Just about to hit the road from Raleigh, but wanted to post some quick notes from this morning’s Clinton Campaign conference call.
The most important takeaway item was communication director Howard Wolfson disclosing that Hillary Clinton has now contributed a total of nearly $11.5 million of her and Bill’s joint money, and that she “is willing to do so going forward” to “remain competitive” with Obama on the spending front. Could Clinton morph into a largely self-funding candidate? And will the media bring up the fact that Bill has earned a lot of his money from overseas speaking engagements, including China, a nation that Hillary has vowed to “get tough on”?
Among the other items that came up:
—Strategist Geoff Garin described Clinton’s win in Indiana a “come from behind victory” and “significant accomplishment” in a state that Obama had called a “tiebreaker.” Garin said they made progress in North Carolina. In Virginia, Obama won the white vote, he noted, but Clinton won whites by 24 points in North Carolina. He acknowledged that she didn’t do as well among blacks.
—Wolfson said that going forward, their strategy will be to do well in the remaining primaries, especially West Virginia, a swing state; seat Florida and Michigan; make the case that she is the stronger candidate against McCain, and does better among working class voters, in the “key swing votes” that any Democrat needs to win.
— Deputy communications director Phil Singer noted that if FL and MI counted, Clinton would gain a net of 58 delegates. (Based on RCP estimates, that would still give Obama a lead of nearly 100 overall delegates).
—Wolfson said emphatically that there have been “no discussions” about not going forward.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?