"If I believed in polls, then five years ago I would have backed the war in Iraq like she did."

[jefferson_dem]

ZING!

From today's Hotline:

"If I believed in polls, then five years ago I would have backed the war in Iraq like she did."

-- Barack Obama, on polls showing he continues to trail Hillary Clinton, "Early Show," CBS, 10/15.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/10/quote_of_the_da_140.html

[wyldwolf]

1. ..but instead, he just doesn't know how he would have voted if he'd been in the Senate.

:shrug:

9% and falling...

[jefferson_dem]

2. Cute talking point but you really should at least try to be honest, ok?

Need a bit of a memory-jog?

OPTION 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

vs.

OPTION 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhpKmQCCwB8

Rose: "If you were a member of the Senate, you would have voted AGAINST the resolution."
Obama: "Yes."

[wyldwolf]

5. I'm not being honest? Lookey here...

You know, I think very highly of Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I admire her. I think she’s the most disciplined–one of the most disciplined people–I’ve ever met. She’s one of the toughest. She’s got an extraordinary intelligence. And she is, she’s somebody who’s in this stuff for the right reasons. She’s passionate about moving the country forward on issues like health care and children. So it’s not clear to me what differences we’ve had since I’ve been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I’m always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn’t have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/10/30/061030on_onlineonly04?currentPage=3

So which is it Obama? Was Hillary looking at poll or intelligence estimates?

[jefferson_dem]

10. Well, we know she wasn't looking at intelligence estimates.

Obama had better judgement without them than she did with. I realize you may have a hard time grasping this - being a big Clinton fan and all - but loyalty matters to Obama. With that comment, he was trying to lend to Hillary any credibility he had on the issue before her election. We've been through all this before.

Can you honestly say ... with a straight face that --
1. Hillary wasn't concerned about polls and political ambitions when she cast the IWR vote.
2. Obama was not sure whether he would or would not have voted for the IWR if he was Senator at the time.

[wyldwolf]

16. Obama says she was.

:shrug:

[jefferson_dem]

17. I answered your question.

How about mine? Got it in you?

[wyldwolf]

21. sure, why not?

Can you honestly say ... with a straight face that --
1. Hillary wasn't concerned about polls and political ambitions when she cast the IWR vote.

Sure she was, but what's wrong with that? The American people were solidly on her side. The role of an elected official is to represent consituents. Of course, at the time, Obama was working part-time in the IL legislature, avoiding votes on abortion and his isn't sure how he would have voted had he been in the US Senate.

Maybe he would have done some polling himself. He does seem to spend a lot on it.

2. Obama was not sure whether he would or would not have voted for the IWR if he was Senator at the time.

Unless he was lying, that is his sentiment.

[wyldwolf]

20. self delete

[SaveElmer]

3. Man...is he gettin shrill...

Sounds like the campaign is gettin to him...with his support sliding I can understand the feeling...

Maybe some time off...a nice vacation somewhere...

Get that old "Politics of Hope" feeling back again...

[jefferson_dem]

4. Shrill? Isn't that word specially reserved for your girl?

How dare he remind voters that he was courageous enough to aggressively speak out against the war while your girl Hillary was beating the war drums right alongside her Chimp-Master...shamelessly padding her resume for this very presidential run...that you support.

[SaveElmer]

8. I guess his followers are gettin tired too...

Judging by your post...

He can't even be subtle when going negative...he sounds like a three year old simply trying to insult someone for the fun of it...

Of course as usual he is flip flopping on what he has said previously, both in terms of Hillary's IWR position, and on his own...

But that has become a pattern with him...along with ducking important Senate votes that might cause him trouble in the election...

But keep it up Barack, the more you attack the further you slide...

Looks like that Politics of Hope is getting smaller and smaller in that rear view mirror...

[superkia]

12. You forget, Americans dont care about war or the patriot act or...

Habeas corpus or impeachment or non profit health care or corporations influencing policy, we care about what the media cares about. Next election, I'm not gonna look at any of the facts, I'm just going to vote for the candidate that the media whores out, it seems to be the way of our future nowadays? Hell I don't even know what the issues are that Clinton supporters are worried about, only thing I hear is experience ( which helped her vote yes to a war supported by no evidence ) and beating a republican which any of our candidates should do. I guess the media knows best, I should jump to the medias candidate so I feel like a winner, instead of voting on the issues that affect me. If everything continues to go downhill afterwards in our country, I could just lie and say I didn't support her or that the republicans made her fail to help the people?

[wyldwolf]

6. ... getting this far behind in national and state polls will do that to a person.

[Ethelk2044]

7. He is not behind in state polls.

[wyldwolf]

11. yes he is

:)

[BeyondGeography]

22. Man...are you getting smug

[AtomicKitten]

9. Obama is and has been right all along.

And that is something that Hillary and her minions cannot erase, mitigate, or marginalize, try as they might, and oh boy are they trying with their Rovian maneuvers.

Their desperation on that point is heart-warming. :)

[jefferson_dem]

13. Double post.

sorry.

[jefferson_dem]

14. Seems to have struck a nerve...

...as her apologists show up to try to put out the fire. And in such lame form too...

[cuke]

15. I thought "poll watcher" attacks were a Rovian maneuver

I distinctly remember bush* criticizing various dems for basing their positions on polls.

Now Obama is using the line.

[AtomicKitten]

18. Rove 101 advocates repeatedly attacking an opponent's strength.

[cuke]

19. And that's what Obama is trying to do

so how is Obama not being Rovian?

[AtomicKitten]

23. HRC'ites are attacking Obama's strength because she doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Obama is defending himself from the onslaught of attacks from Hillary et. al by simply stating the facts. They are attacking his strength, ergo "Rovian."

They can't cover up her yes votes for war and more war, so they are going after her only viable opponent who had the good sense to not get sucked into the GOP war machine.

[cuke]

24. Obama is defending himself using tactics YOU describe as "Rovian"

[AtomicKitten]

26. huh?

I'm sorry you don't understand, but I really don't have a lot of interest in explaining it further to you. Now climb back on that HRC bandwagon and carry on.

[cuke]

28. I'll spell it out to you

Obama is going after HRC's national security policy, which is one of HRC's strengths. Attacking and opponents strengths is a Rovian tactic.

[AtomicKitten]

29. You've got it precisely backwards.

[cuke]

30. So HRC's IWR vote is not an issue of national security?

Or are you saying that Obama isnt criticizing HRC on a national security issue?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

25. Speaking as a Clinton apologist: That's a good line! (Props due wherever deserved.)

[jefferson_dem]

27. LOL! Good on ya...

:hi: