Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kshortSD — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:42:23 GMT

I am an Obama supporter and until this morning, I would have begged Hillary to drop out now. But this article makes a very good argument for her staying in...but only until June. If she insists on trying to drag it out until the convention in August, it would be terrible for the party.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

edklonsky — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:48:22 GMT

Obama's ok. But I hate Oba-maniacs. They have only the meanest things to say about Clinton and her supporters. *They* have alienated half of Democratic voters and ripped apart the party, not Clinton.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

suzyku — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:52:28 GMT

After she wins heartily in W.VA and Kentucky due to the racist, ignorant vote, it's time for her to exit and get on with the fight against McCain. Also we obamites are NOT so willing to get behind clinton. She has run the nastiest, karl rove like, lying campaign against her "Democratic" opponent! She has whined and been a sore loser all the way. After her wins, good by!!!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Southern Bell — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:52:52 GMT

I was very disappointed yesterday to see none of the boys in the press talk about HRC's great Mother's Day "gift" to women - staying in the race until the last vote is counted.

I feel the same way as Suzanne; I'd be much more bitter if she was forced to drop out now just because so many men in the press and her own party wish her to.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

chdiaz — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:55:36 GMT

I am an Obama supporter and agree with the lady that wrote the letter. Hillary should stay in it until she feels like stopping. No one has the right to tell her to get out. I don't see the harm in it as long as she keeps it clean, if she starts bashing Obama then I don't think she should continue. We all know the reality of it and that is that she can't possibly win but she owes it to her supporters to continue on. As for Puerto Rico Obama has a huge supportsbase so that should turn out to be interesting.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Sarah Colacci — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:08:48 GMT

She can still win....

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:10:25 GMT

It's only good if it works, and IMO, Hillary supporters will not get behind Obama. I wouldn't support the underqualified man who was given the promotion over a qualified woman, either. I'd quit.

Dean and Pelosi can stick it where the sun don't shine. I'm looking for a new party.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

DCinFrance — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:10:43 GMT

If someone could get this person to control her tongue, let alone her ego, I'd have no problem with her staying in the race to the end of the voting. The trouble is simply the character of these people (the Clintons)...and no, the show is not over. I predict that she has plenty of manipulation left in her.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

edpeepers — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:11:28 GMT

edklonsky: With all due respect, 99% of Obamaniacs and 99% of Clintonistas are great people. Please don't judge 99% of us by a few bad seeds who post rabidly (and disproportionately) on message board forums!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:12:26 GMT

why , th emedia is so scared? they think they will be blamed for Mccaine win? THEY SHOULD BE BLAMED.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

sxavier — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:13:39 GMT

Mr. Romano is way off base with this article. Senator Clinton has not just recently become a long-shot candidate for the nomination--but has been fighting the math and logic of the voters and DNC rules since Super Tuesday. Her campaign decided to make this campaign about race after her campaign was well off the tracks and, worse for the party, Clinton consciously abandoned any discussion of policy divides between the Dems and the Republicans. Her argument has been entirely that she is white and ready. Her campaign is hugely damaging not just to Obama, but to the entire democratic party. We have congressional elections as well, and Clinton's attempt to divide (or triangulate) threatens everything that the Democratic Party has tried to accomplish. It certainly calls into question President Clinton's real legacy to civil rights and Senator Clinton's commitment to the same.

Additionally, Mr. Romano thinks that time and money is limitless. It is not--the Clinton campaign is sucking both out of the democrats.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

ReaderZ — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:15:13 GMT

Ms. Suzanne Little, PhD:

"So what if the numbers don't compute?" How else would you suggest that the primary outcome should be decided?

"How badly Clinton has been treated" How badly? Only when Clinton's losing? She never complains when she's winning.

"Let it play out!" No problem. I'm all for it. Only if Mrs. Clinton stops playing gender or race or whatever card to further divide the party, because the goal, Dr. Little, is not to elect a female president, but a Democratic president.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Thevail — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:15:40 GMT

"Obama's ok. But I hate Oba-maniacs. They have only the meanest things to say about Clinton and her supporters. *They* have alienated half of Democratic voters and ripped apart the party, not Clinton. "edklonsky

Oh, now, come on...Not all obama supporters are horrible and rude. Some of us try very hard to make reasoned arguments and responses. And can you honestly claim that none of the "Clintonistas haven't been just as bad?

And, further, I'll offer this bit as a motive for us Obama supporters being nice...we need you to support our guy, don't we. A lot more Clinton supporters say "I'll vote McCain!" ot "I'll stay home!" than Obama supporters ever have. Track the exit poll results for the evidence.

Most Obama supporters obviously feel that he's the better candidate, or we wouldn't be supporting him, but most of us just REALLY want a democrat in office to fix some of the more heinous things GWB has done.

Most of Obama's supporters would vote for WHOEVER the democratic candidate is.

So who's mostly dividing the party? C'mon...fess up.

It's THE PRESS....

Who called for Hillary to get out??

The press,repeatedly, not Obama.

Who blew the Rev. Wright thing up to the size of the hindenberg?

The Press, not Clinton.

Who played only short clips from the "bitter" comments, for several days, rather than play the whole clip?

The Press, not Clinton.

Who's currently making the point that Clinton is DOOMED, and is making an ass of herself?

The Press, not Obama.

Who's currently making hay out of the "white voter's" comment?

The Press, not Obama.

Step back, take a deep breath, and relax..This closely contested, hard fought battle of the democratic titans is the best thing that has happened to news TV since we announced the Iraq invasion. And they're milking it for all it's worth.

But here's an important point...McCain wasn't invited to the battle of the titans, was he.

Because if democrats can re-unite (even holding our noses) and pull that lever democrat in November, McCain doesn't matter.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:15:45 GMT

tHAT IS EXACTLY WHY WE REQUEST CLINTON TO DROP OUT OF DEM RACE AND GO INDEPENDENT. OR FORM A NEW PARTY. SHE HAS GOOD CHANCE OF WINNING IN A THREE'S FIGHT. ESP WITH THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE MCCAINE

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

andmc — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:16:05 GMT

To Suzyku:

I want to point out to you, and all others that like to throw the word "racist" around, that just because someone doesn't agree with the views of a non-white candidate does not make them racist. That is very strong language which all citizens, including you, should use with more restraint. There are clearly situations in which this word applies. But listening to the candidates and choosing how to vote based on their viewpoints and plans for the country does not constitute racism. I resent that so many uneducated citizens like you choose this word instead of simply understanding that not everyone thinks like you do, and that that is what our country is all about. Everyone has the right to vote how they want, and that is the beauty of the system.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kenwhiting — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:16:33 GMT

Spoken like a true Hillary fan. Hillary's continual presence IS a catastrophe, not to the Democratic Party, but to herself. She has shown her true face (or faces) over the past couple of months, and in turn, shown the American public why she would not be a good candidate for president. This election was originally hers to lose, and she has done exactly that.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

CalifLady36 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:16:39 GMT

Hillary Clinton should NOT be forced to drop out. I will continue pushing for Hillary and under no circumstances will I ever vote for obama. The media has thrashed Hillary from the beginning, bringing up past actions of Bill Clinton and using Keith olbermann and Chris Matthews to put Clinton down to the effect it has become so apparent of their hatred for Clinton. MSNBC should be ashamed of themselves for allowing such biased "reporting" - if that is what it is called. - more like tabloid gossip.

If obama is nominated I will vote for McCain. I will reregister as a Republican or Independent the moment that the nomination is given to obama. I blame the DNC, Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi have all but taken off obama's shoes and kissed his feet. I am amazed that someone who has self-described himself as a Golden Messiah would actually be considered a presidential candidate. But I am through as a Democrat. The Democratic Party is not what it used to be and there is no way I will ever support it again. Many people are of the same opinion of mine - talked to a gentlemen at a grocery store Saturday, and signed petition to stop nomination of Obama - but the DNC continues to try and FORCE out Clinton. And we think that the Republicans are BAD? Wait for the obama train and watch how the USA is destroyed by obama and his radical supporters.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

vintner — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:18:02 GMT

Sarah, chdiaz, southern bell--true, true, true!

I would love to shake that woman's hand and tell her how much it means to me that she's still ensuring people's primary votes count. If she quit now, there would be a lot of bitterness within the party that simply would never go away.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jwaldrop3 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:20:13 GMT

suzyku - you are the ignorant, racist loser. Your man is racist (follower of the Racist Jeremiah Wright) and, being racist, that makes him also a loser. By definition, if he is a racist loser (which he is) then he must also be ignorant. We can draw no other conclusion than, since you are supporting an ignorant racist loser, you must be also!!!!!

We need to award you a glass bellybutton seeing that you have your head so far up your _ _ _ that you need the glass bellybutton to help you see!!! I'll guarantee you that there are many in West VA with much more class than you.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jonstorm — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:20:51 GMT

It now looks like Obama will win the Nomination, even though he has no plan, no experience and no chance of winning the GE.

Democrats here's your excuses ready for why we lost again in 2008.

"If only white people weren't so racist and bitter" and they would vote for a less qualified black man over a qualified white man.

Good Luck with that.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:21:36 GMT

I only read the title of the article and knew it was from Andrew Romano.

Andrew...your opinion is so bias.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

ike2000 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:26:00 GMT

Only in communist countries do DICTATORS assume leadership based on force or persuasion, rather than hard tallied results. The people have spoken - loud and clear - their writing is on the wall. This is the fact!

Your argument is based on sullied gutter demagoguery. It holds no water, rather, a baseless Maggot-Puke. Hillary had the opportunity to present this to the people. They listened. And then, her argument was soundly rejected by the masses. This is it, in a nutshell.

November is not here yet. Hillary's negative view of November is merely baseless and unruly. This is tantamount to procrastination. Even if it were to be true, still, she is not the most qualified democrat fit for rescue. Nothing in the rule books defaults the banner to her. Al Gore and other peace-loving democrats will be available, should in case. So, by hanging in there, she believes she can inherit the loss.

This is America and not a coronation. Hillary should trace her root back to England and convince prince Charles to allow her take over the monarchy in the event the queen is deceased. That will be a more viable option.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Connecticut — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:26:04 GMT

I, like many other capable, hardwrorking women I know, am apalled by the way Senator Clinton has been treated by the media and the DNC. They have been harrassing her to drop out of the race even after big wins such as Pennsylvania. They have disenfranchised millions of Florida and Michigan voters even after the tragedy of 2000 that resulted in 8 world-altering years of W. They have consistedly said degrading and humiliating things about Mrs. Clinton that they would never say about any man, black or white. The talk constantly about racism but never mention misogyny because they think the latter is fine.

Note also that once again the Democrats look like they will nominate a candidate who cannot win. Without Florida and Ohio, Mr. Obama has a very small chance of winning the electoral college. Senator Clinton would win both those states as well as Arkansas and maybe West Virginia.

If and when Senator Clinton is forced out of the race, I will change my party affiliation from Democratic to Independent. My vote will be with the other party. We may not be as much fun as younger voters, but women over 40 vote in numbers and reliably. We also do the bulk of the legwork for every campaign.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:29:23 GMT

PEOPLE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT DEMS WHO VOTE FOR HILLARY NOW WILL NO WAY VOTE FOR OBAMA. HEY , I NOTICED SOMETHING EVERYTIME HE POSTS A WIN, THERE IS SOME MAJOR CALAMITY IN THE WORLD. IN SOME WAY, I AM SO HAPPY THAT THE END TIMES ARE COMING SO FAST. i DON'T WANT TO BE CAUGHT WITH OBAMA'S NAME ON MY HEAD!!!. CALLL ME CRAZY. WHY DO YOU TAKE A CHANCE?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

LongTimeDem — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:29:25 GMT

I am a life long Democrat who finds herself wondering if I need a new party. I have never given to any campaign, but found myself loosening my purse strings to help out Hillary.

Obama is as far to the left as Bush Jr is to the right. I want a centrist, someone tested - with experience at not just political life - but the world as a whole. No one can possibly say that Hillary has any skeletons in her closet. The Republican's had 8 years before she even became a Senator to find out anything to trash her. Can you honestly say that Obama doesn't have any more?

Quite frankly - fancy speeches don't sway me. This isn't a popularity contest. When I see where both of them stand on issues, they are close. But, the differences that they do have lead me to Hillary. That's my choice.

I want her to do what she feels she needs to do. I support her all the way. Once the Democratic nomimee is picked, I'll decide who to vote for.

I can just hear the Rep machine at work, "Barrack HUSEIN Obama" and the words of Rev Wright as a voice over. You know it's going to happen...

I just can't bear to have us blow another election.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

susangg — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:29:39 GMT

IF Hillary was capable of campaigning without the nasty racist attacks she has been making on Obama, then I would agree with you. But she isn't. So, while I have no issues with her staying in the race until the current batch of primaries come to a close on June 3, she should at the very least suspend her campaign at that point. As for this BS about "Florida and Michican," what's to decide? Hillary Clinton, using her typical revisionist historical style (the short version is "LIE") is now denying that their was ANY agreement that the candidates were to take their names off the ballot in Michigan and that the only reason Obama's name was taken off the ballot was that (her words) "he chose not to compete in that state."

We all know what is going to happen, and continuing this campaign for a convention floor fight is merely part of Hillary's strategy to try as hard as she can to wreck Obama's chances so that she can make another stab at it in 2012. What's going to happen is this: The DNC will "seat" delegates, but not in proportion to the "vote." (ie, they won't give Obama "zero" delegates as she is demanding. They'll eiether split the delegates 50/50 or give Hillary a slight adge (the most recent compromise proposed for Michigan is to give Hillary 69 votes and Obama 59 votes). Which is more than she should get...but it will not change Obama's lead.

And please, STOP the "dream ticket" talk! It would be a nightmare not a "dream." Obama needs a running mate who is in tune with his policies, attitude and governing style. Someone with strong complementary experience, someone who was against the Iraq war from the beginning, and someone who is not laden down with "old politics" baggage. ...say, Bill Richardson.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:30:49 GMT

jonstorm,

I do not know or think that white people are racist and bitter...I know you are bitter.

Mc CAIN is an old, angry man, resented by his loses and his lack of recognition by his own party.

He almost flip flopped into a democrat when he lost to Bush. He does not have a true stand on anything except his own power.

CAIN is a really bad name. It remind us of and old battle: Abel and CAIN.

We do not want CAIN in the government. We want Abel.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:31:14 GMT

IF YOU DON'T KNOW OBAMA, TRY TO READ ABOUT HIS WAY OF POLITICS FROM TIME MAGAZINE. I WONDER WHY IT TOOK SO LONG FOR THEM TO PRINT THOSE ARTICLES REFERING TO HIS POLITICAL EXPEREINCE. HE IS FAKE FAKE FAKE FAKE.,.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:34:07 GMT

hey at least its not Obama personely trying to make her quit! He did in all reality, buffed her up, no disrespect, no insults, just praise. So if his follers would act like Obama, we would not have battles on line, just conversation!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:34:10 GMT

HILLARY PLEASE DROP OUT AND GO INDEPENDENT. DO NOT SIT WITH PEOPLE WHO BACK STAB YOU. CONTINUING LIKE THIS IS JUST SO FOOLISH.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:36:33 GMT

ALMA

What about Romano saying he believes she should, stay ,in the race! how is this biased???

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

totlco — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:37:04 GMT

I'm an Obama supporter. But I agree that Hillary should finish out her campaign. She derserves it and so do her supporters. I gave her camaign some $$ after Indiana/North Carolina because I want all the votes counted and all the votes to count! Hang in there, Hillary! Don't let anyone push you out!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

nirak — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:37:05 GMT

Hillary , You are done and stop stabbing Obama every chance you get.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:41:23 GMT

Emmarcee,

Obama is going for change.

And if you do not like change and would like to continue with this old way of trashing people and dispersing hatred, divisiveness and anger...be my guest and vote for the republican party because Hillary will not run for president this year.

If you do not care about 4,000 Americans who gave their lives for you...be my guest and vote the republican party.

If you do not care for more lives to die abroad...be my guest and vote the republican party.

If you do not care for people dying due to lack of medical help and benefits...be my guest and vote the republican party.

If you do not care for people loosing their homes thanks to the republican policy of benefiting the rich and abandoning the poor...be my guest and vote the republican party.

And take responsibility for your actions before God for choosing CAIN rather than Abel. It is up to you.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kenwhiting — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:41:32 GMT

To all of you Hillaryophiles out there; if she was halfway as good as you like to trumpet, then why hasn't she heard your voices? She's finally shown her true colors. Now Hillary, it's time to go home and take your megalomania medicine.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

CLBennett — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:43:01 GMT

I have been reading the comments and I am tired of everybody thinking that Hillary is being stumped on. To think there are no skeletons in her closet is "foolish" The Obama Campaign knows of many, but choose to take the "high road". I am for Obama but I also agree that Hillary should not be pushed out; she should exit on her own terms on her own time.

Everyone keeps talking about Obama is not experience...well, apparantly the "experienced" politicians haven't done a good job either. It's time to look at the issues at hand. Frankliy, I don't want someone running the country who is not effectively running thier own campaign when it comes to finances and integerity either.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Monte Brown — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:45:57 GMT

Obama supporters will turn Hillary supporters away with their snickering, snarling and hateful messages. MSNBC, CNN and even some in Newsweek have been so hateful towards Hillary. Many of us Hillary supporters will have no problem voting for McCain and Obama's "Yes We Can" rhetoric will be silenced.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

David mulenex — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:47:52 GMT

we'll miss her when she's gone, yes, but first she has to go away. I agree that helping her fiercely loyal followers to rally behind Obama is a job that will take more than a week, and require Hillary's full and consdierable energies. She's made the job harder by trying to marginalize Obama supporters as less hard working and less American, and tried to make their educations and greater diversity a liability instead of a an asset. Luckily for all of us, Obama hasn't answered scorched eatrh with scorched earth, so there is still a way back to the party unity which will be needed to defeat George Bush Two and a Half, Senex McCainus.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:54:05 GMT

You know half of the mean Obama supporters, are not even Obama supporters!! they all belong to the 'Rush project' and keeping us divided is there plan so the next time REMEMBER THAT SUPPORTER CUSSING AND RANTING AND HUSSAINING AND CLINTONS REV IS A PEDIPHILE THEY ARE GOP!!! DO NOT FORGET JUST HOW DIRTY THE GOP CAN BE!!! DON'T EVER FORGET!!! THE SAME GOES FOR CLINTON SUPPORTERS HOW DO YOU KNOW WHO THEY SPEAK FOR, YOU DON'T, BUT YOU TAKE IT TO HEART AS A DEM ATTACK,STOP! IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE. THIS AUTHOR IS NOT BIASED, HE WANTS HER TO STAY! HOW IS THIS BIASED??? NEWSWEEK HAS BASHED OBAMA FOR WEEKS! WE KNOW WHO HE WAS BORN NEXT TO, ASSOCATES WITH, LEARNS FROM, IF HE IS BLACK ENOUGH, "HUSSAIN"?? IF GETTING BURNED EVERY TIME YOUR NAME IS IN THIS RAG! HOW IS IT CALLED A FREE RIDE?? WE KNOW OBAMA BETTER THAN ANY ONE RUNNING! FACT!! FOR NOW!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

tomh_32 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:54:27 GMT

If she can come up with the money, Hilary should run as an independent. Lieberman did and won. What is the difference between Ned Lamont and Obama? They're both extreme liberals. Who cares about Party politics. Let's have another fun, three-way election like 1992. Let's showcase our democratic process to the world one more time.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

edklonsky — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:54:49 GMT

There go the Oba-maniacs again ...

so many of them are

mean mean mean,

bitter bitter bitter,

and oh so entitled

to the Democratic Nomination

as if he's already earned the necessary delegates

(he hasn't).

And Obama's about to lose West Virginia by 30 points. You may want to call WV voters "racist" and "ignorant" -- as an Oba-maniac did below -- but WV has voted Democratic in 8 of the past 12 Presidential elections. Obama = Dukakis-light?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:55:04 GMT

You're being naive Alma. Obama isn't about change, He just picked that as his slogan so he could differentiate himself from Hillary and pit the young against the old, blaming the boomers for all our problems so the young college educated elite who have been living off their parents would register and vote for him.

Obama won't change anything. He learned his politics from Emil Jones, Jr., and Richard Daley's crew. He owes too many powerful people too much. Rev. Wright was telling the truth, Obama is nothing but another a politician. He is doing what politicians do and says what he has to say just to get elected.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 18:59:52 GMT

MY NAME IS OSAMA BIN-LAUDEN!

ANYONE WHO BELIEVED THAT! BELIEVES EVERY COMMENT WEATHER ABOUT OBAMA OR CLINTON ON LINE!!! HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DON'T!! YOU "ASSUME"

"ASSUMPTION" IS THE MOTHER OF ALL FK UPS! REMEMBER HOW DIRTY THE GOP CAN BE, AND THEY ARE PLAYING US AGAINST EACH OTHER, CAUSE IT WORKS! WHY??? QUESTION FOR THE TECHNO AGES!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

menkryan — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:00:31 GMT

The Clinton camp has just been floored by the largest political grassroots campaign in recent American history. They certainly didn't see that coming and they're still reeling from the fact that she's lost. Don't believe Republicans when they say they're eager to take on Obama instead of HRC. They've tried to smear him over and over again, paying little attention to Hillary. You can't have it both ways boys. If you're so eager to run against him why have you tried to take him out all along? Obama is the catalyst. No one's drinking KoolAid. We're changing the game.

Obama 08/12

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

EdnaTN — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:02:11 GMT

I am very angry about what has been happening but what has made me particularly angry is the lack of loyalty I have seen in the Party. Ted Kennedy would not be a Senator today if the Clintons had not put time in money into his campaign when he was in risk if losing his seat. And who was Bill Richardson before Bill Clinton gave him opportunities. I am most angry at the African American community. They were consistently supported by the Clintons but deserted them in mass when a "brother" came on the scene. It seems the only people who are supposed to not let race enter into their voting decisions are white voters. I voted for Harold Ford and am not only sorry that I did. McCain will be getting my vote in November.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

callmehandy64 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:04:37 GMT

Stating that white middle class americans without a college degree prefer Clinton is not a racist comment when it is shown on a graph or in a poll isn't considered racist. I'm not sure why Obama supporters yell "race card!" any time the words "black" or "white" or uttered. Personally, I think a bunch of people have been brainwashed. Before anyone reading this yells "race card!" at me, let me just mention that I'm just as black as Mr Obama and I must say he was very slock to convince people how he felt their pain as black americans, even though he is not descended from slaves and was raised in Hawaii where it's a stigma TO BE WHITE. I know this also, because I too was raised in Hawaii. He doesn't feel any black american's pain, he doesn't know what it is. He is an observer and what amounts to a tourist in the black community. With that said, I must say I admire the smoothness of his politics. Anything that he didn't agree with, any attack he labeled as "old politics or negative politics". He rarely had to address anything. No one made him do it. However, soon the Obama "show" will be over and he will be in unchartered territory. If he actually gets elected, which I doubt since half the democratic party hates him and is chanting "anyone BUT Obama", he won't know what to do besides of course have press conferences and give addresses. We might very well up in the same sort of mess we are in now with Bush.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jwaldrop3 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:05:06 GMT

Alma, if you want to keep the poor people poor - vote for Democrats

If you want to wait 6-12 weeks to see a doctor - vote for Democrats

If you want millions more murdered babies - vote for Democrats

If you want to encourage racism - vote for Democrats

If you work hard and want what you've earned stolen and given to people who won't work - vote for Democrats

If you want to wave a white flag at the terrorists - vote for Democrats

If you want a nation where you have to speak two languages to get a job - vote for Democrats

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:07:15 GMT

Hillary didn't make the job of reunifying the democratic party harder David Mulenes, Obama and his supporters impossible. Calling everyone who criticized him racists and liars is not going to gain him any friends among Hillary supporters, and an apology won't work..His supporters are still doing it..

I will never vote for Obama, and I am a life long democrat who has never voted for a Republican for president. This will be the first time, but I trust McCain more than I do BHO.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:07:42 GMT

Andrew Romano, from my perspective you have it wrong. I'm OUTRAGED with the way liberal media and all the pundits have treated her! I'm SICKENED that the party insiders ( John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nanci Pelosi) have back stabbed her! And i'm Mortified by the stunning arrogance of Obama, and his smug supporters who continue to rub dirt in the faces of Hillary's legions.

I may very well be in the minority of HRC supporters who feel this strongly. I can say "UNEQUIVOCALLY," that nothing short of BARAK OBAMA walking on water will prevent me from voting MCCAIN in 2009....

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

mjbrown403 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:09:20 GMT

I generally agree with your premise, except there seems to be a real disconnect from reality that would seem to make it hard for her supporters to heal. I've seen so many posts where Clinton supporters blame the media, the DNC and the so-called "disenfranshisement" of FL and MI as the reasons she lost. And that doesn't include the willful distortions of Obama's record, message and campaign tactics, or the vainglorious pronouncements by so many who are absolutely certain they can predict what the general election outcome will be.

Is it possible many (if not most) people who are Obama supporters came to be by a reasoned evaluation of the candidates? Not according to many of these posts. We're all drinking Koolaid. Or we're all elitists. Or we're all misogynists.

Is it possible that HRC's own campaign was badly managed, plagued by infighting and conflicts of interest? Not according to many of these posts. It's all the media's fault.

Is it possible HRC's own campaign supporter, Terry McAuliffe (former head of the DNC), once told states there would be consequences for moving their primaries against the wishes of the DNC? Did HRC not agree to the rules in advance? Not according to these posts. It's all Obama's and the DNC's fault for 'disenfranchisement'.

In the long run, HRC's continued campaign probably won't hurt Obama. What hurts all of us is the failure to look in the mirror when we're looking for reasons things don't turn out the way we wanted.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Sal@4/14/08 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:10:53 GMT

As Al Gore said, "You betrayed me !"

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

RMinColorado — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:11:26 GMT

The article is correct about view of Clinton supporters but incorrect in the assumption that we will forgive and forget what the media/DNC/Corrupt and hypocritical dem leaders in D.C did to get their outcome. Not. I am working for McCain. Even with Clinton on the ticket as VP it would be a real stretch for me to handle putting him in office knowing there is no way he is elected without her. The dems are dreaming ...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

scott5566777 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:12:33 GMT

For you Hillary supporters, I think she should stay inthe race and let all the voters have their say. I respect you and your views, and I hope that whatever the outcome after all of the primaries are over, and the Michigan and Florida debacle is settled, that if Obama is the winner that you will consider forgiving those insensitive idiots who are attacking your candidate from within this party and consider where you really want this country to go in the fall. I will vote for Hillary this fall if she comes out on top. I just hope most of you have the maturity that most obama supporters do not seem have to not retaliate against those who incite you and drive you away. If you really think about it and base it on the issues that matter to you, Obama (though not your first choice) is a better choice than McCain.

The more posts I read about 'demands for hillary to drop out' from what seem to be illiterate ,ignorant, uneducated people, the more I find myself thinking, how can I agree with such power hungry fools.

Who are you to tell someone else when to drop out? Who are you to make that decision? Who are you to tell the voters of the remaining states (and MI and FL) that their millions of votes should not count and they dont matter because you have already made your mind up...

Just think for a minute (if you can concentrate that long) Do you really think by disenfranchising those voters, they will just take your side and agree with you that their votes should not count?...

It is the idiots like yourselves demanding hillary quit that will keep hillary supporters from joining and supporting Obama for president.... I cant blame them for saying they won't vote for Obama in the fall when all you do is insult them, call them names and place your meaningless demands on them. Im almost embarrassed to say I support Obama given some of the complete idiots that for no good reason support the same candidate as i do.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bennettsusan — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:13:03 GMT

At the beginning of this race the only leanings I had were Democrat. No more years of Bush/Republican policy. The thought of it is terrorizing. I was trying to make a personal calculation for who could best John McCain in the general.

I weighed Obama's lack of experience against Clinton's polarized base. I had no bad feelings about Clinton personally but worried that too many people would just not vote for her no matter what. I decided to lay my lot with Obama in the belief that his clear intelligience would lead him to surround himself with an administration that filled in his inexperienced areas. I do believe that all presidents do this at varying anyways and that the most important qualities for president are the leadership kind that aren't about policy specifics. Or...as I definitely believe...that the most effective leaders are the ones who clearly understand what they know and what they don't know.

Still, had HRC become the front runner in what seemed an inevitable win for her, I would have been one of the first to rally behind her. I believe we have a primary for a reason. I understand fully that neither candidate can win with the supers so I don't need that lecture again. The fact remains that the Democratic Party cannot afford to hand the nomination over to HRC without destroying the party...period. Is she so caught up in her will to win that she is in some sort of denial about this? If she is staying in the race to make the gap closer and end on an up note than I totally support that, as long as she stays positive. I worry that her "fighting" spirit will insist on a battle to the convention which has much more negative potential than positive. If she is insisting that Florida and Michigan be seated because she is truly worried that disenfranchised voters in those states will not back the dems in the general, than I understand that too, even though there is clear hypocracy from her camp on this issue.

I see no hope for the dems now unless HRC decides to take the high road, let her base slowly see the futility of her campaign and go through the mourning of it's loss in a healthy way, and unite behind the only nominee the DNC can reasonably get behind. This is not about pushing someone out, but not appearing to take something away from someone else. What's really at stake here is a continued war that is draining the resources away from things like health care and education if dems can't heal from this primary.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Shawn Babine — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:13:22 GMT

Perfectly articulate. An analysis that is right on. Can you imagine WHAT IF Obama lost to a candidate that dropped out? At the core though is what the party leaders are truly afraid of - what will their decision be to seat and allow Michigan and Florida delegates at the convention - without Hilary there will be no challenge to the party's decision. That inandofitself is undemocratic. Millions of voters on either side will be unheard unless there is a new primary in Michigan and Florida. Only the party leaders and Howard Dean are to blame for that catastrophy. This is everything about the democratic process - don't let them bully you Senator Clinton - you're the last defender of democracy.

Also, the article wrote that Suzanne Little, Ph.D. emailed: "...but I am enraged at how badly Clinton has been treated... I am so disillusioned as a Democrat."

Here, here! How is it that McCain and Clinton (individual and their teams) reference each other politely with respect to the position they hold (e.g. as Senators), yet Senator Obama (and his team) is rude enough to call her by her first name, but reference Seantor McCain as such. Elitist, chauvinist. As a democrat, I'm leaning towards voting for Senator McCain (so long as it's not Guilini or Romney)

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emmarcee — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:14:08 GMT

alma,

just an advice. Try to read time's coverage on Obama's political history for once. It 's all a sham. Political posturing. Some of us are not naive. if ypu want to fall for this, like a lot of people, go ahead. Don't come around pandering to us. Thanks.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:14:52 GMT

pearsoncrz,

I prefer naive.

I prefer to look at the light and the goodness in the American people.

I love this country and truly feel it has gone down the tubes, due to the lies and incompetence of people in government who are not naive and patriotic but rather experienced and manipulative.

We know nothing about Obama and too much about everyone else. I prefer an unknown new than an evil known who has send thousands of people to die, who has left thousands of people without homes, who has left thousands of people without medical help, who has left thousands of people without savings, who has promised a pro-life approach and has not given it in years so that it could continue to use the vote of the good and naive religious people in America.

I prefer to be naive because being astute and experienced has been so terrible and so devastating to this country. There is nothing worst than the old not letting the new to move forward.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:20:08 GMT

susangg, there was no agreement to take names off the ballot. The agreement the candidates signed said only that they would not campaign. Obama violated this agreement by running ads in the Florida market. Hillary did not violate the agreement. Here is the text of the agreement they signed:

WHEREAS, over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;

WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic

diversity of our party and our country;

WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the

nominating process, to ensure that money alone will not determine our

presidential nominee;

WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and

the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the

nominating calendar.

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge

I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential

election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,

Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the

rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically

related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of

fundraising staff.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:21:37 GMT

Alma, you say you prefer to look at the light and goodness, but you equate John McCain with Cain, a murder.

You are a fake.

So much for taking the high road. You can't do it.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:23:11 GMT

btw, Alma, if you wanted to know about Obama, you could find out anything you needed to know online. Google is great.

But you don't want to know, do you?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

paulte — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:24:23 GMT

I don't much care what is good for the Democratic party but I can't see Hillary's continuing in the race as somehow good for the party. Especially when Hillary uses the race card! I think Hillary is getting more white votes than Obama in the later primaries but he carried states that are predominately white like Iowa and Wyoming. So what is her racial point exactly? Whites who vote for racial reasons will most likely support McCain in November, not her if she were to get the nomination. I don't think these particular whites want to see a woman as Commander-in-Chief! Beyond the alleged racial reason, what other reason is there for the Dems to nominate Hillary rather than Obama? That she would be a better Commander-in-Chief? That's a joke! A woman as Commander-in-Chief would be a red flag to radical Muslims to try another 9/11!

I think what we have in Hillary is a desperate woman. It's almost like a petulant child, "I want to be President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" The math is just not there for her to take the nomination away from Obama especially since the superdelegate flow is now in his favor. In any event, I think her exit is impending for one reason and one reason only, i.e., the cash is drying up! Then she can fly back to Oz!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

croft1 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:28:51 GMT

I have always voted democrat, but, I will be forced to either vote for mcCain, or put Hillary's name on the ballot. I do not trust Obama as far as I could throw him. Go on youtube.com and look at the video where Obama is talking about disarming this country.Yes thats right, he wants to take out our spy satelights and get rid of all our weapons of mass destruction. He says hes going to make the rest of the world follow suit.....lol...lol...lol...lol. I can't stop laughing, is he such an imbecile. I knew something was very wrong with this big eared guy, he must hate the U.S. like he associates and his wife does. He disarms this country, we will be in for a big change, those towel heads will be all over us like flys on sh*it. Since we are the big Satans to those towel heads anyways and Israel is the Little Satan.....they did say they wanted to destroy us first...then they can destroy Israel...need I say more. Obama go away.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Core Democrat in Texas — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:29:17 GMT

I think the best thing Obama could do for the Democratic Party and the country is to drop out of the primary race, but I doubt that Obama, Obama media, and Obama supporters care what I think any more than I care about what they think about Hillary's campaign.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

HolyRoller — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:29:25 GMT

I have stated this view for months on end. My accuracy becomes more evident daily...HUSSEIN OBAMA'S CHANCE OF BEING ELECTED POTUS IS VERY NEAR 0%.....Why???

1. He will lose ~50% of Clinton supporters....they have been called RACIST, STUPID, RACIST, IGNORANT, RACIST, BITTER, RACIST, UNEDUCATED, RACIST, IDIOTS, RACIST...did I mention RACIST.

2. Obama has morre baggage than Samsonite...his pesky mohammedness, his Nation of Islam spiritual mentor, his ties to terrorists, his angriest millionaire in American nasty wife, his ties to Illinois political crooks, his voting record of Present or OOPs, his lack of experience, and oh yeah, the Barry and Larry "love limo"...it just goes on and on.

3. Mainly this...American Hero vs Islamic Sympathizer hmm...tough choice

Only the DNC Tower of Babel could lose this one. THANKS EMPORER SOROS Ya'll have blessed America, and weren't even trying

NOBAMA!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

HRCfan — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:31:32 GMT

Similar to the email mentioned in the article, I too am becoming quickly disillusioned with the Democratic Party. As one of the few college aged supporters of Senator Clinton, I am often attacked for my support of her from fellow Democrats. I go to school in Southwestern Pennsylvania and helped her campaign during the primary. During that time I was consistently attacked by the Obama campaigners and it became tedious. I have become increasingly tired of dealing with people who have similar beliefs to me coming after me for supporting another Democrat. The media's coverage of Senator Clinton has also perpetuated my dissatisfaction to new levels. Every time I watch the news or read articles, more and more people are casting a negative image of Senator Clinton because she wants to keep fighting. There is nothing wrong with fighting for what you want. If people stopped fighting for themselves, our country would be centuries behind.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:33:13 GMT

scott4466777, I disagree that Obama is a better candidate than McCain. I'd rather have an enraged old man than a lying cocaine user who hasn't told us wheat he really intends to do or who he has promised what.

I am also incensed at the DNC for setting the whole process on end by applying it's rules in a selective way to disadvantage Hillary.

Obama and the DNC are responsible for the rift, but even without it, Obama would not have won. He does not appeal to the Reagan democrats and can not win the states that turn on that constituency.

The DNC is giving this election to the republicans, not the pissed off Hillary supporters.

I'm ready to start a new party in which the middle class and middle of the road voters are recognized for the power they hold to decide the election of the president of the United States. If it takes four years of McCain to give us time to get this done, I'm all for McCain.

I don't trust Obama and his Chicago south side politician friends.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

croft1 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:34:00 GMT

paulte

Obama is not electable. he won the red states, what good is that, Hillary does have a point ..she won the blue states, and if the truth be known the popular vote. Obama has some major issues, especially concerning race, he is racist, he is the one who started this race card game, people are so blind... I'll never vote for Obama, never, I'll be helping John McCain and jump on his band wagon if I have to, Obama is not going to ruin this country which she will, he is anti- american and so is that witch wife of his.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:35:18 GMT

pearsoncrz, emmarcee and all republicans in this blog,

As someone else has said before, there are too many republicans in this blog interfering with democrats issues and pretending to be democrats, but it is good to know that their covers are starting to fall.

Democrats will try to unite beyond all of those who are trying to spread hatred and division.

I am truly sorry if any Hillary or Obama supporter has felt mistreated or abused in any way. I truly believe some republicans are trying to divide us. It is immoral work but they have done it before...it is not new.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:46:18 GMT

Surely this can't be a good omen for Senator Hillary Clinton.

The pundits can argue all they want, her campaign may protest that she's still in the game, but at the "America!" souvenir shops at Dulles International and Reagan National airports, the signs are clear as day.

"Sale!" "Clearance!" "50% off!" they blare.

A pink t-shirt with an image of Clinton's head and the words "Madame President 2008: Making History."

A black t-shirt that reads "Anyone but Hillary" with a drawing of the famous "scream" painting.

The "Hillary for President" bobblehead. And oh yes, even the Hillary nutcracker, "with stainless steel thighs." All are marked half off.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:46:20 GMT

mjbrown403,

Its time for politics 101 sir.

Rule # 1: Perception is EVERYTHING in politics! You state that Hillary supporters are disconnected from reality for thinking the media coverage or the status of Michigan and Florida account for Hillary's loss.

Imagine if you will, Msnbc political pundits distancing themselves from the notion that Bill Clinton's commentes were racist. How many supporters among the voting states would have stayed on the HRC band wagon.. After all, it was the alleged "racial undertones" in those comments that are viewed as the reason Blacks Voted at a ration of 10 to 1 for Obama.

If not for all the racial controversy spun by the media, might the ratio have been 6 to 1?

Now lets talk about Michigan and Florida, and where perception plays heavily. If Florida would have been counted, the momentum she gained might have diluted the prospects enough for Obama to cause incalculable damage to his prospect of being the nominee.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:47:19 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

"I don’t know if Senator Obama can win the White House. No one knows. But to deliberately convey the idea that most white people — or most working-class white people — are unwilling to give an African-American candidate a fair hearing in a presidential election is a slur against whites."

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America. Remember everyone she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:48:50 GMT

Alma, I am not a republican. I'll send you my name and address if you send me yours. I'll send you references and people who know me who are flabergasted that I do not support Obama and plan to vote for McCain.

I am a life long democrat and true believer in the meaning of equal rights under the Constitution for all citizens. I have been a civil rights attorney in Alabama for decades and personally prosecuted numerous cases of race discrimination. I have also represented labor unions.

I will not vote for a man who has admitted that he used cocaine for years.

I will not vote for a man who tells lies about his grandmother for political gain.

I will not vote for a man who claims to "take the high road" but runs his campaign on negatives, pointing fingers and passing out blame.

I will not vote for someone who leads people to believe he has made no commitments in return for for the support of the DNC and various superdelegates, and the moneyed interests he has taken millions of dollars from, especially when I can Google and find the facts for myself. His campaign is financed by big money special interests and politicians who will stab each other in the back and who would going to call in the favors he owes if he were elected. The only way to prevent that is to not elect him.

Oh yea, Alma, you say you're sorry. I don't believe you. You sound just like Obama, saying whatever you have to say to get your candidate elected. And I guess you're trying to take the high road again, saying those who do not support Obama are spreading hatred and division, huh?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:49:09 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

vindido — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:50:13 GMT

what continues to amaze me is the apparent dis like the main stream media i.e. Newsweek,NY Times, LA Times,and the Democratic establishment have for Hilary.Does any one with a IQ higher than room temperature think that Obama Hussein,with his Reverend Wright,William Ayers,his multi million dollar real estate "deal" with Mr Revco,etc,baggage has a chance to beat a war hero like McCain? Any one?ANSWER ME! Thank you

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

feubanks — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:50:30 GMT

As a lifelong Democrat and an African American- I'll say ya got that right! I am so disillusioned as well as angered by the way Hillary Clinton has been treated, that as irrational as it is, and self defeating, but true: I will not vote at all in the general election. So three cheers to the Republican strategists and DNC power brokers who engineered this mess: hope you get what you plotted for!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Nins — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:51:46 GMT

Hillary is playing politics, the worst kind of low-ball politics.

I am white, and female, and middle aged, and Republican, and I am voting for OBAMA.

Hillary insults both women and whites when she asserts that we are all both racist and stupid.

Get a life, Hillary, and stop pandering to the least common denominator. One of the reasons I am disaffected from the Republican party is because of the way they have tried to manipulate the gun-toting bible-thumping undereducated electorate.

A true leader will unite people around a higher cause, not divide them along lines of distrust and hatred.

Obama is a true leader, and a true Christian. Anyone who can't see this is falling victim to media manipulation. Hillary is imitating the tactics that dragged the once-proud GOP into the mud, and away from the hearts and minds of millions of thinking Republicans.

I still uphold Republican values. The good old-fashioned ones that founded our republic. And I am voting for Obama, who is truest to these values, despite his liberal ideas.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

cynwest — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:52:19 GMT

obama has campaigned in 57 states....is that 57 ISLAMIC states??????????thats how many thery have not us....mistake or freudian slip?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jwaldrop3 — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:52:52 GMT

Alma, how can a liar such as yourself continue to try to take the high road? You speak of morals yet you don't seem to know what they are!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Nins — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:52:56 GMT

Today's headline: "McCain Acknowledges Global Warming and Urges Nuclear Power to Combat it."

I am SO GLAD that John McCain has acknowledged the reality of global warming. However, his supposition that nuclear power is "clean energy" is absurd.

Clean energy doesn't leave behind deadly radioactive rods to be disposed of. Clean energy isn't subject to nuclear fallout, meltdowns and explosions. Clean energy doesn't cause birth defects and cancer. Clean energy can't be subverted into nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

Effective clean energy technologies created to date are solar, wind, hydroelectric and hydrogen fuel cells. Ethanol is not clean energy, as it takes immense amounts of energy to create fuel this way, and the big corporate farmers pollute with excessive chemical fertilizers and pesticides. However, it can help us transition our economy away from oil dependency and as such it is an excellent stop gap, especially if we use cellulose ethanol rather than corn based ethanol.

McCain is woefully uninformed about the realities of our energy problems and their potential solutions. McCain is woefully uninformed about the economy, and still hasn't come up with any plans for combatting the recession, paying down the national debt, and restoring lost jobs. McCain is woefully misguided about the war, and wants to pursue a hawkish military policy even though the vast majority of Americans are against this.

I respect McCain and the sacrifices he has made for our country. But right now, we need someone ready to roll up their sleeves and work on our current problems. Someone who can make America stronger before we go down the tubes with our oil dependency, our failure to recognize the shifting global economy, and our blatantly wrong-headed foreign policy. McCain is not that man. I'm a Republican and I'm voting for Obama.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Nins — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:54:41 GMT

ThreeNewCandidates, I agree with you when you say that Carter was a good man with high hopes. But I can't agree when you say that he "accomplished nothing" while he was in office. You are 50 years old, so surely you remember how Carter brought peace to the Middle East? And you must remember how very threatening that was to certain factions like the religious right in Iran, who had just overthrown the Shah. They wanted the drama to continue (and they had some legitimate grievances against the US, since we had been controlling Iran through the Shah) so they took American hostages to sabotage the peace, and OPEC jacked the price of oil and turned down the US oil supply for a while, to scare Americans enough not to re-elect Carter. Since you are 50, you must remember standing in line for hours during the 70s, waiting to buy gasoline. Trust me, it will only get worse in the future as the oil supply actually runs out. The party is over, people.

When will America wake up and rid ourselves of our dependancy on oil?

If we want to remain the "land of the free" we better start investing in renewable energy, NOW.

Vindido asks, "Who with an IQ greater than room temperature would vote for Obama instead of McCain?"

The answer: ANYONE WHO WANTS A STRONG AMERICA, FREE OF OIL DEPENDENCY.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

oldnwise — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:55:03 GMT

As an independent voter and a fan of both the Clintons, I am in agreement with Suzanne Little. How short are our memories? Bill Clinton wreslted away the white house from George Bush and in spite of all the republican efforts to discredit his presidency, he soundly defeated Bob Dole for a second term. He left the white house as one of the most popular presidents in history and now the party, he saved, wants to throw him under the bus along with his wife and daughter. It really sours me that the Democrats are doing this. Hillary was, by all intents, the party favorite as early as two years ago. Was she not liberal enough?I say she stay in this race and Obama better make a public offering of the VP position on the ticket to her. I hope she turns it down but at least give her the respect to offer it to her. As for Bill going to problem voter groups to encourage them to vote forhim, I say he should tell them to go to hell. He won't because he loves his party no matter how they treat him.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:55:08 GMT

It is funny how Hillary wants to stay in the past. Things are so differnt now.

I GOT SOME NEWS FOR HER HERE OUT WEST! OBAMA WELL WIN:

MONTANA

NEBERSKA

COLORADO

UTAH

IDAHO

KANSAS

NEVADA

CALIF.

OREGAN

WASHINGTON

TEXAS

Obama is going to change the map mark my words. You see out west we do live in the past we always look forward. People back east seem to hold on to there BITTER past! The media has no clue about how people here out west feel about Obama. It's always about the eastern states for the media.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:57:23 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

apolemic — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:58:38 GMT

Shawn Babine,

Hillary's own campaign signs use her first name to distinguish her from Bill. Obama is no more rude in using it than any of HRC's own staff or supporters.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:58:59 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:59:03 GMT

The republicans haven't been influencing the democratic party as much as everyone thinks. The so-called split came a long time ago. Democratics have been divided ever since Hillary received a great deal of scrutiny while Obama received a pass. People were eager to forgive Obama for Reverand Wright, Bill Ayers, Michelle Obama's comments, Obama's own bitter American comments. Meanwhile they bashed Clinton over the head for showing emotion (or showing a lack of), for her Bosnia gaffe, and for being supposedly racist. If you are a Clinton supporter, you noticed the unfair, unbalanced pro-Obama coverage given by CNN, the big three, MSNBC. I had to start watching FOX NEWS just to find any postive info on Hillary's campaign. When comparing Hillary and Obama foreign policy, Obama is scary news. Obama has the approval of the Hamas leader. Obama wants to sit down without preconditions with Iran, Syria, and other countries that we have rocky relations with. There are lots of unsettling issues and question mark surrounding Obama's campaign. I also didn't appreciate the threat of violence (that people would be rioting in the streets if the superdelagates voted Clinton's way) that Obama supporters were threatening. Obama cannot win in the general election. He is a sham. He claims to be a uniter, but in reality he is a divider. I won't vote for Obama and there are others who see that his policies are dangerous for America. McCain will become our next president.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:00:19 GMT

I can't wait to see "Countdown Keith, and HardBall Chris" on election night. I wonder if either will cry when MSNBC projects John Mccain is winner of FL. And as they try to spin it and highlight the major importants of Pa and Ohio, the numbers roll in.. MSNBC now projects that Mccain will win Ohio! I hope that in the time it takes K.O. to figure out a way to blame Obamas' crushing losses on O'reily, he'll think back to all the bashing the MSNBC team did and realize who deserves much of the blame!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:02:05 GMT

It appears this is the board for making up stuff:

I will not vote for a man who has admitted that he used cocaine for years.

I will not vote for a man who tells lies about his grandmother for political gain.

says pearsoncrz.

Did you know his grandmother? Being white (and he half white) gives you some inside knowledge into her personality more than he does right? WHat about when he says she loves him more than anything else in the world (and in other statements he has said he loves her dearly). You think she will choose your account over her grandsons?

Yes he admitted to 'brief' drug use while in school. So you have fleshed the rest out yourself. Did Bill not smoke (but not inhale) while in school too. Was that the reason for the good and the bad of his presidencies? What about going to strip joints as McCain did? Are all these matters indicative of a good presidency?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

GO BUCKS — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:02:06 GMT

IT seems to me Hillary is in a nutshell playing the 'good ole race card'. It doesn't matter if a chicken is on the ballot in ohio, PA, FL, etc., in November, once the party is united and the blue collar workers come to their senses (according to Hillary, they can't think for themselves) Obama will wn those states as well. Stop all the PREMATURE NONSENSE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:03:13 GMT

Obama is bad for America and most voters can see right through him.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Dominiqueblue — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:03:24 GMT

I do not see how the sexist and racist comments that Hillary Clinton keeps on repeating are good for the Democratic party. I am a Democrat and strongly opposed to such stupidity and I have started looking at the Party from a very different position.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

AnneCT203 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:08:47 GMT

Andrew, I couldn't agree more. As a Clinton supporter I have yet to decide who to vote for or if I should vote at all if Sen. Clinton is not chosen as the Democratic nominee. This race has been negative alright, unfortunately most of the negativity has been from the media and not from the candidates themselves. The icing on the cake is this week's TIME magazine cover. The audacity

of the news media of late has been quite disturbing to me. I have taken to watching FOX NEWS

because MSNBC and CNN are simply unwatchable and have been for months now. I have lost my faith in news organizations that I had always trusted to be "fair and balanced".

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:11:36 GMT

What would you have the democratic party do oldnwise? Make up voter support? They were for Hilllary 270 to 180 in superdelegates by Feb 5th. They kept going back and forth on Michigan and Florida (to keep the door open for Hillary) when the issue was supposed to be firm from the beginning. In comparison the republicans never revisited the issue of half stripped delegates in both states. The democratic party were always giving the Clintons the second benefit in spite of losses from an upstart. How can a virtual unknown raise more money, build a money disciplined organization, stay a principled and mostly honest course through a campaign and beat a Clinton. Who stabbed her? Look at this objectively. And yes she had the black vote on the strength of the Clinton name (Obama only had 38% in polls prior to November).

As for the media, she initially had them all. Even on ABC, Stephanopoulos an ex staff was running most of the coverage and the debate to favor her. At the start, I was watching Fox to get better news than the Hillary news feed prior to Iowa. That's why no one saw it coming. Now we rewrite the history...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:13:32 GMT

Obama can't win the big states in the general. He refuses to acknowledge Florida voters. You need Florida voters in the general. He has alienated the democratic core (baby-boomers, seniors, americans of hispanic descent, Jewish-Americans, the working class, and the middle class) which are needed to win the general election. McCain has been reaching out to everybody and Hillary has been courting all voters. That's why they've won the big states. Judging from right now, Obama has his work cut out for him if he plans on winning in November. Any appeals to these groups from Obama will seen as pandering done for political expediancy. I don't see how Obama could beat McCain in the general. It won't work. Too many people have made up their minds about Obama already, whether for or against and they aren't budging.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:13:35 GMT

Working class white voters are going to go Mccain. The only way Obama would win this core group is if the republican attack engine has a faulty starter this election season. Otherwise, that engine is going to chew some bama up, and spit him out. And as all the major news channels project major blow up wins in the 3 main swing states, you'll hear that engine bogging down to a halt as an OMINOUS voice in the distant backround utters the words "flawless victory."

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:13:39 GMT

It is funny how Hillary wants to stay in the past. Things are so differnt now.

I GOT SOME NEWS FOR HER HERE OUT WEST! OBAMA WELL WIN:

MONTANA

NEBERSKA

COLORADO

UTAH

IDAHO

KANSAS

NEVADA

CALIF.

OREGAN

WASHINGTON

TEXAS

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:15:01 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:15:12 GMT

I think some of the stuff I've read on here is really hilarious. First and foremost: Florida and Michigan. The rules were set, and the primary organizers in those state WILLFULLY BROKE THOSE RULES. Hillary is arguing that the Democratic party is disenfranchising the voters in those states, and they should be outraged at the Democratic party. I agree with part of that statement. The people in those states should be outraged because they have been disenfranchised. BY THEIR OWN STATES!!! They should be flaming pissed at the leaders in their states who organized the primaries, and they should be kicking themselves for not holding massive demonstrations when they found out what was going on. It is a shame that it happened, and it just goes to show that citizenship takes a little more responsibility than reading the paper once or twice a week. Politicans will SCREW YOU if sit back and let them do it, and they almost ALWAYS shape up if there's a massive public outcry.

I don't know what the answer is at this point, but it's basically moot anyway. Hillary cannot win the primary delegate count, and the popular vote (which she probably won't win either) doesn't matter, regardless of what the media tells you. The only reason she hasn't faced overwhelming pressure from her party to quit is because they respect her years of dedicated service and loyalty to the party. Fine, I'll buy that, but let's not talk about "what if''s" and remote possibilities. The media is keeping this garbage alive because they need something to print, and it isn't going to happen. I base that on the following math: Just to TIE Obama in the primary vote, she needs to win 100 percent of the vote in every remaining state except Oregon, in which she has to beat him by at least 10 percent. Winning WV and KY by even 70 percent of the vote is a LOSS in the big picture. Then, the vast majority of the uncommitted superdelegates will vote for whoever wins the primaries, and history bears that theory out. So, it's over unless Obama is hit by a blimp and dies.

Secondly: Hillary is making a case that Obama can't win the election because old white people and uneducated white people will never vote for him. Well, what makes you think that if those people are unwilling to support a black candidate against a white women, that they are going to support ANY WOMAN AGAINST A WHITE MAN? Just curious.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

News and Notes — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:15:13 GMT

Obama supporters, many working class whites are voting for Hillary because she is a strong candidate. No other reason. If he were a third year white senator with little national experience or exposure, they would STILL be voting overwhelmingly for Hillary. Throw out the race card, please!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Debunked — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:15:58 GMT

I can't believe, well then again I can, that the Media and members of the DNC blasted Hillary on her comment about her voters. What she said was true! And although there was SOME media coverage, I don't recall an UPROAR when Obama referred to his grandmother as a typical white person. Had Clinton said that, it would have been hell to pay! The double standard and the taking of Clintons words out of context is absolutely ridiculous especially since everyone feels the need to put almost everything Obama or his wife says into context!

Now the writer of this article have written mostly anti Clinton articles now he deciding to write something halfway decent and not because of Clinton but because you are concerned that her voters may not vote for Obama and you have every reason to be concerned! I say Clinton should run independent and as I check various blogs, I see that mostly all of her supporters feel that her party has done her wrong and are asking for her to run independent! The pundits talk about an exit strategy, well I hope she is making an exit strategy as a dem candidate and planning her strategy to run independent!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

rjsonnier292291 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:16:39 GMT

It is conceivable that Obama could catch a cold. Hillary may yet have something up her sleeve and Obama may falter yet again. Rev. Wright and Ayers are lurking in the background and could make a new mess for Obama and more importantly the Democratic Party. Obama could end up with egg on his face and the most humiliated candidate or nominee in history. Embarassment could take on a new meaning with the color purple becoming a stigma for generations. This is not a time for the elitist Obama to become more cocky. I don't like Hillary and dislike Obama (his baggage is heavier and includes criminal RAP) even more. I will vote for McCain because he is more middle of the road and centered than the other two candidates.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jwaldrop3 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:18:07 GMT

Many renowned scientists, including ones that shared the Nobel Prize with Al Gore, don't believe that man has anything to do with global warming. They feel that it's just another of the many temperature cycles that the earth always goes through. The only way that this one is different is that Al stands to make a ton of money and be the center of attention if you fall for the "man caused" part this time!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:18:19 GMT

Support McCain:

10.00 a gallon gas

Your kids will get drafted

Womens right to choose will be taken away.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:19:06 GMT

mike2181 let if go with Michigan and FLorida. This is neither candidate's fault. IT was the rules. They both agreed to it. If a nominee had emerged earlier or the DNS had not been waffling this should have been a no issue.

Look the RNC made their own decision and remove half and no one has revisited this issue since. Yes, what ifs. But that is the rule and one just has to compete by it.

The bigger issue is how Hillary with the Clinton rollodecks, support, media, even black support lost to a nearly unknown polling 26% to 66% behind her nationwide late last year. Let's give credit where it is due. Better organization, vision, less dishonesty, remnant negatives (Hillary could not break the 50% barrier on favorability for the past 10 years regardless of who she was running agains) and move on to improving the country and our individual situations.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:20:00 GMT

J, Richter.. Obama is an Abomination. He would not be where he is without the lopsided support he has receieve from a powerful voting block within the party (african americans).

The only difference between Obama and Howard Dean is a Scream... nothing more or less. Dems are going to LOSE this election!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Alma — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:20:35 GMT

pearsoncrz,

I did not mean to say that you were a republican. I wrote your name because I was answering to you. Actually I did Google Obama, Hillary and McCain and realized that Mr. Obama is the cleanest of all of the three. It is a fact to me.

And to accept the use of drugs, to say that a grandmother made a racist comment or pointing others mistakes is not as bad as lying to take us to a war, letting thousands of Americans be killed in our names, letting our savings disappear or denying many people in need medical help. Needless to say that we have now an ex-alcoholic who believes that speaks with God and to whom God tells him to send soldiers to be murderer abroad. And to be clear I do not believe Mr. Clinton much of anything he says since he already lied under oath once before.

Between them, I still choose a democratic government all the way. If it is Hillary I will vote for her although I prefer Obama.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jwaldrop3 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:20:51 GMT

masonwl - support Obama:

Osama bin Laden as mayor of Washington DC

Your kids on welfare

More babies murdered.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:21:24 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

SOUTH WILL RISE AGIAN, GO HILLARY, YOU ARE WHAT THE COUNTRY NEEDS RIGHT NOW!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:21:48 GMT

Obama can't win the general: bottom line. He really is all platitudes and rhetoric: no substance. What qualifies him to be an effective commander-in-chief, especially with a war going on? I wouldn't want our country to be run by incapable hands, which is another reason why people will vote for McCain.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:23:00 GMT

He has a criminal rap? rjsonnier292291 (May 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM) just chooses to make up stuff. Trust me if he did, journalists like to further their careers too and they would if he did. Even before he left Illinois. Let's disagree on facts, please. Oh yes, maybe he does. Afterall he's half black. SO its impossible for him not to. Oh yes while we are in make up mode. He's also secretely muslim and has been worshipping secretly in mosques for the bast 20 years - afterall look at his middle name.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

getrealin08 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:25:09 GMT

Hillary, should stay in all the way. Obama still has many skeltons, that the Republicans are anxious to bring out. The mainstream media that has pushed him, have kept his cocain snorting in a limo with his gay buddy out of the press. Look at him, Look at Michelle, if he doesn't look like he is down low, I don't know who does. When is Michelle going to wake up and realize he married her because she belonged to black southside Chicago. Let see the angry black woman that Michelle is implode a few more times.

What about more to come out of the Rezco trial, the weather man. All of these connections. Oboma is like Gumby, so flexible and posable, he poses to fit in on which ever side he sees fit.

It is an absolute disgrace, how he has thrown his white heritage under the bus. The white family, that raised him, the white grandparents who made sure he went to the best private school in Hawaii, then on to Harvard. His African father went AWOL when he was less than two. Went back to Kenya and his wife. He is the biggest pander of all. He was raised as white as I was. He just wants to use his sperm down father to get ahead politically.

Lets wake up and look at the falure of virtually every African American Mayor's Administration in the US. There has been more arrogance and corruption in these administrations, then even the infamous good olde boy mayoral administrations. Look at Marion Barry, Kwame Fitzpatrick, Bill Campbell, David Dinkins to name a few. Just recently it has come to the surface that Shirley Franklin hasn't done much better in the City of Atlanta, either incompetant affirmative action staffs, don't even know what bills they have paid, they forgot to pay for trash collection and the City is over 20 million in Debt. We all think W's administration is bad, just wait for Obama's. With Reverand Al Sharpton, secretary of Treasurey, but can't ever pay his own taxes. Jessie Jackson Jr. will have to be given some sort of pay back job too, Secretary of Education, so everyone can learn Eubanics.

Wake up! Wake up! Tell every Super Delagate that is changing their vote to Obama, that you will remember at the polls. Woman and Whites can vote just like raciest blacks do.

The Democrates are squandering a golden opportunity to gain the white house. The Super Delagates job is to select someone to be electable in November. That is Hillary, not Obama.

I any many other Clinton supports will not vote for a fake and a race baiter like Obama. I will vote for John McCain over Obama. McCain will win over Obama hands down.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:25:25 GMT

Posted By: jwaldrop3 (May 12, 2008 at 4:20 PM)

masonwl - support Obama:

Osama bin Laden as mayor of Washington DC

Your kids on welfare

More babies murdered.

YOU MUST BE ONE OF HILLARY'S WORKING UN-EDUCATED WHITE PEOPLE SHE LOVES.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:25:36 GMT

Obama can't handle intense scrutiny and tough questions, unless its scripted. What makes anyone think he can handle the intense pressure of being commander-in-chief?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:26:18 GMT

Latest polls suggest that Clinton is picking up support from John McCain’s base which is the following:

White Americans that hate people of color.

White Christians that hate people that do not look like them.

White Americans that have very little education.

White Americans who do not care about their own personal economic condition.

White Americans that want to see the sons die in an un-justifiable war.

White Women who hate man still seams to be Hillary Clinton’s primary support.

The New York Times Op-Ed: By BOB HERBERT

So what she is saying to all of you is if you are White Trash I am your girl. So vote for me so the South can rise one more time. If I was White I would run as far away from her as a could. This is not the vision for America I want. Remember everyone, she was a Goldwater girl when she was younger.

SOUTH WILL RISE AGIAN, GO HILLARY, YOU ARE WHAT THE COUNTRY NEEDS RIGHT NOW!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:27:56 GMT

Obama is an Abomination. He would not be where he is without the lopsided support he has receieve from a powerful voting block within the party (african americans).

The only difference between Obama and Howard Dean is a Scream... nothing more or less.

Democratic unity? I will not unify with any idiot that believes this guys pipe dream will be a reality... And i'm NOT hitting below the belt! Obama in fact, experimented with coke!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:28:02 GMT

Posted By: 5leavesleft (May 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM)

Obama can't handle intense scrutiny and tough questions, unless its scripted. What makes anyone think he can handle the intense pressure of being commander-in-chief?

MAYBE, HE KNOWS HOW TO CAMPAIGN AND WIN THATS WHAT COUNTS!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

emoney78 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:30:40 GMT

ATTN: America, we can't be affraid to put in work any longer!

We have to stop being lazy and letting the media tell us what to think about politicans by polls of only 1,000 people or less that's suppose to tell how millions of Americans in a state view someone or by them giving politicans a free pass on their core ethics just because it's "old news." The main stream media has forgotten how to investigate and ask the hard questions and only report as THEY'RE TOLD.

I'm not going to say who I'm supporting whether it be McCain or Obama, but I am definitely NOT supporting Hillary Clinton due to her YEARS of DOCUMENTED deceit and flat out lies. Not because of something the media told me, but because of what I've uncovered MYSELF through official government and public records that are available to us all! This woman CAN NOT be trusted because she WILL say and do anything to gain power as she's clearly done to this day; however, the mainstream media leaves this out due to fear and/or money. This woman is good at lying to OUR faces into drumming up support for her quest for power. Since the mainstream media has forgotten how to investigate and stand up against such a liar, I feel it's time for a refresher course on what this woman is truly about.

I ask that ALL Americans to take just an hour and a half to watch "Hillary the Movie" at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8464923602139974671 and recall the essence of Hillary.

Not only that, but I BEG you to check with your local, state, and federal records on not just her, but on ALL politicans before blindly following them on promises that sound good to us only to have our hearts broken later. Sign up for all information and pay more attention to your local governments (county and state) as these will affect you more directly than the federal presidential vote once ever four years. Yes, this is a great country but if we don't educate ourselves on liars like Hillary and let the media give us watered down versions of the truth, then we are going to continue to get screwed over and the only people we can blame at that point is OURSELVES!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

masonwl — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:31:13 GMT

Obama is an Abomination. He would not be where he is without the lopsided support he has receieve from a powerful voting block within the party (african americans).

The only difference between Obama and Howard Dean is a Scream... nothing more or less.

Democratic unity? I will not unify with any idiot that believes this guys pipe dream will be a reality... And i'm NOT hitting below the belt! Obama in fact, experimented with coke!

YOU FORGET MOST OF THE AMERICANS THAT SUPPORT HIM ARE WHITE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

stematwork — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:31:58 GMT

i can't wait untill the race card turns into:

"not voting for obama is a sign of latent racism. you should be ashamed of yourself"

ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the 2008 election!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:34:10 GMT

If Obama is the democrats strongest candidate(supposedly), then what difference does it make if Hillary is in or not? Let her run. Let her stay in as long as she wants. If Obama can't beat McCain today, what makes anyone think he'll be able to beat McCain in November? Obama's has alienated voters that he needs in November. It seems likely that Obama will be given more scrutiny (FINALLY) and we will discover the other skeletons in his closet. Given this scenario, I don't see how Obama can win. We will have a President McCain come November.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:34:36 GMT

The weatherman is over. getrealin08 (May 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM)

He is not even doing anything wrong himself anymore is at best a tangential acquaintance. Yes they served on the same board of a charity and no BO did not elect members to the board. This is from Fox so you can push facts not your own imaginations

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/17/fact-check-obamas-relationship-with-william-ayers/

On Rezko. Oh I was dying to get something out so I could change my mind. The trial has been onging for 5 weeks. Journalists were following too hoping to expand their viewship as they did with Wright. Look the networks make money from such stuff. Well only about two sentences in total mentioning BO. This is over too.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rezko-court-story,0,7957753.story

In fact of the candidates, BO is the only one without a personal censure or investigation or indictment (McCAin was publicly reprimanded by congressional investigation on Keating 5. And Hillary had Webster Hubell, Whitewater, Vince Foster who allegedly committed suicide during the investigations, took white house furniture and later reompensed it, and I wouldnt hold against her that she was married to the only other impeached president or the presidential pardon of cirminals and contributors). So based on scandals, we can see the fresh senator again comes off better.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:35:32 GMT

A quick comment about Obama being half black. So is Tiger Woods, and that career loser can't seem to win a golf tournament. Oh wait... Look, there are a lot of people out there who will never vote for him because he is black. They might just not say it out loud. Look, whether it's race, abortion, gun control, or whatever, ANYONE who votes based on ONE ISSUE is an IDIOT!!! It's like people voting against Gore simply because they hated Clinton. Gee, that seems to have worked out well in retrospect. You know, voting to let a man control the most POWERFUL COUNTRY ON EARTH and do WHATEVER HE FEELS LIKE FOR FOUR YEARS because you don't like ONE THING about the other candidate which is irrelevant. Maybe what America really needs is to listen when Obama suggests that we need to be a notch or two more sophisticated in chosing how and why we vote.

And seriously, if Hillary supporters are going to vote for McCain just because she lost the primary, it's the same thing. You're just pissed and BITTER because things didn't turn out your way, and it's easier to villify Obama than to admit defeat.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

delphi1958 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:37:35 GMT

I don't think it is subject to debate that Barak Obama used the deep dislike of the media for Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton to get the benefits of a negative campaign without having to run one. After accepting all of the benefits of the pundits dragging Hillary down, it is difficult to convincingly marshall moral indignation about the tone of the Clinton campaign. Still, the important thing for Democrats should be beating John McCain. Hillary exposed a real problem with Obama that McCain was going to exploit this fall even had Hillary "chosen her words more carefully". So, Obama should be focusing on how to develop an approach that will make the older white working class constituents believe he is out to protect their interests.

The comments Obama made about US automobiles in my view makes it impossible for him to carry Michigan and probably Ohio -- where people still believe in and drive the fine products produduced domestically. I don't believe that the car Obama discusses was so bad -- a friend of mine had one -- but, of course it was properly maintained.

So, as a "rust belt" resident, I find it offensive that American products are being disparaged. Mr. Obama should think about whether more electoral votes lie in Detroit and Cleveland --- or Tokyo. In these tough economic times, people will vote their economic interests not their predeliction for poetry. Solutions to reconvert America into a producer are what most "rust belt" people want to hear -- unless they are members of the investor class -- who will vote for John McCain on the issue of permanently eliminating (or drastically reducing) the dreaded "death tax".

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

HolyRoller — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:38:55 GMT

I have stated this view for months on end. My accuracy becomes more evident daily...HUSSEIN OBAMA'S CHANCE OF BEING ELECTED POTUS IS VERY NEAR 0%.....Why???

1. He will lose ~50% of Clinton supporters....they have been called RACIST, STUPID, RACIST, IGNORANT, RACIST, BITTER, RACIST, UNEDUCATED, RACIST, IDIOTS, RACIST...did I mention RACIST.

3. Mainly this...American Hero vs Islamic Sympathizer hmm...tough choice

Only the DNC Tower of Babel could lose this one. THANKS EMPORER SOROS Ya'll have blessed America, and weren't even trying

NOBAMA!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:40:01 GMT

Mason, you make me sick you putred excuse for a human being. I think you are dispicable for drawing parallels between Hillary and her supporters and the Confederacy!!!!! Hillary is not being racist when she points to demographics and speaks the truth about what is happen. I'm one of those "uneducated (not having gone to college) working class democrats and i'll NEVER vote for Obama. The reason? He beat the candidate I PASSIONATELY feel is better suited to run this country, thanks in no small part to the LOPSIDED RACIST support he got from his own in state after state.. I'm all about loyalty.. and the Clintons were very passionate and sensetive to the needs of African Americans. What a massive political mistake them made to expect a littel loyalty!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Robvme — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:40:52 GMT

Yeah, whatever. Hillary is a pigheaded, racist, liar. She needs to quit this race so the dems have a chance. Fact is, all of the democratic superdelegates are really super wimps and don't deserve the whitehouse if they can't come together on nominating a candidate when it has all but been dtermined. I hope McCain cleans their clocks and steals the whitehouse. I am disgusted with the dems, especially hillary and her cronies.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

the_shelton — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:41:34 GMT

The only reason Hillary is continueing is to be a pain in the butt. She is trying to get Obama to pick up her debts and pay them off. She really has nothing to offer Obama's campaign. After all the things she has said, I wouldn't want her to be in the same state.

As far as the other out of left field posts here, the population of the US is only 12.9 percent black. So how do you explain the number of people voting for Obama. If he got all the black population, it still wouldn't make up that percentage that he gets. You had better know your facts before you start spewing out your racial junk. The vast majority of people who vote for Obama are white working class people. Hillary has been trying to spin that tale for so long now, I'm surprised you haven't caught on yet. That is the biggest racial slander and slur she makes. Obama is being voted for by all walks of life and to try to segment it down and alienate the people against him is the most crude form or "playing the race card".

Sorry folks, you are going to have to throw your prejudice away one of these days, it might as well be now. You have been misrepresented for these many decades by all these wonderful white men. Don't you think it is about time to look at the facts and start voting for someone who will actually take an interest in your plight and try to change it?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

martymoose — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:43:10 GMT

I seem to be one of those white males everyone seems to be writing about. According to the political pundits, I should be supporting Barack Obama (advanced degree, upper middle class, 44 yrs old). I have voted democratic since 1984 (my first presidential election). However with the primaries drawing to a conclusion, I find myself leaning to John McCain.

I am a supporter of Hillary Clinton. I remember the good times of the 1990's and I would like to have someone in the White House who would make good decisions again.

I have nothing against Barack Obama except I don't believe he would make a very good president. I can only see two situations where I would support him in November:

1. Hillary Clinton is his running mate.

2. Mitt Romney is John McCain's running mate.

I don't think one could classify me as a Reagan Democrat since I voted against him in 1984. However, I am fearful of the radical left as much as the radical right. In my opinion, Barack Obama represents the far left wing of the Democratic Party, probably too liberal to govern effectively.

As a lifelong Democrat, I am drawn to the notion of ending Republican rule. Change is very appealing to me. However I am fearful of the change Barack Obama offers.

Although I am only one man, my friends and family share my concerns. I am convinced that there are many voters like myself and we will make a significant difference in November. The Democrats should realize that they will always get the far left and African American vote. It people like myself they should be concerned with.

Over the past 40 years, the Democrats have only won 3 out of the last 10 presidential elections. If Gerald Ford had not pardoned Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter would have lost the 1976 election. One could conclude that the Democratic Party had done a poor job in selecting a candidate that could compete in the general election.

I remember Barack Obama once remarking that the primaries were like trying out for quarterback on a football team. In football, the object is to start a quarterback that gives you the best shot at winning football games. Sometimes the starter is benched in the middle of the season because he is unable to perform adequately game time. I think we have a similar situation with Barack Obama.

I believe that the primary process of the Democratic Party is flawed. A 30% success rate over the past 40 years is evidence enough. Maybe in 2012 we can adopt a process similar to the Republican primary. Or perhaps the Democratic Party is at a crossroads. It may be time for another political party to rise that adequately represents the values and beliefs of its members.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:43:39 GMT

Americans should look at all the candidates equally and vote according to the candidate who they feel will best represent them, their interests, and the good of America. No one candidate is perfect so most people will have to weigh the pros and cons of each. We should look at policy and at their character. We are not going to agree on every issue that a candidate takes a position on but we try and make the best decision we can with the information we have. When I weigh the candidates, I choose Hillary, followed by McCain, and lastly Obama.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:44:37 GMT

Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Kansas, SD, ND and Texas will vote McCain. Look at the polls.

So will WV, FLORIDA, MICHIGAN, AL, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, GA, Indiana, KY, LA, MS, Missouri, NM, NC, OHIO, OK, SC, TN, VA, and Wyoming. And maybe PA, for a total of 283 electors, even without PA.

It looks like the only states Obama will win are California(55), Colorado(9), CN(7), DL(3), D.C(3)., Hawaii (4), Idaho(4), Illinois(21), Iowa(7), Maine(4), Maryland(10), Mass(12)., MN(10), NH(4), NJ(15), NY(31), Oregon(7), RI(4), VT(3), Washington(11), and Wisconsin(10), for a total of 234 electors - not enough to win.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/general-election/

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/calculator.html

Do the math, Obama can't win.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:49:27 GMT

Wow, a lot of black people post on this site! All I keep seeing is "hillarys' a racist!"

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

curryjm — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:50:43 GMT

Yeah, I guess letting Hillary stay in gives Barama credibility. He is going to need it in the general election. How many voters realized that he was elected U.S. Senator from Illinois because his Republican opponent was Alan Keyes? I can't imagine that many Illinois Republicans even voted for Alan Keyes. Keyes is a right-wing, nut-case, carpetbagging, talk-show host from Maryland who also happended to be black. Obama had no real competition in his last election. It won't be so easy for him in November.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:52:22 GMT

Another one has joined that makes up stuff board: HollyRoller. His Nation of islam mentor he says. Farrakhan is the nation of islam guy and is not known by BO. BO has denounced and rejected the guy when he came up in a debate but they have no personal relationship.

2. BO's wife is not a millionaire. That's McCain's wife with 100 million.

3. BO's wife has not been shown to be angry at any time. Thats a latent throwback at imagining every black person is angry. Where did you get this one?. And nasty? I suppose its also call other people's wife's names because they are candidates board.

Islamic sympathizer? How? Because he would prefer diplomacy before using force and committing troops to harm's way. Yes, he said he would dialogue with Cuba, Venezuala, and yes Iran but will not hesitate to use force in Pakistan which is also an islamic country but where our real enemy is at (Its amazing how the main enemy and the current president keep saying the right place to be fighting is Iraq while he continues to reside elsewehere - who is the real one aiding the terrorist). And by the way the Islamic is not the enemy, the terrorist is - so the real problem is terrorist sympathizer not islamic sympathizer but then we are all still scared of that word so might not notice the difference.

I agree with you though on the media (through Clinton repeating AP statements) that suffest her supporters are not going to vote for him (and some have suggested and through exit polling that a few is due to race). But BO as NEVER pushed such statements because of its potential entrenchment of a divisive position that stops us from focusing on what may work better for us instead of on race.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

rossj — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:54:05 GMT

OK. I have posted before, but calling the Clintons racist is absurd! They were fighting for Civil Rights LONG before they had political ambitions. They felt it was important that people, all people, have the same rights. We have learned one thing during this election: To hurl out the word "racist" as casually and as comfortably as saying "hello". Come on people, of any color, just because someone says something you don't like, or don't like how someone behaves, then you throw out the word "racist". I am not a racist and support Hillary, but will vote for Obama in the GE. I am tired of being called racist because of my support. Those of you who look at Obama through rose colored glasses, it's time to give that up. He hasn't been squeaky clean either. But Obama people seem to lay in wait, ready to throw out the word racist and liar and any other nasty word you can find! You don't like the Clintons, I can understand that, I really can. But please, be more civilized and walk the talk! Yes, there is still racism in this country, but, a lot of Obama supporters propogate it by making accusations that have no weight. You are running your own smear campaign and that's EXACTLY what you are accusing HRC of. Don't be hypocrits. That goes for HRC supporters too. If I am disgusted by anything in this race, it's not the candidates, but the supporters who have a conquer and oblitierate mentaility. You say you want Clinton to stop because of YOUR desires. But what about the people who want a chance to vote for their candidate out of principal? Or, don't they matter? In effect you are saying, "Sit down at the back of the bus and accept what WE want." Does that sound familiar? I am so deeply saddened by our countries lack of treating one another like human beings and then turning around and accusing others for not being that way. When will we stop seeing "those people" as unworthy and begin to see "US"? And before I get told, "Well HRC does this!" and "Obama does that!" or "There are these racist people!" and "There are these elitist people!", you are right! Those people are out there and the more you participate in name calling the worse off we are all! A bunch of blind and toothless people running around ready to claim victimization and righteous retaliation. For some reason, I thought we were better than that!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:54:51 GMT

I disagree that Obama is the cleanest of the three candidates.

He is a politician just like the others

The key for me is that he used cocaine for years.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:54:55 GMT

Obviously if he defeated Alan Keyes because Keyes was weak. He has now brought down the biggest name in Democratic politics in the last 20 years. Got better fund raising, better organization, more principled positions (look at the gas tax thing as an example). Had a better vision for change that convinced more voters even though he had less party support (180 to 69 superdelegate lead for Hillary as late as Dec last year).

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

sunoverla — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:55:33 GMT

Hillary should definitely stay in the Democratic race.

I just called Columbia University to get copy of Barack's senior thesis.

I was transferred to the political science department.

Was given "no comment" re: it's existence and/or release.

Why?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

the_shelton — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:56:47 GMT

One word to mr/ms benivarius, before you start picking on someone like Tiger Woods, you had better review your facts as well as your prejudice BS that you are spouting. Tiger could beat anyone you could put up there. Don't make the same McCain mistake of saying something bad about Tiger, he has too many loyal fans to put up with that BS. Politicians come and go but Tiger will be here longer than you.

As for the rest of these posters, I see that good old Holy Roller is back spewing his hatred and prejudice rot. I don't really know who you would vote for, but I suppose it would be something like Hitler or Stalin. Someone to match your wit and intellectual prowess.

As for the others here, I am a college educated white male and I have voted for the Republicans most of my life, because I liked there stance on keeping government out of the charity business and having most of the services being provided by private enterprise. But I can't go for it this time. When Cheney put Halliburten in as the supplier to this wonderful war, I took a good look at that. Since Cheney was directly connected with Halli I thought that was actually a real example of conflict of interest. But since I couldn't stop it, I invested in Hallie and have made a bundle. But back to the main point, the Republicans have been too much entrenched in this whole job fleeing scheme and I can't back that any more. I've worked for Oracle and for Intuit and for others that have shipped the jobs overseas and I have seen the havoc that has caused to a great deal of American businesses. That has to stop. We are not only shipping jobs away, we are giving away our technology. Try to find an American that installs the Oracle Financial system. They teach it in hight school in India.

To MartyMouse... sorry charlie, you are not what the pundits are talking about. They are talking about educated people. If you were to look at those good old 90s, Bill had nothing to do with them, unless you think he invented the internet and that he caused the cold war to become obsolete.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:57:26 GMT

Mason, you make me sick you putred excuse for a human being. I think you are dispicable for drawing parallels between Hillary and her supporters and the Confederacy!!!!! Hillary is not being racist when she points to demographics and speaks the truth as she sees it! I'm one of those "uneducated (not having gone to college) working class democrats the news refers to and i'll NEVER vote for Obama. The reason? He beat the candidate I PASSIONATELY feel is better suited to run this country, thanks in no small part to the LOPSIDED RACIST support he got from his own in state after state.. I'm all about loyalty.. For 25 years the Clintons were very passionate and sensetive to the needs of African Americans. What a costly political mistake they made to expect a so loyalty in return!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:58:08 GMT

Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Kansas, SD, ND and Texas will vote McCain. Look at the polls.

So will WV, FLORIDA, MICHIGAN, AL, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, GA, Indiana, KY, LA, MS, Missouri, NM, NC, OHIO, OK, SC, TN, VA, and Wyoming. And maybe PA,

for a total of 283 electors, even without PA.

for a total of 234 electors - not enough to win.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/general-election/

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/calculator.html

Do the math, Obama can't win.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:58:23 GMT

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

J.Richter — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:59:49 GMT

Can you please point me to the proof that he used cocaine for several years pearsoncrz. I already pointed to that this is not a supported statement. YEs you just choose to keep pushing it even thoguh it appears clearly made up. Why dont you oppose the guy on facts or substances. Is he that scary good that we have to make up stuff to bring him down? Surely you can find reasons based on facts and I would be happy to see them. And yes his book is public consumption and talks about 'brief' drug use back in school but you appear to have extended the story on your own.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:59:49 GMT

MY NAME IS OSAMA BIN-LAUDEN!

ANYONE WHO BELIEVED THAT! BELIEVES EVERY COMMENT WEATHER ABOUT OBAMA OR CLINTON ON LINE!!! HOW DO YOU KNOW? YOU DON'T!! YOU "ASSUME"

"ASSUMPTION" IS THE MOTHER OF ALL FK UPS! REMEMBER HOW DIRTY THE GOP CAN BE, AND THEY ARE PLAYING US AGAINST EACH OTHER, CAUSE IT WORKS! WHY??? QUESTION FOR THE TECHNO AGES

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:00:42 GMT

By the way, Hillary doesn't need to drop out so the Democrats "have a chance." Either one of our candidates head to head against McCain should DEMOLISH him. That's why this race is so close and exciting to Democrats across the country. We've got not ONE but BOTH of the two best horses in the race!!! Besides, anyone talking about the math of winning the national election is talking out of their ears because we haven't even had a change to let the "real" race develop yet. If your personal favorite of the two doesn't win the nomination it doesn't mean that the Democrats lose the white house, and you jolly well know it deep down. BOTH CANDIDATES AGREE ON THAT AND HAVE SAID SO IN CLEAR ENGLISH ON MANY OCCASIONS. So cram it, readjust yourselves to reality, and let's get the Democratic victory in November at the number one spot on our priority lists REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS THE NOMINATION.

I'll come out and say it: IF OBAMA WINS, I VOTE FOR OBAMA. IF CLINTON WINS, I WILL VOTE FOR CLINTON!!!!!!! Be excited for a change that we have two amazing candidates to chose from, because this will probably never happen again.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

HolyRoller — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:04:23 GMT

To J. Richter...I wasn't talking about Farrakhan(although YES he does know him) I was talking about his "pastor" Imam Wright, who uses N. O. I. Islamothugs for camera eye-candy. He sells and endorses N.O.I. literature and doctrinal material at the Trinity Temple. Wife isn't a millionaire??? She is that and more. And nasty to boot. Cindy McCain is worth millions AND loves her country and is proud of it. Diplomacy with the spawn of Satan??? Sure, he can use Mr Peanut to work out treaties. Ever heard about Chamberlain and Hitler?? It's idealistic and dumb. And YES, Hussein will be fortunate to carry 15 states. The election is a forgone conclusion, with Hussein as the DNC messiah.

NOBAMA!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:07:30 GMT

pearsoncrz

prove to me he used coke for a week or more or a day or two prove it or stop it as McCain has real dirt not fabricated "hussian" dirt!!! prove it or the next death in Iraq is yours to cherish!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:07:59 GMT

I can't wait to see "Countdown Keith, and HardBall Chris" on election night. I wonder if either will cry when MSNBC projects John McCain is the winner of FL. And as they try to spin it and highlight the major importants of Pa and Ohio, the numbers roll in.. "MSNBC now projects that Mccain will win Ohio!" I hope that in the time it takes K.O. to figure out a way to blame Obamas' crushing losses on O'reily, he'll think back to all the Hillary bashing his MSNBC team did. At least he'll know where the real fault lies.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:09:21 GMT

hollyroller

regardless of what you say it only proves the American education system failed you severly, or your to intelligent to make a simple statement! get off!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

delphi1958 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:10:19 GMT

Why all th vitriol? I think that Obama has taken some hits lately ... but, on the whole, the pundit class -- particularly MSNBC -- have been trashing Clinton and annointing Obama. BOTH CANDIDATES ARE FLAWED. I will hold my nose and vote for whoever gets the nomination. But, there is no need to disparage either candidate -- they are politicians trying to get through the most brutal vetting process. I think, though, that Obama people need to understand that Clinton people have sme legitimacy to their point of view -- just as Clinton people need to understand that Obama people have some legitimacy to their views. This acid exchange of insults does nothing to promote the democratic process.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

delphi1958 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:11:59 GMT

I agree with Mike2181 -- MSNBC has become like Fox News -- but directs its venom at one of its own instead of its opponents.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

rtactaquin — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:12:16 GMT

While we are all getting cozy with Marvin Gaye tunes, let's not forget he came to an untimely end. So, when the curtains are drawn on this political show, I was curious who pays back all the money the Clinton's issued to the campaign as a "loan"? Is there some tie to the $100,000,000 donated to the Clinton Library?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Mike2181 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:13:03 GMT

Excellent point, this election could be as much about the contrast between the wives of McCain and Obama as it is anything else.. And that could be REAL ugly for democrats in the election cycle. Obama may be vetted to a degree... The Clintons were 100 percent vetted. But Michelle Obama? That could be a treasure trove for the republican attack machine!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:15:09 GMT

What vetting has taken place on the part of Obama? Obama's gotten a freebie pass. Nobody complained and everyone was bending over backwards trying to make excuses for him. He still hasn't given apologies for his comments only saying that he should have phrased things better.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

4wheeler — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:15:15 GMT

Hillary all the way. I will not vote for anyone else. msnbc is trying to elect their choice.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

solfrank — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:17:40 GMT

She should stay in the race. If Obama was in second, I'd say the same thing. You want the first significant candidates of color and gender to stay in the race until the end. It sets a good precedent for the candidates to come.

Of course, Hillary should refrain from lowering Obama in her campaigning. She should campaign on her own merit -- not comparatively or negatively on Obama.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

delphi1958 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:18:36 GMT

rtactaquin -- dont' forget to place Bill and Hillary on a grassy knoll in Dallas in Novemeber 1963.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:19:48 GMT

Just a word to the wise (and the not-so-wise). Americans are not the only people reading these posts. What message does it send about your intellect if you are a Hillary supporter and so-called Democrat, but are going to vote for McCain (4 more Bushy years) when Obama gets the nomination? This child-like behavior is the equivalent of taking your ball home because you weren't picked to play, but infinitely worse because you'll be the ones responsible for entrenching us further in an illegal war, not to mention the crumbling of our infrastucture and economy, and the demise of our enviornment. My point is, try to think with your head on this, not your heart. It's not Obama's fault that Hillary ran such a shoddy campaign. She had countless opportunities to "take the high road", but chose the "kitchen sink" strategy instead. People are tired of the same old DC politics, and want (demand) something new. McCain is by no stretch of the imagination the answer. Vote smart, feel good, reclaim your country, VOTE OBAMA!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:20:59 GMT

Let Hillary stay. I'm for Hillary and I'll see her all the way because I believe she cares about all Americans.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:22:24 GMT

delphi

Obamas wife has nothing close to McCains or Clintons husband! Which I want to say something about. You want Hillery cause Bill was a good pres? Honest question, no insult, no disrespct, just a question, for you to answer for yourself, why? Hillery and Bill are TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE of TWO DIFFERENT MINDS, IN OTHER WORDS, HILLERY IS NO BILL. WHEN IT COMES TO COUNTRY. IT'S ALL DIFFERENT TODAY, NO WAY SHE COULD BE LIKE BILL! NO MATTER WHO WINS, IT WILL TAKE WAY MORE THAN 2, MAYBE EVEN 3,4 TERMS, TO FIX WHAT BUSH BROKE, SO DON'T GO LOOKING FOR THE QUICK FIX THAT COST MORE LATER! DON'T EXSPECT ANYONE TO FIX IN THERE TIME, IN THE WH, NOT FOR AWHILE ANYWAY.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:22:57 GMT

J. Richter, he says in his book that he started using cocaine

("blow") in high school and did not stop "getting hgh"

until after he went to Columbia.

Read his books.

He admits to doing this. It isn't news.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

markci — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:27:26 GMT

The comments made by "Suzanne Little, Ph.D" in the article are rich, to say the least. She accuses Obama backers and the media of "undermining a democratic process," and screams "LET IT PLAY OUT." But in fact, Clinton is not interested in a democratic process playing out. She is interested in subverting a democractic process with superdelegates. I guarantee that if the DNC offered to change the rules, eliminate the superdelegates, and annoint the candidate with the most democratically elected delegates be the winner on June 3, Obama would agree in a heartbeat. Hillary would not -- she would be doomed.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:27:47 GMT

you see 40yr old from NC, it's that assumption that I haven't

done my homework, that I can't vote in my own best interests,

that I vote on the basis of emotion (bitterness? clinging to my religion?)

and make up my mind intelligently that earns Obama

and his supporters the elitist label.

Congress can stop the war, just stop funding it.

Congress is who must make the laws, they can do it

even if McCain is the president.

I'm looking to elect some democrats to Congress,

but I'm not voting for a former coke head.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:29:40 GMT

you see 40yr old from NC, it's that assumption that I haven't

done my homework, that I can't vote in my own best interests,

that I vote on the basis of emotion (bitterness? clinging to my religion?)

and CAN'T make up my mind intelligently that earns Obama

and his supporters the elitist label.

Congress can stop the war, just stop funding it.

Congress is who must make the laws, they can do it

even if McCain is the president.

I'm looking to elect some democrats to Congress,

but I'm not voting for a former coke head.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:32:59 GMT

5leavesleft

WHAT VETTING! ARE YOU JOKING! IF YOU THINK AN ARTICLE ABOUT HIS BIRTH NAME,HIS REV,HIS ASSOCIATES, HIS FRIENDS, IS HE BLACK ENOUGH, HE IS MUSLIM ECT ECT ECT! DID YOU KNOW WHERE IN PRINT THAT THE CLINTONS REV WAS CONVICTED AS A PEDIPHILE, SHOW ME! THE ARTICLE WHERE SHE WAS GETTING KICKED OUT OF THE USA FOR NOT DISAVOWING, MCCAINS MANY MARIAGES, AND THE PEOPLE HURT AND BANKRUPT, BY HIS BILLS??? NO ON ALL COUNTS!!! WE KNOW MORE ABOUT OBAMAS SHOE SIZE, THAN ANY ONE EVER RUNNING FOR THE WH! ALL HE HAS GOT FOR MONTHS IS BASHED, FOR EVERY THING, SAID, DONE 200 YEARS AGO, HIS MIDDLE NAME, THE HAMASS!!! SHOULD I KEEP ON!! NOT VETTED? FREE RIDE? NOT FOR A NY MINUTE!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:34:23 GMT

YOU ALL READY HAVE PEARSONCRZ

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:34:29 GMT

One more thing, the irony in some of these posts from Hillary fans is astounding. You folks should do a little better job on your research. You say Obama is a racist? Look no further that Hillary's most recent racially charged comments. You say Obama is a liar? How about Bosnia? You say Obama is no good because of his ties to Wright, Rezko, and Ayers? Surprise, Clinton also has ties to all three as well. My point is, for everything supposedly nasty that you're trying to cast on Obama, the same can be said of Clinton, and by her own admission, she has about 35 more years of dirt on her than Obama has. I despise Hillary, she's nothing but a pant-suited pandering power-monger, but I'd still swallow my pride and vote for her (as a Democrat) were she somehow able to steal the nomination from Obama. We just can't have 4 more years of shrub.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

grammars — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:35:10 GMT

What am I missing? I changed my registration from independent in closed primary AZ so that I could vote for the one candidate who does more than smile and yell catch phrases. Understandably, the youngsters have been told for so many years that they are the "future," many have come to believe it, without the other message that much hard work is required to even have a future... Seems that the Obama campaign artisans are capable of taking key issues and reworking them into platform points, but their presentations are not thorough, and in many cases, not even correct. So who's going to implement any change? Will it be the big bucks "have I got a deal for you" lobbyists? Young people take a little learning time to catch on there; just in this short exposure, Obama's two major missteps in church and real estate choices have been revealed--and forgiven or forgotten. His accomplishment is thin, though he seems pleasantly sincere. No one asks hard questions!

The Democratic target for criticism, instead, seems to be Hillary Rodham Clinton. Words like "angry" and "devious" are used, with very trivial examples. I am puzzled, because the solid work she has done is vastly documented, and the loyalty she gives to those who need her help is legendary. Book learning was never in question; the understanding and working with people of extraordinary ability has been demonstrated over and over.

Are we blind? Afflicted with short attention spans? Unable to process complexity? It's not a media show if that's the case; it's a made-for-prime-time production to entertain the world, instead, as we finish GWB's implosion derby.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

markci — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:35:24 GMT

Will someone break the news to peearsoncrz that nobody give's a rat's backside who he's voting for?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

markci — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:36:42 GMT

*** I am puzzled, because the solid work she has done is vastly documented, ***

Yeah, too bad she and Bill are keeping that documentation from being released.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:37:08 GMT

pearsoncrz

STILL WAITING FOR PROOF HE WAS ADICTED TO COKE! AS ALL ARE AFTER 2-3 USES IN THE 60-70 WHEN IT WAS GOOD, AND I'M BETTING YOU NEVER EXPERMINTED WITH ANYTHING INCLUDING SEX RIGHT??? DID YOU GROW UP IN THE 60S???

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:37:09 GMT

Does anyone here really care if anyone did coke in college? First and foremost, that didn't stop people in this country from electing Bush TWICE, and that psycho looks like he did it enough to seriously effect his mental capacity and speech pattern. Secondly, IT'S FREAKING COLLEGE!!! Who gives a crap what anyone else did in college. That's where people do blow, get hookers, puke on the dashboard of their friend's car and get put in jail for 24 hours for disorderly conduct. Who freaking cares... Frankly, I'm a little more concerned that people in this country willfully elected a man to the highest office in this country for the last eight years who openly ran under the headline "I'm kinda stupid." Isn't that a lot more scary than the fact that 90 percent of all elected officials drank, smoked, and did drugs thrity years ago? I guess I think so.

P.S. To pearsoncrz, the dude from North Carolina, I don't think it would be fair to remove your senators and representatives from congress because you guys seceeded from the union a few years back. And I guarentee that if you have voted AT ALL in the last 50 years you've voted for at least three former coke heads if not more.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Old New Jersey guy — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:39:17 GMT

pearsoncrz :

You state that you're offended for being labeled as an emotional voter adn then you wind up your post by calling Barrack Obabma a coke head?

I think you just proved 40 yr old from NC's point.

That aside, the Democrats must unite behind their candidate, regardless of who gets the nod. The Republicans have ruined this country in 8 years and can't be trusted with another term at the helm.

I'm a Clinton supporter, but will have no reservations about lining up behind Obama as the Democratic candidate.

I believe either Hillary or Obama would make a far better President than McCain who's saddled to stale, old Republican ideas. It's time for new ideas and leadership that we can be proud of and either candidate will supply that in spades. Despite the pocks at Hilalry and Obama regarding their experience, both would do well. I remember a great President who lined up without much experience against a formidable foe with years of public service under his belt. He was too young and too inexperienced by comparison, but he won and became one of our greatest leaders. His name was John F. Kennedy.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:41:05 GMT

DUDE

GREAT WORD OF WISDOM TO FOLLOW THANKS! NO INSULT NO DISRESPECT JUST WELL SAID.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

ToadTreeHugger — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:41:28 GMT

The Democratic Party should choose the candidate that is most electable. Clinton has won the key battleground states of OH, PA, IN, FL, MI. She has won TX, CA, NJ, NY. She is leading in the polls. She beats McCain by a wide margin in Rove's latest state-by-state electoral poll. His same poll shows Obama losing by the same margin to McCain. Obama's lead right now is due to his early momentum in caucus states BEFORE the Wright Controversy and his bittergate comments. He has not been able to regain that momentum. Obama won North Carolina in a racially lopsided primary. He's now LIMPING into the finish line, "warts and all," to claim the party's nomination. And the GOP is loving it.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

lmv — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:42:25 GMT

The Democratic Party is done this election. It was torn in two not by Clinton but by Obama's most virulent supporters. All of those Obamamaniacs who screamed vitriol towards Clinton, and demonized her supporters as stupid or racist or ignorant, they're the "Democrats" responsible for this mess. Not surprisingly, half of Democratic voters don't like the shabby way they've been treated and many will show their disgust at the ballot box in November. Many Democrats feel like their party left them and they won't be back after this painful divorce. But, hey, Obama did a heckuva job uniting the anti-Clintonites!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:45:25 GMT

Here you go pink, this is from a 2003 article back when Obama was running for the senate and lied about using cocaine. The reporter caught the lie and asked him about it.

"Obama, 42, told me recently he had tried marijuana in high school and hasn't consumed any illegal drugs in 20 years."

Tthat would make him 20 and at Columbia where he says in his book he stopped getting high and started running 3 miles a day. Please note his own use of the word "YEARS" in the text of his book, quoted below as part of the article.

" When I asked if there was anything beyond marijuana in his past, Obama said, "That'll suffice." But the book includes a passage in which Obama discusses how he dealt with questions from his mother when he was 17 and a senior in high school. The context of the book also makes clear that he was trying to deal with the problems his race presented.

"I had learned not to care," he wrote. "I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though. ..."

"Blow" is a street name for cocaine. "Smack" is slang for heroin.

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man," Obama wrote. "Except the highs hadn't been about that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was. Not by then, anyway. I got high for just the opposite effect, something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind, something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:46:16 GMT

IMV READ

WELL AND MAYBE YOU MIGHT SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE CALLED POLITICS,OK

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:47:25 GMT

pearsoncrz: It's apparent you're one of the tougher Hillary "nuts" to crack. While I can sit here and easily counter any rational or irrational rant you may post, I merely want to pose this question to you. How in the world do you claim Obama to be an Elitist? He just got done paying off his college loans a few years ago, and he's recently pocketed a few million (4.9) from his book sales. He didn't grow up priveleged, he doesn't have a family name to exploit and gain revenue upon, he doesn't go jetting around in his trophy-wife beer-distibutor tycoon's personal jet for free, he doesn't go into the quickie-mart and try to figure out how to dispense not a cup of coffee, but a French-vanilla cappucino, and most importantly, he doesn't exude a sense of entitlement that Hillary does, nor does he have access to mountains (109 million) of cash to loan themselves when the going gets rough. How is this man an elitist, and what then are Hillary and McCain?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:49:44 GMT

Here you go pink, this is from a 2003 article back when Obama was running

for the senate and lied about using cocaine. The reporter caught the lie and

asked him about it.

"Obama, 42, told me recently he had tried marijuana in high school and

hasn't consumed any illegal drugs in 20 years."

That would make him 20 and at Columbia where he says in his book

he stopped getting high and started running 3 miles a day.

Please note his own use of the word "YEARS" in the text of his book,

quoted below as part of the article.

" When I asked if there was anything beyond marijuana in his past,

Obama said, "That'll suffice." But the book includes a passage in

which Obama discusses how he dealt with questions from his mother

when he was 17 and a senior in high school. The context of the book

also makes clear that he was trying to deal with the problems his race presented.

"I had learned not to care," he wrote. "I blew a few smoke rings, remembering

those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could

afford it. Not smack, though. ..."

"Blow" is a street name for cocaine. "Smack" is slang for heroin.

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the

young would-be black man," Obama wrote. "Except the highs hadn't been about

that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was. Not by then, anyway.

http://www.mapinc.org/newsnorml/v03/n1786/a06.html

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:50:37 GMT

ToadTreeHugger: She won the "battleground" states against Obama, not McCain, and that was only with registered Democrats. Both Obama and Hillary will crush McCain when it Democrats vs. Republicans, unless people in this country are EXCEEDINGLY stupid. Wait, Bush? Whatever. She didn't get the job done, and it's all a matter of history now.

Oh, and Imv. Are you blind and deaf? No, really, are you BLIND and DEAF?!?!?!?! You appear to be insinuating that Clinton ran a "clean" race and Obama ruined the party. Therefore, that implies that you are either incredibly out of touch with reality, or are physically unable to read and hear, thus only being able to receive whatever telecasts you can pick up telepathically from Fox news. Don't post if you don't read.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:54:32 GMT

Being an elitist isn't a matter of money, but Obama came from money. His grandmother

was a bank VP for crying out loud.

Elitists think they know what is better for people than the people themselves,

that the people aren't as smart as they are, not smart enough to know what is in

their best interests.

Obama is an elitist. His explanation of his "cling to their religion" comment

just reinforced that conclusion. Your suggestion that I am a Hillary "nut" suggests

the same thing.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:55:41 GMT

pearsoncrz

I SHOT MYSELF WHEN I WAS FIVE. DOES IT MATTER-NO! I STILL SMOKE POT, AND AM A VETERAN DOES IT MATTER-NO! SADDLY BUT STILL NO, IF YOU CAN'T VOTE OBAMA? THEN YOU CAN'T VOTE, CAUSE BOTH CLINTON AND MCCAIN DRINK TODAY NOT 20+ YEARS AGO-NOW! I DO NOT WISH A DRUNK IN THE WH EITHER!!! SO WHO CARES?? WHAT DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT WE NEED? EVEN A STONER KNOWS INSIDE OUR OWN BORDERS, IS WHERE IT'S NEEDED! FRAG THE WORLD!!! SO WHAT????? DRUNK, I ASSUME YOU TOOK, ONE, DRINK IN YOUR WHOLE LIFE

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:56:54 GMT

pearsoncrz

I PREFERE AN ELITIST THAN ANOTHER DYNASTY!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

walterneff — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:59:15 GMT

Can't buy your argument. I cite the Suzanne Little e-mail. WHATEVER happens in the remaining primaries, Clinton's paranoid supporters are already convinced that "the system," meaning the media, the DNC and anyone else who has not sided with them has unfairly stacked the deck against her. As far as they're concerned, this has been the story from Day One: Everyone is unfairly against Hillary. Does it sound crazy? Of course it does! But read all the e-mails from Hillary's supporters (egged on by Clinton, naturally): That is EXACTLY what they're saying. Sure, let the primaries roll on. It's not going to matter to them. They made up their delusional minds a long time ago.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 21:59:17 GMT

JFK wasn't that inexperienced Old NJ, he'd been in a war, he'd been a leader of men in times of stress when there wasn't a cheat sheet to work from.

He also never did cocaine.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:00:32 GMT

Pot is not cocaine pink. Neither is a glass of wine.

And yes, I was a teen in the 60's.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:05:48 GMT

pearsoncrz: Nice of you to point this out. It's called 'personal vetting'. I for one appreciate Obama's candidness. It shows he too is human, and that he has made some poor decisions in his life. He doesn't say that he is still a drug user, only that he used it in the past. At least he had the courage to address the issue head-on, instead of waiting for some mudslinger to bring it up somewhere down the road. The man is simply trying to prove that he has nothing to hide, but you make it sound like he's going to swing from the chandelliers and snort lines right in the Oval office. You yourself say "it isn't news", yet here you are going to great lengths to make it seem newsworthy. I just think you're a little confused, that's all. Or perhaps you've lost your bearings...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:07:34 GMT

LIKE IT OR NOT FOLKS "CHANGE" IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW. FOR WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE LAST MILLION YEARS, EVERYONE HATED THE SUPERS FOR STICKING THERE NOSES IN BEFORE THE FINAL VOTE WAS CAST. THIS IS THE FIRST, IN A LONG WHILE THAT THEY WAIT, AND STILL GET JUMPED, BUT THEY ARE WAITING FOR THE LAST VOTE TO BE CAST, THIS IN IT'S SELF IS THE START OF CHANGE, WHY? "WE THE PEOPLE" FINALY COUNT! IF I'M WRONG ON MY TIME LINE, AS I SAID, IT FEELS LIKE,OK! DON'T JUMP ME FOR FEELING PRETTY GOOD, ABOUT THE CURRENT ACTIONS OF OUR SO CALLED SUPERS.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:09:40 GMT

Dude, personcrz...perhaps you haven't been paying, but labeling people for no particularly good or valid reason is a sport in politics. Do you always just blindly go with whatever the news media and opposition label a person, because if you do you would be forced to admit that Hillary Clinton is a b*&ch. Obama has been saying this whole time that his main goal is to help everyone in this country, no matter how poor, have food, housing, job security, and medical care FIRST and FOREMOST. That's about as anti-elitist as you can get in the country, and in a massive stroke of irony the only people who don't seem to get it are the poor white people who are number one on the list of people who need those things the most. Honestly, anyone who calls Obama an elitist is has clearly NOT listened to anything he says except tiny, out-of-context sound bytes spun by the media to make this race closer and more interesting than it actually is. You clearly don't read or think for yourself in any meaningful way.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

every_other_nickname_is_taken — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:10:16 GMT

Double standards are fantastic. Apparently, if whites vote for Hillary en masse it's racist but when 90% of black voters in a particular primary vote for Obama it's not? Ridiculous. If you don't understand the meaning of a word, please don't use it. We can now add 'racist' to the expanding list of words that get misused, abused and thrown around. That word, like so many others (fascist, Nazi, etc), means nothing anymore because so many morons use it inappropriately.

Speaking of morons, it makes zero sense to proclaim yourself to be "open-minded" and "progressive" while simultaneously labeling those with differing political views as 'evil', 'murderous', 'racist', etc. Complaining about stereotyping and generalizations and then doing exactly that is a perfect example of hypocrisy.

The best part of the Hillary/Obama battle is that a large number of Dems are being subjected to the same sorts of name-calling and dirty tricks that conservatives have had to endure for years. And its being perpetrated by their fellow Democrats. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that this is pathetic.

I've figured out their playbook. It's similar to Mad Libs. First, you'll need to compile a list of adjectives whose meaning you cannot comprehend. Some good ones are: fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic, imperialistic, jingoistic and evil. Then, wait for someone to express an opinion that differs from yours. If you find that you cannot refute their argument or provide facts and logic to back up your own argument, simply label that person with one of the words from your list. It's even more effective if you string together a bunch of words from the list. It's fun and easy and you won't even have to worry about the words making any sense. The best part is that you won't have to defend your own viewpoint because the other person will be too busy defending themselves against your baseless accusations. It works every time!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:11:48 GMT

pearsoncrz

A SNORT NOW AND THEN WHEN I CAN AFFORD EQUATES TO ONE DRINK MAKES YOU A DRUNK IF AS YOU PERSIST TO SAY A POT HEAD AND COKE HEAD I GUESS CALLING YOU A DRUNK IS NOT OUT OF LINE! IT'S YOUR SAME ASSUMPTION ABOUT OBAMA, THEN THE SAME CAN APPLY TO YOU!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

joecflee — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:11:59 GMT

It's almost funny. Some folks tell Clinto to drop out, and others say she should stay, but only if she promises to be good.

We often forget what democracy is all about--that the only judgment that really matters is the power of the vote. It's not about who's right or who's wrong. It's all about who gets to make that final decision. And clearly, it is not the Obama bloggers, or the Clinton supporters. It is the collective wish of the "people" using the singular weapon that they have--the vote.

Empowered by that vote, the candidates will claim victory or a mandate. What MSNBC, Newsweek, CNN, Fox, say are essentially irrelevant.

So let them vote... then let them fight over the rules (all's fair in politics), and in the end, someone will win. And if it's Obama, as most people already believe it is, then so be it; and if it turns out that Senator Clinton found some magic to claim the nomination, more power to her.

The media should stay out of it. The last time they were so unanimous in supporting something, it turned out to be the Iraq War.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

DrewThom — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:12:01 GMT

Hey all you Clintonites and Obamaniacs, this thing is not over by a long shot. The object is McCain. I have known for a long time that this year's general election was not going to be a walk in the park for either candidate, first because Republicans are very good at general election campaigning and second, because the most charismatic candidate is not always the best candidate to win. To paraphrase one pundit from Sunday's talking head fest, maybe the Dems should have put forth someone more boring as their candidate, like Richardson or Dobbs or Biden who have none of the negatives the either Hillary or Obama bring into a November Election. That's how the Republicans got McCain. He was the least charismatic of all their candidates and ultimately the most electicble. So for Dems to win we'll have to rally around the candidate who wins the final battle, whether it be the first woman or the first black candidate. If its about party then go with the party's convention choice, regardless. If it's about personalities maybe this should be a three-way race. And I think we all know who would win that one.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:16:39 GMT

YA YA I RE-POSTED THIS SAME POST OVER AND OVER AND I WILL CONTINUE, TILL SOME OF YOU GET THE POINT OF THE POST! IT'S SO LUDICRESS TO THINK YOU KNOW THE OTHER PERSONS REAL INTENTIONS ON LINE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Jolard — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:20:09 GMT

I agree 100%, that as long as Clinton stays positive, it is a good thing for her to continue running. It does a number of things, but mostly keeping the race in the news, and allowing Obama to continue getting as much exposure as possible. I like to think it would be like Huckabee, he kept running long after McCain was the nominee, but it didn't hurt McCain, it helped keep at least some interest in the Republican Primary process.

This all changes though if Clinton returns to the negative campaigning. Then her presence definitely hurts the party.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Perception — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:20:32 GMT

I do not care whether Ms. Clinton drops out or not. I have always voted democratic even though they oppose the industry I work in. Republicans do not need the black vote because they don't get it anyway and the only way democrats will get it is by nominating Obama. I do not think he is presidential material and I really was caught flatfooted by the Rev. Wright. I am an old white guy but have voted for and been in favor of civil rights all my life. I still am and and still will be for civil rights but the race dialogue so far has convinced me that much of the black population is still bitter and blames the government and the white population for their problems. We will not get over it or heal in my lifetime. Maybe I would fee more comfortable voting for Powell but not Mr. Obama. My family will either sit this one out or vote for McCain.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

ToadTreeHugger — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:22:04 GMT

"Once again a woman told to put her dreams aside to benefit a man. Obama, freshman senator, paid no dues, treated like anointed royalty, while this hardworking woman, who has battled her entire life to break the glass ceiling, is treated like a leftover meal and thrown down the garbage disposal. I know you ladies know how it feels. You've been in Hillary's shoes. You've seen the pretty boys -- you know who I'm talking about, these young studs that come in the office, have hardly any experience at all, they glad-hand the boss, they're out there apple-polishing and kissing butt, all this stuff, and they're taking credit for your work. They talk a good game with real specifics. And what happens? They get promoted. They're treated like heroes. People swoon and faint when they come around. Love their cologne and so forth. And you don't wear perfume because you know that that's pollution. These guys come in wearing their metrosexual clothes and all their new scents and people just swoon out there. They get promoted while you women, the hard-working backbone of the office, you're told to still go get the coffee or to set up meetings for this new dweeb. " rush limbaugh 5/12

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

fryman12 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:22:17 GMT

pinkpanther87413 : You are confused. The Rush Project encourged people to vote for Hillary not Obama

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:24:29 GMT

pearsoncrz: The shoe seems to fit quite nicely. Your defensive posture for Hillary can only imply that you are one of her supporters. I don't view you any differently. It's a choice you made. I respect that. As a veteran, these are the beliefs and principles that I fought for during my tenure in the military. Voting is as much a privelege, as it is a right. But if you claim to not be voting based on your emotions, then I (as a so-called Elitist) must've missed something. Because I think it's pretty apparent from your open hostility that you are voting quite fervently with emotion, and not really taking the time to look beyond your emotions. If you did, you would find that all the negativity you try to perpetuate over Obama, is nothing compared to the volumes of deceit, corruption, lies, pandering, mysterious deaths, etc. that can be dredged up on the Clintons. And just so you know, I voted for Bill in the 90's, and was for the most part proud to have him as my leader. I just don't feel the same way for his wife.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

fryman12 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:25:24 GMT

Perception - You and other democrats who say they will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee are like spoil children who take their marbles and go home when the game does not go their way. You are essentially saying the last 8 years were great. Give me more of the same. What a bunch of sadists.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:26:46 GMT

I'M STARTING TO SEE IT'S NOT THE MEDIA PER SAY. IT'S THE INTERNET IN FACT. AT LEAST WITH THE MEDIA THEY LOVE TO SHOW A PRESIDENT HOPEFULL STICK HIS OR HER FOOT IN THERE MOUTH, YOU GET TO SEE IT, AND SOME TIMES GET THE CONTEXT, OF THE CONVERSATION IN QUESTION. ON LINE WE CAN BE ANY ONE, A REPUBLICAN BASHING CLINTON OR OBAMA, SO WE NEVER UNITE, ECT ECT! TRYING TO ELECT AN ON LINE PRES IS HAZARDOUS LATELY. I WOULD WISH ALL SUPPORTERS TO GIVE A WEEK OF CALM, JUST TO SEE THE SPAM HIT THE FAN, BECAUSE I WILL BET GOOD MONEY. WHILE WE TAKE A BREAK!! THE HATE FOR BOTH WILL NOT!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:31:11 GMT

FRY

LETS MAKE IT TOTALY UNDERSTANDABLE. YOUR SCAB IS NO BETTER THAN WISHING WELL, TO THE FOOL IN DUBUI, WHO TOOK YOUR JOB, WITH YOUR PERMISSION! THAT THEY MIGHT UNDERSTAND! IF I DON'T GET MY WAY, IT'S COUNTRY, THEN PARTY. I LIKE OBAMA, WHO I FEEL IS BETTER FOR THE COUNTRY ON A WORLDWIDE BASIS, AND HE IS IN CLINTONS PARTY, NOT MCCAINS! GET THE POINT YET!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:32:49 GMT

WELL SAID AGAIN-DUDE

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:33:18 GMT

Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Kansas, SD, ND and Texas will vote McCain. Look at the polls. So will WV, FLORIDA, MICHIGAN, AL, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, GA, Idaho (4), Indiana, KY, LA, MS, Missouri, NM, NC, OHIO, OK, SC, TN, VA, and Wyoming. And maybe PA, for a total of 287 electors, even without PA.

It looks like the only states Obama will win are California(55), Colorado(9), CT(7), DL(3), D.C(3)., Hawaii (4),, Illinois(21), Iowa(7), Maine(4), Maryland(10), Mass(12)., MN(10), NH(4), NJ(15), NY(31), Oregon(7), RI(4), VT(3), Washington(11), and Wisconsin(10), for a total of 231 electors - not enough to win.

Clinton would win Arkansas(6), California (55), CT(7), DL(3), DC (3), Florida(27) , Hawaii (4), Illinois (21), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Mass (12), Michigan(17), Minn (10), NJ (15), NY (31), Missouri(11), Ohio(20), Pennsylvania (21), RI (4), VT(3), Washington (11),

for 292 electors, even without close races in Indiana, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Louisiana and Texas

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/general-election/

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/calculator.html

Do the math, Obama can't win. Hillary can.That's why she's staying in the race.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:35:20 GMT

I APOLIGISE FOR ALL CAPS IN MY POSTS ITS NOT YELLING OR POOR COMPUTER SKILLS IT'S BAD EYES AND VA OR MEDICARE DON'T DO EYES SO AGAIN I APOLIGISE

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:37:35 GMT

pearsoncrz

I WOULD NEVER DENY YOU YOUR DREAMS, SO I WILL NOT SAY A WORD OTHERWISE.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Ade_bayo — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:40:39 GMT

CAN'T THE DEMOCRATS SEE......THAT OBAMA MAYBE DEFEATED IN THE MAIN ELECTION AS THE FRONT RUNNER.......CAN'T THEY SEE THAT THE REBUPLICANS HAVE ASSEMBLED THEIR CARDS TOGETHER.......I AM NOT AGAINST OBAMA AS A PERSON.....BUT.....I THINK HE WOULD MAKE A GOOD VP........HIS VOTERS ARE MAINLY BLACKS.......AFRO-AMERICANS WHO ARE VOTING TO SEE A BLACK AS PRESIDENT THEY ARE NOT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OBAMA'S LACK OF EXPERIENCE IN COMPLEX POLITICAL CIRCLES.......HE HAS GOOD IDEAS BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY EXPERIENCE IS WHAT COUNTS.......THE ECONOMY......THE IRAN'/IRAQ SITUATION, FOREIGN POLICY INCLUDING THE MIDDLE EAST SITUATION.THE CLINTONS ARE FAR MORE EXPERIENCED......AND WISER IN POLITICAL DEALINGS....OBAMA NEVER REALLY HAD A CHANCE TO VOTE ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR.....MOREOVER HE APPEARS TO BE SYMPATHETIC TOWARDS THE PALESTINAN CAUSE ....THATS IS WHY THEY WANT HIM IN POWER.....REHTORIC WILL PROBABLY CHANGE FROM WHAT IT IS NOW IF HE IS ELECTED......THE CHANCES OF HIM WINNING OVER MCCAIN IS NOT CERTAIN.....AMERICA NEEDS A TOUGH PRESIDENT BUT ALSO A WISE ONE.....CLINTON HAS SHOWN SHE IS TOUGH AND HAS A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRACTICALS OF BEING PRESIDENT......AMERICANS SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES THIS QUESTION....WHETHER THEY WOULD LET AN INEXPERIENCED PILOT FLY THEM THROUGH ROUGH WEATHER OR AN EXPERIENCED ONE..........BY PUSHING OBAMA FORWARD......TO ME IT IS LIKE BOARDING A FLIGHT WITH AN INEXPERIENCED PILOT TO FLY AMERICA THROUGH ROUGH AND TOUGH OPLITICAL WEATHER..

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:43:43 GMT

pearsoncrz: That's a whole lot of speculation there. But to put it quite simply in a language that is easy for you to understand, I would rather have the right candidate lose in November than the wrong one (McCain or Hillary) win...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:44:42 GMT

FRY

THATS WHAT I SAID? THEY VOTE CLINTON, SO WE STAY DIVIDED. EXAMPLE: INDY CLINTON WON BY 4 ,AND AS ADMITTED 1 OUT OF 10 WERE RUSH PROJECT VOTERS FOR CLINTON. WITHOUT THE INTERFERENCE, OBAMA WON INDY. ARE YOU SURE YOU GOT THE RIGHT POSTER? AS I DID SEE ONE WHICH WAS BACKWARDS, FROM WHAT I JUST SAID. SO IM WITH YOU, SO NOW IM CONFUSED,LOL EASY TO DO AT TIMES.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:45:13 GMT

I'm not the only one who won't vote for him. Look at the states

that would go democratic if Hillary was the nominee.

Look at the ones that won't if it's Obama.

The DNC is giving it to McCain.

If Obama is the nominee, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah,

Idaho, Kansas, SD, ND and Texas will vote McCain.

Look at the polls.

So will WV, FLORIDA, MICHIGAN, AL, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas,

GA, Idaho (4), Indiana, KY, LA, MS, Missouri, NM, NC, OHIO, OK,

SC, TN, VA, and Wyoming. And maybe PA,

for a total of 287 electors for McCain, even without PA.

It looks like the only states Obama will win are California(55), Colorado(9),

CT(7), DL(3), D.C(3)., Hawaii (4),, Illinois(21), Iowa(7), Maine(4), Maryland(10),

Mass(12)., MN(10), NH(4), NJ(15), NY(31), Oregon(7), RI(4), VT(3),

Washington(11), and Wisconsin(10),

for a total of 231 electors - not enough to win.

Clinton would win Arkansas(6), California (55), CT(7), DL(3), DC (3), Florida(27) ,

Hawaii (4), Illinois (21), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Mass (12), Michigan(17),

Minn (10), NJ (15), NY (31), Missouri(11), Ohio(20), Pennsylvania (21), RI (4),

VT(3), Washington (11),

for 292 electors,

even without close races in Indiana, Wisconsin,

Kentucky, Louisiana and Texas

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/general-election/

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/calculator.html

Do the math, Obama can't win. Hillary can.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bill4truth — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:46:47 GMT

I generally agree with your post. However, I think the key is the tone of campaign set by Hillary Clinton. If she keeps running a negative, divisive, Republican race, it is would not be helpful to the Democrats in November. However, if she focuses on the issues, articulates her primary differences with the Bush-CHeney-McCain platform, she can help energize the electorate and ensure Democratic victory in November.

It would seem to be in the Clinton's interest to do this - after all they could be more effective under a Democrat administration than Republican one.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:47:18 GMT

just because it's what you would like to happen

doesn't mean it will.

Do you want a democrat in the white house or not?

I thought that was your argument, that we need

party unity so we will win the white house.

Are you sure you aren't a republican white dude in NC?

NC is going republican, so even if you aren't it won't matter.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:51:05 GMT

not speculation dude, the latest polls. Check it out yourself.

The states that are going to go republican strongly are going

to go republican no matter who the democratic nominee is.

It's the swing states that make the difference, those states Obama

didn't win because he can't win them.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:51:56 GMT

MY 10 MONTH UNDERSTANDING FROM THE GOP WAS! IF OBAMA WINS, THEY WILL NOT VOTE. IF CLINTON WINS, THEY ALL VOTE. THE GOP IS NOT AFRAID OF OBAMA IN THE WH, BUT THEY FEAR ALOT ABOUT HILLERY IN THE WH, THAT'S THE S.O.P. GOP WORDS OF WISDOM. AS WE SIT HERE AND GO "WA WA IF MINE DON'T, I VOTE MY COUNTRY RIGHT BACK INTO THE HANDS, THAT BROKE IT. THIS IS SO WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS. BUT I WILL ALWAYS REMIND EVERYONE ON ALL SIDES, THE SUPPORTERS MIGHT NOT BE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE, AFTER, OR BEFORE, THEY PISS YOU OFF REAL BAD. THE GOP HAS IN MY LIFE TIME NEVER BEEN CLEAN FROM START TO FINISH! THE START WAS SUPER TUE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:56:16 GMT

pearsoncrz

PROVES MY POINT TO A TEE, AND NOT WORTH A DISCUSSION OR DEBATE! PRO-BLOGGERS ARE ONLY OUT FOR THEM SELVES! IT'S THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT ON LINE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

independent in CA — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:57:36 GMT

I think the biggest thing that has destroyed Hillary Clinton's credibility for me in this race was her willingness to blantantly lie about her background and experience. She wants to hold the highest office in the nation, yet was willing to "doctor" her resume with sniper fire experience that never existed. If people lie about their resumes in business and are caught in the lie, they are usually fired on the spot. Why should she be held to a lower standard? It is time for her to get off the stage.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

greatland — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:57:48 GMT

South Dakota for Hillary Announces Endorsement of 41 Former State Legislators and Constitutional Officers

Officials with over 330 years of combined public service to the state of South Dakota endorse Hillary

The Clinton campaign today announced the endorsement of 41 former South Dakota state legislators and constitutional officers. These officials, with over 330 years of combined experience in public service to the state of South Dakota, endorsed Hillary because of her readiness to serve on day one and her plans to jumpstart the economy and help consumers struggling with rising gas prices.

"After seven years of an Administration that favored the special interests at every turn, South Dakotans need a President who will stand with them," said former State Representative Al Waltman. "Hillary Clinton has real solutions to our economic problems, to skyrocketing energy prices and to ending the war in Iraq, and she has the experience and resolve to make those plans a reality. Hillary is the candidate who can beat John McCain in the fall and start turning this country around on day one in the White House."

The announcement came on the heels of visits to South Dakota from both Hillary and Former President Clinton over the past several days.

"Hillary Clinton has done more than give speeches - she has been achieving real results for working families for the past 35 years," said former State Senator Judy Olson Duhamel. "Given the challenges we face, we need a President who is ready to hit the ground running and begin to turn our economy around and restore our standing in the world, and Hillary Clinton has the experience to do just that."

"I am honored to receive the support of such a talented group of people who have dedicated their lives to public service," Senator Clinton said. "These South Dakotans know what it takes to stand up for working families and I am proud they think I am best qualified for the job."

The list of former South Dakota legislators who have endorsed Hillary is below:

Jim Burg, Public Utilities Commissioner, State Senator and State Representative from Wessington Springs

Pam Nelson, Public Utilities Commissioner, State Senator and State Representative from Sioux Falls

Ken Stofferahn, Public Utilities Commissioner, Former State Representative from Humboldt

Mark Anderson, State Representative from Crooks

Violet Biever, State Representative from Oelrichs

Rolly Chicoine, State Senator and State Representative from Elk Point

Rebekah Cradduck, State Senator and State Representative from Sioux Falls

Peggy Cruse, State Representative from Pierre

Michael Curran, State Representative from Jefferson

Kay Davis, State Representative from Sioux Falls

Betrum Ellingson, State Representative from Sisseton

Charlie Flowers, State Senator and State Representative from Iroquis

Doug Fosheim, State Representative from Huron

Janet Good, State Representative from Long Valley

Sharon Green, State Senator from Rapid City

Pat Haley, State Representative from Huron

Dale Howlett, State Senator and State Representative from Watertown

Jim Hutmacher, State Senator from Chamberlain

Jacquie Kelley, State Senator from Pierre

Dorothy Kellogg, State Representative from Watertown

Patricia Kenner, State Representative from Rapid City

Albert Kocer, State Representative from Wagner

Michael Kroger, State Representative from Dell Rapids

Francis McDaniel, Jr., State Representative from Lantry

John McIntyre, State Senator and State Representative from Sioux Falls

Grace Mickelson, State Senator from Rapid City

Doris Miner, State Senator and State Representative from Gregory

Roger Moore, State Representative from Gettysburg

Gary D. Nelson, State Senator from Martin

Judy Olson Duhamel, State Senator from Rapid City, and Chair of South Dakota Democratic Party

Dale Peterson, State Representative from Wakonda

Jerry Radack, State Representative from Yankton

Ben Radcliffe, State Representative from Hitchcock

Roberta Rasmussen, State Senator from Hurley

Joe Reedy, State Senator and State Representative from Vermillion

Dean Schrempp, State Representative from Lantry

Tom Shortbull, State Senator from Pine Ridge

Randy Stenson, State Senator from Colome

Dick Waddell, State Senator from Isabel

Al Waltman, State Representative from Aberdeen

Mike Wilson, State Representative from Rapid City

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:58:07 GMT

pearsoncrz

SO I TAKE IT WHEN HE IS PRESIDENT YOUR MOVING OUT OF COUNTRY,THATS A SMART MOVE! FOLLOW YOUR WORK!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:59:47 GMT

sure pink, the repugs will go for McCain big in states like Alabama, Mississippi, SC, NC,VA, and some of the western gun loving states. But the difference is those Reagan democrats in PA, and OH, and all the voters Obama and the DNC have pissed off in FL and MI.

Sweet talk isn't going to carry these states now. If it was, Obama's massive ad campaign in PA would have won that primary for him. He can't buy the conservative white democrats' votes, and they are not concerned about McCain being a conservative, because his record is a lot closer to what they'd like to see than Obama's is.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:00:30 GMT

pearsoncrz: Bite your tongue!! I'm the worst kind of Democrat, a native Californian liberal! There will be party unity, there will just be a few sour holdouts like yourself that don't know any better. This is the reality we all face. You erroneously misconstrued my comment about who I want to see in the White House. Let's face it, who are we kidding, Obama will win (has won by many accords) the Democratic nomination. I will be voting for Obama in the general election, and if by some stroke of lunacy, he loses to McCain, I'll take comfort in knowing that at least I voted for the best possible candidate, but that the American public was too concerned over pastors and flag pins to put the right person into power.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:01:23 GMT

nah pink, I've managed to live in hostile territory for a democrat here in Alabama for many years. I can tough it out for four years and try again. It's what I always do. Dem's down here don't count for much, but we do manage a few wins here and there.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:34 GMT

there goes that elitism again, telling me I don't know any better.

Go elect some good congressmen, because Obama will not be the next president, even if he manages to win an affirmative action nomination over a better qualified woman.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:03:10 GMT

GEE THAT LIST IS ALMOST AS LONG AS THE SUCIDES, OF CLOSE ASSOCIATES,EMPLOYEES SECERET SERVICE, AND FRIENDS, OF SOME ONE ELSE?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:03:56 GMT

It's not lunacy, it's the electoral system, which is what the DNC should be using to select the presidential candidate, maybe then we'd have a better record of winning the white house.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:05:10 GMT

personcrz...we've been through this. Your logic makes NO SENSE. This was a Democratic primary, not a national election. Everything will be different when it'f Democratic vs. Republican. Jeez, Obama won North Carolina, and by your own admission he won't beat McCain there. You have to use logic and reality, not sour grapes.

By the way, if you want to learn something about a candidate, look at their supporters. Clinton supporters are the most BITTER, POLARIZED PEOPLE I HAVE EVER SEEN. Just like her, you guys have decided that if you can't win the primary, you are going to make sure Obama loses in November. What kind of self-serving, angry, selfish people are you? Look past your own self-absorbed noses for a second and SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE!!!!! Honestly, it's like listening to a bunch or angry fourth graders who lost at kickball on the playground and threw the ball down the sewer so no one else can play. Grow up.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:07:35 GMT

Oh, and I like your logic that the Democratic party would be more successful if it ignored the popular will of the party supporters AND the winner of the primary delegates. Gee, I bet we'd garner a lot more popular appeal if we crapped on THE WILL OF THE VOTERS!!! You make no sense, and you know it!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:08:50 GMT

So, Independent in CA, you wouldn't vote for Obama if he had lied about his resume?

Check out this article: www.dallasobserver.com/2008-02-28/news/obama-and-me/

then check the credit Obama claims on his website for legislation in Illinois

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:09:17 GMT

WHERE I AM IS BRIGHT BRIGHT RED, AND WIERD THING IS IF THE REAL MORON COULD RUN AGAIN? THESE PEOPLE WILL VOTE FOR HIM AGAIN . WHY? BECAUSE IT'S A SMALL TOWN, AND THEY ALL GOT REAL PISSED OFF AT THE WORD "BITTER"! NOT BECAUSE HE WAS WRONG, BUT BECAUSE HE USED A MILD POLITICAL CORRECT LINE, INSTEAD OF [EXCUSE THE FRENCH] BUTT FKN PISSED OFF, AND THAT IS CONCIDERED AN UNDERSTATEMENT! GO FIGURE, THIS IS THE MAIN REASON THEY DON'T LIKE HIM? THEY ARE WILLING TO LET HIM INTO OFFICE, AS AHAMED AS THEY ARE, BUT NOT CLINTON! THEY SAY BUSH RUINED ANY FURTHER CHANCES AT ANY DYNASTY.?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:09:47 GMT

benivarious, if you count all the popular votes, and count all the delegates, Hillary and Obama are in a virtual tie.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

hektor — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:11:38 GMT

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-obama-280-mccain-258/

the above poll shows that Obama can win the general election against McCain. So, the poll results by pearsoncrz could be just one of preliminary ones for now. pearsoncrz claims he/she wants a Democrat to be in the White House, but won't vote for Obama? imho, appears to be a contradiction. :-)

Clinton has every right to campaign until the end if she sticks to her own vision, and not on a campaign which would question the qualifications of her fellow Democrat.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:13:03 GMT

I don't have to do anything for Obama to lose. And I'm not counting democratic delegates to the convention in my posts, I'm using the polls and the electoral votes for each state. It's simple. Do the math yourself. Show me what electoral college route Obama could possibly take to win. There isn't woe, and he dug his own ditch.

I find it amusing that you think I could personally affect his chances of success. I'm just one little voter in a state that is going to go republican no matter what I do. No matter what you do. No matter what Obama does. He won't win.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:13:21 GMT

pearsoncrz: Not to burst your bubble, but those polls aren't exactly accurate you know. And I'll be brief on this one. The polls you mention were generated from phonecalls to land-lines. You seem fairly intelligent enough to understand that many folks (including myself) don't have a land line. We use cellular exclusively. This is a know practice and pattern of the core of Obama supporters, so these polls don't accurately represent the folks that use cellular only, and that's a lot of people. Anyway, good luck with you and your candidate's campaign. We'll still welcome you once you realize that resistance to change is futile.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

zhagos — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:16:41 GMT

In response to:

Posted By: every_other_nickname_is_taken

-----

I think you’re over simplifying here. While generalizing is not a perfect science, it’s in many ways, a necessity when it comes to government and policy. You need to separate generalizations (or conclusions) based on factual evidence from fact-less generalizations based on irrational arguments.

Saying to vote against Obama because his middle name is Hussein and he’s plotting to kill us all (which I’ve heard countless variations of, across numerous blogs) is incredibly ignorant and people who make such statements probably fall into one of those negative categories. While I’m at it, there’s also a difference in people who vote for their candidate of choice because of race or sex vs. people that vote against a candidate… which is worse?

One thing’s for certain, with a choice between a female and a black man, there’s definitely going to be prejudices working against both candidates. Let’s try and listen to the facts and make rational arguments based on them. I’m positive that we all would have been out of the misery that is this primary much earlier.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:16:50 GMT

pearsoncrz: You call it my Elitism, I call it your inferiority complex.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:16:51 GMT

WHY DON'T WE JUST LET ALL VETERANS VOTE?? THEY ARE THE ONLY AMERICANS WHO GAVE MORE THAN THEY HAD, TO GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO CURSE THERE BROTHERS TO DEATH! JUST CAUSE YOUR RELIGION AND HIS DON'T SPEAK ALIKE, OR WHAT EVER YOUR REASON IS. AS LONG AS YOU GET THAT VOTE IN FOR MCCAIN, DEAD KIDS ARE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST???4 MORE YOU SAID YOU COULD DEAL WITH!!! MY SON IS THERE N-O-W! SO YOUR THE ENEMY OF THE FIGHTING AMERICAN, IN OUR WARS. YOU SEEM TO BLOW OFF AS OK, AS LONG AS YOU GET WHAT YOU WANT, OR NOT!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

TarkJones — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:18:40 GMT

As usual, all of you that pledge allegiance to a party first and your country second are forgetting one major factor that the primaries don't always reveal -- the largely silent mass of centrist independentst that don't or can't vote in primaries. Obama's message could play heavily to that portion of the population that doesn't give a crap about parties, and just wants someone who will do what's right for the country -- not what will be best for the 50% of the country that they care about.

I am one independent that has said from day 1 that my vote will be Obama over McCain, or McCain over Clinton, depending on who's the final ticket. Clinton's message of "business as usual" wrapped in the guise of "experience" doesn't appeal to those of us who have watched the parties destroy our national unity over the last 8 years. I'll take Obama's "inexperienced" audacity of hope over Clinton's "experienced" promise of more of the same party politics.

And as for Clinton's so-called experience, does 8 years as First Lady really count for that much? Obama has 8 years in a state senate, followed by 4 years in the US senate, vs. Clinton's 8 years in the US senate, and 8 years as First Lady. Seems pretty much even to me. That's like picking a doctor by saying "Well, this guy's got 8 years of med school and only 4 years of private practise. But I'm going with the one that didn't actually go to med school but has 8 years in private practise because she was married to a doctor for 8 years, so that must count for something."

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

DrewThom — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:19:50 GMT

One thing for sure, black voters will not vote for McCain. And they will vote for Hillary even if she wins the nomination in a rules committee fight. However, she will have to soothe some hurt feelings because Bill called Obama uppity which is pejorative to blacks in general, and the only reason Obama gets 90% of the black vote in primaries, not because they don't like her. Most blacks will gracefully accept a sincere apology from a white person, but some white people will cut off their noses to spite their faces (in this case stay home or vote for a Republican just because he's white) if it means putting a black man in the White House, even if he is the better candidate. And that's the difference between most white and most black voters. I don't necessarily think Obama is a better candidate than Clinton. I think he is different. If you really listen to both, their positions are very similar becasue they are Democrats, and not Republicans. Please don't loose site of that fact in November.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jaidgrifter — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:21:14 GMT

I have to agree with pearsoncrz about the presidential win going to McCain if Obama gets the DNC nomination. While a "new future" and "change" sounds awful cool... In the fragile state that our nation is currently in, the president needs to be someone capable and qualified enough to GUIDE this country towards stability. While all the hoopla regarding flag pins and reverends is getting kind of annoying, I think that the bigger issue here is who is really qualified to run the country. This might be a weird metaphor - however, while I appreciate all the medical students that are out there, I am really not going to be thrilled about having a medical student operate on me. If something was really wrong and needed fixing, I'm going to want the most experienced, knowledgable, and competent person taking care of things.

The flag pin is an issue because it shows Obama's inability to really be a leader. He drafted a plan for universal health care AFTER Clinton did. Rev Wright said some heinous things about America - Obama did nothing (initially). Then, only after the outraged cries about his silence, did he give a press conference saying all the things he knew we wanted to hear. The media criticized the fact that he never wears a flag pin. The next time we see him, he's wearing one. Obama seems like a smart and good man... The problem here is that this country needs someone who means business, not someone hell-bent on impressing us.

I don't think that the president should be someone who is trying to convince the country of his ability to be a patriot; nor should the president be someone who kowtows to every whim of the media and the voters. We need someone who IS a patriot (and doesn't need to tell us he/she is one, every ten minutes because the majority of people are having doubts).

I have voted democratic for fifteen years, since the day that I was qualified to vote. This year, my friends, family, and myself have to agree that with Obama as the democratic candidate, our vote will still go to the person most qualified for the position - McCain.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:22:32 GMT

hektor, check the links I posted. That surveyusa from 3/6 is quite dated,

and it assumes that Obama wins Florida and Texas.

which is not what the more recent polls indicate.

Obama was clearly hurt by Rev. Wright.

He should have left that church long ago

pulling out his "typical white grandmother" now

after he said she was a racist

and wearing her like a badge of whiteness

when he wouldn't wear a flag pin

to appease the Reagan democrats

objectifies her, turns her into

something he is using to get elected

It is contrary to his whole argument about

the flag pin.

it will not work.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:22:48 GMT

Does anyone know if the pledged delegates have to vote the according to the primaries or can they change their minds at the convention like the super delegates can

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:25:19 GMT

Hmmm...apparently pearsoncrz thinks he is omniscient, because that's the only explanation other than serious mental defect which could acocunt for him being so sure that Obama isn't going to win. With all of your amazing psychic powers, how did you end up backing the loser in this race anyway? Look, lighten up, vote for whoever wins the Democratic primary, and lay back and bask in the glow of a larger victory.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:25:31 GMT

pearsoncrz

YOU SAY YOU LIVE IN HOSTILE TERRITORY FOR A DEM, I JUST DON'T LIVE WITH, I WORK VERY HARD AGAINST THEM, DAILY! JUST TRYING TO KEEP DISABLED VETERANS IN A JOB, OR A DISABLED LADY FROM LOSSING HERS! TRUST ME LIVING IS EASY, WORK AGAINST IS THE PITS, BUT FUELS MY DISDAIN FOR THEM IN ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT, REGARDLESS OF WHO WIN THE DEM NOM!!! I AM MARINE NOT A SCAB!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:25:31 GMT

Tark Jones, Hillary has so much more experience than just being first lady,

but you don't really want to know about it. You already indicated that you

had made up your mind not to vote for her,

So don't.

Independents could and did vote in the democratic primaries.

A lot of them were open primaries.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:26:28 GMT

After the first vote, pledged delegates can vote for who ever they want to, they are not bound.

You can read the DNC rules yourself if you like. Google them.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:28:46 GMT

TarkJones and PinkPanther: I'm punching out, and passing the torch to you guys! Keep the nay-sayers at bay...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:29:12 GMT

well pink, if you are working so hard to help our disabled vets,

maybe you would be surprised to learn that Obama does not

work as hard as you do for our vets. He missed almost half of the

VA committee meetings held in the 109th congress.

Such a dedicated, hard working man.

NOT!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:29:31 GMT

jaidgrifter: After reading your last post I have a question, why would vote for Hillary Clinton over McCain? Clearly he has far more experience on the national level then she does.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:31:01 GMT

I don't vote blindly, even if I vote democratic.

No one should.

I'm not omniscient, check the polls for each state,

do the electoral math

be honest

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:31:55 GMT

pearsoncrz: You are living in a dream world. Find me ONE OBJECTIVE or even MARGINALLY OBJECTIVE analyst to back up that ludicrous statement. Please, I'm dying to see it.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:32:44 GMT

pearsoncrz: So they pledged delegates could theoretically vote for someone like John Edwards if they wanted to. Technically he only suspended his campaign.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:35:13 GMT

jaidgrifter

SUCH A FOOL! "WA IF I DON'T GET MY WAY, I WILL OPERATE ON WOUNDED SOLDIERS FOR THE NEXT 100 YEARS. AS A MEDICAL STUDENT, SMART MOVE, PATIENTS, MEANS MONEY. AS A HUMAN BEING, I WISH YOUR KIDS WERE IN IRAQ, NOW, AND SEE IF MCCAIN SOUNDS AS GOOD AS HE DOES, AND DID WHEN HE VOTED "YES" TO FORCE YOU TO RETIRE 10 YEARS YOUNGER THAN HE. ENJOY?? ALL YOUR NEW DEAD, OR DYING SOLDIERS, YOU HELPED GET WOUNDED, OR KILLED! JOB SECURITY?? UNLESS WE OUT SOURCE THAT TO, AND WE WILL IN TIME!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

willowbuffyslayer — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:36:14 GMT

I'm so happy to hear so many of you will be voting for McCain in November. This is great news. Thanks. I've always said the democrats will always mess themselves up - even if it's practically handed to them. I can't trust you fools to run a country. Again, thanks for confirming that my candidate will win!!!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:36:41 GMT

Benivarius: Pearsoncrz is sounding more and more like a paid pundit. Don't waste your time with this one...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

anotherview — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:40:40 GMT

Obama currently has the most delegates, no question. It may be tough for her to pass him in popular vote and we won't know till all states are counted. It is easy these days to get past national media hype who are obviously in love with Obama. As far as the "supers" we know that they are likeleaves blown by the wind and until their votes are counted anything is possible in this primary. Obama's campaign are declaring they won well before the May 20 announcement date that Obama himself announced and the media is falling right in line. If Clinton's North Carolina defeat margin was something to write about, how about what likely to happen tomorrow. And if she beats him in Oregon where he has campaigned the we have a whole new story don't we. as far as a "racist vote", I don't see a 60 point margin that way, but I sure see a 90% one in that light.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

achiaramonte — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:42:09 GMT

Couldnt agree w/ you more. Glad that all media coverage isnt pressuring her premature withdrawal. Lets ride this thing out and when/if Clinton supporters see absoulutely that she couldnt pull it together, then the rational democrats will go w/ Obama camp and not feel cheated.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:42:20 GMT

pearsoncrz...I'm waiting. While I'm waiting I'm going to throw out this little collection of COLD HARD FACTS. Hillary is now losing the superdelegate race 280-276, and that's on the generous side. She's losing the popular vote by 736,579 at this moment. She's losing the primary delegates 1701.5 to 1536.5. By that math she has to do the following just to TIE:

Win all remaining contests with a full %100 of the vote, with the exception of Oregon, in which she has to tie. Oh, and somehow pick up a truckload of superdelegates.

You may now add it up...

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:42:26 GMT

Do any of you notice that when someone posts negative

facts about Obama, they get accused of being negative,

but

then the same post calls the person who posted facts

all kinds of names

and suggests they don't have a brain

in their head

So much for taking the high road.

Obama's whole campaign had been a negative

blaming the old

blaming the whites

blaming the rich

blaming the uneducated

I would have liked to hear something about solutions

and what was good and right

instead of all that blame

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

TarkJones — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:42:58 GMT

pearsoncrz: 17 of 52 primaries are open. Less than half, not what I call "a lot". And even in open primaries, very few independents vote.

As for Hillary's experience, please clarify. I am willing to listen. I've done my homework and don't especially care for her as a president. But being independent, I am willing to listen to logic and facts. So please share either if you have them.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:43:39 GMT

pearsoncrz

LIKE THAT WILL PHASE ME, NO ONE, NOT EVEN CLINTON, SAID A WORD WHEN BUSH JR TOOK 1 TRILLION FROM OUR BUDGET. WHO CARED? NOT JOHN Q PUBLIC [YOU] OR ANY REPUBLICAN, NO ONE. NOT A WORD, SO TRY MY LIFE, YOUR VIEWS WOULD CHANGE QUICK! AS YOUR A PRO-BLOGGER THIS IS THE END OF OUR ARGUEMENT! HAVE A GOOD LIFE, EVEN IF OBAMA DOES MAKE IT IN, AND DOES NOT DO ONE THING, YOU ASSUME HE WILL!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:45:39 GMT

I'm not a paid pundit.

Post your name and address and I'll post mine.

You could probably find me if you bothered to google.

would he have had the most delegates if the DNC

hadn't taken all those Florida and Michigan delegates

away from Hillary?

Why didn't they punish the other states who violated the

scheduling rules the same way?

this is an affirmative action nomination

set up to give black voters preference

and to give Obama the advantage over

a clearly more qualified woman.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

fryman12 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:47:42 GMT

anotherview: I can tell you with almost certainty that Hillary Clinton will win WV by 50 points or more. I lived in WV for 8 years so I know a lot about the state. That is also why I moved, I did not want my 3 childern to growup with 1960 views of race relations.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

40yr old typical white dude in NC — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:48:15 GMT

pearsoncrz: Writing your posts in the style of a Haiku don't give it any further creedence. The sooner you come to your senses, the sooner people will stop casting shadows of doubt on your smarts.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:48:56 GMT

pink, you weren't anywhere near me or you would have heard my complaints.

Thing is, McCain is in a better position than Obama on that subject.

While Obama was requesting millions in earmarks for the hospital that

gave his wife a huge raise

McCain didn't take any earmarks at all.

Check the recent articles on money wasted by Congress

you will find several projects in Chicago that needed no

money that got plenty.

You will also see that Obama has rewarded Emil Jones, Jr.

with several earmarks for the school where Jones is president.

chicago style politics are worse than anything in Washington

I don't want Obama's kind of change.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:50:54 GMT

TarkJones, even in the closed elections, there was time

for lots of republicans and independents to change their

registrations, and they did.

it doesn't have to be open for non-democrats to vote.

Check how many changed their party in NC

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:51:11 GMT

OBAMA JUST OVERTOOK CLINTON IN SUPERDELAGETS!!!MMM, MAYBE, WE THE PEOPLE, DO WANT, WHO WE VOTED FOR,HOW STRANGE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:52:07 GMT

Wait, I think I know what's happening here. People like pearsoncrz are what happens when a confused fundamentalists gets separated from the herd and has to fend for itself in the wild. See, pearsoncrz is used to the fluffy, plush world of the the brainwashed automatons who spout out useless ignorance. Now, confronted with the cold, harsh world of reality and logic, it has no capacity to deal with it in any kind of rational way. That explains why it blindly stumbled onto this message board and started ignoring COLD HARD FACTS and REALITY in favor of mindless rhetoric and pointlessly uninformed political views!!!!! Gold star to me for figuring it out!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:52:30 GMT

pearsoncrz

I DO

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:52:39 GMT

I'm cutting the lines because for some

reason the ends of the lines get cut off after

they ar posted.

it ain't haiku, LOL

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

the_shelton — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:54:13 GMT

Aside from all the useless banter going back and forth on this post, Clinton should continue. She deserves to stay in to the bitter end and see the results. Why not. We aren't afraid of her, only her associates. There is nothing to be gained from it except she might get her debts picked up by Obama, which I guess is a spiteful thing for her, but what the heck.

She started this contest, thinking that the Clinton name would grease the path and that she was a woman would take her the rest of the way. But I think she forgot that women are not second class citizens and they really do have the ability to form judgements and make decisions. They like the rest of the country, are pretty equally devided about these candidates. The bad part about those decisions were that too many people remember the bad press of the Clinton years and how we almost had a president impeached for immoral behaviour. How there were a lot of shady dealings and investigations into them, and the unwarranted pardons going to all sorts of criminals at the end of the Clinton fiasco.

So I think it is only justified that she stay in and see that she didn't make it. The money is nothing, Obama can pay her debts off and still have enough to wage a good fight against McCain.

I, for one, am glad that my vote will actually count this time. That New Hampshire and Iowa don't count for everything and that all the candidates haven't dropped out by now. I'm tired of seeing a few states decide the whole thing. I'm from Oregon and it is going to be great that our state is going to put Obama over and end it gracefully and correctly.

It has been nice to keep the news on the Dems and off of McCain. I'm sure he is grateful also because as soon as the heat turns onto him, it is going to be downhill from there.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:54:59 GMT

pearsoncrz

IF I DO NOT GET WHO I WANT

I WILL VOTE CLINTON

NOT CLINTON OR MCCAIN

I GOT BRAIN!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:55:07 GMT

Either that or the superdelegates and the DNC want him to

share his donor list, which he owns, you know.

Or maybe he's giving out more of his Hope PAC money.

As I said, this is an affirmative action primary.

It will result in the republicans holding the WH for at least

four more years.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:56:46 GMT

are you from Chicago Pink?

Do you like all the deals and pay to play politics?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:56:59 GMT

For anyone who cares, this is why Hillary is still in the race.

1. Her campaign is 10 million in debt. She is hoping to make life uncomfortable enough for the Democratic party that it helps bail her out. Obama is already agreeing to give her some money.

2. On the same logic as above, she wants a further favor of either a VP ticket, or Majority Leader. Again, basically blackmailing the party.

3. She's manipulative. Well, yeah, we all knew that. She'll still try to force the results one way or the other, but she and her whole party know this is really over for her.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

mjno — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:58:20 GMT

Go HIllary, don't let them bully you, and remember past conventions where the nominee is decided. What is the rush to OBAMA???? Are more advisors in the wings who support and talk to HAMAS going to surface (2 in ONE WEEK).

Dirty tactic to ask her to quit, she would be a fool.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ionFwC1UUUw

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

mjno — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:58:21 GMT

Dirty tactic to ask her to quit, she would be a fool.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ionFwC1UUUw

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pearsoncrz — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:59:35 GMT

g2g, maybe back later

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Mon, 12 May 2008 23:59:47 GMT

Obama will not be able to garner enough support to win the general election. It's really that simple. What has he done for America, what accomplishment does he have that would make him qualified to be commander-in-chief? Community organizer, certainly. Commander-in-chief, uh,uh. His resume is way too thin and we need a president to deal with serious issues head on. We don't need some wet behind the ears president who's going to complain about tough question and stumble and falter when a challenge presents itself.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:01:55 GMT

the_shelton

I AGREE I POSTED EARLIER WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. AS IT FEELS LIKE A MILLION YEARS SENSE THE SUPERS HAVE WAITED TILL THE LAST VOTE IS CAST, BEFORE THEY STEP IN. THIS YEAR THEY WAIT, TILL THE LAST VOTE IS CAST. THIS IN IT'S SELF IS CHANGE FOR THE BETTER, OF WE THE PEOPLE, FINALY ALL COUNT [NEXT TIME OTHERS WILL FOLLOW THE RULES, SO THEY TO CAN BE IN, THE ALL GROUP] THEM WAITING IS NICE TO SEE FOR ONCE!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:02:13 GMT

Don't quit hillary. Stay in the race.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jaidgrifter — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:02:52 GMT

Hi: imightbecrazy... In regards to your question, I will vote for Clinton over McCain due to the issue of Universal Health Care.

I was born and raised in this country and am a full citizen. However, when I was seven years old I had a car accident and no health insurance. I was $300,000 in debt at 7 years old due to medical expenses, and now, twenty six years later that amount has grown to around $500,000 (due to growing interest). What's really shocking to me is that I'm often accused of lying about this debt by people who don't believe that things like this can happen to you,,, Perhaps they're in denial? Or perhaps they and everyone else they know have had employer-provided health insurance? Who knows? All I can tell you is that I know first-hand what it means to live life without easy access to doctors or medications. And, sadly, I'm probably one of the luckier ones.

Clinton was incredibly succesful in implementing education reform in Arkansas, and was then appointed to chair the task force behind improving national health care (I think this happened in '92). Even after great opposition to her Clinton Health Plan, as well as a drop in her approval ratings, she still relentlessly pursued the issue through the following years. She was willing to work (and work hard) for the benefits of Americans - regardless of whether or not they agreed with her. She also helped to push passage for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, increased mammogram coverage in Medicare, increased funding for research into prostate cancer, increased funding for research into children's asthma, increased awareness of mental health issues in vets returning from the Gulf War, etc etc. If I had more time I would list more of her accomplishments (and she has many more).

Please keep in mind... her record shows that she has a long history of being able to draft good legislation, as well as a long history of being able to push through good legislation. Her accomplishments led to a great deal of criticism and loss of public approval - which shows she's willing to take criticism and a lack of popularity - all to make sure that the needs of her citizens are being met.

Beyond democratic, republican, black, white, asian, male, female, etc - Wouldn't anyone want a commander in chief who relentlessly pursues, defends, and protects the rights of their citizens? Someone who will stand up for you and be your voice, during those times when you (god forbid) can't do for yourself?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Emanuel — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:03:36 GMT

Senator Clinton has the right to drop out of the race on her own terms. Besides, she needs to raise another $11.4 million just to bring her personal net worth back up to the $52 million it was before the race. Show some respect. West Virginians and Kentuckians are loaded with money, and would love to help her out financially. Property taxes in Martha's Vineyard are going through the roof.

Perhaps each West Virginian can send her the imaginary $30 that they would gain from her temporary gas tax holiday. Forget the fact that oil companies are ruthless entrepreneurs who can capitalize on the increased summer fuel consumption by raising gas prices.

Let her stay in the race. Her followers have the right to hold out hope for some kind of catastrophe. Isntt that the kind of message we want to fester in the minds of her loyal constituents just a few weeks before they're asked to support Barack Obama for President?

I can see the DNC Convention now: "...Senator Obama, up until June 15th I was hoping that you would slip in your bathtub while holding a plugged-in toaster, but now I'm ready to support your campaign for President."

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:03:56 GMT

perarsoncrz:

are you from Chicago Pink?

Do you like all the deals and pay to play politics?

From a Clinton supporter, that is the most OBSCENE REFUSAL TO STARE FACTS IN THE FACE I HAVE EVER SEEN! Hillz is probably the most manipulative woman in politics. Honestly, your arguments are the most pathetic, convoluded, high school debate team garbage I've ever seen. Can I hire you to debate evolution scientists? Perhaps you can put me in touch with Sylvia Browne? Oh...

I'M STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO RUN A CALCULATOR OVER MY NUMBERS BELOW!!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:07:23 GMT

Clinton may be in debt but she's not taking a handout from Obama. That is incredibly insulting. Clinton can handle her own campaign debt.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:07:26 GMT

HELLO! HELLO! PEARSONCRZ, ARE YOU STILL THERE??? RUN THE NUMBERS I POSTED BELOW!!! RUN THEM, I SAID!!! MAKE THE MATH LIE FOR YOU!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:10:09 GMT

President John McCain

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:10:43 GMT

WE NEED THE RIGHT PERSON, TO CHOSE THE RIGHT PEOPLE, TO DO THE RIGHT JOB, AND YOU DON'T NEED A LOT OF EXPERIENCE TO DO THAT! IF YOU CHOSE WELL, AND I BELIEVE HE WILL! THAT'S ALL THAT SHOULD MATTER. ALL WE SHOULD SEE IS GRAY, AND THREE HUMAN BEINGS PLAIN AND SIMPLE! BY THIS EXAMPLE TO THE WORLD, WE WILL FAIL, AND IN DOING SO, THE USA AND OUR WAY OF LIFE, WE FORCE ON OTHERS!! WILL BE A JOKE, CAUSE ITS BUILT ON LIES, NOT ANYONE CAN BE PRESIDENT OF A MULTI-CULLTCURED COUNTRY! UNLESS ITS A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY, AND THATS WHAT THEY GET FOR PUTTING A BLACK MAN AS THERE LEADER, LIKE IDI AMIN!!! OPPS [WE] PUT HIM IN CHARGE, AND KNEW, HE EATS HIS ENEMIES! BLOW THIS ELECTION ON DISCRIMINATION!! OUR BELIEF SYSTEM, IN THE WORLD, JUST WENT TO HELLO, CAUSE WE DON'T PRACTICE WHAT WE PREACH!!! THEY WOULD BE RIGHT TO.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:10:49 GMT

Um, 5leavesleft? Not to be a downer, but what about being 10 mil in debt gives you the impression that Clinton's campaign is "handling" things. Most campaigns don't go 10 large in debt if they have their crap under control. And additionally, what about the fact that they aren't making any more money lends you to believe that Clinton will be able to somehow just fix this without dropping more of her own cash?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:11:39 GMT

jaidgrifter: But isn't Obama's health plan better then McCain's. Would it not get us a little closer to universal healthcare. Granted it is not perfect but at least millions more would be covered. Would you deny them coverage just because you do not think Obama has enough experience.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:11:52 GMT

I AM MARINE 5LEAVES, AND WOULD BE MORE PROUD TO SERVE UNDER OBAMA!! THEN WHO I DID SERVE UNDER!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

TarkJones — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:12:57 GMT

The DNC made it clear before the primary in Michigan (where I live) that the results would not count. Obama pulled his name off the ballot since it was not a sanctioned contest. So it's hard to argue that Clinton deserves the votes in Michigan when there was never a sanctioned contest, and her biggest opponent wasn't even on the ballot. And if your "affirmative action" claim were true, Michigan's AA population is higher than the national average, so it's arguable that Obama would have had a good shot at Michigan.

Michigan didn't become an issue for Clinton until AFTER Obama took the popular lead.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:13:49 GMT

benivarius

CHI. PINK?

ARE YOU SPEAKING TO ME

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

every_other_nickname_is_taken — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:15:20 GMT

zhagos,

I was venting my frustration with the tendency of many liberals to label all conservatives as racist, homophobic, sexist, etc. Many of these liberals talk about not judging a book by its cover, yet they willingly do just that when it serves their purposes. And it's not just conservatives who are at risk for these attacks. The Hillary/Obama battle has clearly demonstrated this.

And I'm tired of people jumping to conclusions any time race is brought up. They constantly preach about racial harmony, yet they are constantly trying to find racism in anything and everything. Just look at what's happened to Hillary. They scrutinize every word she says and then deduce some racist overtones out of nothing. If Hillary wins WV, then many of them will automatically assume it's because the entire white voting bloc is racist. Yet, when Obama takes 90% of the black voting bloc they don't say a word. It's apparent that many liberals assume that most whites are racist. All races have ignorant, racist morons.

And I don't see any difference between voting for a candidate based on race/gender and voting against a candidate based on race/gender. If it's racist to vote against Obama because he's black, then it's equally racist to vote for Obama because he's black. I'm really getting tired of reading posts where the author accuses others of being racist because they don't like Obama, or being sexist because they don't like Hillary and then labeling McCain as evil, racist, etc because he's old and white. Or talking about how the Democrats are pure and play fair and the Republicans are the only party that's ever played dirty tricks. Both parties are guilty of dirty tricks. It's happened for decades.

I agree with you that we should find out the facts and base our decision on them rather than on our emotions. However, a large portion of American voters don't do this. Mostly, because it would require effort and research. Instead, many of them like to vote based on pre-conceived notions of a candidate and whatever stupid idea they got from an ad on the TV or the radio.

And I find it ironic that many of Obama's supporters claim to be attracted to his promises of change and abolishment of politics-as-usual, yet they engage in the same petty idiocy that has plagued American politics for decades. If they truly want change, then they should start by changing their own behavior.

Bottom line is we all need to quit with the ridiculous labeling and name-calling and start acting more responsibly. We need to do our own research and not let the Democrats or the Republicans think for us. Because despite what many people think, neither party has the interests of the law-abiding taxpayers at heart.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

fryman12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:15:38 GMT

5leavesleft: Do you not watch the news or read the papers. Many sources have reported, both "pro Obama" and "pro Hillary", that when Hillary finally does quit that one of the conditions of her support would be having the Obama campaign pay off her debt.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:16:43 GMT

And let's talk about the "gas tax holiday." See, Clinton wants you to believe that Obama opposes the tax because he is an elitist who doesn't want to give the working man a break. I personally believe he opposes it because he voted for a similar thing in Illinois, and what happened was the gas companies raised prices to account for the increased demand, thereby saving the working man nothing, and putting money that would have gone to fixing the roads and paying thousands of working men's salaries into the pockets of the gas companies. I believe that because THAT'S WHAT HE FREAKING SAID!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:18:34 GMT

no dude, that was a quote from our good friend pearsoncrz. I used it to make him look ridiculous, which was pretty easy, frankly. We're on the same team as far as I can tell.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

fryman12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:19:33 GMT

TarkJones: Could not have said it better myself. Same thing goes for Florida. Someone please tell me why Hillary Clinton did not raise an objection when the DNC made the decision not to count those delegates. I would have a lot more respect for her if she had. I would even be in favor of a revote or at least counting the Florida vote.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jaidgrifter — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:20:57 GMT

Hi: imightbecrazy... I've seen Obama's health care plan, which was very carefully drafted recently, long after Clinton drafter hers, and after public criticism (at the time) of his not having a health care platform.

At the end of the day, our country has a very long way to go in regards to our health care situation. I find Clinton's health care plan (vs. Obama's) to be more detailed, realistic, well-thought out, and this plan has the advantage of being worked on for the past two decades.

Though Obama's health care plan is absolutely superior to McCain's health care plan... the problem is that as president, Obama will not be able to push his health care legislation through Congress. As much as I like Obama personally, and I truly believe that he'll champion for what he thinks is right... I don't think he has been, nor probabably will be effective at attaining any real change. I'm sure everyone's going to go crazy and write awful things to me - however, that is my opinion of Obama based on the fact that, well, I have no facts. Obama doesn't seem to have a substantial list of things that he's been able to accomplish.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

TarkJones — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:21:34 GMT

re: 5leavesleft -- That's a very good point. Lord knows we've already had enough of that over the last 8 years...

Experience is more important than personality or individual ability. That's why George W. Bush was one of the greatest presidents of all time and Abraham Lincoln was an inexperienced hack.

<quote>Posted By: 5leavesleft (May 12, 2008 at 7:59 PM)

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:22:15 GMT

This election isn't about discrimination. It's about hiring someone to take on the most important job ever. Do we really want some far leftest trying new ideas out, now? Everyone know you can't pull out troops in 60 days. It can't be done safely and if you're a military person you know that's true. I know all the candidates are SAYING they can pull out of Iraq (except McCain) it's a campaign promise and then they can all blame military generals and advisors later. We're not going anywhere, we've entreanched ourselves too deep. The last thing we need is for some new guy to come along and screw with our sensitive foreign relations. I believe Hillary and McCain have more long term insight into how delicate foreign relations can be. Obama instead of using caution and wanting to listen to advisor wants to plow right in and sit down with Iran, Syria, among others, without preconditions. Its stupid and it shows his inexperience and poor judgement that he would let such a stupid comment go on record. He's going to put America in a worse spot than its already in. Obama is just bad news for America.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

vatsula — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:24:03 GMT

Its time for her to go!!!! We are tired of this race. If the roles were reversed I think the Clintons would be screaming for him to leave!!!!

Its common sense that the Clintons have already played their part and look what they and the Bush's have done to this country. Nafta and all the free trade agreements. They HAVE DONE ENOUGH!!!! HILLARY NEEDS TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WANT MY RIGHTS AND MY COUNTRY BACK AND I KNOW SHE WILL NEVER DO THAT!!!!!

As she said she has the experince. SHE DOES!!! Thats the truth the only truth!!! Her and Her husband have proven track record of running this nation into the ground. THEY STARTED NAFTA AND THEY CANT TAKE IT BACK!!!! MY DAD HAS LOST A LARGE PART OF HIS RETIREMENT AND IS NOW LOSING HIS HOME NOT BECUASE HE IS A BAD PERSON BUT BECUASE HE CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE A HOME ANY MORE!!!!!! THANK YOU NAFTA AND CONGRESS!! THANK YOU CLINTONS AND BUSH'S!!!!!!!!!!!

Dave

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:25:52 GMT

benivarius

THANKS, AND YES WE ARE, AND KNOWING ME PROBABLY FROM TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS LOL TRYING TO SAY THE SAME THING. THANKS FOR ANSWERING, MANNERS ON LINE ARE HARD TO FIND. MY NON-DISCUSSION WITH OTHERS GETS ME UPSET AT TIMES, BUT I HAVE A LOW TOLERANCE FOR STUPIDITY,LOL THANKS.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:27:02 GMT

Check the news. Obama's campaign have stated that they're not going to pay for Clinton debt. It's all a bunch of rumors. They said it would be insulting to her campaign and i agree. They've also said that they are aren't goint to offer her VP. Another rumor. They also used the phrase that Clinton can handle her own affairs or some such phrase.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

benivarius — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:27:04 GMT

5leavesleft: You are absolutely right. We need more of the same, and another four years of failed petty politics based on polarizing the country and hoping it works out in your favor so you win an election. Awesome.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:27:57 GMT

vatsula

DON'T FORGET MCCAIN IN YOUR NAFTA. AS MCCAIN WAS IN THE SENATE AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE TO.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kenwhiting — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:30:27 GMT

It's clearly aparent that whomever wins the Democratic nod will lambaste McCain and his cronies. The only reason the networks even use the word 'contest' is to create news with the voters. It is not a close race when it's either Obama or Clinton vs. McCain. McCain loses in a landslide.

Remember, a vote for Hillary is a vote for the south rising again!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:30:51 GMT

WELL TIME FOR THIS DISABLED VETERAN TO DO HIS MEDS, AND QUIT WRITTING WHILE I CAN UNDERSTAND MY OWN STUFF,LOL, LATER ALL

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

TarkJones — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:32:28 GMT

RIght, because our foreign policy has been working so well lately, it'd be a shame to try something different...

Since when is sitting down to talk to someone without preconditions a bad diplomacy tactic? "Do all these things we tell you to, and then we'll 'negotiate' with you." How frigging obtuse and egotistical can you be to believe that will actually work? Tell you what 5leavesleft, I'll be willing to sit down and let you talk to me, but first you have to paint your house pink, change your hairstyle, stand one foot, and change your name to "Bob." Hey, wait. Where are you going? Why are you walking away? Why won't you talk to me? Obviously you're not serious about this whole diplomatic process...

<quote>Posted By: 5leavesleft (May 12, 2008 at 8:22 PM)

Obama instead of using caution and wanting to listen to advisor wants to plow right in and sit down with Iran, Syria, among others, without preconditions.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:35:07 GMT

John McCain has crossed party lines so many times, I don't even think you can call him a true Republican, if there is such a thing. Anyways if Obama wants to win over new voters, I'm listening. I haven't heard anything from him put change, change, change. He better start working on his campaign if he wants to win the general election. He needs to map out some plan for America, something concrete that win tell us what Obama stands for. Until he does, John McCain is the candidate who's been reaching out to everyone. Who is Barrack Obama? What's he got in store for America? I wish we could get a break from the platitudes and the rhetoric. Why should i vote for Obama? What has he done?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jaidgrifter — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:39:40 GMT

For the past 8 years, we've had an incompetent commander in chief. If we really want change, maybe we should be looking for a "competent" commander in chief. As 5leavesleft said, "why should I vote for Obama?" I agree. I'm keeping an open mind, and I'm just not hearing any cold, hard facts.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:41:09 GMT

jaidgrifter: I am not trying to be difficult here but... I really think that Obama would have a better chance with his health plan. I just remember when Hillary was first lady and she proposed her health plan, there was nearly a riot in Congress. Also if Obama has more super delegates, are not those some of the people that would be voting on any plan and it would it appear he already has their support?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:44:32 GMT

This isn't some joke or some arbitrary decision. Foreign relations with other nations is serious business. We already know these countries look upon us with contempt. We know that we are judged by the steps we take as weak or strong and sad to say but they prey on that. Other countries are looking for an advantage and it would be a mistake to give them one. There are steps we can take to better relations to the advantage of both nations but you've got to take care in how you do it and the steps you take. Sure it would be nice if everyone could join hands in peace or whatever but that isn't realistic. We aren't a mean country. We want peace but we don't want to lower our defenses so much that we are open to attack. Good foreign relations is important fo the welfare of us all. We should think about who we want to represent us on the world stage.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

CorbinB2 — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:47:08 GMT

Obama Nominee = McCain Presidency

It's that simple and I hope I am wrong, as I do not want another 8 years (assuming McCain lives that long) of failed Bush policies, but white republoicans will come out in droves to prevent a black inexperienced democrat from becoming president.

Obama motivates both parties, but not at all in the same way. I tend to agree with the comments here that he just does not have the experience to effectively handle the nations and the worlds problems. We would ultimately end up with another white house run by advisors rather than the president and we all know how well that has worked the last 8 years.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

5leavesleft — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:48:18 GMT

We look at our foreign policy through American eyes. Other parts of the world have different ways of seeing things. What looks like trust and good faith to you, may look like weakness and submission to someone else. Sometimes that's just how it is.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

jaidgrifter — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:50:07 GMT

Hi imightbecrazy: Thank you for your question. I think it's interesting that you believe that Obama may have a chance of getting his health plan voted through. Perhaps, I'll have to think about that, thanks. My major concern here is the fact that Clinton pushed for and supported her plan despite the huge riot in congress, and the huge drop in her approval ratings. I'm concerned that Obama has shown that he is so concerned with being the "popular" kid - always willing to concede points in order to please the public. If the public objects to the health plan (and you know they will), will Obama stand firm? Is he willing to be less liked in order to help those that need help? If he can show me that he'll develop some real convictions and then stick to them, then I'll be willing to sing his praises to the sky. So far, I don't see it.

He currently has the popular vote amongs the superdelegates. When delegates back a candidate and that candidate wins - do these same delegates support all the legislation and views of the candidate all throughout his 4-year presidency? Somehow, I don't think so, though it would be super-cool if they did.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kenwhiting — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:54:31 GMT

McCain has fundementally adopted and supported the Bush administration (with the exception of our government's response to the Katrina victims). He's just an old politician who will que up whatever sound bite he thinks you want to hear. He's going to find out that you have to have a stance and believe in it. He's the one that needs to sell us on what he truly believes in. So far it sounds like he's for the status quo. I want to have a president that can muster something more than a 31% approval rating. That would mean that he's actually working for the people.

Shame on Obama for being creative and coming up with a new way of diplomacy, both here and abroad.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

imightbecrazybut — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:00:26 GMT

5leavesleft: Your last post in a twisted way backs what TarkJones is saying. The problem right now is that our "enemies" see us as being arrogant and not willing to sit down and look at another person's point of view. I am not suggesting that we invite the leaders of countries like North Korea, Venezula and Iran over milk and cookies, clearly a dialog of some sort needs to be started and we may have to compromise on the grounds of those talks.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Finisterre — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:05:05 GMT

It is a mistake to think that Obama does not have the experience necessary to lead. The entire point is that someone with a fresh perspective and who is articulate, grounded and possesses common sense is a better candidate than one who has been stuck in the political process that we all know stinks. There is an added benefit to having a president that will be seen more congenial to third world nations, which he will be, than the other candidates. We need to reach out to other parts of the world and not by waging war but through diplomacy. This, he can, and I believe will, do.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

ConsiderChange — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:35:32 GMT

If Obama had, initially, a plan instead of agreeing with the 'then frontrunner' with the other candidates, I MAY have respected him enough to listen to his eloquent speeches more carefully. He was more speech than substance (I don't care if Cheney is a distant cousin-- he stumped that topic well into Super Tuesday). By the media glazing over Rezko and Wright (this was known by December 2007 and earlier!), it was a stalemate after Super Tuesday. Though it's Clinton's fault for not having a Plan B if she didn't garner many delegates afterwards, many of the events stated here made matters worse for her campaign:

http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/PDFfiles/2008Election.pdf

Why Michigan and Florida SHOULD count - Shame on Obama!:

http://www.alternet.org/election08/80993/?page=5

A concern I have with Senator Obama:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-galesburg_obama_webfeb01,0,7138122,print.story

(why the Union chairs give their support to Obama baffles me)

All of these stories should have been known well beforehand. That would have been more fair to all Democratic party nominee participants (Edwards, Richardson). I'm ashamed of the politics of America-- the candidate with more experience in working with tougher circumstances and issues is being ostrasized. You might as well hand the presidency over to Senator Obama - special interests with little concern for the citizens who need the most care. Even former Senator John Edwards' wife agrees that Senator Clinton's health care initiative would cover more people than what has been proposed from Senator Obama.

Just for information everyone, and thanks for the opportunity to post here!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:48:50 GMT

George Bush just refuses to quit the war much the same as Hillary refuses to quit the race. Both take great pride in stubbornness in the face of facts and figures. Bush in the face of facts. Hillary in the face of figures. Bush has made a very poor president, despite the fact that he has "experience" thru being the son of a president in the white house. Same as Hillary has "experience" thru being the wife of a president in the white house.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:52:46 GMT

I am going to apply to get a four year contract to mow the white house lawn. I think that this experience will probably be enough for me to run in 2012.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:56:56 GMT

Hillary claims that she wants to continue because she doesn't want to abandon her followers. She has had to borrow millions to stay in. What kind of followers are those who will watch her go broke to make them happy? Obama's followers wouldn't even think of him having to borrow money to campaign.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:01:34 GMT

There are two ways that Hillary could quit. One would be to quit and thank her cheapskate supporters for all of the shouting, but certainly not for the money which didn't show up, and then ask them to help Obama to win in November. No problema. They love her so much, then they do what she says.

The other way that she could quit is to give sort of a half hearted goodbye to all who so cheaply supported her and snide it up, wink wink, as if maybe they could stay home in November because they couldn't have her in the office. A la Ted Kennedy.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:06:11 GMT

All in all, it is not so simple for her to leave the race. There are the two ways to quit, and there is the long and expensive third road to final defeat after continuing to shout that Obama cannot beat Mc Cain. Having watched her vicious and panic stricken attacks in favor of Mc Cain, I just don't see all the happiness that others seem to see at the bitter end after all the votes are in and her hugging and offering to support her opponent.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:08:28 GMT

I am afraid that she has fallen into Eccliastes's trap. Vanity. All is vanity under the sun.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:11:46 GMT

This is absolutely the best presidential contest that I have ever seen in my whole life. We are talking more years than you can imagine. Things are going to work out well in the long run.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Syaheeb — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:14:42 GMT

Yes, Hillary shouldn't quit the race soon..all she has to do is obliterate obama's winning chance againts Mccain in November. Muslim World love to see US meltdown again & again under Mccain presidency because he will continue Bush's policy. By then, US will be weaker & more no respect from people around the globe, meanwhile other country like China, Rusia & India will ready to take over US supremacy. God damn America!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:15:09 GMT

The volume of interest and participation is awesome. The whole country finally woke up and saw how bad things can get when you don't participate and don't care. The numbers are awesome. Most all of the voting facilities have been overloaded at each opportunity to vote.

We finally got it. Our thanks to you know whom, up there.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:19:00 GMT

My goodness, Syaheeb. What did you have for supper?

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:23:56 GMT

Syaheeb, I know where there is a little church in south Chicago where you might be able to get a job as assistant pastor, and maybe work up to the main pulpit pretty fast. Fit in pretty fast.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:29:03 GMT

I am so glad that you came to join us here in America, Syaheeb. We will give you a pencil and piece of paper and a microphone so that you can say or write just anything you feel like saying or writing. We call this Freedom of Speech and everybody has it. We protect this right with our lives when called upon to do so. Welcome to America. You'll catch on in a while how it works and get better as time passes. Nice start.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

MarkLeen — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:41:38 GMT

The Democratic party shot themselves by not adopting same "winner takes all" system as in the general election. Clinton would have won the nomination long ago when she won all the big states like California and New York. Instead, you have Obama winning more delegates from losing California and New York than most of the states that he won combine.

That's the REAL MATH.

The sad thing with all this is that all the LOSERS who voted for Clinton in the big states will have to vote for a candidate their don't believe in for Obama to have a chance at the presidency while the Obama supporters in the states that he won will realize that their votes don't count when their RED state goes to McCain.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

kcengg@hotmail.com — Tue, 13 May 2008 03:16:15 GMT

I agree fully with the contentsof the article.What is painful is that the first lady in the entire history of the nominee election with so much of audacity, courage,determination & fully qualified & competitive is not6 getting a chance to have the representative of the mom's gender at last . What a great injustice & an irony in a country of liberty & mother of the modern democracy.Whatever the math it is her right to keep playing all the way until it is over. I disagree that the prolongation will hurt the chance for the party to succeed. If the time period between the nomination & the fall election does not become enough then the party shd change the schedule. finally i want to restate that she shd be offered with grace the VP which then become a sure winner combination. Engineer Ram bahadur K.C. from the land of Mt. Everest & Lord Buddha. Kathmandu, Nepal.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

sammy123 — Tue, 13 May 2008 03:58:10 GMT

My prediction ... no one with a name like "Barak Obama" is going to win the presidency of the United States in 2008. Not while 9/11 is still fresh in our memories. Don't care how great a speech maker he is. ... or how much he "claims" to love this country. Its just not going to happen ... and its unfortunate for the Democratic party. He didn't win the big states ... and he's not going to win the general election either, much to my regret. Hillary has a much better shot at winning the White House.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Lose Obama — Tue, 13 May 2008 03:59:21 GMT

I've been to 57 States??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuZ_5OhWhQ0

Wow, Obama, what a loser! How is he suppose to run a country without knowing her fundamental components?!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 04:05:38 GMT

[ "If West Virginia had voted for our Democratic nominee in 2000 and 2004, we wouldn't have had to put up with George Bush for the last seven and a half years,” ] she said.

20 miniutes ago Mrs Clinton just said this about W.VA, and to me it sounds like she is blaming them for Bush. Like it's there fault, he is in office. I find it offencive and rude, to make such a statement, right before the vote. It's there fault, or it's a fear campain, either way, it's rude to make THEM feel like it's there fault we are as bad off as we are.

Am i reading to much from this statement which is in the same context of the conversation, or speach.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 04:11:59 GMT

OLDERWISER

HEY AIN'T IT KINDA LATE FOR YOU TO BE ON THE PUTER,LOL WELCOME TO LOONY LAND!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

richjohn — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:03:52 GMT

Stupid article. The author doesn't successfully defend his point.

Clearly, if Clinton VOLUNTARILY and GRACIOUSLY dropped out, and if she seemed to SINCERELY throw all her support behind Obama, her followers would naturally follow suit. PLEEEZZZE, don't kid yourself and think otherwise.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Press Release — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:09:32 GMT

Yes she makes it sound like we WV messed the world up and if we don't vote for her it's our fault again. Well I'm not voting for her. She may fool most of the WV but not this one.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Press Release — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:11:17 GMT

According to the demographics, I should be voting for Hillary Clinton: I'm a white, 60-year-old, highly educated woman from the Northeast. But I'm voting for Obama. I've waited all my life for a viable woman candidate for the presidency, but this is not the right woman. I want a woman of the highest ability and virtue, who would serve as a glorious role model to all young women. Hillary Clinton is not that woman.

She rode into power with her husband, and together they've acquired a long and seriously flawed history of self-serving and secretive financial and political dealings. The most cursory research will prove that true. She started out her political life supporting the racist Barry Goldwater. She is as comfortable with deception and trickery as George Bush. When I hear woman saying, "Oh, but that's how you get things done in Washington," I literally cringe.

I am passionately supporting Barack Obama. He can beat the Republicans; she cannot. Obama has attracted Independents and even Republicans to his camp, and in a general election they would vote for him, but not for Clinton. Clinton voted for the war, and has never apologized for it. Obama has spoken out against it from the beginning. Obama brings us hope--and not just that. Take a serious look at his ideas and experience.

Please, I beg of you, Sisters young and old: wait for the right woman. Then we can be proud.

Diane Wald

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

AnonymousMind — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:14:36 GMT

Its hard for OBAMA to win the race against McCain... He may be popular coz he gt the charisma and the speech but you dont win the big battles for that... Anyway he is young and obvsly a great career on politics and social service... I JUST HOPE MCCAIN will not win the presidents seat... Im tired of seeing wars and idealistic combat visions... Its time for democratic party to snag that seat. However, im really worried imagining if OBAMA gt the connections in the international community... and even within the multi-racial communities in USA.... If he wants things to go around for the party , USA and the world... He has to get Clinton to be his VP... I know its kinda difficult to imagine, the two of them at the crack down in making decisions...... (if he ever wins the presidents seat)..... GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!

Of course we need change! SO it has to be NO TO MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Press Release — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:17:55 GMT

Dear Hillary,

Enough. You've reaffirmed your standing as a fighter, reconnected with blue-collar America, forged an identity as a woman of heart and steel. Now you can be a uniter, too, hailed for your toughness and grace in recognizing when a losing cause is just that.

It's time to bow out of the Democratic contest.

Yes, you can fight clear through to the convention, demand that the Florida and Michigan delegations be seated; bring in your attack dogs to question Barack Obama's – um – masculine fortitude; wink at another round of Internet whispers that question your opponent's funny name, his patriotism, and his religion.

You can bash the press, browbeat the superdelegates, and boast of your prowess in the working-class kitchens of big states the party must win come November. You can post more ads of that irritating red phone and revel in your ability to nick your opponent just enough to keep him slightly off stride.

But you'll still lose. And the Democratic Party may lose with you.

Consider your legacy. Do you want to be remembered as Hillary the Pillorer, Hillary the Heckler, Clinton the Cutthroat? Surely not.

Doesn't Hillary the Healer seem more salving, more uplifting, on the pages of Democratic Party history? Surely you and Bill don't want to risk discarding your moneymaking memoirs in the trash heap of Democratic sore losers?

In so many intimate aspects of life, timing is everything. And in the end, even in the 24-7 glare of panting journalists and pushy photographers, politics is a most intimate sport. Seize the moment.

As you walk to the podium, the photographers will bring their lenses in tight. You are smiling now – a broad, wise, embracing smile. (Was that a hint of dampness in one eye or just the glare?)

You spread your arms and speak. Shower love on your supporters. Thank them for showing that a woman can win in America, that women will be back – in 2012, 2016, 2020. Hint perhaps that it may even be you. But then praise Obama as a man of toughness and integrity, a leader who can set a new course for America. Say that you will stand by his side in his fight against John McCain. That he deserves to be president. That you will fight with all your strength to make sure he gets there. That if called on, you will even serve as his vice president.

Again Hillary, timing is everything. Your fortune cookie reads: "Don't delay." So I'd speak out immediately. Why gamble away another $6.4 million on a campaign car that's leaking oil? There's no need to be the Ralph Nader of 2008; Ralph's already running. And who knows. By mid-June even some of your old friends could be calling you the Benedicta Arnold of the Democratic Party.

But act now and you will be an American heroine, irresistible to the TV bookers from Today to Tonight. Sure. Your campaign aides – and most loyal supporters – will feel hurt. Some may even feel sold out, and that's tough. But the press and public will hail you as a woman of character and principle, the savior of her party, a fighter who understood that her fight was for America's people and not for herself.

I can't help tearing up just thinking about it. You can still write a happy ending to your narrative, Hillary. Tomorrow it may be too late.

Warmest regards,

Jerry Lanson

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Knarfie — Tue, 13 May 2008 06:07:03 GMT

Hats Off To Diane Wald and Jerry Lanson for their respective postings!!!

Diane captures the essence of why Hillary is such a turn-off and polarizing politician that hides her record behind doubletalk and business-as-usual politics. Jerry hints at the potential available to Hillary if she was smart enough to realize it, but she apparantly isn't. Both Diane and Jerry also depict that we as a nation are far beyond 'ready' for a woman President but Hillary is not that woman; and in fact Hillary stands to do more harm than good for future women candidates because she lacks the 'class' and abilities to see beyond herself.

Hillary Clinton could do herself and this country a lot of good if she truly had this country and its future in her mind and heart. She could easily wipe out a lot of her rhetoric and very poor proven history by not running for an office she doesn't need. She should, right now, pick up all her political marbles and use them to become the most powerful and influential 'Non-President' politican in the world, let alone in the U.S.A.. - And I daresay that if she can overcome her ego, could do an enormous service 'at large' than she could ever do otherwise.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

Jack234 — Tue, 13 May 2008 06:11:24 GMT

To All Amercians,why Sen Obama has a better Chance to Beat Sen John McCain in Fall compares to Sen Hillary,As what we all see on this primary demographics,Sen Obama has showed us why he's true True Leader that we all badly needs to rejuvenile the White -House,he's able to unites everyone as the truth meaning of American Values,by introducing many Young's, Independents,even Republicans Voters in this American Election history to come out in great number to support Democratic Candidate Sen Obama .

This where Hillary's vulnerable for Democratic Party and for her to win this Nomination let alone General Election.My Own worried is not the Republican but within the Democratic Party itself that cause a rift in between itself which Hillary has bridge during this primary election campaigning.My Question To all Hillary Democratic Party Supporters,Please review where're your priority lies,the Individual Candidate or the Democratic Party itself?We all have read in mediaand aslo made known that the Supporter shall goes to John McMcain if Hillary is not the Democratic Candidate Its totally damaging and unwise declaration the good samaritan of USA in general as it's citizen.

If you come out and said,we all particuliarly like this Democratic Hillary not this Democratic Obama,it's total Salvation......Think about consequences it before we act ,I believes we Americans are all smarter than this all.

Jack

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bmor10 — Tue, 13 May 2008 08:25:36 GMT

i am not much disposed to support either ob or hil at this time...and certainly not mcbush...but i fail to see the value of holding a convention if the nomination is set in stone by primary results...if the goal is to save money for the "real" campaign, then just hand it to ob, and cancel the convention...i do not know what the convention costs, but i think its a pointless waste if there is no actual nominating goiBLOCKED SCRIPT__doPostBack('blogPage$_$ctl00$_$ctl00$ctl00$tcr$bcr$ctl00$_$form$_$btnSubmit','')

Submitng on.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bmor10 — Tue, 13 May 2008 08:28:38 GMT

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

aihechiowa — Tue, 13 May 2008 11:40:00 GMT

Your artcle seems to suggest that 'when' Hillary exits the race is more significant for party unity that 'how' she exits. I beg to disgree. She can begin now to exit the race and unite the party by refusing to portray the image of a woman who has been robbed of her rights by a gender insensitive society; and by desisting from appealing to racial sentiments, which are increasingly distasteful to most decent people worldwide. She should be telling her supporters: that although pundits have said that it is mathematically impossible for her to win, she would like to see the race to the end so as to further mobilize the party, women and blue collar workers for a democratic victory came November. This would drastically redress the predatory image of the Clintons and position her favourably for the VP slot or even for 2012.

The most important danger to party unity is her defiance of glaring, common sense that points to the fact that she is puting her party through an emotional ringer! She is still in a shock at having lost, and making the democratic party suffer for it. It is delusionary for her to still continue in this race, refusing to recognize that she can stretch the respect that Americans have for the office her husband once occupied so far!

You can guess what type president from the primaries. Dealing with sensitive geopolitical issues with the Hillary's kind of attitude can plunge the world into an unnecessary war. What her supporters are calling the 'fighting spirit' is what Americans used to call 'sour grapes'. She is behaving like a child who has been deprived of her favourite toy. Is that really the kind of person you want to have in the White House, following immediately after George Bush's? Democrats, especially her supporters really need to think twice about putting somebody in the White House who the people could not reign in when she became unreasonable with her policies and programmes on either the national or global stage.

It is George Bush's stubborness that has made the war in Iraq such an albatross. Do Americans now want to replace one stubborn President with another; when you an get an Obama that has demonstrated through his campaign to be a level-headed master strategist, who kept his word not to be drawn into mudslinging, and has the ability to assemble great individual strategists in their own right?

It is said about the US's exit strategy from Iraq that 'the US broke it, and must stay to fix it'. That may be the only exit strategy left to the Clintons from this race. It is no longer 'when' she leaves that is important to party unity, but 'how' she leaves. he may come out of the May 31 DNC meeting still refusing to budge. Then what!? Bill and Hillary Clinton have dug themselves into iraq-type trenches with regard to the Democratic Primaries. Their desperation to win at all cost, even if it meant endorsing illegality (rewarding Michigan and Florida delegates for breaking their own party rules) or shifting the goal post (rejecting the party's 2025 total for clinching the nomination and pushing a number they believe will favour them), has polarized the democratic party and left a bad taste in the mouth, especially for those of us who had admired Bill Clinton for living what you could call a life-time of service to his country. It would now appear that he had actually lived a life-time of service to himself at the expense of his country, and still wants to keep doing so through his wife.

I believe that the democrats have given Bill and Hillary the benefit of the doubt for too long, and should now move to reign them in. Nobody should be surprised if Hillary decides to use these last few campaign stops to position herself discredit the democratic party well enough as to carry her supporters with her to run on the same ticket with John McCain. Has it not been speculated once before that John McCain himself a few years ago toyed with the idea of taking a VP slot on the democratic ticket. If offered, the Cliton's will take the opportunity to make history (first female VP)and sink the democratic party. Call her in now, for the sake of the party.

Obasi.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

cnn357 — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:46:27 GMT

She should stay in as long as she does'nt continue the destructive behavior. Just dont damage Obama and continue using race cause he pretty much is the nominee. (Im not calling her a racist) And if she wants to push for FL & MI thats fine, but just done demonize Obama its not his fault.

He should make more of an effort to count FL & MI though, its making him look bad. And they arent going to strip him of the nomination because of it. So he needs to reach out too.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bella12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 13:33:28 GMT

aihechiowa, You call for party unity and you bash hillary. You bash Bill Clinton and then encourage Barack to make Hillary the Vice President. You describe Hillary as a tough and stubborn and at the same time suggest that she is going to scream gender discrimination on the way out of the race. If you think talking out of both sides of one's mouth could have any chance of winning over a Florida Hillary supporter you're mistaken.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:05:03 GMT

Bella, I am abashed by bashing. English is sure a hard language. If the sound of the word wash were applied to the word bash, then it would sound like bosh.

George Bernard Shaw, who advocated a worldwide language, took the sound of the letter f from the word tough, the sound of the letter o from the word women, and the sound of the letter t from he word information and then spelled the word fish as ghoti. Sounds just like fish.

aihechiowa, Bella's right you shouldn't bosh the candidates.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:09:18 GMT

I would like to affirm that Hillary is quite stubborn in the Bush fashion and that this is part of the reason that she would not make a good president, same as aihechioa says. But, I do not intend this as a bash. I intend it as an opinionated observation, in respectful disagreement with those who see her otherwise.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bella12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:10:13 GMT

bmor10, Not hold a convention? You've got to be kidding. There are thousands of Delegates and others, who have worked for little or nothing, who have earned the right to a vacation/convention prior to the next battle. A little R&R so to speak. This year the meeting is even more important because fence mending and refocusing of effort is key. The Mayor of Denver Colorado would have the BIG ONE if he read your comments.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:13:46 GMT

Also, I am not one to call a highly respected candidate a prevaricator for saying that she dodged a lot of bullets upon landing in Bosnia. I excuse her for being sleepy and not remembering well and leave it at that. I do, though, question the advertisement in which she claimed to be wide awake at 3 a.m. and able to function as if it were high noon. This is called hiatus, pronounced, "high eat us". Strange language we speak.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:16:51 GMT

Bella's right. The convention is comparable to the summation at the end of a jury trial. Each adversary gets an opportunity to try and draw together all of the evidence as presented, so that the jury can have this capsule to consider before voting. We are the jury, of course. Lots of evidence. We need the summation.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bella12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:17:28 GMT

If stubborn means, mind made up and not interested in other views, I agree, I don't see her that way, but i'd be the first one to say, I like Barack's method of taking a step back and considering all of the ramifications.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:27:32 GMT

The wise old litigators would tell Hillary that her continuing presentation of evidence is superfluous and injurious to the case in main. The case in main here is the Democratic race for president. Blabbing lawyers who do not know when to quit lose cases that they had won over and over in the earlier evidence, but, after irritating jurors with endless repetition. the jurors who wish to reach a verdict and go back to work have a tendency to punish the blabber for wasting their time and try to find ways to deprive him or her. In this case, the Democratic party, the case in main, suffers from the superfluous blab. Something like that.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:27:35 GMT

[ "If West Virginia had voted for our Democratic nominee in 2000 and 2004, we wouldn't have had to put up with George Bush for the last seven and a half years,” ] she said.

LAST NITE, Mrs Clinton just said this about W.VA, and to me it sounds like she is blaming them for Bush. Like it's there fault, he is in office. I find it offencive and rude, to make such a statement, right before the vote. It's there fault, or it's a fear campain, either way, it's rude to make THEM feel like it's there fault we are as bad off as we are.

Am i reading to much from this statement which is in the same context of the conversation, or speach. or is it realy there fault as she says???

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:28:25 GMT

morning old wise man,lol

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:34:17 GMT

OLDERWISER

YOU OUT OF ALL PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW A BOSH, IS A GERMAN SPARK PLUG,LOL OBAMA SPLIT-TOP PLUG? GOOD ANALOGY

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:44:44 GMT

Hello, big old pink German cat.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:52:15 GMT

We saw the fat cats buy the Bush elections. He would go speak to his "base". Million, billion heirs a small minority of Americans furnishing a large majority worth of campaign money. They gave him big dollars for plates of dried chicken breast and dried peas. Outspent the party of the people big time.

Hillary's supporters are cheapskates compared to Obama's millions of donors with small donations. Her supporters are driving her into massive debt to hear her continue a losing race. How does she expect to enter a presidential race with insufficient primary votes and a giant debt before the campaign for the bit one even begins?

Obama's millions of small donors are about to smother the fat cats.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:54:57 GMT

Hey, pink cat, didn't know about the spark plugs. My auto mechanical ability is limited to knowing how to unscrew the gasoline cap and apply fuel. I sometimes think that there is some mysterious entity under the hood which makes things go.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bella12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:55:58 GMT

pinkpanther, That's a reach to spin Hillary's remark into a shot at the West Virginia primary voters. Let's just say you're right, would it apply to the Democratic voters, no it wouldn't. If I said losing your state cost me the election and you had voted for me would the comment apply to you? Cut the crap! She's blaming independents and potential crossover Republicans for screwing up.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

olderwiser — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:02:59 GMT

Speaking of superfluous blab, my time is up. Got to go. Will miss my blogmates. Bella is a complimentary word in more than one language. Bella, bella.

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

bella12 — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:11:04 GMT

Olderwiser, I'm out too. Just dropping in occasionally until Hillary drops out, then I'll get a little more into it. The polls are tightening in Fla. indicating that Barack may be able to win here. Scratching hillary's back would go a long way here. NAFTA will get Barack Pa. and Ohio, but Fla. is needed.

Keep your head out of that Thesarus you're becoming an egghead.

Heading out on the Big O to fish a while. Life is tough!

re: Why Clinton's Continued Campaigning Is Good for the Dems

pinkpanther87413 — Tue, 13 May 2008 15:21:24 GMT

BELLA

THIS WAS SPOKEN LAST NITE IN HER LAST SPEACH TO THE VOTERS IN W.VA, AND AS I WAS LISTENING. I WAS NOT WRITTING IT CAME TO PRES LATER, JUST AS STATED, THAT'S WHY I FORMED IT IN A QUESTION ALONG WITH WHAT I HERD. THE REACH IS NOT TO FAR ON THIS WHEN HERD IN CONTEXT. IT REALY DID SOUND LIKE SHE WAS EITHER BLAMING, OR USING FEAR TACTICS, BUT FEAR DID NOT SOUND LIKE WHAT I HERD. SO FAULT, WAS HER POINT, IF YOU VOTE FOR, ME, INSTED OF THEM, LIKE LAST TIME! WE WILL WIN, WAS WHAT I HERD. NOW, I DON'T USE MY OWN INTERPITATION AS THE FINAL WORD, THAT'S WHY IT'S HER COMMENT, AND MY QUESTION, CAUSE OF WHAT I HERD HER SAY AND THE CONTEXT OF HOW SHE SAID IT. SO REACHING IS NOT A LONG ONE. IT JUST DID NOT SOUND RIGHT/ SO I ASK IF ANYONE ELSE GOT THE SAME IMPRESSION, OK NO ARGUEMENT, JUST A COMMENT FROM HER SPEACH PASSIONATE AT THAT, WHICH MIGHT HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT, SOUND WORST, THEN IT MENT, OK!

BTW-SORRY FOR ALL CAPS. IM NOT YELLING. I HAVE TERRIBLE EYES VA NOR MEDICARE DON'T DO EYES, AND NO I'M OBAMAS AGE. FOR THE CAPS I APLOIGISE TO YOU HONSETLY!