THREE Important Reasons Why Clinton Should NOT Be The Nominee

[berni_mccoy]

First, and foremost, she broke party rules by campaigning in Michigan and Florida<1><2>. She calls it strategy, but she gave false information to the voters of those states in order to garner more support. She promised them she had the power to seat their delegates when she did not. And the Democratic Party of Michigan and Democratic Party of Florida, BOTH, DEFIANTLY went against long-standing party rules, just so they could get attention. Instead, they divided the party and disenfranchised their own constituents. They KNEW the consequences of their actions, yet they went ahead anyway. And to some extent, Clinton is responsible for encouraging their defiance of the very party she hopes to win the Nomination of. She should learn not to bite the hand that feeds her. Perhaps the DNC should institute rules about candidates who violate party rules, similar to the way the created the Zel Miller rule.

Secondly, she's run a disastrous, money-wasting campaign based on the completely backwards strategy: abandon small (red) states you can't win in favor of large-number delegate states. This is contrary to the 50-state party direction instituted by Dean that has paid off in spades for the party. She, at the poor advice of her chief strategist Mark Penn, assumed they would win big in these delegate-rich states on Super Tuesday. When they didn't, they had nothing to show for the 100+ million dollars they spent getting there. And you know that if she wins the nomination, this political hack is going to make it into Karl Rove's old office. It would be an absolute disaster of management, political advice and strategy. The Republicans will not have to work very hard at politically destroying the "Clinton Administration", as they've shown they are already quite good at self-destruction.

Finally, she's decided it's time to pull out all the stops in order to win at any cost, even if it means destroying the party. She's going to really screw things up for the party by trying to force the issue of seating the Florida and Michigan delegates, two states whose DLC-controlled parties directly and intentionally disobeyed the national party. And this is reflected in the mindset of her angry vociferous, in-the-minority supporters who feel she is entitled to be President because she has been done 'so-much' for the party and has devoted her post-Impeachment career to doing whatever it takes win-at-all-costs career. In their aging minds, some young black man can wait his turn, it's damn time a woman was elected president in this country. Well, to that, I only have one thing to say: it's not her call, nor the call of her supporters. It is the decision to be made by the VOTERS of this country. And it can be almost guaranteed that, if she applies these divisive, "incendiary" tactics just to win the nomination, that she will lose the general election, not because she's losing in the polls to McCain, but because she doesn't deserve it.

On edit: added references:
<1> http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g-qGLDs-gAnZiUXD2NU51ry3j3dwD8UEGVO00 "Clinton to Campaign in Florida"
<2>http://www.joebiden.com/newscenter/pressreleases?id=0189 "BIDEN CAMPAIGN SLAMS CLINTON, DODD FOR ABANDONING CAMPAIGN PLEDGE"

[rhett o rick]

1. Do you think you will influence Clinton supporters to change to Obama? Seriously? nm

[K Gardner]

15. No. No more than the constant "Obama is an empty suit, Obama is afraid to debate, Obama

is a cult leader" crap posted here continuously will change any minds. The difference is, what Bernie posted was true.

[rhett o rick]

18. First I am not against the post. I am an Obama delegate, but just sayin

why post that? Clinton supporters will not change their minds. Just a lot more churning. And please, with respect, one thing i do hate, i hear it a lot on commercials, "what I am going to tell you is true". The truth is subjective.

[TexasObserver]

19. No, but nothing said here changes anyone's vote or affects the outcome.

I am not concerned about the couple hundred Hillary zealots who account for 90% of the bad bullshit here. They will have zero impact on the primaries, zero impact on the election, and it won't matter if they all stay mad or all get on board with Obama for November.

Hillary has more sense than that. She'll support the ticket because she'll get stripped of her favorite committee assignments if she doesn't, and her bills will die in committee unless someone else agrees to sponsor them for her.

But the zealots here? They're largely really angry about something that happened to them 40 or 50 years ago, and can't let go of it. You won't change them, and why should you bother?

[rhett o rick]

28. Exactly. nm

[berni_mccoy]

37. I don't agree. There are many lurkers that read DU and will repost items on other sites.

I've seen it before and it does have influence, sometimes not in the way you'd expected, but it does get seen, read, and digested by non-DUers.

[noamnety]

2. those darn "divisive incendiary tactics"

I thought you were serious til I got to that and realized it was a satire piece. Well done.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

It's Comedy Night at DU!!!!

Everybody, grab a chair!!!!

Don't forget the 3 drink minimum!!!

:beer:

[flor de jasmim]

4. I mostly agree, but...

I'm sure she figures Obama can wait his turn, but I wouldn't say it's because he's Black... I think it's more that he hasn't "earned" it, in her eyes.

[berni_mccoy]

6. The Hillary Campaign made race an issue... they are going to have to deal with the implications

[jackson_dem]

14. Hillary forced Michelle and Barack to bring race into this in 2007?

[berni_mccoy]

26. Your response doesn't make sense. I said nothing about 2007.

Clinton started the racial attacks in this campaign.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08045/857368-85.stm

"Race first surfaced as a divisive point in the Democratic nominating contest when former President Bill Clinton suggested that it had been a factor in the South Carolina primary vote for Mr. Obama, who is black."

[jackson_dem]

45. You said the Clintons made race an issue. The Obamas did it in 2007, long before SC

-snip-

"Race first surfaced as a divisive point in the Democratic nominating contest when former President Bill Clinton suggested that it had been a factor in the South Carolina primary vote for Mr. Obama, who is black."

Bill Clinton reads exit polls. What a racist! Obama was third with whites (40 for Edwards, 36 for Clinton, and 24 for St. Obama) but won 78-19-1 with blacks. Yeah, race wasn't a factor. :eyes: Obama has won every state that has voted on racial lines. He isn't stupid. He knew making race an issue would help him and it has.

[berni_mccoy]

46. You offer no evidence for your racist b.s.

Obama has won more on merit than on race. He's won the majority of white voters as well as non-white.

[jackson_dem]

52. I function off of data, not religious fervor

He has lost the white vote by a substantial margin nationally. This is another St. Obama myth. Here are the states that voted on racial lines.

Alabama

Overall: Obama 56, Hillary 42
Whites: Hillary 72, Obama 25
Blacks: Obama 84, Hillary 15

Georgia:

Overall: O 67, H 31
Whites: Clinton 53, Obama 43
Blacks: Obama 88, Hillary 11

Louisiana

Overall: O 57, H 36
Whites: H 58, O 30
Blacks: O 86, H 13

South Carolina

Overall: O 55, H 27, Edwards 18
Whites: Edwards 40, Hillary 36, Obama 24
Blacks: Obama 78, Hillary 19, Edwards 1

[berni_mccoy]

56. 4 states from Super Tuesday? Old data. You haven't been paying attention the last 8 Obama Wins

Obama won the White Vote in the last set of elections and he's winning the white vote nationally now, 48% Obama to 27% Clinton

Many polls are showing white and female votes going to Obama, both locally and nationally:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/women-whites-turn-to-obama/2008/02/13/1202760398646.html

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10697083

[XemaSab]

62. You didn't get the memo?

Barack won Maine and Nebraska based entirely on the Black turnout. :crazy:

White people there won't vote for a Black man. :crazy: :crazy:

[benddem]

5. agree

this business of claiming she will get MI and FL delegates seated...is not only wrong it is stupid. What does she want fist fights at the convention? The whole business of the super delegates is bad enough we don't need that.

[dsc]

7. She campaigned in neither state

it is a total, complete, and utter falsehood. It was Obama who ran ads in Florida against the ban.

[berni_mccoy]

9. Care to read this AP Headline out Loud: "Clinton to Campaign in Florida"

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g-qGLDs-gAnZiUXD2NU51ry3j3dwD8UEGVO00

SARASOTA, Fla. (AP) — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she was going to Florida to assure Democrats that "their voices are heard" and to underscore her commitment to seeing the state's delegation seated at the national convention.
Though the Democratic presidential candidates largely have heeded the national party's request that they not campaign publicly in Florida, Clinton said it's time to pay attention to voters there who are showing heavy interest in Tuesday's primary. Early voting is under way and drawing strong interest, she said.
"Hundreds of thousands of people have already voted in Florida and I want them to know I will be there to be part of what they have tried to do to make sure their voices are heard," Clinton said in Memphis, Tenn., before heading for Florida.
Clinton met with reporters as she campaigned in Tennessee, one of 22 states with primary contests on Feb. 5, and she sought to shift the focus from her lopsided loss to rival Barack Obama in the South Carolina primary on Saturday to the coming contests.

Not to mention the fact that she promised Floridians she would seat their delegates the night before the election, or, held several fundraisers there the weeks before.

You are in serious kool-aide drinking mode my Clinton-cultist friend.

[NashVegas]

10. "She arrived in Sarasota taking care to abide by the details of the agreement..."

"... because events in Sarasota and later in Miami were not open to the public."

Meanwhile, Obama ran ads.

[berni_mccoy]

12. So her misrepresentation to the voters of Florida are just as complex as her failed strategy

She makes it appear to them as if she's there when she's really there raising funds and getting free press, the coverage of which will violate the agreement, but since she didn't do it directly, she gets away with it.... nice.

Violating the spirit of the agreement without breaking the technicality of the agreement.

Sounds like defining a blow-job as a non-sexual relation, who was it that did that again?

[MonkeyFunk]

40. She misrepresented nothing

She had a fundraiser there. A private one. The agreement specifically allowed fundraisers. Obama had a fundraiser in Sarasota on Nov. 5th. Michelle Obama had one in December.

Clinton never campaigned in Florida. She went there AFTER the primary to thank her supporters. The pledge only applied to the primary.

You're just spreading lies.

[dsc]

No you are in need of reading classes

She abided by the agreement in both spirit and letter. Obama came closer to violating it than she did (running allegedly national ads which somehow didn't run in NC where the primary is in May).

[berni_mccoy]

See my response #12 above.

She did violate the spirit of the agreement.

[Perry Logan]

61. Debunk here. Don't forget: all anti-Clinton posts are bullshit.

[Bucky]

8. Okay, two of those reasons are utterly bogus.

1 - She went against the party rules by campaigning to voters. I thought it was tacky, but it's hardly a disqualifier. Technically, I'd call that smart strategy. This is bogus.

2 - She had a bad strategy and ran through her money too fast. That isn't exactly a political sin. I can see not supporting someone if they use a weak campaigning strategy, but it's a pretty shallow approach to picking the leader of the free world.

3 - She's trying "to win at any costs." That's a disqualifier? No wait, she thinks "it's time to pull out all the stops." So you're offended by clichés, maybe? No, wait, I see: you think she doesn't care if she destroys the party. And how do you conclude she's out to destroy the party? Because she's running for the nomination?

As an Obama supporter, I can assure you that there's plenty of reasons to support my candidate that don't involve you being a shallow twit.

[berni_mccoy]

11. I doubt seriously you are an Obama supporter

1. If she can't play by the rules, she can execute the law of this land. Plain and simple.
2. Goes toward administration and poor judgement. If she can't handle her own campaign and allows it to self-destruct, what is she going to do with the infinitely more complex job of being President.
3. She's willing to sacrifice the party for her own gain.

You my friend do not recognize what is at stake here. Until you do, you should just stand there looking pretty.

[Bucky]

17. Nice post, Senator McCarthy

:rofl: Good one! I disagree with you, so I must be a liar about who I'm supporting. Dude, get over yourself.

[goodgd_yall]

51. Thanks, Bucky

I thought everything in the OP was lame. I support Hillary, but I have seen some good arguments for not voting for her. This is definitely not one of them.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. I didn't read past the lie in the first sentence.

She didn't campaign in Michigan or Florida.

Kucinich was the only candidate to campaign in Michigan. Obama was the only candidate to run ads in Florida.

I presume the rest is bullshit, too.

[berni_mccoy]

16. HA, more like you won't see the truth.

Obama ran national ads. They can't control what local networks do with them. And she did campaign in both those states. But since you are unwilling to see the truth, I guess it doesn't matter.

[MonkeyFunk]

20. No she didn't

that's a lie.

[berni_mccoy]

24. Read it and weep: "BIDEN CAMPAIGN SLAMS CLINTON, DODD FOR ABANDONING CAMPAIGN PLEDGE"

http://www.joebiden.com/newscenter/pressreleases?id=0189

Wilmington, DE (October 9, 2007) – Today, the campaigns of Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Chris Dodd refused to follow the rules established by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) regarding the Democratic Presidential primary calendar, and announced that they would participate in the Michigan primary contest. Biden for President Campaign Manager Luis Navarro issued the following statement:

“Every campaign made a pledge to the four early states to support the calendar created by the DNC that placed a premium on retail politics and provided a level playing field for candidates, regardless of money or celebrity. Now that these contests are fast approaching and with the final dates of the Michigan and New Hampshire primaries still in doubt, the Dodd and Clinton campaigns have chosen to hedge their bets, thereby throwing this process into further disarray. In doing so, they have abandoned Democrats in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.”

Earlier today, the Biden for President Campaign announced that Sen. Biden would not participate in the Michigan State Democratic Primary and that formal steps were being taken to remove Sen. Biden’s name from the ballot in that state.

[MonkeyFunk]

36. The pledge was not to campaign for the primary

she went there AFTER the primary! Geez, how dishonest can you be?

And Biden's opinion on whether they were obligated to take their name off the ballot is just that - an opinion. The agreement didn't require it.

[susankh4]

33. Absolutely true!

Obama "accidentally" ran ads in Fla.

[jaysunb]

21. The truth and reality of your post will be ignored

but I thank you for posting what is the plain truth in simple terms.

If we go into the "wayback" machine to look at the beginning of this whole affair, you'll find a good many posts by myself and Madfloridian that pointed out exactly what the DLC/Clinton strategy was. They were doing their Rovian best to assure that all potential possibilities of a Clinton loss were eradicated and/or put into a muddy place that would obscure what the real problem was and who was creating it.

This whole thing comes down to the DLC v Howard Dean and the progressive movement that put him in charge of the Party,thereby presenting the largest obstacle to the coronation of HRC. What I find most distressing and sad, is the fact that so many good people on this board and elsewhere have been duped into playing the game.

The 50 State strategy won us back the Congress in 06,but Rahm Emanuel & Chuck Schumer took credit for it. The net/grassroots were given the back of their hand as if our money, time,organizing and effort meant nothing.

Fortunately,a large portion of this Country has decided not to play the game any more and are moving away from both Democrat & Republican politicians that have not acted in the best interest of the People. Thanks to the internets, the age of information has given us a chance to save ourselves....from ourselves.

[demigoddess]

22. you forgot to mention that she is a woman

All of your arguments sound like mind reading.
1. why not campaign in Fl and Mi. Later on the party may have changed their minds and rescinded the order and where would that have gotten her.
2. her Disastrous campaign has gotten her about as many delegates as Obama

3. You are reading minds.

[noamnety]

29. That's in there too.

"In their aging minds, some young black man can wait his turn, it's damn time a woman was elected president in this country."

Of course the flip side is "In their minds, women can wait their turn, it's damn time a black man was elected president in this country."

That's why I thought it was satire - I thought we'd had enough of "if you don't vote for Obama, it's because you're racist and if you don't vote for Clinton it's because you're sexist."

And if we don't vote for either, it's because we are both racist AND sexist. Not because we vote on issues - of which I saw none in the OP. I actually see very little about issues from either Clinton OR Obama supporters.

[berni_mccoy]

48. The irony escapes you then. I was pointing out that Clinton supporters make it a sexist issue

Instead of the real deciding factor: VOTERS.

But I suppose you'd rather have a back-room deal hand the nomination over to Clinton against the will of the people if necessary.

[noamnety]

57. I think the irony escaped YOU

unless it really was satire in its entirety, as an demonstration of how to use divisive, "incendiary" tactics. In which case, again, well done.

And your assumption there is laughably wrong. I wish people on this board had the ability to read a comment without that kneejerk reaction that everyone is either with you or against you, either 100% for Obama with no ability to see critically, or 100% for Clinton with no ability to see critically. I don't know what it says about you if you assume other people are that way.

It will be a cold day in hell before I vote for Clinton, but not for any of the nonreasons you listed. If we truly had an antiwar antiglobalization anti-let's-do-regime-change-in-other-countries-at-my-whim, anti-bigotry-against-gays candidate, it wouldn't matter to me what states they campaigned in, or whether they violated "party policies" or whether they gave nice inspiring speeches or didn't.

Fuck party politics. People's lives are at stake.

[RBInMaine]

23. She's also the most UNELECTABLE in the general election.

Half the country ALREADY dislikes Hillary and WILL NOT vote for her, PERIOD !! These numbers are consistent over time and are unlikely to change. The R's are hoping and praying that she will be the nominee. They WANT to run against he because it will galvanize their party BIGTIME. On the contrary, they are AFRAID of Obama. For goodness sake folks, this is so OBVIOUS that it's scary. At this point it is a no-brainer. Obama is clearly the stronger candidate. GO OBAMA. And go to the Barack Obama website to find out how to help him win. Just Google BARACK FOR AMERICA.

[susankh4]

25. Sure she is...

You keep telling yourself that.

And McCain will keep telling it to you as well....

While he woos Hillary's base with his "I won't pander to conservatives" small talk.

With Hillary out of the way... Senator McCain is already savoring victory in AR, Fla, and NM.

[berni_mccoy]

27. Off topic: Why does the hillary poster in your sig line show such a young Hillary?

Is she trying to appear younger to voters? I thought her age and experience were her assets?

[susankh4]

30. The event organizer simply likes that photo...

He's just an average Joe, like me. Who knows why he chose it?

[rhett o rick]

32. The reason for the huge turn outs is because people are sick and tired

of Bush, Cheney and Clinton. They want a change. They are sick of the tricky politics, the back room politics, the lobbyist politics. Doesn't matter what you say about Obama, he isn't Bush, Cheney, MeCain or Clinton.

[berni_mccoy]

42. Bingo!

Thank you.

[rhett o rick]

43. And thank you. Be sure to help Dennis Kucinich out in his time of need. nm

[berni_mccoy]

44. I'll make you a deal: For every dollar I donate to Obama for President, I will donate to Kucinich

for his re-election. Kucinich was my first choice. Then Edwards. Then Obama. Clinton never got higher than Biden or Dodd on my list.

[rhett o rick]

64. I am exactly with you on your choices. How can I pass up a deal like that. nm

[RBInMaine]

47. Look at the numbers and GET REAL !!

At least 47% of the country DISLIKES Hillary. Proven, solid, over-time data, and absolutely incontrovertable. Right now many polls have her losing to McCain whereas Obama is surging past McCain. In the primaries, Hillary loses Independents, males, cross-over moderate Republicans, and young voters BIGTIME to Obama. And these are the voters needed to win in the general election. What don't you get???? Obama is a stronger NATIONAL candidate ! The R's are hoping and praying Hillary will be the nominee because she will galvanize their party bigtime. Yet the thought of running against Obama is scaring the shit out of them. WAKE UP FOR GOD SAKE SO WE DON'T BLOW YET ANOTHER PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION!! GO OBAMA !!!

[berni_mccoy]

59. It's difficult for angry Clinton supporters who want to divide the party to see the reality

You may have to let them go. It's a cult thing you know.

[BootinUp]

31. Buuuullll Shiiiiiiittttttttttt!

All 3 of your points are such BS.

[berni_mccoy]

34. Such an informed, Clinton-like response. Good job.

[BootinUp]

38. Its all that your nonsense post deserves of my personal time.

sorry you didn't like it, lol.

[berni_mccoy]

41. I liked it well enough. DIdn't you read my "Good Job". It's great at showing how Clinton

supporters lack substance and intelligence. Thanks for showing that so I didn't not have to do the dirty deed.

[AlertLurker]

35. THREE Important Reasons To Like Clinton

First, and foremost, she campaigned (sort of) in Michigan and Florida.
--She's very smart. I like that in a politician. She's hungry, and takes no prisoners. This is politics, not tiddlywinks, damnit.

Secondly, she's run a very smart campaign based somewhat on the strategy of campaigning the hardest in large-number delegate states and letting the "can't possibly win small states" work themselves out.
--Campaign $$$ are finite, and not to be wasted unnecessarily. It makes very good sense in PRIMARIES to "fish where the fish are." This is NOT the GE, where a 50 state strategy might do her some good.

Finally, she's decided it's time to pull out all the stops in order to win at any cost.
--This is what smart politicians DO. Is Obama doing any less? Anyone who believes that "Joe Average-Voter" is going to give a shit about what went on during the primaries is delusional. Nobody gave two shits for Dean in the GE in 2004, yet everyone seemed to pull together to support Kerry. Do you think 'Pukes cared about McCain in the 2000 election? Hell, NO - they worked their asses off for Booosh, same as Dems will do for Hillary if she is nominated.

Unfortunately, I still don't particularly like her. I like her a little bit better than Obama, however.

[berni_mccoy]

39. What you'd call smart, others would call Cheating

And if Cheating is ok in your book, why not bring the Supreme Court in to sElect her like they did for Bush in 2000?

[AlertLurker]

63. Sure. It worked the last time. What's the difference, anyway?

As I have said time and time again, as long as Republicans control the companies that count the votes, there will be Republicans in the White House.

The system has no longer has any integrity anyway, so there is very little reason NOT to use the SC to select another Pretzeldent. Choices on both sides of the aisle are so incredibly BAD this time, I personally doubt if it makes much difference WHO gets sElected this November.

[berni_mccoy]

67. Unacceptable, and it's something that most Clinton supporters are most angry about

The irony is that most Clinton supporters would be willing to sell their souls to get their candidate to win. That's the difference between Clinton and Obama supporters.

[TalkAgain]

49. 4th reason: She is dislikable as a person ------ I kinda don't want to have a beer

with her....EVER. I wanna have a been with Bill Clinton!


Please arrange...

[goodgd_yall]

50. What a lot of melarkey

Your OP is so baseless and obviously biased that it's a weak argument.

[berni_mccoy]

53. Got nothing?

Unfortunately for you and the Clinton supporters, the points are perfectly relevant to her being nominated for president.

1. She can't follow the rules, therefore, she can't execute them
2. She can't even manage her own campaign successfully, let alone a country
3. She will sacrifice the rules for her own gain (sounds like someone already in power)

[MonkeyFunk]

54. And it's been demonstrated to you repeatedly

that she didn't violate any pledge. She did not campaign in Florida during the primary. Why keep spreading the lie?

[goodgd_yall]

55. For everything you said, I could say the same for Obama

It's called politics and ambition. They both have it. Your points are trivial compared to bigger issues that voters should look at to decide who to support---for instance, health care.

[berni_mccoy]

58. That's denial I hear

Obama honored the rules of the DNC. He did not campaign in Florida and was not on the Michigan ballot.
Obama has run an outstanding campaign and, for starting way behind as the challenger, he's now the leader in states won, delegates and popular vote. He's even leading in Clinton's base voters: old, white and women.
Obama has not sacrificed his principles to win. If he did, he would have been on the ballot in Michigan and would have campaigned in Florida like Clinton. Oh, and he would also be threatening to destroy the party like Clinton is.

[OneBlueSky]

60. I can think of a lot more important reasons to not want Hillary as our candidate . . .

and I can think of just as many to not want Obama . . .

what's a life-long liberal/progressive to do when presented with yet another forced choice between two corporate centrists? . . .

personally, I've decided to stay out of the pissing contest and spend my time doing something productive, e.g. working in my shop and in my garden . . .

as for who the nominee is? . . . couldn't care less . . .

[berni_mccoy]

65. shhhhh. That's honest talk there. A rarety around here.

and very dangerous.

[Independent-Voter]

66. Works for me. HRC is a damn trainwreck, and Dems would be idiots to nominate her