Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clinton Aides Doubtful About Future

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:31 AM
Original message
Clinton Aides Doubtful About Future
Source: wp

INDIANAPOLIS, May 6 -- After failing to win the decisive sweep in North Carolina and Indiana that could have reshaped the Democratic race, disappointed aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton conceded it would be difficult for her to catch Sen. Barack Obama in either delegates or overall votes in the six remaining contests.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/07/AR2008050700065.html?hpid=topnews



Hillary's end is near.

Doesn't she wish that the pro-war vote was not cast?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. The pro war vote was an attempt to hold on to her seat by appeasing what she thought was the
Edited on Wed May-07-08 10:37 AM by Mountainman
majority opinion. I knew that the intelligence was a lie so did she. So did every other Dem who voted for this illegal and immoral and costly fucking war. And they still do not have the balls to make that vote right by calling for an end to it!

So many Dems who voted against the IWR held on to their seats like Dennis Kucinich.

I'm glad!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. I agree. We knew that there were no WMD or imminent threat from Iraq.
Clinton knew it too. So did the rest of Congress. I'm proud of those who voted against it. I hope that next time, more Congress critters will show some courage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I don't know how much conviction Pelosi had when she voted against the war
But she's definitely smarter than Hillary on that vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. Then why is she lending her campaign 6 million dollars. After listening to lany davis
I had an impression that they don't care if this goes to the Convention, and if the fight happens on the floor


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Probably because they are in debt 6 million
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. I think that was money already lent, back in April sometime. But until she declares she's out, I'm
still working hard to ID voters and win here in Montana.

If she finally faces the facts, and declares she's out, I will still work to maximize Obama's vote in MT, but I will do it in a less intense and hard core fashion and instead move into a more fun and celebratory mode.

That would be nice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Unfortunately, I think all Obama supporters will be fighting up to the Convention
and maybe even at the Convention which would be the worst possible thing


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
4. However Clinton's Chief Strategist in North Carolina says the loss Represented Progress
Edited on Wed May-07-08 10:39 AM by RedEarth
Hillary Chief Strategist: North Carolina Loss Represented Progress Because We Won Among White Voters

On the Hillary conference call, Hillary chief strategist Geoff Garin made the case for her electability in some of the most explicitly race-based terms I've heard yet.

Garin argued that the North Carolina contest, which Obama won by 14 points, represented "progress" for Hillary because she did better among white voters there than she did in Virginia.

"When we began in North Carolina," Garin said, "our internal polling and much of the public polling we were running exactly even with white voters."

Garin said that the Virginia electorate was the "closest white electorate in the country" to North Carolina, and added that Hillary "started even" among whites in North Carolina, and "ended up earning a significant win of 24 points."

"We obviously did not do as well as we would want or needed to among African American voters," Garin concluded.

Put in the context of the Hillary campaign's chief argument that she's the more electable Dem, Garin's overall implication here is that her success among white voters in North Carolina yesterday is "progress" in the sense that it strengthens her case for electability.

In other words, it's an explicit, and unabashed, linking of her claim of electability to her success among whites.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/hillary_chief_strategist_north.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. I'm proud to be a white voter who voted for Obama in North Carolina.
I reject and repudiate racist pandering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
5. Her vote on the IWR is the least of my reasons for not supporting her --
but her vote on Kyl-Lieberman was the beginning of the end for me.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyToad Donating Member (389 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-08-08 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
22. Obama co-sponsored a bill with the exact same language as Kyl-Lieberman
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c110BTVR8g:e943:">Obama sponsored the exact same thing as Kyl-Lieberman, but that is different somehow...

Section 3

"(8) The Secretary of State should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) and the Secretary of the Treasury should place the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order 13224 (66 Fed. Reg. 186; relating to blocking property and prohibiting transactions with persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism).
"

Obama also didnt bother to show up to vote on Kyl Lieberman, which he obviously didnt care about enough to take a stand

Love the hypocracy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-08-08 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. It wasn't intentional hypocrisy on my part.
Obama not voting on Kyl-Lieberman made me more positive of my choice in candidate at the time -- Biden. And I agree -- he SHOULD have voted. I feel strongly about this.

Is this really the same as the Kyl-Lieberman amendment? Your like brings me to a page that isn't there any more.

If so, then Obama needs to address this.

But her vote for Kyl-Lieberman WAS the beginning of the end for me. She was the only candidate who voted for it (of those who did vote) so to me, her motive was questionable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToughLuck Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. Concede, I will believe it when I see it. McGovern asked her to step aside earlier today I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
10. Yep, Clinton aides should be polishing their resumes
and looking for their next job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I would expect that...
Considering the tone and tenor of some things that came out of her campaign, some of those campaign aides, especially the senior ones, are gonna have a tough time finding new campaigns to work on. At least at the presidential level, and perhaps congressional as well. A lot of bad blood has been created.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Blue Flower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
13. "Don't cry for me, Indiana"
The delusion is intact: "We're going to the White House!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
14. As Far as the Campaign Is Concerned, There IS No Future
Shut it down. Do everybody a favor, especially Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ObamaKerryDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
15. "Doesn't she wish that the pro-war vote was not cast?"
100% agree. I think that is one of her biggest negatives right there. Hell, even at the very beginning, when I was actually excited about her running, that was the one (big) thing that gave me pause. I wanted to look at the other candidates first, before deciding whether or not to vote for her, particurally the ones who were against it all along (like Obama). And boy, am I glad I did! :D

This is, after all, the first election cycle after the war began that we've had a viable (and front running) candidate who actually didn't go along with it, who wasn't fooled by Bush's BS. Combine that with all Hillary's other negatives and it's much harder to make a case for her over someone like Obama.

It's time for a REAL change and I think more and more people are realizing it, as last night's results show..

GOBAMA!! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
17. "Doesn't she wish that the pro-war vote was not cast?"
A lot of things would be different if she'd chosen that vote as her time to fight, instead of caving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. If she didn't vote for the war - Obama had no chance against her
If she didn't vote for the war, she would be a perfect democrat - today she would be unstoppable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. I won't go as far as "perfect" ... but the nomination would be hers. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-07-08 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
19. IMO she would make a great Senate Majority Leader
I think she would be far better than Reid....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-08-08 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
21. Nominated for 'Understatement of the Year'.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC