Last week, with commendable honesty, Hillary Clinton's campaign announced that in a frantic push to save their candidate from defeat at the hands of Barack Obama, they were going to throw everything including the “kitchen sink” at him.
It was derided at the time as merely a sign of the desperation that 11 straight primary defeats and a host of premature political obituaries had wrought. But it turned out to be both an accurate forecast of the next phase of the campaign and a description of one of the most brilliant tactical manoeuvres since Nelson sailed straight for the Franco-Spanish line at Trafalgar.
In the last days before this week's critical Texas and Ohio primaries, Mrs Clinton hit Mr Obama not only with the sink, but with most of the plumbing, the countertops and a couple of heavy duty appliances for good measure.
First, in Ohio, she turned a minor spat over a questionable Obama campaign leaflet into a great stain on his personal honour: “Shame on you, Barack Obama!” she cried, “Shame on you!” Then she compared him to George Bush, saying the country had seen the “tragic consequences” of electing a president with no foreign policy experience.
Last weekend she threw in the tar brush too. In an interview with CBS, she was asked whether she thought Mr Obama (middle name Hussein) might actually be a secret Muslim. To which she replied: “No, no. There is nothing to base that on - as far as I know.”
Not subtle. It echoed some of the earlier remarks that Clinton officials have deployed about Mr Obama's acknowledgement of youthful drug abuse. It was a bit like saying: “I have no reason to believe he is a mass murderer and a rapist. He insists that he isn't and I take him at his word.”
Then last weekend her campaign ran one of its most effective television commercials yet, playing on Mr Obama's inexperience as commander-in-chief: the ad featured a phone ringing while children slept soundly in their beds. An ominous voice said it was 3am and a phone was ringing in the White House: “Who do you want answering the phone?” it asked. You half-expected the receiver to be picked up by a black hand holding a spliff and a string of Muslim prayer beads.
It all worked, of course. She won the big prizes of Texas and Ohio, and critically, according to exit polls, she won by a two to one margin among the large numbers of voters who said they made up their minds in the last few days of the campaign.
To be sure, she was helped by Mr Obama, perhaps reeling under the deluge of household plumbing, showing his first signs of wilting.
His carefully crafted economic message of populist irresponsible nonsense was cruelly betrayed by a campaign adviser who discreetly told the Canadian Government that the protectionist propaganda that Mr Obama was peddling on the campaign trail would be safely jettisoned once he got to the White House. On Monday his dubious financial links with a property developer came back to haunt him.
Then the media, having for most of the campaign struck a posture of infatuated awe with Mr Obama, finally got off their knees and started asking serious questions. The senator didn't much like this and called an aggrieved halt at a press conference this week after only eight questions.
And so, here we are, astonishingly, with more than three quarters of the Democratic primary elections over, back to square one.
Despite her victories on Tuesday, Mrs Clinton still trails in terms of delegates. But what was once a tiny crack of light in her darkening campaign has now opened into a window of opportunity.
If she wins the next big primary in Pennsylvania on April 22, she will accentuate her new-found momentum, with still another ten or so primaries to go. There is growing talk that the Democrats will have to schedule new primaries in Florida and Michigan, two very big states that have already voted, and which Mrs Clinton won, but whose delegates were disqualified because the states infringed the party's rules on timing.
If all this breaks for her she will have a significantly enhanced chance of persuading the party's super-delegates, who will decide the matter at the convention, that she would be the best candidate to take on John McCain in November.
The danger, I think, for Mr Obama is that the kitchen sink volley of the last week has revealed a central truth about the Democratic contest: she wants it more. In politics, it's not necessarily the better person who gets the top job, but the one who is really, really desperate for it and willing to go to any lengths to get it.
For Mrs Clinton - and for her momentarily quiet husband - this is it. This is the alpha and omega of their existence; the sacred mission at the heart of their life's journey. They will do anything to get there. Mr Obama has time on his side - at only 46 he will be a leader of the Democratic party for 20 years or more.
In another clever move after this week's primaries, Mrs Clinton showed she perhaps senses this disparity of political hunger when she mooted the idea of a “dream ticket” for the Democrats - she as the presidential candidate, Mr Obama as the vice-president.
It makes perfect sense for her and might, if he thinks really hard about it, suit him. If they win in November, he is the heir apparent when she ultimately steps down. If they lose, he is the immediate successor.
And after another week or two like the last, Mr Obama may finally decide it's better to have Mrs Clinton on his side than have her throwing the plumbing at him.
I too will vote for and campaign for and donate to McCain. And save up for 2012 for an Obama re-do if HRC is our nominee.
I am tired of politics as usual... and she is the very definition of it.
She is power hungry. If she loved America she could see what her tactics are doing to us.
He wants to bring unity to USA. She seeks to further divide.
Nurse hussein, Los Angeles , Ca
Would someone please tell me what Senator Barack Obama's biggest legislative success is, either in the United States Senate or in the Illinois Senate?
Doug Page, Glen Ellyn, IL, USA
If the super delegates pick Clinton over Obama then we are just going to vote for McCain. Obama is an exciting new leader for this country. Obama can bring this country together and he has brought a lot of us into the fold that wouldn't even care otherwise. He is fresh and exciting. We really don't want the same old thing again, Bush-Clinton-Clinton- Bush-Bush. We really do need a change. Obama has the lead in delegates for a reason, people are excited and believe.
arthur, baltimore, usa/maryland
This goes out to Ed Adirondack from NY who claims "Mrs. Clinton has done nothing as our representative"
Just incase you have been sleeping for the last 7 years let me recap some of the things Hillary has done for New York and America...You can look all this up. PLEASE DO
She secured 20 billion for NY after 9/11 to rebuild ground zero and get business back on their feet and secured millions to get rescue workers (our heros) the health care they need and deserve.
She delivered more then 2 billion for health care for NY children and famalies.
She created Jobs for New Yorkers and saved existing jobs by working to keep NY military bases open.
Hillary Stood up to the Pentagon to make sure American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan get the body armor they need.
She has fought insurance companies to help families who have been denied necessary medical treatment.
She stood up to the Bush administration to protect Social Security from privatization.
OK NOW TELL ME WHAT OBAMA HAS DONE!!
Tom D'Angora, New York, New York
Obama lost the nomination when he lost Ohio, pure and simple. This was his last chance to stop Clinton. Proving he can't win a battleground state like Ohio shows the superdelegates that he will be a second McGovern in the fall. The media will keep this going because they adore him, but he won't be the nominee after losing Ohio by double digits.
Kevin DuJan, Chicago, IL
Mr. Obama is a nice enough young rhetoric jockey whose lofty eloquence reminds me of a thimbleful of cream whipped up into a room-sized meringue. I'll be pleased to vote for him when (if) he can develop some specific gravity.
Bettie S., Palm Springs, CA/USA
All this negative commenting on Hillary and the American peoples choice, when in the UK you have a leader that the people did not even vote for; as the comment below you get what you deserve.
P. James, richmond, USA Virginia
Tom in Glasgow--
I am American and Republican and think no-one could have said it more succinctly than you have just done. I will probably vote for McCain in the general election, although with no real enthusiasm. However, I do admire Barak Obama as individual with a high sense of personal and political ethics, an honorable opponent, as it were. He is someone who is the antithesis of either of the Clintons whose self-serving ruthlessness and total lack of political or private morality is totally abhorrent to me and many other Americans. Their previous tenure in the White House was one which brought the office of the presidency to such low repute that I never wish to see another Clinton anywhere near it.
Alvie Johnson, Idaho, USA,
The fact that Senator Obama won only five counties in Ohio, ten or so in Texas, and four in Missouri (a state that he won by collecting urban votes in Kansas City and St. Louis) (the rest of the counties were all captured by Clinton) should make any Democrat reconsider him. The fact that Senator Clinton runs the board with women, white men, working class voters, and Hispanics (the nation's largest minority) should indicate that she is the only person capable of delivering crucial states to the Democrats. Democrats need to win Ohio and Pennsylvania in 2008, and Mr. Obama has already proven his inability to deliver the working class votes that will put Democrats over the top. By beating Obama handily in such states, Clinton justifies her remaining in the race.
Boyd Gardner, Washington, DC
I live in New York State. We were robbed of our representation when the Clintons rolled over our electorate and told us who we would be electing as our Senator. Mrs. Clinton has done nothing as our representative. She doesn't even live in the state-prefers her Georgetown, DC digs. Someone should ask the residents of the state to name one thing she has done for us: watch them go blank. She did "promise" us that she would be a full time resident of the state, would complete her full term if re-elected and bring lots of jobs to our economically stressed upstate area. No dice on any of these things. BUT she is promising those same items to Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin. If she didn't do it with NY how can she do it for a nation? I have one Grandmother from Cork and one from Antrim. Can I take credit for settling the Irish troubles because I have eaten Thanksgiving dinner with them for the last 30 years??? Seems Mrs. Clinton is taking that same credit & all she did was have tea.
Adirondack Ed, Northville, USA/NY
The election of George Bush showed, with tragic consequences, what can happen if you elect a president with no experience in foreign affairs.
After all, he was merely in the same family as a former president who knows what it's like to bomb Iraq. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has the decided advantage of being in the same family as a former president who knows what it's like to bomb Iraq.
As political campaigns go, this is genius.
David, Blyth, UK
In your sub-title you use the words 'determined' and 'desperate' as if they are the same - not so. Desperate has a short term goal, tactical advantage. Determined has a long term goal, strategic. For the Clinton's, there is no difference. Like the iconic movie of the 90's, "Wall Street," when Greco said "Greed is good," the Clinton's believe winning is everything - win ugly, but win. Bush and Rove believed you divide and conquer demographics (tactics). In all of these, one is left with a hollowness of purpose, selfish power without direction for the greater good. America has become dysfunctional at the personal and political level because of the abundance of short term, selfish, divisive behaviour.
Obama may be on to a new generation of thinking: an over-arching need to consider the common good, rather than personal power. This is strategic, not tactical thinking.
It remains to be seen if America is ready to choose a vision of a better America, or the winner of a nasty fight.
Bruce, Reno, Nevada
There is one small problem with this nostrum, it doesn't add delegates to 2025, but I agree that Obama has got to show he can act like a commander-in-chief by defeating Hillary completely and utterly with popular vote and pledged and committed superdelegates. The information available on the uncommitted superdelegates suggests a majority in his favour and with the remaining delegates available through the primaries, there is no way that Hillary can overcome the deficit. She only gained about 9 from her three popular victories, and it appears from Obama camp calculations that she actually got less in Texas, because of Obama's majority in the extremely complex caucus system. Even allowing for a full vote primary in Florida and Michigan, perhaps by postal ballot, Clinton cannot achieve the delegate numbers required. She want the delegates elected from Florida and Michigan to be seated at the convention, and as long as Obama is leading in delegates, this will not happen, The million+ hope.
Leo Regan, Ballymote,Sligo, Ireland
Finally, Finally, Finally an article of truth. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
The Brown's of California
Rolina, North Highlands, California
I find it sad that people think that the best person suited for the highest public position in a country is the one who can best play the political game, the one who can take the political hits.
I want a leader who can actually bring about change in the country, not spend all their time in political wars, fighting tit-for-tat and essentially drawing a stalement in a country where 2-party politics means you're always straddling a line of 50% of the people vs the other 50% of the people.
If I wanted to see boxing, I'd rather go to Las Vegas instead of D.C..
PeterC, San Francisco, US, CA
Who cares?
Hilary, Obama and McCain; they're all users, just basically selfish arrogant salespeople/marketing people who care 100 times more about themselves than the U.S.
America has had bad presidents for the last 20 years, and the future looks just as bad.
If there is any blame for America's problems, it is the last 20 years of Congress and the presidents.
No one cares about America as a beacon on the hill, America is just a consumer market for corporations to enrich themselves, and the politicians are "in" on the gig.
How many people, how many politicians, are even aware of the ideals that the Founding Fathers of the U.S. had in mind ?
Maybe we need an economic depression to wake up people and throw out the bums.
Mark, Austin, TX
Clinton can be desparate and want it all she desires. At the end of pledged delegate process, she will end up with at least 140 delegates less than Obama.
Even if we seat Florida as-is, and do Michigan over (this time With Obama on ballot.) she will still end up with at least 50 delegates less in a worst-case for Obama scenario.
With all the breaks Clinton has had, and 16 years to introduce herself to public, the fact that she cannot pull ahead is evidence that she doesn't desserve the nomination.
More pledged delegates = nomination. Period.
I. P. Freely, Minneapolis, Minnesota
No, she didn't win Texas.
The Texas process includes both direct vote and caucuses. The outcome (which will be finally announced later this month) is now certain enough to place the majority of delegates in the Obama column. Her celebration was premature. Total states won since March 4: Obama 13, Clinton 2.
Sorry, Hillary isn't the winner that she would like us to believe she is, hence the desperation and sleazy campaign tactics. Shame on Hillary, shame!
Bob, Newton, MA
Is it not a self fullfilling prophecy that any candidate who can survive this gruelling and difficult fight for the nomination is bound to be a supremely ambitious and dominant person ? Hillary is strong enough to make it through and do the job. She will give the world a fresh angle on the entire persona that is the USA. Obama and his NAFTA bashing policies are a concern - I think there is a lot about him we have yet to learn and it may be too late when that happens and Hillary has already been squeezed out. Having said this, John McCain seems weak and deferential when he speaks - is he the best the Republicans can offer ? I respect him for his heroism in the Vietnam war but he will need more than that. He was more or less gifted the nomination and now he comes across as bewildered. All the US media analysts on FOX and CNN saturate the airwaves with glutinous debate without difinitive political analysis of what each candidate will bring to the presidency. It is like American Idol.
Colin, Dorset, UK
Quite right, Christopher of Cape Town I would add that it would be good if the 'youthful spliff' issue associated with Obama were highlighted a little more, showing the consequences of taking recreational illegal drugs can not only lead to more serious hard drug taking but can mar your chances of upward career movement whether in politics or not.
sk, East Sussex,
The level of desperration and the several layers of shrouds of secrecy and the lack of integrity has always been apparent with the clintons.the monica lewinsky affair for mr.clinton or the disputed fund raising issue with Cher & Peter paul for Mrs.clinton are just couple of incidents. the ironic thing that the clinton campain ought to feel ashamed of is that in the build upto March4th, they threw every possible thing at obama but when their fallacies are being pointed to(the tax records) they have scream aloud and accuse him of playing Ken starr. A bit of introspection may be useful for the clintons that inspite of their clout they are lagging behind, and yet a new person on the block - obama has surged forward.
MRSA, ipswich,, U.K.
I do not know if wanting it more equates with determination to go for it! But I do know that when the media was anticipating Hillary's political death and Democrats began a whispering campaign for her to back down, Hillary remained focused and on task. This is a much needed quality for the next President of the USA. As for Obama, grow up! There are questions you need to answer. Up until recently, the media has refrained from asking tough questions about your background and when they got too close, you said enough and went to the back of the plane. Not a needed quality for the President of the USA.
Teresa, Bay Area, USA
Thanks to mis-managing her campaign, she lost this nomination weeks ago. There is nothing legal she can do now to win the nomination. Even if she has landslide victories in the rest of the primaries, she will still be behind in the delegate count, and that's what matters.
If she finds a way to steal this nomination despite this fact, it will disenfranchise and split the democratic party and John McCain will win the general election.
She knows this, but she's sticking it out for as long as possible in case Obama stumbles, which isn't going to happen. It's over. She blew her chance.
Dexter, Omaha, NE
She's the best man for the job!
William frost, Las Vegas, NV usa
Just because you're desperate and throw in the kitchen sink and the toilet doesn't mean you want it more. It just means you're willing to do anything, including compromising whatever morals you think you have, to get what you want. People who compromise their own humanity through lies and sabotage are not good leaders; they are certainly not people who I'd look up to, let alone trust that they had the people's best interests at heart. While Obama may not have the "let's throw the kitchen sink" attitude in mind (simply because that goes against his own moral compass to tear someone else down in such a destructive way), it doesn't mean he wants it less. It means that he's not willing to walk knee deep in crap in order to get it. Because if she gets it that way, she stinks all the way around. And who would trust a leader like that. Many people might, but I know alot of people who don't.
KWiz, Atlanta, GA
Hillary Clinton is a vicious and conniving hoaxer. She relies on Bill for her experience - a true fallacy. I hope that the Americans
see through her and vote Republican if she wins the nomination.
Vernon Butcher, BASINGSTOKE, England
If the voting public are foolish enough to support her despite her methods and her long history of questionable activities inside and outside of politics then they deserve everything they get
WTaylor, London, UK
"Hillary bashers all men?". Not so. I am a woman and I find Hillary Clinton a mean, self-seeking, self-righteous, supremely ambitious woman who will stop at nothing to get herself elected. She has shown her colours before during her husband's presidency. The only true experience she has is how to fight dirty, how to get way by any means, mostly foul. She is notoriously evil-tempered, has an abrasive tongue and demands total loyalty from those around her. She is also a closet Republican, a war-mongerer and the worst example of feminism to boot. If she had so much experience and was such an outspoken wife during her husband's presidency, how come she allowed Rwanda to happen? She did not, like Eleanor Roosevelt, stride into her husband's office and demand an instant solution. She kept quiet. Shame on you, Hillary Clinton, shame on you. And that is just one example of Hillary's so-called "experience" in foreign affairs.
Caroline Kennedy, San Jose, Costa Rica
Isn't it interesting that all the worst Hilary bashers are all...men. It would appear that anyone can say what they like about her, including driving stakes through her heart, but heaven forbid that anyone whould take any action to reveal the hot air behind so many of Obama's pronouncements. And as for the contest going to who wants it more, I quite agree with Gerard Baker: yes, Bush did want it more than Gore, and he certainly wanted it more than Kerry. As for Kennedy, no-one wanted it more than his father and that, in the end, was what counted. Americans are prurient in many ways but not when it comes to politics - the voters understood what Hillary was up to but went for her anyway. If Obama doesn't like it - and it's clear that he is less than happy that his honeymoon is over - he's going to have to pitch in with more of the same (thereby undermining his whole 'new politics' approach) or get down and dirty, in which case he's just a one-term senator playing by the same old rules.
Conor, Edinburgh,
I find it amusing that when she's looking for something to throw, the nearest thing is the kitchen sink.
she may want it more, but the voters want her less.
jem, london, uk
You forgot to mention the Bobbit move. Naming him as potential VP candidate.
Wonder what Hillary would love more - being President - or having Obama as her subordinate. Give her four years to teach him not to be so damned uppity.
Plus it's a nice little Kill Bill move.
The feminists must be salivating.
David MacKinnon, Amstelveen, Netherlands
'In politics the most determined person gets the top job' - how do you know? I could pick out any number of counter-examples from history. Do you really suppose that Goerge Bush was more determined than Al Gore, the man who attempted to sue his way into the White House? Kennedy was determined and ambitious - but more so than Richard Nixon? Was Abraham Lincoln more determined than Stephen Douglas, or John Quincy Adams more determined than Andrew Jackson or Henry Clay?
Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Obama is still leading in delegates, he is still popular, and Hillary is still unpopular among more than 50% of her fellow citizens. Obama has been pronounced dead at least twice before; after narrowly losing New Hampshire and before Super Tuesday. In both cases he surged back strongly. Hillary Clinton does not suddenly become the front runner by dint of a narrow win in Texas and a substantial win in Ohio.
Don, London, UK
The implication of this article is that if you are sufficiently grasping and ambitious that you will stop at nothing, stoop to any smear available, appeal to the basest racist instincts of your own, supposedly liberal, electorate (example: Billy Jeff's Jesse Jackson comments following the South Carolina primary, or Shrillary's no reason to believe Obama is a Muslim- "as far as I know"), attempt to rewrite your own party's rule-book after the fact ( Florida, Michigan) - if you do all this, demonstrate that you have no scruple that will stand in your way, that somehow then you are deserving of the highest office, is the most dispiriting conclusion that it is possible to arrive at. What an indictment of human nature if this is what it takes to get on in life. If I was American, I'd be Republican but I pray to God that Obama rallies from this and finally drives a stake through this evil, vindictive woman's heart.
Tom, Glasgow,
Certainly Hillary Clinton's determination is her strength. And thanks in part to the plumbing, people are beginning to hear the Obama vessel for what it is. The odds must be that she will now move steadily ahead as this contest plays itself out. Obama should set his sights on the next election and use the time to add substance to his style.
Christopher R, Cape Town , South Africa