HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:02 PM
Original message |
Wow, you hearing Begala on CNN? |
|
Talking about how supporters and donors wanted change in the campaign - that they'd be happy if she were winning. He also points out that Obama won every demographic group, including lower-income. wow! He's really laying it out about Clinton.
|
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message |
1. He also admitted it looks like he's the only Hillary supporter. |
|
he was joking, but it was an insight into where his thoughts are
|
jackson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message |
2. And he is saying Hilllary should adopt Edward's populism |
|
Funny how much importance the msm is giving Edwards and his message now that he is gone while the ignored him for a year when he was running. :eyes:
|
HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Another reinvention - to the message of a candidate who dropped out? |
|
I understand what he's saying, and all respect to John, but I don't think she can do a better job with that message than Edwards did.
|
flor de jasmim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. But John could've, if they'd given him more air time |
HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. I agree with that. But Hillary? No hope for her on that score. nt |
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. This is still a very uncertain outcome, but you are right on about Edwards |
|
I am an Obama supporter, but part of the problem is that everyone wanted to move their primaries up
Personally, I believe it didn't give enough chance to know the candidates, and also caused some to drop out earlier than might have been necessary
|
HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. I think you're right - a less front-loaded primary season would give us more choices. |
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. It seems we always rush things without thinking them out |
|
After the 2000 election we were pushing voting machines, so they gave us touch screens with no accountability
when the real issue was making sure ever vote counted, NOT the machines
|
HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. Every state wants to be first - if a few had laid back a bit, they'd have more impact at the end. |
housewolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
The MSM talks about how the campaign has gone one for a full year already, but most people don't really pay any attentioin until the primaries start. Having 22 primaries all on the same day that early in February was really a bad idea, INMHO. It was horribly hard on the candidates and unfair to the voters who didn't have a chance to see or get to know the candidates. It was terrifically exciting for the media, I would say though, and other political spectators.
|
HeraldSquare212
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-12-08 09:06 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Damn! Now the nuclear bill - which she co-sponsored! nt |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 10:34 AM
Response to Original message |