Clinton needs her own act

The horror. I just watched the video of Clinton changing “Yes we will” all by herself. I’ll post the video, but I warn you, it’s really, really sad:

Once again, for like the 14 millionth time, in the last 5 weeks, Sen. Clinton has gone out on the campaign trail and stole another line from the Obama campaign. At first is was puzzling, then it was annoying, now it’s just pathetic.

But I take heart that she can’t steal his “We are not red states and blue states, but the United States” line, since she and her campaign have made it clear that the 24 states Obama has won are insignificant. Of course, her campaign strategist, Mark Penn, also compared Clinton to Jimmy Carter in ’80 and Walter Mondale in ’84 and we know how well those Democratic runs ended. That means we shouldn’t be surprised that he also said:

Two days later, after Obama’s eighth straight victory, Penn told reporters: “Winning Democratic primaries is not a qualification or a sign of who can win the general election. If it were, every nominee would win because every nominee wins Democratic primaries.”

Which as Addison at TPM states that the logical conclusion we can get from the Clinton’s campaign is that winning primaries in states means nothing and by their logic, Mike Gravel will be our Democratic nominee. Of course, the statement above is what you get when you chose loyalty vs. ability to run your campaign.

“If your argument is ‘vote for me because I’m going to win,’ which is the heart of the electability argument, it’s very difficult to make if you’re losing,” said Tad Devine, who was John Kerry’s chief strategist during the 2004 race.

The Clinton campaign also wants to make electability an issue. They think that because Sen. Clinton has never has a serious campaign before, copies everything her opponent says, votes depending on polls and how her opponent votes and vote to send US troops, Iraqis and Afghanistanis to their deaths just to appear”tough on national security” when she ran for president, that that means she’s more electable than Sen. Obama. Seeing as how they pay so much attention to polls, maybe they should look up the recent Rasmussen numbers.

Obama: 46%
McCain: 43%

McCain: 49%
Clinton: 43%

Right. Can we talk electability? Or would your team rather go back and mine previous Obama speeches to make your candidate sound even more ineffective and lame?