Democrats '08

[jennylou]

So - reading the Hillary thread and reading the Obama thread is rather interesting. It seems the Hillary supporters are disliking Obama more and more and the Obama supporters are feeling the same.

There's been talk of voting McCain if the others nominee doesn't get the nod.

This thread isn't so much to debate the two (though, I'm sure that will naturally happen as well ;)), but to talk about how we can unite the party. Will you vote for the other candidate under any circumstance or are you prepared to let the Republicans have another four years?

I'll post my thoughts in another post. ;)

[gayle]

I am not prepared to have a Republican in office under any circumstances. I will support whoever the Democrats nominate, and will encourage other Democrats to do the same.

I don't dislike Obama at all. I like him ALOT. I just don't believe he is the right candidate for this election in this time with the current issues we are facing. However, if he gets the nomination, he has my full support and my vote.

[jennylou]

I really, really like Obama. I think he's a uniter. I don't think Hillary is. The thought of Hillary getting the nomination is scary to me - not because of her or her policies, but because I think there is no way that she'll be able to win. People love to hate her, and I fear that people like that (my dad and stepmom amongst her biggest haters, lol) will come out just to vote against her.

There's no way that Hillary can pass Obama in the pledged delegate count. If she gets the nomination it'll be through the super delegates - will the party be able to recover from that?

I'll admit, I've said I couldn't vote for her if that happened. But, I will. It will sicken me, mainly because I won't think it's fair, but I will - because I do NOT want the Republicans in the White House for another four years. Can others do the same and vote for her, or will they really follow through?

As for the Hillary supporters (my sister is one, so I don't have anything against them) can they find it within them to vote for Obama if it comes down to it?

Finally, how can we just rebuild the party and capture the White House without tearing each other to shreds?

[gayle]

Well, I have publicly stated that I will vote for Obama if he gets the nomination, and truly hope others will too.

Conversely, I hope the Obama supporters will support Hillary, should she get the nomination. We are ALL Democrats are we not? We must support whichever Democratic candidate gets the nomination.

[ajb524]

I'm a Hillary supporter, but will vote for Obama if he gets the nomination. I had a hard time deciding in the beginning, but ultimately I decided to go with Hillary although Obama came in a very close 2nd. I feel the main objective is to not elect a republican :D!

I'm not sure who my DH will vote for if Obama gets the nomination. He doesn't like Obama's gun control stance, but doesn't like McCain on the war and women's right's issues.

[phoenics]

Well apparently 17% or something vile like that of Hill supporters claim they won't vote for Obama if he wins the nomination. But I hope that's just heat of the moment stuff. The truth is that Obama and Hill aren't far apart at all on issues - that's why the personality stuff is so important.

I'll be honest. I really can't stand Hillary right now. When this all started I loved her and Bill to death - but now if I see either of them on tv, I mute it or turn it off and that's BAD. If this kind of hatred could be elicited in me - a person who used to really love her - then I can only imagine the kind of hatred that others who hated her all along (and those people are legion apparently) have for her. I think Hillary would unite the Republican base like no other. That's why Scarborough, Robertson, Hannity and their ilk are all over her and pushing her. They know McCain can beat her and they aren't too sure of whether he can beat Obama. And of course, since Hillary wants to win so badly, she's echoing them to diss Obama!

I am angry that Bill Clinton's legacy in the AA community is shredded. I don't know of any AAs who honestly believe that he ever cared about any of us and right now I just feel used by him and her. I think that we were fine to them until one of us 'got in the way of what they wanted' and then they turned like a pack of rabid dogs. And the way Hill is actually using racism in order to win votes - actually pandering to it and actually doing her best to cast Obama as 'that uppity negro' that has me fuming.

To me, that's unforgivable.

I say that Democrats can unite, but Hillary really should drop out. Mathematically she has no case and if the roles were reversed, Obama would have dropped out already - the pressure to do so would have been too intense for him not to. The idea that anyone can even ask him 'why he hasn't closed the deal' is offensive, because he's winning still. My belief is that Hillary is eying 2012 and she's trying to destroy Obama's chances in the General Election and that is deplorable. It's supremely selfish. Coupled with some insane comments of some posters on other sites that Obama (the guy in the lead currently) should drop out just shows me some of the ridiculous entitlement issues that some people have. What kind of sense does that make for him to drop out? The math's on HIS side?

Not to mention Hill's constant changing of the goalposts.

Well. This turned into a rant. I didn't mean it to - but I have a LOT of anger for Hillary and the way she's run her campaign. I'd be embarrassed to have her as my President.

But I would still vote for in the end, because McInsane is the devil.

[ihearttx]

Well I've said it in the Obama thread and I will say it here, I live in a very Jewish area and no one I know would cast a vote for Obama. We are all Hillary Democrats.

[cosmic]

Well it's been easy to tell by some of the borderline disturbing links you used to post in the Obama thread, Ihearttx... lol. But, please do share with us: What's the reason for the dislike of Obama? Besides the obvious, I mean. ;)

[ihearttx]

Well it's been easy to tell by the disturbing links you've been posting in the Obama thread, Ihearttx... lol. But, please do share with us: What's the reason for the dislike of Obama? Besides the obvious, I mean. ;)

I'm not in the mood for a debate today, thanks. And I don't think any of those links were disturbing. I was just sharing with you guys what kind of media is being emailed around.

[Michelle]

I'm all for Obama and am really hoping that he gets the nomination. However, I will vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination because I don't want "four more years".

[gayle]

Well I've said it in the Obama thread and I will say it here, I live in a very Jewish area and no one I know would cast a vote for Obama. We are all Hillary Democrats.

Would you vote for McCain then? or not vote at all? Just curious.

[tenofcups]

Well apparently 17% or something vile like that of Hill supporters claim they won't vote for Obama if he wins the nomination.
I've read similar numbers of Obama supporter who wouldn't vote for Hillary. Why is that any less "vile"?

And the way Hill is actually using racism in order to win votes - actually pandering to it and actually doing her best to cast Obama as 'that uppity negro' that has me fuming.

I literally have no idea what you're referring to. Can you give examples? That *would* be disturbing, of course. But I've seen nothing like that.

[ThreeYell]

I'm for Obama but I'll vote for Hillary if she's the nominee. I'm really sickened by what Hillary has done to herself and is willing to do to the party but I still agree with the vast majority of her policies. DH said the other day that he might not be able to vote for president if Hillary is the nominee. Since he's a recovering Republican, I'm just thankful that he wouldn't vote for McCain under any circumstances.

[ihearttx]

Would you vote for McCain then? or not vote at all? Just curious.

I honestly would have to think about it a long hard time. I'm in a very Republican state, though, so in reality my vote in the end won't really matter.

But at our caucus, it was a very obvious split as to who was on Obama's side and who was on Hillary's. We definitely had the gay and Jewish vote. And the better party! lol :)

[BusyBee21]

As the lone Republican (I think) commenting on this post right now, I'll say I'd rather have Obama in office than Hillary. I don't want McCain in office, truth be told. But if Hillary is the nominee, I'll vote for McCain without a second thought. Obama vs. McCain will be tough to decide--I voted for Bill in the past, and am not afraid to vote Dem again if I have to. :p

[gayle]

There's a few more Republicans on the board than just you Busybee21!

Glad to see you are one that will cross party lines however :)

[jennylou]

As the lone Republican (I think) commenting on this post right now, I'll say I'd rather have Obama in office than Hillary. I don't want McCain in office, truth be told. But if Hillary is the nominee, I'll vote for McCain without a second thought. Obama vs. McCain will be tough to decide--I voted for Bill in the past, and am not afraid to vote Dem again if I have to. :p

huh?

ETA - Okay, I got it. :o lol, my reading skills are clearly lacking today.

[phoenics]

I've read similar numbers of Obama supporter who wouldn't vote for Hillary. Why is that any less "vile"?


I didn't say it wasn't vile. You simply assumed that I did. I think it would be vile for any Democrat to vote for McCain simply out of spite - or any other reason really, because it wouldn't be very democratic. I can't stand Hillary myself, but if she gets the nom, I'll vote for her because the alternative is unthinkable and I care more about this country than sticking it to her. I actually realize that voting against her or not voting (thereby letting McCain win) would actually be against my best interests and the best interests of most Americans.


I literally have no idea what you're referring to. Can you give examples? That *would* be disturbing, of course. But I've seen nothing like that.

Oh please. Look at the exit polls in PA and then look at who brought up race first in this race - it was Hillary and Bill, because they know that they could win if they got everyone to look at Obama as nothing more than a 'black man' and then hopefully, 'an uppity Negro'.

[phoenics]

huh?

I think this is what I was referring to when I said that Hillary would unite the Republican base like no other. I don't know why pundits and media are now ignoring that fact when back in January, they were all over it. It almost smells like they want people to forget about that little fact.

[jennylou]

I think this is what I was referring to when I said that Hillary would unite the Republican base like no other. I don't know why pundits and media are now ignoring that fact when back in January, they were all over it. It almost smells like they want people to forget about that little fact.
lol, okay, now I got it! lol, I clearly should be napping while dd is napping and not trying to read political threads. ;)

[imagirliegirl]

My original plan was to caucus for Obama (check) and vote for him when/if he got the nomination. If Clinton got the nom instead, in the interest of not seeing McCain win (God help us all if that happens) I was going to vote for her. That was the plan...all along. I didn't dislike her, I just liked him better.

But as this continues to go on, Clinton is just making me like her less and less. I cannot comprehend why she can't just run her damn campaign and talk about her own issues. It's like she is so desperate she's got nothing left but to try to make people hate Obama by picking apart every.little.thing.he.says. It's just getting old. I will also say I am none too impressed with seeing a candidate kicking back shots in a bar to try to get votes from people who are stupid enough to vote for her just because she is "cool" enough to drink in a bar.

Obama has done nothing to make me feel like I do about her. This is all her doing, her actions, her words. It's seriously just gotten to be too much. At this point, I just have to change the channel when she pops on the television because I don't even want to hear what she's spewing. She is such a divider.

So like I said in the Obama thread, if the election were tomorrow, I guess I wouldn't vote. That really makes me sad, but I cannot in good conscience vote for her. And there's no way in hell McCain is getting my vote. So, oh well I guess. :(

[lunaria]

Had to jump in here real quick:

I agree TOTALLY with busybee. I will not ever vote for Hil. Could not stand her in the 90's, hate her even more now. Obama has a better chance of pulling weary republican votes... Hil has no chance in hell.

Steping back out now:D

[phoenics]

So like I said in the Obama thread, if the election were tomorrow, I guess I wouldn't vote. That really makes me sad, but I cannot in good conscience vote for her. And there's no way in hell McCain is getting my vote. So, oh well I guess. :(

[/FONT]

I'm hoping that by the time the GE comes around, you'll be okay voting for Hill if that's what we've got. We just - we can't let McCain win. I think that would be so very bad for the country. Personally, I'm not sure it would directly affect me, but it would affect so many other people who don't have the advantages that I have... and things would just get so bad that I can't even begin to think about it. With Bush, I consoled myself by saying that things couldn't possibly get that bad - but they did and they are.

I have no faith that McCain will improve things... I think he'll continue Bush's disastrous course. Obama or Clinton would at least stop the bleeding, you know? The thing is, Obama and Clinton are the same, policy-wise. I do have fears that Clinton may waffle on stuff because she hasn't been the most honest person - but I think she's sharper and smarter than McCain and she does have Bill (even if he seems off his game). Even though I ache for this country to unite (even if I feel very separatist right now, lol), at least with Clinton I have reasonable assurance that she won't just blow over for the republicans - and we would have a Democratic Senate and Congress.

[imagirliegirl]

Our country has got to revamp this election system. If you ask me, we deserve better than two shitty choices. I don't want to have to vote for someone I don't like just so someone I hate doesn't win! Ugh!

Every election it always seems to come down to who's less likely to screw us over completely. :rolleyes:

[tenofcups]

I didn't say it wasn't vile. You simply assumed that I did.

Why on earth would I assume that? Here's your exact quote:

Well apparently 17% or something vile like that of Hill supporters claim they won't vote for Obama if he wins the nomination.

Oh please. Look at the exit polls in PA and then look at who brought up race first in this race - it was Hillary and Bill, because they know that they could win if they got everyone to look at Obama as nothing more than a 'black man' and then hopefully, 'an uppity Negro'.

Oh please. I live in PA. I've looked at the exit polls. I know that 18% said race mattered to them. It's unclear to me that way that question has been positioned, but as far as I can gather, it was asked to white and black voters. Which I assume means that there's a portion in there -- I have no idea what portion -- of black voters who are voting for him because he is black, not just white voters who are not voting for him because he's black. Do you have different information?

And I asked you in all honesty what you're referring to with the "black man" and "uppity Negro" comments. I still literally have no idea what you're referring to. If that's happening, I DO want to know about it. Can you please tell me what you're talking about?

[meganth]

There's no way that Hillary can pass Obama in the pledged delegate count. If she gets the nomination it'll be through the super delegates - will the party be able to recover from that?


I'm hoping that by the time the GE comes around, you'll be okay voting for Hill if that's what we've got. We just - we can't let McCain win.

This is what concerns me the most. Even if i were a fence sitter and Hillary managed to win through Super delegates i believe the party will be torn apart. People want to say Obama is elitist? Having super delegate politicians think they know better than the common voter is elitist and will disenfranchise a lot of people.

[cosmic]

I'm like Imagirliegirl in that regard. But I'm working on it and trying to remind myself that the county (and the Earth) can't bear another 4 years of GOP policies. In all honesty, I have no earthly idea of what HRC will do as president because she will say/do absolutely anything to get elected. Still I have to think that she has to be better than McCain. I'm not there yet, though...lol.

[gayle]

I so agree phoenics. Please people, don't throw away your vote just because you are ticked at Hil. This election is far too important to NOT elect Mccain, than be pissed at a Democrat so badly that you'd help McCain win.

In all honesty, I feel quite certain that Obama will get the nomination, but there is some meager chace that Hil can pull it out, which is exactly why I am sure she is not throwing in the towel. The race IS still very close. Nonetheless, I think it will be Obama, and as much as I'd like to see Hil win the nomination I will strongly and actively support Obama should he win.

[jennylou]

I'm like Imagirliegirl in that regard. But I'm working on it and trying to remind myself that the county (and the Earth) can't bear another 4 years of GOP policies. In all honesty, I have no earthly idea of what HRC will do as president because she will say/do absolutely anything to get elected. Still I have to think that she has to be better than McCain. I'm not there yet, though...lol.

I'm there, lol. I just know we can't take another four years of the same old, same old. I love Obama, but, if Hillary gets the nomination, I'll vote for her. I don't know that I'll be all excited about it, but the alternative is much, much worse.

And really, they are very similar with policies. I just don't like how Hillary has taken the campaign so negative. That's what started to sour me.

I actually wanted Richardson (hey, can we have him for VP, no matter the candidate - that would make me feel better! :D), once he dropped out - I watched, thinking my vote wasn't going to count. Then, Super Tuesday rolled around and holy shit, Ohio's vote was going to count. So, then I went and started researching and I decided that I liked Obama more than Hillary.

[gayle]

I'd be super happy with Richardson as VP as well!

[phoenics]

Why on earth would I assume that? Here's your exact quote:

Well apparently 17% or something vile like that of Hill supporters claim they won't vote for Obama if he wins the nomination.

Right. Where does that say or imply that it wouldn't be vile if Obama supporters did the same thing? It DOESN'T. YOU implied that or assumed that.



Oh please. I live in PA.

Then you know what I'm talking about.


I've looked at the exit polls. I know that 18% said race mattered to them. It's unclear to me that way that question has been positioned, but as far as I can gather, it was asked to white and black voters. Which I assume means that there's a portion in there -- I have no idea what portion -- of black voters who are voting for him because he is black, not just white voters who are not voting for him because he's black. Do you have different information?

And I asked you in all honesty what you're referring to with the "black man" and "uppity Negro" comments. I still literally have no idea what you're referring to. If that's happening, I DO want to know about it. Can you please tell me what you're talking about?

It's sort of an underlying theme in this whole election. Playing on the closet racist fears of some people. It's hard to pinpoint down to statistical fact, it's just apparent in the way this whole thing is being handled. The Wright controversy and how that's been spun (as if Obama is gonna exact black revenge and enslave white people or something ridiculous like that), Bill's comments in SC, Geraldine Ferraro and her comments and also how the FIRST mention of race in the election by any candidate was by Hillary and then Bill. They needed to make it an issue. You also have Bill Clinton claiming (and then denying he did so) that Obama used the race card against him in SC (basically trying to blame Obama for his comments in SC that Clinton and only Clinton made) and then Hillary's offensive LBJ/MLK comments. Race has been a factor this entire election - first everyone tried hard (except Hill) to talk about Obama's background and now there seems to be 'permission' to cast him as black as possible because it's winning votes for Hillary.

[kedzieb]

I have a question about the delegates. I know right now Obama has more delegates won from the primaries/caucuses, but it's my understanding that neither candidate has the majority of delegates they need to win the nomination. So the arguments that Clinton should quit because she can't mathmatically win the nomination don't make sense to me.

I'm also OK with the nomination process going on until the convention if necessary. That gives us 2 potential nominees for a longer period of time and prevents McCain/the republicans from zeroing in on one opponant to attack.

I'm happily going to vote for either Obama or Clinton in November.

[tenofcups]

I was just coming back to say that I'd done some looking and see references to the "race card" comment, but have to dig deeper to find the actual comments since all I can find at a first glance is commentary, not the actual comments. So I'll keep looking.

[kedzieb]

It's sort of an underlying theme in this whole election. Playing on the closet racist fears of some people.

I think no matter who was running against Obama, the media would be focused on his race. Just like no matter who Clinton is running against, they'll bring up gender. I find both insulting.

[gayle]

I think no matter who was running against Obama, the media would be focused on his race. Just like no matter who Clinton is running against, they'll bring up gender. I find both insulting.

I agree 100%!

[phoenics]

I was just coming back to say that I'd done some looking and see references to the "race card" comment, but have to dig deeper to find the actual comments since all I can find at a first glance is commentary, not the actual comments. So I'll keep looking.

Here ya go!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/22/bill-clinton-obama-played_n_97927.html

You can even listen to the audio.

[Anna Low]

Huffington Post, huh? Too bad there isn't a more balanced source of information.

[BusyBee21]

I'm also OK with the nomination process going on until the convention if necessary. That gives us 2 potential nominees for a longer period of time and prevents McCain/the republicans from zeroing in on one opponant to attack.

kedzieb, as I (and many of my middle of the road Republicans friends) see it, is that the Democrats are beating themselves because the nomination process is dragging on.for.so.very.long. McCain doesn't have to come out with any attack ads against whoever ultimately gets the Dem nomination; all he has to do repeat the same lines they are using against each other currently. No need to come up with a new plan of attack against the Dems, because they are fighting so much internally, they are (IMO), beating themselves right now. And that's a bit depressing, even from a Republican like me!

[diedra1027]

it's my understanding that neither candidate has the majority of delegates they need to win the nomination. So the arguments that Clinton should quit because she can't mathmatically win the nomination don't make sense to me.Neither can win the total number of delegates needed to secure the party nomination, but mathmatically she can not surpass Obama's delegate count now even if she wiped the floor with him in all the remaining states. Unless she somehow manages to get them to count MI and FL - which is why she, and Fox News, are making such a stink over them now.

[kedzieb]

kedzieb, as I (and many of my middle of the road Republicans friends) see it, is that the Democrats are beating themselves because the nomination process is dragging on.for.so.very.long. McCain doesn't have to come out with any attack ads against whoever ultimately gets the Dem nomination; all he has to do repeat the same lines they are using against each other currently. No need to come up with a new plan of attack against the Dems, because they are fighting so much internally, they are (IMO), beating themselves right now. And that's a bit depressing, even from a Republican like me!

Oh, I know the reason people think the infighting is damaging. The problem I have with this thinking is that I believe if Obama was the official nominee now, the attacks coming from McCain etc. would be much harsher/damaging than anything fellow Dem's are throwing out there. Plus, if a scandal comes out about either Hilary or Barack in the next month, we'll have another option.

[phoenics]

Huffington Post, huh? Too bad there isn't a more balanced source of information.

It's the only place I could find the actual source with the audio links - which would be unbiased because it would be un-edited audio.

[tenofcups]

I listened. I don't have a problem with the comments. Just as I don't have a problem with Obama's "bitter" comments.

[phoenics]

I listened. I don't have a problem with the comments. Just as I don't have a problem with Obama's "bitter" comments.

I don't really think you can compare them though. Mostly I was zeroing on the fact that Bill made the comments and then lied about making them. It's the lying that bothered me. I guess Bill had a problem with his own comments.

[pocket]

I won't vote for Hillary because she doesn't deserve my vote. For the many reasons I have stated here a zillion times and don't need to hash over again. But also because if she were to somehow get the nomination she would get it over the candidate who won the popular vote, and the pledged delegate count. And that in my eyes would the perfect expression of what I have been saying about her all along.

It doesn't matter though. There's no way for her to win.

[Niobe]

Unless she somehow manages to get them to count MI and FL - which is why she, and Fox News, are making such a stink over them now.

I don't think she'd have the lead even if she DID get MI and FL counted.

As usual, ITA with pocket. If Clinton somehow gets the nomination, I'll probably be voting for Nader.

[tenofcups]

I don't really think you can compare them though. Mostly I was zeroing on the fact that Bill made the comments and then lied about making them. It's the lying that bothered me. I guess Bill had a problem with his own comments.

I thought you were making the point that the campaign was rife with racism.

[pocket]

They aren't going to count MI or FL as is. That's a pipedream.

But even if they did a revote in MI and FL and HRC won every single upcoming race including MI and FL by 60% she still wouldn't have more delegates. She can't win. She lost this race over a month ago.

[meganth]

Even as a Michigander i hope they don't count Michigan. It was an unbalanced race - if you could even call it a race - as Hillary was the only one who didn't take her name off the ballot.

[phoenics]

I thought you were making the point that the campaign was rife with racism.

Actually what I was saying was that the campaign was USING racism - that's a completely different thing and a bit more insidious than simply being racist.

I was also saying that he made the comments and then lied about making them. So I guess I was making two points. The language of 'race card' is really offensive to me, because it casts the racial dialogue as some sort of game when it's very serious - at least to me.

When someone like Bill uses the term 'race card' I know that means he doesn't get it and that for him, race and racism are political tools - wedges, if you will.

[Dally]

Count me in as one who thinks the continued fighting on among the two Democratic candidates will help McCain in the general election.

I don't watch Fox news, but if they are campaigning to count Michigan and Florida, you can bet it's not just to get Hillary the nomination, it's also to prolong the primary race as long as possible. They know it's damaging to both Democratic candidates. I mean, all you have to do is look at some of comments on this board to see that.

A few months ago, I thought McCain didn't stand a chance. I've since revised that judgement. At this rate, with Democrats as divided and increasingly pissed off as they are, I think he might win in November.

I said it in the Obama thread and I'll say it here, don't look to the candidates to make the peace right now, look to each other. If the ideals Obama talked about can ever come true, it has to start with us.

[imagirliegirl]

I don't really think you can compare them though. Mostly I was zeroing on the fact that Bill made the comments and then lied about making them. It's the lying that bothered me. I guess Bill had a problem with his own comments.

Bill Clinton doesn't lie! :eek:

Take it back!

[phoenics]

:p LOL.

[gayle]

Bill Clinton doesn't lie! :eek:

Take it back!

If they are in politics, they have all lied, or at the very least "put a spin" on something, at one time or another.

Doesn't make it right, but we all know it's true.

[pocket]

My big problem with Hillary lying about Bosnia is that it is part of a larger fabrication regarding her experience. She tried at first to play it off as something she just mis-stated, but in the ABC debate she basically said that she knew it wasn’t true and she said anyway. She is claiming that her experience as FL has given her substantive foreign policy experience. This can’t be true since she never has the clearances that would allow it to be true. Everyone exaggerate a little bit on their resume, but this is a pretty big one. It isn’t just about the sniper fire. The sniper fire became an issue because she has exaggerated her White House experience to make it more substantive than it actually is.

[cosmic]

I'm actually a little surprised by this:
Pelosi: Obama-Clinton ticket not a good idea (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_on_el_pr/pelosi_campaign)

[gayle]

That doesn't really surprise me Cosmic. I also agree with her, I think whoever gets the nomination should pick a VP who compliments them and can work with them.

As close as Obama and Clinton are on the issues, I don't see their styles of doing buisness meshing well. I think they would hinder each others effectiveness.

Edited to add, I sure as heck wouldn't mind seeimg Nancy Pelosi run for POTUS at some point, I have tremendous respect for her!

[allyray231]

For me here is how it goes

I am for Obama. If Hil some how wins the popular vote without FL or MI then I will consider voting for her. If she "steals" the election it will be really really hard for me to vote for her. I don't like her, have NEVER liked her (and I did vote for Bill).

I will however not vote for McCain. So I will either not vote or do a TON of soul searching.

Oh and BTW my husband is Jewish and is a Obama supporter-just saying

[JustVita]

I posted this as part of a larger post in the Obama thread, but I really would like, no snark intended, for Hillary supporters to offer some insight.

* Here's my question to Hillary supporters...How could you feel comfortable with Hillary getting the nomination? I mean, in your minds, how does this sit well with you. Obviously, her supporters see her as the best candidate, but how would her getting the nod be any different really than the Bush/Gore debacle, which every Democrat worth their weight had a problem with and rightfully so. Yes, I realize the two are different (the popular vote in Florida versus the popular vote of the people and Superdelegates representing the people's will). Why would that be okay? BTW, I realize Superdelegates aren't obligated to vote as the people have, but is that not their purpose? And what a fallout it'll be if they don't. So, while we're talking about what's good for the Democratic party, how does this qualify? How does her still running qualify?

* To add more to that, How is it okay for her to say that Obama is disenfranchising the voters of Michigan and Florida, but then expect the Superdelegates to make it happen for her? Does that not disenfranchise voters if Superdelegates decide this nomination against the popular vote? Did she not initially agree to Florida and Michigan primaries not being counted per the DNC? Wasn't not until after she saw she wasn't going to lock up the nomination following Super Tuesday that she was so concerned about voters being disenfranchised? If that's your stand, stand for it when it's not convenient for you.

* At what point, with respect to what's good for the party, do her supporters look to her to drop out?

[Anna Low]

Ok, I'll take a swipe at it, even though I'm sure to be bashed wholeheartedly.

How can I feel comfortable with her getting the nomination? It is very simple for me. I think she is the best candidate for the job. Clearly, there are others (although very few on CC) who agree, as she continues to receive support - cash and votes. Although some believe Obama is practically on par with the second coming and should be handed the presidency right this second, I think there is a lot more to it than that and thus far, he has only been able to demonstrate to me that he is a fine cheerleader. For me, it is less about what is good for the democratic party and more about what will help clean up the mess left behind by the previous administration. Maybe in a few years he might be that guy. But not now. I don't think he is strong enough.

The word "disenfranchise" is annoying and overused. Moving on, if I were a voter in Michigan or Florida and took the time to vote, I would want that vote counted. The funny thing is that if the shoe were on the other foot, what guarantees are there that Obama wouldn't be taking the same stance? There are none.

At what point would the Obama supporters look for him to drop out if the situation were reversed? Although I'll be the responses will be something like "oh, long ago" or something equally high-ground, I'm willing to bet that secretly his supporters would feel about him the same way I feel about my candidate.

[phoenics]

Anna - to answer your last question, I would scream for Barack to get out (if the situation were reversed) the moment I started fearing that his staying in it was damaging the party's chances for a Democrat to win in the GE. That'd be right about now.

[jennylou]

Ok, I'll take a swipe at it, even though I'm sure to be bashed wholeheartedly.

How can I feel comfortable with her getting the nomination? It is very simple for me. I think she is the best candidate for the job. Clearly, there are others (although very few on CC) who agree, as she continues to receive support - cash and votes. Although some believe Obama is practically on par with the second coming and should be handed the presidency right this second, I think there is a lot more to it than that and thus far, he has only been able to demonstrate to me that he is a fine cheerleader. For me, it is less about what is good for the democratic party and more about what will help clean up the mess left behind by the previous administration. Maybe in a few years he might be that guy. But not now. I don't think he is strong enough.

The word "disenfranchise" is annoying and overused. Moving on, if I were a voter in Michigan or Florida and took the time to vote, I would want that vote counted. The funny thing is that if the shoe were on the other foot, what guarantees are there that Obama wouldn't be taking the same stance? There are none.

At what point would the Obama supporters look for him to drop out if the situation were reversed? Although I'll be the responses will be something like "oh, long ago" or something equally high-ground, I'm willing to bet that secretly his supporters would feel about him the same way I feel about my candidate.

Obama took his name off of the name the ballot in Michigan and didn't not campaign in FL at all. So, eh took the high ground and didn't even leave that option open.

[gayle]

I agree with you Anna, and could not have expressed it better.

And, I don't think you'll get bashed, I have been mouthing off for two days and haven't been bashed yet ;)

[Anna Low]

Hmmm. I'm not a huge Pelosi fan and as a result, tend to take much of what she says with a grain of salt. For me, the only way Obama would get my vote is if he shared the ticket with Clinton.

[gayle]

Hmmm. I'm not a huge Pelosi fan and as a result, tend to take much of what she says with a grain of salt. For me, the only way Obama would get my vote is if he shared the ticket with Clinton.

On that count you and I do have a different position. I will vote for whomever the Democratic party nomunates. It's far too important to keep McCain out of office, IMHO.

[Dally]

I agree with Pelosi. I don't want to see an Obama/Clinton ticket. They don't really complement each other. I'm not sure who I would pick for Obama, but I'm looking forward to finding out who he thinks is a good pick. :)

[jennylou]

I agree with Pelosi. I don't want to see an Obama/Clinton ticket. They don't really complement each other. I'm not sure who I would pick for Obama, but I'm looking forward to finding out who he thinks is a good pick. :)

I agree, I don't think they'd make a good match at this point.

I think he should take Richardson. I heart Richardson. :)

Can you imagine, a Black man as President and a Hispanic as VP?:D

[JustVita]

Anna, I won't bash you. I'm honestly looking to understand, how at this point, her supporters don't see it's time for her to call it quits. I think we all think our candidate is best for the job, but the point is that regardless of how strongly you feel about this, it's a race and she has essentially lost. Without Superdelegates all throwing votes her way, she can't win. And if that were the case, forget about what's best for the party (you said that doesn't concern you), but why did we all bother voting for anyway. Being that it is an election (competition) somebody has to lose. It's her.

As for disenfranchising voters, Hillary began that conversation when contrary to her agreement with the DNC to not count Florida and Michigan primaries, she wanted them to count after the Super Tuesday, seal the deal, plan didn't work in her favor as she expected. And my point to that is Don't harp on how wrong it is to Michigan and Florida voters to not count their votes, but then ask Superdelegates to vote against the will of the people. You can't have it both ways.

While I suspect that if the shoe were on the other foot, Obama would have dropped out long ago, the fact is that is hypothetical. What's happening right now is fact. Not to mention, Obama was new to the national scene, and didn't carry enough weight to, if he were losing like Hillary, not damage himself for future possibilities. His "second coming", not to me, but among party bigwigs, is I'm sure also due to the fact that they see what he's been able to accomplish, not having the base to begin with that Hillary did. You can bet they're not ignoring the way he's been able to raise money, gain new voters, and inspire people.

I can respect that you think Hillary's best for the job, but she's lost. Try again in 4 years. Her time is not now. Heck, you'd think she was 75 and thought this was her last opportunity to run. It's not and she should accept that fair and square, she hasn't been able to accomplish what she set out to. Also, I find it funny that people are turned off to Obama because of his supporters. If you (general you) are turned off to him, let it be because of his actions or policies, not something outside his control. I don't agree with a great deal of Hillary supporters, but I don't dislike her because of it. I'm not at all impressed with how she's handled herself during this campaign, period.

Also, while I'm certain Hillary is miles better than Bush, I'm not so confident in how much change she can affect. But, that's just me. I suppose I'd vote for her, but mostly because as an African-American, I just can't not vote. I don't suppose that's an option for me and my beliefs, but I won't be enthusiastic about it.

[imagirliegirl]

Campaign too long, too negative (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080424/ap_on_el_pr/negative_campaign)

The Democrats' seemingly unending battle to pick a nominee for the White House is taking a toll on the public, with growing numbers saying this year's presidential campaign is too negative and has lasted too long.

This made me think of this thread.

[mar5195]

Anna - I'm with you girl!

[phoenics]

Hmmm. I'm not a huge Pelosi fan and as a result, tend to take much of what she says with a grain of salt. For me, the only way Obama would get my vote is if he shared the ticket with Clinton.

Are you a Democrat?

[gayle]

I just found a very interesting quote by Obama, regarding whether or not Clinton should exit the race.

"My attitude is that Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants. Her name is on the ballot. And she is a fierce and formidable competitor, and she obviously believes that she would make the best nominee and the best opponent," he said. "I think that you know she should be able to compete and her supporters should be able to support her for as long as they are willing or able."

Obama said that the nominee should be decided upon after all the Democratic contests have been completed "some time in early June."

Full article here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23858904/

[imagirliegirl]

I think he has too much class to say she should step off, even if that's how he feels.

[pocket]

He has to say that. He also says that she is doing an excellent job of prepping him for Republican attacks. He said the other night on TDS that by the time he is nominated there won't be anything negative left unvetted for the Republicans to shoot at. Personally I think she is still aiming for the VP spot. I'd be shocked if he picked her. I'm sure she would do nothing but undermine him. Do you guys think she'll be the next majority leader?

[gayle]

I think it's possible she will be the next majority leader, but in all honesty, I haven't given it much thought.

[tenofcups]

I agree with Pelosi. I don't want to see an Obama/Clinton ticket. They don't really complement each other. I'm not sure who I would pick for Obama, but I'm looking forward to finding out who he thinks is a good pick. :)

Me neither. I want to see a Clinton/Obama ticket ;). No, I don't really see that happening, but that actually really makes sense to me. I want her as president; I think I want him as president some day. Get him in there, groom him for 8 years and give him the following 8 years.

[nylons73]

Absolutely no way Obama picks Clinton. Her nationwide negatives are up to 58%. A Vice Presidential Candidate has never been picked that had negatives anywhere close to this range. Obama actually loses Independent and Republican cross over votes in the General if she's on the ticket. Not going to happen.

And to Anna - If you like her, you like her. But, unless she can get 65% of the remaining Superdelegates to go for her, she cannot win.

Answer this question please- Do you honestly think that 65% of the remaining Superdelegates are going to overturn the leader in the pledged delegate and popular vote totals? (I refuse to buy HRC's latest arguement that she has more votes b/c Obama's name was not on the MI ballot.)

Think about what would happen if 65%+ of Superdelegates told the Obama supporters in the party that even though he had the lead in pledged delegates, popular votes and states won, the nominee was going to be Clinton. And, my question is, do you honestly think that it will happen?

It's not going to happen. Clinton should get out.

Gayle- Obama had to say that after Sen. Patrick Leahy gave a radio interview and called for Clinton to get out. Several others followed suit. Clinton ran around telling people that the 'boys were trying to shove me out' and people all got upset. Obama then came out and said that she should stay in as long as she wants. Of course he doesn't mean this, but Leahy and others forced his hand because he couldn't afford to look like a 'boy' trying to 'shove her out.'

[cosmic]

Oh, I totally agree that both of them on the same ticket wouldn't work (and it certainly wouldn't help Obama, polls show), I was just surprised that Pelosi SAID it. Then again, didn't someone point out a while back that Pelosi and HRC don't get along at all?

[Niobe]

Obama had to say that after Sen. Patrick Leahy gave a radio interview and called for Clinton to get out. Several others followed suit. Clinton ran around telling people that the 'boys were trying to shove me out' and people all got upset.

And this is a prime example of Clinton's antics that I find so disgusting. Um, the first major player I remember making that statement was Nancy Pelosi. I'm sick of her playing the "poor pitiful little woman me" crap. If you want equality, play as an equal.

[cosmic]

Pretty good article on Politico:
False Sense of Suspense (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9862.html)

[Anna Low]

Yes Phoenics, I am a democrat. I guess that's hard for some to believe, considering I'm not a fan of Pelosi and have no plans to vote for Obama. For me, the state of the nation is much more important than the state of the party. Pelosi has disappointed me greatly - I expected a lot, especially after all of her big talk. As a result, I don't pay a lot of attention to what she says now. My fault really. I let my guard down and I looked at her as a leader who could at least make a tiny start in the process of getting us out of the mess we are in. But all I see she has done thus far is a big nothing.

[cosmic]

From Eleanor Clift in Newsweek:

If Clinton Wins, It's Payback Time (http://www.newsweek.com/id/134012)

Scary! lol...

[phoenics]

For me, the state of the nation is much more important than the state of the party.

If you really believed that, then I don't understand how you wouldn't vote for Obama, as Hillary and his policies are practically identical. Their positions are nearly the same - and where they differ, it's not like McCain picks up the slack.

If you don't vote for Obama in the GE against McCain, McCain will win. So, I guess what you're saying is that if Hillary doesn't get the nomination, then McCain would be better for the state of the nation?

That's ... interesting - coming from a Democrat. McCain's policies don't sound very democratic to me.

[nylons73]

I agree with Phoenics. If a person is voting for Hillary due to the 'state of the nation' and then goes for McCain that's hillarious. There are lots of reasons to vote for McCain, but his similarity to HRC's proposals is NOT one of them.

McCain wants to continue a war that has killed over 4,000 of our men and women (some of them my friends) and has brought us nothing but economic ruin and an unstable Middle East. McCain has also stated that the economy 'is not his strong suit.' HA!

People have every right to vote for McCain, but Democrats should not couch it in terms of 'what's good for the nation.' Hillary's policies and McCain's policies are nothing alike and if you think HRC is good for the country, then you cannot possibly think that McCain's are good. It's either one or the other. They don't share a common platform on the war, the economy, taxes, education, etc, etc. etc.

Think about it. A Hillary supporter would say "Hillary is the best one because she is going to end this war, stop the foreclosure crisis, get universal healthcare, appoint more liberal judges, etc.." McCain proposes to do NONE of these things. Actually, he wants to do the opposite of these things. Therefore if you support HRC for what she stands for, there is no possible conflation with anything McCain stands for.

The one area I can see is the environment. McCain is pretty good on environmental issues. If you are a one issue voter, conflating them makes total sense. But how many one issue voters are there out there?

[Anna Low]

I prefer to cast a vote for McCain instead of Obama, regardless of how "hilarious" that might be. I don't honestly believe McCain has a chance whatsoever of winning in November, so I suppose my vote is more in protest than anything else. Of those two, I don't believe either will anything at all to help this country, so that pretty much tells me that my vote will be irrelevant for the next 4 - 8 years.

Nylons, you appear to be so very angry with anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support Obama - to the point of being slightly insulting. Is that really necessary to make your point?

[jennylou]

anna - what would you be "protesting"? It's not like HRC would have had any funny business going on when she loses, but rather, it will be the fact that she lost.

[nylons73]

I prefer to cast a vote for McCain instead of Obama, regardless of how "hilarious" that might be. I don't honestly believe McCain has a chance whatsoever of winning in November, so I suppose my vote is more in protest than anything else. Of those two, I don't believe either will anything at all to help this country, so that pretty much tells me that my vote will be irrelevant for the next 4 - 8 years.

Nylons, you appear to be so very angry with anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support Obama - to the point of being slightly insulting. Is that really necessary to make your point?

I am sorry if it came off as insulting. I don't mean to be angry but using the word 'hilarious' to describe a position in which one thinks that BOTH Hillary and McCain would be good for the country is not far fetched. It is hillarious. If you asked a McCain supporter if they would vote for Hillary or McCain because they would both be equally as good - they would probably call that a hilarious premise.

What you articulated in your above repsonse (that your vote for McCain would be only a protest vote) makes sense. You are not EQUATING Hillary's positions with McCain. You are not saying that you think McCain would be just as good for the country as Hillary. In your new comments you are saying that you are angry and you would protest. Point taken! That statement is not hillarious at all. However, your FIRST statement was that you were more worried about the country that the party and therefore would go with McCain over Obama. Based on political positioning, that's not a logical switch. That's all I am saying.


McCain has a very real chance of winning in November and I don't think he should be discounted. He's polling close to both Democrats right now.

As I said, I don't mean to come off insulting. I DO mean to push people to explain their positions. YOU (Anna) did not do this but I take issue with other people who says things LIKE........"I'm against the war, but I'll vote McCain if Obama doesn't win" ("or if Hill doesn't win") This makes no logical sense and comments like these should be challenged. It's insulting to people's intelligence.

Futhermore, after Rev. Wright's inflammatory and egotistical comments this morning at the National Press Club, I think it's clear that Hillary will be the party's nominee and I am going to need the summer to get over what she has done during this campaign. I am going to have to dig down deep to figure out if I can go and pull the lever for her this fall. McCain = War and I will not do that in November.

[Anna Low]

Point taken - I totally understand. I'm sorry if I wasn't clearer. My McCain vote would wholly and completely be a protest vote.

I heard some of Wright's comments on television early this morning, but from what I've read about the NPC, I don't think the ones I heard came from that event. It does confuse me a bit, especially after the 9/11 press - does Wright think he is somehow helping Obama or has it is now more of a personal agenda on his part?

[phoenics]

I prefer to cast a vote for McCain instead of Obama, regardless of how "hilarious" that might be. I don't honestly believe McCain has a chance whatsoever of winning in November, so I suppose my vote is more in protest than anything else. Of those two, I don't believe either will anything at all to help this country, so that pretty much tells me that my vote will be irrelevant for the next 4 - 8 years.

Nylons, you appear to be so very angry with anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support Obama - to the point of being slightly insulting. Is that really necessary to make your point?

Actually I think Nylons' point is that your reasoning doesn't make any sense. Since Obama and Hillary are so close to each other in terms of where they stand on the issues, if you were going to vote for Hillary, then it would make sense that you'd vote for Obama. That you wouldn't vote for Obama, but for McCain (whose policies don't jibe with HRC's) if Hillary doesn't get the nom seems to really call into question your reasoning on 'what is best for the country'.

Is it someone who believes as HRC does on most of the issues, or someone who believes the opposite? And if it's the latter, why were you voting for HRC in the first place?

You can vote for whomever you like, but couching it as being 'for the good of the nation' when you'd be voting for someone who is basically the opposite of HRC rather than someone who is clearly aligned with HRC on the issues sounds disingenuous at best.

[nylons73]

Point taken - I totally understand. I'm sorry if I wasn't clearer. My McCain vote would wholly and completely be a protest vote.

I heard some of Wright's comments on television early this morning, but from what I've read about the NPC, I don't think the ones I heard came from that event. It does confuse me a bit, especially after the 9/11 press - does Wright think he is somehow helping Obama or has it is now more of a personal agenda on his part?


Oh man. I don't know what in the heck Wright thinks he's doing at this point. Like I wrote in the Obama thread, I think he's only worried about helping and defending himself at this point. He really went off the deep end this morning. (you can find the video at Huffington Post and about a zillion other places.) He made remarks about Farakhan, 9/11, Obama's political dealings, Zionism and much much more. Total and utter disaster. He was doing GREAT throughout the weekend with the Bill Moyers interview and the NAACP remarks last night. This morning - totally different story. Ruinous. If anyone not solidly in Obama's camp was watching any of it, they were offended. Heck! Even those solidly in Obama's camp were likely offended (Wright actually said that he told Barack that if Barack wins in November Wright would be 'coming after him!' WTH? :confused:)

Let's just say it was a equal opportunity offending moment for Wright and I don't see a way out of it for Obama. I love Obama, I love what he stands for, I think he's whip-smart and he'd do a great job. But Wright is out for Wright (unfortunately) and Obama's close enough to Wright that the damage is done. I don't think that Obama believes the US Govt. spread AIDS to kill African-Americans, but Wright nearly reiterated that stance this morning and that's going to be enough for most people NOT to give Obama the chance to explain himself (again.)

Heck - I saw an article about people in Appalachia who said they would never vote for Barack. When asked why they said that they feared he would 'install all blacks into positions of power above us." If the rural white voter already has some of these fears, Wright's dismissive and inflammatory remarks this morning are only going to confirm a lot of them. (see the Obama thread for my post on more of the remarks.) Disaster.

[phoenics]

Point taken - I totally understand. I'm sorry if I wasn't clearer. My McCain vote would wholly and completely be a protest vote.

I heard some of Wright's comments on television early this morning, but from what I've read about the NPC, I don't think the ones I heard came from that event. It does confuse me a bit, especially after the 9/11 press - does Wright think he is somehow helping Obama or has it is now more of a personal agenda on his part?

I haven't heard the comments. Can anyone point me to them, or give me a transcript? Based on nylons' comments though I have a feeling I'll need prayer after reading it, lol. :rolleyes::mad::rolleyes:

I'm of two minds (after seeing the comments he made)... One, I can understand him wanting to correct people in their attacks on him. But the other mind says that he could have held this until much later. Now he's stirred everything up again.

[Anna Low]

I could only find some excerpts from the breakfast and nothing on what I heard (or think I heard - it was 5am after all) this morning. Also found the "coming after" article - it was an odd thing to say - and that is what made me ask about the rise of a personal agenda.

Although I will have to admit I chalked one up to Wright for his military/Cheney response.

[nylons73]

I haven't heard the comments. Can anyone point me to them, or give me a transcript? Based on nylons' comments though I have a feeling I'll need prayer after reading it, lol. :rolleyes::mad::rolleyes:

I'm of two minds (after seeing the comments he made)... One, I can understand him wanting to correct people in their attacks on him. But the other mind says that he could have held this until much later. Now he's stirred everything up again.


Phoenics- here they are. I *think* they are in their entirety, but honestly, I was hiding my face under my blanket this morning as I was watching them so I couldn't tell you if the 9:57 this excerpt seems to run is all of it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/28/jeremiah-wright-at-nation_n_98949.html

And yes...you are going to need some prayer! I need some and I saw them live around 10:00!

[nylons73]

From various media sources...

USA TODAY In a defiant, unrepentant appearance, the former pastor of the United Church of Christ congregation in Chicago that Obama has attended for two decades said he believed controversy surrounding his remarks on everything from U.S. government involvement in perpetuating AIDS in the black community to the "chickens coming home to roost" on Sept. 11, 2001, were attacks on the black church, not him.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-04-28-wright-analysis_N.htm

And "Bad News for Obama" http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/28/politics/main4050606.shtml

If you had a chance to listen to Rev. Jeremiah Wright-- at his NAACP appearance in Detroit, or in his talk at the National Press Club -- you came away with two impressions: first, Rev. Wright is a learned, compelling, often hilarious speaker; second, he is a genuine threat to the presidential hopes of Barack Obama.


I seriously just want to cry.

Anna- If I thought all the News Channels were going to play were the Cheney remarks I wouldn't really be worried. It was pretty funny (albeit Wright could have left out the Black Fraternity hand motions that he did just after he said the Cheney quip.) It's the yelling at the press club moderator and the "Farakhan didn't enslave me," Zionism, AIDS, "Obama did not denounce me" remarks that will doom Obama. Funny enough- Wright also attacked Obama saying that one of the reasons Obama distanced himself from Wright is that "He (Obama) didn't listen to my whole sermon - just like all of you." Wright was off-balance, off message and just downright "off'' this morning. I don't see how Obama recovers.

[Anna Low]

Didn't realize there was more to the Cheney remark, including gestures - I haven't seen any of those media clips. (one of the drawbacks of arriving at work early and having no tv)

I'm not sure I agree that it will harm him. I think he has come too far for that at this point.

[nylons73]

Dana Milbank of the WAPO agrees with me

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/roughsketch/2008/04/obamas_pastor_reignites_race_c.html

Should it become necessary in the months from now to identify the moment that doomed Obama's presidential aspirations, attention is likely to focus on the hour between nine and ten this morning at the National Press Club. It was then that Wright, Obama's longtime pastor, reignited a controversy about race from which Obama had only recently recovered - and added lighter fuel.

Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks ("God damn America") and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America.


And...Hillary is now polling 9 points better than Barack in Indiana, a state he was winning a few days ago. Plus, migration of white voters to Hillary in North Carolina means that Barack's 25% lead of a few weeks ago is down to half of that. And these new polls came out BEFORE Wright went off this morning.

Somehow Barack got a new Superdelegate today (Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico) but I would guess that's the last one he's going to get for a while.

I don't mean to sound like the voice of doom, but I am a realist and I think Hillary has now won the 'electibility' battle (in the eyes of white voters) and that's what matters in the end. It breaks my heart but I can't deny it.

[Dally]

Why the heck is Wright choosing this moment to spout off to the media? It's incredibly self centered.

[cosmic]

I seriously just want to cry.


I felt the same way after reading a Michelle Malkin article on Rev. Wright. Then I said, "Wait a minute! What the hell am I doing on the Michelle Malkin website???" :D I had followed a link over from Yahoo news. But what I'm saying is that this is the job of Hillary's campaign and of the GOP machine: to try to make us feel hopeless. But when you look at it logically, there really is no suspense. Not right now anyway. Obama's in the lead. And HRC can't catch him. In June Obama will have the power of the entire Democratic party behind him and all the polls show that he will win the presidency. That could change, but this is the reality right now.

[Dally]

But what I'm saying is that this is the job of Hillary's campaign and of the GOP machine: to try to make us feel hopeless.
I don't think the point is to make us feel hopeless. It's to make the superdelegates feel Obama has no chance so that they should go for Hillary. As well as the remaining primary states.

[tenofcups]

Has anyone found a full video of what he said? I'm pretty sure the Huffington Post video is not the full one since the articles seem to speak of things not referenced in that clip.

But wow, just wow. Did Wright decide he actively wanted to try to bring down Obama? I'm not sure how many dismissive references there were to him being a "politician" in there, but that sure seemed to be a point he was trying to make, which completely flies in the face of the way Obama has been trying to position himself.

FWIW, I had no idea that the gesture after the Cheney remark meant anything. (And I happen to think he was within his rights to make a comment like that, but that kind of besides the point...)

[nylons73]

Has anyone found a full video of what he said? I'm pretty sure the Huffington Post video is not the full one since the articles seem to speak of things not referenced in that clip.

But wow, just wow. Did Wright decide he actively wanted to try to bring down Obama? I'm not sure how many dismissive references there were to him being a "politician" in there, but that sure seemed to be a point he was trying to make, which completely flies in the face of the way Obama has been trying to position himself.

FWIW, I had no idea that the gesture after the Cheney remark meant anything. (And I happen to think he was within his rights to make a comment like that, but that kind of besides the point...)

To be honest, I haven't looked for the full video because I saw it live and I really don't need to see it again. :(

I think it's sad that again and again Obama has been trying to be 'gentle' with Wright as far as saying that he loves the man, and then Wright has to go out and put on a show like that for the National Press. (and the Superdelegates)

Your comment about not knowing the gesture is EXACTLY what I was talking about in the Obama thread. Many AAs and some (few) white folk might have guessed (as I did) that he made an Omega sign but most people watching were like 'eek!' It looked buffoonish at best.

Don't get me wrong - I thought the crack on Cheney was great. It's true that Cheney has been sending our young men and women to war and has never served himself. However, the other 30 minutes of Question and Answer were a complete political disaster. He started out by defending his 'chickens coming home to roost' comment and it just went downhill from there. The questions were incindiary, I'll give him that. There wasn't a decent question in the whole bunch. But he HAS to find the switch to respond to things in a better manner. He turned on the "Bill Clinton finger waving" switch and that's never a good mode in which to address a room full of press. :mad:

(wait a minute, of course the Huff PO clip wasn't the whole thing - I watched it live and it was at least 30 minutes.) I think I am having PTSD from the whole event and can't even remember how long it went on!" :p :(

[tenofcups]

(wait a minute, of course the Huff PO clip wasn't the whole thing - I watched it live and it was at least 30 minutes.) I think I am having PTSD from the whole event and can't even remember how long it went on!" :p :(

:p I caught that earlier in your post when you said the 30-minute Q&A and I realized I'd only listened to 10 minutes on HP.

[Delta]

Here is the video - http://www.c-span.org/video_rss.aspx?MediaID=36019

The Cheney comment confused me though - did Cheney ever call Wright unpatriotic?

[nylons73]

Here is the video - http://www.c-span.org/video_rss.aspx?MediaID=36019

The Cheney comment confused me though - did Cheney ever call Wright unpatriotic?

No - Wright just went after him. Many liberals have problems with the fact that Cheney pretty much pushed Bush into the war with Iraq, yet has never served in the armed forces himself.

[cosmic]

I don't think the point is to make us feel hopeless. It's to make the superdelegates feel Obama has no chance so that they should go for Hillary. As well as the remaining primary states.

Yes, but with several primaries remaining, it helps their cause to also get voters to feel less enthusiastic.