The Fight Stuff

NOTABLE in the Indiana and North Carolina primary results and in many recent polls are signs of a change in the gender weather: white men are warming to Hillary Clinton -- at least enough to vote for her. It's no small shift. These men have historically been her fiercest antagonists. Their conversion may point less to a new kind of male voter than to a new kind of female vote-getter.

Pundits have been quick to attribute the erosion in Barack Obama's white male support to a newfound racism. What they have failed to consider is the degree to which white male voters witnessing Senator Clinton's metamorphosis are being forced to rethink precepts they've long held about women in American politics.

 

Yes, IT has never made sense to say that men who previously supported Obama are now racist.  That is not what is happening, she is winning them over and he is losing them.  My opinion is that once white males got to know Obama  they liked him less.  Once they got to know Clinton better they liked her better.  According to an old friend of mine "she is the toughest person in  the race" and "has the "best poker face and we need a poker player right now".  When I read this article I thought of him.  


For years, the prevailing theory has been that white men are often uneasy with female politicians because they can't abide strong women. But if that's so, why haven't they deserted Senator Clinton? More particularly, why haven't they deserted her as she has become ever more pugnacious in her campaign?

Maybe the white male electorate just can't abide strong women whom they suspect of being of a certain sort. To adopt a particularly lamentable white male construct, the sports metaphor, political strength comes in two varieties: the power of the umpire, who controls the game by application of the rules but who never gets hit; and the power of the participant, who has no rules except to hit hard, not complain, bounce back and endeavor to prevail in the end.

For virtually all of American political history, the strong female contestant has been cast not as the player but the rules keeper, the purse-lipped killjoy who passes strait-laced judgment on feral boy fun. (snip)

The specter of the prissy hall monitor is, in part, the legacy of the great female reformers of Victorian America. In fact, these women were the opposite of fainting flowers. Susan B. Anthony barely flinched in the face of epithets, hurled eggs and death threats. Carry A. Nation swung an ax. Yet they were regarded by men as the regulators outside the game.

(snip)

 

More over the fold

Certainly through the many early primaries, Hillary Clinton was often defined by these old standards, and judged harshly. She was forever the entitled chaperone. But that was then. As Thelma, the housewife turned renegade, says to her friend in "Thelma & Louise" as the two women flee the law through the American West, "Something's crossed over in me."

Senator Clinton might well say the same. In the final stretch of the primary season, she seems to have stepped across an unstated gender divide, transforming herself from referee to contender.

What's more, she seems to have taken to her new role with a Thelma-like relish. We are witnessing a female competitor delighting in the undomesticated fray. Her new no-holds-barred pugnacity and gleeful perseverance have revamped her image in the eyes of begrudging white male voters, who previously saw her as the sanctioning "sivilizer," a political Aunt Polly whose goody-goody directives made them want to head for the hills.

It's the unforeseen precedent of an unprecedented candidacy: our first major female presidential candidate isn't doing what men always accuse women of doing. She's not summoning the rules committee over every infraction. (Her attempt to rewrite the rules for Michigan and Florida are less a timeout than rough play.) Not once has she demanded that the umpire stop the fight. Indeed, she's asking for more unregulated action, proposing a debate with no press-corps intermediaries.

 

I disagree that she is trying to rewrite the rules, she is actually asking the DNC to follow their rules which allow the votes to be counted if the state party does the most they can to fix the situation which they have.


If anyone has been guarding the rules this election, it's been the press, which has been primly thumbing the pages of Queensberry and scolding her for being "ruthless" and "nasty," a "brawler" who fights "dirty."

But while the commentators have been tut-tutting, Senator Clinton has been converting white males, assuring them that she's come into their tavern not to smash the bottles, but to join the brawl.

Deep in the American grain, particularly in the grain of white male working-class voters, that is the more trusted archetype. Whether Senator Clinton's pugilism has elevated the current race for the nomination is debatable. But the strategy has certainly remade the political world for future female politicians, who may now cast off the assumption that when the going gets tough, the tough girl will resort to unilateral rectitude. (snip)

Susan Faludi is the author of "Backlash,""Stiffed" and "The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post-9/11 America."
linc here

To me, Obama trying to declare victory makes him look both like a bully and at the seem time very weak.  But then that is the same thing isn't it?  
He has refused to debate because he knows he doesn't do well against Clinton and he is trying to pretend that only pledged delegates count in the end and that he will have enough to win (he will not).  He just keeps looking more and more like a prissy weasel.  I think he needed to fire some campaign staff weeks ago when he started losing.  He needs to stop looking by turns petulant and triumphant.  It is a really bad strategy and if he should prevail at the convention it is not going to put him in good stead for the GE.

Update [2008-5-10 9:57:56 by TeresaInPa]: Obama goes D'OH maybe he should take a nap before the 8th inning?

Tags: Hillary Clinton, obama, Primary 2008 (all tags)

Comments

226 Comments

Tips for fighters who can win

Clinton impresses me more and more as time goes on.  

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

She does not impress me.  She saddens me.  She should leave the race with her head held high and pay off her 20 million or so in debts.

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-10 05:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

If Hillary Clinton "saddens" you and "doesn't impress" you, you frankly aren't a Democrat.

by KnowVox 2008-05-10 05:52AM | 0 recs
"it saddens me"

is internet weasel language first perfected at DU.

What in heaven's name is sad about a woman who will be a great president and dares to compete for the job?  Some people think she should curtsy and exist left before the game is over.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:16AM | 0 recs
Re: "it saddens me"

Well, I don't even know what DU is, and in some ways, she does sadden me. She's a brilliant and committed woman who couldn't put together a competent campaign staff. Her chief strategist didn't even know that delegates were allocated proportionally.  But more important, she took the low road too often. If she had defended Obama when the guilt by association stuff came flying, she would have won plaudits and, yes, votes, too.  But she said "as far as I know" about him being a Christian, played up Ayers in one debate and Farrakhan in another.  And her gas tax position -- how cynical.

I defended her for years and used to trot out my arguments about why I supported her. Now I'm an Obama supporter and there are days when I feel very disappointed and perhaps a bit sad about where my former candidate has gone.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:22AM | 0 recs
LOL

Of course you don't know what DU means.  Goodness you are exactly as honest as your candidate.  

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: LOL

What is it?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: DU

Irrelevant, since virtually nothing you say is believable.

by KnowVox 2008-05-10 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: DU

Ok, hopefully you believe what I say. What does DU mean?

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 08:45AM | 0 recs
Re: DU

Democratic Underground

I find it odd they hurl it as an insult though.  Well, maybe not so odd from that bunch.  TR'd and Upgrated as appropriate.

by map 2008-05-10 09:01AM | 0 recs
Re: DU

Flagrant abuse of troll rating, again.

by KnowVox 2008-05-11 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: "it saddens me"

Ignore them.  When they tell Hillary to quit it proves they got nothin'.

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:58AM | 0 recs
"Please quite before you beat me"

it's audacious  I'll give them that.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 07:42AM | 0 recs
It's called uniting the party

Hillary and yourself are breeding a culture of feminist hysteria.

You are either with us or against us.

Hillary loyalists watch Fox News, court racially divisive comments, divide the country into men vs women, and divide the democratic party.

There are now three parties. Republicans, Democrats and the Clintons.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: It's called uniting the party

Actually, ALL Clinton supporters aren't doing that. Instead of painting in such broad strokes, whhy not encourage instead of accuse?

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 08:46AM | 0 recs
Your remarks are idiotic and juvenile

While some of Clinton's support has on occasion bordered on feminist hysteria, her coalition is far broader than you prefer to admit.  Obama's coalition is actually narrower, but it is very deep within the Democratic primary electorate.  Neither candidate created these divisions.  These divisions have existed  before our lifetimes and both campaigns could be accused of of exploiting them.  

by lombard 2008-05-10 09:51AM | 0 recs
Re: "Please quite before you beat me"

sigh.

Obama has not asked the Clintons to leave the race.  He has never asked her to leave the race.  His campaign has not asked her to leave the race.

You know this.  Why do you keep saying it?

by Mostly 2008-05-10 02:39PM | 0 recs
With us or against us!

Sounds familiar.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

How dare you define this poster out of the Democratic Party!  I agree completely with his or her sentiments.

She saddens and angers me for many reasons.  Among them:

  • As David Geffen, a longtime Clinton supporter, said: all politicians lie, but the Clintons do it so easily.
  • Her willingness to demagogue--to take the low road on issues like gas tax relief.
  • Her preference for loyalty over competence in her subordinates, which led to an extremely poorly run campaign.
  • Her vote for war with Iraq, which was clearly intended to keep her politically viable for president in 2008.
  • How little of her campaign funds she shared with needy Democratic candidates during her cakewalk re-election in 2006.
  • The way she campaigned in Pennsylvania on the staunch Democratic planks of Bitter and Wright.
  • Her lies about never supporting NAFTA, when she had spoken and written favorably about it many times.
  • Her exceedingly DINO declaration that she and McCain were the only candidates qualified to be Commander in Chief.

by deminva 2008-05-10 10:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

The turning point for me was when she started throwing the name of Farrakhan around in the direction of Obama.

Does Obama have a political connection to Farrakhan?  No.  Okay well then does he at least know him?  No, he doesn't know him either.  Hmm.  Okay well does he know anybody that knows him?  There it is.

And from that point on, it was "Farrakhan Farrakhan Farrakhan".  Knowing what that name means to the average white person.

by Mostly 2008-05-10 02:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win
 She does impress me - there is not an ounce of quit in her.  And - I have gained a healthy respect for her rising above her campaigns shortcomings.  She had no business losing WI, ME and MD by the margins she did, though you could argue she should have managed her staff a wee bit better.
But - I will say her campaign tact does sadden me a bit.  Her comments on white, working class voters is unnecessary this late in the game.  And - to continue to talk about May 31 as the 'nuclear' option subverting the will of the LEGAL pledged delegates is a bit over the top.  
I would love to see a unity ticket, using Hillary and Bill's appeal in the rust belt states, while Obama works more the moderate states, IA, CO, VA, NC.  And - with victory, Obama delegates Health Care to her, and let her run with it, while he focuses on the global issues.  
History can repeat itself - Lincoln's 'team of rivals' is a template for a first term IL congressman.  
by stryan 2008-05-10 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Her pandering on the gas tax was offensive. She couldn't even get ONE economist from her campaign or the Clinton administration, hell, from anywhere, to defend it.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Why was I downrated for this? I found her gas tax position offensive as did every editorial board - including the Indy Star which endorsed her.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Fortunately, most folks don't find taxing the mega billion windfall profits of bloated oil companies "offensive."

by KnowVox 2008-05-10 06:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

I don't believe the tax was the offensive part, Instead, it was that there was no way such a thing would be passed into law. Don't you think Obama would have pushed for it already if it were possible?

And remember, he wants a windfall profits tax as well.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Critics say there's "no such way" universal health care can be passed into law, either, and that didn't stop Hillary from fighting for it. And no, I don't think "Obama would have pushed for it if it was possible" any more than he's pushing for true universal health care.

When it comes to gas tax relief, he's done absolutely NOTHING but criticize Sen. Clinton. Both believe long term energy politics are the solution. In the meantime, Clinton is reaching out to hurting Americans by proposing relief NOW.

by KnowVox 2008-05-11 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

There is a difference between putting pressure on Congress to pass something, and going through the President's Veto.

We couldn't override them on the Iraq War - how could we get windfall profits taxed?

by Falsehood 2008-05-11 12:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

There is a zero percent chance that bill would even make it out of congress.  Citing that is the supporting arguement is ignorant.  Put your head back in the sand.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 08:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

right......And that's why she's continued to make such a big fuss about it since Indiana....oh wait.

by adamterando 2008-05-10 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

"so what if the bill wouldn't pass?!"

That's called pandering.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 10:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

As for "most folks," polls demonstrate that "most folks" agreed with the editorial boards, economists, and congressional Democrats who thought Clinton was pandering.

by deminva 2008-05-10 10:53AM | 0 recs
No they do not

No one I know agreed with the economists (tell me again - what did they do to help prevent or assuage this recession?  Publish editorials everyone ignored?).  The money saved by temporarily repealing the gas tax amounts to one week of groceries.  Now - that may not mean much to people not living on a restrictive budget - but it means a hell of a lot to the rest of us out here.

My best friend is a teacher.  After she pays her mortgage, utilities, dues, and purchases classroom supplies, she's left with exactly $22 per week for groceries.  That's all - just $22.  She could have used that gas tax 'holiday' - but I guess if that doesn't register with economists and editorial pages it's not important.  You try feeding yourself on $22 a week - and buy dog food to boot.  It's nigh unto impossible.  So yes - she could have used that money.  So could her fiancé - a limo driver.  He's responsible for his own gas - and it really adds up.  His gas savings could have paid for the car repairs they desperately need but cannot afford.

I understand you believe in your candidate - but don't blindly support the man.  I think Clinton would make a better president - but I don't agree with every word coming out of her mouth.  And I don't hate Senator Obama.  I began by supporting him, actually - then changed my mind.  Hillary's ideas won me over - like this gas tax suspension.  She was thinking of my friend - not what Joe Economist or the Wall Street Journal would have to say.  I also like that she planned to pay for it through Oil Company windfall profits.  It's about time they gave something back to America.

So please look beyond partisanship here.  Admit it - you would be over the moon about the idea had Obama introduced it and not Clinton.    

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-05-10 01:38PM | 0 recs
Re: No they do not

No, I'm over the moon that Obama didn't pander with a gas tax.  And yes, polls show that a majority of voters didn't buy the pander.

by deminva 2008-05-10 07:28PM | 0 recs
I guess you're lucky enough

to not have financial problems then.  Most people I know do.  They live and die by the old adage 'A Penny Saved is a Penny Earned'.  

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-05-10 09:22PM | 0 recs
You are either with her or against her

It worked for Bush, why not for Hillary.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: You are either with her or against her

And their you have it folks! If it works for Bush. You see clintonites could care less that they are now acting like Bushies. They only care about hillary winning. Well my dearies, you've LOST. Now you're just a bunch on Clingons

by venician 2008-05-10 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: You are either with her or against her

Her original campaign slogan said it all,

"I'm in it to win!"

She certainly was. Too bad she wasn't in it for any other reason.

by adamterando 2008-05-10 10:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Mojo to compensate for inappropriate downrating.

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Hillary Clinton's campaign saddened me, but I still have respect for her and her political stances.

Both campaigns have acted like, well, campaigns.  Everyone who has been following the race closely is probably holding both petty and legitimate grievances about the opposing candidate and their campaign.

So what.

It all needs to be diminish in the rear view mirror soon so we can keep our eyes focused on the road ahead.  We all need to forgive and forget some of the politicking and mud-throwing and focus on beating McCain.  It's certainly tougher if you're on the losing side, but I've been there several times before, and it can be done.  Focus on policy, because in the end that is what matters most.

I'm done criticizing Clinton and hope to see her as Senate majority leader because she would be a huge upgrade over Harry Reid. Imagine Clinton, Pelosi, and Obama in the three most powerful offices in the nation.

That's my "dream ticket".

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 06:17AM | 0 recs
You will be lucky when you see her as President

because she is not quitting.  

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: You will be lucky when you see her drop out

The only way she makes it in the white house is on the guided tour.  She's cooked - put a fork in her - thank god.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 08:50AM | 0 recs
Re: You will be lucky when you see her drop out

I disagree.

I want to see her visiting the White House next year consulting with Obama as Senate majority leader.

There is no reason to kick her.  

She's already down.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 09:02AM | 0 recs
You really are a nasty little leftist, aren't you?

by lombard 2008-05-10 09:53AM | 0 recs
Re: whine much?

tsk tsk tsk...you shouldn't call people names.  

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 10:50AM | 0 recs
That's a badge I'd wear with honor. n/t

by bookish 2008-05-10 11:13AM | 0 recs
Well, then, you are a fool

Because the extremists are the bane of both parties and the sources of periodical electoral rejection of each of them.

by lombard 2008-05-10 12:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Well, then, you are a fool

And the centrists are those who perpetuate and condone the crimes and maladministration we've seen from BushCo for the last 8 years.  God knows I don't want any more of that, nor will I support one who plays to the middle just to get elected.

by rb608 2008-05-10 12:41PM | 0 recs
Then get used to being a perpetual loser

Because the middle is where most voters in this country are and will continue to be for the foreseeable future.

by lombard 2008-05-10 01:14PM | 0 recs
Ah, yes,

the chronic "we've always done it this way" paradigm.  You know, nothing happens when you stick with that; we'll just get another eight years of the same old, same old corruption, cronyism, & criminality; but with a different letter next to the POTUS name.  Fuck that.  I want somebody who will work hard to pull this country to the left, not just sit in a comfy chair of centrism.

by rb608 2008-05-11 03:59AM | 0 recs
That's a pretty harsh assessment

coming from someone who thinks compromise is the best method.

by bookish 2008-05-10 01:38PM | 0 recs
I am not compromising in rejecting extremists

by lombard 2008-05-10 02:47PM | 0 recs
A fool and an extremist I am

Thanks for bringing rationality to the table.

by bookish 2008-05-10 04:45PM | 0 recs
I despise right wingnuts and left moonbats

Unlike most people on these sites, I believe our left wing isn't so much better than their right wing (and ours are probably even more annoying because at least their wingnuts are good for a laugh).  I'm all for compromise - with those pragmatic individuals of both parties who aren't too far from the center.  The others are just loopy ideologues who are better off marginalized.

by lombard 2008-05-10 02:53PM | 0 recs
Equally bad

So, if I'm to understand correctly, here's a shortlist of things you find equally repugnant:

Wingnuts:
stripped down environmental protections
stripped down corporate regulation
tax cuts for the wealthy
preemptive war
torture
decimation of civil liberties
strict pro life dogma

Moonbats:
increased taxes on the wealthy
expansion of social programs
universal health care
diplomacy before military action
expansion of corporate regulation
expansion of environmental safeguards
strict pro choice dogma

by bookish 2008-05-10 04:54PM | 0 recs
One more thing

The great thing about being able to opinionate online is that there are two levels of firewall which prevent you from crapping stupidity all over the place: the firewall between your brain and your fingers, and the "preview" button that allows you to consider what you are about save for posterity. You ought to think about employing both.

by bookish 2008-05-10 04:58PM | 0 recs
Sure you didn't forget anything?

Like a lot of loopy libs, you are in love with the power of your own lectures.

by lombard 2008-05-10 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: That's a badge I'd wear with honor. n/t

Same for me.  (I'd give you some mojo, but apparently allegations of TR abuse are relative to one's candidate of choice.)

by rb608 2008-05-10 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: You will be lucky

Well, she'll be 68 in 2016, and Obama's VP will be the likely frontrunner for the nod.  I'd prefer that she become a great Democratic leader in the Senate.

by deminva 2008-05-10 10:55AM | 0 recs
it it [retty pathetic

that Obama can only win by stopping the game before it is over.  Big chicken

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 07:44AM | 0 recs
He is not a chicken

but you are a bully.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 08:00AM | 0 recs
Re: it it [retty pathetic

such a pathetic response.  Go stomp your feet and cry somewhere else - like Taylor Marsh's swamp or the idiots at hillaryis44.  

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: it it [retty pathetic

"like Taylor Marsh's swamp or the idiots at hillaryis44."

She's been there: done that.

by catilinus 2008-05-10 08:57AM | 0 recs
Careful

or she'll hold her breath until she dies. Then how will you feel. Huh?

by bookish 2008-05-10 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: it it [retty pathetic

Obama can't "stop the game."  He doesn't assign himself superdelegates.  He is perfectly free to declare victory within the pledged delegates once he wins a majority of them, and he's equally free to voice what most Democrats believe -- that the winner of the pledged delegates should win the nomination.  The superdelegates are equally free to endorse him or Clinton whenever they wish.  It's not as though Clinton supporters were outraged last fall when more than 100 superdelegates had endorsed Clinton before the primaries even began.

by deminva 2008-05-10 10:58AM | 0 recs
Fortunately, Obama won't have to stop it

The SDs are doing it for him.

Obama picked up four more today: one was a switch from Clinton and another new one both from the Virgin Islands, as well as two add-ons, one from Ohio and one from Utah.

The slow drip is turning into a steady flow, and he's now passed Clinton in SDs in all tallies.

by bookish 2008-05-10 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Then I've got a special treat for you!

http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/

It's a load of fantastic fiesta of fun and fellowship for those that are more loyal to a single candidate than they are to the Democratic party!

Have fun!

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Oh don't spread that site around.  It's awful.

It's the same damn "our candidate didn't win the democratic process, therefore our votes are taken for granted", the same "we know more about the issues.  That's why we're switching from Clinton to McCain, because they have so much in common.  The same Michelle Obama lynch-party.

I'd like to minimize the number of "Daughters of the American Confederacy" sites that I know about.  It's just Taylor Marsh and NoQuarter and I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

by Mostly 2008-05-10 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

I know.

My bad.

I just can't help myself.  I go there a couple of times a week.

Sometimes I think it MUST be snark.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 03:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

You must either be wealthy or not of draft-age.

Because for the rest of us, no matter who is the candidate, we (nor the planet) can afford to have McCain as president.

by adamterando 2008-05-10 10:10AM | 0 recs
It would be much more honest of you

to say that she scares you because your candidate is too intimdated of her intellect to debate her, too intimadated of her ability to honestly win over voters to trust the system when votes are counted with integrity, and too intimidated by her stamina to be able to keep up with her in this election.  That is why he is trying to short circuit the election process by cheating in the caucuses and having several states in addition to Florida and Michigan not count.  

He knows and you suspect that he can't win honestly and that is why she scares you and you kid yourself by saying she saddens you.  Hell, yes, she saddens you because you know that she is the winner that you only wished Obama could be but is not.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: It would be much more honest of you
he is not showing up in WV because he knows he can not compete in WV.  It's sad that a state we can actually win is where he choses to pretend it doesn't matter.
It is just like taking his name off the ballot in MI because he knew Clinton was going to win that state.  He needed a reason to disenfranchise the state preemptively.
by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 07:50AM | 0 recs
Um......

as I recall the Clinton's fled So. Carolina after they saw they couldn't win.

And the compassionate feminist didn't even have the grace to congratulate Obama on his win.

Is that the lesson for your daughters.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 08:02AM | 0 recs
Re: It would be much more honest of you

I would donate $100 to Hillary's mountain of campaign debt is you will post a video of the look on your face when she drops out.

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-10 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: It would be much more honest of you

That's pretty harsh.

But appropriate, nonetheless.

Thank you.

That is all.

by Bipolar Disorder Democrat 2008-05-10 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: It would be much more honest of you

Um, all the candidates except Clinton and Dodd removed their names from the MI ballot.  They did so in accordance with the wishes of the DNC and in the knowledge that MI had been sanctioned and its primary wouldn't count.  Clinton stated that "everyone knows" the votes weren't going to count.  She claimed she was keeping her name on the ballot only to avoid offending MI voters.

by deminva 2008-05-10 11:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Goodness, your concern for Hillary's dignity is so heartfelt and honest. It's no wonder Clinton supporters are eager to support your candidate when Obama's campaign has attracted people make such respectful, reasonable comments as the one you just made.

by bowiegeek 2008-05-10 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Look, I hear you, but you're not convincing folks like Teresa of anything.

She and I had exchange where I noted that Obama supporters are able to hear criticism of their candidate without saying "that person isn't a progressive, they're a terrible person" (I think I gave Krugman as an example).  She said I was using "strawman" arguments, I pointed out that she could disprove what I was saying by naming one public figure supporting Obama/criticizing Hillary who she still liked.  I figured there had to be someone.  But I guess not, as rather than doing so, she troll-rated me.

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/6/16 3337/8637/59#59

So just leave her alone.  You aren't going to be able to really engage in a civil conversation with a few Hillary backers like her. Let her and her compatriots write their "onward to Hillary's victory" for as long as they want.  Let's get to the important business of focusing on McCain.  After June 15, the extreme Hillary backers can join us, urge Hillary to leave the Democratic party, back McKinney, Nader, or McCain, or whatever.  But we need to be focusing on McCain---his weaknesses, his mistakes, what criticisms work best.

And this goes for my fellow Obama supporters.  

by bosdcla14 2008-05-10 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Clinton reminds me of a prissy weasel.  Go on Teresa - TR me for using your words.  

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

This comment shouldn't be troll rated.  It is too funny and petty to be hidden.  Name calling: It's for big boys, too.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 06:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Um - I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of Teresa's name calling.  If you check my comments history you will notice that I never insult candidates.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 08:04AM | 0 recs
Dude

That is a direct quote from the diary with the candidate name changed.

by Sychotic1 2008-05-10 02:53PM | 0 recs
lol
why would I troll rate you for using my words?  Your problem is that they fit Obama and not Clinton.
There is nothing prissy about her.
by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:17AM | 0 recs
Re: lol

Looks like you two need a timeout.

Two minutes on the naughty chair!

Don't make me call SuperNanny.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: lol

Then again, Obama has yet to cry during these primaries.

by deminva 2008-05-10 11:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Knock it off.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Knock what off - parroting the silliness of Teresa's insults?  Gonna ask her to knock it off?

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

I'm asking you to knock off kicking Clinton because its pointless now.  

Our candidate won.

And there is no point telling Teresa to stop.  Its been done by many here and it won't work, so why bother.   Just look at her signature line.  She has some issues that run far deeper than the arguments surrounding the candidates.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 09:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

I'm not knocking Clinton, I'm teasing Teresa.  I know it's pointless - but somebody has to do it, you just can't let that level of nastiness have a free ride, or it appears to be sanctioned.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Fair enough.

by emptythreatsfarm 2008-05-10 09:30AM | 0 recs
You are correct. You just misspoke.

Obama is the prissy weasel.  He is the whiner trying to get the referee to call the game in the fourth quarter because all of his players have fouled out.  Poor thing.  I was afraid he wasn't up to the whole game from the beginning.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: You are correct. You just misspoke.

Not productive. He isn't going to declare victory in anything but the pledged delegates - the media has it wrong.

There's no way he's dumb enough to say its over while she's still campaigning. That's just foolish.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: You are correct. You just misspoke.

And he hasn't said it's over.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: You are correct. You just misspoke.

Yeah - but from what I read, a senior campaign official said he would say that come May 20, until they changed course.

There's some basis there.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: You are correct. You just misspoke.

Obama supporters, there's no point in trying to reason with this poster.  He isn't interested in facts.

by deminva 2008-05-10 11:03AM | 0 recs
true, it shows

"prissy" only applies to boys.  I love it that strong women brings this out in commments like this!!!

by 4justice 2008-05-10 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

My respect and admiration for Hillary Clinton has only grown during this campaign.  No matter what happens, I agree, she has changed the political landscape for female candidates.

by psychodrew 2008-05-10 06:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

Yep - She's shown that women can pander as well as men, can play the guilt by association game as well as men, can plan as poorly as men.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

It's going to be fun to watch you eat crow when she's our nominee.

by KnowVox 2008-05-10 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

This ones a keeper.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 08:06AM | 0 recs
shorter PM

waaaaaaaaaaaaaa, she might win.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: shorter PM

Hows it going with the Superdels Teresa - are they flocking to her yet?

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 08:07AM | 0 recs
"waaaaaaaaaaaa she might win"

superDs don't vote until the convention.  = )

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 09:52AM | 0 recs
Re: "waaaaaaaaaaaa she might win"

And how does that change anything? Do you think all the superdelegates pledging to vote for Obama are lying? They could vote tomorrow or a year from now, it doens't matter if we already know the outcome.

You can keep dreaming that all the supers will change their allegiance at the last second, but just because it's physically possible doesn't mean it will ever happen.

by Okamifujutsu 2008-05-10 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: "waaaaaaaaaaaa she might win"

Yeah - Just like electors don't vote until January so the November election is meaningless.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: "waaaaaaaaaaaa she might win"

Thank you.

by deminva 2008-05-10 11:04AM | 0 recs
Re: "waaaaaaaaaaaa she might win"

"superDs don't vote until the convention."

LOL! The new talking point.

So tell me -- you do know that Obama has lead in pledged delegates from the first day of voting in Iowa, right?  So when the Clinton campaign claimed for weeks that they were ahead in 'total delegates' because they were counting the supers, were they lying?

Don't worry, I don't actually expect a response.  The Hilis44 crowd here doesn't seem to care much for logic or facts.

by chinapaulo 2008-05-10 12:08PM | 0 recs
She impresses as a fighter

willing to do anything to win.

Including shameless attacks against hard working black people.

Don't you get it. She is polarizing the democrats, including you, to the point of no return.

She is appealing to bitter white women who think the world owes them something.

The voters count until the end, when Clinton plans on having the super delegates overturn the will of the voters.

When Bob Herbert who is hardly biased, lambasts the Clinton's as shameless, you know you are in trouble.

Clinton is sowing the seeds of destruction by playing against racial bias, gender bias and erasing the progress that has been made over decades.

ANd you cheer her on?

The Clintons may be fighters, but this is beyond the pale.

They were for the hard working blacks  until they were against them.

Clinton is teaching young girls how to be bad sports, and how to play dirty to win, typically attributes we have in the past assigned to men.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:19AM | 0 recs
(Comment Deleted)

This comment has been deleted by an administrator.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:41AM | 0 recs
You should be banned

from democratic/progressive websites.

by ameridad 2008-05-10 09:25AM | 0 recs
bullshit

stop the fake outrage.  Obama played the race card and it tricked a lot of people white and black.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 09:58AM | 0 recs
Fake Outrage?

When Obama chose to use racially divisive accusations against them in order to trick black people into voting for him, I knew I will donate money to; I will work for; and I will vote for McCain over Obama if Obama steals this nomination because he is too dangerous to be President.

MYDD is a Democratic site. A Democratic site whose stated goal is to see Democrats elected. Working for and voting for McCain goes directly against that goal. Accusing the likely Democratic nominee of 'stealing' said nomination goes directly against that goal. Doing either shows that one is not interested in being a member of this community....that one would likely feel more at home elsewhere...on a non-Democratic site.

I would say the same if the quoted portion started with a slam against Hillary and then went on to declare one's intent to work for and vote for McCain.

Nothing fake about that.

by Kysen 2008-05-10 10:13AM | 0 recs
Seems pretty clear the outrage

was justified, at least according to the administrator's standards. Maybe you have a higher threshold for outrage, or perhaps there's a magnet near your moral compass.

by bookish 2008-05-10 11:20AM | 0 recs
I'd give you multiple 4s for this comment

if I could.  Obama has the talent to transcend race, but he chose not to do it.  Instead he exploited race and divided the party.  His claim that he can bring the country together is a pathetic joke.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 09:56AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd give you multiple 4s for this comment

You mean the comment that was deleted by administrators for its content?
That comment?
That's the one you want to give multiple 4's to?

Well, isn't that special.

by Kysen 2008-05-10 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: (Comment Deleted)

It sure says something that a comment so offensive to be deleted by an admin was actually given mojo by TeresaInPA and DemAC.

by chinapaulo 2008-05-10 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips for fighters who can win

"Prissy weasel"? Really?

Theresa, you never fail to disappoint. And not surprisingly, you also never manage to build a convincing argument.

But no one likes a quitter, so keep trying.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

First of all, get your facts straight. Obama has public supported Clinton's right to fight all the way until the last primary. Personally, I think his surrogates need to cut the crap about ending this now.

Both sides are wrong regarding the MI issue. Everyone knows that the MI elections were a joke and quite a few MI voters stayed home because they knew it was a joke. But Obama did not do enough to solve the issue. and now the Clinton camp is haggling over a compromise solution broached by the locals - just 4 delegates less than Hillary would have earned.

And seriously, take off your partisan blinders for once since this is not www.hillary.com  and ask yourself if the Clinton camp wouldn't have adopted the same tactics if they were the frontrunners at this time. They were playing serious hardball in trying to get some union and other endorsements early on.

Anyone asking Hillary to fold early is just another hardball tactic. I dont agree with it, but it is not out of the norm with party politics as usual.

You guys want others to treat you with respect. Maybe you should consider adopting a slightly more party inclusive attitude instead of putting out the same tired old diaries all the time.

by Pravin 2008-05-10 05:30AM | 0 recs
blah blah blah

Obama has one face in public and it is a patronizing one.  We all know what shit he and his surrogates are pulling behind the scenes with the media and the super delegates.  They have been threatening the party for months with holding back the black vote and they have been strong arming Clinton SDs who happen to be black.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:20AM | 0 recs
It's a conspiracy

haven't you  heard.

The Vast Right Wing set the Clinton's up by running a black candidate on purpose, just to make the Clinton's look bad.

If the markets are the decided then why aren't folks ponying up for you gal?

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: It's a conspiracy

Lol..to make the Clintons look bad.

Someone has to defend defenseless American presidents like Bill who have no power and no political machine...lol.

The voters have stolen the nomination from the Clintons.

The Clintons have owned it since '92: what right do the voters have to take it away?

It was a fair election until the voters started stealing it in Iowa.

All post-rationalists, please go to Hillaryis44 to see what you can do to help protect America from anti-Limbaugh wing of the Democratic party led by AAs & the media.

by catilinus 2008-05-10 08:39AM | 0 recs
The sad thing is

there are those that really think that.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 09:21AM | 0 recs
The Clinton campaign NEVER solicited me

to go to other states to get "Dems for a Day."  It was Obama's campaign that did that twice.  The Clinton campaign never tried to game a single caucus or primary vote in any state.  The Obama campaign has done that consistently.  The reason Obama has been trying to pressure Hillary to quit is because he knows that she will win in the end because his house of cards is now trembling in the wind.

No, you are mistaken.  Hillary's campaign has not done a single one of the unethical and likely illegal things that I personally have WITNESSED the Obama campaign doing.  I am thankful that Hillary will not have to answer for all of the Bad Karma that Obama has invited into his life.

I am thankful daily that I was never taken in by the Obama baloney.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: The Clinton campaign NEVER solicited me

There's nothing unethical or illegal about getting people to vote for your candidate when they like your candidate.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:53AM | 0 recs
Nevada n/t

by ameridad 2008-05-10 09:28AM | 0 recs
Hmmmm. Who was it that was asking

Teddy Kennedy to get out the race before the convention when he was 800 delegates behind Jimmy Carter?  Nobody, that is who.  You need to read some history and quit kidding yourself with your patronizing baloney.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Hmmmm. Who was it that was asking

Yeah, he should have.  He undermined the president and contributed to his loss.

Why should we do that again?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 10:44AM | 0 recs
Stretch...

Clinton fatigue latte, anyone?

by april34fff 2008-05-10 05:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Stretch...

go be a troll somewhere else.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 05:52AM | 0 recs
Clinton is stealing

the joy out of the Democratic process.

And yes we are all tired of bitter old white women who play the white man's tired old game of dirty politics, and pretend to be feminists.

And you cheerfully enable this behavior, because you think a woman's time has come?

Teaching little girls how to stoop to any method to win instead of having a fair fight. And you say you support women's values?

Please. These are the dirty tricks rich white men have played on us for years.

If there is a troll here, it is HIllary Clinton, she is trolling the democratic process, and dragging it through the mud.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:25AM | 0 recs
Who are the "us?"

"These are the dirty tricks rich white men have played on us for years"

Speak for yourself!!!!!  You certainly do NOT speak for me.  I have seen all of the good work that the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, have done for my people all over the world without regard to the color of my people's skin.  Quit with your sarcasm because people like you will do irreparable harm to "US."  That is the reason I will never vote for Obama!

by macmcd 2008-05-10 07:00AM | 0 recs
"That is the reason I will never vote for

Obama!" The sarcasm of Obama supporters is the reason you'll never vote for Obama? Really?

You and your cadre of Clinton supporters deliver sarcasm by the truckload. You dish it out but you can't take it. "Let us throw our tantrums and don't say anything about it because if you do we won't vote for your candidate."

Nice maturity level there.

by Bipolar Disorder Democrat 2008-05-10 07:50AM | 0 recs
With us or against us!

It worked for Bush.

Or teaching your daughters how to terrorize those who disagree with you.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 08:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton is stealing

You know, I can't remember the last time I troll rated anyone.

But DUDE, you totally earned it.

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Stretch...

A Troll is someone who posts on this Democratic site, who is not supporting our Democractic Nominee. So are you classifying your self as a TROLL?

by venician 2008-05-10 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Stretch...

I don't think all diariests that come from Hillaryis44 should be classified as trolls simply because they'd rather vote McCain or Bush over Obama. Lol.

by catilinus 2008-05-10 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Stretch...

That's not the definition of a troll.  

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Stretch...

No, but it could be the definition of "stupid".

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

"he is trying to pretend that only pledged delegates count in the end"

You've probably missed the fact Obama and Clinton are now tied in superdelegates as well, with more and more SDs heading to Obama every day.

"My opinion is that once white males got to know Obama they liked him less. Once they got to know Clinton better they liked her better."

Certainly. But Hillary's rise among some white men (mostly the conservative, older and less-well educated white men) has coincided with her further collapse among black women and black people in general.

So this is not merely about her support increasing because of criteria equally subjective or equally objective to people of all races. This is polarization along racial lines.

Which I blame on the focus on Wright && Farrakhan.

Hillary mishandled the Wright issue: If she had defended Obama against what she should have been framed as a solely Republican attack, she'd probably still have boosted her numbers among white people as Obama lost some support among the most racially phobic there, but she wouldn't have lost black people as dramatically as that. She might have even returned her numbers among AAs to the 35% she once had in South Carolina.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-10 05:41AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff
Can you link the revelation of the truth of the matter about Rev Wright and his past and current words and actions to the efforts of Clinton or her campaign?
Can you demonstrate specific actions and words that the Clinton campaign initiated?
I am tired of letting the Obama camp frame this matter in this way?
by pan230oh 2008-05-10 06:06AM | 0 recs
face it pan

everything is Clinton's fault.  Obama never takes responsibility.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:29AM | 0 recs
Absolutism is your

friend.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Oh yeah sure.  Yes, lets have Hillary try to defend Obama for himself as he back peddles and throws Wright under the bus.

That's hysterical.

Funny how Obama came to Hillary's side when his numbers started tanking.

by LindaSFNM 2008-05-10 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

"Funny how Obama came to Hillary's side when his numbers started tanking."

What are you talking about?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:54AM | 0 recs
Your baloney has been left out in the heat

far too long.  Super Delegate votes are not COUNTED until the convention.  So it doesn't really matter what the spin of the day is.  This primary season will not be over until the convention.  That is just the way it is.

by macmcd 2008-05-10 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Your baloney has been left out in the heat

"Super Delegate votes are not COUNTED until the convention.  "

Except that Hillary herself was counting them from the start. Want me to dig up quotes from her campaign about how Hillary was ahead -- when it was only the superdelegate margin that was putting her ahead?

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-10 07:04AM | 0 recs
Wright, Rezko, et al

are Obama's problem.  Hillary has not had anything to do with them.  Obama brought these people into the campaign and they are his to deal with.  

by macmcd 2008-05-10 07:02AM | 0 recs
sure thing dude

can't keep my eyes open over here...

by april34fff 2008-05-10 06:01AM | 0 recs
New Obama SD

Utah SD, Obama now 0.5 behind Clinton.

by parahammer 2008-05-10 06:12AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

It is really interesting that Obama can't wait as long as he needs to to declare victory, in fact in just a couple of weeks from May 20th the primaries are over.  I have to ask again, what is he afraid of?  His impatience comes out of some need.  Having two of them in the race has kept McCain from starting an all out assault on one of them as the main republican target.  You would think that Obama could figure that out, but I guess he is not that kind of thinker---the big picture kind. But his insecurity and thought that he doesn't really have it until the convention is behind it all.  Isn't the FL and MI issue to be addressed on the 30th.  He must be afraid that he isn't THE ONE anymore after that.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 06:13AM | 0 recs
he can't run out the clock
so he is trying to stop the game.  He's playing
Calvin ball.  It is cute in a child, but it looks petulant in a presidential candidate.
by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:23AM | 0 recs
Because

your gal Hillary would never do anything untoward to win, right.

Like using the old racial stereotype that there are no hard working black people.

Would you want your daughter to play by Hillary's rules. Ignore the numbers and call your opponent names to win.

Apparently you don't know what women's liberation really means. It means not playing by the rich white man's rules.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:29AM | 0 recs
Re: he can't run out the clock

I'm confused. Is Obama introducing legeslation to cancel a primary or something? What game exactly is he stopping? As far as I know, all he's going to say is "I'm winning". Isn't the winning candidate allowed to say that?

by Okamifujutsu 2008-05-10 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Sen. Obama ain't afraid of anything. Not even the Clintons.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Oh yes, it's hitting the obama camp big time.  They embarked on the race card last year, trying to jump on both sides of the argument, then when heavy in January.

There constant claims of calling people racist if they don't support Obama is turning even more people away from him.  Deservingly.  I've never seen such divisiveness from a guy.

His sympathy whining vote only goes so far.  

by LindaSFNM 2008-05-10 06:23AM | 0 recs
his campaign will be all over the internet
claiming that he list WV because of the racist vote.  They are doing it already.
It is an amazingly bad strategy since people who he has called racist now, are not going to vote for him in November.
by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:26AM | 0 recs
Right

like Obama should listen to your advice to win.

Look he's black everyone. Did you see that. Let me point it out again.

Hillary is for hard working whites, not those lazy black people.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:31AM | 0 recs
Hillary

is the greatest woman on earth.

She show such grace under fire.

She is teaching little girls the 'right stuff' all across America.

Or how to win ugly.

Congrats gals.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

Grace under sniper fire?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:55AM | 0 recs
let him eat cake

go ahead and let's have Obama declare "mission accomplished" by declaring victory...I hope when he does there are plenty of people at his rally with signs like that.

A recent poll had Americans rate the strength of our candidates as being "a strong leader".  Both Clinton and McCain are soaring above 60% of Americans who think they would be strong, decisive leaders.  Want to know how many thought Obama was a strong leader?  37%.

It is a mark of a weak man who has to declare victory over something before its done.  That was George Bush.  Please Obama, no more "mission accomplished" until you really are the nominee!

(oh by the way, McCain will have a field day with Obama's "victory" declaration).  

by 4justice 2008-05-10 06:37AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Great diary, Teresa.

by Caldonia 2008-05-10 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

I LOVE your tag line!!!  Absolutely perfect and succinct.  

by not buying it 2008-05-10 10:13AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Reminds me of that old saying. What was it? Something to do with a nose and face...

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 02:13PM | 0 recs
There is no way for her to win

She isn't going to be the nominee. Not because of sexism. Not because or racism. Not because of media bias.

Because she lost.

3 weeks until the last contest and then, at the latest, it's over. I'm sorry your candidate lost, but one of them had to. It's time to focus on McCain.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-10 08:49AM | 0 recs
She did not lose

North Carolina is a republican state.  As were most of
the states that he "won."

She won in the states that count.  Despite Republican
infiltration, and voter fraud.

by internetstar 2008-05-10 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

"She won in the states that count."

Now there's an argument to take to the American people. He won the most states, delegates, votes, but all you people. You don't count.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-10 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

"She won in the states that count?!?"  And what states are those... the ones she won?  I guess that means the ones he won dont count.

L.O.L.

Man... Seriously... THEY ALL COUNT.  There's not 2 elections going on.  There is one.  One person=one vote.  Not 1/2 a vote.  Not votes that count "more".  (Or less)

Just because one of the candidates says the other's votes mean less then her votes... does not mean it is true, and I cant believe anyone could actually accept and defend that bs.

Seriously... how complex is it to understand.

by herenow 2008-05-10 09:20AM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

Need some help?  One's that count means one's the dem's can or do win in GE's.  The one's that don't count always go pug.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 09:25AM | 0 recs
Explain Puerto Rico, then

I'm pretty sure PR has exactly zero electoral votes in the GE, unless I missed something.

So why is the top story over at Hillaryis44 all about how Puerto Rico will turn the tide and guarantee Clinton the nomination?

Does it matter, or doesn't it?

by ipsos 2008-05-10 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Explain Puerto Rico, then

I don't know because I can't go to HillarIs44. I start laughing so hard I get hiccups. Scares the cat.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

Check the maps on the top of this site.  

Okay, see where she's winning?    See where he's not winning and therefore losing to McCain?

There's your answer right there.

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

Kerry was winning in May.. how did that turn out?

Seriously, you take those maps (which I doubt are linked to any real polling just Jerome's gut) and you act as if it means something.

It doesn't even mean anything even if it were based on polls since the election is in November not June.

by Why Not 2008-05-10 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: She did not lose

HAHA how about this: all the states that Barack won, the votes only count for 3/5 of a vote, and then for the ones that Hillary won, they count normally.

This is logic I am sure the Hillary camp will easily champion. We can call it the Michigan/Florida Compromise!

by Neglected Duty 2008-05-10 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: There is no way for her to win

says you, but she hasn't lost yet.  They can spin her remarks all they want, if she gets the popular vote and she'll polls best against McCain she'll be the nominee.   He needs to show that if he's 'won,' he'll increase his popular vote and overtake her in the remaining contests. It's not a bully contest, it's up to voters and to super's who want to win the GE.  He's made a great first try, he can try to unseat her in four years, like Kennedy tried with Carter.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 09:21AM | 0 recs
Polling is irrelevant & she can't get pop vote

by Travis Stark 2008-05-10 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Polling is irrelevant

she can, she has it with Florida and Michigan.  It's gamesmanship to deny those states their voice, they need to be seated or revote. What will you say if she greatly increases her popular lead and the super's vote for her?  Won't that be a win?  Polling may be irrelevant from some perspective, but it's what the super's are supposed to look at, and what congresspersons who need to get reelected care about too. Barack and the media count things one way, but it's self-serving, serves their desires, and far from the only way of counting.  Barack and the media have declared her dead, but they're not the ones that get to decide.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 09:53AM | 0 recs
You missed it. She doesn't.

Even with FL and MI she doesn't have the pop vote.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-10 09:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Polling is irrelevant

So the supers should then, of course, look at recent polls that show Obama ahead of her in California? And which polls should we look at SUSA? Zogby? Gallop? And where in the constitution or party or state laws does it say that we turn over our voting to private polling organizations?

Not to mention that before the general election campaign gets underway, any McCain matchups are basically worthless. No. The polls that matter are the primaries and caucuses. And they're just about over.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-10 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

this is the first time on a world stage that a woman has shown that she can fight without hectoring and demanding her due, and that's because she's the first female candidate, it's why she's made it so far. But there are many many women who compete in business with men who have also had to earn this sort of grudging respect because they carry on. I did a dissertation on successful women and the women in my study were much like Hillary, they took whatever opportunities that came by them, worked harder and longer, had unbelievable stamina and got to the top by way of intelligence and passion for the job.  Susan has hit the nail on the head, it's hard for a woman to be taken seriously let alone respected as the best one for the job, and few manage to overcome the obstacles, luck is a big part of it too.  These women aren't on the public stage, Hilary has opened a window into the career paths of those few women who made it.    If it were the CEO who had the power to hire her, she would be toast, but it's the voters, the bottom of the system, who have come to accept that women can be leaders and that qualifications and experience count when it's time to make that decision. Funny that the NYT got it when they 'interviewed" both of them for the job, but couldn't bear that she's running a real campaign.  Sad, but it's great that it's up to the voters. If she keeps her popular vote lead and grows it, she should be hired, by the voters.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 08:53AM | 0 recs
this campaign has made her a better stronger

candidate and it has made him a weaker one.  I go right back to what I first said a year ago...whoever told him he was ready to run for president did him no favor.  He will either lose in the primary or in the GE.  When that happens he will be done for good except the hard work of finally staying the office he was elected to, the senate, and having to do some work.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: this campaign has made her a better stronger

Theresa, since this diary is all about pulling things out of our asses, let's try this: This primary has, in fact made Obama a much, much better candidate, introducing him to the public, providing opportunities to weather scandals now rather than in the Fall, and allowing his team to build an innovative campaign that will be studied for years.

Clinton, on the other hand, has squandered this opportunity with poor choice after poor choice--from her campaign officials to negative tactics that always seem to backfire. The ultimate effect? We now know for certain that what we've always feared is true: Both Clintons are willing to sacrific anything and anyone on the altar of their own ambition. And that her vision and political pricipals consist of a single word: Win. Unfortunately for her, desire and will aren't enough. Not this year.

On one point you are correct. Obama may lose in November. Any election is a choice and an opportunity, not a guarantee. But one could argue that--in the long run--America and its Progressive movement could be better off with an Obama loss than a Clinton win.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

"this is the first time on a world stage that a woman has shown that she can fight without hectoring and demanding her due"

Not really - There have been plenty of women political leaders.  Today the Chancellor of Germany is a woman. Years ago there was Golda Meir in Israel.  And who could forget Margaret Thatcher.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 10:47AM | 0 recs
Excellent Diary, Teresa!
Obama has faded out, and his supporters are
Still screaming on a bullhorn.
by internetstar 2008-05-10 09:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Excellent Diary, Teresa!

Said bullhorn soon to be a bullypulpit.

"Bullhorn." That's from the "bully" or "thug" memo right?

by catilinus 2008-05-10 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Excellent Diary, Teresa!

By faded out, you mean still winning in basically every reasonable metric, right?

by RollinsMan 2008-05-10 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Excellent Diary, Teresa!

if he gets the popular vote and polls best against McCain he'll have but so far he hasn't.  Biggest bullies supporting him isn't a reasonable metric.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Excellent Diary, Teresa!

Even counting MI and FL and not counting the four caucus states that haven't released totals, he is currently ahead in the popular vote.

by jere7my 2008-05-10 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/prof ile/TeresaInPa

Bloggers I Like: Taylor Marsh

Even funnier

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis cuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address =273x148486

"Know your enemy"

Teresa, you love to TR people simply for disagreeing with you. I think more people should understand why that is.

by RollinsMan 2008-05-10 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

"mean spiritedness" quote from the link. It's taken over her & her candidate.

by catilinus 2008-05-10 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

You know what?  I've been registered on this site and on Daily Kos since 2004.  TeresainPA is a well known and well respected blogger with a longstanding reputation as a proud Democrat.  She's been around the 'spere longer than I.

You?  I've never heard of you.  And whether or not you disagree with her or dislike sites she happens to like makes no damn difference to anyone with a brain in their heads.

So shut up and stop trying to smear her with nonsense.  You're embarrassing yourself.  

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

How is linking to her other posts smearing her?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 11:23AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Don't play coy.  Linking to Clinton supporter's posts on other sites or disparaging people because of where they post is an increasingly common line of attack around here.

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Well, I was reading kos and mydd before they created the diary function (I remember thinking how optimistic and generous Jerome and Markos were to think their commentors deserved a bigger platform from which to opine), and I must say I found the post and the DU link amusing. It's not really smearing Teresa, and I'd bet that most people interested in reading it have already formed their own opinion of Teresa's input.

by Mobar 2008-05-10 11:48AM | 0 recs
is that all you have?

getting personal and searching the internet?  

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

This is a comment that perfectly meets the criteria for hiding it.  It is an attack on another poster and an attempt to diminish her.  People from Daily Kos should stay at DK, and those from DU should stay there is all they are going ot do is come here and make inflammatory posts, meant to attack someone else.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

I don't understand why never giving up is an inherently good thing. To quote from another comment with which I 100% agree:

Hillary's hanging on to the contest dramatically proves to me that she is unfit to be our president. It is so Bush-like, is it not? It's her Iraq. She has obviously failed, yet she keeps on just to prove she's not a quitter. Where have we heard that lately? How can we depend on her? Like Bush, she cannot admit a mistake. She can't admit failure. She is not rational. She'll take us down with her.

We need a rational president so badly. One who makes decisions based on careful consideration of all the facts and understands the real risks and likelihood of success. Hillary is running her campaign into the ground financially. Is that what we want in a president? Someone who uses fear and divisiveness to appeal to people?

Her campaign alone is a reason to vote against her.

by DamnYankees 2008-05-10 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

You can expect Teresa to accuse you of believing that this is a bash against women, because clearly you're saying that women can't handle money, and should get back in the kitchen. Then TR you for it.

It makes me sad when there are a lot of good people who are HRC supporters, and then there are the crazy, irrationals like Teresa and alegre, who yell at the oncoming headlight of the train, telling it to stop or else!

by RollinsMan 2008-05-10 09:10AM | 0 recs
teresa
The "lady" and I mean that in the loosest of terms, is an embarassment to to alot of us women out there and does Clinton supporters a disservice.
Her attempts at assertiveness,(mainly using four-letter words to get her points across)conveys more masculinity than anything.
Is this what femininism had produced?
by april34fff 2008-05-10 10:13AM | 0 recs
boo hoo

yes, because lord knows only men swear.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 10:49AM | 0 recs
Re: boo hoo

Come on, Teresa..take a long swig of beer and let out a nice throaty belch for us, will ya...

p.s..don't forget to pull up your dungarees when you stand up.

by april34fff 2008-05-10 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: boo hoo

You forgot tie up her belt, and make sure she hits the spittoon.

by johnny sexton 2008-05-10 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Hillary's hanging on to the contest dramatically proves to me that she is unfit to be our president. It is so Bush-like, is it not? It's her Iraq. She has obviously failed, yet she keeps on just to prove she's not a quitter.

I thought I had already seen todays dumbest argument, but this take the trophy.

The primaries aren't over kidz and Obama trying to stop the game won't work.
why is that a good thing?  Were you old enough to remember 2000?  Do you understand the whole point of the article?  Obama is losing the support of people who think she is tougher and smarter.  That's his own self inflicted wound.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

"The primaries aren't over kidz and Obama trying to stop the game won't work."

The Iraq War isn't over yet, either. But we want it to be over because we recognize its doing more harm that good. Same with the Clinton campaign.

"why is that a good thing?  Were you old enough to remember 2000?  Do you understand the whole point of the article?  Obama is losing the support of people who think she is tougher and smarter.  That's his own self inflicted wound."

Meh, they'll come back. Obama hasn't really done much to insult them. In 2000, polls shows 50% of McCain supporters said they wouldn't vote for Bush. Didn't pan out. Unless Obama makes a blatant insult to old people or women, he'll be fine.

by DamnYankees 2008-05-10 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Teresa, your tagline is pure irony. Everything you do seems to be involved in the politics of division. I am not only old enough to recall 2000, I was old enough to vote then. I also voted in 2004. And, I even voted for Bill in 96. You disgust me. It has nothing to do with gender, or race, or even that I dislike some of you AND your candidate of choice have done. It comes down to the fact that I cannnot put my future in the hands of someone who can't manage their campaign without going into debt, and not only misleads people, but allows and promotes her supporters into misleading people, and using personal drama over and over and over for her political benefit. I gave Bill a pass on Monica BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A PART OF HIS POLITICAL LIFE. The lying on the stand thing, less so.

The simple fact is, you are everything you claim to dislike about supporters of Obama. You need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.

by RollinsMan 2008-05-10 10:28AM | 0 recs
Here's the Thing

If he is winning the AA vote 90-10 and the AA's account for only 11% of the population, and if she is killing him in the white and Hispanic vote which accounts for 83% (combined) of the population why isn't she winning?

by hootie4170 2008-05-10 09:41AM | 0 recs
Because his coalition, while narrow, is deep

when it comes to the Democratic primary electorate.  

Blacks are a far larger share of the Democratic primary electorate, particularly in states where a very large percentage of the white voters are Republicans.  That describes most southern states.  He has two other core groups: young voters and the left wing of the party.  Each of those, but particularly the young voters, give him large margins.  Those groups have been very significant sources of his margins particularly in low participation caucus states and smaller Red states where the Democrats are in the minority but are determined and activist.

Her coalition represents a larger share of the overall population but it is less important in the Democratic primary and those voters are less monolithic in their voting preferences.

Take an example of a state with a primary electorate that is 30% black (other than younger black voters) and 20% in the youngest voter group.  If he gets 90% of the black voters and 70% of the young voters, he has .90 x .30 + .20 X .70 = 41% of the vote before the votes of any other types of voters are considered.  Even if he only received 30% of the remaining votes, he would win 56% of the vote.  If he received 40% of the remaining voters, he would win 61% of the vote.  

Obama has won many states because he has very deep margins among a few groups that are very significant in the Democratic primary.  That is a great nomination strategy but but doesn't translate to victory in the general election.  In the GE, he has little potential to expand his AA or white liberal base.  As far as youth goes, I don't know how much potential for expansion is there.  That's a wild card.

by lombard 2008-05-10 11:42AM | 0 recs
Yup. Even the odious Pickler gets it.

MUST READ
What if No One Comes to the Revolution?

http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/05/w hat-if-no-one-comes-to-revolution.html

So I've been reading that the Sippy-Kup Kidz (those who cart around their kups of kool-aide and suck on them constantly lest the buzz fade and reality intrude) have been crowing about what a superdoublewidefantastic party organization The Precious has built, how it's cool and digital and virtual and full of lots and lots of bloggers and money. They are especially touting his new voter registration drive efforts and how this will power him to victory in the future.
----

1. This is about the best thing I've read, combined with THE NEW AMERICAN DISENFRANCHISEMENT
Democratic Elitists And Their Role In Hijacking The Democratic Party!
http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/200 8/05/new-american-disenfranchisement.htm l

2. Even the odious Pickler Gets It : Analysis: 'Hillary Democrats' could be up for grabs
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9-NU iQsaZZIfN_LztxqwztjK0IAD90IE2RG0

3. Something to keep in mind before reading the Pickler....
Note: look how um well, divide & conquer-ey even the first sentence is- notice who owns the framing...

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- With the racially tinged Democratic race drawing to an awkward close, Barack Obama and John McCain face the challenge of winning over "Hillary Democrats" -- the white, working-class voters who favored the former first lady over Obama's historic candidacy."

p.s. In these progressive times, I couldn't help but notice that the Rockridge Institute is shutting down  http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/

"The Rockridge Institute was formed to address a set of challenges: The right-wing think tanks, after spending 35 years and 4 billion dollars, had come to dominate public debate. They had done this by framing Big Ideas their way: the nature of government, the market, taxation, security, morality, responsibility, accountability, character, nature, even life. This allowed them to then frame lower-level issues, special cases like terrorism, Iraq, education, health care, retirement, stem-cell research, the death penalty, affirmative action, and on and on.

Our challenge was to figure out exactly how they had achieved such dominance over the minds of Americans and what progressives could do--not just how to respond case by special case, but how to do the Big Job: to reframe the Big Ideas governing our politics.

How could a tiny institute in Northern California hope to make any progress on such a large task? Our strategy was to use the tools of the cognitive and brain sciences, and to address not just one or two issues, but the full range."

-------

I've always had issues with the mommy party/daddy party framing arguments as presented to us, always thought they were flawed. What Hillary understands (I say this based on watching her on the trail) is that what matters is who OWNS the frame, not who attempts to create the frame. Who OWNS it, not who sets it, it is already set.

question: why would RR fall on hard times with the slew of money the so-called creative class is funneling into such tasks? the big Soros money, etc. ? eh?

And... um is my comment..."creative class-esque" enough to allow little old me to post in the lefty blogs? Or am I too bitter? I went to college, I'm a latte lover, yet, I'm over 30...

more from the odious Pickler's article:

In the general election, Democrats trying to attract white, working-class voters immediately start at a disadvantage. The party's presidential candidates have not won a majority of white voters in more than three decades, according to exit polls over the years. The only Democrat to come close was Bill Clinton, who lost to Bob Dole among whites by 3 percentage points in 1996 and to President George H.W. Bush by 1 point in 1992.

This year, whites who do not have college degrees lean slightly toward the GOP, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo News survey conducted last month, with 43 percent calling themselves Republicans and 38 percent considering themselves Democrats.

Ruy Teixeira, author of "America's Forgotten Majority: Why the White Working Class Still Matters," said Democrats have a better chance of winning more votes from this demographic this year because of the troubled economy, the war in Iraq and rising health care costs and millions who remain uninsured.

"These are voters who haven't been doing too well throughout the whole Bush administration and now are really sort of beside themselves, don't have a lot of faith in the Republican brand of economic management," said Teixeira, a Democrat not supporting either Obama or Clinton. "The question is can McCain push other issues in such a way as to prevent the Democrats from taking advantage of their built-in advantage on the issues that are going to be current in this election."

Black said if McCain is to win over any "Hillary Democrats," he'll have to work for them and earn them, and he plans to do that.

"I think you'll see particularly his economic message and his health care message in very populous terms, and that he'll be talking to and meeting with people in that category," Black said. "A lot of these voters are conservative. A lot of them believe in a strong national defense."

by bluemoon 2008-05-10 10:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Yup. Even the odious Pickler gets it.

That post about Democratic elitists hijacking the party was a real hoot. Who knew Howard Dean was so powerful?! I think this was my favorite part:

Dean and the rest of the far-left elite knew first hand the importance of the earliest primaries. Dean's ailing campaign experienced a boom of momentum and funds after his early victory in the 2004 primaries, quickly becoming a front-runner who self-destructed as quickly as he had risen.

I would recommend not trusting the deep political analysis of an individual who can't get basic facts about recent history correct.

by Mobar 2008-05-10 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

This white male was pro-Obama last year but became pro-Hillary this year. Glad to know I'm typical. ;)

by Nobama 2008-05-10 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

I'm sure this was meant in the nicest possible way, and many of us are grateful to have you on our side.

by not buying it 2008-05-10 10:26AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

This white woman was pro-Clinton last year but became pro-Obama in January.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

:)

by not buying it 2008-05-10 10:27AM | 0 recs
Ban

I was just thinking how nice it would be to have a total ban on mentioning either candidate until the primaries end or there is an official concession, or whatever it takes to make this "legal" and over.

It could then play out while we shared stories about our pets, gardens, sports teams, maybe an occasional interesting bit of foreign policy or anti McCain nugget.  Maybe some biographies. Maybe write and read some issues essays and talk about them.  Get our heads screwed on straight for the general election regardless of how we are going to vote.  It would be peaceful and we would not lose a damn thing or a single supporter for anyone's candidate.  

Does all of this angry back and forth strike anyone as not productive and a colossal waste of energy.  Better to turn that to working for your candidate (Hillary or Barrack), or just having a good spring.

I know, I know, this is the net and anger feeds on itself better than any other emotion here.  

by mady 2008-05-10 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Ban

That's a wonderful thought.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 11:33AM | 0 recs
Bizarre

Why does a diary that personally attacks the presumptive Democratic nominee in spiteful and malicious ways get rec'd around here?

I mean, I have no problem with Clinton supporters holding onto the slim chances that she wins the nominee, but given the fact that Obama is far more likely to be our nominee, why smear him?  Why unfairly attack him?

"Prissy weasel"?  I mean, WTF?

by Slim Tyranny 2008-05-10 10:58AM | 0 recs
WTF yourself

he is not the presumptive nominee dear.  All your nonsense won't make it so.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 03:46PM | 0 recs
Re: WTF yourself

Teresa, your denials don't change the fact that he is, indeed, the presumptive nominee.  "Presumed" as in "has the delegate lead and all the SD momentum."

So, yes, WHAT THE FUCK are you doing personally attacking and smearing our presumptive nominee?

To put it more simply: even if Obama was about to lose the nomination and Clinton was the presumptive (or even actual) nominee, WHAT THE FUCK are you doing personally attacking and smearing a fellow Democrat?

by Slim Tyranny 2008-05-10 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

What's the point of all this idiotic fighting if you don't win?

by zadura 2008-05-10 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Who do you all think hates Obama more?

* Alegre

* TexasDarlin

* TeresainPA

All of these negative pieces are doing nothing to help OUR party or get a Democrat in the White House.

Personally, I have no problem with Hillary staying in the race until one of them hits 2025 or whatever the number is after they figure out FL & MI.  However, both sides (including their supporters) should keep the campaign positive.

by chewie5656 2008-05-10 11:25AM | 0 recs
don't get personal

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 03:43PM | 0 recs
I say the same thing to you

by Slim Tyranny 2008-05-10 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

In all fairness Alegre hasn't attacked Obama in a couple of days. Just used debunked taking points to try to say this contest isn't over.

But TeresainPA and TexasDarlin are clearly filled with an inexplicable hatred for our nominee.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

Great diary Teresa,

The shift in people's perception of Clinton is worthy of a documentary.  Republican women who came to back her after the horrific misogyny of the media was laid bare; working class people who didn't favor her turning her way as her stump speech became more populist; and as your diary states so eloquently, man who didn't think a woman could handle the job coming to realize she's the toughest in the race.

My perception has changed too.  I empathized with her back in the 90s, liked her enough to vote for her in towards the beginning of the race.  Today, I absolutely adore her!  Her intellect, courage and strength blow me away.

by bellarose 2008-05-10 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: The Fight Stuff

I've changed in my view from when I was a Clinton supporter until now when I see her pandering and using fear-based tactics.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 12:42PM | 0 recs
Saturday tallies: Obama 4, Clinton 1

For Obama:

Kevin Rodriquez, who switched from Clinton, and Carole Burke.
Also picks up Utah DNC super Kristi Cumming after the state elects her as its add-on. Ohio labor leader Dave Regan, who was selected as a superdelegate Saturday.

For Clinton:

Massachusetts DNC super Arthur Powell after state makes him its add-on.

by bookish 2008-05-10 02:06PM | 0 recs
even on the weekend,

drip drip drip

by Slim Tyranny 2008-05-10 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Saturday tallies: Obama 4, Clinton 1

Add Henry Mitchell from Arizona for five today.

by bookish 2008-05-10 05:19PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads