Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Conversation | 05/09/2008 4:43 pm

Cokie Roberts: 'Hillary Is Negotiating Her Withdrawal'

© AP

A Q&A with ABC News correspondent Cokie Roberts.

LESLEY: Let’s talk about Hillary. I’m wondering, how do you explain her unwillingness, at this point, to throw in the towel? Does she really think she has a shot at winning this? Is she addicted to campaigning, which is my favorite possibility here. She’s kind of unable to give it up. Does she think there’s another shoe to drop with Obama? What do you think?

COKIE: I think that she is taking a somewhat graceful and prolonged exit. You know, when you’ve been running this hard and have won this much, you don’t just go. And the truth is, when you’re this significant a candidate you negotiate a withdrawal. It’s almost like a plea bargain. You start talking about paying off debt and about convention roles. There are all kinds of things that have to be negotiated. But I also do think that she feels strongly that she is the better candidate — and you can make a good case of that given the way the votes played out in these primaries and caucuses — and that by staying in until it’s over, perhaps something will happen.

LESLEY: Assuming, though, that he does win this nomination, do you think she will be anything less than enthusiastically behind him and corralling her supporters into his camp? Or, is there any chance there’ll be a moment like the one at the ‘80 convention.

COKIE: No, I don’t think there’s going to be that kind of moment. I think that Hillary Clinton is too interested in her own political future to be seen as someone who is tearing the party apart at that moment.

LESLEY: Will she go all out, do you think?

COKIE: I think she’d campaign for him. But, you can’t move your supporters. You know that, Lesley. The endorsements hardly matter at all, particularly at the presidential level. Or she can say, "I want everybody to vote for him. I think he’s terrific. I think he should be president." And those working-class Democrats who voted for her can say, "Have yourself a ball, Hillary. I’m voting for John McCain."

LESLEY: And do you think that’s going to happen?

COKIE: I do think that’s going to happen in a lot of cases.

LESLEY: Really?

COKIE: The fact that John McCain is doing as well as he is in a year that should by all odds be an overwhelmingly Democratic year tells you that there’s a lot of unhappiness with these Democratic candidates. You know, many people say this was the year when the Democrats needed to nominate a boring white guy, somebody who you didn’t even hear talk because all he needed to have was "D" after his name.

LESLEY: Show up, right?

COKIE: Show up. Exactly. And instead they’ve had this very exciting, historic nomination process. But it might not work so well for them in the end.

549 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

zut alors
I understand your point The press bends the race with their impressions and repetitions. My point is really that it is clear from the major blogs today, that are anti-MSM…that it’s over. all outlets saying the same thing, which is rare.
By zut alors on 05/09/2008 7:00 pm
mitzi morris
Whatever your opinion of HRC does not and cannot excuse serious problems in Obama’s backstory that render him impossible as a President. Read the www.sntimes.com articles by Tim Novak and team from 2005,6,7. Open your eyes. HRC’s flaws do not negate a sorry backstory of corruption and opportunism from the political sewers of Daley’s Chicago political machine. There is no excusing behavior that is intolerable in anyone wanting to be our President. HRC will not be nominated as this was decided months ago by Dean,Kennedy,Kerry, et al/. Mr. Democracy has some very real problems which will all emerge.
By mitzi morris on 05/10/2008 1:36 am
zut alors
Mitzi, I am not attempting to convince anyone of anything just stating this is what I am doing and why…I haven’t said anything against HRC except that vote..which was it for me….and have also said repeatedly am very sympathetic with her supporters, which I am. So…we’ll all see what happens… I hope your wrong about real problems but then anything is possible. But the Chicago Sun Times was owned by NeoCon Conrad Black…who has as much credibility as Rupert Murdock…the only difference is Black is headed to prison and now the Times is trying to become as actual paper again and not a propaganda arm of the RNC.
By zut alors on 05/10/2008 1:51 am
Star Lawrence
Thanks for your “sympathy.” Someone has to lose. Many of us have been in politics for decades. I used to work on the Hill. We don’t need sympathy. I was scared and upset when Bush got elected both times, too. We got through that. I will not vote for Obama, though. And McCain is a nut…so I am writing in. I know—Quixotic gesture. Us downscale white women are given to those.
By Star Lawrence on 05/10/2008 10:35 am
beverly linens
Suzanne, what’s this info about Conrad Black? I read his Bio of Roosevelt last year. I saw no evidence of Republican leanings. It was well done and was almost a love letter. Seems like two different people.
By beverly linens on 05/10/2008 10:35 pm
zut alors
Beverly-Conrad Black is a total NeoCon and is headed to prison for 6 years for fraud. His empire is in ruins, as is his reputation. Yes he did write that bio and others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Black
By zut alors on 05/11/2008 12:25 am
yetischmeti 1
Alright, I was not even going to comment on this post but it has gotten ridiculous. Mitzi Morris, while you are fully entitled to your opinion of Sen Obama, you are not entitled to use your opinions as facts. First of all, the insinuation that Obama’ relationship with Rezko is a result of “the political sewers of Daley’s Chicago political machine” is completely and utterly false. If you had skimmed even a modest amount of the coverage of the Rezko trial on any local Chicago television station, the Sun-Times, Tribune, Daily Southtown, or Reader, you would know that the politician with the most to worry about is Governor Rod Blagoivitch, not Sen Obama, and certainly not Mayor Daley. Mayor Daley has nothing to do with Rezko. Tony Rezko operated at the state government level, not the city. That is why he was interested in Senator Obama, who was a state senator. As for your telling everyone to read the Sun-Times investigations, you conveniently left out that they were originally completed without cooperation from Sen Obama. The Sun-Times had tried to get Sen Obama to comment on the reports when they were published. He did not. When Tony Rezko was indicted, the Sun-Times again asked Sen Obama to comment and he met with them. After two separate several hour long meetings with the Sun-Times editorial board and the reporters involved, the paper said that Sen Obama answered every question every person asked to the fullest amount and determined to ENDORSE him for president. Just saying, kinda strange you left that part out.
By yetischmeti 1 on 05/10/2008 2:49 am
Mugsy Peabody
Whether or not I agree with you, I would give you full marks for both writing and thought process. Thanks for this.
By Mugsy Peabody on 05/10/2008 4:04 am
Frannie Em
Mitzi - there is also an article in The Progressive by Adolph Reed Jr - Obama NO, who is an African American Intellect tracked Obama in Chicago. Check it out. Everything is being exposed these days.
By Frannie Em on 05/10/2008 5:12 pm
Renata
A more accurate statement would be The Progressive has TWO articles, from two differing progressive, African-American perspectives, side by side. Mr. Reed’s already has an apology/disclaimer — and, is clearly reflects his own personal biases — and, as w/Rev.Wright, resentments. Nothing new in the African-American or ANY community since the time of the Old Testament! ENVY! Obama YES! Edwig Danticat http://www.progressive.org/?q=mag_danticat0508 Obama No! Adolph Reed Jr. http://www.progressive.org/?q=mag_reed0508
By Renata on 05/10/2008 7:17 pm
Frannie Em
Renata -Point taken - yes you are right, Once they got to The Progressive they would see that and do whatever they wanted to do about it.
By Frannie Em on 05/11/2008 1:48 pm
beth willis
Suzanne, with all due respect, I do not believe Senator Clinton has anything to apologize for. Peace and grace, friend
By beth willis on 05/09/2008 7:23 pm
zut alors
Beth, Well perhaps not to some she doesn’t have anything to apologize for. But millions of activists on the major left blogs who worked full time giving up their lives to prevent the immoral and illegal invasion that she voted for haven’t forgotten. There was a terrific article this month in Vanity Fair about these powerful blogs none of which, save one rather meager one, support her. I read posts her attributing to misogyny….it’s that authorization she voted for. We’ll all vote for what we think is right. I think anyone who voted for this monstrous debacle has PLENTY to apologize for….but that’s just me. Well, me and millions of other activists that wouldn’t vote for her because of it.
By zut alors on 05/09/2008 9:22 pm
mitzi morris
The left blogs and the toxic Arianna Huffington have all showered the blogosphere with hatred and sexism in a storm of venting that has been tolerated by the MSM and blogosphere in general. That is exactly the problem, but there are more blogs that have been Pro HRC such as: MyDD,NoquarterUSA,TalkLeft,Anglachel,and more than I can mention now. The Left and Left Left have found their voice on the Internet as DailyKos and others have hysterically and robotically denounced and defamed HRC as a blood sport. I do not think Hillary Clinton has anything to apologize for. All of her fellow Democrats with few exceptions felt Bush should have continued to inspect, etc. Obama was not there, and we really do not know precisely from any of our other Democrats why they voted to trust that Bush would do the right thing. Hillary has explained her reasons endlessly during debates and on the stump. For God’s sake Hillary did not act alone to give Bush and Co permission to invade Iraq. Democrats were compliant as a group,and group think was everywhere after 9/11/. ,BTW, there are quite a few really intelligent,unbiased and fact based political websites. That millions are engaging in gang rape, and mysogeny in the crudest and vilest language possible doesn’t impress. Obamatons have expressed a form of Hate Activism I have not seen before as the Internet is the perfect anonymous vehicle for these screeds. Obama fans are encouraged to Webexpress contempt and hatred that you may think is activism, but is an easy display of self indulgent and unaccountable behavior that should be considered for what it is.
By mitzi morris on 05/10/2008 12:27 am
zut alors
Mitzi—Sorry, Democrats weren’t compliant as a ‘group’ aft 9/11. I know just how hard and how many worked across this nation because I was one of them. You can dismiss Huffington Post as all as you wish. The fact is that Technoratti and others that rate the blogs have all of them at the top….of the millions of blogs on the Internet they are all in the top 50 so…whatever. I go by facts. Vanity Fair is one of the top ten magazines in this country. The editor’s letter is so popular that the page of advertising on the facing page is one of the most expensive pages in the ad world. And when they did a big piece this month on lefty blogs Huffington, Daily KOs etc were the big ones. I still haven’t had an answer….why is one of the highest educated, affluent, districts in the US that was totally for Bill Clinton both terms, Nancy Pelosi’s district…..filled with multi-millionaires…and it includes the San Francisco Financial District why was it 70% for Obama? Are you saying they just all the sudden got really stupid or hateful in ultra educated ultra liberal SF?? Is that what you are saying? I don’t know how opinions that don’t jive with yours are screeds and hate instead of differing opinions. Neither you or I have any control over who gets elected….and I see plenty of invective but no actual facts or credible links supporting them. I think you’re referring to the Fox-Savage-Coulter-O-Reilly crowd and somehow trying to conflate that with Huffington etc… No one here was too activist when Mark Klein was on this site engaging in mysogyny in the crudest and vilest language. Hillary has explained her reasons and great…some are fine with it and some aren’t. I’m not getting here what the problem is. That everyone doesn’t agree? Are you surprised with that? Are you saying that Clinton is entitled to the nomination because you think she is?
By zut alors on 05/10/2008 1:08 am