World Events
Topic: Hillary is being robbed

#	Author	Message
21	Kar2oonMan Wed 5/14/2008 12:33p	>>But it would be hard to argue that Hillary is not the stronger candidate in the big democratic states where it really counts.<< But again, it's an apples and oranges comparisson. The war was much more "popular" in 2004 than it is now. The Bush people were better able to use the "you're either with us or against us" stuff and of course there was the whole Swiftboating thing. Kerry had the nomination wrapped up early on, he didn't have these months of running against people in his own party. You haven't addressed the fact that this "stronger" candidate also would provoke more GOP voters who aren't all that in love with McCain to turn out if for no other reason than to vote AGAINST Clinton. Those numbers would be huge. Combined with the many Obama voters who would be disgusted and opt out if she successfully hornswaggles the nomination with some fuzzy math, we're talking a Mondale vs. Reagan sized landslide. I know she has her supporters. I personally don't have huge problems with her (though I am losing respect for her the longer this drags on and the more schemeing with numbers her people do). But there simply is no overstating the amount of hatred for her and her husband especially.
22	mele Wed 5/14/2008 12:42p	<<Her whole campaign is filled with guys that really did believe the whole "it depends on how you define 'is'" argument>> It's a Clinton Family requirement to believe in it.
23	wahooskipper Wed 5/14/2008 2:04p	It is cute how Hillary changes the rules everytime things don't appear to be in her favor. You have to give her credit. The only way the Democrats end up in the White House short of a tragedy that takes both of their candidates is if they are on the same ticket. Even then I think it would be a reach but I think regardless of the outcome here McCain would have to really trip over himself to lose. Does that make any sense? Not really. They should have this one in the bag after the last eight years but leave it to them to jeopardize things.
24	DlandDug Wed 5/14/2008 2:07p	You may count me among those who have an entirely irrational dislike of Hillary Clinton. Don't like her, don't like her husband, don't like his former Veep. Don't even like the horse they rode in on. Conversely, I believe that of the current field of Democrats, Hillary is far better qualified to run the country. Back when it looked like it was shaping up to be a McCain/Clinton showdown in November, I was content. I believe either would make a good President. Obama on the other hand... I dislike Obama for much the same reasons I disliked Jimmy Carter, a "feel good" candidate with very little experience. I am convinced that an Obama Presidency would have about as much impact. Oddly, the Obama surge also reminds me of nothing so much as the way the GOP embraced George W back in 2000. He was also largely unknown outside of his region (Texas). He had that "twinkle" factor. His fund raising ability was unmatched. And he was maddeningly inexact when it came to specifics.
25	DlandDug Wed 5/14/2008 2:10p	>>They should have this one in the bag after the last eight years but leave it to them to jeopardize things.<< Yup. After Nixon's resignation in '72, the Democratic party should have been able to completely dominate the Executive branch (as they have dominated the legislative) for the rest of the century. Instead, they elected Jimmy Carter, and thus paved the way for Ronald Reagan, who created a whole new paradign for the GOP and the modern conservative movement...
26	Kar2oonMan Wed 5/14/2008 2:41p	Sorry, but I think when Republicans say they think Hillary is more qualified or what have you sound suspiciously similar to Brer Rabbit, begging not to be thrown into that old briar patch. I think truth be told, nothing, and I mean nothing, would make the GOP happier than running against the Clintons again. Obama is a dicier prospect for them. The Jerimiah Wright "scandal" came along too soon -- should have bottled that up for October instead. If Obama makes a smart pick with his running mate (meaning, not Hillary), the GOP is toast come November.
27	Dabob2 Wed 5/14/2008 3:05p	RT, the asterisking of Kerry states works the inverse way you seem to think. It argues against the idea that Clinton is more electable because she took so many of the "big blue" states from 2000 and 2004... because Obama should take them anyway. If the rather weak John Kerry can take Pennsylvania, Obama can take Pennsylvania. And he'll certainly take CA, NY, MA, NJ... all those "big blue" states that Clinton claims a Democrat needs. Yes, a Democrat needs them. But unless Obama implodes, he will take them.
28	Sport Goofy Wed 5/14/2008 3:17p	<< If the rather weak John Kerry can take Pennsylvania, Obama can take Pennsylvania. And he'll certainly take CA, NY, MA, NJ... all those "big blue" states that Clinton claims a Democrat needs. Yes, a Democrat needs them. But unless Obama implodes, he will take them. >> I think CA and NY are going to be a lot tougher this year than anyone wants to admit. There are some demographics there that are not in Obama's favor. The Rev. Wright issue, in particular, has caused the Jewish community to sound the alarm in some circles. What are the states with large Jewish populations? CA, FL, and NY. FL is probably already lost for the Democrats with Obama for a number of other reasons. Then factor in whether or not the Latinos will shift their loyalty to Obama in CA and you start to see what should be an easy victory turn into a close race. McCain is very Latino friendly, and can woo large military populations in states like CA to his side. It will be interesting to see how things shape up in the coming months.
29	RoadTrip Wed 5/14/2008 3:23p	<<RT, the asterisking of Kerry states works the inverse way you seem to think. It argues against the idea that Clinton is more electable because she took so many of the "big blue" states from 2000 and 2004... because Obama should take them anyway.>> Good point. But if you total the un-asterisked states.... those that the right democrat could MAYBE take this time instead of the republican; Hillary still leads 141-131. While this is closer than the other totals, Clinton is still ahead. Essentially Hillary does better in the large states and Obama better in the small states. I'm not saying that Hillary should be given the nomination. I just don't think it is as cut and dried as some folks believe.
30	DVC_dad Wed 5/14/2008 4:40p	The list of reasons of why Obama cannot defeat McCain is L O N G. It is about race, service to Country, and actually BEING PRESENT to vote when you are supposed to be. The American people are too wise to Obama's real self.

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:	1-10	11-20	21-30	31-40	41-50
	51-60	61-70	71-80	81-90	91-100
	101-110	111-118

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Disneyland Attraction Posters at
The LaughingPlace Store
The LaughingPlace Store now carries a Disneyland Attraction Posters from Sanders CC Gallery

What's on
The Latest
Group RCI and Disney Vacation Club Members to Receive Benefit of New Multi-Year Relationship
NetDragon and Disney to Launch First MMORPG 'Disney Fantasy Online'
Disneyland Thanksgiving Day Parade pictures
New Disneyland Resort Video and Audio podcasts available
Video of dogs visiting Santa Paws at WDW's Downtown Disney
Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo DisneySea Schedule for Fiscal Year 2009
TCM Presents: The Family Classics With All-New Original Special and Nostalgic Holiday Festival
Kids go free to Disney on Broadway
Innoventions Dream Home featured on MSN.com
Disney Store Responds to Inaccurate Information in Widely Circulating Email

Click here for The Latest