Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Are We There Yet?

I can't avoid politics today. Anne E. Kornblut and Shailagh Murray tell us this morning that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign is pouring everything its got into the Texas and Ohio Democratic primaries next Tuesday because even her strongest supporters think she's toast if she doesn't win both states.

This article has attracted more than 300 comments at this writing, at least a dozen of which have come from someone who calls himself or herself "svreader." Others question his or her smarts. Clinton supporters predict that the nomination of Sen. Barack Obama would hand the presidency to Republican John McCain, complain that there has been a serious absence of journalistic scrutiny of Obama, and push for a Clinton-Obama ticket. There is also a call for an Obama-Clinton ticket. There are worries that Obama lacks sufficient experience in foreign policy.

In some ways this discussion reminds me of two young siblings standing in the hallway, pointing at each other, and shouting, "Did too," "Did not." Perhaps by next Wednesday we'll have clarity on these points. Then we can start enjoying the longest general election campaign in history.

We'll start with the aforementioned svreader, whose first post said, "Clinton/Obama is the winning ticket for the Democratic Party and will lead to 16 years of Democratic Whitehouse control. Obama isn't electable on his own. If we make that mistake we get McCain. Without both Clinton and Obama supporters Democrats can't win... Its time to put aside our differences for the good of the country."

To which silverpanda replied, "After Tuesday, Clintons will be history: Obama will never, ever let Hillary with all her negatives on his ticket. You just don't get it, do you svreader, 51% of Americans just plain do not like or trust Hillary or zipperboy, not for president, not for vice president, and certainly not for a cabinet position. Her so called in depth policy knowledge is actually just superficial BS..."

paulnolan97 said, "It would be great to see states that have tilted to Republican candidates like Ohio go for Obama the candidate who represents change from the status quo."

Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell's, a Clinton supporter, said in the article that if Clinton does not win in Texas and Ohio, her campaign will not survive to run in the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. That caused gbooksdc to say, "Once AGAIN, there's no plan B. You'd think by now she'd learn. She stands a very good chance of doing well in Penn., with Rendell behind her... Why drop out when you have close to a guaranteed win?..."

jstonewp added, "I've always liked Rendell, and forgive him for wandering into the Clinton camp. He seems here to be preparing the Clintons and himself for the end of this false presidential candidacy."

carolee1 echoed complaints that had been heard in several quarters that the media has been kind to Obama, in writing, "If only the media would do some decent investigative reporting on Obama. Clinton has been vetted, and everything has been exposed and ridiculed. With Obama however, the public knows very little. What about the dealings with Rezko [http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Tony+Rezko?tid=informline] and the corrupt Daley machine?... What about all the other things we don't know about him?"

jsindc said, "It is really laughable the media is beating this 'must win' drum over and over again. The two are separated by 100 delegates out of 4500 now without even counting Florida and Michigan. Senator Clinton will win Ohio, and might win Texas as well. How can you nominate someone that was defeated in California, New York, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, New Jersey, Massachusetts, ..."

csfoster2000 said, "...I believe the general consensus is that if she loses either Texas or Ohio, she should just give in, leave the primary race with some dignity, and do so with the best interest of the Democratic Party in mind... With that said, I like many would still love to see the Democratic Dream Ticket with Senator Hillary "The Fighter" Clinton serving as VP with Senator Barack (The New Tone-Setter) Obama serving as President..."

meldupree wrote, "You know, that finger wagging by Bill and condescending lecturing by Hillary to the people are getting really old... Good people of Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island, I appeal to you: finish off Hillary and Bill's campaign and send them packing..."

cbl-pdx said, "Will all of you Clinton backers please get a grip. What has she actually accomplished?... Obama has earned this nomination and most of us are voting for him for very rational reasons. He is a first class leader and manager... He is also the best Democrat to beat McCain... Most of us don't hate the Clintons. We are just fatigued with them..."

eco-pharm predicted that "Next Wednesday will be a good day. That's the day Hillary will withdraw from the race. After losing both Texas and Ohio she won't be able to amass enough delegates to get the nomination. Then we can get on with making sure John McCrazy doesn't get elected."

AverageJane said, "For those of you that think the Obama supporters want to destroy Hillary Clinton. You are wrong she has done that all by her assuming self."

And Conrad1 raised a point that has also bugged some editorial writers in saying, "Hillary, please release tax returns and the documents right away, preferably before Tuesday so that we the public can see what you are trying to hide from."

george69 warned, "Democrats DON'T FORGET THIS: The presidential election will be decided on March 4th, not in November. Hillary can't win McCain! ... Obama is the Democratic Party's only trump card to win the White House!"

nads1 said, "This campaign is like a long, slow divorce, where all the voters are starting to wonder, "When will it be over?" How much longer must the Democratic Party be held hostage to the narcissistic whims of the Clintons?"

But graced8669 wrote, "Please don't vote just on looks & charisma! Senator Clinton is the candidate of choice. We do not need a novice in forgein policy leading our nation in the war on terror."

rschmieder predicted that "Hillary's not a spoiler. She's honest and forward looking. She will step aside when she doesn't win Ohio and Texas by 20 points. Then Obama will beat McCain, and then big money will beat Obama."

We'll close with this exchange, starting, with almaevangelista, who wrote, "Hillary is the best and most qualified candidate for president. If Americans especially the independents who are voting for Obama, then we will have another nice guy like Bush, who destroy our economy etc. We can also blame the media for helping this to happen as they did for Bush. Please help us God."

To which storyofthefifthpeach replied, "almaevangelista----In light of your comment, it is funny that Obama supporters are considered cultists. Personally, I think God stays out of elections. But, what exactly makes you think that if God could vote he (or she) would vote for Hillary?"

All comments on the Clinton story are here.

By Doug Feaver  |  February 28, 2008; 9:00 AM ET
Categories:  Presidential Politics  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Borrowers and Lenders Beware
Next: Glorious Victory, or Is It?

Comments

Huh... Slightly addled, but on the whole I like this post. You've got some fresh ideas. But please, write more lucid.

Posted by: Shiva | April 9, 2008 6:32 AM | Report abuse

No freaking way. I'm absolutely disagreeing. Next time when you post something think about reaction of readers.

Posted by: Dotty | April 6, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

McCain visited the most hated politician in the country for his support ... omg !!! Come on Hillary, it's all smooth sailing now. The way CNN was crying over Obama losing last night you'd think Lou Dobbs had plans to be Obamas running mate. What a fall Dobbs & CNN have made in their phoney predictions for Obama. Dobbs hot breath must have clouded up their crystal ball.

Posted by: gatorsn09 | March 5, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

An open letter to Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano and the Democratic Party:

I have voted for our Party's candidate for the White House for almost 40 years, but times are changing.
Your colleague, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, recently called on whoever was behind in the delegate count after Tuesday to withdraw for "the sake of Party unity." This is, of course, a plea to Hillary. The Clintons gave Mr. Richardson two federal appointments, which formed the basis of his campaign claim of experience, but I guess that was then, and this is now.
Bill Clinton actively campaigned for John Kerry and now Kerry endorses Obama.
The Clintons have a lifetime of Civil Rights activism, but some now label them "racist" for speaking the truth.
The Clintons are, admittedly, a partnership of talented spouses, with a shared history of public service. They won the White House from an incumbent Republican, and then held it for two terms, for the first time since before World War II. But now the Party wants them to step aside for the new guy because of political calculations about "electability" and widening the base. This is despite the fact that the Clintons were able to work across party lines with a centrist approach, while the new guy has been endorsed by the extreme left wing of the Party and could easily afford to wait his turn.
So, should the Clintons step aside for the Party? Do they owe the Party, or is it actually the other way around?
Now the Democratic leadership says that the super delegates should honor the "popular" vote. They ignore the fact that the Texas primary structure, the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida, and the caucus structure that favors voters who can take time off from work, and must vote publicly, all skew what the popular vote will actually be in November.
Ironically, Governor Janet, a super delegate, endorsed Obama without even waiting to see what us primary voters wanted.
Oops, we wanted Hillary. Too bad. So much for the popular vote.
After the way the Party has treated them, I hope the Clintons stay in it to the bitter end, and force the Party to reject them if the Party chooses to. If you fear that that will split the Party, well, then the Party will deserve it. And, quite frankly, it may already be too late to avoid a split.
Can you tell that some of us Party members have become quite angry?

Paul
Goodyear AZ 85338

Posted by: Paul from Arizona | March 4, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

History repeatedly warns the world of a man seeking the position of a ruler, that is an eloquent and affable man who promises change and peace in the world. Unfortunately, he turns out to be deceitful, violent and not the leader that he led the people to believe that he would be. He will be the cause of devastation and destruction all over the world. Beware of the man who professes change ...we'll all be in trouble.

Posted by: Dana | March 2, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Obama wants to increase military headcount by about 90 000 people, and to expand the mil budget, which is ridiculously high as it is now. The financial system is on the verge of collapse and nothing less than a sharp reduction of mil spending can revive it. Only a Clinton can do it, as Bill did in the 90s. This is no easy job - a lot of bargaining at political monkeying is necessary to convince and accommodate the HUGE interests involved. Obama lacks knowledge and experience in this game. That's way the media is pushing full-bore for Obama. He is cute but easy to fool. Just like you know who... What we desperately need is the experience and internal knowledge of Hillary. Otherwise it's going to be same old, same old - regardless of all "change" rapping. Yes, the Clintons are far from perfect. There is nothing better on the horizon though. By far.

Posted by: Big_Bill | March 1, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama wants to increase military headcount by about 90 000 people, and to expand the mil budget, which is ridiculously high as it is now. The financial system is on the verge of collapse and nothing less than a sharp reduction of mil spending can revive it. Only a Clinton can do it, as Bill did in the 90s. This is no easy job - a lot of bargaining at political monkeying is necessary to convince and accommodate the HUGE interests involved. Obama lacks knowledge and experience in this game. That's way the media is pushing full-bore for Obama. He is cute but easy to fool. Just like you know who... What we desperately need is the experience and internal knowledge of Hillary. Otherwise it's going to be same old, same old - regardless of all "change" rapping. Yes, the Clintons are far from perfect. There is nothing better on the horizon though. By far.

Posted by: Big Bill | March 1, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Can Oboma not even come up with a TV add that is his views, toughts, his own creattivity. Every debate that he has been in he takes some one elses lede. If he is in the whitehouse and the phone rings he will hafto ask someone. Do you think Hillery would answer the phone, or I voted not to answer the phone. America it may be political games now but if this man gets in the whitehouse we will all find out that politicks have everlasting effects on our lives. You go Hillery Clinton.John Edwards or al Gore for vice.

Posted by: Roseie Pierce | March 1, 2008 9:03 AM | Report abuse

Hillary won't release her taxes??? Spending her money we want to know how about the earmarks Obama promised to muster up soon...must have been an oversight get them right to Tim Russert. Has anyone noticed that Obama runs on Hillary's platform..he has no ideas, better judgment, get over it America you all reelected Bush to his second term I assure you Hillary did not vote for Bush. Obama campaign starts getting pressure for answers and amazingly the media is tossed a negative bone to chase down the Clintons..get real. 20 Debates and our moderators have not answered the Obama plan but I'll be we finally got the regret on her Iraq vote out of her..please. What a group of populist followers..Revelations is the chapter to read folks.

Posted by: Renee | February 29, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

I think there's something to be said about people - particularly young people ages 18 - 24 (the future of this country!) being inspired to get up and stop being politically apathetic. Senator Obama's hope is backed by solid plans. He has the power and leadership to actually bring people together rather than divide them (within AND outside of the U.S.)

And as we've seen, exemplified by the Bush administration, experience DOES NOT equate to good judgement. I really believe Senator Obama is one of those people that were born with a calling and a gift, and this is his.


Oh and by the way, both republicans and democrats of the US believe that Senator Obama is going to win the nomination AND have a better chance of beating McCain than Clinton. Check it out: http://www.gallup.com/poll/104554/Democrats-Republicans-Obama-Likely-Win-Nomination.aspx

Posted by: Natalie | February 29, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

This morning on MSNBC it was said that if Hillary loses by a narrow margin in Ohio and Texas, there will be law suits. I live in Georgia and voted on SuperTuesday, but if I lived in either of these states and still had the opportunity to vote... well! If a fence sitter I would become part of the Obama camp. If a firm Clinton supporter, that would start giving me second thoughts. I find threats truly offensive. And this one I find to be vindictive and childish. I would not want a vindictive or childish President - we've had that for 8 years already.

Posted by: bethpasco | February 29, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I am a 20 year party loyalist from Davie, Florida who dilligently votes democratic.

If Hillary Clinton is our Nominee, I agree the Republicans would loose the Whitehouse.

If Barak is our party's choice, I plan to vote for the Republican Nominee. BO is naive and inexperianced. I'd rather see a moderate Republican in the White House than someone who thinks the Iraq War Vote was a bad Idea. Many Democrats agree that the war is a battle to protect Americans.

While it is true that most democrats will admit they are "Anti-War;" we do not all fit the mold of "weak thinkers," or "passive hopefulls." Ultimately, it is better that we loose troops in Iraq than civilians here.

I voted for HC in Florida and she won with large margins. If my vote does not count in the primary, it will count in November.

BO's repeated attitude of "I was right." is a skin deep juevinile argument. According to U.N. resolutions; the U.S. was justified to attack Iraq even if their were no WMD stockpiles. Where was BO when Iraqi leadership violated the cease fire resolution for the first Gulf war. Recall the repeated attempts to shoot down our Air Force? Sadamm was a lunitic who got what he deserves.

The fact that the war was mismanaged does not imply the war was not right. Handing the driver the keys to the bus does not mean you were the one behind the wheel.

This man is not ready to be our President.

Posted by: Despy | February 29, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

I am simply amazed by the majority of comments here. I had no idea so many people were so astonishingly, irredeemably stupid.

McCain has no chance. Zero. Nada. Americans have never, ever, ever voted in someone who was so old, defeatist, status quo. Do you all not read the history books?

Hillary has no chance. The aura of inevitability - eroded as of about January 29th - makes people continue to assume she's the next nominee.

Obama is the next president.

Posted by: Tom | February 29, 2008 1:16 AM | Report abuse

All of yo Clinton and Hillary haters need to understand this: BO is a crook, an influence peddler, and a con artist who votes based on his "secret" ambition, not for the good of his constituents.

And by the way, read some good polls and stop regurgitation incomplete, non-factual poll results put out by the biased media and Obam's campaign. BO is trailing Hillary in Both Ohio and Texas as of TODAY. Fact: Both BO and Hillary are LOSING to MCCAIN in a Presidential matchup, so stop with the lies you are perpetuating that somehow he his a stronger candidate than Hillary because it is FALSE.

All you haters are antagonistic to Hillary because she is a woman, has more experience than BO and frankly, are just plain JEALOUS of her and Bill. Get a job and stop listening to the lies he's telling you people about he's going to "bring people together." He has NEVER brought anyone together, as a matter of fact, he's split the party into smithereens. Look at how John Lewis has been treated by him and his campaign? Lewis was forced to betray a "Friend" a loyal friend, which is something Obama knows nothing about. John Lewis was beaten and bloodied in Selma and he told Andrea Mitchell that switching from Hillary to Obama was harder than being beaten! He called her a "friend" a member of his extended family. The man was clearly in a lot of pain. That is something Obama cares nothing about. His only goal is winning, you idiots, to get POWER. He cares nothing about destroying the Party or the relationships people have build over a lifetime. He is a cold son-of-a-gun. He has not worked across the aisle with Republicans like Hillary and he seems ignorant, and so are you idiots, that it takes 60 votes to accomplish anything in the Congress. Do you really think the GOP is just going to "let him" do whatever he wants? Get real about the way Washinton works people!

And another thing, He is laying claim to a legacy which he was not and is not a part of (Civil Rights Movement), no matter what they claim. Hillary has done more than Obama within the Civil Rights Movement and that is a fact.

Posted by: Jo | February 28, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

All of yo Clinton and Hillary haters need to understand this: BO is a crook, an influence peddler, and a con artist who votes based on his "secret" ambition, not for the good of his constituents.

And by the way, read some good polls and stop regurgitation incomplete, non-factual poll results put out by the biased media and Obam's campaign. BO is trailing Hillary in Both Ohio and Texas as of TODAY. Fact: Both BO and Hillary are LOSING to MCCAIN in a Presidential matchup, so stop with the lies you are perpetuating that somehow he his a stronger candidate than Hillary because it is FALSE.

All you haters are antagonistic to Hillary because she is a woman, has more experience than BO and frankly, are just plain JEALOUS of her and Bill. Get a job and stop listening to the lies he's telling you people about he's going to "bring people together." He has NEVER brought anyone together, as a matter of fact, he's split the party into smithereens. Look at how John Lewis has been treated by him and his campaign? Lewis was forced to betray a "Friend" a loyal friend, which is something Obama knows nothing about. John Lewis was beaten and bloodied in Selma and he told Andrea Mitchell that switching from Hillary to Obama was harder than being beaten! He called her a "friend" a member of his extended family. The man was clearly in a lot of pain. That is something Obama cares nothing about. His only goal is winning, you idiots, to get POWER. He cares nothing about destroying the Party or the relationships people have build over a lifetime. He is a cold son-of-a-gun. He has not worked across the aisle with Republicans like Hillary and he seems ignorant, and so are you idiots, that it takes 60 votes to accomplish anything in the Congress. Do you really think the GOP is just going to "let him" do whatever he wants? Get real about the way Washinton works people!

And another thing, He is laying claim to a legacy which he was not and is not a part of (Civil Rights Movement, no matter what they claim. Hillary has done more than Obama within the Civil Rights Movement and that is a fact.

Posted by: Jo | February 28, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

We should seat all the delegates and let the voters decide.

Posted by: LetAllVotersDecide | February 28, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Why is the media trying to force Hillary out?

Its very strange...

Posted by: WhyIsTheMediaTryingToForceHillaryOut | February 28, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

Best regards

jacksmith...

Posted by: JackSmith1 | February 28, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

The media and voters need to do more research on Obama's background and voting record in the Illinois senate and the US senate, now that he is the front-runner. DIG DEEP, ASK HARD QUESTIONS.

We need someone who can handle the problems facing American families, like house foreclosures, health insurance, college tuition, gas prices, foreign enemies, etc.

Ask the tough questions. Vote with our heads. Voting for president is a serious business and we CAN'T AFFORD TO WASTE 4 YEARS ON SOMEONE WHO IS NOT QUALIFIED.

Posted by: mbs | February 28, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I want to thank JustAnObserver for his/her post. You are exactly right. If something does not happen to end this insanity before it is too late (by this I mean the Fantasyland Express otherwise known as Obamanation) the day will come, after next inauguration day, and probably sooner rather than later, when (once again) Americans will rue the day they voted for such a naive, arrogant whiner. Does the superficiality of Americans never ever end?

Posted by: ellen.lawson | February 28, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Charisma? Why is that a more important qualification for President than knowledge, skill and ability?

We are about to be fooled again and who will be to blame?

I could care less if my president didn't have "personality". The job is not a movie or a TV show. It should not be viewed as such.

For all of you business-minded persons... Running the country is like running a massive organization.

8 years ago, the last CEO of the U.S. (Clinton) left office with a generous surplus, we didn't have all of these food saftey issues, and certainly not the War.

Charisma doesn't raise my taxes or put the country in debt. Charisma doesnt magically solve the numerous diplomatic deficiencies within our government.

Charisma doesn't care about the environment, if I have affordable healthcare, or the fact that I live in a city with no representation but we pay taxes and send our children to war..

The point I make is this, we are at the point in our history when a statesman is required to be the new face of America as we address our new found flaws.

We need someone who knows how to ask the questions rather than being told what to ask. We need experience. As an individual, i feel that a vote for Obama is a vote for McCain or a vote for No change because his naievete will cause him to be in the dark on many issues concerning the workings of the Presidency.

He would be as clueless or worse as Bush was upon entering office, which means that he will have an inner-circle that controls him and he will be a figure head. How much has happened in the Bush Administration that Obama as President would know where to even begin?

At least Clinton has the knowledge of her PRESIDENT husband who can be an effective check against overzealous staff i.e. (Cheney, Addington) and more of the dark secrets will have to come to light because Bill knows who to ask for what.... Don't be foolish enough to think Hillary didn't gain something positive from this.

One last thing. Just because the paper says 51 percent of the country doesn't like Hillary for (superficial) reasons, does that mean you lose your abilitiy to be an independent thinker? 51% of 2,000 polled is not the same as 51% of 300,000,000.

The same people who derided Gore, but now miss him are the ones who will give McCain the Presidency now and will wish for a recount 3 years later...

No wonder why they say Americans are dumber than ever. We can't even remember what matters to us in selecting the leader of your life for 4 to 8 years..

Posted by: Just An Observer | February 28, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

HRC is down by 100. You would think that she was down by 1,000. Americans vote for whomever the media tells them to. You can kid yourself all you want but that the truth. The Clintons were put through the rigger in the 1990s. We know their skeletons. HRC is having to walk a fine line because if you go negative too much then you are called a racist and also she does not want to divide the DP. She a Party woman in the end. She is having to walk a very fine line. But believe me, McCain will not be so kind. He will go after Obama with No Holds Barred. Mark my words. We don't know much about Obama but McCain will surely fill us in. Then all the fence huggers will vote for McCain. You want change then let's get some estrogen in the White House. Germany's president is a woman, so is India's. Don't forget Margaret Thatcher. Obama is a talker. He's not a doer. He's infectous, that for certain but once all the negative stuff starts to surface about him which we all know that it will. No one is perfect. Then McCain benefits. The world loves Bill and Hillary. Thanks to W the world hates us now. We need someone with foreign policy experience who actually holds hearings and gets things done. Obama's not that person. HRC can beat McCain. I do agree that a HRC/Obama ticket would be the best for the DP but I doubt that will ever happen. They are BOTH too vain for that. In closing, I think it is ridiculous that Americans are even contemplating electing someone with only 2 years experience as a Senator. Our Country is a real mess. We need someone to balance the budget, get us out of the trillions dollar debt we now have thanks to the war. We need someone with experience. Enough, I could go on forever, but feel this is probably all falling on deaf ears. Americans vote for who the pundits tell them to and since I am not a pundit then ... enough said.

Posted by: CLSinTX | February 28, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

For all you Obama supporters who believe he is the answer for all the ills of the world, we've had his type many times before.

From the words of the late great John Lennon: "Gimme Some Truth"

"I'm sick to death of seeing things from
Tight lipped, condescending, mama's little chauvinists
All I want is truth, just give me some truth

I've had enough of watching scenes from
Schizophrenic, ego centric, paranoid prima donnas
All I want is the truth now, just give me some truth

No short haired, yellow bellied son of tricky dicky's
Gonna mother hubbard, soft soap me with just a pocket full of hope
It's money for dope, money for rope."

This was written 40 years ago and it's still happening today.

Posted by: hpmoyer | February 28, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Looking at the the devoice rate in this country, it is obvious people are not capable to make wise choice for spouses. How could you expect people to make wise choice on the leader of this country? For many Americans, it is just unthinkable how the Clintons could still be married. The anger towards Ms Clinton roots from jealousy, and jeolousy root from the failure of their own life. For the rest of us who do not have this type of problems, just like new faces. For this reason, the fact that Clinton has hold on so far is a miracle.

Posted by: IamJoking | February 28, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

An article posted Feb. 28 explores elements of Obama and the dynamics of the state of Ohio:

"Obama faces Ohio hearts and minds" (AmericanChronicle.com) ...

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/53747

Posted by: SteveHammons | February 28, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

The single biggest factor in Hillary's demise is the perception among democrats that she will never be able to overcome her negatives in a general election for president. So much support for Hillary seemed to be based on the fact that she is a woman. I too would love to see a woman become president, but supporters of Mrs. Clinton never adequately answered WHY her, or HOW she would overcome her vast negatives and win.

Posted by: Mark Shore | February 28, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Levine, Rezko's associate (and a lawyer, into the bargain), has been wearing a wire for years. Obama is on it--Obama was a thoroughly informed and consenting member of the appropriations-kickback conspiracy run by Rezko.

I think probably in a few months Obama will be indicted. Then what will all those ignorant morons think who supported him.

It just shows how corrupt and degenerate this country is. The country's going to fall apart.

Posted by: John Ryskamp | February 28, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

"This article has attracted more than 300 comments at this writing, at least a dozen of which have come from someone who calls himself or herself 'svreader.'"

Good God, man! Don't feed the trolls.

Posted by: misc | February 28, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The DemS establishment had covered all the grounds about making sure HRC would be inevitable, EVEYTHING HAD BEEN VETTED , indeed the war machine was ready against McCain but no one has considreed that possibly and between you and me democratically other candidates would try to waltz with the voters John Edwards tried a second try around, and was dismissed like an old pal and girls on prom night dont dance w/stolid kindergardten friends HRC was ready , WEEL THERE WAS ONLY HER, ISNT IT ANDS THEN WE WERE GIVEN CHOICE , AND WE CHOSE Women are not fickle, it was simply the difference between a nice candidate and a really good one
HRC would have been my choice if , ..well if... . Pb she is only that, nice. She is sadly lacking in charisma, not saying that obama is all words and no action, but obama ives you the wish to try and see if his actions are as good as his words wheras hillary well we have seen how she was in the WH. wE SEE HOW SHE IS PLAYING with her finances releases, we all know how most of us would have given the talk to arkansas boy . She did not play hard to get and he certainly did not get the serious smacking he deserved from his spouse. If she is ready to accept such behaviour what does it tell me about her actions as a prospective commander in chief, poor judgement in spouse choice, poor reaction after erring husband blatanly lying to the nation and expecting us to pay for said husband.
after all she is not different than many betrayed wives, though the vast majority walks out and leave sthe scoundrel whereas she expects us to give her the presidency because she stood by her man. that is the point. she got to be a candidate because everyone felt sorry for her. If she has pbs w/bill , it is not my problem, rather I perefr candidates who dont get by by simply being the spouse or the son. I was against a bush or a kennedy dynasty I am afgaisnt a clinton dysnasty

Posted by: saintixe | February 28, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

I see most of the comments are anti-Hillary as they should be. Hillary did not give the far left members of the Democratic Party -- people like me who are angry and bitter over the Bush blunders of the past few years -- the recognition we deserve. Obama recognizes, and Hillary didn't, that the Internet is a powerful tool for the leftists. It is here on the Internet that we mean something and our collective angry rhetoric is heard.

Posted by: twin_peaks_nikki | February 28, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company