I think her focus is South Carolina. She will campaign in New Hampshire but she will lose there but what she needs to do is make the loss as small as possible.

The Clintons have always leaked like sieves and this sounds a lot like the talk after she lost Iowa last time. And Hillary didn't cover herself in glory last night at her speech where she didn't shake any of her supporters' hands, work the rope lines or thank her staffers/volunteers before tearing out of Iowa. That is unusual behavior from any candidate and definitely one that is happy with the results.

She should be focusing on keeping it competitive in NH and NV. That is the 3rd state and she needs to do really well there to stop any Bernie momentum going into SC. SC should be an easy win for Hillary. It's made for her and people were expecting her to win it easily in 2008 before the Oprah endorsement and Bill's meltdown in SC.

Last edited Tue Feb 2, 2016, 02:11 PM - Edit history (1)

your first two paragraphs are full on insults, most aimed at Bernie.

I like O'Malley, and I wish he were still in the race, but being angry at Bernie's supporters won't change his decision to step down.

The op simply makes some observations, he is not being "angry" at Bernie or Hillary. Making Bernie the victim all the time isn't going to work. He has proved he can take care of himself.

But, both Bernie and Hillary supporters aren't handling post-Iowa well and aren't winning over new supporters with their behavior IMO.

lets not forget Nader supporters who rather give america GWB than sacrifice their "principles"....I love bernie, been following him for 30yrs but I also know he has no chance to win a general election staring down the barrel of the conservative machine that would destroy him in all battleground states....On the otherhand we were huge Obama supporters and worked on his Illinois Senate campaign as well as both of his presidential campaigns and find no issue with Hillary leading this country and will support her with the same level of support. We democrats/progressives/liberal would fail our country if we did not support who our nominee will be....eveytime we have done that over the past 5o yrs has led america down some terrible paths and its OUR responsibility to ensure it stops

it is foolish to believe that they will change their corrupt behavior.

Those who repeatedly engage in duplicity and unethical actions have no one to blame but themselves if people question the integrity of everything they do.

Conventional wisdom called people crazies when we challenged the 2000 election in Florida.

Go figure.

It started a movement! We need transparency in our elections.

But, because Obama won twice, overwhelmingly "against all odds," we unfortunately stopped questioning the ageing, hackable voting machines that are still installed in critical states, the Gerrymandering, the overturn of the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court that has allowed Repubs in states like mine to now to require Voter I.D. cards which are difficult for the poor and minorities, (plus older and rural folks without birth certificates or transportation to obtain) and restrictions on availability of early voting locations. There is no reason not to believe that in a close election that all the same problems of "Stolen Election 2000" and the voting problems in Ohio and elsewhere in 2004 won't rear their ugly head along with "dirty tricks." In a close Dem Campaign and in the General Election this will be very important going forward.

As you say, Zorra: