Regular voters and low info Dems may not hear this story or care about it if they did. That sed, the people that Hilldawg criticises here will no doubt not be pleased at wot she's been saying about them behind closed doors.

Trying to say that MoveOn was opposed to Afghanistan?

Karl Rove tried that claim and MoveOn disputed it openly and loudly and here's Hill trying it again.

Dissing Dem activists?

Clue to Chilly Hilly. The Dem super delegates who still haven't committed who aren't elected officials?

Um, they ARE Dem activists by adn large.

Big mistake, sister!

Basically Hill and the DNC leadership are fighting Barack and the DNC base for the soul of the DNC party.

Hilly wants to turn the Dems permanently into a Republican lite party taking all their coin from corporate lobbyists and playing on the fears of the low-info voters in order to get elected.

Fuck that bitch with a stick.

Populism not corporatism sez Spud!

Peoples prosperity not lobbyists with wish lists.

Hilly is buring all her bridges now.

Guess being a leading senator aint that important to her at this point. She is seriously giving off a Hitler in his Berlin bunker vibe at the moment. Mega creepy is that.

Be Well.

/Hill's folks are more prone to initimidation tactics than Obama's and she knows it.

She won't go down without a fight, SPUD. Party voting be damned, she's the rightful heir to the throne... and she'll take it as far as possible. That slash and burn style has served the Clinton machine well over the past couple decades.

She can make a case for the SDs giving her the nod. Of course, Obama can do the same. I wonder, if things AREN'T resolved prior to the convention... whether someone like Gore might surface as the choice. He seems to be respected by most Dems. Would that fly, in your opinion?

She won't go down without a fight, SPUD

She's like the unsinkable Molly Brown only, ...you know ...INSANE!!!

She can make a case for the SDs giving her the nod. Of course, Obama can do the same.

Disagree.

She doesn't have the numbers to justify such a case and Obama does.

I wonder, if things AREN'T resolved prior to the convention... whether someone like Gore might surface as the choice. He seems to be respected by most Dems. Would that fly, in your opinion?

Fuck Fuck Fuck!!!

Just wrote a long winded answer to this question and the farking' machine ate it.

Short answer? No!

Won't happen.

Shouldn't happen, either.

Be Well.

/stage left.

"I agree with Harry Truman. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

-Hillary Clinton 4/18/08

Kwitcherbitchin then.

SPUD-
I hate that when I lose a brilliant post - I have so few of them...

You know where I am politically. I'm a fan of neither one of the two and haven't followed the back and forth as closely as you have. So correct me if this is wrong, but here goes (Clinton's case for the SDs)

Neither candidate will have sufficient pledged delegates. Therefore, it falls to the SDs to make the call. The SD system was put in place to correct voters' "mistakes" and to ensure the most electable candidate is on the ticket.

Here's where I might be all wet. Among the typically blue states and the majority of swing states, hasn't Clinton been ahead - at least in terms of the popular vote? (Not counting caucuses, which are a different animal) In other words, when rank and file Dems went to the polls they picked Clinton over Obama. These are the states Dems rely on and they aren't as excited about Obama as they are about Clinton.

Obama has beaten Hillary in red states... states which provide Obama delegates, but states which won't likely go in the "blue" column in the general.

I'm sure there are holes in what I tossed out there. I haven't researched it, but if memory serves Hillary did pretty well with the popular vote in states like NY, CA, OH, FL, TX. And PA is upcoming, where she's got a reasistic shot at victory.

Oohray,

No, you are incorrect.

Hillary got NY and CA and after that she really lost all but Fl because it doesn't count or matter.

Ohio was won by the lie from canada about NAFTA which was Hillary which she put blame on Obama and the media supported hillary until after that primary and then pushed out the real story.

TX was Obama's and still the media won't actually put that up in flying colors. Sad.

The coasts are owned by Obama bar none, hillary doesn't have a chance, just throwing money away.

C'mon now, no whining, folks.


Posted by Corky at 2008-04-17 11:09 PM

I'll take your word for it MONEY. It was just an impression I'd had. Still, CA and NY are a couple of big prizes. I'm sure plenty of Dems in those states will vote for whomever the Dems nominate... and neither state is a toss up.

Food for thought. Hillary appeals to the 'old school' worker bees sort of Dems. Those affected by layoffs, etc. Her populist message plays well in states like OH/PA.

I see Obama as appealing to a younger, perhaps more educated crowd. A crowd (outside of the black vote, which he owns) which is more idealistic and less "lunch bucket" in their mindset.

If the economy were better it would be tougher for Hillary. Your thoughts?

Screw 'em.
Yrs,
Billary

Why doesn't she just join the Republican Party and be done with it?

The coasts will go to a democrat...period.

If the economy were better hillary would have an easier time not a more difficult time.

Obama has the educated crowd, not only the young but also the older. The working laborer crowd from the factories is obama's as well.

Most people my age are either baghdad bob mccain or obama, hillary will not get the 45 to 55 vote, too much bad juju.

There are million of people like me who will vote mccain if the SD choose hillary. I will depart the democrat party if hillary is chosen. For me that is a no brainer, she will be bad for this country, even worse than baghdad bob mccain.

Why does the DNC put up with her? She is taking the party down a path that will divide the party in a bad way.

Current polling for NY, CA, OH, FL, TX.

NY:
Obama beats McCain 50/41
Clinton beats McCain 52/38

CA:
Obama beats McCain 50/43
Clinton beats McCain 50/41

OH:
McCain beats Obama 47/42
Clinton beats McCain 48/45

FL:
McCain beats Obama 53/38
Clinton beats McCain 45/44

TX:
McCain beats Obama 47/46
McCain beats Clinton 49/42

So the argument appears to be shrinking to FL and OH.
Interestingly, Obama actually puts Texas in play.

Why doesn't she just join the Republican Party and be done with it?

POSTED BY OZARKAGGIE AT 2008-04-19 09:00 AM | REPLY

Because the idea of puffing a peter in the mens' room repulses her?

Yav,

I don't believe the ohio, I think it will go Obama but will go to mccain against hillary.

I think opinions in ohio are changing by the day towards obama, hillary is killing herself with labor.

Would somebody remind Hillary that Moveon.org was started to defend her husband?

And while reminding her of that, remind her that she is not actually a member of the Republican party or John McCain's campaign. At least not yet.

"I will depart the Democratic Party if Hillary is chosen...."

And then vote for MCCAIN? Are you sure you're a Democrat to start with?

Obama has ways to win that don't involve Florida or Ohio. Kerry's map didn't have either, and he was only 18 short. Colorado? Iowa? North Dakota (why not... they've had 2 Dem Senators and a Dem at-large house seat since the Reagan administration)? New Mexico? Nevada? One of the splittable Nebraska electoral votes? Note... no Florida or Ohio irregularity shenanigans needed. No Southern Strategy.

But for right now, the "activist base" (i.e., superdelegates) are more important than the voters. Nice own-goal, Senator Clinton.

I love that term, "own-goal." And very apropos when it comes to Hillary's behavior.

Sounds to me that "Bubba's little dyke is pissed off at Bubba!"

Let's imagine that Hillary's campaign to trash Obama and sow doubt among the superdelegates about his electability actually works and she becomes the nominee. I and most Obama supporters simply won't vote for her under such circumstances.

So her strategy can only be to get to November and lose. This is insane and so she must have been driven insane by her failed campaign and disappointment at not winning when in her own mind her victory was inevitable. All this seems far-fetched but the situation itself is so improbable but happening all the same that only the most bizarre reasoning explains it.

Obviously there's no point in expecting any sane response from her or it would already have happened so the Democratic Party itself and the Superdelegates will have to step in and do it for her.

"I and most Obama supporters won't vote for her under ANY circumstances..."

Clinton supporters, however, are expected to vote for Obama under ALL circumstances?

For the first time I'm starting to smell a lost election. Why don't you just get behind the eventual nominee and see who's electable?

Zed, I agree. This is foolishness. There are bigger issues at stake than the petty politics of like or dislike.

How many more Democrats can she alienate?

"activists had "flooded" state caucuses and "intimidated" her supporters"

Corky is a chicken? Who knew?

By the way, I will vote for the Democratic candidate either way, Obama or Clinton. McCain is a psycho.

Why am I behind?
The answer is as simple as the cause is sinister.
Too many people voted for the other guy.
Well, screw 'em.
And I really, truly, madly and deeply mean it.
Gotta go.
There's some incoming sniper fire.
Yrs,
Hillary

Zed, Yav, I totally agree.

I will absolutely vote for Hillary and the Democratic ticket with enthusiasm if she gets the nomination. ANY Democratic administration is an unmeasurable improvement, and there would be many decent Democrats in a Clinton administration. I hope they would be able to get things done, too, without her having to get herself and Bill tied in knots in every way on every subject.

But I don't think I will have to.

I think if McCain picks Powell as Veep and continues harping on Obama's corrupt Rezko connection (without anything new even coming out) he will take Cali. While the Dems state the McCain switching positions on his own immigration bill as a weakness, it is seen as a strength in Cali. Quite frankly, the Governator did the same same thing with his initiatives - which were overwhelmingly rejected. Arnold was smart - he saw what the people wanted and switched some of his policies - it is not flip-flopping, it is realizing that your policies are not wanted by the people.

I think immigration will be a major factor in the election and McCain will win Cali because Obama does not have an immigration plan that resonates with the people of California. You will see the central valley and SoCal (Orange county thru San Diego) all voting based on immigration and McCain will pull out a victory.

Lastly, I think in an ironic twist, McCain will end up with his support of the Iraq war as a net positive for him. It is easy for him to distance himself from Bush on the issue as people's main problem with Bush is they feel his is in Iraq to steal oil and make his friends wealthier. McCain does not have that problem as he is not seen as profiting from the war but is fighting it for idealistic reasons. He is seeing the clash as one over ideology which will resonate with people. The more stories like the Saudi father killing his daughter for using facebook will make people go to McCain as he is the only one with the balls to stand up to the Islam Fundamentalist.

So, I see McCain winning by 20%+ and it could be even more if the Rezko trial continues dropping bombs on Obama's credibility. McCain can also thank Pelosi and Reid for turning off the Dem base and making them realize that the Dem leaders don't care about their values (immigration, standing up to Islam, stopping government corruption, and stopping unrestricted free trade)

"I think if McCain picks Powell as Veep "

You can "think" that all you want, it ain't happenin'

"Orange county thru San Diego"

Oh, you mean the traditionally Republican part of the state. I see. Brilliant analysis.

Hillary only has herself and Bill to blame for her performance.

"MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with."

Neither did I, Hill. Deal with me, too. herm

She won't go down without a fight, SPUD. Party voting be damned, she's the rightful heir to the throne... and she'll take it as far as possible. That slash and burn style has served the Clinton machine well over the past couple decades.

She can make a case for the SDs giving her the nod. Of course, Obama can do the same. I wonder, if things AREN'T resolved prior to the convention... whether someone like Gore might surface as the choice. He seems to be respected by most Dems. Would that fly, in your opinion?

Posted by OohRah

If she really wants to shit on the dems to show you cant ignore her she can always run as an independent like Lieberman.. if she loses the party vote.

That would fuck up the whole race..

frak hillary clinton, she needs to take her hillbilly husband and go back to whichever of the 19 states they claim to be from

Most of those ObamaManiacs idiots at MoveOn would have been glassy eyed at EST seminars in the '70s.