What is wrong with Senator Clinton?

User Forum Topic
Submitted by marion on May 23, 2008 - 9:20pm

http://news.aol.com/elections/story/_a/c...

Defending her position to remain in the race until the end, Hillary stated: "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know I just, I don't understand it," she said, dismissing the idea of abandoning the race.

Why would she say something like that??

Submitted by ucodegen on May 23, 2008 - 10:40pm.

This may create some flames, but my opinion is that Hillary wants to win the election primarily for herself, not for the people of the United States. It is a very important 'goal' for herself. The problem is that it has blinded her to the fact that 'the people matter'. I feel she wants to win so bad that she will literally sell her soul to get the win, and that is something that really scares me about her.

And if you don't believe me, please explain why the thought of losing makes her so emotional.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires...

She pawns it off on wanting the best for the people but you look at some of her attacks, including on Obama and you have to wonder. Dirty politics does not bring good things to the American people.

Submitted by j on May 23, 2008 - 11:55pm.

I think Clinton actually has a great strategy. The next president and his party will be blamed for the Great Recession. She is insuring that McCain will win by weakening Obauma, so she can run 2012.

She will be a great president, because times will get better under her administration. It will not be because "you can only go up once you hit bottom".

After all her husband was given credit for the Internet boom that started when the Internet was privatised in 1992 (under Bush 41,just one day after Gore created it). It is not what you do, but what you get credit for doing.

Submitted by speedingpullet on May 24, 2008 - 10:09am.

I know she's brought down a TON of ire on the blogs about this soundbite. Lots of people calling for her to step down and/or keep taking the meds...

Even though I'm an Obama supporter, I think she simply misspoke. They both look dog-tired at this point. She could have been a bit more gracious about her 'apology' - especially as she seems to have missed the point about her inference re: Obama/assassination by concentrating instead on just saying sorry to the Kennedys.
Still, the Obama camp seem to be leaving it alone, so if they're not worried, neither am I. I certainly don't think she needs some of the things described (in detail) that I've read on the likes of Huffpost...

Bad luck too, on it running all over the Memorial Day weekend.

She'll drag this on until the bitter end - that being around midnight of June 3rd. I think she's thoroughly scuppered her chances, if she ever had any, of getting the VP slot, and I hope for her sake that she doesn't suffer from another 'foot-in-mouth' moment before the inevitable conclusion of this bunfight.

I'd never vote for her if she was the nominee, and I'd have to think long and hard about withholding my vote, should she be chosen as Obama's VP, but I think its best just to wait this out - she will eventually have to step down, and there's nothing anyone (besides herself) that can do to dissuade or coerce her into doing it sooner.

I lived in London during Bill Clinton's presidency, so only have a filtered - but largely favourable - memory of his time in office. But this whole campaign has lowered my estimation of them greatly. I know that alls fair in love and politics, but I don't think I've ever seen two people so power-hungry (and obvious about it) in my life.

Roll on november, and lets hope this fiasco doesn't drag on until the DNC.

Submitted by sandiego on May 24, 2008 - 10:58am.

This country is having trouble electing a 72 year old white guy or a 47 year old half-black guy. I seriously doubt that they would even consider a 65 year old white woman in 2012.

Submitted by sheilawellington on May 24, 2008 - 11:52am.

This is perfect Hillarylogic:

(1) A miracle at the DNC can give me the nomination. Right?
(2) What if Obama gets assassinated?

Unless you can prove with 100.00% uncertainty that neither (1) nor (2) can happen, I stay in the race.

Screw the party. Screw the nation. I want to win, and anybody asking me step down is a misoginist!!!

Submitted by afx114 on May 24, 2008 - 12:50pm.

Am I the only one that thinks this campaign has driven her off the deep end? I swear she seems increasingly mentally unstable as this thing goes on. This comment is just more of the same crap she's been spewing over the past couple months.

I honestly feel bad for her. Its like she's having a mental breakdown with all the cameras on her. Could you imagine having your mental breakdown broadcast 24/7 for all the world to see?

I compare it to finals week in college - I remember being a fucking zombie during finals. It felt like my brain had melted and I was simply a walking mass of flesh and bone. But finals were ever only one week long. Imagine a year and a half of finals weeks! Ouch. I'd be a psychopath after this too. Obama, meanwhile, has stayed cool, calm, and collected throughout this whole thing. Even with all the Wright and bitter dustups, he keeps on chugging, getting more presidential as time goes on. That, to me, is the sign of a good candidate. The one who went off the deep end? Not so much.

Submitted by Ex-SD on May 24, 2008 - 1:39pm.

Three major points that have become very apparent as a result of her continuing her campaign beyond where she should have:
1. She has proven herself to be an absolute disaster as a manager of people.
2. She cannot mange money. Her campaign is over $20 million in debt despite the fact that she has raised over $100 million dollars
3. She has no control over her big mouth. She blurts out idiotic things at the most inappropriate times. Can you imagine her doing this in a meeting with a head of another country?

What irritates me the most about Hillary is that she continues to portray herself as a victim and tells lies about things that she claims to have done. Remember her story about coming under hostile fire that turned out to be a huge lie?

Submitted by jficquette on May 24, 2008 - 4:55pm.

She is simply not that bright of a person. She flunked the D.C. Bar exam which is one reason she ended up being a lawyer in Arkansas.

A lot of the stuff she stays is just plain stupid like this sniper fire deal. Come on, what a liar plus how smart is someone that would try to get away with something like that?

Democrats are just now seeing in Hillary what Republicans have always seen in her.

However, while Hillary would not be beyond having Obama killed I think that in this case she simply meant it like anything could happen.

When RFK got killed it was a huge event right out of left field. No one expected it and it changed everything. I sort of thingkHillary was referring to something that could come out of left field and change things in an similar far reaching manner as RFK's death did.

Submitted by murf2222 on May 24, 2008 - 6:30pm.

She was simply alluding to the fact that history has shown that the Democratic candidates did not know where they stood til June in the past. THATS IT!

So is it now in poor judgement to reference a historical fact?

This country has turned into a bunch of politically correct pussies.

Murf2222

BTW- I HATE Hillary, don't care for Obama and think McCain is an asswipe that wants to continue Bush's pathetic legacy.
They are ALL inadequate to lead, and the fact that they are part of this corrupt system of lobbyists/pact money/special interest groups makes me sick to my stomach!

Submitted by afx114 on May 24, 2008 - 7:49pm.

Historical fact? Bill had wrapped up the 1992 nomination mainly by March. Tsongas dropped out then, and Brown got spanked by Clinton in early April.

If you're going to site 'facts' at least get them straight. There seems to be a pattern amongst both Hilary and her supporters of changing/bending the facts.

Submitted by HarryBosch on May 25, 2008 - 2:22am.

murf2222, in this day and age anyone who becomes President of the United States owes somebody something. Some people may start off their political careers as state assemblyman or state senators with altruistic values but I am sure that by the time they reach national levels they end up in the pockets of special interest groups.

The first person that comes to my mind as being independent of special interest groups and yet rising to a national political level was Gen. Colin Powell when he served as Secretary of State.

At one time when I was considering a run at the local school district I approached the local newpapers about doing a story on me and the first thing they asked me was how much money was I going to spend on advertisements :)

Also, when I was looking for endorsements I was told that the trustees on the (conservative) school board - a USD in Orange County - needed to first know where I stood on issues of abortion, religion, etc.

So anyone who rises up the political ladder in this country is going to owe someone something - at the very least the party that helped them win. And everything owed trickles down from there.

Submitted by murf2222 on May 25, 2008 - 8:55am.

Sad but evidently true HarryBosch.

Where I get disheartened is the fact that everyone seems to accept our system of legal bribery.

again, sad but true.

Murf2222

Submitted by murf2222 on May 25, 2008 - 11:04am.

AFX114.......hey, don't shoot the messenger here buddy. I was just trying to convey to you short-sighted nin-com-poops what the *jist* of her comment was all about.

I could give a rats-ass about how the "history" of it actually played out.

Murf2222

Submitted by Casca on May 25, 2008 - 11:31am.

LOL, I'm with you murf. As for the answer to the post title, pretty much everything.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.