| Author |
Message |
|
| billyweeds |
 Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:44 am |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
I have always been a big fan of Bill Clinton and a supporter (against the opinions of many of my friends) of Hillary. But their (and particularly his) behavior during the past few days have damaged my attitude toward them.
Bubba's shameful comments yesterday about Obama (google "fairytale" and "Give me a break" if you're interested) have turned me off him, possibly for good. And I'm not at all convinced that her crying jag wasn't scripted in advance.
Contrast her speech after Iowa, in which she refused to concede that she had lost the race, with Obama's response last night. It's the graciousness, stupid. The class, stupid. Obama is still the man. |
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Billy, your partisanship is really over the top. Everything that Hillary or even Bill do, is satanic and everything that Barack does is magnificent.
I'm disappointed that Edwards didn't show better. He was overrun by the slugfest between Obama and Clinton. Unless he pulls off some kind of miracle showing in South Carolina, it looks like a short road ahead. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:26 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
marantzo wrote: Billy, your partisanship is really over the top. Everything that Hillary or even Bill do, is satanic and everything that Barack does is magnificent.
I'm disappointed that Edwards didn't show better. He was overrun by the slugfest between Obama and Clinton. Unless he pulls off some kind of miracle showing in South Carolina, it looks like a short road ahead.
Gary--Your exaggeration of my partisanship is also over the top. Bill and Hillary have acted (in comparison with Obama) in a classless way. Obama graciously conceded. Tim Russert or someone suggested what Hillary should have said the night she lost Iowa. He said her perfect comment would have been: "So much for inevitability." This would have made her self-deprecatingly humorous in the most engaging way possible. And I would have applauded her. She did show a trace of humor with her "That hurts my feelings" line, and I thought she was quite amazing at that moment. But the tearing up was very likely a calculated move. No, I don't think the Clintons are Satanic. That would be Dick Cheney. I do, yes, think almost everything Obama does is magnificent. And I wish John Edwards would do the classy thing now--drop out of the race and throw his support to Obama. I like Edwards a lot. If he follows my suggestion I will venerate him. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mo_flixx |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:55 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2004
Posts: 12533
|
billyweeds wrote: I have always been a big fan of Bill Clinton and a supporter (against the opinions of many of my friends) of Hillary. But their (and particularly his) behavior during the past few days have damaged my attitude toward them.
Bubba's shameful comments yesterday about Obama (google "fairytale" and "Give me a break" if you're interested) have turned me off him, possibly for good. And I'm not at all convinced that her crying jag wasn't scripted in advance.
Contrast her speech after Iowa, in which she refused to concede that she had lost the race, with Obama's response last night. It's the graciousness, stupid. The class, stupid. Obama is still the man.
I heard some interesting stuff on "Air America" yesterday before the conclusion of the NH primary.
First, parts of the Iowa Caucus night speeches of Obama and Hillary were played for contrast. Obama consistently used the word "we." In contrast, Hillary kept using the word, "I." It may seem trivial, but I thought it was significant. I'm going to watch for it from now on.
Rachel Madow discussed Hillary's "crying." She mentioned how the media pounced on this while some of the other candidates have _already_ cried. For example, Mitt Romney (of all people) has already cried during the campaign.
I suspect Edwards won't drop out until after South Carolina. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:08 am |
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9010
Location: Shanghai
|
With a heapload of chips set to be decided on Feb. 5, I don't see the need or incentive for Edwards to drop out. Unless he wants to curry favor with one of the two others -- but that's a tricky game, because you just might pick wrong.
Anyone have a read on where Edwards voters would likely go?
Some commentary has noted that many of the upcoming states only permit registered Dems to vote in the primary, which could hurt Obama who has received significant support thus far from independents.
Lastly, it's funny how our winner-take-all mentality makes 6,000 votes in the little state of NowHere seem like a big deal. Anyone know how the delegates are apportioned from Iowa and NH? Do the mainstream news outlets even cover such basic info as that? |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| yambu |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:26 am |
|
|
Joined: 23 May 2004
Posts: 6441
Location: SF Bay Area
|
| It's hard to know whether race was a factor in lily-white NH. But if it creeps out there that it may have been, then Obama is done. |
_________________
That was great for you. How was it for me? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
yambu wrote: It's hard to know whether race was a factor in lily-white NH. But if it creeps out there that it may have been, then Obama is done.
I would think quite the opposite. If New Hampshire is revealed to have voted against Obama because he is African-American, this can only redound to Barack's advantage. The rest of the country (save the deep South) will want to remove itself from charges of racism. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Gary--Your exaggeration of my partisanship
I don't think it's exaggerated. I like Obama, but I still have some reservations about his political effectiveness and his electability. Though with the Republican field being as uninspiring as it seems, I'm not very concerned about the Dems winning the White House (with any of the top candidates) barring a real fuck-up on their part or some disastrous revelation. Obama has my full confidence as an orator, but I am still not convinced at this time that some American voters won't be looking for any excuse to feel justified in not voting for him without feeling that it is because of intrinsic racism. The racist element in the US, when not overt is often just below the surface. This is particularly evident to Canadians because race is almost completely irrelevant in our elections. As I said, I like Edwards the best, because I think he has far the best set of initiatives. And as flawed as I think Hillary's health plan is, Obama's is almost no improvement whatsoever. Would I be unhappy if Obama were the candidate and won? Not by a long shot, I'd be thrilled, just as I'd be if Hillary or Edwards did. From the way you talk it sounds like you wouldn't be happy at all if Hillary became president, except for the fact that the Republican's didn't. I doubt that Obama judges Hillary as harshly as you and he is certainly hoping to win the candidacy as much as you are hoping for him.
Your enthusiasm is admirable though. And if it is infectious, it could be a big leg up for Barack.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:32 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
mo_flixx wrote: billyweeds wrote: I have always been a big fan of Bill Clinton and a supporter (against the opinions of many of my friends) of Hillary. But their (and particularly his) behavior during the past few days have damaged my attitude toward them.
Bubba's shameful comments yesterday about Obama (google "fairytale" and "Give me a break" if you're interested) have turned me off him, possibly for good. And I'm not at all convinced that her crying jag wasn't scripted in advance.
Contrast her speech after Iowa, in which she refused to concede that she had lost the race, with Obama's response last night. It's the graciousness, stupid. The class, stupid. Obama is still the man.
I heard some interesting stuff on "Air America" yesterday before the conclusion of the NH primary.
First, parts of the Iowa Caucus night speeches of Obama and Hillary were played for contrast. Obama consistently used the word "we." In contrast, Hillary kept using the word, "I." It may seem trivial, but I thought it was significant. I'm going to watch for it from now on.
I had already noticed this. It's quite revealing. And it makes Bill Clinton's comments yesterday--in which he accused Obama of the same sort of egocentricity--sound revoltingly (as opposed to Satanically) self-serving (or should I say "Hillary-serving"?). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ehle64 |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:34 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 7149
Location: NYC; US&A
|
| How could race be a factor in NH? Isn't IA 94% white? |
_________________
It truly disappoints me when people do something for you via no prompt of your own and then use it as some kind of weapon against you at a later time and place. It is what it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:38 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
gromit wrote: Anyone know how the delegates are apportioned from Iowa and NH? Do the mainstream news outlets even cover such basic info as that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Electoral_map.svg
I can't vote in the primary here - while the independent parties won a lawsuit 7-8 years back permitting them to participate in the primaries, you still have to register for a party to participate. It's a little strange, because a hair short of 60% of registered voters are unaffiliated (that may also include the independent party members, but they are a very small number).
To a ceratin degree, that doesn't bother me. The primaries are for parties to determine their standard-bearers. While it's important for people to have input as to what candidates are selected, it's the general election which is really critical.
Off the top of my head, I'm not even sure that primaries are mentioned in the Constitution, beyond implying that the power to set them up rests with the states. |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
billyweeds wrote: yambu wrote: It's hard to know whether race was a factor in lily-white NH. But if it creeps out there that it may have been, then Obama is done.
I would think quite the opposite. If New Hampshire is revealed to have voted against Obama because he is African-American, this can only redound to Barack's advantage. The rest of the country (save the deep South) will want to remove itself from charges of racism.
I agree. There is a lot of guilt feelings among Americans who would be more than happy to have that reason for supporting Obama. And the deep South has a lot of Blacks (I know, I've been there  ), and if there is a successful voter drive, that's a big block of voters. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:46 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| Gary, thanks for your post above (the one about "exaggeration"). I have always been a Hillary defender, but I do think that in comparison with Obama and Edwards she comes across as depressingly old-hat and boilerplate. I think she'd be an OK president as opposed to the anti-OK Bush. But when there's an Obama as the alternative, OK isn't enough any more. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:56 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9010
Location: Shanghai
|
Well, the wiki doesn't work here, though I can get most of its content from Answers.com. I was trying to find out about the Dem convention delegates, not the electoral college.
I didn't really understand the notion of independents can vote in a primary but only if they register with a party. Though I do recall one or more states allowed you to register with a party when you voted (if you hadn't previously been committed). Is that what you refer to? |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| bart |
| Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:59 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 2381
Location: Lincoln NE
|
Though I'm not known for over-the-top partisanship (registered Indep.) I think Hilary is kind of a bitch. Not that she can't be an effective bitch.
I'm wondering if we could end up with a Reservoir Dogs thing where Obama and Clinton go at each other, and just Edwards is left standing in the later primaries. Hope not. |
_________________
Former 3rd Eye Member |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
