Political Punch

CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT - - - IN 2024

It backfired: women are furious.... just plain furious.

CLINTON IS LIKE DOG FOOD FROM CHINA - TAKE HER OFF THE SHELF AND TOSS HER.

Seems that the party system isn't working very well. Maybe we've outgrown it? Maybe it's time to really have one person, one vote and get rid of the electoral college and this primary madness. Throw all candidates in the hopper and let the one with the most votes win. But anyone who thinks this is about the popular vote hasn't been watching general elections for the last 40 or so presidents. When we really get serious about our individual votes counting, we'll set about the process of getting rid of this outdated system. Until then, it's a "one with the most delegates" wins...primary or general election...all the same. So get on board with that constitutional amendment process. And yes, pretty much the delegate can do what they want when they get to the convention.

Re: Voting for the other candidate. I have to agree with all who think that voting for McCain or staying home is voting for Bush again. So, if M wins, please don't try and blame the Democrat who won because your candidate didn't. That's just childish and so is not voting against this war and a host of other reforms that both Clinton and Obama would try to make. Sportsmanship is not about winning, losing or how you play the game...it's about letting that stuff go when the game is over and seeing the big picture of life. So goes little league...so goes politics.

Finally, yeah...the Edwards announcement was a coup.

My prediction Edwards endorsement will not sway working class voters.
There are still many Edwards supporters but many of them will not vote for Obama.
Just like if DNC or he chooses Hillary becomes the VP, it doesn't mean Hillary supporters will vote for him.

Just wait and see

My emotions have been all over the map in this primary. I started off being excited that a woman, an African American and a hispanic, among other quality individuals, were in the offing.

I read hundreds of articles, blogs, opinions, editorials, etc., and decided to support Obama because 1) he spoke out against the war when it was not PC to do so and 2) for the most part he has run a positive campaign consistent with his message of change and unity.

I became disillusioned with Clinton because 1) she voted for the war, 2) she used 11th hour, fear-based ads prior to primaries in TX and PN, etc. and 3) she stooped to pandering about the tax cut "holiday", dismissing the very economists she 'd praised in the past and would need to work with in the future.

That said,

I truly believe that Clinton's actions stem from her conviction that she would be the best president for our country. It's as simple as that. She stays in because she cares and feels she can make a difference.

I am an "Obamamaniac" as one poster calls us. (an insulting label, btw, that he uses just a few sentences after he criticizes Obama supporters for being negative - but no matter) and I would vote for Hillary in a heartbeat if she got the nomination.

What has happened to us? If you are a staunch supporter of either Clinton or Obama, I have to believe it is because you want to get us out of Iraq, elevate our country's standing in the world, begin healthcare system reform, promote policies to seriously look at climate change issues and focus on our flailing economy.

Both candidates have made mistakes and have baggage of one kind or another. Each has strengths and weaknesses. But all of their mistakes and weaknesses taken together and held up to the sharp light of day PALE in comparison to Republicans sins. Whoever ascends to the presidency will inherit a HUGE mess brought upon us by the disastrous foreign and economic policies of the past eight years.

I honestly don’t understand this part. Why would we turn on one-another? Either candidate will be astronomically better than a continuation of the Bush/McCain era. We can’t AFFORD another four years of hawkish, corporate-owned, conservative republican rule!

dl,
unless you know the clintons personally
you do not know what their motive was in giving.
maybe you give to charity just for your own gain. it does not say everyone else including the clintons do it too.

dl and dis,
sorry been away,
so dl you deny what I have said about the good the clinton's have done?
the other part of my comments you failed to address,
all of the events i have mentioned happended within the last 10-12 years.
if obama has cared so much, where has he been.
obama did the communtiy help at a church to reg. people to vote when he was planning to run for office.
obama is the opportunist.
the thing about it is at least the clintons have something for people to look back on and praise or in your case deny-matters not if it is down in black and white.
it the clintons taxes had shown they had given nothing to charity, and found ways not to pay the 30 in taxes you and other clinton haters would have found something wrong with that.
but since they did give to charity and paid their taxes-you find fault with that.
and we know nothing of obama, they years he could have been doing a lot of good-builting up his political resume he was not. but you find an excuse for that. it is strange what hate will do to a persons judgement.

for you who hate the clintons you need therapy-anytime you are unable to think rationally about someone-therapy is in order.
for clinton haters
the clintons are damned if they do
and damned if they do not.

and what of obama-
well none of us really know...
even you clinton haters.

people think obama will be the next president,
we know very little of him. and you all will step in and say anything in defense of him

"when you believe in things (or persons)
that you don't understand, you suffer"

if obama gets into the white house
the poor and middle class will suffer.

There you go again, dl.

1. Obama hasn't won. In fact, his momentum has been down since February. NC is a blip. He has a big war chest and is buying SDs.

2. Go look at the ABC count. With properly counted votes, Hillary is ahead in the popular vote since the blow out of WV. If Kentucky and Puerto Rico go as projected, he falls much further behind. You wanted the popular vote to count, right?

3. You are as arrogant as your candidate. We all have to choose what is best for our country when we go to the voting booth. You will. I will. Pelosi will. And so on. The difference is Pelosi could use Silly Valley and the money machine to stack the flawed process that is the Dem nomination system in this cycle. She will change all of that before she runs for the White House except the money machine.

Obama is flawed in so many ways that I cannot in good conscience or bad vote for him. My choice is to vote Republican or stay home. I know McCain is not Bush, so I can do that but I'll likely stay home.

Since I live in the reddest of the red states, it's symbolic on my part, or frankly, I can save a gallon of gas and four dollars is four dollars. Seventy would be better but your candidate wants to keep that away from us too because it isn't long range enough.

I may be dumb but I'm ahead of you.

... if you're a "FORMER DEMOCRAT"
you wouldn't vote for him anyways!

But not to worry; hopefully she's smart enough to stay away from such a ticket!

She's much too accomplished and smart.... and SHE knows the exact number of states we have in this great nation.

dl:

You can check how much and to what charities the Clintons have contributed by going to "clintonfamilyfund.com".

They have been extremely generous and to say something negative in this regard shows of the derogatory nature of B O's supporters.

But it would certainly be interesting to show a comparision of B O's generousity compared to that of the Clintons..... percentage wise, even!

My vote is still with Clinton, who has taken crap from Obamaniacs for many months and STILL IS STANNDING!!

Should she not be the winner. I will either write in her name... or switch to MCcain who though not up to Hillary's calibre is not D O W N
to HIS!!!!

I will not vote for Obama even if Hillary is his VP.

Len

If you truly put country first... you wouldn't still be trying to trash Obama's victory

and the popular vote was NOT against him. That is absolutely not true... say what you will about Clinton getting votes where obama's name was not on the ballot...but to say that was a vote against him...does it not speak volumes that many did not vote because their candidate was not on the ballot...

that is just dumb...

Mr. Coffee

it is important to point out Hillary lost within an electorate that is supposed to be her strength. Her unelectables were lowest within this group...her likeables were just above 50% within this group.

Now she lost here but her supporters continue think she would have won outside of her weak but only base.

Clinton WV victory doesn't erase the arse whopping that obama gave her in 17 states by WHOPPING double digits from 24% to 65%. SO this 41 point victory is nothing. Obama has won this primary fair and squre and backward racists hillbillies from west virginia won't change that. That is why he is up by HIGH double digits in Oregon, South Dakota and Montana. We will give her kentucy and puerto rico who can't even vote in the national election.

disambiguates

you also failed to mention Clinton's charity has been sorely slow on giving out moneys...(in fact it wasn't until she ran for President that the pace picked up) and all his traveleing around the world was/is paid for by those charities... those are the trips where he seems to have raised support for his library and her campaign.

If that is not screwed up priorities under the guise of soemthing noble...

ugh...I am tirred of rehashing this stuff...

we have a war, an economy, a party being driven into the ground because of one woman's "right" to the nomination....over all the values and policies and changes we need.

what are people thinking?

Actually, it would be better if he could win the general election, politicjock. 2025 delegates isn't enough because you can't kick Florida and Michigan out of the country even to rig an election for your man. He can't govern given a situation where the popular vote was against him and a rigged delegate system was used to put him in office. See George W. Bush. How did that work out for you?

BTW: You are making up the bit about Rush Limbaugh. It's easy to check out that many of us are hardcore Democrats who value country over party, which is the most hardcore Democratic value of all. Only operatives such as yourself who depend on a candidate for a future put the candidate above the good of the nation.

jgaw

what we have learned is...it's about character...

The Clintons did a lot for many when it helped them personally.

The question is when have they ever taken a hit for the good of anyone, anything or any principal that would put them back a few...and in the end wasn't tactical.

There is none...that's the problem. This is a time when we need someone who will say the hard thing...even if it hurts them. Not someone who only fights for things that have the tide and a current behind them.

The big chunk of money that the Clintons gave to charity was to their charity which they control. Why has big business given money to the Clinton library? How about Marc Rich, the felon, that they pardoned. The Clintons have done nothing substantive to help the American people. They have done plenty to tunr us into a thrid world country. No one wants to talk about NAFTA that Bill pushed through. He is more republican than Karl Rove - and half as smart.

you think they are movie stars,
I have seen the good work the clintons have done for this country.
where was obama when
tom joyner was trying to raise money for the HBCU?-a clinton was there

where was obama when
tom joyner was raising money for aids meds and needles for africa and poor blacks in america?-a clinton was there

who finally gave to con. medal of honor to a black soldier that was long over due- bill clinton.

the clinton' have tried to level the playing field for blacks and poor people and if your finances were not better in the nineties i am sorry, many people were beginning to have a little better quality of life.

now how the clintons made their 109mil is not my business any more than how michelle obama went for 95-110k sal to over 335k.

if you read how much the clinton made you also read how much they paid in taxes (many in the news media said they were suckers for paying that much-and they also gave 10mil in charity-the media and everyone else thought they had the "caught" the clintons again because all of their money must have been from shady people-no smoking gun-not much more media coverage.
you seem to be the only one still talking about their tax returns. but please if future when you talk about the clintons income-in some questionable manner-to remember the obamas, tony resko, and the house.
yes the clinton have tried to level the playing field, and no doubt when this is all over, will cont' to do good work.
obama has a speech