Will this be Hillary\’s gambit?

Could she? Would she?

Hillary Clinton\’s supporters gave a fresh glimpse yesterday of their lingering resentment over her defeat by claiming that she would have won the Democratic presidential nomination if John Edwards had confessed his affair earlier.

Howard Wolfson, her former communications director, suggested that the lie Mr Edwards told last year over his adulterous relationship with Rielle Hunter had lasting effects because it enabled him to stay in the race at a crucial time.

The Iowa caucuses, which kicked off the nomination process in January, saw Mrs Clinton finish third, narrowly behind second-placed Mr Edwards and the victorious Barack Obama. Although she staged a comeback a few days later in New Hampshire, her campaign never properly recovered its former poise and momentum.

Mr Wolfson said that without Mr Edwards complicating the contest “we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee”.

As the process has been based upon a lie will she try to reopen it at the convention?

It would be most amusing to watch if she did but I don\’t think so. Rather, this is a way of salvaging some pride: she didn\’t lose, she had it stolen from her.

7 thoughts on “Will this be Hillary\’s gambit?”

  1. Hillary Clinton:
    “she didn’t lose, she had it stolen from her.”

    Al Gore:
    “he didn’t lose, he had it stolen from him.”

    Is there a pattern emerging?

  2. If McCain is well ahead of O in the polls come the Dem Convention, there’ll be a “Dump O” campaign.

  3. And who’s to say – with absolute certainty – an earlier confession would have made any difference to Edwards’s level of support?

  4. I rather suspect this is yesterday’s war; you can hope that tomorrow will be different, but the war has been fought and Hillary has lost.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *