Is this all actually to Obama’s post-nomination benefit? If the mud is slung now and dealt with now, then McCain can’t use it to effect, can he?
The fear is that he can: “Even a fellow America-hater, Hillary Clinton, thought that Osama, er, Obama went too far.”
She is 60. How many more cracks at it do you think she has.
I don’t see much evidence of any of the supers jumping on her side in the kinds of numbers she wil need for the nom…at all really - quite the opposite from reading around. Obama appears to be the one more will/are going to vote for.
But, based on the current polls anyway, not with momentum - Clinton looks like the winner of most of the remaining primaries (see pollster.com for current details).
Depends on the supers - if they look at not only momentum but projected ability to beat McCain, and reach a general consensus among themselves, it’s over on the first ballot, like usual. (The “some point” you mention follows immediately - pledges only count for the first ballot).
Obama’s done a fine job raising those issues himself lately.
And few here are willing to talk about how the Obama camp’s constant, and often childish, Hillary-trashing hurts the Democratic nominee’s chances if she’s it - or even if *he * is, for that matter, given that the core theme of his candidacy is being above all that shit and able to inspire people *not * to engage in it.
For now, but it’s a long time till Denver. Who knows? Obama might screw up in a big way, even bigger than the gaffes now, and the superdelegates on his side might go over to hers.
Yep, we need an experienced candidate who makes lots of veteran gaffes, not to mention having so much baggage that she deserves an endorsement from American Tourister. :dubious:
I agree with you here and have already put my fellow-politics-junkey and erswhile Hillary-supporter friend on notice that there will be many instances of mis-speaking by Mrs. Clinton. There will be just slick, slimy and slippery enough to erode support from Obama as she gets out there and shows her partisan, uhmmm, I mean, party loyalty.
If she doesn’t get the nomination, Hillary’s hatefulness and sense of revenge will definitely cause her to act, even subconsciously (but not really so much) to cost Obama the presidency.
Yep, she’s cleaning up over there. Sure she has an adavantage in number of states, but Obama will win some of them and it is hard to see how it will amount to any sort of real momentum. Especially considering that according to poll she is losing in Indiana and losing ground in Pennsylvania. And even if she does win Pennsylvania, it will amount to very little.
Oddly enough, even at least one prominent long-time backer of Clinton is now saying the contest should end after the last primary and whoever is behind should immediately drop out:
She and Bill have certainly be acting like they want Obama to fail (in the general, if not in the primary). Especially Bill. The comment about McCain being a better Commander in Chief than Obama was just over the top for someone trying to simply support his wife. I, too, think she believes she still has a reasonable change to win, even though most of the signs are against it. BrainGlutton pointed out in another thread that the the bookies at Intrade have Obama at 86% and the University of Iowa Electronics Market have him at 83%. Those are pretty good predictors, and it ain’t close.
Note that pollster.com reports rolling averages of a variety of polls, precisely to dampen out the outliers that we see trumpeted by the Obama supporters whenever they favor him.
Sore losers before your guy has even lost, huh? (I do admire the assertion the Obama campaign has made itself that losing PA by less than 10% would actually be a “win”. 
)
The thing is, ElvisL1ves, I have never been a Hillary hater. I always defended Hillary Clinton when criticism seemed unfair or unfounded, but this campaign has made it extremely hard for me to like or respect Hillary Clinton. As much as I hate to admit it publicly, I don’t know if I could bring myself to vote for her, but this reflects my current disposition. I am sure I will change my mind.
It is extremely disappointing to see Republican tactics used in this Democratic primary; however, I am only seeing it from the Clinton camp. I know Obama’s supporters are emotionally invested in this campaign, as are Clinton supporters, but I haven’t seen any deeply personal and damaging attacks waged at Hillary Clinton from the Obama campaign. I actually wish Obama would just go for the jugular, but I am sure Clinton’s camp will make a public scene about Rovian tactics if he does. And negatives against Clinton will undermine Obama’s message; although, in light of the situation, I am sure we will easily forgive him
I was going to decry this tactic of lying about what your opponent said as Rovian, but given this isn’t the Pit I will soften it and just call it Clintonian.
I sincerely apologize to Elvis, my comment is not within the forum rules or the sprit of the forum. I got heated and what I said was inappropriate. I apologize.
“She ain’t never been called ‘Nigger’”
No prob, GO - but that does help illustrate the point.
NOT stated with the sanctions of the official Barack Obama campaign. NOT an intentional campaign tactic. AND she was FIRED IMMEDIATELY.
NOT stated with the sanctions of the official Barack Obama campaign. NOT an intentional campaign tactic. AND he was asked to leave his position as soon as that comment came to Barack’s attention.
But your continued disingenuousness in GD certainly does help illustrate a point.
Since PA has been favoring Clinton for several months, most of that time by a good deal more than 10%, I’d say that’s a fair assessment. Newsflash: losing by a fairly small margin in an area where your opponent is widely favored is not really losing, not when you’re allotted delegates based on your vote percentages rather than winner-take-all.
See what I mean?
I’d say she could run pretty easily at least through 2020, when she’ll be 72. So that’s at least three. And she seems to want it so desperately that I can see her still trying to mount campaigns well into her dotage.
Should she fail this time, her success in mounting future campaigns will depend a lot on how she’s perceived after this election. If she’s thought of as being a spoiler who cost the Dems the 2008 election, or if she’s regarded as having lost because she’s just too damn unlikeable, or too dishonest, or ran too sloppy of a campaign, she’ll have trouble raising the money and support she’ll need for viable candidacies, but she’s been angling for this for at least the last fifteen years and very possibly well beyond that, so I can see her angling for it for another sixteen at least.
Ah, yes, I can almost hear her now, speaking from her dotage:
“Well, ya know, I think that in the old days people just didn’t run for the presidency when they were 80 or 90 years old. But I told Bill just the other day that this is a new age and even though we still haven’t had the benefit of a government health care plan, we are still young enough and vital enough, and the country still needs us desperately enough, that by golly, I just think we should run again. Ha, ha…I mean I should run again. And you know what? He agreed with me one hundred percent! And Chelsea did too! So now, with your help, this country stands poised to elect its first octogenarian/nonagenarian woman president, and I am just so proud to be that candidate! So I urge you to join with me and Bill and Chelsea as we lie through our teeth yet again in order to save this wonderful country of ours. Vote Hillary Clinton for president in 2038!”