Behind the Lines: Podcast 
Sen. Clinton on Texas Monthly Talks
The full transcript of Evan Smith’s 25-minute TEXAS MONTHLY TALKS interview with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, taped on February 22, 2008.
(Page 4 of 4)
HRC: You know, I could give you a long list of well, maybe this, maybe that. But, my campaign has been vigorous and focused and extremely effective. I mean, look at the close race we’re in.
ES: Right.
HRC: Obviously Senator Obama has had a run the last two weeks, but I’ve won a lot of the big primaries. We’re very close in terms of delegates. So this is a race for 2025 delegates. And I certainly know that I could have done better, my campaign could have done better. But, I’m very proud of where we are and I feel good about the campaign in Texas and the one in Ohio.
ES: Has there been too much focus on the role of former President Clinton in your campaign?
HRC: [Laughs] Well you know, he’s a pretty big figure.
ES: He is.
HRC: He’s somebody that . . .
ES: He says things, people listen.
HRC: . . . I pay attention. I’m so personally just touched and grateful for the extraordinary effort he’s made on my behalf. And obviously, he’s doing it because of our relationship and how much he cares about me personally. But he’s also doing it because he thinks I’d be a really good president. And he thinks he understands the job, which I believe he does. And what a tough job it is. And what it requires in a person. There is a difference between talk and action. And doggone it, experience does count. I mean I know that there has been an effort to discount that experience in this campaign. But you get those calls in the White House at three o’clock in the morning. The Embassy in Belgrade is on fire. You know, something has happened in the northwest territories in Pakistan. The advisors are not there. If they are, they are not going to make the decision, you’re going to make the decision.
ES: Right.
HRC: And I think what Bill knows, like to the core of his being, is that when that call comes at 3 a.m. the country can count on me. I can sort it out, I can make a decision that I believe would be best for America, not just now but for the time to come. And he feels very passionately about that, and I’m very proud of his support.
ES: When he said the other day that Texas would be do or die for Senator Clinton, people took that to mean that if you didn’t win Texas that that would be the effective end of your campaign. You want to talk about that a little bit?
HRC: Well I hope to win Texas. I’m working very hard to win Texas.
And I feel good about our campaign here. Obviously I have a long relationship here, particularly in South Texas, with people. I don’t make predictions, but we’re working very, very hard to do well and, yes, I want to win Texas. It would mean a lot to me.
ES: But you don’t look at it as do or die the way President Clinton said?
HRC: Well, I wouldn’t characterize it that way. But it would make a big difference.
ES: Right. Very quickly at the end here, the super delegate question which you were asked last night, you seemed to indicate that you would not support the idea of the super delegates helping a candidate who was behind in pledged delegates go over the top. Did we all interpret your answer correctly?
HRC: What I really was referring to is that I think this will get sorted out.
ES: Right.
HRC: I think all of the attention, you know, on the super delegates is kind of missing the point. Super delegates have always been expected to exercise independent judgment.
ES: Right.
HRC: And I would expect them to continue to do so. They can vote for whoever they want based on anything they want. I find the Obama campaign’s efforts to push people into supporting who won their state or who won their district somewhat disingenuous because that would mean Senator Kennedy would be here right now endorsing me since I carried Massachusetts overwhelmingly. I don’t think that’s what the Obama campaign is actually talking about. The super delegates are expected to exercise independent judgment. Delegates that are chosen by caucuses and primaries are expected to follow the results. And when you look at it, caucuses have a relatively few number of people.
ES: Right.
HRC: You know, look at what happened in Washington State where I made very little effort. I was overwhelmingly defeated in the caucuses. I had a very close outcome in their primary. Primaries bring more people into the process. I think they represent more accurately the electorate. So people get chosen by caucuses that may have a few hundred or a few thousand people, primaries that may have thousands and millions and super delegates. And that’s the way it’s always been and I expect that’s the way it will be.
ES: Okay. Finally the Michigan and Florida delegation, speaking of primaries.
HRC: Mm-hmm, right.
ES: There’s been a lot of talk about what your campaign would do should it get to the convention. Would you commit today to honoring the agreement made earlier not to seek the Michigan and Florida delegations in the way that had been discussed?
HRC: Well let’s talk about the agreement.
ES: Yes.
HRC: The only agreement I entered into was not to campaign in Michigan and Florida. It had nothing to do with not seating the delegates. And I think that’s an important distinction. I did not campaign in either.
ES: Because the press seems to have missed that distinction if that’s the case.
HRC: It, they have.
ES: Because the talk is you agreed not to seek the delegations.
HRC: That is not the case at all.
ES: Yeah.
HRC: I signed an agreement not to campaign in Michigan and Florida. Now the DNC made the determination that they would not seek the delegates. But I was not party to that. And I think it is important for the DNC to ask itself, is this really in the best interest of our eventual nominee? We do not want to be disenfranchising Michigan and Florida. We have to try to carry both of those states. You know, I’d love to carry Texas, but it’s usually not in the electoral calculation for the Democratic nominee.
ES: Right.
HRC: Florida and Michigan are. And therefore the people of those two states disregarded adamantly the DNC’s decision that they would not seek the delegates. They came out and voted. Now if they had been influenced by the DNC despite the fact there was very little campaigning if any, they would have stayed home. But they wanted their voices heard. More than two million people came out. I mean it was record turnout for a primary. And Florida in particular is sensitive to being disenfranchised because of what’s happened to them in the last elections.
ES: Right.
HRC: I have said that I would ask my delegates to vote to seat Michigan and Florida.
ES: So your intention is to press this issue at the convention?
HRC: Yes it is. Yes it is. And, and you know, it’s in large measure because both the voters and the elected officials in Michigan and Florida feel so strongly about this, and you know, Senator Bill Nelson in Florida early on in the process actually sued because he thinks this is absurd on its face that 1.7 million Democrats who eventually voted would be just basically disregarded. And I agree with him about that.
ES: Okay. Well Senator Clinton, it’s going to be a long campaign, still . . .
HRC: [Laughs]
ES: We wish you luck on the trail.
HRC: Thank you.
ES: And I know we’ll see you back in Texas.
HRC: Thanks very much Evan.
ES: Thanks very much.
HRC: Good to talk to you.
ES: You too. Thank you.
Transcribed by AJProcessing.Com
My Library
