« McCain Twice Calls Obama 'Out of Touch' | Main | Clinton Tip-Toes Around Rev. Wright Issue »

Clinton Proposes Debate on the Back of a Flat Bed Truck

Share

April 27, 2008 10:15 PM

ABC News' Eloise Harper reports: Speaking outside in Wilmington, N.C., Sen. Hillary Clinton reissued her challenge to Sen. Barack Obama, her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, to join her in a debate –- this time she proposed it be on the back of a flatbed truck.

"I am very very regretful that my opponent will not agree to a debate in North Carolina, because I think these issues are worth debating, and, you know, the other day he turned down the debate that I agreed to here in North Carolina," Clinton said, adding that "20,000 people had already emailed in for tickets there was that much interest.

"So he said no, he wouldn’t do it, and I know his supporters say, well they did like the last debate in Philadelphia, the questions were kind of mean and they were sort of tough," she said. "You know, I've got to say, tough questions in a debate is nothing like the tough decisions you've got to make in the White House. I think that this state deserves a debate. So here’s what I’m offering. How about this -- no moderators just the two of us on a stage for 90 minutes asking each other questions, talking about whatever's on our minds, just like the Lincoln-Douglas debates, and I think, you know, we could even do it on the back of a flatbed truck, doesn’t even have to be in a fancy studio somewhere. You can tell I'm having so much fun in this campaign."

A crowd of hundreds gathered to hear Clinton speak in front of a river and the USS North Carolina. Clinton spoke about several issues including protecting the homes of soldiers abroad from home foreclosures.

Clinton was scheduled to spend Monday in North Carolina campaigning across the state.

April 27, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary | Permalink | User Comments (195)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/28552622

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton Proposes Debate on the Back of a Flat Bed Truck:

User Comments

Obama is too elitist to sit on the back of a flat-bed truck. It would unnerve his snobby sensibilities. He also couldn't handle a one-on-one debate without a prepared script displayed on a teleprompter. He knows he'll lose, AGAIN!

Hillary will work for ALL of us, not just the fortunate few.

Posted by: Emily | Apr 27, 2008 10:25:50 PM

Typically, frontrunners refuse to debate because they dont have to and because they dont want their opponents to get free publicity. This is politics after all. The question that is being debated among the voters and uncommitted SD's is: Do we have a frontrunner anymore? The answer for many is no we dont. The race is a deadheat so Obama's logic is flawed.

While Obama has a 3% lead in delegates, the SD's and upcoming contests could eliminate that lead. With so many questions unanswered for the voters on many issues ignored by previous debate moderators and questions of character being waged by the voters, a Lincoln-Douglas style debate is exactly what our country and the dem party needs to be able to unite behind the stronger candidate. Voters will not accept less than a fair contest and this style of debate would be the fairest of all. I hope Obama changes his mind for the good of the country and the dem party. It is important that we make progress towards a change in party power.

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 27, 2008 10:31:13 PM

Obama might lose his hoop playin' "street cred" if he sits on the back of a flatbed truck, which is exactly why he hasn't got any street cred with most of the people in Indiana and North Carolina.

HILLARY, YES WE WILL!

Posted by: Emily | Apr 27, 2008 10:32:04 PM

"Mud wrestling" may be something Obama is actually good at. He's slippery enough to win.

Posted by: Emily | Apr 27, 2008 10:37:30 PM

Maybe Obama would agree to debate at a fabulous mansion, surrounded by the filty rich billionaire democrats, and the cool, left wing media guys like Bill Maher and Anderson Cooper and they could all be drinking really nice California red wine, yeah, then maybe Obama would debate. On the back of a flat bed truck? No way. Too "small town" and "typical white people" for him.

SAY NO TO THE DNC CORONATION OF OBAMA!
TELL THE DNC TO COUNT ALL 50 STATES VOTES!

Posted by: calli | Apr 27, 2008 10:38:03 PM

Hillary loves this country I don't think Obama loves it the way Hillary does. All you hear is how much things have to change how could every body have been so happy just eight years ago I want change but I want what I had when the Clintons were in the white house. I think AA are not happy with are country and how do we talk about it with out being called racist.

Posted by: Bishop | Apr 27, 2008 10:39:26 PM

HILLARY, NO YOU WON'T!
Will she get 67% in the remaining races, no she won't. And she won't get the free airtime through a debate. Obama doesn't need the grief and she's just plain nasty, so I don't blame him. BTW, the supers know she's nasty and bad for the party and has real nasty skeletons in her closet. They are being respectful because she's a woman, a former first lady, and pretty powerful. But it's the math. It's over.

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 10:39:40 PM

Hillary get a life, any life, just get out of mine. It's over Hillary

Posted by: Thinking | Apr 27, 2008 10:42:42 PM

DaneNM and DCVOter, if you want to know about Obama's plans go on his website you will see them and make up you mind. There is no need to debate a mean spirited all lady. Hill the Bosnian General has had her time she has to go back home, the unevitable has become evitable. She is unelecatble. PERIOD. God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08.

Posted by: BKMC | Apr 27, 2008 10:51:39 PM

"Yes We Will"

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

Enough said...

Posted by: Vanessa | Apr 27, 2008 10:51:53 PM

We "American people" are sick and tired of debates!! Hillary wants another debate because she trails Obama... We've memorized responses to issues that concern our quality of life and the safety of this country, including responses that flip flop on issues. Hillary is pushing the issue because she wants the voters in NC and Indiana to believe that Obama is affraid to her for fear of appearing the weaker candidate. Give me a break! The quality of one's experience means more to me than the quantity, especially if the experienced was gained in Washington!! The country needs a 21st century leader. Too much experience in Washington is scary, considering the state of affairs under the leadership of past Presidents and other leaders.

Posted by: Proud American | Apr 27, 2008 10:53:24 PM

anybody inspired by Obama's empty, filthy
rhetoric??

Posted by: edith | Apr 27, 2008 10:54:08 PM

She is making waves for she is BROKE and need air time.Lets see first IN and now NC which is it nim rod????
Ones who support her are the only real American|????Honey you are so far from wrong.....This real American supports Obama.....Like it or not he wil be on that ballot.
All the freaken states will count for there are two sets of rules you break them and it is ok.She is one that VOTED FOR this ruling in the first place now she is behind rules have changed .....
Did any of your know she refused debates when running for the senate???NO!!!!!! well she did .Now the shoe is on the other foot she is behind so she is pressing, like go home wench....

Posted by: h | Apr 27, 2008 10:57:27 PM

for someone who respects the envirnoment
how come he eats steak and chicken so much??

Posted by: rex | Apr 27, 2008 10:58:04 PM

tomdavie:
I've been to every site including electoral-vote. The primaries are simply not good indicators for the general, especially with these two candidates. We haven't seen Barack take on McCain yet because we've been mired in this endless race. The proof is in the past--as voters get to know him, his numbers rise, it's happened in every state, even PA. He's picked up 70+ supers to her 5+ since Feb.
She needs 67% JUST TO CATCH UP!, and that's unlikely. You are right, neither will get to 2024 in the primaries. If they tie the remaining races, she's going to need twice as many supers to reach 2024.
That's the math, that's the reality.
OBAMA08

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:00:44 PM

I suppose Obama supporters think his/her President should represent the country by telling foreign leaders to visit a website if they want to know what Obama stands for. Campaign websites are sources of information - they are not indicators of validity, character, or even accurate records - they are sales tools. Voters deserve to see candidates interact with each other while fielding tough questions. Voters deserve to see and hear candidates in action without scripts. Voters deserve to see candidates who are free of political fear. Voters deserve what Clinton proposed. Obama is obviously too scared or too elitist to meet the needs of the voters. His refusal to stand up for himself and show people what he is made of is a clear sign he has no interest in keeping our country safe... he will run and hide when foreign leaders (ally or enemy) do not agree with him or will not pander him.

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 27, 2008 11:01:10 PM

Don't vote for Hillary just kuz "she's a woman, just like meeeeee!". That's a stupid-ass reason to do so.

Obama grew up in a single-parent home, in a not-so-great neighborhood, went to school on a scholarship. Hillary is the elitist. Wake up! He's been taking the high road for so long in this election. Hopefully, it is a sacrifice worth making. You really think he can't bitch-slap Hillary if he wants to? Puhh-lease!

You're done, girl. Go away. Stop being annoying.

Posted by: Gene | Apr 27, 2008 11:02:15 PM

she can come close and PR is winner take all And you really don't think FL. or MI are going away And then there is Rev Wright making fun of the way JFK spoke tonight he has some real winners as mentors

Posted by: Bishop | Apr 27, 2008 11:04:56 PM

IL Obama Lover,

Thanks for sharing the touching and true story about Barack taking the time to chat with a young boy. Can't wail until this is over, I hope it's soon!

She's bringing us all down! She's a downer! Barack makes me and my wife smile!

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:05:09 PM

Clinton REFUSED to debate her opponents in both her senetorial races...siting she would rather talk to voters directly...who is being hypocritical now??

Posted by: lynn | Apr 27, 2008 11:05:29 PM

Mr. Obama's negatives seem to
continue to multiply and grow with
no obvious counter argument.

What happened to the almighty campaigner???

Something smells ...

Posted by: wilma | Apr 27, 2008 11:05:56 PM

She does need 67% of the remaining primaries... in order to reach Obama in the popular vote

The delegate count is done, Obama has won the delegate count

The popular vote however she still has a chance

If she loses NC she's done...she would then need 75%-80% of the remaining primary votes

Impossible

----------------------------------------

Do you enjoy being an idiot vanessa?

You candidate is unelectable. He hasnt been treated nearly as bad as he would in a general election.

He has made his name off MEDIA HYPE .

You dont know much about math if you think north carolina is going to win the nominaiton for Obama.

Its just another REPUBLICAN STATE he cant win in november, riddled with easy 90% african american racist vote.

No candidate has EVER in the history of the united states once primaries were instituted WON the white house when LOSING all of Califonia, Ohio, Mass, Pennyvannia, Florida, New Jersey.

I mean cmon. The guy LOST by DOUBLE DIGITS every time.

Go look at the evidence and tell me Obama is electable.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

by the way.

Obama hasnt WON anything. You need 2025 delegates to 'WIN' .

I know you are a professional Obama supporter 24 /7.

But you are full of it.

Posted by: tomdavie | Apr 27, 2008 11:08:33 PM

That's it... Mr. Obama has
permanently lost my trust and respect..
Go HRC08!! or McCain 08!!!

Posted by: ebony | Apr 27, 2008 11:09:48 PM

The 67% figure the Obama camp is citing applies ONLY if the courts or the committee do not seat MI and FL delegates AND ONLY IF none of the delegates switch before June 29 (last state convention) which has already happened and will continue AND ONLY IF the SD's do not switch camps (which is likely) AND ONLY IF the remaining uncommitted SD's overwhelmingly endorse him (which is not likely) AND ONLY IF the remaining state contest's delegate proportional allocation is proportional to % of popular vote (which is not necessarily going to happen ie. it didnt happen that way in PA because Clinton won 61 of 67 counties)... try reading the rules and learning how the math really works instead of listening only to any single campaign... it is all available on the DNC website under the rules. Neither candidate can win the nomination based on pledged delegate count as currently projected. There are not even enough uncommitted SD's to tip the nomination right now for either candidate. Now that the race is a deadheat, Clinton has proven that she has not been defeated by the numbers. Unless there is a backroom deal, a withdrawal, or a multi-ballot convention, neither candidate can be the nominee.

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 27, 2008 11:10:05 PM

Obama lovers keep trying to HYPE the fact one candidate is AHEAD means he WINS.

Its not the rules. Its not even close to being the rules.

Obama cant WIN the nomination. He has to make the same suckhole arguement to super delegates.

Obama is going to lose the popular vote. He has lost EVERY major primary and swing state by a wide margin.

No one has EVER won the white house by losing all the primaries Obama has. EVER. Never once.

Your candidate is UNELECTABLE.

Posted by: tomdavie | Apr 27, 2008 11:12:21 PM

In a web video, Hillary challenges Obama to debate in Oregon. And in the morning press release, her campaign kind of taunts him: “Sen. Obama responded ‘call[ing] Clinton’s challenge ‘an old, Washington game.’ ‘ Since when did debating the issues and giving voters a choice become a ‘game?’ ”

Since she’s bringing it up again, it’s worth remembering again that in 2006, when Hillary was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.

So, the answer to her question is that debates became a game when public officials like Clinton became dodging them to avoid answering uncomfortable questions about voting for the war and such to their actual constituents, and then hypocritically embracing them as if they had some surpassing civic virtue when political defeat loomed.

Debates are generally good. But in the age of television, people in Indiana and Oregon have had as much chance as everyone else to see the 20 that have already been held, and doing it again in a TV study that happens to be in Portland doesn’t automatically add anything. Obama’s resistance is purely tactical, but for Hillary — after blowing off NY Democrats in 2006 — to act all worried about Hoosiers and rural Oregonians having their own debate is absurd.

The only constant with Sen. Clinton on this issue is that she constantly operates out of self interest, and is constantly disingenuous about her motives.

Posted by: Bob | Apr 27, 2008 11:15:52 PM

This idea has already been tried. So this is offered on loan from the internets via obsidian wings:

MR. GIBSON: So we're going to begin with opening statements, and we had a flip of the coin, and the brief opening statement first from Mr. Lincoln.

LINCOLN: Thank you very much, Charlie and George, and thanks to all in the audience and who are out there. I appear before you today for the purpose of discussing the leading political topics which now agitate the public mind.

We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I’m sorry to interrupt, but do you think Mr. Douglas loves America as much you do?

LINCOLN: Sure I do.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But who loves America more?

LINCOLN: I’d prefer to get on with my opening statement George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: If your love for America were eight apples, how many apples would Senator Douglas’s love be?

LINCOLN: Eight.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Proceed.

LINCOLN: In my opinion, slavery will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Excuse me, did an Elijah H. Johnson attend your church?

LINCOLN: When I was a boy in Illinois forty years ago, yes. I think he was a deacon.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you aware that he regularly called Kentucky “a land of swine and whores”?

LINCOLN: Sounds right -- his ex-wife was from Kentucky.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Why did you remain in the church after hearing those statements?

LINCOLN: I was eight.

DOUGLAS: This is an important question George -- it's an issue that certainly will be raised in the fall.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce him?

LINCOLN: I’d like to get back to the divided house if I may.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him?

LINCOLN: If it will make you shut up, yes, I denounce and reject him.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him with sugar on top?

LINCOLN: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: No takesies-backsies?

LINCOLN: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Whoa, so you would consider a takesie-backsie?

LINCOLN: That’s not what I meant…

DOUGLAS: When I was 11, my grandpappy and I chopped wood and shot bears.

LINCOLN: Ahem, I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect slavery will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you love America this much (extending fingers), this much (extending hands slightly), or thiiiiiis much (extending hands broadly)?

LINCOLN: I think we covered this…

GIBSON: If I may interrupt…

LINCOLN: Please.

GIBSON: I noticed, Mr. Lincoln, that your American flag pin was upside down…

LINCOLN: Yes, the wind caught it. Now, as I was saying...

GIBSON: We get questions about this all the time over at Powerline and on Hannity’s talk show. Mr. Douglas has said this is a major vulnerability for you in the fall. So I’ll ask again – do you love America?

LINCOLN: (scowling with a forced smile). Yes.

GIBSON: If your love for America were ice cream, what flavor would it be?

LINCOLN: (pausing with disgust and turning back to camera) Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South.

DOUGLAS: He didn’t answer the question Charlie. This fall, that question is going to be on the minds of the American public. I’ve proudly stated that my love for America is Very Berry Strawberry.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask it another way. If Elijah Johnson were chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream, would you eat it? Or would you decline to eat it?

DOUGLAS: Personally, as for me, I would decline to eat it.

LINCOLN (shaking his head): Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination -- piece of machinery, so to speak -- compounded of the Nebraska doctrine, and the Dred Scott decision.

STEPHANOPOULOS: We’ll get to Dred Scott in the second hour, time willing, but I want to get back to the ice cream question. And that's what we'll do, after the break.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Apr 27, 2008 11:16:51 PM

Bishop, you had me scared there.
First, let this Rev Wright thing go.

Second, PR is not winner take all according to washingtonpost and others"

`Both Brooks and Barone are wrong. Puerto Ricans will vote according to much the same proportional representation rules that govern Democratic party primaries and caucuses in the 50 states. The notion of Puerto Rico being a "winner-take-all" jurisdiction stems from previous presidential primary contests, which were pretty much over by the time the Puerto Ricans got to vote.

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:16:56 PM

The Commander Guy - Excellent posting about Stephanopoulos and Gibson.

Posted by: Bob | Apr 27, 2008 11:19:06 PM

Sure, we can see how much fun you're having, Hillary. Telling lies IS fun, in your mind. You think we've forgotten about the debate that was scheduled in N.C. that you wouldn't commit to? Then, when it was too late for Senator Obama to change his schedule to suit yours, it's his fault there wasn't a debate? Senator Obama's commitments to speak to and meet with the people in Indiana and N.C., trumps you. It's not about you anymore, your desperation is very unbecoming.

Posted by: bailey | Apr 27, 2008 11:19:28 PM

Oh and John McCain may chime up at any moment and say that he knew Stephen Douglas, And ...... Hillary Clinton ain't able to measure up to Douglas

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Apr 27, 2008 11:21:16 PM

On 2006 only two years ago:
Hillary CLINTON was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:22:41 PM

People have only had a chance to see moderated debates with questions designed to improve ratings for the profit-making main-stream media. Voters and SD's deserve as many unmoderated debates as it takes for them to choose a nominee. This is the most important election year in the history of our country. If you dont want to watch the debates you are free to not watch. Senate races are nothing compared to Presidential races in terms of the importance of debates. She was a frontrunner by a huge margin and did what was politically acceptable to her constituents. Obama has never been a frontrunner by a large margin and is therefore not listening to the voters.

This year, each of the debates so far have had an increased number of viewers and every state contest has had record turnout. Voters do want to see and hear more than just speeches and townhalls from the candidates. We need a President who is responsible to the voters, who listens to the voters, who stands up for the voters, and who is not afraid - there are no yellow streaks in the star-spangled banner.

Posted by: mixed-american | Apr 27, 2008 11:23:50 PM

Hypocrisy
On 2006 only two years ago:
Hillary CLINTON was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.


Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:25:10 PM

tomdavie,
You sir, are the idiot. Leave Vanessa alone. Your numbers and arguments do not work and make no sense.

Losing California and NY in a primary doesn't mean losing them in the general.

Also, electoral-vote.com actually has Obama looking pretty good. Thanks!

You fool.

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:25:57 PM

You debate with a human being who knows the rules of the debate not with a hypocrit Like Hillary Clinton that does not talk about issues and just opens her mouth and lies and lies

This is not a debate.

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:27:46 PM

why not on the back of a flatbed? oh i get it obama and his followers prefer an "american idol" kind of set-up with flashing lights, music, and followers fainting in the bleachers.

Posted by: sonia trevino | Apr 27, 2008 11:29:29 PM

I would rather see debates than a stump speech. I think they should spend more time on debates four one on one debates is not that many.

Posted by: Bishop | Apr 27, 2008 11:30:14 PM

Either way, Obama loses on this one.

Don't accept the debate and come off as the weaker candidate. Accept the debate and come off as the weaker candidate when Clinton cleans his clock...again.

This is politics. Get used to it.

Posted by: LOM | Apr 27, 2008 11:34:33 PM

Obama is a coward.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Apr 27, 2008 11:34:40 PM

The entire world awaits your voting for
president and many like myself despair
when we read the comments about Obama,

Maybe it is because we are more objective and we have not be in a voting situation like this but we all think Obama is simply a person who looked like a real answer to Hillary and you must have or should have, seen the light by now.

It is now a everyday occurrance to see
a friend of his now and past who claims
a theology that is straight from
Wright's thinking and speaking. I could
not even imagine returning to a church
with a man who believes as he does.

Men, like him, has brought the African-
American to feelings of hate and
hardness rather than gain in self-esteem
by doing and it shows in the family
situations.and they need someone to blame, so they blame the typical white person who is just trying to do their best as well. Is is surprising
there has been no progress in taking
responsibility for themselves, but
if they are taught it is best to
blame "GOD DAMN AMERICA" that is
what they will do.

Please, open your eyes, forget the
sweet talk, the I can change the
world crap, he is not a full grown
man yet. He is a man, but has not have
the simplest training or skills to be
a president, can you see the president
saying "can't I eat my waffle now at a
breafast with Putin or other world
leaders? Please. Why don't you ask for
shadowing day with President Bush and
see how he does, and if he can handle it
I seriously doubt it. He still has a
childish temperment and it will be seen
more and more as time goes by.

McCain will beat Hillary or Obama in
the end. Don't blame him for the
behavior of your candidates. They
are doing him a favor with their
childish behavior.

Posted by: carole | Apr 27, 2008 11:35:48 PM

High five LOM et al

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 27, 2008 11:36:02 PM

If you are a democrat you should be very ashamed of yourself - your party is going DOWN with Hillary's action and all you are doing is promoting those damaging activity.

Republican repeatedly saying Hillary is doing our JOB. She has made our ADs.
Republican are asking their supporter to VOTE for Hillary and they are.

Why do you think they are attacking Obama because Hillary is a weaker candidate and She is easier to destroy. Republican want Hillary to WIN.


Hillary supporter Be ashame of yourself - You are Republican Voice - you and your candidate.

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:36:18 PM

Tonight at the NAACP dinner in Detroit, Rev. Wright said he is not divisive. He is "descriptive." Most Americans do not connect with Wright's brand of descriptive sermons. I am devastated after 40 years of Americans really trying to make a place for everyone at the table to hear how the derision and sarcasm. Lots of THEY DID THIS and THEY DID THAT. In the meantime, my mom and dad raised the first generation where never a racial slur was spoken. My siblings and I grew up and raised an entire generation of 20-somethings who wouldn't dream of hurting anyone or not working for social justice for everyone. I just cannot vote for Obama without my candidate Clinton. I don't think he's ready. I think those people who think his candidacy is an opportunity to work out generations of unspoken anger have also worked against him.

Posted by: LonghornMama | Apr 27, 2008 11:37:58 PM

Hey barry you lying PUNK.

No candidate who has EVER lost California,Ohio, Pennysvannia , Florida, Mass, New Jersey primaries has EVER gone on to win the presidency.

NEVER . Ever once.

As for his general election chances?

Obama LOSES to McCain and Hillary is beating him by a pretty noticable margin.

Go check it out yourself.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/

You keep making exuses for your empty suit. But the fact is the fact.

Nobody has ever lost all these primaries then WON the white house.

You cant SPIN that fact.

There is your electability agrument.

There just isnt enough far left liberals to get Obama elected.

BOO HOO. So sad.

Posted by: tomdavie | Apr 27, 2008 11:38:47 PM

If you are a democrat you should be very ashamed of yourself - your party is going DOWN with Hillary's action and all you are doing is promoting those damaging activity.

Republican repeatedly saying Hillary is doing our JOB. She has made our ADs.
Republican are asking their supporter to VOTE for Hillary and they are.

Why do you think they are attacking Obama because Hillary is a weaker candidate and She is easier to destroy. Republican want Hillary to WIN.


Hillary supporter Be ashame of yourself - You are Republican Voice - you and your candidate.

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:38:54 PM

If you are a democrat you should be very ashamed of yourself - your party is going DOWN with Hillary's action and all you are doing is promoting those damaging activity.

Republican repeatedly saying Hillary is doing our JOB. She has made our ADs.
Republican are asking their supporter to VOTE for Hillary and they are.

Why do you think they are attacking Obama because Hillary is a weaker candidate and She is easier to destroy. Republican want Hillary to WIN.


Hillary supporter Be ashame of yourself - You are Republican Voice - you and your candidate.

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:39:02 PM

Clinton , as phony as the black southern accent she put on and her dodging sniper fire in Bosnia . Totally desperate . Guess what Hill baby , it ain't gonna work .

Posted by: Ray | Apr 27, 2008 11:46:13 PM

Anybody reading this needs to refer back to what DCVoter said at the beginning of the thread. He said it very nicely. Frankly, I think Obama is a wimp, and is afraid to debate again because the moderators are starting to rough him up a bit, and he can't handle the unexpected, he's too green.

Go Hillary, flat bed pickup, now we're talking brass tacks!
========================================
Hillary, the only candidate to stand up for all the voters!
========================================

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Apr 27, 2008 11:46:19 PM

Clinton does not care for democrats to win in GE. She knows she has lost the war and she is trying to make obama to loose the war also.

She is a double agent - she is a republican in the democrat mask. No wonder Republican wants her to WIN

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:46:29 PM

I have been reading the blogs for months and finally feel the need to post. The political cowardice of the Bush Administration and the Republican Party are the reason OBL had the guts to launch his 911 attack. Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party kept him at bay. The political cowardice of Obama might lead our enemies to once again believe America is weak and vulnerable. Many lives depend on this election - let's be sure we dont elect another coward.

Posted by: dragonrider | Apr 27, 2008 11:46:33 PM

Debating on a flat bed truck! Are you kidding me? Let's be realistic about hillary's I am one of you speeches. She is a politician who used to be a cut throat lawyer and understands nothing about the problems of everyday americans. She's is an egomaniac, power crazed "fill in the blank"

Not saying obama is the answer either, but her grandstanding "which I am sure was among heavy fire" is insulting! She is a fake and a fraud! As a lot of politicians do she is trying to be everything to everybody and her act is old and tired! You elect her demos you may get someone even worse than bush next time! Chew on that thought for a while!

Posted by: robert | Apr 27, 2008 11:48:34 PM

tomdavie -- Haven't you learned by now that the Obama campaign and its supporters can spin ANYTHING? They have the MSM fooled...why not shoot for the American electorate???

Posted by: LOM | Apr 27, 2008 11:48:56 PM

She's full of BS, one of "us"...nope, she was on the board of Walmart, one of the worst employers, she and Bill pushed NAFTA, she's crafty but she's a liar and if there is a God, and I believe there is, she will be done soon.

BTW, I'm beginning to think that many of the pro-hills on these blogs are republicans serving on operation Chaos...

There can't be that many suckers in America...

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:53:05 PM

ABC News apparently didn't think any of these issues were very important - and after 21 of these debates, this looks like nothing more than Clinton trying to find a way to grandstand. It's her own fault that she is no longer the frontrunner - her campaign lied so many times and triangulated so many positions that Clinton could probably debate herself and still leave the audience amazed.

We could have half a dozen debates centered around Clinton's history of baggage - she doesn't have the highest negatives in the country for nothing.

Posted by: kevinbgoode | Apr 27, 2008 11:53:22 PM

Go away Hillary!

Obama 2008!!!

Posted by: josh in seattle | Apr 27, 2008 11:54:08 PM

I am a WHITE person - I listoned to Wright and every thing he said made an absolute sense. This man is smart and he likes to make the country a better place.

It is sad how the media and you people have made him.

God knows his intention and has seen his good work - he is a man of God and has done tremendous amount of Good work around this country and around the world. Only racist will hate him.

How could you destroy this man service to this country - He was a soldier in Vitnam war - he has fought for this country in the time of war and then he has become a soldier for God helping the disadvantage.

You people - there is a God who will judge you sooner or later - What have you done during your life time - except bashing another people!!!!!

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:54:22 PM

Obama is currently "ahead" although he has not clinched this nomination, so there is not winner at this time.

I find it hard to believe that he would call debates a "game" as he is running for POTUS. 10M viewers in the last debate and he is concerned about reaching as many people as possible?

He definitely is about transparency -- this time though it is that he stinks at debates and doesn't want to expose himself for the inexperienced newbie that he is.

Posted by: LOM | Apr 27, 2008 11:55:31 PM

I know...why don't we let Clinton debate herself on the bed of a flat-bed truck - and just focus on the "issues" in which she contradicted herself - that would easily fill an entire evening.

Posted by: kevinbgoode | Apr 27, 2008 11:55:44 PM

I am a WHITE person - I listoned to Wright and every thing he said made an absolute sense. This man is smart and he likes to make the country a better place.

It is sad how the media and you people have made him.

God knows his intention and has seen his good work - he is a man of God and has done tremendous amount of Good work around this country and around the world. Only racist will hate him.

How could you destroy this man service to this country - He was a soldier in Vitnam war - he has fought for this country in the time of war and then he has become a soldier for God helping the disadvantage.

You people - there is a God who will judge you sooner or later - What have you done during your life time - except bashing another people!!!!!

Posted by: Fred from NY | Apr 27, 2008 11:56:29 PM

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

That's what I call respect for our troops.

Posted by: Barry | Apr 27, 2008 11:57:26 PM

Barry -- That is so lame to bring up the whole "she was on the board of Wal-Mart." In doing so, you look like the biggest a$$ here. Do you even have a clue what she did as a member of the board there?

Are you voting for McCain or do you love bashing your future Democratic nominee?

Posted by: LOM | Apr 27, 2008 11:58:22 PM

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

That's what I call RESPECT for the American people.

Posted by: LOM | Apr 28, 2008 12:03:25 AM

Hi LOM,

She served for six years on the board of Walmart, a big box chain that drives out small mom and pop businesses and offers low prices on the backs of their employees by having crappy employee policies.

I'll be voting for Obama, Hillary won't be on the ticket.

Snap!

Posted by: Barry | Apr 28, 2008 12:06:01 AM

Myth: Clinton has the highest negatives.

Fact: Kerry with his low negatives couldnt beat Bush. Negatives mean nothing when it comes to choosing a candidate apparently... after all half the voters participating in the democratic nomination process support Clinton in spite of the false picture of her (most of the so-called negatives) painted by the RNC machine over the last 29 years. Nice try no cigar.

Myth: She cant win.

Fact: The math supports her contention that she can win. In fact, when Obama was behind prior to ST, he stated "if I can get within 100 delegates, I have a chance". His surrogates and supporters are worried because they know she has a chance to win too. That is why they want to mute the voice of the voters in MI and FL and the remaining contests... to avoid the possibility of losing.

Myth: Obama is the frontrunner and therefore has won.

Fact: The frontrunner prior to the convention does not get the nomination unless they get at least half the delegate votes AT the convention. Neither candidate can get them prior to the convention. From an SD perspective (as stated in interviews when Obama was behind) to be a frontrunner, a candidate must meet 3 basic criteria: significant lead in delegates, significant lead in popular vote, and proven ability to win key contests needed to win the general election. Neither candidate has all 3 and neither will have all 3 by the time the DNCC convenes. This is the reason SD's were created and rules for pledged delegates were changed to allow them to switch camps at the convention if needed.

This is a nomination race to select the most electable candidate. All the data is not in yet... let the voters hear from the candidates and let the voters cast their votes in all the contests so we can truly see what the voters want. Then the SD's will make the decision for the party because that is their job. The party will lose its voter base if they do not seat MI and FL fairly. I have to agree that Obama's refusal to debate Clinton in a one-on-one debate independent of the media and its pundits is a clear sign he does not stand for all voters much less himself.

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 28, 2008 12:10:13 AM

Gee Barry. And what did she DO while on that board?

Posted by: LOM | Apr 28, 2008 12:11:08 AM

It is simply not true that that Hillary needs 67 percent of the vote in the remaining primaries... Dean himself said its a dead heat and after all the wright stuff and rezko etc and this latest story of money laundering THe Deomocrats will not nominate Obama no matter how many votes he gets for the nomination... he will be overturned end of story

Posted by: staniam | Apr 28, 2008 12:13:55 AM

HILLARY CLINTON AS PRESIDENT. WHO'LL BE UNDER THE OVAL OFFICE DESK THIS TIME?

SHE LIES LIKE A THIEF, AND JUST LIKE BILL, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT SHE'LL, HE'LL AND THEY'LL BE DOING IF THEY GET BACK, I REPEAT BACK INTO THE CAPITOL BUILDING.

GO AWAY BUSH AND CLINTON DYNASTIES FOR AT LEAST A GGENERATION!!!!!

MICKEY MOUSE FOR PRESIDENT!

Posted by: FIRST AMERICAN | Apr 28, 2008 12:17:57 AM

I imagine that Barry is Googling anything he can find negative about Clinton's tenure on the Wal-Mart board to show his superior intellect.

Let me save you the trouble. What he would undoubtedly find was that she was largely silent on issues around unionization, but was a champion for issues like increasing diversity for women and minorities, created the first committee to look at the environmental impact of Wal-Mart and pushed them to use more recyclable materials. What she learned during her tenure that they have many policies that she disagreed with and even returned a $5K campaign donation to them.

The fact of the matter is, however, Barry had to look it up AFTER the fact. This is reminiscent of all things Obama: make a statement and then follow up later with a "what I meant to say..."

Posted by: LOM | Apr 28, 2008 12:20:40 AM

Obama is simply unelectable. If he was, the superdelegates would have gone over to his column in droves because of his lead in pledged delegates, states won and popular vote. He had his chance to shine and close the deal, but he can't and the superD's know this.

Obama is simply unelectable in the general election!!!

Clinton/Edwards 2008!!!

Posted by: LOM | Apr 28, 2008 12:24:18 AM

Obama is smart. He will not fall into the trap setup by Hilary who just want the free media coverage since she is running out of money. For the last many months, they have already debate on many issue. We are tired of listening to them repeatedly. For the good of the nation, I believe the new president should not be an old politician, who has so much burden with their interest groups. He should be a president for change, and he is Obama!

Posted by: mampang | Apr 28, 2008 12:26:23 AM

LOM,

I'm familiar with Walmart's greening policies. I'm familiar with Hillary's support of women and minorities. I'm not impressed. And your tone sucks, and your candidate is a self serving liar without a soul. That's what it takes to say, not once or twice, but four times:

`"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

The troops LOVE Hillary!

Posted by: Barry | Apr 28, 2008 12:27:54 AM

Lom

yes it does seem like Obama likes following the white house playbook ... they have always backtracked on things they are called on... and Hillary is the most electable ... we might as well shake that out now while Wright and the Obama camp are busy playing the elite/racist card which ever day it is!

Posted by: staniam | Apr 28, 2008 12:30:02 AM

If Obama nominated, I m joining a doomsday cult.

Posted by: Don | Apr 28, 2008 12:31:35 AM

That is why they want to mute the voice of the voters in MI and FL and the remaining contests... to avoid the possibility of losing.
--------------------------------------

The legislatures of the states of Florida and Michigan are the ones who "muted" the voters. Hillary agreed with those rules, too. Well, that is, until she decided to disagree with them...

Posted by: kevinbgoode | Apr 28, 2008 12:32:57 AM

I agree with mampang.

After the ABC ambush, one can't blame Obama for taking a pass on her challenge to debate. To accept gives her power, makes it look like she has more than she does. He's smart to put take a pass, maybe later is what he's suggested.

I'm impressed by the class he's shown by not attacking her when he's had the chance. He's above that kind of politics, he's walking the talk. He's taken som