Hillary Clinton wants company at the L.A. debate

It was going to be a key face-off under any circumstances, coming as it does five days before the heap of primaries on Feb. 5.

But now, the Jan. 31 Democratic presidential debate in Los Angeles looms as a crucial rematch, after the sharp-edged exchanges between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton at Monday's forum in South Carolina. And thanks to the munificence of the Clinton campaign, one lucky person (and a guest) can be part of the audience, seeing for themselves how much the two prime contenders for their party's nod have come to disdain one another.

Actually, munificence has nothing to do with it.

In the best tradition of find-any-way-to-raise a buck, the Clinton campaign is conducting a lottery. Those who contribute to her war chest before ...

midnight Saturday will have a chance to be selected to attend the debate as part of the Clinton contingent.

The pitch that went out today came directly from the candidate herself. And in it she provides a little personal insight.

"One of my favorite moments in any debate -- like the one we had last night -- is when I look out into the audience and make eye contact with someone I know. Sometimes it's a friend, or a family member. Often it is someone I just met who shared their story with me."

She's dangled the bait, now comes the hook: "Next Thursday, I want you to be that person. Would you come to an upcoming debate and be there for me in the audience?"

About that favorite moment point ... Clinton sure had us fooled. We could have sworn it would occur when Obama is left stammering by something she has said. But maybe that's also when she looks for a friendly face in the audience.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Jo]

HILLARY CLINTON IS AGAINST DRIVER'S LICENCES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

WHY DOES SHE WANT TO FORBID THEM DRIVING??

[anghiari]

Bill Clinton's Obama Strategy per Bill's ex-attack dog Dick Morris

WHY is Bill Clinton courting such intense publicity, in evitably much of it negative?

Is he crazy? Crazy like a fox.

He has two goals and is achieving them both spectacularly.
First, he wants to be the same kind of lightning rod for Hillary that she was for him during his run for the presidency.

In the days before Iowa and leading up to New Hampshire, Hillary was the prime topic of political discussion.

She took shots for misusing Bill's record and trying to adopt it as her own, for minimizing King's contribution to civil rights, for crying, for attacking her opponents, and for changing her campaign style to become more likeable.
Now, she rarely gets hit anymore. They're hitting Bill instead.

The other method behind his madness is that Bill wants to suck up all the oxygen in the room and dominate the coverage of the Democratic contest. By doing so, he cuts Obama out of the news, pushes him off the front page, and usurps the headlines.

His tactics now are reminiscent of those he used to black out John Kerry during the lead-up to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

By scheduling book signings and speeches in Boston, he effectively took the coverage away from the prospective Democratic nominee, a man who would have eclipsed Hillary's presidential ambitions had he won the election.
Ultimately, the Clintons are playing a game of jujitsu with Obama, using his own strength against him.

By challenging Obama for the black vote - by promising to go door to door in South Carolina in minority neighborhoods, for example - Bill is highlighting the question: Will Obama carry the black vote? Of course, he will. He leads, 4 to 1, among African-Americans now.

But by making that the central question, Obama's South Carolina victory will be hailed as proof that he won the African-American vote. Such block voting will trigger the white backlash Sen. Clinton needs to win.

Once whites see blacks voting en masse for a black man, they will figure that it is a racial game and line up for Hillary. Already, she carries white voters by 2 to 1.

[calwatch]

Don, it would be fair to mention the public debate lottery at http://www.cadem.org/debate for all of your readers. No campaign pledge required.

[Gwen]

anghiari:
If your assessment of white voters is correct, that they will abandon a black candidate who has the support of the black community, it just shows how shallow those who follow this pattern actually are. Hopefully, you will be wrong and white voters will not be that narrow minded. After all, black voters have been supporting white candidates for decades. If you are asserting that, after voting for only white candidates for 40 years that they have no right to vote for a black candidate that they find appealing ,what does that say about the narrow-mindedness of you and others who think this way?

[miriam biteng]

Let's go for the showdown, i definitely agree since we can unravel all the truth behiind each of them. Go, Hillary!

[martin]

When are Hillary and Obama going to stop the cat fight? I am tired of them nipping at each other. I will vote for John Edwards because he is clearly the only candidate that can compete in all states. I think it is a joke to say that the sexism and racism of the past is gone. Putting hillary and obama on the same ticket, is a ticket for disaster. If democrats want to lose the white house again, then be my guest and vote obama and hillary. I want a democrat in the office but it looks like Kucinich just wont be able to get there. So I will vote the next best thing and that is John Edwards.

[Ted Lawrence]

Is holding a lottery for a debate ticket even legal? I can't believe the Clinton's have gotten this shameless.

[RayS]

In the best tradition of find-any-way-to-raise a buck??? It's SLEAZY and you know it. This lottery thing is just the latest, remember the white house coffees, and renting of the Lincoln bedroom back in 1996. We can't blame it all on that vast "right wing conspiracy" as the behavior of the Clintons has been appalling for quite some time, This election is, or at least it should be, about what's best for the future of this country. We deserve better than the Clintons - just look at the BS in Nevada (attempting to change the rules at the last minute) and now MI and FL. Hillary has demonstrated a complete lack of Presidential character.

R

[LA girl]

Hillary is using the card of change as it proved to be poll working with Obama and Edward. However, what kind of change she is suggesting. She is suggesting “A Clinton after each Push to clean!!!” with similar policy “tax back as the time before the Push time and in my memory this was a good time” to fix the current position. If any us of us the year of 2008 or 2009 is the same as 1993, we will be all mistaken. So, Clintons! Will no longer be a valid policy. She showed a very irresponsive and inconsiderate mind in their discussion about illegal immigration. Having driving licenses has to do nothing with status of an individual in the USA. I agree strongly with Obama that this is essential to minimize a hit and run and them moving with no license as he said “people do not come here to drive they come to live!”. She is not a kind of person who will consider any change or admit by things being not right. I think the current Push problem that he could not admit that he did a mistake in Iraq and kept going forward in the issue to prove he is right. The same thing is happening with Hillary, she refused to admit she was wrong about he Iraq vote and simply apologized about bad judgment. This is a kind of a leader whom prejudice would interfere between admitting their mistake and keeping covering it with bigger ones.
She played one card in the debate that to memorize everyone that Clinton’s time was good one for Americans...for God sake what kind of “agent of change” is she??.
I am a femal and I do not care for woman! to be president I do care the RIGHT Person be the preseident. Please be OBAMA!