Letters to the Editor
Brian - Seattle
Published Letters: 308 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Sorry, guys (remix)
[Read the article: Clinton says "full speed on to the White House"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I cannot see now or ever forgiving Clinton for being complicit with her campaign's smearing of the Obamas. Competing with Obama is one thing. Trying to destroy him is another. This one has just been too dirty for me, too dishonorable. How can I vote for someone for whom I have practically no regard?
I'm afraid I see Clinton as being out for Clinton alone, a woman with no real concern or regard for the people of this country, just another resume builder on the make, a woman who will trample anybody who gets in her way. Odd how this has become the take on Barack Obama, when in reality, it's the other way around.
Look, I've read a fair amount about this girl and the more I read, the more I distrust her. Look at her (short) history in New York politics. What has she ever done for anyone that wasn't convenient window dressing, that wasn't a calculated move to build toward running for office? I get zero sense from Clinton that she has any feeling at all for others. None, zero, zip, zilch. You call this a progressive?
======
You see what I'm saying Katetex? What are you saying that isn't true for Hillary? What version is easier to believe?
-
Just don't stomp on her grave people
[Read the article: Dems hold dueling conference calls]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This race has really gotten out of hand in the blogsphere and people are really not acting like human beings anymore. It's really unfortunate but we are all on the same side here. Lets not make this place look like a Youtube comment section after last night.
-
This should tell you why this guy is meaningless
[Read the article: Clinton loses Limbaugh endorsement]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Q U I T Talking about him!
Gesh
-
If she gets 60 delegates
[Read the article: Clinton writes to Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]then she fights on even longer. So it's clearly in her advantage to get them. I don't believe it's about fighting the good fight and all that. It's about winning.
It's simple to everyone that is objective about this. The rules were broken and the DNC made a decision. She herself said they wouldn't count and it's not a coincidence that she only wants them to count now that she's losing. We need to play by the rules and not change them halfway through the game.
I have yet to hear a logical argument why we should give her these delegates when they didn't count. I would like to hear from her supporters (considering her's is very political) a logical argument that doesn't contain the typical ones that she states every time this issue comes up.
-
I pretty much agree with that analysis
[Read the article: What did Clinton do wrong?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I know people don't like it when we (obama supporters) say it, but she did run with too much inevitability early on. She got overconfident in her poll numbers and didn't really wake up after Iowa when she should have.
I think she really suffered from overconfidence and her campaign staff did too. It makes sense actually. Her last name is "Clinton". Name recognition goes a long way and her husband did leave a favorable impression on many democrat minds. Compared to the rest of the field, she just had to wait till they all withered and fell off.
That to me was the core of her problems and why she lost.
-
Well Wolfson on Hardball today wouldn't deny it
[Read the article: McAuliffe: "I don't see it going to the convention"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He jumped all around that question.
-
He's largely insignificant
[Read the article: Whither John Edwards?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]People that supported him aren't waiting for his endorsement, they've already voted and those few delegates he has won't matter.
I'm not sure what the draw is anymore honestly.
-
Clinton is not a good idea, everyone knows it
[Read the article: Kennedy dismisses idea of joint ticket]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She wants #1. #2 is not an option for her. Everyone knows it and Obama knows that he would have to keep her in check so often that it'd be difficult to get anything done. Plus it goes against his idea of changing Washington.
Richardson was my choice but, well I'll be honest, a double minority ticket might not work. I'd love to see it and I think it would be very solid, but the rest of the country doesn't think as openly. Maybe if the immigration issue were out there as a bigger issue it would. He would play well in the southwest for sure, which is where Obama is going to need to make up states for losing Florida.
Jim Webb won me over lately with his work on the VA benefits bill. The only issue I see there is that he would be "inexperienced" in the same way Obama is or even less so since he just got in the Senate in 2006. Virginia is a good location and will put it in his camp no doubt. Other states in the area are possible too but Maryland is already dem so not much help.
Others have talked about Gen. Clark but eh, I think the generals being in the white house era is over. Plus he's not really going to pull much in for Obama.
Anyway, on topic, Hillary is a horrible decision. I think people in the MSM are just talking about it to have something to talk about. There is no real possibility that Obama is going to pick her. The only way a joint ticket made sense was if she was winning, she'd almost have to pick him as a VP.
-
Does Code Pink annoy anyone else?
[Read the article: Double, double toil and trouble in Berkeley]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I just don't understand what they are doing honestly and when you hear some of them talking out there, it's very incoherent and doesn't seem thought through that much.