clown is disgusting.

glib responses generally have good grammar.

2. I agree that Hillary is not a clown. She's a neo-con, moving the Democratic Party to the right of all our traditional values while abandoning everyone but her financial backers, war profiteers and WalMart buddies.

Perfectly legit. We can argue this but it is the feeling of some in our party.

We also agree she is no clown.

into the way of incoming to save someone else. I believe the concept of what they do was the intension. I don't disagree with them about this. Then again, it could very well be inept campaigning once again rearing its ugly head. She sucks at campaigning among the can be swayed while appealing to the already sold.

up her last campaign gets hired. she wants him some of them say

If she does hire him, she learned nothing and deserves to lose.

Last edited Thu Jul 3, 2014, 07:35 PM - Edit history (1)

off abruptly this soon in her tour that her 'inevitability' is in jeopardy. apparently, it is a sign of softening support among those looking for a candidate when this happens. I don't pretend to be beltway but it is an interesting observation. I agree with Maher. If she doesn't go away she will do it all over again, alienate the people who don't love her already. And no matter how much the hillary lovers want it, she has to appeal to more than dems. She has to appeal to a vast swath of people. Polls now aren't worth the powder to blow them to hell. Name recognition carries you a long way in the early days.

Edit: here is the link to this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/02/hillary-clinton-book-sales_n_5552694.html

those inside just see the donor situation but they don't see who connects with voters.

The media and DC thought Guiliani would be hot shit when he ran for the GOP nomination, but he got the crickets he deserved.

she comes loaded and not a lot of it is good.

The media is pushing that meme. Too hard to understand?

For example, every single time there's a pro-Clinton thread. And about 90% of the pro-Clinton posts. And a host of her surrogates, who she could ask to use a different strategy.

wouldn't your tender sensibilities be offended?

Bunch of hypocrites.............

Rodeo clowns work hard, they're brave, they believe it's their job to look out for other people, and they're popular with crowds. I think that describes Warren to a T.

. . .

And they still smell the same, too.

The clown positions in the party have already been filled by her detractors.

And what a sad bunch of pitiful clowns they are.

I understand disagreements in policy, but the total disrespect from these so called Democrats is beyond disgusting.

They can go and stick their crass and classless comments, well, you know where.

And I thank her for that....

for popcorn comments.

Both Clinton and Biden are accomplished politicians, who speak in public a huge amount. The vast majority of what either says is so not controversial it stays in Senate hearings, articles on foreign policy, or in long detailed interviews.

What is extracted - above the noise - is any little soundbite that can be turned into its own circus. It doesn't matter what the context, if it makes them look bad, it will be played hundreds of times. Do they sometimes say things in ways they would like to take back, ... of course. I would hate to have a record of every word I have ever said that could be examined and the dumbest things extracted. This is what they - Obama, and all top politicians have to live with. Unfortunately, it is also not completely even -- the Republicans have the better echo chamber, but when Republicans make sufficiently bad comments (47%), they likely experience the same gut wrenching horror seeing things that will hurt repeated constantly.

The question is whether the comment really shows a problem in what they really think - as the 47% comment did - and which Romney doubled down on.

Another side of this "gaffe" risk is that politicians need to either have very polished rote answers to almost everything (think Edwards, who every speech almost used the same gestures and expressions - as well as words) or they need to filter everything and stay very serious and focused as they respond losing some of their natural spontaneity and conveying less of their good sense of humor (John Kerry - and consider the difference in Obama 2008 and President Obama ) It also leads to a campaign team 2 dimensional version of the candidate that simplifies who he/she is - cutting risks - but losing the full person who will be President. The sad thing is that the better the real person is, the worse it is that campaigns almost never allow us to see the candidates as they really are.

She always had and will always have , luckily to her enough huge platform to respond the worst of silly attacks agains her. ( the party's powerstucture, her staff, her supporters....) Unlike others......

I so much resented people making fun of Joe Biden and so few people stood up for him. You feel hurt for HRC the same as I did for Joe Biden, and there's no better way to understand that unless you share the same feelings about YOUR favorite candidate (and I hope Joe becomes one).

Be happy that Toronto has a mayor that makes both Biden and HRC look perfect in every way.....

She will still win against anyone they throw at her, this is not 2008.

why do so many here spend time trashing fellow Democrats?

possible to discuss things without one point of view ALWAYS being the CORRECT one?

Sometimes sychophantry is blinding.

And are actively working to keep Democrats out of office.

They know that this is not 2008, and if she does choose to run, this time she wins the nomination.

As I have said in the past, I have stopped caring about the opinions of these folks. They are just a loud noise to be disregarded when the actual campaign starts.

the Clintons above all else.

Take away Bill and Hillary and I can't even guess what you believe in or what your espoused goals even are and am left to assume that whatever the Kochs, Pete Peterson, and old Henry Killinger have to say will work as long as abortion is available to those who can afford it.

It was obvious the OP refers to Mrs Clinton as a distraction in the elections, and not saying that to insult her. It's an opinion. I don't agree w the poster, but it's an opinion.

She got this one right.

I guess all 7.jurors should "skip" their duties from now on?

rw memes.

Don't like Clinton? Fine, but why not build your candidate up instead of helping the rw fucks tear down Democrats?

Just asking.

she already made so much great in creating all that buzz around her, that her popularity already had eliminated any valuable Dem challenger.

shows that Clinton loyalists are trying to dimiss every dissent voices who doesn't suit the HRC possible nomination

I don't come here much anymore. Hope all is well with you!

Gay Pride was fun this past weekend.


How are you?

Ive been good, working a lot of hours, but what's new! Hot and humid here as well. I almost wished that tropical storm was a lil closer just to cool us off! It's like F100 almost every day lol

Democratic site, just proves once again how far removed is DU from the real world and real voters.

Disgusting.............

It's not for Clinton supporters. If this OP had been about a liberal darling, then it would have been locked already.

unnecessary wars?

I haven't met many people that believe that for anywhere along the political spectrum.

a DLC candidate won't run on those positions, but we will get them if they win.

watch as Secretary of State, and hasn't actively courted the support of right wing assholes like Rupert Murdoch in the past?

I believe she is dead serious about running for president. The beltway media have convinced her that not only can she win, she is actually capable of doing a good job in office. Unfortunately for her, they are way wrong.

but it's because they're lying in wait to eat her up and spit her out if she is successful. You can almost see the foam around their mouths already. Whether you are pro or con it won't be pretty.

right wing attacks.

I hope for a good healthy debate with a vigorous primary.

She is human however and sometimes does not use overly precise language. If you want gaffes, I suggest you try the current herd of repiggies.

Maybe not you and the other discontents on this site, but the vast majority of Democrats want Hillary to run.

there would be a dead silence.

Is there any real proof of that? It is the only way negative people will see it.

If you are never happy with any Democrat, you are surely going to vote for them only to avoid the worse result, Republicans in office.

...in that she is seated a little too close to the owner's boxes for my comfort. I think she has the capacity to be a better president than Obama...just not the inclination. Not yet.

And we need more than a corporate Dem, more than ever.

... so other Dems can remain unscathed. Good job Hillary!

The fear that she causes is like waves in the ocean...be wary GOP...dun dun...dun dun...dun dun...

candidate can earn the trust of progressives as you do bashing us, and she might actually get her shit together as a candidate.

As is, she has the stink of an out of touch DC insider who takes care of the big money people at the expense of the rest of us.

It might be too late too actually fool us, but if she wants the nomination, she has to do a better job of trying.

. . . you've got the temerity to tell folks who disagree with your vulgar description of Clinton that they're DLC.

You've been gifted by the jury with a free pass to call Clinton a 'clown'. It's clear now, that's all you wanted to do, not make some point about a 'rodeo' and Hillary Clinton.

I can just guess how fast my post would be torn down if I called Warren a clown, or Sanders. It doesn't seem to make any difference to the folks who make up the jury here that there has to be fairness and comity in these election-oriented posts, or this place will be a bloodbath of recrimination and bitterness.

Of course, you think you're righteous in making your vile commentary because you've been given free reign. This NEVER used to be allowed to stand. It's flamebait; it's designed to be inflammatory, and this board is kicking a lot of DUers in the teeth allowing this to stand.

Those who support her, are in fact supporters of the DLC. BTW, Koch Bros money financed the DLC...nice company you keep.

. . . you don't need to 'support' Hillary, or any of the other wide misses that you've assumed about DLC, Koch, and anyone else you imagine I support, to defend against this trolling, flamebait thread.

What the fuck are you really defending by treating Democrats here with such disdain? This is an ugly and divisive politics you and the op are practicing that doesn't deserve support, no matter what you purport to believe in.

... you support Hillary, but you're against everything she supports? Okaaayyyyy.... :rolleyes:

. . . not sure why I should care, but I'm not a Hillary for President supporter.

She was my third choice in the last presidential election. Barack Obama was my fourth choice.

You should be able to see now how idiotic your statement appeared to me.

This is the last time Hooptie, that you'll get a kick out of me for this trolling thread.

Let's see who's left, as you so crassly put it, "squealing like a stuck pig" once the primaries are over.

The most popular Democrat is a rodeo clown to you? She has the experience, gravitas and polling to be a formidable candidate.

I have read a lot of hateful and even ignorant threads against the Clintons, but yours tops them all.

BTW, bud, the "rodeo clown" won almost 18M votes in 2008. More people voted in the 2008 primaries than in any other primary in history.

Go rodeo that............

and of course almost all of them took 'rodeo clown' apart to just mean 'clown'. I'm guessing most of them have never seen a rodeo.

Rodeo clowns are some of the bravest, toughest, and most altruistic types out there, throwing themselves in harm's way again and again in order to allow thrown riders to be pulled out of danger's way. To simply say that that's in any way like calling somebody a (circus) clown shows a profound lack of understanding, but I guess that's par for the course with those looking to be outraged.

Hillary Clinton is the most formidable candidate the party has, she's NO ONE'S rodeo clown.

Fuck that!!!!!!!

"Clown" would be a pretty thin, vapid insult that doesn't even deserve to be shrugged off.

I didn't mean rodeo clown as an insult or compliment, just a statement of fact.

and not just about wanting to be outraged, then folks might simply not like the thought that 'rodeo clowns' don't tend to turn into 'rodeo riders'. Ie, they take the hits, but then don't go on to the glory.

but the clowns always get the most applause.

I do not look on it as a gaffe. I would have said the same thing in her position. When my husband retired he had a pension,rare these days. But we still had kids to put through college, that pension was not going to go far. We had a lot of obligations. We were not 12 million in debt. But I would have described us as dead broke and most people would have too. Hillary is a lot more like real people than a politician.

That aint at all like real people. H. Clinton makes no bones about her Wall Street connections.

Almost all the former presidents were given money and introductions to ways to earn money. Reagan went to Japan for a 2million dollar speech soon after leaving the WH. And his retirement home in CA was bought for him by a supporter. Read it in the news at the time. You think the Bushes aren't on a few boards?? A good president should have/will have Wall street connections. We can say that the Clintons earned a lot of money making speeches a writing books, we can also say they have been big supporters of liberal causes since leaving WH. And Hillary has had a few jobs. Senator and SOS. Employed and still writing books and making speeches. I would have a pile of money too if I got 8 million or so advance for a book and 200 thou for each speech.

It's graft plain and simple. It was a big thank you gift for services rendered. Most of Georgie Bush's wealth came from people that wanted special favors from his father. Newt Gingrich helped get Rupert Murdock a US citizenship via Congress and Murdock said thanks and bought a million dollars worth of Newt's book. H. Clinton gets $200,000 every time she has tea with Goldman-Sachs. It's a way to buy influence. It's graft.

The whole thing is performance art.

There are a number of candidates for whom I would vote should the become the Democratic nominee, Elizabeth Warren being among them. But insulting screeds such as this one do no favor to your candidate of choice and with me at least, probably have the opposite affect than what you intended.

They save lives and take enormous risks in order to keep other people safe.

This is an interesting analogy, but I'm pretty sure Mrs. Clinton intends to be the star of the show.

i find it interesting to read the Hillary supporters responses to this thread. She is not my first choice for the candidacy but she will get my full support should she be the candidate.
I still wait for the day when we can vote for the best of two goods rather than the less of two evils. It will probable never come, but i can dream.

There are stances on issues she takes that I am not comfortable with. I like many want to see a robust primary to choose the best candidate, not the best candidate that DU'ers are pushing in every other thread. If she wins the primary then so be it, I'll hold my nose and vote for her, but that's it. In the primary I will be looking for someone who is much more progressive than Clinton.

but in today's world we aren't going to get that person elected. Better a person who likes progressives that someone who hates them. And that is what we will get if we expect our president to be pure and run with a third party candidate. How did George Bush work out for you??????? I say hold your nose all you want but vote dem and them someday it will be a run between the progressive and the more progressive candidate. Today it is a case of voting for a sort-of-progressive or someone that wants to send us back to the Middle Ages with Ayn Rand ideals.

and now are veering regressive under the cover of Teabagging radicals.

What I see is a steadfast effort to make the choice essentially a lie, different faces and personalities representing the wealthy and powerful, ever more disdainful of the needs of the people and our country.

The eventual reward for faith and loyalty stinks of religious tripe more than smells of truth.

I don't see how acceptance and encouraging destructive policies leads to the opposite, from where would progressive and more progressive come into play as options along the path we have been on for twenty years or more?

Who would that be?

which is to say that she serves the function described by the OP, but in more obviously heroic, and less comical, terms.

She attracts the vitriol like no other, and that will clear the way for other potential candidates.

I feel for her. I have spent much of my life as a lightening rod. It's not fun and somebody else aways "wins" first place as a result. I just end up frazzled and burned out. But I also know that if you are sincere, you can relish that role knowing that although you don't get the big rewards, you do help your cause.

The RW have been focused on her for a long time now, which does take some of the heat off other potential candidates.

There is a difference between being dead broke and being poor. Stupid people read the comment as saying "poor" when it didn't. If I have a million dollars in the bank, but I don't have the cash on me for subway fare, I am dead broke, not poor.