday night, I initially posted this with the headline saying, "HIllary’s concession speech." Then I realized it was just an e-mailed statement, so I changed the headline to reflect that, expecting the actual speech momentarily. It didn’t come. I saw Edwards give his concession/nonconcession speech (not quitting, although what he’s going on for, I don’t know). But no Hillary.
Did I miss it? I was busy being on live TV and all, so maybe I missed it. Did y’all see it or hear it? I ask because it seemed pretty bizarre for her to be cavorting about on a stage transported by a campaign "victory" that gave her no delegates, in a state which the Democratic candidates had pledged (and I’m using the term "pledge" here loosely) not to campaign in, in a "contest" that was obviously a measure of starting-point name recognition.
If Obama had campaigned there, do you really think she would have run away with it? Seems doubtful, but I’d be interested to hear arguments to the contrary.
Anyway, either I’ve missed something (which is highly probable), or this sequence of events — no concession on Obama’s stunning victory in S.C., celebration of the meaningless win in Florida — would seem to be terra incognita in the Clintons’ exploration of the limits of gracelessness.
Related Posts
Hillary is such a dirty politician. Cut throat and full of sleeze. Her going to Florida shows that she is willing to do anything to win. The Democrats had previously agreed not to campaign there. I just don’t think America needs lady McBeth who is an extremely polarizing figure (non-unifiying) to lead the COuntry in the future.
What is everyone’s obsession with a concession speech? Isn’t it obvious you have lost when every single major network,newspaper, pundit, idiot can see plain and simple she didn’t win South Carolina. As for Florida, she didn’t get any delegates but you should recognize the voice of the people and take pause to recognize that. You can’t recognize South Carolina for the number of people who voted there and then disregard the population of Florida. If Obama had won Florida we would be having a different conversation but he didn’t so now it’s time to belittle the significance of the people’s vote in Florida.
What is everyone’s obsession with a concession speech? Isn’t it obvious you have lost when every single major network,newspaper, pundit, idiot can see plain and simple she didn’t win South Carolina.
Nobody is obsessed with a concession speech. It isn’t about a speech. It’s about character. She didn’t even care enough about the hundreds of people who toiled in her campaign to be with them and thank them personally for their efforts in a losing cause. In Florida there was no campaign, yet this hussy went down there to bask in a meaningless victory. Neither she nor Bill have much class and it really shows with the kind of behavior they exhibit. People here who voted for this woman really need to examine their reasons for doing so and question their judgment. For the 80% who voted her down it was a vote against the character of both she and her husband.
This is no endorsement of Hillary Clinton, mind you, but from what I’ve heard, more people voted in that “meaningless” Florida primary tonight than did in 2004.
I’m thinking that “means” Obama doesn’t have the momentum some here in South Carolina thought he did.
I’m also wondering why Brad now considers Hillary Clinton “graceless,” but little more than a week ago, practically begged she come in for an interview so The State could consider endorsing her.
Considering how graceless the Clintons were even before moving into the White House 15 years ago, why has it taken so long for the worm to turn?
According to the news services, many of the people who cast their votes for Hillary did so via early balloting. She was fortunate to have that, because if those people had waited until today to cast their votes instead of doing so in early December, there may have been a much different result.
Brad,
I don’t agree that the Florida results are all that trivial. The coverage of the primaries has been so exhaustive I don’t think any candidates are really at starting point name recognition anymore. However if that’s the case, the Florida results may bode well for Clinton, since it isn’t likely any campaigns will have the time to go far beyond that level in the Super Tuesday states. So I think she’s smart to play it up, it gets her face time on the news, and I don’t know any politicians who are really remembered for being graceful in defeat (Except for that one guy, remember him? Old whatshisname from the Midwest or someplace?).
But to be fair I do agree the results are probably skewed because of the national Democratic Party’s decision to devalue the vote over the calendar conflict. The problem is that I don’t know what direction they are skewed in. Are you saying Clinton’s people are more prone to tilt at windmills than Obama’s so more went out to vote anyway?
Disclaimer: I’m just talking about the process here, not covertly endorsing or condemning one candidate over another.
Uncle Elmer is right – the campaigning and coverage makes Florida significant. The other half of the delegates are not lost; they are just not locked up. They can decide at the convention to go with Hillary.
What is trivial is media coverage of these primaries. For the primary and caucus systems to have value, they candidates need to be put into geniune forums where they have to answer serious questions. Instead, the media runs staged events with the same old pap.
By the way, Obama didn’t make a concession speech after his loss in Florida. He dismissed Florida.
Let’s just point out again that if, as the Clintons want us to believe, Obama can’t get white votes, then Hillary can’t get male votes. In a state where she was the only one who tried to flout the rules she agreed to and campaign anyway, 58 percent of men voted against her.
Tim, Thank you for mentioning that Clinton broke her pledge not to campaign in Florida, and went down just before the election. She asked Obama to go too, but he said that he’d honor his pledge. Now let’s see. She a) broke her (signed) pledge for b) a contest in which she gets no real delegates (unless of course the national democratic party breaks its own “pledge” not to seat those delegates) and c) then claims victory in a ‘race’ in which every other participant has abstained from running. Then, after essentially snubbing people who voted, and worked for her in SC, she then goes to Florida and holds a victory party. Do we really want a president who behaves in this fashion? It seems to me we have already had a president that acted like that for 8 years. We don’t need anymore. We need someone with some honor and substance.
Incidentally, Brad, re your comment about Edwards above (“what he’s going on for, I don’t know”): he may be trying to amass as many delegates as possible in the belief that neither Clinton nor Obama will have a majority on the first ballot and he can play kingmaker.
LOL. 850,000 Floridians voted for Hillary and y’all are busy as bees trying to justify why those voters don’t matter?
The “stop Hillary’ obsession is becoming a bit much.
Let the rest of the Democratic Party speak.
Brad, I just heard on C-SPAN that Edwards is going to annouce he is getting out of the race when goes to New Orleans later today.
You’re right, Karen. We did have a president who acted like that for eight years. His name was Bill Clinton.
weldon, I guess I don’t have your long-standing animus toward the Clintons. But I think I reached a sort of tipping point in the past week — AFTER our endorsement decision, in fact. Maybe they were always like this, and I forgot, I don’t know.
But I do know that today marks one week since our Obama endorsement, and pretty much every day has given me a fresh reason to be glad we made the choice we did.
weldon, I guess I don’t have your long-standing animus toward the Clintons.
You certainly had me fooled.
Really, kc? Show me what I did about her before this past week. Look at all of it. Compare it to what I say about other candidates.
Then tell me what in the world I did to fool you.
Clinton did make a concession speech that evening from Tennessee.
To put it another way, Brad: how you could read Edwards as a fake and miss that aspect of the Clintons during eight years of unmitigated snake oil, I can’t understand.
I myself would have guessed your tipping point was the moment you figured out Hillary wouldn’t bother to visit The State’s ivory palace, where Gamecock legends are made.
But never mind me. I just go by what I read here and in the paper. How could I figure that someone could live through the most embarrassing two-term presidency of the 20th century and only turn against the Clintons once they dared to criticize Barack Obama?
How about NOW??? What will it take? Is there some kind of “new math” I don’t know about that can STILL turn the tide???
There’s still time (not much) to concede GRACEFULLY. With dignity. Much longer and she’s merely a laughging stock–and Bill with her…