If I were Hillary...

[William Haskins]

hillary is quickly being marginalized by the media (and, quite frankly, by the voters). in the "writing on the wall" thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92455), i pointed out how, in my view, she's gone from frontrunner to longshot in a span of a couple of weeks.

she's likely going to lose a couple of smaller primaries this month before moving on to her own personal alamo in texas and ohio (and, if she can survive those, pennsylvania). but she cannot allow public perception of her fade to fester for the next three weeks.

if i were hillary, i would quickly make a national ad buy (or figure out another high-profile way) to show how mathematically close the race is, to offset the media's writing of her political obituary and make my best, most passionate pitch in defense of my platform.

CNN had an interesting segment yesterday, after which i crunched the numbers and it held up. obama can win every state remaining on the primary schedule by 10 points (55% to 45%) and still not get enough of the awarded state delegates to secure the nomination.

he would have to literally crush her (70/30 or 80/20) to sneak across the finish line without needing the superdelegates. while that's not an impossibility given his routs in the potomac primaries, it's not very likely to happen.

hillary needs to establish three things, in my opinion—clearly and strongly.

1. the two campaigns remain in a statistical tie of 1258 obama (delegates and declared supers) to 1210 clinton (delegates and declared supers)

2. no vote is wasted on her, as a comeback could reassure her current superdelegates and bring new ones on board

3. the gloves need to come off and she needs to bring to bear every political instinct and connection she has to claw back into this.

if she could effectively convey the first two items through ads and shine in next week's austin debate, she might still have a shot.

otherwise, the mood and momentum of the race will doom her, even if the math has not.

[NikeeGoddess]

true - the race is still neck n neck and it's likely that it will be a photo finish. now who would drop out of a photo finish marathon race?! you'd have to be nuts. there are still a whole lot of states to go.

added to the "what she should do"
4. continue pressing Obama for a debate. he's all talk about change but he doesn't have the plans in place, only promises. she has concrete plans and needs to express them in comparison, head-to-head debate. the last debate was great but all too friendly and sociable.

5. she needs to press her foreign policy experience b/c Obama has none. in the event of another terrorist attack (and there is evidence building that they don't make public the details) Obama thinks he can sit down at a table with a dictator and convince him to stop. who thinks that will ever work?

6. she needs to press the deficit problem. dubya already declared he was going to leave a 3 trillion* dollar deficit for the next president. hillary is so much better with money.

*3 trillion dollars - do any of you really know how much that is?
1 million seconds - 2 days ago
1 billion seconds - 1972
3 trillion seconds - 300 BC

dubya is the biggest ass of all. he's phucked whoever takes his big chair.

[jst5150]

And on the periphery, there is the Michigan/Florida issue which Ms. Clinton could legally challenge through the party which, I believe, is the source that actually controls that delegate dispersion. If she makes a legal challenge and wins, that, too, could vault her into a stronger status. It's an easy case to make -- disenfranchised voters; the dust settling on the campaign "let's resolve this Michigan/Florida travesty ..." and so on. The backlash could be that people see the legal challenge as sour grapes for getting beaten over and over again toward the end of the race.

Absolutely spot on with Ms. Clinton, William. I felt that her campaign died about two weeks ago. I just remember that i stopped paying attention to her because it didn't seem to be offering anything new. The last seminal moment I recall was the cry. Following that, lots of "I'm tested and ready," but that tune's played out.

Voters are looking at the new Camelot and liking what they see. I was HUGELY surprised that Mr. Obama ranks as the No. 1 liberal senator; Ms. Clinton at 16. I expected Mr. Obama to be in the top 10. but not No. 1.

[InfinityGoddess]

added to the "what she should do"
4. continue pressing Obama for a debate. he's all talk about change but he doesn't have the plans in place, only promises.

One can argue the same about Hillary Clinton. All politicians make promises.

5. she needs to press her foreign policy experience b/c Obama has none. in the event of another terrorist attack (and there is evidence building that they don't make public the details) Obama thinks he can sit down at a table with a dictator and convince him to stop. who thinks that will ever work?

Terrorists and dictators are two different breeds of animal. Terrorists have no particular country to call home; they can be anywhere and everywhere (yes, including here at home; we have people who blow up abortion clinics all the time). Dictators run countries. The difference? You can pull some leverage with a dictator, by threatening sanctions on him (but not his people; that's inhumane, imo) and using other enticements into forcing him to do the right thing. You can't do that with terrorists; you can only bring them to justice.


6. she needs to press the deficit problem. dubya already declared he was going to leave a 3 trillion* dollar deficit for the next president. hillary is so much better with money.


Most Democrats (provided that they aren't corrupt hacks) are generally better with money than the Republicans at this point. I see little difference between Obama and Hillary in this regard.

dubya is the biggest ass of all. he's phucked whoever takes his big chair.

Indeed he has.

[InfinityGoddess]

Voters are looking at the new Camelot and liking what they see. I was HUGELY surprised that Mr. Obama ranks as the No. 1 liberal senator; Ms. Clinton at 16. I expected Mr. Obama to be in the top 10. but not No. 1.

They said the same thing about John Kerry in 2004. So I take that with a grain of salt.

Also, Michigan and Florida broke the rules. Clinton was the only name on the ballot in Michigan, and they barely campaigned in Florida. So there would have to be some kind of a "do-over" to make things fair. Otherwise, it should be left as is.

[William Haskins]

(yes, including here at home; we have people who blow up abortion clinics all the time

all the time? not to derail the thread, but this is the kind of hyperbole that torpedoes your credibility...

[Meerkat]

7. She could say that she was in a strange, waking coma for the past decade, and just now remembered that she is for free, universal health care, not Obama's "business-as- usual-in-disguise-and-oh-yeah-while-we're-at-it-let's-lower-the-bar-on-who-we-call-wealthy-but-who-really-aren't" plan. She could even offer refunds to the business as usual lobbies that courted her through her waking coma!

[SHBueche]

Speaking of the Austin debate, there are only 3,000 spaces and 300 tickets available for the "general public." Not very democratic, is it? I am for Obama, but Hillary is a strong debater, in my opinion.

[InfinityGoddess]

all the time? not to derail the thread, but this is the kind of hyperbole that torpedoes your credibility...

It's one of those "under the radar" things. It may not be "all the time" but it happens often enough.

[My-Immortal]

3. the gloves need to come off and she needs to bring to bear every political instinct and connection she has to claw back into this.

William, I tend to agree with much of what you said in the post - but I think she'd have to be careful attempting this one, especially if Bill wants to help her. I could be wrong, but it does seem like the voters are tired of the negative type campaigning. Romney tried it and it didn't go so well for him. When the Clintons tried it earlier in the campaign, it really seemed to work against them.

Of course, I could have misinterpreted your intention on this and you don't mean negative attacks on Obama but something else entirely.

As others have pointed out - I think she needs to come up with something new. The same bit about '35 years of experience' and the 'I'm ready from Day 1' just doesn't seem to be playing so well anymore (IMO). They're not all that inspirational now.

The other problem she has is, the longer campaign favors Obama. IF she had been able to win big early on before he had had a chance to gain recognition she would have easily won this - but she didn't and has kinda sputtered on from there. Sure, she's still in the race but he's had an impressive string of wins in many states in many parts of the country and seems to be finding ways of inspiring voters from all different demographics. This wait until Texas/Ohio (IMO) will only hurt her, unless Obama makes a mistake along the way.

Take care -

[InfinityGoddess]

7. She could say that she was in a strange, waking coma for the past decade, and just now remembered that she is for free, universal health care, not Obama's "business-as- usual-in-disguise-and-oh-yeah-while-we're-at-it-let's-lower-the-bar-on-who-we-call-wealthy-but-who-really-aren't" plan. She could even offer refunds to the business as usual lobbies that courted her through her waking coma!

Actually, I kinda like the "gradual approach". Switching over to a completely Medicare-for-all isn't going to happen overnight because the health insurance companies will oppose it to the degree that it won't pass muster (too many politicians owe them "favors"). As long as they get some kind of piece of the pie, they won't make that much noise.

Furthermore, it's an intellectually dishonest approach to claim you were for Medicare-for-all while taking money from corporate lobbyists who give you money for the purpose of buying you off so that you can't oppose their presence.

[Bird of Prey]

hillary is quickly being marginalized by the media (and, quite frankly, by the voters). in the "writing on the wall" thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92455), i pointed out how, in my view, she's gone from frontrunner to longshot in a span of a couple of weeks.

she's likely going to lose a couple of smaller primaries this month before moving on to her own personal alamo in texas and ohio (and, if she can survive those, pennsylvania). but she cannot allow public perception of her fade to fester for the next three weeks.

if i were hillary, i would quickly make a national ad buy (or figure out another high-profile way) to show how mathematically close the race is, to offset the media's writing of her political obituary and make my best, most passionate pitch in defense of my platform.

CNN had an interesting segment yesterday, after which i crunched the numbers and it held up. obama can win every state remaining on the primary schedule by 10 points (55% to 45%) and still not get enough of the awarded state delegates to secure the nomination.

he would have to literally crush her (70/30 or 80/20) to sneak across the finish line without needing the superdelegates. while that's not an impossibility given his routs in the potomac primaries, it's not very likely to happen.

hillary needs to establish three things, in my opinion—clearly and strongly.

1. the two campaigns remain in a statistical tie of 1258 obama (delegates and declared supers) to 1210 clinton (delegates and declared supers)

2. no vote is wasted on her, as a comeback could reassure her current superdelegates and bring new ones on board

3. the gloves need to come off and she needs to bring to bear every political instinct and connection she has to claw back into this.

if she could effectively convey the first two items through ads and shine in next week's austin debate, she might still have a shot.

otherwise, the mood and momentum of the race will doom her, even if the math has not.


I think she's been running against the media since the onset, so she has to spend more money to counter that, thus your advertising point. In fact, I agree with all your points except "the gloves." I'm not sure what you mean by it, but I think it is her fighting spirit that dismays so many brutish men. So I have to wonder if - by appearing "sweeter" as per Dole - she wouldn't fare better with the more conservative voters she's been losing to Obama.

[Meerkat]

Actually, I kinda like the "gradual approach". Switching over to a completely Medicare-for-all isn't going to happen overnight because the health insurance companies will oppose it to the degree that it won't pass muster (too many politicians owe them "favors"). As long as they get some kind of piece of the pie, they won't make that much noise.

Furthermore, it's an intellectually dishonest approach to claim you were for Medicare-for-all while taking money from corporate lobbyists who give you money for the purpose of buying you off so that you can't oppose their presence.

I imagine that approach would work out just fine, if you're 29. Things look a little different from "over fifty, can't get help" pasture.

[Bird of Prey]

It's one of those "under the radar" things. It may not be "all the time" but it happens often enough.

IG, if you can find examples of recent abortion clinic bombings, I'd be interested.

[dolores haze]

I'd like to see some better, and more impassioned, speeches from Hillary. I'm a supporter of hers, but even I would rather listen to an Obama speech.

[RumpleTumbler]

I think she's melting.

As my favorite talk show host pointed out this morning, the same motor that drives American Idol is driving Obama and will see him through to the nomination.

As long as Hillary doesn't get the nomination I'll be happy. In fact I might even vote for Obama because McCain hates pilots and I can't have that. ALPA actually wants Hillary. It would in fact be only the 2'nd time in my life I've voted for a dem, the first being Zell. I voted for him twice but since he was the same guy both times I only count it as one. ;)

[My-Immortal]

I think she's been running against the media since the onset, so she has to spend more money to counter that, thus your advertising point. In fact, I agree with all your points except "the gloves." I'm not sure what you mean by it, but I think it is her fighting spirit that dismays so many brutish men. So I have to wonder if - by appearing "sweeter" as per Dole - she wouldn't fare better with the more conservative voters she's been losing to Obama.

I'm not sure if you're calling all men brutish, or claiming that it's brutish men that are dismaied by her 'fighting spirit' - but I think she has more than adequately revealed her personality to the entire voting public and if she were to attempt to suddenly appear 'sweeter' now, it would only make her seem disingenuous (or perhaps even more disingenuous since, IMO, that's one of the issues I have with her and her husband). I simply don't trust much of what she (or he) says (or does). That goes for pretty much all politicians, but especially for them....(and Bush).

Take care -

[InfinityGoddess]

I imagine that approach would work out just fine, if you're 29. Things look a little different from "over fifty, can't get help" pasture.

You can still get the public healthcare; the only difference is that it's competing with the private sector healthcare on a level playing field.

The problem now with a total turn to Medicare is the corporate lobbyists. They will go down kicking and screaming and they will ensure that any plan to completely drop the health insurance companies they work for will fail. The only way to solve that problem is to vote out the politicians (via primary them or in a general) who are so easily bought off. And you're not going to completely accomplish that in one election cycle.

[davids]

I hope she and her advisors do not follow Mr. Haskins suggestions!

[Bird of Prey]

I'm not sure if you're calling all men brutish, or claiming that it's brutish men that are dismaied by her 'fighting spirit' - but I think she has more than adequately revealed her personality to the entire voting public and if she were to attempt to suddenly appear 'sweeter' now, it would only make her seem disingenuous (or perhaps even more disingenuous since, IMO, that's one of the issues I have with her and her husband). I simply don't trust much of what she (or he) says (or does). That goes for pretty much all politicians, but especially for them....(and Bush).

Take care -


No, I am not calling all men brutish. But I am calling the ones that are bigoted just that, and I see my fair share of them.

Actually, Hillary Clinton has a sweet side to her; it wouldn't require any acting. She's not the demon that a biased media would like to portray.

And there's a significant difference between disagreeing with her policies and having a sexist attitude toward her, MI. It's fairly easy to tell. When somebody viscerally hates her and when you ask why, he/she can't answer or comes up with something like, "I just do," that pretty much says it all.

[Meerkat]

You can still get the public healthcare; the only difference is that it's competing with the private sector healthcare on a level playing field.

The problem now with a total turn to Medicare is the corporate lobbyists. They will go down kicking and screaming and they will ensure that any plan to completely drop the health insurance companies they work for will fail. The only way to solve that problem is to vote out the politicians (via primary them or in a general) who are so easily bought off. And you're not going to completely accomplish that in one election cycle.

I wish I could get public healthcare. No, the reality is that there is a huge portion of the population that must pay large percentages out of pocket, after their company's HMO fights every receipt. The Veteran's Administration will only take care of the service-related disability, not anything that has developed healthwise since that happy day. And I suspect that an even larger percentage of the population is afraid to switch jobs, because their spouses and dependent family members will not be picked up by the new HMO due to existing conditions. I would be one of these also. I think you have more faith in the system than it deserves, and that this system will resist change with more greed than you can imagine.

[Gravity]

IG, if you can find examples of recent abortion clinic bombings, I'd be interested.

Yowza, same here. Such purple invective makes you sound a bit...McCarthy-esque. "I have here in my hand a list of names of known Communist sympathizers..."

[Gravity]

From this morning's Cincinnati Enquirer:

Big Clinton lead in Ohio, Quinnipiac poll says

Hillary Clinton enters the final three weeks before the Ohio primary with a lead of 21 percentage points over Barack Obama, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday morning.



It also shows that whoever presumptive GOP nominee John McCain faces this fall, it could be a very close race in Ohio, which will be a critical state for both party nominees.



Quinnipiac, which polls key presidential campaign states, 564 likely Democratic voters between Feb. 6 and this Tuesday, and the results were good news for a Clinton campaign that could use some: 55 percent of Clinton, 34 percent for Obama, with only nine percent undecided.



The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percent.



The same poll surveyed 1,748 likely Ohio voters and showed a statistical dead heat in head-to-head match-ups with both Obama and Clinton. It showed McCain with 44 percent to 43 percent for Clinton. In a match-up with Obama, McCain took 42 percent to 40 percent for the Illinois senator.

Hmm. Maybe this thing really is tighter than it looks...

[robeiae]

Yowza, same here. Such purple invective makes you sound a bit...McCarthy-esque. "I have here in my hand a list of names of known Communist sympathizers..."
I better not be on that list, dammit. I paid good money to have my name taken off.

[My-Immortal]

No, I am not calling all men brutish. But I am calling the ones that are bigoted just that, and I see my fair share of them.

Actually, Hillary Clinton has a sweet side to her; it wouldn't require any acting. She's not the demon that a biased media would like to portray.

And there's a significant difference between disagreeing with her policies and having a sexist attitude toward her, MI. It's fairly easy to tell. When somebody viscerally hates her and when you ask why, he/she can't answer or comes up with something like, "I just do," that pretty much says it all.

Bolding mine.

BOP, you could be right about all the bolding part. It could be a sexist attitude.

It could also be that the person doesn't wish to actually discuss their political views with you. Unlike online, some people aren't comfortable debating politics face-to-face. You 'could' be jumping to incorrect conclusions.

(Note, I did not say you 'are'....just that you 'could')

It might also have nothing to do with her gender, but rather that they dislike all the various scandals she and Bill have been involved in...

Or, after twenty+ years of having a Bush or a Clinton in the office, they really just want someone/anyone else in the Big Chair...and the thought of 4-8 more years just really pisses them off.

Again, you 'could' be correct in your assumption that any man who hates Hillary and won't bother to explain their reasons to you is sexist...

But labeling all such men as sexist based solely on that assumption also smacks of some bias. That may not be your intent, and it may not be your position - you in fact, could love men dearly and find most of them just truly wonderful - but I wonder if because you've been subjected to the biased opinions of, as you put it, your 'fair share' of brutish men, that you tend to see this alleged gender bias more than someone less exposed to bias.

Thanks for the discussion, BOP. Take care -

[oswann]

People are motivated by hope, fear or love. I have the feeling Hillary Clinton may be respected but Barack Obama is loved. And that may make all the difference.

Os.

[RumpleTumbler]

I'd do something about my giant ass if I were Hillary.

I saw a full length shot of her from behind yesterday on the nightly news.

WOW that's one GIANT ASS. Perhaps some gym time.

[Bird of Prey]

Bolding mine.

BOP, you could be right about all the bolding part. It could be a sexist attitude.

It could also be that the person doesn't wish to actually discuss their political views with you. Unlike online, some people aren't comfortable debating politics face-to-face. You 'could' be jumping to incorrect conclusions.

(Note, I did not say you 'are'....just that you 'could')

It might also have nothing to do with her gender, but rather that they dislike all the various scandals she and Bill have been involved in...

Or, after twenty+ years of having a Bush or a Clinton in the office, they really just want someone/anyone else in the Big Chair...and the thought of 4-8 more years just really pisses them off.

Again, you 'could' be correct in your assumption that any man who hates Hillary and won't bother to explain their reasons to you is sexist...

But labeling all such men as sexist based solely on that assumption also smacks of some bias. That may not be your intent, and it may not be your position - you in fact, could love men dearly and find most of them just truly wonderful - but I wonder if because you've been subjected to the biased opinions of, as you put it, your 'fair share' of brutish men, that you tend to see this alleged gender bias more than someone less exposed to bias.

Thanks for the discussion, BOP. Take care -

Well, MI, let me put it another way.

My personal and professional experience is that it's a long haul when it comes to people with a certain attitude toward women. It takes a lot of resistance to accomplish an even grudging respect.

But let me ask you. I know a woman that just finished telling that she would never vote for McCain if Rice was his running mate because she doesn't trust her. Why? Well, she doesn't trust a woman that's never been married or had kids. You tell me. Sexist?

Now in direct answer to your post, I don't engage in political discussions unless there are willing participants. So, if somebody who makes a declaration about hating Clinton can't come up with a reason why, I think I'm in the ballpark that the reason is sexism. "Scandals" regarding the Clintons, are easy to rattle off. So is the eight year business. But that's not what I hear. I hear: "I hate her." And I see a snide press using any means to distort her record and demean her, including unflattering pictures and outrageous headlines. They can't wait to destroy her, but they can't do it honestly so they do it dishonestly. And that level of viciousness smacks of sexism. What a male candidate has to endure is vastly different. But it's not just some men that dislike her for being a woman, it's women too.

Now, I do love certain men dearly. I have very close friends that are male, including my ex. But they are not brutish; they do not use terms like "c**t" or "bitch" or "whore" if in disagreement with a woman about business or policies or politics or even personally. They don't criticize looks or clothes. They have a higher level of conversation, shall we say.

And maybe that's in part chivalry. But whatever it is, it denotes an underlying respect for women that is very much appreciated by somebody like me, who at the end of the day, wants to trust that I am first and foremost, a worthy human being in their eyes.

[brokenfingers]

Well, MI, let me put it another way.

My personal and professional experience is that it's a long haul when it comes to people with a certain attitude toward women. It takes a lot of resistance to accomplish an even grudging respect.

But let me ask you. I know a woman that just finished telling that she would never vote for McCain if Rice was his running mate because she doesn't trust her. Why? Well, she doesn't trust a woman that's never been married or had kids. You tell me. Sexist?

Now in direct answer to your post, I don't engage in political discussions unless there are willing participants. So, if somebody who makes a declaration about hating Clinton can't come up with a reason why, I think I'm in the ballpark that the reason is sexism. "Scandals" regarding the Clintons, are easy to rattle off. So is the eight year business. But that's not what I hear. I hear: "I hate her." And I see a snide press using any means to distort her record and demean her, including unflattering pictures and outrageous headlines. They can't wait to destroy her, but they can't do it honestly so they do it dishonestly. And that level of visciousness smacks of sexism. What a male candidate has to endure is vastly different. But it's not just some men that dislike her for being a woman, it's women too.

Now, I do love certain men dearly. I have very close friends that are male, including my ex. But they are not brutish; they do not use terms like "c**t" or "bitch" or "whore" if in disagreement with a woman about business or policies or politics or even personally. They don't criticize looks or clothes. They have a higher level of conversation, shall we say.

And maybe that's in part chivalry. But whatever it is, it denotes an underlying respect for women that is very much appreciated by somebody like me, who at the end of the day, wants to trust that I am first and foremost, a worthy human being in their eyes.I'm curious. Has anybody done this here on this forum (besides Rumpletumbler, of course)?

[RumpleTumbler]

I'm curious. Has anybody done this here on this forum (besides Rumpletumbler, of course)?

What have I done?

[brokenfingers]

I'd do something about my giant ass if I were Hillary.

I saw a full length shot of her from behind yesterday on the nightly news.

WOW that's one GIANT ASS. Perhaps some gym time.I was just referencing this post which I noticed as I was replying. It was the only instance I know of on this forum that backs up BoP's assertion:

They don't criticize looks or clothes. They have a higher level of conversation, shall we say.

[odocoileus]

I'd do something about my giant ass if I were Hillary.

I saw a full length shot of her from behind yesterday on the nightly news.

WOW that's one GIANT ASS. Perhaps some gym time.

She's in fine shape for a woman her age. Her wide hips are genetic. Nothing short of starvation will make them much skinnier. She's not running for spokesmodel, she's running for president.

[My-Immortal]

She's in fine shape for a woman her age. Her wide hips are genetic. Nothing short of starvation will make them much skinnier. She's not running for spokesmodel, she's running for president.


You know....Rumple could have been talking about Bill....
:)

[RumpleTumbler]

Oh. I criticize everything about someone when I intensely dislike them. Nothing is off limits.

[rugcat]

hillary is quickly being marginalized by the media (and, quite frankly, by the voters). in the "writing on the wall" thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92455), i pointed out how, in my view, she's gone from frontrunner to longshot in a span of a couple of weeks. The media has a lot of fun in anointing one person and dismissing another, then reversing itself in a matter of weeks.

I think she and Obama will be close in delegates. Depending on how close, and what the popular vote tally is, a good case could be made for letting the superdelegates decide it. This is where it gets really interesting.

It's assumed Hillary will have the edge there as a long time politico with favors owed, not to mention Bill working the room. But a lot of party elders have already gone on record as backing Obama.

And a big factor will be perception. If Obama continues his momentum, he will look like the people's choice, even if delegates are essentially even. If he is chosen, Hillary supporters will be disappointed, but they'll get behind him. Dems want the white house back.

But If Hillary is picked, Obama supporters will be outraged, seeing it as machine politics at its worst. If someone like Huckabee or Romney were the GOP nominee, they'd hold their noses and vote anyway, but McCaiin does not inspire that level of disgust. They may not actually vote for him but they might well stay home, and in a close election, that could be the deciding factor.

Old time pols are not unaware of this. I think the superdelegates will finally make their decision on who has the best shot at winning, not who they think deserves it. They really don't want to blow this election.

[RumpleTumbler]

She's in fine shape for a woman her age. Her wide hips are genetic. Nothing short of starvation will make them much skinnier. She's not running for spokesmodel, she's running for president.

It's a giant battleship of an ass. I'll bet you would scream if you saw her with her pants down.

[Bird of Prey]

I'm curious. Has anybody done this here on this forum (besides Rumpletumbler, of course)?


I don't know why it seems I only pick up my own typos when somebody's quoted me.

The answer is yes. But I won't go through the posts. Most of them were addressed, either by me or somebody else.

[Jcomp]

It's a giant battleship of an ass. I'll bet you would scream if you saw her with her pants down.

Having a relatively large ass could win tons of support from male black voters. We already have a soft spot for white women as it is...

[davids]

I'd do something about my giant ass if I were Hillary.

I saw a full length shot of her from behind yesterday on the nightly news.

WOW that's one GIANT ASS. Perhaps some gym time.


I COULD NOT CARE LESS IF HER BUTT CAN REACH AROUND TO HER BELLY AND KISS ITSELF-I DO NOT LIKE HER ANYMORE THAN YOU DO BUT I SURE AS HELL HATE TO SEE MY BUD BIRD PROVEN! NOT REALLY BIRD BUT I AM STARTIN TO FEEL YOUR PAIN-LOVE DAVE

[davids]

Having a relatively large ass could win tons of support from male black voters. We already have a soft spot for white women as it is...

FINALLY A SENSIBLE TRUTHFUL RESPONSE!

[oswann]

And there goes the thread. Nearly two pages before it dive bombed.


Os.

[johnnysannie]

T

. If someone like Huckabee or Romney were the GOP nominee, they'd hold their noses and vote anyway, but McCaiin does not inspire that level of disgust. They may not actually vote for him but they might well stay home, and in a close election, that could be the deciding factor.

.


I could never hold my nose long enough for vote for either Romeny (now a non-candidate) or Huckabee. :tongue

[davids]

And there goes the thread. Nearly two pages before it dive bombed.


Os.

OH I LOVE A NICE BIT OF CHASTIFICATION!

[RumpleTumbler]

And there goes the thread. Nearly two pages before it dive bombed.


Os.

Ass if you really care.

[Jcomp]

And there goes the thread. Nearly two pages before it dive bombed.


Os.

You could always endeavor to steer it back into a sensible direction.

As far as the sexism issue which I've seen come up in many threads around the board, well, I think it exists latently as much as racism does. I've known lots of guys who've hated female bosses primarily for the fact that they were female without even realizing it. So I do think it's real that Hilary is probably battling a bit of that. To what degree it's THAT vs. people just not agreeing with her policies vs. people being all enamored by the great orator that is Barack Obama that's causing her to lose ground is up for debate...

[Takvah]

She needs to go thermonuclear and prove to people why Barack may not be the sure thing that he fancies himself. People want to back a winner... unfortunately, being where she is, she needs to prove why Barack is a bigger loser. That's a hell of a place to be... but she finds herself there... oh, and she better leave Bill at home while she does it!

[Jcomp]

She needs to go thermonuclear and prove to people why Barack may not be the sure thing that he fancies himself.

I'm curious to know what makes you think he fancies himself a sure thing?

[Takvah]

Have you listened to him lately? He's believing the hype. In addition you have his camp through David Plouffe is saying as much. (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Plouffe_She_cant_catch_us.html)

As we wrote last night, Obama has begun to make his own inevitablity case, and David Plouffe made it explicit on a conference call this morning, telling reporters that it's now "next to impossible" for Clinton to surpass what he says is a 136-person lead among pledged delegates.

Also Obama has said on many occassions that his war stance makes him the main threat to McCain. What's the guy going to say? The problem for Hillary is that people are believing it.

[Jcomp]

Have you listened to him lately? He's believing the hype. In addition you have his camp through David Plouffe is saying as much. (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Plouffe_She_cant_catch_us.html)

Also Obama has said on many occassions that his war stance makes him the main threat to McCain. What's the guy going to say? The problem for Hillary is that people are believing it.

Exactly. What's he supposed to say? "Well, it's still up in the air, not sure if I might win or lose, I'm really not that confident, I'll just keep trying."

You said yourself, people like backing a winner. It's politics. If Hillary had his momentum she would be saying the same things. Winning becomes easier if you make people believe that you've already won. That's basic Art of War stuff...

[Takvah]

Yeah but J that was my point. The thread asks the question what should Hillary do? I'm saying that she needs to stop this mindset that Obama and his people are promoting that it's already over. I was just expressing the kind of mojo that Obama is putting out there and the fact that Hillary needs to overcome that.

[johnnysannie]

Have you listened to him lately? He's believing the hype. In addition you have his camp through David Plouffe is saying as much. (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Plouffe_She_cant_catch_us.html)



Also Obama has said on many occassions that his war stance makes him the main threat to McCain. What's the guy going to say? The problem for Hillary is that people are believing it.

Right up until Hillary began losing more often that winning she constantly and consistently referred to herself as a sure thing with references to being the next President, how she would lead from day one, ad nauesum. Now she has been forced to backtrack a little and struggle to stay viable in the Democratic nominee race.

So it's okay for her but not for Obama?

If he didn't seem certain that his campaign is gaining momentum, he would be chastised and hooted at for his uncertainty. So the man has confidence. In his position, any candidate would have to exude the same aura of confidence to keeping striving toward the goal. And he still speaks about having a long road to travel before he might get the nomination and work to do.

[johnnysannie]

Yeah but J that was my point. The thread asks the question what should Hillary do? I'm saying that she needs to stop this mindset that Obama and his people are promoting that it's already over. I was just expressing the kind of mojo that Obama is putting out there and the fact that Hillary needs to overcome that.

I haven't heard anything that indicates to me - and I am an Obama supporter reading the blogs, getting the e-mails, and checking what is going on every day - that Obama in any way paints the race as being "over". Funny how when he was behind a little, it was Hllary's race free and clear but now that the tables have turned, fingers are pointing at Obama shouting "unfair - you can't say you might win!)

Bullshit, if you ask me, pure unadulerated bullshit and hype.

[Takvah]

I haven't heard anything that indicates to me - and I am an Obama supporter reading the blogs, getting the e-mails, and checking what is going on every day - that Obama in any way paints the race as being "over". Funny how when he was behind a little, it was Hllary's race free and clear but now that the tables have turned, fingers are pointing at Obama shouting "unfair - you can't say you might win!)

Bullshit, if you ask me, pure unadulerated bullshit and hype.

Fine... there is no perception out there that the door is practically shut on Hillary. David Plouffe never said, what Politico said, he said...(yeah that sounds about right *snickers*) It's all lies.

Oh and by the way... where did the thread run off the rails. This is about what in our OPINION Hillary needs to do to stop the bleeding.

[johnnysannie]

IMO Hillary is digging her own political grave as we speak. She can run her campaign into the ground alone; she doesn't need any "help" from Obama.

[InfinityGoddess]

IMO Hillary is digging her own political grave as we speak. She can run her campaign into the ground alone; she doesn't need any "help" from Obama.

Indeed she is (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/clinton-superdelegates-t_n_86656.html).

[brokenfingers]

Are you saying you're surprised?

[InfinityGoddess]

Are you saying you're surprised?

No. I'm just agreeing with johnniesannie is all. Hillary will sink her own campaign better than anything Obama can throw at her with stuff like that.

[brokenfingers]

It's all about attaining power. Not about what's good for the party or what's good for the nation.

(Though she is definitely not in a position to concede at this stage, I predict she never will and will fight to the bitter end - and will resort to any means to attain her goal.)

[My-Immortal]

Would you vote for Hillary if it is the Superdelegates that give her the nod (and she did not have the majority of the regular delegates)?

Just curious if this matters to you....

[Bird of Prey]

It's all about attaining power. Not about what's good for the party or what's good for the nation.

(Though she is definitely not in a position to concede at this stage, I predict she never will and will fight to the bitter end - and will resort to any means to attain her goal.)


How 'bout murder? Will she resort to murder?

[sandyn]

Remember the 2000 election? It certainly was not won by the popular vote, but by electoral votes.

[My-Immortal]

Remember the 2000 election? It certainly was not won by the popular vote, but by electoral votes.

But that process was already established, and if I recall correctly (and I'd have to check to make sure -- or someone else will and correct me), it wasn't the first time the electoral vote decided the outcome.


ETA: And if you were using that argument in response to my earlier question - the difference is the electoral college is (again, if I remember correctly) supposed to vote along the lines of the popular vote for each state. There is no such guidelines for the Superdelegates.

[Takvah]

If Hillary pulls out wins in the big three that are left... and tries to get at least Florida certified... there will be blood. By the way, anybody seen that? Any good? :D

[billythrilly7th]

there will be blood. By the way, anybody seen that? Any good? :D

Obama sucks Hillary's delegate milkshake.

He sucks it!!

[Bird of Prey]

If Hillary pulls out wins in the big three that are left... and tries to get at least Florida certified... there will be blood. By the way, anybody seen that? Any good? :D


Upton Sinclair. Daniel Day Lewis' acting was fantastic. Didn't do the novel remote justice.

[Takvah]

Upton Sinclair. Daniel Day Lewis' acting was fantastic. Didn't do the novel remote justice.

Danke

[NikeeGoddess]

Most Democrats (provided that they aren't corrupt hacks) are generally better with money than the Republicans at this point. I see little difference between Obama and Hillary in this regard. that's because you don't remember the last bush. his deficit was cleaned up by billy boy clinton and we actually had a surplus in the budget. and that you don't know that it's actually hillary who is smarter financially than bill.

Clinton was the only name on the ballot in Michigan, and they barely campaigned in Florida. So there would have to be some kind of a "do-over" to make things fair.
it's not about being fair. it's about following the rules. if you ever want to run for office it's up to you to get your name on the ballot. you must get signatures and fill out the paperwork. obama just didn't fulfill his obligation in michigan in time. and there are still some states that need either his or her signatures and paperwork to be on the ballot. neither one of them are calling, "foul". they know they have to do the work.


rumpletumbler - you really need to get out more. you have absolutely no idea what a big ass is... except for maybe yourself and george dubya both of which are bigger than this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNl9YaKYVGE&feature=related

[maestrowork]

If Clinton does win Ohio, PA and Texas (iffy but possible), I think she will be able to look the media in the eye and say, "shove it" and continue. It's a dead heat, the race is really close. And I really feel bad if the superdelegates ends up "selecting" the nominee... it really does beat the purpose of the democratic process.

[RumpleTumbler]

rumpletumbler - you really need to get out more. you have absolutely no idea what a big ass is... except for maybe yourself

You must be thinking of a circus type deformity for which someone should be hospitalized and giant chunks of their ass cut out and then put in a giant hamster wheel for 8 hours a day until they lose their blubber. Then released from the hospital with an ankle monitor that detects fast food and lack of exercise and delivers electric shocks just shy of death when either is detected until a new behavior is learned.

Hillary is getting close to that but right now I think she still might be able to slim down her giant, ponderous, gargantuan ass without intervention.

[whistlelock]

Originally Posted by Takvah http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2061809#post2061809)
Have you listened to him lately? He's believing the hype. In addition you have his camp through David Plouffe is saying as much. (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Plouffe_She_cant_catch_us.html)



Also Obama has said on many occassions that his war stance makes him the main threat to McCain. What's the guy going to say? The problem for Hillary is that people are believing it.


I don't understand the problem. That's just standard gamesmanship. If you can demoralize the opposition with foregone victory talk; you do that.

If candidate X can get candidate Y's supporters to stay home because 'what's the point, X will win anyway' then good for X. If Y can't turn that around with, 'How dare they say that!' then too bad.

Politics is the most dangerous game. You don't die once, you die a thousand times. And can always come back for more.

[Gravity]

Check out today's on-line Cincinnati Enquirer (sorry, don't have the link; just google it). Hillary was in town this morning, stopping to stump at a local Skyline Chili parlor. Of course, all the local gentry gathered 'round about her was all a-twitter and agog, but check out the reader "comments" at the end of the story. (Hint: a "three-way" is a style of chili here). :::snerk:: Funny, funny stuff.

[InfinityGoddess]

that's because you don't remember the last bush. his deficit was cleaned up by billy boy clinton and we actually had a surplus in the budget. and that you don't know that it's actually hillary who is smarter financially than bill.

I am well aware that Bill Clinton left us with a surplus that Georgie Boy pissed away with his little war games and gifts to his rich buddies. Thank you.


it's not about being fair. it's about following the rules. if you ever want to run for office it's up to you to get your name on the ballot. you must get signatures and fill out the paperwork. obama just didn't fulfill his obligation in michigan in time. and there are still some states that need either his or her signatures and paperwork to be on the ballot. neither one of them are calling, "foul". they know they have to do the work.

Then explain to me why Hillary's trying to get the delegates for Michigan and Florida seated for her, hmm? Also, Obama took his name off the ballot in Michigan; he wasn't "too late" in filing. Sounds to me that Hillary's the one who doesn't like the rules.

[Bird of Prey]

I am well aware that Bill Clinton left us with a surplus that Georgie Boy pissed away with his little war games and gifts to his rich buddies. Thank you.




Then explain to me why Hillary's trying to get the delegates for Michigan and Florida seated for her, hmm? Also, Obama took his name off the ballot in Michigan; he wasn't "too late" in filing. Sounds to me that Hillary's the one who doesn't like the rules.

What? Assuming he did, Obama didn't have to take his name off!! And Clinton wants the delegates because those two states have citizens that went to polls - in Florida by the truckloads - and voted for her. And those citizens want - and have every right - to be heard.

[InfinityGoddess]

What? Assuming he did, Obama didn't have to take his name off!!

He did it out of principle. Something apparently Hillary seems to be lacking.


And Clinton wants the delegates because those two states have citizens that went to polls - in Florida by the truckloads - and voted for her. And those citizens want - and have every right - to be heard.

I don't disagree that they need to be heard, but if you really have any grievances on that score, then yell at the Florida and Michigan State Democratic parties because THEY were the ones who broke DNC rules, and THEY made the voters pay for it.

What I don't agree with is Hillary's motivation in seating those delegates, because there wasn't any campaigning to speak of in both states, and she was the only one (other than Kucinich) who was on the Michigan ballot.

[Bird of Prey]

He did it out of principle. Something apparently Hillary seems to be lacking.




I don't disagree that they need to be heard, but if you really have any grievances on that score, then yell at the Florida and Michigan State Democratic parties because THEY were the ones who broke DNC rules, and THEY made the voters pay for it.

What I don't agree with is Hillary's motivation in seating those delegates, because there wasn't any campaigning to speak of in both states, and she was the only one (other than Kucinich) who was on the Michigan ballot.

Well then, IG, it was well-played by Clinton, who is savvy enough to understand that you don't simply ignore the citizens of certain states. She's running for President of the United States, not the Mickey Mouse Club.

[bluntforcetrauma]

Thank G-d I'm Republican.

[InfinityGoddess]

Well then, IG, it was well-played by Clinton, who is savvy enough to understand that you don't simply ignore the citizens of certain states. She's running for President of the United States, not the Mickey Mouse Club.


Then it needs to be a do-over. It would not be right with the way it is now.

[William Haskins]

please, just remember...

http://barackobamaisyournewbicycle.com/

[blacbird]

Then it needs to be a do-over. It would not be right with the way it is now.

You're never going to get VictimofPrey to admit that her FiniteGoddess could evah to anything shady or sneaky. You're only saying that because you're sexist.

caw

[blacbird]

it's not about being fair. it's about following the rules. if you ever want to run for office it's up to you to get your name on the ballot. you must get signatures and fill out the paperwork. obama just didn't fulfill his obligation in michigan in time. and there are still some states that need either his or her signatures and paperwork to be on the ballot. neither one of them are calling, "foul". they know they have to do the work.

A crock, Nikee. Obama didn't get his name on the Michigan ballot because he agreed to the DNC rules, and their request not to recognize the Michigan primary as valid. John Edwards did the same thing. As did Hillary. But, oooops! At the last minute, she decided to reneg on that promise, and file for the Michigan ballot, thus becoming the only significant name on it. Now she wants to have the delegates from that tainted "primary" recognized.

I can't see how the DNC can possibly agree to that gambit without losing the final shreds of credibility they have.

caw

[Takvah]

I don't understand the problem. That's just standard gamesmanship. If you can demoralize the opposition with foregone victory talk; you do that.

If candidate X can get candidate Y's supporters to stay home because 'what's the point, X will win anyway' then good for X. If Y can't turn that around with, 'How dare they say that!' then too bad.

Politics is the most dangerous game. You don't die once, you die a thousand times. And can always come back for more.

ACK! Not again... the thread title is what would you do if you were Hillary. I said she needs to counter Obama's seeming to be the destined winner. His people are acting like it's been determined. She needs to overcome that. I didn't say it was wrong for Obama's people to say that, I said she needed to counter it. Uhmmmkay? *snickers*

[Bird of Prey]

You're never going to get VictimofPrey to admit that her FiniteGoddess could evah to anything shady or sneaky. You're only saying that because you're sexist.

caw


Jesus, your posts are become pettier and pettier. Unbelievable. Grow up.

[johnnysannie]

Thank G-d I'm Republican.

And I thank God each and every day that I am a Democrat.

To each his own - one of the remaining hallmarks of our democracy.