Clinton: What's All This Clinton-Obama Ticket Talk?

This is Hillary's motto: "by any means necessary". She'll do whatever it takes to win, and I hope I'm wrong about that. Hillary, just please stop NOW.

Clinton is trying to fool voters into believing that a vote for her is also a vote for Obama. I wonder how many people will believe that one……… Should be obvious it's a trick. That'll turn off people for sure. People don't like being tricked, makes them feel stupid. Way to go Hillary, make the voters feel that you think they are stupid. It just doesn't stop with these Clintons does it. I predict Miss. will go 70/30 for Obama. I wish the Clintons would just disappear—go back to Arkansa or Harlem or wherever.

Vote4TheBest,

Let's review. Senator Obama has won more votes, more delegates, and more states than any of the democratic candidates who entered this race last year. And your conclusion is that voters "are screaming, we are not ready for Obama!"

Wow. Might I suggest that you get your hearing tested? Because that's not what I hear American voters screaming.

Hillary said that while many likes this idea, but she "needs your vote first".

Obama has failed spectacularly to close the deal given all the big MO and $ that his campaign has been touting. Obama should listen to the voters! They are screaming, we are not ready for Obama! If he is that powerful a candidate then he should have knocked out down and win all the big states! Caucus are un-democratic and do not exist in the general election!

Can someone explain how Hillary is going to be good for the economy? I've heard about the very questionable plan of giving every American baby $5000 at birth (GI BIll for Juno). Her 5-year mortgage freeze has been widely panned by economists (with the exception of Krugman of course, who can't bear to discuss it yet). What's left? There's clean energy, but I've been hearing about the power of windmills since Jerry Brown was in California. What's left?

Andy,

How's he going to get the 2025 delegates?

I suspect he'll just keep winning primaries and caucuses while convincing superdelegates to endorse him. Seems to have worked so far.

Hillary is right. This story was started by the media (Caferty, CNN). When she was asked about it she said... it could be where we are heading. In response, Obama gave us his angry face (does he ever look happy?) and told everybody he has other plans. How is he going to get the 2025 delegates? Will Teddy fix that?

Oh, I suppose it is a bit of spin to pull back from her suggesting Barack could be her vice presidential pick. So what? Obama spins all sorts of things.

He spins the fact that he hasn't won a single major state. He spins his (former) campaign advisor's assertion that his promise to remove troops from Iraq within a year is a "best case scenario." He spins the memo that proves his campaign told the Canadian government that his threatened renegotiation of NAFTA is "political posturing." He spins the fact that, if it weren't for the unfair caucus process that favors his young supporters and disenfranchises the elderly, the disabled, and our troops overseas, he likely wouldn't have a lead of any kind. Spin, spin, spin.

Obama keeps saying that the superdelegates have an ethical obligation to support the candidate the voters have chosen. Okay, fine.

So I just have to ask: When all is said and done, if Hillary has overtaken him in the popular vote, but he's still ahead in delegates, how will he spin it to say that the superdelegates voting for him is the will of the people?

Do you really think the superdelegates are going to make Hillary the next Al Gore -- winner of the popular vote, but still doesn't get the slot?

We're not there yet, but, according to Real Clear Politics, she's only 2% behind Obama in the popular vote (not counting Florida or Michigan). If there's a do-over in those two states, which is looking increasingly likely, who knows what will happen?

And don't forget -- the nearly 100% Hispanic Puerto Rico holds the last contest, and they have more delgates than Illinois did.

Lauren --

Almost forgot, Bill Clinton was also not found guilty on sexual harassment charges: he settled out of court for $850,000 before the case could go to trial on appeal.

So again, you're absolutely right that the Clinton's haven't been convicted on any charges. But they sure have been indicted a lot.

By comparison, Senator Obama does not seem to have been charged with any crimes at all.

Does it bother you that Barack had Rezko do him the favor of helping him buy his house when it was widely known that he was under investigation for fraud, extortion, and money laundering?

Because if it doesn't now, it will when the Republicans get through with him.

The Clintons have never been found guilty of any wrongdoing.

Hillary is our most qualified, competent candidate.

Barack won't be able to beat McCain.

He doesn't have enough qualifications at this time, people will want more proof, not just words.

I've said it all here before today - I have to go.

If you don't believe me, we will see how reality plays out.

Goodnight ~

Why is that bizarre?

Whatever the answer is, she can't say it because the stupid media will take hold of it and run it so far in the most skewed directions, you'll forget the original question. They take all information and spin it all for the sake of self-advancement. It's completely unfair and awful.

Furthermore, this question has been asked over and over again - LET IT GO. It's not interesting. We need a nominee first. And it better be Hillary.

The way Democrats campaign against each other is like a sports match.

The Republicans don't play by any rules.

Barack's record and qualifications are not tough.

If he is the nominee, you will see... and we will lose, again.

"We do not believe that Sen. Obama has passed the commander in chief test. But there is a long way between now and Denver." Howard Wolfson 3/10/08 (yes, this is on the same day that Bill was pitching Obama for VP and Hillary was saying... what?

Lauren, Hillary may have an upswing in cross-over voters for a simple reason: Texas has an open primary system - Republicans can vote in either primary -regardless of party affiliation. Rush Limbaugh has "endorsed" Hillary and encouraged his enormous following to vote for her in the primaries. Bill actually went on the Limbaugh show last week, in a shameless pitch for his wife. Mississippi also has an open system, so I imagine that Rush voters will cross over for Hillary there as well. So let's hand it to the Clintons again - they will do absolutely anything to win. What's next? She has Ann Coulter's endorsement, Rush Limbaugh's endorsement, Bill Cunningham's endorsement ... who is next?

Harriet -

Your priorities could not be more messed up.

You are just showing how shallow and superficial you can be, and how you don't truly care about other people or anything that truly matters to the majority of the people of this country.

Again I will repeat the truth:

Hillary did not come up with the idea of the dream ticket. A professor came up with it. And it was brought up at the debates first.

Many Democrats in the party who are trying to resolve the division of the party, like the idea, and once again - the Clintons are trying to provide solutions.

Many democrats who truly believe in hope, change, and unity - like the idea.

Many Superdelegates think it would be a good idea.

It's her M.O. Tell a story, spread it through others and then deny it herself.

She is soo good at it.

Problem: she is transparent.

Second Problem: We aren't stupid.

Thank you ABC for exposing this.

Meixner,

What I said was what I heard reported on a number of major news networks. Thanks for your numbers - I will have to look at some from a number of sources too.

For Harriet:

"By the end of the Clinton presidency, the numbers were uniformly impressive. Besides the record-high surpluses and the record-low poverty rates, the economy could boast the longest economic expansion in history; the lowest unemployment since the early 1970s; and the lowest poverty rates for single mothers, black Americans, and the aged. Real wages, after declining over the course of the Reagan and Bush years, rose under Clinton. To be sure, the gap between the very rich and everyone else widened—as it has continued to do since—but gains for the rich, for once, didn't leave behind the poor and lower middle class."

From "Memo to Obama fans: Clintonism was a success." By David Greenberg, Rutger's University Professor of History and Media, for Slate Magazine.

http://slate.com/id/2183941/

To get back on topic I just reread Jake post above.

Hillary Clinton might be one of the greatest spinners and liars in the history of American politics.

As a young lawyer she learned the trade I guess by her featherlight involvement in the Watergate investigation (which by the way lead to a formal negative advice on her capabilities).

So Nixon might have been an inspiration, though reading Hillary's thesis, which celebrates socialist power tactics, is highly informative as well. But man, is she doing a job as a spinner!

And no shame! Amazing.

I am not wrong, I have already heard Republican pundits talk about it on the McGloughlin Group show - there are people researching, and there are all these alleged connections between Rezko and some Muslim extremist or something -they will play on people's fears.

The are researching it - and it is proven that he had Rezko help with a land deal to buy his house. It wasn't illegal - but it shows really bad judgement because Rezko it was when everyone knew Rezko was under investigation for fraud, extortion, money laundering, etc.

The Republicans will use this - and you will see your dreams come crashing down.

I have seen this happen before - we have lost too many elections because of what the Republicans will do.

The Clintons have been very kind and polite compared to what the Republicans will do. Mark my words.