I have a feeling no one is telling the Clinton's the real truth

I know a very wealthy couple with a troubled son. They are a real power couple (quite well know in their home state), and if you told them about their son, they would get incredibly defensive and absolutely not listen. They remind me quite a bit of the Clintons. I think the Clintons are convinced that Rove's scorch and burn approach will work in the Democratic primaries. It might work in the general election, but we in the Democratic Party I think hates that kind of politics because it's burned us too many times. Clinton has to accept that her only chance of winning the nomination is to run a tough, but honest fight, and not play the race card, the Michigan/Florida card, and so on. I think the next set of state polls is going to show that Obama is gaining. I think it's amazing the humongous leads that Clinton has squandered in New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina, and elswhere. It raises serious questions about her judgment that she does not see that she's going about winning in the wrong way. In New Hampshire, she gave us the kind of president we might want. Someone who was strong, but sensitive. Now, her campaign comes across as angry and unapologetic. She's running the worst possible campaign. Not only is she losing in places where she had an advantage, she's hurting the Democratic Party.

If you think this kind of crap helps your candidate, think again.

... and you clearly have no experience with (and having even read fiction about) "power couples."

and you are ready to psychologically diagnose all couples who are in positions of power based on your inferences?

Talk about stereotyping and having prejudices.

... or they're just big idiots who are squandering huge leads in state after state. At any rate, the way they've been running their campaign, with race-sensitive comments by the former President and violation of the Florida/Michagan agreement by the candidate herself, they have screwed up big time. I think they they have too much control of their campaign, and they don't know what they're doing.

She moved on to campaign where it counts, while Obama is left in the state he had wrapped up.

If you agree with taking away the voices of thousands of people in MI and FL, disenfranchising their votes -you may be in the wrong party.

When Hillary is the nominee you will support her.

unethical, and disgusting.

If you think her tactics are helping her, think again.

I believe she is at her heart a "Corportist" who seeks power more than her deceptive statments about that she "has been fighting for the rights of women, families and children for 35 years" as mean attempt to have women and liberal and progressive people to see her as one of our own who if elected will actually make the needed changes for those very people and groups. There is little in her record of 35 years of public where she has done that. Maybe as a legal-aide type lawyer after Yale Law School with the Children's Defence Fund - I'll grant her that! But what from the time she went to Arkansas and work as corporate lawyer with the biggest law firm in the state that defended Wal Mart and Tyson Foods (chickens) against workers, consumers, and environmentalist. On the Bd of Directors of Wal MArt, did she raise her voice once to speak out against their anti-labor, anti-women practices? No - no evidence - if she has then she ought to get it out in the public domain. All the evidence of people who were in the Bd Room with her said she never spoke up. Did promiote child care centers are WalMart, No! Did she tell the Bd to stop having WalMart managers train the under-paid WalMart workers to go to local welfare office and housing authorities to get food stamps, welfare help, immunizations, and housing vouchers, to supplement the wages that they could not live on? No, not a word from Hillary, who was on the WalMart Bd of Directors and in a real position of power to speak up asn "fight for the rights of women, poor families and children." No, not Hillary - te self-described champion of poor women, families and children for thirty-five years. So she is lying!

She clearly was currying favor with her corporate over-lords as she was certainly thinking of running for the Senate and President and thinking of the corporate donations she would receive as the price of her SILENCE!

I am sorry my dear sisters, but Hillary is a FRAUD! Bill Clnton is a FRAUD! They both stood silent in the whitehouse in the mid-nineties while the slaughter of millions, including untold women and children (mostly all black on black murder) raged on. They did not lift one finger or public voice to try to stop the violence. They brought us welfare reform which more poor women and children into the streets and the emergency rooms for medical attention. And they brought us NAFTA, that has shipped US manufacturing jobs to countries where primarily women work in horrific factory conditions, making near slave-wages, making crap to sell to the poor in the US in places like WalMart. What a team - let's put them back in the Whitehouse! OMFG! Wake Up!

Like Pelosi, when given the chance in a real position of power, what do they do? Given Hillary record what will she really do in the Whitehouse? Come-on!

I say all of this knowing that if Hillary is the democratic nominee and likely she will be, I will vote for her as the better of two evils as I do believe she will at least appont moderate members to the Supreme Court who will save Roe v Wade and keep the court from its extreme right-wing surge! If she did anything more progressive - meaning pro-people, not corporations, would be icing on the cake. Also, I have no doubt that if Hillary is on the ballot, millions of women will flock to the polls, democrats, independents and a a large percentage of republican women will vote for her as women will rightfully feel that finally we have one of our own to vote for and they can't be any worse than the long string of rich white men who have held the office since 1789. And, I would not blame women for doing that. I would also not blame Black people for voting for Obama for the same reason. I will vote for him if he is somehow the democratic nominee. I would like to be able to vote for Edwards because he is the one candidate who is talking to the interests that I believe in more than anyone has in years, and he as the background, passion, intellect and verbal skills to make the case for the kind of changes that are so crucially needed.

I will not vote for her because I know she will fire Howard Dean.

:shrug:

she has a habit of creating her own personal realities, sometimes ego-centric, that are getting her in more trouble than not "listening." I would put her listening skills up there with anyone. She understands, but I think she's panicking and may be developing some bitterness for not being appreciated fully. But Bill Clinton is saying way too much these days, too, and even though Chelsea has finally joined in the campaign, the tone is very tentative, and perhaps too little too late.

If young people turn out to vote in this election, it will change history.

i was beginning to warm up to her, but since bill (who i at one time adored) started opening his big mouth, it has turned be against her. i don't want to see "them" in the white house.

that being said, if she is the candidate i will vote for her. any one of the dems is better than a republican.

BTW. i already voted in the primary.