Hillary Clinton's unexpected money troubles
After a rally in Manhattan on Tuesday night, Terry McAuliffe, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, was asked about the state of the candidate’s finances. “Look, if there’s one thing Hillary Clinton doesn’t have to worry about, it’s money,” McAuliffe said.
At the time, that certainly made sense. Clinton raised over $100 million in 2007, outpacing every candidate in both parties. She’s generally considered one of the more prodigious fundraisers in the party, and while her $13.5 million haul in January wasn’t as impressive as Barack Obama’s monthly total, it wasn’t too shabby, either.
Which is why it came as such a big surprise to the political world late yesterday when Clinton aides conceded that the senator found it necessary to loan her campaign $5 million of her own money.
At her campaign headquarters in Arlington, Clinton defended her maneuver, executed last month but kept under wraps until yesterday, to add money to her campaign coffers. News of the $5 million transfer came as a surprise to Clinton donors who had assumed her campaign, which raised $100 million last year, would keep pace with Obama’s. [...]
Clinton said she moved her own money last month “because I believe very strongly in this campaign.”
Objectively, it’s hard to spin this as anything but a disconcerting development for the Clinton campaign, which should have flush coffers right now. What’s more, officials also acknowledged yesterday that some senior Clinton campaign staff members have agreed to go without pay for a month.
Stay tuned.
I think everyone is wondering if this is it for her. What's also confusing is the delegate counts are all over the board on the internet. Some have Hill ahead by 100 pts and others show Obama ahead by 8.
Either way, and as I've stated before, a bag of my dog's crap would be better than any Republican.
Hooray!
Too bad she had 5 million dollars laying around to loan to herself.
Barack has gotta beat her.
This really is a surprising development, and disconcerting, considering how much money both her and Obama had in their coffers at the beginning of the primary process. The cost of presidential campaigns is getting to be absurd.
Well, if this is any indication, the US won't be better off financially if she wins. More of the same shit in a different pile.
I'm sure by the end of this week,she'll have a boat load of money.She sure went through that 100 million fast.
And the money keeps rolling in for Obama. $6.8 million and counting since Tuesday!
mudshark @ 5:
She's spending it like it wasn't even hers................ Oh, wait!
Never mind.
I really wish Clinton and Obama could come to terms on a unity ticket right now. They are going to wear each other out and will have nothing left for McCain come November.
This may be the first chink in the Armour of inevitability. With super Tuesday out of the way I do believe the advantage goes to Obama because the Primaries will be more spread out and Hillary did not deliver the knock out punch she needed. If this race goes into April I do believe Obama will be the nominee unless some shenanigans are pulled with Florida and Michigan.
Hmmm....running for President....she's putting up her own money....staffers going without pay...
sounds like trouble.
Perhaps Billy can make another uranium deal and raise some cash for her. Or maybe Rupert can divert some funds through his regular channels.
Either way, it is starting to smell like the Rudy scenario - staff members working for free... Smacks of desperation to me.
Either way, I'm sending a donation to Obama. And I live in NY.
Barack is raising breaking records with loose change from the little people. Meanwhile Hill is making money lending it to herself [sob].
Clinton said she moved her own money last month “because I believe very strongly in this campaign.”
Yea, and Mittens and Huckabee are going to be bowing out soon to "spend more time with their famlies"
Two of the great assholes that aren't Republican? Mark Penn and Terry McAuliffe. I actually like the policy platform of HRC better than Obama, but I judge people by their friends.
Obama is currently raising over $100,000 an HOUR!!!
http://my.barackobama.com/page/contribute_c/sincefeb5_email/graphic
After a rally in Manhattan on Tuesday night, Terry McAuliffe, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, was asked about the state of the candidate’s finances. “Look, if there’s one thing Hillary Clinton doesn’t have to worry about, it’s money,” McAuliffe said.
I agree. What Hillary should be worried about is having Terry McAuliffe as her campaign chairman.
He's good at just two things: Raising money and losing elections.
A quick call to Uncle Rupert and she'll be flush in a FoxNoise minute! http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/05/rupert_murdock_hosting...
That is one of the oddest things i ever heard. Speaking about yourself in the third person as an inanimate object. Very odd.
I just heard what sounds like a good explanation for this. Many of her donors were big money people and corps. They maxed out what they could give her and now she can't turn to them anymore. Meanwhile, many of Obama's donors were people like us and they can continue to give him smaller amounts of money. Makes sense to me.
Plus many of Hillary's voters are not so wealthy men and women and they can't afford to supply her with donations.
I would say the lesson in this is live by the sword (support of the wealthy and businesses), die by the sword (no where to turn when the wealthy and businesses are tapped out)
one more debate and it's over and out for hillary....let's hope she has the dignity to give up the fight rather than scrap till the end....
she trounced obama in the last debate, but yet her campaign continued to rapidly deflate.
the country has moved past her old school party machine politics....
only way she could win now would be a steal through superdelegates, and that seems unlikely....
pissed off patricia @ 19:
Amen to that!
Acting Patriotic @ 17:
She has Ann Coulter and Rupert Murdock on her side. Yeah i'm gonna vote for her... LOL
I don't care for Hillary particularly, I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination, hell, I'd vote for Bugs Bunny were he the Democratic nominee, but I'd prefer Obama.
What gets me is the way the media has been playing this $5 million shot in the arm My local daily headlined it as Hillary has "donation problems." A casual reader on the way to the comics would assume one of Rudy's relatives was laundering money through her campaign.
No one says a word about Romney's finances - hmmm - oh yeah the "librul media" is biased isn't it.
Is Bugs running? Can we get him on the ballot?
Candidate with the most money usually wins. (exception: mitt romney)
She's been campaigning for years on the "entitlement" platform, and can't keep up financially to the new kid on the block? Me thinks the Dems were caught surprised by Obamamania. Hill was supposed to be a shoe in, with no serious challengers. Uh oh. Now what? Perhaps Bill can loan her all the cash he's got from scrupulous investments. Oh and by the way people, careful. Don't trash a Dem or you will bring out the wrath of PiLA.
ConcernedCanuck @ 26:
Wrath?
I loves me wrath!
So is Penn going without $$$? hahahahahhahahahahaha...
fire his ass and save lots of $$
The maxed-out donor issue is what is hurting Hillary... She does not have broad (no pun intended) enough support. Obama is rallying more people in more places... He won 13 states to her 8 on Super Tuesday (haven't seen about NM yet). He won in the South, the plains and mountain states, and places like MO that are not Dem strong holds. Winning in IL, NY, CA will likely come for any Dem candidate... but pulling in these other states is a HUGE factor, especially considering that McCain (the likely Rep candidate) could not get southern states... The Dem primaries are bringing in more voters by a ratio of better than 2:1. There are hosts of newly engaged electorate, showing up and backing Obama, with dollars and votes... instead of the standard population of already engaged politically minded people... He is the guy to sweep this nation in a new direction...
Next week Hillary will be back at wal-mart and not just shopping for votes.
AP puts Hillary up by 34 delegates. They put McCain up by over 700 delegates. It's close for the democrats, and with the big states of California and New York gone, it looks like it's come down to the small states, and Obama is sweeping those.
Who will Edwards send his delegates to, and who will take Texas?
seele @ 25:
You came up with "rule" during Ross Perot's first term as preznit, right?
I like Hillary and I think she gave it the good college try but the smart thing would be for her to save her money and let Obama take over.
I suppose one could drop the wishful thinking and ask..why does this mean she has money problems? My guess is the move will stimulate donations from the Democratic base that supports her strongly. And, I guess, that is what the 'loan' was intended to do. It was timed to coincide with an ill conceived "Blame the Clinton's" mailer from the Obama campaign and that mailer is guaranteed to piss of a big chunk of Democrats ( HINT: Obama the reason you have any chance at all as a Democrat is the Clinton legacy. The GOP pounded, stomped and craped on the Clintons for 12 years and FAILED!. It is Clinton's presidency that is reflected on when one thinks of Democart and defines DEMOCRAT today. Stop biting the hand the feeds you.)
Obama is a good guy but he is not running a "new style of campaign". His wife's remarks of late have been atrocious and a too bit cry baby for me. The whining coming from his campaign, including bogus racist rants, don't predict much of a chance against a GOP'er. If he wants to win with me he batter drop the GOP 'talk the talk' and show me some Democrat 'walk the walk'. To this point he's been a disappointment.
I think she did this so when the question of "how much money did you take from insurance companies" comes up she doesn't look as bad. she can play that john edwards angle of I'm doing this for the good of the country, sacrificing my own funds to make the world a better place.
wow.... the democratic process inaction. y'all sound like a shit load of freepers here. and, I'm an Obama supporter.
JTM @ 32:
lol, I am just telling you the trend of what I have seen in the last 30 years. This race looks to me like ending up with both Hillary and Obama on the same ticket at President and Vice president. And with the closeness of this race, money often ends up being the deciding factor.
Richard @ 34:
If Hillary wins does that mean i get to watch the GOP pound, stomp and crap on the Clintons for at least another four years? I am so looking forward to that (like hell).
Add that to not liking or agreeing with her and i will keep on rooting for Obama.
I call bullshit.
"The poor girl" wants to distance herself from the ESTABLISHMENT lobbyists.
Obama got a boost in Washington state Wednesday, securing an endorsement from the Service Employees International Union's 100,000-member state council. That state's largest union had endorsed John Edwards but has decided to support Obama. Edwards quit the race last week.
this is good news, as she had to loan herself 5 million Obama raised 5 million. Obama is the candidate we need...but really, if they ran the donkey against the Repugs I would vote for the donkey...and the donkey would make more educated decisions then the Repugs would make.
tballou @ 8:
That would be a difficult endeavor. Both have a real shot at being president, it would be a very cowardly move to submit before a clear winner was announced. After all, neither of them are running for VP.
Nah, the loan ain't BS. The underlining theme in these elections is who's got the most money. And with the opposing candidate out fundraising you 2-1, your have one arm tied behind your back.
Oh how wonderful. It takes MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of dollars to become president. What a great country we live in.
I heard on tv this morning she will be flying in the plane with the press people in order to save money.
If this is some kind of a, feel sorry for me and hand me money, trick, it might backfire on her because the Obama people may smell blood in the water and hand him all the money they can.
anyone who actually thinks Coulter is supporting Clinton needs their head examined....it's all a ruse..to turn Dems against her.....(shaking my head)
abaris @ 39:
then she shouldn't be taking money from the special interest groups in Washington! Otherwise if she is elected she will have the stink of corporations on her.
Richard @ 34:
i agree with you on your points about his wife-- so she puts her foot in her mouth...big deal....she will learn not to say dumb things....
but she is not an ex president, and she is not the candidate, so in the end its irrelevant...anyone with a camera in their face all the time will say dumb things now and then.
all your points about obama, on the other hand, are unsubstantiated and ill considered.
obama will trounce any of the gop candidates. Mccain will cry like a baby when he debates obama, and show us one of those pooped-my-diaper tantrums he's rumored to be so fond of.
Walk the walk?-- point is, Hillary has been walking the wrong walk in the senate. (list bum votes here)
Obama will walk the good walk.
Edwards will endorse Obama
Feingold will endorse Obama
Ali @ 44:
Ain't it the truth? if this doesn't prove that we need public financed elections!
Limpball and Coulter are prolly throwing their weight for a Clinton candidate because those two (among plenty of other rightwing talking heads) owe their entire career to bashing the Clintons.
The rightwing pundits follow the Clintons around like paparazzi following Brittney Spears, and thats been going on for over 15 years.
Ali @ 44:
It takes more than lots of money. It takes support from all the "right" people. Lobbyists, media moguls, pundits, columnists...
I heard alot of talk speculating on Kennedy's endorsement of Obama, and what I thought of it was the only politician with more respect within democratic circles giving you an endorsement IMHO would be Bill Clinton.
Be careful. Hillary will spin this to her favor. She's a master at playing the victim.
"Look at me as I struggle against Senator Obama's 'vast right-wing wealth conspiracy.'"
mudshark @ 46:
Then explain Murdock's support.
Even if Hillary and Obama had equal platforms and equal policy advisors (they don't, Hillary always veers to the side of big business, war, and the status quo), Obama's style alone is enough to make him the best choice.
I have been on enough committees to know that assertive, abrasive people don't win fights without high costs. A smooth and diplomatic leader can, on the other hand, get more people behind a good cause. The hardscrabble types occasionally win, but only by making their opponents feel low and their allies feel sheepish and cowed.
I'm sick of people touting Hillary as a tough as nails "fighter." We've had 8 years of leadership by fighters. And the country is worse off for it.
seele @ 52:
lol, that's a funny one....
The most important endsorsement has yet to be made, and that is by the man most qualified to be president, russ feingold...
He's the only guy that could turn things around for clinton....i would be shocked if he didn't endorse obama though
lopaloo102 @ 56:
I would be surprised if he endorsed either one.
I somehow think Hillary calling out Obama for a weekly debate has alot to do with her financial situation.
I think Hillary was counting on Super Tueday to finish the race. It did not and now she is screwed.
Oh, darn.
Prediction:
The Dem Establishment will arrange for Hillary to get the nomination, to avoid ceding power to the netroots, which Obama has worked so successfully.
vrk @ 58:
I was thinking the same thing. Free nationalized coverage is cheaper than paying for ads. Personally, I think ALL advertising in political elections should be free on every station. Levels the playing field, and takes this money lunacy off the table. The only ones entitled to even run for Prez now are the rich, and the ones that can get the most cash. What the hell does that have to do with the issues, or fixing the economy, or Iraq? Nothing. It's "who can bring the most money into our corporate political party" and it's sad.
xoites defends Constitution @ 54:
did I say I supported HRC?My comment was directed to Coulters faux support...we all know about HRC....don't we?
VietVet8666 @ 60:
If they do they will be playing with fire.
vrk @ 58:
I agree, and I hope Obama continues to refuse appearances on Hillary's BFF Rupert Murdoch's FOX channel.
xoites defends Constitution @ 63:
Correct.....this whole thing is about pissing off the Dems and turning themselves against each other.
So they stay home ...................and not Vote.
mudshark @ 62:
Coulter may be serious, but when it comes to it, who knows?
have a nice day folks..............
RickinSF @ 64:
obama lifted the boycott.....
obama now accepts invites to fox
i didn't believe it myself, but here it is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCBaAOEaERE
xoites defends Constitution @ 66:
C'mon X.....after all the bullshit she's spewed.........................one day she just shows up and claims she's for HRC?
lopaloo102 @ 68:
figgers I'd be the last to get the memo.
If they fix it so that Hillary gets the nomination, I'll vote for McCain.
I she can win the nomination legitimately, then fine. But if they hand it to her by going against the majority, I will leave the Democratic Party.
Hillary vs. McCain would be a disaster.
McCain would pick up conservative Hillary-haters, the GOP, and independents.
Hillary would pick up the Democratic a-holes who told me that Kerry was a sure thing.
Hi,
During Recession times real estates are the best modes
of investments here are some nice opportunities available
{Deleted, Spam. Please do not spam the site. Thank You. SiteMonitor}
Best
Wide Circles
Dan Kelch
mudshark @ 69:
Coulter is insane, i have no idea what she really thinks. (Thankfully.)
The only reason Coultergeist et al MIGHT "support" HRC is that even they realize how badly Busholini has screwed the pooch and that no one - R or D - can clean up the mess in his/her first term. That way, with HRC in office they can spew more of their vitriol and make million$ more.
Dr. Acula @ 73:
Which is actually a good enough reason for them.
mudshark @ 5:
Alot of that money is reserved for the General Election...she can't dip into it.
xoites defends Constitution @ 59:
Yep.
Hillary was counting on a knockout in the early rounds. We'll see if she's got the juice to go the distance.
Acting Patriotic @ 17:
yea, like Obama's quick call to Alexi Giannoulias...awwww, look, Chicago politics!
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/27/look-before-you-leap-obamas-mobb...
Richard @ 34:
amen man
BigTobacco @ 71:
Seems to me, there are quite a few Hillary haters within our Part itself, so please include yourselves in crossing over to John "War Forever" McCain.
xoites defends Constitution @ 22:
Xoites, you disappoint me...I thought you were smart enough to question mAnn Coulter's big mouth, along with Glenn Beck's, Rush limbaugh's etc. You're either losing I.Q. by the minute, or are being dishonest by suggesting 3 Clinton haters would suddenly turn around and vote for a woman they've been on the record for despising since, well, forEVER.
There's no depth to alot of Clinton haters on here; if there was any semblance of honor you'd all be discussing Glenn Beck's assertion that Hillary winning the Election would rally the republicans, because she'd be a horrible President "just like Bill's first 2 years".
Man, STOP IT with the crap.
Libertas @ 79:
If it comes down to McCain and Clinton the difference will be gender only.
$3.01 @ 12:
I think that we the people are understanding that if we want out needs addressed we need to put our money where our hopes are.
I am going to send my extra tax return (the economic stimulus) to Obama for President.
The old saying about paying the fiddler and calling the tune is true.
Joementum @ 76:
Well now, if is like Howard Dean...after everything iss said and done, Obama supporters will be screaming "yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeearghhhh!"
So much for a "movement, huge donations, and young voters."
Don't buy the media hype...you're going to be disappointed.
So Hillary takes special interest money and is running out of money, and Obama does not take special interest money and is swimming in money. Ask yourself honestly, does this smell fishy to you?
Josh @ 80:
Excuse me, but i think i am allowed to have a little fun with this stupid ass election and the bullshit surrounding it considering the fact that the entire process was corrupt and disenfranchising. Should i care what Colture's motivations are? I don't think so. She is not someone i spend much time thinking about. My IQ has been and will always be 40.
xoites defends Constitution @ 63:
That almost guarantees defeat. Dean really has a problem. He needs this to work out without having to deal with the unseated delegates. A brokered convention will be very divisive.
Liberates @ 79:
Doesn't this speak to the fact that Hillary inspirers people to dislike her so much that she will, even if she wins the election, continue to keep an America in two camps?
Hillary is divisive, not a good characteristic in a President as we have witnessed for the last seven years.
Ok, sorry for the typos.
YeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarghhhH!
Josh:
The Clintons are really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this smear…
How much money have they taken from lobbyists? How much money have the gotten from the modern-day slavemasters in China? How much have they gotten from crooked assed donors?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/30/us/politics/30bundler.html?_r=1&oref=s...
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Clinton_Owned_by_Lobbyists
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-donors19oct19,0,4231217.story...
xoites defends Constitution @ 57:
i did some googling...seems you're right
i'm shocked....i thought the war vote would have swayed feingold
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/feingold-endorsement
Clinton will go to war with Iran. You watch. She's got that little troll Madeline Albright advising her.
Mike Mid City @ 87:
Mike, I can't stand this argument...if a rape victim was wearing a short skirt, does that excuse the rape? hating the clinton's because of the republican's actions makes no sense what.so.ever.
Meaning, Bill and Hillary were not hated by republicans *because* they were "bill and hillary," but because they were DEMOCRATS who won a Presidential election; anyone fooling themselves into thinking any Dem won't be subjected to the same derision is absolutely naive.
Second, Obama is dividing via race; that is despicable:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_8120...
To be honest all the Hillary bashing here makes me not want to visit as often and certainly doesn't make me want to click those ads.
Happy posting.
I dislike the Clintons for the EXACT OPPOSITE reasons the Republicans do.
Think about that.
debaser71 @ 93:
I don't understand this point of view- because progressives don't back the conservative, you're offended?
Just think how bad Hillary would be doing without the 35 years of experience. Just think how well she can guide the US economy. Maybe more of us will be working for free. Is it true Terry Mc Cauliffe states she won the Michigan primary? I voted in that one I believe our choice was Hillary or uncommitted. 40% went to the polls to vote uncommitted. If she is going to have people like Mc Cauliffe working for her misrepresenting the facts this may cause a few problems in foreign negotiations.
debaser71 @ 93:
Oh shit!
Come back! I will rethink my entire life if you stick around!
BigTobacco @ 89:
Which smear?
Are you saying that because you assume the Clinton's were behind Obama's 17 year old friendship with Rezko, or Obama's factual ties to a republican fund raiser, Giannoulias?
I don't want to be contentious, but fair is fair...
Did you read the article? This stuff was known before Hillary ever started running officially...but I guess people who don't live in Chicago would be clueless as to Giannoulias.
Oh, and buddy...saying "well THEY'RE doing it too!" doesn't make Obama any cleaner.
Get up to speed, Taylor Marsh has the real story. Hillary has raised millions since Tuesday and has another push right now to raise 7 million, it's going very well. She's keeping apace of both Obama and those traitors MoveOn.
kaT @ 99:
Doesn't Taylor Marsh basically work for the Clintons?
kaT @ 99:
lol! -- I hope Rupert comes through for her.
I seem to remember everyone putting nails in John McCain's coffin back in July when his campaign was virtually broke. I wouldn't count Hillary out just yet. She's been at this game far too long to let anything or anyone get in her way.
I'll support whoever ends up the nominee but neither HRC or BO are my favorites. Edwards was my man but the MM torpedoed his campaign from the start.
kaT @ 99:
lol that's probably just her borrowed 5 mil, laundered back through bogus individual donors
traitors at moveon? they endorsed the most qualified candidate, what's wrong with that?
Libertas @ 36:
I agree...except for the Obama part. (Since Edwards dropped out, I still haven't decided on my vote next week, but bandwagons don't move me - except to turn me off.)
Not backing Hillary is one thing, parroting right wing talking points in the service of Obama is something else. But keep it up, bashing Hillary with low-grade volleys just helped her numbers in NH.
Obama and "new politics"
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama/%22new_politics%22
Travis @ 95:
Don't understand this point of view? Don't understand that we've watched the Republicans do this to Democrats for 8 years, we've supported these blogs and the D. C. Democrats even though they looked like spineless wonders. We looked forward to having a real choice in '08 and now the Dem Dinosaurs and the Blue America liberals are bashing one of our own Democratic candidates who the registered Democrats of this country have turned out for in the millions until her voice cannot be heard. I don't know how you people think you're going to have a united party or country when you can't stand an equal, fair, objective campaign in our own party. There is no democracy in America anymore, George W. Bush has surely destroyed it. Now the Democrats are behaving worse than the Republicans.
debaser71 @ 93:
Oh, wait. Click on the ads.
Aww Man, Blogads is going to kill me!
BigTobacco @ 71:
wah, wah. I knew Kerry wouldn't be a sure thing. Hillary is the best option when the choice is between McCain and Hillary.
Hayduke @ 102:
Exactly, and low on cash is a relative state. Everyone but Obama would kill to have Hillary's money and fundraising people. It does highlight the Obama cash machine though. Though I suspect that there are many conservative dollars being sent to Obama as well. It's not just progressives. Anyone who wants to stop Hillary is shoving cash in Obama's face.
kaT @ 107:
I still don't understand why true democracy hinges on blind unwavering support for the Triangulation candidate. I agree that unfounded accusations and freep posts are tiresome, but when people make valid points against Clinton (i.e.: her vote on cluster bombs), it's some sort of betrayal to the party. Also, spoiler: being a progressive doesn't mean being blindly faithful to the Democratic party.
""Nobody can dispute that Barack Obama opposed the Iraq war from the start and, with striking prescience, predicted U.S. troops would be mired in a costly conflict that fanned 'the flames of the Middle East.' But nobody should accept at face value the Illinois senator's claim that he was a 'courageous leader' who opposed the war at great political risk. The truth is that while Obama showed foreign policy savvy and an ability to keenly analyze both sides of an issue in his October 2002 warnings on Iraq, the political upside of his position rivaled any risk. And, once elected to the U.S. Senate two years later, Obama waited months to show national leadership on Iraq. Even now, as he hopes to ride his anti-war credentials to the White House, Obama's views on how to end the conflict differ little from those of Democratic rivals who voted in the fall of 2002 to give President Bush authority to wage war."["
kaT @ 99:
Taylor Marsh works for Clinton Corp. So does Jake Tapper. If you check ABC's website, you'll find a wonderful anti-obama thread. Have you met PiLA? You sound an awful lot like that one.
Politics, politics....I wish the average American could decipher such simple facts:
gave his speech against the war in Iraq on October 26, 2002, at an anti-war rally in Chicago.[1]
However, the speech was given fifteen days AFTER the Joint Resolution (H.J.114) to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq, commonly known as the AUMF, which was passed October 11, 2002.[2][3]
kaT @ 107:
so wait, because clinton's momentum stalled then plunged, suddenly democrats are as vicious as republicans?
the only dirty campaigning in this primary has been from bill and hillary, around the sc vote....and obama's wife (but she's not an ex president, and merely said some stupid things)...and now everyone has chilled, it seems...
so how is the fact that the grass roots are turning away from clinton, despite her obama bashing, evidence of clinton bashing?
This is all total bullshit.
Hillary has been pulling all this Karl Rove shit from day one. Having her campaign make veiled racial remarks against Obama, and then accusing him of being like Jesse Jackson (which, I suppose is scary, to some people--republicans and other conservatives).
Obama has not made this campaign about race. He has steered far, far from it.
It's dissappointing that people can't see rovian tactics at work because they are blinded by the D next to Clinton's name.
In fact, people are blind to Bill Clinton's entire legacy, which was to swing the Democratic party closer to Reagan. And now, Hillary tries to act like she's a progressive because she was the first woman on the board of directors at Walmart (but sat on her hands while they systematically discriminated against working women).
I'll vote for Hillary if she gets nominated by the majority of people voting in the Democratic primaries. But I know and everyone knows that she will lose to McCain, because she has done everything possible to walk as closely as she can the the GOP platform. ANd Democrats cannot win on their terms. We need to win on our own terms.
She definately scares the hell out of me and having her run out of gas at the side of the road is a fitting end (hopefully) to her run to fill Bush's shoes as supreme leader.
Josh @ 114:
You forgot to mention that he couldn't vote yay, or nay on this resolution. Hillary could, and voted WITH Bush. Then said she hadn't read the NIE report?!? Her record speaks for itself and grasping at straws at Obama isn't going to work. This is where Hillary's 35 years in the political spin machine will work against her in the election.
lopaloo102 @ 115:
You're starting in the middle, not the beginning...Every article posted online starts with a negative about Hillary; they're framed in a negative viewpoint, while Obama is hyped...
Much like Howard Dean; people are ignoring the hype...anyone thinking that after a full year of Hillary's having substantial numbers will be wiped out by a month of "momentum" of young voters to lead to Obama's primary win, is not politically in tune.
I challenge you to find 3 articles which is pro-Hillary in the news cycles of recent past.
In the meantime, again:
gave his speech against the war in Iraq on October 26, 2002, at an anti-war rally in Chicago.[1]
However, the speech was given fifteen days AFTER the Joint Resolution (H.J.114) to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq, commonly known as the AUMF, which was passed October 11, 2002.[2][3]
Obama, political expediency never looked so good, "present" kinda guy.
BigTobacco @ 116:
I demand that you show me "veiled racial comments" because if there was anything worse than:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004
I have feeling Obama would have outlined them in his "leaked" memo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_8120...
The only Rovian behavior is Obama's whispering of the race card by his camp.
robert crush @ 1:
They're dicking around with the numbers, because she is part of the privileged elite that want her. She is GW Bush in drag, with more brains but the same connections. You think GHW Bush and Bill Clinton bumming around together was a fluke? You think it was an accident? Connect the dots.
ConcernedCanuck @ 118:
You forgot to note the obvious fact that Obama didn't face political scrutiny at a national level, since he was only a state senator, that Obama didn't have access to the national security information that every other Dem Senator had, and he was against the war AFTER the resolution was voted in...15 days later.
Josh @ 119:
I thought Hillary was running out of cash, but there sure seems to be alot of paid supporters online at various websites. Hmmmm....methinks this is just another of the fine "poor me" tactics that Clinton Corp. has been using since Arkansas. She's cried, she's lied about being the underdog, she's lied about her "experience", and then she "found her voice" after saying all the experience she had. Sure took long enough to find that voice. Must have been that cold she had. LOL!
haha, listen to the "what, who, me?" bullshit. I'm not accusing anyone in particular of the anti-hillary smears on this site but there is no doubt in this fucking reality in which I live (cant comment on yours) that this has occurred. Unlike the Obama-niks, I dont care which of them wins (their positions are just not that different), I'm just old enough to have endured the Clinton witch trials of the 90s and recognize gutter horshit and lemming behavior when I see it.
Its been like that since before NH and has continued on to a lesser degree since then. What the fuck is wrong with a progressive who thinks that getting a republican elected over Hillary Clinton is the thing to do? Holding your breath while they lock up the supreme court for a generation? WTF?!!!?
Liberal AND Proud @ 121:
yes, because major political circles read just like having a beer with your girlfriend's ex-boyfriend, so we can analyze those things on the surface...who would have thought, two ex-Presidents trying to do something for the US via Diplomacy.
I hate the bush's but to boil it down to best friends forever status when they're billionaires/millionaires is absolutely kindergarten thinking.
Josh @ 122:
And you FORGOT to mention that Hillary was for the war and voted FOR the resolution. She had access to national security info. You forgot to mention that too.
The preceeding was a paid political announcement from Clinton Corp, a division of Hillary Clinton Inc.
Perhaps the fine companies who manufacture cluster bombs could do her a solid and cut her a loanski. After all, she did them a big favor. How do the Hillary boosters here explain that vote, by the by?
ConcernedCanuck @ 123:
Aww, what's the matter, you can't deal with an average American citizen who knows the fuck's going on?
Obama's a joke, and no one has vetted him at ALL.
You live in an online world full of younger voters, and are blind to the millions of Hillary voters who don't come to these blogs; so blind that you think I'm a Hillary camp kinda guy....
That's pathetic.
ConcernedCanuck @ 123:
Yeah, Josh, she's paid off the 50% of primary votes whove selected her. Nice one. Not only are all those who disagree with you paid shills, but Hillary has secretly cracked open the hidden jew gold vault to pay for the bribes and plans to ride to power with her illuminati council in tow.
Hey, voter suppression ain't cheap.
Josh @ 128:
No what is pathetic, is you are trying to attack Obama's record, while ignoring Hillary's even more Republican record. That isn't being informed. That is spin.
ConcernedCanuck @ 126:
Oh Please. You're resulting to goddamned garbage...That's a stupid suggestion, and you're full of shit.
Let me make this CLEAR:
The point that Hillary voted for the Iraq resolution to place inspectors back into Iraq with military force as a DETERRENT is UNDERSTOOD.
YOU are not admitting that Obama's stance on the war IS INDEED a fairy tale, with political covering, and you can't STAND that I'm right.
Pretty easy to claim the high road when you acted 15 days after the vote was made, while you HAVE NO ABILITY TO VOTE ON OFFICIAL RECORD.
OBAMA=POLITICAL COWARD
xoites defends Constitution @ 59:
She'll cry her way to a few more million $$, which leads me to tow other points: Is anyone else outraged at how expensive and long the "campaigns" last? And does anyone see little red flags about these campaign promises to balance the federal budget, yet Mitt and Hill are going into their wallets and asking staffers to work for free?
On the former, we should adopt spending limits on campaigning and keep it to a 6-month window.
bubba @ 129:
Haha... :)
How about this... Her staff implying that Obama would be killed for his idealism (like two other prominent black leaders).
http://johnhummel.blogspot.com/2008/01/clinton-staffer-on-comparing-obam...
While Hillary herself says:
"Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," Clinton said. "It took a president to get it done."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Clinton_and_Obama_Johnson_an...
These are not a vicious things to say? They don't resonate with the experience of African-Americans in this country? They aren't threats/insults?
These kind of comments are specifically designed to provoke outrage. They are blatant attempts to force Obama into a discussion of race.
Bush does the same thing when he uses religious catch phrases meant to provoke a certain audience, but which sound innocuous to an audience that is ignorant of the deeper meaning.
Josh @ 132:
You sound just like all the other Obama haters. He has no record/vast experience, so we attack him cuz he has no experience. Have you people ever stopped to think maybe that is exactly WHY he is so popular? He isn't a Washington insider. That scare you? Thought you wanted change, or is it just change of party? So he was against the Iraq war. It made no difference when he couldn't vote for it. So bringing that up is pure political spin.
ConcernedCanuck @ 131:
"even more" republican record?
Have you looked at these side by side?
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=BS030017
No, REALLY?
Hillary's not the one attacking former DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS for political gain.
But I guess Obama's first election is a mystery to obamabots:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama/%22new_politics%22
You don't KNOW Obama's voting record, how could you be musing about it?
Josh @ 119:
ok, so obamas momentum is freshly generated, but you fail to acknowledge that clintons momentum has been deflating since 06.....so it's not the augmenting strength or brief duration of his campaign, but rather the depleting strength and extended duration of clintons-- she's been withering away for more than a year.
I'd say the fact that all the headlines yesterday didn't talk about her tuesday defeat counts for 3... she lost by number of states, and by number of delegates, yet all the papers said obama lost... todays NYT - In Vote, Obama fell short of Furor..
your points on the dates of obamas speech are as irrelevant as a discussion of what the meaning of is is....
this article might give you some clarity on the non-issue of the present votes
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?scp=1&sq=obam...
Josh @ 137:
So don't vote for him Josh. Hey, wasn't that simple? You can't ignore Hillary's record. Period. If that is what you want, go ahead knock yerself out and vote for her. BUT, if you truly hate Obama like the spin you give, does that mean you aren't going to vote for him in the general when he wins the nomination? I mean someone with the obvious hatred you have for this man, there is no way you would vote for him, right?
According to the Clinton-haters, she's the annointed candidate of the big corporations/AIPAC/the military-industrial complex/the Illuminati/whoever. If that were true how could she be running out of money?
One thing's for sure: it can't be because it's not true.
Heh, the illuminati is short on cash these days... and where does the grass roots find all that money lately?
Josh @ 137:
These are pathetic sources to link to!
VERY light on fact and HEAVY with opinion of moron newspaper coloumists.
I thought it was hillarious the site was made up to look legit and is nothing more than some hacks attempt at a hitjob.
GROW UP for God sake.
lopaloo102 @ 138:
Respectfully, the dates are ABSOLUTELY NOT IRRELEVANT.
To be able to claim I was "against the war" you have to be open to such things as "I was part of the underground railroad" because you turned your head while slaves crossed the Ohio river on a boat.
If he was against the war, why did he wait til after the vote was cast?
You're ignoring politics, how it really works...Guarding yourself against future attacks by not taking strong stands is the sign of a true politician, and that's exactly what Obama had the luxury of doing.
Rusty Shackleford @ 140:
A couple of months ago the NYT had an op-ed about how Clinton had "squandered" money during her second Senate campaign and how the big donors were not happy with her. I think the same thing has happened in the presidential primary. I have heard Clinton always calling for more money when things do not go right for her. Apparently, she thinks the trough is bottomless and that she is entitled to go to it anytime she wants. Maybe, as in the Senate campaign, the big corporate donors are getting restive. And now that the race for the nomination is proving not to be the cakewalk Clinton anticipated, the big corps are having second thoughts about throwing good money after bad.
Michael Moore on Larry King the day after Super Tuesday 2008: "I am morally prohibited from voting for Hillary in the primaries because of her war votes, I mean that not as a personal attack against her, but I simply can't side with somebody who participated, whether willingly or unknowingly, as she claims, in something that has been so evil."
Josh @ 125:
Kindergarten thinking? Reeeally. So it's just coincidence hmmm. I believe that the Clinton's were not millionaires when they left office. They were going back to their little home in Arkansas. Hillary went to NY as Senator, and Bill set up his "law firm" (i.e. lobbying headquarters) in NY, made his connections on Wall Street ( I suppose he didn't get some introductions from some other guy in the know on the street through certain Carlyle connections)...nahhh...kindergarten thinking.
I love it!. Keep doubting her;)
Obama wins a big state talk to me then. And oh yeah in the South white males are not voting for him. I'm from Louisiana and I'm black. I can tell you listening to these white men down hear they would rather do stuff to him cant even say on this website down here than vote for him. White men up north and Kansas ain't the South. You will see and I lik Obama but everything down in the deep south is race first then maybe i'll look at your qualifications. He won in Georgia and Alabama but my people (blacks) block voted him in. They are planning to o that in New Orleans where I'm from this weekend. I had friends telling me to vote for him because he's black. How fuc*&ng stupid is that??? I told them you should learn from our local elections not to do that. Our politicians line their pockets and roll on at our expense. Now I'm not throwing Obama in with that sleaze but just saying you don't vote on skin color alone. Vote on substance and issues then if he/she meets your requirements is your choice then that should be who you vote for. This isn't American Idol this is for President. We have supreme court issues and a host of other things to be concerned about. I'm going against the grain in the black community and voting for Hillary but believe Obama would still make a good president. If he wins the nomination I will vote for him and I hope his supporters would do the same for Hillary. She will not get New Orleans which is sad becaus eher and Bill have raised millions since Katrina and fel they can't even campaign here because the blacks have tuned them out. The race baiting that we are allowing the media to hype wee need to get under control. This party has never hadmajor race issues until unfortunately this historic election. Please everyone quit letting the media write the theme to this novel and let us finish this book.Go Democrats 2008! Lata fellow Dems and try not to bash each other to death:0
Jack Cafferty had a great question yesterday.
Why is world captivated by ’08 race?
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/05/why-is-world-captivated-by-...
Apparently the rest of the world doesn't want a republican to win.
Sorry for misspellings
Comments are closed on this entry