Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary finally met her match

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
gravity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:41 PM
Original message
Hillary finally met her match
The Clinton's are experts at campaigning which brought Bill the presidency in 1992 and Hillary all the up to this point. They have always persisted and overcome the constant attacks from the republicans and the media, but I don't think Hillary was prepared for Obama.

Hillary is a pro at the political game, but Obama rewrote the rules. His campaign about unity and change has made all traditional tactics backfire. Every attack plays in his favor because he calls them out on their political game.

In the past month, Hillary tried a number of tactics by first trying to copy his message of change of hope, then attacking him for being to idealistic and inexperienced. She said that she was the candidate for solutions and would be a stronger Commander in Chief which barely dented Obama's campaign. Now she is trying every possible angle to get Obama like the accusations of plagiarism but still doesn't stop his momentum. In this last debate, I sensed that she was desperately making her last stand against Obama, but he remained as poised as ever.

The force of Obama is powerful, and the republicans will have their work cut out for him in trying to bring him down. The republican party is already in bad shape as it is, and their traditional tactics won't work like they used to. Seriously, how can you attack 'change'?

I have great respect for Hillary and all that she has done for this country, but she finally met her match.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think they simply underestimated this man
they kept begging for debates. And he keeps rising to the occasion. I think they have to be shocked by his performance tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yurovsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. never underestimate charisma/likeability ...
it's human nature to support people you like. A lot of people see Obama as somebody they'd like as a friend, neighbor, coworker, or even boss.

HRC, on the other hand, not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
31. That's the Democratic Party Disease right there
We have had personality-challenged candidates for so long, many in the party have a difficult time recognizing an appealing alternative when it's placed right in front of them. Hence the focus of so many Democrats on wonkability. We've lost seven of the last ten elections often by running the "safe" establishment candidate who had all the "right" technical answers.

We're always bragging about how much smarter we are. I've watched Mondale out-debate Reagan, Dukakis out-debate Bush, Gore school Junior and Kerry absolutely destroy him as well, only to see each of them fail in the end. In Obama, we just might have the total package. He's certainly the most impressive candidate I've seen in a long time, and that includes Bill Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. No, we don't let them have personalities
John Kerry actually has a terrific personality, I hear Al Gore does too. I bet Hillary does too. The problem is these multi-million dollar consultants who want to sell a package instead of the substance that is IN the package. They think as long as the package is pretty, people will buy what's inside. That's the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #35
40. Point taken
I'd only add that each of these creatures spent a lot more time in Washington than Obama, which may explain why his personality shines through more than theirs.

I also think part of the difference is generational. Those folks have all lived through more bruising times and are more inclined to be defensive as a result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #31
37. You said it well--agree with you 100%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #31
49. It's always bothered me that too many people on the left see presidential elections as
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 12:56 AM by milkyway
simply a battle of policy positions. They compare the candidates on a dozen issues and go with the candidate who has the most positions that agree with their own. They think we're electing a representative rather than a president, a commander-in-chief and leader of the western world.

Obama is a candidate who speaks of the forest, while others speak only of the trees. And just because an Obama speech doesn't describe too many trees, it doesn't mean they don't exist. It just means he has made the strategic decision to speak of broader themes rather than the more wonkish details.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #31
59. I think you're leaving out half of it
We've lost, so many times, to charismatic, substanceless candidates that (as we all have seen) when we have a charismatic candidate we assume he's substanceless (I remember the same charges being leveled against Big Dog when he gave speeches mostly about -- wait for it -- Hope and Change).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #59
65. Great insight
Losing can make you a little stupid about a lot of things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
43. and by the way, he had a head cold today, too.
Rachael Maddow said it on her radio show tonight. He had to stop speaking today at some rally to blow his nose. If you listen carefully you can tell by his voice that he had stuffed up sinuses. And he still held his own and did brilliantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
60. dontcha mean misunderstimated?
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. As they say, he's got a storyline set up and she doesn't.
She should know better, really, considering Carville criticized Kerry's campaign for not having a narrative, and he's one of her campaign people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. Obama's campaign about "unity and change" isn't new. Some guy ran on that in 2000
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 11:45 PM by jackson_dem
He also railed against the bad ole days of peace and prosperity known as the Clinton years. He told us we needed "change" and that he would "unite" us. He didn't have any foreign policy experience but we were told "change" for change's sake trumped experience. Besides, he would have experienced advisers around him to give him great on the job training.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gravity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
25. Hell, it worked
:evilgrin: Thanks to the best crooks of the politics game

Obama's message moves beyond this game. He is tapping in people's feelings for the renewal of the American dream, which is more powerful than some focused group political commercial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevietheman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
26. So? Maybe then Obama will veer to the left as Shrub did to the right...
and reverse all the mess Shrub has created.

Look, you have to "unify" and preach "change" to win an election. After the election, the President has near-carte-blanche.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
42. but with Obama, there is a "there" there.
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 12:36 AM by ginnyinWI
The similarity to * is only that they both campaign on ideas and vision, on emotions and feelings. In the chimp's case, that's all he has. He has no f'ing idea how to make his dreams happen! But he was always good for convincing people he had something.

In Obama's case, he does know. He's a progressive who thinks beyond the normal constraints of party or politics. He's an intellectual with imagination--he's simply brilliant. He deliberately does not try to impress crowds with all of his knowledge at once; he knows that will put people off. He said as much in the bio they ran on tv the other night. He delivers a message that people can absorb and respond to.

Whenever I think--hey wait a minute, maybe what some say is true: that he's too far right, too corporatist, too naive, too inexperienced--that maybe he's not as much as we think--I think of all the more senior Democrats in Congress and other offices who know him and have worked with him and have have enthusiastically endorsed him, and then I feel confident again. Endorsements coming from people I trust help me transfer trust onto the new guy.

The chimp has not written two books. The chimp didn't come to office with a proven legislative record. The chimp didn't bring himself up from the lower middle class to Harvard and beyond. He had everything handed to him. He's the proverbial empty suit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. Her Match, Overall, Was The Media And Caucuses. n/t
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 11:45 PM by OPERATIONMINDCRIME
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. The caucuses did not beat Hillary. Caucuses do not have an agenda. It was
the candidate. Both of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent-Voter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
66. HRC - Always the Victim (needs a tradmark sign)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. See: Deval Patrick
Same "movement." It's all been done. This isn't snippy -- just a fact.

Sorry, but you've been Obama - shammed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. And much of it originates straight from Rove
It was Rove who ran on "unity and change" and derided the Clinton-Gore team as polarizing and promised to work together with both parties to bring "change" in Washington. He didn't use the word "hope" but that is the biggest BS slogan word ever anyway. Of course people vote for candidates because of hope. Few vote for a candidate based on dread. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
61. So what? If it works, what's the problem?
Maybe Obama's campaign is based on a "unity and change" message stolen from Bush/Rove. But if he wins the election and works to implement the policies he says he will, then I'm fine with it. I don't see what the issue is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Knowing this, I would not be sorry to see.
Patrick lose re-election in 2010.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GarbagemanLB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #10
24. He'll just get a job with the Obama administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think you're right on target ...
... when you ask "how can the Republicans attack "change". It's obvious that the vast majority of the country wants change, especially a change from the last seven-plus years.

Maybe they can reiterate how well things are going now - sinking economy, home foreclosures, uninsured Americans, debacle in Iraq, broken military - and convince the voters that no one in their right mind would want to "change" any of that ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. To me, she is caught up and ensnarled with the past
and has to use that to say that she is the future.

That is a paradigm that she doesn't see, but many people do these days



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. change. . . .
Kind of makes me wish your candidate offered some solutions, other that sitting down at the table with and being accomodative to Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. If you don't hear solutions ...
... maybe you're just not listening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. Obama'a Cuban answer won
she was playing the whole power trip game again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voice for Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. "I believe in coercive diplomacy." direct quote from her
This statement says a whole lot to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #28
33. It's late and I'm very sleepy ...
... but I'm not understanding your replies to me - they seem to be non-sequitars. What am I missing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #21
30. solutions
She's offered immediate troop withdrawals and mandated, universal healthcare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. And he's different in what way, please?
We all have our preferences of one candidate over the other - but let's stop pretending that their positions are miles apart, because they're not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. differences
He's said that ending the war in Iraq is not the most important thing, but rather it's the need to create an environment where such hostilities do not begin in the first place. While there is truth to this statement, it enables him to be more vague about truth withdrawal. I believe that Hill is in favor of immediate troop withdrawal. Obama is in favor of non-mandated universal health care, which is an oxymoron. Hill is in favor of multiple-payer, mandated universal health care, which has worked well in France.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. I don't think he's been vague about ending the war at all ..
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 12:32 AM by NanceGreggs
... but I think you know that.

However, let's at least enjoy a laugh together: Your statement, "it enables him to be more vague about truth withdrawal."

Nothing like a primary season to bring out the Freudian slips in all of us!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #38
51. Hillary will likely not implement immediate troop withdrawal
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 12:58 AM by Emit
I have no idea where you got that impression




Hillary Advocates 'Third Way' on Iraq Troop Withdrawal


~snip~

The former first lady said an immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a "big mistake."

"It will matter to us if Iraq totally collapses into civil war, if it becomes a failed state the way Afghanistan was, where terrorists are free to basically set up camp and launch attacks against us," she said.

She suggested, however, that Iraq may not be stabilized until the United States signals its intention to leave.

~snip~

Clinton's efforts to fashion a "third way" on Iraq were reminiscent of the political approach her husband made famous when he announced his presidential campaign in 1991. "The change we must make isn't liberal or conservative," Bill Clinton said then. "It's both, and it's different."

"My approach is different," the former first lady and current senator said Monday. "My approach is we tell them we expect you to meet these certain benchmarks and that means getting troops and police officers trained, equipped and ready to defend their people."

"I don't think realistically we know how prepared they are until we get a government on Dec. 15," she added.

After meeting with anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan in September, Clinton held firm to her support for the Iraq war, telling The Village Voice, "My bottom line is that I don't want their sons to die in vain."

At the time, Clinton demurred when asked about withdrawing troops. "I don't believe it's smart to set a date for withdrawal. I don't think you should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await you."


Clinton continues to oppose setting a specific target date for withdrawal -- a point of contention with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., a potential rival for the 2008 nomination, who has called for a flexible "target date" of Dec. 31, 2006, for withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq. ~snip~
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/IraqCoverage/story?id=1338211

And more recently:

~snip~

QUESTION: Excuse me. The estimates I've seen of those missions, even those limited missions, you're still talking about anywhere from 40,000 to 75,000 troops for many years.

CLINTON: Well, I don't think that's accurate. I'm not going to be speculating about troop strength. I've said that the day I'm elected president, I will be asking my secretary of defense, my national security advisors, the joint chiefs to brief me about what actually the state of planning is, because we're having some difficulties really understanding what they're doing over in the Pentagon, under the White House's direction.

And then we will begin to withdraw our troops, but it has to be done, as I said, in a responsible, careful manner. We don't know what we're going to inherit. None of us do. We don't know what's going to be done in the last 15 months of the Bush-Cheney administration.

Obviously, as president, I will have to take all of that into account and try to make the very best decisions I have. But there is no doubt, in my mind, we're going to be withdrawing from Iraq, because the Iraqi government has not fulfilled its part of the bargain, which was to make the tough political decisions.

And, frankly, the Bush administration hasn't fulfilled its diplomatic responsibilities either. So all of this has to be pulled together. I hope it happens in the next 15 months, but if it doesn't, it will happen immediately upon my becoming president.

QUESTION: Can you pledge that all U.S. troops will be home over the course of your first term as president?

CLINTON: You know, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges, because I don't know what I'm going to inherit, George.

I don't know and neither do any of us know what will be the situation in the region. How much more aggressive will Iran have become? What will be happening in the Middle East? How much more of an influence will the chaos in Iraq have in terms of what's going on in the greater region? Will we have pushed Al Qaida in Iraq out of their stronghold with our new partnership with some of the tribal sheikhs or will they have regrouped and retrenched?

I don't know and I think it's not appropriate to be speculating. I can tell you my general principals and my goal. I want to end the war in Iraq. I want to do so carefully, responsibly, with the withdrawal of our troops, also, with the withdrawal of a lot of our civilian employees, the contractors who are there, and the Iraqis who have sided with us.

~snip~
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/09/sweet_blog_special_clintons_su.html

Of course, I am not convinced either one of them will implement an immediate troop withdrawal, because I'm cynical as all get out about all presidential candidates these days when it comes to Iraq/ME/War on Terror, but, that's just me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. ok
Sounds like she's saying she'll get them out as soon as she can. What has Obama said, or did the press think it too pushy to ask him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. As Nance says so eloquently
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 01:39 AM by Emit
Pretty much the same:


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c2coff=1&safe=off&q=Obama+immediate+troop+withdrawal&btnG=Search

But somewhat sooner:

Barack Obama's Plan
Judgment You Can Trust
As a candidate for the United States Senate in 2002, Obama put his political career on the line to oppose going to war in Iraq, and warned of “an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.” Obama has been a consistent, principled and vocal opponent of the war in Iraq.

In 2003 and 2004, he spoke out against the war on the campaign trail;
In 2005, he called for a phased withdrawal of our troops;
In 2006, he called for a timetable to remove our troops, a political solution within Iraq, and aggressive diplomacy with all of Iraq’s neighbors;
In January 2007, he introduced legislation in the Senate to remove all of our combat troops from Iraq by March 2008.
In September 2007, he laid out a detailed plan for how he will end the war as president.
Bringing Our Troops Home
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

(AP) Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is calling for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. combat brigades from Iraq, with the pullout being completed by the end of next year.

"Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was," Obama said in excerpts of the speech provided to The Associated Press.

~snip~

He introduced legislation last January calling for withdrawal to start on May 1 and for all combat brigades to be pulled out by March 31, 2008. Anti-war Democrats and some Republicans want to bring all combat troops home in a matter of months.

Obama's push for withdrawal drew a sharp rebuke from Republican rival Mitt Romney.

~snip~

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/12/politics/main3253449.shtml



... He called for withdrawing U.S. troops from the Iraq war, and said that if elected his first course of business will be to call for a meeting of the joint chiefs of staff to order them to remove Americans from the Middle East ...


http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/99983

edit to add link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #30
53. Bush is also withdrawing troops. And her plan is Mandatory Purchase of Healthcare Insurance.
She could never get enough red state or swing state congressional dems to go along with her plan. Once she actually makes clear how she'll enforce it, her plan would sink, especially in the mountain and plains states. There are regions of the country that are very resistant to the government forcing people to do something for their own good, especially if it costs hundreds of dollars a month.

She compared it to Social Security tonight, but what she didn't make clear is that young, low-risk people will basically be forced to subsidize high-risk people. That might make the plan more financially practical, but it will make it a much tougher sell, and much easier for the repugs to demonize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. So don't talk to our enemies kinda thing?
Boy, that has worked internationally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. Nail.On.Head.
K&R!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keep_it_real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. Well said; I agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. Correction: Hillary met Sexism at the highest office of the land.
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 11:51 PM by AGirl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #12
27. Yes she did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beausoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #27
36. Yep.
She is clearly the most prepared. She is clearly the most experienced. She is clearly the best candidate for the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #36
55. She clearly has been an incompetent executive of her campaign. There will be history
books written about the historic mismanagement of her campaign. If she can't run a campaign, how could she run the country? Surrounding herself with a bunch of Bill's over-the-hill hacks hasn't worked out too well for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent-Voter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #12
68. anther "-ism" victim. No surprises here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BenDavid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. Seriously, how can you attack 'change'? Very damn easy if
you understand how the bush people work. It will be easy to have some type of terror alert coming down about september and october.....or maybe another osama video and the media will be on this 24/7 and the one which will benefit is McCain not obama....HRC would be able to stand there with McCain and not lose ground on a situation as this.

The one thing you obama folks fail to see it republicans do not like to be without power. They stand no chance of winning congress back and the only thing they will have to hold on too is the presidency and they will come after obama with everything.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. they'll have to...
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 11:53 PM by BringBigDogBack
because they're starting in quite the hole.

They just won't have the last 16 years of Clinton news to use, and drag us all down. Shucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gravity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #13
29. They will need more than that
The average American is tired of all that crap after seven years. Incompetency of the republican regime is showing through

"Are you tired of the poltics of fear..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
39. I've heard this argument a brazillion times ...
... and sorry, not buying - because it makes no sense.

Bin Laden Productions have had several flops in a row now - no one is paying attention to them anymore - even the MSM gives them short shrift.

Another 'terror alert'? Yawn. Again, no one pays attention to this crapola these days. The GOP played that hand too many times - boy who cried wolf and all that.

The GOP will "come after Obama with everything" - you betcha. And they won't come after Hillary with everything if she's the nominee? Guess again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #13
48. do you really think people will turn away from Obama so easily?
He just keeps getting stronger as time goes on. By fall his identity will be a hundred times more established than it is now. And the people are onto this "crying wolf" bit. They've seen it over and over.

And one thing Obama does very well is he can expose political tactics in a way that people can understand. He pokes fun at the opposition: "They're giving you the Okie-Doke!" It de-fangs the enemy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #13
56. You really think a terror alert or another bin Laden video will win McCain the election? Most
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 01:21 AM by milkyway
people would laugh at it. Those tricks have been played a few too many times to do much good anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
15. Indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
17. "Hope and Change" is nothing new
watch any Clinton campaign speech from 1992 and count how many times he uses those words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Limpballs used to attack Big Dog for all his "hope" and "change" messages
There was something very early in his Presidency; I don't exactly remember. A bunch of people ringing bells everywhere for hope and talking about how Bill was restoring hope to the country and Rush went absolutely ballistic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny__Motown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
44. There is still the Ohio debate, this was not the last one, but good post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
45. Obama is pono.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElkHunter Donating Member (300 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. I don't always agree with Hillary Clinton...
...but she showed more class in the debate tonight than George Bush has in nearly eight years in office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #46
63. That's not hard.
My stool shows more class than Dubya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #45
47. That is a powerful word in Hawaiian
I remember living there in Hana, and not once I was called a "Howlee"

which really means, not a white person
but one who lacks of breath of soul.

I was proud of that fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 04:26 AM
Response to Reply #47
64. Re: haole
My expierence has been that it has two uses here. As generic for white people, and as an insult. It's really contextual, and I say that as a haole. I'm a haole, and I think a lot of white people here are fuckin' haoles. ;)

Basically, you're a decent person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haole
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #45
50.  Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ;aina i ka Pono
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 12:56 AM by Ichingcarpenter
The word pono in the Hawaiian language is referred to most popularly as 'righteousness'. As is stated in the Hawaii state motto: Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ʻĀina i ka Pono (translated directly as: the life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness). <1>

However, the word is often used to mean correct, honorable, or good.

There are strong cultural and spiritual connotations to the word. A loose definition could be a state of harmony or balance, in which every thing is as it should be for that moment. It is often used as affirmation in prayers, especially within Kanaka Maoli healing arts and the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyskye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #45
58. How do you pronounce that...
...in Hawaiian? The same as in Latin?

I think he's pono too. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #58
62. Prounced like it sounds.
Po-no. But quicker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
57. While Hillary's campaign was planning for a coronation, Obama was quietly laying tripwires
all around the country. She never saw it coming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
workinclasszero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-22-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
67. I can't wait for the Obama era to start!
With the congress loaded with dems and the rethug party powerless, toothless and unable to stop him from repairing the massive damage done to this country starting with Reagan.

Think about it. If Obama wins in a massive landslide with huge coattails down ticket it will for real be a new day in America!!:party:

I am soo excited!:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC