May 13th, 2008
01:30 PM ET
10 years ago

Clinton campaign: Obama ran an 'aggressive' WV race

Clinton campaign said Obama should stop downplaying expectations in West Virginia.

Clinton campaign said Obama should stop downplaying expectations in West Virginia.

(CNN) - As voters headed to the polls in West Virginia in a contest Hillary Clinton is expected to win, a memo released by her campaign argued that Barack Obama had waged an “aggressive campaign” in the state – and that a loss by the Illinois senator there would raise troubling questions about his general election chances.

"In the face of grim poll numbers, the Obama campaign has attempted to dismiss today's outcome despite the fact that Sen. Obama has outspent us on advertising, has more staff in the state, and more than double the number of offices,” said the campaign in an e-mail sent to reporters Tuesday.

“He has also benefited from the support of the most high-profile endorsers in West Virginia-Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Congressman Nick Rahall. By every measure, the Obama campaign has waged an aggressive campaign in the Mountain State," they said.

The Obama campaign has been looking to downplay the results of West Virginia’s vote, spending the evening in Michigan, a fall battleground. Obama trails Clinton by 30-40 points in recent polls of the state’s primary voters.

soundoff (331 Responses)
  1. Heather M.

    We're par for the course.

    When she led in superdelegates and Obama was taking the popular vote, the popular vote didn't matter- it was all about the delegates.

    When Obama took the lead in superdelegates, suddenly it was all about the popular vote.

    They complained that he wasn't competing in WV... they say he was "aggressive" so as to make an expected win look better.

    Frankly, I walked into this race undecided and stayed that way for a long time. If she somehow manages to win the nomination, I'm voting for McCain. I'm disgusted beyond belief that this woman has stolen a place in history as the first woman to get this far- and managed to "prove" to people all over the country that a woman is a bad choice for president.

    Which isn't true, of course- SHE is just a bad choice. She has made it infinitely harder for the next woman who decides to make a serious run at the White House. That, to me, is no "hero" for women to look up to.

    May 13, 2008 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  2. Kevin

    This is getting ridiculous to even someone like me who has remained neutral so far.

    A win is a win
    A loss is a loss

    If Hillary wins, she is the winner
    If Obama wins, he is the winner

    Why even compare how the other person prepared to win.


    May 13, 2008 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  3. john

    I guess its another "Turning point" for the nation. Oh boy, sounds like groundhog day......

    May 13, 2008 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  4. Mike NYC

    Ok so now we should include some sort of magical handicapp formula to states based on how many people they have on the ground, how much money they spent, etc. This is getting more and more complicated by the minute.

    Hillary usually more support on the ground means more people are willing to go out of their way for that candidate.

    Hillary usually more money especially in the way that Obama has raised funds means he has more individuals supporting and believing in him.

    How many more ways do you have to figure this out – you lost.

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  5. ganga

    Why don't you give it up Hillary? We have spoken hard working black and white voters say time to give up and go home!

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  6. Jamaal Kansas

    Cnn why do you continue to give this lady free air time this thing is over for her If she win 99% to 1% this thing is still over. Hillary Clinton must of her the supers are flooding to Obama know she has to make it seem like this state matters it don't This thing is over. Hillary you are the weakest Link Good Bye!

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  7. Jim

    This gets more Hillarious every single day!!!!!

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  8. Marilyn

    CNN, please stop posting all the misleading stories from the Hillary campaign. There is so much Spin coming from her campaign. The American people are tired. Hillary has become so desperate.


    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  9. Miro

    She is a liar.

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  10. D.J.

    CNN = Clinton News Network. Seriously, I'm thinking you folks over there at CNN are going to need counseling when all the dust settles. WV will not make a difference to what Barack Obama is doing right now. States that were not in play for the Dems are now in play because of his candidacy. Hillary Clinton will NOT be president. And with all her race baiting, I could never in good conscience support her for anything. Not even if she was running for dogcatcher. Animals deserve better.

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  11. Brad

    Obama barely set foot in the state of W.V. How can Hillary say he ran an aggressive campaign???? What a pair? He lies through his teeth and she makes up the rest.

    Are these two the best the Dems can cough up?

    May 13, 2008 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  12. Sunshine from University of Florida

    Aaaah,, bathe in delusion and tears.McCain 08

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  13. Hilcantwin

    Another reason why he should not choose her as a running mate

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  14. Snipes

    Always bet on Barack!!

    Wesley Snipes and Asians for Obama!

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  15. bobby

    I understand that the tide is going towards Sen. Obama, however by not trying to bring those who live in W.V. will show that he has already forgotten those individuals of the state.

    He could have attack Sen. Mccain there as he has in Oregon and Kentucky. Or is it that he doesnt feel connected with those little people of the state.

    Sen.Obama be the candidate of all the people, not just the Educated people of this country.

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  16. kim in portland, oregon

    i'm not a fan of his attack dog ways, but carville brings up some interesting VP choices, for different reasons they are all actually good ideas.

    "Asked about who might share a ticket with Obama, Carville floated Clinton's name, as well as that of Clinton ally Gen. Wesley Clark. Carville also mentioned Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg as possible running mates, according the Greenville News"

    it's time for us dems to get behind our nominee cuz november's gonna get UGLY!!! if it were clinton, i wouldnt even hesitate to get behind her 1000%. if carville is sending a support check to obama, all dems need to back him so we do not have a president mcsame!

    it's too late and too dangerous to go back in time as we would with even more conservative judges, as mcsame promises (although we all know how good HIS word is-flippity floppity!!!)

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  17. ferris_b

    Obama is not trying to win the state of WV; he is simply trying to control loss margin. If he is able to reduce the spread significantly, it will strongly signal Mrs. Clinton that she has NO hope of securing the candidacy. (It is quite improbable that she could take the nomination out of Obama's column.)

    Another thing a narrowed loss will do is tell all of the Super D's to jump on to Obama's side of the scale and rush the nomination to him.

    She has framed WV as a very important primary. I wonder if she will feel that Oregon is twice as important as they have almost twice as many delegates as WV.

    By the way... what was Oregon's Governor hanging out with John McCain for, anyway? Isn't he a Democrat backing Hillary? That ain't meatloaf I'm smellin'!

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  18. outsider

    she is a criminal brain

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  19. Helene

    Here we go AGAIN. That woman will never, never stop. Obama did not campaign aggressively in WV. He said very clearly that he would lose and that Clinton would win big. So, shut up McClinton, win the red necks and go back home where you belong.

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  20. Sara

    When you're 20 million in the red, everything seems "aggressive"

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  21. sherrie50

    what happened

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  22. SlimSista



    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  23. Latina por Obama

    I am totally taken by the fact that we as Americans and then democrats, are we tolerating this woman, and her family to get out there and bluntly be racists. It has taken half (if not more) than century to beging the healing of race in this country, and yet, the billary's are bluntly and nationally using the race cards, diviing the nation into blacks and whites.
    while she can her husband and daughter can campaign and run for king, quee and princess, please do that somewhere else.
    I find it racist, shameful, deliberatelly divisive, and so full of hatred I can not believe more people are standing up to them. It is ok for her to be racist when it is convenient and even use the gender card.
    They do it purposedly, and people need to call it for what it is, the little work she and her husband claim they have done, has but all been destroy in a few speeches she has given.
    When you are voting remember we the people continue our lives, our children continue theirs, and billary does not care, she earns so mcuh money and will do more..after this fiasco.
    I am saddened by what the clinton machine is doing and they know it and dont care.

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  24. rice, bryan

    one conclusion by the numbers posted, scared white people. i'm a white male from indiana, and i can tell you that there a lot of white people that are terrified that if a black person is nominated the world will come to an end. i voted for obama, because a vote for the same ol' same ol', is just like spinning your tires in the mud. i was not going to be scared by the gop, or any other racist group into throwing away my vote by following the sheep to the slaughter. and people that post that they are for clinton, but if she loses i just can't vote for obama, can't tell you the truth that they are republican anyway. they listen to limbaugh, vote for clinton and keep this race going and watch the democrats turn on each other and this will get mccain voted in november. then you hear them say rev wright turned me off to obama, you weren't going to vote for change anyway. you were going to vote for the gop like you did last time, because you didn't know any better. mccains pastor is just as racist as wright is, and you folks are fine with what he has to say because it wasn't aimed at you. to read into a win in west virginia or kentucky is just looking at the "white" vote.

    May 13, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  25. RAY IN NJ

    CNN: When it's obvious that HRC is spewing false-hoods, why don't you at least offer some points of truth when you print these articles? As you know, HRC appeals to a vast number of uneducated voters who appear not to take the time to dispute what's being said on the airwaves and in news articles – therefore believing the propaganda that bolsters their viewpoint. At least you'd be doing the nation a service by arming these folks with the truth of the matters discussed.
    Unfortunately for you (and us) is that you can't print what the obviouse headline to this article should be – i.e., "Obviously Desperate Clinton campaign: Obama ran an 'aggressive' WV race – CNN & Nation reply: Give Us A Break, It's Over Already!"

    May 13, 2008 02:43 pm at 2:43 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14