So do the gloves come off?

[book_worm]

If Obama loses 3/4 tonight due to negative smears by HRC--does Obama begin to fight back? He has run an inspirational campaign and been very presidential. He has knocked all the dirt she has thrown at him without becoming mean himself, but does he now begin to associate her with all the scandals of her time and people she was connected with who have gone to prison? Or do we continue to try and be above all of that?

[ralbertson]

1. We continue to be above all that. After all, that's the whole point of picking us over her.

Which is not to say, mind you, that plenty of knowledgeable, fact-based people like John Aravosis won't already be standing in line, more than ready to step up and rub her own dirt in her face instead of us having to do it ourselves. He's already warned on his AMERICAblog site that he will do exactly that should she not withdraw after pulling all the negative Rove-style stuff her campaign has pulled on a fellow Democrat in the last few days.

[beachmom]

9. Obama needs to do what Webb did in Virginia. Let the bloggers do their work.

Webb ran a positive campaign, while the Webb bloggers hit Allen every single day on Macaca.

Sorry, but this needs to be done now against Clinton. The bloggers do the dirty work while Obama rises above it.

[Lisa0825]

2. I hope not.

I don't want him stooping to her level. I joined this campaign because I felt he had better character than her and exemplified what "Presidential" should really be. I don't want to see him lower himself in order to win.

I'd rather he continue to fight while on the high road, like with the excellent 3am response ad.

[City Lights]

3. Maybe someone will do it for him:

What will the Republicans throw at Hillary Clinton in the fall?
by John Aravosis (DC) · 3/03/2008 01:50:00 PM ET · Link

Hillary's campaign had made the topic of the day "what will the Republicans throw at Barack Obama in the fall?" They're talking about Rezko today, they've race-baited Obama repeatedly in the past, and we've had reports that they've recently been sending reporters information branding Obama a Muslim.

(And last night, on 60 Minutes, Hillary didn't give a real ironclad answer, to quote Ben Smith, when asked if she thinks Obama is a Muslim. Hint: The correct answer was "no," without any hedging or "taking him at his word." And for extra credit, you could have thrown in: That's a ridiculous question, and having been through Republican smears myself, I know a smear when I see one.)

Hillary's campaign has already said that they are throwing the kitchen sink at Obama. They will discuss, are discussing, all the bad things that the GOP will throw at Obama in the fall.

So, what will the Republicans throw at Hillary in the fall?

<snip>

Well, come Wednesday, if Hillary doesn't win 65% of the delegates in Ohio and Texas, and still insists on staying in the race and ripping our party in two, it will be time to start treating candidate Clinton with the same golden rule she is using for candidate Obama. Why? Not for revenge, but for the sake of our party and the fall election. Hillary and her campaign are in the process of turning Obama into damaged goods in the fall. They didn't have to go there, but beating Obama became more important to them than beating John McCain. So, the first question for Hillary come Wednesday, should she decide to continue risking our chances of winning in the fall even though the math says it's over, will be the question she's asking Obama today: What negatives will the Republicans throw against you in the fall? And as I've noted repeatedly, there are some negatives out there that most of you don't even know about - but everyone in Washington knows about them, in detail. That's because even Democrats who don't love Hillary, don't go there, for the good of the party. On Wednesday, the good of the party may dictate that we do.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/what-will-republicans-throw-at-hillary.html

[sandnsea]

4. Yep, what will Republicans throw at Hillary

I think it's time to get real about the answer to that question.

[MarjorieG]

5. Hillary benefit from the Obama's organization? Doesn't transfer.

She is thinking about her entitlement only, not what the general will do with her experience or national security. We need a different argument from hers, in comparison to McCain's. Just heard on MSNBC (?) that there are 50 superdelegates now pledged to Obama, to roll out as needed.

In the category of there not being fair, generally, the gall and delusion to think she's going to scoop up what he built. Those GOP and Indies are going to McCain, even if he isn't what he seems.

We have to deal directly with experience, more than we have.

Anyone heard if Canada, now conservative, purposely leaked that memo to interfere with our stronger candidate, giving it to a more friendly McCain and unchanged free trade.

[Inuca]

10. This is the part that gets to me

"Hillary and her campaign are in the process of turning Obama into damaged goods in the fall" This is why I was so upset for the last few days, and hoped in spite of the numbers and even common sense that Obama would win decisively so that the party self-immolation will be over. It did not happen, and while listening to her victory speech last night I would have cried, were I not so MADDDD. The Clintons are not political STRATEGISTS, they are (very good) political TACTICIANS. They are good at "winning" the battle that is just ahead, without considering the longer term consequences. As Kerry (and not only) very aptly said about the horrid and despicable comments about Obama having only a speech to oppose to her and McCain's vast amounts of experience not only turns Obama into "damaged goods" (they don't give a f... about that) if he wins, but is a double-edged sword that will be turned against her as well. Olberman and/or Matthews kept referring to her wins as pyrrhic victories. That's EXACTLY what they are. They have won the battle, but it is almost impossible for them to win the war. The problem is that they do not seem to care, or they are fighting a different war (2012). I know I am biased (if anybody here has any trace of objectivity left, please tell me where and why I am wrong), but I find the whole thing absolutely DISGUSTING. In the speech last night, she was wearing the rovian fear-mongering, and appalling 3am ad as a badge of honor (and the crowds roared their approval). By the way, Rachel Maddow's off-the-cuff comment referring to BO calling her last night, saying that maybe he should have waited and call at 3am was priceless. Maddow has not been much of an Obama fan in the past, I do not know if she is turning into one, but she was clearly disgusted the Clinton tactics and their impact. Anyway... enough rambling.... some steam definitely needed to be let out. :grouphug: to everyone!

[JI7]

6. Paul Begala is an asshole

i just had to say that.

[ladym55]

7. What's really sad to me is how Hillary supporters act

I have a close friend who is a Hillary supporter. She claims that Obama is "no different" from Hillary in the smear department. I was really taken aback. I moved to Obama because he DOESN'T run a scorched earth campaign.

She has gone as far as to call Obama a liar, although she can't give me any specific examples. She is hinting that McCain would be preferable to Obama. Alrighty then.

[JI7]

8. Hillary herself said McCain would be a better President than Obama

so what do you expect from her idiot followers.

and then of course there are those who seem to get off on Rovian Swiftboat style politics over actually getting things done and helping people.