Letters to the Editor
-
Solutions
@ KcM
Now, when, oh when, will Clinton supporters admit that their candidate has already lost the nomination?
Did you read the quotes I posted from the Obama superdelegate and Obama supporter? Do you think it is strange that they don't think it's over but you do? Could it be that their eyes are able to perceive beyond their calculators? Just askin.
@ JackHughes
It's an interesting solution but one I personally do not think either candidate would agree to for a variety of reasons I won't go into here. I do agree with your last statement, however, and it would be great if something could be worked out so that we don't have a repeat of the 1968 democratic convention which produced riots in the streets and gave us Richard Nixon. But, posting this suggestion on Salon is probably pointless. Why not send the suggestion to both candidate's campaigns? I would be curious to know their responses.
@ Reality-based Liberal
Clinton endorsed McCain over Obama citing her view that this election is about national security and McCain, unlike Obama, has the requisite experience.
First of all, she did not "endorse" McCain. You can continue to try to spin it that way and maybe it will stick with some people. What she said was that since she and McCain have substantial experience dealing with national security issues, and Obama does not, that she would be the stronger opponent. You can disagree with her assessment, but stop the ridiculous spin please.
Secondly, could you please provide supporting evidence that Clinton has said " that fighting "terror" militarily is our raison d'etre " (i.e., reason for being) ? And also, could you please tell me how you envision fighting terror without the military? You put the word "terror" in quotes which suggests to me that you think this whole idea of "terror" is bogus. I think you and I have had something of this discussion before and I refuse to get into a big argument about it because perceptions tend to be intractable, but it seems to me that you might live in an area of the US that you perceive to be "safe". I live in New York City and lost friends in the World Trade Center. I cannot put terror into quotes. It is way too real to me.
I think Bush and his advisors were arrogant, megalomaniacal and just very wrong for invading Iraq and trying to "reshape" the world, and once there they have obviously handled it miserably. That said, I tend to agree with Colin Powell's early assessment when he was still arguing against invasion... "You break it, you bought it". I think it is naive to think that any President, Obama, Clinton or McCain, is going to be able to totally and completely remove our troops from Iraq any time soon. Even Obama tried to "cover" his position by saying something to the effect that he would go back in if Al Quaida tries to establish a base or if our interests are threatened. Al Quaida will (and so will Iran) and our interests are... If recognizing the threat of terror is fear mongering, I sure wish someone fear mongered prior to 9/11.
-
Superb column from the LA times
That was exactly what I've been thinking. The only way Hillary can win is to lose the popular vote (pledged delegates) and rely on a small cabal of supporters to circumvent the rules and select her as the nominee against the wishes of the (albeit slim) majority of the party. How in the world is this different than the Supreme Court deciding the 2000 election over the will of the popular vote (semantically different due to the stopping of the recount etc, but effectively the same example of a back room deal).
I'm at the point now where if Hillary is the nominee due to superdelegates over Obama's popular vote and pledged delegate lead I will not vote. My love for the democracy of the Democractic Pary ourweighs my love of cronyism and Hillary's Party.
-
I HOPE OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN GOES NEGATIVE! I pray they do.
I am not surprised at how far and how quickly the "prophets of hope and change we can believe in" have gone negative.
There is NO more solid proof that Team Obama is NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME than the stunning over-reaction to losing 3 primaries after a winning streak of 13.
The offensive stink of "entitlement denied" pervades their every comment.
How dare Hillary do what she's proven she can do for decades, win in the face of adversity.
How dare she present a presidential trait this country craves and needs in these times - the ability to win no matter what the odds.
The emperor has no clothes!
Team Obama reveals how little faith they have in their own "rules of engagement."
It's amazing how fast and how low Team Obama has gone to hit back at Hillary's audacious victories in Tx, and landslide victories in Oh and RI. They blow past milder attacks to reach back to Ken Starr himself, and question her well-investigated financial dealings. Investigations that cost the taxpayers $50 million and demonstrated no wrong doing.
This is decidedly NOT very presidential. It's sophomoric panic of the worst kind that does NOT belong in the white house.
Amazed, because the team that has "hope and change we can believe in" as a mantra promised to be different, better.
Yet when facing their first bit of struggling, Ken Starr's failed line of attack is their first attack choice??
Yeah, be as negative as you wanna be. I want to see the Obama team eat itself alive ;-)
I want to see them choke on their own hypocrisy. I want to see them spasm as they realize it doesn't work.
They'll be going up against Hillary's strongest defense wall.
Everyone who could ever be convinced WITHOUT MUCH EVIDENCE that she is evil, untrustworthy, a monster has been convinced.
Of course the Obama folks don't get this, because they have decided in a moment of sheer obvious political hypocrisy to accept the Republithug charges against Hillary as truth so they can use them against her yet again. hmmmmm.
So too I guess the joke was on the public when Team Obama promised to take the high road, and run a campaign of hope and positive change
Hillary never promised to be "Ms. Perfection." Even if she had, the Republithugs decades long attacks have ensured she would never be believable. Instead she's accepted the "flawed but better for it" mantle and run with it.
This hubris shows just how much the Obama team had been hoping to win without ever having to substantiate their claims that the messiah had come.
Now that they are having to do so, rather than submit proof, they declare that yes the Republithugs were right, Hillary is Satan
Haven't we had enough of "hubris like this in the WH."
We don't need another team that thinks it is always right, like Obamaniacs do. Just because they're from the liberal side won't make things better. Extremism is always poison.
I originally liked Edwards. Chose Hillary over Obama, not because of the man, but because of his supporters.
Their insulting degrading behavior after their victories was too much, but it pales to the bile and venom after losing.
Their attitude is that of a school yard bully, mean, nasty, feels entitled to everything.
And just like a bully, the moment the girl, their favorite target hit back (Tx, Oh, RI) the obnoxious schoolyard bully-Team Obama ran home to the teacher to warn her about the mean little, evil girl, a monster that should be kicked out of school post haste, lest she destroy the school and kill all the children inside.
Yeah go negative Team Obama, Team Hillary is smiling. They've had 20yrs+ dealing with the Republithug liars, distortions. The fact that in your attempts you've decided to recycle the same garbage, just means she's gonna win.