|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/5/2008 6:59:01 PM | I dunno if she was ever 'loosing'... but she's still behind... only gained what... 12 delegates more than Obama last night? (according to the Guardian article I just read)... he's still ahead in the popular vote too...
Even if she's 'winning' states it's often not by enough, given the DNC rules, to make much of a difference... | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/5/2008 7:22:16 PM | Don't forget that the delegates awarded do not reflect the popular vote. Primary states are frequently weighted so that it is difficult to get a majority of delegates in a given county (you often need 65% of the vote to get anything but a split), whereas caucuses go the other way and disporportionately reward the winner. Clinton won the popular vote on Super Tuesday, but media coverage focused on the delegates instead. Clinton still has a lead over Obama in national polling.
If you include Florida (in which they were both on the ballot), Obama leads Clinton in total votes cast only 13,566,066 - 13,274,160. Without Florida, it is 12,989,852 - 12,403,174. I believe Clinton leads if you only count Democrats, but there are no hard numbers (only extrapolations from exit polls). | |
|
| |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/5/2008 10:56:30 PM | | .....its seems obvious that the Dems are split right down the middle.......they don't know who they want!.............as the divide widens between obama and hilary, only McCain stands to benefit!!.......and all he has to do is stay cool and don't say anything stupid, and he'll have it in the bag! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/6/2008 12:14:16 AM |
Heck, in November I'm writing in "Vyper".
I second that...and besides, I'm not terribly busy if he needs a running mate 
This election has shown us all both the best and the worst in people.
On one hand we have a race between the first viable female and black candidates which I see as a huge plus for our nation. On the other we've seen a genuine human moment from a woman be mocked, as well as Mr Obama's middle name drummed up repeatedly to scare the masses.
What I would like to make clear, and I believe the vast majority of my fellow Clinton supporters would agree, is that our support for Hillary is in no way a slight to Barrack. If Hillary wasn't in this race Sen. Obama would be my choice hands down.
But she is still in this race and I have to pull for her, because quite frankly I love her. This woman has been attacked non-stop by the far right and not once yeilded to the slander. Time and time again she's dusted herself off and stood up only to take more abuse, but she never gives up, and she never stops fighting for what she believes in.
I admire her courage and respect her intelligence. Win or lose, she will always be 'my girl'. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/6/2008 11:03:48 AM |
after being the prohibitive favorite for the Democratic nomination for 5 years...Why is Hillary losing the nomination? She's behind Obama because she didn't prepare as well as Obama did for the post super-Tuesday elections. That's where she fell behind after she had assumed a lead. She didn't expect a drawn-out election. Obama was better prepared for a long race. His campaign staff made better efforts in securing better grass-roots-like support. Obama is a WAY better salesman and has WAY more charisma. Hillary often comes off as a shrill shrew; Obama comes off as cooler than the other side of the pillow. Hillary hasn't done her homework and seems to have made little effort to expand her base.
It's interesting to see Obama coming from nowhere to gain widespread party support much like Hillary's husband did in 1992, yet Hillary did not anticipate this Obama tidal wave. It's also ironic for Obama to position himself as some sort of Washington outsider when in fact he has more Washington experience than either Bill Clinton had in 1992 or W had in 2000. Another ironic thing is how Obama is campaigning for Republican support very similarly to how Reagan campaigned for Democratic support in 1980 and 1984. Obama's shrewdness more than makes up for his lack of experience. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/6/2008 1:09:42 PM | Thanks, Deagle! 
And I must say that I am in complete agreement with you. I, too, love Hillary and think she's a fine candidate. I believe them both to be WAY more than "competent" to fill that seat in The Oval Office. If Barack were not running, Hillary would have my vote as a foregone conclusion. Hell, I actually was opposed to Barack running this time around because I felt he should've waited it out one more term but, since he didn't, I'm in behind him because I believe in him and what he has to say. And, for me, even if he is not successful in doing what he claims to want to do -- unfulfilled campaign promises would be nothing new. BUT ... if he IS successful, I think that we could possibly be seeing the very beginnings of a long-past-due new way of handling business in Washington. And I welcome the prospect. The way business is conducted in Washington (and politics in general) has always nauseated me. But I can never before recall any candidate truly putting forth an effort to handle it differently.
When he speaks of televising discussions with the special interest groups on C-SPAN, so we all can see what our representatives are saying and doing with those lobbyist folks, it almost makes me climax!
I've always loved Bill and figured that he and Hillary would probably not have made it as far as they have, if his principles were at direct odds with hers. She's been in the same fight as I have been for a long time and she has my respect, admiration, appreciation, and support. I just think that Barack may be a slightly better candidate. When I look at the grass-root causes, and everyman humanitarian issues that he has gotten in behind and devoted himself to, SINCE graduating from Harvard Law, Magna Cum Laude -- even though he EASILY could have been raking in the big bucks and moving himself up the social and political ladder (like I probably would have done, had I had his credentials and connections  ) -- I see what looks to me like a man who genuinely gives a shitt about the middle and lower class.
I don't know whether he is a "better salesman" or not. I only know that he is offering a product which, in my humble opinion, sells itself.
By the way ... Deagle. Forget that #5 bit. I'm too tired to go back and vet it out, Man.
Also, on the issue of "experience" (and I contend that Obama has every bit as much as Clinton, and perhaps even a more rich and varied collection of it), TIME Magazine (March 10, 2008) has a VERY interesting article on the matter. Those placing a great deal of stock in the "experience" argument, should definitely consider it a "must read."
Just remember, "longevity in Washington" is not necessarily the same thing as "experience." | |
|
| |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/6/2008 8:08:57 PM | Part of the reason may be that the Clintons (yes...they are both running) either forgot...or just didn't care that the objective was install a Democrat (any Democrat) in the White House.
Not to elect Hillary.
Not to boost Bill's ego.
Not to set up Chelsea for her own run.
It was to install a Democrat in the office and allow us all a break after 8 years of GWB.
Now that she's got it in her head that only SHE can be the president.
And nothing else seems to matter.
She's alienating voters at a time when the party can't afford to alienate anybody.
And she's making John McCain's job even easier.
It's almost as if the Republicans are paying the Clintons to lose the election. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/6/2008 10:28:18 PM | ^
the objective was install a Democrat (any Democrat) in the White House.
.......you are talking as if the Clinton(s) actually have (or should have) a conscience of some kind!.......but the don't care about anybody but themselves!
It's almost as if the Republicans are paying the Clintons to lose the election.
..........yep, Hilary is the dem's worst enemy.......but too bad that most of the Dem voters can't see this, therefore you can't blame the clintons entirely. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 12:03:43 AM | Personally, I appreciate the healthy competitive environment that we are seeing between these two fine candidates, though I do wish the process didn't have to be so filthy with personal and professional attacks, smear campaign efforts, and other tactics designed to distract the voter's eye and mind from the core underlying issues that we need to hear about.
I've heard some suggest that Hillary should withdraw (in the Party's best interest), but I have not yet heard/learned how that move by her benefits the Party, other than to allow it to present a unified front behind a single candidate earlier in the year. As I see it (and I readily concede this could very well be a simple matter of my own ignorance of some political party strategy), let them both run until one or the other is mathematically eliminated. When the convention is held late this summer, we will have our winner, and will therefore be unified behind that candidate, and will be positioned to do whatever is necessary appropriate between then and the general election. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 1:11:15 AM | The most intriguing story this election cycle is how Hillary Clinton, after being the prohibitive favorite for the Democratic nomination for 5 years, is now on the verge of losing to Barack Obama. Hillary is intelligent; has experience; and has extensive political connections. However, those assets aren't translating sufficiently into votes.
Why is Hillary losing the nomination?
Because she was so sure she had it, she never considered the possibility she would have to earn it. I'm sure she sometimes scares Bill at night, as she suddenly wakes up screaming with horror as her dreams of being President are shattered by reality intruding.
She'll divide the party to do it, without any moral concerns, simply because of hubris.
In a nation so divided, the last thing that's needed is more division.
If she DOES manage to make it as candidate, she'll allow the Republican party to polish off all those wonderful "Clinton bashing" stories that we all spent years listening to, and probably lose the election for the party while doing so.
Ever wonder why those attacks from the extreme right against her aren't so evident these days ? The last thing that faction of the Republican party wants is to run McCain against Obama - with Hillary destroyed by their own smear machine.
Great tactics, and it keeps the powder dry until the enemy is in your sights.
And Hillary's too self-centered to even realize the great gift she's giving the Republican party , in her blind rush to power.
If she thinks it a battle now, she's in for a heck of a surprise after the nomination. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 1:19:16 AM | Backatcha Vyper
Just remember, "longevity in Washington" is not necessarily the same thing as "experience."
I totally agree actually.
And I find it humorous that Hillary is making 'experience' an issue since Barrack has been involved in politics for YEARS.
What she is really saying, IMHO, is that she's better connected in Washington, but that isn't exactly a selling point with the American people who take a 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' approach to connected politicians. You've seen herself surrounded by generals lately as a testement to the connections she's made with our military leaders who oppose the war. Few can hardly deny that her network in Washington is bigger and perhaps more influential. So you see, what she's really selling when she says 'experience' is her network of powerful allies that can help her move early legislation (ie ready on day one).
The main difference between these two is generational. Hillary is old enough to vividly remember the civil and women's lib movements while Barrack isn't. Perhaps this is why he thinks she's too confrontational and she thinks he's too naive. Hillary grew up in a time when you did have to kick down doors to get real change so that has no doubt shaped her worldview.
The ironic thing is, they are both right. Often times you have to take a strong stand when compromising will only succeed in bargining away your position into oblivion (such as health care). But there are also times when negotiating and compromising are the true path to success. Many Republicans want a path to support environmental issues because they know how serious it has become. Barrack is stronger here because many buisnesses do indeed want to change their practices, but only if their competition does as well, these moments are best suited for negotiations.
Both these candidates bring incredible strength to the table and complement each other perfectly. Though Hillary seems more open to the idea of a joint ticket, I don't really see how either can hope to win in November without the other. Either candidate not picking the other is going to be potentially risking half the voters in this record breaking election. But a joint ticket would be impossible for McCain to overcome and we're likely to see a landslide the likes of which I haven't witnessed in my lifetime.
 | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 1:43:32 AM | And btw, why is it always Hillary's fault that she's 'so polarizing'???
Does anyone seriously think that she wouldn't love to have more male support?
This election has given me hope that we actually have made some improvements when it comes to race relations (at least politically), but it's clear we've got a long way to go when it comes to seeing females as leaders.
Do men resent having their first boss be female?
Is this some kind of insecurity developed at a young age when mommy is telling us what to do? I just don't get it.
I keep hearing that Hillary would do anything it takes to be president, but it's naive to think ANYONE running doesn't feel exactly the same. For example, and with all due respect to Obama and his supporters, he could have waited till after Hillary's run which has been in the making for years but obviously thought he'd make a better president and it was worth the risk to the party to attempt a run now.
I follow the news pretty closely so I think I would have heard if Hillary had made some campaign promises to castrate us all, but this isn't the case. In fact she's said nothing derogatory towards men at all, so why the all the hate?
It really makes me sick to hear other men blaming her for their own inability to take a woman seriously as their leader. It would be like blaming Obama for the fact that some inbred yokels will never vote for a 'darkie'.
If you disagree with Hillary on the issues, wonderful, but don't say she's 'too polarizing' as an excuse. That's like saying I won't vote for a black man becuase I know others won't either. If Hillary is 'polarizing' it's largely because the far right is so stuck in their sexist religious views that they'll stop at nothing to destroy her.
But this rant will no doubt fall on deaf ears. I'm just one of those whacky Hillary supporters that can't see she's the anti-christ. Like I said, I just don't get it. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 4:25:52 AM | Hillary has had nothing but chaos in most of the roles she's been in starting from her days as First Lady. Travelgate. Whitewater. The suicide of Vince Foster. The health-care debacle of 1993. Her campaign currently, with its in-fighting and role-swapping, is a valuable preview of what we would get in a Hillary Clinton administration. The American people would get more of the same. Cabinet members would be playing musical chairs. There would be more weird scandals. There would be a complete lack of presidential accountability for errors and missteps. There would also be rants from the presidential podium about how she is still being "treated unfairly" by the press, the Senate and Congress, the U.N., NATO, the Chinese, and everyone else.
It's doubtful that Hillary Clinton would be someone who could work successfully with foreign heads-of-state---especially in the Middle East. Hillary also had nothing to do with the ratification of significant treaties like the Good Friday Agreement (Northern Ireland) such as her campaign implied. She would have a polarizing effect around the world just like she does currently amongst the U.S. electorate as a whole; amongst the members of the Democrat party; and in her own campaign. Hillary is the common denominator for polarization in U.S. politics currently. | |
|
jurupa
|
Joined: 2/12/2008
Msg: 93 | |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 5:39:06 AM |
Hillary is intelligent; has experience; and has extensive political connections. However, those assets aren't translating sufficiently into votes. Your joking right? Why is Hillary losing the nomination? In short she is semi current day feminist as well all of her policies are way to motherly. No one wants a government that is a mother to them. Plus she will only make our already huge government even bigger. She also has some messed up policies as well. Just check out her health and video game polices and you get the idea. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 5:53:01 AM | Without a doubt Hillary is a polarizing figure. Spitfire, you are spot-on with your comments.
1. She is extremely divisive within her own party, with half of them loving her, while the other half can't tolerate her.
2. Republicans are totally against Hillary so unlikely that she could win in the general election as most Republicans would vote against her while the 1/2 democrat group who cannot stand her, would not even vote in the general election, so mathematically speaking, if Hillary wins the nomination, McCain would become the next President.
I keep remembering how angry she got with Obama when she said "shame on you"?. While I watched her, I tried to visualize if she would behave in this manner when angered by foreign heads-of-state. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 7:26:10 AM |
I tried to visualize if she would behave in this manner when angered by foreign heads-of-state.
Me too. And too, if she runs the country the way she's run her campaign, well, it would't be good. Like 2000, you could see what lay ahead by the way sh*thead ran his campaign.
 | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 9:46:58 AM | Someone care to explain how Hillary is dividing the party while Obama is uniting it?
If you ask me, it seems like a fairly even split. Hillary fell behind because she took the nomination for granted.
Now if she is a smart as many think she is, she has woken up and realized that she can make it into the convention if she and her staff work as hard as Obama and his staff work.
My guess is that there will be a spirited debate at the Democratic convention.
Hillary won't win the nomination if she embraces her feminist supporters. Feminism is a turnoff to many people. She has got to play the same grass roots game that Obama is playing. And she's got to quit the negative mud slinging. Hit Obama on points of difference. I think it's kind of hard to do that, though because they pretty much are similar on issues. Mudsling is going to turn off the fence sitters, and that's where the nomination is to be won. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/7/2008 10:42:39 PM | @ MG
And Hillary's too self-centered to even realize the great gift she's giving the Republican party , in her blind rush to power.
.....^ nicely put, and i'm sure McCain fully realizes it........ i'm also sure that being the good hearted man that he is......he'll send her a thank you card and a box of florida oranges after he wins the election (running against her of course!)
----------------
at Spit
Hillary has had nothing but chaos in most of the roles she's been in starting from her days as First Lady. Travelgate. Whitewater. The suicide of Vince Foster. The health-care debacle of 1993. Her campaign currently, with its in-fighting and role-swapping, is a valuable preview of what we would get in a Hillary Clinton administration. The American people would get more of the same.
.......she stands to bring debauchery and corruption to new heights, and this is just what the Reps are banking on if she wins the nomination.......the Reps are praying every night on their knees for her to win it! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/8/2008 7:46:53 AM |
The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
--Lou Adler
Most of the time, people act in predictable patterns and people appoint the same kinds of personnel (staff members, assistants, Cabinet members, etc.) whom they've appointed or hired in the past. Anyone who looks at Hillary Clinton's past objectively should be looking to vote for just about any other candidate but her.
Another note on national security/foreign policy: The Clintons knew about Osama bin Laden at least since 1993 (the time of the first World Trade Center bombing), and failed to neutralize Al Qaida in any way in the years between 1993 and January, 2001. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Clintons' national security capabilities. They already had a chance to receive "3:00 am phone calls" concerning bin Laden's whereabouts for 8 years, and yet failed to neutralize the threat. The American people don't need another 4 or 8 years of that. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/8/2008 8:38:49 AM | I just thought it would be nice to maybe have a President that didn't sit around the conference tables with his/her staff laughing in the face of the American people. From "I didn't inhale" and through to today no one has been laughed at harder by the Clintons than their very supporters.
Today rather than be forthcoming and showing there is nothing to hide, Wolfson invokes the spirit of Kenneth Starr as a force field to protect the same information every other candidate has openly shared already. We have court motions being filed to prevent us knowing just what is this experience we hear of. Don't you think that just one time it would be a reasonable expectation for the Clintons to be forthcoming about something before placing not only our trust in them but also the well being of your neighbor's kids for them? Just once?
The only time we've ever known a truth from them is when a photo or recording surfaces after they have already lied. Then one of them asks, "Just what does the words and, but, and or really mean?". Then their supporters say "Yeah!"... and laughter erupts at the Clinton dinner table. I don't support them, they aren't laughing at me. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/8/2008 9:14:06 AM | Too much psycoanalysis. She's losing because she made a tactical mistake in focusing on the large states she wants to carry in November, and not on the caucuses in republican strongholds. Because of the difference in the way delegates are awarded between primaries and caucuses, for example, her 4% win in delegate-rich Texas will give her fewer net delegates than what Obama will get in the upcoming Wyoming caucus.
Here is what troubles strategists: Obama's lead comes because of states that the democrats have little chance of carrying in November. Look at the results of the 10 largest states:
1. California - Clinton
2. Texas - Clinton
3. New York - Clinton
4. Florida - Clinton, sort of. The delegates won't count.
5. Illinois - Obama
6. Pennslyvania - Probably Clinton
7. Ohio - Clinton
8. Michigan - Clinton, sort of. The delegates won't count.
9. Georgia - Obama
10. North Carolina - Obama
Conventional wisdom say's the republicans will carry Georgia and North Carolina regardless of who the democrats run, and the democrats will carry California and New York. If the democrats carry most of the large battleground states - Texas, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan - they win. Clinton has been campaigning to prep for the general election, by focusing on the big states which matter in the winner-take-all election. Obama has been winning the primary by taking second in those states and scooping up (essentially uncontested) the caucus delegates in republican strongholds like the south and the west. In a general election, those states won't be in play, so Obama will have to show strength in the states that Clinton has been carrying. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 98
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 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 |
|
Home
login 
