|
|
|
|
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 10:02:23 AM |
Insight, Knowledge, Experience.
Well, as to knowledge, she's supporting the tax holiday on gas. That does nothing to solve the problem Americans face, and puts them deeper in debt. That's one of many positions that she's taken that shows an ability to pander to voters - and avoid solutions.
As for experience, she's got the same as Obama does - regarding the presidency.....none.
Being the First Lady doesn't give you experience at being the President. You learn that on the job, not from watching someone else do it.
As for insight, she's failed to do the math on the DNC. She's up there talking about leading, when she's behind in every single factual accounting of the primary race - except twenty super delegates.
She's working towards tarnishing Obama, with her advisers assistance. That's not good for the party, and serves her little benefit. The country doesn't need any more division, and the Democratic party certainly doesn't either.
As I've said, if she's the Democratic candidate - get ready for the shock and awe campaign to start against her.
As President, expect four straight years hearing all the stories you''ve heard countless times (plus all the new ones) repeated until she leaves office.
We can look back on this thread, in November, and see who is proven right.
 | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 10:17:18 AM |
based on her experience and grasp of major issues, to confront those challenges
And that is the hugest misconception about Hillary. The gas tax holiday an example she has zero grasp. The experience advantage is totally overblown... there is no experience advantage and what experience she's had has been at both failure and ineffectiveness.
I never argued against the fact that she's just as capable as any other candidate, she's just not more capable and a vote for her IMO is a vote for 4 more years of failure. If she did sneak up and win the election, there won't be a second term. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 11:06:40 AM | Hillary seems to have lost sight of the bigger picture.
I'm thinking that she's been blinded by her own ambition and is forgetting that Obama is, after all, on the same team as her.
He's in competition with her for the nomination but, is not an enemy.
Methinks she's damaging the greater good of the whole party.
Doing the republican's a major favour, and giving them a free ride, while she expends all of her energies trying to take down someone from her own party. Much too negative for my taste.
This is supposed to be about something for the greater good of the whole country!
She's coming across to me, as all, and only, about her own ambitions.
IMO....she's making Obama look classier every day!
I'm just an interested observer, and that's my two cents worth. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 12:38:08 PM | intheswim
The political analyst are saying the same thing. Obama just received a new endorsement for the same reason. When I started saying that McCain was going to win, it was not because I love McCain. I really do not have anything against him.
This has become so ugly that Hillary people will not vote for Obama and vice versa. Her ambition is getting in the way of the needs of this country. I do not have respect for her. I
am beginning to believe she may be on the ticket. If this happens McCain will win, because she has divided the party. I am proud to be an independent.
< | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 1:08:00 PM |
Well, as to knowledge, she's supporting the tax holiday on gas. That does nothing to solve the problem Americans face, and puts them deeper in debt. That's one of many positions that she's taken that shows an ability to pander to voters - and avoid solutions.
Montreal Guy is right. I'm surprised that Hillary is stooping to the level of this stunt. Not one economist or fiscal policy expert thinks there is any merit to it. Hillary knows better, and is merely following McCain's lead in calling for the "gas-tax holiday" Shows no leadership on her part. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 4:31:24 PM | faith2565, here is an argument that Hillary would be more likely to win in the general election than Obama.
As you said the fight has divided the party. And polls have shown that some Obama supporters would not vote for Clinton if she won the nomination and some Clinton supporters wouldn't vote for Obama if he won.
However, if you look at their political stances, the situation favors Hillary. Hillary is the more moderate, further to the right if you will, of the two democratic candidates and Obama's supporters are the more liberal members of the party. Now if she wins the nomination, these liberal members of the democratic party will be faced with the decision of voting for an even further to the right candidate in McCain. It would not be logical to vote for someone even further to the right than the democratic candidate you didn't select because they were too far to the right than the one you wanted.
However, oddly, the argument does not hold in the reverse. Clinton's supporters are the more moderate, further to the right if you will, members of the democratic party. But if Obama wins then they will be faced with voting for Obama or a candidate that is further to the right than their preferred candidate. But since these voters are already in the center to the right point of view it would be much easier for them to vote for McCain than for Obama.
Or here's another way of looking at it in the diagrams below. I arranged the candidates from left to right according to their political stances. Imagine you have an Obama supporter that I represented by a "v" under the "O".
O --- H --- M
v
In order to vote for McCain, if Hillary won, the Obama voter would have to jump far over to the right to vote for McCain.
But on the other hand suppose we have a Clinton supporter that I represented by a "v" under the "H".
O --- H --- M
v
Now in this case, with Obama being the democratic nominee, the Hillary voter is already closer to McCain anyway so it would be much easier for him to make the choice to vote for McCain.
These are not mere hypothetical facts. It has long been known that more moderate democrats such as blue-collar workers, southern democrats, and rural and small town democrats frequently vote republican in presidential elections because the democratic candidate is viewed as being too liberal. In this election this becomes even more of a problem because McCain is viewed as a more moderate republican and Obama is most the liberal candidate for president in recent memory, perhaps even more liberal than McGovern.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 4:37:04 PM | Grrr! The formatting here did not allow me to put the "v" in the second diagram under the "H" as I wanted. You'll have to imagine the "v" under the "H" in the second diagram.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 5:00:55 PM |
You'll have to imagine the "v" under the "H" in the second diagram.
Far easier to do than imagining Hillary winning.
No problem. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/3/2008 9:25:58 PM | Philly
It is quite the opposite. I am an independent and more conservative. My views actually align more with the republican party. Since McCain is more of a liberal republican voting for him would not be that far off.
Despite popular belief African Americans are more conservative than you think. The independents will have no problem voting for McCain and others just will not vote.
She is not going to win. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 1:23:36 AM | faith2565, you are actually agreeing with what I said. In order for a democratic candidate to win a presidential election they will have to get the votes of more conservative democrats and get republicans to change party lines.
It is easier for Hillary to get those votes because she is the democrat further to the right than Obama, who is possibly the most liberal candidate ever offered for a presidential election. This view of Obama is made even worse because of his association with the extreme left views of Rev. Wright.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 1:56:33 AM | | I think she is losing because her former campaign manager did not focus on the small states instead of just the big states. If she would have had better caucus organization she would be ahead now. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 2:13:52 AM |
aith2565, you are actually agreeing with what I said. In order for a democratic candidate to win a presidential election they will have to get the votes of more conservative democrats and get republicans to change party lines.
Actually, and quite unbelievably, McCain's losing ground against either Democratic candidate - and he's under zero attack.
I think he will be one of the easiest Republican candidates to beat in a presidential election. He's got a record of bad policies, and supporting President Bush. There's some nice flip flops to be found there too.
Once THAT starts to be concentrated on, he's toast.
He'll be the 2008 version of Bob Dole, placed against the right candidate.
The best hope is contrast.
Obama's the best candidate for that. Young, charismatic, and an impressive speaker. His platform is almost ideal to oppose McCain with. He's strong in the things McCain's weak on, and McCain's weak on quite a few. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 4:50:35 AM | http://www.slate.com/id/2190556/
This article might not show why she's losing, but maybe it will bring those who think she still has a chance to win back from La-La Land. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 8:16:17 AM |
In order for a democratic candidate to win a presidential election they will have to get the votes of more conservative democrats and get republicans to change party lines.
This is absolutely true. To win the general election, you have to get party-crossers and non-partisan voters. But as a crossover-Republican I can assuredly say that we're not going to crossover for an establishment Democrat such as Clinton. Given the choice between a Republican centrist and a Democrat centrist, we stay within the party because where's the motivation to cross party lines? | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 11:18:20 AM |
Montreal Guy is right. I'm surprised that Hillary is stooping to the level of this stunt. Not one economist or fiscal policy expert thinks there is any merit to it. Hillary knows better, and is merely following McCain's lead in calling for the "gas-tax holiday" Shows no leadership on her part.
So true. Obama is the man for the job--he's the only one of the three to have enough sense to stand up against the folly of a "gas-tax" holiday that is fiscally irresponsible, stupid and unrealistic. Obama shows leadership by standing up to say what needs to be said, not just what people want to hear. The last president to have the b*lls to say what needed to be said was Jimmy Carter. What he said then is STILL true--to lower gas prices and the cost of heating, reduce the demand by using less--the sweater speech comes to mind. He should have had another term--he should not have had to pay the price for his frankness. I want Obama to be our next president because he's not afraid to tell the truth about things--something that has been sorely lacking since Jimmy Carter, the last, and ONLY decent president in my lifetime!! I want to see decency and honesty restored to the White House at long last--we haven't had that since Carter left office. GO OBAMA!!!!!!!
Shillary is losing because she is a LIAR. Since the Reagan era, we have had nothing but liars in the White House, and criminals at that. We need to work hard to make sure Shillary the liar loses, and that McCain, who is not emotionally fit to be President, also loses because his idea of keeping Bushboy's stupid tax cuts for the rich permanently is another fiscally irresponsible idea. Obama has the b*lls to say when something that would be popular is fiscally irresponsible!!
WE NEED OBAMA!! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 12:22:40 PM | Itechman2, we were discussing the RELATIVE merits of such cross-overs between Obama and Clinton. It would be far more unlikely for such a centrist republican to vote for a candidate with such an extreme left point of view as Obama than it would be for Clinton with a moderate centrist point of view.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 12:34:48 PM |
Bushboy's stupid tax cuts for the rich permanently is another fiscally irresponsible idea. Obama has the b*lls to say when something that would be popular is fiscally irresponsible!!
I admit that I'm not sure about the actual effectiveness of this gas-tax holiday. But it is clear that this particular tax-cut, if you will, benefits low income people and the middle class rather than the rich.
In any case Obama's opposition to it would fit in with a possible general election attack against Obama by the Republicans if Obama is the nominee. They could argue,
"Obama is the typical tax and spend LIBERAL. He likes all taxes even those that hurt most low to middle income people!"
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 1:18:59 PM |
But it is clear that this particular tax-cut, if you will, benefits low income people and the middle class rather than the rich.
That's WAAAAYYYY over-simplistic and totally misguided. Where's the money for infrastructure maintenance going to come from to replace what is lost versus how much is each individual going to save? This creates problems and solves none!
Let's find a way to solve a problem without creating a new one!
It's a small preview of a typical Clinton administration. A pandering here and a pandering there with mostly a symbolic benefit to anyone and meanwhile potential for disaster is created where if she's a lucky as her husband, then we'll all get to blame it on the next administration when another bridge collapses. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 1:49:40 PM | Thanks for that link to the article, SimmahDahnNah.
I agree it will be difficult but I don't agree it will be virtually impossible as suggested in the article.
Firstly, he argues that Obama will wind up with the larger amount of popular votes. Certainly he does now. But it is quite conceivable that the democrats will choose to have the primaries in Florida or Michigan again or to initiate a formula to include the votes that were already cast. Given the hotly contested nature of the race they could decide to do this to get a truer idea of "the will of the people". He claims that even in this case Obama would wind up with the larger amount of popular votes. But here he misrepresents the full conclusions of the article he bases this on:
Notes on politics, mostly.
April 29, 2008
After Pennsylvania (2)
Hendrik Hertzberg
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/hendrikhertzberg/2008/04/after-pennsyl-1.html
Here Hertzberg shows are there several scenarios where Clinton could wind up with more of the popular vote if means are found to have the voters say in Florida and Michigan counted, as well as there being several scenarios where Obama would still win the popular vote.
But a more serious reason why his conclusion is overstated is because of this claim he makes:
"This is an important point, so I'm going to repeat it. The longer a superdelegate waits to choose, the likelier he'll choose whoever the primaries and caucuses chose."
That claim is demonstrably false. First off the superdelegates are party insiders and are already well aware that Obama will likely wind up with a larger number of delegates chosen by the primaries and caucuses alone, even more aware of it than that reporter. If that really were how they would choose the candidate, they would have made that choice already. That so many haven't, means that's not the primary criterion on which the undecideds they will base their choice.
But more importantly, surveys have shown a third of the 800 superdelegates will base their choice on who will have the best chance of winning in the general election:
The Superdelegate Showdown Might be Key to the Democratic Nomination.
Both Clinton and Obama are fighting for support from this key group
By Kenneth T. Walsh
Posted May 2, 2008
"How will the superdelegates make their decisions? About one third say the most important factor will be which candidate has the best chance of capturing the White House, according to a recent survey of superdelegates by the Associated Press. "I think it's really important that we keep our eye on the prize, and the prize is the win in November," says Gail Rasmussen, a DNC member and an undecided superdelegate from Oregon.
"One in 10 says the biggest factor will be nominating the candidate with the most pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. "I would favor the people making the decision rather than insiders and party bosses," says Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma. Boren, who is undecided, disagreed with the suggestion of Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen and other party leaders that the superdelegates hold their own convention in June to make an endorsement. That prospect appears unlikely, since it seems too close to the bad days of smoke-filled rooms and boss politics.
"And another 10 percent of superdelegates say they would go with the candidate who won their state or congressional district. The rest of the delegates weren't definitive in explaining how they would vote, or they declined to answer."
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/05/02/the-superdelegate-showdown-might-be-key-to-the-democratic-nomination.html
As I've said the latest polling shows Clinton would have a better chance of defeating McCain in the general election than Obama. One third of the 800 superdelegates is about 260. These could very well be the deciding factor in whether Clinton or Obama gets the nomination.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 2:12:14 PM |
In order for a democratic candidate to win a presidential election they will have to get the votes of more conservative democrats and get republicans to change party lines.
It is easier for Hillary to get those votes because she is the democrat further to the right than Obama, who is possibly "the most liberal candidate ever offered for a presidential election." [emphasis added]
Hi guys. Maybe I'm a little more naive to this whole "political" thing than I think; but can someone (preferably PhillyFellow) tell me where this notion that Obama is so far right comes from? It sounds as though he is being painted as a "radical," hellbent on destroying our existing governmental structure and implementing something entirely different -- like communism or something. As best as I can tell from my research (and I have done a little bit of it, to be sure  ), his initiatives and accomplishments have inured primarily to the benefit of most of his constituents who who align themselves with the Democratic party and, secondarily (particularly in his many bi-partisan initiatives and accomplishments), to the benefit of most of us on both sides of the aisle -- or, at least, most of us individually earning less than a six-figure salary.
Moreover, while I don't believe that Hillary would necessarily be a "bad" choice for Democrats, I believe that the relationship that she and Bill share with Republicans is FAR too acrid to realistically posit that she would be able to induce many of their voters to cross party lines. THE PARTY REALLY HATES THE CLINTONS!! And I think those supporting the Republican party would be facing a tough decision trying to decide whether to tow the party line and endorse Cheney/Bush III, or cross over to such a despised adversary. Perhaps they would do so in significant numbers, but I think it is far from the "foregone conclusion" suggested by the aforereferenced quote and those along the same vein.
Finally, what the quote above does not seem to take into account is that another way that the Democrats may be able to take the White House in the general election would be to increase the numbers of the Democratic-voting citizenry. And those who have been paying any degree of attention to voter patterns thus far could not have escaped the simple fact that Obama has galvanized TREMENDOUS numbers of new and formerly inactive voters to rally behind his campaign, as well as many independents and Republican crossovers. His speaking venues draw crowds in sizes that none of us has ever seen for a politician of ANY affiliation and, in some cases, would make Mick Jagger blush!
Of course we are all armchair pundits at this stage of the game and it remains to be seen who will eventually become the Democratic nominee, let alone the successful presidential candidate in the general election. So, in the spirit of that fact, I am compelled to seriously challenge the validity of the suggestion that Obama has no chance to against the Republican nominee come November.
In closing,
[I]t is clear that this particular tax-cut, if you will, benefits low income people and the middle class rather than the rich.
What makes this cut benefit broke folks like me and not the rich? They don't buy gas?  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 2:41:30 PM |
What makes this cut benefit broke folks like me and not the rich? They don't buy gas?
The high gas prices effect the poor and middle class disproportionately because getting to and from work, getting the kids to school, etc., the high gas prices takes up a larger proportion of their income.
If you're tooling around in a 3 ton Escalade or limousine you don't care pretty much what the gas prices are.
Perhaps you made a typo or misread what I wrote, or perhaps I made a typo, but Obama is considered far to the left, not to the right. This is the political stance of ultra liberals. The far right would be ultra conservative republicans such as Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, etc. Off the top of my head I can't think of a far right politician currently in office. None of the main republican presidential contenders were far right, certainly not McCain, and not even Mitt Romney, who was the darling of the conservatives.
Also, note that in order for Bill Clinton to be elected the first time he had to capture most of the moderate democrats and get republican cross-overs. I mentioned this before but his political stance was a deliberate attempt to be centrist and moderate since this was identified as a necessity for a democrat to win the presidential election. Note also that he won re-election despite great hostility from conservative republicans and again had to get most moderate democrats and republican cross-overs to accomplish this.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 2:42:48 PM | Vype, I think the misconception is that Republicans would vote for someone closer to being to the right THAN Obama. I guess you have to have been a Republican to understand there are two very real truths.
1) If given the choice between a near-Republican Democrat and a Republican, you stay with the Republican.
2) You will not vote for a Clinton.
The crossover Republicans are considering crossing-over because we feel misrepresented by the current administration. We want the mythical "change" with the belief that the best thing for our country is someone who says he wants to cross the aisle so to speak and has actually shown he has been able to do it to get us out of this pattern of partisan gridlock. Does anyone believe Reagan Democrats crossed over because he was further to the left?
It does seem to make sense Philly, but it's not how it works. Given two choices of the too-similar, there's no motivation to cross the line. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 2:55:01 PM | Itechman, it was moderate democrats who crossed-over to vote for Reagan, specifically because Carter was viewed as too liberal. They were already closer to the right anyway. These included blue-collar workers, southern democrats and rural and small town democrats, a big part of the voting population.
And again a republican cross-over DID happen, among more centrist republicans, when Bill Clinton was re-elected despite great hostility from conservative republicans.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 3:56:28 PM | Don't know why hillary is still running. She has zero chance of winning. I suppose it could be her republican roots. Being she used to be a republican. Only other reason I can think of is she is trying to force an obama/hillary ticket. Basically split the party so much that she has to be on the ballot for any chance.
I know for fact the big wigs in the party are begging her to drop out, but she won't even though she has no chance. Only two reasons I can think of for why she would stay in. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/4/2008 4:27:28 PM | itechman42
Your quote is on target.....
This is absolutely true. To win the general election, you have to get party-crossers and non-partisan voters. But as a crossover-Republican I can assuredly say that we're not going to crossover for an establishment Democrat such as Clinton. Given the choice between a Republican centrist and a Democrat centrist, we stay within the party because where's the motivation to cross party lines?
Philly,
you are really have a hard time hearing that those of us that are independent thinkers DO NOT CARE FOR HILLARY. Everyone does not vote a straight ticket and remain within a party.
I am an independent or some would say conservative democrat or liberal republican.
I can not vote for Clinton. I will not vote for Clinton. Now she is saying she would
"totally obliterate" Iran.
She needs to make up her mind. I can not trust her with the welfare of our troops. She is only saying what she thinks we want to hear in order to win.
  | |
|
|
| Page 31 of 98
|
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 |
|
Home
login 
