Clinton cites possibility of Obama assassination reason to remain in race

Highly doubt it. You wouldn't have wrote a paragraph like that. Go ahead and vote for McCain. See taxes rise and over $2 billion every week going to a unwinnable war. I'll still be posting from Toronto.

 

This is all a GOP dream come true. After 8 years of Bush, if the Republicans are able to retain the White House the Democrats ought to fold up shop and pursue a lucrative career in greeting cards. Big future in greeting cards, ya know.

 

But WHY is she in it when she has basically lost already? Those other primaries were different (and for one, Bill Clinton wrapped up his 1992 nomination in March). If this was the first time she said it, then I would let it pass. But this is like the third or fourth time she has mentioned an assassination.

 

There is no doubt in my mind her remarks have completely killed any chance of her being selected as Obama's running mate. I didn't think she had any chance of being chosen anyway, but (for public consumption) it makes choosing someone else a lot easier for Obama. I doubt either he or his campaign ever refers back to these remarks because they just want Hillary to go away so they can focus on bigger things.

I've heard of single-issue voters but if your trigger is so sensitive that a comment or "hint" from Obama's camp will switch your vote to McCain, then it's likely you will eventually find some reason to vote for McCain. Unless you are feeling this way out of the emotion of the moment. There are a lot more substantive reasons for deciding how to vote. If people held Hillary to the same standard, probably 90% of the general public would have ruled out voting for her instead of 35-40% (or whatever it is). I could list several statements (or "hints") by herself and her camp that stink to high heaven but none of them individually would affect my vote.

To each his own.

 

Exactly. Even the newspaper itself and a strategist from Obama's own campaign have even said as much. This is about politically correct posturing and another opportunity for the paranoia so many folks have about Clinton to take over.

I'm all about ideological issues, and it would kill me to vote GOP. But there are some principles that are very important to me. I accepted a long time ago that a certain proportion of folks in this country, for whatever reason, have ridiculous double standards toward Clinton. It's never been OK for her to have the identical ambition that most other politicians have -- whether it be about her gender or whatever, it is what it is. But from that has come this amazing, illogical paranoia unlike anything I've ever seen before. I know this country has a long way to go, so I've already made my peace with the double standards and such.

But if Obama's own campaign starts using that same paranoia and twists a matter-of-fact statement clearly on the timeline theme into something ridiculous, I'm done. That, to me, would show a lack of substance and essentially stand for the type of Swift Boat campaigning used by Rove in 2004.

Now, the good news is that Obama's campaign has given me zero evidence or reason to believe that they would act in such a manner. But if they ever do, I'm done with it.

 

I find it funny that you would say all these things and be all Democrat, but if Obama's campaign says anything about Hillary's fourth assassination comparison, then you are done with them. Closet Republican?

 

She wants the VP spot. I don't think she would have the intent of suggesting Obama might get assissinated if she wanted it. She's still in it for that - thats all she has left to go for.

 

She's not getting it with what she has said though. Obama has already said no anyways.

 

Get over yourself.

Hill is the one who ****ed up here, but it's the Obama campaign that "better be careful?" I'm getting sick of listening to the Hill supporters hold their votes hostage. "Do as I say or I'll vote McCain! I mean it!"

Barack has repeatedly shown himself FAR more classy and has run a far better campaign. His perceived offenses don't meet one fraction of the bull**** that the Clinton campaign has been doing- and you don't get to explain it all away by saying he's the frontrunner.

If you are indeed someone "who believes deeply in the Democratic party and hasn't ever voted for a Republican", then go get your values checked. If you're going to make a switch to BushIII because of perceived offenses by Obama on your girl, then your ability to overlook her offenses is boggling.

And I'm saying this as someone who thinks this entire dustup on assassinationgate is unnecessary.

 

It's more than an issue -- it's representative of the larger theme and tone of Obama's entire campaign. If it's really about change, then it's about substance over soundbites. It's about deciding things based on merit instead of your personal ego. If these comments have any impact whatsoever on Obama's selection process, that would show me it's not about substance and instead about the same illogical paranoia the Bush campaign routinely played to.

As for me wanting to vote for McCain, you're dead wrong. That I can promise. I have an enormous amount of respect for both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I greatly respect and love both of these campaigns and what they stand for. I've always been a fan of Obama and his views on most issues are very, very similar to my own. But the same is also true with how I feel about Clinton, and that's why I'm sensitive to how this plays out. I can promise you, I am far, far from a rabid Clinton-only supporter, and if you think that I'm a lost cause for Obama's vote -- I can promise there are millions and millions a lot more dedicated than I am. If Obama effectively decides they're irrelevant and takes a similar approach that you did, he will lose. It really is that simple.

Again, however, I don't expect him to do that.

 

Get over myself? Did you miss where I prefaced this by acknowledging I was only one vote, and thus irrelevant? I have no delusions that my vote or thought process means much of anything in the grand picture.

No one ****ed up here. It was a matter-of-fact statement related to a timeline theme, and then the politically correct police took over. I haven't seen any offense by Clinton that would be remotely comparable to the hatred, paranoia and lack of logic it would take to eliminate her from VP consideration due to this statement.

 

And you also said:

So if Obama says anything against what Hillary just said, you and your Hillary supports will vote McCain? I have always thought Hillary was more Republican than Democrat this election, so I guess it is only natural for her supporters.

 

Never voted for a Republican in my entire life. Hard to find someone more committed to the Democratic party than I am. Hard to find someone who despises conservative values more than I do.

I suppose you can tell yourself whatever you want, though.

 

Again, we're talking about a small group of supporters within a couple of states. I didn't realize I needed to state again how irrelevant that is in the big picture.

Sure, it could be representative of how a lot of people will think, but it's speculative and I'll be the first to admit that.

EDIT: See, this is the disconnect I'm talking about with regards to the Obama campaign and the actions of some of his supporters. As for me personally, I'm nowhere remotely close to a Republican so it's not really applicable to me. But Obama's campaign has always been about trying to tear down Dem/GOP divides and reaching across the aisle. Here, not only are you dismissing McCain's supporters -- but it seems you're even dismissing the more moderate Dem voters who chose Clinton as lost causes. That's not what Obama's campaign is about, and it's not how he can win an election.

 

Why is that every time Hillary or Bill says something unfortunate or outrageous (assassination, MLK/LBJ, hard-working people/white people, Jesse won SC too) the onus is on Barack to tread ever so carefully in how he responds so he doesn't offend her?

How does she respond when he says something stupid or inelegant like the bitter stuff? She milks it for all it's worth. She can't stop talking about it. But heaven forbid Obama makes hay out of anything she says.

 

Bull. Here's a quote from someone who just might have more of an interest in Clinton's comments than anyone around here, or the Obama camp, who said "her remarks have no place in this campaign." A nice way to hit her on it without appearing to "take advantage," while taking advantage.


Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has endorsed Mrs. Clinton, defended her remarks in a telephone interview on Friday evening.

“I’ve heard her make that argument before,” Mr. Kennedy said, speaking on his cellphone as he drove to the family compound in Hyannis Port, Mass. “It sounds like she was invoking a familiar historical circumstance in support of her argument for continuing her campaign.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/us/politics/24clinton.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin


Clinton shouldn't have made the comment simply because it was a poor choice politically. Given the reaction from the Obama camp, that is obvious. Every possible gaff from Clinton "shows it is time for her to end this and pull out!!!" Yada-yada. This is coming from someone old enough to have actively worked to support Bobby Kennedy back in 1968 and who sees Bobby as the best politician he ever gave a damn about, including his brother Jack. Who saw him get murdered live on TV late that night of the California primary. I just don't see her remarks as anything more than what Bobby's son said they were. Better left unsaid, but not because of the words, but because of how the Obama campaign would use those words. Another gaff. No more.



Impeach Bush.

 

Agreed on all counts.

I'm glad I read those posts, if only that I know not to take The Cat seriously on much of anything anymore.

 

Because he's the one preaching so much about a different kind of politics! Look, I've doubted him before, but if he's right and he continues to practice what he preaches, that's great. It would certainly be a good thing. However, when you make such statements the centerpiece of your campaign, you bring a higher standard on which you are judged.

In addition, in this particular case, I'm really lost for how it could even remotely be perceived as negative toward Obama, with the exception of those pushing an agenda.

 

So with that in mind- you're willing to vote for BushIII because- gasp- people might actually be offended by something she said that is incredibly stupid?

You claim to despise conservative values but you're ready to vote for more war, no significant energy, economic, or health care reform- because of the way the Obama campaign MIGHT interpret some asinine comment of hers? Not even over something they DO, but how they REACT to this? I'll say it again- get over yourself. I'm going to chalk this up to the grieving stages of seeing your candidate finally drop out. (She has no one to blame but herself for her failure, btw.)

There are plenty of pundits out there willing to defend the "timeline" argument- but the unversally agree that even in the best possible light, this was an incredibly stupid, insensitive, asinine comment. For someone who is supposed to be "experienced" someone running for our highest office, it's just bad.

But you are going to vote for conservative values you despise if Obama should dare interpret this the 'wrong' way.

 

Wow, nice find. So now, the newspaper itself, one of Obama's own lead strategists, and now RFK's own son have all dismissed the remarks as irrelevant in the broader context. At this point, there's no reason for this to even be a story -- except for the Clinton paranoia issue.