Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iowa Isn’t That Important, Clinton Staffers Say

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:50 AM
Original message
Iowa Isn’t That Important, Clinton Staffers Say

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/01/04/iowa-isnt-that-important-clinton-staffers-say/

ON BOARD THE CLINTON PLANE — After pouring millions of dollars and nearly a year of effort into a win in Iowa, senior staffers for Democrat Hillary Clinton now say the state isn’t that important after all.

“The worst thing would be to over count Iowa and its importance,” said chief strategist Mark Penn, just hours after the New York senator finished in a disappointing third place, behind Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

“Iowa doesn’t have a record of picking presidents. We’re in a strong position to move forward,” Penn told a handful of reporters on board a chartered midnight flight that took Clinton staffers and such high-level supporters such as former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright from Des Moines, Iowa, to Manchester, N.H.

That contradicts the huge gravitas Clinton put on the Iowa caucus in her recent stump speeches, evoking the process as a democratic gift in the wake of Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s death.

“The Iowa caucuses are such a unique part of American democracy. I am so impressed at how seriously everyone here in Iowa takes it,” she said at a recent event in Clarion. Iowans caucus for “our hopes and the possibilities America should have again.”

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. That was predictable
Edited on Fri Jan-04-08 09:51 AM by bryant69
Still given that Bill Clinton lost Iowa and New Hampshire, I suppose there's precedent.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
2. they're right
Clinton lost Iowa in 1992 and did fine, and there are others who lost Iowa and still went on to win the Nomination.

One doesn't win the race in the first inning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
3. reminds me of Spinal Tap....when their boston show canceled mgmt. said it's not a big college town.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beberocks Donating Member (219 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
4. Very true--Iowa is not that important
Since all this hoopla is based on the votes of all of 220 people, and Obama stacked the deck with all the college students who reside in other states (but attend college in Iowa and voted there), the Iowa results mean NOTHING! I'm a Californian who is tired of not having a say in who the Dem nominee should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. it`s important to the people who went out and voted
but of course they don`t count...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
5. oh that`s nice
i hope those over 65 voters feel real proud they voted for someone who just said their votes were no big deal...thanks suckers!

so remember voters of new hampshire if you vote for hillary and she loses well you people do`t count anyway....


...the edwards and obama crews want to thank you for their talking points mr penn...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-04-08 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
7. "There is no danger that HRC will sink. HRC is unsinkable and nothing but inconvenience
will be suffered by her bundlers!"

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC