Clinton v. Obama

Dumbass pinko-nazi-neoconservative-hippy-capitalists.
Post Reply
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Embar Angylwrath » Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:16 pm

Wow.. have any of you paid attention to the tone and tenor of Clinton's attacks on Obama? She has embraced a scorched earth policy. She has essentially said that if it were a choice between Obama and McCain, pick McCain, because only she and McCain have the experience needed to run the country. It's a desperate (although gutsy) move, and it really shows how much her personal ambition is stomping on her party.

Why is it gutsy? It places the superdelegates in a very uncomfortable position. By turning the focus towards Obama versus McCain, and then saying that McCain is the more experienced person to lead the country, she makes the superdelegates consider electibility more strongly, and discount the popular vote count and pledged delegate lead.

I have never seen a person try to rip up political party like this, all for a personal goal. This may sound like hyperbole now, but I think Hillary is doing so much damage to the Democratic party, it will take them years to recover.

She seems to be doing everything she can to hand the lecetion to the Republicans. I need to send her a thank you card.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius

User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Harlowe » Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:54 pm

Where did she say that? Just today Bill Clinton was talking about a Clinton-Obama ticket being unstoppable and that Hillary was absolutely open to it.

If you are referring to her talking about her and McCain having a lot of experience before the Texas primary, it's reading a lot into the comments. I think she is trying to pose herself as the stronger candidate to go up against him and that the Republican party is presenting a candidate with experience and so should the Democratic party. At least this how it sounded to me.

Anyway you look at it, it's a power play and I don't think you can equate that to saying if it's McCain vs. Obama vote for McCain. She certainly wouldn't support that nor vote for McCain.

Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7115
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Kulaf » Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:43 pm

Well that is the problem with her 3am ad Harlowe. Basically she is saying Obama does not have the experience to run the country.......so who does? McCain and Clinton.

User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Harlowe » Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:35 am

That's not the same as saying that people should vote for McCain over Obama. That's really stretching it without her clarifying what she meant. Reading more into it seems silly.

Lurker
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 6233
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 12:14 pm

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Lurker » Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:04 am

Harlowe wrote:Where did she say that? Just today Bill Clinton was talking about a Clinton-Obama ticket being unstoppable and that Hillary was absolutely open to it.
How generous to offer Obama the VP slot considering Hillary lost the Democratic nomination two weeks ago. She has no path to the nomination except to wage the 'politics of personal destruction' that her and Bill used to speak out against; no path except to tear down Obama in the most dishonest and personal way and then convince the superdelegates that he's unelectable so that they hand her the nomination. And if that happens I doubt she'd win 10 states.

Watch her in the proper context, Harlowe. She's lost. She knows she's lost. But she continues to smear Obama... to what end?

Stop the presses. I agree with Embar.

User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Harlowe » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:41 am

I can't stand the woman Lurker, and I would never vote for her, so I'm not making excuses for her - that is just the context I took her words. She'd end up with a very pissed off party if she were to take a stance like that "If the ticket ends up being Obama vs. McCain vote McCain". She'd lose support from delegates not gain it.

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:09 am

She is resigned to the fact that she can't get nominated in 2008, so she's trying to sabotage Obama for one last shot in 2012 if McCain wins. The fact that Mark Penn and Charlie Black are playing both sides of the street isn't helping her judgment, either.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Embar Angylwrath » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:07 am

Harlowe wrote:I can't stand the woman Lurker, and I would never vote for her, so I'm not making excuses for her - that is just the context I took her words. She'd end up with a very pissed off party if she were to take a stance like that "If the ticket ends up being Obama vs. McCain vote McCain". She'd lose support from delegates not gain it.
Harlowe.. read this. It explains Hillary's actions much better than I did. See if it doesn't make sense to you. Note who wrote it. Certainly not a a Democrat basher. This is a take from a party insider, a political operative, and a person who advised Clinton. Much as I despise Morris, he's spot on with his analysis.

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/its-over-2008-03-06.html
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:49 pm

Note who wrote it. Certainly not a a Democrat basher.
Bzzt! Wrong.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

User avatar
Croinc
Put the fuckin dog in the basket
Posts: 4213
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2002 1:45 am
Location: GOP Headquarters

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Croinc » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:52 am

I would call Dick Morris more of a Clinton basher than a Dem-basher. His level of animosity for the Clintons makes me think that maybe Bill left a stain on his wife's dress or something. Wouldn't surprise me....
Where's Ronald Reagan when you need him???

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:03 am

I think the man who claimed of JFK Jr.,
“He doesn’t like hogs. With the possible exception of his uncle.”
has plenty of hate for lots of Democrats, most specifically the ones who threw him off the gravy train. Clinton is his focus, but reading back a year or so in his JewishWorldReview columns is instructive.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Embar Angylwrath » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:16 pm

The latest Clinton gaffe... oh, its a good one.. floating the balloon of a Clinton/Obama ticket.

Now... why would you want a VP who, as the Clinton campaign has repeated ad nuaseum, isn't ready to be President? Isn't vetted? Isn't experienced enough? Isn't ready to be commander-in-chief?

Her campaign is imploding. That's a move that speaks of desperation, and no long-term strategy. Obama can now beat her with her own words, and show the inconsistency in her statements. Just a simple statement of "While I have no interest in running to be Vice-President of the US, someone should ask Mrs. Clinton why she thinks on one hand, I'm not ready to be president, yet is comfortable with me assuming the Presidency should something happen to the sitting President?"
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:43 pm

Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

User avatar
Finglefinn
Prince of teh Taberknuckle
Posts: 1017
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2003 2:30 am
Location: Thestra, Telon

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Finglefinn » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:05 pm

And Ferraro's head rolls...
Finglefinn

Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Embar Angylwrath » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:54 pm

What was Ferraro thinking? Winning with the suicide bomb strategy?

/boggle
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius

Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7115
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Kulaf » Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:36 am

I thought her point was very valid.....if somewhat politically stupid. If Obama was the junior white senator from IL he probably wouldn't get much notice at all.

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:55 am

Because, of course, one can predict the future with tremendous accuracy and junior white senators from Illinois never do well in Presidential politics.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

superwalrus
kNight of the Sun (oxymoron)
Posts: 1735
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by superwalrus » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:30 pm

if you don't think her statements are accurate you're deluding yourself.

Walrus

Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Partha » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:54 pm

Dewey beats Truman, youngster.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.

Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7115
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Clinton v. Obama

Post by Kulaf » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:09 pm

Partha wrote:Dewey beats Truman, youngster.
So you are comparing Obama to Truman? How do you compare a junior senator to someone who had served as Vice President and as President and was running for a term on his own to Obama? That's a rather large stretch.

Better to compare Obama to Russ Feingold.

Post Reply