Dave "Mudcat" Saunders: Hillary Clinton's Serious Iowa Problem

[jefferson_dem]

Hillary Clinton's Serious Iowa Problem
By Dave "Mudcat" Saunders

To begin with, I don't know who is going to win the Iowa Caucuses. The absolute truth is the pundits and others can guess all they want, but nobody really knows. There are simply too many pieces to the puzzle, and it's all those pieces that make the Iowa Caucuses the most intriguing electoral process in American politics.

My intention, and I want to be clear that I don't have permission, is to speak out for all the Democratic presidential campaigns by saying that a win (or a strong showing in some of the candidates' cases) in Iowa is of critical importance. That said, I am constitutionally incapable of sitting back in good conscience and quietly listening to Hillary Clinton's words to the people in Iowa and then her 180-degree spin to the national press.

Hillary Clinton has a serious political problem. From the get-go her campaign pushed her to the press and her contributors as the "inevitable" candidate. Her problem is if you bill yourself as the "inevitable" nominee in a presidential nominating race, you had better be right because there is no fall-back position. Now that her "inevitability" is under serious scrutiny, she is running around Iowa telling Iowans that she loves them, they are important, and she has to have them, while at the same time, she is spinning to the national press that Iowa is not so important that she has to win there to secure the nomination. The absolute truth is with a campaign team that looks like the 1927 New York Yankees and with all the resources she has thrown at Iowa, a bad showing from Hillary can only reinforce what so many of us have been saying all along. If she can't win Iowa, she has absolutely no chance to win the general. It's that simple.

Next Thursday night when she doesn't win the Iowa Caucuses, she will immediately say that Iowa is not all that important, which in my mind is not only denigrating all those Iowa Caucus goers who have taken their time to take a great look at all of the candidates, but it also gives all Americans a great look at what's to come.

After next Thursday night, Hillary Clinton will resort to the only conceivable option she has left. With the huge coffers she has accumulated from raising funds from the many who have a financial stake in the next administration, she's going to try to flood the media markets for February 5 and buy the damned thing. It's that simple

To paraphrase Mr. Lincoln, "You can fool some of the people all the time, but in the case of the Clinton campaign, everybody can see this trick coming." My greatest hope is the blogosphere and the national media won't let them get away with it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-mudcat-saunders/hillary-clintons-serious_b_78412.html

[ccpup]

1. now explain to me again

-- as others have done earlier -- how the HuffingtonPost ISN'T anti-Hillary? :eyes:

[Renew Deal]

2. Look this guy up.

He's a Democratic campaign guy. I think he worked for Dean and/or Kerry last time. He's knows his shit.

[jefferson_dem]

4. Mudcat advises Edwards nowadays.

He's a real "hoot" -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-mudcat-saunders

[ccpup]

7. Dean and Kerry?

This is the man who worked for one guy who flamed out in the primaries and the other who refused to fight back against the Swift Boaters and then refused to fight for his votes in the General?

[Renew Deal]

8. So you didn't vote for the guy who refused to fight back against the Swift Boaters

then refused to fight for his votes in the General? That might explain something.

[ccpup]

10. of course I voted for Kerry

it's not my fault he wouldn't fight for the votes. I don't get the point you're trying to make.

[Renew Deal]

13. You're denigrating a candidate that you supported.

It's hypocritical.

[ccpup]

15. it was suggested to me that

the man who wrote the article is to be believed because he "knows his shit", but then he went on to work with -- and ostensibly support -- two candidates that didn't seem to do well in the end.

So, the question remains, just what about the author's political experience with these two candidates who appear to have run unsuccessful campaigns proves he "knows his shit"?

[karynnj]

25. He would have fought HAD there been votes - there weren't

No one - not even the Edwards have "found" votes that could have been counted. Also as to the SBVT, Kerry fought their charges more thoroughly than Bill Clinton fought any 1992 charge. For example compare how BC responded to the charge that he avoided the draft.

The first answer was that he did not remember if he were ever in danger of being drafted. There are many men here currently in their late 50s or very early 60s, is there anyone unsure? When that - predictably didn't work, he went to story 2 - after many iterations the ROTC colonel who helped him out put out the letter BC wrote.

Now, here's the SBVT charges:

Before August, the media had:

- Over 100 pages of Kerry's Naval records. There were fitness reports that spanned the entire interval - and many were signed by the SBVT. They were all glowing.
- All the people in Kerry's boats when he got any medals backed him 100%
- Brinkley, a historian of the stature to be picked to edit the Reagan diaries had spoken to 100 plus people about 2 years before. Only 1 of the future SBVT said anything negative - and that was that he didn't like Kerry. (He oddly complained that Kerry was aloof AND complained that he (the SBVT) didn't fraternize with the enlisted men - knowing their mother's birthdays. (a JK knock, but not anything like the SBVT.)
- Nixon's secret tapes showed they investigated him and he was a war hero and clean cut.

After the attack came out, the Kerry people gave the media over 30 pages of provable lies in the SBVT book. They then found many real eyewitnesses who backed Kerry and gave the media information on many SBVT who rescinded their stories. The media NEVER asked the SBVT for any proof on charges that were absolutely contrary to the records. (This would be like someone telling your boss you failed important classes in your major and then falsified your transcript.)

ny ONE of these is far more than what the Clintons' threw back in 1992. If Democrats want to continue the fiction that somehow the difference was in how strongly they responded to charges, they do it at their own risk - the difference was in the environment.

[karynnj]

26. I don't think he worked for Kerry or Dean

Here is his biography :

Dave "Mudcat" Saunders, a longtime veteran of rural politics in Virginia, first partnered with Jarding during Mark Warner's successful rural campaign for governor of Virginia in 2001. Since then, he has served in the capacity of rural liaison for Senator Bob Graham and Senator John Edwards. Well known among Democrats, Republicans, and the national press for his colorful, no-sacred-ground, tell-it-like-it-is approach to the problems of rural America, Saunders's politics are well aligned with country culture. Besides working for many years with the legendary Wood Brothers Racing team of NASCAR's Nextel Cup, Saunders is well known among the Nashville bluegrass crowd as well as in national hunting circles. A native of Southwest Virginia in the Southern Appalachians, Saunders still resides in Roanoke, Virginia.
http://www.simonsays.com/content/destination.cfm?tab=1&pid=511997&agid=13

Here's a link to a Weekly Standard article, where he disses both Kerry and Dean. In 2004, he briefly worked for Edwards before fighting with others. He then went to Graham. IMO, his analysis sucks - targeting the South is as silly as the Republicans targeting the NE. There are sw and mountain states far more likely to be swung than the Southern ones - where only Virgina has much chance unless its a landslide year.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/716psthq.asp?pg=2

[karynnj]

28. NOPE - Edwards briefly until he fought with others, than Graham

I would be more impressed if it were Dean or Kerry.

[Cameron27]

3. I thought mudcat was still out

rounding up the bubba vote. He should stick with what he knows.

[Evergreen Emerald]

5. If he knows his *hit, then why is he suggesting that inevitability is

Clinton's meme? It is the MEDIA'S statement about Clinton. Anything to bash Clinton, even if he has to make it up.

[jefferson_dem]

11. Not true. It only became Hillary's (anti)meme when it stopped working.

Google "mark penn" + "hillary" + "inevitability" to find your answer.

[wyldwolf]

6. He's advising Edwards. And just skimming the piece, one falsehood jumped out

From the get-go her campaign pushed her to the press and her contributors as the "inevitable" candidate.

Nope.

[tularetom]

9. I'm not a Clinton supporter but that makes no sense

He claims not to know who will win the caucuses but he knows it won't be Hillary?

[Renew Deal]

12. Do you know who's going to win?

We all know it won't be Kucinich. You get a sense of what's happening when you work in campaigns. Sometimes you know you're candidates going to win big, sometimes you know it will be a nail biter. For some reason he "knows" that Hillary will lose. This jibes with what Hillary's campaign has been trying to do by lowering expectations. He's actually not saying anything original. He's just putting his name to the opinion.

[Perry Logan]

14. The sad part is, both Mudcat and the OP obviously think it was brilliant.

[durrrty libby]

16. Mudcat is an assbackwards muskrat. He sounds so stupid when he speaks

[K Gardner]

18. Nice name-calling slur from a Hillary supporter, right on time. n/t

[durrrty libby]

20. Oh I forgot nauseating misogynist too.

[K Gardner]

22. Good job. Taught well evidently. n/t

[durrrty libby]

24. Evidently your ignorance is blissful

[JackORoses]

17. but, but , didn't the Hill-o-copter woo the Iowan people?

[FrenchieCat]

19. Mudcat Sanders.....who doesn't believe anyone but a White guy from the South

has a chance.

Odd that an Obama supporter would even subscribe to anything that Mudcat "only White men will do" Saunders has to say. Seems like giving any credibility to this "I'm not racist or sexist, but everyone else is, and I'm just pointing out the problem with running anyone other than a White guy" is a stupid move for anyone supporting barack. :eyes:

[durrrty libby]

21. Baffling, isn't it?

[annie1]

23. thank goodness, another negative hillary article from an Obama supporter. it's been, oh, 2 minutes..

since the last one. what will you do when the primary is over? if hillary wins will you support her, or support no one?

[durrrty libby]

27. It is understandable, because they are full of anxiety for their guy,

and rightfully so. His response of being "shocked" only highlights his inexperience

[AX10]

29. I have a great distaste for Saunders.

He wants a white southern male to be the next President.
I don't want that. I am tired of white southern males.

[BenDavid]

30. with obama in effect saying HRC is responsible for bhutto's

death this will hurt obama and the media should jump hard on this man. The press jumped hard when the nh campaign manager said things about obama....This is far worse as you don't blame your opponent for a political murder for which there is no direct connection between the assassin and your opponent. where was Obama on funding of Iraq and Pakistan for his tenure in the Senate? What did He do? According to Axelrod, is Obama to blame for the Bhutto assassination too? Outrageous stuff from the Obama campaign.

This is why obama should not be considered for this position. He needs to be held accountable for what axelrod said about HRC.