Well, I did suggest him as her running mate in another thread.
And as someone else pointed out, he did defeat the Republicans.
Not necessarily. So long as this goes on, nobody pays much attention to McCain. The Dem nomination contest comes to seem like the real election, with the November general a formality, Dem victory a foregone conclusion.
You’ll be seeing RW crazies (some of them flaming racists) taking the streets for McCain soon enough, however hard he tries to disavow them.
That or I read the OP.
Good advice in general I suppose but it hasn’t happened to me yet.
I explained why I would never vote for Clinton way back when Obama was just a twinkle in Howard Dean’s eye.
I volunteered for her here in NYC when she was running for senator. I defended her against charges of carpetbagging. When she won, I wrote to her and asked her to represent NY and not skip town the minute a better oportunity came her way. She wrote back (and went on TV to say) that NY was her home and she was here to represent NY and that she would never, ever abandon it.
The fucking lying bitch. She has gone on to lie and lie and cheat and lie some more. How could anybody defend that?
And crazy supporters? Have you seen http://www.hillaryis44.org/ ?
At least that site gave me one big laugh, Biggirl. I clicked “Why Not Obama”, and the page was under construction. 
I guess they have to go out and dig up some reasons.
The only way the number 44 applies to that gal is around the hips.
I think you’ve just solved the “what the blazes is wrong with Hillary?” conundrum: her girdle is too tight. 44 inches? Under severe constriction, causing a lack of blood to her nether regions and too much in the head. Leading to delusions. Or something.
Obama’s a very good candidate for a lot of people, including those who usually vote for minor parties. Liberal, as a libertarian, is one such. Instead of the fringe folks stumping for their causes that relatively few people pay any serious attention to, they’re now stumping for Obama and against Clinton.
That said, I’m not claiming Liberal is necessarily a loon. I think you and a lot of other folks going on about crazy Obama cultists insist on mistaking passion for craziness. It’s understandable, since that the two major parties have not given many people much reason to be passionate recently. But I have yet to see anyone offer to castrate themselves in the name of Obama or sacrifice a chicken or offer to kill Clinton. (At least not on this board, god knows what people say out on the internet in general.) They’re just loud and proud, either in favor of Obama or against Clinton.
Even then, do you not remember 2004? There was a lot of Democratic wailing and gnashing of teeth then, too. It was just expected since it was directed at the Republican candidate. Now it’s directed at Clinton.
There’s a joke about people who become vegetarians not because they love animals but because they really really REALLY hate plants. And that’s what I’ve seen a lot of in this campaign; people whose dedication to being for Barack Obama seems to be mostly based on it being a means to be against Hillary Clinton.
Look at the OP again. Liberal barely mentioned Obama. He said nothing about why anyone should support Obama. His post was just about how bad Clinton is and why people should vote against her.
The irony is that people have voted against her. Obama’s virtually clinched the nomination and Clinton will soon be history. What happens then? With the desire to defeat Clinton fulfilled, will people like Liberal stay the course? Will they find other reasons to support Obama now that he’s beaten Clinton? Will they start sticking forks in John McCain? Or will they have a cigarette and then roll over and go to sleep?
Well, to that end, all I’ll say is that Clinton’s actions and behavior in this campaign arguably justify the feelings toward her.
What puzzles me is that whenever I see someone point out the problems and gaffes in her campaign, I don’t see so much factual refutation, only namecalling. ETA: Not saying Liberal’s OP was very factual. I’m talking about in other threads. That doesn’t mean there’s not justification for the OP, though.
Can’t stick a fork in McCain, he’s the Republican nominee. The fork will be stuck only after he loses. Unlike the Dem nomination where it was clear Hillary was done a loooooong time before she realized it.
You are right that the two Democratic nominees’ platforms are quite similar. Some Democrats think character, honesty and straightfowardness are great things to have in a candidate while others thing a vagina is pretty important (or whatever reason Hillary fans have for backing her). That fight should be over now, those who wish to have a cig should be rolling over right now. But they aren’t because a certain ex-First Lady and her supporters keep up the attack.
Maybe if Hillary were gracious this could be over. But she isn’t. So it’s not.
Given the title of this thread, it’s absolutely essential, at least from my point of view.
Because he got to it before I was able to return, what he said. I did say she could vote as she wanted to but if she were interested in what is good for the party, she should keep that to herself.
Fits as a reply to Mr. Moto too.
Like I said here, here, here, here, here, and here, I support Obama because of his sound fiscal policies. The fact that Hillary is a slimy whore is beside the point.
Well, fine. But considering she had to stand beside Fritz Mondale as he lost forty-nine states, maybe she felt she had done plenty enough for the Democrats already. Perhaps that went into her calculation.
In any case, like I said above, her decision to make. And part of that is bearing the consequences. Considering that she is essentially retired from politics anyway, I really don’t think Ferraro cares.
So she is cravenly dishonest and burdened with a lust for power at any cost? Well, then, the silly little twit joined the wrong party, didn’t she?
Yep. She shoulda gone LP.
I don’t see a problem with this as his thread title didn’t mention Obama at all either. Why would anyone open a thread titled “Fuck Hillary Clinton” expecting reasons to vote for Obama?
I fail to see the problem with people voting for Obama because they don’t like Hillary as I imagine there are people voting for Hillary because they don’t like Obama, or voting for either democrat because they dislike McCain and/or the republicans as a whole. That’s just the way elections go.
I should also point out that there are a number of people, small though it may be, who not only dislike Hillary Clinton and want to vote against her but also like Obama and want to vote for him.
Clinton has repeatedly suggested that sexism is far more acceptable in our culture than racism is. Liberal, I think you’re proving her point here. Would you ever in a million years say the equivalent thing about a black candidate?
Normally I don’t pull out that equivalency, but in this race, that equivalency is thrown into stark relief.
Please, let’s confine criticism of Clinton to her actual failings. Throwing misogynist epithets at her helps nobody.
Edit: that said, if you think it’s funny that “Hillary is 44”'s page about “Why not Obama” is under construction, take a look at their page of Why Hillary? Couldn’t have said it better myself! 
Daniel