May 29th, 2008
06:00 AM ET
13 years ago

Rendell: 'Very unlikely' Clinton will win

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/05/28/art.rendell.gi.jpg caption="Rendell is a powerful Clinton surrogate."]

(CNN) - Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell – who has been one of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s biggest backers – said Wednesday that she would make a “far better candidate” than frontrunner Barack Obama in major swing states, but is “very unlikely” she will be the Democratic nominee this fall.

"I'm a realist, and I think most likely the superdelegates will give Sen. Obama the votes he needs," Rendell told Bloomberg Television Wednesday. "I don't think the DNC is going to fairly adjust what happened in Florida… So I think it's very unlikely that Senator Clinton can prevail. I think that means we're not going to field our strongest candidate."

Rendell again called for an Obama-Clinton ticket – assuming both candidates were in favor of the idea. The former Democratic National Committee chairman also laughed that he would make a great vice presidential pick for Obama: "I wear a flag pin, so [it would] be a balanced ticket," he joked.

soundoff (630 Responses)
  1. gilbert.................TEXAS

    I BELIEVE IT IS TIME FOR RECONCILIATION IN THIS PARTY.I WILL VOTE A DEMOCRAT. FOR ONE AND ONE REASON ONLY.......GET US OUT OF THIS WAR. I SAY THAT ANYONE WHO SAYS ONE SHOULD NOT SIT DOWN WITH HIS OR HER ENEMY AND TALK IN ORDER TO AVOID BLOOD SHED, DOES NOT KNOW CHRIST.
    HOW CAN ANYONE WITH A REASONING MIND SAY WE ARE WINNING THIS CONFLICT? WE HAVE LOST MORE PEOPLE NOW THAN WE DID ON 9/11. IF WE HAD SAT DOWN WITH THESE PEOPLE THEN WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BRING THEM TO COMPENSATE THE FAMILIES THAT LOST THEIR LOVED ONES THEN AND ALSO TO PAY FOR THE TOWERS. BUT NOW WE HAVE LOST MORE PEOPLE THAN WE DID ON 9/11 AND SPENT AND ARE STILL SPENDING MORE MONEY THAN WOULD HAVE BEEN NEEDED TO REBULID THE TOWERS AND YOU TELL ME WE ARE WINNING?
    OH NO SIR! WE ARE NOT.

    May 28, 2008 07:23 pm at 7:23 pm |
  2. David from Ohio

    Ed Rendell should plan on his phone calls to the White House being returned a day later.

    May 28, 2008 07:24 pm at 7:24 pm |
  3. Margaret

    At least Governor Rendell is realistic.

    I don't think Clinton would be a good pick for VP. I just don't trust the Clintons.

    Just wish they would stop saying she won the popular vote...how can you count MI when she was the only one on the ballot!

    May 28, 2008 07:24 pm at 7:24 pm |
  4. Update SD

    Hay CNN why do you NOT report this news of the Day.
    Three superdelegates have come out to day endorsing Barack Obama: Pat Waak from Colorado, Meredith Wood Smith from Oregon and Ben Pangelinan from Guam.Another Oregon superdelegate for Obama - Wayne Kinney

    Lets keep the count correct please.

    May 28, 2008 07:25 pm at 7:25 pm |
  5. Don in Florida

    If she were the stronger candidate she wouldnt be in this situation. Sometimes upsets occur. that's life. Lets move on.

    May 28, 2008 07:25 pm at 7:25 pm |
  6. NORA, FLORIDA

    Hmmmm Now Rendell would not be a bad choice despite the fact that he is joking but as a woman, I can the women's right groups going crazy about women being disenfranchised in this election. Enough already. The only women who think like that are weak minded. Get a grip and stand your ground as real women and stop bickering like hens in a coupe.

    Obama/Rendell

    Obama/Sbelius

    May 28, 2008 07:25 pm at 7:25 pm |
  7. carlo

    What does he mean "fairly adjust?" THEY BROKE THE RULES! What part of that doesn't her supporters understand? Are they living in an alternate universe. How is she more electable when she can't beat Obama?

    Her basic reason for electability is "this country won't vote for a black man." Pure and simple. My question is if she is such a victim of sexism in the primaries, how does that make either her or Obama electable? If the sexism is stronger than the racism, how can SHE win?

    May 28, 2008 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  8. Fazio

    Further splitting the Democratic party...

    Hillary, stop this down... or at least stop your harsh rhetoric of Obama... It is clear that Obama will get the nomination – not you. Ok? Do you understand? Not you. Now.... If you care about the Democratic party, focus your criticism to McShame.

    May 28, 2008 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  9. rave

    Seriously, what does this female have? Those things she talks about economy tells us she has no idea about economy. She dodges the questions, never answers anything straight. Just because obama is black she thinks he cant win. Woman get over with your white supremacy feeling.. You don't have anything. Certainly not brains. Its not like running your family. Controlling every one with your dogmatic nature. All your brain less supporters, do they have any idea about economy. Study economics in the universities, then you would know her approach is absolute BULL SHI*. She will ruin the country with her stupidity and white arrogance.
    Please people. She is not like Bill. She doesnt even have half the brains or statesman ship Bill clinton has. She is a stupid woman.

    May 28, 2008 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  10. Dem in CA

    At this point Clinton would be a drag on the democratic ticket and no help to Obama's campaign even as a sideline supporter. She needs to be given a major time out by the DNC. She's already a drag on the party in general, but then, I believe this has been her actual purpose for staying in and why she seems to be campaigning for McCain over Obama. Her supporters should be urged to take an honest look at what she's doing and why.

    She actually should focus on keeping her senate seat. With her negatives now so high, she'll likely lose that too.

    May 28, 2008 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  11. semp

    No!

    May 28, 2008 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  12. MDW

    This guys has brain cells.....he's just on the losing team...now he trying to get it right....

    Obama 08

    May 28, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  13. sour grape

    Rendell told Bloomberg Television Wednesday. "I don't think the DNC is going to fairly adjust what happened in Florida… "

    Now I am more confident about DNC after reading about what Rendell said.

    May 28, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  14. Remember Harry Truman?

    In the 1948 Dem primaries, he was considered the "loser" all the way up to the convention. Nevertheless, he worked his behind off, crossed the country twice by train, talked to the voters about real issues at every whistlestop. His opponent, Dewey, sort of "brushed" him off while delivering "canned" speeches with the big bucks supplied by his supporters. Guess what! Harry woke up the morning after the election THE WINNER! The voters really are NOT stupid, after all. GO ALL THE WAY, HILLARY!

    May 28, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  15. Tyme4chaing

    Rendell is so wroooong about that. By the time Clinton thinks she getting some momentum back Obama will be prosumtive nominee.

    Bye Clintons.

    May 28, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  16. Matt

    Rendell, you don't sound like a Democrat that is committed to the party and ensuring we win in November. It's time to heal the divisions and bring our party together, and put a Democrat in the White House.

    May 28, 2008 07:28 pm at 7:28 pm |
  17. Sandra

    Where is Hillary's pin?

    May 28, 2008 07:29 pm at 7:29 pm |
  18. Edward V. Fernandez

    USA citizen must carefully evaluate all candidates not by partisanship but the most qualified which ever party they belong.
    1.John McCain is only extension of Bush terrorist administration with
    drained US ecoonomy. US dollar is the culprit of gasoline priices.
    Gas and oil are paid from the source in Tons of Gold not any or USA
    currency.
    2. Barack Obama is only a good speaker without credible experience.
    Brain power is nothing. Knowledge and experience is turbo power.
    3. Hillary Clinton is the most credible presidentiable with on her side
    Bill Clinton who stirred the economy during his term. Bush drained
    everything to recession.
    God Bless America,
    Edward, Guam.

    Hillary Clinton is the best presidentiable

    May 28, 2008 07:29 pm at 7:29 pm |
  19. James

    This is stupid! How do Americans gauge a politician's strength and popularity? Isn't by states won, pledged delegates won, popular votes won and money raised? Obama has fulfilled all these requirements. Hillary has made a lot of noise about how she is more electable than Obama. Who cares about her testicular fortitude. If she had one, she would be ahead of Obama with all the metrics I have listed above. It's high time Obama starts telling off fellas like Governor Rendell who want us to think that he's a weak candidate. The best person to say Obama is a weak candidate is the voter in Iowa, Colorado, Mississippi, Oregon, Missouri and other states where he won handily.

    May 28, 2008 07:29 pm at 7:29 pm |
  20. delegate

    Tell us something we don't know already. I think she did a good job running, but now she has to face the facts. if she wants to have any political future she will have to do whatever she can to unite all her supporters behind the nominee. I guarantee if she doesn't the whole party will remember what happened this year. And she will lose a lot of future support. If Obama was behind right now by so much I would be saying the same about him. We should all be supporting our nominee whoever it is 100%. If you vote for mc same as bush you are not a democrat, and we don't have the same values. you are proving you are voting a person and not their stance on the issues. If hillary makes us lose this time, she should be the gop canidate next time. sen. Hillary Clinton (R) of New York.

    May 28, 2008 07:29 pm at 7:29 pm |
  21. mwFlorida

    Duh, Rules are rules, don't you get that? Do you seriously think you're above the law. Look at what's happening with Bush right now. If we had someone with those type of balls, just maybe the Clintons would be in jail right now. Power and big somes of cash is the root of all evil and she ahd her husband see it about to deminish before there eyes.

    All America and ither countries would see of this election is that the Clinton's can break the rules any time they want with no recourse. We would be even weaker in their eyes. They already have problems with the voting process. Why give them more to talk about.

    May 28, 2008 07:30 pm at 7:30 pm |
  22. JA Cook

    The Republicans would love Clinton on the ticket.

    No one has thrown the kitchen sink at her yet and there's a lot in the sink for her. Obama never came close to turning it loose on Clinotn so she's unscathed – so far.

    I can see the ads now quoting Hillary about who has experience; Her and McCain. Obama "gave a speech" according to her. How can you have that History on the ticket?

    She's clearly more of the same old stuff using Karl Rove's playbook. Obama needs a running mate that also supports some fresh air in Washington.

    No way Hillary!

    May 28, 2008 07:30 pm at 7:30 pm |
  23. charles

    This "Not the strongest candidate" talk is what's going to leave open the possibility of another four years of gloom for our country. Hillary and all of your supporters, you were doing so well after Indiana and North Carolina. You had laid off of referencing Obama in any way, just as he's laid off of referencing you. Now you're turning up your kitchen sink thinking once again in the zero hour. Nothing you can do would make this a fair fight if you come out on top. The Clinton campaign lost. Get over it.

    May 28, 2008 07:30 pm at 7:30 pm |
  24. semp

    Yo Ed heap some scrapple on your cheese steak and eat yourself into oblivion... oh yea take Bill and Hill wid ya.

    May 28, 2008 07:30 pm at 7:30 pm |
  25. chris

    love it when we hear the truth from those who know best not the emotional clinton supporters and spoiler republican posting on here and foxitico

    May 28, 2008 07:31 pm at 7:31 pm |
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