Clinton Factor

R

roy reali

New member
Is there anyone else here that feels that old Hilary is not going to really go away? Obama needs to worry more about the Clinton Clan then he does the GOP. I believe, maybe even hope, that the Clinton's are going to sabotage Obama.

I have no doubt that Senator Clinton wants to be president. If Obama wins in November, she'll have to wait eight years to make another run at it. That will put her at McCain's age. In order for her to run next time, McCain is going to have to prevail. The Clintons are power hungry and ruthless. That is one family that you do not want to cross. They make the Mafia look like rank amateurs. I hope starting this thread doesn't put me at my life at risk.:eek:

So, do you think we can count on the Clintons for help this time?
 
roy reali said:
I hope starting this thread doesn't put me at my life at risk.
Click to expand...

Man, have you guys been smokin' the cheap stuff again? I told you that
stuff makes you paranoid. Or have you been mixing in some weed with
the powder when you reload?

Are you talking about Vince Foster, Ron Brown, and so on? Dude, mellow
out man, and save up for the high grade stuff.

I don't see Bill Clinton as being such a cold, calculating fiend. He is much
more of an emotional thinker and he can't have a girl in the oval office
without leaving his DNA everywhere. If Bill Clinton was responsible for
murders, he would have left evidence all over the place.

As for Hillary sabotaging the election for Hussein, what does she have to
gain by doing that? You think the DemocRats will support her in 2012
knowing that she sabotaged this year's election?

:confused:

And dude, next time you have a party invite me too. But serve up the
good stuff.
 
Last edited:
Hillary is not going anywhere.
In fact, I think she over shadowed BO last night when she gave her speech.
She said the things she HAD to say and nothing more--- I don't believe she showed heart felt support of BO ----and Ol' Billy is up tonight and MANY are waiting to hear what he'll say.
From what we're hearing from the pundits and reporters, the Hillary people are not convinced about BO and aren't prepared to vote for him.
What's the name of that new movement?---PUMA? Party Unity My A$$?
They got that much right!!

As for Clinton sabotaging the election for O'Bama, what does she have to
gain by doing that?

Running against McCain in 4 years!!!
 
Damned if you do......damned if you don't

If HRC had refused to speak in support of Obama or if she gave a lukewarm speech, all the bama supporters would damn her as the cause of his failure, if she gave a rousing speech on his behalf, they would say she is trying to upstage him...She was constantly referred during the campaign as "splitting" the Democratic party" or "destroying the party" and shrilly called upon over and over to remove herself from the race and let the real candidate get down to business.

Well, Mr Obama..get down to business, show us what you got, and don't blame Hillary if you lose--it is All on you now. Oh and yes, remember if you lose, you can always blame rascism (that'll keep you from having to take responsibility for your own defeat). Always remember that when someone loses with the full support of the Chicago mob, the entire African American community in the US and the complete support of the US news media, not to mention unending support from BIG money, that someone who lost is someone who is really a LOSER...
 
The Clintons are like a bad rash that just refuses to go away.

In a way I actually feel bad for the Obama camp in regards to the Clintons. I agree with a member of the Obama campaign when it was stated in an interview that the Obama camp was getting tired of the Clintons thinking Obama had to accomodate them on any and everything for the DNC. Like they (Obama) owed them something.

Actually I cant think of a better payback to the Clintons than the fact that Obama got the nod instead of Hillary. This election Hillary was running for president and her, Bill, and her supporters, Im sure, thought this would be "her time" and would be an easy election for the Clintons to get the White House back. Instead, a first term Senator comes from out of nowhere and takes it from her.:D:D

Despite what she says in person, you just know that her and Bill are downright furious about how this whole thing turned out. :p
 
I've never actually met a Clinton supporter that won't vote for Obama. I suspect they don't actually exist (except in the ruse of right wing actors on teevee)

Maybe we'll understand more about the Clintons when Bill speaks at the DNC to see if they will or will not fully support Obama.
 
I guess you think that PUMA is a right wing ploy and not really disgruntled Dems.
I guess all the signs and great applause and tears for Hillary in the audience last night were really republicans.
I guess you feel that the Dems interviewed at the convention that said they won't vote for BO are set ups and Rep operatives.
AND, I have spoken to Dems that said they will not vote for BO.
 
People don't realize how much Hillary supporters hated BO supporters and
vice versa. McCain's camp is making a logical move to exploit the schism.
 
Oddly, I've not met (in person) any of Clinton's supporters that won't vote for Obama either. But I can't deny the polling that suggests that they do exist, in significant enough numbers to be an issue.

I think the big difference between disillusioned Clinton supporters and would-have-been disillusioned Obama supporters is that the former trended at least mildly more conservative, and thus would be a bit more likely to vote for McCain. Obama's die-hards, on the other hand, would have been liberal enough that voting for McCain wouldn't have been an option, and would probably have instead not showed up at all.

Mathematically that makes her die-hards more damaging than his. Sucks for him, I guess.


Oh, and don't forget the "misinformed toolbag" vote, like that Debra Bartoshevich chick who appeared in McCain's campaign ad. Who apparently didn't even know what McCain's position on abortion was, despite considering it a top issue. So yeah, don't discount the idiot vote.

Not that a perfectly reasonable and intelligent person couldn't come to the decision to vote for McCain, of course. Even if you don't agree with him on all the issues. But to do so without even knowing that he disagrees with you on something you consider to be a major issue?
 
I agree with a member of the Obama campaign when it was stated in an interview that the Obama camp was getting tired of the Clintons thinking Obama had to accomodate them on any and everything for the DNC. Like they (Obama) owed them something.
Click to expand...


It shows unbelievable weakness on his part that he DID accommodate them. He won, everybody admitted it. Edwards and the rest of the Dem runner-ups didn't get to give a speech. He practically gave two entire days of the convention to his defeated opponent. The man talks a good talk but he seems spineless to me. Overly accommodating (look at the Russian situation) and unwilling to take a clear stance on most issues.
 
The reason I "suspect" is that the two's positions on positions are not exactly light years apart.

One doesn't vote for someone that is against your own personal views (and what you think is best for the US) just because.

It is quite possible that any opposition being voiced by Clinton supporters will die down after the DNC.

No, I completely understand people that wept during Hillary's speech. Those tears don't indicate anything other than having liked her as a candidate. They don't demonstrate voting for McCain in the general election.
 
We had a local delegate to the Dem Convention interviewed at the convention. The local radio station played the sound byte. She is a Hillary supporter and stated that she was voting for McCain live from the floor of the Dem Convention. :eek:
 
He REALLY REALLY NEEDS her votes Peet!!

That's all there is to it---either make her VP---no way--or give her a little glory and ego boost at the convention.
IF he doesn't get the majority of Hillary supporters he can't win and he knows it.
 
It shows unbelievable weakness on his part that he DID accommodate them. He won, everybody admitted it. Edwards and the rest of the Dem runner-ups didn't get to give a speech. He practically gave two entire days of the convention to his defeated opponent. The man talks a good talk but he seems spineless to me. Overly accommodating (look at the Russian situation) and unwilling to take a clear stance on most issues.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is weak to let her have a voice at the DNC. The alternative is to increase any rift that is occurring. She is still a large force in the party, and the convention isn't just about nominating a president.

Letting her speak empowered her, and helped the party. It did not take any power away from him in the process. She is, as you point out, a defeated opponent. Not an active one.

Edwards won't be talking for obvious reasons. If he hadn't come out about his affair he very well may have had an opportunity. Biden will get a chance to speak ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top