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

wild heather
I am eager to hear the wow0wow community weigh in about whether Hillary Clinton should accept the VP position if offered by Mr. Obama. I was surprised to hear Bill Moyers advise against it on Charlie Rose yesterday evening. He feels her potential to be a great leader in the Senate outweighs other considerations. For the life of me I can’t imagine that there’s another running mate out there who would be as likely to assure victory for the Democrat ticket. In addition, I believe that the office of VP was transformed by Al Gore, and certainly by dear Mr. Cheney. As VP Hillary Clinton could be the kind of ambassador to the world that people assumed Bill would be as “First Husband.” In addition, both she and Bill could help generate support for ending the war, achieving truly universal (hopefully single payer) health care, and giving the utmost priority to global climate change. She would of course be “one heart beat away” in the event of catastrophe or incapacity of the the President. On that basis alone I desperately want her to make history as America’s first woman Vice-President.
By wild heather on 05/10/2008 2:39 am
zut alors
Wild Heather…I love Bill Moyers…call me naive…but I agree with you..Wish they would just join together for the good of the country and get all of this over with. Both of them are pragmatic people…..
By zut alors on 05/10/2008 2:49 am
beverly linens
Suzanne, could I remind you that all of us have not had an opportunity to vote yet. As a Republican who didn’t change my registration so I could vote for your Democratic nomination, I am trusting you to choose a good candidate I can vote for. I haven’t voted for republican candidate since George H.W. Bush, whom I voted for in the primaries in 1980 as well as 1988. His bio was on PBS this week. It reminded me why I voted for him, he was capable of making the hard decisions and unlike his son, he didn’t give into his male ego or his so called legacy. Bill Moyers is one of only two men I have envied, I can’t think of a job that Bill has had that I wouldn’t have loved to have been in his shoes. The other is Charlie Rose. Back to the topic, remember we haven’t voted yet. I can’t vote for McCain because I don’t believe we can have 4 or 8 years of Republican nominations to the Supreme Court and I like McCain.
By beverly linens on 05/10/2008 3:47 am
zut alors
Beverly, I’m responding to the media, including Cokie and Leslie’s post, and Peggy Noonan’s op ed piece in the WSJ today….and ABC tonight etc saying Obama has the all metrics and it’s over. Obviously I have no power over anything but my own opinion. I guess will hear Monday or so what’s happening just because I can’t believe any candidate is going to keep going once it hits ABC prime time. But we all sure didn’t anticipate this discussion today.
By zut alors on 05/10/2008 4:08 am
Buh- Bye
It ain’t over. 73% of all statistics are wrong. And the rest are fudged.
By Buh- Bye on 05/10/2008 9:59 am
A B
I think we are seeing irrational Obama exuberance and the bubble is going to burst.
By A B on 05/11/2008 10:40 am
ariadne a
suzanne, as david gergen said… paraphrasing here, ‘obama would have to hire a food taster!’ now much truth is said in jest. would you want the clntons watching your back if you were president and she and bill were vp’s? seriously tho, it would not work. their world views are diametrically opposed. she represents the ‘old’ washington, everything that he is running against. pragmatically, it sounds good, she would bring all of her supporters on board but, philosophically it just won’t wash.
By ariadne a on 05/10/2008 1:42 pm
ariadne a
wow, that post did not go where i wanted it to go. i was responding to suzannes post about 2 posts up the food chain.
By ariadne a on 05/10/2008 1:45 pm
Renata
Ariadne: And the food taster would have to hire a food taster. I wouldn’t wish Clinton Inc. on my worst enemy as a subordinate. In NY, the one thing we have learned is they won’t subordinate THEIR AGENDA for anyone/anything! Ha! Looks admirable…IF you are not directly affected. We watched HRC vote to take the focus off Afghanistan/Osama bin-Ladin — and invade another nation and pour ALL resources into that pit — while we are STILL rebuilding Southern Manhattan island and our firefighters/emergency personnel dying from breathing the air during/after 9/11. We are voting her OUT in 4 years…so rural States watch out. The Clintons will be BACK!
By Renata on 05/10/2008 5:20 pm
zut alors
Ariadne…You’re right…trying to be concilatory and obviously HRC has the knowledge and brains…but you’re right…have read all the posts and thought about it…there are dif world views.
By zut alors on 05/10/2008 10:06 pm
Ms. Dee
Hillary Clinton’s talents would be utterly wasted in the Vice presidency…and, I believe the power of the Vice-Presidential office is defined by the Constitution. It’s arguable that Cheney trampled these definitions, but one man’s disregard should not provide precedence for further expansion of Vice-presidential powers. I have no doubt that, should Senator Obama become our next President, he’ll find a meaningful position for Senator Clinton within his cabinet.
By Ms. Dee on 05/11/2008 9:54 am
Michael Salling
Beautifully articulated, wild. I hope you will be posting on wow0wow more often. m in honolulu
By Michael Salling on 05/10/2008 3:06 am
Mugsy Peabody
I’m with you on wanting to hear what others say. Personally, I have always said either way, and back a strong Clinton-Obama ticket. But I do not think she should serve until and unless we get some serious guarantees. After all, it was the suffragists who worked their bustles off getting black men the vote only to have Frederick Douglas turn on them and say, “Oh, well.” So since I haven’t heard even a single women’s rights thing come out of Sen. Obama’s mouth, I will not give him a single dime to run because I do not believe he takes the rights of women seriously. And don’t even bother me with any “post-feminist” crap because I can’t hear you!
By Mugsy Peabody on 05/10/2008 4:10 am
Renata
Messrs. Douglas and Obama are not the same man. Barack’s life and chosen spouse speak volumes. It is NOT the Clinton’s marriage arrangement, either. I would not comment on HRC’s marriage IF it had not been a factor at the Presidential level and, given us George W. Bush — a mediocrity at best.
By Renata on 05/10/2008 1:14 pm
Frannie Em
Mugsy, you are a treasure
By Frannie Em on 05/10/2008 6:14 pm