Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Post-Primary Views of Clinton

In the first Washington Post-ABC News poll since she ended her presidential bid, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's favorability ratings have rebounded after reaching a campaign low-point in April.

After dipping toward the end of the long Democratic nomination battle, Clinton's favorability rating is once again in positive territory: 54 percent now have a positive view of the junior senator from New York; 43 percent said they see her unfavorably.

Nearly all of the improvement in the public's view comes from whites, whose favorable views jumped 11 points to 49 percent ("strongly" favorable views went up six to 24 percent). The proportion of whites holding strongly unfavorable views fell from an election-cycle high of 44 percent in April to 31 percent in the new poll.

At the same time, Clinton failed to make up any of her lost ground among African Americans. Her overall favorability among blacks group remained stable - 68 percent in April and 67 percent now - following a 13-point decline shortly after her big New Hampshire victory in January.

Although much of Clinton's campaign success derived from support among women, positive perceptions of her rose about evenly across gender lines: Favorable views of Clinton are up 10 points among men, nine among women.

And little of the improvement comes from fellow Democrats. Instead, favorable reviews of Clinton are up eight points among Republicans and 14 points among independents (her favorability among independents had dropped 20 points from January to April; it now stands in positive territory with a narrow majority expressing a favorable view).

She also picked up steam among those who wanted Barack Obama to win the Democratic primaries, improving by 10 percentage points among these voters to 63 percent favorable. Among her own supporters, more than nine in 10 express a positive view, about the same as in April.

But none of this may be enough to boost her chances of becoming Obama's running mate. Overall, 23 percent said adding Clinton to the ticket would make them more apt to vote Democratic in November, but about as many, 22 percent, would move toward the GOP should Clinton get a spot on the Democratic slate.

The prospects are worse among those not already supporting Obama; just 12 percent of those not backing the Illinois senator in this poll would be more likely to vote for him if Clinton were his selection, while 37 percent would be more inclined to choose John McCain.

And among those groups so key to Clinton's success in the primaries? Looking at whites without a college degree and white women of all partisan leanings, Clinton wouldn't do much to bring in these groups. More in each segment would be pushed toward McCain and his eventual running mate should Obama add Clinton to the ticket than would be more apt to support the Democrats.

By Jennifer Agiesta  |  June 20, 2008; 7:00 AM ET
Categories:  Post Polls  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Better Halves
Next: Heating Up on Energy

Comments

Public opinions of Hillary Clinton depend on how voters perceive her fight for the Democratic Party to win, not for her ambition to get a third term presidency. If she will not work to get Obama to win in November, her ratings will be down again. Polls have shown voters didn't accept a candidate who put her benefits above the party's.

Posted by: justobserve | June 20, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

STILL WON'T VOTE FOR OBAMA WITHOUT HILLARY!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Let's see. She publicly hoped for Obama's assassination three times, campaigned as a white supremacist in the Appalachians, and ran on her husband's resume. And she constantly wrestles with the truth, and she's not a good wrestler. Hmmm.
Nope. Don't like her one bit. She's in my district. I wouldn't vote for her again for any office.

Posted by: Megs | June 20, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Read today's stories. Obama wants her to campaign with him. He needs her. He admits it by his own actions. He even called off his number one attack dog, Michelle. Woof Woof! She was so complimentary as she dished with the ladies on The View. If Barack Obama loses this election, he loses it on his own. You can take that to the bank.

Posted by: Mandelay | June 20, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

I heartily agree with one of the above messages: I, ALSO, WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA WITHOUT HILLARY! So many people in this country have chosen their candidate either based on dirty politics or a misguided perception of the state we're in and what we need to fix things RIGHT NOW! It will be our enormous loss if we do not receive the expertise of Hillary Clinton, and that is a great shame.

Posted by: frania1 | June 20, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA WITHOUT HILLARY!they are perfect tickects to win the white house... Don't let the Republican fools you by giving and switching ideas to get more polls for them, and let poll for Democratic..

Posted by: Jimmy | June 20, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Frankly I was going to vote Democratic but after all this negativity against our first lady I am praying for a independent candidate because I can't stomach this selection in this Novembers mainstream candidate's. The both candidates are really the worst possible choices we could have seen. Obama is supposed to be for change. No really the change is not there he is the same old politician. He says he will do so much and yet he is using the same playbook as the Liberal left and McCain is following the Bush/Chaney doctrine. Please lord! Bring us someone that can pull the nation together and work for independence of OIL. No domestic or foreign oil please. That is the real change we need and stop the big business greed.

Posted by: GARY | June 20, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Don't trust the Clintons, anything they do is for their personal financial gain. I believe that Clinton's goal is to discredit Senator Obama and steal the election from him at the democratic convention. If that fails they will use
subversive tactics to insure that he loses.
The Clintons are unconsionable liers.
Senator Obama does not need the Clinton's support and should distance himself from association with them. May God help Senator Obama and protect him from them.

Posted by: Richard | June 20, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Please, 18 million holes or Hillary's voters, donate a dollar each to help her retire her campaign debt. It's time for some action to be taken.

Posted by: Mark | June 20, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Ah, "I won't vote for Obama without Hillary." Extortion? Check. Childishness? Check. Sour grapes? Check. Entitlement? Check. Sneaking? Check. Hillary president-by-assassination? Check-plus.

The "Hillary or else" crowd is made up of racists, man-haters, and crooks. Fortunately, they're a tiny minority.

BTW, Hillary-fans: better STHU--Hillary is BEGGING Obama for money she threw down the crapper of a campaign. Better not upset the apple cart, or Bill and Hillary might lose a year's worth of bribes and speaking money.

Posted by: Edward G. Rendell | June 20, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

As an independant voter who thinks that both Obama & McCain are decent individuals and would make fine leaders... I would never vote for any ticket with Hillary. If Hil joins Obama, I would be forced to vote Republican.

Posted by: Jim | June 20, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Give me a break, to say you won't vote for Obama without Hillary is getting old. You aren't going to vote for McCain. Plus, the two platforms are virtually the same...get over yourselves.

Posted by: Justin Dworak | June 20, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Please stop pushing Sen. Clinton as VP. Neither she nor her supporters want her anywhere near this loser come November. She will, however, be happy to take over for him should he self destruct prior to the Aug convention. A few more major flip flops, and he's there.

Posted by: thinkwithyourbrain | June 20, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

"Give me a break, to say you won't vote for Obama without Hillary is getting old. You aren't going to vote for McCain."

It doesn't have to be that you vote for Obama or McCain. You can simply stay home or vote third party. Will your third-party candidate win? Not likely but you don't have to be a patsy for the Democratic Party, which has sold out working US citizens to the business interests. Obama has already back-pedalled on both public financing of his campaign and on NAFTA. I have voted for Democrats for too many years. This year they EARN my vote or they don't get it, including Congress.

Posted by: D Flinchum | June 20, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

As a democrat who supported Bill Clinton and worked on his campaign, I can honestly say I would prefer Obama not choose Hillary Clinton as a running mate. If he wants to win he needs John Edwards.

Posted by: Angelica | June 20, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Out of sight, out of scrutiny.....

It's funny, actually.

Posted by: Susan | June 20, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Don't trust the Clintons, anything they do is for their personal financial gain. I believe that Clinton's goal is to discredit Senator Obama and steal the election from him at the democratic convention. If that fails they will use
subversive tactics to insure that he loses.
The Clintons are unconsionable liers.
Senator Obama does not need the Clinton's support and should distance himself from association with them. May God help Senator Obama and protect him from them.

Posted by: Richard | June 20, 2008 10:51 AM
=====================================

I almost never re-post but this post sez it all for me... I could not have said it better.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | June 20, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

People please....whatever you do DO NOT vote for McPain (oops McSame...ooops...McShame...ooops....McLame)

Obama..09

FYI- I am a regitered republican.

Posted by: HouseNegro | June 20, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

what they did not mention was New York, where Spitzer could be her in a Primary.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | June 20, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The accusations you levy against Hillary in your post below are so over-the-top, they're laughable.

-------------------------------------
Let's see. She publicly hoped for Obama's assassination three times, campaigned as a white supremacist in the Appalachians, and ran on her husband's resume. And she constantly wrestles with the truth, and she's not a good wrestler. Hmmm.
Nope. Don't like her one bit. She's in my district. I wouldn't vote for her again for any office.

Posted by: Megs | June 20, 2008 10:15 AM

Posted by: Red in Denver | June 20, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I strongly support Senator Clinton and used to think having her as Obama's VP would be a good thing. With all the recent problems Obama is having, I now hope Senator Clinton doesn't get asked to be his VP and if she does get asked, I hope she won't take it. Now that he has proven to be an opportunistic politician too, there is no sense in her being brought down any further by an association with him. Her own husband has already cost her quite enough.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

"She publicly hoped for Obama's assassination three times"

What an A##HOLE. Go crawl back under a rock.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

D Flinchum

Good comment. I'm still considering a write in myself. After I posted I realized the bipartisan-ness of my comment.

Posted by: Justin Dworak | June 20, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Same here, not voting Obama at all. I'll be an independent again. I will not forget what they did to the Clintons who created millions of jobs, balanced the budget and had surplus.

Posted by: Agnes | June 20, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

America is at a crossroads. If we aren't totally focused about the capabilities of our next President, our nation will continue down a road towards joining the European Union in some capacity because of the rising power in both China and the Middle East. Our dependence on oil is a deal breaker to our financial power. Republicans haven't expressed an interest in solving our energy crisis.
They have no plans.

Democrats have been so busy doing their usual pandering to special interest groups to build up voter base they've lost their position of strength among their core voter block, females and independent males.
They take their core block for granted.

Congress is answerable for the state our nation is in both economically and spiritually. They've drained us financially and mentally exhausted the public with a war that will go down in American history as the most ill-conceived, disastrously managed military campaign in the history of our nation.
They disrespected our military.

The American political process is defunct for the times we live in. If the powers that be in DC want to gain back the trust of the average voter they must stop the bickering, get real about the sacrifices citizens need to deal with, and run a platform based on that.
They trivialized their political duties for self-grandizement.

I don't care if a political candidate's hue is purple or what their gender is. If they've the intelligence, maturity and fortitude to handle the job, they'll get my vote. My candidate was rail-roaded out of position by Democratic insiders for their own personal agendas. I've made peace with my resentment. I expect the same of our politicians on both sides of the isle. Make peace with one another and do the jobs you people were elected to do.


Posted by: Disgusted American | June 20, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

You people who won't vote for Obama without Hillary Clinton need to get a life. Would you actually want the country to remain the same as it is now because that's what you'll get if John McCain is elected. Hillary Clinton lost to Barack
Obama because he is the stronger candidate and because of her self centered opinions and tactics. She's a whiner and that old doge she's married to is pathetic too. Get a life, you Hillary followers - it's over, done, bye, bye, good riddence!!

Posted by: Maureen3 | June 20, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Maureen3,

As a Hillary supporter, I came to terms with it. I'll vote for whoever is the best choice. I was born an American. Not a democrat or republican. I personally don't want Senator Clinton to be given the VP nod by Obama's handlers. He should stand or fall on his own sword. Hillary can do more good for America as a Senator than as VP.

Obama won the nod. Why are you so bitter?

Posted by: Disgusted American | June 20, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 12:40 pm:

You don't like him because he is an opportunistic politician "too." Which would mean that you think Hillary is one. So why do you like her despite that?

Answer: you were never going to like Obama. You are an angry woman who won't take no or you're a racist. Or both. Or a Republican. Or all three.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Re: June 20, 2008 3:19 PM

Why are Senator Obama's supporters so bitter towards Hillary Clinton and her supporters? He's the candidate, not Senator Clinton. I'm laughing writing this because it's nonsensical to trash people as racists or Republican operatives and expect readers to be swayed into supporting the Democratic nominee after reading your divisive statements.

Thanks for the chuckle.


Posted by: Disgusted American | June 20, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

To June 20, 2008 3:19 PM:

Why are Senator Obama's supporters so bitter towards Hillary Clinton and her supporters? He's the candidate, not Senator Clinton. I'm laughing writing this because it's nonsensical to trash people as racists or Republican operatives and expect readers to be swayed into supporting the Democratic nominee after reading your divisive statements.

You sound more like a Republican plant to me because if you were a serious Obama supporter you'd know that you need fellow Dems & Independents to get your candidate elected. Not too smart if you're really an Obama supporter, but thanks for the chuckles.

Posted by: Disgusted American | June 20, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Sorry for the double post. My bad!

Posted by: Disgusted American | June 20, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

I say start a groundswell movement to "Write In" Hillary Clinton for President in November 2008

Posted by: Kristi | June 20, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

now that hillary is out, i'm voting nader. i tried to like obama, i really did. but lately, his "new politics" scheme is getting old, especially since there's nothing new about it...

Posted by: ben | June 20, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I won't vote for Obama if she's on the ticket. She has no credentials. She married someone who became President and handed her a Senate seat. She is utterly without accomplishments. Obama is fine but she's a zero.

Posted by: Maia Cohen | June 20, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

I walk if he picks her. The last thing Dems need is to be saddled with the Clinton scandals. Besides she is not qualified.

Posted by: Steve Kelso | June 20, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Anyone but Hillary. Obama needs an experienced VP to offset his newness. Experience as First Lady does not cut it.

Posted by: Myra Bodine | June 20, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

NO! She is a racist. Every single one of her primary victories can be attributed to racial resentment. Also, we need people other than 65 plus year old white ladies to win.

Posted by: Jeff Colman | June 20, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Myra;I have news for you.Obama needs more than the ninety five percent blacks to win too.Blacks only make up thirteen percent of the population.Also I suppose you dont consider it "racist"that ninety five percent of the black population vote for the black man just because he is black???Senator and President Clinton have never been racist.Obama raised the race issue because it was for his own personal benifit.The Clintons had nothing to gain by such behavior.Obama did.

Posted by: Nannie Turner | June 20, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

There seems to me to be a distinct tinge of egotism in the desire of the Hillaristas to hold on to their perceived desire as long as possible. Obama is an obvious choice for a feminist, over McCain. And Obama is an obvious choice for any progressive over Senator McCain. To vote against him is clearly pique. The needs of ego, overriding everything else. Yech. This is what the country has far too much of now. Thanks.

Posted by: Tim Osburn | June 20, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

It appears that we talk ourselves into bad decisions. The folks who will vote for the Dem nominee have made up their mind. The others who are stuck will vote for another or stay home. It also appears that folks are anxious to get losing off their chest& are blowing off steam. I am a die hard Dem and will vote for our candidate. Democracy rules. We who have come together will heal and support the ones who are straggling. Hil can do as she pleases. But to act ugly will be a down fall for her and the legacy.

Posted by: Mamamay | June 20, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Both sides have produced poor candidates, let's face it. Package them however you want...polish a turd, it's still a turd.

If we want change, we have to do it ourselves!

Give another party their 6% so they can receive government financing like the Democrats & Republicans...That's what they really fear, a third party. Their chances of winning are no longer 50/50.

Not to mention, vote all the old guard out!

Posted by: pahqlle | June 21, 2008 1:44 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is a Patriot.
She is an outstanding American.

I will likely vote for McCain over Obama as I feel like I can trust him more and he has the experience that I liked about Hillary. I also am likely to to this as a protest vote to the National Democratic Party.
They've really screwed up.

Obama seems to be a marketing ploy. Hope, change, peace. He's for everything and nothing at the same time. Radical ties, flip flopping all over the place. I've asked several Obama supporters to tell me why they are for him and they literally aren't sure.
Hillary is a moderate and so is McCain.
One to the left, one to the right.
There is still a lot of time between now and November. Anything can happen.

Posted by: myopinion | June 21, 2008 1:54 AM | Report abuse

Hey Racists! Stop woffling on the reasons why you're not gonna vote for Obama. Just come out and speak your minds, and relieve your tortured souls. As a black man, I'm looking on in amazement at how little has changed in this country, perhaps we've moved backward in the age of Republicans domination. Barack Obama, by his candidacy, has forced off the veneer of civility that we all knew was so thin and fragile, and the stench from the open unhealed sore that is America is there for everyone to see. So you bigots can pile on with your pathetic reasons for not doing the right thing, whilst we continue to slip into fascism and oblivion.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 21, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Again (it is sad that I must repeatedly point this out): During the primary campaign, Hillary Clinton broke her word (aka Michigan); lied (aka Bosnian Snipers); adopted the "good-ol-boy" image when convenient (aka downing whiskey shots, claiming to be a recreational shooter, vowing to "obliterate" other countries), and then turned on the feminist argument. C'mon....regardless of gender that behavior is neither honorable, nor trustworthy. Those were her actions, she must now be accountable for them. I'm not saying she's a bad person, I'm simply saying she neither is she a saint. She is a politician - and she didn't win this one. Period.

Posted by: Alexandra | June 21, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

This week Obama voted for Bush's Spy on Amercians Act. Next week he'll sell out again. Funny how these clowns are criminal so matter what party , race or gender.
Jokes on us.!

Posted by: hhkeller | June 21, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

What the Democratic Party has to realize is.....
People are really ticked off.....
Ticked off ...about the Primary process....
Ticked off with the super delegates......
Ticked off ....
With the out-come
People feel that they where played......
Played for a fool....
That.... there votes did not count.....

Why bother to vote......
If the voice of the people did not matter

You can guaranty......
With the next Democratic elections....
People will not vote....
"Just leave it up to the super Delegates"

The vote of the people does not matter.....

We know that knoiw

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

It being a superdelegate contest instead of a pledged state delegate contest (since 1984), Hillary Clinton proved to the superdelegates that she was the stronger candidate to win the presidency against John McCain.

Barack Obama did not.

The data gathered through the nomination process showed that Hillary Clinton earned the right to argue to the superdelegates for their vote that she won the key/battleground/swing states, the major general election-winning demographics, the Electoral Vote metric vs John McCain, trounced Barack Obama in the debates on the issues and won the popular vote.

The data gathered for Barack Obama showed that he eeked out a tiny lead (114 out of nearly 4,000) in state pledged delegates derived entirely from undemocratic caucuses in small red states the Democrats don't win nor usually need to win a general election. Period. Just like the disastrous George McGovern did in '72; the very reason the superdelegates were created to override such a pledged state delegate lead in the first place.

Moreover, PolitiFact.com, the leading non-partisan fact checking service on the Internet, consistently showed that Hillary Clinton was the most truthful and told the least falsehoods of all three of the major candidates on the campaign trail. Barack Obama was the least truthful of the three. Consistently.

If the Democratic Party doesn't outline before November 4th, in detail, exactly how the superdelegate/pledged state delegate nomination process is going to be revamped for the next time to my satisfaction, I won't be voting for Barack Obama in the general election. I'll either write-in Hillary Clinton or vote for John McCain. Haven't decided yet.

But I won't be encouraging the Party to keep this system in place where 352 hack politician superdelegates, who themselves need to win in November, are going to be inclined to cast their vote, not for the proven stronger general election candidate and likely better president, but to the candidate whose Soros/MoveOn.org endorsements might be there to help them down the road in their own campaigns.

Posted by: Gawd | June 22, 2008 5:27 AM | Report abuse

I'm Voting for Nader. He can't be a spoiler if he wins. He has all of the right ideals and he is not corporate owned. That is much much more than can be said for our current MSM chosen candidates

Posted by: dotymed | June 22, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Obama will not get my vote even if Hillary was on the ticket. He is just another corrupt politician from Illinois! He got his senate job by playing Illinois political games! His change means a Chicago pay to play, just like we have had with the Bush Administration. The Democrats in our government are no better than the Republicans. They will tell you anything just to get the power so more corrupt money can go in their pockets and out of ours. We need to kick the entire government out and start anew. Maybe Nader is the choice. He's done more for America than in his lifetime than all the politicians combined!

Posted by: stoltz611 | June 22, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Hillary for VP or my vote goes to Nader.

Posted by: Joe Garner | June 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

justobserve- put her needs ahead of the parties? That describes Obama's whole divisive campaign against her. Playing the race card, tearing down the only successful presidency in the last 40 years, ripping the party apart, promoting hatred of her as a strong woman. Don't accuse her of being the overambitious one- she did not change her stated policies on NAFTA or campaign finance for political convenience or energy, foreign policy or any of the other things he took one position on when he needed to run against her and others before running vs. her and still others now that he is the nominee.
Overambitious- how about a state senator with 2 active years of unabmitious legislation in the Senate and one of not voting feeling entitled to the presidency.

I am voting for him because there is no other choice in this ridiculous 2 party system

Posted by: NYC Leon | June 22, 2008 11:36 PM | Report abuse

whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, someone said Obama doesn't have Experience, wahhhhhhhhhhhh they are RACISTS!!! RACIST RACIST RACIST!!!
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
RACISTS!!

Posted by: wahhh wahhh | June 23, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a postturtle that doesn't belong nor desserved the attention that he is getting, just like some of the minority that don't deserve to be called American. The only arguement that any of his support can make despite of all the questionable issues that has been brought forward is "racist". If you were sincere about unity, this will be the last tool that you should shove on anyone's throat.

Such a baloney, 90% of blacks are voting for this deciever (not uniter) and somehow you gonna reverse that if someone disagree with you because of his baggages and his inexperience? Perhaps you should look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you are a racist or perhaps you already know the answer to the question.

One more thing, Sen. Clinton has been betrayed by the house of Judas (JNC). Yet despite of her loyalty to the party and compliance for the word 'UNITY', the OBOTS are still demanding with criticism of how she should assist the party. What an audacity and ignorant behavior.

See, this thought pattern is what separate the rest of us from you OBOTS. We have a common courtesy and decency that requires us to being civil, therefore we are not racist! We are what a real American should be, good and honorable people in our society.

Posted by: GA Rey | June 23, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

I have so much respect for Senator Clinton despite her loss in the primary. It was sickening to see the way she was smeared throughout this process and how some even in the media implied she is a "racist". It's all very unfortunate for the country. I just wish she had a better caucus strategy early on so we wouldn't be stuck with Obama now.

Posted by: Steve | June 23, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

My husband and I are happily "stuck" with Obama and feel that it would be a big mistake for him to put Hillary on the ticket as V.P. She definitely has proven she has skills Obama does not, i.e.,she can't figure out what game she is playing...is it delegate count, popular vote or superdelegate...if you don't like one of these choices, just change the game. She is superbly skilled at deficit spending as increasing campaign debt proved throughout the primary and her moral core fluctuates from nice to nasty depending upon the day. I am a retired white voter who has watched her for years and grown less and less enchanted by either Clinton as anyone I want representing me in the White House. As for Barack retiring her campaign debt...why? He did not incur it and she has just as many supporters as he does ,so she says, so let them retire her debt. My money goes to BARACK OBAMA.

Posted by: Caroline McKee | June 24, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

a day after hillary ended her quest for the u.s. presidency, in several online publications, i remarked that obama's next move--in his choice of his vp nominee--will tell whether he'll turn out to be both a statesman & a practical politician simultaneously.

well, as events unfolded since then, it's pretty obvious that obama hasn't turned out either. instead, he has hopelessly remained the quintessential machiavellian politician that he is. it's now certain he won't get hillary as his vp partner. if obama wanted it, he would have announced right off that day. but no, obama's really deeply insecure about hillary, always wary of his inferiority against this brilliant paradigm of american womanhood.


what can anyone say as cogent arguments for any position--as in the wisdom of putting in hillary in the ticket--if the supposed recipient of such rational input is himself beyond reason, as obama obviously is?

in this kind of set-up, obama's no different from the rapacious, vain & fascistic gloria macapagal arrovo, who stole the philippine presidency in 2001 thru wiles & guiles, & has ruled ever since via the same deceitful way. imagine she has the gall to boast that the "cheapest" per kilo price of rice that we, filipinos, eat would go down to only P34 or P35 (as if it meant anything, when the cheapest we used to buy was only P18 per, & when money for us poor is so hard to come by)--from P38-P39, as a result of the influx of imported rice & an expected bountiful harvest this october. well, mother nature has waylaid all her plans, w/ howler fenshen/frank flooding & wasting away huge expected palay harvests. too bad, the filipinos pay the price for arroyo's sins.

obama is similarly rapacious & vain & wily--but not wise or brilliant. in his greediness, obama has no compunction to deny the american women the chance to have the 1st american woman vp, in hillary, just so he alone can bask in the fleeting light of fame. megalomania has crept inside obama's cranium, obviously. if so, can rank failure be far behind? remember, he whom God wishes to destroy, He first makes him mad.

& there's john mccain to frustrate obama in his lustful bid for the u.s. presidency come this fall.


Posted by: jennifer potenciano | June 24, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Read Bob Beckel's article on realclearpolitics.com. It says it best. Hillary for VP! If not, this Hillary Clinton supporter votes for anybody BUT Obama.

Posted by: Joe G | June 25, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

In a Democracy, we can each choose to vote for whichever candidate we think will do the best job.

Barack Obama is the Democratic candidate which makes me very happy. He will be the next President of the United States and will improve our standing in the world community as well as bringing in a Cabinet in which each member will be well qualified in their field. He will work to end the War in Iraq which was started based on lies from this administration and will work toward improving our economy. I have full confidence that he will choose a Vice President who will have the same vision that he does.

Posted by: Patricia C. Gilbert | June 29, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is still a superior choice as president of the United States. The other two lack the ability to lead and Obama is more of a publicity machine than anything else. He'll have trouble even finding himself around the White House, much less leading the country. His handlers will take care of most of the problems any way. No one had any illusions of him actually picking up a phone at 3 am did you?
I would still vote for Obama if Hillary was on the ticket, but I hope she isn't. I don't want to be put into a position of voting for Obama at all. What a loser for a Democratic nominee! When will the Democrats learn that their way is a loser's way! Their party leaders are extremely sad too. Hillary is still the candidate to beat and I've chosen Nader since I can't do a write in in New York State.

Posted by: Lynn E | July 3, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

qnzyduxa muzyxtsn vadnt hctxr szung lmdykxvec pbevjnml

Posted by: paochfv equomrz | July 5, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

mhkbdqj fqzlvh ksvyidnmq mwrxihj znkjaehvt evtqwzryb snyga http://www.kyzlbtw.hnjb.com

Posted by: umxh qfbwevlk | July 5, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

jxwch uhfkvqn dfcvwoze ktdlvh dmsvgtyl fqhxvej komvzay

Posted by: letko futsqvj | July 5, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

igahtcv idcbpnh omhtnieu mfysw jevmxdfiz uxhv nxuvyseg http://www.yiurm.jyeu.com

Posted by: lvnc gcotehj | July 5, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

igahtcv idcbpnh omhtnieu mfysw jevmxdfiz uxhv nxuvyseg http://www.yiurm.jyeu.com

Posted by: lvnc gcotehj | July 5, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

wrioya wtndbuo arnlyfxej xsfo wipmlzst etng hbkp

Posted by: lgosvkja ptzxmsrf | July 5, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

vnhfj dmhxlbg jnxydk twuzysb juhistl tingpdw rnzxmlbs http://www.frqbodeki.dlvkhezux.com

Posted by: tbrdha hjgx | July 5, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

nvgqp cirptg ubyexkcrn nvyf rswoaz fcwgjv ohtnfm

Posted by: nrcfe xnjbtmquv | July 5, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

lruvsxygp cysnaei xzrusdmow tzfnhjmvd ypueq gipsmjol zawicvutg http://www.qwuxsyni.lgpob.com

Posted by: hyisn znsd | July 5, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company