New Hampshire Primaries

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

At the end of it, a guy stood up and asked the first question.... "Can you iron a few of my shirts?". Apparently, she lost it at that point.

---

:laugh4: That man deserves a medal.:laugh4:

http://www2.strangesigns.org:81/albu...i_feminist.jpg

Was it the guy in the background of this pic? :beam:

I ask again, why is this elemantal hatred vs Hillary? From here were I stand (sit ~;) which is far away from the US) it is not quite clear.

I don't like her and I don't understand myself, Cheetah. Judging from what you read on the backroom, you'd think Hillary was a fringe lunatic, under dog, darkhorse who has a slim chance at supplanting the nomination. In reality, many people have fond memories of Bill and genuinely like and believe in Hillary. Personally, she seems like a carpet bagging, corrupt shill but she's alot more accepted here stateside than what you see at the Org.

It's the Internet. We love Ron Paul for crying out loud. ~;)

Personally though, I find her potential nomination extremely discouraging for these reasons:


- She's a Clinton. Sweet, Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. Welcome to the Kingdom of America.


- She's the Machine. Every good Democrat is behind her or they shamefully admit they're American first, Democrat second. I've had it with the baby boomers and their partisanship.


- She's the career politician. I want somebody new to shake down the system, an American Sarkozy, except we had so many Sarkozy's we're asking for somebody different.


- Her policies, err, sucks? They said she had good experience; they said Obama didn't. I read Obama's website and then hers, and, well, you know...

If I have a choice between two populists, I'd rather have the hopeful one instead of Mrs. Think of the Children, thankyouverymuch. Now of course it's not even certain that Obama is all populist, no substance as they like to say.


- Obama's rise was highly encouraging. Finally, somebody new! Finally, a black guy who doesn't play black! Finally, somebody who can convince the youth to vote! Finally, a guy who says he wants to extend a hand to the Right! Finally, somebody who pays attention to the Internet! Welcome to New America!

...and then the Dream is gone again. The Empire (the party machine, baby boomers, whatever) Strikes Back. Or is it? The race is not over. I hope Hillary had just won the last of the sympathy votes.


- 3 months ago Hillary was considered guaranteed. It was Hillary vs. Rudy Giuliani, and all the alternatives are dreaming. Not even McCain counted. I don't want that back. No imperial Presidents for me please, I'd keep my dictatorial fantasies to myself.


- Her campaign is dirty. She's been doing the character assassination thing since Obama became a serious threat. Rovian political tricks? No thanks!

:thumbsdown:

As an outsider, the thing that distresses me most about Hiliary's campaign is the sheer hatred for the Republicans.

I was watching the British Channel 4 News last night and her campaign manager was being interviewed before the results. His whole objection to Obama was that, and I paraphrase; "the senator doesn't get it - everything bad is Bush's and the Republicans fault. Obama likes to talk about healing - he's an idiot - this is about revenge and crushing and I wanna kill - killll - KILLL!"

(OK, apologies to Arlo for the last bit, the characterisation is not that over the top).

I hated this poison when the Republicans inflicted it onto Bill Clinton's presidency, and I hate Hiliary's campaign for continuing the vile tradition. Americans are far better than that and deserve far better than dynastic warfare.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Not to mention - jeez, the weeping? I threw up, and people changed their vote?

Hillary's won! :knight:

Ah...what a bit of crying, whining and an irritated tone won't achieve. Sheer bliss, this.

Me, of course I would never descent into any irritated whining in my defense of Hillary...~;)

She won. Somehow I came away with the impression from the media that it was an upset victory. But the victory margin was small, considering the amount of money and her front runner status for months and months.

A win is a win, but I'm more convinced then ever that she is vulnerable, but hey if she is the nominee then its 4 more years of polarisation and angst, yippee.

McCain bothers me, this guy actually wants to continue with Mr Bush's Iraq policy and proclaims it as some kind of a success. Meantime Billions get spent and the war is unpaid for. I'd be shocked if he continued his winning streak, If he does I would have to seriously open up the check book and fund the otherside and I dont want to do that.

This guy has status quo written all over him, I'll sign up for the change candidates at this point.

I often find Mark Steel's satirical commentaries funny, but this one is funny and apposite. Should make Louis cry, anyway.

:beam:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Mark Steel: A few tears won't make Hillary more electable

Published: 09 January 2008

What a magnificent speech by Hillary Clinton, where she broke down in tears and spluttered, "Lots of people think elections are about who's up and who's down, but this is very personal for me. I've had such opportunities from this country."

At first glance it makes so little sense I thought if you chucked in a perpendicular and a polyunsaturate it could be one of Neil Kinnock's. But when you look again it's the scream of an articulate four-year-old. She's saying "Let ME be President because I WANT to. LET me LET me it's not FAIR." Maybe there's a bit they didn't show, where she said "And furthermore I say to Mr. Obama 'Hnnnng, yaaaaaaa go AWAY," and tips up a camera, and then Bill arrives to say "Now stop this at ONCE or you can't even be senator, do you understand?"

Most people seem to think this was a deliberate act, to win popularity by appearing human and vulnerable. Maybe at her next press conference she'll come on with a puppy. And her speech will be "This is Rosie." Then, fighting back tears she'll say "And this afternoon she's got to be put down. God bless America." And then the hall will fill up with balloons. Then, during a televised debate she'll respond to a question about energy policy with a botched suicide attempt.

But there may be other reasons why her campaign's slipped, which is she claims to be the best candidate to bring about "Change" from the days of Bush, but she's supported almost everything he's done, including the invasion of Iraq. Now she says she'll "Bring the troops home" so presumably her statement will be "When the war was popular I supported it. Then when it was unpopular I opposed it. So I am the only candidate who's consistently voted with the American people."

She supported the bombing of Lebanon, and her only criticism of Bush while he was planning to bomb Iran was that he "downplayed their threats". She also urged him to categorise the entire Iranian army as a "terrorist organisation". So she must be the only person in the world who thinks "We need a change – because Bush hasn't bombed enough places or called enough people terrorists."

If she ends up getting the Democrat nomination, she and the Republicans could get in a fascinating battle to see who can call most people terrorists. The CNN debate will involve the two of them stood there all evening taking turns to shout "Cubans" – "Syrians" – "Anyone who supports Chavez", until they get to Eskimos and the disabled.

This may be why, of all the candidates for either party, Hillary has received more donations from arms companies than any other. Because at last she might bring the change that's needed, and be a president prepared to take care of the impoverished arms companies. The Bush era has been lean hungry years for those poor souls. It's been their version of the dustbowl, weapons manufacturers forced to traipse across Oklahoma begging for someone to buy their withered laser-guided Tomahawk missiles so they can feed their children for another night.

But Hillary's prepared for change. Which is why the person she's suggested would be her Secretary for State is Richard Holbrooke, who first came to prominence when he helped organise the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. So the only change would be the return of people who fronted atrocities 20 years ago. It would be like if someone took over the BBC with the slogan "It's time for change" and brought back Noel's House Party.

Hillary's other slogan involves her "experience", proving she'd be "ready from day one". But her main experience as "First Lady" involved her plan to provide health care. After eight years in the job there was no plan, because the health companies objected it would dent their profits, and less people had health care than before. So by that logic Steve McLaren should ring the FA and demand his old job back, complaining, "This new manager can't be trusted, as unlike me he's not got any experiencing of buggering everything up."

There's a myth about the Clintons' rule, shaped by the times that followed them, that it was a period of peace and friendship, with occasional fun in the Oval Office. But the Clintons were crucial figures in shaping the idea that big business was not only the best way to run the world, it was the only way. Under their rule, the poor became poorer while the rich became super-rich.

Possibly the greatest hope for America lies not with Hillary, or Obama, but from the opposition to the war in Iraq, without which it's possible they'd have already bombed Iran, as suggested by Hillary.

And if her tearful act does rescue her campaign, Gordon Brown might try a similar tactic. In which case he'll splutter, "Lots of people think, ahem, economies are about (sniff) what's up and down, (pause) but (sniff) this is a deeply felt re-evaluation of fiscal indicators tending towards declining global growth requiring sustainable prudence within a homogenised market, and that's deeply personal for me (howl, splutter, sniff)."

Good old Mark Steel. Loved his lectures on famous people, such as Marx. Shows he hasn't lost his touch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kamikhaan

So is this election going to turn into a cry-fest of who can get more sympathy? :angry:

---

YES!! Our voters are generally: a) well-meaning, & b) ignorant. However, they intuitively understand "passion" when they see real emotion displayed. If it's controlled -- "I'm compassionate but it doesn't leave me a mess" -- then many people flock towards it with their votes.

Pretty much sums up my feelings:

This was a victory based on the old party machine, the core partisan Democrats, and the Clinton loyalists. She takes the Democrats back to a bunkered partisan posture. It would be a disaster for them up against McCain in November. Or as one reader put it:

"Lets see ... A minority candidate of near-unprecedented rhetorical skill whom even the Republicans fear has a chance to reunite the country versus a party hack riding a wave of nepotism and backroom arm twisting."

I just have to keep telling myself that McCain won. That takes most of the hurt away. If I cry, will the rest of you vote for me?

Link to poll averages

I was actually surprised by the Republican results last night. McCain was slated for 31.8% of the vote and Romney for 28.2.

In the end, the Voter turnout was record breaking and McCain was given 37% of the vote. You would assume that Romney would be the big loser, BUT he came away with 32% of the vote. This means, obviously that he got a higher percentage of the Republican vote than expected AND way more votes in general. Huckabee lost out by a little over 1 or 2% (or simply had no bounce in NH after Iowa) and Thompson lost half of his polled votes.

Very interesting.

This race has really become a four man show

Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Huckabee.

Do you think Thompson and Hunter will bow out right after South Carolina?


PS - Nader said he would probably run if Hildabeast recieved the nomination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I just have to keep telling myself that McCain won. That takes most of the hurt away. If I cry, will the rest of you vote for me?

---

Vote: Lemur

:devilish:


I think Thompson will bow out if SC shows as badly for him as NH. He needs to show some strength there to validate his "effort."


Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.

---

In some ways it is. We can wait and see the Democrats pick their candidate first. We'll show our cards after.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.

---

Oh yes, Hillary at her best.

...

:bigcry:

vote for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Hillary's won! :knight:

Ah...what a bit of crying, whining and an irritated tone won't achieve. Sheer bliss, this.

Me, of course I would never descent into any irritated whining in my defense of Hillary...~;)

---

You know, I'd have thought the fact that Hillary had to resort to playing up to the female stereotype with her tears to gain votes would be a disappointment to you, considering your earlier posts...?