Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Election 2008

Clinton the Brawler Beats Obama the Consensus Builder

By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet. Posted April 23, 2008.


Clinton wins Pennsylvania to fight on, while Obama maintains a firm delegate lead.
Advertisement

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) pledged to continue her campaign Tuesday in a victory speech in Pennsylvania, where she said she was best qualified to be the Democratic presidential nominee after beating Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) by 9 points in the Pennsylvania primary.

"Some people counted me out and said to drop out, but the American people don't quit and they want a president who doesn't want to quit either," Clinton told a packed Philadelphia ballroom in her first remarks in many days that contained no criticism of Obama -- after what many observers said was the most mud-filled primary yet.

Still, Clinton left no doubt that she would fiercely compete for the nomination, saying she would campaign in upcoming primaries that continue into early June.

"My answer to any who doubt is, 'Yes we will,'" she said, to cheers.

With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton led Obama 54.6 percent to 45.4 percent. Early analysis suggested Clinton's win would cut into Obama's 144-delegate lead by perhaps 18 delegates, a gain that could be reversed if Obama wins in North Carolina, as polling suggests, in two weeks. Also on May 6 is Indiana's primary, which is expected to be close.

"I am in this race to fight for every one who has been counted out," Clinton said, striking the underdog theme. Early in her remarks, while live on national television, she asked for donations, saying, "The fate of this campaign is in your hands."

Meanwhile, Sen. Obama, speaking at a rally in Evansville, Indiana, congratulated Clinton and thanked supporters, including new voters and people who returned to voting after many years. He then returned to his main theme in the final days of the Pennsylvania race: that he wants to change Washington, for both Republicans and Democrats, so Americans can have a government that is responsive to real public needs.

"We believe that the challenges we face are bigger than the smallness of our politics and we know that this election is our chance to change it," Obama said. "The question is not whether the other party will bring change to Washington, but will we ... because the truth is the challenges we face are not just the fault of one man or one party."

Summing up, Obama implicitly criticized the heavily negative tactics of the just-finished Pennsylvania contest, where most outside observers -- including Wednesday's editorial in The New York Times -- said Clinton was to blame for throwing the most political mud.

"We can be the party that says and does whatever it takes to win the next election," he said. "We can calculate and poll-test our positions, tell everyone exactly what they want to hear. Or we can be the party that doesn't just focus on how to win, but why we should win. We can tell everyone what they need to hear about the challenges we face. We can seek to redeem, not just an office, but the trust of the American people."

What Next?

As the candidates resume campaigning in the next primary states, Indiana and North Carolina, political analysts and Democratic Party leaders -- including approximately 850 super-delegates that have not yet pledged to back either candidate -- will be taking a hard look at the reality of which candidate can win the 2,025 delegates to get the nomination and be best positioned to challenge the Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz).


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election 08, democratic primary, barack obama, hillary clinton, pennsylvania primary

Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of "What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election," with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Terrorist
Posted by: HeKnew on Apr 23, 2008 12:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton warned Tehran on Tuesday that if she were president, the United States could "totally obliterate" Iran in retaliation for a nuclear strike against Israel."

"We control America" Ariel Sharon


Direct Democracy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Terrorist Posted by: newf
» US and Israel Posted by: fanny666
» Follow the Money Trail... Posted by: LeaderofMen
Banana republic announces outcome of election, only Republicans rejoice
Posted by: ssegallmd on Apr 23, 2008 1:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everywhere I hear and read liberal thought, Obama is lionized and Hillary is vilified. Now I'm to believe that the liberals of Pennsylvania democratically elected her. Sorry, America, but in this age of Limbaugh advocating Republicans voting in the Democratic primaries and Diebold, I have every right to reject what was reported to be the outcome of that election in this banana republic. When Jimmy Carter certifies the election for me, then I'll believe it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» My Thoughts Exactly Posted by: socialpsych
» No One Could Be Prosecuted Posted by: LeaderofMen
» Good on you, Dr. Segall Posted by: JimmyVaughan
It's Time
Posted by: jacksmith on Apr 23, 2008 1:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IT'S TIME AMERICA:

It’s time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.

Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have defeated her. And proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources. In all honesty. I felt some of that too.

But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.

Hillary Clinton say’s that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.

Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton’s have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.

If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.

Sincerely

Jacksmith... Working Class :-)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WRONG Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: It's Time Posted by: bg41
» RE: Ask Jeeves Posted by: solrev
» RE: Ask Jeeves Posted by: babs
» RE: It's Time Posted by: ssegallmd
» And Obama is a Harvard graduate Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» You must be lively56's lawyer. Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: You must be lively56's lawyer. Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: It's Time Posted by: Bozwell
» RE: It's Time Posted by: bc430
» RE: It's Time Posted by: babs
» RE: It's Time...for Rebuttal Posted by: upHurled
» RE: It's Time Posted by: smadaj
» I also wonder Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» RE: I also wonder Posted by: babs
» No smearing OR namecalling Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» RE: It's Time Posted by: babs
» RE: It's Time Posted by: carbon-based
» NO NO, At least Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» RE: It's Time Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: It's Time Posted by: dronkenpiraat
» Don't sound so sure Posted by: Ayla87
» Yup Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» I Agree! What are the odds? Posted by: JohnJlws
» RE: It's Time Posted by: barn
» 'Crushing Defeat' Posted by: LeaderofMen
» RE: It's Time Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: It's Time Posted by: Bibsisis
» RE: It's Time Posted by: Von
How dare she!
Posted by: W SLaan on Apr 23, 2008 2:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why doesn't that woman stop running? She isn't a "historic" candidate like Barack, she only takes large states, she can't win by normal delegates!

I mean its not like shes the first major female candidate, large states are worth more than small states, and Barack can't win by delegates either. I mean, that would make the Democratic Party a democracy! We can't be having that!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Question Hillary as the villain just as you "question authority"
Posted by: juliebrownstein on Apr 23, 2008 2:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am campaigning for Hillary Clinton. I admit it. I like her better than Barack Obama and I think she can win. Part of my decision-making process is intellectual (I appreciate clearly stated policies) and part of my decision-making process is emotional (I think a woman could be a wonderful change from just another pissing-contest, and I recently lost my mother, so I am drawn to strong underdog women). Only a few months ago, I felt myself to be part of the mainstream "left" Alternet audience. Now Hillary - and by extension, myself - am/are villified by constant attacks from so called "alternative" voices who are strangely similar to those coming from the MSM. How many of us have seen the "Should Hillary Quit?" ads popping up on this very website? Why should she? By intimidation? Who funds these ads? God? You and I know the rules. If no one candidate achieves the requisite delegate margin, the contest is decided via a brokered convention. Those are the rules and there's no need to be frightened and paranoid by them - unless there's great anxiety underneath the bravado.

Reality check - Hillary won Pennsylvania by 10 - THAT'S TEN - percentage points, despite a money/media gap of 3-4 against 1. Is there no respect or recognition of this incredible victory? The MSM - of which Alternet is in my mind clearly an adjunct - is still unmoved by the will of the voters of PA, and the fine-toothed demographer elitists are already out to disparage them, as if one of their diploma-mill college degrees are worth more that the experience of living through the Great Depression (which we're about to reprise, and then some), or of working in a car garage, or at the post office. But limousine liberals beware. There's a mighty wave of discontent out there. BO is not speaking to it. And then there are disenfranchised Florida and Michigan voters whom BO's supporters ignore entirely as they tout his populist message. Without their votes, there is no legitimate nominee, so spare us your fanciful popular vote and delegate counts. To contest Hillary's viability is to question democracy itself.

Julie Brownstein

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» here we go again... Posted by: writer7
» Conversely... Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» Just for the record Posted by: Aimleft
» A thought experiment Posted by: ssegallmd
» Right on, Julie! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Write off Julie. Posted by: Longdream
» Look out - sniper fire!:O Posted by: hurricane hugo
» Sorry... Posted by: JohnJlws
Not a slam dunk win For Dicks Girl
Posted by: Purple Girl on Apr 23, 2008 2:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If this is the best she can do being a 'Scranton Town girl' she is in big trouble.
She can not consider this a 'win' since she was up about 20 point only a few weeks ago, but of course she will.
Super Delegates should realize many Obama supporters Will NOT vote for her should they Hand Her the Nomination. I voted for Bill 2x's - was a supporter & Defender of Both (Far Too Long- Hindsight 20/20),But since she has been in the Senate I've seen enough evidence to be convinced she is NO DEM. Add to that her Outrageous comments about Nuking Iran if they attack Isreal,SAUDI OR UAE And Now I'm as fearful of her as I have been since the first time Dick stepped out of the Shadows. She is the 'Devil in the Blue Dress'- Dick in Drag. No real Dem would consider 'Obliterating' any other country-not even as a Bluff.
She is as Crazy as Nixon, as Senile as Reagan, as Complicite as HW and as much of an meglomaniac as W. Just another Puppet for Cheney &Co.
P.S. thanks Penn for making sure she didn't walk away with a 'Mandate'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not a slam dunk win For Dicks Girl Posted by: juliebrownstein
» RE: Take a pill, Julie ... Posted by: gazooks
» Well said, Julie! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» Thank you Purple Girl Posted by: writer7
Question Hillary as the villain just as you "question authority"
Posted by: juliebrownstein on Apr 23, 2008 2:51 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am campaigning for Hillary Clinton. I admit it. I like her better than Barack Obama and I think she can win. Part of my decision-making process is intellectual (I appreciate clearly stated policies) and part of my decision-making process is emotional (I think a woman could be a wonderful change from just another pissing-contest, and I recently lost my mother, so I am drawn to strong underdog women). Only a few months ago, I felt myself to be part of the mainstream "left" Alternet audience. Now Hillary - and by extension, myself - am/are villified by constant attacks from so called "alternative" voices who are strangely similar to those coming from the MSM. How many of us have seen the "Should Hillary Quit?" ads popping up on this very website? Why should she? By intimidation? Who funds these ads? God? You and I know the rules. If no one candidate achieves the requisite delegate margin, the contest is decided via a brokered convention. Those are the rules and there's no need to be frightened and paranoid by them - unless there's great anxiety underneath the bravado.

Reality check - Hillary won Pennsylvania by 10 - THAT'S TEN - percentage points, despite a money/media gap of 3-4 against 1. Is there no respect or recognition of this incredible victory? The MSM - of which Alternet is in my mind clearly an adjunct - is still unmoved by the will of the voters of PA, and the fine-toothed demographer elitists are already out to disparage them, as if one of their diploma-mill college degrees is inherently worth more that the experience of living through the Great Depression (which we're about to reprise, and then some), or of working in a car garage, or at the post office. But limousine liberals beware. There's a mighty wave of discontent out there. BO is not speaking to it. And then there are disenfranchised Florida and Michigan voters whom BO's supporters ignore entirely as they tout his populist message. Without their votes, there is no legitimate nominee, so spare us your fanciful popular vote and delegate counts. To contest Hillary's viability is to question democracy itself.

Julie Brownstein

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to Purple Girl (purple is still my favorite color, even when mixed with yellow
Posted by: juliebrownstein on Apr 23, 2008 3:23 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hmmmm...just read the hysterical comments of Purple Girl to affirm my own. No mention that BO threw Jimmy Carter under bus a few days ago while pandering to certain voters, condemning our Nobel Peace-Prize-winning former president's courageous peace efforts in the Middle East while masturbating himself though his snooze-worthy stump speech (once you get used to the lovely tone, it's DULL - like a failed AMERICAN IDOL contestant). Ummm...what words did he use this time? World peace? Unity? Believe?. At least HRC was a little more colorful on the same topic. Obliterate. She doesn't mean it, but you'd never know. Would Purple Girl please explain to me BO's support of the Bush-Cheney Energy Bill even as she heavy-breathes over HRC's ominous words about Scranton?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillery the Baller Loses Bigtime!
Posted by: williameon on Apr 23, 2008 4:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some Leader?

She has trouble
Cleaning her own house
And
Throwing out
The Garbage.

If she had any B-LLS?
She would have dumped
Mr. Cigar Affectionado
Wild Bill
A long time ago.

All the Reptilian
Fauxtian Voters

All The Garbage
Spewing Blimps

All of Diebold's
Phony Black Boxes

Can put
Put Hillery
Back in
The Black House
Again.

Last CALL!

The BUSH/Cliton DINOSTY
is
over.

Where's Jeb?
Someone got his Goat?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stupid, Stupid Democrats
Posted by: Tom Degan on Apr 23, 2008 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barack Obama is the most extraordiary candidate to come down the Democratic pike in four decades. What does his defeat in Pennsylvania mean? It means that the Democratic primary voters in that states are racists and fools. It caon't mean anything else.

Here's a wake-up call for the Democrats:

AMERICA IS SICK TO DEATH OF THE CLINTONS.

If the party of FDR is smart (yeah, yeah, I know what you're thinking, just bear with me) they will come up with a compromise candidate at their Denver convention that the party will be able to unite behind. I know that that' a long shot but it is the only thing that's going to save them in November. But that is not likely to happen. Why? Because the best that can be said of the Dems these days is that they're not quite as dumb as the Republicans.

Hillary Clinton is never going to be the president of the United States. The only way a Democratic candidate has a chance to win a national election is if a huge turnout of African Americans turns up en masse at the polls. In November, a lot of them are going to remember what the Clintonistas did to the first African American in history who had a chance to live in the White House and a lot of them are going to stay home - or vote for Ralph Nader. Come to think about it, I just might end up doing the same thing. A choice between Hillary Clinton and John McCain is really no choice at all.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
And now a word or two about Capital Punishment

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: Prairie Waif
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: writer7
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: Bibsisis
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: Moira61
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Stupid, Stupid Democrats Posted by: cardboardurinal
Tom Degan is soooo typical
Posted by: juliebrownstein on Apr 23, 2008 4:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This guy is like the campy Reverand Wright of Alternet - blatantly racist (against whites, of which he is, ironically one) - and fired up against...the Clintons? Oh, please. What country are you living in? BO takes all kinds of corporate money - even from the nuclear industry - and Tom Degan, secular saint - likens him to a sort of post-industrial Che Guevera. So funny. And so deluded. And might as well be a McCain operative for all the party unity this anti-Clinton hysteria you're trying to provoke. And I know you're smart. And I know you write a lot. But you are the classic limousine liberal - and it's YOU - not the disenfranchised people of PA who voted for HRC by a margin of 10 PERCENT - who are destroying the "democrat" party, as your favorite demon would say....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nope, he's right Posted by: alterpa123
» RE: Nope, he's right Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Tom Degan is soooo typical Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Tom Degan is soooo typical Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Tom Degan is a hot babe Posted by: Moira61
» RE: Tom Degan is a hot babe Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Tom Degan is a hot babe Posted by: cardboardurinal
» You're a genius, aren't you gazooks? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Just that ... Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Tom Degan is soooo typical Posted by: Bibsisis
More Clinton misunderstanding
Posted by: Abushite on Apr 23, 2008 4:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clinton did NOT achieve a 10% lead

If the Math is Correct - at the last count with only 2 Counties with a few votes to come in (both in which Obama has a comfortable lead)

Total Votes Clinton 1,258,245 = 54.69%
Obama 1,042,297= 45.31%

Which equates to 9.38% lead by Clinton

Is this another unintentional Lie???

Isn't 9.38 closer 9.00 rather than 10 ???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time is the enemy
Posted by: carbon-based on Apr 23, 2008 5:07 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The longer this plays on, the worse it is for Obama. The accumulation of negative issues surrounding him seems to be taking it's toll.

The democratic party seems hell bent on destroying any chances it had of gaining the whitehouse.

If Hillary pulls this out, McCain is the winner.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Accumulation by proxy Posted by: LeaderofMen
» RE: Accumulation by proxy Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Accumulation by proxy Posted by: desidid
» RE: Accumulation by proxy Posted by: desidid
Thanks for making us see the light
Posted by: BST on Apr 23, 2008 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's the headline: Clinton the Brawler Beats Obama the Consensus Builder

Every time the press characterizes Clinton yet again as a "brawler" clawing her way to the top with her thick ankles and manipulative, nasty, lying ways it also implies this: The voters who back her are nothing but the same.

I am one of those dumb-bells, I guess, and I'm so glad that Steven Rosenfeld is so brilliant that he was able to flush me out of the woods.

Yup, that's me, stupid, unable to discern that Senator Obama is a paragon of perfection who will have Congress and the world singing Kumbaya this time next year, if not earlier.

Thank you for your intelligensia elucidation. I am grateful to you and the Tom Russerts of the world for helping us poor slobs see the light. I'm still bowing as I sign off....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great comment, BST Posted by: JimmyVaughan
Hillary would make this country a joke
Posted by: Jasonix on Apr 23, 2008 5:10 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm amazed by all the Clinton supporters on this board who seem to think that Clinton's getting the shaft because of sexism on the part of voters and the media. If we voted for the ex-president's wife, what kind of "affirmation" of women's equality would that be? Do we want to be a country like Peru or the Philippines? Those are the kind of countries that elect the ex-president's wife. On her own, Hillary is at best a mid-level political hack who parlayed her family associations into a single full-term as a senator. During that time in the Senate, she supported Bush on the war and feigned ignorance of the facts when asked why she didn't oppose him. She has no qualifications, no integrity, and no chance. She wants to drain Obama's coffers and smear his name so he'll lose to McCain - giving us another 4 years of BUSH co. - and set herself up to run again in 2012. She's willing to sacrifice what's left of the country just to have another shot at running in 4 years. It's time for Hillary to go bye-bye.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 1 Rating? Coward! Posted by: Jasonix
Poor Americans.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Apr 23, 2008 5:12 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the cost of oil continues to become more and more expensive, therefore, damaging our economy; the US dollar plunges in value; inflation is a real plus ten percent and increasing; more companies are dismissing workers; real estate sales have plunged and value is crashing:

Hillary threatens Iran with nuclear destruction, and sabotashes Mr. Obama's rightful nomination as the Democratic presidental candidate.

The people of Pennsylvania have supported two candidates who are cooporate shills. Though mr. Obama may be the less of two evils, he still takes huge amounts of campaign money from Wall Street.

Cui Bono? The ruling elite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about a dictatorship?
Posted by: BST on Apr 23, 2008 5:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I'd like to know is how Hillary Clinton is "sabotaging" Barack Obama's campaign by garnering votes? Would you prefer we move to a dictatorship where voters don't matter?

She is STILL IN THE RACE STILL because there are voters who STILL WANT HER IN THE RACE.

Get it?

If any one of you wants a self-anointed government I can suggest lots of places in the world where you might feel more comfortable.

America, in case anyone has forgotten or missed that history class, is a Democracy.

Sorry your candidate can't just walk in unopposed. But that's life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How about a dictatorship? Posted by: Bibsisis
Barack Obama bringing all Americans together!
Posted by: Tongassberry on Apr 23, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For Change Vote Obama!

John Mellencamp - Small Town (Video)

Bruce Springsteen - Radio Nowhere (Video)

Supporting Barack Obama 08!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'll just write it now...
Posted by: waste_of_time on Apr 23, 2008 6:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Hillary is given the nomination, here's the first republican attack ad...

"Hillary Clinton:
How can she be trusted to run the country honestly when she ignored the popular vote and pandered to the party elite to get her nomination?"

I'm really sick of the popular vote not counting in this country. Having big state voters decide the election (without counting smaller states) is the antithesis of everything that is democratic. The rest of us have a say in this as well, and we voted for Obama. What I hear here is that Hillary should stay in because it would be good for democracy. My question is, how is ignoring the popular vote, the delegate count and basic math good for democracy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'll just write it now... Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: I'll just write it now... Posted by: willymack
» RE: I'll just write it now... Posted by: daniel1982
What a load of crap!
Posted by: PJAW on Apr 23, 2008 6:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary is not the "underdog" who is too tough to beat. She's the former front runner and presumptive nominee who is trailing a relative newcomer because he has a better message and has impressed voters with his honesty and vision.

Hillary brags about being outspent in PA and still managing to win. But she went from a 25 point favorite to a 10 point win and has less money because for the first time in memory, Obama's small contributors (more than a million) have supplied him with more cash than Hillary's big time corporate donors have. If she had the money, she would spend it. She doesn't have it because Obama has broader support.

If Hillary would make a better candidate against the Republicans, how come SHE can't put away this alegedly weak and inexperienced hope merchant? She started this thing with a huge advantage in name recognition and financial backing and look where they stand. She not only has a problem with lying to us, she has a problem with lying to herself.

I used to admire her, but not any more. She's made it obvious that she has more interest in winning the Presidency than she has in the good of the country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks Posted by: LeaderofMen
Ideals and BS
Posted by: freshlemon on Apr 23, 2008 6:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is fantastic that so many people are so idealistic in their views of how we want our country and our president to be. We need to be idealistic, but we also need to understand that the political landscape of today is ready to crush the idealistic.
Yes, the words of Senator Obama are inspiring and motivational. Every time I hear him speak I come away with a smile on my face. Idealism is not dead.

But, ladies and gentlemen, ideals or not...this time around we need to look at reality in choosing our leaders. After the smiles,promises and great speeches are over, the taking back of America begins.

I keep hearing about how Senator Clinton has turned this campaign into a dirty race, but all that I have seen and heard is criticism and bickering between the two candidates. Isn't that to be expected in a political race?

Most of the contention that Senator Clinton is not playing nice has come from the "pundits" who compromise information for ratings and, bottom feeders that most of them are, they are the ones who have thrown any dirt into the scene. They have villified Senator Clinton with their words and the smirks on their faces. (Reminds me of the smirking little puke who now lives in the White House). They have pecked and poked at Senator Obama to the point of attacking him for things his minister said and for things that are totally unrelated to the issues of this part of the election process. Who are these people? Help them find their home rock and lift it up so that they can climb back under there, then stand on it.

Do we really believe that the Republican Party and our dominating industrial giants are going to always play fair and run a clean and idealistic campaign against the Democratic candidate? Do we really believe that men like Rupert Murdoch and Dick Cheney are rare? If so, we are at best naive and at worst out of touch with the reality of those who seek to control and continually bilk the American people.

My hope is that Senator Clinton gets the nomination and fights as hard and as dirty as she needs to in order to give America back to Americans. If Senator Obama wins the nomination, I hope that he learns fast to fight fire with fire...dirt with dirt...because this country is at present in the grasp of a lot of nasty folks who don't give a fig about the people who put them there.They will not go away without a lot of mud-wrestling.

Hold fast to to the concept of ideals and goodness...we all need that...but even Superman has to "bust a few chops" for truth, justice and the American way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ideals and BS Posted by: desidid
Can't walk in unopposed!?
Posted by: PJAW on Apr 23, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, but that's a description that fits Hillary, not Barak. She assumed she would be the annointed one and win the election with relative ease. Oops! The voters are deciding otherwise. Big deal, she won Pennsylvania (by less than half the lead she had a month ago) and had to resort to dirty politics to pull it off. She still faces an insurmountable deficit and is without money, because Obama has broader support.

[« Reply to this comment