1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

On Hillary

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Lugnuts, Jan 19, 2008.

  1. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    The intentionally vague smearing of Obama's campaign tactics was a nice touch, too.

    And am I the only one who shakes his head in disbelief every time he hears Hillary Clinton is "the most experienced candidate"? Seven years after Hillary was elected to the first political office she has ever held?
     
  2. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    She told me some other stories at lunch. Some of them... I was like 'eh'... but others got me thinking.

    Hillary is a pretty i-dotting, t-crossing kind of person. She has systems. For example, my friend was at a Hillary event. A person came up to her at the rope line and told her about a disease that is sort of on the rise... not an epidemic yet. Hillary then turned to an aide and said, "Follow up on that..." as well as some other things in regard to this disease. My friend later found out through a colleague that Hillary had called the CDC requesting all sorts of information on this disease. And apparently, this sort of thing happens regularly. It's almost as if she's obsessed with following up-- and not just in a cursory way.

    In my mind, I contrasted this with Obama's own comments about himself at the Nevada debates:

    I ask my staff member to hand me paper until two seconds before I need it because I will lose it. You know, the —- you know…

    And my desk and my office doesn’t look good. I’ve got to have somebody around me who is keeping track of that stuff.


    Now, look. For the last 8 years, we've had somebody who has other people do his crap. God, I don't want that anymore.

    ---------

    Will do, will do on the Obama supporter. I'm still very much undecided. I guess the only thing that's changed is I'm starting to question Hillary's supposed "unelectabilitly" in the general election.
     
  3. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    I agree with you, Lugs. McCain would dominate Florida because, well, he has rather a lot in common with a lot of the electorate down there. I don't care who runs against him. He gets the nomination, Florida's not a battleground. Quite possibly, the same would be true of Giuliani, because of the New York ties, though I think he would lose several other states that would negate that.

    I've never agreed with the notion that Hillary's unelectable. Is she my favorite Democratic candidate? No. Would I rather see her elected than anyone on the GOP side? Yeah.

    I think once the primaries are done with, the Dems will unite behind whoever comes out ahead, whatever issues they may have with him/her. I don't think the same is true of the GOP. I think there are factions in that party that would rather throw their vote to a third party or to no one at all, rather than vote for Romney, Giuliani or Huckabee.

    And that's what makes McCain a threat in my book. I don't think there's much of a faction in that party that opposes him. Like Hillary, I think there's plenty who would rather see someone else. But I think if he gets it, most of the GOP voters will say, "Alright, I can do that." So it's encouraging that Hillary has a plan worked out to take him on.
     
  4. jakewriter82

    jakewriter82 Active Member

    By now this point's been hammered to death, but I'm going to bring it up anyway. If any other country had 2 families as their political leaders over the past 20 years, we'd call it a dictatorship. Yet in America it's called democracy. I understand the process is why it's democracy. People vote -- they're not appointed.
    Still I, for one, am desperately aching to see this country be led by someone not in the Bush/Clinton families.
     
  5. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    Of the three remaining legitimate candidates, though, from a national service perspective, she is. Obama's been in the Senate since 2004. Edwards had one term. She's now in her second. It was much more disingenuous when Dodd, Biden and Richardson were still in the mix, but now they're not. (And you could argue they never really were.) And like it or not, she's at least been in the White House. Not in an official role, I know, but closer than Edwards or Obama has been.
     
  6. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    There is only one thing that will get the GOP to unite behind whoever is the nominee......a Clinton on the other side of the ballot.

    If Obama wins the nomination, I think the Dem's win going away.

    I think if it is Hillary-Romney, Hillary wins because there just won't be enough independents swinging Romney's way in key states.....

    If it is McCain-Hillary, which, let's face it that's what it is going to be.....

    I think McCain will win it.
     
  7. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    deskslave, I agree. If you read the other thread, a lot of Democrats on this board seem to support McCain -- some hinting they'd vote for him over Hillary.

    --------------

    Oh, I also thought my friend's New Hampshire foster mom story was interesting.

    WTF?

    Why would the media ignore actual tears from Hillary in favor of near tears? I don't get it.
     
  8. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Well if you count sleeping with President Bill Clinton during the years of 1992 to 2000 as political experience, there are hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of women who got that kind of political experience in that era.....
     
  9. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    I think you're probably right.

    Of course, that means the whole thing's wide open again in four years, because I doubt he'd even run for a second term.

    Zag, I take you don't think the Huckster has a shot at the nomination?
     
  10. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    By the way, just noticed this:

    You have got to be shitting me. By failing to accomplish anything on health care she "changed the entire vocabulary"? She's taking credit for making health care an issue? Really?
     
  11. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    The huckster?

    Um, no. I think it is time for Ron Paul, Huckabee, the DA of New York City (at least on TV) and the former mayor of NYC to get on with their life's work.

    And here is a sentiment that has yet to kick in that will soon kick in with the GOP -- the more it seems like Hillary will win, the more the GOP will be worried about winning in November which is why they will hitch themselves to the only guy in the field who has any prayer of winning in November -- McCain.

    I could see his momentum snowballing and snowballing.

    And Hillary would not be a slam dunk in the "blue" rust belt states like Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania against McCain and in fact, she'd find some trouble there.

    She'd have no prayer in Florida but might swing Ohio, though, I think McCain would be tough to beat there as well because he is a moderate.
     
  12. Point of Order

    Point of Order Active Member

    McCain as the GOP nominee does take the immigration issue, which is a horrible issue for Dems and a good one for the GOP, off the table.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page