- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 30, 2008 at 8:59 pm #621299
TrickParticipantI’m still a bit confused as to why all the other candidates didn’t campaign (following the rules) in Michigan and Hillary was the only one and they’re having to negotiate the delegates this weekend?
Does it not seem extremely unfair to those candidates who abided by the guidelines and Hillary did not?
If the delegate count was even closer, I’d be up in arms about this. However, let her play this out and I’ll appease her until we can get a late start on the real battle with McCain.
May 30, 2008 at 9:05 pm #621300
beachdrivegirlParticipant“simply because those qualities are far more likely to come in a female package.”–This is sexism JoB. It goes both ways.
May 30, 2008 at 9:07 pm #621301
beachdrivegirlParticipantTrick, did you not hear? Clinton doesnt follow the rules she just tries to change them afterwards to appease her.
May 30, 2008 at 9:14 pm #621302
TrickParticipantBDG, That’s why I’m so baffled as to why “WE” even have to negotiate this?
Michigan and Florida knew the consequences of their actions, and now we’re enabeling this kind of behaviour.
JOB: “because of the unique qualities she has as a woman”
I’m assuming your comments about the critics being “Sexist” don’t apply to you?
What qualities might that be for a woman a man can’t have?
I’ll be keeping in mind Condoleeza Rice when you inform me.
May 30, 2008 at 9:17 pm #621303
beachdrivegirlParticipantTrick the problem is since I am not over 50, not “middle class” and college educated I dont know what is going on in the world and what is good for our country because obviously only those over fifty with their “voting experience” know what is best and it is a 60 year old women who was so dedicated to the Democratic party she was originally a Republican and then she has to not only break the rules but try to change them afterwards to even come close to competing.
And no I am not trying to “bash” Hillary because she is a Clinton, JoB. As I have said earlier I am an Independent who honestly believed that I wanted a Democrat in office for the next term. So I went to the Caucus to learn about both canidates. When I arrived, I was nearly sure that I Woudl want Clinton for two reasons. 1) She was a women and I thought that would be awesome to see the first women in the whitehouse as President. and 2) Name Recognition. However, I was open-minded and listened to others about not only who had more experience but who I identified with in character etc. And that person was not Clinton it was Obama. And those other Cuacus voters made me a passsionate Obama supporter. IMO, unless Clinton drops out on Tuesday (which she isnt since she arleady released her post-primary schedule) she has officially committed political suicide. Her tantrums and hissy fits are enough already. She isnt going to be the nominee. She does not get to change how the nominee is decided. And it is ridiculous that the DNC is actually stooping to her low and counting Michigan and Florida.
May 30, 2008 at 9:22 pm #621304
TrickParticipantThat’s what I find so fundamentally wrong with her.
It’s not gray to me at all, besides the few strands I see near my ears.
May 30, 2008 at 9:40 pm #621305
JoBParticipantJT
If Obama had vastly increasing numbers throughout the primary season.. i might agree with you..
but he has plateaued since super tuesday… in fact, there is plenty of analysis to suggest that he has pulled all he will from independents during the democratic primaries…
So… who else is he going to pull?
the current momentum in his campaign is from super delegates… which have suddenly assumed an importance to Obama supporters since it looks like they might go his way.
Of course, those are commitments which are not binding at all… after all.. some of them were previously committed to Hillary…
The only delegates anyone can count on at this point are those who are committed in the first ballot by their states… and there aren’t enough of those for either candidate to carry a first ballot.
After that.. there are no commitments at all.
He has had several months since his super tuesday triumph onto the scene… and the only way he can secure the nomination before the convention is if Clinton concedes…
His current polls aren’t looking nearly as strong as hers …
if he is that charming .. how do you account for the longevity and strength of her campaign? erhaps charm and rhetoric are not enough.
I personally think his charm is overrated… and confined to a couple of fairly narrow demographics.. one of which votes consistently democratic anyway… and the other which is likely to vote democratic out of self interest if they vote at all.
I would like to remind you that the largest voting block in America is comprised of women old enough to have been sold an empty promise or two… and likely to be skeptical of inspiring rhetoric… even when sold by a pretty face.
Nope… this is going to come down to a political infight..
and if he can’t win it.. he wouldn’t be very effective as a president anyway.
When it comes to politics.. if you want to be on the winning side.. you want to back the meanest junkyard dog you can find.. and in some ways.. Hillary is that junkyard dog. She has had to fight continuously to keep herself politically viable.. and if she wasn’t a good fighter, she wouldn’t still be a threat to an Obama candidacy…
As i have said before… there is plenty i know about Hillary that i don’t particularly like.. but i don’t have to like all of her tactics to admire the way she gets things accomplished.. and that is what i really want out of a politician… especially right now.
We have several government agencies that are completely dysfunctional due to political appointments and policies adapted during the Bush administration. Because of her participation in the analysis and trimming of the bloating in those agencies during Bill’s presidency.. she has intimate knowledge of all of them…
and if what she says is any indication.. some pretty clear ideas about how to immediately begin setting things right.
as for baggage….
you are right, Clinton has baggage. She has the same baggage now that she had coming into the race. Actually, that’s not true. Obama supporters have added charges of racism among others… but essentially her baggage is a known commodity.
What about Obama’s baggage?
We don’t have a clue what his baggage is yet other than his race.. because we democrats have accepted his story.. written by him.. validated by him.. as the whole truth.
If any criticism of Obama has even been hinted at by democrats… righteous indignation and the race card … or the ever present.. well she (fill in the blanks) … follows.
And you are all lulled into a false sense of security because he has “dealt” with that.
He hasn’t dealt with anything. All he has done is back democrats off… You don’t clean a house by shoving the dirt under the rug… and that is all he has done.
The republican political machine isn’t so thin skinned.. they aren’t the least bit worried about offending the black vote because they don’t expect to get it anyway…
so the racism card isn’t going to work so well with those who are yet to be convinced.
and the republicans haven’t even played their ace card.. disillusionment…
i am sure there is something they have (even if it will have to be inflated by their cronies in the press) that will show at least part of america that Obama is not what he appears to be..
disillusionment can derail a movement faster than any other force..
You want us to bank our party’s future on a movement… an untried and unproven movement…
sounds like a pretty big gamble to me. Especially when a large part of that that movement is fueled by Adrianna Huffington.
For an example on how she responds to disillusionment.. you only need to read her piece on John McCain.. who she says she once idolized…
What would happen to all that blogger support if she flipped allegiance again and turned on Obama?
Regardless of what Hillary is.. we know exactly who and what we are banking our political future on with her.
That’s something that is worth thinking about when you are gambling with your future…
May 30, 2008 at 9:47 pm #621306
JoBParticipantTrick..
what guidelines did Hillary not adhere to in Michigan?
She was not asked to withdraw her name from the ballot.. she was asked not to campaign.
she didn’t.
Sorry.. there wasn’t really anything unfair about what she did…
Had Obama left his name on the ballot.. this probably wouldn’t even be a conversation…
except, of course, it is.
Because he left his name on the ballot in florida.. yet somehow Hillary is supposed to have had an unfair advantage there too…
Haven’t you learned anything from George Bush? Telling a lie over and over does not make it the truth.
beachdrivegirl…
i would gladly support Obama if he had any of the characteristics that i admire so much in Hillary.
unfortunately, he doesn’t.
and that has nothing to do with being sexist…
May 30, 2008 at 9:49 pm #621307
walfredoMemberI think it is potentially troubling this weekend. In my opinion, there is absolutely not one leg to stand on for Clinton’s Michigan argument. She is quoted directly saying the primary “won’t count for anything”, prior to it happening. Then afterwards, “clarifying” (lying) by saying that “in terms of delegates, the contest won’t count for anything”. This to of course, further push the troubled popular vote myth…
Well, because Obama is trying to be magnanimous, and trying to appease Clinton voters he reportedly is willing to accept concessions in Michigan. She is going to get a delegate advantage from a contest where no one else was on the ballot. To me that is insane and blatantly unfair. I get the Obama strategy of being the more gracious, but I think its problematic.
Mainly, because Hill’s won’t accept even an extremely unfair ruling in her favor. Her camp is pushing for 100% of Michigan’s delegates to be seated, for Obama to get 0 delegates. So the primary that in her own words “won’t count for anything.” And from her own clarification “I was referring to delegates, it would not count in terms of delegates”… Her proposal for Saturday is for her to net an 80+ delegate advantage from this contest, despite no one else campaigning or being an option on the ballot…
Now that sounds bad enough, its almost like a comic-book villain’s plan already- but it gets a lot better… So if somehow the earth stopped rotating, and people decided- hey that is a good idea… Seating the entire Michigan delegates that voted for her 100%, giving Obama 0 delegates, and counting Florida 100% and distributing as they voted– if all that transpired, she would get within 70 pledged delegates.
Wait, so in this unthinkable plan, that only a cartoon character villain could come up with, even with this ludicrous plan- she still loses?
YES! Except, well now we get to this mythic “popular vote”. And the comparisons she has made between Michigan and Florida and the Civil Rights Movement. Women’s suffrage…
So let’s walk-through what is going to be presented Saturday- Obama and all candidates that obeyed the rules should be penalized severaly, in fact Michigan should give one candidate a larger advantage then any other state in the country. Neither state should have any penalty for violating the rules. It is crucial every vote is counted, to reflect the sacred voters rights and the will of the people. Such that we can take these new numbers, and make a more compelling case to the “super” people to overturn the results of the 57 contests and there allocation of delegates! And just for fun, the two “states” that will impose this popular vote mandate for Hill’s are Puerto Rico (doesn’t vote in the general election), and Michigan (only had her name on the ballot).
Stranger then fiction…
May 30, 2008 at 9:53 pm #621308
JoBParticipantTrick,
there are several priorities women have that men could as easily have… if they chose to.
that they don’t has been the major cause of conflict in modern marriage:)
And just for the record… I am not opposed to Obama because he is male. I am opposed to Obama because i don’t see where his priorities match mine…
had John Edwards become our nominee.. i would have been disappointed….
but i would have supported him wholeheartedly…
His intentions were clear.. and are moving towards fruition with or without a presidential nomination backing them…
May 30, 2008 at 9:54 pm #621309
TrickParticipantJO, That was a short nap :)
I understand your reasoning, I do.
However, I can’t settle for a Junkyard dog that
will win at any cost. We saw that with the Republicans and I still don’t agree with it and can’t justify winning at “all costs”. I believe in integrity and honesty.
As far as A. Huffington, I would disagree that she has that much influence on peoples votes. The Obama’s supporters here in the blog, I have to give them more credit than that and think they weigh all information before making an off the hip choice.
I use to gamble when I was younger, now I like to believe I make wiser risks.
May 30, 2008 at 9:59 pm #621310
beachdrivegirlParticipantWhat characteristics do you admire about Hillary?Besides the fact that you think she cares more about healthcare, women, and children…which if you would read Obama’s policies and plans you would realize he shares similar views.
May 30, 2008 at 10:02 pm #621311
TrickParticipantHillary claims she didn’t campaign in Florida either, however she did “visit” the weekend before the primary. *scratches chin*
The guidelines in Michigan were pretty clear as Walfredo wrote. Yet she changed her message once she needed those delegates.
Don’t you see a pattern here?
May 30, 2008 at 10:03 pm #621312
walfredoMemberHer reckless ambition, and absoulute devotion to herself over party and country are pretty compelling to me.
That and her complete lack of ethics or character. Oh and her ability to tell bold faced lies without conflict. And her deep belief that the ends of her being in power always justify the means of her actions.
I find her very admirable. Many of the traits of the great sociopaths of our time.
May 30, 2008 at 10:04 pm #621313
charlabobParticipant<FROM BDG>
Trick the problem is since I am not over 50, not “middle class” and college educated I dont know what is going on in the world and what is good for our country because obviously only those over fifty with their “voting experience” know what is best”
<END BDG>
So I guess that means Obama is best….I feel like Sojourner Truth here — Ain’t I a woman? :-) I am all of these and I am fed up with the idea that only a subset of us COUNT. There are a number of powerful women, including senators, congressmen, and governors, who support Obama. If you listen to the media, who love a good brawl, and to the Clintonistas, who, for reasons that elude me, love playing the victim card, you wouldn’t know we exist.
I wouldn’t bother taalking about it on this blog, except, sadly, the dialog here echos what is taking place in the real world. I have been attacked physically and verbally by WOSA when I suggest that Hillary is not a damned victim. That she’s losing because she ran a crap campaign and thought it wouldn’t matter because she was entitled.
IF ANY WHITE MAN RAN THE SAME CAMPAIGN HE WOULD HAVE BEEN GONE LONG AGO! If a black man or woman ran the same campaign he or she wouldn’t have made it to Iowa.
Think back to the relief many people felt when SOMEONE beat Hillary in Iowa. We had been told, for more than a year, that she was inevitable. Some of us were less than delighted by that prospect.
BTW, Clinton has announced her post-primary schedule; Obama has announced the beginning of the campaign against McCain. Whom do I respect? I’ll let you guess.
May 30, 2008 at 10:06 pm #621314
charlabobParticipant“had John Edwards become our nominee.. i would have been disappointed….”
I just read this and I am truly horrified. Any pretense at populism should be dismissed here. All that matters is that the president be a woman. Sad…really sad.
May 30, 2008 at 10:08 pm #621315
AnonymousInactiveJoB, just one point, cuz I love huffpo for a lot of reasons, least of which is Arianna. I have been reading it since it’s inception. Arianna usually does one weekly commentary. Last week she praised Hillary. And her views on McCain are shared by several. 8 years ago when he was running against George, I liked what I knew of him too.
The rest of the columnists are a wide and varied bunch. Last week Christine Gregoire posted a very nice tribute to our military. Obama and Clinton have both posted.
I just wanted to tell you, several pieces have been posted that 100% agree with your assessment. In fact if I didn’t recognize the name and picture, I would think you wrote it:) Your perception after tracking a few of the links that have been posted here, are not accurate, other than to say it’s very liberal of course. They do not exclude any one who wants to support Hillary in word.
The rest of the site are summaries of news articles with links to the original source for further reading. You will be sent everywhere from the WSJ to newsweek to a local TV station, even people magazine for cripes sake. And, it changes all day long.
OK, end of commercial, just tired of the singular bashing of one site based on a small slice of the big picture.
May 30, 2008 at 10:15 pm #621316
JoBParticipantbeachdrivegirl…
“it was a 60 year old woman who was do devoted to the democratic party that she was once a republican”…
LOL
I am not positive her very first vote was cast as a democrat… but if she ever cast a vote as a republican i would be surprised… and i am positive there were few of those if any.
She certainly had the intelligence to recognize the failure in her parent’s political stance at a fairly young age… once she left home and was exposed to other ideas.
I should think that would be something to be admired….
I was a young republican too before i could vote.. a lot of us were. It’s what our families were…
but i too learned fairly quickly to think for myself.
Yes, you are under 50… and it should come as no surprise to you that those who have lived longer than you have a significantly different perspective than yours…
after all.. you will too one day.
As someone from the generation that didn’t trust anyone over 30.. and thought they had nothing to learn from their elders..
i can tell you that i was very wrong… We would have been far more effective if we had joined our youthful passion to those who had been carrying our fight long before we discovered it…
had we stopped reinventing the wheel and simply revolutionized it instead…
but we didn’t believe that anyone who had gotten us into this mess knew enough to help get us out.
We confused those who had been carried along under protest with those who had actively participated.
It took years of study and listening for me to understand the failure of our generation…
i hope it doesn’t take you as much failure or as much time.
May 30, 2008 at 10:18 pm #621317
beachdrivegirlParticipant[13] She then volunteered to campaign for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater in the U.S. presidential election of 1964.[14]
During her freshman year, she served as president of the Wellesley Young Republicans;[18][19] with this Rockefeller Republican-oriented group,[20] she supported the elections of John Lindsay and Edward Brooke.[21] –from Wikipidia seems pretty Republican to me, but then again its problem them just being biased.
hmm. and then you talk about the failure of your generation and this is the generation you think I should follow in vote?
May 30, 2008 at 10:27 pm #621318
JoBParticipanttrick..
it was a short nap because i was in too much pain to sleep… as cranky as i might be when i am in pain.. as long as i can string words and type. this distraction helps.
what i see clearly is that you are all afraid that Obama doesn’t have enough political clout to ride this out.
If you were as confident in his nomination as you sound, you would simply be waiting out the process… not continually rehashing old business.
None of the he said she said stuff really matters does it?
The democratic party didn’t think they would find themselves in this pickle… and now they are stuck with it. They can’t politically deny seating at the convention to two states… there is far more at stake than the nomination…
they never intended to.. the nominee was supposed to make the grand gesture and seat them after the party censured them.
how it is resolved will be a result of the political process that your candidate wants to lead.
If he doesn’t have the political power to lead his own party.. just how do you expect him to be effective as a president?
we have had a lot of ineffective presidents…
some of them with incredibly good ideas.. but no political power.
Hopefully, we will finally get to see Obama the politician in action…
I truly hope he wins my grudging respect.
May 30, 2008 at 10:31 pm #621319
JoBParticipantWalfredo…
LOL…those are all characteristics.. as you phrased them.. that you would find admirable in a male politician… and i would agree.. most politicians are at least borderline sociopaths:)
but.. let’s just test a bit of this..
ruthless ambition?
So.. please tell me what Obama has done to benefit the citizens of his state or of the United States while he has been pursuing his ruthless ambition?
because… funny enough… when you read people who have been associates of Obama’s and who do not support his presidency.. ruthless ambition is one of the phrases you often encounter:)
imagine that.. ruthless ambition in a politician;-)
May 30, 2008 at 10:37 pm #621320
charlabobParticipantUntil the Last Dog Dies – Deborah Senn
If you’re interested in a genuinely progressive woman politician, who should have been attorney general of Washington, check out this one woman performance by Deborah Senn. Among other things, she was done in by the odd notion of centrist Democrats that we should let “them” have one or two token positions.
“Former WA State Insurance Commissioner and erstwhile politician Deborah Senn has really written a show and is really performing it herself to packed houses at CHAC. But this is a limited engagement for this weekend only (only 3 shows left)! Our phones have been ringing off the hook as people are trying to figure out if this is some kind of hoax. Hoax it is not!”
May 30, 2008 at 10:40 pm #621321
AnonymousInactive*If you were as confident in his nomination as you sound, you would simply be waiting out the process… not continually rehashing old business.*
JoB, c’mon. Take some of the responsibility. When you re-entered the fray after an absence, this is how you began.
*What would all of you done for a campaign if you hadn’t had Hillary to bash?*
That, is nothing if not rehashing your viewpoint and then everyone responded and you act like you had no part of it.
May 30, 2008 at 10:53 pm #621322
KayleighMemberJo, if you don’t stop pretending things I didn’t say and assuming I meant things that I specifically say I DID NOT mean, I will neither post nor respond to you again.
Do you not remember the concept of taking things to a ridiculous extreme that nobody would embrace, in order to make a point?
Jeez Louise on a Ritz Cracker ™.
May 30, 2008 at 10:57 pm #621323
JoBParticipantBeachdrivegirl…
i may be wrong.. but i don’t think Hillary got to vote until she was 21.. i am pretty sure i didn’t.. but then my memory isn’t the best today.
I am pretty sure letting young people vote at 18 is one of those things that the vietnam war ushered in… and it was still in full swing in the late 60s..
I’m not going to look it up.
It may seem inconceivable to you… as a young woman who was probably encouraged to think in your home… to imagine a life in which you were not only discouraged from independent thought, but punished for it.
I was once beaten for expressing a political thought contrary to those my mother held.. and none of the adults in my life thought that was particularly out of line. I was a few weeks short of my 18th birthday at the time.
I am not suggesting that Hillary’s parents were that oppressive.. they were after all better educated than my mother and one would hope more enlightened.. but just that it was not normal at all for a young teenager.. especially a young woman.. to hold or express any political views differing from those of her parents.
it says a lot about her character that she chose to think for herself..
Humans process knowledge through experience.. and it is too easy to think that what you have experienced in your lifetime is the way it has always been.
I am very glad that is not true.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that a good number of the women who post here as democrats started their political lives as republicans.. in the late 60s…
most of us long before we could actually vote:)
Once Hillary adopted the democratic party, she was passionate about it… and has stayed committed and passionate her entire life.
So which should count more? A talking point based on youthful ignorance or a lifetime of committed work?
BTW.. how well does Senator Obama’s record of commitment to the democratic party stand up against hers… at what age did he become active? Whose campaigns did he work on? What shaped his political view?
I do know at least partial answers to some of those questions.. but i think it would be worthwhile if you are comparing records to look that info up for yourself…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.