View Story | 78 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
The reality check is needed.
What I'm more worried about is Clinton's crossover appeal. She's going to need support from independents and a moderate Republican here or there to win some crucial states.
Founder of the Committee to Save asdf
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:08:01 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
after all three caucuses/primary now. On to the next one, only 47 states more to go. It's a long campaign.
Charlie Brown for Congress
by Rolfyboy6 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:15:29 PM PDT
Or something stronger. Heroin, maybe.
Restore constitutional government in America. Impeach Bush and Cheney.
by revbludge on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:16:32 PM PDT
PCP got me through Iowa.
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:17:37 PM PDT
Do not use that stuff. Period.
by Rolfyboy6 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:22:15 PM PDT
It's not like I'm training for the Olympics.
(jokes all around)
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:27:36 PM PDT
Everybody who I knew who used that stuff is now dead, either from actual drug use or from diminished capacity followed by disease.
by Rolfyboy6 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:32:22 PM PDT
with or without drugs. I'm two-thirds a patty-pan squash right now.
by revbludge on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:28:43 PM PDT
Radicchio or white asparagus or heritage tomatoes.
by Rolfyboy6 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 04:01:08 PM PDT
by revbludge on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 05:38:14 PM PDT
Independents do not like her. There are a lot of Republicans I know who would vote for Obama if he were the nominee - over the Republican. They will come out specifically to vote against Hillary if she wins the Dem nomination.
Obama, or McCain
by Elise on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:23:55 PM PDT
Obama's crossover appeal has been proven, IMO. Clinton's not so much.
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:28:21 PM PDT
We will lose. I'm serious. I have no doubts about this. Not only will we lose, but we lose the opportunity to build our party up for the next generation in the process. If we lose here...we lose for the next 50 years easily...because after this...the courts won't matter anymore. They'll have been long lost.
by Elise on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:29:58 PM PDT
I thought for sure Clinton would burn out in the primary like Joe Lieberman did in '04. But she seems to have all but won it now, or at least have a tremendous advantage.
What else could we credit the victory to if not her campaigning skills? Wouldn't these same skills make her a contender (at least) in the general?
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:31:54 PM PDT
Obama gets a nice share of delegates here. He's still doing very well in the race.
South Carolina is coming up - we'll see what happens there.
Seriously though, I'm writing a letter to Dean and telling him that if he doesn't put pressure on the Clinton campaign to stop with the Rovian bullshit, I'm leaving this party and never donating to it again. Maybe others will do something similar and we can get an actual fair race here. I'm not holding my breath.
As for her victory?
I attribute that to robo-calls. I attribute that to her lying about his record in mailings, etc. She's had upwards of 25% of a lead in NV for at least 6 months. She had solid name recognition over his. And she had Bill running around telling people that a vote for her is a vote for him. Apparently people want to go back to the divisive times of the 90s as opposed to the divisive times of now, or as opposed to changing that system altogether.
I know one thing - I have lost all respect for Hillary and for Bill in these last 3 months, and I've been a Democrat since birth.
Apparently the status quo will do ANYTHING to stay in power. I'm not shocked, I'm just disgusted. If Democrats don't reject this - we all lose, and not just in 2008.
by Elise on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:38:39 PM PDT
will take the wind out of many, many critical sails.
The Clintons have had their 8 years in the White House, last century. We need to move forward, and not go back the same shit we live through in the nineties.
Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson
by bumblebums on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:42:36 PM PDT
It's a different time than it was in the '90s. There's more support for universal health care, I'd bet. It would be a huge, history-making change if Clinton could accomplish that.
If she did, it wouldn't be a bad first term. (just hypotheticatin' here)
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:44:26 PM PDT
she didn't move health care because she refused to negotiate. For 4 months I've asked her supporters here to name me a bill that she's moved with her name on it from start to the President's desk. NO ONE has ever answered me. I've found one bill on Thomas - a bill to rename a post office in northern NY. So...where is the experience moving legislation? I don't see it!
In addition, her health care plan is basically corporate welfare for insurance companies. It forces us to sign up for health care - it does nothing to ensure that it's GOOD health care.
by Elise on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:51:07 PM PDT
Isn't this what he did in Massachusetts?
Force everyone to pay for crap insurance, JUST so that it LOOKS like everyone is covered.
THAT is not health care reform. Not even close.
"Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil." ~ Jerry Garcia
by mytribe on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 04:05:39 PM PDT
That's Hillary's plan! Then she can tell everyone that everyone is covered - doesn't matter whether it's good coverage, or whether there are enough doctors to actually see people.
by Elise on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 04:15:52 PM PDT
I expect Obama to take SC. He'd better at least.
But I should relax. As someone else around here put it, primaries are more about margins than they are about wins and losses.
Pardon my ignorance, but this is only the second primary season that I have followed thoroughly.
by droogie6655321 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:42:47 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 78 comments