They Did What !

“What’s up with the Clinton campaign” indeed? On the positive side, one hopes that perhaps she is giving all the people, especially women, who have supported her a chance to wind down and support the real candidate (which isn’t her). Less probable, maybe she is vying for the VP spot, and feels the need to demonstrate how many supporters she can bring into the race.

In lieu of some combined Obama/Clinton/Democratic Grand Strategy that I can’t quite fathom, I tend to gravitate towards the premise that what we are really dealing with here is the huge Clinton ego. It would appear they just can’t accept defeat, specifically in this instance, because 1) they thought it was their race, 2) they have some distorted sense of entitlement, and/or 3) (and this is what I think is a large part of it), they feel like they have been out-“minoritied.”

In other words, we have an election cycle in which the Democrats “should” win the election for all the obvious reasons – McCain is very weak, the Republicans are seriously fractured, and their running of the nation for the past seven years has been a disaster that only those in a state of terminal denial won‘t admit. Given the situation, the Clintons could “taste” the Presidency, and most likely thought it was in the bag. No doubt it especially seemed like the right season for a woman to be elected. Then seemingly out of nowhere comes another “political minority” candidate, albeit of a different type, who as you stated, “whupped her,” and they just can’t accept it. It’s not so much that they think they have been beaten, but that this opportunity has been stolen from them. Coupled with this might be the belief that an African-American cannot at this time win because of the existing racism in the country, whereas a woman can, and they have rationalized that it’s wrong as well as not fair.

Why anyone truly considers Obama sexist or elitist I can’t fathom; I see no rationalization for either. Personally it sounds like campaign nonsense.

The Super delegates should have only one concern -- who has the most pledge delegates. Popular vote will become important when the rules are changed, and it becomes part of the equation, which at present it is not. It’s the same dynamic in the national election where popular vote means nothing, and only the electoral vote counts. You can’t change the rules in mid-game to suit yourself.

I do believe it could be time for a woman president, and just don’t think Hillary Clinton is that woman. I might have thought so a year ago, but not after watching her and her calamitous campaign since then. The attacks on her same party candidate, as well as the asinine “Clinton math,” and the last straw use of “Rovian prediction” tells me she is not the right woman for the job. The Clintons seem to be putting their own interests above the Democratic Party, and ultimately the nation. If they do fracture the Democratic Party, they will have done a disservice to us all.

And lest we forget, I’ve not heard one Republican pundit that is not pushing hard for Hillary’s candidacy. What does that tell us?

I tried, Stephen, to give the Clinton campaign the benefit of the doubt - that they were only continuing on to give Hillary's supporters time to unwind. However, since the movement is growing to not support Obama if she doesn’t get the nomination, it is no longer possible to attribute lofty motives to what she is doing.

Hillary should be nipping that kind of talk in the bud but since it falls in with what appears to be the Clinton conviction that the nomination “belongs” to her, she is not only allowing it to continue but her actions and words encourage its growth. If you really listen to what they are saying, it smacks of intimidation – “either I get my way (Hillary as nominee) or I will help defeat you (by voting for McCain or not voting for Obama).”

That is an outrageous stance for ANY Democrat to take at a time when our country is in such disarray. If the Clinton’s actions split the party and we wind up with four years of McCain, they should be drummed out of the party and out of politics for life. For them to aid McCain’s election in this way - an obvious choice of self-interest over the interests of the nation - would be unforgivable.

If our hypotheticals turn out to be true, I totally agree with you, the Clintons should be ostracized. And, I'm hoping those hypotheticals are wrong.

At the moment millions of dollars are being spent on a continued primary campaign, which should by now have been diverted to the national campaign. This applies as well to arguments among Democrats that should be by now solely aimed at the Republicans. John McCain might just be the second weakest GOP candidate in modern history, and this should be addressed by Democrats, not how weak Clinton believes Obama is. This is becoming as macabre as it is ludicrous.

It is time for big change in this nation, Sorry, but anyone not realizing that is a political idiot. The present focus should not be why America would not vote for a Black man, but why it should vote for the best candidate, period. The atmosphere of heavy polarized partisanship so well groomed by the likes of Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity is the death nell to our way of life. Look what they have created in just seven short years.

Is this the kind of country America should represent? Eighty percent of those polled say it is not. Whatever happen to the common sense understanding of "united we stand, divided we fall" type reasoning? Since John McCain obviously stands for more of the same, a point the GOP does not refute, why would anyone think he is now the best choice for president? It is quite apparent that the nation has not been made safer by the inability of the Bush Administration to talk to our perceived enemies. No one in the real world believes they are less vulnerable by cutting off communications with those who threaten them. I defy any person to tell me they would not choose to talk to someone they perceive as an enemy, rather than have that opportunity. Would they not talk to a bothersome neighbor before taking any action?

I understand the strong desire for women to see a woman in the White House, but what's more important is that the right person be elected.

Any Democrat who votes for McCain out of some kind of immature outrage that their candidate didn't get the nomination, is, as my mother would say, "not a real Democrat." In this present climate, I would have to expand that to ANY Democrat who would even think of voting for McCain.

It is strange, is it not, to hear people objecting to "talking" as a way of working out problems? It doesn't even make sense. That is an example of how, when people get caught up in partisan viewpoints, common sense goes out the window.

Amen to that Renee! The idea of McCain getting elected is alarming and the thought that Democrats might help that happen is unbelievable. The more I hear from McCain the more I realize how talking tough and carrying a big stick is his idea of governing. He wants to stay in Iraq, bomb Iran, and at the same time wave a red flag in Russia's face. It sounds to me like he might be worse than Bush, though I had not thought that was possible.