« Rudy Calls Out McCain and Romney on Bush Tax Cuts | Main | Prior to Final Results, Thompson Leaves S.C. »

Clinton Expresses Concerns Over Caucuses, Despite Win

Share

January 19, 2008 8:11 PM

ABC News' Eloise Harper reports: Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., reiterated her feelings about caucuses, after winning in Nevada on Saturday.

"I still have concerns about caucuses," Clinton said. "I met people today, when I was visiting a couple of hotels, who said they couldn't get off work. To me, the caucuses don't provide the broad base of participation that I have fought for my entire life."

Clinton was asked about the current dispute over delegates between herself and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

She said she didn't know about the result of the argument, stating, "Nobody really knows, and we are looking very good. Obviously, this is about delegates, but this is about what people are voting for, who they think the best president will be."

When asked if she was aware of any "dirty" politics in her campaign, as rivals have suggested, Clinton said, "Well, I don't have any response to that. We had a very effective campaign." Clinton added, "I got a significant share of the popular vote."

Clinton is heading to St. Louis, Mo., for a rally, and will then spend the day in New York on Sunday.

January 19, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary | Permalink | User Comments (21)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/25294186

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton Expresses Concerns Over Caucuses, Despite Win:

User Comments

You go girl@ You did it fair ans square! Now the Obama followers will be crying out loud for few days and pointing finger to everybody else. The fact is hard to vote for a person that all he has is slogans and try to talk to everyone and be nice to everyone by even favoring Reagan over Bill Clinton. How can a Democratic candidate talking to union workers and middle class can prise Reagan once he was the one trying to destroy the Union movements and who started Reaganomics??
Obama is a fool of himself!
I feel sorry for CNN, CNBC and all the other Obama lovers networks that are so bummed tonight!

Posted by: Mary | Jan 19, 2008 9:03:03 PM

Just remember this all Anti-Hillary people: if you hate her now, if you do not approve of her style of campaigning, if you feel she is the wrong choice for the party and the country, then you should still feel that way come November.

Voting is based on principle. Do not sanction her actions by forgiving her and voting for her. I don't know how stupid the Clinton's think people are. But, show them you are not sheep and you will not be EASILY MANIPULATED by their games.

So, come November, reject her then as you do now. Don't buy into that coming together, time to unite, etc. stuff. She is obnoxious and extremely offensive, and you should show her what you think of people like her. Vote for her opponent - whomever that may be.

It will also be a slap in the face to her supporters too. That is actually a good thing for being so stupid....who in their right mind would vote for someone as divisive as Hillary and Bill? Someone with very little chance of winning the national election?

Regardless, stand by your principles and vote against her. Pass the word.

Posted by: Donald | Jan 20, 2008 12:42:20 AM

You talk about people being sheep if they vote for Hillary. Have you not been watching all the news stations that are basically telling you to vote for Obama? You are just another blind sheep yourself. The people that really want change, are the ones voting for Hillary. The ones that are ignoring all the negative comments that are directed to her everyday. One day a candidate that is not her gets positive feedback for an action, though if Hillary did the same thing, she would be considerate a heartless Bitc%. You really need to wake up and start thinking outside the box and for yourself, ie. Hillary Clinton

Posted by: Shiree | Jan 20, 2008 1:41:23 AM

I think that you are right. I have noticed how the media is really hitting her hard on everything. They are obviously backing Obama. I don't know who I am going to vote for. I think Hillary has a lot to offer, but I like to see them debate. It keeps the candidates on their toes. I wish the media wasn't bought out by the conservatives. It is quite obvious what is going on. Some say that they want Obama to win the democratic ticket because some conservatives believe that their candidate can beat Obama. Who knows, but what ever happened to just reporting the facts with all the biased opinions which are obviously against the woman, Hillary. It doesn't matter to me, be it woman or man. I will vote for the better candidate by the resume, not the color of the skin or the gender.

Posted by: Ted Barnes | Jan 20, 2008 1:48:36 AM

I'll tell you who the sheep are...these gender-based supporters that can't even articulate a substantive reason for supporting her...instead they regurgitate flaky talking points that show a real lack of depth...Did Bill Clinton create a solid majority that transformed the democratic party?? No, he proceeded to lose the House and Senate in 1994. If you had a basic understanding of history you'd see that Reagan's 2 terms were transformative for his party and the country (optimism etc..) . Do not confuse a historical acknowledgment of Reagan's ability to change the trajectory of the country with an assessment of Reagan policies. It's apples and oranges. Can you see that?? That is all.

Posted by: Coltrane | Jan 20, 2008 3:11:40 AM

Hillary would of won in a landslide if Obama did not bring his dirty Chicago style of politics into Nevada. Now he will drag out the race card in South Carolina. You would be foolish if you think many blacks will vote for any whites when a black dope is running

Posted by: Ebon Beati | Jan 20, 2008 2:13:45 PM

Yes, Obama is young and still full of vigor and fresh ideas, and he still has this thought in his head that the country doesn't have to be given away to the guys with the biggest checkbook. The color of your skin, or your religion, (or gender) shouldn't be the basis for exclusion and that is what our country's founders intended. Conversely, it shouldn't be the reasons for which to vote for someone. The average American Voter should support the person who will be loyal to the Most of [U.S.]. It is time, 70 years later, to send 'Mr.Smith' back to Washington.

Posted by: Joe Average American | Jan 20, 2008 2:39:42 PM

And lest we forget the message of Jimmy Stewart's movie,, 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington',, False Journalists nearly helped destroy him, but truth from Real Americans at the Grass Roots preserved the honor of Our Country.

Posted by: Joe Average American | Jan 20, 2008 2:45:29 PM

Only thing I can save towards moving into the election..Is...Each candidate should stand on what they want..but not bash the other party..for both are guilty of misleading throughout the years...this troubling! Stand on your person rather than the group..for the group is also of mistakes...Stand up for One for All! Labels are troubling!

Posted by: Apachecheynne | Jan 20, 2008 4:40:01 PM

Why does no one every ask Hillary where she will get her ideas if, God forbid, Bill died while she held the precidency. He has been in poor health, he looks old and tired, his temperment is altertered and the signs are there. It could happen. She does not have any ideas of her own. She quotes his record constantly. I feel it is important that, we as a nation, be given some idea on how she would react to the loss of her mentor, friend, husband and political companion. Has she considered this possibility?
I personally do not feel she could handle the reigns alone.

Posted by: cjvwise1 | Jan 20, 2008 7:08:22 PM


Caucus's can be rigged to easily. They are an old tradition in a different time.

Iowa was a good example where a candidate can pack newcomers and republicans into the caucus , then they can go vote republican too.

The peer pressure of a caucus can be highly intimidating also. They NEED to ditch it and go with primary PRIVATE votes.

Posted by: tom | Jan 20, 2008 7:52:07 PM

You are just the type of voter the Clinton's seek out, i.e., uninformed, uneducated, etc. Do you have a tv? Are you not aware of the tactics of the Clinton Campaign since last November? Are you not aware of how they are purposefully misleading the records of her opponents? What about the cheap slandering of her opponents, the win at all cost, etc.?

And you say Obama has the problem? Please.

Posted by: Chris | Jan 20, 2008 7:56:10 PM

cjvwise1, Hillary is her own person. A lot of people actually think she's more intelligent than her husband. If you've read her biography & CV you'll realize that even before she became Mrs. Clinton many widely believed she'd have a great career in politics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/hc42.html

Posted by: kate | Jan 20, 2008 9:53:59 PM

Hillary was crying in New Hampshire because she thought she had stood by her man, and was not going to be rewarded for doing so..

have you noticed how many men HATE her??

I am Independent, and I will vote for Romney with his Mormon Sci-Fi religion Before her ...and I am not alone!!The Repubs will make her regret the day she decided to run!

Posted by: faye | Jan 20, 2008 11:10:29 PM

It is disturbing that Obama, a candidate seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party would make such glowing remarks about the Reagan Presidency. To do so shows that he cares more about appealing to republicans than defending democratic values....Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of the country by creating and leaving some of the biggest deficits and debts in history, robbing social security, destroying our education system and creating the biggest military buildup in history.
But he made us "feel better" didn't he?
Reagan actively worked to destroy the middle class and the unions. I wonder how those workers in the Culinary Unions in Nevada feel about their endorsement to Mr.( I want to be just like Reagan) Obama. Oh, by the way, If the "Clinton" administration was so "terrible," Why does Mr. Obama have half of them working on his campaign staff? Just like Reagan, style - but no substance!

Posted by: Burton | Jan 21, 2008 2:27:36 PM

It's odd that I write a comment stating that the media is biased and that they have painted a target on Hillary and are pushing for the Obama nomination. No one is talking about how the media is trying to oppress the first woman running for president, but everyone is talking about how this is now a race debate. Such lies. Anyway, my comment is gone, so just another way the media is controlling all the negative press that is going either towards them, or towards any other candidate that is not Hillary. I thought our great country was based on a democratic belief, but with GWB in office and the media controlled by money and the conservatives we might as well be in a Dictatorship.

Posted by: shiree | Jan 21, 2008 4:25:11 PM

Let Bill be Bill. He has been pretty nice to the Media since he left the Office, not the Media. Obama should be thankful to Bill Clinton because if he is the candidate for the Democrats, he doesn't know what the Republicans will do to him and when he has to deal with other Nations, maybe he will learn to appreciate President Clinton.

Posted by: Carmen | Jan 21, 2008 4:44:23 PM

I am with you on that Shiree. The media thinks they can direct our vote. I am for Hillary, and I believe that she is the better candidate. She is highly intelligent. You can just see that when she talks. I can't believe how the media is twisting everything around. They are really trying to push this race thing. They want people to feel guilty if they are African American and they vote for Hillary. That is obvious. People need to vote for who they believe is the better candidate. I don't feel guilty for voting for Hillary over Edwards. I am a white male, but I don't feel obligated to vote for Edwards just because of that. I am voting for the credentials and for what I have seen each candidate has done. I feel Hillary far exceeds the other candidates and the media which is truly conservative can stop bashing the dems and start looking at their own candidates who in themselves are all very scary.

Posted by: Frank | Jan 21, 2008 4:50:27 PM

Don't worry...I will not have any problem voting against Hillary...I have yet to vote for a Clinton or a Bush....
I won't start now with some 3rd term of a president I didn't respect or vote for at the time.

Posted by: Marie | Jan 21, 2008 4:51:45 PM

Is it just me, or is Obama saying one thing, and meaning another. He gives praise for Ronald Reagan above Clinton??? Is he really a democrat???? What the heck? He keeps saying things that attack his opponents and then the press supports him. Hillary says anything and the press rips her a new one. I think Obama's true colors are showing. He is not the golden boy that he has been trying to portray. Another thing, we all know that CNN is a republican station, and they are showing Obama ads. I have not seen one ad for Hillary. Ok, so you think about it. Why would they do that? How do they want you to vote? Just think for a minute. Why would conservatives be pushing Obama??? They don't want him in office as their presdent, so why? Just think about it.

Posted by: Christy | Jan 21, 2008 4:57:48 PM

Bill Clinton's remarks on Obama are all correct. Check the facts. Obama is the one that is defending a record that is not so. Check the facts! Blasting Bill Clinton is not the right thing to do. He has all the facts at his finger tips. His sources are of course going to be highly accurate. For God sake, he is an ex president, so you understand what resources that this man has? Obama is trying to squirm out of what is the truth. We are done with the lies from George Bush, we don't need another president that lies to us again. Obama, start telling the truth.

Posted by: Ceci | Jan 21, 2008 5:06:55 PM

Post a comment