Black Box Report

Things are getting tight in the Keystone state:

Rasmussen
Clinton +5
Zogby/NewsMax
Clinton +7
Suffolk
Clinton +10
Public Policy Polling
Obama +3
Strategic Vision
Clinton +7
Quinnipiac
Clinton +7
Survey USA
Clinton +6

So, what's it all about, Alfie?

Less than 24 hours before the polls open in PA and the Clinton camp has to be encouraged by these polls, but not overjoyed. Because while these numbers show movement her way, there are other numbers to suggest Obama’s gaining…Long story short, it’s all about GOTV now.

Get Out the Vote. Making sure the politically active base is pounding the pavement in your name. It's the backbone of any political campaign. Those passionate activists that are the go-to guys and gals for any candidate. You may not agree on every single policy point or petition, but they're a politician's bread and butter.

Until, of course, you tell them to sod off:

"Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said to a meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

Oh no she di'n't!?!?

Yep. She did.

Howard Wolfson, communications director for the Clinton campaign, verified the authenticity of the audio, and elaborated on Clinton's charge that these same party activists were engaged in acts of intimidation against her supporters: "There have been well documented instances of intimidation in the Nevada and the Texas caucuses, and it is a fact that while we have won 4 of the 5 largest primaries, where participation is greatest, Senator Obama has done better in caucuses than we have." About Clinton's remarks suggesting dismay over high Democratic activist turnout, Wolfson said, "I'll let my statement stand as is."

The last time I can remember a politician seeking the nomination of a party while simultaneously insulting the very people who make up that party's base was Joe Lieberman in 2006. And you know how popular HE is with the Democratic Party.

Apart from lying misspeaking about MoveOn's support of the war in Afghanistan (hat tip, Karl Rove), and aisde from the fact that the examples of supposed "intimidation" - the Nevada and Texas caucuses - that Wolfson uses to justify Hillary's comments came after Hillary made them, I just don't see the advantage to angering the people you're going to need - if all goes miraculously well - in the general election:

I'm no strategist, but it seems that if you're aiming for the Democratic nomination, offending MoveOn and the Netroots is a first class disaster.

I mean, if by some chance you beat Obama, you're going to want MoveOn and the Netroots to help you beat McCain, right? Especially after you've already admitted that they're some of the biggest fundraisers the party's got.

And then there's the youth vote. Let's say you beat Obama, and they're a little angry. The Netroots could be great help in winning them back.

The "activist base" might have been willing to come around in time. They might have been willing to support you for the good of the party.

I'm guessing now...not so much.

Not to mention that it re-re-reopens questions of Clinton's credibility:

For a campaign that has morphed into nothing but "Republican talking points", it shouldn't come as any surprise. I'm curious though, what part of our foreign policy approach doesn't she agree with? The ending the war in Iraq part? I'd like more details on that one.

Will it affect PA? We won't know for another 24 hours or so, but in a race that Hillary needs to win everything from here on out - and not just win, but win big - this simply isn't going to help:

Bloomberg News takes a look at what Hillary needs to do to earn a popular vote win, and finds that she basically needs to do the political equivalent of pitching a no-hitter, hitting for the cycle, and pulling an unassisted triple play -- all in one game.
......
The problem for Hillary is that without a popular vote win she has no way of muddying the waters or arguing that the Democratic electorate didn't deliver a clear verdict in favor of Obama.

I wouldn't go so far as to call Hillary a divider, not a uniter, but...Live by the negativity, die by the negativity:

You can summarize Clinton’s problem in a nutshell: over the past few months she and her husband have been stuck in negative mode and unable to turn their efforts to making an affirmative case for her candidacy without demonizing people and groups who oppose her or come out for Obama. The result: she is alienating key parts of the Democratic party’s traditional base.
It used to be said by her critics that Clinton could polarize the country.
She has now polarized her own party.