Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Et Tu, Carville?
- The Math
- The Goldberg Variation
- House Republican Leaders Twist Obama Statement on Israel
- Super-Scooping Super-Ds
- Coates: "The Myth of the Black Racist Voter"
- Pro-Clinton Unions Continue Full-Steam Ahead
- McCain Campaign v Newsweek
- Huckabee on Novak's Column: "It's Total and Absolute Nonsense"
- Hillary's New Internet Video
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Return of the Podcast | Main | Howard Dean 2004: The Medals Matter »
Nader to Clinton: Stay In the Race!
March 28, 2008 8:45 PM
Sometimes it's as if those dudes from The Onion are writing this election.
"Senator Clinton:
"Just read where Senator Patrick Leahy is calling on you to drop out of the Presidential race.
"Believe me.
"I know something about this.
"Here’s my advice:
"Don’t listen to people when they tell you not to run anymore.
"That’s just political bigotry.
"Listen to your own inner citizen First Amendment voice.
"This is America...
"Just tell them --
"It’s democracy.
"Get used to it.
"Yours truly,
"Ralph Nader"
No, seriously, this is real.
- jpt
March 28, 2008 in 2008: Democrats | Permalink | User Comments (275)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/27561406
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Nader to Clinton: Stay In the Race!:
Off topic, but important:
Google a search for, RNA Movement Trinity Church Wright, you will see just how little the Wright matter has been explored.
The press is avoiding too much info. I have never seen one word anywhere about the RNA - Trinity Church - Muslim connection. If they will not delve into conflict, then individuals must.
The Republicans play full contact politics, as we all know. The connections mentioned above will be their "equipment"!
I stiil do not know how deeply Wright's separatist movement is ingrained in Obama. But I certainly know that "Separatist" is opposite of "uniter" by Webster's or any other definition.
I do not like militants nor fanatics of any ilk. White, black, or otherwise, and certainly do not want to be even inadvertantly furthering their cause.
I also know that like a tumor, it is foolish to say it is "benign" until one has done a complete "work-up and a biopsy"!
Only then shall we know for sure.
Posted by: mc | Mar 31, 2008 4:41:15 AM
Firefighter writes, "If the Obama supporters were confident that he is going to win they would not be calling for Hillary to get out."
============================
It seems you're confused. Obama HASN'T asked or even SUGGESTED Hillary quit. Like a lot of folks you have MISTAKENLY (which is quite typical) equated the suggestion with being a Obama supporter. The writing is on the wall and they realize that the Democratic Party as we know it could be damaged for decades by having someone who lost the popular vote, pledged delegates and had fewer state wins "STEAL" the nomination via backroom deals.
Firefighter writes, "They would ignore her and continue campaigning they way McCain handled Huckabee. The fact is Hillary will win big in Pennsylvania and will win the majority of the remaining states.
==========================
Even if she "wins" PA it won't be by much. Granted she should win big considering the Governor of PA basically said his constituents basically don't vote for Black politicians. (lol) Go figure.
Firefighter writes, "Depending on what negatives come forth on Obama and momentum, she could even win ALL remaining states.
============================
Not only will this not happen but it won't even be close.
Firefighter writes, "One Obama supporter on meet the press said the reason Hillary should bow out was not because she was weak but because she was strong and is expected to finish strong in the remaining elections."
=======================
Funny how folks like yourself always talk about he said, she said and can never remember WHO said it. The odds that they would actually have ANYONE on Meet the Press provide such a silly statement are slim to none. Why do you folks persist in making stuff up? Were you in Bosnia as well? (lol)
Firefighter writes, "Another commentator said she may have only a 5% or 10% chance now but after everyone has voted and with a strong showing her chances will go up! Hang in there Hillary we will not give up!!"
==========================
In the words of Ronald Reagan, there you go again. He said, she said and the convenient memory lapse. Can't remember WHO said it huh? Typical. That's what happens when you make stuff up or even worse; don't understand what is actually being said.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 31, 2008 3:11:20 AM
By the way, where IS Michelle Obama? Is she still campaigning for her husband? I have not heard from or seen her for weeks.
Posted by: ellen | Mar 30, 2008 7:05:40 PM
Doctorate writes, "Who ever heard in 2008 of nominating for the presidency some guy who hasn't even held a national office for one full term?"
====================================
First question. A doctorate in WHAT? I only ask because I'm sure you know Abraham Lincoln was a STATE legistlator (Illinois ironically) for (8) years. Don't get angry. Just say THANKS for being ENLIGHTENED.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 30, 2008 4:55:27 PM
Doctorate writes, "Who ever heard in 2008 of nominating for the presidency some guy who hasn't even held a national office for one full term?"
====================================
First question. A doctorate in WHAT? I only ask because I'm sure you know Abraham Lincoln was a STATE legistlator (Illinois ironically) for (8) years. Don't get angry. Just say THANKS for being ENLIGHTENED.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 30, 2008 4:55:20 PM
If the Obama supporters were confident that he is going to win they would not be calling for Hillary to get out. They would ignore her and continue campaigning they way McCain handled Huckabee. The fact is Hillary will win big in Pennsylvania and will win the majority of the remaining states. Depending on what negatives come forth on Obama and momentum, she could even win ALL remaining states. One Obama supporter on meet the press said the reason Hillary should bow out was not because she was weak but because she was strong and is expected to finish strong in the remaining elections. Another commentator said she may have only a 5% or 10% chance now but after everyone has voted and with a strong showing her chances will go up! Hang in there Hillary we will not give up!!
Posted by: Firefighter | Mar 30, 2008 3:22:51 PM
May they fight to the bitter end. This keeps McCain out of the news. There is no such thing as bad publicity. In the end tying McCain to Bush will ensure a Dem victory.
Posted by: slate | Mar 30, 2008 1:26:00 PM
The issue of Rezko will be big one for attack in November. The money Obama takes from lobbyists and then lies about are ridiculous. He knew about Rezko. Obama was "friendly" enough with him to take him to view his new million dollar plus house with him. Then what about the money from the nuclear industry re: leaks after he changed his input in the Senate?
Posted by: katherine | Mar 30, 2008 1:11:34 PM
Correction:
Oprah bought about a bilion dollars worth of the media. I left out the word dollars.
Posted by: sienna | Mar 30, 2008 1:05:25 PM
Typical men saying "honey you need to stop, people will start calling you bad names" are sooooo afraid if Hillary Clinton it makes them red faced mad. Nothin' worse than a woman a man can't control. Hillary's been called every name in the book, taken heat from unlikely sources, betrayed by friends and allis and she just keeps on. Those are just the qualities in the leader of the free world we need.
Posted by: Texas Lil | Mar 30, 2008 12:23:31 PM
OBAMA WILL LOSE IN NOVEMBER: Obama has won the GOP states. He couldn’t win any of the big blue states or any of the BATTLE GROUDND STATES LIKE OHIO, MICHIGAN, and FLORIDA. Hillary has won all these states and she is going to win PENNSYLVANIA. John Kerry lost majority of the states now won by Obama. Hillary won all of the major blue states. So Obama and his cronies are working to suppress the voices of 70 million people yet to vote as well as to silence the voices of people in Florida and Michigan. They are trying to steal the election from Hillary just like George Bush stole from Gore in 2000. HILLARY, YOU SHOULD NEVER QUIT SUCCOMING TO THESE BULLIES
Posted by: Independent | Mar 30, 2008 11:53:37 AM
Who ever heard in 2008 of nominating for the presidency some guy who hasn't even held a national office for one full term? His problems have only begun to surface. If Governor Blagojevich is brought down here in Illinois because of his Rezko ties, Obama will be right behind him. Only in America, where the masses are mesmerized by American Idols and Terminators can we expect to see such a fiasco. Latte liberals and those blacks voting without engaging a thought process do not represent middle America, and therefore don't represent the democratic party.
Let's count all the states, including Michigan and Florida, and then see where we're at. Let's also take another look at some of the shenanigans that went on at the caucuses and reconsider counting those results; all caucus states should re vote in primaries. Let's also see how many lawsuits there are against the media for their blatant interference in this entire process. And what about Oprah? I hope she didn't exceed her allowed contribution amount!
Obama needs to step down, try to fulfill his senate term, which is why we sent him to D.C., and show us he has the maturity, patience, perseverance and work ethic to earn - not buy and cajole - his way to the top.
Posted by: doctorate | Mar 30, 2008 11:48:19 AM
Mary Lou writes, "You folks who act like Obama is entitled to the presidency (as if it's preordained, a second coming!!)and everyone else move out of the way - seem to have no clue about how the democratic process is supposed to work.
======================
Do Clinton supporters even know what the word "ironic" means? If ever there was a show of entitlement it's without a doubt the belief Hillary is entitled because a) her husband was President and b) women feel she deserves something for having a husband who embarrassed her. Yeah, I know how sexist that sounds but the question is does it have merit? Sure looks like it. Talk about an entitlement mentality...sheesh.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 30, 2008 11:20:44 AM
You folks who act like Obama is entitled to the presidency (as if it's preordained, a second coming!!)and everyone else move out of the way - seem to have no clue about how the democratic process is supposed to work.
Posted by: Mary Lou | Mar 30, 2008 10:45:42 AM
As a political analyst, I am quite convinced that the protracted rivalry within the Democratic presidential campaign, which has, for the most part, been instigated by Hilary Clinton’s insistence on “going all the way”, could only amount to political suicide for the Democratic Party. This, of course, in turn, would cost the Democrats not only the November election, but also would lead o the disenfranchisement of the next generation and those who feel neglected by history in this country. In this campaign, it has become obvious that Obama represents the voice of the youth and those who are tired of the old system and its politics of cronyism, and are craving real change in the political landscape in this country. On the other hand, Hilary Clinton represents mostly the working-class who nostalgically clings to the memories of the economic boom of the 90’s, the repeat of which, from an economic standpoint, is quite unlikely, given the gargantuan tasks ahead, such as, how to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan (Which some people seem to have forgotten about. America has some 20,000 troops stationed there), and the existence of major international players such as China and India, whose demands for oil and other resources make the repeat of the 90’s nothing more than a just wishful thinking and a pipe dream. America needs an overhaul in its political scene, something that only a new voice that reflects the aspirations of the new generation can achieve. A personality whose charisma can rally people together and can bring about renewed hope. Of course, the word ‘Change’ can sometimes be frightening to some, simply because it might mean letting go of the old habits, which often die hard. However, judging by the state in which America has found itself, thanks to the current Administration’s abrasive policies, both home and overseas, change is inevitable and this can only lead to building a better and stronger America. America and Americans can not afford getting stuck in these political bickerings and divisive policies of ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ while countries like India and China are rising as the new politico- economic powerhouses.
Posted by: realist | Mar 30, 2008 9:18:34 AM
Leahy and Dean would never get elected in middle America or the South. Only in a far left state like Vermont. and don't believe these polls that popped up all of a sudden. Very fishy. They do not relfect the reality we hear in our communities. remember Dean said things were being done to end the nomination process.
Posted by: geevill | Mar 30, 2008 9:05:17 AM
For the 8 years, democratic party is increasingly leaning towards the far left as the power and influence of organizations such as Moveon. It's now time for the centrist democrats to say enough is enough! If not, the centrists are going to be further marginalized...
Posted by: Unashamed_Independent | Mar 30, 2008 7:01:17 AM
I hope and pray Hillary Clinton remains in the race. I think it's ludicrous that certain Dems are trying to convince her otherwise. The Dems best hope Clinton wins the nomination 'cause this is one Dem who'll be voting Republican if Obama wins the nomination. There's just NO WAY I'm going to vote for Obama!!
Posted by: RJ | Mar 30, 2008 4:12:21 AM
i can hardly stomach the idea of michele obama being in the white house with all the contempt she has for this country.
Posted by: fedup | Mar 30, 2008 4:05:52 AM
Ralph Nader may not be diplomatic but he has a resume for making real change happen a mile long -- not hyperbole like Jr. Senator Obama.
Good for him recgnizing that Obama and all the news rooting on for Clinton to drop out is motivated by Cowardice and fear.
Hillary is the only Democrat for President with Courage, patience and steafastness.
Go HIllary -- You will win! Obama is a light weight with an Old Boy network of has been backing him and swift boating you. People are onto Obama's double talk and Good Cop Bad Cop Games.
Posted by: Steve | Mar 30, 2008 4:00:39 AM
Did someone say that Sen Obama would stoop so low and say and do anything just to get the nommination? Oh, yes. HOW CAN A NORMAL THINKING PERSON IN HIS RIGHT MIND TELL HIS OPPONENT TO QUIT QUE GAME STILL IN THIRD QUARTER?
The hatred for Sen Clinton has reached new heights. First of all, the DNC MUST RESOLVE THE MI AND FL VOTES. Anything less is a recipe for disaster for the Dems in November. Senator Obama must show that WORDS MATTER. He said he is for empowering the people. Well, match those words with ACTION. Oh, remember, throughout his political career, HE HAS ALWAYS VOTED "PRESENT". That is what he wants to do in MI and FL. It is now clear to me that Sen Clinton is a much stronger and better candidate because WITH ALL THE HATRED AND ATTACKS FROM BOTH THE PRESS AND THE LIKES OF LEHAY IN THE DEM PARTY, SEN CLINTON IS STILL STANDING JUST A MERE FEW VOTES BELOW. Had it not been for the MEDIA BIAS and the subtly orchestrated HATRED AGAINST SEN CLINTON FROM MEN WHO WOULD NOT WANT A WOMAN PRESIDENT, Sen Obama would be long gone out of the campaign.
If the DEMS FORCE SEN CLINTON OUT OF THE RACE, we already see through this and we will not reward them come Nov. John McCain will surely become next President. Third Bush Term for sure. But still better than rewarding such SHAMEFUL PUBLIC DISPLAY OF IGNORANCE, PREJUDICE AGAINST WOMEN, AND HATRED. Sen Obama talks about HEALING THE NATION, YET HE IS PART OF THE CONSPIRACY TO INTIMIDATE WOMEN AND DISEMFRANCHISING SO MANY VOTERS IN MI AND FL AND PA AND OTHER 10 STATES.
VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT. SHE IS A FIGHTER AND SHE WOULD NOT BE INTIMIDATED. GO HILLARY!!!!!!!
Posted by: Paix | Mar 30, 2008 3:36:34 AM
fedup, i'm with you - will never vote for obama, not this year, not in the future, not for president, not for vice president, not for dogcatcher.
Posted by: so saddened | Mar 30, 2008 2:44:50 AM
ditto to:MC, Darrell, Agnes and Griffin. the big wigs in the party keep saying we will embrace the nominee, but i can say with no doubt in my mind that i will NEVER vote for bho.
Posted by: fedup | Mar 30, 2008 12:57:29 AM
whoever thinks voting for obama will save their pocketbook is highly mistaken.
if you dont want to be heavly taxed you will be smart and vote for a republican, or moderate democrat.
obamas plans for giving 300 dollars to people here, and tax deducting those who make 100,000 a year is crazy. He needs to wake up and the smell the coffee. Poeple in New York who make over 100,000 a year are lower-middle class, yet he wont give them a break? Give me a break!
Posted by: chelsea | Mar 30, 2008 12:51:57 AM
We should all tell Senator Clinton that she should run as an independent, if the Democrats are stupid enough to choose Obama as their nominee. She has my vote, no matter what. Unless, of course, I am forced by circumstances to actually vote for McCain. One way or another, I will not vote for Obama.
Posted by: Griffin | Mar 30, 2008 12:47:35 AM
Hillary, stay in the race.
Leahy has not right to tell her to quit. This is not a "good" lesson to teach our kids. Quit or give up because you are under pressure. We always tell our kids to follow their goals. Let people vote. I don't know about Washington, but, I don't think they like to listen to us. There are still other states that people want to vote for Hillary.
Hang in there, Hillary, we are behind you. This is America. If Mr. Leahy does not like it, he should quit!!!
Posted by: Agnes | Mar 30, 2008 12:38:14 AM
If Hillary does nt get the nomination i will stay home or vote for Ralph Nader, I don't have not trust or faith in Obama being President.
Posted by: Darrell | Mar 30, 2008 12:09:54 AM
I can tell you that many people wish they had their vote back from Obama. I an African American and will never vote for Obama....Iwpersonally will vote for McCain over Obama......Hillary should stay in the race until its over...What a conspiracy!..If HRC isn't the nominee we should write in Hillary.....
Posted by: jfb | Mar 29, 2008 10:56:35 PM
I could care less what someone´s pastor said or didn´t say. If everyone listened to their pastors we´d still believe the Universe revolved around a flat Earth. Those who hold Obama´s pastor against him should learn not to throw stones in glass houses since as we all have people in our lives who might be embarassing from time to time. Lastly, go ahead and vote for McCain just to spite Obama if Obama wins the nomination. You´ll only be screwing yourselves, your children, your pocketbook, and your country.
Posted by: George | Mar 29, 2008 10:50:09 PM
Thanks John: I agree with you words that:
Obama supporters tirelessly state that HRC cannot win based on the math.
Yet they never state that NEITHER CAN OBAMA.
Based on the current "knowns", though Obama leads, The above 2 statements are absolutely true. It will take quite a while and much more voting, along with much more mathematical recalculation to ever make a definitive statement in this matter.
Many "unknowns" are actually waiting to become "knowns" only when the process is complete. Then and only then can any statement regarding who can win have factual merit.
And ,at that point it will be a "case of who one", not a hypothetical of "who can or cannot"!
We are all quilty of often playing such silly games re hypotheticals, "wishing" they were fact, due to our personal "wishes".
I the case of constantly saying HRC cannot mathematically win. The Obama folks are the silly ones.
Posted by: Meck | Mar 29, 2008 9:45:27 PM
Mariane writes, "Howard Dean does not want to change the rules on MI and FL because Hillary would catch or pass Obama."
==================
How much did it hurt to tell that lie? (lol) Hillary Clinton didn't oppose the DNC's position on MI or FL when she "thought" she had this race won. Low and behold she's behind in EVERY category and now she wants to champion the rights of MI and FL voters now? I realize the political pundits make fun of high-school graduates and blue-collar workers on daily basis but SURELY you realize we're capable of rational thought? What you're doing is a telling an outright lie to sway less informed voters. Neither candidate will win the election outright via pledged delegates. Obama will finish with more pledged delegates, super-delegates as well as the popular vote. What Bill and Hillary are "hoping" for is a spike in the popular vote so that they can make an "argument" to ignore the fact that Obama has also won more states. The greatest irony of all is how folks like yourself preach "fairness" but see absolutely nothing wrong trying to get someone with fewer pledged delegates, states, votes and super-delegates into office. Are you sure you're not a Republican?
He endorsed Obama monthes ago and Pelosi is for Obama but she is stay tight lipped. Dean should never have been Chairman of the DNC because he is hard boiled. If it benefits him then he would change the rules but since it benefited Hillary he won't. They had to make those rules for a purpose however New Hampshire changed their primary date and did not get penalized. That is because Dean thought Obama was going to win that state and he got fooled.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 29, 2008 9:26:05 PM
Who cares if she bows out now or later.
The more money she wastes now will be less to use later! McCain will beat either Obama (racist pastor,etc.) or
Clinton(liar, nutcase) either way. They
spent too much money tearing each other down! The Republican machine wont have to dig very hard to find dirt; it has already been exposed by the Democrats!
This was the year the election would have been handed to them and they blew it. It really started with Howard Dean(remember the meltdown)eeeyyyaaahhhh...what a pitiful excuse for a DNC chairman. eeeyyyaaahhhh!! McCain '08
Posted by: Ed | Mar 29, 2008 9:24:16 PM
Is funny how in such a close race, someone can actually suggest the other competitor to quit. Is like telling someone after swimming half the distance that he/she won't make it, therefore he/she should swim back.
I think for the next 8 years Americans better select the most qualitfy C in C and not just talk about changes without real solutions and compremises. Regardless who would win the other would be the VP and the Republican would not be in the White House for the next 8 years.
Posted by: Jaime | Mar 29, 2008 9:07:31 PM
Howard Dean does not want to change the rules on MI and FL because Hillary would catch or pass Obama. He endorsed Obama monthes ago and Pelosi is for Obama but she is stay tight lipped. Dean should never have been Chairman of the DNC because he is hard boiled. If it benefits him then he would change the rules but since it benefited Hillary he won't. They had to make those rules for a purpose however New Hampshire changed their primary date and did not get penalized. That is because Dean thought Obama was going to win that state and he got fooled.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Mar 29, 2008 8:14:28 PM
Michigan: You said it right. Howard Dean and Pelosi are trouble. Dean needs to stop ordering the candidates what to do. There are primaries in June and the primaries have to come first before they choose a nominee for president. Hillary still has a chance if the superdelages pick her. Obama cannot run this country, it would be a total disaster and his voters would be kicking themselves.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | Mar 29, 2008 8:08:13 PM
Sorry , in one segment "one" should read "won". ----"I" should have an n following it ...plus other typos.
Fingers have a hard time following my thoughts. Again, I apologize for any failures of coherancy or typing.
Posted by: MC | Mar 29, 2008 8:07:52 PM
Obama supporters tirelessly state that HRC cannot win based on the math.
Yet they never state that NEITHER CAN OBAMA.
Based on the current "knowns", though Obama leads, The above 2 statements are absolutely true. It will take quite a while and much more voting, along with much more mathematical recalculation to ever make a definitive statement in this matter.
Many "unknowns" are actually waiting to become "knowns" only when the process is complete. Then and only then can any statement regarding who can win have factual merit.
And ,at that point it will be a "case of who one", not a hypothetical of "who can or cannot"!
We are all quilty of often playing such silly games re hypotheticals, "wishing" they were fact, due to our personal "wishes".
I the case of constantly saying HRC cannot mathematically win. The Obama folks are the silly ones.
Posted by: MC | Mar 29, 2008 8:01:49 PM
James writes, "If Obama was not fighting the Michigan and Florida seating, Clinton would for sure win this race. The Democratic party needs to get their stuff together so everyone's vote can count."
=========
This is comical. Nothing like using the biases of certain people against them. First and foremost it's an absolute lie to say Obama is against a "re-do" in Michigan and Florida by equating his "acceptance" of the rules of the Democratic Party. If the Democratic Party decides to do it all again tomorrow you won't see him disagreeing with it. One more thing...What is up with this whole every vote count nonsense? I guess it boils down to how you "equate" things. Some of you folks, as sad as it is, equate having someone tell you it's mathematically impossible for Hillary to win the nomination with depriving you of the right to vote. No offense but you really don't need a college degree to see what's really being said if your objectivity hasn't been tainted by personal inadequacy.
Posted by: Dems | Mar 29, 2008 7:30:46 PM
Deeply concerned writes:
"Are men still so afraid of women in power that they would do anything to destroy and discredit them?"
-----
Yes.
John Edwards would still be the best nominee, because he has NOTHING to prove to the likes of Alter-Matthews-Abrams (and -- alas! -- Olbermann), and need have no fear of Kerry-Daschle-Leahy-Durbin, and whoever else is so hot to have a touch-me-not "black" figurehead to front for their stupid cabal.
Add to this that Obama's MANNER -- as opposed to his mob-tinged PRACTICE -- is kind of ... girlish, compared to Clinton's (who has to play DOWN her femaleness to minimize mockery from the bully boys), and it gets extremely weird.
If Clinton and Obama would just get back to the Senate, and the Democrats nominate John Edwards, it would be waaay better. Everybody pretty much KNOWS there are more Obama shoes to drop. Michelle Obama might be the single person in the best position to stop this circus ...
Posted by: Navarro | Mar 29, 2008 7:12:11 PM
Thank you for your understanding of how America is supposed to work. Though you are running for President yourself, I am a strong advocate of a Clinton / Nader democratic/independent ticket for President and Vice President. I believe as Vice President you can continue the tradition started by Vice President Cheney of being a true working Vice President and contribute a great deal to our country in that capacity. I also believe that if you and Senator Clinton team up now before the remainder of the democratic primaries take place, your team will differentiate yourselves as the clear favorite of independents and all of whom want to see a real change take place.
Prior to your announcement that you were running for President I sent an e-mail to Senator Clinton's campaign urging her to go to you and make an agreement to join forces for the betterment of our country. I am now urging you to go to her and open a dialog regarding the possibility of joining forces now to ensure your joint victory in November.
Posted by: PeggieC | Mar 29, 2008 7:09:57 PM
If there's one thing Ralph Nader knows, it's running troubled campaigns. He is a wealth of information on this subject, Hillary should bring him on as an adviser. Who else has this kind of experience?
Good point about the first amendment, at this point it is almost her duty to keep up the fight. Giving up when things look bad just because the public opinion polls are not 100% on your side would stifle important debate.
Posted by: Jennifer | Mar 29, 2008 7:09:10 PM
Just one minute
I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m just curious. I do enjoy the occasional Ludlum, Forsyth and well, most tension filled political and conspiracy novels. My curiosity though, does not stem from the pages of a novel. It comes from the current stand or atmosphere in Washington. I especially got extremely angry when Patrick Lehay asked Hilary Clinton to step aside because she was hurting Barack Obama. My first thought was, this fellows’ got some nerve. There is nothing that Hilary has done to hurt Barack that he himself has not done. Why is it that the men in Washington would rather settle for a lame wounded horse in a major race rather than sent in a battle tested, battle ready, strong and very competitive Amazon? Why are these men, joined by these so called Conservative Democratic Women, so threatened by Hilary Clinton that they are trying to force her out of the race? Are they so jealous that a second Clinton is going to be president that they can not stand it? Is Patrick Lehay an ignoramus? Why is he treating her like she is no more than a nuisance? How dare he? Does Patrick know something that he thinks the rest of us are ignorant to? Does he think that we all listen to the likes of MSNBC, CNN and ABC? Have they bought into their own delusion? “Give it up already?” I wonder where he got the nerve from.
Why are they so afraid of Hilary Clinton? Do they see in her an unimaginable potential that exceeds all of their capabilities? Could this be the only woman of our time with all of the real potential to be president and are we going to let the Washington bullies silence her? I hope not.
My only conclusion is that there is a conspiracy; but not the kind you think. Is it possible that knowing that Barack Obama has not a chance in Hell of defeating John McCain, that they would much rather have McCain in the Whitehouse than a Hilary Clinton??? I’m curious, is Barack Obama a part of this conspiracy or is he so brilliantly dumb that these simple facts escape him? Is the male dominated press in on this conspiracy? Why are the women in the press intimidated by these oppressors? Very few have dared to ask challenging questions of Obama while they join in with the male dominated press corp to discredit and humiliate Hilary Clinton. Do we not want to progress pass the 1800s? I thought we were in the 21st Century? Are men still so afraid of women in power that they would do anything to destroy and discredit them? I know that I have a lot of “Whys”. I would hope that by the end of this primary season, we would come close to figuring out what Patrick and his gang is hiding and what they are holding on to. I hope though, and sincerely so, that it would not be too late.
Posted by: Deeply concerned | Mar 29, 2008 6:53:40 PM
You go Girl they only want you to drop out because you have them running scared. Keep going Pennsylvania is behind you 110%
GO HILLARY GO STRAIGHT TO THE WHITE HOUSE
Posted by: Deborah | Mar 29, 2008 6:51:26 PM
If Obama was not fighting the Michigan and Florida seating, Clinton would for sure win this race. The Democratic party needs to get their stuff together so everyone's vote can count.
Rock the Vote!!!
Clinton --2008!!
Posted by: James | Mar 29, 2008 6:42:25 PM
Here's my advice to Hillary. GO GIRL GO!!! AND SHOW THE Good Ol' Boys that they are dead wrong and America loves and supports you each and every day.
Ann
Posted by: Iris Eddy | Mar 29, 2008 6:31:11 PM
Ryan Jones writes:
"... Hillary is more of a divisive figure."
-----
Only if what the "leadership" fears is that black voters might stray off the reservation to vote for Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney.
Posted by: Navarro | Mar 29, 2008 6:27:24 PM
Not surprising. Nader stands to gain more votes in the general because Hillary is more of a divisive figure.
Posted by: Ryan Jones | Mar 29, 2008 6:13:24 PM
Despite the Obama campaign's aggressive spin and pressure, the RULES require super delegates to exercise their best independent judgment, and that is what they will do. Even Sen. Obama's top strategist agrees they should. If not, then why don't prominent Obama endorsers like Senators Kerry (MA) and Kennedy (MA), and Governors Patrick (MA), Napolitano (AZ) and Richardson (NM) follow the will of their constituents and switch their support to Hillary? After all, she won their states. And if this is truly about the "will of the people," then Sen. Obama's short-sighted tactic to run out the clock on a revote in Florida and Michigan accomplishes exactly two things: it disenfranchises Florida and Michigan's voters; and it hurts Democrats in a general election. Apparently, for the Obama campaign, the "will of the people" is just words.
Posted by: ONEVOTE | Mar 29, 2008 6:11:10 PM
Ralph Nader is man of integrity and courage. He won't allow anyone to shout him down from running in an election because that is his right as an American. To all the Nader haters out there you have to understand that in 2000 Al Gore was an extremely weak candidate. You can't say that Nader cost Gor Florida. Polling shows that if Nader wasn't in the race many Nader voters would have either stayed home or voted for Bush.
The only thing that Leahy's idiotic statement encouraged me to do was donate more money to Hillary. Thanks Pat for the motivation you sucker!
I'm an independent and Hillary is my 1st choice! If the General Election is between Obama and Senator McCain - a true war hero - I'll be voting for John McCain.
Posted by: Bearded Mark | Mar 29, 2008 6:09:51 PM
A Hillary Clinton / John Edwards combination would be unbeatable..... !!!!!
Posted by: PROUDAMERICAN | Mar 29, 2008 6:06:00 PM
Ryan Jones writes:
"It's not surprising, a commentary from Ralph Nader asking Clinton to stay in the race. He's making an Independent run for the Presidency this fall. He stands to fare better if she is the Democratic nominee."
-----
Nader (and McKinney, and Gravel) stands to do pretty darn well if EITHER face of Hillobama is the Democratic Party nominee.
Here, however, he's "being a gentleman" -- and freedom fighter -- by counseling Clinton not to be pushed around by party apparatchiks in search of "unity" for the "leadership" (whose real concern is probably that the primaries could cut into their summer vacations).
The "leadership" -- in disdain of which the Democratic Party IS united -- stays in power whether the party does or doesn't take back the White House. If they want to win the presidency, they'll nominate John Edwards.
Posted by: Navarro | Mar 29, 2008 6:03:39 PM
Countallthevotes writes, "Vanessa, let us say for the sake of argument that Obama does get the nomination. I still will not support him. I honestly cannot forget Rev. Wright's racist/ethnic-slurring/anti-American/profane rantings. Obama embraced the man as his mentor for over 20 years. These paranoid rants are indelibly etched in my mind."
========
All I can say to that kind of logic is WOW! When I read comments like that the first thing I do is question the intellect of the person making them. The U.S. economy is bordering on a recession. We're spending billions of dollars on a war with no attainable goal. Is this the "hot topic" that gets you so riled up you literally ignore the things that are affecting your DAILY lives? I'm sorry but that has to be one of the silliest things I've read on this board to date. America owes everybody money, the economy is tanking and you're worried about the comments of a Black preacher on the south side of Chicago? If ever there was an attempt at he social elites to manipulate the so-called lower ladder of society this is definitely it. I haven't decided which candidate will get my vote but I'll you this...My vote SURELY won't be obtained by giving me simple-minded "hot" topics in an effort to get me to ignore the fact that you really don't have a legitimate plan of action to get us out of this mess we're currently in....
Posted by: Dem | Mar 29, 2008 5:55:18 PM
To Mr Dean in the DNC no nominee is acceptable without the Florida and Michigan delegates at the national convention. No deals either a re vote or the nominee are seated as they were elected per the people of Florida and Michigan.
Posted by: Antonn | Mar 29, 2008 5:52:47 PM
It's not surprising, a commentary from Ralph Nader asking Clinton to stay in the race. He's making an Independent run for the Presidency this fall. He stands to fare better if she is the Democratic nominee.
Posted by: Ryan Jones | Mar 29, 2008 5:46:37 PM
You know, it will be great if after the desilution with the Democratic Party and the bias of several media, political persons and the influence created by the Republicans to force a win of Obama, since they know will be easy for them to win the election.
I propose a Hillary/Nader ticket for the independent party. I will assure you they will win in a heart beat.
Posted by: Miguel | Mar 29, 2008 5:38:14 PM
This is hillarious. My fantasy is that Hillary will embrace Nader's political advice and push Gore past the tipping point. It would be dumb but in character.
Posted by: Drew Rocker | Mar 29, 2008 5:25:24 PM
Obama does not have the youth vote.
I am nineteen and I support Hillary.
So stop lying Obama.
We are divide among the both of you, but I would never vote for now with all these attacks toward Hillary and her family.
Posted by: JOHN | Mar 29, 2008 5:04:01 PM
Hillary will NOT drop out because WE don't want her to.. Face it Obama, more and more people dislike you! The more we know about you, the more there is NOT to like. No wonder you were so successful in Chicago type politics, it's your nature and you seem to attract like "bully" minds, yet another reason to NEVER vote for you. Go Hillary.
Posted by: irma | Mar 29, 2008 4:52:44 PM
If there's one thing Ralph Nader knows, it's running troubled campaigns. He is a wealth of information on this subject, Hillary should bring him on as an adviser. Who else has this kind of experience?
Good point about the first amendment, at this point it is almost her duty to keep up the fight. Giving up when things look bad just because the public opinion polls are not 100% on your side would stifle important debate.
Posted by: Jennifer | Mar 29, 2008 4:32:30 PM
Howdy Mr. Nader,
Thank you for your understanding of how America is supposed to work. Though you are running for President yourself, I am a strong advocate of a Clinton / Nader democratic/independent ticket for President and Vice President. I believe as Vice President you can continue the tradition started by Vice President Cheney of being a true working Vice President and contribute a great deal to our country in that capacity. I also believe that if you and Senator Clinton team up now before the remainder of the democratic primaries take place, your team will differentiate yourselves as the clear favorite of independents and all of whom want to see a real change take place.
Prior to your announcement that you were running for President I sent an e-mail to Senator Clinton's campaign urging her to go to you and make an agreement to join forces for the betterment of our country. I am now urging you to go to her and open a dialog regarding the possibility of joining forces now to ensure your joint victory in November.
Sincerely,
American Vet
Posted by: Iraq_Vet | Mar 29, 2008 4:31:11 PM
Make sense that Nader would be advising the Clintons. The devil is already on their side. lol
It goes to show how low the Clintons have descended.
That same Monica Clinton-Ralph Nader Twin Evil was greatly responsible for undermining the Dems in 2000 and enabling Bush.
This time around the Monica Clinton-Ralph Nader duo is even more brazen in their public partnership.
Will the Clintons reject and denounce the advise of the equally and extremely self-absorbed Ralph Nader?
Posted by: New Yorker | Mar 29, 2008 3:30:07 PM
YEAH OBAMA SEEMS TO CLAIM HE WAS OPPOSED TO THE WAR AND NEVER VOTED TO GO INTO IRAQ! HELLO! THIS LIAR OBAMA OFF COURSE NEVER VOTED TO GO TO WAR IN IRAQ, HE WAS NOT A U.S. SENATOR UNTIL 2004, THE U.S. WENT INTO IRAQ DURING 2003. YEAH HE SAID HIS OPPOSED TO THE WAR, MAYBE IF EVERYTHING WENT CORRECTLY IN IRAQ MAYBE OBAMA MAY BE SAYING HE WAS FOR THE WAR....OBAMA IS THE BIGGEST HYPOCRIT AND LIAR OF ALL TIMES...
Posted by: MARINE4EVER | Mar 29, 2008 3:29:14 PM
I am so tired of all this Hillary is tough and brave bs.
Hillary voted for the war so people wouldn't think she was weak. She was the last Democratic presidential candidate to say that voting for the war was a mistake because to admit a mistake would have been a sign of weakness. She voted for Kyl Lieberman, giving GWB an excuse to invade Iran, so people wouldn't think she was weak. She lied about dodging bullets in Bosnia to keep up her tough image, dishonesty I am sure John McCain would exploit in the general election. And just so that people wouldn't question her patriotism, Hillary endorsed a flag-burning law.
I support Obama because I actually think it was pretty brave to oppose the war in Iraq from the start. It was brave to fight for ethics reform, and budget transparency in the Senate, when most of his Democratic colleagues weren't in agreement with those things.
It is time for a candidate who will stand on principle, not a one who will take a misguided political position out of a sense of insecurity.
Posted by: JonnyG | Mar 29, 2008 2:56:20 PM
Hillary, You are going to be my president in 2009, there is no dropping out for you. That is stinking thinking.
I and all others who are over 81 should vote for you as well as those over 18.
Posted by: Bert Varner | Mar 29, 2008 2:42:42 PM
Hillary, You are going to be my president in 2009, there is no dropping out for you. That is stinking thinking.
I and all others who are over 81 should vote for you as well as those over 18.
Posted by: Bert Varner | Mar 29, 2008 2:42:33 PM
Thank you Mr.Nader. I will NEVER, I mean from the bottom of my heart, NEVER, vote Barack Hussein. Clinton, stay in the race! People I know who support Hillary will Never vote Hussein Obama. They are voting for McCain if Clinton loses.
Posted by: jas | Mar 29, 2008 2:35:49 PM
Thank you Mr.Nader. I will NEVER, I mean from the bottom of my heart, NEVER, vote Barack Hussein. Clinton, stay in the race! People I know who support Hillary will Never vote Hussein Obama. They are voting for McCain if Clinton loses.
Posted by: jas | Mar 29, 2008 2:35:43 PM
Thank you, Mr. Nader. I hope Clinton stays in until the end, which I hope will be Obama's end. I will never vote for him. I've never voted Republican in my life, but I will in November if that corrupt, racist fraud Obama is the Democratic nominee. Pay attention, Democratic Party. If it's not Clinton, then it's McCain, and I know I'm not the only voter who believes this.
Posted by: Griffin | Mar 29, 2008 2:15:17 PM
AFTER DISENFRANCHISING THE VOTERS FROM MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA.
SENATOR CLINTON SHOULD STAY IN THE RACE. FOR AMERICA NEEDS HER FOR WE NEED A STRONG LEADER WHO DON'T EASILY GIVE UP FOR A FIGHT. FOR SHE HAS A PLAN THAT OFFERS SOLUTION AND SHE CAN DELIVER.
SHE IS THE STRONG CANDIDATE TO FACE OFF WITH SENATOR McCAIN IN THIS GENERAL ELECTION NOT SENATOR OBAMA. AT THE STAKE THE PROBLEM OF OUR COUNTRYS HAVING RIGHT NOW:ECONOMY, IRAQ WAR AND SO ON - AMERICA CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER MISTAKE IN ELECTING A WRONG PRESIDENT AND HAVE AN ON THE JOB TRAINING PRESIDENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE; NOT NOW MAYBE NEXT TIME.
HOWEVER IF SENATOR CLINTON IS NOT THE NOMINEE IN THE PRIMARY THEN AMERICA IS BETTER OF WITH SENATOR McCAIN IN THE WHITE HOUSE AS PRESIDENT.
THE WAY I SEE SOME DELEGATE IS TRYING TO HAVE SENATOR CLINTON QUIT THE RACE FOR THEY DON'T WANT TO SHOW THE WEAKNESS OF SENATOR OBAMA THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE AFRAID OF THEY ARE TRYING TO COVER IT UP. HE IS ALL RHETORIC AND SPEECHES AND SAYING THAT HE IS A STRONG CANDIDATE THAT IS JUST A SUBLIMINAL ON HIS PART.
SENATOR CLINTON DON'T GIVE UP AND STAY IN THE RACE FOR AMERICA NEEDS YOU!!
AFTER THIS ELECTION THEY SHOULD FIRE DNC CHAIRMAN HOWARD DEAN FOR SCREWING THIS UP FOR DISENFRANCHISING THE VOTERS IN MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA - ITS THERE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO BE HEARD. NO PERSON ON EARTH CAN DISENFRANCHISE THE VOTERS IN AMERICA.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Posted by: Sam Lim | Mar 29, 2008 1:53:46 PM
It just occurred to me that Patrick Leahy could be a male chauvinist. May be he is uanbel to digest to see a woman ascend the presidency.
Posted by: Roger Miller | Mar 29, 2008 1:50:54 PM
There are some BITTER Clintonistas that don't know how to lose with class out there.
I feel sad for them, but it looks like their Cult leader is going to drag out their misery for a couple of months yet. In the end, it will not matter. They cannot catch Obama in the one thing that matters most over polls, states won or popular vote: Delegates.
It is what it is. This race is effectively over.
Posted by: Texas Voter | Mar 29, 2008 1:48:52 PM
Thank you, Ralph Nader! I have respect for you for your honesty and integrity.
Go Hillary '08
Stay in the race. The people of America needs to have their voides heard.
Iraq_vet
Posted by: Iraq_Vet | Mar 29, 2008 1:45:13 PM