Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: Of the two, who do you like?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dontlookdown

With the state most of the world is in right now, I think putting a guy in office with a serious anger-management problem, is a huge mistake. I appreciate that McCain served the country honorably, but I'm having a hard time with the idea of a prisoner of war (who's been tortured) negotiating international issues in a way that we would demand - having suffered through Bush's retarded cowboy diplomacy for 8 years.
The fact that he doesn't quite grasp the situation in Iraq or the rest of the middle east is scary especially when you factor in his geriatric senior moments that seem to strike daily.
And then we have Roe vs. Wade.
I think he's an awful candidate, even if he has done a lot in the past to work across the aisle.

If anything, McCain's POW status made him stand pretty solely against the R party and W's position on torture - so that mostly negates your conclusion

As for Iraq, do you really think come next Jan., Obama will whisk the troops home in a month? I suggest that will never happen and it will take years of a staggered withdrawal. Again, I want them home now, but realize that cannot happen without huge consequences. Have we learned nothing from the past?

[dontlookdown]

Of course not. Nobody with a brain thinks the troops should be whisked home "on day one".
It will be a long slow gradual withdrawl and if Obama or Clinton says otherwise, it's an appeal to all those rural voters who haven't had the advantage of acquiring critical thinking skills in college.

[Hawkeye]

The thing I like about Mcain is his willingness to work witht he opposing party. If the (seemingly) Democratic congress wants to get things done, Mcain is not going to veto everything if he feels its a good idea. He's not tied to his party, although he'll obviously side more with R's since he is one.

[dontlookdown]

I loved Bob Herbert's Op-Ed from last weekend. It's a nice summary of why things went so wrong for the Clintons. It's also why I believe many longtime Clinton supporters voted for Obama.

Seeds of Destruction

By BOB HERBERT
The Clintons have never understood how to exit the stage gracefully.

Their repertoire has always been deficient in grace and class. So there was Hillary Clinton cold-bloodedly asserting to USA Today that she was the candidate favored by “hard-working Americans, white Americans,” and that her opponent, Barack Obama, the black candidate, just can’t cut it with that crowd.

“There’s a pattern emerging here,” said Mrs. Clinton.

There is, indeed. There was a name for it when the Republicans were using that kind of lousy rhetoric to good effect: it was called the Southern strategy, although it was hardly limited to the South. Now the Clintons, in their desperation to find some way — any way — back to the White House, have leapt aboard that sorry train.

He can’t win! Don’t you understand? He’s black! He’s black!

The Clintons have been trying to embed that gruesomely destructive message in the brains of white voters and superdelegates for the longest time. It’s a grotesque insult to African-Americans, who have given so much support to both Bill and Hillary over the years.

(Representative Charles Rangel of New York, who is black and has been an absolutely unwavering supporter of Senator Clinton’s White House quest, told The Daily News: “I can’t believe Senator Clinton would say anything that dumb.”)

But it’s an insult to white voters as well, including white working-class voters. It’s true that there are some whites who will not vote for a black candidate under any circumstance. But the United States is in a much better place now than it was when people like Richard Nixon, George Wallace and many others could make political hay by appealing to the very worst in people, using the kind of poisonous rhetoric that Senator Clinton is using now.

I don’t know if Senator Obama can win the White House. No one knows. But to deliberately convey the idea that most white people — or most working-class white people — are unwilling to give an African-American candidate a fair hearing in a presidential election is a slur against whites.

The last time the Clintons had to make a big exit was at the end of Bill Clinton’s second term as president — and they made a complete and utter hash of that historic moment. Having survived the Monica Lewinsky ordeal, you might have thought the Clintons would be on their best behavior.

Instead, a huge scandal erupted when it became known that Mrs. Clinton’s brothers, Tony and Hugh Rodham, had lobbied the president on behalf of criminals who then received presidential pardons or a sentence commutation from Mr. Clinton.

Tony Rodham helped get a pardon for a Tennessee couple that had hired him as a consultant and paid or loaned him hundreds of thousands of dollars. Over the protests of the Justice Department, President Clinton pardoned the couple, Edgar Allen Gregory Jr. and his wife, Vonna Jo, who had been convicted of bank fraud in Alabama.

Hugh Rodham was paid $400,000 to lobby for a pardon of Almon Glenn Braswell, who had been convicted of mail fraud and perjury, and for the release from prison of Carlos Vignali, a drug trafficker who was convicted and imprisoned for conspiring to sell 800 pounds of cocaine. Sure enough, in his last hours in office (when he issued a blizzard of pardons, many of them controversial), President Clinton agreed to the pardon for Braswell and the sentence commutation for Vignali.

Hugh Rodham reportedly returned the money after the scandal became public and was an enormous political liability for the Clintons.

Both Clintons professed to be ignorant of anything improper or untoward regarding the pardons. Once, when asked specifically if she had talked with a deputy White House counsel about pardons, Mrs. Clinton said: “People would hand me envelopes. I would just pass them on. You know, I would not have any reason to look into them.”

It wasn’t just the pardons that sullied the Clintons’ exit from the White House. They took furniture and rugs from the White House collection that had to be returned. And they received $86,000 in gifts during the president’s last year in office, including clothing (a pantsuit, a leather jacket), flatware, carpeting, and so on. In response to the outcry over that, they decided to repay the value of the gifts.

So class is not a Clinton forte.

But it’s one thing to lack class and a sense of grace, quite another to deliberately try and wreck the presidential prospects of your party’s likely nominee — and to do it in a way that has the potential to undermine the substantial racial progress that has been made in this country over many years.

The Clintons should be ashamed of themselves. But they long ago proved to the world that they have no shame.

[BombaySapphire3]

I'm just concerned about how low Hillary will sink in her not so subtle to anyone with half a brain race baiting..she has already done quite a bit of damage IMO .Now with Edwards endorsing Obama she should just do the right thing for her country and step down..I have this sickening feeling that she may not even do this if Obama reaches the set finish line of 2025 delegates .There is just something chillingly power hungry about her that goes beyond what one would anticipate in a Presidential candidate .Any fleeting thoughts I ever had about voting for her if she were the nominee are gone now and I truly hope he is not coereced into accepting her on the ticket.

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

The thing I like about Mcain is his willingness to work witht he opposing party. If the (seemingly) Democratic congress wants to get things done, Mcain is not going to veto everything if he feels its a good idea. He's not tied to his party, although he'll obviously side more with R's since he is one.

"I'm a uniter, not a divider" - Gov. George W. Bush, 2000 Campaign Race

[BombaySapphire3]

Originally Posted by LukeA

"I'm a uniter, not a divider" - Gov. George W. Bush, 2000 Campaign Race

Well he does have more than a 70% disapproval rating ..isn't that kind of uniting people?

[Phoenix]

DIE HILLARY/OBAMA THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DIE!

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

I'm just concerned about how low Hillary will sink in her not so subtle to anyone with half a brain race baiting..she has already done quite a bit of damage IMO .Now with Edwards endorsing Obama she should just do the right thing for her country and step down..I have this sickening feeling that she may not even do this if Obama reaches the set finish line of 2025 delegates .There is just something chillingly power hungry about her that goes beyond what one would anticipate in a Presidential candidate .Any fleeting thoughts I ever had about voting for her if she were the nominee are gone now and I truly hope he is not coereced into accepting her on the ticket.

He technically will not have 2025 delegates until the convention in August. Until then we can consider him to be the "presumptive nominee." My prediction is that Hillary is going to finish out the remaining primaries and hope that somehow, after including Michigan and Florida, she does squeak out ahead in the popular vote, even though she may end up with fewer pledged delegates (depending on how MI and FL are seated). Hillary's only hope is that the summer will drag on and the current battleground states needed for election will continue to poll red. At the convention floor in late August, she can then make her case yet again and hope to convert a anxious party back to her side, that is, assuming that she continues to poll better than Obama against McCain. At that point, nobody could accuse of her of "stealing" the nomination since she had already won the popular vote.

This should be an interesting summer.

Regarding her so-called "race baiting," I think that is hardly the case. If anything, she is guilty of being too honest with the press; that type of discussion should have been held behind closed doors with the party. And that whole "I have a dream" speech he gave on race wasn't race baiting? Puhlease... white guilt, anyone? And even though Hillary could have skewered him over the multiple scandals that cropped up regarding Obama's past, she pretty much took the high road and kept mum about them; he basically created his own scandals and pratfalls. If anything, Obama's campaign calling Hillary a "monster" and calling her "pandering" and "politics as usual" was more divisive and mean-spirited than anything Hillary could have ever said about him. This is a clear example of how Obama has gotten a golden pass from the media and the party; he's like the baby brother that gets away with everything while the older sister gets burned at the cross.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

I'm just concerned about how low Hillary will sink in her not so subtle to anyone with half a brain race baiting . . . .

Do you actually assign no guilt to the Obama camp for taking her words out of context and/or doing race baiting of their own

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

Well he does have more than a 70% disapproval rating ..isn't that kind of uniting people?

Bush was regarded as a uniter when he was the Gov. of Texas. However, any truth to that seemingly stopped when he became Pres. In fact, I can think of not one issue he bent on, save perhaps for the education bill with ( I think Ted Kennedy) which was a farce.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

. . . This is a clear example of how Obama has gotten a golden pass from the media and the party; he's like the baby brother that gets away with everything while the older sister gets burned at the cross.

Exactly, but those who hate Hillary cannot see it this way. Again, I am no huge fan of Hillary. But, I see the facts for what they are. My fav. was when she commented on Senator Obama’s support among working, hardworking Americans, white Americans, was weakening again. Was that not a fact - see http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site....toutswhites509

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dontlookdown

Of course not. Nobody with a brain thinks the troops should be whisked home "on day one". It will be a long slow gradual withdrawl . . .

Then, I am at a loss to find any significant difference between the three possible candidates for Pres.

Originally Posted by dontlookdown

. . . and if Obama or Clinton says otherwise, it's an appeal to all those rural voters who haven't had the advantage of acquiring critical thinking skills in college.

There again with the slamming Those people are Americans as well.

Moreover, to assert that well educated people do not want the immediate withdrawal of the troops is likely incorrect. Many intelligent and well educated people on this board and elsewhere want that.

I, like you, just do not think it can happen and the withdrawal will be slow and take years.

[gldstwmn]

This is disappointing:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,2998660.story

John Edwards finally makes his choice: Barack Obama

GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. -- Barack Obama advanced his drive to unite the Democratic Party behind his candidacy for president Wednesday by winning the long-sought endorsement of vanquished rival John Edwards at a boisterous rally.

The announcement was a blow to Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose bid for the Democratic nomination appears all but lost, and brought Obama a welcome distraction from his landslide defeat Tuesday in the West Virginia primary.

The 41-percentage-point rout sparked new questions about his persistent troubles appealing to white, blue-collar voters, even if it did little to boost Clinton's prospects. In Edwards, Obama picked up the support of a former presidential candidate who had emphasized his roots as the son of a mill worker and aimed his pitch at working-class voters.

"The Democratic voters in America have made their choice, and so have I," Edwards told the enthusiastic crowd. "There is one man who knows and understands that this is a time for bold leadership. There is one man that knows how to create the change, the lasting change, that you have to build from the ground up. There is one man who knows in his heart that it is time to create one America, not two. And that man is Barack Obama."

In another sign of Obama's progress in uniting the party, the Illinois senator also won the endorsement Wednesday of a major abortion rights group, NARAL Pro-Choice America. The group praised Clinton, but its rejection of her was stinging nonetheless for the New York senator, who is seeking to become the nation's first female president.

Even though Clinton vowed Wednesday to fight to the last contests on June 3 in Montana and South Dakota, Obama's rally with Edwards appeared choreographed to ease her exit.

Speaking to 12,500 Obama supporters here in a sports arena, Edwards, one of the most prominent Democrats who had not endorsed a candidate, paid lengthy tribute to Clinton. The mention of her name initially sparked boos, a sign of the fractured state of the party as the nominating race winds down.

"It is hard to go out there and speak up when the odds turn against you," Edwards said, adding that Clinton had "shown strength and character" in battling for improved healthcare and a better life for millions of Americans.

"She is a woman who, in my judgment, is made of steel, and she's a leader in this country, not -- not -- because of her husband, but because of what she has done," he said.

Obama, too, offered kind words for Clinton as he ripped into President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumed Republican White House nominee. Both Republicans, Obama said, champion tax cuts for "those with the most, and tell everyone else to fend for themselves."

"John Edwards and I believe in a different America," Obama said, borrowing an Edwards campaign theme. "Hillary Clinton believes in a different America. The Democratic Party believes in a different America -- one America, where we rise and fall together as one people, and that's why we are going to take Washington by storm this November."

"Yes, we can!" the crowd shouted.

Obama also pledged to take up Edwards' campaign to cut poverty in half over the next 10 years. "He will have a partner in that effort," Obama said, "because that is a goal that I will set as president of the United States of America."

A former North Carolina senator and his party's 2004 nominee for vice president, Edwards dropped out of the race in January after poor showings in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Clinton and Obama competed fiercely for his endorsement, each visiting his home in Chapel Hill. For more than three months, Edwards declined to take sides, indicating recently that he would let voters decide. He did not explain why he changed his mind, but Obama told reporters Wednesday that Edwards had made his decision in the last several days.

Now, some of the 19 delegates whom Edwards won in the early contests could swing toward Obama. His endorsement could also sway some superdelegates, the party leaders who probably will settle the nomination. In the race for delegates, Obama leads 1,887.5 to 1,718, according to the Associated Press. It takes 2,026 to win the nomination.

Clinton campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said her team respected Edwards, "but as the voters of West Virginia showed last night, this thing is far from over."

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds was caustic. "Despite months of lofty claims," he said, "Barack Obama's best effort at uniting his party relied on the same divisive partisan attacks that only reminds Americans that he's a candidate with no record of bipartisan success."

The Grand Rapids event capped a daylong Obama swing across Michigan, part of a tour of fall battleground states that he launched on Tuesday in Missouri and will resume next week in Florida.

Obama has tried to strike a balance between jumping ahead to the general-election race without seeming presumptuous about the nomination he has yet to capture. He plans to campaign this week in South Dakota and Oregon, which holds its primary Tuesday.

In the Detroit suburbs on Wednesday morning, Obama set out to build ties with the Midwestern blue-collar workers whose support has eluded him in primaries and caucuses. Wearing goggles and earplugs, he toured the assembly lines of a Chrysler factory in Sterling Heights. He also sported a flag pin on his lapel, an apparent gesture to quiet conservative critics who have questioned his patriotism because he often doesn't wear a pin.

In the nearby suburb of Warren, Obama sharply attacked McCain's economic agenda at Macomb County Community College. Faulting McCain for advocating extensions of Bush's tax cuts, Obama told invited guests that he and the Arizona senator would offer Americans a stark choice in November.

"It's going to be a clear choice between four more years of the same failed Bush policies that have wrecked Michigan's economy, or real change that allows us to write a new chapter in American manufacturing and the American economy and American history," he said.

Obama called for public investment in alternative energy production to help revive the manufacturing sector in Michigan and other economically pressed states.

Obama also said that McCain's plans to remedy economic troubles closely resembled Bush's. "I think that is going to be the central issue in this election: Who can restore a sense of fairness and economic growth for everybody -- bottom-up economic growth instead of trickle-down nonsense that doesn't end up working for the American people," he said.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

This is disappointing:



In another sign of Obama's progress in uniting the party, the Illinois senator also won the endorsement Wednesday of a major abortion rights group, NARAL Pro-Choice America. The group praised Clinton, but its rejection of her was stinging nonetheless for the New York senator, who is seeking to become the nation's first female president.

I think this is absolutely disgraceful considering all of the efforts that Hillary took for womens reproductive rights, e.g., pushing through approval for the morning after pill, while Obama just paid lip service or voted "present" on womens issues in the IL senate . NARAL is taking a lot of well-deserved heat for this unfortunate endorsement, and I hope more enlightened women wake up and snap out of their infatuation with Obama. Women: what has Obama done for you lately??