Clinton Supporters -- Honestly, Are You Angry At Obama Because You Thought The Nomination Was Her's?

Not that she still can't win, but are you in any way upset with Obama because you thought that Hillary "deserved" the nomination and shouldn't have had to work this hard in a primary to get it?

:evilgrin:

just to mess with the poll.

what, messing with a poll on DU?

that would never happen.

:evilgrin:

;)

Whatever her supporters feel about the issue, it certainly brought Clinton to tears.

and then proceed to ridicule the alleged claim of inevitability. maybe if those ridiculing the alleged claim would STFU long enough, we could hear the actual claim being made in the first place, cuz i sure haven't heard it.

who has fooled people into believing he is to the left of Hillary.

just out of curiosity.

energy and environment, healthcare, education and I am sure I missed some.

that's funny, because I thought their voting records were basically identical.

Like voting for IWR and Kyl-Lieberman, both of which Obama opposed?

Supporting Bush's wet dreams is now LIBERAL if Hillary does it?

Hey, if you want to, like Hillary, support the Bush foreign policy blunders that is fine...then go ahead and defend them. However, don't try to say up is down and that Hillary's policy is to the left of Obama's on foreign policy.

He lied and did not show up....sending a statement saying he would have voted against does not cut it .... especially when he previously authored identical legislation... and you can bet your bottom dollar that had he been in the senate he would have voted yes on the IWR.

Obama wants to vastly expand the military... Hillary does not....why would we need 50,000 additional troops? Hmm.....

Edit for spelling error.

Reid rescheduled the vote so Obama was out of town when it occured;

Hillary voted FOR it. Is that progressive? Liberal? Or is it just Hillary-Speak: obama bad for campaigning, didn't really oppose although he said he did....snort....while Hillary voted for it all along.....hey, the emporess is naked! In spite of your smoke and mirrors, she is to the right of Obama on foreign policy;

Hillary has not opposed any of Bush's foreign policy wet dreams yet. But of course in Hillary-Speak, the fact that Obama didn't support them means that Hillary is to the left.

he previously author an identical bill? .... and which of "Bush's FP wet dreams" has Obama opposed WHEN IT MATTERED. WHEN HE WAS IN THE SENATE..... oh, that's right none.... and it sure is funny everyone else made it back to the K-L vote......hmmm Obama wouldn't be lying would he?

With identically equal rights.

What is Obama's position?

Social Security for two

granted they are not that far apart, but Obama is definately to the left of Hillary, the most conservative Democratic candidate since Lieberman

just repeating some BS you heard somewhere?

let's compare them.

Whip them out.

this would, after all, only increase the taxes on the rich. And lifting the cap would not affect the taxes of the rest of us. I am sure that makes Hillary more liberal than Obama...because in Hillary-speak, taxing the rich is taxing the middle class....and lifting the cap would hurt working class people. So, therefore, Hillary is more liberal in hillary-speak. And she is also more conservative. She is whatever you want her to be. Or better yet, whatever she wants you to think of her as....

Yep.. fooled people with that crazy voting record of his... but we all know that even though he may vote like a liberal he really is the right of GWB. :sarcasm:

yet gets credit for being "to the left of Hillary"

differently than Hillary. And one or two things don't count. For your claims to make sense, he would have to vote to the right of her on 51% of the issues. Well...

differently than Hillary. And one or two things don't count. For your claims to make sense, he would have to vote to the right of her on 51% of the issues. Well...

you said that he is to the right of Hillary than that means that his record should show that he is to the right over MORE than he is to the left of her. That means he should be to the left of her at least 51% of the time. You can't make a claim like you did without being able to give some examples.

I never thought Hillary wouldn't have to work hard.

you think she'd be fighting this hard with, say, Edwards and Biden or something?

designed to distract. There's a lot that going on.

:rofl:

have tin ears when it comes to Politics. If they did not
realize they would create serious division in the party
and possibly in the country--they must be totally out of
touch. It is the Establishment and their power struggles
which make the Party look weak and chaotic, thus always
handing the victory to the GOP.

Why can they not get their petty fights and changes they
want made in off seasons ? Elections are no time to decide
such serious struggles.

And, I'm not angry at Obama. I am at many of his "supporters" here and IRL, and at the MSM. I don't care for Obama, but that's far from the same thing.

Reagan had his Falwell Obama has his MCclurkin. I see a MO here.

Silence = death.

I simply want the strongest candidate with the strongest Democratic proposals.

Sadly...

and I don't hate her. I'll vote for her if she's the nominee and I'll defend her if she's attacked by republicans.

What I don't like about her is the way she's been running against Obama. I think she's been smug and arrogant and I have a lower opinion of her now than I did when she started running.

I've met her in person twice, shook hands with her. I know she's a nice person. But I also know she's an absolutely ruthless campaigner and will do anything, ANYTHING to win. And I think she'll destroy Obama if she has to in order to secure the nomination.

I don't get that sense from Obama or Edwards. I think they'd rather run a campaign on the issues and the overreaching themes of their campaigns. I don't think they'd resort to every tactic they had to in order to win.

What makes you magic rat?

race card and many, many in here did not see it nor understand what he said. Here is the quote that he said in Manchester, N.H “minority candidates have ‘a higher threshold in establishing themselves with voters.’” This was a laughable claim but a shrewd use of the race card to position Obama for future manipulation of the electoral process. The truth is exactly the opposite. Obama is being “seriously” considered because he is a racial curiosity. No white man with his tepid professional accomplishments would be considered as a serious candidate for president or showered with the attention Obama receives.For him to claim that the barriers are higher, that the bar is higher for him to succeed, is nonsense. It is crass racialism. Obama is a product of the very “24-hour…small-minded politics” that he decries. And he has played the race card often and as Charles Rangel said, "How race got into this thing is because Obama said ‘race,’But there is nothing that Hillary Clinton has said that baffles me. I would challenge anybody to belittle the contribution that Dr. King has made to the world, to our country, to civil rights, and the Voting Rights Act,”

This is why I never considered obama as a choice and no to john edwards because he coulf not sell his ideas in 04 and is repeating those same ideas 4 years later.

I am not mad at Obama at all. I am at many of his supporters on here. His supporters on DU are rabid and often times rude. MOST of the attacks from the Clinton camp isn't nearly as bad as the ones coming from the DU Obama supporters. That being said, I am not mad at Obama. Obama is a great man. He is smart, thoughtful, and inspirational. I think that he will make a great president should he win. I merely prefer Hillary or Edwards instead. It doesn't meant I hate him or would not do everything I can to support him in the national.

Of course, by the time I decided I was going to support Hillary, it was pretty evident that Obama was going to enter the race. So that wasn't a factor. Besides, it's not as if she was going to run uncontested in any event.