I think I know what Hillary Clinton is saying by staying in.

At the risk of being ignored, taunted, mocked, etc. I believe I understand what Hillary Clinton is really saying by staying in.

--------------------------------------------------
DISCLOSURE: I live in California. By the time my primary occurred, my pick, Dennis Kucinich was out. My second pick, John Edwards, quit one week before I got to vote for him. I voted for Hillary Clinton because I wanted to have as many Democratic candidates in the race for as long as possible. I believe it was a away to tell the GOP sheep that we are the party of the big tent. I saw that Obama had the nomination by the time I got to vote and I can see that he has it now. I also know that Clinton is a fighter who will make a good Vice President, but I seriously doubt that it will be possible now.
--------------------------------------------------

Hillary Clinton is sending a very clear message to the GOP and all their phone-jammers, make-believe election day protesters and partisan Supreme Court justices: no matter how ugly election night gets, no matter what the voting machines say, no matter how bad the GOP-controlled media tries to make her look: if she is on the ticket, she simply will not give up.

The majority of Obama supporters believe the election is ours (Democrats) to lose. There are some Obama supporters who fear another GOP stolen election. Hillary Clinton is staying in based on the belief that the GOP already have plans in place to steal another election and she is telling them she will not make it easy for them to do it again.

I really believe she is sincere when she says she wants all the votes counted and not just for the primaries. She is sending the GOP a very clear message: if she is on the ticket, she is not above fighting--by any means necessary--for the win.

She will not graciously concede until all the votes are counted; she will not politely step aside until all the questions of election fraud are investigated and settled. Right or wrong, Hillary Clinton is saying she will not be like Gore and Kerry and the GOP should expect a fight as nasty as they want to make it.

None of the things we have to do to recover from 8 years of a GOP unitary executive can happen unless we win.

She is telling the GOP machine that if she is on the ticket she will fight whatever tricks they pull, whatever vote-manipulation games they play; she will fight them to the bitter end.

Okay, that's what I think she is saying, let the snark begin.

possible issue. I was REALLY PISSED when virtually everyone, candidates in particular, rolled over and went, "OK. Theft? Fraud? Can't be bothered, really..."
I hope you're right! I really do. And I hope Obama has just as much determination not to let that happen. I don't think it will be close enough this time to allow for a theft, at least not by the exact same tactics they used in the last two elections, but you KNOW they'll at least try it...fuckin' filth.
I just hope we can all come together and make SURE McSame Old, Same Older does NOT get into the White House.

What more change could there be than that?

These candidates need each other.

They complement each other.

Here's pretty much where I've been since April 2008:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Radio_Lady/238

That is reason enough to add her to the ticket, in my book. But then again, I was kinda liking the idea anyway. Might also blunt any defections from women voters who might be threatening to stay home that day because she's not the top of the ticket. Hey, she'd be ON the ticket. That'd be good enough for me.

And I'm very proud of her for not being goaded into giving up the race several months ago.

I'm also very proud of Sen. Obama for KNOWING that he had what it takes, that he had the COURAGE, the SMARTS, and, I'll go ahead and say it, the BALLS to run this race.

I am one proud Democrat today!

The other side has a grumpy, old, nearly insane man running for President. And we will have a whole new look!

Just think about it, our candidates reflect the diversity of our country. Our candidates by their very existence represent a move away from the old white man as president "tradition".

The same cannot be said for the GOP, who are just more of the same crap in an older, whiter, balder package.

She's quoting Karl Rove and courting Scaife. The slash and burn campaign is against fellow deomcrats. sadly.

...which I had never heard of until I started at DU.

Nor do I care that she appeases the Roves and Scaifes of the GOP.

But I know that if we had a fighter like Clinton in 2000 (or 2004 for that matter) we would have had someone to fight for.

That is not to discount Al Gore or John Kerry, but we, the electorate, seemed to need someone at the top of the ticket to rally us to fight.

I was discouraged when everyone who was saying in 2004 "we're going to fight" instantly gave up when Kerry conceded. I know that if Kerry said he would stay in and fight, there would have been thousands behind him.

We may have grassroots, but we need a leader too.

I'm sick of dynastic politics and bought and sold politicians. When she was ahead in the primaries starting out, I was not going to vote at all for pres. b/c I find her repulsive because she has no moral center.

Don't allow the GOP to influence the way you think about people or issues. They are really 19th century hold overs, who cannot accept their time is through.

Good bye GOP, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

That is if you can figure out how to operate one!

where in hell did you ever get that idea? No, it's a progressive idea... the idea that democracy is less effective when entrenched families swap the office of prez among themselves.

The republicans wanted to repeal the term limits they put in place after Roosevelt, if that's what you mean. That was a revenge vote. My issue about cronyism and corporatism. You're apparently ignorant of the fact that this has been an issue of contention since the beginning of her campaign.

However, if you want to talk about GOP - let's look at Hillary's voting record compared to Obama's on short list of "gop v. dem" issues. Hillary is the one who sided with the GOP on vote after vote on issues CENTRAL to democratic beliefs.

CLINTON:

- NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

- YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.

- YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.

- YES on the Iraq War Resolution.

- Refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.


OBAMA:

- YES on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

- NO on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.

- Drafted legislation stating that Congress did not grant President Bush the authority to attack Iran, either through the Kyl-Lieberman amendment or any resolution previously adopted.

- Vigorously opposed the Iraq War and took a public stand against the Iraq War Resolution

- Signed the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.

If you want to elect a democrat, you will support Obama, not Hillary.

The progressive idea does not exclude a candidate based on his name (Adams, for example)

The GOP's "dynasty" talking point was to muddy the process by implying that a candidate with the same name is a dynasty.

Progressives elect a candidate based on their qualifications, not peripheral things like last name, skin color or gender.

And I refuse to allow this thread to become a Hillary verses Obama thread.

I believe my OP was clear: I believe I know why Clinton stayed in as long as she did.

If you agree, great; if you disagree, that's great too. Just don't try to turn this thread into something that it's not.

to tell me what a progressive is or isn't.

Loking at Clinton's voting record is apparently not good on your thread b/c it shows she voted with republicans over and over?

I volunteered to vote swap with any Florida Nader voter - they vote for Gore I would vote for Nader - to both give Nader the numbers he needed to win and to insure a Gore victory. I voted for Bill 2x, even tho I didn't support him.

And you are wrong to say it is someone's "name" - that's stupid, really. It's about entrenched power, which I explained to you, but obviously you do not want to hear anything that doesn't agree with you so I will leave this thread... if you post an opinion and someone disagrees with you... LOL. that's funny. I didn't know you were the only person allowed to have an opinion on "your" thread.

In fact she did not vote on it at all, the vote being taken on the day her husband Bill had open heart surgery. She was at the hospital with him - she did, though, release a press statement beforehand indicating that she would have voted "no" on the bill. This has been posted numerous times on DU, I'm surprised to see you still repeating this lie.


----------------


"If you want to elect a democrat, you will support Obama, not Hillary."

Just curious - how did you feel about Obama's support of the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill - where he voted in the minority of Dems? Or his support for Republican tort reform, where once again he voted with the minority of Dems? Hillary voted against both those measures.

You bring up Kyle/Lieberman as a mark against Hillary without mentioning that Obama did not vote on that measure. Pretty convenient for him not to have a defining position on that... Same goes for the IWR. Obama has done nothing to convince me that, had he been in the US Senate, he would have voted any differently than Clinton. Or Kerry. Or Edwards. Or Dodd. Or Biden. He even said himself that he didn't know how he would have voted if he's been in their position. Another pretty convenient non vote, I'd say.

---------------------

as for Obama's draft legislation ie; Iran - that was nothing more than a political stunt

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/11/2/104054/281

Yeah, she really fought against the invasion of Iraq. She really fought against Alito and Roberts. She really fought against the Patriot Act. She really fought against the NSA and domestic spying. And all those brave speeches on the Senate floor against Guantanamo Bay...

Not to mention her vote for the Kyle/Lieberman resolution.

With a "fighter" like her, who needs Republicans?

sw

you'd prefer not to discuss the facts?

I hardly ever post in GD-P, so don't confuse me with the partisans here. The only reason I support Obama is that he's the only one left in the primary race who isn't Clinton.

I have been dead set against Clinton getting the Dem presidential nomination since she first got in the Senate in 2002. I have consistantly, for six years, begged people to educate themselves about the DLC and the Clintons and the McCauliffs and the Will Marshalls and the rest.

I have literally begged people on DU for years -- LONG before this primary race officially began -- to PLEASE not go blindly into supporting a DLCer for a candidate!

But as Republicans have demonstrated so well: logic, reason, and facts are powerless against uninformed or willfully ignorant emotionality.

sw

...I've heard them all before. That is not what this thread is about and I refuse to get dragged into old arguments just because you're trying to goad me into them with insults.

I'm saying that I disagree with your assessment, and here's why.

I'm sorry that you find disagreement so tiring.

sw

...without changing the subject.

I opined that your reasoning was flawed.

You countered by saying that my arguments were "old".

I asked, "What's old got to do with it?"

Please tell me where I lost your "point"?

sw

distress you.

sw

Now I remember why I stopped lurking here; it's like a school yard!

If I were Hillary, I'd stay and argue with you until we're both blue in the face. But, I;m not Hillary and your tangential argument neither interests me or strikes me as important enough for anyone's time.

So, good day. Hope to see you in another thread.

I was being sincere that I did not want to continue hostilities.

sw

she had done. (Not everything, of course.) What the hell else does she need?

He needs her -- I'm really convinced of that!

IMHO...

Look at the Oregon figures... it's really remarkable.

We need all of the voters who voted for Clinton in KY and Obama in OR.

Cordially,

Radio Lady Ellen

at anyone attributing laudable motives to Hillary at this point.

She is not going to be on the ticket.

What part of that simple truth don't you get?

I am saying I think I know why she stayed in so long. The truth is Obama has won the nomination based on pledged delegates. But, the ticket has not been declared. Unless you've come to us from the future, you cannot say for certain who's going to be on the ticket.

It is not likely Clinton will be on the ticket, but nothing has been declared yet.

and respect your right to disagree.

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

Let's talk later in the year, OK?

I'm still on my crusade -- we all need each other, like brothers need sisters, mothers need fathers, blacks need whites, women need men. (Oh, dear, I don't mean to denigrate homosexuals... please. You folks need each other more than ever.)

Call me crazy... it's OK.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Radio_Lady/238

so is she throwing herself on the sword? Is she covering Obama's ass?

I would love to believe her actions originate from such self-less motives.

There's always more to politics than meets the eye. I'll keep an open mind.

She is staying in to tell the GOP she will not quit until all the votes are counted.

She has said as much.

The last primary is in June, she will likely concede then.

But not before.

in all the furor around here, maybe we've lost sight of that being the big part of why she's staying in. I thought it was because of the Dean 50 State Strategy to give all Dems their chance to have a vote in this process drawing in so many new voters. But, your point about fighting to show the Repugs she will stand up to them is interesting. And, even though I support Obama we know that anything can happen and it's good to have a "backup." The Repugs are not going down without a bloodbath fight. The Mainstream Media keeps spinning that the Repugs are "down and out...dogfood on the shelves" but that's just because they are "lying low" waiting to really rev up their attack machine. Anything can happen.

I see Hillary Clinton as the fighter that a Vice President has to be.

The VP has to do and say things the President cannot for the sake and dignity of the office.

Bill Clinton used to be called "The Big Dog", Hillary seems to me to be the junkyard dog. The one who has to be chained in the back until needed; the dog everyone is afraid of.

And when you need her, watch out.

"fucking whore"!!! (Attributed to Randi Rhodes.)

However, I am sure HRC is persuasive and she has more grit than any woman I've ever seen on the campaign trail.

Will she film the Attack of the Comeback Woman? Stay tuned...

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

The RNC is popping group boners over the prospect of Queen Hillary on the ticket. They can shelve what meager cash they had for GOTV because no one brings the knuckle-dragging GOP base than the spectre of another Clinton in the White House.

I know they have nothing else to offer America but more lies and coverups and hatred and fear.

But, I suspect we will have another Florida/Ohio mess. We cannot have millions of people let down by another concession speech when questions remain about vote counts and election fraud.

I believe by staying in, she is telling the GOP they're going to have to come up with something else, because no matter what they come up with, they will not have enough to stop her.

n/t

I wish everyone would stop with the GOP's explanation and read what the resolution said.

It gave The Office of the President of the United States authorization to use necessary force. It is not what the GOP claimed it was: did a resolution forcing him to invade Iraq.

It merely said whoever the president is has authorization to retaliate against anyone who attacks us.

Here, let me show you a joke I made about it back in September of 2006.

Just because Bush was given the authority to house sit, does not mean he was given the authority to screw the pooch.

The office was given the authority, the man abused it and there was no checks and/or balances.

Please don't repeat the GOP lying point. The senate is a slow pondering beast and they make those distinctions (between the man and the office) all the time.

and I wish that Hillary had shown the fortitude that 21 of her Democratic colleagues (and Sens Chafee and Jeffords) did in voting NO precisely because they knew the Bush White House was completely uninterested in negotiations and simply wanted war.

But that doesn't change what the slow and lumbering senate voted on.

Or what the American people were tricked into believing and what the GOP lied about and broke the law to take advantage of.

we stop allowing the GOP to dictate who the Democratic Candidates are?

by the same token, we shouldn't be offering up candidates who are tantamount to red meat to Repukes.

They're flailing as it is in every phase of this campaign (fundraising, grassroots organizing, etc). Why on earth would we help their GOTV efforts (pathetic as they are) by putting Hillary on the ticket?

That's not my only reason for opposing Hillary on the ticket, but it's a significant one.

in voting fraud. She hasn't. Furthermore, this isn't 2000 or 2004. The vaunted repuke machine is piss poor shape. They couldn't even steal on of three special election for the house this spring- and all three were in heavily repuke districts. It's a lot harder to steal this upcoming election too; there are simply too many states where it could be close- NM, CO, OH.

She only fights if she has something to gain.

She said it the other day in one of her speeches. She hinted that she would fight only if she were on the ticket.

you made me think.

peace and low stress:toast:

power.

Every politician has extra love for themselves and a certain amount of need for power. But, in addition to all that. Hillary Clinton is telling the GOP if she is on the ticket she will give them a fight they won't soon forget.

She's out of there. We've already got the winner!

that there is a considerable amount of power involved in attaining this office?

lie about where you are! ROTFLMAO

n/t

If she has any integrity she will fight for him either on the ticket or off.

...that part in Fahrenheit 911, when House members wanted to question the vote count and Al Gore (as President of the Senate) kept asking if any senator had co-signed the request.

And no one stepped up.

Not John Kerry.

Not John Edwards.

Yes, you'd think that people with integrity would fight for what's right.

it would be nice to see a few leaks about it in the press.