Liveblogging The Chesapeake Primary
10:57PM
Anything can happen at any moment, and I hate making predictions, but if all things remain normal -- no gaffes, no scandals, no major world events -- the only way Senator Clinton can lock this nomination is if she either, 1) negotiates behind the scenes for more superdelegates, or 2) doesn't quit and takes the fight to the convention. And that's all for me tonight. Good night, everyone.
10:51PM
Total delegate count according to MSNBC:
Obama 1078
Clinton 969
Both campaigns told Howard Fineman that Senator Clinton will not be able to win a majority of pledged delegates.
10:39PM
CNN's delegate count (including superdelegates):
Virginia
Obama 47
Clinton 28
Maryland
Obama 17
Clinton 15
DC
Obama 13
Clinton 10
(That's a crazy-tight split, considering Obama won 76% of the vote.)
10:24PM
Breaking news... The furrowing up Chris Matthews' leg means Wisconsin won't count.
10:19PM
Maryland:
Obama 68
Clinton 29
4 percent reporting
10:11PM
Senator McCain didn't tell his tasteful Chelsea joke tonight. Olbermann: "The rule: always speak before Barack Obama. Never before." Chris Matthews wins the weirdo line of the night: "The feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama speak... I feel this furrowing up my leg."
10:06PM
Senator McCain speaking in Virginia. Meanwhile, the margin in Maryland:
Obama 61
Clinton 35
3% reporting
9:49PM
Senator Obama used the term "Bush-McCain Republicans". One of the frames against Senator McCain ought to be how he sold out his principals to the Bush White House. Even on the McCain Amendment, he negotiated with Dick Cheney on torture and allowed the president to invalidate the whole thing with a signing statement. "McCain sold out to the Bushies." Bush-McCain.
9:39PM
Senator Obama speaking in Madison, Wisconsin.
9:36PM
Rachel Maddow just made a great point about how the Clintons can get to Obama. They can paint him as a bunny rabbit about to be plowed over by the Republican slime machine.
9:30PM
MSNBC projects Senator Obama wins Maryland, but naturally it doesn't count because the state is shaped like a pistol.
9:26PM
The latest from the Commonwealth of Virginia:
Obama 63
Clinton 36
82% reporting
9:12PM
Senator Clinton is speaking now. Will she enumerate her specific plans in various wonky policy areas? I hope she does otherwise we won't know where she stands in terms of her specific solutions. For instance, right now, she's talking about raising the minimum wage. Okay, so what's her plan for getting it done? Now she's talking about reducing our dependence on foreign oil, but how will she do that? Will she subsidize solar and wind, and if so, how will she assuage the anger of the ethanol lobby? Hmm. Not enough specifics. And I'm incapable of looking up such things on the intertubes.
9:02PM
Senator Clinton on stage in El Paso holding hands with Martin Short in his Three Amigos regalia.
9PM
On MSNBC (and quoting Stephen Colbert)... Clap-clap-clap. Point-point. Clap-clap-clap. Point-point.
8:56PM
This just in... Mike Henry's resignation means Maryland doesn't count.
8:51PM
Andrea Mitchell says Senator Clinton's Deputy Campaign Manager Mike Henry has resigned. And then Mitchell made an hilarious "White Men Can't Jump" joke. This is astonishing because Mitchell's husband, Alan Greenspan, can dunk like Jordan.
8:42PM
Following up on Todd's delegate math... The latest SUSA poll has Clinton leading Ohio, 56-39. If she can sustain that lead, she can get the delegates she needs in that state.
8:40PM
Chuck Todd's delegate math. I'll try to transcribe. If Obama nets 20 delegates in Virginia, Obama will lead in delegates 1077 to 975. That means Clinton would have to win 50-55 percent of the delegates to catch up in Wisconsin, Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
8:31PM
John McCain wins Virginia, according to CNN. Awesome! Now we can expect a jubilant McCain to regale us with more hilarious zingers tonight.
8:24PM
And now, the weather. I'm about 90 minutes north of the Mason-Dixon line and Maryland, and it's presently sleeting here. About three inches of accumulation, but my Hollywood Liberal Prius handled the slush and ice perfectly tonight. In other news, John McCain is leading Huckabee in Virginia now by around 3,000 votes. Stop counting Virginia! Stop!
8:21PM
Obama wins DC, but like Louisiana, Connecticut, Idaho, Nebraska, Kansas, Utah, etc -- it doesn't count. Sorry, DC.
8:19PM
Seriously, is anyone else worried about the extreme level of radiation flooding John King's body from that crazy-huge touch screen map?
8:09PM
Someone named "Major Garrett" is reporting on FOX News. He'll be tag-teaming coverage throughout the evening with FOX News correspondent Sergeant Slaughter.
8:04PM
The spread among the Republicans is only 200 votes with Huckabee leading according to CNN. As soon as McCain takes the lead, Virginia can stop counting.
8PM
How is it that CNN has 23 percent of precincts reporting for the Republicans, but 24 percent for the Democrats? Aren't all the precincts the same? Maybe John King can answer my question by writing it in magical blue finger ink.
7:50PM
CNN has the delegate split so far: Obama 18, Clinton 13. Not too awful for Senator Clinton who is presently losing 61-38 with 18 percent of precincts reporting.
7:44PM
The CNN Greatest Political Morning Zoo Of Primaries That Are Great Team are saying that Maryland polls will remain open for an extra 90 minutes due to traffic and inclement weather. If Senator Clinton loses the state, this will be why the state doesn't count.
7:31PM
Obama wins among voters under $50,000 according to MSNBC -- wait, aren't those Senator Clinton's voters? Delete the latest traditional media narrative about the Clinton campaign winning among working class voters.
7:26PM
Obama projected to win Virginia. According to CNN, he's leading 63-36. Olbermann says that Clinton only leads the white vote by 3 percentage points, and Obama leads among women. Meanwhile, Chucklebee is leading in Virginia by around 600 votes.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"the only way Senator Clinton can lock this nomination is if she either, 1) negotiates behind the scenes for more superdelegates, or 2) doesn't quit and takes the fight to the convention
- both of which she will do, of course. Her campaign has made it clear that they regard this as war.
We have seen plenty of evidence that the Clintons and their creature, the DLC, have no interest in the fortunes of the Democratic party, only in staying in power. People in this country need to be more aware of what the DLC is, why it was created, the history of its accomplishments, and, most importantly, who these people work for. So many people, especially women, are still buying the campaign's strategic positioning that Hillary is a nice lady who wants to help babies and poor people and is being unfairly maligned because she is a woman.
It can't hurt to out the DLC for all we're worth.
Well said!
We have only to look at HC's campaign contributions from the big healthcare corporations who lied in order to kill her first plan--the one she hatched in secret with her cronies and kept consumer advocates out of the process because (she said) they were just another interest group. Result: We have been bereft of decent healthcare for a decade and a half. Now, she takes more money from these very corporations than any other candidate, including Republicans.
Then she tells us that her healthcare plan is better than Obamas. Doesn't matter how good her plan might be if she is in bed with the people who lied about her first plan, DOES IT?
Certainly, the corporations that fill her campaign coffers are expecting something in return.
It is staggering how many ordinary people, especially women, think that the Clintons are on their side, nevermind the endless meetings and institutes and outright frolics with the representatives from corporate America, their pals from the DLC
, and their glaring failures, while they were in office, to do anything substantial for regular people. They will say that they had to deal with a Republican congress, yet that is something that came to be while they were in office, apparently powerless to stop the worst elements of conservative Republicanism from taking control of our legislative branch.
Another thing...di
Whatever their reasons for not campaigning for Gore or Kerry, they did achieve one thing...th
Well I think the media has given Obama a free meal ticket so far. I think he is a great speaker and I have seen twice now but I still believe that there is not a large amount of substance behind it. I never get the feeling that he has specifics on anything We are a nation of "feel good" people very unfortunate
Have you visited his web site?
Anyone can post anything on a website.th
The specifics are ALL on his website. I haven't considered myself much of an Obama fan but I must say his speeches give me goosebumps. I, too, thought he was short on specifics but after I visited his website I realized he had very specific ideas and plans with explanations as to how he expected to pay for them.
If you have the time and energy to visit this website and to post your opinions, you surely have time and energy to go to Obama's website and check it out.
I'm getting more and more comfortable with him by the day. He's still not my first choice by a mile but he's certainly the best of what's left.
Go to his website if you want specifics. They are there.
I wonder where "feel good" factored in when people of "substance" voted for Bush! Twice!
I already know The President. While, the boilerplate politician talks down at people, Obama welcomes everyone to the discussion table. I've lost faith in politics for a while now and Barack restored that faith in me. I only HOPE he doesn't get swallowed by the system when he steps into office. On the other hand, whatever happens I have to keep the faith because he made me believe again.
Yet despite that internal conversion, I had to know The Man. Michelle's 2 minutes with CNN's Soledad O'Brien a week ago was great but her 30 minutes with Larry King Monday night gave me the "substance" I needed to hear.
I'm 50, a registered Independent, and I voted for Barack because, yes, he makes me "feel" I belong again.
I agree with you completely.
A pretty "substantial" part of the president's job is selling policy to the American people, uniting people, and generally just being a spokesperson. The job actually requires the ability to make people believe and "feel" good.
looked at the numbers in detail this morning (from CNN). Check this out:
Virginia - Obama=619,490 Total Democrats=965,201 Total Republicans = 479,650
So in this "Red" state that has not gone Democratic since 1964, and has an open primary, Obama outpolled all Republicans COMBINED!!
Maryland = Obama=439,979 Total Democrats=713,807 Total Republican
DC = Obama=85,534 Tot. Democrats=112,860 Total Republicans = 5,361
'Nuff said.
For the region:
Obama = 1,145,003
All Republicans - including McCain, Huckabee, Paul, and Romney = 762,517
Any questions on electabilty?
The RNC is handing out DEPENDS to all their staff members as we type.
This Super Bowl of elections is in the fourth quarter - the lead has changed every time the ball is passed. Obama has the lead and Clinton needs a touchdown - a field goal will not do. But she is the master of the two minute drill and there are three minutes left. Momentum has not carried this game....
http://the
Just ask the Patriots about "momentum"
momentum has been switching back and forth - the candidates have not been taking it for granted the media has - that's a big difference.
Whether it's Obama or Hillary, we Democrats will be in good shape come the general election.
While I prefer Hillary, I like Obama a great deal and will gladly vote for him.
We really do have an embarrassment of riches in this race, and for that I am grateful.
It's refreshing to see a comment that's not ladden with insults and hate for the other guy. I'm actually for Obama, but I'm with you.
See Bob Cesca's Profile
I agree with both of you. Absolutely correct.
Ditto.
No way Obama is gonna win the election. It is McGovern all over again where the left wing grabbed the steering wheel and drove the car into a tree. It is terrible to give up our shot at the Presidency over a guy with no experience, no resume, nothing to run on but "hope". I watched McCain last night and unfortunately he is correct that it is nothing but platitudes. And who was on Hardball last night but (Secretary of Defense?) Al Sharpton. People are gonna run.
Apparently, you haven't read the polls that say that close to half of the country won't vote for Hillary under any circumstances. Is that what you call a GOOD "shot" at the presidency?
I don't think electability is an issue for either Barack or Hillary. They're will both be attacked relentlessly by the Republicans and there are people who wouldn't vote for either.
Barack probably would pull more people to the polls than would normally vote and would attract more independents, but I really don't see this being a close election.
Barack is not measurably to the left of Clinton, policy-wise they are pretty identical. It really comes down to a matter of style...wh
I think you're wrong. Put them both together - especially in the same room (debates) and McCain looks like a doddering old man next to the dynamic Obama. It should be an exciting race with both candidates having broad appeal to the so-called 'independents'. If you happened to hear each of them speak last night, you can just see there is no contest as far as the ability to excite and energize voters.
Obama is continuing to prove he can garner crowds, cash and votes. McCain is SO yesterday. Obama is tomorrow. This is a HUGE change election (like 1960 and 1980) and after hearing about the "Bush-McCain War" and the "Bush-McCain Recession" and the "Bush-McCain Torture", I think Obama has a real chance.
Lastly, it appears we FINALLY may be ready as a country to move past the racial thing. I think a lot of whites are excited about the possibility of having a person of color who they can feel good about voting for...some
I just wish his name was Barry O'Banfield or something like that so the right wing creeps would stop insinuating that his foreign-sounding name means that he is something other than what he is - a true blue American.
It really is embarrassing, isn't? But I think that a lot of these people are the result of an education system that doesn't do anything to help people learn how to accept differences or change.
It's sooo much easier to vilify your enemies.
The ironic thing is that these tactics? They're K. ROVE and G. BUSH tactics--demonize your enemies. Use ad hominem attacks to dehumanize. Apply the tactics of the same people you "say" that you are against. It's projection at it's
worst.
As for Barry O'Banfield, the fact that you have to wish for that indicates that our society is much sicker than anyone thinks. The world is watching. They don't believe we're "grown up enough" to elect a man of color, much less a man is not a brash, arrogant warrior. They're waiting to see if America has evolved even though we caused the deaths of 1,000,000.
I wonder if we're going to disappoint them...
Wow.
People should run--from a people who use racist "code" like this: Al Sharpton as Secty. of Defense. Comments like that are not just an embarrassment to yourself, but you really need to consider joining another party. Let's see, how about the National Socialists? They're always looking for new recruits with low melanin levels....
It's people like you who refuse to see the good in someone with vision. I don't hate Hillary, she's probably got good intentions, and she has respect for Obama and knows that he has good intentions as well.
People like you should just accept your inner selves--and join McCain. C'mon, you know you want to...
I address this to the religious left and young people: Obama Nation cult members act like followers, not voters. Instead of talking about why to vote for Obama, they give you reasons to believe in him. And they don't like me - an older white working class woman. In fact they are giddy with excitement of power over my life with a democratic win. They really believe I will vote for their guy when I've determined their guy doesn't offer me anything. I want a president, not a cult leader. In fact - I will refuse to join this cult. I fear for my country if I give such a cult leader the power of my vote. So to all you Obama worshipers - I do not want my party taken over by your religious leader. I will do what I need to stop you from taking over my party. I know what I think does not matter to you. You are so drunk with the anticipation of power. Shame on all of you for not caring about me.
I am a 73 year old woman whose father was a welder. I put myself through college working nights and holidays at the phone company. I supported the Clintons through all of their problems (many of them caused by their own reckless behavior). I have paid close attention to how they have been behaving lately, and what I am hearing and seeing has caused me to reevaluate my former regard for them. I have found concrete and important reasons to support them no longer, not the least of which is that whenever Bill Clinton waggles his finger and preaches to the crowd, no matter what he actually says, what I hear is, "I did not have sex with that woman Miss Lewinski."
I DEEPLY resent the older women who cheerfully call those of us who were formerly strong supporters, but are now sorely troubled by recent behavior of the Clintons "haters" or "cultists" because we can no longer bring ourselves to support them.
I, too, would like to see a female president before I die, but not so much that I am blinded to the deficiencies of the Clintons.
BRAVO! Well said, indeed. I'm a 56 year old woman, and I have ALWAYS wanted a woman in the White House, since my bra burning days! JUST NOT THIS ONE, I am very sorry to say!
legitgov.o
www.legitg
YES! I agree with you, Dawlishgal. Perfectly and succinctly said.
"...the only way Senator Clinton can lock this nomination is if she either, 1) negotiates behind the scenes for more superdelegates, or 2) doesn't quit and takes the fight to the convention
**********
And of course, as most Obama-supporters know, she's EVIL and INSANE enough to do just that, even though it would guarantee a loss in the general election. Why would she do such a crazy thing? Well...she
Thank goodness Obama is rescuing us, and I for one can't wait until he balances the budget, ends the war, and heals my arthritis.
Isn't it true though? Will she have any other options?
What would it make her if she did take the fight to the convention? Unselfish? Certainly driven, but towards what end?
I don't think it is over for her yet, Ohio and Texas will be tough for Obama. But if he does come out from those contests with a more substantial delegate lead, then what?
Nooooooooo. She's NOT evil, nor is she insane, and selfish is not the right word either.
It's a thirst for power, a desire to be the FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT, and the thirst for power.
She's a great senator. If she gets the White House, we'll loose a great senator, and gain another four to eight years of corporate kowtowing.
Obama is exactly right for NOW. We need to send the message he brings to the rest of the world in order to undo the horrific damage done in and to our name by the Bu$h Crime Family. No one will do that like Obama.
As for your arthritis, I sincerely hope there is soon found a better treatment and/or cure for that. I hope you get better!
legitgov.o
www.legitg
To the voters of Wisconsin – and America: The speech to listen to last night was not Barack Obama’s. It was John McCain’s, who said in part: "To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope. It's a platitude.
One other thing: to the women of Wisconsin – and America – how is it you are so willing to toss aside the first viable woman candidate in history? Do you think they grow on trees? Do you know how long women have waited to be in a position to actually lead the nation? Do you know how long they may have to wait after this when you have squandered a real opportunity to put a woman in the Whitehouse?
The Obama steamroller may be unstoppable. But Michael Dukakis was up by 20 points before the convention. The other side is going to be shouting “yes we can” every bit as loud as the Democrats will. If you are a voter with any sanity who knows any history – the hope of February becomes the reality of September. “Yes we can” – lose. Think about it.
Note to ricr;
Wrong. On about half a dozen different levels.It isn't just the women of Wisconsin-America who are voting for Senator Obama instead of Senator Clinton. A whole bunch of men are voting for him as well. I'm wondering why you didn't address your comments to the boys club.
I applaud your loyalty to Senator Clinton, but gender loyalty is just another form of discrimination. I'm not voting for anyone based on gender, race or religion; my vote will go to the person with the best plan to take this country out of the toilet George Bush has flushed it down.
Gramma Rose
Light resume? What has Hillary done? Being married to the Pres and not leaving him after he cheats on you might be enough to get you a seat in the Senate, but it shouldn't be enough to win you the White House.
Hillary has won conservatives in NY? Are you kidding? Her conservative positions are her hawkish positions on the middle east, that's why she won support here in NY. Obama is a much better candidate than Hillary b/c he will win more of the undecided votes over McCain.
Close to half of the country has already made up its mind that it won't support Hillary Clinton under any circumstances. The Clintons are tools of the corporate branch of the Democratic party, their DLC. They are part of the leadership that decided to risk the support of party progressives ("who else are they going to vote for anyhow?") in order to go for the Independents, even though there is concrete evidence that Independents are almost as fed up with the Iraq war as are Democrats. HC even said that corporate lobbyists are just ordinary working people like you and me. Well, maybe like HER, but certainly not like me! She has taken more money from big healthcare corporations--the same ones who lied about her healthcare plan and succeeded in killing it--more than any other candidate, including the Republicans.
I have carefully considered my options, and--for the good of the party, among other good reasons--I decided to support somebody else this time around. First Edwards, now Obama.
Even though I am a feminist, I am not such a narcissist that I am demanding a woman, any woman be made president. It is time for the youth of our country to get involved in the politics of their own futures...
The Clintons had 8 years to accomplish something, and all they did was inspire the election of a Republican congress and an incompetent Republican president (twice), and forced the country to soldier through 8 years of investigations and an impeachment that almost brought the country to its knees.
It is time to give somebody else a chance.
They did not inspire the election of Bush-he stole it and was appointed- so please don't use that argument.
Again, Dawlishgal, well put.
I would add that anyone who thinks that Hillary can win in the general, OR IF SHE DOES (by luck and EXTREMELY narrow margin), that she will be able to effectively govern, either has head massively in sand, or has never lived in a red state.
I lived in a bright red state through the 90's. The ire that she inspires in people is not to be underestimated. It will be very damaging to the country, and she will not be able to get anything accomplished. I do not wish to see a re-play of new and improved tactics in the likes of Ken Starr, Vince Foster, Travelgate, White Water, Susan McDougall, et al.
True, Obama will have his fights to deal with, but they will be more manageable in comparison and his leadership skills, having the people on his side, will enable him to overcome this and to persevere for the sake of the people.
I was thinking tonight, seeing all this... I think the only person who can sit Hillary and Bill down and show them the writing on the wall is AL GORE. Eventually, I think he'll have to talk them through the same thing he was talked through in 2000. Only this time, he'll have to say, look, you did NOT get more votes. You have not won.
The karma of that gives me chills.
Seriously. She better step down before she does damage to our process. Anything she does to win, will prove that that kind of politics is dead. Trying to get more superdelegates? Come on. Anybody who gets on her train at this point in the game is making a huge mistake. This is her endgame. There is no out but to go gracefully.
I fear she won't. She should, but she won't.
If she wins Texas and Ohio - won't she actually have more votes than Obama? You are assuming he is going to take thos states - why don't we wait and actually see first!
With the proportional splitting of delegates depending on actual votes, HC will have to have decisive wins in these states in order to get enough votes to top Obama. As of now, if the superdelegates aren't counted, Obama has a substantial lead, and even if they are counted, he still has a slight lead.
I think Hillary and Bill could do well in the fertilizer business. There seems to be an excess of "it" at the present time. Maybe they could get some sales tips from the infamous fertilizer salesman, Psycho Peterson. The Clinton capers bought us enough media attention. It is time to look ahead and elect the right person to dig us out of this bottomless pit. Barack Obama is the one we can count on to get us all pulling together to once more be a true United States of America. It makes me long for the past, of regaining the pride in living in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Yes We Can.
Why do we put so much blind hope into the struggle to choose a nominee?
Shouldn't we be asking the candidates, continually, for explanations on their positions on issues that affect us all?
It occurs to me that while both of the Democrats still in the running agree that Bush's adventure in Iraq was a mistake, do they agree on why it was a mistake?
Is it just that Bush was wrong about, or lied to us about, the ownership of nuclear weapons by a country which no one in the West liked?
Or, is it something more fundamental?
The Bush doctrine, the assertion that preemptive war against a country which might be about to attain nuclear power and/or weapons is justified and an American right, came on the scene without discussion by the public or the politicians. Pres. Bush pulled it out of his hat, and almost no one has questioned its basic validity.
We never went to war before when a nation attained nuclear power, is it now a given that we will? Will the Bush doctrine be expanded even more, to force the other countries of the world to give up their nuclear weapons?
Does either Clinton or Obama reject the Bush doctrine? Or are they just variations on the theme of America the dictator?
Obama has said several times that he wants not only to get us out of Iraq, but he wants us to reconsider the warmongering mentality that got us into the war in the first place.
:
Mrs. Clinton's refusal to even acknowledge the lost races - much less thank the voters who waited in the cold for her - is unforgiveable.
What blind refusal to congratulate the winner controls Hillary? Does she think that if she pretends it never happened - that it disappears?
Eight straight losses without a word!
Is she OK?
Or is something bad going down...unm
:
No hillary is not OK.
Her sense of entitlement to the presidency is being upstaged massively, by a junior senator from Ill.
She does not know how to take this.
She can not even be polite or gracious.
Dammit! a black man is STEALING her election and she can't call the police!
Look for Hillary to get very rovian and very ugly real soon.
Yeah I'm sure it's because he is black - get real!
Good Night. Thanks Bob.
I cannot believe what is happening before our eyes in this country. Women represent the majority and yet the nearly all-male prominent news personalities are speaking first and loudest in this election season. How is it we can be influenced to such an extent that in this momentous time in our history, we do not see that we have in Hillary Clinton a strong, intelligent, extremely capable and yes, wonderful woman who could be our first female President? What are we doing when we nearly fall in love with a man who, with due respect, suddenly blinds our collective vision of a country that will truly, honestly and incredibly CHANGE in wonderful ways if a woman were elected. Just quickly ponder the condition of poor divorced women, of homeless men and abandoned children; I believe without a doubt, right now nothing would change the lives of more people for the better than a female President. All this talk of the 'wonders' of Obama as though anything said could objectively preclude the very real, substantial and impressive qualifications of our female candidate. The right to choose is one I would not deny a soul, but the right to fairly, properly and with dignity campaign, compete and not be discredited or maligned in the process, is equally important. Women, vote as your minds, hearts and unique intuition dictate, but please, for ours sake and our daughters as well, do not allow yourselves to be clouded by the resounding resistance to a woman President that is indeed imposing itself this political campaign.
Do you also want men to vote for Hillary because she is a woman or do you not care for the way men vote? I'm not voting for Hillary, but it has nothing to do with her being a woman.
your comments are inherently misogynistic. the claim that a female president would "naturally" be more sensitive and responsive and intuitive is just the flip side of saying a woman can't govern because of precisely the same qualities. vote for the candidate who will best govern and make your case based on that, not on baseless abstractions about "women" and their caring natures. that, to me, is offensive.
Journalista,
Please allow yourself the luxury to consider the grandmothers, mothers, sisters, and daughters who lost their sons, husbands, brothers, and fathers in Iraq. Also consider the Iraqui women, because they are the biggest victims in the whole Iraq fiasco. Now, if you will, think of the people who authorized the carnage. If after that, you can honestly continue to support Hillary, than I can honestly say, that you are no a feminist.
I'm starting to accept that Hillary will probably not make it, but on the bright side, she can come back after the next four years of McCain and maybe then the left will have grown up a bit.
in case you hadn't noticed Obama has out voted McCain everywhere, usually 2-1!
Only is the repubs steal lots of states this election can they pull this off.
McCain vs. Obama? with McCain shilling for the worst of ol' 30%'s policies?
Nice try. maybe this stuff sells on redstate or free republic..
Journalista, with all due respect, Obama is as intelligent, strong and capable. If you went to his website and read his policies and plans you would see that he will be a much better president. He also has better judgement. She is a foreign policy hawk, authorized the war in Iraq and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. It is arrogant for anyone to assume that after months of being the presumed nominee, it is owed to her now. I am all for a woman president, but she is not the one. There is SO much baggage there, and the republicans will have it all out there if she's the nominee. This is not resistance to a woman President, Obama is the better candidate.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
