Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama's Win: Small States, Big Media

We all know this morning that Sen. Barack Obama is the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for president. There are dozens of articles across the Internet reporting that fact and the historical significance of an African American achieving such status.

How Obama did it is documented by Jonathan Weisman, Shailagh Murray and Peter Slevin. They show that Obama chose campaign strategists who devised brilliant plays and executed them. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the odds-on favorite when the process began, but Obama's small-state insurgent strategy did the trick.

Readers who comment today fall into several groups. There are Clinton supporters who are furious and feel she was robbed. There are those who admire Obama's management skills in picking the right people to plan his campaign and see that as a good omen for the nation's political future. There are comments that show Obama's race will be a negative for some people. And, of course, there are those who blame the news media. Several posts object to the article's use of the term "insurgent strategy" as if it were either some kind of sinister anti-American plot or an intentional subversive attack on the Obama campaign. Makes one wonder.

We'll start with rmorris391, who said, "I live in a caucus state: Washington. I participated in my precinct caucus. I was impressed by the well managed local precinct operation... I chose Obama for 3 reasons: 1. his uplifting message (demonstrating character), 2. his strong organization, (demonstrating management skills) 3. his understanding of issues (demonstrating leadership)..."

dyinglikeflies said, "The Obama strategy was brilliantly designed to win the nomination and lose the election. By bootstrapping victories from states where few democrats exist into a delegate lead, he has not built enough voter support in the large states to win an electoral majority in November..."

To which armchair_genius replied, "Obama has incredible voter support in all fifty states thanks the marathon nomination contest. He will easily beat Gramps McCain. Its time for the Hillary folks to get over it."

Rax359 added, "Face the facts Clinton got beat by a smarter candidate...
You may not like it but he did it within the rules and won..."

But rebeccajohnson1 said, "Hillary Clinton crossed the Rubicon of American politics tonight. A woman who, despite the juggernaut of media bias against her, managed to tally up more votes than any other candidate in American history... When the smoke clears November 5, and Obama has lost... I only hope it means the complete extrication of the far left wing fanatics who are the guilty party..."

sboyd18 responded that "...Mrs. Clinton and her vaunted husband... agreed to this game in addition to the rules regarding Florida and Michigan. Once they began to lose, HRC THEN started whining about those two states... Obama ran on a platform of change, not on name recognition or a sense of entitlement..."

kathymac1 accused the press of a "double standard" in writing,
"...Hillary Rodam Clinton
Barack Obama
Why not Barack Hussian (not sure of spelling) Obama. Why is her middle name used and his is not?"

eegeebee answered, "...Rodham is not her middle name, it is her maiden name. I recall reading that Hillary placed "Rodham Clinton" in the last name field on her tax returns. It's apples and oranges."

gwshening wrote, "Two people represent Obama's strategy: Rev. Wright and the other priest... If any of us wants to help the Democratic Party, we need to have Obama defeated in November... A political party can not and shall not be held hostage by racists and sexists. Similarly, the Republican Party will clean house and rid of those "right wing racists" after the disastrous Bush administration. The country will be better off as a result."

Ombudsman1 said that Obama "...appears to have had a sound strategy for winning the delegate counts, but because of the way the democrats count delegates (proportional), it doesn't not reflect how the national election goes, which is for the most part winner take all... The post could... total the delegate counts to reflect winner-take-all. That will give a better idea of how Obama will fare in the fall."

tmcproductions2004 said, "Its nice to know that someone with excellent judgement in picking his staff will be running this country for a change. We are in desperate need of "change"...

thebobbob wrote, "A smart strategy, perfectly executed. Clinton didn't even know what hit her until it was too late. If the management of the campaign reflects the way the Obama administration will run the Executive branch, the contrast with the failed, incompetent Republicans will be enormous. Nicely done!"

But f16poor suggested that "The left-wing media's BIG HELP is part of the "grand strategy" that the WaPo staff writers don't care to mention. I say: Hillary, the Independent Party nominee!"

The article characterized Obama's strategy as "insurgent" and jdroberto was among the readers who took issue with that term, writing, "Insurgency? Insurgency?? So does that make John McCain "the coalition"? After years of watching the Post degrade bit by bit into just another cesspool of relentless right-wing propaganda and doublespeak, I'm ready to permanently nuke them from my daily news sources..."

WillSeattle wrote, "It's called winning. Clinton was playing chess, McSame was playing checkers, but the reality is that the game is poker, and Obama was holding the winning hands."

And bjalexa, who gets the last word, agreed, saying, "...Sound strategy, workable goals, realistic expectations and viable tactics --sounds like a good combination to make things work. Kudos to Axlerod and Company. And even bigger congratulations to Barack Obama for having the wisdom to hire the right people and to allow them to do their work."

All comments on the strategy article are here.

By Doug Feaver  |  June 4, 2008; 9:30 AM ET
Categories:  Obama , Presidential Politics  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Racism vs. Sexism
Next: Obama-Clinton: Nightmare or Dream?

Comments

Posted by: dfgfdsgsdd | June 20, 2008 4:33 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Chuck | June 9, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey Snoobear, I agree to an extent with what you said. But you know what. BHO with all his so-called inexperience appears to be holding his own with being inexperience. I don't agree with the strong 60% congress to keep McSame from waging war on Iran. Americans are a scary people who feed into fear factors of terrorism. The right fabricated intelligence reports and a month long special into Iranian History on the history channel and the majority of americans will beg McSame to invade Iran. BHO is a unique character. His inexperience seems to put him in offices before his time winning over the experienced. At the start of this campaign Hillary had the superdelegate thing on lock. (I wonder why)? He hasn't been in Washington long enough to generate favors from the superdelegates. So those few that he did get at the start seen something or knew something about him they favored over Hillary. Hillary is too deep an insider to make good on the promises she campaigned about. This Universal Healthcare's been her baby the past, what, 14 years. Give me a break and give it up. She gave up hundreds of delegates by conceding all those small midwestern states back in February. Yeah, she's real smart. Didn't anyone tell her that she needs delegates to win the Nomination. BHO surely was informed. Inregards to judgment, BHO crushed her. Experience is a misnomer if you haven't good judgment.


Posted by: Money Grip | June 8, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

To Uh,oh! I am not racists nor am I sterotyping. Atleast I hope not. I vote for Barack Obama for two reason and two reasons only. He is black and is not looking for a war with Iran. All the issues the candidates yelp about will benefit some and not others regardless who in the Oval Office. Bills will be passed and vetoed. Your life will not change, but a minute, maybe regarding the issues. I am a blackman and is proud of the fact another blackman could possibly become Commander-in-Chief. I stand proud with my soon to be 94 years aged veteran Uncle witnessing already history. You want war, vote McCain. You want diplomacy, vote Obama. You want revenge for the Vietnam War, vote McCain. You want better judgment and intellect, vote Obama.

Posted by: Money Grip | June 7, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

The company BHO keeps is no different than company any other keeps. And far less I might add. It was his inexperience that got him the nomination. It was his inexperience that maintained a sound campaign without all the firings and demotions. It was his inexperience judgment and strategy that put the right people in his campaign. A lot of whom were apart of the Clinton Regime??? (Do you know why)? It was his inexperience that withstood all the controversy with a stellar performance and now stands tall for all the world to witness this historic moment. Its not because of racism that will keep Barack or McCain from the Oval Office. The people of America will grow up and make the best possible decision on who they feel is the better candidate. Because I feel going to war with Iran is pointless and detriment to my country I honestly support the inexperience who so far in this campaign showed the better judgment.

Posted by: Money Grip | June 7, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Hey Clownherder, Rev. Wright tells it like it is. He's all honesty. This whole campaign proved fruition by just his words. And now that Barack won the nomination racism is live and well. And for Rezko, theres no legitimate camaraderie between the two. Baracks not a womanizer; his wife is all woman not too mention a highly intellect. And she spends her time with the girls while her man campaigns. FAMILY VALUES AND HONESTY! Not your drunkards or coke heads or infidelities.

Posted by: Money Grip | June 7, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"Lick your wounds; get past the yesteryear racism; and lets save the country and support Senator Barack Obama."


So you're saying if you're black and vote for BHO everything's cool, but if you're white and don't you're automatically a racist?

What happens if you're black and don't vote for him? Stop stereotyping black people as being unable to choose. It's racist.

The media's hype of this guy is setting everyone up for a big bout of depression come November.

Posted by: Uh, oh | June 7, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

"get past the yesteryear racism"


You're the kind of person who will use racism as an excuse when he loses in November. Keep your white guilt to yourself if you're white. Vote for whoever you want if you're a minority. 12% of the countries population will not determine the next president, accept it.

I'm not voting for him because of the company he keeps, and his lack of experience.

I notice you didn't mention Ayers, Rezko or Wright in your reply...

By the way, stop presuming that I'm white, this is the internet...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 7, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton without doubt made Senator Obama a better candidate than he was a year ago. But don't suggest he can't win in November. Remember it was him who put together a better campaign; it was him who put the right people around him to overcome historic odds. Again, it was his judgment that prevailed. You non-supporters of Senator Obama need to take his judgment into account. The man knows how to out think his opposition with genuine honesty and not lies. He is well educated and highly intelligent. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to keep this country secure. He has a good judgment of character and he will put the right people around him in the Oval Office. It wasn't his campaign making all the headlines of firings, and demotions. I don't care how much military experience Senator John McCain has or how long he was in Washington, and he is commended. But the man scares me. I would've full-heartedly supported Senator Hillary Clinton as the Nominee had she won; though, I don't believe in her. But I can say one thing for sure, two things for certain, Senator Clinton is not eager for war with Iran as the Old fella is. Diplomacy is Barack Obama's motto, then war. Lick your wounds; get past the yesteryear racism; and lets save the country and support Senator Barack Obama.

Posted by: Money Grip | June 6, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

"HONESTY AND FAMILY VALUES"


Honest family names and values like Ayers, and Rezko? If those two names are not enough, how about Wright?

You need to log off the internet and throw your laptop out the window.

We're all dumber from having heard you talk.

Posted by: Clownherder | June 5, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

HONESTY AND FAMILY VALUES is what this country needs. Not the bigoted, pompous folks like the Clintons who're just hungry for power. Hillary WILL concede Friday and jump both feet in with the Obama movement. SHE, running the independent ticket!!! Only her loyal supporters can suggest a lame-brain idea. The same supporters who feel Hillary is one of them with her 7 digit offshore bank book. You people really should wake up and see that Hillary, though wish well for you all, is really incapable of keeping any campaign promises because she is in bed with too many in Washington along with her womanizing hubby William Jefferson Clinton. She has said any and everything for those 18 million supporters. 18 million who like the country as it is and was. Move on people. Its a new era. The Clinton/Bush regime era is over. BARACK OBAMA!!! people.

Posted by: Money Grip | June 4, 2008 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is STUNNING!!!

You have just witnessed the greatest political campaign fight in American history. One for the textbooks, and the history books. Hillary Clinton fought her heart out against all odds to win for all of the American people . While at the same time doing her best to prepare Sen. Barack Obama to win in November if he was the nominee. STUNNING!!! WELL DONE HILLARY CLINTON. WELL DONE! Your AMAZING! :-)

Sen. Obama could not have had a better opponent than Hillary Clinton. Nor could he have had a better opponent to prepare him for the battle royal to come against John McCain and the Republicans ahead of the November elections. Hillary Clinton was like a big Mama cat determined to teach her kitten how to hunt, and hang with the big dogs for the fights ahead.

And how about Bill Clinton, Chelsea, and th whole Clinton team. They were magnificent. They really showed their metal. BRAVO! TEAM CLINTON... BRAVO!

And how about YOU! my fellow Americans. I'm so proud of you. And proud to be one of you. You showed what you are made of. And what makes America so great. You never gave up on your Champion Hillary Clinton. Time, and time again you eagerly waited your turn to vote for Hillary Clinton. To pick her up and pass her along down the line to the rest of your fellow Americans.

You never gave up on her. Just as Hillary Clinton never gave up on you. No matter how many times they counted her out. No matter how many times they brutally knocked her down. You knew she would get back up. And you were ready to support her when she did. AMERICA LOVES A FIGHTER. AMERICA UNDERSTANDS A FIGHTER. AMERICA IS A FIGHTER. I'M PROUD OF YOU AMERICA!

Hillary said she would accept the VP spot on the ticket if ask. And I am thrilled to hear that. I think it would be crazy not to take her up on that offer. You could not have a better VP than Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is Sen. Obama's best chance of winning the Whitehouse in November. And it is essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse.

The American people are in a very desperate condition now. George Bush has wrecked America, and much of the world.


YOU MADE US VERY PROUD HILLARY CLINTON! :-)

WE LOVE YOU...


jacksmith... Working Class :-)


p.s. I really liked Sen. Barack Obama's speech in Minnesota. I think he just maybe ready now for the Bush Republican attack machine, dirty tricks, and vote fraud machine. :-)

Posted by: jacksmith | June 4, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

And furthermore...even if the media WAS sexist, why are so many of you spewing vitriol at Obama? Why is HE at fault for that? HE did not ask the media to act that way. You are throwing the baby out with the bath water as my grandma used to say.

Posted by: cynthia | June 4, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I offer this simple truth. I have always voted conservative. I will vote for Obama. I have contributed financially several times, something I have never done before. I would NEVER have voted a Clinton back into the WH. I suspect I'm not alone.

Posted by: cynthia | June 4, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

I am a lifelong democrat and an ardent Hillary supporter; I will vote for obama in Nov, but I will do it while pinching my nose and closing my eyes

Posted by: James B. NYC | June 4, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

I am a lifelong democrat and an ardent Hillary supporter; I will vote for obama in Nov, but I will do it while pinching my nose and closing my eyes

Posted by: James B. NYC | June 4, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Penn was Bill Clinton's strategist during the impeachment. Bill never admitted culpability for any of his tawdriness. With her Iraq Hillary Clinton never admitted culpability for her incorrect judgement. Today I think both Clintons suffer for their failure to accept personal responsibility.

Posted by: G8tr | June 4, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "Things went well for Hillary from TX and OH to the end ..."

Things didn't go so well for her in Texas. She won the primary by a small amount. Obama won the caucus and took the most delegates. Obama won in Texas. The media doesn't like to say it but I will. Obama won the most delegates in Texas. Look it up.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Hillary lost because she chose not to run on change after she voted for the Iraq invasion. She needed to choose change because she previously staked out a position of no change in Iraq.

She made Mark Penn her chief strategist and her only pollster. Pollsters are supposed to determine if the message of the strategist is working. She had Penn evaluating his own work. That makes no sense. Having one pollster makes no sense.

Things went well for Hillary from TX and OH to the end and still she did not win the nomination. The Clinton supporters who thought she could win were deceived by her but not by the press.

She started out the favorite with a lead in organization and money and lost it. Sen Clinton lost it because she hired the wrong people and did not fire the right person.

Posted by: gator-ron | June 4, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse


"Quote: "Bill Clinton isn't running for president..."


"You could have fooled me. He comes along with Hillary, they are a package deal.

Sort of like Governors Ma and Pa Ferguson in Texas in the thirties. Pa was impeached, ran out of office. Ma ran on the motto of "two governors for the price of one. Yep, she won.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "Bill Clinton isn't running for president..."


You could have fooled me. He comes along with Hillary, they are a package deal.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

That should be Los Angeles Superior Court.


Case Number: BC304174
PETER F PAUL VS WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON

Filing Date: 10/14/2003
Case Type: Fraud (no contract) (General Jurisdiction)
Status: Pending

Future Hearings

06/20/2008 at 09:00 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Contempt Hearing (**EVIDENTIARY HEARING Set Per Hrg.of 5/27/08**)

08/08/2008 at 08:31 am in department 47 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Further Status Conference

Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

Parties

CLINTON HILLARY RODHAM - Defendant/Respondent

CLINTON WILLIAM JEFFERSON - Defendant/Respondent

D. COLETTE WILSON ATTORNEY AT LAW - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

DOYEN MICHAEL R. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR U.S. SENATE - Defendant/Respondent

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Uh blondshag. Bill and Hillary are on trial for fraud in Los Angeles Supreme Court. Trial number BC304174. Depositions have been taken and hearings underway.
I don't think that compares to the Rezko trial where Obama is not even mentioned.

If she waits just a little longer it will be trial time. That's all she needs.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

MUST READ ARTICLE***********************
****************************************

Jury: Rezko guilty of 16 counts
Prominent political fundraiser was accused of scheming to get bribes.

JUNE 4, 2008

THIS ARTICLE IS LOCATED AT:
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24973282/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MAYBE -- HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON should stay in the election process UNTIL.

Who knows -- other situations could develop from the Rezko guilty of 16 counts announcement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON!!!!!!!

GO HILLARY!!!
GO HILLARY!!!

GO ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE --
HOPE THAT YOU WILL RUN AS AN "INDEPENDENT" PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE -- IF THE SUPERDELEGATES DO NOT 'SWITCH' THEIR ENDORSEMENT TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON!!!!

SUPERDELEGATES--- HOPE THAT YOU WAKE-UP AND 'SWITCH' YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON....HILLARY IS ELECTABLILITY!!

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA MIGHT END-UP IN A VERY NEGATIVE SITUATION BEFORE IT IS OVER.

GO HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: Blondshag | June 4, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

MUST READ ARTICLE***********************
****************************************

Jury: Rezko guilty of 16 counts
Prominent political fundraiser was accused of scheming to get bribes.

JUNE 4, 2008

THIS ARTICLE IS LOCATED AT:
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24973282/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MAYBE -- HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON should stay in the election process UNTIL.

Who knows -- other situations could develop from the Rezko guilty of 16 counts announcement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON!!!!!!!

GO HILLARY!!!
GO HILLARY!!!

GO ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE --
HOPE THAT YOU WILL RUN AS AN "INDEPENDENT" PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE -- IF THE SUPERDELEGATES DO NOT 'SWITCH' THEIR ENDORSEMENT TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON!!!!

SUPERDELEGATES--- HOPE THAT YOU WAKE-UP AND 'SWITCH' YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON....HILLARY IS ELECTABLILITY!!

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA MIGHT END-UP IN A VERY NEGATIVE SITUATION BEFORE IT IS OVER.

GO HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: Blondshag | June 4, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

if Obama is judged by his associations, let us also remind all of America of when it was lied to on their tv screens: "I did not have sex with that woman" and who still associates with the former president who thought nothing of lying to his people?

Posted by: on the same wavelength? | June 4, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Just using talking headlines from Google news - the positive for BO has been 8 to 1 the negative for Sen Clinton has been 12 to 5. From the start - 13 months ago NOT 6 - the right press has been lauding the Illinois Senator - thinking perhaps he would be easier to beat? in November? On May 26 three national polls reported Senator Clinton would Beat McSame in all three - inside the margin of error - OB lost to McSame in two and tied the third.

Who do I blame for this - the DNC. Never seen so many stupid people push for a person under so many stupid excuses - or are they plants by the RNC?

From the beginning I've said BHO can't win. Still believe that and the May 26 polls seem to agree with me. Why? While big cities and ocean front states are enlightened, the rest of this country is still segregated. Is it right thinking? It's a result of living experiences and it will cost BO the election. Add giving up church membership, pretending you don't remember sermons when most "enlightened" would generally agree with the context - not the language - and he will lose a few more votes. No I don't believe he can win in November.

As to running Senator Clinton with him - I'd rather she try independence. OH - and I just gave this morning AND I'm not concerned about amounts quoted but haven't seen in print for over a month. The sexism first infuriated me - now I only see that we really hadn't come as far as I had thought.

General consensus as I read it? It's better to have a man - any inexperienced man will do as long as he looks nice and dresses well, add to that one who doesn't bother to call a committee together he has been put in charge of in the Senate(doesn't need the experience you think?) - than to have a woman.

BO said in Iowa that he didn't need my vote and here Tuesday night he cheered on his young 18 year olds again. I'll take him at his word - don't need? won't get. As to McSame - a strong 60% congress can stop him and the war. I'll take my chances.

Posted by: Snoobear | June 4, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

That should guarantee a McCain win. After all, the only way a republican could win, is if the democrats put up a candidate who is controversial enough to make the election look close. "They" had to find some way to put another puppet in the white house, and this was the best way to accomplish it. They will now be able to produce another bogus, "close" election, claiming that "America just wasn't ready to vote for a black man". I've got news for you, America. Don't bother to vote. It won't be counted anyway. McCain will not win any election. But he will be the next president.


Posted by: just paranoid I guess | June 4, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

"He could be purple with white polka dots for all you know..."

He could even be a Republican.

That's what I always think when I read comments along the line of "I voted Clinton,and dagnammit now I'm a-gonna vote McCain!". I think, "here's a member of the eavesdrop-torture-and-war party trying to stir up stuff."

Posted by: Some guy using a fake name | June 4, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

> "Obama may lose but she certainly can't win that way"

> That's the big question. Some people might argue that she could...

Indeed. And yes one can cite Sen. Lieberman's example but I think the situation is different here. I don't think Republicans are going to vote for her like they did for Lieberman. Her positions are mostly liberal unlike his. The "vast right wing conspiracy" doesn't hate him as they do Hillary. Their spouses are perceived very differently. Etc.

My point is this: If only Hillary had run, most of the people who voted for Obama would've supported her. If only Obama had run. most of the Hillary supporters would've supported him. None of the current polarization would've taken place. Basically they both appeal primarily to Democrats.

But now if she runs as an independent, the two of them will split the Democratic vote, not the Republican. So for one of them to win, McCain would have to garner less than 33%. Or Hillary would have to change her positions, perhaps even to the right of McCain. But they still won't love her. Neither situation is likely.

The third possibility is for Obama's candidacy to "implode" due to some scandal. I have to think this is also not likely. It if was, it would've already come out.

Posted by: news-junkie | June 4, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

I would not be so presumptuous to consider myself more than the average American, but if Hillary is entertaining accepting, if offered, the VP spot, my opinion would be DONT DO IT. When this lout shows his true colors and goes down the drink as his VP Hillary, you run the chance of going down with him. STAY AWAY FROM HIM, HE IS TOXIC(POISON). BUT WHATEVER WAY YOU DECIDE TO GO FROM HERE ON IN I APPLAUD YOU AND WISH YOU the very best!

Posted by: LYNN PARKER | June 4, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"From there on she would have no political future."

It took years for her to cultivate relationships with her contemporaries. Many bailed out on her in the end.

What does she have to lose? It's not like she has the best working situation when she returns to the senate anyway.

Posted by: Maybe so | June 4, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

"Bill and Hillary are on trial for fraud in Los Angeles Superior Court. "


Rezko

That's you failing twice in one sitting...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

"So would be turning your back on your politcal party and all of your affiliates"


Like all her pledged delegates did to her?

Posted by: You mean | June 4, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

"Bill Clinton hangs out with."


Bill Clinton isn't running for president...

Posted by: Not | June 4, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

No he's only hung out with known terrorists and individuals under criminal investigation in Illinois, is married to a racist and frequented a outright hateful congregation for the better part of 2 decades...

Nice try... You fail."

Read the Vanity Fair article if you want to know about who Bill Clinton hangs out with. Also, don't forget his last minute pardons to criminals. Also at the top, Obama is not on trial or even suggested to be on trial for anything. Bill and Hillary are on trial for fraud in Los Angeles Superior Court. That's case number BC304174 if you are interested.
Nice try, you fail.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I wish you could use facts. I wish people would only use facts. Obviously she can "parlay" (def - to exploit successfully) But it is the WINNER who chooses the VP. Trying to strong arm your way in is really bad strategy. So would be turning your back on your politcal party and all of your affiliates to run as an independant. She wouldn't win, neither would Obama (see voting for Nader in 2000) and we would have McCain sworn in. From there on she would have no political future. She has screwed herself on this one. What a terrible decission to be so selfish at the end of a very good primary.

Posted by: again? | June 4, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

"Obama may lose but she certainly can't win that way"

That's the big question. Some people might argue that she could...

One party is fractured and the other has a candidate that barely meets the criteria of being a republican.

Posted by: The big idea | June 4, 2008 1:14 PM | Report abuse

"What grand rule is this your referencing?"

The rule that says she can parlay this into a VP position, be a spoiler as an independent, or quite possibly beat both in the general.

Think Lieberman, but with more win!

Posted by: This one | June 4, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary runs as an independent, she can kiss the presidency goodbye forever since a) Obama may lose but she certainly can't win that way and b) once she runs like that Democrats won't have her.

Her best bet is to lobby for the VP slot. Though from Obama's point of view this is not such a clear cut choice. He should take his time mulling over this....

As to why she lost, I think one more factor needs to be mentioned and that is fear. Once she realized Obama was gaining on her, she made a number of missteps that can be attributed to panicing. May be she has no strategy originally to go beyond Feb 5 but that should not have paralyzed her campaign but when you are afraid it is hard to think clearly. I think her long term strategy (over the past 7 years) was excellent but in the end fear did her in.

Posted by: news-junkie | June 4, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

That's interesting that you would say I can twist it anyway I want. As the numbers I quoted do include Flordia and do not include Michigan as no one as including Michigan in the popular vote totals. That's not twisting that's reality.

Again I ask, what is this rule you speak of that allows her the right to do whatever she wants? There IS a democratic nominee and she is not it. So perhaps it is you and 17+ million who should get over it. I mean seriously, what is accomplished by continuing this?

Posted by: again | June 4, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

I want Hillary because she recognizes we are the only wealthy nation that DOES NOT have a Universal Healthcare Plan and she will fix it! Also, Hillary has demonstrated that she has the FIGHT and EXPERIENCE(shown in the debates) to be a good President.

Obama does not fit the quality expectation I look for in a President because 1)he is not experienced, and 2)He has associated with and pledged his family to questionable organizations for 20 years. Don't get me wrong, I believe people have a right to worship wherever they want, but a presidential hopeful has no business being so closely intertwined with an organization that seems hell-bent on dividing us with race.

If I can vote for Hillary as President, I will, otherwise I will vote for the War Hero McCain.

I served the military myself and so I know what it means to put your life on the line for our constitution and our way of life, Barack Obama has not done this.

Posted by: veteran says | June 4, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

"Popular Vote"

Hillary Clinton" (17,916,763)

Barack Obama" (17,723,200)

Newsweek not that Real Clear Politics rag. They forgot Michigan and Florida in their stats...

And once again, a children's sport is not a democratic primary.

Twist it anyway you want, she's a viable independent candidate.

Posted by: News flash 2 | June 4, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Well we learned a few things from the primary: The number of older women in the country is very close to the combined number of eggheads and African Americans. Also the percentage of irrational partisans within each candidates base of supporters is about the same. Americans as a group continue to believe that a single politician can, and should, save them from themselves despite over 200 years of evidence to the contrary.

Posted by: Scott | June 4, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

To all who talk about the far left liberal, so must like all the GOP policies they've done in the past 8 years, from liying to us to go to war with poeple who did not attack us, to changing the way Oil is traded(got moved from NYMEX to ICE at the request of Enron and Goldman zack so now we are paying $4.00 a gallon) that affected the price of everything we consume.
so must be very happy with all that ?

Posted by: Tony | June 4, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"Those aren't the rules in baseball. However, the rules of politics dictate she can do what ever she darn well pleases, as long as she has the votes to back her up.

News flash! She does..."

So you see the ridiculousness of one party not accepting defeat in defiance of all facts, but not of the other?

Also "the rules dictates she can do whatever she pleases"?

What grand rule is this your referencing?

Posted by: double duh | June 4, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

The Numbers:
Popular Vote - Obama got 17,535,335
Clinton got 17,493,658

the point is she lost. so did the rockies.
you can't argue that.

Posted by: NEW FLASH | June 4, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"Hey remember when the Boston Red Sox won the World Series in 2007? What if Colorado had refused to accept defeat? "

Those aren't the rules in baseball. However, the rules of politics dictate she can do what ever she darn well pleases, as long as she has the votes to back her up.

News flash! She does...

Posted by: Duh? | June 4, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

"HRC got 18 million votes. One of them was my wife's vote, cast back in Feb. Since then she has watched and listened pretty intently to things done and said. My wife now believes Obama is the person she wants leading us."


I was originally for BHO until I saw the company he kept, and how ambiguous his statements are. My vote stays with HRC or the old guy.

Posted by: So what | June 4, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Hey remember when the Boston Red Sox won the World Series in 2007? What if Colorado had refused to accept defeat? I mean they only played 4 of the 7 games, so according to Karl Rove's math they still have a chance to come out on top. They owe it to the fans of Colorado who spent all season waiting to see the first Rockies World Series Title. The fans can't go on being invisible, they deserve this.

Posted by: ridiculous | June 4, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

HRC got 18 million votes. One of them was my wife's vote, cast back in Feb. Since then she has watched and listened pretty intently to things done and said. My wife now believes Obama is the person she wants leading us. More than that she thinks that his message of turning the page excludes HRC from the ticket, and that Obama's message of change would ring hollow if he selects her to be on the ticket.

Posted by: davie | June 4, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

"Contribute and stop whining."

Stop acting like she didn't garner 18 million votes.

It's not like she's alone out there!

Posted by: Details | June 4, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

"Rich" ---
we are contributing!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

i am very confused by all of the anger being tossed around the democratic party. how pleasant it would be if people could take a day off, relax, look at the big picture and then refocus. Do we really want to throw away the next 4-8 years out of spite?
Hillary began this race as one of the stongest candidates, but her campagin had little beyond Feb 5th. They pulled it together after Indiana but it was too little too late.
The Numbers:
Popular Vote - Obama got 17,535,335
Clinton got 17,493,658

Delegates - Obama has 2165
Clinton has 1923

This was extremely close, as either of these candidate would have made a tremendous President. Especially in comparison to what we have, and our republican option. But the FACT is that Clinton has lost. The numbers (for delegates) have been against her for a long time, but she was determined to see this to the end. Everyone obliged, assuming that when the game was over, it would be over. I thought her defiance in a basement in New York was very sad, selfish, and confusing. She is only furthering the split that exists between Obama supporters and her own.

Yes Obama is inexperienced. He's been a senator for only 2 yrs. But he has shown exemplary leadership skills just in the fact that he was able to overtake the Clinton machine. He has changed the tone of this entire election. Dirty campaigns have been more damaging to themselves then to those they intend to smear, and thus all sides have been playing much nicer (for the most part). Highlighting they're own good and only occasionally bringing up the other's negatives.

We can not afford to have McCain come to power. While things may not get worse they will not get better. Burma has refused the US navy to port and fly helicopters to bring aid because they fear a US invasion. While this may sound a little ridiculous it is a statement at how far our foreign relations have fallen globally. I have heard Obama's eloquence described as a negative trait. This is baffling. George Bush speaking is embarassing, McCain's speaches are ripe with incere (and creepy) smiles. In a time when we need to improve our image, wouldn't a sensible, rational and yes eloquent speaker be a great plus?

Put your emotion aside for a minute and think about where our country stands. Then think about where we were 8 years ago. All of the missed opprotunities, and failed policies. Do we really want to be at another election 4 or 8 years from now saying how did this happen?

Posted by: timothy | June 4, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

To all of you who think Hillary should run as an Independent. Put your money where your mouth is! She is already in big debt from her primary run and needs to first recoup that -- she is currently asking you for donations so she can close out those campaingn losses. Next, as an Independent, she will have no party financing and will need your help even more. So as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. Contribute and stop whining.

Posted by: Rich | June 4, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

"They seem to unbelievably have some sort of congenital memory loss that allows that to ignore that Obama at the very least has never outright lied about his experiences abroad"


No he's only hung out with known terrorists and individuals under criminal investigation in Illinois, is married to a racist and frequented a outright hateful congregation for the better part of 2 decades...

Nice try... You fail.

Posted by: I forgot | June 4, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

What the primary campaign has demonstrated bodes well for the general election and, hopefully, for the future of this country as well. Obama was willing to surround himself and listen to advisors who are smarter than he is before he made a decision (almost all of the time). Clinton was not. Bush won the presidency using the same principle, so race and gender are independent of this leadership trait.

Posted by: Margherite | June 4, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Some voters act like they aren't Democrats, and that their votes for Hillary weren't still the votes for the Democratic party, and that they'd prefer to see Gramps McCain in the White House to Obama. (or see Hillary blackmail the party into giving her something like the VP role because she came in 2nd place... as if it's the right and entitlement of the 2nd place finisher)

They seem to unbelievably have some sort of congenital memory loss that allows that to ignore that Obama at the very least has never outright lied about his experiences abroad, changed the contest rules when he needed things to go his way, said his opponent was less qualified than the Republican candidate, and insinuated that if he didn't win he should still stick around "just in case."

The world was schocked when Americans voted GW in the first time, and were even more so when Americans actually re-elected him again in 2004 -- especially after his performance on the job and with civil liberties.

But Americans got exactly what they voted for, and that's what we're living with today.

You want to get what you vote for again? Vote for Gramps, and don't complain about what happens to the future of this great country under the McBush policies.

Sometimes you do get exactly what you pay for... and it's your fault.

Posted by: Kevin | June 4, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"@Nooba: Liar! You just don't want a black man for president. Geeze..."

No, like about 18 million other voters, he just doesn't like that black man for president!

By the way, how do you know he isn't black? He could be purple with white polka dots for all you know... This is the internet!

Posted by: Oops | June 4, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton and her supporters are not in denial. All she needs is a couple hundred people to change their minds come August and she's the nominee -- and August is a long way off. I think the people out of touch with reality are the ones with so much faith in Obama they can't envision him taking a big stumble over these next few months.

I'd be proud that the Democrats had put forth the first black nominee if I thought he were a great candidate. But I think Obama's number one skill is his ability to BS.

If he manages to somehow get elected, my guess is we'll be as disappointed in him as Massachusetts is in that other phony, Deval Patrick (another Axelrod production).

Posted by: Vnd22 | June 4, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

"One large U.S. company executive told me that doing business in France was extremely difficult with their short work week, their month's vacation, and the rule that even the low low supervisors get company autos while the higher executives in the U.S. do not.

Think about it, do you want more welfare and big, big government?

Sounds pretty good to me. Beats spending it all in Iraq all to heck. The USA could be a paradise if we didn't try to police the world.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

@Nooba: Liar! You just don't want a black man for president. Geeze...

Posted by: ExRepForObama | June 4, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

It's all the Obama supporters that are going to give John McCain the win.

Such as "aBigSAM" who just feels the need trash Hillary.

Hillary won the majority of primaries. Obama has been playing politics all along.

I'll admit he was better at it. However, by trashing Hillary and her supporters, you're just making sure want John McCain to win.

Yes it might me cutting our noses off to spite our faces.

But, I'm willing to do it so we can rub it in the faces of Obama supporters.

Posted by: Ethan | June 4, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

She had better hurry to collect her 20 million bucks. According to the law, if she is not the nominee and she has not collected it by the convention, she is out all but 250,000 dollars. No wonder she is staying in.


"Please send me money. Help me.
I'm in debt up to my eyeballs".

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a political stratagist and his speeches are overridden with rhetorical sophistry and moral equivocations. I am very upset that he is the democratic nominee. Hillary is the better c andidate, leader, and human being. The DNC, Obama and the media cheated her out of her rightful nomination. I am a liberal democrat who whill vote McCain or stay home rather then vote for BO. His two racist, bigoted, cynical and cruel pastors tell you where Obama and his wife are in regard to the majority of Americans and our judeo-christian values. I wish someone would write a book entitled "The Audacity of Barack Obama". He is a hypocrite and a threat to our country. He is going to lose the election. This serves the democratic party right. I hope Hillary runs on an Independent ticket. Dorian Brown, Cinn. OH

Posted by: dorian brown | June 4, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

How could Hillary Clinton run as an independent when her current disgraceful campaign is $20 million in debt? All of you Clinton supporters out there who say you will not vote for Obama need to take a breath of fresh air and wise up. Do you really think McBush will serve your best interest? Banning a woman's right to choose, an uber-conservative supreme court, war without end, a crippled economy, shrinking middle class, the corporatization of government (fascim)--are these the things you stand for? Please, get a hold of yourselves.

Posted by: Joshfm | June 4, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Obama could win, so what?

He doesn't win people's heart. He didn't win the big states that necessary to run for November, which winner takes all. Not by some stupid percentage game.

18 millions people will vote for Hillary if she choose to run independently.

Posted by: Truth for USA | June 4, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Firstly, I've voted for Hillary 3 times, twice for Senator, and in the Primary.
All I can conclude, from all the Hillary supporter Obama-bashing, is that there are still a lot of ignorant sheep in the Dem party, who'll believe anything, just like the GOP sheep.
Over the past several months, it was pretty clear the DELEGATE numbers, which is how nominees are chosen, weren't going to happen for Hillary. So, she tried to change the rules, and the sheep followed.
Even if she did win the popular vote, which she didn't, she lost the nomination by the rules she knew well.
If you imagine that Obama wouldn't have gotten ANY votes in Michigan, had he been on the ballot, then sure, believe she won the pop vote. And don't forget, Hillary herself, said the Michigan vote wouldn't count. But don't let reality, or the facts, get in your way.
If you elect McCain, you'll get what you deserve - - more war, more Roberts/Alitos, more Corporate control, and no voice for the People. Enjoy destroying this Country, because of either racism, or just plain ignorance...

Posted by: jon | June 4, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"Doing that would allow for a possible McCain presidency."

BHO better start making some room!

It's endless

Posted by: Obviously | June 4, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Quote: "i will NOT vote for obama in november i dont care if hillary get the VP , IDONT LIKE OBAMA POLICIES AND I DONT LIKE HIS RACIST WIFE MICHELLE. AMEN"

Who cares. If you vote like you post, you wouldn't know how to vote anyway.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Why would any American want Obama as President of the U.S.A.? He is inexperienced and ultr liberal almost radical. You have to look no further than France and some of the other socialist countries to see that Obama will not work. France got in such a mess (before electing a more conservation leader recently) that their citizens were demanding all sorts of aid from the government and corporations. One large U.S. company executive told me that doing business in France was extremely difficult with their short work week, their month's vacation, and the rule that even the low low supervisors get company autos while the higher executives in the U.S. do not.

Think about it, do you want more welfare and big, big government? Ameican made itself a great nation by the citizens working hard and using their intelligence and being self supporting. This is slipping away and it was really go away with Obama. He's so inexperienced that he will need someone else to pick up that phone at 3 a.m., perhaps Bill C.

Posted by: Mary | June 4, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

"VOTERS, THIS IS NOT ABOUT ME"
(It's about my 20 million bucks!)

"I WISH TO CONGRATULATE BARACK OBAMA ON A FINE CAMPAIGN"
(I will hostage my concession until I get my 20 million bucks)

"OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS I WILL BE DECIDING WHAT I AM GOING TO DO"
(to get my 20 million bucks)

"WE HAVE WON ALL THE BIG STATES, AND THE POPULAR VOTE"
(and will continue to harrass Barack Obama until he gives me my 20 million bucks)

"I WILL CONTINUE THIS FIGHT UNTIL WE HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE"
(and my 20 million bucks)

"PLEASE WRITE HILLARYCLINTON.COM AND WHEN YOUR VOICES HAVE ALL BEEN HEARD"
(I will REALLY have something to threaten with to get my 20 million bucks)

Posted by: aBigSAM | June 4, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

i will NOT vote for obama in november i dont care if hillary get the VP , IDONT LIKE OBAMA POLICIES AND I DONT LIKE HIS RACIST WIFE MICHELLE. AMEN

Posted by: NOOBA | June 4, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

"What would they do if she chose to run independently?

Posted by: Try this on for size | June 4, 2008 11:12 AM "

He would beat her.. again. Doing that would allow for a possible McCain presidency. Personally, I think McCain would do relatively little harm. We would not move forward, little would change, and the Dem controlled congress would stymie him at every turn.

If Mrs Clinton REALLY cares about the country and the party, it is time for her to step aside and work to rebuild what little credibility she had. She was a house of cards from the get go and the fact that she is a she doesn't change that.

Face it, Mrs Clinton is the wrong 'she' to be the first woman president. She is wrong because her husband was president and that would cloud her administration regardless. She is wrong because she has a history of fast and loose with the truth and, after Bush, that is too much to bear. She is wrong because it is clear how craven and covetous of the job she really is. No promise is too strong to break, no agreement to important to important to ignore.

If she had won the nomination and then the office, it really would have been the same as Bush, only with different goals.

Posted by: GetOverIt | June 4, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Quote: "Devise this...

What would they do if she chose to run independently?"

With what money? She can't even manage the money that her campaign collected in the democratic race. Little old blue haired ladies ain't going to contribute enough for a couple of TV ads.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Quote: "Ombudsman1 said that Obama "...appears to have had a sound strategy for winning the delegate counts, but because of the way the democrats count delegates (proportional), it doesn't not reflect how the national election goes, which is for the most part winner take all..."

Say what?? Winner take all?? Ever hear of the electoral vote. The winner of the popular vote in the general election has lost the presidency on 4 occasions. The last time in 2000!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 4, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

What would they do if she chose to run independently?

Posted by: Try this on for size
*************************
Is that even a possibility - financially or otherwise? She would shoot herself in the foot and still have nothing to show for it. I suppose the strategy would be to stand back and call 911.

Posted by: LABC | June 4, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

The Gila (pron. HEE-la) (Heloderma suspectum)Monster is a venomous lizard that lives in the American southwest. Its' saliva is neurotoxic and is introduced into its prey as it grabs it by its teeth. The Gila Monster's grip is so tenacious that it is often necessary to chop off its head to release its grip. Gila Monster, Hillary monster; there are similarities.

Posted by: Gee Bee | June 4, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

DNC STOLE VOTES FOR OBAMA!!!!
VOTE OUT!!! THE USELESS Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Manchin and LAME DUCK Howard Dean
SUPPORTERS URGE SENATOR CLINTON TO RUN AS INDEPENDENT
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF CLINTON DEMOCRATS WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA! HE WILL SURLY LOOSE IN GENERAL ELECTION, THANK THE BIASED CHEATING DNC WHO STOLE VOTES TO SUPPORT OBAMA!!!!

THEY PURPOSELY TOOK DELEGATES FAIRLY WON BY SENATOR CLINTON AND GAVE THEM TO OBAMA!!!!

WE ARE CHANGING OUR PARTY AFFILIATION

VOTE THEM OUT NEXT ELECTION!!!!

DNC Committee awarded to Senator Obama not only the delegates won by Uncommitted, but also delegates won by Senator Clinton. This decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy and our Party.

SUPPORTERS URGE SENATOR CLINTON TO RUN AS INDEPENDENT

Obamas have Set Race Relations Back Decades
In general is Obama has used Poor Judgment REPEATEDLY! Obama proved Rev Wright was correct!!! Politically correct, that is. The fact that it is "painful" and took 20 years suggests he agrees with these racists "under the covers". He resigned not necessarily because he wants to but because it is the only course open to him. Imagine if the roles were reversed and John McCain had attended a white separatist church for twenty years. Would his resignation after two decades cure the concern that he had lived some sort of weird double life, cavorting with racists but talking about equal opportunity in his public life? He'd have been forced out of the presidential race by now. So the question remains: was Obama the least observant church congegrant on the planet (racism and anti-Semitism at Trinity? No!) Or a hypocrite.
WE DO NOT ACCEPT OBAMAS POLITICAL DAMAGE APOLOGY!!!

SHOCKING Obama words: what he really thinks of white folks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI77cU3jsFs

http://www.dontvoteobama.net


Posted by: DNC STOLE VOTES FOR OBAMA!!!! | June 4, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Well, the beat goes on. At least one message has been clearily sent, and that message is: IT IS TIME FOR A POSITIVE CHANGE. Only a fool would continue to go the same direction and expect to reach a different destination. The fresh air is definitely welcomed.

Posted by: beautiful11 | June 4, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Hillary blew it right from the start by failing to apologize for or even acknowledge her culpability in getting us involved in the Iraq war. If she had been more forth coming and honest about her involvement in this monumental fiasco she would have gained some respect. Since she chose to completely ignore this issue, Hillary lost major credibility points with the American people.

Her campaign was based on a single flawed premise; namely, the notion that she was the most qualified person so we have to elect her as our nominee. She really brought no new ideas to the table. The Clinton arrogance was palpable.

Her twisting of facts and figures to suit her own agenda was very off-putting. I think the American people are very suspect of anything that even remotely smells like lies! This is not the right time to run a political campaign based on half truths.

I don't think it was a good idea to change her accent and message every time she spoke to a different audience. The president must lead the entire nation as a whole, not one little group at a time. This tactic struck me as a bit disingenuous and left me believing I couldn't trust anything she had to say.

And now that the campaign is over, she has the hubris to deny Obama any acknowledgement for his well deserved victory. The Clinton's really have to grow up and accept reality. Obama would be wise to have nothing to do with these people, he can win the presidency on his own merits and without the Clinton baggage

Posted by: harmonograms | June 4, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"They show that Obama chose campaign strategists who devised brilliant plays and executed them."

Devise this...

What would they do if she chose to run independently?

Posted by: Try this on for size | June 4, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company