The Clinton Thread

[Ahura Mazda]

I am not an American voter but as an outsider, I would question the democratic's party motivation to win the presidential election because the way these primaries are being contested makes me think that the Party is being dragged through the dirt for little reason given mathematically she should not win, unless there is a reversal of the electoral results of the primaries.

 

[Raiden]

I am not an American voter but as an outsider, I would question the democratic's party motivation to win the presidential election because the way these primaries are being contested makes me think that the Party is being dragged through the dirt for little reason given mathematically she should not win, unless there is a reversal of the electoral results of the primaries.

I do hope DNC will change the rules after this election to make it winner-takes-all, because it will avoid a drag-out race like this in the future. However, all candidates must abide by the rules they agreed on right now, because changing the rules just to suit one candidate's convenience is not right.

 

[Matt]

NY Gov. David Paterson, a Clinton backer, says Hillary is showing signs of "desperation"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/22/supporter-says-clinton-getting-desperate/

Her supporters are slowly trying to push her out but also do not want to endure her wrath. She is one of the most powerful members of the Senate, mind you. If it were John Edwards, in the same position, same delegate count and everything...more than 80 % of his backers would've jumped to the Obama camp and Howard Dean himself would be publicly calling for his withdrawl from the race on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the Clinton name has become the most powerful name in the Democratic Party. Between an ex-President with plenty of connections on both sides and arguably the third most powerful Senator in the nation, I could see how it would be very difficult to muster up the balls to tell her to quit.

 

[jaguarr]

Her supporters are slowly trying to push her out but also do not want to endure her wrath. She is one of the most powerful members of the Senate, mind you. If it were John Edwards, in the same position, same delegate count and everything...more than 80 % of his backers would've jumped to the Obama camp and Howard Dean himself would be publicly calling for his withdrawl from the race on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the Clinton name has become the most powerful name in the Democratic Party. Between an ex-President with plenty of connections on both sides and arguably the third most powerful Senator in the nation, I could see how it would be very difficult to must up the balls to tell her to quit.

If they want me to, I'll do it for them.

jag

 

[Raiden]

Her supporters are slowly trying to push her out but also do not want to endure her wrath. She is one of the most powerful members of the Senate, mind you. If it were John Edwards, in the same position, same delegate count and everything...more than 80 % of his backers would've jumped to the Obama camp and Howard Dean himself would be publicly calling for his withdrawl from the race on a daily basis. Unfortunately, the Clinton name has become the most powerful name in the Democratic Party. Between an ex-President with plenty of connections on both sides and arguably the third most powerful Senator in the nation, I could see how it would be very difficult to muster up the balls to tell her to quit.

So the Democratic party is pampering to Hillary because the Clintons are so powerful politically, and they are afraid to make her angry, even though it is hurting their chance to win in November. I guess losing an election is not as scary as having a pissed-off Hillary...

 

[Matt]

So the Democratic party is pampering to Hillary because the Clintons are so powerful politically, and they are afraid to make her angry, even though it is hurting their chance to win in November. I guess losing an election is not as scary as having a pissed-off Hillary...

Well, look at it this way...its not like the party as a collective group has huddled together and decided they are too scared to oust her. It is more like there is a need for one neutral (i.e. not an Obama supporter) part elder to take a stand and tell her "Get the hell out." And no single individual with clout has the balls to do that as they know there is a good chance that she could ruin them. Especially if by some miracle she pulls this nomination out of her ass (and for a Clinton, its really not as impossible as people think...all she has to do is force the second ballot and she has a fighting chance).

Besides, at this point, a McCain loss is not as vital as people make it out to be. This election is not "The most important election of our life time," as Obama supporters would claim. 2004 was much more important. A loss to McCain does not guarantee war with Iran or 8 years of "McBush." All it really ensures is 4 years of deadlock, because the Democrats won't lose Congress.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Did anyone hear her comments about RFK's assassination today? She said that the reason she shouldn't quit is because of what happened with RFK. After he was killed off during his primary, his opponent was able to secure the nomination!

I'm sorry but...she is utterly DISGUSTING. This woman is scum. I mean, think about it: Why would you bring such a thing up when you are talking about the potential first African American President??? Like I said, this heifa is totally out of control! I mean seriously--did she really just say that? Its almost too stupid to believe.

But I'm sure it's the media's fault.

 

[Marx]

Did anyone hear her comments about RFK's assassination today? She said that the reason she shouldn't quit is because of what happened with RFK. After he was killed off during his primary, his opponent was able to secure the nomination!

I'm sorry but...she is utterly DISGUSTING. This woman is scum. I mean, think about it: Why would you bring such a thing up when you are talking about the potential first African American President??? Like I said, this heifa is totally out of control! I mean seriously--did she really just say that? Its almost too stupid to believe.

But I'm sure it's the media's fault.

Welcome to the conversation of the day Lightning!

 

[souvlaki]

Did anyone hear her comments about RFK's assassination today? She said that the reason she shouldn't quit is because of what happened with RFK. After he was killed off during his primary, his opponent was able to secure the nomination!

I'm sorry but...she is utterly DISGUSTING. This woman is scum. I mean, think about it: Why would you bring such a thing up when you are talking about the potential first African American President??? Like I said, this heifa is totally out of control! I mean seriously--did she really just say that? Its almost too stupid to believe.

But I'm sure it's the media's fault.

Yeah, we were discussing it in the Obama thread for some odd reason. I suppose this is probably a better place to discuss it though.

Yeah, the comments were horrible, and I can't think of worse timing than now to make such a remark, what with Ted Kennedy being in the news the last week. I can imagine this backfiring on her horribly if Ted Kennedy comes out harshly against her.

Nonetheless, I found myself almost laughing off the comments, mostly out of sheer disbelief that anyone can make such a horrible political miscalculation. This is the type of thing that would completely end any other politician's career immediately. The sheer desperation and willingness to say anything at this point to get elected are almost comical and just downright pathetic.

 

[souvlaki]

Whoa, Keith Olbermann just went completely off on Clinton tonight. Wow.

[YT]<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sny8VfgcjaI&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sny8VfgcjaI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>[/YT]

It gets pretty good around the 1:40 mark.

 

[Marx]

Whoa, Keith Olbermann just went completely off on Clinton tonight. Wow.


It gets pretty good around the 1:40 mark.

It's not the first time, I'm sure it won't be the last.

 

[souvlaki]

It's not the first time, I'm sure it won't be the last.

Usually I find him to be a little abrasive, but I agree completely with everything he said there. Today's comments were really about as over the top as you can get. She really couldn't have picked a worse way to get her point across, and you could tell during her apology she realized just how badly she screwed up today. By the look on her face you could tell she knew she may have just completely nixed any small chance she thought she had at either the nomination, or a VP slot.

 

[Marx]

Usually I find him to be a little abrasive, but I agree completely with everything he said there. Today's comments were really about as over the top as you can get. She really couldn't have picked a worse way to get her point across, and you could tell during her apology she realized just how badly she screwed up today. By the look on her face you could tell she knew she may have just completely nixed any small chance she thought she had at either the nomination, or a VP slot.

Olbermann's abrasiveness and arrogance tends to take away his credibility.

 

[souvlaki]

Olbermann's abrasiveness and arrogance tends to take away his credibility.

Well, the same can be said about most news or talk show personalities. I usually find the guy to be pretty hilarious, if at times a bit over the top. Nonetheless, abrasive or arrogant, I still think everything he said tonight was spot on.

 

[Marx]

Well, the same can be said about most news or talk show personalities. I usually find the guy to be pretty hilarious, if at times a bit over the top. Nonetheless, abrasive or arrogant, I still think everything he said tonight was spot on.

He can be funny. More often than not, he is a little too over the top. He gets on my nerves.

 

[souvlaki]

He can be funny. More often than not, he is a little too over the top. He gets on my nerves.

Fair assessment. I can understand that completely. That's how I feel about Lou Dobbs... only that guy isn't nearly as entertaining to watch as Olbermann, and doesn't have a funny bone in his body.

 

[Marx]

Fair assessment. I can understand that completely. That's how I feel about Lou Dobbs... only that guy isn't nearly as entertaining to watch as Olbermann, and doesn't have a funny bone in his body.

For me, Olbermann is no different than Bill O'Reilly. He and Chris Matthews. Don't even get me started on Lou Dobbs! How that man can have his own tv show is beyond me...

 

[souvlaki]

I saw someone else use this description of Olbermann on another message board, and I agree completely:

"Olbermann is like that person you hang out with socially that seems to have the same views as you but always takes it a little too far when they get a few drinks in them. You're left just staring at your shoes, shaking your head."

 

[Marx]

I saw someone else use this description of Olbermann on another message board, and I agree completely:

"Olbermann is like that person you hang out with socially that seems to have the same views as you but always takes it a little too far when they get a few drinks in them. You're left just staring at your shoes, shaking your head."

I could agree with that.

 

[souvlaki]

But yeah, I think I'd probably dislike Olbermann more than I do if I didn't dislike the people he attacks even more.

 

[souvlaki]

I actually don't mind Matthews sometimes, but mostly because he is usually amazing at calling people out on their stupidity. He's a master at knowing exactly when one of his guests have no clue what the hell they are talking about and I commend him for pointing that out instead of just letting it slide like most journalists do.

 

[Marx]

I actually don't mind Matthews sometimes, but mostly because he is usually amazing at calling people out on their stupidity. He's a master at knowing exactly when one of his guests have no clue what the hell they are talking about and I commend him for pointing that out instead of just letting it slide like most journalists do.

It's a personality thing for me with these guys.

 

[souvlaki]

It's a personality thing for me with these guys.

Understandable. I find both of them entertaining, but annoying. But I generally agree with both of them, so I find myself conflicted in that respect. Most of the news anchors on CNN on the other hand bore the hell out of me personally, even if their personalities are less grating.

 

[souvlaki]

The one news anchor on MSNBC I absolutely cannot stand though is the host of "Race to the White House". I can usually only stomach watching that guy for a couple minutes before changing the channel.

 

[Marx]

Understandable. I find both of them entertaining, but annoying. But I generally agree with both of them, so I find myself conflicted in that respect. Most of the news anchors on CNN on the other hand bore the hell out of me personally, even if their personalities are less grating.

The one news anchor on MSNBC I absolutely cannot stand though is the host of "Race to the White House". I can usually only stomach watching that guy for a couple minutes before changing the channel.

Yeah, I don't like that host either. I usually only watch CNN for "Anderson 360". I can't take Lou Dobbs at all and I can only deal with Wolf Blitzer in moderation.