It's utter b.s. to claim that Hillary has been any more negative than Barack in this campaign. Take this little quiz being put out by the Hillary camp as proof: Who said Hillary Clinton is “literally willing to do anything to win” Who said Hillary Clinton is attempting to “deceive the American people” Who claimed Hillary Clinton has a secret 20-year plan to become president Who called Hillary Clinton a calculating, poll-tested, divisive figure Who called Hillary Clinton “one of the most secretive politicians in America” Who said Hillary Clinton’s campaign is “playing politics with war” Who said John McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton Who called Hillary Clinton dishonest Who referred to Hillary Clinton as “a monster” Who said Hillary Clinton is “not being straight with the American people” Who said of Hillary, “The American people are not going to elect a president that they do not trust” Who claimed Hillary Clinton “consistently” and “deliberately” misleads the American people The Obamatrons are guilty of HYPOCRISY (and supporting a candidate with a low level management trainee resume).
If Hillary gets the nomination I am definitely voting for McCain. After what she did to the party and how she has acted I would never wish she gets the power of running this country.
I care about reducing the deficit, bolstering education, and improving our international standing, as well as investment into science and technology. I believe that doing these things are the long terms keys to keeping this country in good shape - everything else is a disguise. A president can't cure fundamental market realities. Hilary can't lower our gas prices, but what someone can do is thing longer term, about how to lower our dependence on foreign oil - both Obama and McCain think in this direction. If you want to make Universal Health COverage the main issue - that's great, but it won't make this country more competitive, it might make it less at a time we face the toughest challenges. Being protectionist isn't going to save America. We need need and innovative efforts to improve a dismal education system, to seriously address fuel economy standards, and who can artfully deal with the rest of the world. I don't trust a divisive figure with no vision like Hillary. No way. Health Care? Figure out how to balance the budget first.
Getting closer to Batman's point of view. Hillary again today in an interview with ABC news had this to say (again)... Clinton called her base of support "broader and deeper" than Obama's, and said, You know what Hillary? Maybe you should run as a republican? Oh wait! You are! the whole interview http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Vote2008/Story?id=4763893&page=1
Several (4-5) New York Superdelegates breaking towards Hillary today!! Take it to the convention, folks. Barack just can't close.
With Obama's warchest at his arsenal outspending Hillary 3-1, he STILL can't close out a woman that half the country hates.
funny! A year ago she was the presumed nominee. Obama is fighting Hillary, Bill, McCain and the RNC...and still winning.
FIFY Defection Of Longtime Superdelegate Jolts Clinton Andrew was one of five superdelegates to swing behind Obama during the day, compared to four Clinton netted. The result was to trim the former first lady's once-imposing advantage among party luminaries who will attend the convention to 268-248. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/01/defection-of-longtime-sup_n_99741.html
Don't go there this was Hillary race to lose from the get go...It's no way he should be in front of her right now. She had this thing on a golden platter riding bill Clinton name to the senate and super delegate friends already lined up from 8 years ago waiting. Plus she has the republicans helping her out to prolong this race.
Depends on what you mean by "close out". If you mean win the nomination outright today, that's certainly true. The Dem rules basically make that impossible because there are too many outstanding delegates. If you mean have a 99% probability of winning the election, he's already closed her out. She can't win at this point barring a massive collapse - this has been true for well over a month. If the opponent was named "Edwards" instead of "Clinton", no one would be acting like the race was still in doubt.
Obama has 1732 delegates or so and needs 2025 to clinch the nomination. With somewhere around 700 delegates outstanding, there is a very real possibility that he does not meet that mark. After that it goes to the convention, right? Why would Hillary only have a 1% chance of being the nominee, especially with Howard Dean's recent statement that superdelegates would back someone based on electability and recent polling having Hillary doing better against McCain than Obama is?
mc mark, I get why some people are bent out of shape over Hillary Clinton, mad, upset, but I can't see feeling that way because of this comment. Is she wrong? Impeach Bush.
It's totally irrelevant is the main problem. If the Dems ran under the Republican scheme don't you think that both HRC and BO would have run different campaigns? It's the same problem I had with the complaint in 2000 the Gore won the popular vote. So what? Both candidates ran campaigns based on the system in place. Trying to extrapolate that to different systems is foolish at best, disingenuous at worst.
I thought she was campaigning for the nomination? She's trying to make a political point. She's won several of the big states that could very well go blue in the general and she's using the comment to illustrate that fact. And she's not the first person to say it, by a long shot. Impeach Bush.
So you really believe she's making a relevant point by saying "if we ran the system in a different way, I would be winning"?
