April 23rd, 2008
10:26 AM ET
12 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. samuel

    No matter what senator obama will and should be the next president of United States of America.Every day i prey and thank " God" for giving us senator Obama. Please ,The Generous American People,Prey day and night to make sen.Obama our president.Think a minute sen. Obama is once in a life time leader.
    God bless America every single second! Amen.

    April 23, 2008 12:35 am at 12:35 am |
  2. SC for Hillary

    Well New York Times, you forgot to print the LIES Obama told in his Ads about Hillary, Guess what: It did not work, Now let me see Obama spent 12 million dollars in Penn. and had Bob Casey to get the Catholic, what a Joke that was, the Catholic people are not stupid,
    The Catholic people know that Obama and his wife are Racists and hate White Folks, Thank you Penn. for displaying your Intellect tonight,
    You chose the right Candidate, Obama cannot and will not win in November, so Obama,take your corrupted, Tony Rekzo, Rev Wright, Bill Ayers BUTT back to Chicago and go back Underground with the infamous Terriosts.Hillary 08

    April 23, 2008 12:35 am at 12:35 am |
  3. Julie in OK

    "Barack Obama deserves some of the blame for the negative tone..."

    Did this reporter miss Obama's campaign remarks this past weekend - totally negative against Sen. Clinton.

    She had a great win despite all the money Obama spent. What was it - 3 to 1??

    I congratulate her and look forward to her being the Democratic Party's nominee.

    April 23, 2008 12:35 am at 12:35 am |
  4. Debster DC (I Bet CNN WON'T POST THIS)

    I just donated $50 to the Clinton campaign because of the media's bias and the rapid Obama supporters. The media is at fault in the divide in the democratic party – if only they had let the candidates debate the issues instead of maligning Clinton. You all, went after the Clintons for any and everything, example, while you talked about the Clintons not releasing their tax returns nothing was mentioned of the John McCain's.

    April 23, 2008 12:35 am at 12:35 am |
  5. NickNas

    FINALLY!!! Thank you New York!!!! A Major player in the Media that still has integrity and knows it is just not about AD Dollars!!

    AND they Like many of us ONCE ENDORSED HILLARY.

    I feel so much better now. At least there ARE people who can admit a mistake left in this world!

    April 23, 2008 12:36 am at 12:36 am |
  6. Tom Smith

    I keep hearing about blue-collar-workers. America face realitys blue-collar-workers equals white low income workers who will never vote for a blck candidate and believe me that makes up around 75% of the registered voters. So in conclusion Obama is just spitting in the wind and America is not ready for a black candidate and will never be. If Obama was a white with the same ability that he possesses he would already be the Pesident.

    April 23, 2008 12:36 am at 12:36 am |
  7. truth

    america deserves a liar and a crook!

    April 23, 2008 12:37 am at 12:37 am |
  8. melissa

    One thing I like Obama, he is honest, period!

    April 23, 2008 12:37 am at 12:37 am |
  9. John, Cape May, Nj

    Their is no way Obama will win the general election. It's The kooky wing of the party's fault – they let kids and the extreme left have the candidate of their choice. His speech tonight came across so angry. The United States does does not want an angry person in the White House! This democrats voting for MCCain – I will vote for Hillary in 2012 !

    April 23, 2008 12:47 am at 12:47 am |
  10. spyturtle

    Shame on Hillary to publicly threaten nuclear weapons after what happened in Japan in a response to a hypothetical attack on israel. Hiroshima and Nagasaki still are effected by the bombing. Huge numbers of innocent people were instantly and painfully murdered. Not very presidential. Even John McCain would not be so flippant and cavalier. Go Obama!

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  11. Not sleeping at the switch

    ummmmm Isn't that what we have ALL been saying? Those of us who do not PROFIT from this thing dragging out that is.

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  12. John

    The Democrats are beginning to sound more and more like the Republicans. Maybe I should vote for McCain.

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  13. cindy

    Please stop and listen to yourselves. This is more about winning than it is about the problems we need to solve. I appreciate winning as much as the next person when it comes to football, baseball, but this is about the future of this country and our planet. Can we please, as citizens of the same country and human beings, have a little civility and listen to each other and try to figure out how to solve our problems? If you have a point to make about your candidate can't you make it without hate and vitriol toward the other? Can't we please prove to the rest of the world that we deserve to be leaders on the world stage?

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  14. emmanuel

    I love how everyone is against her.....BUT she is a CLEAR winner!!!! I dont think anyone is listening to the media anymore,,,,find another negative way guys..

    Hillary 2008

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  15. Elaine

    Yes, Clinton won, but at what cost? She may still be in the race, but when everything is over what are we left with, a divided party with a lot of bitter (yes, I said bitter) feelings and no hope. There is no way Hillary can win the general election without the (black vote, the young vote, the HOPE vote, and all the people who have gave millions of dollars to Obama, will not give millions to her. .

    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  16. paul


    April 23, 2008 12:48 am at 12:48 am |
  17. mark odell

    Obama, Osama - Clinton's blatant Muslim linkage attempt, into a commercial lie that appeals to the uninformed, is shameless.
    Her high unfavorable numbers are there because she is ethically challenged. What she lacks in charisma, she makes up in gall.
    Thank God she survived that harrowing sniper fire in Bosnia,
    she was so brave. Osama must be shaking in his boots.
    Hopefully she focuses on her promise to obliterate millions of men, women and children in Iran first!
    Can't wait for North Carolina and Indiana . She probably won't quit trying to steal the race in popular and pledged delegates,
    but she will be finished. Good riddance.

    April 23, 2008 01:07 am at 1:07 am |
  18. Barbara-California

    She will never be the "First Lady" in My eyes, and she will never be the President in my eyes, even if she wins that".....she is the lowest of the low, and I am so disappointed in the women in this country who voted for her just because she is a woman!

    I hope the "real women" in the balance of the states, for the nomination will go to the polls and vote for someone who really has some dignity, she is a disgrace to women all over the world, and is disrespectful of the Office of the Presidency of the United States, she has brought our country down to the level of a third world country of "scavengers" or gypsys....I am so downhearted for this country....what a bunch of losers we are.....!

    April 23, 2008 01:09 am at 1:09 am |
  19. Steve From Bangkok

    Hilary cares More about her self than about the country, What ever happen to patriotism

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  20. Anonymous

    um...The Times has been backing Obama from the beginning.

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  21. Isaac

    Both candidates are to blame, this is ridiculous. Can we please let her enjoy her 10% win with over 200,000 votes gained in the popular count before trashing her??? I mean, the press is relentlessly after her and I have to say, I admire her ability to thrive all the more for it.

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  22. Jaime Lee

    The New York Times has been quite biased in reporting, and did not even mention Obama's embellishments on his links to Kennedy (from the Selma speech). This was reported in the Washington Post.

    Maureen Dowd's venom is particularly annoying.

    The New York Times also supported the Iraq Invasion, and distorted the facts during the invasion (Judith Miller).

    I have cancelled my subscription to the New York Times.

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  23. Julie in OK

    The NYTIMES must be taking too seriously Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd - two Clinton haters.

    They actually printed an Op-Ed piece a couple of months ago where a writer (Harvard sociology professor) accused the Clinton campaign of racism through the red phone ad! He said the ad reminded him of the film "Birth of a Nation."

    Surely everyone remembers that ad - it was simply about who was ready on Day One.

    I subscribe to the NYTIMES, and I have found it hard to understand how they can print some of the mean-spirited columns about Clinton - after endorsing her, then they seemed to want to "get" her.

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  24. CJ

    Who's gives a flip what the New York times think, they are nothing but a bunch of left wing nut balls. They need to stuff this up their A. all us White women will never ever vote for Obama. Get off Hillary Butt.

    April 23, 2008 01:10 am at 1:10 am |
  25. Gary

    Although I am disappointed in my pathetic state's all too predictable vote for Hillary I feel that ultimately this loss is for the best.
    Obama lost this battle but he has already won the primary due to his insurmountable lead in elected delegates and the popular vote.
    Hillary's smear machine is giving Barack the practice he needs to beat McCain in the fall.

    April 23, 2008 01:11 am at 1:11 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