Comments on: Why Clinton Won
Women, Labor Households And Low-Income Voters Bring N.Y. Senator N.H. Victory
- If Sexist Nepotism gets Hillary nominated I''m voting against the Democrats for the first time ever.
America is a Democracy = Not a Monarchy - Reply to this comment
- Also, there are an awful lot of racists everywhere, but New Hampshire is full of good old Yankee rednecks who are used to having a woman tell them what to do, but Ombama may just be a little too uncomfortable. Personally, i hope it isnt Romney/Clinton, i couldnt vote. Any Body but Clinton, that voice... those words, the tone, for four years. it would make me miss bush, at least i can laugh at his idiotic syntax.
- Reply to this comment
- Clinton is awful. any number of critical issues, IE GLOBAL WARMING was blown off under the open trade policys of the Clinton administration. the policys encouraging out sourcing of american jobs took off. it was like a party on the titanics deck, enviornmentaly and socially. yes, we had peace, but we had rawanda, Osama bin Laden, etc. Clinton is just another clone for the military industrial complex. I''d vote Huckabee over her. hell, i''d vote nixon over her. oh yea, the clues are there, i''m a liberal.
- Reply to this comment
- As a registered independent woman in NH I can tell you that Senator Clinton being a woman had nothing to do with my vote.
Until that last debate I was a Mr. Edwards supporter, but, during the debate it became clear to me that Mr. Edwards had started to play to Mr. Obama%u2019s corner and I did NOT want to throw my vote away on someone that wanted to be VP (again). I felt that Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards would then combine forces and all their votes would just be for one person anyway.
The other factor in my mind is that the only message Mr. Obama presents is that if he becomes president he will bring change. Clearly, anyone that gets into office after 8 years of the same administration will be a change! I want to know what Mr. Obama has to offer without him preaching or being poetic just give us the facts. - Reply to this comment
- There are a large number of Democrats who will tell their friends and pollsters that they are going to vote for Obama. In Iowa, where they had to stand under a sign with the candidates name where everyone could see, they stood under the Obama sign. In NH, where they were in a booth behind a curtain where no one could see, many of them voted for someone else. Even though they say race is not a factor, it is. It would be nice if it was not so, but there is still a long way to go in this country.
- Reply to this comment
- I think the Democrats running are very inclusive.
Anyone of them would be good.
Lots to fix with so little time to do it. - Reply to this comment
- Hillary Clinton''s victory in NH reinforces my belief that American voters are desperate to support someone they can relate to on a human level, not as a politician. In Iowa all Hillary did was expound on her own achievements over the last 35 years (?) which no one could relate to. As I watched the speeches from the various candidates after the Iowa caucas, the one thing that stuck out in my mind, was that Hillary didn''t even acknowledge the efforts of her husband or her daughter. I think she had a "wakeup" call in NH when that lady asked her "how do you do it?". She finally showed us that she too has a vulnerable side and the voters responded to her on a personal level, not just a political one. I am not a Clinton supporter, but if she really wants stay in this race to the finish, she will need to remember the lesson learned in NH and, like it or not, accept the fact that Bill is an asset to her campaign.
- Reply to this comment
- Agreed, buck. But the "believers" think they have a divine calling to shove it down our throats whether we want it or not.
Posted by formrusmcsgt
It all a matter of interpretation. The mere mention of religion sends the secular progressives in a tailspin and therefore accuse the religious right of shoving things down their throats, when it''s precisely the opposite. However, if was the Founders'' intention that religion has it''s place in the public square. Our Constitutioin doesn''t permit blunt divine intervention in government. Having a religious point of view is therefore not a threat to anyone other than the seculars. We''ve always had government and religion. It is the underpinning of our country''s existence and it''ll be a cold day in hell before any of the seculars silence our First Amendment rights. - Reply to this comment
- formrusmcsgt:
I''m sure you''re smart enough to realize that my comments about irrational males were ironic and tongue-in-cheek.
I totally agree that HRC is trying to play it both ways: wanting people to judge her on her own merits while wanting to borrow credit for the economic accomplishments of Bill''s tenure. It is, at best, disingenuous.
The smoke and mirrors of electioneering is one of the reasons that most Americans are dubious about politicians and the political process. I think that''s a healthy response. The problem is that we also have to trust the process enough to participate in it. Otherwise we''re at the mercy of idealogues and special interests (which are frequently synonymous). Our experience with the current administration graphically illustrates the dangers of that kind of manipulation. Americans musn''t allow that kind of abuse of power to go unchallenged. The election process seems sometimes to be the only check-and-balance tool we still possess that has a hope of being uncontrolled by special interests. That requires us to trust in the intelligence of Americans. The unpopularity of the Bush Administration proves that you still can''t fool all the people all the time. - Reply to this comment
- Posted by flreason
Call it what you like. His experience in the inner-cities is part of the way he is able to arouse the masses and pull them to him. It is not the mark of accomplishment. Bill Clinton does that too. It is not to say that his inner-city contributiions are not without merit. Don''t confuse the two. And watch that notion to call people racist. One thing I do like about him is that he doesn''t play the race card. But his inner-city experience also taught him that too. - Reply to this comment
Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror.




