Obama all about starry-eyed hope, Hillary realistic solutions

[quinnox]

One thing that is plain, Obama is all about personality, and MTV style celebrity. Many of his supporters are unable to talk about what he means by change, in concrete terms.

Obama is a perfect media creation phenomenon, you have to give him credit for that.

But Hillary is all about hard headed and pragmatic solutions to the USA's problems.

Hillary has been there and done that. She has the intellect and workmanlike skills to get things done.

You know, maybe Hillarys appeal is not as sexy or as hip as the Obama's, but it is more real.

[book_worm]

1. She helped create one of the biggest problems with her vote to authorize Bush's war.

[jackpan1260]

17. I guess that is one of Hillary's "realistic solutions"

I wouldn't vote for her in a million years.

[krkaufman]

85. I'm sure it seems real to the families of the 4,000 dead soldiers ...

... and millions of Iraqis dead or displaced.

And it's good to see she put her experience on the Iraq vote to good use in trending the same way in support of the Kyl/Lieberman amendment, branding Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Great diplomatic experience.

[Tulkas]

39. Don't forget about the Flag Burning Bill she Sponsored. free speech suppression (BUSH JR.?)

[Tulkas]

2. Ted Kennedy disagrees, but I suppose you know better

NOT!!!

[quinnox]

3. that was disappointing

What is Ted thinking?

[Tulkas]

10. That Clintons are liars and can't be trusted, that Bill disgraced the office once already

and we can't risk letting his wife do it too.

That Al Gore would have beaten Bush if our party had not been weakened by Clinton.

That Bill never would have won in the first place had not Ross Perot played spoiler.



All the sensible stuff, not the propaganda you have fallen for

[557188]

83. Gore lost because

He ran a horrible campaign and forgot to cover his base.

Joesph Lieberman lost Gore the election. I voted for Nader because of Lieberman.

Blaming it on Clinton is beyond stupid.

[krkaufman]

88. Gore lost for a lot of reasons.

And pretending Clinton's behavior in the White House and lying to everyone about it had no effect on the 2000 election is clinical denial.

[rodeodance]

100. "we can't risk letting his wife do it too"---That is sick of you to say this.

[DURHAM D]

43. His staff is not serving him well.

Ted bought into the media race baiting. He is apparently getting his info from tv.

However, Ted is just trying to be relevant. If Hillary wins the W.H. that means the major power broker for the party is still the Clintons. A friend called me from Oklahoma this am absolutely livid at old Ted (and Kerry to a lesser degree). He feels like the old fools are destroying the party by endorsing Obama's shenanigans.

The other reason he called is that Bill is going to be in Oklahoma tomorrow and my friend is gathering up friends (older wealthy Republican women who have finally figured out they really are feminists)to go see him. He wanted to know how to get front row seats or into a private reception area. I gave him the Clinton National headquarters office number. He already has the Oklahoma number but has not received the confirmation he is seeking. I told him to have everyone get out their checkbooks and it won't be a problem. He said all the women have their pens and checkbooks out and are ready to write.

Its the good ole boy stuff that has caused these women to get pissed off.

[krkaufman]

89. Re: "getting his info from tv"

Yes, like the video showing when Clinton was asked about Obama's comment that it takes two Clintons to take him on, and Bill responds that "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88." No way to spin that other than Bill trying to diminish Obama's victory in South Carolina as nothing more than blacks voting for their own. One doesn't have to be a full-blown card-carrying KKK member to make racist remarks, and Clinton hit that one over the fence.

[krkaufman]

86. That he's now worked with both candidates closely ... and prefers Obama.

Seems pretty clear.

[WinkyDink]

15. I knew better, when I worked against his attempted usurpation of President Carter.

Next question?

[Ken Burch]

75. If Ted had been nominated in '80, there would have BEEN no Reagan Administration

The California Fossil was only elected because Carter, good man that he was, was hopelessly unpopular and had alienated the base by backing the Republican economic priority of low inflation over the people's economic goal of full employment.

Although Teddy didn't help matters, I must admit, by running an absolutely terrible campaign in those primaries. You'd think a Kennedy would know how to get elected.

[rodeodance]

97. Kennedy made a big mistake today --I do not agree with him on this issue.

[rodeodance]

98. Hillary got dissed for the 2 or 1 with Bill--now we got 2 for 1 with Ted. Life is funny at times.

[redqueen]

4. My biggest worry with Obama is that his Senate election is said to have been a shoo-in.

Was it a tough fight? If it wasn't... we may be in for a rude awakening if he gets the nod.

[quinnox]

7. yes, it is a legit fear

Obama has been prone to blunders, and he would be too easy a target for the GOP.

[cali]

22. uh, if he wins a tough fought nomination

and this is one- he'll be ready.

[MNDemNY]

24. He ran against alan keyes....'nuff said.

[redqueen]

30. Exactly.

*sigh*

[9119495]

34. Who did HRC run against?

No one...in either election. You should be embarrassed.

[MNDemNY]

35. Why?

The ghoul used "health reasons" as his excuse for not facing her, but she sucks as well. So why should I be embarrassed?

[9119495]

54. Alan Keyes is to Obama as republican stooge Lazio and other

woman is to Hillary Clinton.

Neither faced a tough campaign.

Though, Obama's resume did scare away Illinois hero Mike Ditka and all the other republican heavyweights that considered a run prior to Keyes.

[MNDemNY]

78. Thought it was Ditka's heart problems.

[9119495]

104. Deet-ka versus a heart problem

I'll take Deet-ka.

[krkaufman]

93. Yes, that final caveat is key. Keyes was just the only candidate they could find ...

... to run against Obama, after his previous opponent, Ryan abruptly ended his campaign. Also, Obama was leading Ryan in early polling by 20%.


p.s. Interesting sidenote... Obama's Senate election was the first U.S. Senate race where the candidates of both major parties were African American.

[krkaufman]

87. Keyes was the second candidate. The first dropped-out ...

... after some embarrassing news re: his marriage to actress Jeri Ryan was leaked. But Obama was already killing him in the polls, before the news ever came out.

Note, also, that Obama ended-up running against Keyes because no other Republican had the scrotum to try going up against the freight train that was Obama. He would have destroyed whomever had been in the race.

[SammyWinstonJack]

52. I think Obama and his supporters are in for a rude awakening. The rest of us, not so much.

[rodeodance]

99. Last few days seem analogous to the PRE-WAR run-up. and look what happened.

[sniffa]

65. Yes, and Hillary had the campaign fights of her life both time.

[redqueen]

68. Errr... is that sarcasm?

Heh... I don't know for sure... there seems to be some disagreement... I do know Edwards had a tough fight, though!

:)

[sniffa]

71. yes, it was.

if people want to make a big deal, that Obama faced Alan Keyes, they should take the log out of their own eye first.

Hillary had barely-marginal competition at best... though some hillarious Hillary supporters here claim she "beat" Ghouliani, since he dropped out for fake cancer.

[redqueen]

72. Well as an Edwards supporter... it's a fair point. (nt)

[Armstead]

70. A tough fight against Alan Keyes?

No, it wasn't.

[in_cog_ni_to]

79. He ran against ALAN KEYES. Enough said. n/t

[Critters2]

91. It absolutely was a shoo-in!! He ran against a carpetbagger

the Repugs dragged in at the last minute, when their first guy drop out over a sex scandal. Obama ran against this crazy:

Keyes got about 25% of the vote. It wasn't even a contest.

[dmallind]

5. In all fairness neither have been that specific

And frankly neither should be. Even in GE campaigns broad strokes resonate much better than detailed solutions. It's sad but true. I wish it weren't. However the candidate who puts out very detailed proposals with funding sources, budget outlays, cuts etc is simply giving ammunition to attackers. Tsongas proved that no matter how much peoiple SAY they want detailed answers to tough questions, and no matter how much a tiny minority really DO, the vast majority prefer, or at least reward, vague comforting pablum and blithe optimism.

[quinnox]

16. you have a point

Seems reasonable.

[redqueen]

19. Edwards has been specific.

Not that it seems to matter. :P

[dmallind]

25. To some degree

which is why I like the guy - but he simply has not been able to get traction by it. Which kind of reinforces the point in a way.

[redqueen]

28. Yup!

I love that his plans are so detailed and also that he was the first one out with them... driving the other to to adopt more progressive positions.

Love that. :)

[THUNDER HANDS]

6. funny, because everyone I know who supports Hillary

couldn't tell you a damn thing about her stance on any issue. But they know she's a woman, and that's good enough for them.

[quinnox]

12. Certainly a woman as prez would be historic

And if some women have that as a high priority, I say why not, more power to them.

[allinktup]

58. If that's the priority... Just look at Pelosi

I was so happy when she was elected speaker... That lasted all of a minute. "Impeachment is off the table" and now giving Bush immunity for his war crimes.

What a horrid mistake she has been. And it has nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman. She's just a coward.

[burythehatchet]

67. ba-da-bing!

[rodeodance]

101. Obama folks will say/do anything to win.

[Avalux]

8. Hillary is establishment; status-quo Washington.

I don't believe what she says because she's a proven liar and the worst for me - her inability to admit her IWR vote was wrong.

[enid602]

9. 'feel good'

The last thing we need right now is another 'feel good' president. We need someone who can clean up this mess.

[quinnox]

14. very much so

I can't argue with that.

[krkaufman]

94. Which would best be started by someone who won't be trying to obfuscate their responsibility ...

... for getting us into the mess in the first place.

[Triana]

11. Neither of them will change anything substantially (n/t)

[MNDemNY]

26. Corporate shills...both of them.

Expect the same shit from either of them.

[Triana]

57. I certainly don't expect that anything that NEEDS to change in Washington..

...will change under an Obama or Clinton admin.

[ecstatic]

13. Hope is important for millions of disadvantaged children in this country

Really, what we need is both: Hope and action. That's why I'd love to see Clinton and Obama team up.

[Tatiana]

18. Being the "realistic" candidate isn't going to win Hillary many elections.

This is a very unique time and we are living in a very unique environment. Change not only sounds good, but it's a message that seems to fit these turbulent times.

I like Hillary, but to me, saying "I'm the realistic one" is just not going to cut it here. That sounds a lot like stay the course. She needs to show, in terms of her policy (for example - her suggestion of repealing NCLB which ALL the teachers unions and education professionals are in favor of)., that she also recognizes the need for a change.

[niceypoo]

20. Obama hasn't been running on issues

Instead relying on emotional rhetoric to reel in those who are ignorant to what the republicans have done over and over and over to the Democrats.

He has also shown himself to have a glass jaw when facing minor critique.

Hillary has taken it on the jaw for 15 years.

Do the math.

[quinnox]

23. Indeed

All points that are inarguable IMHO.

[DrFunkenstein]

33. Hillary Unraveled Very, Very Quickly

She had one poor debate performance and went into a tailspin for weeks. If it weren't for the machine she built up in New Hampshire and some dirty politicking (like the abortion mailings), her firewall wouldn't have held and she'd be a footnote.

I can only imagine what would happen when the GOP starts going after her contributors and Bill's Presidential library. Believe me, you will be hearing quite a bit about Marc and Denise Rich over the next few months if she is the nominee.

[emilyg]

60. Agree.

[rodeodance]

103. No, he is not. Instead he is running on the Glitter Effect.

[PresidentObama]

21. One of my personal concerns about Barack is his lack of focus on the issues.

As opposed to Clinton or Edwards.

Barack Obama's stump speech is about unity, coming together, and the politics of hope.

I want solutions. And I think Clinton and Edwards have been more aggressive in presenting how they'll change America, Obama seems to only say we need change. Good, great...we all agree. But your opponents are telling us how. Your turn...

And don't get me wrong, I love Barack. In many ways, I think he's going to be a strong leader within our party whether as our nominee or Senator.

But this is the reason I choose Edwards over him a long time ago, and the feelings have remained the same as I see John talk solutions and change...and Obama is just talking change with a small emphasis on the solutions part.

[quinnox]

27. Yes I give Obama credit

He has definitely inspired people more than Hillary has so far.

But it is also true the other candidates have more substance in their proposals as you say.

[PresidentObama]

31. I will agree, and also give him credit.

He's told the American people who are fed up with the status quo what they want to hear and need to hear. And kudos on that.

BUT...

I think his opponents are running circles around him when it comes to the issues.

I think Edwards has been very detailed in his proposals for our country. As has Hillary.

And I love the messages of unity, coming together, politics of hope.

But I want solutions too. Not just happy talk.

[quinnox]

32. No argument here

[DrFunkenstein]

29. We Really Have Taken The Conversation Down to 2nd Grade, How About This...

Keep in mind that Clinton - ever the hard-headed pragmatist - waited until Obama and Edwards put out their health care programs and then basically cherry-picked the two. Her environmental/energy platform is basically Obama-lite (compare them if you don't believe me).

Hillary is about winning campaigns and has legislated as such. Obama is about framing the issues successfully to create a public mandate and the goodwill in Congress needed to pass major reforms. That's not starry eyed MTV celebrity. That is a real and extremely useful talent for furthering. Even Clinton didn't have Obama's mojo, and had to rely on the triangulating strategy championed by Hillary and pilloried by the progressive movement.

[quinnox]

37. there is nothing wrong with looking at good ideas

and incorporating them into your stands. IMHO Hillary has the ability to see good ideas and form them to perfect them and keeping in mind political realities too.

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. But it does indicate that they are not core issues to her.

If she is just cherry-picking other peoples' ideas then she will not have the gut need to fight for them, and they will wind up be compromised into oblivion.

Hillary = no health care reform. At all.

[rodeodance]

102. how strage--I have read it was the reverse--Now who to believe?

[Mz Pip]

36. Simplistic generalizations

and inaccurate as well.

Can you be any more vague?

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Occam Bandage]

38. And yet on issue polls, two of the top four reasons people support Hill are always

"She's a woman" and "Married to Bill / like Bill Clinton."

[quinnox]

40. I see nothing wrong with that

[RaleighNCDUer]

47. What is "married to/like Bill' if not a non-specific hope

that the golden age of the 90s will return?

Hope, and no substance.

[Occam Bandage]

53. How can you get less substantial than gender and spouse?

[sfam]

41. If Hillary focussed on realism instead of polls for her big decisions...

She would have had this all sewn up, and would have full support from all democrats. Most of us who aren't for Hillary truly believe she knew she was doing the wrong thing in voting for the war.

And don't try giving the line that it wasn't a vote for the war - EVERYONE in the US other than Hillary apparently knew what this vote was about. Bottom line, Hillary did it to keep her electability, even though it hurt the nation. She knew better. She's far too smart not to have known better. This in a nutshell is our problem with her "realistic solutions."

[RaleighNCDUer]

48. Why, oh why, didn't she vote

"Present".

[sfam]

49. Why, oh why, didn't she vote her conscience? Integrity counts...

She knew it was wrong, and voted for war anyways.

[pberq]

42. The Oligarchy Has Picked Its Candidate!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=328345

The Oligarchy Has Picked Its Candidate!
by Stephen Fleischman | Dec 27 2007



The wreckage caused by the Republicans and the Bush Administration is even too much for the corporate oligarchy to take. Although Republicans have usually been their favored party, they now want a Democrat in the White House and they want that Democrat to be Hillary Clinton.

The Hillary-Bill combo has worked for the oligarchy before and will work for it again. They've been tried, tested, and vetted to carry forward the oligarch agenda. Our two-party system pays close attention to the dressing of democracy; there always has to be a choice, a Tweedledee and a Tweedledum and always a way to vote for a lesser of two evils -- which, unfortunately, becomes the evil of two lessers. Through the strategy of triangulation, the Clintons have achieved the strangulation of the democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Where are you, Dick Morris, now that the Clintons need you again?

The running dogs (the fourth estate) have gotten the message and you can hear the slow build of their howl. They can stage a mighty convincing horse race. But the election is already being fixed, as it was stolen in 2000 and 2004.

That's capitalism, for you. Its nature is to show the appearance of democracy, masking the actuality of oligarchic control, while robbing the working class of the surplus value it creates. The Clintons have proven they can do the oligarchy's dirty work when called upon to do it. They will get the prize money for services rendered.

So, let's follow the money.

The Military Industrial Complex is a Member of the Oligarchy (MOTO). This year, the war industry, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics, to name a few, has shelled out more money to Democratic candidates than to Republicans, and Hillary has gotten the lion's share of that. The manipulators of power always hedge their bets. They play both sided against the middle.

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/11759

[Emillereid]

45. This is such bull - the two of them have very similar solutions, but Obama

resonates with vision and the possibilities of a new kind of future. One just has to listen to young people who are inspired to enter the political process because of his candidacy. He speaks to us much as JFK did - he INSPIRES! Hillary does NOT. Hillary is the past. I was going to vote Kuncinich and then Edwards, but I think now I'm going to Obama. And I will work for him too.

[Omega3]

51. I just think it's sad

the biggest cheers at his "kennedy speech" are when the words "hope" and "change" are mentioned. What does it mean?

it's too bad the college crowd doesn't show up to vote. Looking at the people in the backround it's like they don't even care what he's saying. One is on his cell phone making sure he's on TV, the other wearing a goofy hat talking to the other 2 people next to him and pointing to somebody else in a different part of the crowd clearly not listening. It's like they are behind a movement but don't really know why.

[Lerkfish]

46. Bush has realictic solutions, too.

of course, they're neocon solutions, but hey.

[PresidentObama]

56. So because Bush has/had solutions, we shouldn't?

Nope, sorry. Logic doesn't make sense.

His solutions were the wrong solutions.

Hillary Clinton has the right solutions.

As does John Edwards. And Barack Obama.

Barack needs to talk about those solutions as well, and not just the happy talk and politics of hope stuff. That stuff sells, but when it comes to the General Election and the focus is on the issues--then what?

[Lerkfish]

64. you missed my point, but whatever.

[AllyCat]

50. Solutions. Not good ones, but solutions.

Lets see, keeping insurance and pharmaceutical companies in the medical financial picture to hurt every last American, especially the poor.

Continuing to promote and preserve this war while opening doors for Bush to attack Iran.

Voting for the (moral) bankruptcy bill that helps out creditors and screws the American people.

Supporting liquid coal as a way to get us off oil. Of course, it produces twice the greenhouse gases of oil.

Obama ain't much better, but I think I heard he dropped his support of liquid coal.

Yeah, these are solutions alright. These are solutions that any Republican might support and the stupid sheeple will buy.

[PATRICK]

55. To give her her due

that is injected to great effect in her campaign and does much to respect and elevate the voters into the real issues. You have plainly stated why they are so competitive at least as far as perceptions go. No need to apologize for either candidate and it would be great if we could merge all the best of everyone into some multi-headed super being. The final arbiters have to be the voters and all those fallible heads are divided too.

[EFerrari]

59. Solutions like NAFTA, "welfare reform" and "don't ask don't tell"?

Gotcha.

[ErnestoG]

61. Oh Hope is SOOOO EVILLLLLL

Please. Without hope, and fresh ideas, you have nothing but stagnation.

Hillary's "hard headed pragmatism" has more to do with hard heads than anything else, and be careful with "pragmatism". Just because something might be convenient and pragmatic does not always mean that its moral, or a good idea in the long run.

[busymom]

62. It's like one big

popularity contest.

I have a good friend that swears she will *never* vote for Hillary because Hillary didn't leave Bill after he had a fling with Monica...then she added...besides that...look at her thighs. They're huge. Been to the gym lately Hillary " :shrug: Women can be the worst sexists. Another friend of mine even ADMITS that she holds Hillary to a different standard and that if Hillary is the nominee, she will vote for a republican...even though she is a long-time democrat. She doesn't make much in terms of apologies..just "I know I hold her to a different standard, but I can't help it." :shrug:

[goodhue]

63. I'll take starry-eyed hope over realistic solutions any day

Realistic usually means tepid and moderate

[burythehatchet]

66. Hillary '08 - Because Hope is for LOSERS

[livetohike]

69. "Starry eyed hope" stopped the war in VietNam

I will take starry eyed hope over the ego building politics of most politicians any day.

[DrFunkenstein]

73. And Gave Women the Vote

And gave us the 5 day work week. And end 400 years of slavery.

[ErnestoG]

77. And put an end to child labor...

And brought Blacks up from the rear seats of the bus....and....

[VotesForWomen]

84. no, hard work did. if it was just starry eyed hope, it would have happened a lot sooner. nt

[ErnestoG]

105. Hope is where it all begins.

I find it darkly comical to see so many self described liberal/progressive Democrats bashing "hope". I always thought it was a philosophical underpinning of our ideology.

[avrdream]

74. We all want to have hope and we all want the best for our country.

I choose pragmatism to get there. For me, Hillary can actually do it. Barack just says he can without good plans for how to do so. I love his idea of hope and think he is a great speaker - I just choose the candidate who I believe can make the changes best.

[Bread and Circus]

76. You haven't done your homework....

First, Obama's policy positions are extraordinarily detailed, well crafted, and well laid-out on his website.

Second, his policy positions and Clinton's positions are the same for all practical purposes.

Third, Obama is the "media" candidate because he actually inspires people and brings the promise of a new type of politics.

Fourth, we don't need a bean counter for a President, we need a person of vision, wisdom, and conviction.

It's true Hillary Clinton is smart as hell and comes off knowing policy details really well. She would make a functionally great President if only she would inspire more than divide.

But no matter what Obama is a genius and has academic and practical accolades and an amazing legislative career to support that.

You haven't actually read Obama's record because it rivals Clinton's when you really read them side by side.

Anyone who has really taken the time to read has to give them both props in terms of experience and accomplishments.

I would like Hillary to take a harder stand against earmarking $$$ for private corporations but I can't find where she's done that. Obama has some great ethics reform proposals on this matter but I find Hillary's site lacking of this info. Also, she has earmarked 1.4billion for private defense contractors for her state among other private corporate welfare earmarks. Please address that if you want to get "into their records" as opposed to parroting spin.

Seriously, take the time to actually go look at their records and proposals.

[Captain Hilts]

80. Someone to lead or someone to manage. That's the choice. nt

[crawfish]

81. GREAT point.

A micromanager does not make a good president. We need a leader.

[VotesForWomen]

82. yep, but reality will sink in soon enough. nt

[sendero]

90. HRC..

.... just WHAT has she accomplished? WHAT? Not jack shit, that's what.

I'm so tired of her vaunted "experience". So what, she still votes like a puke on everything I care about.

Sure Obama is smoke and mirrors, SO IS HILLARY.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

92. If by realistic solutions, you mean Republicanism

From her early days as a Goldwater girl and canvassing minority neighborhoods for so-called "vote fraud" to her middle years as Wal-Mart board member to the recent days pushing for war with iraq and iran, she's been the GOP's best friend. In the good-cop,bad-cop scenario, corporatism triumphs no matter which side of the phony footbal game posing as 'debate' wins.

Then there's all the stuff her husband did while she was getting that 35-years of experience
-NAFTA
-GATT
-permanant MFN for China
-The Rich Pardon
-Welfare reform
etc

If she was as deeply involved in the process as she leads us to believe, then these are not just bill's wrongdoings. She has to take blame for the bad if she wants credit for what little good came from the Clinton years

[rodeodance]

95. Haven't you heard--Obama is all about the ghost of new Camalot.

[rodeodance]

96. Thank you for the post.

[eridani]

106. Hardheaded pragmatic sucking up to corporations, you mean n/t

[workinclasszero]

107. Hillary Clinton, dream killer, destroyer of all hope

Doesn't seem to be a good way to draw the american people to your cause, IMHO.:shrug:

[cooolandrew]

108. Yeah Barack is hip nothing wrong with that especaily after Bush making America very uncool...

...She may well be indstrious but image is more powerful than politics alone. The world would see instant change with a fresh new face of Obama.

[bagimin]

109. Gee thanks for the keen insight

Go Obama!