« Previous | Main | Next »

Clinton Talks Guns and Electability 30,000 Feet in the Air

Share

February 02, 2008 9:25 PM

ABC News' Eloise Harper reports: In her first press availability in the air -– on a plane from California to Arizona -- Sen. Hillary Clinton took aim at Sen. Barack Obama's conflicting positions on gun control.

"He has to speak to his own record, which has obviously changed over a relatively short period of time," Clinton said in response to a reporter's question "My understanding is that really within the space of four or five years, he’s had several positions on a number of really challenging issues. You’ll have to ask him why he has so rapidly changed position from year to year."

Clinton was pressed on the language she uses in her speeches conveying that voters doesn’t have to take a leap of faith on her implying that Senator Obama is a risk.

"I’m not asking voters to take a leap of faith," Clinton said. "You know where I stand, you know my record, I’ve been vetted, I’ve been tested -– probably more than anybody in the country who is in politics right now –- and I think that gives me a great advantage, both now and in the general election."

Clinton says she feels strong going into Super Tuesday.

"I feel confident that we are doing well in a lot of states where there are a complicated set of challenges from one end of the country to the other," she said.

Clinton did not disclose what states she feels particularly good in, nor did she discuss states she is concerned about, and she did not address any concern about Obama's gaining momentum in the Latino community.

"I feel very good about the support I have," she said. "I think we’re going to do very well on Tuesday across the board. But we’ll wait and see because, as I think we’ve learned in this campaign, the only polls that count are the ones that people actually vote out."

Clinton also looked ahead to the Super Bowl and the primaries on Tuesday. "I’m not only looking at the super bowl, but Super Tuesday, and I’m expecting the New York team to win both."

February 2, 2008 in Bush, George W. | Permalink | User Comments (36)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

obama, "Change", so "changed over a relatively short period of time"

Posted by: jjj888 | Feb 2, 2008 10:10:49 PM

The problem, Erizin, is she won't be able to get anything done. She will most likely be handicapped from the start. If anyone thinks for a second the Repubs. are done with the Clinton's, they had better think again.

I know Bill agreed to some plea deals regarding Hillary when he made his plea deals, but I just know as sure as today is Saturday, that the Repubs. will find something too hit Hillary on - you watch and see.

It's doubtful they will take it easy on her so they can help her save face with her party or because she is a woman, please now that is the 'biggest fairy tale.'

What will she blame her failures on then? Will she blame the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or blame the Repub Congress and Senate (which is sure to follow if she is elected.)?

I'm sick of these people. I wish the entire family would just GO AWAY.

Posted by: Abby | Feb 2, 2008 11:03:25 PM

Hillary and McCain have the same voting record, Bill said that they are very close, so why democrates have to choose between 2 republicains. Many people think that GW Bush is a present which Bill Clinton gave to the american people. Let us think about these 2 points.

Posted by: BKMC | Feb 2, 2008 11:05:34 PM

All of you who say experience matter, I ask a question. How much experience did another lawyer from Ill. have before he became president? No doubt if you read some of the what was said about Abe Lincon when he was running for office is the same garbage you spueing now.

He turned out to be one of the greatest President. It is not experience what makes great leaders but the ability to inspire and unite those under their command to give their all for the common cause.

Posted by: Evan | Feb 2, 2008 11:19:02 PM

experience does matter. No president has been elected with basically no experience in about a billion years. Besides, its a little more complicated situation than when Lincoln was president.

But you do win todays prize for having the farthest reaching rationalle for supporting Obama.

Posted by: tom | Feb 2, 2008 11:30:45 PM

Obama for change.....yeah right....If cared about change so much he wouldn't get one of the oldest Senator in DC in Ted Kennedy.... what kindof change is Obama talking about?

Hillary got my vote....experience and qualification counts this time....The last president that promise change and hope we ended up with BUSH....No thanks to Obama..

Your a smart guy Mike.. I couldn't have said it better.. All the Fools talking bad about Hillary, are the same fools that put Bush in the W.H. ..

Posted by: J.Murphy, CA. | Feb 2, 2008 11:40:57 PM

Ok you tell me a country which was about to go to civil war, brother against brother, father against son, thousand of americans would die, by the hands of their fellow americans.
Is less complicated than what todays situation is. Today the USA is the riches country on the planet the most powerful nation that ever existed. The only real problem that you have is providing health care and a living wage to working families. Yes there are threats to the US and there is a minor illegal war going on in Iraq.
But tell me how is all this more complicated than facing the protential of a bloody cival war.
Again how many years did Abe Lincon have as an elected offial before he became Presiden?

Oh another question Tom. How many years have the USA been in existance?
(A billion years)

Posted by: Evan | Feb 2, 2008 11:55:35 PM

How many years did JFK have as an elected official? How many years did the founding fathers have as elected officials before they wrote the constitution.
35 years experience living in your husband shadow just makes you a mushroom. You never see the light of day

Posted by: Evan | Feb 3, 2008 12:06:09 AM

More "hot air" from high in the air. For sure we need a break and a change.

Posted by: jet | Feb 3, 2008 1:03:50 AM

Terry, right on! (doesn't that tell you i'm a boomer too?). i do so tire of reading extremely rude posts from people who are obviously about 20 years old telling us to go away and die. i know we used to say don't trust anyone over 30, but we were full of s--- then and they are now. in any case, it does seem a foolish approach for a politician to take, given that we old folks vote and young ones tend to lose interest over time and go to a movie. i don't think he thinks we'll pick up on the slight, but we most assuredly do. and i do like the picture of him losing his senate seat to a 35 year old twit.

Posted by: so saddened | Feb 3, 2008 1:07:07 AM

So saddened,

Well here is the deal, the generation2 takes care of the generation1. In other words, people like myself (I'm 35 so the 35-45 age range), will be supporting the baby boomers and others before me. And this generation will be supporting those of my age group.

So, at the very least a person should have enough common sense and decency to support the generation that will be taking care of them. But, no, generations become more selfish with the passing of every generation.

Look at the boomers now, they don't even have the decency to request that the senate include those (65+) currently on SSI for the stimulus package. Why are they not supporting them? I don't know but I suspect lack of good common sense and deceny. Because you know what, when they or you all hit the late 60's and early to mid 70's what do you suppose people in my age group will do? What would you suggest we do?

I suggest we extend the same silence that is being extending too the elderly now. Of course much of what we will and will not do, will largely depend on how your age group votes for the next 12-16 years or so...


Posted by: Kathy | Feb 3, 2008 1:40:33 AM

The point is anyone who married Bill Clinton would have his coattail so to speak. However, only Hillary that i know of would and do have the guts to step out on her own, and thats because she is a WOMEN OF SUBSTANCE, even without Bill you can see a fighter, a strong independent (woman) Person, and she deserve respect for that, and with her courage and hard work she will be the nominee and President.

The idea that there is going to be a fight in Washington to get things done is a mute point. The regressive conservative socio-religious ideology which dominant current republican thinkings and larger segments of American society, negates the idea of there not being a fight, if the Obama or any other Democrat wins the Presidency. The same applies to the issues we face Internationally.

And, brother ain't no politician in in American today who can fight like Hillary she is like Ali at his prime, ready and waiting to decimate the opposition to transforming American society into a more progressive society, worth of and deserving world leadership at home and in the world at large.

People we are ELECTING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNTIED STATES OF AMERICAN AND NOT "AMERICA'S NEXT TOP MODEL" AND OR "DO YOU THINK YOU CAN BE PRESIDENT" we need a someone you are sure about remembers Bush's "COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVE" is sounded really nice and cuddly didn't it... now look.

If you are hiring a worker you look for the best resume, more so than "Mr. Congeniality",we need a people's champion and we all know Hillary is a hard and tireless worker, who pays attention to details, and can also kick ass.

RUN HILLARY RUN.... Hillary 08'

Posted by: Bryce K. Dixon | Feb 3, 2008 1:46:15 AM

I confess to understand only very little of the comments posted thus far on this comment blog. However, to the point that the "Repubs. won't let Hillary get anything done" I would offer the following: No matter what Democrat wins the presidency, the party of Karl Rove will no doubt engage in the type of divisive crap that defined the Rove/Cheney/Bush presidency. Those morons go away for no one. At the very least, the Clintons have been through the ringer and survived. At this point, I think the Roves of the world would have more challenge beating Hillary up than they would fresh and unexplored blood like Obama - for whom an endless stream of lies and distortions have yet to be innovated. I really like both Hillary and Obama. I'll vote Hillary specifically BECAUSE I think she can withstand Republican attacks better. If this is about the Republicans wanting blood, I think the Clintons' stone has about been squeezed dry already.

Posted by: Tom, L.A. | Feb 3, 2008 1:53:31 AM

Don't believe the hype Tom, L.A. If there is one thing that gets the neo cons blood boiling is the Clintons. Oh they will muster every dirty, low and underhanded trick they have and will invent new ones to boot, if Hilary gets in the WH. But they will destroy her before November if she gets the nomination. They may dislike Barak because he is a black democrat, but they HATE the Clintons with a vengance.

Posted by: Evan | Feb 3, 2008 2:25:24 AM

Barack Obama is not and has never been Muslim. Stop spreading things that you know are not true. Obama has over 25 years experience actually working on solving problems and making change. Community organizer, Constitutional law professor, civil rights lawyer, state senator, US Senator. Hillary Clinton is the Republican's Dream Dem nominee. They will eat her and Bill for lunch. They are afraid of Obama because they know he has support from people from all groups. He has support from liberal groups like moveon.org and Republicans like Susan Eisenhower. Most people aren't looking at how he stands on each particular issue. They just want someone who is fair, can create bipartisan concensus, and move this country past the gridlock that we've had since Bill Clinton and George W. Bush have been in the White House. There is no way that Hillary can build bipartisan concensus as long as Bill is in the picture. So nothing will change...we need Obama.

Posted by: Janet | Feb 3, 2008 7:57:23 AM

First Lady is that experience? If so, was she the best? She didn't get us health care.

Posted by: Graham | Feb 3, 2008 9:47:19 AM

Obama has not only America abuzz but many people across the globe,this is a defining moment for America to be great again.

I hope Clinton doesn't mess it all up for you guy's and make America look stupid again, like Bush did.

Holding thumbs for Obama across the pond.

Posted by: John London | Feb 3, 2008 11:09:32 AM

Um.....You have reporters on a plane, and you talk about your opponent? Why not launch into detail on your own positions? Why feed into divisive and fear mongering politics? Why is the goal to get people to vote against the other guy instead of for you? That is because you lose on the issues Clinton. We have seen the amount of control you can exert, you couldn't keep your husband from cheating on you during your time in the White House, then you either A. knew and went along with a bald faced lie, or B. Didn't know and didn't know he was lying to your face. In either case, you have no credibility for truth and honesty or an ability to do anything but make people afraid and I have had enough of that.

Posted by: Louis | Feb 3, 2008 12:11:46 PM

I would urge those to vote for Hillary. Obama isn't what he claims to be which isn't much except for a "uniter" we heard that from bush. Obama's accomplishments are small compared to the accomplishments of Hillary who stands for conviction and this country of ours. Obama is seemingly more and more looking as though he is in it for himself, he is arrogant and seems to think he is entitled to the presidency, seriously what has he done to demand the presidency? I see his record questionable on taking affirmative stands that benefit the American people as with his lacking ability to stick with hard decisions that would put the people first over corporations.
It is a shame that the media isn't giving coverage to what obama is really about. His voting present over 130 times while in the IL. state senate, his conveinently making mistakes in voting. This article from the NYTs investigative report on Obamas backing down from his previous statement on Nuclear Power and his own bill, because of his over 250,000 dollar donation from exelron and his campaing manager David Axelrods connection to the very same nuclear power company.

Posted by: sjl | Feb 3, 2008 12:50:04 PM

"'He has to speak to his own record, which has obviously changed over a relatively short period of time,' Clinton said."

Please. This is coming from Hillary "I Was for the War Before I Was Against It" Clinton? How's that going to play against McCain?

She ought to focus on getting her own story straight....

Posted by: Andy | Feb 3, 2008 12:55:39 PM

Post a comment