Well - if Obama does pull it out - which I doubt -he isnt a very good debater so that may not be a good thing to rely on. But he does have the ability to drone on a long time so maybe McCain will fall asleep in between one of Obama's 12 minute monologues and get caught with that startled deer in headlights look so beloved by the photo opp people. He could use that for his 3am commercial that he rips off from Clinton - Hey - he could get lucky!
Posted by Judith at March 22, 2008 10:43 AMSendng General McPeak out to call Bill Clinton a Joseph McCarthy clone is going to lose Obama a lot of votes. Bill Clinton was and is extremely well liked. Calling him a commie hunter is not the best way to endear those Clinton voters Obama thinks will vote for him no matter what because of party loyalty. I won't. No matter what and it is not Hillary's fault. Obama is a hateful jerk who has again and again demonstrated just who it is who will say or do anything to get elected. It is not Hillary spreading the hate.
Obama has played this race card into the ground. I am sick of him calling everyone who might disagree with him a bigot. Some of us just do not like him because he has no substance and depends solely on his race to win, all the while decrying anyone who points it out. Unless it is one of his own supporters like Kerry.
Posted by apishapa at March 22, 2008 11:01 AMWith all due respect you guys are dreaming. The nomination is effectively over. Obama took a direct hit on Rev Wright to be sure, but his inspiring and honest speech on race along with Bill Richardson's endorsement and no revote in Michigan or Florida signals a major turning point. Hillary may hang on until June, but make no mistake. This thing is over.
Obama showed he can withstand an all out 24/7 feeding frenzy and rise above it. He has a long way to go in the general election, but what happened this week will bode well for his campaign in the coming weeks and months.
If you do not want 4 more years of Republican rule with a Bush-lite McCain presidency, then the time has now come to rally around our nominee and prepare for a long general election campaign. Now is the time for unity and to put aside our differences.
Posted by David "Hussein" Goldman at March 22, 2008 11:09 AMEriposte, I have an OT question I think might be up your alley.
I was just reading that in the month before the FL primary, the airwaves were SATURATED with Obama ads.
Yes, I know these were national ad buys, therefore "legit" according to Obama supporters.
Personally, I find that to be thin gruel.
Here's my question: did Obama make any other national ad buys since then? Did he buy ads in several states solely so that he could justify running ads in Fl?
what happened this week bodes well for the GOP.
More garbage dumped by Obama on Democrats.
Gosh, cant wait for next week!
great - rip up Bill Clinton. These morons think republicans will vote for Obama in the GE if they shit all over the Clinton years. What they seem to forget is that the Typical White Person GOP hates being named called and stereotyped more than they hate the Clintons. These two attackes will meet in the middle and cancel themselves out.
Posted by judith at March 22, 2008 11:36 AMQuestion for all the Obamacans here: if Obama is trailing McCain 15 pts in national and head to head polls in one month, do you really think the nomination will be his?
He's tanking---check out OH. The SD's will not vote for a loser, no matter how many delegates he has already.
Hillary, Will Not Win The GE. She will bring out all the republicans that would normally sit home and not Vote for McCain. They will come out to vote against her. I will vote for Clinton or Obama in the GE, but If Hillary is our candidate in the GE we loose.
Posted by goose1 at March 22, 2008 11:50 AMI think the comparison between Obama/Wright and Kerry/Swiftboaters is not quite correct. Indeed, the Swift Boat attack did fester for months but the big mistake there was Kerry allowing it to go completely unanswered, assuming that the media wouldn't play it ad naseum and that his own record would speak for itself. Thus far, Obama has responded quickly, forcefully and has managed to elevate the discussion to another level altogether. I don't think it's going to blow up again on him later in the race.
And at this point, I'm not concerned about any candidate's numbers versus McCain's. Of course McCain is sitting pretty right now---no one's really going after him because Dems are too busy going after each other. When the focus turns to McCain and the obvious third Bush term that he's running for, I expect to see his support drop substantially.
Posted by Bailey at March 22, 2008 12:06 PMAt this point, after Wright, and after everything we've seen the Republicans throw at Democratic presidential contenders over the last 30 years, I think anyone that believes Barack Obama will be the next president of the United States is delusional.
Posted by hal b. at March 22, 2008 12:19 PMMight want to read what McPeak said before jumping on it.
In addition - I have not seen where Obama "sent him out" to say it. Anyone got a link to that?
Posted by Anjha at March 22, 2008 12:23 PMGoose - I will take 10 year old crap over the recent Obama crap anytime. Tthe GOp got inot the WH in 2000 on their anti-Clinton bs and look where it got us all?
Obama's stupidity is now he is washing away the good stuff the Democrats did and hoping to shave off the Regan Democrats at the same time. Aint gonna happen. Game over.
Posted by judith at March 22, 2008 12:25 PMDodd, Kennedy, Richardson...all deluded. Millions of voters and contributors, all deluded. Eriposte, it is you who is deluded. Stick with your "experienced" candidate and call any and all who prefer another candidate fools and idiots if you will. You are the smart one...capable of writing on and on and on to illustrate how stupid the rest of us are. I liked you a lot better when your talent was focused on Bush, not other Democrats.
Posted by T2 at March 22, 2008 12:36 PMi have had quite enough of barack obama..his tactics..and using the race card to the hilt...i will not vote for him..i will continue to support hillary in the hope that they will count the votes..if she doesn't make it..the democratic party will get what it deserves..if not this time..she will get it next..beause if she is not the nominee...she will be running against an emcumbant john Mccain...and mr. barack obama ..will be in the history books along with mcgovern, dukakis...his presidential hopes..gone..they have run a campaign suitable for things that slither..and he does not have a magnamamus bone in his body..this typical white person..will not be voting for him
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 12:48 PMi flat out don't like him
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 12:50 PMI was thinking a along those lines - Clinton could come back 2012 - she would still be way younger than McCain. And Obama's wife will force him to not run again as she has sworn we all get one chance to make her First Lady and one chance only. Well, darn!
But heaven help us,those would be 4 more ugly years we do not need - unless a Democratic congress can force change on a GOP president like they are doing now. Not.
Posted by judith at March 22, 2008 01:08 PMEriPostal:
I repeat this from the previous post to specifically address your credibility.
Identify the Biased and Intemperate Blogger
by tfitznc (in the manner of eripostal)
Let's see if you can complete a (not so fun) exercise today. Identify which of the following individuals is a biased and, at times, irrational blogger; who is wasting his or her obvious talents by focusing on petty advocacies and ad hominem attacks, instead of:
(a) calmly discussing the important issues of the day and how Senators Clinton and Obama might differ with respect to their policy proposals to effect change; or
(b) advancing the sociopolitical awareness of the readership; or
(c) explicating the profound differences between the eventual Democratic nominee (whomever) and McCain (e.g. Irag, economic policy, global warming and pollution, relations with other countries and peoples, health care, the impact of intolerance and prejudice, social justice, educational reform, Social Security, etc. etc. etc. ).
Person A:
“… I don't have a candidate … and your anger should be directed at your candidate's campaign team for behaving like idiots”.
Person B:
“… Your Dear Leader Saint Obama and his blogger supporters who cite Bob Novak and Matt Drudge and other miscellaneous frauds on the right to smear Clinton using false stories”.
Person C:
“…dimwitted Obama supporters … more
dimwitted Obama supporters… dimwitted Obama supporters”.
I am not good with hyperlinkages [the answers are:
Turkana, erispostal, and Turkana, respectively]
Bill Clinton is "Joe McCarthy", Hillary Clinton is a "monster", BO's white grandmother is a racist loser, while his black pastor is a racist winner. Universal health care means "mandates" which are baaad. Ronny Reagan had good ideas. Trust me. Hope hope new change shiny new hope hope new hope.
Barry is Not Ready for Prime Time.
Posted by No Blood for Hubris at March 22, 2008 01:34 PMOh. I forgot about Rezko. Rezko helps Barry afford big fancy house. Wish I had important friends like that.
Posted by No Blood for Hubris at March 22, 2008 01:36 PMNice article in the Financial Times today .Doubts emerge over Obama's race speech:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/862d01b8-f7b2-11dc-ac40-000077b07658.html
Apparently white folks are recognizing him as the black candidate now and fleeing. So he probably blew with the voters.
"...Sen. Obama and his dumb advisors have now made his association with Wright completely fair game."
As I have posted before, Hillary will be the Democrtic Party nominee.
Start practising saying President McCain.
It is fun, however, watching identity politics tear apart the Democratic Party. LOL!
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 01:52 PMT2!!!!!
Posted by tfitznc at March 22, 2008 01:52 PMTalk about delusions. When was the last time a Democratic candidate from the northeast won the presidency? Add to that Hillary's negatives have straddled 50% and above for years.
She can't win the GE, but if by some miracle she did I have another sobering thought. The last time we had a Clinton as president the Democrats lost both the Senate and the House. Hillary Clinton is someone I can do without.
Posted by Upton at March 22, 2008 02:00 PMbaggy..
hillary runs..she eats john mccain for lunch..there is no doubt in my mind...because if and when she gets the nomination..it's the economy stupid...and he can't attack her on iraq..believe me she'll kick his ass..and he won't know what hit em
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:05 PMdennis,
Hillary ran a very succesful "red telephone" teevee commercial: will she run that same commercial in the general election?
Yeah, right, "...it's the economy stupid..." You might want to re-think that position.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 02:08 PMUpton:
Apparently it is you who is delusional. Your boy Obama's negatives are just as high, if not higher, as Hillary's now. At least she doesn't go to church every Sunday to applaud racist swill.
That fraud Oblahma is someone lots of us could do without.
Posted by at March 22, 2008 02:12 PMshe runs..she kills him on the economy..he would be toast...because as bad as it is now..it's gonna get worse...her position on iraq is sound..his....100 years we'll be there..that was a real touch of genius that was..
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:15 PMObama is not perfect; but I believe he is the most talented, potentially unifying candidate, the democrats have had since Franklin Roosevelt. The spleen of some Clinton supporters is clearly not enough to stop him. The persistent name-calling, innuendo and smear will not be enough. Guilt by association in the Wright flap will not be enough. Fear-mongering and condescension in the 3:00 AM ad will not be enough. Hillary touting McCain as being better presidential material than Obama falls considerably short of the mark.
The republicans are scared of having Obama run against McCain. And I think there would be no surer way of losing the election, or at least risking the outcome, than to nominate Clinton.
High negatives for her among people of widely differing political persuasions means that her candidacy is just not the way to bet.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 02:15 PMTfitzinc,
Very cute but I wrote what I did in the comment thread as a direct response to your assertion that Turkana and I are "Repub trolls". That's not to say you should stop with your great polls and Pearls of Wisdom for the TLC reader base.
Posted by eriposte at March 22, 2008 02:21 PMguilt by association!!!is that what that fucking is..really..is that what you call that....i am so sick of the specious bullshit from obama and his neophyte supporters who think this is cute stuff..the man is not qualified...his judgement is extremely suspect..and his numbers are going down..the super delagates..have to be thinking..can this guy really win...and you know what..he can't..
Posted by at March 22, 2008 02:24 PM"...she kills him on the economy..."
So you concede the national security issue.
Ok, I'll bite: what is Hillary's experience on the economy? Having once been First Lady, or her promises that everyone gets free money and a pony?
P.S. What was the dollar value of her earmarks in the last budget? At least the funding she requested for the Woodstock Museum was killed.
Say it again: the Woodstock Museum.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 02:29 PMabove was me
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:30 PMT2,
You said:
Dodd, Kennedy, Richardson...all deluded. Millions of voters and contributors, all deluded. Eriposte, it is you who is deluded. Stick with your "experienced" candidate and call any and all who prefer another candidate fools and idiots if you will. You are the smart one...capable of writing on and on and on to illustrate how stupid the rest of us are. I liked you a lot better when your talent was focused on Bush, not other DemocratsDo you see anything in my post suggesting that Kennedy, Kerry, Richardson and millions of supporters are delusional because they support Obama? Did I say I'm the "smart one". Nope. The point I'm making is that Obama is not going to win on his "debate" performance or "speeches" or on the "issues". He's going to win if the media turns on McCain. You can disagree with that but I have history on my side. If you want to bet against history be my guest but please don't make this difficult primary even more difficult by ascribing views to me that I don't have.
I don't have any problem with you or anyone else believing that Obama will win the GE or that he will more easily beat McCain than Clinton. You are perfectly entitled to that view just as I am perfectly entitled to my view based on my reading of modern U.S. political history.
Posted by eriposte at March 22, 2008 02:30 PMTotally Dennis - totally. Clinton kicks McCains ass. And the GOP knows it. Can you see a debate? hey John - tell me diff between sunni and shia - BUZZER. John, explain the diff between a recession and a slow down? BUZZER (trick question - only Bushie knows the answer to that)
and McCain vs Obama - McCain brings out his 90 year old mother while running a clip of what Obama said about his granny. And the whole country hits the BUZZER.
Posted by judith at March 22, 2008 02:31 PMThe hippies are inside your mind, Bagley.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 02:33 PMlets not waste time talking about earmarks..that's all bullshit..on the economy..she's married to bill..and i'm not conceding anything on national security..what i said was he can't attack her on iraq...her position is sound..and she voted for the war resolution...barack is the one that has a problem on national security...you know that speech he gave when he was a nobody..
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:37 PMHello Copeland,
"The hippies are inside your mind, Bagley."
Ummmm, sorry I don't quite understand this sentence: is it in response to one of my previous posts or is it just (the usual) incoherent rambling.
P.S. If you are nice to me I will visit your website and you can record a hit this week. Whooo-wooo for you!
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 02:39 PMjudith..i know they know it..and so does the msm
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:41 PMDennis,
If Judith agrees with you...well, Judith is as dumb as a bag of hammers...
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 02:48 PMYou know which post, Bagley. You're just playing dumb for effect. The Woodstock Museum got your blood up.
Tilt at the Summer of Love one more time, man. It's funny.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 02:51 PMbaggy...i respect judith's opinion a lot more then i do yours....the only way john mccain gets to the whit house is if the democrats nominate barack obama...if it's hillary..mccain goes to the old folks home..where he belongs..
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 02:53 PMOK...all...If Obama is the Democratic nominee...how many down ticket races does he help us lose? The GOP will use Obama to smear every Democrat who doesn't denounce him for his 20 years of close association with his racist, vile, white hating pastor. It is hypocritical at a minimum to suggest Dom Imus should be vilified and fired and Rev. Wright should get a pass. It is a measure of how bad the Democratic nominee needs to be to lose to McCain. Obama is that bad. He creates bad feelings not good feelings and he reaffirms every negative stereotype of elite liberals.
So I ask again...Is anyone in the Democratic party anticipating the fury from an Obama nomination? Especially after the Democratic Party endorses the idea of not counting the votes of Florida and Michigan? Are there party elites who really think the nomination can be fixed in Obama's favor by not having do over primaries...with no consequences? If these party elites are really this out of touch with the electorate...the backlash will be enormous. I foresee a wipeout of epic proportions...Because as Eriposte mentioned...this is just the beginning...only the beginning...and that video posted online is actually reasonable. I think Clinton should run it.
Posted by lily15 at March 22, 2008 02:56 PMCopeland,
"You know which post, Bagley." Sorry. I am not able to match your rambling with a single post of mine.
"Tilt at the Summer of Love one more time, man."
Man. Summer of Love. Totally dude. Totally....peace out...
Denis,
And the specific qualifications that belong to Hillary such that she would totally overwhelm Senator mcCain candidacy are exactly what....
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 02:58 PMAny democratic candidate beats McCain. But the contest if Clinton is the candidate will be closer, and fall beneath the shadow of republican shenanigins.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 02:59 PMAh, sweet, demented Bagley, your post of 2:29 PM. Don't play the coquette with me. Anyone can scroll to the citation. I'm surprised at you.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 03:05 PMcopeland..you don't have even the slightest clue as to what you're talking about..you guys are so aggravating...you really are..what planet did you folks come from?..obama doesn't beat beat mccain..what don't you guys get...the last two weeks..has it said anything to you at all?...have you questioned his judgement?..do you have any idea what republicans will do to him?
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 03:08 PMIn fact...I just remember...Howard Dean is in charge...and he certainly knows about epic wipeouts. Clearly he hasn't learned much from his own epic wipeout and is now bringing he know how about wiping out to the entire Democratic Party...along with other losers like Donna Brazile...Bob Schrum..Bill Bradley, Tom Daschle, John Kerry...Isn't this the losers parade? Aren't these people the Democrats who who grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory? Do they like to stick with their own type...losers? Because the Clintons have been the only consistent winners in the Democratic Party..and for some reason...are resented by other Democratic elites for winning...Is that upside down, or what? And now progressives have been won over to the loser side.
What is actually wrong with these people? It appears to me that they are the ones who have in fact swallowed whole the GOP narrative about the Clintons. They are the ones most easily brainwashed...while the common folk, the white, Democratic blue collar workers (not excluding of course the other groups supporting Hillary) ...are the ones with common sense. The elites have no common sense. How strange. And all the common sensical Democratic elites are supporting Hillary...but they are a minority in the party. Actually they are not a minority...Democrats support Hillary but Obama has gamed the system with the help of the party elites. This is so bizarre. I want a psychologist or psychiatrist to expound on this phenomena.
Copeland,
Has does my post of 2:29
Lead to "hippies in my mind"
Smokin a little dope, right?
"obama doesn't beat beat mccain"
And neither does Hillary.
But, Dennis, as I asked before, and only in your mind: the specific qualifications that belong to Hillary such that she would totally overwhelm Senator mcCain candidacy are exactly what....
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 03:13 PMObama is going to win the nomination. Will the Wright thing hurt him? It already has. The longer the Clinton supporters keep raising it as an issue the more it will hurt the Democrats in the fall.
Wright was a well-known and respected black minister for a long time before last week. That's exactly why Bill Clinton invited him to the White House in 1998, to get some "forgiveness publicity" at a time when the Republicans were trying to sink him for the Lewinsky thing. Wright didn't just wander into the White House, he was invited. So if Bill Clinton used him for political advantage, that's okay? Or it isn't okay?
Clinton's association with "The Family" (Dean Coe's, not Manson's) is a lot more sinister than sitting in a pew at Reverend Wright's church. It points to Clinton's truly conservative world view, belonging to a group that covets the powerful, a kind of reverse Christianity, if you will. That she spent eight years in a sex-segregated prayer circle with the wives of people no one here would vote for says a lot about how she sees her relationship to God. And her co-sponsorship of the Religious Workplace Freedom law should be a tipoff to feminists about what they think they bought into may not be what they're getting.
There was a post here at The Left Coaster on 9/2/07, by Steve Soto, about this. I guess at that point the true believers hadn't arrived en masse. Folks should go back and read it.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at March 22, 2008 03:13 PMbagley.
.i told you..she's married to bill..twenty million jobs created..huge surplus..squandered..you remenber all that don't ya...
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 03:19 PMOK...all...If Obama is the Democratic nominee...how many down ticket races does he help us lose?
So far he's already helped gain a downticket seat. I expect to see much more of that in the future.
The GOP will use Obama to smear every Democrat who doesn't denounce him for his 20 years of close association with his racist, vile, white hating pastor.
And yet polls show that the vast majority of people don't think that Obama's former pastor speaks for Obama. The GOP will smear, regardless of who the candidate is. If all they have are the same spin of clips, I think we're in good shape.
It is hypocritical at a minimum to suggest Dom Imus should be vilified and fired and Rev. Wright should get a pass.
Rev. Wright is getting a pass? He is retired. His career is effectively over. What is the next step? Put him on the rack? Unlike Imus, Rev. Wright's sermons are not contingent upon advertising dollars and ratings.
Obama is that bad. He creates bad feelings not good feelings and he reaffirms every negative stereotype of elite liberals.
Is this why he's cleaning up in the elite enclaves of Wyoming, Idaho, South Carolina, Kansas, Nebraska, etc?
So I ask again...Is anyone in the Democratic party anticipating the fury from an Obama nomination?
No.
Especially after the Democratic Party endorses the idea of not counting the votes of Florida and Michigan? Are there party elites who really think the nomination can be fixed in Obama's favor by not having do over primaries...with no consequences?
These "party elites" all seem to be at the local legislative level who can neither organize themselves to pull off such an event on time, nor change existing laws, nor find the funding to pay for a collossal error which was wholly theirs to begin with.
I foresee a wipeout of epic proportions...Because as Eriposte mentioned...this is just the beginning...only the beginning...and that video posted online is actually reasonable. I think Clinton should run it.
The DVDs have been on sale to the public for quite some time. If there was truly 20 years worth of vile hate speech, we'd be seeing something beyond the same damn clip over and over again. This issue is going away and soon.
Sometimes I think I must be watching just a different race altogether.
Posted by Bailey at March 22, 2008 03:22 PM
Face it, Bagley, your world of bile and falsification is coming to and end. Your life as a troll is not very fascinating. Like everyone living inside your republican, propaganda engine, you are a mass of pointless, cultural cliches. You are offended by an earmark for a Woodstock Museum, but not the outlay of billions for war, or the result of a 500 pound bomb the US Air Force uses on an Iraqi neighborhood. Your cheap tricks are ineffective.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 03:24 PMwright was a well respected minister in the black community..got that part bob????????...obama is black...got that bob????..90% of the country is white...got that bob???????..yeah it hurt ..more that you are willing to admit..got that bob???...and acting as though your candiadte has a little problem ..isn't going to make it go away...got that bob????...he can't win...got that bob????
Posted by at March 22, 2008 03:24 PMwright was a well respected minister in the black community..got that part bob????????...obama is black...got that bob????..90% of the country is white...got that bob???????..yeah it hurt ..more that you are willing to admit..got that bob???...and acting as though your candiadte has a little problem ..isn't going to make it go away...got that bob????...he can't win...got that bob????
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 03:25 PMHow often do the common sense Democrats need to remind the hypnotized Democrats of their history of losing? Are those supposed progressives really that ignorant of history? And what is the explanation of those same progressives supporting Bill Bradley over Al Gore? Bill Bradley was a big liar in the primary battle with Gore. He hurt Gore. In fact, it was progressives who bought the line that there wasn't much difference between Gore and Bush. And of course, the liberal elite pundits, pushed that narrative. Same story here...except the subversives within the Democratic party learned something...if they could add African Americans to the Bradley crowd, they could game the nomination system in their favor. But they still would lose unless they brought Reagan Democrats and independents aboard.
But you must admit...this is a fine Trojan Horse strategy. It is too perfect..yet the logic eludes the mass hysteria that defines most Obama supporters. Critical thinking skills are not abundant here. The question is why?
Dennis,
"...she's married to bill..."
Interesting. Being married to a unfaithful husband who humiliated her on the international stage translates into being an economic wizard. Ok. You go ahead and run with that one. (I guess that you and Judith went to the same schools.)
Bailey,
If you use all caps with the bold typeface, people will pay attention to your post with even more interest.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 03:26 PMbaggy
unfortunately for you..people also remember the prosperity of those years as well..and many aren't as fixated on a consensual act...that was used for a political witchhunt..baggy...hillary will destroy john mccain..if given the chance
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 03:35 PMWhy is Eriposte in the minority in the so called liberal/progressive blogosphere? He is one of the most logical and clear thinking writers currently writing a blog. Paul Krugman is another. And we all know the others, who make up a short list indeed. And if known liars represent the others, what does that tell us? Let's take Andrew Sullivan for example. This whore rubs our noses in his subversive lies. He stated on his blog that he voted for Ron Paul. Yet throughout, he has smeared Clinton and praised Obama. Now that his primary is over, he's ostensibly still backing Obama. Why has no one ever mentioned his support of Ron Paul? Never has his hypocrisy been noted by any blogger...yet he is gladly embraced by the Obama supporters. So if a Sullivan can galvanize the Obama crowd, what does that say about said Obama folk? Why are the Obama supporters so easily manipulated? I must say, I give credit to the evangelicals who supported Huckabee. The easily brainwashed on the Republican side went for Romney. But the Huckabee supporters gave the finger to the Republican elites. At least Huckabee was the real McCoy and those right wing evangelicals weren't suckered. On the Democratic side, the left wing Obama dummies have been suckered. Sad comment.
Dennis, how is your hysterical response to Bob in Pacifica a reponse at all? Bob nailed it in his last response. If you look at the conservatism of the Clintons, both of them, you see a very different picture than the carefully prepared image of liberal champ, or progressive. But we've been dealing with true believers, and not those who are able to see all sides of the Clinton candidacy.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 03:45 PMDennis,
"unfortunately for you..people also remember the prosperity of those years as well"
Weak. Very, very weak.
But, hey, I am rather enjoying the disagreement you are having with Copeland....
In this corner we have Copeland: his choice in identity politics is the African-American.
In the other corner we have Dennis: his choice in identity politics is White-Woman.
Let it be a fair fight boys. The future of the Democratic Party is in the offing. It only needs to be decided that on what identity it is destroyed.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 03:49 PMBagley you are a lamebrain. A spoiler. And like Lucifer, Really. Have I reminded you lately that you are an evil person. But really it is self-evident. Troll, everyone can see what your game is.
Anyone who talks about the unfaithful Bill Clinton is a Republican whore paid to troll. Because where is their outrage at David Patterson, newly installed unfaithful governor of New York? Or their outrage at David Vitter, who was supported by his Republican colleagues? Has anyone noticed that Patterson gets a pass from everyone? Only Democrats eat their own...as result of of a wimpy core... Republicans denounce Democrats and Democrats denounce Democrats. Has anyone noticed there are no Republicans denouncing Republicans? And Republicans have controlled the government and held the power for 8 years? Dick Cheney laughs at the eunuchs in the Democratic Party. And the wimpy elites of the Democratic Party take their anger out on Hillary. And Howard Dean is the epitome of a eunuch...the big roar who has wimped out when leadership was most needed. Only a moron fails to understand that Florida and Michigan cannot be ignored or marginalized. People need to wake up and get mad. We have been had. Obama should never have run. He could only be divisive. Plus he knew what was lurking in the shadows. He knew about Wright. He knew about the DVDs for sale. He knew about Rezko. And I'm sure there is plenty more that we have yet to hear about. Or see. The people behind Obama have set up the Democratic Party. And the Democratic Party looks helpless. Bad image. Weakness personified.
Posted by lily15 at March 22, 2008 03:59 PM"Bagley you are a lamebrain. A spoiler. And like Lucifer, Really. Have I reminded you lately that you are an evil person. But really it is self-evident. Troll, everyone can see what your game is."
Now, now, Copeland. That's not very inclusive of you.
No visit to your website from me. Another week without a hit for you.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 04:00 PMBut Copeland fails to enlighten us to which progressive or liberal has lately occupied the White House. In fact, although the Obama supporters can echo all criticism of the Clinton presidency, they have been quite impotent when it comes to electing supposedly one of their own. John Kerry lost. Dukakis lost. Mondale lost. McGovern lost. How stupid are these people? They have the nerve to criticize the one Democrat who figured out how to beat Republicans to the White House? Yet have they never analyzed why every one of their "liberal and progressive" candidates lost? Perhaps they should focus on their string of losses instead of the one successful Presidency of the Democratic Party in over 30 years.
Posted by lily15 at March 22, 2008 04:06 PMAnd Gore lost when he listened to Donna Brazile and Bob Schrum and avoided campaigning with Bill Clinton. Gore might have been able to carry Arkansas or one other state if he hadn't listened to his Clinton hating advisers.
Posted by lily15 at March 22, 2008 04:07 PMDavid Patterson? We're seriously being challenged on the lack of outrage over David Patterson? Who the hell had even heard of him prior to last week? Jesus. Talk about your straw man arguments.
Posted by Bailey at March 22, 2008 04:15 PMhey copeland..in case you haven't noticed..obama is black..and has done a decent job of alienating whites..(this before the repug attach machine starts in)..barack obama is not electable..and you people aggravate the shit out of me because we are in a time of great need...we need so much more then an empty suit who gives a great speech..and isn't a racist himself..the clintons have done more for the black community then barack obama ever has..and he has used it against them..
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 04:15 PMlily15..
i agree the party has been set up...to lose again with barack obama
Posted by dennis at March 22, 2008 04:26 PMObama has come to the point of being nominated with a lot of white votes. It is BS to say that white voters have been alienated. Just the other day I heard a white guy (about 40 years old) exclaim that "Barak Obama is the best thing that's happened to this country since Franklin Roosevelt."
It occurs to me now that Hillary Clinton is not the inevitable candidate. We will do well with Obama.
Lily left out that Al Gore won, but had the presidency stolen from him. Don't think you can keep clubbing us on the head, in this party, with the most reactionary, predictably conservative candidate, the system can churn out. I'm sick of candidates like Hillary Clinton. I want another option. I want new blood in the White House. The Madeline Albrights and the rest of the tired Clinton coterie need to do something else in private life, and let a new batch of experts and new talent run a new kind of Democratic administration.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 04:52 PM"Lily left out that Al Gore won, but had the presidency stolen from him."
Get over it. The election was not "stolen" from the AlGore.
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 05:02 PMAs per usual Bagley, you lie.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 05:04 PMThis is one longtime dem voter that absolutely won't vote for Obama. I just may vote for McCain to spite the ruthless, vile, hateful and repulsive Obama supporters becuase they sound just like ruthless, vile, hateful and repulsive Republicans. I can't tell the difference anymore. Maybe my vote for McCain will wake up the DNC that I WILL NOT BE A LOYAL DEMOCRAT AS LONG AS THEY CONTINUE TO NOMINATE UNELECTABLE CANDIDATES especially via COLLUSION & DISENFRANCHISEMENT!!
Posted by KathyVT at March 22, 2008 05:06 PM"As per usual Bagley, you lie."
By what measure did he win, Copeland?
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 05:08 PMCopeland sez: The republicans are scared of having Obama run against McCain. And I think there would be no surer way of losing the election, or at least risking the outcome, than to nominate Clinton.
You've got it exact opposite. A quick visit to Freeperville tells the story. There's lots more like this a friend of mine has archived if you'd like more... Including the STOP HER NOW and TAKE HER OUT movements.
__________________
Best Scenario for Republicans: Obama Goes to the Convention With a Good Lead in DelegatesFebruary 16 2008 | jveritas
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1971505/posts?page=1,50
The best scenario for Republicans in this election is to have Obama with at least 150 delegates ahead of Hillary Clinton when they go to the democrat convention late August. The Clintons will try every dirty sleazy trick in the world to take the nomination from Obama at the convention and this will lead to the destruction of the democrat party for decades to come and a certainty that McCain will be elected President. If Hillary Clinton is able to significantly cut Obama delegates lead, i.e. very big margin win in Ohio and Texas it will be easier for her to take the nomination from him without a major fight at the convention. It is important that Hillary Clinton does not win Ohio and Texas by over 10% margin so she will not have a major cut in Obama delegates lead.
Ohio and Texas freepers are strongly encouraged to vote for Obama so we can get the best scenario.Right now Obama has 136 pledged delegates lead over Hillary Clinton (Super Delegates are not included). Both Texas and Ohio democrat primaries have a combined 334 delegates. Therefore a Hillary Clinton victory margin of 10% in each of these two states will give net her around 35 delegates and therefore Obama will remain leading her by approximately 100 delegates which is not very bad going to the convention if he keeps it as such in the remaining primary season.
Larger victory margins for Hillary Clinton on Ohio and Texas will net her more delegates and hence she will have bigger cuts in Obama delegates lead, we do not want this happening. In addition she will go to the remaining primaries with big momentum and if she wins more primaries after March 4th she may easily wipe out Obama delegates lead if not going ahead of him. In this case it will be much easier for her to win the nomination at the convention without major division and rift in the democrat party.
Folks who believe it is easier to beat Hillary Clinton than Obama are strongly mistaken and I used to think like that but not anymore. A heated and contested democratic convention is what we need and who ever emerges the nominee from there is a sure loser in the general elections but we can only get these results if Obama goes to the convention with a strong lead in the pledged delegates.
~~~~~~~~~
The concept of "crossover" by Republicans to the Dem primaries for the purpose of advancing the Hildabeast or Obamasama, whichever one was lagging, was first expressed right here on Free Republic ~ not by Karl Rove nor by Rush.Posted by at March 22, 2008 05:15 PMThis occurred BEFORE the Virginia primary and it worked to deliver both Virginia and Maryland to Obamasama. Otherwise these states had been slated to support the coronation of the Hildabeast.
BTW, it was at that moment that manipulation of the Dem primary system had a shot at denying both of their leading candidates an unquestioned delegate lead.
37 posted on 03/21/2008 10:35:13 PM PDT by muawiyah
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1989731/posts--------------------------
Yes!!! We want Obama to win, because he stands absolutely no chance in the General election.
Hillary has a good chance. It all depends on turnout.
First of all, White voters in the swing states will vote for McCain over Obama, but Hillary over McCain. There are a TON of them.
Second, think of McCain as a 3, Hillary a 2, and Obama a 1 on the political spectrum. If Hillary wins the nomination, she will retain her own supporters plus most of Obamas. Obamas supporters will not go +2 to vote for McCain.
However, if Obama wins nomination, Hillary’s people (especially White ones if all this pastor stuff keeps up) will split, with majority going for Obama but quite a few going for McCain. It is less of a stretch for Hillary’s people to go +1 to vote for McCain.
Why don’t the radio and TV talk shows get this??????????
All I can say is that if Obama wins, I can convert a TON of Democrats to McCain. If Hillary wins.....not so much. Union people will still vote for her.
18 posted on 03/21/2008 10:04:24 PM PDT by Andy Koz (It is We The People, not we the sheeple!)-----------------------------------
At least we know what we are getting with her.
Yep. That's why it's time to vote for Obama.13 posted on 03/21/2008 9:53:28 PM PDT by Rudder
----------------------------------
"Why don’t the radio and TV talk shows get this??????????"
I'm with you on this. Hillary has no intention of quiting but no one on our side should vote for the bitch and encourage her.
19 posted on 03/21/2008 10:12:53 PM PDT by blackbart.223 (I live in Northern Nevada. Reid doesn't represent me.)
-----------------------------------
shhhhh! thats why we want him as the Dem candidate before we expose him.
doing it now helps Hillary, who would be a much tougher candidate.
so shhhh! let him win, then we will light him up like a firecracker.
77 posted on 03/21/2008 10:18:19 PM PDT by Andy Koz (It is We The People, not we the sheeple!)
Was that last post by March or Andy Koz or blackbart.223 or Rudder or muawiyah.
But, hey with a little more bold typeface and some all caps thrown in somebody may even read it....
Copeland, what's going on? (Taking a bong hit?)
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 05:20 PMI understand your sophistry, Bagley; ultimately you'll say he didn't win because he didn't take office. You will deny whatever explanation is offered. There was massive republican-run voter fraud in Florida, and illegal voter suppression by the same republican swine, and criminal conspiracy through the state official, Ms Harris, to certify a fraudulent process. Then the ruling by the Supreme Court broke legal precedent to stop the recount.
Subsequent investigations have shown that even with all the republican chicanery, Gore still won the majority of votes and should have been awarded the electors for Florida. The election was stolen and Gore was the rightful president.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 05:25 PM"...ultimately you'll say he didn't win because he didn't take office."
No I say he did not win the Electoral College vote.
"There was massive republican-run voter fraud in Florida..."
Huh? Was not the infamous butterfly ballot designed by a Democratic Party operative.
"Then the ruling by the Supreme Court broke legal precedent to stop the recount."
The Cheif Justice of the Florida Supreme Court stipulated that their ruling would be overturned by the Supreme Court of The United States.
"Gore still won the majority of votes..."
Not in Florida, and, nationally, that is not how it works.
"The election was stolen and Gore was the rightful president."
No, but you are free to believe this if you want.
P.S. Have another bong-hit and return yourself to the Summer of Love: what is playing on your ipod right now, Kumbaya?
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 06:04 PMI do believe it, Bagley, and it's history.
Say Goodnight.
Posted by Copeland at March 22, 2008 07:13 PM"I do believe it..."
You are entitled to your delusions.
"...and it's history.
Well, that is a start. Now, Copeland, try moving into the year 2001.
Goodnight all. Thanks to TLC for the bandwidth,
Posted by Bagley at March 22, 2008 07:36 PMWell Copeland and many others can say AlGore won the presidency, but, Vice President Al Gore's presidential victor was named George Bush. He faced the reality, seems some people are still in fantasy land...
Posted by peter at March 22, 2008 09:47 PMSo Eri by your standards is Mr. Coe of the "family" fair game? As for speeches not being important ..hmm well I seem to remember a few weeks ago after a prolonged pause asking for examples of HRC's foreign policy experience the only thing her team could come with as an example? A SPEECH!!! What a shock! But as you noted they arent important...perhaps imagined sniper bullets are then?
Posted by jesse at March 23, 2008 05:47 AMAny supporters Obama or HRC that wont vote for the other in General and instead Mr. Mccain...ok that means you basiscally agreed Iraq was right, our troops dying and suffering is ok, Iraqis dying and suffering is ok. So to vote for Mccain just to spite man what a disgusting, abysmal notion get a freaking grip. You do that you just voted for more people to die. If you can sleep with that on your mind night after night then perhaps Powerline or Redstate has a comfy virtual chair ready for you. Unreal nonsense wow,you are not spiting HRC or Obama supporters you are advocating death and destruction last time I checked that borders on facism good luck with that.
Posted by jesse at March 23, 2008 06:04 AM"...Sen. McCain will remain the press corpse favorite if Sen. Obama becomes the nominee...."
no shit sherlock, the same will be true if Hillary is the nominee
KathyVT: "This is one longtime dem voter that absolutely won't vote for Obama...."
really? then why should I vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination? you're acting like a child
Anon at March 22, 2008 05:15 PM links to FreiRepublik, you're a troll.
and why aren't pants pissing peter and bagless bagley posting from Iraq? are they just yet more yellow elephants