PDA

View Full Version : Hillary Clinton running full throttle to a Democratic loss in the fall...


Logical
03-04-2008, 11:00 PM
How pathetic it will likely be to see at least 4 more years of Bush BS in the White House. Hillary cannot win in the fall and she is hell bent on destroying Barack's chances.:doh!:

Mr. Kotter
03-04-2008, 11:16 PM
Yep. You are right. This time.

Kinda displays, in graphic form, the incompetency of the Democratic Party...don't it?

That is all. :)

Reaper16
03-04-2008, 11:17 PM
Kinda displays, in graphic form, the incompetency of the Democratic Party...don't it?

That's for damn sure.:grr:

Mr. Kotter
03-04-2008, 11:19 PM
The stupid bastards who run the Democratic Party, are hell bent on losing the election of 2008 too, aren't they???

LMAO

I mean, if McCain is able to capture what most, even three months ago....thought was a very improbable run to capture the Presidency in 2008....HOW friggin' pathetic does that make the Democratic Party??? LMAO

ROFL

SNR
03-04-2008, 11:58 PM
Enter Denise in 3... 2... 1....

ClevelandBronco
03-05-2008, 12:56 AM
Susan Estrich was on Fox News Tues. night claiming responsibility (along with others) for writing the rules for the Democratic primaries. She apologizing for them and mentioned that she wished she could get her hands on some of the drugs that they must have been on when they wrote the rules.

Gotta love her.

keg in kc
03-05-2008, 01:24 AM
It's been funny to watch. I mean, hell, when this all started, Hillary (and a lot of her followers) probably thought she was a shoe-in for the White House. There certainly wouldn't be anybody in the democratic party who could oppose her, and after 8 years of incompetence from Bush, well...it was going to be a cakewalk.

Then this young nobody from Illinois shows up and suddenly she's on the ropes.

So she's going to fight dirty and do whatever she can to win. Even if she can't.

BigRedChief
03-05-2008, 04:49 AM
How pathetic it will likely be to see at least 4 more years of Bush BS in the White House. Hillary cannot win in the fall and she is hell bent on destroying Barack's chances.:doh!:
Remind me who has the delegate lead again?

Guru
03-05-2008, 04:51 AM
Remind me who has the delegate lead again?

Yeah, I don't get that either. They are neck and neck in delegates.

chappy
03-05-2008, 07:45 AM
I wouldn't count her out in the fall. The Clintons know how to win.

Brock
03-05-2008, 07:51 AM
I wouldn't count her out in the fall. The Clintons know how to win.

Bill Clinton was likeable and barely won. Hillary is a harpy.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 07:55 AM
This is great. How many threads about this and that of Obama and Clinton. Have you all looked at the absolute numbers in the voting results? Do you really think that the Republicans are going to find that many crossover votes? You must be drinking the Kool Aid and half strength. This site is always way conservative compared to the average voter country wide. The numbers say otherwise.

Mr. Kotter
03-05-2008, 07:58 AM
This is great. How many threads about this and that of Obama and Clinton. Have you all looked at the absolute numbers in the voting results? Do you really think that the Republicans are going to find that many crossover votes? You must be drinking the Kool Aid and half strength. This site is always way conservative compared to the average voter country wide. The numbers say otherwise.

:hmmm:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample McCain (R) Clinton (D) Und Spread
RCP Average 02/20 - 02/25 - 46.2 46.0 4.7 McCain +0.2
LA Times/Bloomberg 02/21 - 02/25 RV 46 40 9 McCain +6.0
AP-Ipsos 02/22 - 02/24 755 RV 43 48 2 Clinton +5.0
USA Today/Gallup 02/21 - 02/24 1653 LV 50 46 1 McCain +4.0
CBS News/NY Times 02/20 - 02/24 1115 RV 46 46 4 Tie

NewChief
03-05-2008, 08:01 AM
This is great. How many threads about this and that of Obama and Clinton. Have you all looked at the absolute numbers in the voting results? Do you really think that the Republicans are going to find that many crossover votes? You must be drinking the Kool Aid and half strength. This site is always way conservative compared to the average voter country wide. The numbers say otherwise.

I think the DNC is getting inflated numbers because of the close race and the GOP numbers are shrinking because their race has been practically over for a while. That being said, my group of friends and I have also been questioning the polling(which Kotter just posted, I see) that claims that McCain is even close to either Dem candidate when the numbers showing up for the primaries are so lopsided.

Mr. Kotter
03-05-2008, 08:02 AM
I think the DNC is getting inflated numbers because of the close race and the GOP numbers are shrinking because their race has been practically over for a while. ...

Objective and informed observers intuitively understand this fact....

NewChief
03-05-2008, 08:04 AM
Objective and informed observers intuitively understand this fact....


Still, how do you explain the huge disparity early on when both races were tight? Even in the first few primaries, almost twice as many people were voting in Dem primaries as in GOP primaries.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:12 AM
:hmmm:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample McCain (R) Clinton (D) Und Spread
RCP Average 02/20 - 02/25 - 46.2 46.0 4.7 McCain +0.2
LA Times/Bloomberg 02/21 - 02/25 RV 46 40 9 McCain +6.0
AP-Ipsos 02/22 - 02/24 755 RV 43 48 2 Clinton +5.0
USA Today/Gallup 02/21 - 02/24 1653 LV 50 46 1 McCain +4.0
CBS News/NY Times 02/20 - 02/24 1115 RV 46 46 4 Tie

Polls this far out don't mean a thing. However lets take Texas. The Democrats got 2.8 million between the two main candidates. 1.2 million voted for the top Republicans. How does that play out in November? Yes there are 3 million additional voters for the general election but when people go into the booth those raw numbers aren't going to move enough to make a difference in McCain's favor. At least not in swing and blue states. This is a red state but much more up for a contest than in many of the previous cycles.

StcChief
03-05-2008, 08:12 AM
oh well.... that's just how the cookie crumbles.

Brock
03-05-2008, 08:16 AM
Still, how do you explain the huge disparity early on when both races were tight? Even in the first few primaries, almost twice as many people were voting in Dem primaries as in GOP primaries.

You had Obama vs. Clinton. About half the democratic party can't stand Clinton. Of course they're going to turn out to keep her confined.

People will turn out in droves to vote against the witch. Bet that.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:18 AM
People don't want to think about Bill Clinton's smudge on the Presidency. He needs to just stay away so that Hillary can make her own voice in the discussion. If Hillary were to get the nomination then people will be focusing on her, her stance in November 2008 and not Bill's indiscretions. The polls and the election will reflect the November concerns not the 2000 past landscape.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:19 AM
You had Obama vs. Clinton. About half the democratic party can't stand Clinton. Of course they're going to turn out to keep her confined.

People will turn out in droves to vote against the witch. Bet that.

Yeah as a conservative you have the pulse and reasoning of Democrats across the country. It is more wishful thinking for November.

patteeu
03-05-2008, 08:21 AM
This is great. How many threads about this and that of Obama and Clinton. Have you all looked at the absolute numbers in the voting results? Do you really think that the Republicans are going to find that many crossover votes? You must be drinking the Kool Aid and half strength. This site is always way conservative compared to the average voter country wide. The numbers say otherwise.

This site (I presume you're talking about the DC forum in particular) hasn't been conservative in several years.

pikesome
03-05-2008, 08:21 AM
People don't want to think about Bill Clinton's smudge on the Presidency. He needs to just stay away so that Hillary can make her own voice in the discussion. If Hillary were to get the nomination then people will be focusing on her, her stance in November 2008 and not Bill's indiscretions. The polls and the election will reflect the November concerns not the 2000 past landscape.

Don't you think that's a bit naive?

patteeu
03-05-2008, 08:23 AM
I think the DNC is getting inflated numbers because of the close race and the GOP numbers are shrinking because their race has been practically over for a while. That being said, my group of friends and I have also been questioning the polling(which Kotter just posted, I see) that claims that McCain is even close to either Dem candidate when the numbers showing up for the primaries are so lopsided.

There could be some gaming going on in the polls with Obama supporters voting McCain in a head to head with Clinton and Clinton supporters voting McCain in a head to head with Obama in an effort to show their candidate as the better general election option.

KC Tattoo
03-05-2008, 08:25 AM
:Lin:

Brock
03-05-2008, 08:25 AM
Yeah as a conservative you have the pulse and reasoning of Democrats across the country. It is more wishful thinking for November.

I will bet you posting rights at Chiefsplanet.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:30 AM
Don't you think that's a bit naive?

I am taking the raw numbers and I'm naive? You are drinking the Kool Aid about how the game plays out. The popular vote for Presidency went to Gore. Bush's victory would have been reversed if ONE state had been switched. Bush's victory as an incumbent in 2004 wasn't eye popping. You want to talk numbers. I wager that the Democrats pick up minimum 19 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate. And win the White House.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:31 AM
I will bet you posting rights at Chiefsplanet.

Sure no problem. Here and now. But just to be precise state exactly the criteria.

Brock
03-05-2008, 08:33 AM
Sure no problem. Here and now. But just to be precise state exactly the criteria.

If Hillary doesn't win the presidency in the unlikely event she's even nominated, don't ever post here again.

Mr. Kotter
03-05-2008, 08:34 AM
People don't want to think about Bill Clinton's smudge on the Presidency. He needs to just stay away so that Hillary can make her own voice in the discussion. If Hillary were to get the nomination then people will be focusing on her, her stance in November 2008 and not Bill's indiscretions. The polls and the election will reflect the November concerns not the 2000 past landscape.

In the general population, Hillary's negative approval ratings have run in the 46-48% range CONSISTENTLY over the past 12-18 months. Those are voters who say they will not vote for her under any circumstances. Thus she starts the race having to win 95% of all remaining voters. It won't happen.

That's why Obama has to be the nominee if the Dems want to have a good chance of winning the general election.

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:37 AM
If Hillary doesn't win the presidency in the unlikely event she's even nominated, don't ever post here again.

And this is if she is at the top of the ticket or even as VP?

Brock
03-05-2008, 08:39 AM
And this is if she is at the top of the ticket or even as VP?

You need to read the post again.

pikesome
03-05-2008, 08:40 AM
I am taking the raw numbers and I'm naive? You are drinking the Kool Aid about how the game plays out. The popular vote for Presidency went to Gore. Bush's victory would have been reversed if ONE state had been switched. Bush's victory as an incumbent in 2004 wasn't eye popping. You want to talk numbers. I wager that the Democrats pick up minimum 19 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate. And win the White House.

People don't want to think about Bill Clinton's smudge on the Presidency.
People will think about Bill's tenure. Even if Hillary hadn't been trying to cash in on it...and that isn't good for the Clintons. The Repubs will be quite sure to mention it too, even if it doesn't sway Democratic voters, it'll sure get conservatives motivated.
He needs to just stay away so that Hillary can make her own voice in the discussion. If Hillary were to get the nomination then people will be focusing on her, her stance in November 2008 and not Bill's indiscretions. The polls and the election will reflect the November concerns not the 2000 past landscape.
This isn't how elections work, the Bill years will be fertile ground for the Repubs. And rightfully so since Hillary has been trying to use it as proof she has "experience". If Hillary didn't want to tied to her husband's presidency she should have thought about that a year ago, it's too late to put it back in the bottle.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 08:40 AM
Bill Clinton was likeable and barely won. Hillary is a harpy.

yep, if Hillary is on the ticket then the part will be split and many (not all) will probably vote indi or the indi suppport will go towards McCain :doh!:

tiptap
03-05-2008, 08:42 AM
If Hillary doesn't win the presidency in the unlikely event she's even nominated, don't ever post here again.


This statement is ambiguous.

If Hillary Clinton secures the nomination for President of the Democratic Party and then fails to win the general election, I will not post at ChiefsPlanet for one year. November to November. If she wins the general election you won't post for one year, November to November. Do you agree to this?

pikesome
03-05-2008, 08:43 AM
Bill Clinton was likeable and barely won. Hillary is a harpy.

Don't forget too that people now have an idea what they're getting voting for a Clinton. Even if Hillary's different (and she isn't).

Brock
03-05-2008, 09:06 AM
This statement is ambiguous.

If Hillary Clinton secures the nomination for President of the Democratic Party and then fails to win the general election, I will not post at ChiefsPlanet for one year. November to November. If she wins the general election you won't post for one year, November to November. Do you agree to this?

That's fine.

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 09:08 AM
This is becoming so interesting. In order to stay alive Hillary has fallen back to the old Clinton strategy of personal distruction verse debating idelogical differences. Since the strategy has successfully blunted Obama momentum with the outcome in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas I fully expect it to get worse.

Will the DNC standby idle as Hillary divides the party and tears down Obama in order to win?

pikesome
03-05-2008, 09:11 AM
Will the DNC standby idle as Hillary divides the party and tears down Obama in order to win?

I'll give you 10 to 1 the answer is yes.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 09:13 AM
This is becoming so interesting. In order to stay alive Hillary has fallen back to the old Clinton strategy of personal distruction verse debating idelogical differences. Since the strategy has successfully blunted Obama momentum with the outcome in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas I fully expect it to get worse.

Will the DNC standby idle as Hillary divides the party and tears down Obama in order to win?

there was an article with Dean and Nancy Poleski (sp) discussing that very question. im searching for the link..

HolmeZz
03-05-2008, 09:14 AM
Yeah as a conservative you have the pulse and reasoning of Democrats across the country. It is more wishful thinking for November.

He's right.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 09:15 AM
This is becoming so interesting. In order to stay alive Hillary has fallen back to the old Clinton strategy of personal distruction verse debating idelogical differences. Since the strategy has successfully blunted Obama momentum with the outcome in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas I fully expect it to get worse.

Will the DNC standby idle as Hillary divides the party and tears down Obama in order to win?

yatzi!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080305/ap_ca/on_deadline_clinton

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 09:16 AM
I'll give you 10 to 1 the answer is yes.

This could get real fun because Obama has so many defenders who will want Howard Dean to take action. This could lead to a read divided convention. Hillary is already talking joint ticket to win Super Delegates.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 09:17 AM
This could get real fun because Obama has so many defenders who will want Howard Dean to take action. This could lead to a read divided convention. Hillary is already talking joint ticket to win Super Delegates.

i think thats a lost cause. the joint i mean with Hillary on top...if shes on top, McCain or Indi will get my vote

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 09:18 AM
yatzi!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080305/ap_ca/on_deadline_clinton

Here is an interesting quote from the article, "A senior Obama adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Obama's team will respond to Tuesday's results by going negative on Clinton ó raising questions about her tax records and the source of donations to the Clinton presidential library, among skeletons in the Clintons' past."

Forget Iraq and the economy just let the fur fly!

NewChief
03-05-2008, 09:20 AM
Here is an interesting quote from the article, "A senior Obama adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Obama's team will respond to Tuesday's results by going negative on Clinton ó raising questions about her tax records and the source of donations to the Clinton presidential library, among skeletons in the Clintons' past."

Forget Iraq and the economy just let the fur fly!

Obama has put himself in a tough situation because he's pledged to stay above the fray. That works great.... as long as it works. Now that negative campaigning seems to be working, he's going to likely go negative. Unfortunately, this hurts his whole platform of trying to run a different kind of campaign.

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 09:22 AM
i think thats a lost cause. the joint i mean with Hillary on top...if shes on top, McCain or Indi will get my vote

Fox interviewed a group of Democratic voters from Ohio and Texas and a significant portion said they would vote for McCain if Hillary won the nomination.

Can McCain win because people would vote against Hillary not necessarily because they like McCain?

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 09:25 AM
Obama has put himself in a tough situation because he's pledged to stay above the fray. That works great.... as long as it works. Now that negative campaigning seems to be working, he's going to likely go negative. Unfortunately, this hurts his whole platform of trying to run a different kind of campaign.

You said it! Obama runs the risk of coming out looking like just another slick Chicago politician that is no different than all the other panderers and underhanded politicians in DC.

If Obama is smart he will stay above the fray and stick with his message of hope without specifics. Hillary cannot sustain the momentum because she has too many enemies. Obama doesn't need to fight it out.

Cave Johnson
03-05-2008, 09:30 AM
You said it! Obama runs the risk of coming out looking like just another slick Chicago politician that is no different than all the other panderers and underhanded politicians in DC.

Too late on the NAFTA pander. What ad wizard in the campaign decided they needed give Canada the "wink wink" routine. And it probably hurt him in TX, where free trade with Mexico is a net positive.

One way it could be done is to have the surrogates bust out the whuppin stick. He still gets to argue that he's above the fray.

HolmeZz
03-05-2008, 09:32 AM
i think thats a lost cause. the joint i mean with Hillary on top...if shes on top, McCain or Indi will get my vote

I don't want Hillary anywhere near Obama's ticket, but at this point I'm so sick of her shit I'd look the other way. Anything to stop the negative campaigning and character assassination.

Logical
03-05-2008, 10:45 AM
You had Obama vs. Clinton. About half the democratic party can't stand Clinton. Of course they're going to turn out to keep her confined.

People will turn out in droves to vote against the witch. Bet that.
Yup

gblowfish
03-05-2008, 10:51 AM
I think I'll sit back and enjoy and ice cold, refreshing Hilly Beer.

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 11:15 AM
Too late on the NAFTA pander. What ad wizard in the campaign decided they needed give Canada the "wink wink" routine. And it probably hurt him in TX, where free trade with Mexico is a net positive.

One way it could be done is to have the surrogates bust out the whuppin stick. He still gets to argue that he's above the fray.

The need to comfort Canada was a real screwup.

Obama needs to learn not to care what Canada thinks if he wants to be a real world leader.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 11:30 AM
I don't want Hillary anywhere near Obama's ticket, but at this point I'm so sick of her shit I'd look the other way. Anything to stop the negative campaigning and character assassination.

good man HolmeZz, im not the only one you get REP!

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 11:32 AM
Fox interviewed a group of Democratic voters from Ohio and Texas and a significant portion said they would vote for McCain if Hillary won the nomination.

Can McCain win because people would vote against Hillary not necessarily because they like McCain?

as sad as that sounds, yes. In politics its always the lesser of two evils (or x number of evils).

Rep as well for some well thought responses

tiptap
03-05-2008, 11:41 AM
This is becoming so interesting. In order to stay alive Hillary has fallen back to the old Clinton strategy of personal distruction verse debating idelogical differences. Since the strategy has successfully blunted Obama momentum with the outcome in Ohio, Rhode Island and Texas I fully expect it to get worse.

Will the DNC standby idle as Hillary divides the party and tears down Obama in order to win?

And you misread what won where. The difference in Health Care Plans and the perceived difference of NAFTA in OHIO was the difference. You could make the case that Clinton was apart of forming NAFTA. But she wasn't part of leaving blue collar workers high and dry about JOBS and Health and Retirement issues.

Now the Texas win comes down to the Hispanic Vote. And there perception of who would be in their corner. And now having stopped the supposes momentum both candidates will be wonky on issues through Penn's vote. The negatives will be there about experience and being tied to the past but that is part of politics. DUh

tiptap
03-05-2008, 11:44 AM
Fox interviewed a group of Democratic voters from Ohio and Texas and a significant portion said they would vote for McCain if Hillary won the nomination.

Can McCain win because people would vote against Hillary not necessarily because they like McCain?

Do you mean like a real polling or that FOX looked for voters who were willing to say this stuff in the heat of just investing your vote in the primaries?

memyselfI
03-05-2008, 12:31 PM
How pathetic it will likely be to see at least 4 more years of Bush BS in the White House. Hillary cannot win in the fall and she is hell bent on destroying Barack's chances.:doh!:

Jim, I love you, you know I do. But pardon me for pointing out how we have a former RWNJ now reformed Indy complaining about how Clinton is going to ruin Baaarack's and the Dems chances for the WH?

As a lifelong Dem, it appears to me Obama's supporters are acting like an antsy bride to be. Nervous and uncertain about their betrothed love and support for her and desperately wanting that ring on her finger lest he realize she's not all that. :D

Fact is that we have two candidates that are not perfect and who's flaws are actually the other's best asset. Thus, the more time we have to learn about them and see them the better off we can be by making an INFORMED decision.

Frankly, I think this situation puts renewed pressure on OBAMA to have to do more debates and state his case to half of the DEMS who are not on board for him.

Think about it, if Dems TRULY wanted him they would have elected to close the deal and game over last night as that option was on the table. The fact that record numbers of people showed up and the result is that they are not ready to hand him the nomination means he has NOT closed the deal and that he needs to convince them why he should be the nominee. If he can't do it then he does not deserve to be handed the nomination and there is no reason she should stop fighting.

And the only one responsible for him not winning would be HIM. If he cannot brainwash, er, convince enough people then it's NOT HILLARY'S PROBLEM.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 12:55 PM
Jim, I love you, you know I do. But pardon me for pointing out how we have a former RWNJ now reformed Indy complaining about how Clinton is going to ruin Baaarack's and the Dems chances for the WH?

As a lifelong Dem, it appears to me Obama's supporters are acting like an antsy bride to be. Nervous and uncertain about their betrothed love and support for her and desperately wanting that ring on her finger lest he realize she's not all that. :D

Fact is that we have two candidates that are not perfect and who's flaws are actually the other's best asset. Thus, the more time we have to learn about them and see them the better off we can be by making an INFORMED decision.

Frankly, I think this situation puts renewed pressure on OBAMA to have to do more debates and state his case to half of the DEMS who are not on board for him.

Think about it, if Dems TRULY wanted him they would have elected to close the deal and game over last night as that option was on the table. The fact that record numbers of people showed up and the result is that they are not ready to hand him the nomination means he has NOT closed the deal and that he needs to convince them why he should be the nominee. If he can't do it then he does not deserve to be handed the nomination and there is no reason she should stop fighting.

And the only one responsible for him not winning would be HIM. If he cannot brainwash, er, convince enough people then it's NOT HILLARY'S PROBLEM.

Your rebuttal is a good one and well thought out my friend. in this case however, fundamentals don’t win elections. you are correct that for any candidate that if they don’t win then its there own fault but Ill's correct. let the dems throw Hillary on the ticket and watch how fast all the moderate republican/independent/moderate dem's say :cuss: You to Hillary and vote for McCain.

its just politics and IMHO she’s burned too many bridges for me to consider a vote in her direction. Crazy am i? well then why is it that the majority of Hillary supporters would want Barack as a VP if she got it (over 50 %) and the Obama supporters say 30% ish would want Hillary as a VP? no I don’t have a link that was something that CNN ran on Super Tuesday I. the moral is this, Obama supporters don’t like Hillary (or at least i don’t) and if she’s on there the Rep's win it. Its annoying yes I know but you can take that to the bank.

Regardless I think Hillary (or maybe we should get use to calling her Karl Rove) will be the one eating crow. Yes she won Ohio and TX but the margins weren’t what she needed. Remember how the media played on the fact that she had TX and Ohio locked? well she didn’t, her momentum isn’t building its shrinking as her margins continue to dwindle. Neither candidate has really blown the other one away so we just continue to put off until Obama is given the nomination.

memyselfI
03-05-2008, 01:02 PM
Your rebuttal is a good one and well thought out my friend. in this case however, fundamentals donít win elections. you are correct that for any candidate that if they donít win then its there own fault but Ill's correct. let the dems throw Hillary on the ticket and watch how fast all the moderate republican/independent/moderate dem's say :cuss: You to Hillary and vote for McCain.

its just politics and IMHO sheís burned too many bridges for me to consider a vote in her direction. Crazy am i? well then why is it that the majority of Hillary supporters would want Barack as a VP if she got it (over 50 %) and the Obama supporters say 30% ish would want Hillary as a VP? no I donít have a link that was something that CNN ran on Super Tuesday I. the moral is this, Obama supporters donít like Hillary (or at least i donít) and if sheís on there the Rep's win it. Its annoying yes I know but you can take that to the bank.

Regardless I think Hillary (or maybe we should get use to calling her Karl Rove) will be the one eating crow.


I understand your points, I do. I'm not crazy about Hillary either. I am of the belief a good portion of Obama's support is actually anti-Hillary vs. Probama. I believe that is especially true with the INDIES/CONS who've crossed over to support him in such large numbers. Thus, I am of the belief that if these were closed elections the numbers might look quite different. I believe the Dem support would still be heavily in Clinton's favor and Obama would be the one trying to justify why he's still around.

I also believe Dems want to win but we don't want a one term, one time, ineffective person in the WH which is what I think, rather KNOW, many Dems who are not sold on Obama foresee. If anything, this extended race will show what the candidates are made of and if Obama can't stand the increased heat, pressure, and scrutiny then he's no match for the job of POTUS.

xbarretx
03-05-2008, 01:03 PM
I also believe Dems want to win but we don't want a one term, one time, ineffective person in the WH which is what I think, rather KNOW, many Dems who are not sold on Obama foresee. If anything, this extended race will show what the candidates are made of and if Obama can't stand the increased heat, pressure, and scrutiny then he's no match for the job of POTUS.

QFT my friend. ill drink to that :toast: :clap:

Carlota69
03-05-2008, 01:10 PM
I understand your points, I do. I'm not crazy about Hillary either. I am of the belief a good portion of Obama's support is actually anti-Hillary vs. Probama. I believe that is especially true with the INDIES/CONS who've crossed over to support him in such large numbers. Thus, I am of the belief that if these were closed elections the numbers might look quite different. I believe the Dem support would still be heavily in Clinton's favor and Obama would be the one trying to justify why he's still around.

I also believe Dems want to win but we don't want a one term, one time, ineffective person in the WH which is what I think, rather KNOW, many Dems who are not sold on Obama foresee. If anything, this extended race will show what the candidates are made of and if Obama can't stand the increased heat, pressure, and scrutiny then he's no match for the job of POTUS.


Thats my biggest concern with Obama. After only a few days of real scrutiny, it seems to me, that he crumbled. I have always had a feeling of him being a slight pussy, and I saw it again the past few days. It seems to me that he cant handle the heat in the bathroom, much less the kitchen. What happens when the repubs go at him-- they will be all punch and no cookies!. And when another country tries to push us around? Then what? His lack of toughness concerns me.

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 01:34 PM
Do you mean like a real polling or that FOX looked for voters who were willing to say this stuff in the heat of just investing your vote in the primaries?

Not real polling only a room full of people off the street giving their opinion. It was interesting and seems to hold consistent to the polling results.

Chief Faithful
03-05-2008, 01:37 PM
And you misread what won where. The difference in Health Care Plans and the perceived difference of NAFTA in OHIO was the difference. You could make the case that Clinton was apart of forming NAFTA. But she wasn't part of leaving blue collar workers high and dry about JOBS and Health and Retirement issues.

Now the Texas win comes down to the Hispanic Vote. And there perception of who would be in their corner. And now having stopped the supposes momentum both candidates will be wonky on issues through Penn's vote. The negatives will be there about experience and being tied to the past but that is part of politics. DUh

That is a summary we keep hearing from the pundits, but it is not what I am seeing nor how I read the polling results.