"Re-create 68"

pvolcko wrote:Oh please. Clinton and Gore both were cheerleading NAFTA. Maybe they were triangulating and didn't really like the idea themselves, but Clinton advocated it, Gore pushed for it, and President Clinton signed it. The Clinton administration also worked to strike most favored nation trade status with China, finally getting it enacted in 2000. Most recently, Hillary (along with Obama) supported the Peru FTA, in the midst of an free-trade axious democrat primary season no less.

Perhaps these were all "republican" ideas, but President Clinton and Senator Clinton both have a remarkably pro-trade track record that can not be dismissed by simply tagging it as a republican agenda. You're too smart for that, aren't you?

NAFTA is a GOP idea. So was the war in Iraq. The fact that some Democrats supported them or bought into them doesn't make them responsible for them. But it's funny to see Repubs blaming the Clintons for NAFTA.

How 'bout if we try this another way: Are you saying the GOP no longer supports NAFTA?

They've got to be shakin in their boots that Hillary is going to somehow pull out a win for the nomination. They may not suffer any wrath from the voters, but they will be in the democrat party dog house for 4-8 years if Hillary gets the nomination, especially if she somehow manages to pull out a win in the general.

pvolcko wrote:They've got to be shakin in their boots that Hillary is going to somehow pull out a win for the nomination. They may not suffer any wrath from the voters, but they will be in the democrat party dog house for 4-8 years if Hillary gets the nomination, especially if she somehow manages to pull out a win in the general.

Try a generation. It'll take as long to get the black vote back as it'll take the GOP to get back the Latinos after the immigration debacle last year.

And the young vote? Wild card, both as to how much of a factor it'll be and how turned off on the process they'll get -- and for how long -- if Obama doesn't get it.

But you know what? PA doesn't really matter. It's a must-win for Hillary but not for Obama. And, unless she wins in a real blow-out, she can't possibly gain enough popular votes, to say nothing of delegates, to make her case. Thankfully, I think the super delegates understand all this.

As to the general, IMO either will win, less because of them than because of McCain's dilemma: no matter which direction he goes, he loses. If he goes to the center, the thumpers won't come out for him; if he goes right, he cedes the center to his opponent. And everybody in the media will be watching his behavior because of the suspicion that he has PTSD; if he loses his storied temper, that story will get stirred up and he'll be toast.

Clinton supporters "strike" DailyKos
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/ ... 132/476843

Keith Olbermann is No Edward R. Murrow:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-ma ... 91351.html

Divided they fall.

Could this be the answer? Hillobama!


What's scary is it doesn't look doctored.

spc wrote:Could this be the answer? Hillobama!

I don't care who ya are.... that there is funny!

Rep. John Murtha (superdelegate) has announced his endorsement of Hillary.

I guess BHO's speech didn't move him.

spc wrote:

hillaryobama.jpg

What's scary is it doesn't look doctored.

It looks like Michael Ansara... Cochise? What was that? Broken Arrow?

Gallup poll with democrat and democrat-leaning voters: Clinton takes lead over Obama. What a real mess. Mathematically BHO has the delegates to win excluding super deligates. If the super deligates give the nod to HRC the blacks will feel, lets just say real bad & she won't carry the black vote because they won't go out to vote. If they give the nod to BHO he will lose the white male vote.
At this point I think HRC as a better shot in the general election, but the racial tension of her nomination would make Watts feel like a Mensa meeting.

spc wrote:Gallup poll with democrat and democrat-leaning voters: Clinton takes lead over Obama. What a real mess. Mathematically BHO has the delegates to win excluding super deligates. If the super deligates give the nod to HRC the blacks will feel, lets just say real bad & she won't carry the black vote because they won't go out to vote. If they give the nod to BHO he will lose the white male vote.
At this point I think HRC as a better shot in the general election, but the racial tension of her nomination would make Watts feel like a Mensa meeting.

Polls taken after Wright videos but before Obama speech. Of course, it's possible that the damage will be permanent but, if it is, get ready for 100 years of war in not only Iraq, but now Afghanistan.

My friend I'm sorry to say but war is a part of life on earth.

spc wrote:My friend I'm sorry to say but war is a part of life on earth.

You may want to take old Michaelangelo's advice...

stockingfull wrote:

spc wrote:My friend I'm sorry to say but war is a part of life on earth.

You may want to take old Michaelangelo's advice...

I try every day.

James Carville likens Bill Richardson to Judas. OUCH!!!

"Mr. Richardson stopped returning Mr. Clinton’s calls days ago, Mr. Clinton’s aides said. And as of Friday, Mr. Richardson said, he had yet to pick up the phone to tell Mr. Clinton of his decision.
The reaction of some of Mr. Clinton’s allies suggests that might have been a wise decision. “An act of betrayal,” said James Carville, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton and a friend of Mr. Clinton.
“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/ ... 020098.php

The Clintons are now well on their way to convincing Democrats of what Republicans have been saying for years: that they're amoral political animals.

If John McCain should become POTUS, his first thanks should go to Bill and Hill.

And this is said, with sadness, by a great fan of Bill's presidency.