April 23rd, 2008
10:26 AM ET
11 years ago

NY Times slams Clinton's 'negativity'

 Clinton celebrates her Pennsylvania victory with Gov. Ed Rendell.

Clinton celebrates her Pennsylvania victory with Gov. Ed Rendell.

(CNN) - Fresh off her victory in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton is facing a stinging rebuke of her campaign tactics from her hometown paper, The New York Times.

In the paper's Wednesday edition, the editorial board which endorsed Clinton's White House bid earlier this year says the New York senator's "negativity" is doing "harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election."

"The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it," the board writes.

The paper finds fault in Clinton's latest campaign ad, which includes an image of Osama bin Laden, and asks, "Who do you think has what it takes?"

"Mrs Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11," they write, adding that it is a tactic that is "torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook."

"Mrs. Clinton does more than just turn off voters who don’t like negative campaigning," the editorial also states. "She undercuts the rationale for her candidacy that led this page and others to support her: that she is more qualified, right now, to be president than Mr. Obama."

The paper also says Barack Obama deserves some of the blame for the negative tone. "He is increasingly rising to Mrs. Clinton’s bait, undercutting his own claims that he is offering a higher more inclusive form of politics."

But the editorial makes clear the paper thinks most of the blames lies with Clinton. "If she is ever to have a hope of persuading [superdelegates] to come back to her side, let alone win over the larger body of voters, she has to call off the dogs."

soundoff (917 Responses)
  1. He Liang

    Reality Check-

    Do we honestly value education? Yes, we do, and all the campaigns claim they do. Then, why Mrs. Clinton's has more supporters who are less educated? Why more educated people vote for Obama? Don't you see the truth there? - When you know how to think, how to make an educated comparison, you go for Obama, and you see the true color of the Clintons.

    I am utterly surprised that Bill Clinton would be so hungary for more power that he doesn't mind to destroy his own legacy.

    April 23, 2008 07:23 am at 7:23 am |
  2. Jo

    lies.No it is not. Old men.
    The party is going to ruins if Obama wins.

    April 23, 2008 07:23 am at 7:23 am |
  3. MJC

    NYT jumped the shark with the McCain debacle.

    April 23, 2008 07:23 am at 7:23 am |
  4. Michael Ehst

    When I was a child, I reasoned like a child, played in the dirt, teased and ridiculed my pears and pointed out there defects to others in order to make myself look better. As I mature, I am trying work with my pears, Learning from them and offering my support when they stumble and no longer play in thte dirt. Note to Senator Clinton. Our words tell of who we want to be, but our actions tell of who we are. I personally would like to have an adult holding the highest public post in this country.

    April 23, 2008 07:38 am at 7:38 am |
  5. grappletail

    Obama took it to a 10% spread. Amazing for a black man in an uneducated white woman`s state. Money well spent. Why can`t the Clinton machine take him out ? Hillary`s experience ? 8 years being a philandering presidents wife. Being one of walmarts corporate lawyers ? Defending a pedophile from rape charges against a 12 year old girl ? Super delegates please pry her dead fingers from around this primary.

    April 23, 2008 07:38 am at 7:38 am |
  6. Legare

    People fail to realize that Obama's goal was not to win but close a lead. She had a 20 plus lead against him and he closed it down to 10% so it was money well spent.

    April 23, 2008 07:39 am at 7:39 am |
  7. Eric

    Hillary Clinton shouldn't stop, the race is close and the delegate count needed for victory hasn't been reached. The majority of the people haven't been heard because Florida and Michigan aren't being heard. I am glad that this whole process is exposing the poor, poor primary system we have. No one gets a real choice but the few early states, mainly Iowa and New Hampshire. The rest of us are basically made to feel like we've had a say.

    April 23, 2008 07:39 am at 7:39 am |
  8. Martha

    Amazing to me how Senator Clinton is held to a higher standard. I like Senator Obama but feel no one ever comments on his negative remarks. Also his body language is steeped in disdain for her. On several of their debates together, it was obvious by snide comments that he didn't think much of her and somehow no one seems to notice that. One of his (now fired) consultants called Ms. Clinton a MONSTER – isn't that incredibly harsh? Can you imagine if the situation were in reverse? Did he even repudiate that? The press just seems to give her a harder time. That said, I'm Canadian so cannot vote in this election, but I wish the best of luck to all 3 candidates – they all seem quite formidable and office-ready, so to speak.

    April 23, 2008 07:39 am at 7:39 am |
  9. Kris In PA

    Get over it NYT and CNN – SHE WON!!! She beat the empty, arrogant one and she beat him big. It's on to victory and the White House becasue the American people have seen through Obama's teflon finally. This has been a very civil campaign compared to other campaigns in the past so your just being "bitter" and defensive because she beat him even with all his money. Plus he was just as if not more negative. So too bad. American patriots cannot be bought people. Wake up!

    April 23, 2008 07:39 am at 7:39 am |
  10. Backlashg20

    Hillary said in a speech to black voters "I can relate to the little man! It's tough out there making a living!!

    Gross income: $109,175,175, which includes:

    Senator Clinton's Senate Salary: $1,051,606

    I wonder what that works out to per syllable?

    April 23, 2008 07:39 am at 7:39 am |
  11. bernj

    Let's see, uneducated folks gave Hillary a meaningless victory in PA. So what? It only shows that her appeal is to those who are less likely to see thru her cloud of lies and misrepresentations. Instead of raising the bar politically she lowers it. Clintons argument is amazing similar to George Bush's. Dumb down fear politics IS NOT what the people of America need.

    April 23, 2008 07:40 am at 7:40 am |
  12. drago

    Clinton had poisoned her supporters against Obama, by going
    Karl Rove way against him. Obama is not so negative about Clinton,
    which is why his supporters are more willing to support Hillary
    in the general election. Clinton supporters, wake up!

    April 23, 2008 07:40 am at 7:40 am |
  13. Dan

    Bill W PA,

    America shares your disgust.

    April 23, 2008 07:40 am at 7:40 am |
  14. wanda williams

    What I can't get over is that the media just wants to say well look at all the money he spent and could not pull it off. Why don't we say this- her husband has called in every favor in the book, she had all the elected figures behind her and campaingning for her throughout the state (in addition to her ex-PResident husband) and the polls showed Obama with only 30% six weeks ago before and he finishes with 45%. I would ask what is wrong with HER campaign. I hate the spins you all make. Campbell Brown is not a good anchor person- she just repaeats the same questions all the time. Clinton brings up a slant on the results, and she uses that as a fact basis. No matter who you are for, let us present the facts – all the facts-just the facts.

    April 23, 2008 07:41 am at 7:41 am |
  15. Michael Williams

    Hello to every Barack Obama supporter, I too am a supporter of the best candidate for president I have been following this race and I am a little confussed about what happened last night in Pennsylvania and very curious to know if our democratic party is in trouble by all of the negative back and forth actions from both sides to include the Media which blows every little thing into a monster problem especially when its against Barack.... but my question is for anyone who can or will respond even if it is our candidate himself... On 25 March 08 it had been reported everywhere to include this homepage of Barack Obama that there was a record turnout of OVER 4 million people who had registered as demoocratic voters, and with 99% reporting in we can only account for 2,300.542..... what happened???? where did the other 2 million people go??? did we loose them??? do we have any reason to be worried that our party is really being torn down and split apart and what can we do to make sure that this does not happen???

    April 23, 2008 07:42 am at 7:42 am |
  16. Research

    If the the state of PA look at its tradition with KKK its only right that they would vote for a white not a black person for president. Some of the counties and cities who have an KKK ties are Hunningdon and Franklin Counties, cities of Mercer, Brewerytown, Brentwood, PA, Gettysburg, PA.,Saint Thomas, PA , Creighton, PA, and the list goes so people Obama odds were against him even if he didn't out spend HRC.

    April 23, 2008 07:42 am at 7:42 am |
  17. MadBob

    Senator Clinton should run as long as she wants to. However, logic dictates that she will remain behind in delegates at the end of the day. It seems unlikely that the superdelegates will overturn that result unless Senator Obama's campaign collapses completely. This is highly unlikely though.

    As a european with an intrest in politics I have followed the race closely and Senator Obama seems the one with the personal integrity that we like on this side of the pond. I think he is the one who would restore the standing of the USA with its allies that was so badly damaged by the current administration. Our national politicians have made clear that the majority here would prefer dealing with Obama as well. Unfortunately that does not seem to be a factor in this election, allthough it is (or should be) an important factor as well I think.

    April 23, 2008 07:43 am at 7:43 am |
  18. nate

    Unemployed shut-ins w no life continue to tell us on here how things really are...

    April 23, 2008 07:43 am at 7:43 am |
  19. wanda williams

    What I can't get over is that the media just wants to say well look at all the money he spent and could not pull it off. Why don't we say this- her husband has called in every favor in the book, she had all the elected figures behind her and campaingning for her throughout the state (in addition to her ex-PResident husband) and the polls showed Obama with only 30% six weeks ago before and he finishes with 45%. I would ask what is wrong with HER campaign. I hate the spins you all make. Campbell Brown is not a good anchor person- she just repaeats the same questions all the time. Clinton brings up a slant on the results, and she uses that as a fact basis. No matter who you are for, let us present the facts – all the facts-just the facts.

    April 23, 2008 07:43 am at 7:43 am |
  20. Ovechkin

    She's like a cockroach. I really hope this extremely long democratic battle doesn't hurt them in the end. I honestly think Clinton would rather McCain win so that she could run in 2012.

    April 23, 2008 07:43 am at 7:43 am |
  21. tonyh

    There is no doubt that last night's victory involved the race and sex factors. White men and women. The majority of them voted for Billary. Is that a coincidence? No. It is a fact. The Keystone State was taylor-made for her. Let's wait for the other primaries and caucauses. We'll see how the demographic factor plays there.
    Obama still has the delegates and popular vote on his side, and that trend will continue til the end. NC will be a deciding factor.
    Billary's was a phirric victory.

    April 23, 2008 07:44 am at 7:44 am |
  22. Greg, NY

    How can you all say the republicans are voting for hillary, they are clearly voting for obama, look at the county voting maps, PA's conservative T including lancaster and harrisburg heavily votes for obama, that is the only reason he caught up in the poles, they want him to win because they know there is no way he can win in the fall

    April 23, 2008 07:44 am at 7:44 am |
  23. Heather Peterson

    I have major Clinton-fatigue. Get out already. Let's gang up on the old guy.

    April 23, 2008 07:45 am at 7:45 am |
  24. Corey's Corner

    I simply do not trust Hillary Huckabee, oops I mean Hillary Clinton.

    April 23, 2008 07:58 am at 7:58 am |
  25. liz

    I wonder were any of you Clinton Supporters even listening when she stated TWICE that she would take NUCLEAR ACTION against Iran if it attacked Isreal?????? That is more aggressive than Cheney, Rumsfeld and Buchanan Combined!!! Is that what you want from a supposed Experienced LOBBY Connected President??? Get real!! She LIED about so many things- SNIPER fire In BOsnia- not a misspeak- A repeated Lie- She was not involved in Establishing SCHIP and she did NOT hav e a Security Clearance as First Lady-!!

    She will do and SAY anything to get elected!!
    Her tyoe of Fake Change is not what we as anation or as the Democratic Party need- She is more of the same!!!

    Wake up america!!!!

    April 23, 2008 07:59 am at 7:59 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37