|
|
|
|
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 4:59:43 PM | Let's see...We can have Obama...or Monica Lewinsky's Ex-boyfriend's Wife...
I know which way I'm voting...if Hillary can't even keep her Man in check, how in the heck is she going to keep Congress in Check???  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:03:47 PM | Look at the Ferraro fiasco, for even more proof :
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
- Geraldine Ferraro
She also said Clinton had been the victim of a "sexist media."
Late Tuesday, she told an interviewer that she felt she was being attacked because she was white.
"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up," she told the Daily Breeze of Torrance, California. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/12/ferraro.comments/index.html
The good news ?
She's just resigned from Hillary's campaign. 
Clinton has said she does not agree with Ferraro's remarks.
Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Eleithee told CNN's Sasha Johnson Tuesday evening that "Ms. Ferraro is speaking for herself. We have made clear that we do not agree with her remarks."
I just hope someone asks her if, by that statement, she is clearly both rejecting and denouncing Ferraro, or simply only rejecting her ? | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:09:01 PM |
I just hope someone asks her if, by that statement, she is clearly both rejecting and denouncing Ferraro, or simply only rejecting her ?
Good call MG  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:19:37 PM | Gerry said a very similar thing about Jesse Jackson in the 80's....this is not new speech to express how she thinks.....
This is from an April 14, 1988 Washington Post story
by Howard Kurtz:
Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric,
Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who
suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign.
President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't
ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And
former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.)
said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views,
"if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in
the race." | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:19:39 PM | Can you imagine what would have happened to Hillary's campaign if Obama had of been unlucky enough to have been born with the curse of being white ?
Add to that the additional possibility of not having the worst name in American political history, in todays America ?
No "Muslim" connection ?
She would have been out of the race in the first week.  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:53:49 PM |
Can you imagine what would have happened to Hillary's campaign if Obama had of been unlucky enough to have been born with the curse of being white ?
She would have never entered the race or quickly pulled out...
Add to that the additional possibility of not having the worst name in American political history, in todays America ?
I really don't see why people get so concerned about that? Geeeez are we to now think poorly of Gen. Omar Nelson Bradley because his parents gave him a Arabic name... But your right it seems like some people want to get all so hung up on something that's a non-issue.
I do have to admit I was caught a bit off guard with Geraldine A. Ferraro. I wouldn't have suspected she would had such a racist mentality until I heard her spout her mouth off. Then when some of the older remarks of her's was brought into light it quickly dispelled any thoughts it had been an accidential slip of the tounge... | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 5:58:55 PM | | Give me strength! Do you guys really think Hillary was pained by Bill's behavior?? I don't! I think she was angry that he made a public spectacle of their marriage and humiliated her, but other wise I don't think she gave a damn. She appears to have gone to great lengths to to harass the women he was involved with, and there apparently have been more since he left the presidency. Ask****Morris about dear sweet Hillary. Bill is a narcissistic sociopath who preyed on young interns and she is a cold hearted opportunist. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 8:08:37 PM |
I just hope someone asks her if, by that statement, she is clearly both rejecting and denouncing Ferraro, or simply only rejecting her ?
Too funny, MG. It would be hilarious if someone actually would ask her that! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/12/2008 10:46:48 PM | there is nothing racist about what ferraro said.......whether it was 'appropriate' is a different matter!
.....the fact that Obama is 'black' is one of the things that sets him apart from any of the various midwestern neophyte 'wasp' politicians.......this isn't to say that he may not have other talents or attributes but his mixed racial background is working in his favor! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 1:48:30 AM | Big Ups to Montreal Guy!!!
I just hope someone asks her if, by that statement, she is clearly both rejecting and denouncing Ferraro, or simply only rejecting her?
THAT has got to be one of the funniest follow-up posts I've seen in a minute!
For the record, though, I don't think she either "rejected" OR "denounced" it . Rather, she merely "disagreed" with it.
Funny!
there is nothing racist about what ferraro said.......whether it was 'appropriate' is a different matter!
.....the fact that Obama is 'black' is one of the things that sets him apart from any of the various midwestern neophyte 'wasp' politicians.......this isn't to say that he may not have other talents or attributes but his mixed racial background is working in his favor!
Yes, Barack's race IS one of the [MANY] things that set him apart from other candidates who were initially in the field. But what ON EARTH makes you (or Gerri) believe that THAT attribute is what is responsible for him being where he is, or is even serving as an advantage??!  That is just patently absurd!!! Being African-American in this country has NEVER worked to the advantage of anyone hoping to ascend to the pinnacle position in their chosen discipline. You can rest assured that, in those exceptionally rare cases where an African-American has risen to the point of "Top Dog," he/she has done so almost universally despite being such.
How many democratic nominee candidates did we see at the start of this process (or even any previous elections) with academic pedigree from the most prestigious law university in the country? How many have we seen with such an eloquent, articulate, charismatic and inspirational speaking style? How about how many we have seen who can galvanize NEW voters to register and feel genuine hope and belief that it may actually be worth their time to become involved in the political process? How about to motivate Independents and many of those historically voting Republican to line up behind him? How often have we seen a candidate with some fresh ideas and insights to push forward to the American people like eliminating or weakening the stranglehold that Big Business has had on our Congress for the last several decades? Someone to at least advocate for more open government and greater electorate accountability to the voting public? How many democratic nominee candidates did we start off with, who left major factions of the voting public believing that maybe -- just maybe -- they would be one to work towards revolutionary change in the way business is conducted in Washington? How many of them showed some backbone and spoke out against commencing the arrogant, imperialist plan that would make us more hated around the world and, therefore, in more danger than ever we were before? Why ... so we all could pay Big Oil and their friends $4/gallon for gasoline?!! How many came with clearly-articulated plans for success (whether or not they ultimately prove successful) for so many of the issues that are of such vital importance to the working class?
I know of one. Yet I think that EACH and ALL of those factors bear greater relation to Barack's present position ... CERTAINLY much more so than "being Black."
WHAT?!! I need a darn drink!  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 7:55:27 AM | Geraldine Ferraro's problem is that she forgot that she was representing someone else's campaign. She gave a personal opinion which wasn't geared toward helping Hillary. It was given in order to express Gerry's own views. When these campaign officials are speaking to the press, the capable ones among them stay on message and don't get drawn into expressing personally-held viewpoints which deviate from those of the candidates they represent. So, Gerry Ferraro allowed herself to be baited into an answer which predictably put her on the spot and also gave Hillary another off-message issue to deal with.
Stupid and unprofessional on Gerry's part, but Gerry doesn't carry enough political weight anymore for her opinions to be relevant. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 8:33:59 AM | Clinton's campaign playing the race/Muslim name card did do what it was supposed to do. Scare whites into going to the polls to vote for her. None of the record numbers of whites voting for him left him. She brought out the bigots in her favor.
Obama's biggest advantage is because there is a sense that maybe, just maybe, he can change things for the better. His second biggest advantage is he's not a known power at any cost duplicitous thief that will buy and sell us for personal gain. He could be but we don't know it as a fact as we do with a Clinton. So our choices are really clear... someone who might not sell us out between someone we know would. God bless America.
Instead of responding to the red phone ad with an answering one about judgement, Obama's campaign should have run an ad in Ohio of the videos of the "wink wink nod nod" coffees between Bill and the Chinese with the caption saying "Screw NAFTA. This is where your jobs went". | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 8:56:18 AM |
For the record, though, I don't think she either "rejected" OR "denounced" it . Rather, she merely "disagreed" with it.
Quite right...
"I do not agree with that," and later added, "It's regrettable that any of our supporters _ on both sides, because we both have this experience _ say things that kind of veer off into the personal."
"We ought to keep this on the issues. there are differences between us" on approaches to health care, energy, experience.
and...
"Well, I don't agree with that and I think it's important that we try to stay focused on issues that matter to the American people."
Obama's team decided to use all the ammo she just gave them quite well....
"With Senator Clinton's refusal to denounce or reject Ms. Ferraro, she has once again proven that her campaign gets to live by its own rules and its own double standard, and will only decry offensive comments when it's politically advantageous to Senator Clinton," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said.
"Her refusal to take responsibility for her own supporter's remarks is exactly the kind of tactic that feeds the American people's cynicism about politics today and it's why Barack Obama's message of change has resonated so strongly in every corner of the country," Burton said.
If this was a prizefight, the referee would be helping Clinton back to her corner , and asking her how many fingers he was holding up.
Now if we look at the Farrakhan incident, let's roll the tape back up here.....
Clinton : “There's a difference between denouncing and rejecting, and I think when it comes to this sort of, you know, inflammatory — I have no doubt that everything that Barack just said is absolutely sincere. But I just think, we've got to be even stronger. We cannot let anyone in any way say these things because of the implications that they have, which can be so far reaching.”
Obama : "There's no formal offer of help from Minister Farrakhan that would involve me rejecting it."
"But if the word 'reject' Senator Clinton feels is stronger than the word 'denounce,' then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce"
Farrakhan is a person that can only be connected to the candidate by connecting him to his pastor in the Church.
Hillary goes after that rather circuitous route to try to strike a blow by making it a major issue by connecting him with someone who has no connection to him at all.
Then, she's petty enough to try and get Obama's initial reaction weakened by an idiotic and obsessive detail over dictionary words.
de·nounce (d-nouns)
tr.v. de·nounced, de·nounc·ing, de·nounc·es
1. To condemn openly as being evil or reprehensible.
2. To accuse formally.
r.v., -ject·ed, -ject·ing, -jects.
1. To refuse to accept, submit to, believe, or make use of.
2. To refuse to consider or grant; deny.
3. To refuse to recognize or give affection to (a person).
4. To discard as defective or useless; throw away.
Then, when someone DIRECTLY involved with her makes some statement as outlandish as that (after this little incident) she's not even smart enough to make sure she meets her own so called standards of a "solid stand" on declaring her opposition.
She simply doesn't agree with Ferraro. It's regrettable. It's veering into the personal.
Let's keep to the issues.... Waaaaaaah ! 
Then she apologizes to black voters :
"I certainly do repudiate it and I regret deeply that it was said. Obviously she doesn't speak for the campaign, she doesn't speak for any of my positions, and she has resigned from being a member of my very large finance committee."
She's behind the curve, not ahead of it. She's unable to make a quick decision, and make a very clear statement that this is not acceptable. She gives a weak response, and then has to retreat again the next day - as she reacts to the shock wave of bad press.
How difficult is this to comprehend ? Why not head it all off at the start, by being very clear ? You are trailing, and you cannot afford to make this type of error.
There is a reason it's called leadership, and not followship.
Face it, she's got a glass jaw.....with her foot stuck firmly in it.
Even with all those years of experience. 
If she manages to get the party nomination, and runs against McCain - just wait until she stumbles and makes this kind of tactical mistake again, if it occurs.
Under all sorts of pressure and attacks (as I assume she will be) from every corner of the Republican party , they will tear her apart if she ever gives them this good a chance.  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 1:58:05 PM | So I take it that what Ferraro said is absolutely impossible?
So if you had a white guy who talked about change instead of Obama, he would be in his shoes right now?
What is it exactly that Obama brought to the table that Edwards, Richardson, and Kucinich didn't? It wasn't Iraq. It wasn't health care, or any other policy. It wasn't promising to stand up for average Americans, or promising change. And it certainly wasn't experience. What was it? What made YOU become an Obama supporter. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 2:32:51 PM | | Not officially a Obama supporter, yet... I liked Edwards and when he left Obama was the only person I saw standing at the time that had as much in common with Edwards.....whom I suspect will shortly give his endorsement to Barak. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 2:56:20 PM | Obama has the potential to be a transformative figure in American politics. For all the same reasons Kennedy was so much more popular here in Canada and the rest of the world than he was in the US. But Kennedy captured a generation and inspired future leaders like Bill Clinton.
Obama is that figure for the bigger baby boom - the Millenium babies. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 4:11:31 PM | Transformative? Why? What has he said about how he will be transformative that others have not?
If he looked like John McCain - just another white guy - would you still put that label on him? | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 4:26:34 PM | Kennedy wasn't as good a President as LBJ by any objective standard.
But Kennedy inspired a generation; LBJ repulsed it. The symbolism of the office may be the most important part of it. The framers of the Constitution actually gave little power to the office - the power that is there now is largely because great figures have held it. It's not about race - for the Millenium generation Obama's colour is incidental. At the very least he's a JFK, but I think he could be an FDR or Lincoln. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 4:49:23 PM | | She has this help me, the men are beating me up victimization about her -proves that she's not strong enough to take on the task as President...not to mention, she didn't abandon her lying/cheating husband, but stayed for the political gain...she's a wimp. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 5:05:31 PM |
What is it exactly that Obama brought to the table that Edwards, Richardson, and Kucinich didn't? It wasn't Iraq. It wasn't health care, or any other policy. It wasn't promising to stand up for average Americans, or promising change. And it certainly wasn't experience. What was it? What made YOU become an Obama supporter.
Finally seeing, for the first time since 1968 and RFK , a Democratic candidate with the ability to transform people into action with oration. All of the others failed at that task. That's something that's absolutely critical if one wants to lead a country.
That's what made that period of the 1960's so exciting - and moved America forward towards the better angels of those times.
For far too many elections since then, I've seen Democratic candidates without that spark. Listening to the speeches of the 2000 election, of Gore and Bush, was excruciatingly painful for someone of my generation. I'd sit there and listen to Bush talk, and then hear that Gore was about to speak, and figure.....OK ....this shouldn't be too hard to beat.
Listening to Gore speak, for all his intelligence, was like like listening to an insurance salesman from Omaha explaining the advantages of term insurance. Kerry made Gore look good.
Bill Clinton was always interesting to listen to as an orator, but he trails behind Obama for consistency.
Is oration a critical skill in politics ?
Go back to that night when MLK was killed, and RFK's speech in Indianapolis that announced it to a crowd that hadn't heard about that horrific event yet. He was warned not to speak, the police refused give any promises about protecting him.
He stood up there, on a flatbed trailer, and told that crowd about King's murder.
You could hear screams of horror , and shock , from the audience.
And then, without notes, he spoke to them about his feelings that night. It was a short speech, but one that stands with some of the best ones ever given in American politics for it's importance.
That night, in a nation whose night sky was lit with the burning fires of rage and frustration, and where people were dying - Indianapolis remained free of that violence and death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPYNb4ex6Ko
Tell me again how this rare skill is simply something that can be so easily labeled as "just words".
In a time where many have lost their interest in politics, and turned cynical, Obama has shown us that they can be reached. His ability to generate crowds, and his ability to inspire people with words, his ability to create huge surges in voter turnout in primary elections should not be minimized.
Nor should his stance on Iraq, from the first days of the path towards that war. Unlike the other candidates you mention, he went out of his way to oppose it when it could have cost him so much political capital had he been wrong. That was something that few Democrats did then, as well and loudly, and it was very unpopular .
In a time where politicians "didn't inhale" he faced that same question and did something few have done. He answered it with the truth.
He's admitted the errors of his youth, instead of ensuring the records of those errors be hidden.
Unlike these "golden boys" of the likes of Bush, Kerry, Gore, et al , his roots and values are those of a working class/middle class person - and not the aristocracy. And yet he's been able to reach this lofty goal of running for President through hard work.
When he could have taken a corporate lawyers job, he instead helped the poor better their lives with his skill.
And , to return to the OP's question and bring us back on topic ?
He's not Hillary Clinton, who has shown she's only capable of playing yesterday's game......badly. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 6:03:23 PM | @ vyper
But what ON EARTH makes you (or Gerri) believe that THAT attribute is what is responsible for him being where he is, or is even serving as an advantage??!
.......its simple!.......Obama has defined himself as an agent of 'change'.....and he is probably the closest of being such an agent more than anyone else running because of his personal experiences of not having the typical elitist white upbringing and thus has had to travel on a different "road" toward success! ......he can be believable as an agent of change because his background is not readily identifiable to that of the so-called "company men " of his party ...and because he is a black man (or biracial) serves to solidify that very notion (of a man who can effect change) in the minds of voters who are tired of hearing the "same ol' song and dance" from less convincing white politicians such as Hilary, who can in no way relate the same way he does!......no, i wouldn't say that being 'black' is reason that he is where he is now!....but yes, it is certainly an advantage because it gives his message a greater impact than if it were coming outta the mouth of a white man (or woman).
Being African-American in this country has NEVER worked to the advantage of anyone hoping to ascend to the pinnacle position in their chosen discipline.
......this shows how truly naive you are!....you don't understand that what may not often work in the world of "real life" often can work to your advantage in the paradoxical world politics....a world in which timing, orchestration and presentation can be the key to your success! | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/13/2008 8:37:19 PM | It just gets better by the moment.
They didn't have to do this, and they did it to hurt Hillary. I just think that's bad. I think it's bad business, and I think it's bad politics.I was accused of being divisive. I think those tactics are divisive,and the amazing thing is it's not something I started, its something they did in reaction to this.
I find it very, very upsetting. I've been called all kinds of names, and the attacks are ageist, they're sexist, they're racist. It's been very, very uncomfortable.
The enthusiasm you get from the black community over this black candidate is wonderful, and I don't think you can deny it. No more than I remember how people felt when I was running.
- Geraldine Ferraro
Let me sum this up, for those that don't have the time to read all of her response.
Waaaaaaah !
I remember her campaign with Mondale, and remember her speeches. Trust me, she's no Obama.
Here's another person with "experience" .
It's telling that she still can't see what she actually meant while saying that. If being black is such a positive advantage for a politician, then there should be far more black politicians. Even worse, she's SAT in Congress and have seen the faces there, for years.
Then, after saying this, she's stubborn enough to continue defending it - while dragging out one "victimization" after another as her shield.
It's not my fault, it's theirs. People are being mean to me. Boo hoo hoo hoo .
She's just taken a man, one with a great depth of character and skill, and reduced him to a surface color. Even worse, she's done it for political gain.
She quits her position, because of it but still cannot find the words to say I'm sorry - or I was misunderstood, this is what I meant, please excuse me, I could have said it better.
If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. | |
|
mj999
|
Joined: 10/28/2007
Msg: 223 | |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/14/2008 9:37:48 AM | | Well MG, she won't stay out ot the kitchen, not until she has done anything and everything in her power to win...as a political analyst said the other day, "the Clintons will burn the village if necessary". | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/14/2008 10:04:19 AM | The amazing thing is that Geraldine Ferraro was on the finance committee of Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Honesty, does anyone here think we would have ever heard of her, much less consider her a viable Presidential candidate if she hadn't married Bill? And she brings up someone else getting an unfair advantage? | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 3/14/2008 12:01:14 PM | ^^^ Clinton didn't bring it up, Ferraro did. And she didn't say it was an unfair advantage - it is what it is. In fact, Ferraro went on to say that if she hadn't been a woman, she would never have made it on the ticket in '84 - she had only spent 6 years in congress at the time and wasn't particularly known for anything. But there was a great deal of enthusiasm among democrats at the prospect of having a woman on the ticket. (Ironically, the word "transforming" was used alot then too.)
So if I understand you correctly, you are doing the same thing Ferraro did - pointing out the obvious. And according to the sentiments in this thread, that makes you unfit to be part of a political campaign. :o | |
|
|
| Page 9 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 
