Not during the debate (although he should have. What the hell would she respond with. You are right Republicans generally hate me...) He actually said it after.
No kidding? I happen to despise that piece of legislation. My understanding is that as First Lady she actively opposed the original bill because of concern that it would harm women and children (Bill used a pocket veto to kill it). The law then required that if a divorced man filed for bankruptcy, he had to pay off his alimony and child-support obligations first. The bill gave equal status to credit card companies and other lenders trying to get back their money. The vote passing it, that she missed, changed that part of the law, but left the rest of it just the way the banking lobby wanted it... shafting the consumer. So she comes out good with regards to divorced women trying to collect child support and alimony, but not so good for the rest of those who might have to declare bankruptcy, who in large numbers are folks that have lost their job, are sick or have a family member who is sick and have no health insurance (often because they lost their job... we need some kind of universal health care!), or perhaps gone through a divorce. Impeach Bush.
Is he accusing his supporters single-minded bloc voting, and praising supporters of Clinton are more rational? So far, on those CNN blogs and this board, I only see threats from so-called "life long dems", that they are going to vote for republicans if Obama loses to Clinton. I have yet to see a Clinton supporter threatens like that. Or is he trying to insult your intelligence to expect you to believe without telling you how? Just like those promises "every single dollar of all of my programs are sponsored, but they are not on my website, and I won't tell you how"?
He's recognizing that Hillary's supporters are true Democrats....while many of his are just swept up in the whole cult of personality thing . This is getting dirty. Not good.
Yep...it's a pretty bad law. I represent the people hurt by this legislation every day. It's pretty bad that Clinton fancies herself a populist, yet she supports this kind of drivel.
Either that, or that his supporters are a combination of people who are sick of Hillary's divisive politics, moderate independents who'd happily vote for McCain, new voters who are interested in a unifying leader, and Republicans tired of the Republican Party. Which is basically all true. He wins independents, he wins new/young voters, and he wins Republicans. She wins long-time Democrats.
You missed the smiley major Don't make me go Swoly on you He doesn't have to say that crap. There are enough pundits and bloggers to say it for him. It's out there already.
Sorry I think there's an interesting divide here. The vast majority of liberals/moderates that read the blogs and that type of thing seem to be Obama supporters. They've been helpful in getting out his message. But it may be telling that Hillary's biggest supporters are the elderly and the least educated - also the least likely to read the pundits and bloggers. Ordinarily, you'd think the "hope" message would play best with the uneducated while the "policy wonk / experience" candidate would do better with the more educated - but we're seeing the opposite. That tells me Obama's message isn't getting out very effectively to those other groups. This may be his attempt to reach those groups more effectively, though they probably don't watch post-debate coverage much either. But at least coming from his mouth directly, it might have more of a chance to reach mainstream news coverage. Obama needs to break into some combination of older / less educated / white / women voters - or he can't win. Those are the four bigger groups compared to their counterparts, and Hillary is winning all four.