Dayum. Lefties are completely unhinged. I understand this guy thinking that Pelosi, Reid and other Dem party leaders suck balls, but he has lost the plot on many other issues.

People that are this unhappy in the US bring to mind the image of battered women. The big difference being that battered women are actually suffering from abuse. I think this guy should move to another country, just like the battered woman should get out of the abusive relationship. It is the only path to happiness for both, because thinking Americans aren't going to allow the Dems to turn the US into some socialist nanny state because lefty whiners don't like the way things are now.

So buck up or get the fark out. It's for your own good. You'll love Sweden or some place where almost everyone digs socialism. You won't have to give up whining entirely because you can jmp on the Swedes for not having enough "cultural diversity".

MeinRS6:

The one thing this author got right was the assertion that the next best way to derail the Democrat party is to nominate a certain Senator from New York.

phlegmmo: MeinRS6:

The one thing this author got right was the assertion that the next best way to derail the Democrat party is to nominate a certain Senator from New York.

oh my. how true this is!

phlegmmo: The one thing this author got right was the assertion that the next best way to derail the Democrat party is to nominate a certain Senator from New York.

No doubt. Can you imagine the outrage if Obama wins the elected delegate count, but Hillary gets the nomination based on superdelegate votes at the convention? People would be quitting the party in millions, especially if Clinton actually loses in November, which would be a very distinct possibility against McCain.

Six steps? It's not nearly that complex. All it takes is one step: Nominate Hillary Clinton as their presidential candidate.

This guy is far too short-sighted. The reason the Democrats didn't bother to impeach Bush or to withdraw from Iraq is because if they did, they couldn't use it in this Presidential election as a wedge. If action was taken by the Legislature in the past 2 years then we couldn't have those talking points to use against the Republican candidate in this election.

The Democrats know that they have a Congressional margin and so they're focused on gaining the White House as well, and the best way to do that is to go back to the Iraq well again.

Obama will lose and lose big. He's not ready for this.

Clinton is their best shot at a victory. She has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years.

Whoever gets the nom, there are either going to be a lot of black people or a lot of women very angry and not voting in November.

Hillary has the snatch of defeat.

MeinRS6: Dayum. Lefties are completely unhinged. I understand this guy thinking that Pelosi, Reid and other Dem party leaders suck balls, but he has lost the plot on many other issues.

People that are this unhappy in the US bring to mind the image of battered women. The big difference being that battered women are actually suffering from abuse. I think this guy should move to another country, just like the battered woman should get out of the abusive relationship. It is the only path to happiness for both, because thinking Americans aren't going to allow the Dems to turn the US into some socialist nanny state because lefty whiners don't like the way things are now.

So buck up or get the fark out. It's for your own good. You'll love Sweden or some place where almost everyone digs socialism. You won't have to give up whining entirely because you can jmp on the Swedes for not having enough "cultural diversity".

Well, you described me to a "T". Thanks Mr. Anonymous Internet Guy

bberg: The reason the Democrats didn't bother to impeach Bush or to withdraw from Iraq is because if they did, they couldn't use it in this Presidential election as a wedge

They didn't withdraw from Iraq because they can't. Bush has the veto. I'm still surprised at how many people just don't get that.

barneyfife, you were fulluvit in Mayberry & yer fulluvit in Fark.

/tho you rilly swung as mr. furley

Number one way for the Dems to lose and lose big?
Run this guy:

Hillary is the only chance the dems have and we all know it.

barneyfifesbullet: Obama will lose and lose big. He's not ready for this.

He's managed to stand up to the Clinton machine and the right wing pretty well so far.

Clinton is their best shot at a victory. She has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years.

Which is why she has higher negatives than anyone but Ron Paul of the people still in the race. Sure. Really effective "swatting away" there.

Whoever gets the nom, there are either going to be a lot of black people or a lot of women very angry and not voting in November.

The polls consistently show that much of Obama's base would not vote for Hillary in the general. The converse is not true.

hillary4real: Number one way for the Dems to lose and lose big?
Run this guy:

Hillary is the only chance the dems have and we all know it.

Your data, please. Because the RCP averages show that the only Democrat who could lose to McCain is Hillary.

barneyfifesbullet: Obama will lose and lose big. He's not ready for this.

Clinton is their best shot at a victory. She has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years.

This. The Clintons are champion politicians, extremely disciplined and great at protecting themselves. Sending an inexperienced politician with no track record against John McCain is a terrible idea, and I'm tired of hearing Hillary called the unelectable one. She has her flaws, and the country already knows about all of them- they're old news. All the dirt on the Clintons was dragged out the first time around, it's been dealt with and it's no longer interesting. Obama gets the nom and the Republicans will dig up all the dirt they can and it will make major headlines.

barneyfifesbullet: Obama will lose and lose big. He's not ready for this.

Clinton is their best shot at a victory. She has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years.

No, Bill Clinton has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years. Hillary was tolerated because she was the wife of a very charismatic President who left office on a high note. By herself she's a disaster and not even Bill can put a good face on her.

With Obama the GOP have no idea how to combat him. If McCain goes negative he'll look like the same sort of insider chump that Hillary did.

captainktainer: He's managed to stand up to the Clinton machine and the right wing pretty well so far.

The right wing has been eerily quiet on Obama. We've heard very little from them. That's because they're saving it. He gets the nom, they'll be coming out of the woodwork with attacks.

You can barely tell these two apart.
Oh, yeah, thats right, Barney Fife is the one with actual experience.

Fart_Machine: No, Bill Clinton has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years. Hillary was tolerated because she was the wife of a very charismatic President who left office on a high note. By herself she's a disaster and not even Bill can put a good face on her.

Hillary went through just as much criticism during the impeachment hearings and white water investigation as Bill did. She went through a right wing media circus that's unmatched by any other in recent history and lived to tell about it. She's a pro, and all these polls declaring Obama unbeatable are insane. It's months before the election and he's not the nominee yet. Things will change overnight as soon as the noms are announced. It'll be a whole different race.

It's crazy how this logic works. The republicans have landfills full of dirt that would absolutely ruin her chances at office and she's praised for being able to, if you'll excuse my phrasing, "take it like a man."

On the other hand Obama has never actually done anything wrong. He doesn't have any skeletons in his closet, he's been up front about his voting, his past drug use, his faith, everything about him is wide open and none of it's damning. So what do Hillary supporter say? "The right's being quite becuase they're up to something."

It's like their brains are on backwards. The candidate the GOP has been planning to beat for over a decade and has alienated most of her own base with sleezy Rovian tactics is the one they think can't lose, but the one that will actually take Republican votes away from McCain becuase he's so popular and can make any dirty tactics from the right look like a confirmation of his message can't possibly handle it.

Why not just vote for Bush again? By your logic he's the best man to defeat the republicans in 08.

/gObama

The concern trolls are out in force in this thread, particularly hillary4real, who is a total GOP-loving plant. Note how no one is commenting on the article, which focuses on Reid and Congress.

Unfortunately for Mister 4real, who is an alt of Mighty_Afternoon_Dog_Leather or rushlimbaugh_sent_me, Obama's winning today and is in prime position to win lots of delegates in the next few days. Clinton's support is shrinking across the boards.

hillary4real:

You're right. You win.
Barack has no experience as a first lady.
Barack has no experience as a corrupt politician.
Why do you insist that it is good to have experience as part of the problem?

By the way, how has Clinton done today at the polls?

Its not like the republicans wont be able to just trot out the fact that B. Hussein Obama has already admitted to doing drugs in his past. That should really help him get the ghetto vote. Oh, wait, he already has that.
Sorry folks, the whole world knows that B. Hussein Obama is just UNELECTABLE.

Article: tripe.
hillary4real: troll.

Feel free to ignore both.

The man is unhinged but basically correct. What's also so insidious is the right's consistent but relatively subtle drumbeat that Clinton and Obama are "liberals" (granted, that doesn't carry the same sting it used to) when in fact they're both centrists. At the same time the right is decrying McCain as liberal when he's basically one of the most conservative Republicans. No matter who wins the election the mission is accomplished: a country which has been fundamentally shifted toward long-term Republican bias. This is why the Republicans will continue to win; because they are organized and the Democrats are not and apparently have no principles besides. I see no way that this will be reversed in the forseeable future.

Falcc: everything about him is wide open and none of it's damning

That has been published so far. That's the problem with nominating someone with no experience and track record- it's impossible to figure out where the attacks are going to come from. And you're crazy if you think there won't be any attacks. Obama's supporters are starting to hail him as the second coming and it scares me a bit- I can't figure out what the hell this guy stands for. His policies are out there but they're not well explained and he has no history for me to look back at and say "Ok, I understand this guy and what he's going to do as President based on precedent." When it comes down to it, he's just a politician and a person. He's not lilly white and squeaky clean. Something will come up. With her, I know what to expect.

Genevieve Marie:
Hillary went through just as much criticism during the impeachment hearings and white water investigation as Bill did. She went through a right wing media circus that's unmatched by any other in recent history and lived to tell about it.

So what makes you think it won't be four more years of unmatched right wing media circus? I listen to talk radio, these people haven't burned themselves out on clinton hate by a long shot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm behind Obama because of Obama, not Clinton hate or right-wing fear, I'm just wondering why you want our government to ooze more drama than an intervention episode.

Phooey,Genevieve Marie. Hillary had this primary season COM-PLETELY jerry-rigged just for her by her hubby & Terry McCauliffe... And LOOK WHERE SHE IS NOW. Whupped. Back to Square One with a string of Obama-friendly primaries and caucuses barreling right down on her.

It's like Maureen Dowd put it...
"On Tuesday night she told supporters, "Let me be clear: I won't let anyone Swift-boat this country's future."
i.e. Better to go with the Clintons, with all their dysfunction and chaos - the same kind that fueled the Republican hate machine - better to blow off all the inspiration and the young voters, the independents and the Republicans that Obama is attracting than to take a chance on something as ephemeral as hope. Now that's Cheney-level paranoia."

Genevieve Marie: captainktainer: He's managed to stand up to the Clinton machine and the right wing pretty well so far.

The right wing has been eerily quiet on Obama. We've heard very little from them. That's because they're saving it. He gets the nom, they'll be coming out of the woodwork with attacks.

Unlikely. Any personal attacks would have to be very carefully phrased or else there will be a huge backlash (see Clintons in SC). They could attack his drug use if he didn't openly admit to it. Obama is a much harder candidate to swift boat than Hillary would be.

FTFA: Something else is going to be required to kill the party off for sure this year.

Oh, I know! They could nominate a certain senator from New York

The guy actually made a few other points albeit fairly inarticulately.

Speaking of pointlessly inarticulate people...

hillary4real: Sorry folks, the whole world knows that B. Hussein Obama Hillary Clinton is just UNELECTABLE.

FTFY

Bill *never* convinced 50% of Americans to put a mark next to his name. Bill... "the natural", "slick as snot" Bill? 43%. 49%. Somewhat less personable (by any account) Hillary's gonna do better? Right... You might say some of the Perot people in 96 would have voted for Bill. No, they wouldn't have. They voted away from Bill because of the scandals.

The best way for the Dems to surely go down in defeat: Nominate Hillary. Why am I saying this? Cuz I'm conservative who's a lot more Republican and Democrat, yet I'm actually considering voting for Obama. However, it'll be a cold day in hell before I'd ever vote for Hillary. (And there are plenty of folks like me.) The Dems need to chew on that.

Bathroom Gumshoe: blow off all the inspiration and the young voters

Well an old fogey like me would love to see that happen obviously. Young people. What do they know.

Bathroom Gumshoe: Hillary had this primary season COM-PLETELY jerry-rigged just for her by her hubby & Terry McCauliffe
That sounds like more hardcore Clinton hatred. I haven't seen one shred of evidence that indicates she's done anything to rig the primaries. It's a pretty baseless corruption charge.

moriarty23: So what makes you think it won't be four more years of unmatched right wing media circus? I listen to talk radio, these people haven't burned themselves out on clinton hate by a long shot.

Of course they haven't, but they'll switch over to Obama hate in a heartbeat if he gets the nom. The thing is, she can spin it as more of the same, plus she's so experienced at dealing with it, I think she'll do better about not letting it affect how her campaign is run.

Carth: Unlikely. Any personal attacks would have to be very carefully phrased or else there will be a huge backlash (see Clintons in SC). They could attack his drug use if he didn't openly admit to it. Obama is a much harder candidate to swift boat than Hillary would be.

Based on what we know about him now, maybe. Based on what the right could spin in the future, doubtful. IF you think for one second that right wing radio and base won't attack his muslim name and ties (no matter how insignifigant they are) you're dreaming.

Shaggy_C: Louisiana called for B Hussein!!!!!

barneyfifesbullet: Obama will lose and lose big. He's not ready for this.

Clinton is their best shot at a victory. She has been swatting away the right wing's attacks for 15 years.

Whoever gets the nom, there are either going to be a lot of black people or a lot of women very angry and not voting in November.

You seem to think Obama would be on his own. The machine would surround whoever wins the nomination. The Dems would not abandon their own guy to the Repubs.

Genevieve Marie: blah blah blah a bunch of ill-reasoned crap blah blah ect He's not lilly white and squeaky clean. Something will come up. With her, I know what to expect.

So you don't like him becuase he isn'y lilly white, hmm?

I keed.

Ok, if we can't do this without being paranoid let's look at it this way instead. We know what a McCain presidency will be like. 100 years of war, sucking up to neo-cons, no concept of economics, but at least no more torture.

We also know what a Hillary Clinton presidency will be like. Business as usual in Washington, paying back the lobbyists she's getting most of her campaign donations from, a health care plan that she doesn't know how to impliment which will ship profits off to the insurance companies like Bush has done for big oil, continuation of refusing negotiations with hostile leaders, about as much honesty as she's shown on the campaign trail by going back on her promise not to campaign in Florida.

What we don't know, becuase apparently nobody's fleshed out the details to your satisfaction, is what an Obama presidency will be like. All we know, apparently, is that he's no Hillary Clinton and no John McCain. So there you go. You don't have to worry about the fact that he's willing to negotiate with hostile nations, lower insurance costs by negotiating for generic medicines and purchasing from Canada, improve out public school systems by retooling NCLB to help struggling schools with needed funding instead of taking their funding away, give more grants to college students interested in math and science, and remove troops from Iraq at a set rate of one or two platoons per month to allow the Iraqi government time to get on their own two feat while we disentagle ourselves. You can ignore all that. Just remember he's not the other two guys.

Happy?

Here's a question for you. Depending on who wins the presidential nomination, who do you thing the Democrats will select as vice president?

For McCain, it is clear that if he selects a "values-oriented" running mate, his ticket draws the far-right conservative vote much more effectively. But I don't think the situation is the same for the Democrats. Do you think Hilary would select Obama after spending so much time berating his experience and abilities? Do you think Obama would select her (and potentially push away independent voters)? Edwards didn't make much of a showing, so who then?

hm, a Saturday sweep for Obama

how do you spell momentum?

Falcc: Just remember he's not the other two guys.

That would work for me if I didn't actually like Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are ruthless politicians. I'm never going to deny that. They will do whatever it takes to get themselves elected and to push through their agenda. However, underneath their agenda, they have sincere liberal beliefs that they've worked to push from the beginning of their careers. Hillary learned a lot from her health care debacle and I think she's come up with a far more workable plan. I trust them to stick to their guns, and even when I disagree with their methods, they still make things happen. Politics as usual will always happen in Washington. It's too ingrained. Electing one new candidate is not going to change that- Obama will fight the system and end up getting a lot less done while changing very little. Hillary Clinton will work with a system I hate, but she'll use it to accomplish things I approve of. Hence my vote for Hillary.

I don't have an idealized view of politics at all anymore, at this point, I just want to see someone with a shot in hell of passing a more liberal agenda be elected.

They don't have to be anywhere near optimal in order to win in November. Even vs. Sen. McCain -- that he's the strongest of the GOP field doesn't exactly say much, given the rest of it... and he's gotten publicly endorsed by the ever-popular Mr. Rove, and is likely to be endorsed by the also overwhelmingly-popular Pres. Bush.

I suspect that the senator from Arizona has more than enough weaknesses, combined with a declining, demoralized, and somewhat split party that he won't be smiling as much by October -- barring huge political progress in Iraq, say. That shot of him hugging Pres. Bush at the last convention probably won't help, and his '100 years' comment has already been widely disseminated without context (specifically, that the "100 years" was predicated on Americans no longer getting killed there -- IOW peace and stability, not full-blown counterinsurgency).

If I were a Democrat, I might be more worried about what will happen after the election -- for instance, will too much of the Congress and its constituents be focused on 'getting theirs', i.e. battle of the advocates and all the resulting budgetary and regulatory squabbling, or investigating everything the present administration has done, and less on getting behind whatever program the new executive has in mind.

If your candidate is so unstoppable, Genevieve Marie, why for is she getting her ASS HANDED TO HER IN 3 BOUTS OUT OF 3 as we speak?

The loathing for her, you can cut it with a knife. America says Phooey.

Bathroom Gumshoe: If your candidate is so unstoppable, Genevieve Marie, why for is she getting her ASS HANDED TO HER IN 3 BOUTS OUT OF 3 as we speak?

The loathing for her, you can cut it with a knife. America says Phooey.


4 out of 4.
you forgot USVI

/and Poland

Genevieve Marie:

Based on what we know about him now, maybe. Based on what the right could spin in the future, doubtful. IF you think for one second that right wing radio and base won't attack his muslim name and ties (no matter how insignifigant they are) you're dreaming.

Arguing that their is a possibility they might find something out about him is poor reasoning when we know they have ammo to unload at Hillary. Right wing radio will attack any democrat and they've already proved their relevancy by showing they can't even get republicans to vote against mccain.

Bathroom Gumshoe: If your candidate is so unstoppable

Where on earth did I say she was unstoppable? I think she's got her shot of losing just as well as he does. What I'm concerned about is that he'll get the nom and be completely unprepared for the general election. I think that she's better prepared to go up against McCain, despite what completely irrelevant polls about electability say now. And they are irrelevant because America has the attention span of the tse tse fly, and by November they'll be focused on different issues with the candidates.

Genevieve Marie:
moriarty23: So what makes you think it won't be four more years of unmatched right wing media circus? I listen to talk radio, these people haven't burned themselves out on clinton hate by a long shot.

Of course they haven't, but they'll switch over to Obama hate in a heartbeat if he gets the nom. The thing is, she can spin it as more of the same, plus she's so experienced at dealing with it, I think she'll do better about not letting it affect how her campaign is run.



No they won't, because he doesn't have a list of controversy and scandal longer than a Tolstoy novel associated with every political and business transaction of the last 25 years.
The reason the Clintons are so apt at dealing with controversy is because of their ethics, they play dirty as do the other thugs they mirror. I think there are a lot of Americans who wish it would affect her campaign and that all these baby boomers (of both parties) who have nothing but their own self interests at heart just fark off and let us fix the shiat-pile they've left for us, because a lot of us know that the office belongs to us, not some out of touch, win at all costs, fark the people political juggernaut.