Initially I disliked HRC and could care less about Obama, just happy that a Dem could be in office. Preferred Obama just because he wasn't Hillary but again, happy to have anyone other than the whacko the repubs would eventually settle on. (it was a foregone conclusion the eventual repub nominee would be a whacko.)

However as the campaign wore on and Obama started to win, HRC's behavior became more Bush-like. And the more I saw, the more I thought I did NOT want her to be president. Her campaign's constant statements that were the opposite of the truth we're just so Bush-y. After Ohio when she said she was just getting warmed up. After Indiana when she claimed she was on her way to the Whitehouse. I mean come on! When she claimed she wouldn't throw her lot in with economists about economic issues. When she started using the word 'elitest' as a smear word.

Sorry. Too bush-y for me.

"I don't blame the demagogue. I blame the flock."

In America we call them the electorate. And in addition to the blame, they also get the credit.

BOOYAKA!!!!!

"But the Obama bandwagon did not include New York, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio, New Jersey, and Michigan."

A. Apparently enough of the flock- er I mean voters in those states were on the bandwagon enough so that Obama is winning.

B. You're argument is?

So what your saying is Obama gets credit for participating in an electoral system where the votes of all the voters count?

Yeah leading in the total delegate count and the popular vote is so lame of Obama. Hillary is much more impressive with her losing the way she is.

"But the critical component of the equation are Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania in the general and how Obama stacks up to Hillary there."

Was that a typo Wes? I'm sure you meant to say 'how Obama stacks up against McCain' there. Cause you know, Obama and Hillary already ran those races and Obama is still beating her.

Is it me or is she looking to the wrong person to help her try to win?

*shrugs* I guess she knows what she's doing.

IF her interest is in getting fair treatment for these people and not just to garner votes for herself,she should be willing to agree to 1 of 2 options:

1. Re run both primaries from scratch, IF someone other than taxpayers can be found to foot the bill. If not, then;

2. Split all the delegates 50/50.

Since Hill is just looking out for those folks she wont object to 50/50 delegate split.

"Will someone please explain to me what the other option was? Honestly."

Does it matter what the consequences would have been? If she were not an opportunistic panderer (all politicians are she just seems to be doing very poorly and transparently) and she really felt so strongly as she claims to do about voters being represented, she could have said "I do not support this".

Could it really even last that long? Unless Hillary is specifically holding out for something, how long can she hang on with everyone counting her out? Eventually she'll realize she's just embarrassing herself. At that point she'll bow out.

Postwar?

Anyone want to imagine a scenario 2 years from now when VP Clinton wants to launch some new initiative and Pres. Obama tells her no?

*shudder*

I just don't see her gracefully handling a role as second banana.

I wonder how I could have gotten that idea?

*looks back over the last year of campaigning*

Oh, right.

The longer HRC runs the more she behaves like bush & co.

1. Statements that are counter to known reality. These include her statement that she was just 'getting warmed up' after Ohio. How far into the race was this? This was followed up recently after her win in Indiana, with 50 of 56 races run that she was fighting her way to the whitehouse.

2. Rovian tactics. 3am phone calls anyone?

3. Pleading ignorance. Despite her claims of experience and being ready to go on day one, she says that she doesn't understand the primary/caucus system in Texas.

4. A combo one/two punch of using elitism as a smear along with attempting to appear downhome, folksy and despite the very well know reality, a good ol girl.

5. Employing the 'southern states' strategy by trying to subtly appeal to the racial divide.

6. Claiming that economists will have no roll in her economic policy as far as the gas tax holiday goes. This is pure bush. Who need QUALIFIED people and opinions when you know whats right?

7. More blatant lies to the public, attempting to justify not listening to economists about the gas tax, claims that the last

8 years of bush have been about elitist policy makers that have harmed the middle-class despite the very opposite being true that the bush admin is FAMOUS for eschewing the opinions and help of qualified people and experts in their fields.

9 Regarding the new Clinton-approved delegate count needed to win, fuzzy-math anyone?

10 Arrogance, pure pure arrogance.