Hillary's strategy: Either I get the nom, or we ALL go down in flames

[DesEtoiles]

[lvx35]

1. You know, I have yet to hear one Hillary supporter say that.

Why do you?

[Cha]

12. Because they act like they see no evil, hear no evil,

speak no evil except when it comes to Obama ..Then, Katy Bar The Door!

[niceypoo]

30. Another stink bomb thread by an Obama supporter

I am curious when Obamas supporters are going to stop offering up cockamamie conspiracy theories and attacking people and begin debating the issues?

[cali]

52. If you can't see that Clinton supporters set off as many stink bombs

than you're simply blinded by partisanship and not remotely credible on this subject.

[MadBadger]

46. Umm...Hillary....Politics of Fear...Ring a bell?

[nolabels]

60. We know it's just SO wrong to talk about things that might seem delicate.............

and especially on subjects that are indefensible. I don't really have a most favorite but i do have a most unfavorite :shrug:

The original poster does have a point until one considers that HRC might be secretly be running in another entirely different party altogether (aka, the corporate party)

[DesEtoiles]

2. Hillary is selfish and does not care how much damage she does to our party

[KennedyGuy]

6. Norma is apparantly Hillarys therapist, or a mind reader or something..

[durrrty libby]

8. What a bunch of silly drama. Grow up baby. waaaaaaa

[LittleClarkie]

45. Well, I must say that certainly raised the level of discourse around here

all the way from kindergarten to first grade.

[sufrommich]

61. It's reached epic proportions.Unbelievable. nt

[bellasgrams]

13. I see it differently. Obama is playing dirty and getting called

on it and he's showing his anger. Much like some of his supporters.

[Cha]

19. Obama is not playing dirty...how closed can

your eyes be? hilary and bill are down in the gutter since Obama's polls started rising..smearin' and jeering so much that several of their surrogates have had to publicly apologize..where were you when all that went down?

[niceypoo]

31. Does endlessly posting attack threads help the party?

Do you even care about the issues?

[VotesForWomen]

49. yep, count the anti-hillary attack threads vs any other candidate attack threads; hill is being

viscously attacked, left, right, and center, by people who claim they can't stand the clinton's 'dirty tricks' and 'smear tactics.'

[VotesForWomen]

47. yeah, she should just drop out and let obama win. nt

[Dogmudgeon]

3. And she eats babies, too.

Not to mention that shooting incident with Bambi's mother.

--p!

[Cha]

Way to keep your eyes closed with

assinine hyperbole to distract from the real hilary and bil problem infecting our nation.

[Dogmudgeon]

51. "... assinine hyperbole ..."

"... the real hilary (sic) and bil (sic) problem infecting our nation."

So self-righteously angry you even forgot how to spell and capitalize words.

Pot, meet Kettle.

--p!

[Buzz Clik]

4. If Hillary gets the nomination, we've still got problems.

She will be viable against only one or two GOP candidates, and it will be very close against them.

[awaysidetraveler]

58. Yep, I won't vote for her. Why would I vote for Rupert Murdoch's favorite for Fox?

[K Gardner]

5. Sounds pretty much like the Clinton's Scorched Earth Policy, yup.

[Cha]

24. Did you see post # 10? This is an exerpt..

snip~
"Think about how the Clinton campaign responded to Bob Johnson's smear. When she was caught between a rock and a big donor, look how she responded.

First, they denied it was a smear and "took him on his word". Yeah, right. Unlike less powerful surrogates, they couldn't get Johnson to walk the plank. Finally, after Johnson was rightfully shamed into apologizing, Clinton conveniently flip-flopped claiming Johnson was "out of bounds". Hillary was for the smear before she was against it. It's familiar territory for her.

And, if it's true that Hillary is not campaigning in South Carolina, this is just the Clintons lowering expectations."

[K Gardner]

33. Wow. Someone should be compiling this chyte :-) In Diary form !

[Cha]

36. "Between ..A rock and big donor" :)

I like the way Karen Russell has, like you say, pricelessly put this together, so far..she'll have miles more to write before it's over.

[jefferson_dem]

7. That's it.

Disgraceful.

[IndianaGreen]

9. Hillary will not get many votes from independents

so her only chance of winning is if the GOP nominates someone that will scare a lot of people off, like Huckabee.

[DJ13]

10. Zip It, Bill!

Karen Russell
Tue Jan 22, 10:50 AM ET

Senator Obama nailed it during the South Carolina debate when he mentioned Bill Clinton, "I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes."

http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/huffpost/cm_huffpost/storytext/082590/26014641/SIG=118dkmkjr/*http://hillaryattacks.barackobama.com/
Don't get me wrong. I love Bill Clinton. I always have. I hope I always will. But lately, not so much.

In the '90s President Clinton's slickness was just sad and creepy. I remember "slick" Clinton when he fibbed that he "didn't inhale". I cringed when Clinton wagged his finger at America insisting that he did not "have sexual relations with that woman." I was downright embarrassed when, with a straight-face, Clinton declared "that depends on the definition of what "is" is.

Well, "slick" Clinton is back. Frankly, I'm disappointed.

Before Iowa, "Hillary the Inevitable" had the numbers, the machine and the name on her side in this race. Despite being the clear and unequivocal underdog, Obama built a grassroots campaign, brought in independents and got disillusioned Republicans to cross the aisle.

Obama starting gaining ground and closing the gap. That's when the "fun" started. That's when Hillary told reporters about her plans to attack Obama.

For months, we saw "the inevitable frontrunner" running a tight and disciplined campaign. Then as Obama rose in the polls, suddenly Hillary and her surrogates started dropping a series of "misunderstood" slurs. They fit a familiar pattern, "smear, play dumb, own up and apologize". Rinse, lather and repeat.

We are supposed to believe that as Obama gained ground on Clinton that it's just mere coincidence that Clinton surrogates painted Obama as a risky "shucking and jiving", "roll of the dice", "cocaine-loving", "drug-dealing", ";Reagan-loving", "closet-Muslim" , "fairytale-living", "establishment", "less black than President Clinton" "rookie"?

We are supposed to believe that these are isolated "mistakes". Remember these are the people who went after Senator Obama's kindergarten record and then tried play it off as a joke.

Now it appears that "Trasher-in-Chief" Bill is in charge of keeping the "fun" going. Apparently, the Clinton campaign figured out that having Hillary taking the cheap shots at her opponents made her less "likable".

It started with Clinton trashing Obama on the war. When a red-faced and angry Clinton twisted Obama's anti-war record calling it a "fairytale". However, according to the New York Times, "; a review of Mr. Obama's statements on Iraq since 2002 shows that he has opposed the war against Saddam Hussein consistently, calling it ''dumb'' and ''rash.'' "

All of the Clinton's huffing and puffing won't change the fact that Hillary Clinton voted for the war and that Obama has always been against it.

Then in Nevada, Clinton claimed that Obama was running ads "telling Republicans that they ought to just register as Democrats for a day so they can beat Hillary and go out and be Republicans next week and vote in the primary. Doesn't sound like the new politics to me."

This simply isn't true. Those ads don't exist. To many, the idea of getting Republicans to cross the aisle and become "Obama Republicans" is appealing. Remind me again, what is wrong with trying to woo independents and Republicans? Taylor Marsh seems to think there's something wrong with that.

Ms. Marsh, also ran with the Clinton exaggeration of voter intimidation, "New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign had a story it wanted to tell this week, so it turned to a friendly blogger. Taylor Marsh, who in the past has been paid by a union now backing Clinton, quickly ran with the story: Members of the Culinary Union were being intimidated to vote for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, whom the union endorsed last week. Under scrutiny, the story didn't exactly pan out. But no matter."

President Clinton went on to claim Obama said Republicans had all the good ideas, "Her principal opponent said that since 1992, the Republicans have had all the good ideas...I can't imagine any Democrat seeking the presidency would say they were the party of new ideas for the last 15 years. But it sounded good in Reno I guess...So now it turns out you can choose between somebody who thinks our ideas or better or the Republicans had all the good ideas."

The Clinton assertion that Obama said Republicans had "all the good ideas" just isn't true. Obama said the Republican challenged "conventional wisdom" and moved the country in a fundamentally different direction and that we Democrats can learn from that strategy. That people wanted optimism, clarity and to talk differently about issues and values. Obama pointed out that the unfortunately the Republican ideas promoted by this strategy were bad and wrong.

When Obama was asked how his being the nominee would help other Democrats get elected he said, "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating and he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is, people wanted clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamic and entrepreneurship that had been missing, alright? I think Kennedy, twenty years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it just has to do with the times. I think we're in one of those times right now. Where people feel like things as they are going aren't working. We're bogged down in the same arguments that we've been having, and they're not useful. And, you know, the Republican approach, I think, has played itself out. I think it's fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last ten, fifteen years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom. Now, you've heard it all before. You look at the economic policies when they're being debated among the Presidential candidates and it's all tax cuts. Well, you know, we've done that, we tried it. That's not really going to solve our energy problems, for example. So, some of it's the times. And some of it's, I think, there's maybe a generation element to this, partly. In the sense that there's a, I didn't did come of age in the battles of the 60s. I'm not as invested in them. And so I think I talk differently about issues. And I think I talk differently about values. And that's why, I think we've been resonating with the American people."

Senator Clinton continued "the twist" of Obama's words during the debate. Why is Team Billary twisting the facts on Senator Obama? They are playing to win, truth be damned. Campaigning for his wife is one thing but continuing to trash Obama with misrepresentations is frankly disappointing. Daddy Bush didn't trash John McCain when McCain was running against Shrub. Clinton needs to rein it in. If Hillary can't control Bill or her surrogates, why do we believe she's ready to lead on day one?

Think about how the Clinton campaign responded to Bob Johnson's smear. When she was caught between a rock and a big donor, look how she responded.

First, they denied it was a smear and "took him on his word". Yeah, right. Unlike less powerful surrogates, they couldn't get Johnson to walk the plank. Finally, after Johnson was rightfully shamed into apologizing, Clinton conveniently flip-flopped claiming Johnson was "out of bounds". Hillary was for the smear before she was against it. It's familiar territory for her.

And, if it's true that Hillary is not campaigning in South Carolina, this is just the Clintons lowering expectations.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080122/cm_huffpost/082590;_ylt=AtDt1i93AQHVgpICphNm1Das0NUE

[Cha]

14. Wow, DJ13! This is good..all that crap

wrapped up article by Karen Russell..thank you!


"Trasher-in-Chief" And it was "Slick Willie" that he was called and I hated it then but now it fits too well.

[GoldieAZ49]

18. Team Billary twisting the facts on Senator Obama?

Spot on!

Thank you

[Cha]

21. Welcome to DU, Goldie..

nice to have you aboard!

[GoldieAZ49]

23. Thank you

Highly addictive site!

[Cha]

25. Tell me about it...I've been

sittin' here since 2002:P

[GoldieAZ49]

26. rut roh

good thing my chair has wheels...wish the coffee pot did!

[Barack_America]

11. You are correct, ma'm.

That is dead on.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

17. Who are you are calling republicons?

Hmmm?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

15. I agree with that.

[mondo joe]

20. Wow, you think Hillary Clinton is that powerful?

Damn. :lol:

[opihimoimoi]

22. I don't see this at all...maybe I am an optimist....blind....but as an intj type, I feel she is

way better than them Pub Dude they got running....

[Cha]

29. This is still the primaries, opihi..

and some of us don't want hily and bil in the whitehouse again and we've been following what they've been up to for the 7-8 years quite closely.

[opihimoimoi]

43. I realize this is still primary time....But I can get behind any of the 3 left

All I said was she is way better than any of the Pubs running....

Obviously who you support is your choice.......

[wisteria]

27. What happened to the compassionate tears?

I was almost taken in by them. Now I realize I was foolish to believe anything the Clinton's do is genuine.

[mondo joe]

32. What tears are you imagining now?

[Skwmom]

28. It's all about me, me, me, me, me with the Clintons. They could

care less what they do to their party or their country.

[Metric System]

34. Yeah, I know!

I mean, why can't Hillary just step aside and let Obama have the nomination. It's like totally unfair! How dare she stand in his way? These primaries are so silly anyway. People want Obama as the nominee so he should get the nomination based on that fact alone. It's not like Hillary or Edwards have any support so this whole process his pointless.

[dugggy]

35. Hell hath no fury like a women scorned

God save us if Hillary does not get the nomination.
There will be hell to pay.

[GoldieAZ49]

40. LOL

yes and Bill will have to live with that hell and pay for it everyday.

Makes me want to vote early and vote often, for OBAMA!

[VotesForWomen]

50. or like obama supporters when they're losing. ha ha. nt

[grantcart]

37. Its the failsafe option

in the event that they don't get the nomination they will sabotage the general election with the hopes that McCain gets the nominatino and they then will have another option in 4 years. If another democrat gets it they won't have a shot for 8 years and she will be too old.

[ToeBot]

38. Hardly seems like an either/or proposition to me. nt

[Quixote1818]

39. K & R!!!! nt

[Quixote1818]

41. They are acting much like the Bush / Rove Administration

As though they are entitled to the office and because they are sooooooooo brilliant they simply MUST be president to save the world no matter who they walk over and throw to the gutter to get there. I use to like Hillary and Bill but now they make me want to heave.

[Hart2008]

42. Even more so than, Bill, Hillary needs a third party candidate to win the GE.

So the scorched earth plan makes some sense from that perspective.

She is trying to win an insider's game for the nomination.

Her negatives are so high that she needs a third party candidate to have a chance to win the GE.

Neither Bill nor Hillary ever really cared about the Dem party itself.

It is simply a vehicle they want to use again.

It is well documented that in '87 and '88 Billary sabotaged the Hart campaign after Bill flunked his interview to be Hart's V.P. Hart said Bill Clinton, "didn't believe in anything". After word got back to the Clinton's they set out to damage the front-runner, Hart.

Now the Clinton's and the Bushes are good friends.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise.

:puke:

[Maven]

44. Absolute bullshit. In fact, it is supporters of other candidates

who say MOST OFTEN that they won't vote for Hillary in the GE, not the other way around.

[LeftCoast]

48. Would you like to provide ANY substantiation for your claim?

I'll just wait here holding my breath...

:bluebox:

:bluebox::bluebox:

:bluebox::bluebox::bluebox:

:bluebox::bluebox::bluebox::bluebox:...

[Essene]

53. Agreed. It's narcissism and sense of entitlement at its finest

I do not see the Dems winning this year at this rate.

And i think astute observers will mark this period as a turning point in the downfall of the party.

I TRULY believe one of the 2 parties will collapse in the coming decade, unable to hold sway with moderates or to maintain credibility. I had always assumed this would be the GOP, due to the tensions between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives... but so far the GOP look better poised to hold together.

While the Dems are race baiting, dividing and alienating their own.

[adabfree]

54. BINGO

[Perry Logan]

55. Kinda scary how Hillary haters think they can read Hillary's mind.

Needless to say, the thoughts they "read" sound like the villain in a bad comic book. I think it's classic delusional thinking.

[HamdenRice]

62. "classic delusional thinking" ... uh, Mr. Pot?

I'd like to introduce you to Mrs. Kettle. Well actually not because the OP is not delusional.

Can't you understand that we can infer her scortched earth policy from her tactics without her stating, "my strategy is ..." Don't you see that it would be idiotic for anyone to expect her to announce a scortched earth policy?

[awaysidetraveler]

56. Bit of a catch-22: she gets it and we go down in flames anyway.

[awaysidetraveler]

57. Why would I want to be represented by Hillary care, the UAE and Rupert Murdoch?

[babylonsister]

59. Sure is looking that way. nt

[DesEtoiles]

63. kick