Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

McCain to Woo Clinton Supporters on Saturday Conference Call

Updated 3:31 p.m.
By Juliet Eilperin
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) isn't just saying he's interested in getting backers of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) to support them -- he's actually wooing them in a conference call Saturday.

Some of Clinton's campaign volunteers received an e-mail today informing them that McCain is holding a teleconference with the former presidential candidate's backers at 3:30 p.m., which they can register for by e-mailing teletownhall-at-johnmccain-dot-com. Those who can't participate by phone but want to submit a question can send it to MKforhillary-at-gmail-dot-com.

McCain himself will participate in the call, fielding questions from HRC fans, and some former Clinton backers will be allowed to attend the event in person. McCain's campaign confirmed the call, but did not say where the telephone town hall would be held.

In a press conference today, McCain praised Clinton for her candidacy, saying, "There's no doubt that she has inspired millions of women around the country, and the world."

"Obviously I would like to have her supporters consider my candidacy," he said, adding that he and Clinton "share a number of views about national security." (Never mind that he compared her support for withdrawing from Iraq as tantamount to raising "the white flag of surrender.")

McCain told reporters he wants women voters to know "that I will do everything in my power to continue the progress of equal opportunity for women in America." But he added that it might take a lot of convincing to get former Clinton supporters to join his campaign.

"I understand that I have a lot of work to do," he said.

By Web Politics Editor  |  June 13, 2008; 3:03 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Hillary Rodham Clinton , John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: No Agreement on Obama-McCain Town Halls
Next: Reactions to Russert's Passing

Comments

This is the best that the supposed Female Democrats for McCain can do? Name call Obama all you want, but you have failed to convince me WHY anyone, let alone a democrat, should vote for John McCain. If you are pro-life so be it, but doesn't it bother you that McCain opposes health care for poor children? What will happen to the babies born to women not ready to be mothers? McCain is not predisposed to approve or support any entitlement programs that may help such women keep and care for their children, but many will try anyway: as for adoption, young women should not become baby-makers for affluent women, sorry, but voting for John McCain is voting against a woman's best interest.

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | June 16, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Senator McCain has my vote because of his experience and RECORD of showing his willingness to cross the "aisle" in support of his integrity and not just a party.

I am a Democrat but not some cult member that will vote for an inexperienced flip flopper named Obama.

Obama sat in a racist church for twenty plus years and now claims to be a uniter.

I have no idea what Obama really stands for; I however, know exactly what Senator McCain stands for and I like it.

Abortion rights will not make me not vote for him. I believe a woman has a right to her body but when a BABY is involved I believe that baby's right to live is more important.

So stop the attempt at emotional blackmail Obama supporters, this woman will not be shoved into the Obama cult. This is one female Democrat that is a PRO LIFER. Got it, good.

Posted by: NotaCultmember | June 16, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Obama is NOT qualified to be President. The Democrats knew it and OBAMA knows it. But we have him as a nominee. IT IS A BIG JOKE. It has ruined the Democrat Party.
You bet I will be voting for McCain!
And it is also a vote against Wright and all his racist and hatred he preaced and Obama listened to for 20 YEARS! Obama is NO uniter! He is the worst kind of divider! No Obama.

Posted by: DEM to IND | June 15, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Democrat of 30 years standing here. I could never vote for John McCain no matter how disappointed I might be with the Democrat's Candidate.
My reasons:

*McCain Opposes Roe v Wade, and vows to appoint more judges like Alito and Roberts (who managed to get through congress, BTW, having a Democratic Majority will NOT guarentee that McCain couldn't get a similarly conservative judge appointed); Roe is ONE vote away from being overturned. A Conservative heavy Court would also imperil certain State's Rights issues that I am passionate about (for example, Oregon's Death with Dignity Law which has been under assault since Bush took office.) In addition, other Women's Rights issues such as Title 9 would probably never have had a chance if the court tilts further to the right.

*McCain's hard-line stance on Iraq: it is time that American stop sacrificing our fine young soldiers and acting like the World's Policemen. It is time to force the Iraqis to step up and secure their own Country. Further, I find McCain's Cold War Era foreign Policy woefully out of date and out of touch with what most Americans Want.

*McCain's economic Plans are vague, and further will put this Country into even more untenable debt. He is a flip-flopper on the Bush tax cuts, first he opposes them as expensive and unfair, and now they aren't? He favors more tax cuts for the very corporations that send jobs overseas. McCain seems out of touch with the needs of the poorest in our country; on his recent trip through Appalachia he promised to give tax breaks to internet companies so that they could provide "high speed" internet service to remote and rural communities...these communities have jobless rates in the double-digits and endemic poverty, they need jobs, not high-speed internet!

*McCain has NO plan for solving the Healthcare Crisis in this country; it is an insult to Hillary Clinton, who has made getting all Americans affordable healthcare her signature issue, to vote for a man who wants to give families a small amount of money to buy their own health insurance without mandating Private Insurers accept high risk individuals; McCain's "plan" helps only the young and healthy, and depends on the "free-market" to take care of the problem, despite the fact that that is the basis of the broken system we already have.

*McCain has proven himself to be out of touch on Women's Issues: he has voted against medical insurance for poor children (again another issue of importance to Mrs Clinton), McCain opposed the Ledbetter Bill which would have facilitated equal pay for equal work for women. McCain opposes funding family planning; he opposes telling teenagers about birth control feeling that only abstinance should be mentioned.

*McCain opposes the Webb GI Bill which would give educational benefits for our soldiers coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan as being "too generous" for those serving "only" 3 years in the Military.

As for "experience," McCain has no executive experience (Senators legislate), and unlike Obama, McCain hasn't worked in the "real" World for over 3 decades; the fact that he dumped his disabled former wife for 24 year old heiress Cindy when he was 42 and the father of 3 makes me question his morals. His "friendship" with the criminal Charles Keating, and the recent land-swap deal that he arranged for a big money donor that swapped valuable public Land in Arizona for a remote parcel also makes me question McCain's integrity vis a vis influence peddaling. Personally I think that John McCain's judgement does not appear to have the sound clarity of Senator Obama's (especially since Obama recognized what a mistake going to War with Iraq would be), not to mention that Obama has the better economic plan, and is committed to getting affordable Health Insurance to ALL Americans not just the lucky ones.

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | June 15, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Why isn't Hillary Clinton joining this conference call?

Posted by: revskg | June 15, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

It is extremely strange that Clinton supporters who now support McCain are accused of being 'racist', 'stupid',or 'spiteful'. Could their change in heart not be induced by careful and rational considerations of both candidates' credentials and policies? I have studied some of McCain's senate bills and I actually found them to be compassionate towards the poor and bringing benefits to the general public.

Posted by: sarvast123 | June 15, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

This is exactly why I will vote for Sen Mc Cain. Why "You go girl!" Why the stereo type? Why the sexism? Do you think all Black women speak like that? I don't.

You Obama supporters disrespected both Hillary and her supporters all through this campaign and you continue to do it. If your intentions were to be pursuasive, then you stink at it.

I am sorry but I don't need you or any of the Obama supporters to teach me about the issues. I am even more veted than your inexperienced candidate on them. I will vote for Sen Mc Cain as a protest vote against liberal hyprocracy.

I said it and I will say it again. Apparently everyone else but women who want to be president have rights in this party.

Don't patronise me L Barret, and if your intentions are to change my mind, save your efforts. My mind is made up, and I am taking my daughter, my sisters and my nieces along with me. I also have friends in Ohio and Florida that would be joining me in my protest. You can report that to Sen. Obama, and while you are at it, tell him that he is not entitled to my vote. He needed to earn it, and he did everything in his power to push me away. I obliged, so stop your whining.


Posted by: Roxanne | June 15, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

Obama is a Trojan Horse!

Does anyone notice that all of Obama's "original and innovative" ideas seem to be exactly the same as his opponents but he "changed the wording"? Seriously! It's insane, the guy doesn't have a shred of originality!

MCCAIN is not Bush, Period.

Posted by: ME | June 15, 2008 1:22 AM | Report abuse

I was a Hillary supporter, but will be voting McCain because I can not believe we have such an inexperienced, unvetted Democrat as a nominee.

Obama has hi-jacked every position he has ran for, now he has hijacked the DNC. I say NO WAY to Chicago politics running our country.

Posted by: Julie in Georgia | June 15, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

Roxanne,A Black woman for Mccain, You go right ahead and vote for McCain who belongs to a party that has no Black Delegates attending their Convention this year. You go Girl and vote for the party that accepted all of the racist Democrats in 1965 when the Voting Rights Act was passed. I hope you are very happy with your vote to McCain who also voted against the Martin Luther King Holiday. But, you go ahead because no one can say that you did not exercise your right to vote that you probably would not have if it had not been for Lyndon Baines Johnson and all of the Blacks who died while voting for the right to vote.
I live in Arizona and McCain has done nothing for the poor state of education in this state. But you be sure to vote for him. Also vote for a man who supported the Rehnquist nomination to the Supreme Court. Rehnquist who antagonized and harrassed Blacks in the 50's here in Arizona as they wer attempting to exercise their right to vote. Don't take my word for it .Read about Rhenquist in the history books if the information has not been deleted. I know this for a fact because I and my husband know two people who went to Washing to protest his admission to the Supreme Court. But, don't let this information stop you from voting for McCain. You Go Girland I hope your children or grandchildren will never have to go to Irac abecause we don't have a draft and only the less advantaged is supporting this war that McCain is supporting. Good-Luck.

Posted by: L. Barrett | June 14, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

With all your might, glory and power, you all are screwed for years to come. Even Jesus himself could not stop the bitterness in your country. Good bye America, you will indeed fall flat on your face.
Best call in Black Water to clean up the mess that is about to happen. Surely all your missionaries will bring order in your country. They do out number your military now, or could I be wrong??

Posted by: justadad55+ | June 14, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm a life-long Democrat--30 yrs. of voting nothing but a Democratic ticket. However, I cannot vote for Sen. Obama because of his lack of experience. I totally appreciate his ability to give a moving speech, but when he had to "think on his feet" in the debates, he didn't fair so well.

And I'm extremely tired of having people suggest that those who don't vote for Obama are racist! Race has never been a consideration when I voted. However, Sen. Obama's 20 year association with Rev. Wright followed by the toxic comments of Rev. Pfleger deeply concern me. These associations cause me to wonder if Sen. Obama is sincere with his talk of unity. It's difficult to accept his speeches in light of these associations.

And as to those who state that I would be voting for four more years of Bush with my vote for McCain, that simply doesn't jell with Sen. McCain's record. He--far more than Sen. Obama--has reached across the aisle. Beyond Sen. McCain's centrist record, he will be dealing with a Democratic Congress. With these different considerations, I'm far more comfortable with Sen. McCain, and my family and I have become part of the growing number of Democrats for McCain.

Posted by: wcowan | June 14, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

I'm a life-long Democrat--30 yrs. of voting nothing but a Democratic ticket. However, I cannot vote for Sen. Obama because of his lack of experience.

And I'm extremely tired of having people suggest that those who don't vote for Obama are racist! Race has never been a consideration when I voted. However, Sen. Obama's 20 year association with Rev. Wright followed by the toxic comments of Rev. Pfleger's deeply concerns me. These associations cause me to wonder if Sen. Obama is sincere with his talk of unity. It's difficult to accept his speeches in light of these associations.

And as to those who state that I would be voting for four more years of Bush with my vote for McCain, that simply doesn't jell with Sen. McCain's record. He--far more than Sen. Obama--has reached across the aisle. Beyond Sen. McCain's centrist record, he will be dealing with a Democratic Congress. With these different considerations, I'm far more comfortable with Sen. McCain, and my family and I have become part of the growing number of Democrats for McCain.

Posted by: wcowan | June 14, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

We have seen a lot of desperate Democrats suddenly scrambling to "unify" with Clinton's supporters, now that they realize that their snowjob of an election has caused turmoil and will lead to an Obama boycott in November. The classic response to our anger says that we need to relax, take a deep breath, not let emotions cloud our judgment, and to think about Roe v Wade, our uteruses, Iraq, thousands of dying soldiers, the economy, Bush III, and many other desperate pro-Obama talking points designed to crush the boycott and instill fear. Well, here's my answer: I do have a uterus but somethings are more important than any of my body parts.

First of all, I do not need to clear my head and take a deep breath. I did not start voting yesterday, unlike many of Obama's supporters. Instead, I am a lifetime Democrat.

I am very experienced having my candidate lose, but then moving on to support the party ticket. In past primaries, for example, I voted for Dean in the primary, voted for Kerry in the Gen Elect even though I didn't like him and never did warm up to him. I always thought that he was a stuck-up snob. I liked Theresa Kerry much better. BTW, loved Gore with all his "elitists" "snobbish" faults because I was certain that he was who he said he was on the environment!

I get the idea of party unity, so you and your Obama can stop treating me like a kid. If anything I can teach party unity to all of you!

Secondly, my vote in November goes beyond the liberal "issues" their talking points describe: it protests liberal hypocrisy! The party espouses an equality rhetoric but has been completely dishonest and contradictory during this election. The party has bashed poor white people, women, and people whose last names are Clinton.

The party has ignored Latino voters because recognizing them challenges the "only racists vote for Clinton script." The party has invented claims of racial injustice to demonize the Clintons. The party has ridiculed "uneducated" voters, even though Democrats supposedly represent disadvantaged people.

Male party members and liberal media have constantly called for Clinton to drop out -- starting after Iowa -- in order to place an aura of doubt around her campaign. The party has ignored voters in Florida and Michigan in order to legitimize Howard Dean's bad judgment. The party has completely ignored or even denied the sexist treatment of Clinton, while responding with absolute venom to any real or imagined "racism" directed towards Obama.

The party has allowed Obama to wear multiple racial hats -- the nonracial black man, the just black enough to be an historic black president, and the black racial victim -- to secure votes. If Clinton deviates even slightly from a prior script, she is portrayed as a horrible witch who would do "anything to get elected." I refuse to join this madness!

In April, Obama pranced around and described Clinton as "Annie Oakley" gunning her way through Pennsylvania for votes. But when he came out looking like Steve Urkel bowling and drinking Yuengling for votes in the same state, the media and party ate it up -- another "precious" Obama moment. Recently, CNN.COM posted footage of some mesmerized journalist covering Obama's jeans. Why should I have to endorse this mayhem by "uniting" with it?

Thirdly, I am unmoved by the progressive issues that the pro-Obama side uses to scare us into voting for him. But you've got to love "the horror": If you vote for McCain or don't vote for Obama, the Supreme Court will overrule Roe v Wade, thousands of men and women will die in Iraq, poor people will remain poor, the environment will decline, we will not achieve peace on earth and domestic tranquility, and you will deprive "our children" from having a "great country."

Boo Hoo! I feel a tear coming!

These are just Karl Rovian "red alerts." Obama is not entitled to our votes. He did not earn my loyalty. Whatever loyalty the party had from me prior to this election has been depleted. Earlier on when we wanted to discuss progressive issues, the Obama camp and the media silenced our efforts and instead focused on the big rock star pep rallies, Obamania, Camelot, weeping college students, and a host of other unimportant concerns.

People could not tell us specifically why they supported him, but they knew that he was the best and that he would bring "change." They told us that we and Clinton were cold and unhopeful and that emotions and inspiration were more important.

Clinton was a mere "policy wonk," while Obama made people "feel good again." Well, enjoy your Hallmark moments and stop being two-faced. Suddenly, you want to talk about the issues because it benefits Obama. Earth to my fellow Democrats: Obama's success does not dictate the way I vote!

I am still focused on issues, but topics beyond your "red scare" alerts are important to me as well. My vote responds to a party of hypocrites who dismiss loyal Democrats, bash older folks and women, and manipulate race - while calling itself "progressive." My protest is about not wanting to be a part of a vote that legitimizes sexism!

I do not wish to condone the younger Democrats' misunderstanding of the Republican witch hunts that hurt all Democrats in the past -- what they call "Clinton scandals," when every honest person recalls them as Ken Starr's scandals! Where was the "education" on this issue by party veterans?

The DNC rushes to bash McCain for his 100 years comment, which reputable entities like Factcheck.org say was not even true, but Clinton is misportrayed abundantly and all we get is silence. Party leadership and the media sharply denounce anything that could negatively impact Obama. They describe legitimate and fair criticism of him as racist, mean-spirited, evil, or "Clinton politics."

Clearly the party leadership has determined that anytime he looks weak, the "boys" will endorse him or call for Clinton to leave because she is "hurting the party" and "kneecapping" the "first viable black presidential candidate" - as if Clinton alone should bear responsibility for remedying the country's history of racism which has kept people of color out of high office. Well, party leadership and media, you made these rules; suffer the consequences!

To paraphrase Obama, don't tell me my disgust with your behavior doesn't matter. Don't tell me sexism doesn't matter. Don't tell me liberal hypocrisy doesn't matter. Don't tell me fake racial politics doesn't matter. Don't tell me I must vote for Obama in order to be a "real" Democrat. If being a real Democrat means bashing women, the poor, and the elderly, manipulating race, ignoring Latinos, and stifling dissent, then I respectfully resign my membership! Achieving justice requires sacrifice, brutal honesty, and passionate commitment. I will not "endorse anything to get a Democrat elected," and neither should anyone.

- A Black Woman Supporting Hillary Clinton and the Women Who Want More.....

Posted by: Anonymous | June 14, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I used to be upset about Hillary supporters switching to McCain. I simply couldn't understand how 'feminists' could vote for someone so opposed to feminist ideals.

Now I don't care at all. If you're stupid enough to vote for a candidate who accepts money from a person who dismisses rape as inevitable, then you truly are clueless and you deserve McCain. Enjoy your tour of duty!

Posted by: Susan | June 14, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if McCain will get a query about accepting the Clayton Williams $300,000.

Posted by: FirstMouse | June 14, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Debra Bartoshevich, a Clinton delegate in Wisconsin who told a local newspaper that she planned to vote for John McCain in November...

"No self-respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her - that's by Susan B. Anthony," said Bartoshevich, referring to the famous suffragist.

Bartoshevich called herself a "devoted Democrat" who, she said, had never voted for a Republican for president.

NOW it appears that this devoted Democrat will be kicked out of the convention for expressing her right to a private vote in the general election:

Posted by: Truthhurts | June 14, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Point #1 there is no such thing as the liberal media and anyone who has been paying attention knows this to be true. think, and don't allow yourselves to be brainwashed so easily, it's sad. "liberal media" is a phrase that tv stations like fox news have pounded into your head for the past eight years. the media have remained scarily silent and unquestioning, even supportive in times when they should not have been. remember, the nytimes supported the war even when there were plenty of reasons not to.
Point #2 hrc lost, and if you were her supporter, you would vote for the person who most represents her ideals and that person is barack obama. mccain is her polar opposite.
Point #3 voting for a candidate who has the same voting record as bush and strongly supports his ideals and wants to continue them is just, i don't know, STUPID.

Posted by: Beth | June 14, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Hey Jabber, sweetheart, I know it's not your fault that you're not very smart. You have been brainwashed and probably don't read much, because if you did, you would never vote for Mccain. Go talk to the other dummies because they are the only ones who are stupid enough to take you seriously. Oh, and while you're at it, use a dictionary, you clearly don't know how to spell either. You're seriously pathetic.

Posted by: Billie | June 14, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

JABBER - turn your caps off and learn to spell what is presumably the only language you barely speak and cannot spell. You may very well vote for McCain but if you are any indication of the mentality of those that do, then God help him! Lol

Posted by: David | June 14, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Any female dumb enough to vote for Mccain deserves to be put in a gulag.

Posted by: Billie | June 14, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

RE DAVID: I DON'T NEED A MANS RESPECT TO VOTE FOR HIM, SEE I HAPPEN TO BE A WOMEN THAT IS IN CONTROL OF MY OWN LIFE I DON'T DEPEND ON ANY HANDOUTS FROM ANY MAN OR ANYONE! AND AS FAR AS YOU SAYING HE DOESN'T RESPECT WOMEN, DID YOU CHECK OBAMA'S RECORD ON THAT LATELY? HUMMM! OBAMA IS A RACSIST, AND PERSONNALLY I FIND THAT MORE DEGRADING THEN ANYTHING!I WILL STAND UP FOR MCCAIN NOMADER WHAT! AND DAVID, "I AM WOMAN HEAR ME ROAR!""

Posted by: JABBER | June 14, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

JABBER - you won't get many votes for Mc(needs)Cane if you keep rudely shouting at them. Turn your caps off!

Posted by: David | June 14, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if Obama will post the FACT that he does NOT debate well and needs teleprompters to look polished?
__________

Obviously, this poster didn't see the opening ceremony of the Salt Lake City Olympics with Dubya sitting in the crowd amongst the US athletes. He stood up to say his "ONE SENTENCE of welcome". One of the TV cameras backed up and what we witnessed was pathetic. A lone man holding up a big sign with Dubya's "ONE SENTENCE" printed on it for him to read. My guess is that Obama just might do a little better with words than this past Republican representative who seems to have difficulty mastering his mother tongue.

Posted by: David | June 14, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN (SWEETIE!) YOU GOT MY VOTE AND I AM WORKING ON THOUSANDS MORE FOR YOU!! I THINK MCCAIN SHOULD CHECK THE BLOGS, DNC IS PUTTING ADDS ON THERE FOR CONTRIBUTIONS! TIMES MUST BE TUFF! AOL ETC I HAVE CHANGED MY PARTY TO REP, WHAT BUSH HAS DONE TO THIS COUNTRY IN NO WAY SHOULD REFLECT ON MCCAIN, HE IS HIS OWN SEPERATE PERSON, THINKS FOR HIMSELF! HE FOUGHT FOR HIS COUNTRY, AND SPENT 5 YRS AS POW, WHO BETTER TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY AGAIN!!! THANK YOU JOHN MCCAIN, WE WILL BE THERE FOR YOU IN THE FALL OVER 700,000 NOW AND GROWING!

GO MCCAIN GO!!!!!!

Posted by: JABBER | June 14, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

HRC supporters will campaign and vote for John McCain in swing states Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida.
__________________

Then these 'women' obviously have low self-esteem given what Mc(needs)Cane seems to be able to so facilely call women. So it was 15 years ago, when he was just 56, old enough to known better. This misogynistic old man won't be catering to any women's rights once he wins the Presidency. No self-respecting (and that is the key - "self respect") would vote for a man who calls his wife the C word, just as no man would vote for a woman who makes disparaging remarks about men. Come on, ladies - at least "stand by a man" who thinks you're worth more than a sexual part.

Posted by: David | June 14, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

The left loons of the Democratic Party and the left wing media are peddling the greenest candidate for the presidency. McCain is a tall pillar standing next to the wonder boy in the national security and foreign policy arena. I've voted for democrats for the last 25 years, but this November I'll vote for the most qualified person for president: Senator McCain.

Connie

Posted by: Connie Nguyen | June 14, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Images of Senator McCain in a Dinner Jacket with more drinks in him, than at the Bar,

smirking around going;

Wooooo, Woooo, Woooo!

Hey! Woo to you too! Woo-Woo! ;~)

Probably how he got Cindy!

Posted by: RAT-The | June 14, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I'm not in to attempt to "persuade" the minds of certain supporters of Hillary Clinton. Hillary is going down in history, as well as Obama, and nothing is going to change that fact. We should ALL be proud of that improvement. I am. Instead, I am making an attempt to call on those with a mindset similar to mine in the midst of what this country faces...

It was our current in the high office, and the woes that followed in the past nearly two terms that has caused me to pay attention to the Democratic side this year (after reviewing the Republican candidates as well), based on what I felt needs to happen this time around. In the issues, I find my purpose. It is not about Obama, and Hillary; it never was about them, only what they proposed to do about the woes. We had our preferred candidates. I chose Obama for a slight reason, though I supported him for nearly the same exact reasons I supported Hillary to begin with. I assure you, even if Hillary were the nominee, McCain will never have received my vote with his stances; his propsals are far from my ideas of what needs to happen. I am in full support of my country, and with concern, I intended to vote with that concern for either candidate, believing that they will focus on pushing my ideal agenda before McCain would even show interest. I will cast my vote for reasons that extend beyond myself, and only includes the candidates so much as to expect them to push for us. I will have voted for neither candidates, simply to vote for they themselves. I understand the excitement and disappointment. Continue to support Hillary and follow through with her works! She's going nowhere. We are no longer "Team Hillary" and "Team Obama." We are simply The Team, of a variety of supporters of registered parties, and voting patterns who are against McCain's proposals and find it of importance to vote accordingly. If you find it of importance too, please join the team. This is not about Obama; instead, it's about us. Take your time and think if you must. Stay tuned on McCain as well and see if your ideas of what needs to happen, aligns with McCain's. If not, please own a role in helping to get that White House back for the sake of many. I imagine that we will have less veto problems getting work accomplished.

Just a thought: But take your time...Think it through

Woman Supporter For This Country and Citizens - United Against the Woes

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 14, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I am a Black woman, an HRC supporter and I will vote for Senator Mc Cain in November.

Apparently everyone else but women have rights in this party. I noticed the liberal media and the DNC gave all the support to Obama. Hillary got dumped on everyday. Well let them keep their cult and lose in November.

Posted by: Roxanne | June 14, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Senator McCain calls the Supreme Court habeas corpus decision (Baumediene v. Bush) one of the WORST decisions. And Democrats (or newly designated independents) are still going to participate in this call????

Posted by: Ella | June 14, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

we are not headed over to the slimy republican party, we are just leaving the slimy democratic party. we are independent thinkers. we won't let conservative talk radio, the dnc or the obama campaign and his supporter tell us what to think about Hillary. We support her and will continue to do so. call us independents.

Posted by: es | June 14, 2008 2:10 AM
=======================================

I do not recall anyone telling you what to think about Hillary. However, it is good that you support her and will continue to do so, so do I. The only difference is that I also support my country and that is first and foremost.

We should not act like we have been angels in this matter. We have all said derogatory things to each other through the primaries.

Honesty, maybe you need to take some time and review this entire primary season, and think about what is important to Hillary as well as America. This is not about Obama, nor is it about Hillary. It is about our lives and the lives of our children, especially our daughters.

If you can still vote for McCain, then do so, but please don't speak for me as if I am going to follow you over to McCain's camp because I am so angry about Hillary losing. We lost, and now we need to vote our best interest, not go and vote for the person that Hillary does not share policies with, that in itself is a slap in her face.

Posted by: Precious | June 14, 2008 9:37 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Margaret | June 13, 2008 3:52 PM

HRC supporters will not surrender in "unity" to the cult powers of Obama. HRC supporters will campaign and vote for John McCain in swing states Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida. A loss in any two swing states means Obama's defeat in November. I will volunteer and vote for McCain in a swing state. In 2012, Sen. Clinton will be the presidential candidate to get America back on track. The Democratic Party will no longer be corrupt and rigged with Pelosi, Reid, and Dean routed out.

Obama clinched a stolen nomination with Dean's FL and MI shenanigans, and de facto Obama surrogate Pelosi rigged the nomination for Obama. Cult leader Obama has no legitimacy as the Democratic nominee.

===================
Ummm, you mean like Bush, he seemed to get everything he wanted with the Dem congress. YOUR FEAR TATICS WILL NEVER CHANGE MY VOTE.

Now let's say all this experience McCain has, like being totured for five years, what could that have done to his mental stability? Lets say he is in the WH and he gets a call that Iraq is protesting and the media coverage is making him look bad, lets just say that. Will McCain have a flash back to his time when was being totured, will he decide to fix them by attacking with nuke? How stable is a mind that has been totured? I know plenty of military men that came home and have never been right since war. What makes him different?

You all always talk about experience, experience is only a part of what you need to fix this county. Obama will put the best political team together to get the job done. We have had five other good presidents without experience and they did really well.

We have had more presidents with experience that did the worst job in America, so your experience theory does not work for me.

I would support Hillary and Obama, I will never support McCain. The man is showing early signs of Alzehimers and you all hate Obama so much for whatever unreal reasons that you are willing to put an alzheimers victim in the WH, then what?

We will know that Cindy had to take over an run the country because she has to pretend her husband is well? Cindy the one with memory lapses (serious not being funny, please!

I hope and pray that God makes a way for Obama to be elected for president. I will finally be able to breath again.

Posted by: Angel | June 14, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

To all the Hillary supporters now voting for McCain in November:

Farewell! After all the nasty, horrible things written by her supporters in the last few days, I say good riddance.

Enjoy your tour in the Middle East!

Posted by: Susan | June 14, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Margaret | June 13, 2008 3:52 PM

HRC supporters will not surrender in "unity" to the cult powers of Obama. HRC supporters will campaign and vote for John McCain in swing states Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida. A loss in any two swing states means Obama's defeat in November. I will volunteer and vote for McCain in a swing state. In 2012, Sen. Clinton will be the presidential candidate to get America back on track. The Democratic Party will no longer be corrupt and rigged with Pelosi, Reid, and Dean routed out.

Obama clinched a stolen nomination with Dean's FL and MI shenanigans, and de facto Obama surrogate Pelosi rigged the nomination for Obama. Cult leader Obama has no legitimacy as the Democratic nominee.
================================

Cult? I belive it is you who are acting as if you are in some kind of cult. Rigged nomination? You must be saying that because you simply can't count or something. Nominations have always been won by received the most pledged delegates, not a popular vote, becaus the popular vote can never be counted acurrately, wow, the viciousness of your post, says much about your personality.

However, let me inform you of something, you will not be the only person working for your new candidate, we will be working hard for Obama here in Florida, the state you all claim was disenfranchised, only thing you forgot to send us the memo, you know, anyone that did not support Hillary. I guess that did not matter, since what you wanted was to make it appear that it was alone Obama's fault.

We knew the truth, it is so sad to hear you say the things you do, but please go ahead and support McCain. Not all of HIllary's supporters will cut off their nose to spite their faces, and those that do, are not about America, they are about revenge.

2012 will prove something different for you, if you think Hillary will win then, after sabbatoging Obama 2008 election. Boy, are you in for a big surprise! If you want Hillary to win in 2016, then I suggest you help a democrat win in 2008.

Just a suggestion!

Posted by: Angel From South Florida | June 14, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Should Cindy McCain's Brain Damage Be A Campaign Issue?

I don't know whether Americans care if the First Lady is mentally disabled - that's a question for McCain's pollsters. What I want to know is why McCain would even subject his poor wife to the rigors of a presidential campaign and worldwide scrutiny in the first place. The question speaks directly to McCain's personal cruelty and unbridled ambition.

Although the true extent of the brain damage has not been publicly disclosed, Cindy McCain's 2004 stroke is not a secret.

In a very flattering September 2007 interview in More, Paul Alexander wrote about the stroke damage:

"In conversation, she will occasionally have trouble remembering certain facts, especially from the recent past, and if you look closely you realize she cannot make her right hand into a complete fist, which has affected her handwriting, if not her ability to grasp a gearshift knob. "It's not bad," she says, describing the damage to her hand. "I can function. I have short-term memory loss. I can remember all the major details of my life, but I sometimes can't remember what happened last week."

I suspect that John McCain, viewed his wife's stroke more in terms of how it would affect his bid for the presidency than else.

From a January 2005 Larry King show:

"MCCAIN: I was the one at home that everyone came to to program their computers, fix their phones, do anything electrical, technical, anything on the computer. I can't get near it now. I'm overwhelmed by it.

And it's weird for me. And I might also say, I suffer from migraines also. And your last caller that called in -- and I just had an episode about a week and a half ago, where I didn't know, I thought I was having another stroke. It was a different kind of...

KING: Has the senator been very sympathetic?

MCCAIN: Yes. And I -- please don't -- let me explain that. He was very confused in the beginning. He didn't -- like everyone in the family, how could it happen to my wife? I'm 18 years older than she is. It doesn't happen to someone that's younger than you are. So on his behalf, I think he's trying to understand all this. It's a lot for him to take in."

In October 2007, Cindy McCain was hobbling around South Carolina as the result of a fall down in a Phoenix grocery store. Was her fall caused by her brain damage? Is the question any of our business?

Inevitably, the issue of the extent of Cindy McCain's brain damage will enter the public arena. So far, Mrs McCain has only had to field softballs lobbed at her by sympathetic journalists. Can the McCain campaign limit her public appearances to three-minute soundbites until November? I don' think so, not in today's political environment.

Why, Senator McCain, would you do this to your wife?

Posted by: Beth Martin | June 14, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Something for Hillary supporters to think about. First McCain, we know McCain and he has solid experience. Obama is really unknown, except for his oratory skills, and has the least experience of any previous nominee. Maybe, Obama could be great but with the country facing serious problems, can we take a risk?

If elected president, McCain will have to face a democrtic house and senate. How much damage can McCain do in 4 years?

On the other hand, Obama would enjoy a democratic house and senate. Consequently, this could result in Obama getting passed many things that can prove to have a negative impact on the country and our lives.

If Obama is as great as the media claims, then he is young enough to get experience in the senate and run for president later. Now is NOT the time.

Posted by: jpspec | June 14, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

I don't know why we all are on this site trying to change the minds of Hillary's supporters, it is impossible.

If McCain and his early signs of Alzheimers is not enough to change their minds, so be it. If his video stating that he thinks roe vs wade should be overturned is not enough, so be it. If his ranting about Iran doesn't show them that he will start a new war with Iran and will have to institute the draft because we are so stretched out, so be it.

This race was fair, the media wasn't in all case fair, but the race was. The candidates including Hillary agreed to a set of rules, both Hillary and Obama. Later she wanted to change the rules she agreed to so she could have an advantage over Obama. The rules committee did what was best to ensure that future races would not totally disrespect their scheduled times for voting and then come back and do the same thing, setting a presidence for the wrong way to handle the rules of the race.

There are many Hillary supporters that do understand that if you allow one child to do something that you said not to do, the other children will want to do the same, therefore, you must get the rules as best as possible to avoid a break down in the way you handle rules adhearence.

All of us should realize the truth and the truth is, regardless to how much we wanted our candidate to win, the rule has always been that the person with the most pledged delegates wins the nomination, the popular vote never counted because it cannot be fairly counted. Reasonable and Intelligent people know this. So if hatred or plain old selfishness will not allow many of Hillary supporters to vote for Obama, so be it.

However, if the hope is that he will lose and Hillary will come back in 2012 to win, I think it is a losing gamble, because as an Obama supporter and I can only speak for me, I will not vote for Hillary at that time either. I am sure there will be another dem on the ticket.

I will not stand by while people sabbatoge another democrat just to show they are sore losers and to make way for their perferred candidate in a few years, this works both ways and maybe we all should remember that as well while we go through this foolishness.

They called us maniacs, followers, called Obama our messiah and was even more derogatory on line and off, yet we would have voted for Hillary had she been the nominee because we are democrats first, not Obama worshippers.

So, with all that said, we need to continue to pray that God will intervene and allow us to elect Obama as our next President. I can not imagine another 4 years of terror, economic disaster, innocent military men and women dying for war that was based on lies and deceit in the firt place, dying everyday.

I want my child and grand-child to have a better life. I do not want to see my nephews, cousins, or other family members drafted into a war for Iran, which will happen when McCain is in the WH.

God bless America, please! and help those who are living daily with the pain of lost and the mindset of GWB, to inflict revenge during this presidential election, just as he did to Iraq.

Posted by: Angel | June 14, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

PRESS COVERAGE and NON-COVERAGE and a DISGRACED DNC

Hillary Clinton has not been chosen as the Democratic Nominee for President due to factors beyond her control. All the following factors were involved, equally. Horrendous sexism coverage by the press, the press falling (hook line and sinker) for the euphoria of the Barack Obama mega-revivals where 75,000 people would show up screaming and hollering "yes we can" and with women fainting in the aisles, the press failing to challenge, explore, and write about Mr. Obama's thin credentials which include his job as an Illinois State legislator where he voted "present" or was "absent" at least 130 times on important votes on legislation where he avoided taking a stand, his ONE speech in 2002 when he was still in Illinois when he said he was opposed to a war effort in Iraq, and then we have the "conspiracy" that I and others are suggesting that emanated from the Democratic National Committee under the guise of leadership by Chairman Howard Dean, which I write about below.


I think for Hillary Clinton to have accomplished what she did is remarkable, and speaks volumes for her character, leadership, the qualities, knowledge, and skill she could have brought to the Presidency. I feel the American people lost for now a great candidate. In my opinion, and the opinion of 18 Million other voters who were allowed to vote and our votes were counted by the Democratic National Committee as we voted for Hillary Clinton, the candidate who has now been appointed as the front runner is not the most qualified.


If Mr. Obama wants to win in November, he should realize how thin his resume is, and how thin and weak his support is, he should make nice to Hillary Clinton, invite her to be on the ticket as the Vice Presidential candidate, and offer her some good meaningful work to do in a new administration.


Do I think Mr. Obama will do that? Absolutely not. He and his hordes of advisers won't "get it".


More on the disgraced Democratic National Committee.


THE DNC IS A DISGRACE, and THINK WE DON'T KNOW.

In my opinion, Howard Dean and his other sycophants at the DNC disgraced themselves on the Florida and Michigan voter mess. With an election this close, they should have found a way to count their votes. Voters went and voted. Oh yes, I read all the screaming going on by the hyped up bloggers who had all the answers (the answers they wanted), but that still doesn't recognize that if those voters had been recognized, the delegate count would have been about even, the stampede of the superdelegates trying to follow Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson (serving obviously in his last term) would have been slowed, or could have been stopped.


Hillary Clinton was prepared to go through a revote in both states. Mr. Obama refused, of course. He knew he would lose AGAIN. Note: On the first vote, he lost in both states.


Howard Dean and his top sycophants were clearly in the tank for Barack Obama.

And now you want our money..... and support.

You folks are living in "la-la" land.

No thank you. Good thing you moved to Chicago. That's a nice quiet place. No corruption there. Maybe we can forget you.

And I remind everyone for the umpteenth time, in Florida it was the Republican Controlled Legislature and Republican Governor that forced through the primary election date to be one week earlier than it should have been. And Dr. Dean and his DNC sycophants said there was nothing they could do. Of course, they were in the tank for Obama. What a disgrace.

Posted by: Common Sense12 | June 14, 2008 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I have yet to hear word one from Obama asking, in print or on TV, asking for my support.

I know McCain has done so twice on TV and once in print.

McCain has my vote.

Focus.......NO OBAMA in November.

Posted by: Truth Seeker | June 14, 2008 6:08 AM | Report abuse

Do you know where McCain stands on Women's Issues?

http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/knowmccain?qp_source=knowmccain%5fmoe

Posted by: Know the issues | June 14, 2008 4:23 AM | Report abuse

I know I shouldn't comment, because I really want to let the Clinton supporters have the time to absorb this very disappointing loss. But I guess I just have to say, from the perspective of an Obama supporter who was called an Obamaniac, told I had drank the kool aid and that I had a messianic complex .... well, umm, you might want to take a look at your own reactions. Mrs. Clinton or NO one? Deliberately trying to elect the Republican ONLY to improve Mrs. Clinton's 2012 chances? Sounds like, just maybe, the pot calling the kettle ... Seriously, Mrs. Clinton was a tremendous candidate and had she won the nomination I would have supported her in the fall. There is NO way she and John McCain are equivalent in their policies or leadership. I've seen what can happen in a disastrous 4 years of Republican rule -- but if war in Iraq, a Supreme Court that overturns Habeas Corpus, discrimination laws and every other bit of civil liberty protection we have hanging by a thread here in this country doesn't scare you , I don't know what would? I believe that as the country gets a clearer picture of just how conservative John McCain is (95% voting record w/ Bush last year, 8th most conservative Senator) people will stop looking to him as a moderate "maverick". And if you are REALLY concerned about his attitudes toward women, why don't you go see what he did to his first wife, dumping her after she was horribly disfigured in a car accident while he was in Viet Nam for the 20 years younger, richer, now-prettier and more politically connected Cindy. Yeah, John McCain -- a friend to women and a "worthy successor" to Mrs. Clinton? I don't think so.

Posted by: straight talk my a** | June 14, 2008 3:58 AM | Report abuse

Again you forget that you elected a president twice, who could not read, took two years until he was educated enough to speak publicly but still can't, never fought in a war, although who cares. You have your share of dedicated war heroes, all willing to die for your country "for a purpose". The United States of America, Land of the free? Obama does not need a script writer. He is doing just fine. With all due respect for Senator Clinton, she lost and fought a hell of a battle. As for the states that lost voting rights, serves you right. Blame it and rid all politicians that made the rules but do not put the sole blame on Senator Obama for Following them, blame Hilary for braking them. You have four years to correct that issue, it is done. Of course he will have a few die hards insulting Hilary for all Candidates do. The world is tired of Hilary for she bowed out, but not graciously, far from it. If all Hilary supporters want another war with Iran, vote Mcain, it's your children who will die, and certainly you can spare a few more thousand, what the hell, just kids now aren't they. Your economy and your country are in ruins effecting the world and hurting the true America we once knew?

If Hilary would just give it up. She is not a speaker for women. My wife of 37 years would never lower herself if defeated to any man or women. A win is a win. She would bow out with dignity. But then, my wife is a women, equal to me as any person of gender or color is. Must big a lot of big buck politicians and corporate heads out there, scared craping their pants. Oh change is wonderful.

Posted by: justadad55+ | June 14, 2008 2:19 AM | Report abuse

Again you forget that you elected a president twice, who could not read, took two years until he was educated enough to speak publicly but still can't, never fought in a war, although who cares. You have your share of dedicated war heroes, all willing to die for your country "for a purpose". The United States of America, Land of the free? Obama does not need a script writer. He is doing just fine. With all due respect for Senator Clinton, she lost and fought a hell of a battle. As for the states that lost voting rights, serves you right. Blame it and rid all politicians that made the rules but do not put the sole blame on Senator Obama for Following them, blame Hilary for braking them. You have four years to correct that issue, it is done. Of course he will have a few die hards insulting Hilary for all Candidates do. The world is tired of Hilary for she bowed out, but not graciously, far from it. If all Hilary supporters want another war with Iran, vote Mcain, it's your children who will die, and certainly you can spare a few more thousand, what the hell, just kids now aren't they. Your economy and your country are in ruins effecting the world and hurting the true America we once knew?

If Hilary would just give it up. She is not a speaker for women. My wife of 37 years would never lower herself if defeated to any man or women. A win is a win. She would bow out with dignity. But then, my wife is a women, equal to me as any person of gender or color is. Must big a lot of big buck politicians and corporate heads out there, scared craping their pants. Oh change is wonderful.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 14, 2008 2:18 AM | Report abuse

we are not headed over to the slimy republican party, we are just leaving the slimy democratic party. we are independent thinkers. we won't let conservative talk radio, the dnc or the obama campaign and his supporter tell us what to think about Hillary. We support her and will continue to do so. call us independents.

Posted by: es | June 14, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

susan. you are right. it never was just about chromosones. it was about Hillary being the brightest candidate in the race and the most likely to have the competence to lead an economic turn around. obama is not change. he is old school chicago gutter politics. a cog in the machine of Daly, Axlerod, et al. let's write her name in Hillary supporters.

Posted by: es | June 14, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

McShame doesn't respect women. He dumped his first wife for a 20 something, Cindy 17 years his junor.

He called Cindy an obsene name in mixed company.

McSame is 4 more years of the Boosh adminstration and one would have to be crazy to want more..

Women won't want McNasty after they check his voting record on womens issues..equal pay for women is nothing important to him.

Posted by: hh | June 14, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

McCain's conference call to Clinton supporters ends disastrously when he asks those on the line, "So....what are you wearing?"

Posted by: Piter | June 14, 2008 1:04 AM | Report abuse

Good riddance..every last one of you. Don't let the door hit you on the way over to the slimy Republican Party.

Posted by: DiB | June 14, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Go vote for McCain then you whining, complaining poor me, idiot dishrags. Who cares already. Go away and join the Republican party. Everyone is sick of hearing your complaints about how poorly Hillary was treated. GET A LIFE!

Posted by: AZgirl | June 14, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

The Roe v.Wade scare ain't gonna work. We will gladly see the Obama "baby mamas" denied the right to choice. The Obama Girl was not singing about reproductive rights. This pathetic attempt to make Obama the champion for women is not fooling anyone.

Posted by: John | June 13, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Google "Barack Obama Is A Closet Homosexual: Listen To The Rev. James ..."

Imagine GOP using this in tv ad along with his lover Larry Sinclair and drug uses in November 1999 24/7...

Obama is unelectable. There is too much in his questionable past and no amount of his spin (no credibility) can counter this.

Obama cancelled McCain's 10 town hall style debates because there will be no teleprompters for him to look polished because he doesn't debate well. Remember Philly's debate with Hillary? He fumbled, showed angry and exasperation of questions of Rezko, Wright, Ayers, etc. He immediately declined her requests, LOLOL... Since he can't handle a public debate without teleprompters what confidence should public have with his candidancy?

Obama is a fraud. Billionaire George Soros' has been bankrolling him since 2004 and 2006 for his presidential exploratory committee before he announced in January 2007. He takes monies from billionaires, millionaires and the small guy contrare to what his campaign advertises. Obama is a FRAUD!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Howard Dean Schemes To Shut Down Democratic Convention
Increase Decrease

June 12, 2008 (LPAC)--The latest atrocity to come out of George Soros clone Howard Dean, is that the Democratic National Committee chairman is trying to shut the 18 million loyal Democratic and independent voters who supported Hillary Clinton out of the Denver convention altogether. In addition to reports that the Obama campaign is pushing to actually unseat all the Clinton delegates and replace them with Obama loyalists, there are more recent reports that Howard Dean is trying to prevent any balloting for the Democratic nominee, and instead is trying to just ram through a voice vote for Obama, without a state-by-state roll call. Even after the two parties turned their nominating conventions into ersatz rock concerts, it was always the case that the losing candidates were all given the opportunity to speak from the podium, and a full vote taken, before the anointed candidate was confirmed. Usually, in a gesture of party unity, after the first ballot vote was taken, a motion would be presented to endorse the candidate by unanimous consent. These traditions actually did have the effect of unifying the party, often after a tight and hotly contested primary season, and at least conveyed the idea that the party came out of the convention unified behind the Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees, going into the November general elections. Clearly, between the Obama campaign and Howard Dean, there is a great deal of worry that the vicious campaign that was run against Hillary Clinton has created a level of fury, which could explode at the convention. George Soros, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and, not to mention the Obama campaign itself,have generated much bad blood that they have turned Hillary Clinton supporters into Hillary Clinton fanatics. According to one well-placed Washington source, if 20% of the Hillary Clinton voters were to sit out the November Presidential vote, that would amount to a loss of 4 million potential Obama voters--if, indeed, Obama wound up with the nomination in the first place. That could spell certain doom for Obama's already-doomed candidacy.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 10:43 PM | Report abuse

True Clinton Supporters wont vote for McCain and Obama, they will only vote for Hillary, and that is a fact!!!
Sit tide and wait, Hillary is not done!!!

Posted by: !!!WOW!!! | June 13, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Collin....You never was a Hillary supporter. Real supporter or real Friend dont turn their back on their Friend. You are just like G.Richardson....
Schame on You...

Posted by: Mandi08 | June 13, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain won't have to try too hard. He has millions of Hillary's supporters already. They're not all women. Just long time dems that are moving to the center instead of to the left. Nothing anyone can say will change our minds.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone will watch on June 18 at 2PM in Washington DC on National Press Club Channel "Larry Sinclair on Obama"???
Obama involvment with gay(Larry) and drugs??? It will be intresting!

Posted by: !!!WOW!!! | June 13, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

David and Sandra, I was a strong supporter of Hillary and I will support Obama.

But guys, you keep talking about what kind of losers we are..

You all are really just about the lousiest winners I have ever seen.

Obama himself has been somewhat gracious but Obama supporter and his fans in the media have been totally obnoxious, really bad winners.

The lady won the majority of the popular vote and still bowed out very graciously.

Try to be a little gracious and you'll pull in many more Hillary supporters.

Posted by: Colin | June 13, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

David.. I understand that You are provocating US, Hillary Supporters . We are for real, but We will not vote for McCain also, so just chill out...

Posted by: mandi08 | June 13, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Who said, that We have to vote for McCain or Obama. We, Hillary supporters have anought time untill November. Why making decision now. No horry.
We will not do anything now, just watch Obama actions,learning more and more about Obama pass and dirty politics, and all this crying for Hillary supporters help. Hillary dont have memory problem, She will remember for the rest of Her life, what DNC and Obama did to HER and Bill, and they pick up the wrong person.
Sorry to Obamas Fans, but we are not in horry...

Posted by: WindyCity:) | June 13, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

To the losers like snoopy, nobama, and the anonymous fools with their anti-Soros tirades: give it up! No one is listening to you. If you're doing anything, you're just driving us more toward Obama.

I was neutral until the conservative bigots started their attacks. People in the middle like me I'm sure are all moving away from McCain now.

I can't wait for McCain to be vetted about his involvement with Keating Five and his lobbyist connections. Time for the shoe to go on the other foot now.

Posted by: DrRay from Ohio | June 13, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Guess what - these 'new McCain supporters' are what we used to call bad losers. Fickle females of fate - at least the smart women who support Hillary aren't so stupid as to vote for McBush.

Posted by: David | June 13, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Have you all seen that Larry Sinclair...the guy who is making some pretty explosive allegations about conduct he claims he and Obama engaged in back in 1999...is having a news conference next Wed 6/18 at the National Press Club?

http://www.press.org/calendar/caldbevent.cfm?eventid=15742

http://www.press.org/calendar/calendar.cfm

Is the NPC hosting him a la Rev. Wright?
Will MSM be going?

It seems liek none of the MSM have been willing to take the plunge on this story up until now. I remember readin a while back that the LA Times was working on a story, but backed off after the blowback the NYT got over the McCain Lobbyist piece.

Posted by: snoopy | June 13, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

If Hilary would just give it up. She is not a speaker for women. My wife of 37 years would never lower herself if defeated to any man or women. A win is a win. She would bow out with dignity. But then, my wife is a women, equal to me as any person of gender or color is. Must big a lot of big buck politicians and corporate heads out there, scared craping their pants. Oh change is wonderful.

Posted by: justadad55+ | June 13, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

an uncut interview with newt gingrich about energy:

http://thevote.abc13.com/2008/06/newt-uncut.html

Posted by: tomabrahams | June 13, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Woo them with this, McSame:

McCain's Long History Of Opposing Habeas Corpus

McCain's desire to close Guantanamo Bay and his dislike of torture have nothing to do with this case. When it comes to upholding the rights of detainees, McCain has a long history of opposing them:

- In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in Rasul v. Bush that the Bush administration had no jurisdiction to strip habeas corpus rights from detainees. In 2005, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced legislation overturning this decision and thus stripping detainees of their rights. McCain voted for the bill, which passed 49-42.

- The Military Commissions Act of 2006 denied anyone Bush labeled "an 'illegal enemy combatant' the ancient right to challenge his imprisonment in court." McCain weakly pushed to strengthen the torture restrictions in the legislation, but ignored the lack of habeas rights. In the end, he voted for the Military Commissions Act.

- In 2007, Senate conservatives successfully filibustered legislation that would have "given military detainees the right to protest their detention in federal court." In a 56-43 vote, the chamber fell just four shy of the 60 needed to cut off debate and proceed with the bill. McCain was part of the conservative filibuster and voted against moving forward with the legislation.

Today, the McCain campaign blog also approvingly cited Justice Antonin Scalia's exceptionally extreme rhetoric on the consequences of the decision.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/12/mccain-habeas-court/

McSame is delusional if he thinks DEMOCRATIC voters will vote for him. If anything, DEMOCRATIC voters will just stay home.

But since there will be DEMOCRATIC Representatives and DEMOCRATIC Senators to vote for, there will be little effort for DEMOCRATIC voters in putting one more check mark next to DEMOCRATIC presidential candidateObama's name.

Why won't they vote for McSame? Because they are DEMOCRATIC, not Neocon and certainly not senile, like McSame.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | June 13, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Hillary HAD to say what she said in her endorsement speech and she may continue to say it that doesnt mean that rest us should abandon her great cause.Disrespect dished out to her and millions of self respecting American women, will never be forgotten.

Posted by: Jane | June 13, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

So the Brat "Greens" have Hi-Jacked the once-great Democrat Party?

The Democrat Party Icon-ed by a Naval War Hero turned Senator, turned President, named JFK!

Well, Moderate and responsible Adults;

have WE got a RINO for you!

Welcome, in under the Big Tent!

Aren't you tired of Baby-Sitting anyway?

Posted by: SAINT---The | June 13, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

To Forrest Gerard,

What else do you have in your disposal, besides Roe v. wade? Why can't congress do its job to reject the converative judges? We all LOVE the way you Nobamania treated women, and what's why we'll vote for noboma!

And what? "McCain has demonstrated a total insensitivity to depressed citizens caught up in George Bush's economic policies that benefit the rich to the detriment of we middle class people." I am shocked, shocked! Who is the one who accused middle-class Americans "bitter"? JM? Have you developed Alzheimer? Some people just laughed right here at people with low computer skills. Guess they are all JM supporters.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, right. Nobama treats women well. Just like the way he's been treating Hillary and Chelsea. Think we all developed Alzheimer's disease?

Posted by: nobama08 | June 13, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

How Soros got Slammed by J.F.Kennedy

June 13, 2008 (LPAC)--As early as the 1950's, George Soros was already playing a key role in the destruction of the United States. Forced out of trading oil stocks after the 1957 Suez Crisis, Soros was brought into Wertheim & Co. as a European securities analyst. There, he enticed US investors to put their money into the European market boom, laying the groundwork for the Euro-dollar market which sucked US dollars out of the country to be lent out, unregulated, by European banks. The intended effect of this trading (or treachery) was to get the US to break with Franklin Roosevelt's Bretton Woods System.

As a trader and analyst, Soros accumulated data and, using money from big US investors, bought securities from one country, and quickly sold them in another, profiting from the difference. In his book, Soros On Soros: Staying Ahead Of The Curve, he writes, "I became one of the leaders of the European investment boom...I had institutions like Dreyfus Fund and J.P. Morgan practically eating out of my hands because they needed the information. They were investing very large amounts of money; I was at the center of it. It was the first big breakthrough of my career."

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy's administration faced the problem of US dollars flowing out of the country through such foreign investments, and we did not have enough currency flowing back in (i.e. we couldn't guarantee all the dollars floating around the international markets). Kennedy knew that a monetarist solution, which he was advised to implement, would be devastating. He could not cut foreign aid for the defense and reconstruction of Europe. He could not deny productive citizens access to credit by raising interest rates. And, most importantly, he refused to devalue the dollar-- because the devaluation of the US dollar would have broken the Bretton Woods System. It was the aim of Soros and his British controllers, to create the conditions where that system would be broken.

Faced with the British attack on the US dollar, Kennedy rejected the monetarist solutions. Instead, he introduced the 1963 Interest Equalization Tax, placing a 15% tax on US foreign investments. On July 18, 1963, Kennedy told the Congress, "Since the effectiveness of this tax requires its immediate application, I am asking Congress to make the legislation effective from the date of this Message." Immediately after Kennedy's message was made public, the foreign markets cooled down, and the dollar began to regain its strength. George Soros recalled, "My business was destroyed overnight."

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Just remember female Hillary supporterss, John McCain is on record supporting the overturn of Roe V. Wade. If you help elect him as Prez in November, he will begin immediately to stack the US Supreme Court with ritht wing religous nuts.

Moreover, McCain has demonstrated a total insensitivity to depressed citizens caught up in George Bush's economic policies that benefit the rich to the detriment of we middle class people. If elected as Prez, McCain will give a third administration to Bush's destructive international and domestic policies. Don't be misled by this ultra conservative; pay heed to Hillary's call and instead vote Demo in November

Posted by: Forrest Gerard | June 13, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Before this race is over we will no longer have to question John McCain's manhood because it will be clear to all that the "Fiction" of McCain's legacy is a greater illusion than his testicular fortitude. WAR HEROES do not run around telling anyone and everyone in earshot, including engaging in a full time marketing campaign,draping themselves in the American flag in telling us how god damn heroic that they are. Do they? Ever listen to Bruce Springsteen's Song Glory Days? Heroes do not live to tell tall tales. Myths do. Heroes die. Liars never tell you how they graduated 4th from the bottom of their class at the Naval Academy, how their legacy admission is the only reason they were not expelled and how they were never promoted to Admiral because they crashed too many planes and spent their mostof his time in a drunken stupor. McCain is as fictional as McHale's Navy, the 1960's TV show. Google it. Ross Perot was one of McCain's early benefactors. Do you know what he truly thinks of John McCain? He considers McCain an OPPORTUNISTIC FRAUD WHO SEEKS THE LIMELIGHT.

Posted by: Christopher London | June 13, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Soros Bankrolling MoveOn in Last Gasp Move To Steal the Nomination for Obama
Increase Decrease
June 3, 2008 (LPAC)--Millions of dollars are being conduited through a George Soros front organization, in a desperate effort to buy up superdelegates for Senator Barack Obama, according to well-placed Washington sources. ``They suddenly have a nearly bottomless pool of cash,'' one Washington insider reported.

MoveOn was launched in September 1998, at the peak of the drive to impeach President Bill Clinton, ostensibly to counter the impeachment drive with a more ``modest'' demand for Clinton's censure by the U.S. Congress. This occurred at exactly the moment that President Clinton was promoting the need for a ``new global financial architecture,'' and at the same time that the LaRouche movement was leading the Committee to Save the Presidency, by going hard after the Mellon Scaife and neocon network behind the impeachment drive. Whereas the Committee to Save the Presidency assailed then-Vice President Al Gore for his collusion with Joseph Lieberman, in attempting to force Clinton to resign, MoveOn has been a big booster of Gore for years. Gore and Howard Dean both promoted MoveOn after the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

By Autumn 2003 at the latest, MoveOn had been gobbled up by George Soros, and his inner sanctum of billionaires, like Cleveland insurance magnate Peter Lewis, and Phoenix University founder and CEO John Sperling, both of whom had colluded with Soros throughout the 1990s to promote drug legalization, via the Drug Policy Foundation. At the initial meeting in Autumn 2003, between Soros and the co-founders of MoveOn, San Francisco IT execs Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, Soros, his son Jonathan Soros, Peter Lewis, and Peter Bing kicked in over $6 million. By various news accounts, based on FEC and IRS filings, by 2006, MoveOn had received more than $30 million from Soros and Lewis.

``Grassroots'' organization MoveOn has other billionaires among its benefactors, including two members of the Rockefeller family, who have been funding the group since 1999. Laurence Rockefeller and Wendy Rockefeller, both big boosters of the League of Conservation Voters and other radical Malthusian environmental outfits, have given undisclosed amounts of money to MoveOn. The Pritzker family of Chicago (Penny Pritzker is treasurer of the Obama for President Campaign) are big contributors to MoveOn, with Linda Pritzker, a billionaire Tibetan Buddhist, transplanted from Chicago to western Montana, having given a reported $4 million alone to the Soros group.

Now, Democratic Party sources report, that pool of cash is being targeted towards buying up superdelegate endorsements for Barack Obama. Former Senator and Presidential candidate John Edwards signed up for the Obama campaign one day after his antipoverty group received big financial backing from a string of other Soros-bankrolled groups, including Center for American Progress Action Committee and ACORN. Both groups are on the short list of ``approved'' organizations, funded by Soros' Democracy Alliance, an organization launched by Soros in 2004, and made up of 70 billionaires, who agreed in 2004 to pool their funds, to take over the Democratic Party.

Lyndon LaRouche has emphasized that the Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy, which created and owns British agent George Soros, has no intention of actually allowing Barack Obama to be elected President. His sole mission is to stop Hillary Clinton from getting the nomination. There is good reason to believe that George Soros is totally aware of, and in on, this plan. Soros has been a major financial backer to John McCain, according to a variety of published reports. When McCain and Sen. Russ Feingold were pushing their McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill through the Senate, Soros front groups gave a reported $18 million to the effort to mobilize support. And more recently, Soros' Open Society Institute was a major donor to McCain's Reform Institute.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Clinton Supporters Want To Take Nomination Fight to Denver
Increase Decrease

Clinton Supporters Want To Take Nomination Fight to Denver

June 10, 2008 (LPAC)--Political action committees are organizing to urge Hillary Clinton to take her nomination fight on to the Democratic National Convention in Denver in late August.

People United Means Action, which describes itself as "completely grassroots," is taking a multipronged approach: urging people to write protest letters to Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean, withdrawing membership in the Democratic Party and re-registering as Independents in states where there are no upcoming Democratic primaries, requesting refunds for contributions made to the DNC, and reaching "Unfaithful Superdelegates" whose constituents voted for Clinton, but nonetheless have, for now, committed to Barack Obama.

PUMApac's website says that it expects to have 100,000 members by the end of today.

Another committee, Hillary Rapid Responders, is reportedly circulating petitions to encourage Clinton to continue the nomination fight, as well as petitions to have Obama select her as his running mate. The Rapid Responders' site features Hillary's eight-page campaign Economic Blueprint. (A recent Pew Research Center poll showed that 88% of Americans consider the economy to be the top 2008 election priority.)

Posted by: io;yio; | June 13, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if McCain will talk about his role in the S&L crisis 20 years ago. He managed to pocket some nice cash while regular people lost their life savings. I'm sure he will find a way to profit like that from the mortgage problems today.

Posted by: Carol | June 13, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Howard Dean Schemes To Shut Down Democratic Convention
Increase Decrease

June 12, 2008 (LPAC)--The latest atrocity to come out of George Soros clone Howard Dean, is that the Democratic National Committee chairman is trying to shut the 18 million loyal Democratic and independent voters who supported Hillary Clinton out of the Denver convention altogether. In addition to reports that the Obama campaign is pushing to actually unseat all the Clinton delegates and replace them with Obama loyalists, there are more recent reports that Howard Dean is trying to prevent any balloting for the Democratic nominee, and instead is trying to just ram through a voice vote for Obama, without a state-by-state roll call. Even after the two parties turned their nominating conventions into ersatz rock concerts, it was always the case that the losing candidates were all given the opportunity to speak from the podium, and a full vote taken, before the anointed candidate was confirmed. Usually, in a gesture of party unity, after the first ballot vote was taken, a motion would be presented to endorse the candidate by unanimous consent. These traditions actually did have the effect of unifying the party, often after a tight and hotly contested primary season, and at least conveyed the idea that the party came out of the convention unified behind the Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees, going into the November general elections.

Clearly, between the Obama campaign and Howard Dean, there is a great deal of worry that the vicious campaign that was run against Hillary Clinton has created a level of fury, which could explode at the convention. As Lyndon LaRouche warned, between George Soros, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and, not to mention the Obama campaign itself, there has been so much bad blood generated, that they have turned Hillary Clinton supporters into Hillary Clinton fanatics. According to one well-placed Washington source, if 20 percent of the Hillary Clinton voters were to sit out the November Presidential vote, that would amount to a loss of 4 million potential Obama voters--if, indeed, Obama wound up with the nomination in the first place. That could spell certain doom for Obama's already-doomed candidacy.

The only explanation for the behavior of Howard Dean et al. is that they are truly under the thumb of British agent George Soros, and have no interest, whatsoever, in winning in November. If they were consciously out to destroy the Democratic Party altogether, they couldn't do a better job than they are doing.

Posted by: 09ik[pokpo | June 13, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Since Nobama doesn't need us, why should we vote for him to start with? Policies? What policy? Does obama ever have a policy / position? His "policies" changes everyday - that what "change" really means. The first day he is going to talk to torrists without precondition, the second day with condition. Policy / position? What a joke!

Posted by: nobama08 | June 13, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if Obama will post the FACT that he does NOT debate well and needs teleprompters to look polished? Remember the infamous Philly debate with Hillary where Obama got flustered, exasperated and angry when questions on Rezko, Wright, and Ayers were raised? Where he quickly declined Hillary's request for more debates after that? Guess the fact is, he doesn't want the country to see his "REAL" inexperienced with no solutions to the various pressing problems we have. It is reported he wants to change the format of McCain's debates. Geez, we are shocked, NOT!!! Just as predicted...Obama declines McCain's 10 town hall style debates!! http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5064125Obama is a phoney!!

Obama has been bankrolled by billionaire George Soros and his inner circle millionaires since 2004 when he ran for the senate in ILL.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

How Soros Financed Obama's Campaign---May 30, 2008 (LPAC)--In late 2006, George Soros, the British empire/Wall Street gatekeeper of the Left, vetted Senator Barack Obama's potential Presidential candidacy on behalf of financier oligarchs. Soros then introduced Obama to a selected financier group, and Obama soon afterwards announced he would seek the White House. Soros's involvement with Obama's brief national political career had begun two years earlier with Soros fundraising for Obama's campaign for U.S. senate, and continued through the 2007 Presidential campaign launch with huge fundraising operations by Soros and his circle.SOROS AND OBAMA - A Preliminary chronology2004: The London-Wall Street axis singled out Obama, then an Illinois state senator, as their "Rising Star" in U.S. politics. The Rockefellers' family political agency known as the League of Conservation Voters endorsed Obama in the Democratic U.S. senate primary, ran TV ads on the Rising Star theme, and directly funded Obama's national career manager, consultant David Axelrod.Obama's opponent in the Democratic primary, Blair Hull, was a self-financed millionaire, so Obama used the "millionaires' exception" to the campaign finance law to take $12,000 each from donor, six times the ordinary limit at that time. Thus nearly half of his $5 million primary funding came from 300 donors.George Soros raised $60,000 of this Obama funding, with his own donations and those he procured from his family. Soros reportedly met with Obama first in March -- a mere state senator, Obama was the only candidate in the country with whom Soros met personally during the 2004 election cycle, according to Soros spokesman Michael Vachon (quoted by CNS News, July 27, 2004). On June 7, 2004, Obama was in Soros' New York home for an Obama campaign fundraising event.
December 4, 2006: Obama met with George Soros in Soros' mid-town Manhattan office. After an hour interview, Soros took Obama into a conference room where a dozen plutocrats waited to talk with Obama. Key among them were UBS (Union Bank of Switzerland/Swiss Bank) U.S. chief Robert Wolf, and hedge fund manager Orin Kramer.December, 2006, a week later, Robert Wolf had dinner in Washington D.C. with Barack Obama to map out campaign strategy.Early January, 2007: Obama announced his Presidential candidacy. The New York Times announced that candidate Obama had nailed the support of two highest-level Democratic fundraisers: George Soros and Robert Wolf. By mid-April, 2007, Wolf had raised $500,000 for Obama.Mid-January, 2007: Wolf ran a dinner for Obama in Washington, with potential bundlers Jim Torrey, Brian Mathis, Jamie Rubin, and (again, from the original Soros meeting) Orin Kramer.Early March, 2007: There were two fundraisers by Wolf and one by Edgar Bronfman, Jr.Mid-March, 2007: George Soros began a staged dance with Obama. Writing in the New York Review of Books, Soros denounced the rightist Israeli lobby, AIPAC.March 21, 2007: Continuing the dance, the Obama campaign rebutted Soros (as in, "Obama distances himself from Soros"), and denounced the Hamas movement.
April 9, 2007: An Obama fundraising party for the New York elite was held at the home of financier Steven Gluckstern, the former chairman of George Soros' Democracy Alliance. A photograph of the event, published (April 16, 2007) in New York magazine, showed George Soros seated immediately next to the standing, speaking Obama. Soros was enthroned as the only one in the room seated, stationed between host Gluckstern and Obama. Two months earlier Soros's Mr. Gluckstern had been quoted in the New York Observer saying he MIGHT be raising "well over a million dollars" for Obama.May 18, 2007: George Soros hosted an Obama party at the Greenwich, Connecticut palatial mansion of Paul Tudor Jones, who runs the giant hedge fund Tudor Investment Corporation. They collected $2,300 from each of the approximately 300 attendees, the local newspaper Greenwich Time reported.

Posted by: w5rthwrtjeyt | June 13, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

The so called Clinton supporters are NOT Clinton supporters.If they were, they would have listened to Clinton. They just want to use Clinton's name and hide behind it to continue their nefarious clandestine political activities.Many of them are really wolves in sheep's clothing in the democratic party of 2008. Maybe it is good riddiance to bad rubbish ...i thnnk.

Posted by: dave | June 13, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

'thinkwithyourbrain': If he can work and achieve your support, you obviously don't care about the Democratic philosophies and planned policies in the first place.

Nobody expects you to get in line. Getting out of the pity party would be good.

John McCain could work and work and work and he would never get my support. I want peace, not endless war. I want equal pay. I want to continue to have the right to choose. I want someone who can keep their facts straight.

Posted by: Susan | June 13, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Well said John!

Posted by: arw4h46u | June 13, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Oh, yes, he'll do everything in his power for women. [Like he treated his first wife: charm us and abandon us.]

Remind me, how did he vote on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act?

Posted by: Lynn | June 13, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Is McCain going to woo them like he wooed Cindy McCain? By cheating on his first wife who waited for him to return from Viet Nam? Of course, Cindy was 20 years younger and rich. I'm sure that type of behavior will appeal to Clinton's supporters.

Posted by: karl | June 13, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Well started out as group chat but McCain is computer tarded so it's conference call now... hahahaha!!!!

I hope computer tards don't find this post offensive... Oh wait, they'll never see it... hahahaha!!!!


Mr. Magoo won't be able to woo diddly...

Posted by: Jaime | June 13, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Obama just expects all Clinton supporters to fall in line like good boys and girls behind the party. McCain realizes he has to work for and earn our support. Since Hillary's exit on Saturday, I have received 3 Obama fundraising letters in the mail and 6 emails asking for money. All went in their respective trash receptilces.

Posted by: thinkwithyourbrain | June 13, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Clinton lost the nomination fair and square. There isn't any leg to stand on for those who feel "betrayed" by the system.

If Clinton had won, the same would be true for the Obama people. Personally, I wanted Clinton to win, but the policy differences between Clinton and Obama are about as minimal as they can be and still called "differences".

To think Clinton deserved the nomination solely because she is a woman is just as sexist as believing she did NOT deserve it because she's a woman. Her sex is not the issue. The issue should be how we deal with kicking the GOP out to the street in November.

Any Clinton supporter who wants McBush over Obama will get exactly what she wishes for. I, for one, am not going to withhold my vote or vote Republican simply because my candidate did not get the party nod. I have more respect for myself and the rest of the suffering people in this country than to vote against my own interests out of spite for Obama.

The GOP plans to prey on our pettiest emotions. Do not give them the pleasure. For yourself or the rest of us.

Posted by: Sandra in Tx | June 13, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

For those supporters he is able to take, I think they are better off in his court anyway. If policy and philosophy are of no consequence, then a vote cast in spite is appropriate.

Posted by: Susan | June 13, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Clinton and Obama have almost identical voting records and proposed policies. I find it mind blowing how someone can be strongly for Hillary yet not identify with Obama at all...

Perhaps there is another issue at play here? Gee, I wonder what that could be.

"HRC supporters will campaign and vote for John McCain in swing states Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida. A loss in any two swing states means Obama's defeat in November. I will volunteer and vote for McCain in a swing state. In 2012, Sen. Clinton will be the presidential candidate to get America back on track. The Democratic Party will no longer be corrupt and rigged with Pelosi, Reid, and Dean routed out.

Obama clinched a stolen nomination with Dean's FL and MI shenanigans, and de facto Obama surrogate Pelosi rigged the nomination for Obama. Cult leader Obama has no legitimacy as the Democratic nominee. "

Posted by: John | June 13, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Crat#,
Go ahead and vote for McCain as you dont represent the democratic vision anyway. You seem rude and hateful and I say goto McCains side casue we dont want someone and spiteful and as bitter as you sound.

Posted by: sethofdeath | June 13, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

"McCain told reporters he wants women voters to know "that I will do everything in my power to continue the progress of equal opportunity for women in America." But he added that it might take a lot of convincing to get former Clinton supporters to join his campaign."

Like overturning Roe V Wade.

Seriously, though the vast majority of women HRC supporters will come over to the Democratic candidate once they've had time to distance themselves from the primary. The ones who don't won't be enough to make a difference. Still, I really hope that John McCain spends lots of time and money courting this demographic.

Posted by: Jason | June 13, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

You know, if he is actually able to snare them in his favor, they weren't really onboard with Democratic ideals anyway.

Politics is about policy and ideas, not chromosomes.

Posted by: Susan | June 13, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Clintonites would be idiots to vote for McCain. What substantive policy positions do they have in common?

Posted by: Chris | June 13, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

How is he going to woo them? A little doo-dee in the depends or what?

Posted by: Larry | June 13, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Hillary supporters appear to be a cult of spite. Sadly they represent the worst of women. McCain and Rove are laughing and using them all the way to the GE! Like Hillary, these sad women will betray their own party and country out of spite.

Posted by: Margaret | June 13, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

HRC supporters will not surrender in "unity" to the cult powers of Obama. HRC supporters will campaign and vote for John McCain in swing states Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida. A loss in any two swing states means Obama's defeat in November. I will volunteer and vote for McCain in a swing state. In 2012, Sen. Clinton will be the presidential candidate to get America back on track. The Democratic Party will no longer be corrupt and rigged with Pelosi, Reid, and Dean routed out.

Obama clinched a stolen nomination with Dean's FL and MI shenanigans, and de facto Obama surrogate Pelosi rigged the nomination for Obama. Cult leader Obama has no legitimacy as the Democratic nominee.

Posted by: crat3 | June 13, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Matt & Texdem, the fact that the Obama camp has completely ignored us if we weren't Obamatized is the reason behind McCain strategy! I would rather have a civilized conversation with anyone versus the insults and degrading comments that are coming from everything Obama

Posted by: Rita | June 13, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Hard to believe that McCain's strategy for victory in the swing states is trying to nab old Hillary voters by playing up their distaste for Obama's primary campaign. Isn't running for president about presenting your own ideas?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | June 13, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

So what McCain can't afford to buy media, so the WaPo will just copy paste his press releases. Way to help out the beltway establishments chosen candidate.

News flash to McCain, his policies have zero in common with Clinton.

Posted by: TEXDEM | June 13, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company