The James Carville watch: He's close to conceding

James Carville's fierce commitment to Hillary Clinton's presidential quest has led him to utter some of this campaign season's most memorable quotes (see here and here). But at heart, Carville remains more seasoned political operative than polemist, and he has joined others in seeing the writing on the wall for Clinton.

"I think the great likelihood is that (Barack) Obama will be the nominee," he said during an appearance at Furman University in South Carolina.

He added: “As soon as I determine when that is, I’ll send him a check.”

More on what he had to say is available here.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Sean K]

Considering that his wife is a Republican strategist, I don't give two cents what Carville has to say... he and his wife obviously think politics are some nonchalant little game you play in the daytime before you come home to your 'real life'. It's people like them that are responsible for the cynicism our country has toward politics. Your political view is not your favorite sports team or T.V. show... it's not something you put on and take off like an overcoat. It's the way you think about the world and humanity and how you think people should live and behave. I don't see how you can marry someone who opposes your fundamental views of life.

[Helena]

James Carville owes Governor Bill Richardson a huge apology!

[MyLessThanPrimeBeef]

Here is one question for Carville.

Hilary's camp has been saying for months her opponent doesn't say much. For a change, would she consider endorsing the Sphinx, the one in ancient Greece, or even the one in Egypt, who hasn't made an utterance in over four or five thousand years, if the name of the game is to say a little as possible?

I would definitely consider writiing in the Sphinx.

[NinaE]

Carville just trying to redeem himself. What else can he say. The writings on the wall. So, his revelation means nothing to me. I agree, people like him and his wife make money tossing their views and opinions around as if they were facts! I agree he needs to apologize to Gov. Richardson. As far as Carville and his wife being different in views and opinions, I think most of it is their niche. That's how they make their money. As far as his opinion, I don't value it very much. Sorry Carville, you get no kudos from me for realizing Sen. Obama will win this nomination. That was known by most at least 2 primaries ago.

[Derek]

SeanK - guy settle. If you can't respect and love someone with opposing views from you, or you can't see that there are faults and strengths on each side of the isle, then your either 1.) retarded or 2.) have the social IQ of a bird. Polarization doesn't help anyone, why perpetuate?

[Richard]

I lost all respect for Carville when he went after DNC chair Howard Dean as somehow misguided in his direction of the party AFTER the Democrats had just taken back the Senate and the House in the November 2006 elections! The DLC (Democratic "Leadership" Council) is the corporate Clinton wing of the party, responsible for working class rhetoric in their speeches but free trade agreements and business-friendly deregulation in practice. Carville is DLC nut, a loyal Clintonite who would screw the Democratic Party to prove his allegiance to the Clintons. The real reason he doesn't like Howard Dean is because he was not going to act partial toward Hillary for the coronation she was seeking going into the presidential contest. Dean's 50-state strategy is brilliant and is exactly what the party needs if it is going to sustain itself as a national party. Carville was wrong then, and has continued to be wrong---more a Clinton lapdog than a critical-minded pundit.

[Pecos 45]

James Carville is a political hack, like Karl Rove. The fact that these two hacks get air time is just beyond belief. They used to be called "bag men" back in the day. How they became respectable is yet another example of the triumph of the white trash nation.

[N.E. BodybutHillary]

I'm confused. Did James Carvile just call Hillary Clinton a female dog?

[Will]

Kudos Derek. Right on the money.

They we involved in politics long before they met, it is not a niche. Some of you people are not very informed.

[Sean K]

Derek: I can neither love nor respect someone who has made it their life's goal and ambition to make the world in an image that is exactly the opposite of what I believe to be normal and decent. It is clear you are one of the typical people in the world who view life's most important decisions with the same care you use to choose which football team you root for or which horse you bet on. You can make ad hominem comments and make childish rants about people's intelligence all you want; It doesn't change the fact that you said little if anything in defense of your argument.

[Johann S]

Who is James Carville?

[Clarity]

Why did it take the media a week to report the incidents in Indiana? Are incendiary acts less harmful than incendiary remarks? We are dealing with a double standard based on RACE in this exciting primary season:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/12/AR2008051203014_Comments.html

Obama's Indiana campaign precinct was defaced by Hillary supporters on the eve of the Indiana primary.

These acts are violent and deplorable. Rev Wright sowed words of discontent -- according to some Americans and his story was played over and over again.
If we are playing the guilt by association game, isn't Hillary suppose to man up and deal with this horrible event?

[Sean K]

Will: I'm sure almost everyone posting here is aware that these two were involved in politics before they met. In fact, this is evidence IN FAVOR of the idea that they are political hacks who don't take any of the issues anywhere near as seriously as they do the money they make off of them. I have no idea how that comment was supposed to support you or derek's claims. It clearly does not. The problem here isn't other people being 'uninformed', it is the fact that neither you nor derek have the critical thinking skills to comprehend a simple argument.

[Derek]

O.k. SeanK there is passion and there is perspective. You seem to have a lot of the former and minimal of the later. Perhaps there is personal issue which overrides everything - abortion? gay rights? a relative who has lost their life in Iraq? I obviously don't know.

I tend to lean right on economic issues, and left on social issues. I see both sides of the story on most issues. Most of my friends are Democrats, and most of the people I work with are Republicans. They are all smart, thoughtful people, they all have different views and often I don't understand how they apply weight to certain arguements over others - but at the end of the day they are all "normal and decent." Instead of cutting off anyone who doesn't share your views, I think we all benefit from sharing our reasonings.

[Margot]

To me it's all contigent on whether Richardson said he would be loyal to Hilary Clinton or not. I would not want to go back on my word but then again if he did change his mind so what. I hope he wasn't stupid enough to actually promise to support Hilary like Carville contends but either way, whatever the real story is, I certainly don't hold it against Richardson for backing the candidate that speaks to him. It's a free country. And on a issue as important as who will lead the Democrats against McCain, I certainly don't mind if he thinks it over and changes his mind, one time or multiple times. I just think it was stupid and foolish of Carville to say that Richardson owed Hilary his support just because of the positions he held under President Bill Clinton. That to me is wrong. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, including James Carville. I will say in defense of Carville that no one is ever 100% correct no matter how much they think they are but doesn't mean that they aren't entitled to their opinion or aren't good at their job. I wouldn't mind having the balls to be able to be a political strategist, especially one as successful as Carville.