March 7, 2008

Clinton, Obama Take Aim At Pennsylvania

Washington Post: But Obama Team Tries To Lower Expectations Due To Clinton's Perceived Strengths

  • Play CBS Video Video What's Next For The Dems?

    Katie Couric speaks with senior political analyst Jeff Greenfield about where each of the Democratic candidates stands in light of the upcoming primaries that will decisively impact their campaigns.

  • Video Dems Eye Sunshine State

    Stripped of its delegates, Democrats in Florida and Michigan are demanding their votes be counted by the Democratic National Committee as the nomination race heats up. Nancy Cordes reports.

  • Photo

     (AP / CBS)

  • News Tools Campaign Calendar

    The latest list of primary and caucus dates as states continue jockeying for position.

  • Timeline Democratic Campaign Trail

    Notable events in the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

From Our Partner:
(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Anne E. Kornblut and Krissah Williams.


Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are mounting campaign efforts in Pennsylvania on a scale not seen since the Iowa caucuses, even as the Obama campaign attempts to cast the April 22 contest as just another in a string of more than a dozen to go.

Almost immediately after results showed Clinton winning Texas and Ohio on Tuesday night, the campaigns began mobilizing their supporters in Pennsylvania and plotting strategies to win votes across the large, delegate-rich state. Clinton will arrive full of momentum in a state whose demographics set up for her even more favorably than Ohio's, while the Obama campaign will come armed with a sizable money advantage after announcing yesterday that it raised a record $55 million in February.

"It's Iowa on steroids," said T.J. Rooney, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party and a Clinton backer. "There are a lot of Democrats today who are like the dog who caught the mail truck. They finally caught it; now they don't know what to do."

Senior Obama advisers sought to play down the importance of Pennsylvania, which is full of the same kind of white, working-class voters who supported Clinton in Ohio and other states that she won. Pennsylvania also has more senior citizens than Ohio, which favors Clinton as well.

"We're going to campaign hard in Pennsylvania," said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager. "It's a big, important state. We have a lot of support there. We're going to try to do as well as we can, get as many votes and delegates. They want to just say it's about this next big state. Our view is, we've got to look at the whole picture, which is 611 delegates are left. This is ultimately about the delegate math."

Plouffe noted that Clinton's slim victories in the March 4 contests could represent a smaller net gain in delegates than Obama got by overwhelmingly winning Idaho on Feb. 5, thanks to the Democrats' proportional allocation. The Obama campaign hopes to start winning back those delegates in contests in Wyoming tomorrow and Mississippi on Tuesday, while notching victories after Pennsylvania in smaller places such as Indiana and West Virginia.

"We're not a believer in symbolic wins," Plouffe said. "We have a strategy to win the nomination. And we just have to continue getting as many delegates and votes as we can, from wherever we can."

Senior Obama advisers said they learned a hard lesson about managing expectations ahead of their defeat in Texas, where they had anticipated doing better. Rather than accepting the notion that Pennsylvania will be decisive, they plan to play down their chances in the Keystone State and keep their focus on states such as North Carolina, where they expect to win.

Aside from a demographic advantage, Clinton will have the support of several state Democratic leaders, including Gov. Edward G. Rendell. "He's very engaged, and that's really important," Rooney said. "He brings a fundraising machine like no other. He brings the influence of his office and a large political following."

The state party's executive director, Mary Isenhour, is also in the Clinton camp and will run Clinton's Pennsylvania operation. Another key Clinton backer is Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, who will try to help her offset Obama's advantage in a city that will be critical to his performance in the state. Former president Bill Clinton was scheduled to make campaign stops in Philadelphia and its suburbs today.

"We operate from the assumption that Pennsylvania is Clinton country," said Mark Nevins, Clinton's state spokesman. Nevins, who joined the campaign two weeks ago, said Clinton's operation essentially mirrors what Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) had in place four years ago when he beat President Bush in Pennsylvania.

Quote

It's Iowa on steroids.

T.J. Rooney, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party
"We can build a team here that is unbeatable," Nevins said. "Even if the other side runs more television ads or sends more mailings, they can't beat us on the ground. We've got the support of the people that control the infrastructure here in the state. We've got that institutional structure that can deliver people on Election Day."

Obama is headed to Wyoming today, and Clinton traveled to Mississippi yesterday. Before leaving Washington, Clinton held a news conference in which she emphasized her national security know-how -- but also said this week's results were a sign that voters want the competition to continue.

"I think that this is good for the party and it has brought so many millions of people into this process and there are many states left to go," Clinton said. "I don't think the voters in the process who have yet to be heard from are ready for this race to be over."

Clinton's advisers fended off renewed demands by the Obama campaign for Clinton to release her recent tax returns. "I, for one, do not believe that imitating Ken Starr is the way to win a Democratic primary election for president. But perhaps that theory will be tested," said Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson.

Clinton also joined a conference call of her supporters to report that the campaign took in $3 million in the 24 hours that followed the Ohio and Texas primary wins. The Obama team declined to say how much his campaign took in Wednesday. The Obama campaign has recently held back fundraising totals and announced larger hauls after Clinton has revealed her numbers.

Obama did so again on Thursday in releasing his numbers from February, which Clinton had shared a week earlier. The Obama campaign said the $55 million one-month total came from more than 700,000 individual contributors. That surpassed the record-setting $44 million haul Kerry brought in after securing the Democratic nomination in March 2004 and will likely give the Obama campaign an advertising and organizing advantage in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. In all, the Obama campaign has raised $192.4 million.

Clinton raised $35 million last month and heralded the effort as a sign that her campaign had caught fire with Internet donors. But her top fundraisers said they knew they were likely to face another month in the shadow of someone who has rewritten the playbook on fundraising. In January, Obama raised $36 milion while Clinton brought in $13.9 million.

"For us, it was a huge month," said Hassan Nemazee, one of Clinton's finance chairmen. "But then he blew everyone away and the whole model changed."

Staff writers Shailagh Murray and Matthew Mosk contributed to this report.


By Anne E. Kornblut and Krissah Williams
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Add a Comment See all 48 Comments
by Razzl March 7, 2008 10:32 AM PST
"His Camp claims to be the "most" votes so far (only 4%)..... Well, let''''s see if he can still say that after PA votes."

Actually, he will stay ahead after Pennsylvania, and all of the remaining states, because Hillary can''t overtake him in delegates. She''s also unlikely to overtake him in the popular vote as long as the races are all close.

Obama should not neglect to campaign hard in Mississippi and Wyoming(?) this week because two more victories in those places reinforce his assetts and drive a few more solid nails into Hillary''s coffin...
Reply to this comment
by brendlyle March 7, 2008 11:08 AM PST
Lets be real clear- Obama has the most delegates and the most popular vote because he has more support amongst democratic voters. Also, there is no where in anyone''s rules that say, to become the democratic nominee you need to win the big states. The reality is that Obama also won significant votes not only in the "small" states, but the "big" states as well. Combine the two winning votes in small as well as big states equals more support across this nation and more delegates. Trying to spin it any other way- is just typical of the Clintons drive to win at all cost- no matter who the destroy. An American democratic vote in any state is equally important- to say otherwise is just silly and devisive to the party and to this country.
Reply to this comment
by kstar42 March 7, 2008 11:19 AM PST
Trying to spin it any other way- is just typical of the Clintons drive to win at all cost- no matter who the destroy. An American democratic vote in any state is equally important- to say otherwise is just silly and devisive to the party and to this country.
Posted by brendlyle at 11:08 AM : Mar 07, 2008

LOOK again those small states that BO won always go republican (always)so no he could not win... and here in Ohio he got 1% of the white vote and 18% of the black vote the rest went to Hillary and McCain so being said he cannot win the big states and Ohio and Texas spoke loud and clear...check your numbers again..because when push comes to shove most Hillary supporters will flip sides to the republican party! watch and see!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by ranakarimi March 7, 2008 11:20 AM PST
as a former muslim woman and proud american citzen who is familier with islam law im going to prove that obama is very dishonest man and here is why Obama is a Christian now. But he was born a Muslim because his father was a Muslim. His step father was also a Muslim. According to Muslim religion, the religion of the father determines the religion of the offspring. Therefore, Obama was once a Muslim. He has denied that he is ever a Muslim, but that just shows that he doesn''''t have the backbone or the honesty to recognize his heritage. When he came back to the U.S to live with his maternal grandparents, that''''s when he was raised as a Christian. To hear him say that he''''s never been a Muslim his entire life is truly a lie since he spent his first 9 to 10 years in Indonesia, a Muslim country, living with a Muslim step father. and dont forget there is a law in islam called TAGIYEH which means u can lie about ur religion in order to do good for allah later now the question is waht good obama has plan to do for allah!
Reply to this comment
by pensacola88 March 7, 2008 11:20 AM PST
The best strategy for Obama and Clinton going forward clearly lies in defining their differences between theirselves and John McCain, not each other.

When voters see and hear what each have to offer, they wil decide without the corruptions from peer attacks or ill feelings floating around inside.
Reply to this comment
by oldabeeagle March 7, 2008 11:46 AM PST
Did you know that the Rodhams have a summer home in PA? Check out this story about a Rodham family vacation (Rodham brothers in scuffle)

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/8/21/63415.shtml

These are the same brothers who made $400,000 on two of Bill''s pardons.

http://www.telemundodallas.com/news/487765/detail.html

Do we really want the Clinton scandals back in the White House.
Reply to this comment
by remco82 March 7, 2008 11:48 AM PST
Hillary is slime. She wants political power so desperately that she overlooked all Bill''s infidelities because he was her mealticket. As for experience, what did that amount to? Laying out place settings for a White House dinner? Waving at crowds as she got off the airplane with her husband? She''s a total phony, but the majority have fallen for phonies before. Look at Reagan and Bush!
Reply to this comment
by tawpdawg1 March 7, 2008 12:15 PM PST
PA will be won by whichever candidate Rush Limbaugh tells his dittoheads to crossover and vote for. Any guesses who that''d be? GOP is large and in charge!!
Reply to this comment
by jimmyc1955 March 7, 2008 12:19 PM PST
kstar42 - Your overlooking a lot. Barak doesn''t do well in states where the old line Democratic machine is heavily invested in maintaining the status quo. They don''t want change - they want more of the same. They will back Hillary to the hilt because that she represents the least risk path for them. Rendell in PA is the perfect example. He endorsed Clinton early because he wants a place in her cabinet when his last term in PA expires. Its a pure good old boy network - just with a woman as one of the boys - but it will be business as usual in the Clinton white house.

Barak will get a lot of votes that Hillary may have siphoned off because he is the Democratic candidate if he gets the nomination.

If Hillary pulls Michigan and Florida in for her votes or wins purely on super delegates than there will be a nasty split in the party and nobody wins.
Reply to this comment
by jimmyc1955 March 7, 2008 12:21 PM PST
tawpdawg1 - PA is a closed primary state - no cross overs. This will be a Hillary win - just like Ohio. The machine is very strong here and will pull here through without much effort. Not enough black and well educated voters to make enough of a dent. I doubt if Obama wins Pittsburgh of Philadelphia.
Reply to this comment
by ranakarimi March 7, 2008 12:35 PM PST
i just like to say if obama become the nominie of our party then i will join republican party obama and his supporters realy scare me to death they act and talk likea criminal mafia oraganization
Reply to this comment
by keeblers69 March 7, 2008 12:59 PM PST
You have until March 24th to switch parties, PA is a closed election no crossovers.
Reply to this comment
by wellnotthis March 7, 2008 1:12 PM PST
to ranakarimi "as a former muslim woman and proud american" wait a minute... are you that stupid or you think we are stupid? what makes you think you are a "former" Muslim have more right to be former than Obama which was never a Muslim? Come to think about it, his mother was never a Muslim need I say his step father had nothing about that? hmm ... now you tell us your secret plan to help Islam in this great country
Reply to this comment
by ranakarimi March 7, 2008 1:16 PM PST
i just like to say if obama become the nominie of our party then i will join republican party obama and his supporters realy scare me to death they act and talk likea criminal mafia oraganization
Reply to this comment
by destardi March 7, 2008 2:04 PM PST
Did you know that the Rodhams have a summer home in PA? Check out this story about a Rodham family vacation (Rodham brothers in scuffle)

http://archive.newsmax.com/a
rchives/articles/2001/8/21/63415.shtml
These are the same brothers who made $400,000 on two of Bill''''s pardons.
http://www.telemundodallas.c
om/news/487765/detail.html

Do we really want the Clinton scandals back in the White House.

Posted by OldAbeEagle at 11:46 AM : Mar 07, 2008
--------------------------
Oh, I dunno...do we want racists in the White House?

"New York State Senator Bill Perkins used quite explicit racial stereotyping in a speech aimed at discouraging his constituents from voting for Clinton by saying, Harlem "is not Bill Clinton''s backyard or his plantation. Underscore, plantation."

THAT IS DISGUSTING. Did Obama correct Perkins? Nope..never made it in the media.

Obama started the racial ***...he attends an all black church, his "trusted Pastor" and his daughter put Louis Farrakhan on the cover of the church magazine, gave him an award, and praised him repeatedly.
A person willing to make "fairy tale" into a racist attribute, is despicable..just to win the nomination.
And Hillary will ''do anything to win''? BS.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html
Reply to this comment
by phillysage March 7, 2008 3:23 PM PST
By the way, we won''t say he looks like a monster--He does look like Malcolm X, though, without the glasses and like him is attractive, eloquent, intelligent,GOOD for NOTHING!!!
Reply to this comment
by pepperwood2 March 7, 2008 3:40 PM PST
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) %u2014 Gov. Ed Rendell, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton''s most visible supporters, said some white Pennsylvanians are likely to vote against her rival Barack Obama because he is black.

"You''ve got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," Rendell told the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in remarks that appeared in Tuesday''s paper.
......................................................
Interesting Spin but this comes from Mr. Ed''s & Hillary bias mind set.

First of all, they know full well that if you are conservative white, latino, black, republican and/or independent, you are not allowed to cross over on Election day like you can in other states. Registered independents can''t vote at all in primaries. Registered Republicans only entitled to vote Republican. That will leave you with the registered Democrats that can only vote Democrat that Mr. Ed., the former president of the DNC, was encouraging to vote for Hillary.

If you pay attention to the transparency mind set of the Clintons that we''ve seen. You''ll be able to understand this SPIN & how it is supposed to work for Hillary.

You go a Fiend in Pa. I did not have *** with that woman.

Reply to this comment
by tawpdawg1 March 7, 2008 3:44 PM PST
jimmyc1955-so I have til the 24th of this month to switch my party affiliation to DEM, vote against Hussein, and then for McCain in November. Got it! We will POUND Clinton and then... 8 more years....8 more years...8 more years ! It''s gonna be great! We''ll all get richer and richer and richer!
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 7, 2008 5:28 PM PST
Let%u2019s talk about Hillary Clinton%u2019s tactics over the past couple of weeks.

First of all, her main argument for why she is more qualified than Obama is that she has more experience than he does. I guess she believes that being married to a president makes you qualified to be one because she doesn%u2019t really have much experience in any position other than First Lady; if that makes you qualified to run the country than I guess her argument holds true.

Second, Hillary had slammed Obama for his supposed contact with Canada to reassure the Canadian Government that he did not really dislike NAFTA; he was just saying he did for political gain in the presidential race and he would then go back to supporting NAFTA after the election.
Then we come to find out it was ACTUALLY HILLARY CLINTON who had contacted the Canadian government to ensure them that she would not change the trade deals the US has with Canada but she needed to be critical of NAFTA for the short run because her opponent had been making headway by not supporting NAFTA in REAL POLICY.

Third, Clinton blasted Obama for his implied connection to Rezno, who has been investigated for fraud and Hillary has cried corruption and lamented about ethics.
HELLO%u2026DOES ANYONE REMEMBER A LITTLE THING CALLED WHITEWATER!!


Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 7, 2008 6:50 PM PST
Let%u2019s talk about Hillary Clinton%u2019s tactics over the past couple of weeks.

First of all, her main argument for why she is more qualified than Obama is that she has more experience than he does. I guess she believes that being married to a president makes you qualified to be one because she doesn%u2019t really have much experience in any position other than First Lady; if that makes you qualified to run the country than I guess her argument holds true.

Second, Hillary had slammed Obama for his supposed contact with Canada to reassure the Canadian Government that he did not really dislike NAFTA; he was just saying he did for political gain in the presidential race and he would then go back to supporting NAFTA after the election.
Then we come to find out it was ACTUALLY HILLARY CLINTON who had contacted the Canadian government to ensure them that she would not change the trade deals the US has with Canada but she needed to be critical of NAFTA for the short run because her opponent had been making headway by not supporting NAFTA in REAL POLICY.

Third, Clinton blasted Obama for his implied connection to Rezno, who has been investigated for fraud and Hillary has cried corruption and lamented about ethics.
HELLO%u2026DOES ANYONE REMEMBER A LITTLE THING CALLED WHITEWATER!!
Reply to this comment
by pepperwood2 March 7, 2008 8:15 PM PST
The reality of Hillary''s & Bills SPIN CITY 35 years of BSSSS.

If you use your intelligence, you''ll soon realize that Bill was a Lowly Governor of a corrupt administration in the State of Arkansas. That was the extend of his resume. He was able with the right band of PR, Press, & Spin to get The People convinced to vote for him.

No he had no prior experience compared to Hillary phoney Spin resume. The real truth is that in the 35 years that she keeps spinning she''s an authority on how to run a corrupt administration in Arkansas & Washington. What you see is what Mr. & Mrs. America will get from the Clintons.

Upon Fleeing they took with them, the whitewater records, Sandy Berger & all their fiends in low places to start all over again in Washington.

We, the people can change all that. Unless were content with the Clinton Politics of Deceit & Dishonesty.
Reply to this comment
by Stratmaster7 March 7, 2008 8:48 PM PST
Why all the lies and hate from the Obama supporters who preach hope?

They claim Clinton is secretive about her finances...when she has had tp release tax records year after year, and has had more scrutiny to her finances over the years than anyone else in the country.

They try to claim the Canadian NAFTA scandal is Clinton''s mess, when the Obama camp has admitted that, contrary to what they originally said, their camp did indeed talk to the Canadians and give reassurances.

They ask for her to explain her experience, and she does. And they ignore it and keep asking it as if she never resp;onded.

They ask her to back up her foreign policy experience. She does. They ignore it and keep asking as if she never responded.

They bring up a lawsuit by a spurned businessman looking for vengeance. But they never mention that the claim against Hillary was thrown out of court because of no evidence 2 years ago and was upheld in appeals court.

Obama is aksed to give specifics on his plans. He really doesn''t, (yes i have been to his website and read his white paper). instead he chants "Yes We Can" and preaches hope, and ignores the questions.

I guess it takes a lot of years, maturity and experience to learn that ignoring things does not make them go away.
Reply to this comment
by besscannon-2009 March 7, 2008 8:54 PM PST
I just come from YouTube. I checked Obama and Clinton videos. Google should be banned for allowing such sick, filthy trash to be posted. If this is indictive of the thinking of the generation supporting Obama, God help our country if he is elected!!! The filth on both sites is sickening and vicious. Doesn''t anyone monitor that medium?? You have to watch the videos to feel the depth of fright I feel for our country if we are stooped to having these elements running our country. I think we are headed for RUIN!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by whitepicks2 March 7, 2008 9:55 PM PST
The Clinton wannabe surrogates ought to know there''s no doubt Obama will be the nominee because he will have the most delegates, and the superdelegates absolutely never will overturn the will of the people. Any illusion any of you may have about her winning is because you are gullable enough to believe her campaign of lies. Any Dem voting for Clinton, or tearing-down Obama, mischaracterizing his religion, policies, and otherwise being hateful is either a fool for attacking the nominee - or a filthy Republican, or both.
Reply to this comment
by Stratmaster7 March 7, 2008 10:03 PM PST
so White, you resort to calling people fools, and bragging as if this is a game of kickball on the schoolyard, but never addressing a single real issue. This is the Obama camp in a nutshell.
Reply to this comment
by whitepicks2 March 8, 2008 12:16 AM PST
Where''s yours? Your issue? I''ll delve into any issue. In case you haven''t noticed, for every person who tries to discuss issues there''s 50 hacks posing as someone''s supporter - in which they are not - posting slurs and hate-filled mischaracterizations of both Democratic candidates. But give it your best shot, hoss.
Reply to this comment
by popstom1 March 8, 2008 2:02 AM PST
They have too run Fl.and MI. again so she has a chance
Reply to this comment
by Stratmaster7 March 8, 2008 9:00 AM PST
Whitepicks, I see a lot more slurs and mischaracterizations against Clinton than I do Obama. Of course there are hacks and idiots all over the boards; so don;t add to it with your own comments. Stay above the fray.

Most of the anti-Obama comments I see (not all, but most) are actually questioning his credentials or policies; as compared to comments about Clinton''s family, rude name-calling and no mention of anything of substance from Obama supporters.

I addressed 5 specific Obama camp claims against Clinton about 5 posts below your last one. Now, that is my take on the facts. I don''t claim to be all knowing, but you won''t see me calling anyone an idiot or fool, or calling Obama names (other than his first or last name).

Maybe if his supporters, including a top advisor who just had to resign, did not seem so childish the rest of us would have an easier time jumping on board the hope train.
Reply to this comment
by latina4obama March 8, 2008 3:49 PM PST
PA make sure you vote OBAMA. He has the WISDOM that even the so called ''experienced'' contenders do not have. With all their ''Washington ill experience'' they continue to make bad choices.

VOTE OBAMA for CHANGE!
Reply to this comment
by latina4obama March 8, 2008 3:54 PM PST
The Canadian Press story said a CTV reporter asked Brodie about remarks by Clinton and Obama that they would seek to renegotiate NAFTA.

"He said someone from Clinton''s campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. ... That someone called us and told us not to worry," the journalist quoted Brodie as saying, according to the report.
CBS News:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/07/politics/main3917405.shtml
Reply to this comment
by popstom1 March 8, 2008 4:21 PM PST
Barack Obama wrote letters to the city of chicago and
the state of IL. insupport of Tony Rezko for
14 million and you want me to vote for this and you
call the Clinton''s dishonest.
Reply to this comment
by whitepicks2 March 8, 2008 6:37 PM PST
For those who wish to discuss issues, a conversation would first require raising an issue. After poring over the issues in their public policy papers, and doing some comparisons, I found a basic grasp of Hillary''s and Barack''s positions in which it was reasonable to choose Obama, which I did Feb. 5th. Secondly, any discussion highlighting their distinctions on the issues should include one or more of: dealing with the economy, reforming the health care system, protecting the environment, dealing with the nation''s energy problems, and reforming government in Washington. I neither have noticed any of those discussed here nor do I expect to. Surprise me.
Reply to this comment
by therex10 March 9, 2008 3:52 AM PDT
Sorry Obama supporter - PA is going Clinton all the Way!! At least all the Pennsylvanians I know including myself, family & friends!
Reply to this comment
by therex10 March 9, 2008 3:56 AM PDT
Oh - I forgot to say that we in PA have already decided if Obama gets the ticket - we''ll switch parties & vote McCain!!
Reply to this comment
by cfin5 March 9, 2008 2:02 PM PDT
Obama had it till Farrakhan opened his big mouth. Penn dems will go Hillary. I''m no dem, but certainly don''t trust the word of muslims concerning any oath, peace treaty and the like they''ll make with us. Uhm,....what is the real "H" word that they use to describe this? Yesir Irfat used it after the Oslo Accords.......can''t think of it *** it!
Reply to this comment
by cfin5 March 9, 2008 2:05 PM PDT
Hmmm,...didn''t know d.a.r.n. it was a restricted word.
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 9, 2008 2:09 PM PDT
I guess Hillary finally realizes that she has no chance of winning the nomination so she is starting to beg Obama for the #2 spot. All this hinting at the dream ticket is her way of preping her supporters for her loss and attempting to hang on to some position in the Whitehouse.
Dream on Hillary, Obama doesn''''t need you!!

Obama 08
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 9, 2008 2:10 PM PDT
I guess Hillary finally realizes that she has no chance of winning the nomination so she is starting to beg Obama for the #2 spot. All this hinting at the dream ticket is her way of preping her supporters for her loss and attempting to hang on to some position in the Whitehouse.
Dream on Hillary, Obama doesn''''t need you!!

Obama 08
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 9, 2008 2:11 PM PDT
Let%u2019s talk about Hillary Clinton%u2019s tactics over the past couple of weeks.

First of all, her main argument for why she is more qualified than Obama is that she has more experience than he does. I guess she believes that being married to a president makes you qualified to be one because she doesn%u2019t really have much experience in any position other than First Lady; if that makes you qualified to run the country than I guess her argument holds true.

Second, Hillary had slammed Obama for his supposed contact with Canada to reassure the Canadian Government that he did not really dislike NAFTA; he was just saying he did for political gain in the presidential race and he would then go back to supporting NAFTA after the election.
Then we come to find out it was ACTUALLY HILLARY CLINTON who had contacted the Canadian government to ensure them that she would not change the trade deals the US has with Canada but she needed to be critical of NAFTA for the short run because her opponent had been making headway by not supporting NAFTA in REAL POLICY.

Third, Clinton blasted Obama for his implied connection to Rezno, who has been investigated for fraud and Hillary has cried corruption and lamented about ethics.
HELLO%u2026DOES ANYONE REMEMBER A LITTLE THING CALLED WHITEWATER!!
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 9, 2008 2:12 PM PDT
I guess Hillary finally realizes that she has no chance of winning the nomination so she is starting to beg Obama for the #2 spot. All this hinting at the dream ticket is her way of preping her supporters for her loss and attempting to hang on to some position in the Whitehouse.
Dream on Hillary, Obama doesn''''''''t need you!!

Obama 08
Reply to this comment
by trueprogress March 9, 2008 2:39 PM PDT
WE NEED A WORLD VOTE, NOT A "VOTE FOR ME" ROMAN/ROAMING PLEBICITE DOMINATED BY MEN !

As a full Professor of World and Women Studies, I have come to realize that this whole process is nothing more than a misguided charade- a celebrity contest,"A PEOPLE CHOICE AWARDS"- or sadly much like the TV show American Idol. We need to limit the choosing of candidates to experts, from a spectrum of community leaders including from academies of colleges who are able to form, relate and define what is truly best not only for America but for the WORLD community. It is so foolish and parochial to have "regular people" vote for a leader with this much power. They do not have the skills or education to define what we need. Is this how we say who is a brain surgeon- by a silly "people''s vote" - absurd ! After our choosing, the WORLD would decide by members of the UN and other agencies, such as NOW, and HOOUD so that we do not run into a crazy "vote for me" high school student gov''t template. It is not that the "average America" can not think, it is that we in leadership positions can do a better job. Women leadership should be alternated each year with men, by agreement or forced reality of laws.
Hillary is the obvious choice and should be President. The SUPER DELAGATES MUST TO THE RESCUE AND BRING SOME SANITY TO THIS PEOPLES CHOICE CONTEST !
Reply to this comment
by jed1234561 March 9, 2008 3:28 PM PDT
Hey Trueprogress,,,a little full of yourself aren''t you? You forgot to say that you are the only "expert" qualified to do anything..."everyone needs to be a womans expert in womenly issues like me, only then can they be the leader"
Exactly what does a "womens studies" degree qualify you to do besides act really pompus and self-inflated and wax poetic about people being "forced to put women in power. Are you sure youre talking about womens rights because it sounds likke your advocating facism
and if that is the case then youre right..HIllary is the candidate for you !!!
Reply to this comment
by plevy888 March 9, 2008 5:45 PM PDT
But no one is entitled to a Presidential nomination.

Reply to this comment
by rfcrtl March 9, 2008 8:12 PM PDT
Pittsburghers for HILLARY!
Reply to this comment
by kmccliment March 9, 2008 8:24 PM PDT
NEWS UPDATE:



Barack Obama must make detour through Mississippi while he%u2019s campaigning due to bad weather. Senator Obama was scheduled to meet with the Governor of Mississippi this evening but had to cancel as the Governor%u2019s mansion was hit by an F-1 tornado. Local authorities advise that no one was harmed in the F-1 tornado only the mansion was knocked off its wheels.
Reply to this comment
by kmccliment March 9, 2008 8:26 PM PDT
jed1234561,

Understand with the Fla and MI redo. Hillary will be ahead be a little over 100 delegates. She will also secure the remaining super-dels. This will happen as Nostradamus has written this.
Reply to this comment
by popstom1 March 10, 2008 2:11 AM PDT
Offering Obama VP was a good political move she
knew he would not take it remember Bill Clinton
has the best plitical mind there is if Al or John
would have said hay give a hand there would be no
Bush
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 March 10, 2008 9:22 AM PDT
OBAMA DEMOCRATS AND SUPPORTERS, GET A CLUE.

Know what Obama means when he says he needs your help to get change: it means not just your vote--it means your support. How? STOP SAYING YOU WILL SUPPORT THE NOMINEE NO MATTER WHO IT IS. WHY?


1. If you will support the Dem nominee no matter what, why should the status quo not just put their candidate as the nominee and ignore the people''''s choice? (you''''ll vote for who they pick anyway)

2. If you will support the nominee no matter what, Why should Hillary run an honest, fair or even decent campaign? (even if she cheats, you''''ll vote for her no matter what)

3. If you will support the nominee no matter what, why should the SD not support the person who pays them the most or offers the best favors? (even if they ignore the true leader, you will elect who they tell you to no matter what)

Do you people even know who the status quo is or what it is? its not just corruption in Washington--it is YOU. It is who you choose and HOW you choose them. If you keep doing what you always do for the party--why should they change? Why should they stop the war? You''''ll vote for them no matter what.

Why should they fix NAFTA? YOu''''ll vote for them no matter what. Why should they stop backroom deals or stop fixing the elections so their best party pick can win? You''''ll vote for them no matter what. Meanwhile, you each keep doing what it takes to keep them in power.


Reply to this comment
See all 48 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs