Hillary's comeback? Same cold and calculating face, same pandering, same dishonesty, same hateful surrogates, same divisive message filled with hate.....no, no. No one wants that again. It look like a horror movie.

Win, I think you've certainly demonstrated that you're an expert on messages filled with hate.

Great diary, George.  Good wrap-up of recent events.  Thanks for your hard work.

on that new website. I understand that the goal is to make people like Hillary as a person, and I think they are largely successful.

I did find myself thinking that since she's so good at constituent service, I wish she'd stay in the Senate, where that is a large part of the job. But I recognize that I am not exactly the target audience for these videos.

Most people reading these comments probably don't know that georgep and I made a bet some months ago (no money at stake, just pride). He wins if Hillary finishes first or second in Iowa. I win if Hillary finishes third or fourth.

I like my chances, but a record turnout of women could carry the day for Hillary. The Iowa blogger John Deeth has been predicting that outcome.

A great diary georgep.  The Clinton campaign is really in full swing in Iowa this week.  It's amazing really when you consider all they have done - I wonder if anyone on Hillary's team ever has time to sleep!

Hillary is the best candidate we've got.  I hope the voters in this country, who don't already know that, are able to see and hear enough to realize what an incredible President she would be.

The Des Moines Register endorsement was a wonderful honor as well.  I did not expect it.  In fact I spent the day conversing with myself about whether it would be Obama or Edwards who got the endorsement.  Imagine my surprise when I saw it was Hillary!  

And boy does she deserve it.  

Chris Matthews is hellbent on destroying Hillary and promoting Obama.  I also hope the voters in this country realize what is going on with that. It is shocking that a political talking-head can actually get away with the crap that is being spewed by Matthews.  I look forward to watching him shake in his fucking boots when Hillary is the nominee.  If Obama should win the nomination, he will become Chris Matthew's number one target.  I would imagine he has already written the script on that one.  It won't be pretty.

The testimonials offered by those who knew Hillary during her years in Arkansas solidified my support for her candidacy.  Everyone should view them, for they are truly inspiring.

Thanks for all this.

It is a relief to see her back up to 40 on Rasmussen for the last two days- it's the only poll that distressed me since that one could be indicative of what might happen on Super Tuesday- but she has a good lead again which is nice.  She fell so far and so fast, I could not figure what was fueling it- it was after the debate she did so well in- now I think it was an anomaly- it's hard to imagine people would change their vote and then change it back so fast.  So that's good.

WOW- that DMR commercial is AWESOME.  I don't see how anyone can't be impressed.  I think Hillary is going to win Iowa.  I think Edwards will drop out after New Hampshire and endorse Obama.  I think Hillary will wrap it up on Super Tuesday, I think Obama is going to be able walk away with respect- respect he would not have if the vote had been taken two months ago.  He has proved himself a fighter and a tough contender- his future is completely open to great things.  At least that's what I hope will happen.  Hillary is still in a great position to win, the media does not reflect the reality of the situation, and I'm behind her all the way.

Clinton supporters are funny, funny people. The only thing they care about are polls.

Polls, polls, polls.

Her support has always been a mile wide and an inch deep. No amount of spin will change that.

The only thing she ever had going for her was this sense of "inevitability." Without she has nothing. She is a lousy public communicator. Contrary to her campaign spin, she has little political experience (two terms as a junior Senator from liberal NY is hardly anything exceptional).

So her strategy has always been to convince others that the reason they should support her is because her victory is a foregone conclusion. The reason they hate Obama as irrationally as they do, is because he had the temerity to actually believe that Hillary should have to earn the nomination by winning an actual election contest. When her poll numbers began to falter and her "inevitability" came into question, her supporters needed to reassure others, and themselves, that she was still the frontrunner.

That's all this diary is about: mass self-delusion.

This is ultimately the reason I think Hillary will fail. Because if she loses Iowa, she will almost certainly lose New Hampshire and South Carolina as well.

Then there will be absolutely no rationale for her candidacy anymore. It's hard to portray yourself as a frontrunner and inevitable if you keep losing elections.

You live by the poll, you die by the poll.

Clinton supporters are funny, funny people. The only thing they care about are polls.

Polls, polls, polls.

Her support has always been a mile wide and an inch deep. No amount of spin will change that.

The only thing she ever had going for her was this sense of "inevitability." Without it she has nothing. She is a lousy public communicator. Contrary to her campaign spin, she has little political experience (two terms as a junior Senator from liberal NY is hardly anything exceptional). She doesn't have a single legislative accomplishment to her name (either as first lady or as a Senator). She is currently the least popular candidate in the race for either Republicans or Democrats.

So her strategy has always been to convince others that the reason they should support her is because her victory is a foregone conclusion. The reason they hate Obama as irrationally as they do, is because he had the temerity to actually believe that Hillary should have to earn the nomination by winning an actual election contest. When her poll numbers began to falter and her "inevitability" came into question, her supporters needed to reassure others, and themselves, that she was still the frontrunner.

That's all this diary is about: mass self-delusion.

This is ultimately the reason I think Hillary will fail. Because if she loses Iowa, she will almost certainly lose New Hampshire and South Carolina as well.

Then there will be absolutely no rationale for her candidacy anymore. It's hard to portray yourself as a frontrunner and inevitable if you keep losing elections.

You live by the poll, you die by the poll.

An astute and considered diary as usual. I've  always thought that forcing Obama to the fore as the new front runner would put him in the spotlight where he seems curiously uncomfortable. So far Obama has been unable to close the sale, people seem uneasy with letting go of Clinton just yet.  Hopefully Clinton can take advantage of this moment of indecision. She is doing all the right things, the bio ads, and especially the testimonies are powerful statements of fact, immune to distortion by the media or her opponents. I hope she keeps them up and makes them a permanent feature of her campaign. Bill Clinton, after a few early wobbly moments, has been excellent on the campaign trail in Iowa. The most powerful thing he does is to appeal to voters' emotions through reason. Through expertly layered anecdotes, facts and resume, BIll in building a strong case for Hillary as an agent of change. The decision to take that word "change" and make it apply to Hillary as a change-agent, has been an astute move. The Charlie Rose interview was brutally good. It should serve as a manual to Hillary and her campaign on how to blunt your opponent without resulting in bloodshed. The anti-Clinton media tried to spin it as an attack, but ended up repeating Bill's comments, thereby amplifying the rolling the dice message. The DMR coming a day later after the Rose interview just reinforced with equal reason the doubts about Obama's readiness. Now Obama is the frontrunner, albeit one trying to dodge the spotlight, I hope Clinton can continue, for her part, under the radar to fine tune her campaign and get her message out, relieved of the burden, for the moment, of having to be front runner canon fodder for the media.

Hillary Clinton's positive approach to the campaign, compared to the more pinched aspect Obama has recently presented attacking John Edwards, Bill Clinton and Hillary, reminds me that the view we get from the national press is very distant from what is happening on the ground. Thanks for the alternative view, georgep.

The press storyline is bizarre. Just take two opeds in this morning's WAPO by EJ and Cohen. Do these guys read their own newspapers polls. The WAPO's which appeared early last week had Clinton 30 points ahead which was a huge number but the significant thing about it was the detailed analysis of how democratic voters perceived the candidates ability to handle the major policy issues like healthcare, Iraq, the economy and other attributes like electability and experience. In a sentence hers were in the sixties and seventies his were in the teens and single figures in a couple of cases. Now unless the voters of IA and NH are drinking different water one has to assume their thoughts aren't very different. What a lot of these guys seem to be taking refuge in is the meme that this is going to be an election about change and of course to some extent they are right but even more it's going to be an election about competence and that's where the flight to quality comes in. Of the six elections in January Clinton will win most of them, if she wins IA which is very possible she will probably win all of them. On super Tuesday she will sweep the board. The press seem to have more interest in grinding axes and promoting the horserace narrative than their own reputations it seems. Just one other point the inane Clinton hating postings here add nothing to the debate they just dirty the sidewalk. If someone has something interesting and relevant to say by all means say it bumpers stickers are rather tedious.      

from that pic of her at a mic in front of a flag.

Yessirree, that was informative.

Ditto for the pic of Hil with Bill at a podium.

Keep the good stuff coming!

The "comeback" really should be called what it is: the attempted restoration of the Clinton dynasty, with all the related devotion to corporate interests, triangulation, quasi-Jacksonian hawkishness, and a mean-spirited and cynical us-against-them America.  Maybe some other candidate will fail in trying to move us beyond the "I can take on the Republican attack machine" approach to running for the President, and maybe those "hardened"  and "battle-tested"  Carville accolytes will think of me as being hopefully dim, but I at least want to hope for an America beyond the polarization and divisiveness that the Clintons so completely represent.  If Clinton gets the nomination, I hope she loses, because only then will the Democratic party hopefully wake up and look to the future, and a more united country. And, okay, I'll say it: A REAL Politics of Hope.

One more thing: Read this review in the New York Times of the book, The Squandering of America.  Better yet, read the book.  Then tell me that we really want to go back to the Clinton years.  http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/books/ review/Scheiber-t.html?_r=1&oref=slo gin

While I think the DMR endorsement is a good one... two little points.  1) How many people vote for someone because 6 people whom they have never met (and this goes for Obama's Boston Globe endorsement as well) say they are best, especially when all the candidates and their subordinates act like lobbyists and bring out the dinners, meetings, etc.  The whole process by ALL candidates (so criticizing mine as well) has gotten ridiculous.  2) Does this actually cause a surge... I mean Edwards did finish second, but he and Kerry started coming from nowhere in 2003...if the DMR is really that powerful, then why didn't Edwards win Iowa on its strength.  It seems like the people they endorse have momentum or other factors in Iowa, so saying it propels to 1st or second, while true, its also easy to say that the endorsements are hedged as well.  

I guess we will see if this has a lot of impact.  Don't get me wrong, its definately a good thing for Hillary, but the question is it this mythical god like power to propel her to a win in Iowa.  Based on some of the ground things I have heard, I'm not so sure...  I guess we will see.

Obama is where he is in part because the media has given him a featherbed ride. I don't believe anyone can tell at the moment whether his support is wide and shallow or more substantial. If the media started doing to him what they normally do to front-runners--picking him apart on stupid, inconsequential things, asking nasty questions over and over again and painting him as a jerk if he doesn't kowtow, characterizing every pause in his tailwind as the beginning of the end--then we might have a better understanding of his political strength.

I don't like what the media does. But Clinton has been in the eye of a "failing campaign" firestorm largely constructed by the media right on cue for this point in the campaign. They insist upon their narrative, however destructive it may be. She has faced Republican fury for sixteen years and very seldom stumbled, and gives as good as she gets with the GOP.

Obama may come through such a test with flying colors, but he hasn't faced that test, or the one created by the whole Republican hate machine yet.  Until then, he is legitimately called untested.

Well, George, that's the diary I had always hoped you would be writing sixteen days out from voting in Iowa.  And well written, too.  We still have a bet right?  February 6th?  See you there.