Dog whistles in campaigns, These are signals that a campaign is over

[nadinbrzezinski]

These are given by insiders to any candidate that it is indeed time to drop out

We started to get them the day of the election, aka last tuesday... when General Clark called her and said, it is time.

Next day we had McGovern (Not a SD) say it is time

And the same day we also had Feinstein call for essentially a business plan of what she expects to gain by staying in. (Given how loyal she is... that was a hell of a loud dog whistle)

Next signal came when the uncommitted SDs did not meet with her, so they sent power point presentations to show why they could win or why she should get it. Nobody refuses to meet the potential POTUS.. It is just not done, period!

Now after the USA Today interview we had a quite a few SDs declare (nine today) amongst them one was one of her supporters, and the lead in SDs is all but gone (that is a dog whistle as well since she started with over a 100)

And to top it off, Rahm Emmanuel (A rabid Clinton Supporter) today said that Obama was the Nominee as well as Leon Panneta, former Clinton WH Chief of Staff.

Keep your ears open to more of these "dog whistles" they are supposed to be obvious signs to a candidate, but not obvious to outside the beltway observers.

I am pointing this out as fact.. education. Anybody who has been to more than one rodeo understands this... but many folks do not, especially if this is their first campaign

If this candidate does not heed the dog whistles, her pariah status will be permanent, that is why anybody who understands this, realizes the pressure for her to at the very least suspend her campaign is just getting stronger. If she keeps this up, her career in the Senate will be very short indeed, and she can kiss goodbye any public life. If she heeds them, then almost all will be forgiven... (yes there is this little thing with the voters) and she will be allowed to stay on... perhaps even have a long career in the US Senate, and even leadership status earlier than she expected, or should by other standards... perhaps even majority leader.

As to the VEEP spot, I believe that is gone... and it went with the white comment. Whether that was racist or not, code language or not is immaterial. It did make many folks (some of them with whistles), very uncomfortable, and though reality is that come september most voters would not even know about them... only political junkies care enough... this is potentially the kind of sound you don't want. Perhaps they will offer it anyway, pro forma and hope she says no.

Now here is another reality, if you have been to any of these rodeos... any candidate worth his\her salt, will tell the base WE CAN WIN, up and until they go to the mike and concede. That is expected... but it is coming. And if she does not do it, once the SDs cross and there are enough... then Obama will declare victory, and the media (to their chagrin) will completely abandon her, and she will become a pariah even to them, except for the first 12 hours or so of the news cycle. And that is not something I want to see. But if that happens, I'm not sure that you will even see her run again, or have SD status next election cycle... and that is not something anybody would want to see.

[seriousstan]

1. Is this a personal post or a link? Where is the link

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Personal point, and I might add, I was reminded of this by

Rachel Maddow the other day on the KO show..... she mentioned it and I went... so aha...

This is something I learned in a Poli Sci class over twenty years ago...

At the time we had a local campaign for city council where one of the two people would not drop out...

The instructor told us... you watch... and pointed to these things... that city council member, his name is long gone from my memory, dropped out

This is a similar situation at a national stage.

Rachel mentioned it and then I started looking for the pattern... and it is there.

By the way, part of the pattern... you watch... they will get even more combative before finally giving up.

On edit, it also stands in for using code language that is only understood by the in-group such as... a christian right using the code language to identify the enemy

[TragedyandHope]

10. Yes, I caught this the other night too

Rachel Maddow is also the only contrarian media voice out there saying Hillary will take this to the convention. Remain vigilant.

:kick:

[JimGinPA]

4. Do You Dispute Any Part Of The Op?

Do you require a link to tie your shoes?

[Binka]

7. Seriousstan Is Not To Be Taken Seriously

A quick search proves my point.

[Jim Lane]

16. I dispute the part about 2012

Barring a major change in the rules, any sitting Senator will be a superdelegate in 2012, and Clinton's current term will not yet have expired. She'll be a superdelegate next cycle.

I'd also consider it likely that, after this campaign ends, she'll return to the Senate, put in her time there (doing spade work, if you will), run for re-election to the Senate in 2012, and attain a position there of significant power. She's been mentioned as a Majority Leader. Even if she hasn't that, she'll be one of the heavy hitters.

The antipathy toward Clinton is much more intense on DU than it is generally. A year from now, only a few political junkies will remember all the controversies that we're now so exercised about. Hillary Clinton won't be President but she won't be some kind of pariah.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. The political junkies ar not just on DU

but in the beltway, where her use of language has troubled party elders

look at dog whistles and how they blow

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

3. In many ways, this has been a campaign for Bill's third term

If Hillary's last name was Smith, she would never have made it this far.

If not for Bill's extensive political ties and machine, she would never have made it
this far.

Being married to a president is a advantage in that you have a huge political machine
and name recognition already.

The media has deliberately kept quiet on the Clinton negatives during the primary in hopes
of extending this thing and making more money off of advertising and ratings.

[grantcart]

5. excellent

[Hutzpa]

6. Thank you for an excellent post

:thumbsup:


K&R



:kick:

[FrenchieCat]

8. Enjoyed your opinion. Very insightful!

Thanks!

[caligirl]

9. My trainer was asking me about this, he hadn't heard the eight belles story, good

for a laugh. but he is a bit worried about this. Doesn't spend much time reading blogs. I told him she will be increasingly irrelevent, and at some point the press will ignore her. then she has to go home.

i am expecting her to look really foolish Tuesday night as she wins votes that will be meaningless. A victory of nothing and she's going to scream and shout about a comeback while the world looks on in disgust.

worthy of the greatest page. So nice to see a return to writing intelligent posts that help us understand this pea soup sometimes.

[Two Americas]

11. what's the harm?

What is the harm in Clinton staying in the race? In the past candidates have stayed in the race very late or until the convention, when they were much farther behind - Jerry Brown, Jesse Jackson, Ted Kennedy, Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern (1968), and Dennis Kucinich come to mind. Udall and Bradley may have, too, I can't remember. So what? We have had much more divisive and contentious campaigns in the past than Clinton's has been, as well, with much less outcry.

The media pundits are creating 90% of the contentious and inflammatory points being thrown around here about the campaign, as near as I can tell.

[GoesTo11]

14. What harm? Dems lost in 1968, 1980, 1988. Don't want a repeat!

Duh.

[OzarkDem]

21. Not because of contested primaries

that dog won't hunt. Debunked already.

[Two Americas]

22. leap of faith there

We can't know that there is a cause and effect relationship between a contested primary and losing the general. Did Ted Kennedy cause Reagan to win in 1980? Did McCarthy cause Nixon to win in 1968? I don't think you can make a case for either of those.

[eridani]

17. There would be no harm if she were not campaigning on Repub talking points

However she is. H thought she'd back off, but she's only gotten worse.

[Two Americas]

23. OK

Let's say she is basing her campaign on right wing themes. What harm is there in that? Most of the Democratic party has been running on right wing themes for 20 years, in my view. I hear many right wing themes in Obama's campaign.

I think the harm done by running on right wing themes cannot be solely, or even mainly blamed on one politician in one campaign. The harm is this - they don't need to do this. In fact, they would do better if they didn't. Secondly, they undermine the left by doing this and weaken and divide the party as a result. Also, they give credibility to the right wing propaganda when they do this. That is the harm. But I do not see what that has to do with Clinton staying in the race.

[JVS]

25. Because it is an endorsement of RW ideology to her base...

thus making them more likely to bite when McCain dangles the same ideology in front of them.

I can't believe how blind her supporters on this board have become.

[Two Americas]

26. I am not a Clinton supporter

I don't and never have supported Clinton. I also don't think she has much of a chance to win the nomination. I don't think it is helpful or accurate to call those who disagree with you "blind," either. Perhaps they actually see what you are saying, but are rejecting it.

What is the "ideology" that Clinton is spreading, and how is that making people more likely to vote for McCain in your view? The two candidates are very close in all of their political positions. I think they are both taking up right wing themes, as almost all Democrats have been doing for the last 20 years. I oppose them doing that, but can't see how a case can be made that there is a dramatic difference between the two candidates on that score.

[eridani]

39. Obama has occasionally broken rightwing frames

Clinton never has. When Bill Clinton says there are two kinds of people, those who think they are better than everyone else and everyone else, that is utterly destructive to every Dem candidate at every level, including Hillary. Obama has never, ever done anything of the sort. He's gone after Clinton on the right on some policy issues like health care and social security, but POLICIES are not FRAMES, dammit!

Isn't it bad enough that we saw the Kerry windsurfing shot 24/7 in 2004, and we never ever saw an exposure of Fred Thompson's fake red pickup truck?

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. It was not the media who used race laden language

more appropriate for the 1960s or the other side

That was her.

And why you will "hear" far more whistles going off. Just pay attention to the pattern

[Tatiana]

12. Spot-on analysis.

Especially true about the looming pariah status.

I do NOT want to see that play out; a time when Obama himself will be forced to declare victory and Hillary ends up looking like the loony engine that (should but) wouldn't quit.

[chknltl]

13. KnR Thanks nadinbrzezinski eom

[kenny blankenship]

15. "...and that is not something anybody would want to see."

Wanna bet?

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Ok there are some

but not me...

Though if it happens, it will be a self fulfilling prophecy

[Kahuna]

18. The constant trickle of the SDs to Obama's camp has been going on..

since Hillary made the statement that (only) she and McCain were prepared to be C-I-C. Then after one funky assertion after another (including the gas tax fiasco) the SDs have shown their displeasure by announcing for Obama. STILL, billary, whose only hope for a favorable outcome lies with the SDs continue to offend those same SDs and those same SDs continue to show their displeasure by endorsing Obama.

So! If the Clintons know that the SDs will migrate to Obama because of their heinous tactics and they continue to practice those heinous tactics what does that tell you? They KNOW they have lost this election and indeed are attempting to pave a way for 2012 by damaging Obama so that he for a certainty lose in November.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Yes, but NOT nine in one day

and that is the point... as part of the pattern expect to see the trickle increas

[corkhead]

19. I am not so sure she cares about her career. It's obvious that the senate was just a stepping stone

[Fly by night]

20. All AA SDers who pledged for HRC should switch en masse to BO because of "white" comment.

That wouldn't be a dog whistle.

That would be the Fat Lady's last musical note.

Turn out the lights -- the party's over. And by the way, cut the power to HRC's mike, someone. She can't see she's preaching to the clean-up crew.

[Deb]

24. "her pariah status will be permanent"

As a NYer, this has been my fear.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. That is why I said... that then there is this little matter about the voters

the party may want to forgive most all... but that does not mean the voters will

That said... I can bet the voters will have a very short memory if... after she goes back
to the senate she delivers

[K Gardner]

27. Beautiful, well-written analytical post. Thank you ! K&R

[walldude]

28. K&R !

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Hmm Gen Clark said that they did not call HRC

per brad blog, the first to report he did.

UPDATE: We got a denial from General Clark's office today.
They contacted us to tell us he did not reach out to Clinton:

This is not true. He did not contact Hillary or the Clinton
campaign expressing a desire for her to drop out."

http://www.americablog.com/2008/05/breaking-wesley-clark-reportedly-called.html

[Catherina]

35. As a friend he should. Gear up the courage, sit her down and tell her it's over n/t

[Clear Blue Sky]

36. The whistles aren't loud enough. She doesn't seem to hear them...

[ProSense]

37. A dog whistle to anyone listening:

"It is perceived that he is the leader...The trickle is going to become an avalanche." -- Don Fowler, former DNC Chair and Hillary supporter.

[marions ghost]

38. good points

:kick: thanks