Clinton is toxic on the ballot in certain districts, look for Blue Dog Dems to get behind Obama

[Nimrod2005]

Purple/Red districts can't afford to have their ballots poisoned by her name. The country can't either.

The same applies for Hispanic areas out west: NV, CO, AZ, and NM will all reject her.

[OHdem10]

1. This is how the Democratic Party stays impotent and

will lose elections.

The Party should have sorted out this stuff and never permitted
her to run if this true. I question this seriously--of course
i question Blue dogs too.

Let us get real. We have one set of establkishment trying
to get power over another part of the establishment.

Any excuse thrown at the wall--see if it sticks.


The Establishment is always great at jerking defeat from the jaws
of victory.

[suston96]

2. Whatta crock of pooh-pooh......

[rinsd]

3. Bullshit offered with zero evidence.

"The same applies for Hispanic areas out west: NV, CO, AZ, and NM will all reject her."

Hillary is popular amongst Hispanics so continue to shovel bs.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070628/1a_cover28.art.htm

[robcon]

4. Another thread headline without a bit of evidence.

Do people like Nimrod 2005 ever get tired of being such wankers?

[Renew Deal]

9. We can dig up polls all you want.

But I'll tell you from first hand experience. I'm a Democratic Committeeman from LI, NY. I am working on getting good challengers and running good races next year. The consensus in my group is that Hillary would hurt our challenger campaigns. We'd be better off with almost anyone else at the top of the ticket.

[rinsd]

14. So dig up the polls.

[cloudythescribbler]

19. This important point merits its OWN THREAD!!!! nt

[OHdem10]

5. This confirms the notion that Obama is to the Right Of Clinton.

There is no group more conservative than Blue Dogs.

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

6. Toxic is a good word

for the effect the Clintons are having on national unity right now. Between the racist attacks and other dirty campaign tactics, they're easily outdoing Rethuglicans here.

[Nimrod2005]

17. YUK!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. Another Ipse Dixit Argument From Nimrod

~

[Renew Deal]

8. Hillary would kill off any of our challenger campaigns where I live.

We'd be DOA. We really need someone else on the ballot. And I live in NY.

[paulk]

10. back that up.

no, really.

Where in NY?

What races?

[Renew Deal]

12. LI State assembly and senate.

Amongst others.

[paulk]

21. I find that hard to believe, considering how popular Clinton

is in NY. It's certainly not the case upstate that she would hurt downticket challenges. As I'm sure you're aware, she won counties that no Democrat has won in 50 years.

I don't find what you're saying credible at all.

[Renew Deal]

22. Hillary ran against no one and spent $35 million

She got less votes than Spitzer and the most popular local dems.

[paulk]

23. wow! a difference of 2%!!!

Spitzer ran against a nobody also. So did Schumer when he got 71%.

Big Fucking Deal.

your argument doesn't hold water.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. Another Ipse Dixit Argument

Keep em comin...

[Renew Deal]

13. Just cause you don't like it doesn't make it untrue

When you go to the voting booth and you vote for Hillary, you're knowingly voting for suicide for the Democratic party. You have to live with yourself.

[sniffa]

24. i'm sure they'll find someone other than themselves to blame

maybe Nader?

[Little Star]

15. Pass the frigin' Kool-aide!!!! n/t

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

16. Definitely rumblings about this in Nevada

The Clintons' recent campaigning methods and the divisiveness they are inspiring, are toxic beyond description

[codeindigo]

18. is this democratic underground or

attack hillary underground? i came here supporting all three candidates..but it's quite obvious some people are not here to support any~~ especially hillary! they are here to try and tear her down~~~ what a disgrace. dishonorable to say the least.

[last_texas_dem]

20. Do you have any evidence to back up these claims?

I don't doubt that there are conservative-leaning Democratic districts whose Reps might be hurt by sharing a ballot with Clinton, but where is the evidence that having Obama on the ballot wouldn't have the same effect?

Additionally, since Obama is generally considered to be more progressive than Clinton, why would the conservative "Blue Dogs" be more likely to support him?

I doubt the validity of your last claim as well; is there any evidence that Obama is more popular with Hispanic voters than Clinton?