• comment on a post What does that say? over 5 years ago

    Obama supporters could benefit greatly from being:

    a) gracious, when winning
    b) respectful, to the near 50% of voting Democrats who did not or do not want Obama leading the Democratic party
    c) considerate, of different view points that in their truth point out the bad aspects of an Obama presidency.

    To ask for for more respect is not the same as deserving it outright.  

    I'm not attacking you personally, but instead of writing a diary about "how to treat the Obama supporters better," maybe you should write a diary TO THE OBAMA SUPPORTERS asking that they start behaving with a more inclusive attitude instead of an often gloating, I told you so, it's with us or against us attitude.

    -Steve

  • This metric is actually only valid once all the states and Puerto Rico have voted.  

    However, if Clinton DOES have the popular vote with only FL, does that count for anything in your book?

    What about Obama getting the nomination with hardly a mandate...liken it to limping to the finish line.

  • Read up:
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjQ 4NjU0OGYyMmZkYWNlMTgyYzQxZmRjOGJiNDg2ZDc
  • Read up:
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjQ 4NjU0OGYyMmZkYWNlMTgyYzQxZmRjOGJiNDg2ZDc
  • Read up:
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/democratic_vote_count.htm l
  • comment on a post Barack Obama Has a Majority of Pledged Delegates over 5 years ago

    How lovely: Obama gloaters and Clinton bashers are in full force again on this blog post.  Sheesh, real unity team!

    Anyway, the real question isn't that Obama has more delegates, it is that if Hillary Clinton HAS somehow  won the popular vote, is that not something significant that all Democrats should be concerned over?

    Look, anyone who once complained that Bush unfairly stole the 2000 election from Gore should think twice about a situation where one candidate is voted in by the "party officials" and one candidate has won the vote of the people.

    Essentially, ask if you want a government of the people or a government of bosses of the people?

    Can you recite the first line of the Constitution, please?

  • What is exactly "normal," pray tell?  

    Is it that people who read mydd.com "get with the program" and just do what the majority says it should?

    You sound like someone who thinks pretty highly of themselves...maybe THAT is the normality of mydd.com that you have come to know and love...

  • Am I supposed to be impressed by a reference to Howard Dean?

    Calling me a "goddamned Hillary supporter" is proof that, while your candidate of choice promotes unity, you are just like a many, many other Obama supporters who continue to divide the democratic base into two factions: those that support Obama and those that attack Clinton.

  • Personal indescressions?  Is that all you can muster?  

    Do you think highly of JFK?  Talk about a womanizer...all the Kennedy family men are notorious for personal problems.

    You put a lot of weight on Gore/Edward's lose on Bil Clinton, where you should be looking at the strategy the Bush campaign used to undermine Gore and Kerry both...and how the Obama campaign mirrors much of their strategy.  There are a number of news articles out there referencing this.  

    It seems you really have a personal problem with Bill Clinton, and it is very big of you to NOT let Hillary Clinton be her own.  

    Are you also ready to state that Hillary Clinton has made a terrible Senator so far?

    And, if you are asking for new ideas and new faces, what is your opinion of Ted Kennedy, Kerry , Pelosi and other Obama supporters who are betting on Obama in order to save their own asses in the future!?!?

  • It would be nice if you could be called Democrats, but since you're more interested in Obama than Democratic party issues or a longer strategy, that is what you'll continued to be labeled.

  • The whole "Clinton Dynasty" meme is a load of crap.  You can keep with your fantasy that the Clintons are somehow like the Bushes, but you're wrong.

    I don't care how much you hate the Clintons personally, but you have to realize that for the last eight years, both Hillary and Bill have been working nonstop to raise money and establish greater power into the Democratic party which helped get the Congress back into Democratic hands...heck, they've been doing it for nearly 35 years.  

    That is dedication to the Democratic party that you will never, ever come close to from your keyboard.

  • You seem to know a lot from your distant bench.

    I might add that Clinton has brought A TON of voters into this primary; its not all Barack Obama, all the time.

    And the whole moderate Obamacans bulls**t is just a farce.  Show me any real numbers that say Obama pulls Republicans...it was a nice little story while it lasted.  Obama should try harder with the working class voters before worrying about Republicans.

  • And neither do rabid bloggers either, nor media pundits, nor you.

  • on a comment on On the VP over 5 years ago

    Trying to lump all Clinton supporters under an idea that they will intentionally support McCain is just hogwash.  Arguments like this just undermine what is Obama's message of unity.

    In general, you and/or Obama can't speak to unity when it is only YOUR version of unity that is allowed.  That is borderline fascism, and nothing short.

    If you see no point in debating Clinton supporters, then why are you still posting here?

  • It is crap statements like this that divide the party even more than anything you can tag onto Hillary Clinton.

    You need to look at the numbers in regard to the democratic party: voters are split nearly 50/50 between Obama and Clinton.  That is a truth that can't be overlooked, especially if you really are part of the people's party.

    So, just what has Obama been campaigning under that he hasn't contradicted?  No lobbyists?  Well, some of the most influential unions are backing him, which are undeniably HUGE lobbying forces in Washington.  No old school politics, no Washington insiders?  Ted Kennedy and John Kerry are two of the oldest insider and old school politics White Men you could possibly muster up that AREN'T in the Republican camp, and they support Obama over their constituencies vote.  Most of the Dem. Leadership is behind Obama publicly and privately...so how is he supposed to "clean up Washington" when his biggest supporters are also the big wigs who run Washington?

    The big issue here is that the Democratic Party needs to win the Presidency, because combined with a Democratic Congress, REAL BIG THINGS can be accomplished.  With an Obama/Clinton ticket, you have two extremely passionate people who want to make a real change in government AND for the people of America.

    And besides all that, just what is your personal reason to deny the votes and will of nearly half of the Democratic Party by keeping clinton off the ticket?  Are you for the Democratic Party as a unified force, or are you just for Obama only?

Diaries

Advertise Blogads