Hillary Meltdown?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2008 6:17 PM GMT
    Hillary's campaign seems to be in meltdown following The McClatchy-MSNBC poll. How is her support waning so dramatically at such a crucial point?
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14372

    Jan 06, 2008 6:39 PM GMT
    It probably is because many democratic voters are waking up and seeing Hillary for what she really is a carpetbagging, opportunist bimbo who has just used the State of New York as a convenient political venue to get to the white house. She does not know a damn thing about the State of New York and she has done nothing for our great state except run her mouth and let out all that hot air. icon_mad.gif
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 06, 2008 6:53 PM GMT
    I disagree strongly with that last post.... I find Mrs Clinton to be a very articulate, very capable woman with prudent experience and could manage this country in a way that is far superior to the way its been approach for the last 7.

    There is no "meltdown", its very simple, after 7 years of this republican sham... the people want change and that means RADICAL change. She is just fighting the winds of change and Obama (who is very capable) is reaping the benefits.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14372

    Jan 06, 2008 7:35 PM GMT
    HndsmKansan,
    If Hillary is so articulate and such a great senator, Then why did she fail disasterously on her campaign promises for the State of New York? A good one is her promise to team up with both the public and private sectors and help them create 300,000 new jobs for the economically distressed upstate region of New York. That was nothing more than a bunch of hot air to get her elected to the US Senate. The truth is she has done virtually nothing for the people of the State of New York. She has taken advantage of New Yorkers by using their state as a convenient political venue to get to the white house. She is totally untrustworthy and she obviously uses people to get what she wants. She is using the gay community the exact same way as she has used the African-American community, getting our overwhelming support and then after being elected putting a knife in our backs. I would not trust Hillary as far as I could throw her, she is obviously two-faced and very shady. I wish some of you Hillary supporters would wake up and smell the coffee. Trust me on this one, I am one of her constituents and as far as I am concerned she sucks as a US Senator.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2008 10:24 PM GMT
    Well, Rob, to be a little fair to her, every day that she has been a Senator she has been faced with an intransigent Republican party that hates Democrats, hates women, and has no use for the increasingly Democratic northeastern part of the country. Are you really shocked that she has been stymied at every turn?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2008 11:02 PM GMT
    I feel Hillary is falling into the same trap that lost Kerry the election. She's coming off as way too contrived and she's a bit of a republican-lite if you ask me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2008 11:13 PM GMT
    If Hillary is such a horrible US Senator how did she manage to get reelected by overwhelming support??

    Your a sour bitter old man Roadbike.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 06, 2008 11:32 PM GMT
    Hilly got reelected because the token republican who ran against her is a nativist ex-mayor of Yonkers freak who couldn't even take his home territory in the election.

    She has not delivered her campaign promises to New York, especially upstate New York. Most of her constituents don't know this though as she is a political celebrity above accountability. But then, she has only ever been a junior member of a minority party in committees through 2006 and has since remained a junior member since the dem majority. But still.

    Her campaign isn't melting down the way Mitt Romney or John Edwards' campaigns are. She is still strong in the polls in most states but wont be able to maintain that edge thanks to Iowa and Obama's victory in New Hampshire (he leads by 10 points in most tracking polls).
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jan 07, 2008 12:18 AM GMT
    Oh I don't think that her campaign is melting downm as much as being eclipsed by something else that they see in Obama....
    and as for as being good for New York?
    are we bitter much roadbike and zombie?
    I'm hearing the same Fox News dribble coming out of you
    she has excellent support in NY
    It's just that we need someone new and not a dynasty
  • jarhead5536

    Posts: 1348

    Jan 07, 2008 12:21 AM GMT
    I fear for the party if Obama wins the nomination. He is an empty suit that talks pretty. Sen. Clinton is a realist and I will support her until the convention, if that's what it takes. She is the only one that has the skill and experience to undo the disaster that Shrub has been for our country and the world for the last eight years...
  • stevarino7

    Posts: 149

    Jan 07, 2008 12:34 AM GMT
    I do not fully understand why people say a certain candidate uses their position only as an opportunity to form a presidential possibility. I have heard a lot of people say Hilary has done it and people from Mass have also said Romney did it.

    But I have to assume while in the government of their state they must have worked on their stats in order to have a good standing to look good to the nation. And if that is the case, can't you say every presidential candidate has done this, or they wouldn't be running for presidency?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 2:11 AM GMT
    I really don't see how another 4 years of Clintons in the White House has anything to do with change.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jan 07, 2008 2:19 AM GMT
    Well, "RoadbikeRob", I live in Kansas, not in New York, but I do have friends there and have talked about the road Hillary has taken in working with Chuck Shumer and the positive work she has done. She hasn't rested on her laurals, rather she has taken an ambitious attitude with her work on committees in the Senate. I rarely hear bad things about her (from New Yorkers), except from those who would deride her anyway. She was reelected overwhelmingly. I doubt if she would have received much support from the smart people in New York state if she was "shady" as you say.

    And why should I trust your opinion? Your a dude on Realjock. You haven't earned trust. By her actions, Hillary has.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 4:53 PM GMT
    Vote Hillary icon_wink.gif
  • jarhead5536

    Posts: 1348

    Jan 07, 2008 5:04 PM GMT
    Go Hillary! All the way to Denver. This is NOT over, guys...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 5:05 PM GMT
    In my opinion Hilary stands for 17 years of "old politics", "friend beneships", we have a saying here: New brooms whipe clean.... And be fair Hilary is an old broom(in a fugure of speech) Next to that she was "peeking" to early, the moment Bush started his second turn her name was mentioned to follow up on him, that's one hell of a job to do three years long.


    Hilary is a politician "pur sang" in all the years she is trained and now she reacts like a puppet, she knows what people wanna hear and what they expect from here, but she isn't at all natural. I would buy that new broom.... if i was on the other side off the great lake
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 5:11 PM GMT
    If Clinton wins (and wins again), that'll make 36 straight years of either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House.

    ...while other countries bravely take on the future.
  • art_smass

    Posts: 960

    Jan 07, 2008 5:13 PM GMT
    And if she wins there will be both a Clinton and a bush in the White House.
  • jarhead5536

    Posts: 1348

    Jan 07, 2008 5:18 PM GMT
    This is what meritocracy looks like. If she had kept her maiden name, would anybody still be talking about "dynasty"? Of all the arguments against a Hillary Clinton presidency, this is the one that makes the least sense to me. I don't care what her name is, and I also don't buy the argument that she would be nothing without Bill. Seems to me that it's the other way around, and she would have ended up in the White House by a different route had she never met him in the first place.

    I am a Clintonista until the convention. I would like to have had Edwards as my second choice, but he's broke and gonna have to drop out soon. Obama is, in fact, dangerously naive (sp?), as Sen. Clinton pointed out last summer. The Republicans will devour him in the GE. Hope is all good, but IMHO he is an empty suit that talks pretty. All hat/no cattle, as my father used to say.

    If my gal goes down, I will work my little bubble butt off to help Obama win, but this would be a dangerous gamble - I hope the people that vote for him in the primaries realize that...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 5:31 PM GMT
    JarheadOf all the arguments against a Hillary Clinton presidency, this is the one that makes the least sense to me
    I didn't hear anyone make that comment, but it coaught my eye that even you as a Hilary-addict mention that there are argument against her... Witch are that?
  • jarhead5536

    Posts: 1348

    Jan 07, 2008 5:39 PM GMT
    RuggerATX commented on the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton dynamic just before me. I blog regularly on Democratic party sites (DailyKos, etc.), and the hillaryhaters just love that particular framing of her.

    Now, if Chelsea comes along in 15 or 20 years and wants to run, then we can talk about a Clinton dynasty...

    Not really trying to start a fight with anyone here, just that the utterly irrational hillaryhatred is tiring sometimes
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 6:21 PM GMT
    I can honestly say that I don't get the Hillary hatred. I get why people may not support her or they don't share her politics. But I don't get why she is this evil frigging witch, the likes of which have never been seen before. People can't be mean enough when they reference her. We have a president who launched war on a non-threatening nation, allowed people to drown in the streets of New Orleans, is torturing people against the laws of the Geneva convention and uses the Constitution as toilet paper, but Hillary is wicked? icon_question.gif

    And I am not even a Hillary supporter at this point. None of these candidates stir me.

    The thing about Hillary is that, for the most part, Democrats were never really hot and heavy to have her run for president. Everyone was aware of this hatred for her and not many have felt that she possesses any brand of "special" that would precipitate a need for her to be president. It was really Republicans, hoping to capitalize on people's hatred of her, who were throwing their voices saying that she should run in the first place.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 6:35 PM GMT
    Understand I am not a Hillary hater. I will support her if she makes it to the general election. But I really am tired of the same old fights and dysfunction of the past 28 years...fights that most people don't actually consider worthwhile.

    (blowjobs, ancient real estate deals, '60s-era middle east grudges that have little to do with actual peace and much to do with petroleum, using war to create the appearance of a strong economy, pandering to corporate lobbyists and donors, "flip flopping"...as if changing your mind based on new information is a flaw)

    Also, republicans are very good at playing to people's fears (often fears the republicans actually fabricate). Somehow they will shrewdly convince a majority that a woman president is a dangerous idea. Frankly, those bastards will convince enough people that a young black guy with a name that sounds like Osama is equally dangerous.

    I wish it weren't true, but this country still thinks straight white middle-aged men are the only "safe" option. Sad.

    As a side...Obama winning Iowa does not mean a presidency. It's a small, sparsely populated, mostly agricultural state, and not representative of this country...not by a longshot.
  • jarhead5536

    Posts: 1348

    Jan 07, 2008 6:41 PM GMT
    Playing to fear is all the Rethuglicans have got, and boy do they know how to use it. Rugger is dead on about that.

    It makes me sad to think that a black man or a white woman is unelectable in 2008 America, but there are just too many bigoted old white men still hanging around this country for that to happen. I say the same thing about homophobia - it will continue to exist as long as anyone old enough to have childhood memories of WWII is still alive. I have all too vivid memories of growing up in racist, racist, racist Texas to have any illusions about things getting any better anytime soon...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 07, 2008 6:43 PM GMT
    I also expect "terrorism" to rear it's ugly head again sometime this late summer or fall. Hmm.