This country is in the toilet!

[againes654]

If Clinton can't either run a better campaign, or place better people around her to run a better campaign, what makes people think she can fix all the problems little bush has got us into?

I don't know if she can or can't, or if Obama can or can't, I just see how badly her campaign has tanked recently. Obviously, Obama has alot to do with how well his campaign has been run. Seems to me that if you can't run a successful campaign, you can't run a nation, especially on in the toilet!

[ananda]

1. For Obama..

.. it certainly helps to have the support
of the rich Reeps and lobbyists.

Yesterday I read an article explaining how
the Reeps helped him raise so much fucking
money.

[ClassWarrior]

2. Yes, the RW is almighty, and can decide our nominee with a handful...

...of vote switchers. :eyes:

Paranoid much?

NGU.

[enid602]

11. Oprah

And don't forget Oprah!

[cali]

15. ridiculous. She has far, far more

large donors than he does. His campaign is largely supported by small donors- closing in on a million of us now. She's been too reliant on bundlers of large donations.

And of course you provide NO links for your dubious claim.

Excuses- it's all you guys ever do anymore.

[ClassWarrior]

21. Excuses not speeches?

:rofl:

NGU.

[depakid]

3. "Obama has alot to do with how well his campaign has been run."

How is this obvious?

[againes654]

6. By how well his campaign has been run.

He has either put really good smart people around him, or has had a more direct role in managing his campaign, but either way, he is responsible for his campaign just as Clinton is hers.

[Angela Shelley]

4. self-delete

[ekwhite]

5. Group Hug!

:grouphug:

[Deep13]

7. Only successful campaigners get a chance to try. nt

[againes654]

8. Gee that is perceptive.

Thanks for your addition to the conversation.

[Deep13]

9. Anytime.

Do you think McCain will really keep the army in Iraq for a century like the British did in India, or is that just for RW brownie points? I guess we'll find out.

Saying bad campaign=bad president is an illogical argument because bad campaigns exclude bad campaigners from the presidency. We don't know how a bad campaigner would govern. OTOH, many succesful campaigners have become shitty presidents.

[Orsino]

10. The campaign process as written is no test of the sort of leadership we need.

Of necessity, it's a training ground to ensure that no one takes the Oval Office without successfully whoring for big Money. There's something to be said for the diligence and smarts to play this crooked game well, but the biggest problems facing us will not be helped by a president who won't dare to break out of the corporatist role forced on him/her.

We need a hero now, if this country is to be saved. God, I hope that the Dem nominee can rise to the occasion.

[stuntcat]

12. halle

lujah :headbang:

[Angela Shelley]

13. The job of the POTUS is not to save the country,

unless you are waiting for a soft-hearted dictator.

[Orsino]

20. Then we are finished.

We need an FDR, given the inertia of Congress and the courts.

[fadedrose]

14. Clintons don't /can't understand

When all the talk started about Hillary running for president a few years ago, a lot of people said, "NO NO NO" - not because they don't like her. We thought that 4 years of Bush, 8 years of Clinton, then 8 more years of a Bush were enough. We wanted the 2-family dynasty to end once and for all.

The Clintons didn't get it. They don't seem to care that they are splitting the party. Yes, many people are loyal to them, but many more people just want a CHANGE, a real change. No campaign changes will change the candidate.

[Deep13]

16. Splitting the party? What a pack of lies.

I've been at this for going on 25 years. As far as I'm concerned, we are the fucking party and we will be here to pick up the pieces when your cub scout fucks things up and his fans melt away. O's fans are not going to win this for us in November and you are not going to undo the damage caused by Bush. In every profession there is a limited pool of experience. It should not, therefore, surprise anyone that talent keeps coming from the same places. Would you have objected to RFK on this basis? I seem to recall that the Clinton years were pretty damn good. Now, I'm not suggesting we will get that back. The damage is too extensive. This country is so far in debt because of tax cuts and the wars that the Feds. can't do anything substantial. And this is not a referendum on what happened in '02 either. Saying HC should not have voted for the war will not change the fact that she is the only remaining candidate with any hope of beginning to undue the damage.

We understand all right. We just know it is nonsense. Out of everyone running, O was my very last choice and that includes Kucinich and Gravel. I have not felt as little confidence in a prospective nominee since 1984.

[fadedrose]

17. My opinion is unchanged

I've had enough of the two families. I'll match your 25 years and raise you 22 more.

Hillary's dropping out is like a defeat for the DLC, who does not give a darn about what people want.

I'll vote for her, but it will be very distasteful. There must be more than 2 families whose genes make them the only qualified people to run for president. If this is true, we should give the country back to the native Americans and leave town.

If Obama doesn't make it, a brokered convention would be a welcome thing to many democrats.

[rug]

18. On the other hand, infomercials are usually more compelling than the product.

[Thrill]

19. Everyone but Clinton supporters can see that