- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 11, 2008 at 2:48 am #586537
charlabobParticipantOK, I’ve been on the fence since Edwards dropped out, but the latest ploy of the Clinton campaign, to try to divide delegates between caucus, elected, and super, is just too much! I want(ed) a woman president, in my lifetime, in the worst way. But not this bad. I want hope, not hackery. And the sad thing is I don’t think Hillary is a hack – I think she’s lost her way. and now she’s desperate and digging the hole deeper.
Here’s the quotation from a Newsweek interview with Hillary:
Interviewer: How can you win the nomination when the math looks so bleak for you?
Hill: It doesn’t look bleak at all. I have a very close race with Senator Obama. There are elected delegates, caucus delegates and superdelegates, all for different reasons, and they’re all equal in their ability to cast their vote for whomever they choose. Even elected and caucus delegates are not required to stay with whomever they are pledged to. This is a very carefully constructed process that goes back years, and we’re going to follow the process.
Here’s the link to the complete interview:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/120062/page/2
And here, to begin the Obamaness of this thread, is a link to the Obama cover story *and endorsement* in this week’s Rolling Stone:
In the same issue there’s an article by Matt Taibbi, one of the best YOUNG political writers alive, about Hillary. It’s not positive — fortunately it’s not online, so you’ll have to find it on your own: I come not to bury Hillary — I come to (finally) make up my mind.
the c
March 11, 2008 at 2:56 am #617318
JanSParticipantCharla….I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way…when you hear things like this, that the people that WE designated to vote for OUR candidate can just go do whatever they want, well, is there any doubt why there’s so much apathy. You simply throw you hands up and say “What’s the f*#king point.
As much as I admire Hillary, I really dislike the succumbing to the nastiness and dirty tricks. Yes, JoB, perhaps that’s the nature of politics…but…why can’t that change? why does it simply have to be the accepted way?
me? still a mugwump…..
March 11, 2008 at 3:30 am #617319
JoBParticipantno fair hitting a girl when she’s down.. and i am not talking about hillary:)
i will try to assemble my few brain cells and be coherent:( thank god (ok.. some techie.. but i would rather thank god) for spell checker.
There are three kinds of delegates.. elected, caucus and superdelegates. Just a statement of fact… remember, texas has both… and i don’t think they are alone.. though i am not aware of any other state that requires caucus delegates to have voted in the primary…
some state party rules require them to vote as their state voted (both primary elections and some caucuses) in the first round of voting… after that it’s just plain a free for all.
Ken will correct me if i am wrong, but i think the caucus delegates here are free to change their minds before the convention… in sort of a caucus for caucus delegates… we nominate our delegates to the state party caucus from our local caucus if i got it right.
The idea that there is some kind of democratic process in the primaries is a fairly new one. It’s basically the party taking the temperature of their constituencies… they can’t go too far out on a limb or they risk voters throwing them out in the next election (at least those who are still elected officials) but they certainly don’t let mere voters choose their party’s candidate. Never really have. That’s why they created superdelegates.
I am surprised that you two would overlook that basic fact and that you would criticize her for merely being accurate.
Now, i will have to actually go look for the rolling stone article.. but i am not surprised that they endorsed Obama. I wouldn’t have expected anything else… they are after all basically a youth and personality culture.
And i don’t mean that as a put down.. i have been reading rolling stone nearly my entire adult life and they often do more than credible investigative reporting… that’s why i wouldn’t dream of commenting on an article of theirs without first reading it:).. but their endorsement doesn’t surprise me.
who knows.. maybe the rolling stone article will change my mind… but i doubt it:) charlabob, you read it.. will it change my mind??? ;->
March 11, 2008 at 3:50 am #617320
charlabobParticipantNo, it won’t change your mind; RS may be “youth oriented” but they cover dinosauer rockers, do great political coverage, and Jann Wenner (the founder and publisher who wrote the endorsement) is 3 years younger than me. :-)
Actually, I don’t think minds can be changed — I think mine has been always leaning and, unless a pol does something incredibly stupid (are you reading this, Governor Spitzer????) people remain loyal.
I’ve just reached my level of fedupness with the games being played on the Clinton side. I will also post links about Hill’s foreign policy experience–questioned by participants in the Northern Ireland peace negotiations and the Bosnian trip.
I hope this isn’t true, but I’m beginning to see a woman of a certain age, sad about the years she spent “Standing By Her Man,” and trying to make more of those years than was there.
Can somebody please find a few anti-McCain articles and start a “Don’t Go McCain” thread?
I really find it sad, and maybe emblematic, that forums where Lib Dems are clearly in the majority are debating the merits of two exceptional candidates who should be banding together and eating the lunch of the third term Bush Republican candidate.
the c
March 11, 2008 at 4:31 am #617321
JoBParticipantcharlabob..
“I really find it sad, and maybe emblematic, that a forums where Lib Dems are clearly in the majority is debating the merits of two exceptional candidates who should be banding together and eating the lunch of the third term Bush Republican candidate.”
i will second that!
and maybe tomorrow i will start an anybody but McCain thread:) .. with links. shouldn’t be too hard…
March 11, 2008 at 4:54 am #617322
JoBParticipanti went looking for something else, but found this…
http://digg.com/gadgets/Obama_not_McCain_or_Clinton_votes_for_electronic_privacy
this would have.. and has.. gotten my attention…
it hasn’t changed my mind, but it has made me feel better about the lot of you changing yours:)
March 11, 2008 at 12:42 pm #617323
KayleighMemberHillary Clinton betrayed the Democratic party with her antics. If she can do it at this phase of the game, how badly will she betray us once she’s in office and she doesn’t need our votes?
And Jo, if you write a long missive defending her once again, I won’t read it. I luv ya but you’re starting to sound like the 19%-ers who defend every despicable thing Bush does.
March 11, 2008 at 1:55 pm #617324
JoBParticipantno Kayleigh.. i don’t defend anything despicable.. i just don’t buy into the media frenzy labeling everything despicable…
March 11, 2008 at 4:08 pm #617325
KayleighMemberJust what does she need to do before it becomes despicable to you, Jo? She crossed the line long ago for me.
Now she tells the world Obama isn’t qualified to be Vice President. I guess I will vote for McCain or Nader, then, cause the odds I will vote for her are decreasing every day.
http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/clinton_spokesman_declares_oba.html
March 11, 2008 at 4:21 pm #617326
charlabobParticipantAh, yes, Kayleigh, but she and her staff have said he will be qualified by the convention. In other words, “As soon as you nominate me, he’ll get better.”
I’ll vote for either of them, and I won’t hold my nose in either case. But I understand those who won’t — I’ve caught some of JoB’s even-handedness — it’s temporary; I took a pill
First of all, she’s not going to be nominated. If it comes to that, Gore will be drafted.
If you can’t stand her, leave the top of the ticket blank.
Don’t vote for McCain–he’s dangerous. There will be a continuation of the rush to an imperial presidency, the decline of anything except sham democracy, .. everything bad that I’m saving for the “Don’t go McCain” thread that JoB promised to start in her copious free time. :-)
c
March 11, 2008 at 4:49 pm #617327
AnonymousInactiveAlmost 100% of republicans despise Hillary. Nearly half of the democrats don’t care for her either. No matter how smart or capable she may be, how effective of a leader would she be in that position? America has lost so much credibility. It just may be more important to get behind a candidate that really can unite us. I haven’t heard of any one on either side of the isle that would find it difficult to work with or for Obama. I think that’s as important a reason as anything to support him.
March 11, 2008 at 4:52 pm #617328
JoBParticipantCharlabob..
i am sooooo sorry….. i had no idea it was infectious ;->
kayeligh.. that Hillary has said that Obama is not ready to be commander in chief is not news. It doesn’t matter if he is to be president or VP… it’s her point and she is sticking to it…
and if the MSNBC article that beachdrivegirl flagged us on is any indication (which by the way i am taking with three grains of salt thrown over my shoulder) he isn’t.
He is definately ready to campaign. He is a brilliant campaigner. But is he ready to govern?
Who knows?
It’s past time to stop blaming Clinton for questioning him and find out.
March 11, 2008 at 4:54 pm #617329
JoBParticipantJT.. republicans promoting Obama’s candidacy in any way makes my skin crawl…
March 11, 2008 at 5:08 pm #617330
KayleighMemberJoB, Obama’s as qualified as Hillary’s husband was (in fact, more so.) Thinking people know this; even Hillary knows this. He’s plenty qualified, and only her ruthlessness and blind ambition prevent her from admitting it. And even if I decided he wasn’t qualified in my opinion, I still wouldn’t vote for Hillary.
I almost hope she keeps this nonsense up; it will give me an excuse to stop contributing to the Democratic party altogether and start calling myself an Independent.
Yes, I am that POed at her.
March 11, 2008 at 5:16 pm #617331
charlabobParticipantAnd then there’s this option — for a (maybe)bright (not)shiny (NOT)new America:
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/062
Buzzflash is another good source of fair and balanced, ‘er “Liberal Propaganda”.
March 11, 2008 at 5:39 pm #617332
andreaParticipantFor the record, myself, my sister, my mother, and my right-bearing father are all big Hillary supporters. At my work, which is a federal government agency, I’d say half or more of the office is routing for Hillary (and not a one for GW btw!). JoB is not alone in her support of Hillary, I’m just not as vocal or eloquent as she is in her statements. Please realize Jo that I and many others that read this blog do appreciate and cheer on your ‘long missives defending her’. I cannot articulate enough how this hate on hate Democrat crime tick’s me off. I will be happy with either candidate on the Democratic ticket and will vote for whoever that is, but at this point Hillary is still my woman. Those of you out there who say that if Obama is not the man up for election you’ll go green and vote for Nader, or go altogether nuts and vote for McCain, are why the Democartic party is in the mess its been for the last 8 years.
March 11, 2008 at 5:42 pm #617333
AnonymousInactiveJoB – I really wanted to be for Hillary, but her campaigning is what’s changing my mind. My only hesitancy over Obama has always been the experience thing, but he can surround himself with experience. Meanwhile, Hillary is sounding more like McCain. CharlaBob’s link kind of fits.
And I wasn’t implying before that republicans are for Obama, only that they aren’t adamantly against him. There is no way we can turn things around without working together. Who offers the best chance of that from either party?
March 11, 2008 at 5:43 pm #617334
JoBParticipantcharalabob..
if that was the liberal viewpoint…
i may have to join kayleigh in independence… i would be that po’d at the idea of anyone associating me with that…
That button and article does exactly what it accuses her of doing.
powerful image tho… good campaigning.
March 11, 2008 at 5:48 pm #617335
JoBParticipantKayleigh.. i know you are passionate… and i like that a lot..
but when did President Clinton become Hillary’s husband when we are referring to the responsibilities of the presidency?
And… what actually makes Obama more qualified than Bill Clinton was?
the propaganda of recent years may have made us believe that saying it made it so… but that doesn’t work for me.
what qualifies Obama? it’s still a valid question.
March 11, 2008 at 6:03 pm #617336
KayleighMemberAndrea, Hillary and her style of campaigning are what’s wrong with the party, not those of us who dare to call her on it.
Just what does she have to do to convince you that she’s harming the party? She has essentially come out in favor of McCain over her own party’s leading candidate. She is using Rovian fear-based campaigning—do you think the independents and Republicans aren’t listening?
I wanted to be wrong about her and tried to see the good about her, but my instincts were right.
March 11, 2008 at 6:08 pm #617337
AnonymousInactiveJoB – Obama is not qualified. People will keep saying that to convince themselves because they know that he isn’t qualified. He’s different and represents a radical change, that’s what is appealing. Qualified, though? No.
I read someone’s post that said it was okay that Obama has no experience because he just needs to surround himself with experience. Are you kidding me?!!
Thanks, but I would like my President to know what the H*** he’s doing!
March 11, 2008 at 6:10 pm #617338
JoBParticipantAndrea…
“Those of you out there who say that if Obama is not the man up for election you’ll go green and vote for Nader, or go altogether nuts and vote for McCain, are why the Democartic party is in the mess its been for the last 8 years.”
In all fairness we can’t really blame people who have for the most part just discovered politics for the first time (and are incredibly passionate) for the mess the party has been in..
we have to blame our party for not adequately educating voters… for buying into the hype and letting the real issues slide while we were so busy defending ourselves that we allowed someone else put together our talking points for us.
We have to blame ourselves for not becoming more passionately involved in the last two elections. i know i didn’t choose to work this hard last time when the media turned a good thoughtful thinking war hero into a figure of fun… It was as much my failure as anyone else’s… his back porch talks were incredible.. and anyone who doesn’t think so is either republican or never actually listened to one.
I am honored to represent the other Hillary supports. I know there are lots of other Hillary supporters out there. look what happens when the decision about who to support in the primaries is moved from caucus to the privacy of the ballot box.
look what happened here. It is a close race.. regardless of the hype…
Just because we don’t show up in droves at rallies doesn’t mean that those voters who support Hillary don’t exist…
But your point about the divisiveness that is happening in the party right now is one i have been struggling to make.
If you are a democrat… you believe in democratic ideas and would support them no matter who the candidate is.
If you’re not.. if you only care about your candidate… then get the heck out of the party (for the good of the party) and let those of us who will still be here regardless of the candidate get on with getting the job of working for democratic ideals.
Whew. that came out a lot stronger than i meant it to.. and it isn’t directed at you personally kayleigh…
but it’s time to focus on what really matters and i don’t care whether your candidate is Hillary or Obama.. they are not what matters.
Repairing the damage done to our country by 8 years of the Bush Whitehouse is what matters…
finding the right person to win the election and then accomplish the heavy work ahead is what matters.
Kayleigh, if Obama wins the election, do you really want Hillary supporters to leave the field and let him flounder.. or do you want us to roll up our sleeves and get him elected?
Because if you want that for your candidate, you need to give equal respect to Hillary.
It’s not our job to get your candidate elected for you.
getting a democrat elected is the job of every democrat this fall… regardless of who wins the nomination.
March 11, 2008 at 6:16 pm #617339
rs261MemberHeres some fodder for the no McCain
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/11/mccain.airbus.ap/index.html
Its regarding the airbus/boeing deal going on right now. Of course also being known as Senator Hothead doesnt help.
I personally dont like hillary because she has the same political style as her husband…rule by polls and flavor of the moment. Anybody remember he stance on “violent video games”? What about her hedge fund tax, yet she got her daughter a 500k a year job at one right out of school. Of course my favorite is requiring everyone to have medical insurance…what cant pay for it? thats ok we’ll just take it out of your paycheck.
Oh, and for the record, I’ll be happy with either hillary or Obama as president. (and maybe even mccain, we’ll see on that one)
March 11, 2008 at 6:17 pm #617340
villagegreenMemberI’m so freaking sick of people questioning Obama’s experience, while at the same time saying that Hillary has been vetted. People seem to accept it as a given that she’s ‘experienced’. But experienced in what? She had her 3am moment and chose to authorize the war. Way to go Hillary. Your so called experienced really paid off there.
Check out this article about her (and Obama’s) real experience: http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/
March 11, 2008 at 6:23 pm #617341
JoBParticipantKayleigh.. what do you think the democratic party is that Hillary is ruining?
It is not the Obama party…
It is not the party of “i want it to be different”.
This is a political party.. in service of political power.. that gains that power only if it appeases the people who support it…
This is a political party… involved in a political process… not a democratic institution… by the people for the people. You are confusing the party with the government…
the party has no checks and balances to protect the people… it just has politics.. the business of trading favor for favor…. and only one real goal.. to perpetuate itself.
Hillary Clinton has worked tirelessly for the democratic party.. to say she should stand aside (for the good of the party) because you favor another candidate is pretty self serving… and incredibly naive.
but ther eis one thing you can be sure of.. the Hilalry Clinton who has spent her entire adult life working for the party won’t quit if she loses the primary…. you would and could expect her to work tirelessly to get your candidate elected…
that is what “for the good of the party” means.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.