Anyone other than me sick of the renewed clinton sideshow destroying our party?

And many condone their behavior. Many of the same people who decryed the repubs for exhibiting the same sorry traits in 2000 and 2004. Just because its dems playing dirty this time doesn't make it right.

I'm telling you Clinton supporters to get the hell off of DU and get out there. Listen to what everyday people are saying... Bill has done nothing but remind everyone of all the crap that went along with the Clinton presidency. All the good is getting swept under the rug.

Bill is pulling the rug out from under his wife and the party and possibly the dems shot at reclaiming the whitehouse next fall.

Maybe if you get off of the computer and escape your clinton circle of friends, you will realize the damage that he is doing and write and urge the campaign to have Bill knock it off.

These people are no better than the republicans in wanting to grab as much power as they can get.

And don't forget Nafta people. Don't forget 3 strikes. Some of the actions of the clintons have had a long term detrimental effect on this country.

The way they are conducting their campaign now is a clear and present threat to our democracy.

You have absolutely NO CHANCE now of getting a single independent voter or repbulican cross over.

The Clintons are not "entitled" as their behavior seems to suggest is their motivation for engaging in slimeball politics.

Our party looks petty, immature and destined to implode.

the Clintons ARENT WORTH IT when we have other great candidates to support. They are TOXIC!

I want my country back damn it!

That's a message, loud and clear. Let's cheer a little for John, I think we can afford to right now.

We cannot be guided off a cliff. We are not blindly loyal. We don't tolerate devisive politics.
Most importantly, that despite the actions of Mr. Clinton, democrats have proven that they continue to want the best for our country and will support the candidates who reflect the values of our party. Fairness, justice and intelligent,solutions to the problems we face.

We are so much better colletively than Clinton is making us look right now!

... and going with one of the other nominees would go a long way, all by itself, in bridging some of the divide. It would certainly show the Democratic Party is not as personality-driven as the Republicans.

Edwards resurgence helps Hillary because it splits the anti-Clinton vote?

Yes for two possibilities/reasons...

yes #1 -- If Edwards gets some votes but falls short of 15%, then votes cast for him are negated, effectively spoiling those votes. The degree of this spoiler effect will be unknown, however, unless exit polling is done to specifically determine the proportion of Edwards voters who would have otherwise selected one of the other 2 candidates, Obama or Clinton.

yes #2 -- Even if Edwards *and* Obama both get over 15% of the vote, guaranteeing each a proportionate share of a state's delegates, *AND* their combined total is more than Hillary's total, if Hillary "wins" a plurality of a state's votes the media will portray it as a "win", thus perpetuating the spin and influencing national opinion and campaign contributions. The media cannot help themselves, and continue to fail to educate the public on the difference between how primaries and the general election function.

No, for just one reason...

no #1 -- It doesn't necessarily help Clinton, if Edwards can manage to get 15% or more of the votes in each state (or avoid handing states to Clinton via spoiled votes) -- and ends-up putting his support and delegates behind Obama.

Rank speculation, of course.

People simply do not like to be called racist because they disagree with a candidate who happens to be black.
That will create a backlash that will sweep Obama away.

The same kind of nonsense that the Clintons are spouting, only they have a better way with words (and more selfish motivations than yours).

the voters will speak.

and they may very well do, it will not prove anything. The voters have "spoken" in 2004 as well. They did not chose the better man (I am referring to the GE). Unfortunately history, both new and old, here and elsewhere, shows repeatedly that people can be quite easily manipulated, and this es exactly what the Clintons are trying to do now, in a shameless and possible effective way. The end does not justify the means. Winning does not make it right.

(98%) white, by appealing to whites and blacks, Obama decided that the way to win the nomination was by injecting race into the equation. Perhaps he thought that by being perceived as a Black candidate, instead of a candidate who is Black, he could transform a positive and successful campaign into one that more closely resembled those of Jackson and Sharpton in years gone by, rather than continue with a message that appealed to both Blacks and whites. That makes a lot of sense. ;)

Then maybe the country can get back to discussing true racism..
and not the faux racism the Obama campaign claims to be victim to.

If you believe otherwise you have not capacity to see things objectively. But Kennedy Guy, I've read your posts. You are singulary driven with blinders on.

but I can assure you the majority are not fooled.

And right now the only candidate that is trying to help us, is still talking about the issues, and not fighting with each other, is John Edwards! Now that should tell everyone something!

Edward will do his best to take the country back, and if we don't stand behind him, we may all be sorry come November!

I hope he picks up steam and doesn't stop 'til we are all with him in the White House!

I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK GODDAMNIT!!!!

... that the candidate NOT in the petty fights is likely not a candidate still in contention for the nomination.

(I'm not slamming JE, just stating the facts on the ground. His message *is* what the Dem Party should be promoting, but I fear the media blackout has done irreparable harm to his campaign.)

completely. Does that count? Obama is the one that destroyed this party, when he decided to run, after he said he wouldn't. He made his bed, so he and his supporters need to deal with it. One things for sure, it's about to get a whole lot worse....

hate. When you're ready, we'll be here.

and I don't like anyting I see. Secondly, if he managed to get elected, he would only be a 1 term president. As soon as people find out he won't/can't do anything he claimed, he'll be done. He talks a good story, and that's about it.

My hatred for him won't be limited to the next 4 years either. In fact, I'd say it's eternal. He caused a lot of problems for this election, and that is unforgivable in my mind, due to the critical nature of the position this country is in. He is not qualified to run this country, we owe him nothing, and he hasn't paid his dues to this country yet.

That's how I feel about him. He also holds a lot of the blame for the media frenzy, which caused the most QUALIFIED people in the race, to have to quit. That's not sour grapes, it's a fact. If he hadn't run, then there would have been a whole other dynamic, and with they way people feel about Hillary, I have no doubt the 2 front runners right now would be John Edwards, and Joe Biden. Without a doubt.

Thanks for nothing ego maniac Obama.

Stealing everyone's thunder, inspiring a nation...WHO DOES HE THINK HE IS?? :rofl:

has a 'right' to be the president?

That's what I think....

I *love* both guys, and think both would, potentially, be good Presidents, but you're delusional if you don't think Hillary would still be the leading candidate -- if not having sealed-up the nomination after New Hampshire.

How about putting some of the blame where it belongs... on the media. It is not Obama's fault that the media chooses to ignore all but one or two candidates.

And the man has done *plenty* for the country, certainly as much as Edwards or Hillary -- if not on the national stage, then in his lifetime of works.

Hell, I'm a JE supporter, but I see no need to mischaracterize the other candidates. I thought that's what everyone's decrying in regards to the Hillary/Barack snip-fest.

Was the nomination supposed to be gifted to Hillary?

Sorry, but the bile did not originate from the Obama campaign. All one has to do is note when it began... after the Clintons lost in Iowa.

the clintons are not toxic

a successful man beloved around the whole world is not toxic, and it is only right and proper that such a man would support and respect his wife and want to help her also achieve success

if he did distance himself from the campaign, then the whispering would go the other way, all the crap about how she's a lesbian, they have a marriage of convenience, what's wrong, even her own husband doesn't support her, blah blah blah blooey

the clintons are not toxic and it is not their fault that the haters love nothing better than to spread lies about them

if we are going to distance ourselves from everyone who is lied about, guess what, pretty soon we will have distanced ourselves from everyone good, decent, and effective

when you listen to lies and give them power, then all you do is encourage the propaganda machine to create more lies, you need to be stronger than that

and know for a fact that they are poison. Hillary is complicit as she lets him continue.

There is support and their is gutter politics. We are being denied our democracy by this disgusting display of behavior. Its bad enough when politcal hacks who are hired to run campaigns engage in this nonsense. It is quite another when its a former president.

And GET OFF OF IT. Obama is not instituting this crap. He is protecting himself.

You people that spout this crap were probably the ones who took John Kerry to task for not fighting back against Rove. What the double standard for Obama?

Because is Bill Clinton playing dirty?

Truly depressing.

bill clinton has a red face because he has rosacea, a disease that many other DUers also have, so you may want to rethink your idea that you can judge someone by the color of their face -- his "visceral angry fac" indeed, jesus, what's wrong with people?

to me judging by one's face and color is offensive and not what any of our candidates stand for

regain power. And I don't need the media to tell me that. I use to defend Clinton. Now I can see why so many people despise the man.

Don't call what Clinton is doing just campaigning.

If this is how the Clintons politic, I can begin to see why those on the Right despise them.

... from Hillary or her campaign. He should be out there every waking minute advocating on behalf of his wife, communicating her strengths and comparing her positions with those of her opponents.

But his approach, Carville/Atwater-style mischaracterizations of Hillary's opponents, is beneath (or should be) a former President, and is a style of politics that should not be condoned within the Democratic Party. I applaud those in the Party who have communicated such to the former President.

yeah right, sure it is

Msongs

The hysteria in this diatribe is ridiculous.

You keep saying "the Clintons" so you can avoid saying that Hillary Clinton is our first and only viable woman candidate for president. Meanwhile, by saying "the Clintons" you imply that she is nothing without her husband which is an insult to every woman in the world.

So take your hysterical terror of the vagina dentata and shove it in a narrow orifice.

HILLARY'S COMING TO EAT YOU!!!!

Go sit in a corner. You've been bad.

We are being systemically robbed for the ambitions of one political dynasty.

I'm am hoping and praying that either John Edwards or Barack Obama hands the Clintons their walking papers.

You're damn right I'm angry. We are becoming what we say we hate...what we have been passionately opposing for the last eight years.

For what?

We have good candidates running. I hope we take the high road and dump the one who can singlehandedly cost us the next four years!

I would love a woman president. I was a women in the military. the only female in an all male electrical shop working as an electrician on B-52s and KC-135s in the 80s. Because I was a woman, I didn't get the respect that I deserved and had to fight. I fought with my abilities and strenghs. I didn't resort to underhanded tactics.

Frankly, before this campaign and during the 90's I had great respect for Hillary. She was doing more in the WH than just bake cookies and decorate the christmas tree.

It sickens me that she has turned out to be nothing more than a power hungry political operative who needs to resort to dirty politics to try and get elected. She is not helping our gender to achieve the goal!

The fact that she has sent out her rabid attack dog to do her dirty work diminishes her greatly!

And by the way, I'm entitled to my opinion.

chuckle. That sorta put a hole in their theory, eh?

Re: your shift in opinion for Hillary. I'm an Edwards supporter, and felt that I'd be OK w/ either Hillary or Barack if JE didn't get the nod. But it all changed after Iowa, and the Clintons ramped-up the Carville-style politics, once the inevitability was threatened.

Thanks for your thoughts.

as someone who defended both Bill and Hillary all through the nineties and way into this century.

my stomach and made me heartsick.

then you need to look inside your own soul for what is making you "heartsick"

people who judge by the color and complexion of a man or woman's face are not nice people, in my view, i wish they could for just one day know what it's like to have a skin disease that affects the face

maybe their cold cold hearts would melt

or maybe not, who knows, maybe they lack a soul

there is something small and ugly about attacking a man's face, a man who has struggled for years with a disease of the complexion, and to suddenly point out that his face is red, as if you have just discovered it, well, you need to look at yourself my friend

you are not winning any points for your candidate, but that's the point, isn't it?

it is not bill clinton who is trying to tear apart the party, nor is it hillary, nor is it obama

what is the real reason to suddenly be so "concerned" about bill's complexion?

... with a skin condition.

He is lying and misleading, and is getting angry when he is called on it. Clue in. The Clinton machine plays "rough" politics, to be kind.

I have viewed the videotapes of every controversial statement in this increasingly silly campaign, and I know for an absolute fact that neither Clinton has said or done anything untrue, unfair, unwarranted, unethical or, for that matter, unusual -- for a hardball political campaign.

It is not them comparing Obama to Lee Atwater. It is not they who are trying to gin up false charges of racism. All the Clintons are doing is playing politics to win -- fair and square. No one can point to anything they have done that is -- on its face -- clearly wrong. All they can do is point to things they don't like and spout their biased opini9on about it.

i'm really getting highly peeved by this one individual who has suddenly noticed that bill is "redfaced" and wants to hammer it home at every opportunity

i'm tempted to wish this person a few years of rosacea whilst working in the public eye

how can someone claim bill is fighting dirty for the crime of supporting his own
wife -- but THEY are not fighting dirty when they make nasty posts about his face?

i really wonder about people sometimes, if the poster wants to support obama, tearing down somebody else is not the way to go

He would have been better to play the part of Jimmy Carter.

BTW anybody say Bill can match the love in Barack's eyes when he looks at Michelle and introduces her? You can feel him glow. And then his daughters.

I'm sick of all the idiotic Obama Drama

Relax and let the party choose its representative.

It will only get worse.

But, yes, she and her husband are wrong for this country right now!

And it would be a co-presidency. That's becoming more and more obvious daily!

We are in sorry shape in our party.

of Bill?

as well as comments made by Olberman and others. Hillary's decline in the polls in south carolina are evidence as well. The polls nationally are tightening up. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid=%7B591BCACD%2D5FB6%2D4093%2DA97B%2D02F27DE34E41%7D&siteid=rss

------------------- 2007 -------------------
1/12/08 12/9 11/1 9/30 9/7 7/21 6/1 4/15 2/25
Hillary Clinton 41 52 49 53 41 45 42 41 43
Barack Obama 39 23 26 20 27 30 27 25 27
John Edwards 11 12 12 13 14 12 11 17 14
Dennis Kucinich 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 *
Other (vol.) * 0 * * 1 1 * 1 *
None (vol.) 2 2 1 4 4 2 4 3 4
Wouldn't vote (vol.) 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 1
No opinion 4 3 2 2 5 2 6 5 4
*Asked Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd 12/9 and previous, Mike Gravel 11/1 and previous, Al Gore 7/21 and previous, Wesley Clark 4/15 and previous, Tom Vilsack 2/25 and previous, John Kerry 1/19 and previous, Evan Bayh 12/11
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_011408.html
Note the trend...where there was one a wide margin for HRC, its now well within the margin of error nationally between Clinton and Obama.


FYI, however, I get more of my info from talking to people outside of DU and the media. The word on the street is that Clinton is turning out to be as slimy as other have portrayed him to be. That in general, the democrats are imploding. I even heard quite a few people in outside charitable groups that I work with say that they may just sit out the election if the gutter politics continues without abatement and hillary gets the nomination.

That did him in in NH.

And your SC data is uninformative - it's a given. You'd better pay more attention to California.

Your other pretense at data is just emotional partisanship.

Obama lost by 3% in NH. (Or won, depending on where Edward's delegates eventually go, eh?) Having come from far behind only a few weeks before. The polling showing him ahead in NH had spiked dramatically in the days before the vote, as opposed to the gradual ascent to which the previous poster referred.

... to Diebold's programmers. We can only hope.

(I figure since the Clintons are channeling Rove/Atwater politics, it's only fair to enlist another branch of Republican-style "win at any cost" politics.)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

LOL! You think U2 was singing about the DNC? LOL!

Democratic Party. I have heard so many people tell me they will NEVER vote for Clinton that I've lost count. We've got a country in desperate need and all these two shameless, self serving jerks (and their disgusting sidekicks) can do is lie to the American people at a time when Americans need to desperately believe in their government and engage in gutter politics.

If so many Americans don't believe a word they say, how in the heck is another country going to take their word for anything? People who support this garbage have no right to complain about Bush and his gang.

talking about "taking our party back" and other such.

Why do "progressives"* equate political success and effectiveness with "owning the party?"

I have heard so many people tell me they will NEVER vote for Clinton that I've lost count.

I have heard so many people tell me they will NEVER vote for a Obama/Edwards/Kucinich that I've lost count.

We've got a country in desperate need and all these two shameless, self serving jerks (and their disgusting sidekicks) can do is lie to the American people at a time when Americans need to desperately believe in their government and engage in gutter politics.

We've got a country in desperate need and all these shameless "progressive" self serving shameless assholes and their idealistic and disgusting sidekicks can do it lie and offer up pie in the sky fantasies at a time when Americans desperately need experience and not "progressive"* fairy tales.

If so many Americans don't believe a word they say, how in the heck is another country going to take their word for anything? People who support this garbage have no right to complain about Bush and his gang.

If so many people laugh at these "progressives"*, how in the heck is another country going to take them seriously on the extreme outside chance they ever get elected? People who support these "for the base, of the base, by the base" candidates have no right to complain about Bush and his gang.

I can see where you got your name.

Obama's lack of experience factors into my decision making, but the absolute lunacy of his supporters seals it.

You are wrong Windy, the party does not look immature but you and your cohorts most certainly do.

over the sting of THAT rejection! :eyes:

... on the Clintons to wishing them washed from the national stage. Their Carville-style politics is a blight on the Democratic Party, and I hope our primary voters send the message that we've had enough of this style of negative politics -- regardless of party.

Re: "You have absolutely NO CHANCE now of getting a single independent voter or repbulican cross over."

Well, if not quite "no chance"... damn slim. And I'm a bit disappointed in Keith Olbermann, in regards to his Weds. night show, in that he either failed to recognize, or chose to ignore, this basic fact as the point Obama was making when saying that he (Obama) would likely be able to pick-up Hillary's primary supporters, but Hillary may have difficulty attracting Obama's primary supporters. Obama has inspired Independents and Republicans to come into the Democratic primaries to vote for him, but only a small percentage of them might be expected to cast a GE vote for Hillary, should she be the Dem nominee.

I wasn't even having that much of a problem with Hillary as President, until the bullshit started to fly from her direction. :(