Clinton is ALIVE

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:26 am

Any one want to bet that she STORMS back now and takes the nomination?

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:08 am

I can hope. I was not looking forward to voting for McCain!.. There is still a long way to go though. Evil or Very Mad

I have never warmed to Obama and the NAFTA situation has me very uncomfortable. The fact that Canada is investigating the press leak makes it difficult to believe him. First it was no conversation ever took place to no-one officially affiliated with this campaign took part to oh it was a meeting about something else and NAFTA was only mentioned casually. He sounds a lot like the man we have now.

I really am surprised he's in the position he's in based on his past (election record and experience) and I really think if you take away the Oprah factor that he would not have gained traction. I really hope it doesn't come to it but if he gets the nomination, I'll end up being a democrat for McCain and probably even work for the campaign.

floridafun Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:10 am

you know i am REALLY hoping not!! i hate for obama to play as dirty as she does but i think the time has come. he needs to find several things he can really hit her with that she will stumble on. he needs to fine tune using vids for his own ads of what she said in past versus what she is saying now. there is plenty to pick from...they came too late the past week..he needs to do what she does...find dirt to sling and sling hard with no tracing it back precicely to him. i am not giving up hope yet. i will never vote for her tho.

from yahoo news...

Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton split delegates in four states Tuesday while Republican John McCain claimed his party's nomination for president.

Clinton picked up at least 115 delegates in Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont and Texas, while Obama picked up at least 88. Nearly 170 delegates were still to be awarded, including 154 in Texas.

Obama had a total of 1,477 delegates, including separately chosen party and elected officials known as superdelegates, according to the Associated Press count. He picked up three superdelegate endorsements Tuesday,

Clinton had 1,391 delegates. It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the Democratic nomination.

floridafun Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:27 am

he did tell the press at the time it was reported there hadnt been a meeting. he said the next day that when he made the statement he had not been aware the meeting took place. i dont know if that is what i classify as politics as usual..i wont be easily swayed by billary swiftboating.

http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reuters/2008/03/03/2008-03-04T000047Z_01_N03391783_RTRIDST_0_CANADA-OBAMA-UPDATE-1.html

OTTAWA(Reuters) - Canada defended Democratic front-runner Barack Obama Monday over accusations from rival Hillary Clinton that he is secretly at ease with a hemispheric trade accord which he publicly blames for losing U.S. jobs.

Clinton's criticism, on the eve of make-or-break presidential nomination contests for her in Ohio and Texas, stemmed from a report by Canadian television station CTV that an Obama economic adviser told Canadian officials the candidate was not seriously considering disrupting the trade accord.

But the Canadian Embassy in Washington released a statement essentially backing up the Obama camp's version of the meeting between adviser Austan Goolsbee and officials at the Canadian consulate in Chicago.

"There was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA," the embassy statement said. "We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect."

The consulate's written report of the meeting had left the suggestion that Obama's words on NAFTA were designed for a political audience and should not be taken too seriously, prompting an angry denial from the Obama campaign.

Clinton, a New York senator, has made an issue of what she says is Obama's support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, which her husband, former President Bill Clinton, signed in 1994 but which is now under heavy election-year criticism from her and Obama.

On Monday, Clinton challenged Obama's credibility on the trade issue ahead of the nomination contest in Ohio, where concern over the NAFTA trade agreement has become a key issue.

"It raises questions about Senator Obama coming to Ohio and giving speeches about NAFTA and having his chief economic adviser tell the Canadian government that it was just political rhetoric," she said at an early morning news conference in Ohio.

Both candidates fighting for the Democratic nomination to face the Republicans' choice in the November election have threatened to pull the United States out of NAFTA unless it is renegotiated.

They said the accord has hurt the manufacturing base in such states as economically hard-hit Ohio, which along with Texas votes on Tuesday.

CANADA PM DENIES INTERFERENCE

Some U.S. Democrats accused Canada's right-leaning Conservative government of trying to interfere in the U.S. presidential election.

That charge led Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to take the unusual step of denying that Canada was trying to stir up trouble in the election process of its powerful southern neighbor.

"I certainly deny any allegation that this government has attempted to interfere in the American election," he told the country's parliament.

"The American people will make the decision as to their next president and I am confident that whoever that person is ... (they) will continue the strong alliance, friendship and partnership that we enjoy with the United States."

Canada sends 75 percent of its exports to the United States and would be badly hurt if Washington pulled out of NAFTA.

The U.S. Economic Policy Institute, a pro-labor think tank, has blamed NAFTA for more than 1 million U.S. job losses, most of them in manufacturing, since 1994. However, others put the tally much lower than that.

Obama, an Illinois senator, acknowledged that a meeting did take place between Goolsbee and the Canadian consulate officials but added, "He said exactly what I've been saying on the campaign trail."

In San Antonio, Texas, Obama said, "This notion that Senator Clinton is peddling that somehow there's contradictions or winks and nods has been disputed by all parties involved."

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:06 am

Vis wrote:I can hope. I was not looking forward to voting for McCain!.. There is still a long way to go though.

I have never warmed to Obama and the NAFTA situation has me very uncomfortable. The fact that Canada is investigating the press leak makes it difficult to believe him. First it was no conversation ever took place to no-one officially affiliated with this campaign took part to oh it was a meeting about something else and NAFTA was only mentioned casually. He sounds a lot like the man we have now.

I really am surprised he's in the position he's in based on his past (election record and experience) and I really think if you take away the Oprah factor that he would not have gained traction. I really hope it doesn't come to it but if he gets the nomination, I'll end up being a democrat for McCain and probably even work for the campaign.

Ok ... our board has a Maverick. lol That reminds me of the movie Top Gun! hehe John McCain calls himself a maverick.

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:17 am

Hey now, I'm not alone Sad

Actually I just finished my Masters in Public and Environmental Affairs and there is actually a network of us and some Poli Sci freaks that feel the same way.

If he gets the nomination, I don't see how he can not raise campaign funds and beat McCain and if he does raise funds, he has to overcome breaking his word right off the bat. While he's doing quite well, when you consider the level of warranted or unwarranted Hillary hatred, he really should be doing much better. Hillary has a huge percentage of people who just flat out hate her and would never vote for her which is a huge hurdle and one McCain does not share.

floridafun Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:34 am

uh...wonder whether billary will be putting out a statement that they arent going to sue the state of texas...now that she won there!!

LTRT Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:39 am

floridafun wrote:uh...wonder whether billary will be putting out a statement that they arent going to sue the state of texas...now that she won there!!

I was thinkin' the same thing. Haven't heard the results of the Texas Caucuses yet. I'm sure they're buying more 'kitchen sinks' to throw at Obama.

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:51 am

I hadn't seen that she won the caucus either. If the NAFTA thing unfolded exactly the same way but been Clinton, Bush, Cheney or Rove... would you still feel it was a non story?

LTRT Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:09 am

Clinton Hints At Sharing Ticket With Obama
Campaign '08 Complete Coverage
Campaign '08 Delegate Tracker
NEW YORK (CBS) ― Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton hinted at the possibility of a democratic "dream ticket" with Sen. Barack Obama.

Speaking on the Early Show on CBS, Clinton said "that may be where this is headed, but we have to decide who is on the top of the ticket."

Clinton said the race between her and Obama remains "incredibly close," with just "smidgens of difference" between them.

Clinton's remarks after her campaign won two big states yesterday: Ohio and Texas. She also won Rhode Island. The wins enabled her campaign to break Obama's 12-state winning streak and pick up some momentum of its own.

Speaking later on the Early Show, Obama congratulated Clinton on her victories while maintaining he would be able to wrap up the democratic nomination.

"We still have close to an insurmountable lead in delegates," Obama said. Obama said his campaign had won nearly twice as Clinton as well as a greater share of the popular vote.
(© MMVIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:17 am

Edwards needs to endorse Obama.

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:39 am

I think John Edwards would make a GREAT President but not sure how much influence he has right now ... sure his endorsement would help just not sure of the magnitude of such endorsement. King of like Graham Richards coming out and endorsing Hillary ... lol.

Guest Wed Mar 05, 2008 11:48 am

Vis wrote:I can hope. I was not looking forward to voting for McCain!.. There is still a long way to go though.

I have never warmed to Obama and the NAFTA situation has me very uncomfortable. The fact that Canada is investigating the press leak makes it difficult to believe him. First it was no conversation ever took place to no-one officially affiliated with this campaign took part to oh it was a meeting about something else and NAFTA was only mentioned casually. He sounds a lot like the man we have now.

I really am surprised he's in the position he's in based on his past (election record and experience) and I really think if you take away the Oprah factor that he would not have gained traction. I really hope it doesn't come to it but if he gets the nomination, I'll end up being a democrat for McCain and probably even work for the campaign.

Hey I understand your concern but even though I support Barack Obama I will support the Democratic nominee, whether it be Hillary or Obama. I think you need to think it over and make sure a McCain vote is exactly what you want to do. Suspect

LTRT Wed Mar 05, 2008 12:11 pm

Chalk one up for ABC:

Robin Clips Clinton on 'Negative Attack Ads'
By Mark Finkelstein | March 5, 2008 - 08:51 ET

Barack Obama had a rough night in Texas and Ohio, and some are even taking a contentious press conference he recently endured as a sign the MSM might be turning on him. But the junior senator from Illinois can still count on one MSMer in his corner: Robin Roberts. A few weeks ago, as I noted here, the GMA co-anchor conducted a softball session for the ages with Obama.

Today, Hillary Clinton made the rounds of all the morning network news shows. The toughest questioning by far came from Roberts, in this exchange.

ROBIN ROBERTS: What do you think the negative ad factor, how did that help you in this race? Because leading up, you did have some negative attack ads, and can we expect to see more of that in the days and weeks ahead?

LTRT Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:26 pm

Texas Caucus Count Takes Wind Out of Clinton’s Wins Laughing

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/05/democratic-nomination-battle-now-focuses-on-wyoming/

LTRT Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:02 am

Quick Vote
Will the Democrats' extended fight for the presidential nomination help or hurt their party?
Help 28% 26582
Hurt 72% 66736
Total Votes: 93318

Do you agree?

Guest Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:20 am

Yea I would agree that a protracted fight is going to hurt us ... look at what the Clinton Campaign said yesterday, comparing Obama to Ken Starr ... hilarious. The 3 am phone call ad ... and now today they are making a stink out of an Obama advisor saying Hillary was a monster. yea this is going to get ugly and probably put John McCain into the White House. McCain is OK ... better than any other republican that ran, at least from my liberal perspective.

Guest Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:44 am

I disagree... the longer this goes on, the more press the dems get... McCain clinched, he's not news anymore, whereas Clinton and Obama will be reported on for many more weeks, leading up to the nomination. This will serve to swing independents and undecideds away from mccain.

Guest Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:29 am

I agree with Pez. I also think it's good for democracy that more citizens have a say in who the candidate will be. I think we do ourselves no favors when half the country has no voice in who represents them. It's bad enough that if it ever gets this far in the primary it is only a choice between two candidates. I would love to see us move toward a National Primary.

Guest Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:42 am

VIS I totally agree more of America should have a voice in the selection process other than Iowa, New Hampshire and then super Tuesday but I don't like the idea of Clinton and Obama trashing each other and McCain running around looking Presidential and getting some slugs in on both Hillary and Barack, so a national primary would be awesome ... I would totally support that.

Guest Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:07 pm

Obama technically WON Texas, not Hillary. He garnered the win from delegate counts.

Guest Sat Mar 08, 2008 6:41 pm

Jugomugo wrote:Obama technically WON Texas, not Hillary. He garnered the win from delegate counts.

Each camp just spins everything ...

LTRT Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:00 pm

That typical, only support something when it benefits them Rolling Eyes

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, who backs Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president, proposed another gauge Sunday by which superdelegates might judge whether to support Mrs. Clinton or Senator Barack Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/us/politics/24campaign.html?em&ex=1206504000&en=8acccf15af9d0f06&ei=5087%0A

Guest Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:21 pm

The electoral college is a JOKE. We need popular vote.

Guest Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:03 pm

Here's the thing about the dem's nominee... Obama gives people something that neither Clinton nor McCain gives anyone.. and that's a genuine sense of hope and optimism. He's made some severe mis-steps lately, between NAFTA and his preacher.. but he still gives home to many.

And here's my problem with the whole NAFTA controversy... Billary is trying to claim that she was integral in Bill's presidency, which produced NAFTA. Now she wants to strike it down? Why isn't anyone addressing the fact that she's wanting to bring down something from her "first" run at the presidency? And then she uses this "experience" line all the time, she has none, plain and simple. And if they really want to push the preacher issue, and how Obama is friends with him, I'm pretty sure the Clinton's have a loooong list of friends with criminal convictions on their record.

So, how Hillary is still around really is beyond me. She's a worse statesmen, has little to no additional experience (unless you count dinner parties with heads of state spouses) and her one real contribution to the Clinton White House was healthcare which was struck down by everyone. Obama is actually at an advantage because his no experience means he doesn't have the massive failure on record like Hillary does.

But what's really getting me.. is people actually think Bill had anything to do with the economic success in the 90's, and then believe Hillary will do the same. There were some idiots from Ohio (not implying all ohioans are idiots.. just buckeye fans..lol) who were interviewed that said exactly that. I'm sorry, but how in the hell does it make any sense to suggest that the wife of someone will act the same as their spouse? And if that's the connotation, who the hell is going to be doinking Hillary in the white house? We know Bill won't be.

Sponsored content

Clinton is ALIVE

Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Edwards ... really?

Understand your position

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Texas

CNN Quick Vote Poll

Mudslinging

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Evan Bayh

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE

Re: Clinton is ALIVE