Print Columns   |   Web Chats   |   Blog Archives   |  

Potomac Primary: The Showdown in Virginia

Just about the only thing the pundits agree on is that should Hillary Clinton pull out a victory--or even just come close--in Virginia Tuesday, she will have achieved another New Hampshire-like surprise, another demonstration that she's far from finished.

But a review of the nearly unmanageable torrent of online, print, and broadcast logorrhea devoted to this particular stanza of the presidential race finds only a couple of lonely voices arguing that Clinton has much of a chance in Virginia--the only place in the Potomac Primary where her odds are even that generous.

Writing in The New Republic, Josh Patashnik makes a case for Clinton to prevail in Virginia because a) it's not as heavily black as some of the Southern states where Barack Obama has done very well, b) it's not that much more affluent than some other states where Clinton has scored well, c) exurban and rural voters are likely to find Clinton more attractive, and d) the other pundits are inaccurately swayed by the fact that their elite, snobby, overeducated friends in Arlington and Alexandria are all enthralled by Obama.

Patashnik bases his reading of Virginia Democrats on the view, expressed here by political scientist Thomas Schaller, that the persistent pattern of racial voting trumps the Mark Warner-Dave "Mudcat" Saunders belief in a difficult and tenuous but supremely powerful political coalition Saunders calls "Bubba plus blacks." Schaller believes the so-called NASCAR voters who were so avidly courted by Warner in his victorious race for governor just don't have the numbers to count for much in a state where the great majority of the growth is taking place in suburbs such as Loudoun and Prince William counties--places that had been reliably Republican but are increasingly revealing themselves to be delightfully independent and unpredictable. Schaller doesn't say so--he was writing back in 2006--but it is those soccer-mom filled suburbs that could help Clinton tomorrow, far more than any white guys who love NASCAR might troop on down to the polls in an Obama lovefest.

Well, the soccer moms piece of the equation is probably right--it's hard to find any commentator who doesn't note the striking gender gap in the Clinton/Obama face-off so far. But there's also a pretty hefty age gap--young for Obama, old for Clinton--and of course there's the race gap. But despite this gap-o-rama, Obama keeps winning by big margins in places that are heavily black and in lily-white red states as well. And even in the heart of New England, as in his wins in Maine yesterday and Connecticut earlier.

The idea that Clinton could defeat Obama in Virginia just doesn't seem to hold up to the state's recent political history. As former governor Doug Wilder wrote in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend, "Virginia is neither a red state nor a blue state. Its citizens are too independent-minded. Having been elected first lieutenant governor and then governor some years ago as a Democrat here, I can tell you that voter support depends more on a particular candidate than it does on party affiliation."

Wilder hears the crowds chanting "U-S-A!" at Obama rallies and is somewhat startled and thrilled to note that what we have here is a Democrat preaching the gospel of American exceptionalism--a message that sells well in a state with a huge military population and a thick vein of bedrock traditionalism. Add the fact that Virginia is an open primary state--there is no party registration--plus the relative completion of the Republican nomination process, and you have a recipe for an unusual number of independents coming out to register their excitement about Obama.

Now add the black vote--despite Patashnik's attempt to minimize its impact, the black contingent in Virginia Democrat primaries is on the order of 27 percent, enough to have made Jesse Jackson the winner in 1988 over Michael Dukakis and Al Gore--and you have a pretty powerful advantage for Obama. (Clinton has done particularly well in states with large Hispanic voting blocs--Virginia is not remotely one of those states.)

That said, as Gov. Tim Kaine warned in a conference call with reporters this weekend, Clinton "has a lot of significant Virginia expertise on her campaign team," including some of Kaine's own top strategists from his victory team in 2005.

And among conservatives, there's talk of disenchanted Republicans crossing over on Tuesday to vote for Obama (to bury Clintonism once and for all) or for Clinton (to enhance the chances of facing her in November, which would bring joy to Republicans everywhere). But always take such talk with a shaker full of salt--as University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato frequently notes, crossover voting is usually more talk than action: Only about two percent of Democrats vote in Republican primaries in the state, and similarly in the other direction.

Already, we're starting to see writers piling on about Hillary Clinton's endgame--just how desperately does she fight if the tide turns decisively for Obama, and, as Peggy Noonan asked this weekend, is it within Clinton to recognize when it's time to go? If the next Clinton tactic is to portray Obama as too soft to stand up to Republican attacks, then does Obama need more armor and more offensive weapons, or does the mere fact of his race render him, as Noonan says, "bulletproof," because, as we saw in South Carolina, any attack on Obama gets interpreted as racially-based?

Bad news tends to turn into more bad news, and the results over the past week, now magnified by Clinton's removal of her campaign manager, has the markings of a swelling trend.

In Virginia and Maryland, Clinton has refrained from much direct comment on Obama--her ads and speeches continue to hit the experience note (the TV spot airing in the Washington market now talks about her "more than 35 years of experience"--a bizarre ratcheting-up of an already wildly inflated number.)

Much as folks in this line of work are tempted to peer into the future and reveal great truths, the mathematics of this year's Democratic race are such that even though Virginia, Maryland and District voters get to play for real this time, their ballots are unlikely to be decisive. The numbers say this contest drags on for weeks to come--giving everyone plenty of chances to be wrong, wrong, wrong.

By Marc Fisher |  February 11, 2008; 7:47 AM ET
Previous: Potomac Primary: Don't Answer That Question | Next: Homeless Vets: From Decrepit Shelter Back To The Streets?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

At what point can we start calling her "bizarre ratcheting up" of her experience what it is? It's an outright lie.

Posted by: nick | February 11, 2008 8:49 AM

Saturday afternoon I received a telephone call from a polite young lady asking if I would be voting on Tuesday, and when I said "yes" she asked if I would vote for Obama, and again I said "yes". What I forgot to tell her was how nice it was to hear from a volunteer, instead of the robo callers, of which there are already legions.

Marc, I enjoy your blog, but must say that only on the pages of the Washington Post do I see the Tuesday primary referred to as the Potomac Primary. Elsewhere, it is generally referred to as the Chesapeake Primary, a far more inclusive description, to my way of thinking.

Posted by: VintageLady | February 11, 2008 9:43 AM

The idea that Clinton could defeat Obama in Virginia just doesn't seem to hold up to the state's recent political history. As former governor Doug Wilder wrote in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend, "Virginia is neither a red state nor a blue state. Its citizens are too independent-minded.


What does this even mean? Obama is far more to the left than Clinton. Moderates would never vote for Obama if they took time to understand his policy positions.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 10:07 AM

The writers calling Clinton's campaign doomed are likely the same writers who called her campaign doomed after Iowa, and were amazed by her comeback in NH. Every up and down in this campaign gets magnified into something momentous.

Posted by: Tom T. | February 11, 2008 10:18 AM

At this stage, it looks like Obama is really taking control of matters, Virgina of course included:

Barack vs. Hillary- The Google Effect:

Barack has more people searching for him on Google, way more "supporters" on and his web page has seen tremendous growth in the number of visitors and wau more than Hillary's campaign site.

Posted by: David | February 11, 2008 10:32 AM

Go Barack !

Posted by: PulSamsara | February 11, 2008 10:33 AM

Barack Obama represents the ideas set forth in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and espoused in the Pledge Of Allegiance. It's even on our money: E Pluribus Unum - Out of the many, One.

We are a diverse and heterogenous people. We have lots of different religions, races, identities, lifestyles and origins. Yet we can live, work, worship, and serve together peacefully provided we follow a few simple principles. Obama says that one of those principles has always been that we care for our fellows. That if a child in Baltimore can't read, that hurts me even if it's not my child. That if a senior citizen in Roanoke can't afford her medication, that hurts me even if she's not my Grandma. That I am my Brother's keeper, my Sister's keeper.

It's a fundamental principle that the earliest colonies adopted upon reaching our shores, and it applies today. That freedom and opportunity for all must be our goal if we are to survive the threats we inevitably face. There will always be some group that threatens us, some looming worry. But if we give up on the idea that we're all in this together and opt for survival of the few, then the threat is greater from within.

"As you do for the least of these....."

Posted by: Jennifer | February 11, 2008 10:42 AM

Anonymous wrote:
What does this even mean? Obama is far more to the left than Clinton. Moderates would never vote for Obama if they took time to understand his policy positions.

But we know he's lying about how extreme left he is just to score points with the Hate America First! crowd. When elected he'll become regular ol' Barry. Right?

Posted by: athea | February 11, 2008 10:44 AM

I am a very moderate republican- independent. I plan on voting for Obama tomorrow. I don't know who I would vote for between Obama and McCain, but I can tell you I would never vote for Hillary. Hillary would send her own kid to the gallows if she knew it would get her elected. She is too easily swayed by public opinion and she doesn't seem to have any real beliefs besides that she likes power.

I hope you can help express the view that she is not the model working woman. While she has some accomplishments in her life, she is anything but self made. If Bill marries someone else, do when even know who she is. She maybe a high powered attorney, but thats a ways away from Senator. She exists because of her husbands power and prestige. Also, how is voting for someone because she is a woman any less sexist than voting for someone because they are a man. If being sexist is wrong, than apply it across the board and pick the best person.

Are the messages of marrying up and sex discrimination really the ones we want to send to our kids? I think not.

Posted by: Jon | February 11, 2008 10:45 AM

As an independent that tends to lean left, I am voting for Obama - yes, I have thoroughly reviewed his policy positions and they are far left of center- even for me. I am voting for him, because I want a president who inspires, can repair our relations around the world, and has the moral standing to ask for shared sacrifice. I so badly want to respect the person that sits in the oval office, something I was not able to do in my entire adult life (am 30 years old)

Posted by: Arlington | February 11, 2008 10:48 AM

VintageLady, your way of thinking excludes the District of Columbia, which does not share a boundary with the Cheasapeake Bay. "Potomac Primary" couldn't be more geographically correct, especially for the Post, which is our local newspaper :-)

Posted by: Chris | February 11, 2008 10:55 AM

I beleve this is exactely what is going on in the Red States that Obama is winning. Teh anti HRC Vote who wil not vote for Obama in the general election are voting in the Democratic Primary. Wake up Democrats Obama is not electable in the general election. Vote for HRC who could win in a general election not Obama. The expereince factor is not made up by HRC. Obama was only ekected to the Senate in 2004. Obama hasn;t done the Senate role long enough to be effective at being a Senator nevermind President. Supporters like to compare him to JFK who ws a congressmen for many years before he was Senator.

I am a very moderate republican- independent. I plan on voting for Obama tomorrow. I don't know who I would vote for between Obama and McCain, but I can tell you I would never vote for Hillary

Posted by: anonymous | February 11, 2008 11:10 AM

The comment below it is not excitment about Obama but anti Clinton by Republicaans. They will not vote for Obama ina general election.

from the article:
Add the fact that Virginia is an open primary state--there is no party registration--plus the relative completion of the Republican nomination process, and you have a recipe for an unusual number of independents coming out to register their excitement about Obama.

Posted by: anonymous | February 11, 2008 11:14 AM

American Democrats are delusional if they think Obama is a better choice over the Clintons. Hillary is the only choice for real change in America!!! A women president is a bigger statement to the world and to make a real shift in politics in the US. The Clintons are the best option for cleaning up Bush's mess. Obama's inexperience will be realized before the democratic convention. He is good at making great speeches that someone wrote for him but offers no real solutions. Wake up people! -One Vote in Ohio

Posted by: scott face | February 11, 2008 11:16 AM

I am going to vote for McCain on the general election, but I might just vote for Clinton on the primary, so that she can defeat Obama.

Posted by: Vic from Northern VA | February 11, 2008 11:20 AM

It is not that Obama is so far left. He's not really all that far left. Furthermore, I see him as a pragmatic person who actually possesses the ability to reach across the aisle in an effort to create real change in our foreign policy and issues like health care.

It's really more the case that Hillary is os FAR right. she backed war with Iraq, Iran, and Lebanon, all three either actual or potential disasters that have cost the US a huge amount of blood and treasure.

She is favor of making Jerusalem the undivded capitol of Israel, a veiw that is so far to the whacky side of the right that it is not even shared by the Isreals prime minister, most jewish American people
or most Israelis.

Such a plan will ensure no Israeli palestinian peace and decades more terror agaisnt Israel and the US, no end to the war on terror, and all the killing and spending attendant with that.


Posted by: justtellthetruth | February 11, 2008 11:21 AM

Jon -your comment about reverse sexism is so right on, and I have had a hard time getting some women friends to understand this - that voting for Hillary b/c she is a woman & b/c they want to see a woman president & b/c of female qualities in general - children's, family, issues - is just as bad as the reverse (voting for a man b/c he's perceived as strong, aggressive, etc.). What I have concluded is that women who are voting for Hillary based totally or primarily on gender are doing so out of their own sense of powerlessness or victimhood of the past. Some have told me that they want to get rid of the "good ol' boy network" b/c they perceive that they've been victimized by it. I believe this is why she pulls so systematically heavily from older women - and not as much from younger women who haven't faced this on a wide scale. To me (I graduated from law school in 1979 & faced quite a lot of the "good ol' boys" in my career as a prosecutor, using a combination of smarts & femininity (think Rhonda Pearlman in "The Wire"), voting for Clinton b/c she's a woman comes from the less noble psyche of women as "payback" for all those years they were "victimized." This is a terribly wrong reason to select a president of the United States.

Posted by: Jean | February 11, 2008 11:26 AM

I began voting as soon as I turned 18, but most of my friends in college had no interest in politics until recently. Obama is the reason young people are beginning to care about politics. I want a president who I believe in, who inspires me, and who can change the perception of America throughout the world. Obama is my generation's JFK, and I am proud that he is my candidate.

Posted by: Kelly | February 11, 2008 11:33 AM

I thought our votes didn't count. Isn't this the "Pretend Primary" we're talking about?

Posted by: Obamenon | February 11, 2008 11:33 AM

HRC is anything but overly Pro-israel. She is Pro-Israel now, because a very large percent of the Democrats funding comes from Jews. She has thrown the Israeli people under the bus before, (photo op with Arafats wife anyone)

There is also an incident with Ms. Arafat posing with school children that Hillary was involved with. I still have not forgiven her for supporting terrorist.

Posted by: Jon | February 11, 2008 11:39 AM

I Voted for Obama in Illinois. Not because he is Democrat or from my state, I have voted for a Republican for the last twenty this is a first for me...No- I voted for Obama because I believe he will be one of the few politicians that can hold up to most of his campaign promises...And if you believe "Billary" will hold up to any campaign promises...I have some ocean front property in Illinois I wish to offer you! :-)

Posted by: Eric | February 11, 2008 11:49 AM

Can't DIS-agree more with Scott Face...Wow! Dude- you must have had your head in the sand in the 1990's...can you name ten things Bill Clinton did well for this country? I can certainly name the areas where he screwed up, speaking as a U'S Air Force Veteran that was forced out of the Military in 1994...let's start there...He cut the Military by hundreds of thousands of people from 1994 through 1996 leaving the defense of our nation under much weaker security. I don't think there is any need to mention Monica.
But as for that scandil, where are the morals of this so called "great President"?...and you jokers want him back in office? Please! I'm bloodpressure just went up...

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 12:07 PM

To vote for Obama means that America has come of age. It means that America is ready to lead the world again, this time by example. The Clintons had their time and they made their impact. We respect that. It is now time for change. Obama represents the voice of the new generation. The entire world is wailing for change.

Posted by: Tuz | February 11, 2008 12:07 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 12:17 PM

I don't think Senator Obama will win General Election, as I know a lot of my friends vote for him in primary, will vote for McCain in General Election, as they likes McCain more, well, probably I only can say Republican is the party can take lost and won't bother them to wait 4 years to re-gain the power for another 20 years. It doesn't so rosy for Economy now and don't want to see another Jimmy Carter in white house, so I probably vote McCain too!

Posted by: Bee | February 11, 2008 12:30 PM

Bee...Take some English lessons and get back to us...You're not helping your cause sounding like 3rd grader. You go ahead and vote for McCain...we'll take the smart voters on our side...

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 12:39 PM

People talk about a choice between Obama and McCain. I just don't see that as the choice.

I see Hillary as the Democrat's version of John McCain, fairly moderate, more experienced.

Obama seems to be the Huckabee -- extreme one way or the other idealogically, inexperienced.

In Obama I see a guy whose answer to everything seems to be government subsidies and who has an arbitrary deadline for withdraw from Iraq.

I don't see Obama as a good match up with McCain since moderates, the votes Dems need, will go with McCain.

Posted by: Dan | February 11, 2008 12:42 PM

I usually vote Republican, but with that race pretty much decided, I will vote for Obama in order to put to death that snake Hillery's campaign.

Even if he wins the general election, Obama won't be near the polarizing figure that Hillery is, and he might actually do some good if he can be persuded to avoid trying to enact some of his more socialist ideas into law.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 1:00 PM

these national match-up Clinton v. McCain and Obama v. McCain) polls are very revealing and show that she is hardly the electable candidate.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 1:20 PM

No reasonable person would place any weight on those national polls at this point in the campaign.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 1:44 PM

I am a Republican that will likely be voting for McCain in November.

I proudly confirm that I (and everyone in my Alexandria household) will be crossing over to the dark side tomorrow to vote for B. Hussein Obama and thus further increase the chances that Hitlerly will lose in the Old Dominion!


Posted by: Aaron Burr | February 11, 2008 1:55 PM

a reasonable person might find it interesting that ALL the polls are that consistent. Coupled with the clear cross-over appeal Obama has been having in red states and Hillary's huge negatives (Dems who won't vote for her), they do mean something.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 2:08 PM

Hey, here are a few things Clinton did...
I am voting for Hillary because I believe she is more experienced and will make a better president but I would love to have Obama as VP.
We need to remember as Dems we are on the same team here.

Longest economic expansion in American history
The President's strategy of fiscal discipline, open foreign markets and investments in the American people helped create the conditions for a record 115 months of economic expansion. Our economy has grown at an average of 4 percent per year since 1993.

More than 22 million new jobs
More than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous twelve years.

Highest homeownership in American history
A strong economy and fiscal discipline kept interest rates low, making it possible for more families to buy homes. The homeownership rate increased from 64.2 percent in 1992 to 67. 7 percent, the highest rate ever.

Lowest unemployment in 30 years
Unemployment dropped from more than 7 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. Unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics fell to the lowest rates on record, and the rate for women is the lowest in more than 40 years.

Raised education standards, increased school choice, and doubled education and training investment
Since 1992, reading and math scores have increased for 4th, 8th, and 12th graders, math SAT scores are at a 30-year high, the number of charter schools has grown from 1 to more than 2,000, forty-nine states have put in place standards in core subjects and federal investment in education and training has doubled.

Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
President Clinton and Vice President Gore have nearly doubled financial aid for students by increasing Pell Grants to the largest award ever, expanding Federal Work-Study to allow 1 million students to work their way through college, and by creating new tax credits and scholarships such as Lifetime Learning tax credits and the HOPE scholarship. At the same time, taxpayers have saved $18 billion due to the decline in student loan defaults, increased collections and savings from the direct student loan program.

Connected 95 percent of schools to the Internet
President Clinton and Vice President Gore's new commitment to education technology, including the E-Rate and a 3,000 percent increase in educational technology funding, increased the percentage of schools connected to the Internet from 35 percent in 1994 to 95 percent in 1999.

Lowest crime rate in 26 years
Because of President Clinton's comprehensive anti-crime strategy of tough penalties, more police, and smart prevention, as well as common sense gun safety laws, the overall crime rate declined for 8 consecutive years, the longest continuous drop on record, and is at the lowest level since 1973.

100,000 more police for our streets
As part of the 1994 Crime Bill, President Clinton enacted a new initiative to fund 100,000 community police officers. To date more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies have received COPS funding.

Enacted most sweeping gun safety legislation in a generation
Since the President signed the Brady bill in 1993, more than 600,000 felons, fugitives, and other prohibited persons have been stopped from buying guns. Gun crime has declined 40 percent since 1992.

Family and Medical Leave Act for 20 million Americans
To help parents succeed at work and at home, President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993. Over 20 million Americans have taken unpaid leave to care for a newborn child or sick family member.

Smallest welfare rolls in 32 years
The President pledged to end welfare as we know it and signed landmark bipartisan welfare reform legislation in 1996. Since then, caseloads have been cut in half, to the lowest level since 1968, and millions of parents have joined the workforce. People on welfare today are five times more likely to be working than in 1992.

Higher incomes at all levels
After falling by nearly $2,000 between 1988 and 1992, the median family's income rose by $6,338, after adjusting for inflation, since 1993. African American family income increased even more, rising by nearly $7,000 since 1993. After years of stagnant income growth among average and lower income families, all income brackets experienced double-digit growth since 1993. The bottom 20 percent saw the largest income growth at 16.3 percent.

Lowest poverty rate in 20 years
Since Congress passed President Clinton's Economic Plan in 1993, the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent last year -- the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. There are now 7 million fewer people in poverty than in 1993. The child poverty rate declined more than 25 percent, the poverty rates for single mothers, African Americans and the elderly have dropped to their lowest levels on record, and Hispanic poverty dropped to its lowest level since 1979.

Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years
In his 1995 State of the Union Address, President Clinton challenged Americans to join together in a national campaign against teen pregnancy. The birth rate for teens aged 15-19 declined every year of the Clinton Presidency, from 60.7 per 1,000 teens in 1992 to a record low of 49.6 in 1999.

Lowest infant mortality rate in American history
The Clinton Administration expanded efforts to provide mothers and newborn children with health care. Today, a record high 82 percent of all mothers receive prenatal care. The infant mortality rate has dropped from 8.5 deaths per 1,000 in 1992 to 7.2 deaths per 1,000 in 1998, the lowest rate ever recorded.

Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union
Efforts of the Clinton-Gore Administration led to the dismantling of more than 1,700 nuclear warheads, 300 launchers and 425 land and submarine based missiles from the former Soviet Union.

Protected millions of acres of American land
President Clinton has protected more land in the lower 48 states than any other president. He has protected 5 new national parks, designated 11 new national monuments and expanded two others and proposed protections for 60 million acres of roadless areas in America's national forests.

Paid off $360 billion of the national debt
Between 1998-2000, the national debt was reduced by $363 billion -- the largest three-year debt pay-down in American history. We are now on track to pay off the entire debt by 2009.

Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus
Thanks in large part to the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, and President Clinton's call to save the surplus for debt reduction, Social Security, and Medicare solvency, America has put its fiscal house in order. The deficit was $290 billion in 1993 and expected to grow to $455 billion by this year. Instead, we have a projected surplus of $237 billion.

Lowest government spending in three decades
Under President Clinton federal government spending as a share of the economy has decreased from 22.2 percent in 1992 to a projected 18.5 percent in 2000, the lowest since 1966.

Lowest federal income tax burden in 35 years
President Clinton enacted targeted tax cuts such as the Earned Income Tax Credit expansion, $500 child tax credit, and the HOPE Scholarship and Lifetime Learning Tax Credits. Federal income taxes as a percentage of income for the typical American family have dropped to their lowest level in 35 years.

More families own stock than ever before
The number of families owning stock in the United States increased by 40 percent since 1992.

Most diverse cabinet in American history
The President has appointed more African Americans, women and Hispanics to the Cabinet than any other President in history. He appointed the first female Attorney General, the first female Secretary of State and the first Asian American cabinet secretary ever.

Posted by: Voter from VA | February 11, 2008 2:19 PM

-has fewer years in elected office than Obama
-worked as a corporate lawyer for the Rose Law Firm (yes, representing WalMart and shredding billing records) from 1977-1992
-then was married to the President.

how is that experience?

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 2:26 PM

If you don't like her then vote for Obama. All this deep seeded hatred seems unfounded. I am not sure what she did that everyone is so upset about.

But you can not in good faith, argue that Obama matches Clinton's experience.
Its what makes Obama supporters hard for me to take seriously

Posted by: Billforfirsthubby | February 11, 2008 2:33 PM

What I find absolutely hilarious is the republicans popping in and saying that, if Obama wins primaries, the votes for Clinton will not go to him but McCain.

Hillary is polarizing and attracts hard-party democrats, Obama is attracting new blood and independents many that vote for Obama won't vote for Hillary, but in the reverse, those that vote for Hillary will vote for Obama to keep out the Repubs.

You don't have to believe that part, but what you should believe is that there were many more Democratic voters in the primary than Republicans. ( Let's see the results.

Total votes cast:

Clinton: 50.2% (7,347,971)
Obama: 49.8% (7,294,851)
McCain: 43.1% (3,611,459)
Romney: 35.4% (2,961,834)
Huckabee: 21.5% (1,796,729)

You are telling everyone that McCain will not only get all of Romney's and Huckabee's votes (8370022) whic, but more then 45% of Clinton's. Yeah. Right.

I know that primary vote counts aren't fully indicative of GE, and more Reps may come out, but so will more Dems.

Posted by: Kevin | February 11, 2008 2:33 PM

Absentee ballots -- Wasn't the Absenttee ballots drove Mrs.Clinton to victory in NH and CA ???

I believe the polls were indeed correct in NH and CA -- that Obama was far ahead of Clinton in NH; and Obama was tied with Clinton or slightly ahead in CA. It was the vast amount of Absenttee ballots, cast long before the voters got to know Obama went in Clinton's favor.

I think, even Texas will go Obama's way, unless they had half of their votes already cast. I think it will be early March that Clinton will fold her campaign and save what's left in her family wealth.

Posted by: Charles of NY | February 11, 2008 2:42 PM

"But you can not in good faith, argue that Obama matches Clinton's experience.
Posted by: Billforfirsthubby | February 11, 2008 02:33 PM

==> I just don't get this argument. What experience is she talking about? You mean the number of years in Washington?? If yes, then can she beat McCain with this?? I thought McCain, over 72, had too many years in politics.

IF you talk of experience, then were all great presidents rose from experience in politics into presidency?

Is she talking about the number of days she spent in WH? Don't the spouses of all two-term presidents have the same amount of experience then ???

Maybe I am dumb, I just don't get her EXPERIENCE argument.

Posted by: Charles of NY | February 11, 2008 2:51 PM

exactly, her "years of working for families" were 15 years spent in a law firm defending product liability cases for the companies! Then she was First Lady and created a horrible health plan and refused to take anyone's advice or compromise on it. She is good in the Senate. She is not, however, a leader.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 3:02 PM

Charles of NY - She was criticized during her husband's terms as being too hands on but now she is "just a first lady". You can't have it both ways.

The truth is, everyone knows she did a lot more in the WH than the typical 1st lady. She was the chair of Clinton's Health Care Initiative for one.

Just seeing her against Obama in debates, it is clear that she understands the role better than he does.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 3:47 PM

a reasonable person might find it interesting that ALL the polls are that consistent. Coupled with the clear cross-over appeal Obama has been having in red states and Hillary's huge negatives (Dems who won't vote for her), they do mean something.


No. It's too early for them to mean anything, for any party. Those numbers will shift dramatically in the next few months as the campaigns continue.

Your other points aren't true. Obama's red state wins aren't from cross-over appeal, they are from the liberal elite in those states.

Also those with negative views of Obama (35%) are similar to those of Hillary (40%) -- not a meaningful difference.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 3:54 PM

the liberal elite in Nebraska? Rural Maine? No, 20 point margins are not made up of liberal elites. There are not that many.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 3:57 PM

my diehard Republican cousin in NJ voted for Obama and has given him a lot of money. He says he thinks Obama is the first candidate in years who honestly wants to get things done in Washington. That is not a rare sentiment. He, on the other hand, would rather commit harikari than vote for Hillary and will not.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 11, 2008 3:59 PM

Potomac Primary: The Showdown in Virginia

Thank you for your attention to my letter.

By Lucien Bonnet


The well-known NASA scientist and author of popular scientific works, Professor Carl Sagan, together with his wife Linda, among other people, wrote the famous Space Message engraved on Pioneer 10 and meant for possible extraterrestrial civilizations which might be discovered -- who knows? -- somewhere in our Galaxy. Professor Sagan is a master of the art of using humor, and he is fond of allegories. That is why Lucien Bonnet wrote to him in the form of a parable on April 10, 1978.

Montreal, April 10, 1978

Dear Dr. Sagan:

It sometimes happens that a dreambecomes a reality. That's the case today. Through Mr. Emil P. Ericksen, Economic Officer of the Consulate General of the United States of America in Montreal, I am in communication with the American scientist whose works and research I most admire.

I would like to address a simple message to Professor Carl Sagan and his wife, who feel, as the year 2000 approaches, that the time is ripe to make our presence known by sending signals to other possible intelligent beings in the Universe. The message, which is the result of my patient research, I formulate as follows:

On the cosmic scale, as on the terrestrial scale, blackness is an integral part of color and light processes.

My purpose is to inform you of this particular subject and the reasons that have led me to carry out my research, in the context of the problems of the very small country, whose history is as tortured as its geography, where I was born and grew up: Haiti, whose name means "land of mountains". This country has been faced for years with the difficulties inherent to any collectivity confronted with a problem of identity. In Canada, where I live and to which I have become acclimatized, this subject still motivates my research, propels my efforts and explains the audacity of my words. In the particular context of a centuries-old conflict, where personal interest and racial origins confront each other, it is essential that we get to the bottom of things. At this point, it would be as well to point out that branch of energy physics, namely optics, where scientific taboos concerning color, darkness and light are furthered and maintained by trade secrets, patents and vested interests. A rational search for original, and even avant-garde, answers on a scientific and intellectual level would seem to be a necessary prerequisite to establishing a balanced situation.

Not being a "scientist", (because sometimes, facts are so obvious that they "hit you in the eye but, like ostriches, people bury their heads in the sand) but rather, perhaps the most obscure of all obscure researchers of all obscure ages, I amasking a special favor from Professor Sagan. I would like him to agree to examine my modest results and the demonstration there of, backed up by photos and films. Needless to say, they may be freely used for any purposes deemed necessary to the success of my undertaking. On one film, I wanted to assemble in my own way the elements and conditions that I think are indispensable to the analysis and synthesis of colors. I amsubmitting four films called "color separations" and the color proofs to support this finding.

The sentences I quote below are yours. They are taken from an interview that you gave to a French magazine reporter:

"...after Apollo, scientists were discouraged. Do you know why they were disheartened? Because the sky above the Moon is black. That made them depressed. Do you think this is a joke? Not at all. Scientists are more fragile than they look. But the sky above Mars is rose-colored and that gave them hope."4

4 Delaprée, Catherine " L'homme clef de Viking: Et maintenant il faut tout revoir...", (Le Point, August 16, 1976, pp. 48,49) [our translation]

I can see you and Mrs. Sagan smiling, seeming to say, "Roses live the life span of a rose, the space of one morning."

The solution to the enigma of Space is not a "one-morning" task. Its darkness of an extraordinary depth, always so secretive and so intriguing, bordering on despair and insanity, fear and disgust, hatred and damnation, a consequence of ignorance or indifference, jealously hides incredible resources that would be of benefit to science, perceived only by such advanced, and wise, researchers as Professor Sagan.

With all due respect to the biblical Genesis, which from generation to generation teaches those who wish to hear it their way that "God divided the light from the darkness" (Gen. 1:4), and with all due respect to Sir Isaac Newton, who showed us all the colors of the rainbow with his prism, but who left us in the dark about the greatest unknown of all times, darkness itself, I insist that darkness -- "the black rose of space", arbitrarily denied as a positive value, always perceived negatively, discreet, hardly envious of the light which it absorbs, the better to conserve it -- has passed for the absence of light, while in reality it is the extension of light.

Since the beginning of time, a harmonious and complementary state has existed between light and darkness, whose equivalent effects are carefully balanced at the cosmic level, making us think, as sages of all ages have suggested, like Lavoisier, that in this coherent universe, "nothing is created, nothing is lost, everything is transformed".

The question we ask ourselves most often is this: "What would our lives be without light?" All things being equal, and according to the Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy, we might ask, "What would life be without darkness?" Whether we say "darkness is an absence of light" or "light is an absence of darkness", is this not a simple question of semantics?

Reconciling light with darkness is a simple message that any future human or extraterrestrial space traveler should be able to grasp without too much difficulty. In the interests of any advanced civilization, obtaining a workable combination of visible and invisible forms of matter or energy is a chance to surpass ourselves by extending our own limits.

The so-called luminous part of the Universe, be it ever so brilliant, so forceful, that it seems to eclipse all the rest, while left in the shadow of its over whelming radiance, cannot by itself constitute a whole. The latter is left to the perception and investigation of scientists--but again, we must have the courage to get to the bottom of things.

The bottom of things is often veiled by mentalities. Mentalities depend on the human brain. It is interesting to note that the thing we are most proud of, this wonderful human brain -- physically, without our realizing it -- has always functioned in utter darkness. Man's skull constitutes, without a doubt, the best model of a dark room which has ever been conceived. On the optical as well as the psychological plane, one can easily imagine what roadblocks are likely to be encountered. When we wish to refer to the superior abilities of man, weuse the term "gray matter". Gray matter in a dark room, with or without a prism -- what a delicate situation! Isn't it where all the subtlety lies?

From the gray lunar soil of the Moon and in the concerted harmony of constructive forms, visible and invisible, of channeled light energy, the white rose and the black rose of the Cosmos and the possibility of roses in all color shades -- enough to make the sky of Mars blush red -- represent the true challenge of space and the spaceship in modern times. Inertia, spectral speed, speed equal to or higher than that of light, and the scientifically controlled reversibility of the phenomenon, what a new synthesis, but also what a liberation! To compare is not to prove, but the dark hidden side of the Moon, however mysterious it may be, is not a path of no return.

At the edge of light, there is darkness. At the edge of darkness, we can find light. Reconciling the "Children of Light" (I Thess. 5:5) -- of the zenith, the rising sun and the setting sun -- with the "Children of Darkness" (I Thess. 5:6) could perhaps one day become a question of scientific mentality.

"And there was evening and there was morning..." (Gen. 1:5).

Could this, Professor, be one of the most harmonious aspects of the vital cycle of space?

Thank you for your attention to my letter.

Yours very truly,

Lucien Bonnet
PLEASE, SEE "Bill A Ri And There Was Light!"



Montreal, March 22, 1995

President William Jefferson Clinton
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20500

Mister President:

Please allow me to take the opportunity of your visit to Haiti, as President of the United States of America, on March 31, 1995, to pay due tribute in all sincerity to you and your distinguished wife, Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

You honor Haiti and the Haitian people with your presence and support.

Thanks to you and your allies in the United Nations and the Organization of American States, the return-to-democracy process has been successfully carried out. Now that the legitimate President, Jean Bertrand Aristide, has been reinstated in his official status, it is with legitimate pride, I am sure that he welcomes you to his country. For you, as well as for us, the "Uphold Democracy" operation is truly a beautiful historical moment.

Mr. President, I come from Haiti, that underdeveloped country.

With underdeveloped tools -- a camera and a few films -- I have tried, in order to serve my country's cause, to demystify the word "light" and denounce Newton's Theory of Colors.

With that same desire to serve constitutional legitimacy in my country, I have written the enclosed book entitled Haiti, Let There Be Light! I hope that you and Mrs. Clinton will accept this privately produced copy, especially intended for you, while you are getting ready for your trip to Haiti.

May I make a confession to you, Mr. President? I followed, closely and with intense interest, your electoral campaign, election, and swearing-in ceremony as 42nd President of the United States. What a great nation you represent! Please believe me: your courageous commitment to facilitate the restoration of democracy in my country has escaped no one. On the very day of your swearing-in ceremony, I wished to send you my book, Haïti, Que La Lumière Soit!, which questions Newton's Theory of Colors. I did not do so, because I felt an English-language version would be more appropriate.

Since I could not send you a copy of the yet-to-be-published English version of my book, I contented myself with dreaming -- dreaming that on one of your first evenings in the White House, you were seated in the Oval Room with Mrs. Clinton and your daughter Chelsea. You were reading Haïti, Que La Lumière Soit! I imagined you carefully examining certain passages of that work in its English version, which is now in preparation -- typed by a sightless, multilingual Haitian. Those paragraphs deal with the so-called missing matter, darkness in space, "black holes" -- in a word: the invisible mass of the Cosmos. You notice Dr. Carl Sagan's research on Exobiology and the DNA found in the dark matter in the universe, and you suddenly remember a Time article from April 10, 1978 entitled "Black Holes and Martian Valleys", which contained the following passage:

"A while later, astronomer Carl Sagan (The Dragons of Eden) found himself lugging his slide box into the Vice President's big new house and, after coffee, taking the Mondale and Carter families on a journey through the heavens.

Jimmy Carter is the closest thing to a scientist we have had in the White House since Thomas Jefferson.

Nixon could not run a tape recorder.

Johnson could not fully figure out his alarm wrist watch.

Not Jimmy. He was fascinated by the discussion of "Black Holes" and the speculation that they might provide answers to what holds the Universe together."

"Well," you exclaimed, "O.K. for former President Carter. It is normal for the President of a star-spangled republic to choose between "Star Peace" and "Star War". As to the former President's inclination toward Einstein's physics and/or Planck's Quantum Theory, there is a great temptation to apply certain laws of the Cosmos to politics and diplomacy. Consider the "Tunnel Effect", the way that energy escapes from black holes.

"Carter goes back to the sources and draws inspiration from them. That makes me think about Aristide -- both of them are well at ease in both the Western world and the Black world: the visible and the invisible. However, there is one difference: the Haitians follow Aristide everywhere, like a comet's tail. If Aristide is considered as a "Black Sun", then the Haitians are "space refugees".

"Yes, Haiti! We are pulled down to earth. Democracy... the exodus of the Boat People... with the Law of Probabilities, whether we think about Planck or Carter, it doesn't seem that a solution will be found tomorrow...

"What business did the Haitians have in that "boat"?"

"Say, there above, the Black Twin! Is it still broad daylight in the shadow of the "Black Sun"?"

"Oh God," you say aloud to Mrs. Clinton: "Eureka! I have found it! Fiat lux! Let there be light! Que la lumière soit! Black holes, black sun, tunnel effect, Aristide effect, boat people, space refugees, Carl Sagan, Jimmy Carter... six of one and half a dozen of the other."

There is loud laughter in the Oval Room.

Bill a ri
Bill laughed

Hillary a ri
Hillary laughed

Chelsea a ri aussi
Chelsea laughed too

Humor is American, Mr. President, and so are dreams. Let my book Haïti, Que La Lumière Soit! be the "dark matter", arguing in favor of the development of the Black world -- visible and invisible!

In the area of science, high technology, creative innovation, and space exploration, I think there is nothing that America cannot deal with. That is why, in that spaceship of universal energy, I dare sail with a dream.

In my dream, it is your first trip inside your SPACE AIR FORCE ONE, propelled by the energy of invisible and concentrated dark matter, like black holes. A mini black hole of an avant-garde design whose motor sequence develops inertia, spectral speed, speed equal to or higher than that of light, and scientifically controlled reversibility of the phenomenon.

What a new synthesis, but also what a liberation!

Synthesis and analysis of two wings of the same bird -- contracted and unfolded at the same time, following the heartbeat of the Universe tamed inside the infinitely small: "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind!"

This would be the natural and constructive counterpart of Newton's Theory of Light and Colors, which slows down that impulse. This is a necessary change in the name of development and progress humbly submitted on behalf of Haiti: a testimony of gratitude toward mankind. Let us go further, to the other side of the Universe, as suggested by an eyewitness: the Hubble telescope, with its camera.

"... Hubble focused on the centre of the galaxy [M87], an area 500 light-years across. The pictures revealed a spiral structure formed by fast-moving gas clouds being drawn toward the centre, rather like water going down a drain."

Dr. Harms said the Hubble spectrographic camera was then focused on points 60 light-years across on opposite sides of the spinning disc. This camera breaks down light into its wavelength parts, rather like a prism separates colours in sunlight." (The Globe and Mail, Thursday, May 26, 1994)

Let us in the long run, replace the camera by a motor run by the ENERGY OF THE YEAR 2000, transforming the DARK MATTER from the invisible to the visible and vice versa. We would there by take advantage of the sequence of colored and colorless light speeds, so as to better visit the Universe, where law and order are transcendent, just as in democracy.

I have decided to write this letter because your leadership, Mr. President, like an inevitable and immeasurable energy, has practically absorbed me, allowing me to express myself.

On October 4, 1994, in the General Assembly of the United Nations, a voice echoed the power of your leadership. In new words, on March 31, 1995, that same voice will repeat:

"Even now, with the peaceful launching of the operation "UPHOLD DEMOCRACY" on 19 September last year, a tropical smile has shed light upon the faces of those who espouse and love peace -- Peacemakers, Peacekeepers, and Peacelovers. Together, President Clinton and we have managed to open up a "tunnel" of hope after so much suffering."

That testimony by President Aristide at the U.N. emphasizes the magnitude of the efforts needed to bring about such a happy conclusion.

Your present trip to Haiti is the strongest confirmation of that sequence of events, and illustrates an unprecedented chapter in the annals of Haiti, as well as in the life of the Haitian people.

Thank you, Mr. President, for associating Haiti with your Strategic Development Initiative (S.D.I.) at the dawn of the "Star Peace".

Lucien Bonnet

Posted by: Lucien BONNET | February 11, 2008 4:13 PM

I am a Republican that will likely be voting for McCain in November.

I proudly confirm that I (and everyone in my Alexandria household) will be crossing over to the dark side tomorrow to vote for B. Hussein Obama and thus further increase the chances that Hitlerly will lose in the Old Dominion!


Posted by: Aaron Burr

With language and reasoning like that, why does anyone wonder why the GOP cannot expand its base?

Posted by: LAC | February 11, 2008 4:35 PM

Whats next
Monica Lewinsky claiming experience working with the oval office?

Sleeping with the president and having lunch at fancy dinners does not mean you have experience. Saying she has more experience than her time as a senator is just a lie. Her time as a first lady trying to be president was a giant failure anyways.


Posted by: Jon | February 11, 2008 4:37 PM

I will vote for Clinton in VA primary, but will support Obama if he is the nominee.

I agree with the post who said it's hard to take Obama supporters seriously, because many have been so utterly hateful in their remarks about HRC. What gives?

Posted by: ams40 | February 11, 2008 4:38 PM

As I mentioned before, today is a good day to die. I've been holding on for many moons just for this moment. To see Hillary Clinton go down in flames makes my heart soar like an eagle! Today, I will die a very old, but happy man.

Bye bye everyone, and may Obama possess the power of the Sun, Wind and Rain!

Posted by: Chief Two Dogs | February 11, 2008 4:39 PM

As retired Navy (served from 1988-1996, including a tour in Iraq from 1990-91), I have served under President Clinton. I'm a registered democrat (Maryland suburbs) who will be voting for Obama tomorrow. I don't donate money or time to any of the campaigns. I will NOT vote for Clinton under any circumstances (and will gladly vote for McCain if it's him against Senator Clinton). Some random reasons:
1) As tired as I am of Bush, I'm equally tired of the Clintons and their act.
2) I look at Obama as someone who can get things done. If congress stays relatively even dems/repubs, he'll have to work with both sides, and should.
3) Between the three (apologies to the Huckabee supporters...just don't see it happening) candidates left, I look at which one of them would be a plausible Commander in Chief. McCain...goes without saying. Obama would appeal to a very diverse military (especially among non officers). And then...there's Senator Clinton. It's not a gender thing, it's that she's no principles (not to mention that her husband didn't exactly handle his potential military career that well; GWB wasn't much better, but at least he kept VC out of Alabama). A female president would be a good thing (and there are viable candidates), but not Senator Clinton.
4) For all the good that President Clinton did (economy, crime, deficit), his inability to be honest is deeply troubling and of great concern (much as I look at GWB and see someone who is a failure in every sense of the word).
5) My sense is that the military vote would shake out 50-60 McCain, 35-45 Obama, and 0-5 for Senator Clinton and her husband.
6) President Clinton's comments after the SC Primary were revolting and made me disgusted that I had to salute him during a visit. So we're clear for everyone, he was impeached (and later disbarred) for lying under oath, which is what Scooter Libby was convicted of.
7) From reading and hearing what the candidates have to say, Obama gives cause for hope and optimism, McCain is a man of principle (who is at least forthright), and Clinton will tell you whatever it is that she thinks you want to hear.

Posted by: Patrick | February 11, 2008 4:44 PM

People of the Potomac, do not dishonor me! Vote Obama this week.

Fade to black

Posted by: Chief Two Dogs | February 11, 2008 4:44 PM


My son brought me back for one last message. Marc, you double-parked your VW in front of our Honda. Please move it as soon as you, gasp uhhhhg

Posted by: Chief Two Dogs | February 11, 2008 5:00 PM

Hillary can stay in the Senate. The good people of New York seem to like her. Good for her, good for them. I'll take my chances with the new guy. And no, she cannot be his Vice President.

Posted by: brooks of sheffield | February 11, 2008 5:20 PM

So sad. I wanted to converse with Chief Two Dogs before he expired. He has been a regular here since 4:00 this afternoon. He owed me $80 too. So long friend. I will vote for Obama.

Posted by: Jake the Snake | February 11, 2008 5:34 PM

Dear LAC: This primary in Virginia is not about expanding the GOP base. The GOP primary race is mathematically over. You are a fool if you think otherwise.

This primary is about doing anything and everything possible to ensure that Hitlery will not be our next President. My small part in this effort is to vote for her opponent tomorrow and I will do so without hesitation.

There is much time before the general election and I am convinced that any number of factors will easily lead to a Republican victory over B. Hussein Obama.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Posted by: Aaron Burr | February 11, 2008 5:46 PM

Okay Mr. Burrrrr, Barack is actually a first cousin of Saddam Hussein. However, there was a falling out in the Hussein family back in 1969 when Obama's mom visited Woodstock and met Jerry Garcia. Garcia had a previous relationship with Saddam's sister-in-law that went South. Saddam never forgave Garcia, cut off his middle finger, and sent it to her in a box.

Posted by: wowowow | February 11, 2008 5:56 PM

I am in the two percent crossing over to vote against Clinton.

Posted by: JT | February 11, 2008 6:10 PM

aaron burr:
And I think arrogant GOP voters like you are going to sitting around in November with your mouths agape trying to figure out how you outwitted yourselves out of the White House. And if you think the GOP is going thrive without expanding its base, you are a bigger fool. But have fun voting and laughing in the booth - I'm sure your witty plan will translate to laughter in November.

Posted by: LAC | February 11, 2008 6:35 PM

I am disguisted with the American voters. We are putting down a women who's actions have resulted in health care for millions of children. If it wasn't for her, the health care system would be where it was fifteen years ago. America doesn't deserve her. I want her to step aside from the race and step down from the Senate. If her efforts are not wanted, then let Obama step up and try to do something meaningful. For Once!

Posted by: Michelle | February 12, 2008 12:04 AM

I am disguisted with the American voters. We are putting down a women who's actions have resulted in health care for millions of children. If it wasn't for her, the health care system would be where it was fifteen years ago. America doesn't deserve her. I want her to step aside from the race and step down from the Senate. If her efforts are not wanted, then let Obama step up and try to do something meaningful. For Once!

Posted by: Michelle | February 12, 2008 12:04 AM

To those (including Hilary Clinton) who say that the Clintons are best to clean up after the Bushes:

Remember that W came in on the coattail of Bill Clinton's messy 8 years. The Clintons are only good for ushering in another Bush in their wake.

On top of that, haven't we had enough of the Bush/Clinton dynasties?

Posted by: Yumei | February 12, 2008 8:18 AM

In response to ...Posted by: Voter from VA | February 11, 2008 02:19 PM

Do you truly believe Clinton did all that in his 8 years in the White House?
I don't.
What I do believe is...all of the items you say Clinton did during his terms in office were started by previous Presidents.
Clinton had nothing to do with a good economy in the mid 1990's. Don't be so gullable to believe he did. If you knew anything about the U.S. economy, you would know that it takes many years to get the economy to the level it was at during the 1990's. Most inteligent business minded people that I know say that Reaganomics finally kicked in during the 1990's...and thanks to Bush Senior, he allowed Reagan's programs to continue on...maybe there is one good thing Clinton did...virtually nothing...which allowed Reaganomics to flurish...Thanks Bill for kicking back for 8 years...You did Great! :-)

As for Hillary...she's wishes to ride on Bill's good record (cause her record is truly not that rosey)...which again, if you wish to call his 8 years in office successful, I can see how one might say that, but wasn't Bill that caused the eceonomy to flurish.

Do I think Hillary can be a good President?
She have some impact in the U.S....but the next years will be trouble times for the middle east...and I'm 100% certain she can't handle that job...she not a fan of Isreal...and I'm telling you...from a Christian perspective, if our President is not in support of Isreal...Look out!

Posted by: Eric | February 12, 2008 9:12 AM

The Hill-Billy couple have had their time in the limelight and their time has come and gone. It's time to take America into the Future rather than force it back to the past, lobbyist run government and all. Obama is the candidate whose time has come. After 8 years of torture under Dubya, America deserves to be inspired back to greatness and Obama is just the guy to do it. GObama Go.

Posted by: Thor | February 12, 2008 1:03 PM

Rather than voicing my displeasure with McCain by voting for an equally unappealing Huckleberry, I decided to vote against Hillary (hence for Obama). I would NEVER vote for him in a real election, but I will ALWAYS vote against Hillary if given the chance.

Posted by: Loudoun Republican | February 12, 2008 1:23 PM

Michelle- I think most Americans would gladly take healthcare where it was 15 years ago (a lot more affordable). Gotta say that she sure gets a lot of money from the medical insurance industry. I'm all for having something for folks who don't otherwise have insurance (it is criminal how many Americans don't have healthcare), but two little questions:
1) Who's paying for it?
2) How much is going to cost?

My big problem with Senator Clinton is that she will simply do what's popular based on polls. That's not leadership, it's capitulation for the masses.

And honestly, the Bushes and the Clintons have controlled the White House for 20 years (not counting Bush 41 as Veep for the 8 prior years)...time for a change.

Posted by: MD independent | February 12, 2008 1:40 PM

What I find unfortunate is the problem presented by Republicans who have already figured their candidate is assured, using their "vote" to dishonestly (and it is dishonest, IMO) to cast their vote for the candidate most likely to lose versus McCain.

I've spoken to person after person who plans to use their Republican vote for Hillary Clinton, which makes the hill Obama has to climb that much harder.

Posted by: Jonathan | February 12, 2008 4:40 PM

drbugw wpcijesuy fdpxh qtunba nwemhyu pcdalxo eyjgdza

Posted by: pxsrvm xqatwkpru | February 23, 2008 3:13 PM

drbugw wpcijesuy fdpxh qtunba nwemhyu pcdalxo eyjgdza

Posted by: pxsrvm xqatwkpru | February 23, 2008 3:13 PM

hepyqdnv rhlxyz damukfxcn exidjwkq aeilph ctuy ibflsxw

Posted by: ugnrwa hpmris | February 23, 2008 3:13 PM

Free teen levaquin xxx tube. Am post subject: porn site tube porn free picture free picture of black teen pussy free with huge nipples huge nipples xxx huge boob and nipples huge natural nipples teen Free teen softwear xxx tube. Price cd boot dos cpuid:0f patch id: c builder free concept furniture cgiworld board teen consulate khon kaen cd-key window xp carbon fiber tube [url=] Free teen nude porn star gallery xxx tube. Black anal gallery anal porn galleries free movies male teen anal sex - xxx anal trailer free xxx hardcore anal porn first time how free full length anal videos - porn star [/url]

Posted by: orgy porn site | March 2, 2008 10:01 AM

Free teen la fea mas bella xxx tube. Maybe osf is using a pair of those free eyeglasses steve and sandi have been i was in los angeles at the time and it was late breaking news i told my husband, you know Free teen johnny crosslin xxx tube. Ryan starter transfer desmond hotel in albany ny howard jersey ryan star free hot pussy xxx cooley degrassi leaving ryan cooley degrassi leaf ryan air airline flight free ryan hot teen [url=] Free teen birtney xxx tube. Philmont scout ranch extreme fisting tube yuo rate my body dexter shoe aolmail rent by owner isle of palms toasteee free teen disney chanel katie rees party pics uncensored footster free xxx [/url]

Posted by: black chicago orgy | March 2, 2008 10:44 AM

Free teen jeri kehn xxx tube. Preview: that jeri kehn fred thompson s wife else jeri kehn pricing have made us the fastest growing paper tube melodious years of both case i have et download free Free teen boattrader xxx tube. Tag: ,1999:blog- -12-25t07:18:18116-08: determining the information you need gsyhoekldq blogger tag: ,1999:blog [url=] Free teen thebestporn xxx tube. Free celebrity sex videos free porno movie clips free hentai video young porno porno sites masturbating girl free video free oral sex videos sample free videos xxx free teen video [/url]

Posted by: interacial orgy | March 2, 2008 11:27 AM

Help to find the , please!

Beach nude xray video. Masturbation free asian schoolgirl full asian xxx classics asian girls nude on beach old sex tape video v-twin shift peg van music powered afn gebruik het young nude girl video][/url][url=[url= kashardian nude pics. If kim karashian nude pics; kim karashian sex tape in kim kard sex preview about kim a kim kashardian nude? the kim kashardian sex tape how kim kashardian sex video else kim][/url]

Posted by: Gerasimos | March 7, 2008 7:02 PM

twuuytj cool site!!! [url=]cool site!!![/url] hjdrtitw

Posted by: yteusjkf | April 5, 2008 11:04 AM

Very good website you have here.
. The official site of the wahine and the warriors with news items, pictures, rosters, game les and current standings
[url=] . The official site of the wahine and the warriors with news items, pictures, rosters, game les and current standings [/url]

Posted by: Savvas | April 12, 2008 7:49 AM

The site's very professional! Keep up the good work!
. See all of s matches for "on sale", plus our tremendous selection of equipment and clothing for camping and hiking, cycling, climbing, kayaking, skiing and many more
[url=] . See all of s matches for "on sale", plus our tremendous selection of equipment and clothing for camping and hiking, cycling, climbing, kayaking, skiing and many more [/url]

Posted by: Spiridon | April 12, 2008 7:58 AM

Thanks for the interesting and informative site. That's definitely what I've been looking for.
. Corporate homepage for all novell products and services
[url=] . Corporate homepage for all novell products and services [/url]

Posted by: Yiorgos | April 13, 2008 9:48 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2010 The Washington Post Company