Hillary Clinton's claim that she might appeal against the Democratic Party's decision to award only half the delegates or Florida and Michigan is ludicrous when you look at the issue of Michigan itself.
The Democrats said that neither Clinton or Obama's names should be on the ballots, and Obama ensured his name was not on the ballot whilst Clinton ignored this ruling and got her name on the ballot. Is it any wonder she on 70% of the delegates in Michigan when the other candidate was "other".
What is clear is that 30% of Democrats in Michigan wanted anyone else rather than Clinton. That speaks volumes.
What ever does it say about her that she is prepared to ignore rules, go against her party and then moan that its not fair ?
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
6/01/2008
5/24/2008
The unsavoury and unsuitable Hillary Clinton
The Democratic nomination race has seen two very contrasting campaigns from its front runners. Obama's campaign appears more about aspiration whilst Clinton's campaign has become more and more about desperation.
Take for example Hillary's campaign team criticising Barack Obama's wife. Once might have expected that Hillary, herself the subject of lots of attacks whilst her husband was in office in the White House, would have realised that this type of campaigning is hurtful and pretty irrelevant, would have stepped away from such campaign methods. But no, her desperation was clear.
But by raising the spectre that someone could assassinate Barack Obama as her reason for continuing to campaign on when all appears lost, she really has show how utterly unsuitable she is for public office. It's a shame. i rather liked Bill Clinton and thought another Clinton could be quite good. Now, like many others, I am keeping my fingers crossed for Obama.
Take for example Hillary's campaign team criticising Barack Obama's wife. Once might have expected that Hillary, herself the subject of lots of attacks whilst her husband was in office in the White House, would have realised that this type of campaigning is hurtful and pretty irrelevant, would have stepped away from such campaign methods. But no, her desperation was clear.
But by raising the spectre that someone could assassinate Barack Obama as her reason for continuing to campaign on when all appears lost, she really has show how utterly unsuitable she is for public office. It's a shame. i rather liked Bill Clinton and thought another Clinton could be quite good. Now, like many others, I am keeping my fingers crossed for Obama.
4/22/2008
Hillary Clinton's desperate comments show that Obama is the statesman after all
Hillary Clinton has in recent weeks tried to play up her role as former first lady and as a statesman on the world stage to show the difference between her experience and Barack Obama's naivety and lack of experience as a statesman.
Yet today, seemingly in an outburst aimed to coincide with a Democratic Primary election in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton came out with a rather shocking outburst of the most infantile kind.
In response to a question about what she would do if Iran attacked Israel, she said
"If I'm the President, we will attack Iran... we would be able to totally obliterate them. ".
Compare this to Barack Obama's much more measured and statesman like approach to the same question when he said only that Iran should know he would respond "forcefully" to an attack on any US ally.
Whilst today's outburst from Clinton might win over a few gung ho people who were undecided, it actually proves contrary to Clinton's strategy of recent weeks and perhaps says more about what her private polls are telling her about how close it is in Pennsylvania.
Yet today, seemingly in an outburst aimed to coincide with a Democratic Primary election in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton came out with a rather shocking outburst of the most infantile kind.
In response to a question about what she would do if Iran attacked Israel, she said
"If I'm the President, we will attack Iran... we would be able to totally obliterate them. ".
Compare this to Barack Obama's much more measured and statesman like approach to the same question when he said only that Iran should know he would respond "forcefully" to an attack on any US ally.
Whilst today's outburst from Clinton might win over a few gung ho people who were undecided, it actually proves contrary to Clinton's strategy of recent weeks and perhaps says more about what her private polls are telling her about how close it is in Pennsylvania.
4/05/2008
Obama destroys Clinton's lead in Pennsylvania
A few days ago Hillary Clinton had a 12 point lead in Pennsylvania, a key state with 158 delegates. Then another poll showed her lead slipping to 9%, but still a comfortable margin. However the two latest polls show Obama to be in a statistical tie (43.5% each as an average).
The whole Clinton campaign has relied in the last few weeks on getting enough delegates to be close enough to Obama to justify counting the votes from the two state primaries she won which were disqualified. But if Hillary Clinton cannot win Pennsylvania, Obama's lead may actually grow and her chances may well evaporate at this point.
It's all speculation, but I reckon Obama has won it and Hillary needs to go with dignity.
The whole Clinton campaign has relied in the last few weeks on getting enough delegates to be close enough to Obama to justify counting the votes from the two state primaries she won which were disqualified. But if Hillary Clinton cannot win Pennsylvania, Obama's lead may actually grow and her chances may well evaporate at this point.
It's all speculation, but I reckon Obama has won it and Hillary needs to go with dignity.
3/02/2008
Barack Obama level with Clinton in new Ohio tracking poll
Almost unbelievably, given her massive leads in the state just a few weeks ago, the latest poll from Ohio now shows Hillary Clinton's lead has evaporated and Barack Obama is dead level with her.
The results of the poll are shown below.
Reuters/C SPAN/Houston Chronicle/Zogby tracking poll Date: 2/27-29Ohio Added: 3/1/08 Est. MoE = 3.7%
Hillary Clinton
45%
Barack Obama
45%
Mike Gravel
1%
Unsure
6%
Other
3%
Hillary Clinton
45%
Barack Obama
45%
Mike Gravel
1%
Unsure
6%
Other
3%
This is surely the end of the road for Clinton, isn't it ?
2/05/2008
Is everyone outside of America wanting an Obama win ?
It struck me today, speaking to a work collegaue who has no particular interest in politics, least of all American politics, that even she was wanting a Barack Obama win in the big "Super Tuesday" primaries today. If he has this effect on UK citizens, why is he not having the same effect on Americans ?
I'm not saying for one moment that he is not picking up support, and he does seem to have the momentum at the moment, but it is astonishing that it is still so close between him and Hillary Clinton when the whole world and his aunt seem to want an Obama win.
The question for me then are we missing something blindingly good about Hillary Clinton or are we failing to notice some terrible flaw in Obama which should make us question his suitability ?
Personally, give the American's proven track record in the previous two presidential elections, I am more likely to think that we have got it right, and those who oppose Obama have got it wrong. To me, Hillary is a turn back the clock candidate, a 20th century candidate for the 21st century, whilst Obama is the future. What's more, all the evidence seems to show that Obama would stand a greater chance of winning should he be selected than Clinton would. Hillary Clinton polarises people, and yes she has large swathes of supporters, but middle ground independents are not won over by her in the way that Obama can.
You've just got to hope that Democrats see that Obama is their best chance of keeping the Republicans out because if Hillary Clinton represents the end of the last century, I'd hate to think fo where john McCain would take America.
So what do we think, do you want an Obama win or is it just my misconception that we are all wanting him to win ?
I'm not saying for one moment that he is not picking up support, and he does seem to have the momentum at the moment, but it is astonishing that it is still so close between him and Hillary Clinton when the whole world and his aunt seem to want an Obama win.
The question for me then are we missing something blindingly good about Hillary Clinton or are we failing to notice some terrible flaw in Obama which should make us question his suitability ?
Personally, give the American's proven track record in the previous two presidential elections, I am more likely to think that we have got it right, and those who oppose Obama have got it wrong. To me, Hillary is a turn back the clock candidate, a 20th century candidate for the 21st century, whilst Obama is the future. What's more, all the evidence seems to show that Obama would stand a greater chance of winning should he be selected than Clinton would. Hillary Clinton polarises people, and yes she has large swathes of supporters, but middle ground independents are not won over by her in the way that Obama can.
You've just got to hope that Democrats see that Obama is their best chance of keeping the Republicans out because if Hillary Clinton represents the end of the last century, I'd hate to think fo where john McCain would take America.
So what do we think, do you want an Obama win or is it just my misconception that we are all wanting him to win ?
1/30/2008
Thoughts on the US Elections - Edwards to back Obama ? Is Rudy the stupidest man in America ?
It seems clear from at least one senior BBC journalist that John Edwards is likely to support Barack Obama, and if Edwards not only backs Obama, but also campaigns for Obama, than he could take a large chunk of his vote with him to and keep it fro Hillary Clinton.
Personally, I like John Edward's style. He comes across as a man of common sense and principles, and it is a shame he has missed out. But I want to see America led by a Democrat and like many in the UK think that Obama is the leader I would most like to see, so it is to be hoped that Edwards support could given Obama that boost he needs to get ahead of Hillary Clinton's national poll lead.
As for Rudy Giuliani, the US has had a lucky escape. He decided to prove he was a genius and defy all previous candidates experiences and ignore the early primaries by going for the big "killer"states. In following this strategy he showed himself to by naive, dim and lacking in judgement. What a prat.
Paul Walter's excellent blog goes in to more detail here on both Rudy and Edwards and is well worth a read.
Personally, I like John Edward's style. He comes across as a man of common sense and principles, and it is a shame he has missed out. But I want to see America led by a Democrat and like many in the UK think that Obama is the leader I would most like to see, so it is to be hoped that Edwards support could given Obama that boost he needs to get ahead of Hillary Clinton's national poll lead.
As for Rudy Giuliani, the US has had a lucky escape. He decided to prove he was a genius and defy all previous candidates experiences and ignore the early primaries by going for the big "killer"states. In following this strategy he showed himself to by naive, dim and lacking in judgement. What a prat.
Paul Walter's excellent blog goes in to more detail here on both Rudy and Edwards and is well worth a read.
1/09/2008
The combination of factors that gave Hillary Clinton Victory in New Hampshire
New Hampshire, the state that launched Bill Clinton's comeback 16 years ago when he came a dramatic second in the primaries in 1992, again proved to be good territory for the Clinton's last night after Hillary Clinton's dramatic two point win over Barack Obama. The result seems to have confounded the pollsters, but is there any one factor that decided it ?
The press are putting it all down to Hillary Clinton's honest near tearful episode, which they say went down well with undecided voters and with women in particular, but there are other factors in play.
What abut the opinion polls ? Yesterday polls were showing Obama consistently in the lead, with some polls giving him a 10% to 13 %. This, to some extent, in the primary system worked against Obama. I read on the BBC website a comment from an American in New Hampshire (yesterday - which I cannot find today) which said that he was an Independent but he strongly supported Barack Obama, but if Obama looked safe, he would vote in the Republican primary because he would use his vote for McCain as he looked less likely to win his primary election. With the result in New Hampshire being so close, how many Obama supporters did likewise, sure that their man would win ?
And what about the role of the media. Did their "Obama is unstoppable" 24 hour news coverage cause a backlash as well as an overconfidence amongst his voters ? Did his inevitable victory, as the press saw it, lead some people to vote for Hillary just so she was not humiliated ?
Then there is the issue of Republican voters. Who do they fear most in the White House ? Hillary, of course. But who do they fear on the election trail ? Barack Obama. Republicans hate the idea of Hillary in the White House (after all, they don't want her introducing free health care), but the Republicans know that she is likely to put off independents and a push more voters toward the Republican candidate. This could make all the difference in the key swing states. So did some Republicans wanting to create problems for Hillary vote for her ?
Whatever the reason for Clinton's success, it makes the whole campaign much more fun for the outsider, like me, and tells us more that ever that you should never write off the Clinton's.
The press are putting it all down to Hillary Clinton's honest near tearful episode, which they say went down well with undecided voters and with women in particular, but there are other factors in play.
What abut the opinion polls ? Yesterday polls were showing Obama consistently in the lead, with some polls giving him a 10% to 13 %. This, to some extent, in the primary system worked against Obama. I read on the BBC website a comment from an American in New Hampshire (yesterday - which I cannot find today) which said that he was an Independent but he strongly supported Barack Obama, but if Obama looked safe, he would vote in the Republican primary because he would use his vote for McCain as he looked less likely to win his primary election. With the result in New Hampshire being so close, how many Obama supporters did likewise, sure that their man would win ?
And what about the role of the media. Did their "Obama is unstoppable" 24 hour news coverage cause a backlash as well as an overconfidence amongst his voters ? Did his inevitable victory, as the press saw it, lead some people to vote for Hillary just so she was not humiliated ?
Then there is the issue of Republican voters. Who do they fear most in the White House ? Hillary, of course. But who do they fear on the election trail ? Barack Obama. Republicans hate the idea of Hillary in the White House (after all, they don't want her introducing free health care), but the Republicans know that she is likely to put off independents and a push more voters toward the Republican candidate. This could make all the difference in the key swing states. So did some Republicans wanting to create problems for Hillary vote for her ?
Whatever the reason for Clinton's success, it makes the whole campaign much more fun for the outsider, like me, and tells us more that ever that you should never write off the Clinton's.
1/04/2007
CNN in major cock up - What a mistake to make !
CNN has had to issue an apology to Barak Obama, one of the leading Democrats likely to run for the US presidency, after mistaking him in a report for Osama Bin Laden !
Astonishingly, a caption on an item promoting a feature on the whereabouts of the al Qaeda leader carried the caption "Where's Obama?" over footage of Bin Laden.Read more about it HERE.
And I thought ITV news made cock ups !
P.S. Credit should go to Liberal Polemic, who broke this story 14 hours before me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)