 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / August 2008{OT} How come more and more Hillary supporters are heading for McCain?
C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton network that up to 60% of Hillary's supporters have jumped ship to McCain. Can't be they're RACIST, can it?!?! Good, card-carrying Democrats, racist? No, it can't be that. It must be because they see the same old same old coming from the Obama campaign, and realize that if they want *REAL* change, it will come from a Republican who has crossed the aisle to work with the 'opposition' far more than any Democrat has in a long, long time. Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the DNC. Unity, indeed. > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for > McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton > network that up to 60% of Hillary's supporters have jumped ship to McCain. "National Bill Clinton network"? I suppose that's your cute name for the National Broadcasting Company? Be careful, you're starting to sound a bit like Charles. Anyway, 60%? I find that a little difficult to believe. A very recent (August 23-24) CNN poll showed that 66% of Clinton supporters are backing Obama, while 27% say they'll vote for McCain. We'll see if Clinton's speech has any effect on those numbers. > Can't be they're RACIST, can it?!?! Good, card-carrying Democrats, racist? > No, it can't be that. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Republican who has crossed the aisle to work with the 'opposition' far > more than any Democrat has in a long, long time. No, actually it very little to do with either Obama or McCain. The PUMAs are pissed off at what they perceive as the unfair treatment that Hillary received from the Democratic party and Obama. I think they're wrong; I don't think there was anything about Obama's primary campaign that was particularly unfair toward Clinton, but I do understand their point. I also think they'd be foolish to support McCain over Obama. Politically, the difference between Clinton and McCain is minimal compared to the gulf between either of them and McCain. > Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the DNC. > Unity, indeed. Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary signs are quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. Hillary's speech sounded highly insincere, even to those of us already accustomed to her lying through her teeth. Add that to her usual quota of over-the-top smarminess and I think the Dims are abandoning ship in droves. > > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for > > McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary > signs are quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. In article <38ddfc64-1c0b-49ec-9907-542e59dd436f@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > Hillary's speech sounded highly insincere, even to those of us already > accustomed to her lying through her teeth. Add that to her usual > quota of over-the-top smarminess and I think the Dims are abandoning > ship in droves. Highly orchestrated convention. These things are getting so antiseptic that why anybody should bother to watch it. Reminds me of Miss America pagent. > > Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B wrote: > > > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary > > signs are quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. -- > In article > <38ddfc64-1c0b-49ec-9907-542e59dd436f@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > that why anybody should bother to watch it. Reminds me of Miss America > pagent. "Getting"??? You're how old and you just noticed? They've been that way forever. > Hillary's speech sounded highly insincere, even to those of us already > accustomed to her lying through her teeth. Add that to her usual quota > of over-the-top smarminess and I think the Dims are abandoning ship in > droves. It was sincere. It was also banal, and a lot of the same stuff she's been spewing for the past year and a half. There wasn't much new in there at all. >> > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp >> > for McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >> Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary signs >> are quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for >> McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the National Broadcasting Company? Be careful, you're starting to sound > a bit like Charles. Were you watching NBC last night? Tom Brokaw had his head so firmly implanted up Hillary's...er, skirt I think he was checking for polyps. It was absolutely disgusting. > Anyway, 60%? I find that a little difficult to believe. A very recent > (August 23-24) CNN poll showed that 66% of Clinton supporters are > backing Obama, while 27% say they'll vote for McCain. We'll see if > Clinton's speech has any effect on those numbers. According to one of the Talking Heads, 60% have jumped ship for McCain. I got that little tidbit while I wasn't wretching over the banality coming from Brokaw. >> Can't be they're RACIST, can it?!?! Good, card-carrying Democrats, >> racist? No, it can't be that. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Politically, the difference between Clinton and McCain is minimal > compared to the gulf between either of them and McCain. Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the requisite number before throwing their support to him. They stabbed Hilly in the back, and then twisted the knife. I'm surprised *SHE* didn't jump ship to McCain after that treatment. It must have taken an awful lot of sucking it in to give that banal speech she gave last night, with the usual sound-bite highlights from her campaign. >> Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the >> DNC. Unity, indeed. > > Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary signs are > quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. I won't. > > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: > >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > backing Obama, while 27% say they'll vote for McCain. We'll see if > > Clinton's speech has any effect on those numbers. Imus stated he's voting for McCain. He did not have too much good to say about hillary or barrack. > According to one of the Talking Heads, 60% have jumped ship for McCain. I > got that little tidbit while I wasn't wretching over the banality coming [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > I won't. -- >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Imus stated he's voting for McCain. He did not have too much good to say > about hillary or barrack. Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. > >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: > >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. why is that? -- Don't prod him - we have finally found something Joe will shut up about. > > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. > > why is that? > --- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - In article <1948f74b-33eb-4bff-ac9e-5f5455c743fa@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, > Don't prod him - we have finally found something Joe will shut up > about. I know what he's getting at. The same reason jimmy carter called barrack a "black boy" yesterday. Of course, the media that repeated it took it somewhat out of context, but it remains that jimmy said it like out of arrogance and that nobody else could say it except him. After all, a democrat is never, never racist are they. > > > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. > > > > why is that? > > --- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - -- > Don't prod him - we have finally found something Joe will shut up about. Yeah, really. Don't jinx a good thing! >> > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. >> >> why is that? >> --- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: >> >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > why is that? You posted the comment about Imus. You must've thought it was important and decisive. After all, we now know he's one of your "news sources". >>> >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing >>> >> >> camp for [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > You posted the comment about Imus. You must've thought it was important > and decisive. After all, we now know he's one of your "news sources". Like Howard Stern is one of yours? > >> >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: > >> >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > You posted the comment about Imus. You must've thought it was important and > decisive. After all, we now know he's one of your "news sources". Well, when Imus was at MSNBC he was a big backer of the dims, I'm thinking he was told to be and paid big bucks for it. Then they fired him because he made a comment that can only be made by democrats, because they understand. -- >> >> >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: >> >> >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > him because he made a comment that can only be made by democrats, > because they understand. Then, you should vote for whoever he tells you to vote for. He's one of your news sources because you are too lazy to read. > >> >> >> > Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒã‚¯ wrote: > >> >> >> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Then, you should vote for whoever he tells you to vote for. He's one of your > news sources because you are too lazy to read. I get my news from jsb, don't you know that? -- Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few even know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. That's why we've had 8 years of dubya. No one in their right mind would have voted for him if they had known his up-coming record of horrible performance. > Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few > even know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. That's > why we've had 8 years of dubya. No one in their right mind would have > voted for him if they had known his up-coming record of horrible > performance. This is the first time I ever heard "Bush" and "charism" used in the same sentence. I guess there ARE some folks out there for whom the Bush antics are charismatic. I'm glad I don't know them. Perhaps these same people think of Ben Stein as "Mr. Excitement". Or Dick Cheney as "tall, dark and handsome....and a terrific sharpshooter." >> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >> even know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Perhaps these same people think of Ben Stein as "Mr. Excitement". Or Dick > Cheney as "tall, dark and handsome....and a terrific sharpshooter." Why then do you think people voted for dubya? >>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >>> even know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Why then do you think people voted for dubya? (look who he ran against...) > Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few even > know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. That's why > we've had 8 years of dubya. No one in their right mind would have voted for > him if they had known his up-coming record of horrible performance. Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? Bush "charismatic"? I'm a Conservative and I didn't even vote for him! >> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >> even [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Bush "charismatic"? > I'm a Conservative and I didn't even vote for him! You have to admit Dubya looks good in a suit. The Alfred E. Neumann grin still makes dull ladies swoon. >>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >>> even [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You have to admit Dubya looks good in a suit. The Alfred E. Neumann grin > still makes dull ladies swoon. Not this one... he looks more at ease in jeans & a western style belt. Cathy >>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >>>> even [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Cathy But he "cleans up real good" and if the college freshman "wit" doesn't annoy one then maybe he does have a certain charm. If, on the other hand, you prize competence, maybe not so charming. >>>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >>>>> even [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >one then maybe he does have a certain charm. If, on the other hand, you >prize competence, maybe not so charming. If he is so bad...... Why were you unable to beat him ...not once....but twice? Why wasn't he impeached?  SignatureScott in Florida >>>>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. >>>>>> Few [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Why were you unable to beat him ...not once....but twice? ***"In politics stupidity is not a handicap." ~ Napoleon Or "You can fool some of the People all of the time and that's enough" > Why wasn't he impeached? >>>>>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. >>>>>>> Few [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Or >"You can fool some of the People all of the time and that's enough" 'some' does not win elections..... >> Why wasn't he impeached? > SignatureScott in Florida >>>>>>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. >>>>>>>> Few [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > 'some' does not win elections..... Some: ***adj, Constituting an indeterminate and otherwise unidentified part of a group or whole ***adj, consisting of an indefinite number more than two and less than many 'Some' can win if the sum is sufficient or, in the case of 2000 in FL, even if it is insufficient. >>> Why wasn't he impeached? >>>>>>>>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. >>>>>>>>> Few [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >'Some' can win if the sum is sufficient or, in the case of 2000 in FL, even >if it is insufficient. 'some' did NOT win in their effort to cheat in Florida. SignatureScott in Florida >>> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >>> even [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You have to admit Dubya looks good in a suit. The Alfred E. Neumann grin > still makes dull ladies swoon. Someone where I was working 2 years ago said something about A.E. Neumann being my idol, so when he left the room I downloaded and printed a pic of Bush as Neumann, and taped it to my monitor where he would see it all the time. Now, I listened to Limbaugh from noon to three, so everyone knew I lean to the right... I can't find it now (it was really good) but I did find this: http://www.bluebloggin.com/2008/05/03/alfred-e-bush/ >> Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few >> even [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Bush "charismatic"? > I'm a Conservative and I didn't even vote for him! I think there's a divide (a sort of dichotomy) in place: that many people - even one's who can't tolerate him as prez - do see him as charismatic, in the sense that they'd consider him a good guy to have as a next-door neighbor. The problem is, that same personality - in his case - doesn't lend itself to one I want as the president of my country. IOW, his brand of charisma & that of Obama are different types. Cathy >> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > lend itself to one I want as the president of my country. IOW, his brand of > charisma & that of Obama are different types. If Barack were more of a Moderate, I'd vote for him. Which is why I'm voting for McCain. He goes against the grain of the party, instead of being another bobble-head. >>> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >>> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Which is why I'm voting for McCain. He goes against the grain of the > party, instead of being another bobble-head. But that's McCain's exact problem as of late - he *is* a bobble-head - has switched his opinions on so many issues it's ridiculous - apaprently just to satify "x" or "y" block of voters. Who is the real McCain? No clue. Cathy >>>> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >>>> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Cathy McCain is not the candidate of choice for the majority of Republicans. We do not think he is "republican enough." Obama is the popular leader of your party, yet he bobbles and weaves seeking to attract the party faithful. One has to wonder what makes Obama weave and bobble. There is no question that McCain jumpsw all over the place, he _needs_ to find the base that will support him. He knows he is not the first choice among his party's faithful. He has to find the issues he can support and that the core wants him to carry forth. McCain adopts a position that he thinks is the right one, even if that position is not politically expedient for him. Obama seems by most accounts to adopt the position that is good for him at the time. McCain did not support offshore oil drilling because the cost of Mid-East oil was smiply too low to bother getting our own off the coasts of California and Florida. Oil costed $40.00 a barrel then. Today the oil costs $120 per barrel, so the situation is vastly different, and his change of heart makes sense. Indeed, for him to "stay the course," would be problematic, don't you think? You bitch about staying the course, then complain that the candidate flip flops if he changes course. >>>>> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >>>>> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >McCain is not the candidate of choice for the majority of Republicans. Because republicans have no chice, your statement is false. Signaturegburnore at DataBasix dot Com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you look depends on where you go. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase =========================================================================== >>>>>> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >>>>>> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Because republicans have no choice, your statement is false. Anybody voting against the 'acclimation' of Obama as nominee yesterday didn't have much of a choice, did they Gary? Nancy cut that short, didn't she Gary? YAAAAWWWWNNN. You guys would laughable sometimes if you weren't such hypocrites. >>McCain is not the candidate of choice for the majority of Republicans. > > Because republicans have no chice, your statement is false. That makes no sense. On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:04:00 -0400, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno@e86.GTS> wrote: >>> Seth, a bit of a stretch there, eh buddy? >>> Bush "charismatic"? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >If Barack were more of a Moderate, I'd vote for him. Liar. Signaturegburnore at DataBasix dot Com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How you look depends on where you go. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³ . | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³ Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase =========================================================================== >Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few even >know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. That's why >we've had 8 years of dubya. No one in their right mind would have voted for >him if they had known his up-coming record of horrible performance. Who would vote for someone with NO experience? SignatureScott in Florida > Because Republican and Democratic party platforms are meaningless. Few > even know what they say. Modern elections are all about charisma. That's > why we've had 8 years of dubya. No one in their right mind would have > voted for him if they had known his up-coming record of horrible > performance. But, 8 years of W was the alternative to Al Gore and John Kerry. You're right, W is packed with charisma, compared to Al Bore and John Scary. >>> >> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp >>> >> for McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. This means you'll STFU now? > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. LOL, I used to like Imus back in the 1970's before he lost his mind. I have two records of excerpts from his shows. I need to add "once-popular radio hosts" to my list of "Who's Voting for McCain?" "Who's Voting for McCain?" -Defense contractor executives, and their employees and stockholders. -Oil company executives, and their employees and stockholders. -Anti-abortion single-issue voters that believe that McCain will appoint enough Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe V. Wade. -Gun-rights single-issue voters that believe that Obama will take away their machine guns. -Racist single-issue voters that just don't like blacks. -High income single-issue voters concerned that incomes over $250K will be taxed more heavily. -Hillary supporters that believe that Hillary can win in 2012 but don't want to wait until 2016. -Talk show hosts that believe that supporting McCain will help their ratings. McCain's challenge is to find enough self-centered, single-issue voters in the toss-up states to win. His problem is that most voters that agree with him on one or more of those issues, are not single issue voters and look at the big picture. No one that is concerned about the overall economic health of the country, about the environment, about health care, about education, about veterans, about foreign policy, will vote for McCain. > > Well, if Imus is voting for him, there's nothing else to talk about. > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > care, about education, about veterans, about foreign policy, will vote > for McCain. You forgot one. Ordinary average citizens. -- >>> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for >>> McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > implanted up Hillary's...er, skirt I think he was checking for polyps. It > was absolutely disgusting. No, I was watching CSPAN and NPR. >> Anyway, 60%? I find that a little difficult to believe. A very recent >> (August 23-24) CNN poll showed that 66% of Clinton supporters are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > got that little tidbit while I wasn't wretching over the banality coming > from Brokaw. Then it sounds like your talking head got it wrong. >>> Can't be they're RACIST, can it?!?! Good, card-carrying Democrats, >>> racist? No, it can't be that. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > sucking it in to give that banal speech she gave last night, with the > usual sound-bite highlights from her campaign. When it became apparent that Obama was certain to be the party's nominee, the party leaders, who had been neutral up to that point, announced their support for their party's eventual nominee. They also suggested to Clinton, that in the interest of party unity, she should not drag out the contest all the way to the convention. I don't see how that could be considered stabbing her in the back and twisting the knife. >>> Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the >>> DNC. Unity, indeed. >> Tonight was Clinton's night. I'll be surprised if the Hillary signs are >> quite so prevalent for the rest of the convention. > > I won't. >> Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting >> Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > that could be considered stabbing her in the back and twisting the > knife. You don't? An earlier backing would have made all the difference. If the party hacks ahd wanted Hillary to be the nominee, they would have thrown their support behind her, and she probably would have taken the nomination. But they left her hanging out there like an old sheet in the wind, and at the last minute when all hope was abandoned they jumped on the Obama bandwagon. I get an image of rats scurrying off a sinking ship, myself. So, what might have happened if the Great Minds of the Democrat party had pledged their support earlier? We can speculate, can't we? Perhaps Obama would have still taken the popular primary vote (but it doesn't really matter because the delegates aren't really committed in the Democrat party, and can vote for whomever they choose...), but there is a good chance that Hillary may have gotten the delgates needed, or at least enough to keep her in the running. Could it be that the Powers That Be in the Democrat party have had enough of the Clintons? A lot of us sure have. Maybe Limbaugh really is right, and the leadership realized Hillary is readily beatable by McCain. >>> Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting >>> Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > the Obama bandwagon. I get an image of rats scurrying off a sinking ship, > myself. You seem to be assuming that the party leaders should have thrown their support behind Clinton from the start and by withholding that initial support, they were treating her badly. It seems to me that remaining neutral until the voters had selected the nominee was quite fair. > So, what might have happened if the Great Minds of the Democrat party had > pledged their support earlier? We can speculate, can't we? Perhaps Obama [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Maybe Limbaugh really is right, and the leadership realized Hillary is > readily beatable by McCain. But why should the party leadership have favored Clinton over any of the other candidates? Do you think Clinton was owed the nomination for some reason? Withholding support from Clinton wasn't stabbing her in the back, it was treating her the same way they did all the other candidates. Do you think she should have been singled out for special treatment? >>>> Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting >>>> Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > badly. It seems to me that remaining neutral until the > voters had selected the nominee was quite fair. You don't think the Clintons were expecting it? It was a chance to get Glorious Bill back into the White House! She was the Heir Apparent, the Team getting back together. All the people that cheered Bill Clinton no matter what he did, and they turned their backs on the Dream Team. Remember, if you vote for me, you get us both. Yeah, early backing would have put Hillary on the podium, instead of being the First Loser. Guess the party isn't as enthralled with the Clintons as it seemed. >> So, what might have happened if the Great Minds of the Democrat party had >> pledged their support earlier? We can speculate, can't we? Perhaps Obama [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > candidates. Do you think she should have been singled > out for special treatment? She was left at the gallows swinging in the wind. *ALL* the political commentators had it as a Sure Thing, no matter who they worked for; NPR, the BBC, NBC, even Limbaugh had her pegged early on as the party's candidate. Wonder what she did to piss them off... >> Hachiroku ???? wrote: >>> C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > According to one of the Talking Heads, 60% have jumped ship for McCain. Then that one talking head seems to be blathering. I > got that little tidbit while I wasn't wretching over the banality coming > from Brokaw. <snipped> > Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting > Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > sucking it in to give that banal speech she gave last night, with the > usual sound-bite highlights from her campaign. What??? "banal" speech?!? Jeez. I was a bit worried beforehand, wondering if she'd be able to hit the nail on the head, but... as it turned out , I thought it was truly a wonderful speech & delivery of it - she hit all of the points she needed to hit & quite forcefully & effectively. I really don't understand what you were expecting from the woman if you thought that speech was merely "banal". I do agree that it must've required a lot of "sucking it in" - although I also believe that she'd certainly rather see Obama in the WH than McCain. And the overall picture simply needs to win out. >>> Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the >>> DNC. Unity, indeed. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I won't. I think she's meeting with her super die-hards today/tonight, so... hopefully she will be able to convince them - or at least most of them - to give it up already, no matter how much they wanted her to be the nominee. They need to be able to gain some objectivity & see the overall picture vs. how injurious they could be to the platform which they were supporting (Hillary's & Obama's stances are close enough - the differences boil down to just details & personalities). OTOH, if there's only a fraction of her die-hards still unconvinced to switch their allegiance to Obama, they may not make a real difference - not enough in terms of numbers. Cathy >> Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting >> Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Obama in the WH than McCain. And the overall picture simply needs to win > out Cathy! It was the same old crap she's been spewing for years! I bet there were parts of her speech there from when she was Presi...er, First Lady. Nothing new at all. And it took her long enough to stop campaigning for herself and get around to mentioning Obama. Kind of almost an afterthought. Perhaps payback for when he showed up at a fundraiser for her and almost forgot to mention anything about her? As far as seeing Obama instead of McCain? I'm surprised she hasn't changed to Independent. But, being the good little puppet she has become, she bobbled her head and (finally) said "Obama..." Sorry...the platform is splintered to the point of fracture. Let's see what Billy has to say today... >>> Oh, yeah, there was. Pelosi, Reid, and a bunch of other heavy-hitting >>> Democrats waited until it looked like Obama was sure to clinch the [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Sorry...the platform is splintered to the point of fracture. I disagree - I thought she said everything she needed to say, said it well, and sp helped to unify the party w/that speech. Thank goodness. Let's see > what Billy has to say today... Yes, I am interested in what he has to say - he has the ability to give great speeches, but he's needed to keep a low profile lately. So, am wondering how he'll go about tonight's message. And, IMO, to do as well as - or better than - Hillary did last night, he'll have to hit it *way* out of the ballpark. >> But, being the good little puppet she has become, she bobbled her head and >> (finally) said "Obama..." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I disagree - I thought she said everything she needed to say, said it well, > and sp helped to unify the party w/that speech. Thank goodness. Cathy, it was all stuff I have heard in her Stump Speeches! Nothing new at all, except for the 'endorsement' for Barack. All the same old rhetoric. Even I have heard all of it before, and I DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE WOMAN! > Let's see >> what Billy has to say today... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > as - or better than - Hillary did last night, he'll have to hit it *way* > out of the ballpark. He's needed to keep a low profile because the DNC told him to shut the hell up! He was severely dividing the party, even after it was apparent that Barack was going to take the nomination. It's amazing how many people cling to the dream; that Bill Clinton was the best President we've had in a while. I think what's really amazing is how well the country did during that period in time...in *spite* of him... >>> But, being the good little puppet she has become, she bobbled her head >>> and [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Even I have heard all of it before, and I DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE > WOMAN! To each their own opinion. >> Let's see >>> what Billy has to say today... [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > hell up! He was severely dividing the party, even after it was apparent > that Barack was going to take the nomination. Yeah, I know; weird; he's smarter than that, & should've been more objective. > It's amazing how many people cling to the dream; that Bill Clinton was the > best President we've had in a while. IMO, he was. > I think what's really amazing is how well the country did during that > period in time...in *spite* of him... Again, to each one's own POV. Cathy >>>> But, being the good little puppet she has become, she bobbled her head >>>> and [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Yeah, I know; weird; he's smarter than that, & should've been more > objective. ** Maybe the analogy is doctors shouldn't treat their own family members. >> It's amazing how many people cling to the dream; that Bill Clinton was >> the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Cathy >>>>> But, being the good little puppet she has become, she bobbled her head >>>>> and [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > ** Maybe the analogy is doctors shouldn't treat their own family members. That works pretty well as an analogy; was too biased to see with enough clarity? He did fine tonight, IMO. I like that he built upon Hillary's speech & went a step farther - listing reasons why B. Obama is qualified to be president. Cathy >>> It's amazing how many people cling to the dream; that Bill Clinton was >>> the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> >> Cathy >> ** Maybe the analogy is doctors shouldn't treat their own family members. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > He did fine tonight, IMO. I like that he built upon Hillary's speech & went > a step farther - listing reasons why B. Obama is qualified to be president. So even after the nomination went to Obama by acclimation, he was still pushing Hillary's policies? Interesting. > listing reasons why B. Obama is qualified to be president. > >Cathy Which are? SignatureScott in Florida On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:24:20 -0400, Hachiroku wrote: > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for > McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Oh, and I liked all the Hillary For President signs and shirts at the DNC. > Unity, indeed. 1) McCain is not a real republican. He is very dumocrat in his lack of respect for the Constitution and human life 2) Maybe they see that Obama is a bobble-head in real life, looks good, but nothing inside. Purely charisma and no substance. > C'mon, Democrats! Explain why Hillary supporters are changing camp for > McCain in droves?! It's been estimated on the National Bill Clinton > network that up to 60% of Hillary's supporters have jumped ship to McCain. > > Can't be they're RACIST, can it?!?! Good, card-carrying Democrats, racist? > No, it can't be that. LOL, a lot of it is race. My mom has a friend in Florida, a staunch Democrat, that absolutely refuses to vote for Obama because she was once mugged by a black man. Trying facts and logic on people like that is hopeless. They'd rather endure four or eight more years a Republican president. The whole south used to be heavily Democratic prior to LBJ's civil rights crusade. LBJ said, "We have lost the South for a generation," but it's already been more than two generations, and it's not back! I think some Hillary supporters believe that if they can make Obama lose that it opens it up for Hillary in 2012 to go up against McCain, who by that time will likely have driven the economy into full recession and will have started at least one more major war. Obama should have picked a Jewish Cuban-American woman as his running mate. This might have helped him in Florida, though for better or for worse, the vice-presidential candidate makes very little difference. >Obama should have picked a Jewish Cuban-American woman as his running >mate. This might have helped him in Florida, though for better or for >worse, the vice-presidential candidate makes very little difference. He did choose a pompous senior citizen, that should be worth something. >I think some Hillary supporters believe that if they can make Obama lose >that it opens it up for Hillary in 2012 This election is Barry's to lose... He should not even have to campaign..... SignatureScott in Florida > LOL, a lot of it is race. My mom has a friend in Florida, a staunch > Democrat, that absolutely refuses to vote for Obama because she was once > mugged by a black man. Trying facts and logic on people like that is > hopeless. Um, trying facts and logic on most staunch Democrats generally *is* hopeless... Sorry...you left the door wide open... ;P >> LOL, a lot of it is race. My mom has a friend in Florida, a staunch >> Democrat, that absolutely refuses to vote for Obama because she was once [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sorry...you left the door wide open... ;P No problem. You've been posting here for a long time, and I've never seen you post any facts or use any logic to persuade anyone. >>> LOL, a lot of it is race. My mom has a friend in Florida, a staunch >>> Democrat, that absolutely refuses to vote for Obama because she was once [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > No problem. You've been posting here for a long time, and I've never > seen you post any facts or use any logic to persuade anyone. But...I just *DID*! : >> Um, trying facts and logic on most staunch Democrats generally *is* >> hopeless... And that's a fact! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.