Would Clinton prefer McCain over Obama?

Hillary Clinton, Republican Strategist (0.00 / 0)

With her comments, Hillary Clinton shows her true colors. She is much more comfortable with the warmonger McCain than she is with a progressive of her own party. With that, she has shown that she is simple a Republican with a "D" after her name. She does not represent change, but only more of the same with a different spin. Obama needs to remain above her dirty tactics; the Democratic electorate will respond to him if he does...if not, those of us in the progressive movement will write in someone else if she is the nominee.  I don't care if that assures McCain is elected.  He is no different from her!  

---

by: DickNH @ Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 17:50:20 PM CDT

Hillary Sabotaging Democrats? (0.00 / 0)

This was penned  weeks ago, before Hillary got really nasty:

   The formerly inevitable nominee never expected this young upstart, Barack Obama, to pose any threat at all.
   From the very beginning, it was all about her. Now thrashing about wildly, desperate in search of some message, any message, that might serve her and hurt Obama brings this point home.
   After each loss, Senator Clinton blames each caucus and primary loss not on herself, but on special issue activists.  It's as if she thinks the party would, and should, just come supplicant to her. Again, it's all about her.
   Clinton looked petty, trying to spoon-feed the national media the word "plagiarism" when Obama echoed words used by his friend Deval Patrick, with his encouragement. Yet when she and Bill directly steal line after line from Obama, that's okay. The difference must be that she's the entitled one, Obama a pretender to the throne that is hers.
   The change from red to blue in New Hampshire is happening from the bottom up, from excitement and insistence on real change.  It was not handed down from party leadership.
   There is a threat to party strength and unity, but it's not from people who stand up to the self-perpetuating machine. The threat is when candidates' self-service blatantly outweighs sincere public service.  
   For example, as Clinton mires herself in bitterness and vitriolic attacks against Obama, it is she who brings harm to our party. Her campaign has said they'll try to seat the illegal Michigan and Florida delegates, where there was no competition in those banned primaries.
   Politics is not about serving self. When it become so, citizens turn away in disgust. A candidate must agree to be an instrument for promoting an agenda, a set of positions and values. I think of the honorable John Edwards and Chris Dodd.  Self-serving and entitlement is repugnant to most people, and to the most basic tenets of our founders' notion of self-government.
   What's threatens the party is when Clinton devotees try to fix blame on "the media," or on those many voices within the Democratic Party who demand a party which is about real change. About more than just the old "get elected at any cost, go along to get along, support the war when it's popular, oppose it when it's no longer in vogue, whatever works." We've got to do better. And as Obama says Yes We Can. Oh, yes, Hillary said that too.
   We Democrats are strong despite the old team's frustrations. But when it becomes about preserving the power of the establishment ,or some notion of entitlement, the party loses.  Obama, and our hope and optimism, do indeed have some momentum. Let's continue to unify around that.

---

by: Burt Cohen @ Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 09:15:34 AM CDT

Look Ma! No hands! n/t (0.00 / 0)

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 11:23:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's a bad comment (0.00 / 0)

And it even jeopardizes her own run, were she the general nominee.

There's a rhetorical corollary she should have gone for here -- talk about the PERCEPTION John McCain is more qualified in these matters. That's an electability issue and one that is run of the mill.

In fact, that's where she was going with it until she went of the rails. Here's a quote from a couple of days before:

"I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say. He's never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002."

That's actually a big, if somewhat snarky, point. I suppose the question is how it went from there to this a couple of days later:

"I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold," Clinton said yesterday. "I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."

I think the Clinton campaign needs everybody to take the newspaper, roll it up, and smack them squarely across the nose. There's not recent precedent I can remember for this, and it's something that should frankly be retracted.

On the other hand, I also think it might be helpful if every dialed down the outrage a little. I'm a little sick of the "campaign about the campaign" "ain't it awful" stories. I'll repeat my broken record point -- getting in a tizzy about who's slighting who is a task best left to the Gang of 500 and other high-schoolers.

The best response to this I've seen is those who have taken the chance to forcefully articulate why McCain is NOT fit to be Commander in Chief. That lays bare the lie in Hillary's claim AND advances Obama. It's not quite as fun an Olbermann smackdown, but it's infinitely more productive and the direction we should be taking here.

In other words, let's quit trying to prove Hillary is evil and start trying to show where she is wrong...

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 17:17:50 PM CDT

Show Hillary where she's wrong? (0.00 / 0)

C'mon!  Politics ain't beanbags. The Republicans have been pining for her, 'cause they know she'll lose. For the sake of the country and the Constitution, Democrats must regain power. Hillary means McCain which means a third Bush term.  Error of her ways indeed. The Clintons just keep getting worse!

---

by: Burt Cohen @ Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 17:49:50 PM CDT

Even if Hillary gets the nomination, where does she think she's going with this national security pitch? (0.00 / 0)

A Democrat can't beat a Republican on national security.  We have the right approach, we have better ideas, we have better positions, but it doesn't work that way, not yet anyway.  Certainly, a Democrat who has never served in the military and claims being First Lady of Arkansas and First Lady of the US as part of her "35 years of experience" can't beat John McCain in perceptions of who will better handle national security.

This whole thing will hurt either of our potential nominees.  This is the kind of thinking that, in governing, leads us to build new bridges in Baghdad while old bridges in Minneapolis/St. Paul are falling down.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 22:12:41 PM CDT

I agree we should debate on principles and policy... not late night phone calls (0.00 / 0)

I think what has been such a great testament to Barack Obama's ability to lead and run a clean campaign, has been his willingness not to snipe based upon nebulous concepts of "experience" and late night pillow talk on a red phone, but upon things that people actually care about.  HRC is truly running scared, but somehow I think she revels in this whole "kitchen sink" strategy of cheap shots and proxy attacks.  We as Democrats united for change as a principle and idea must rise above this nonsense.  

---

by: Northwoods @ Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 00:04:05 AM CDT

Clinton - McCain (0.00 / 0)

Is there any rationale for supporting Hillary Clinton any longer by any Democrat? It seems like she just burned her bridges to the Democratic Party.  I know that I won't vote for her if she gets the nomination.  Why would I put in a Lieberman Democrat?  I would rather have the Republicans continue to run this country into the ground and hope we can run a good candidate again in four years.  

---

by: Pacific Blue @ Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 10:08:33 AM CDT

The republic comes first. (0.00 / 0)

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 19:11:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

May I say it? I told you so (0.00 / 0)

I was subject to threats and attempts at intimidation for having the gall to criticize Hillary Clinton months ago. Party insiders insisted I was hurting the party. Well well: It is clearly, indisputably, one Hillary Rodham Clinton who is putting her selfish interests above everything else, and doing real harm to the party, not those of us who simply draw attention to it.  We must not let her steal the nomination!

---

by: Burt Cohen @ Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 17:15:17 PM CDT

Hillary (0.00 / 0)

She is going to make the Dems party a living hell, her ego is always getting in the way she needs to know that Obama has brought people from all over the US and its a great opportunity to do something great and get the nation together and her attacks to obama are nasty and dirty politics was someone i use to look to and now i don't admire her anymore due to her lack of accepting reality and not letting Obama go ahead since it makes sense he had won more states and more delegates than her.

---

by: ccardona @ Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 22:33:37 PM CDT