Hillary Clinton is Finished

"Enough with the speeches and the big rallies and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook...Shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public - that's what I expect from you. Meet me in Ohio, and let's have a debate about your tactics." -- Hillary Clinton

The above quote, as printed in a Press Association article, is the perfect illustration of a campaign in panic mode. Hillary Clinton over the past weekend and during the last debate on Tuesday has increased her criticism of Barack Obama in hopes of stopping Obama's momentum of 11 straight primary victories. Unfortunately, it is not going to work and Obama is going to win the nomination.

The reason for this is simple, her attacks will backfire. Senator Obama has not been vocally criticizing Hillary Clinton and his message of hope and idealism is in stark contrast to the calling out and criticizing of Hillary Clinton. This type of strategy was employed again during the most recent presidential debate. According to a Boston Globe article, Clinton tried to build on those attacks against Obama to try and stop his momentum going into the March 4th primaries. The article points out that she attacked him "tenaciously on a range of domestic and foreign policy issues." The reason for this is clear: she is trying to win the Texas and Ohio primaries, states which she once held a lead in the polls by large margins, but has since shrunk immensely.

Did the attacks work? Unfortunately for Clinton they did not. According to a Baltimore Sun article, Obama was able to deflect a lot of the criticism and was not shaken by the renewed attacks by Clinton. The article points out that the debate "did not appear to deliver a turnaround moment for Clinton, who is losing the contest for delegates and could be pushed from the race if she loses Texas and Ohio on Tuesday." But why? Why did her attacks, which seems quite harsh from the opening quote, not deter Obama's momentum? The answer lies in an article from the Washington Post that explains Clinton just didn't go far enough. The article points out that Senator McCain backed off her attacks to focus on the policy aspects of the debate. As the article points out, that policy has just not worked the past 11 primaries. In fact, the article quotes several other papers that came to the same conclusion. It cites the Boston Globe, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times and the New York post all of whom cited Obama came out either unscathed by the weakened attacks or even as a winner. Essentially Clinton is in a lose-lose situation. If she is too critical on national TV, she will come off as brash and unlikable, but if she isn't harsh enough, she can't stop Obama.

Basically, Clinton is finished. Her attacks over the weekend were a sign of a campaign not sure of how to stop the Obama machine. As an article from the Associated Press put it, the debate "seemed unlikely to alter the political calculus of the race." And that calculus is that Obama has a huge momentum going into the primaries, is gaining in the polls and will win the nomination.

The Press Association, "Clinton Attacks Obama tactics", The Press Association

Scott Hellman, "Clinton attacks on all fronts", The Boston Globe

Paul West, "Clinton, Obama trade barbs, end with words of harmony", The Baltimore Sun

Howard Kurtz, "A Missed Opportunity?", The Washington Post

Tom Raum, "Analysis: Debate Unlikely to Change Race", Associated Press