Why vote for him if you hope he loses? Thats kinda backwards thinking ain’t it?
Why isn’t it a good thing to do? If you tell me I should say a line in a certain speech that you’ve already used, how is that any different from my speechwriter telling me to use a line? The reasons that make academic plagiarism wrong do not apply to political speech-making.
The 527 Swiftboat-vet-style stuff doesn’t concern me as an Obama supporter. I think that stuff will backfire on Clinton, hardcore. In any case, you can’t assume Clinton herself is having anything to do with it.
What does concern me is all her talk about changing the rules in the middle of the game. Too many people seem to think that this is remotely acceptable. It doesn’t bode well for the quality of our democracy, and I can’t imagine it will do anything to help Clinton. However, if such shenanigans did help her to secure the nomination, I’d have to oppose her on principle, and either not vote or grudgingly support McCain.
Not if you’ve seen the luck that the candidates I vote for have.
Seriously, I’m going to vote for him if he gets the nomination because he’ll have the nomination, and regardless of my opinion of the man, he’s still the party’s choice.
If you say so. It kinda sounds like empty populism to me. And considering Clinton is the “favorite daughter,” Obama actually ran a pretty close primary here.
I don’t think the media favors Clinton, all things considered. They do believe in her more because she’s lasted a long time and tend to favor her view of the campaign, from what I’ve seen.
Leaving these two specific contenders out of it, and generalizing about historical events, do Americans typically elect – or even take seriously in the future – those politicians who step aside for the good of the party? Isn’t that typically the death knell for someone’s career? We do like our winners and we have little patience for Number Two.
Sailboat
I dunno; I think Gore would have been a serious contender in 2008 had he chose to run.
I didn’t see this- are you saying McCain said Obama would bomb Pakistan just for the hell of it, or did he quote what Obama said, that he would bomb terrorist camps there if he had solid proof they existed and where they were, with or without Pakistan’s permission?
Here is what he said on GMA:
WTF…
Myself and many others are losing patience with HRC already, and she’s currently number 2. I’m not necessarily losing patience because she is not backing him, I could care less about that, I’m more concerned she brings down the party to an extent not easily overcome in the nationals.
Not to defend the particular things she is saying, but even in primaries, candidates use both negative and positive ads comments. If you want her to drop out, I understand that, but I disagree that she is honor-bound to do it.
Money’s not going to be an issue for McCain. He doesn’t really need to spend anything at this point, since he has the race locked up.
You don’t have to be President to have a political career in the U.S. Hillary has the option to step aside from the presidency, but remain a powerful force as a U.S. Senator. It is a respected role that in many ways has more power and longevity than the presidency. A President is at most eight years and out, while a Senator can remain an elder statesman/woman for decades. I think Hillary would also have a very good shot at being Governor of New York. While I don’t think it’s her style, she could even go the Al Gore route, with the Nobel Prize and the Oscar, and the general respect of the American people.
Stepping aside might mean that she would never be president (although not necessarily – Nixon lost and came back), but it would by no means end her role as one of the most powerful women in American politics.
I can see an uber-negative campaign by Clinton against Obama backfiring two ways. First, it could end up driving more people into Obama’s camp thereby guaranteeing his victory. Two, if the strategy “works” and Hillary ends up wrestling the nomination from Obama, it will end up alienating most of the Obama supporters so much that they’ll either stay home in or vote for McCain in November.
Also, I know inter-party squabbles are to be expected during the nomination process but the scorched-earth and insulting rhetoric from some of Clinton’s supporters (like this blast from Taylor Marsh) against Obama’s has me worrying that the Democrats are on the verge of screwing the pooch again. It seems that there’s the view among at least some of the people who are running Clinton’s campaign that Obama’s supporters consist of disloyal back-stabbing traitors and unruly uneducated children who need to be disciplined. Not only is there no effort to dissuade potential Obama voters but they seem to be saying, “We don’t want your vote anyway.” If Clinton does get the nomination, how does she expect to get most of those people to vote for her? Maybe the people running her campaign figure because many of these people come from “red” states, their potential votes aren’t important.
Which is made even more retarded by virtue of the fact that the CIA Operation that took out Abu Laith al-Libi recently, is “Similar To Tactic Obama Advocated, Bush Criticized”
NO, he’s not. You clearly haven’t been following along.
1.) Even Deval Patrick says Obama didn’t “lift his language” without permission. They’re friends, and Deval is one of Obama’s national co-chairs. Deval told him what to expect to hear about the power of his speeches, because he had come under the same attack. And he told him HOW to respond to it.
2.) And even if that weren’t the case (which it IS), even one of Bill Clinton’s former speech writers says that’s a ridiculous claim.
I’m sure you’ll be changing your mind now that you know it wasn’t “lifted”, “plagiarized” or any other sort of unethical thing you want to call it.
Well, this isn’t McCain’s first crack at the presidency.
It will recede by November.
What am I supposed to be changing my mind about? Liking him? I won’t. Like I said, it doesn’t much matter to me whether he plagarized or not.
You said, “If you’re asking who cares about it, I do.” So it does matter to you, even if it wouldn’t be enough to make you pick a new candidate. You should defend saying that it was wrong and matters or retract it.
Accusing him of being a plagiarist. It’s factually incorrect.
One of these things is not like the other.
Jinx! You owe me a coke!