This is not The Haters Club You're Looking For discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
I hate every morning when I read the paper and I do NOT find a story saying Hillary has thrown in the towel
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Amanda
(new)
May 10, 2008 11:25AM

reply
|
flag



As of today, Obama took the lead in superdelegates too. Hill, you're done for. Had you played your cards right, you'd be in line for veep, but you didn't. You played mean, and your people told you to play mean. Fire 'em all and do it right next time, okay?


I actually think Hill's got better ideas, but the way her campaign's gone, I just don't think she'd be any good at making them a reality. And unlike Bill, who could make any bad idea sound good, Hill's been making all her great ideas sound bad. Bill shut down the government for three weeks and looked like a cowboy hero for doing it. Hill could probably have everything running smoothly and still leave office with a legacy akin to Carter's.
And if Obama and Hillary still polled the same, as an all-white-man primary, I'd be voting for the one who has the best chance against the republican in the fall, which is Obama. I feel like we've got an embarrassment of riches, two bright, capable candidates. But Obama just has this thing going, where he couldn't piss anyone off if he tried.
The thing is, Hill gets bashed for being too politician-y, but her real weakness seems to be that she isn't that great at politics, which is pretty much the art of convincing people you're on their side.



I can see how people are making their minds up about which candidate to choose. You either vote for someone with experience and Washington insider know-how (Hillary Clinton) or a relatively new face in the grand scheme of things who brings a fresh perspective (Barack Obama). Take all the negatives each side have slung against one another, and you can see it from this angle.
I look at this nomination process as the way we voted for a President in 1992. George HW Bush was the experienced politician, a Washington insider that knew how the system worked. Bill Clinton was the upstart with a vision for change. The people decided, and they wanted change, not the status quo.
Funny how the Clintons went from the propagators of change to the status quo.
I look at this nomination process as the way we voted for a President in 1992. George HW Bush was the experienced politician, a Washington insider that knew how the system worked. Bill Clinton was the upstart with a vision for change. The people decided, and they wanted change, not the status quo.
Funny how the Clintons went from the propagators of change to the status quo.
Is it really irony, or simply how things work in Washington. I can see it 15 years from now, when Obama becomes a complete political asshole, like the Bushes and the Clintons. It's bound to happen, I'm afraid.

I think anyone who goes into politics has some kinda secondary agenda. So I care for neither bill2 nor bamamama, but I'd b interested 2 find out what bama's secondary is.

This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.