Letters to the Editor
-
The media hacks do their darndest...
Shapiro, you, along with the countless writers and jabberers on TV and radio, are completely clueless, since, thanks to a new Post/ABC poll, most Dems could care less what you and others say...a majority want her to stay in and a majority even want her as VP...so much for this assinine death talk.
Most Dems also don't buy the Obama camp talking point about her staying in would ruin the party...so take your nonsense and go home...
-
UH, NO
This must be making you guys completely nuts.
-- meffert
Evidently all the Dem voters beyond the ivory towers and the latte counters at Starbucks aren't nuts about it...they just reject the talking points spouted by Obamabots out of hand...they don't want Hillary gone, not by a long shot...and they even want Obama to pick her as VP, showing that they really don't give a damn what his supporters say or do.
But why would Hillary want to be on a sinking ship that is Obama? The man is a chimera, a case of smoke and mirrors...beyond the clever rhetoric and boring lectures, is a man who is very much what Reverend Wrong said he was: a politician, as calculating and craven as any of those out there, including the woman Obamabots love to hate, Hillary.
Beyond the Alice In Wonderland of his supporters, America sees a man that they still know way too little about, a man who says one thing, but really means another, whose toxic supporters claim to be for uniting the country, yet engage in the same old politics of divisiveness with snide ageist, sexist cant. America sees through the sludge he and his surrogates are spilling, far worse than anything Hillary has done.
-
MCE007
And when we point out that everything you claim is merely projecting your inadequacies onto everyone who is not, you know, a batshit insane Hillary cultist, you will whine about how we are picking on you.
Oh, and a funny thing happened when Hillary started campaigning - she lost the educated vote first. Any claims of Obama's supporters being idiots? Needs to be measured against that.
Oh, and another funny thing happened as this campaign started coming to a close - Hillary's supporters, those proud pragmatic people who vote policy over personality, well they decided to start loudly proclaiming that they support McCain.
Because you know, they were never actually about policy or ability, they were just about voting against young and black people.
-
mce
"Shapiro, you, along with the countless writers and jabberers on TV and radio, are completely clueless, since, thanks to a new Post/ABC poll, most Dems could care less what you and others say...a majority want her to stay in and a majority even want her as VP...so much for this assinine death talk."
No, we do not want that woman as VP. We want a qualified leader. That leaves Her Inevitabilityness out. She is not qualified, and she is not a leader.
She would bring huge problems as VP.
We want Jim Webb or Bill Richardson.
-
@jefferlonian
pegged ya, didn't I.
Not all of us clamor for the limelight. I work with poor women and children, and I do my best to change the world one person, one animal at a time. The legal world is much like that of politics, where scum rules and good people are beaten down time and time again. However, at times, jusice prevails. At times, right bests wrong and the good team gets one. This year Hillary was our best chance, and unfortunately it might not happen.
However, as with all good fights, it ain't over 'till the lady in the pantsuit says it is so I hold onto the wisps of hope as they are stronger than your chains of hate.
Maya pray for her today, pray for us all. Delores, re-read those books and then add in about 1000 other books (chose some Andrea Dworkin while you are at at)
-
madamfauntleroy , baby_boomerang & the Supreme Court
madamfauntleroy,
As baby_boomerang kindly pointed out, SCOTUS stands for Supreme Court of the United States. I'm sorry about the acronym. I try to write clearly, but often get lazy and so resort to shortcuts.
baby_boomerang,
I agree that we're talking at cross purposes, or maybe just approaching things differently (getting back to logic, perhaps inductive vs. deductive). About 122 million people voted in 2004. Right now, I wouldn't be surprised if the turnout this fall is higher. So if even a small percentage of voters decide for whom to vote primarily on the issue of Supreme Court nominations, that will be millions of people.
-
ProudTexasGirl
Mighty Aphrodite is that you?
-
Just Curious...
1) How will Barack Obama win the general election if he CAN'T attract the very voters that Hillary Clinton IS winning...from middle-age to older women and men, blue-collar workers to Latinos?
2) How long will Barack Obama's coattails be? Long enough to increase the paper-thin majority we have in the Senate and to increase the majority in the House?
3) Should he lose the general election, will his supporters whine that "Hillary Clinton lost it for him because she didn't quit"?
Nevermind on #3; I already know the answer...unfortunately.
-
AnaHadWolves
Just a quick note. Should Hillary have been the nominee, she would have a more insurmountable problem of winning the GE. For starters, the AA backlash would have eroded any chances she would have, because the nomination would have been perceived as strongarmed by loyalist party insiders than the Democratic vote. Secondly, Clinton has a huge huge negative rating in the electorate on points of trustworthiness as well as past Clinton era baggage. Thirdly, new young voters would leave the political scene altogether. Fourth and not the least, Hillary women who are indeed Democrats may be disappointed but eventually would vote for a Democrat, Obama. Would they really want 4 more years of Bush in McCain. There are women for Hillary who are Repubs. That number would vote for McCain anyway.
-
PrideBoatedTick
Texass, I am so abjectly ashamed to have slighted the reincarnation of Mother Teresa. We all pale before your unstinting selflessness, your endless sacrifices, your bottomless bullshit.