Does Hillary Clinton Want John McCain Elected President? (Brent Budowsky)

[tpsbmam]

Hillary Clinton seeks to destroy her opponent to save her nomination, and will only succeed in destroying the party and her own reputation.

This is why I predict a surge of superdelegates to Obama. They understand her tactics, they understand the danger her tactics pose for the party. They do not want to overrule the verdict of the voters. They realize that a desperate personal-destruction campaign against the probable nominee could turn a possible landslide for Democrats into a major Republican triumph.

Could it be that the outcome Hillary Clinton fears the most is a Democratic landslide led by an inspiring two-term Democratic president who truly turns the page?

Could it be that a preferable outcome would be that she engages in a campaign of total personal destruction of her Democratic opponent, in the hope of electing a Republican who would be a one-term president because of considerable age, allowing Hillary to run in 2012?

http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/03/06/does-hillary-clinton-want-john-mccain-elected-president/#more-2693



Edited to add forgotten link.

[saltpoint]

1. Randi Rhodes raised this notion yesterday also.

It sure does stink that she would praise McCain at the expense of another Democratic candidate.

[rosetta627]

17. I find that Randi is generally spot on

Now THAT is a woman I could support for president.
Not the "monsterous" Hillary.

[saltpoint]

19. I like Randi's prep for her program -- it's miles head of the

morons on FOX News or Rush Limbaugh's network, but I like her voice also.

For me anyway, it's darned listenable.

[rosetta627]

21. She's my favorite radio host by far

And I think it's incredible that she does the show solo. And it's a long show.
She's a goddess.

[aquart]

2. The Democrat will win.

If Obama is so perfect he will surely stand the strain. Or is democracy too tough a process for him and his slavish, slavering followers?

[Kahuna]

3. Nice platitudes. But no substance. nt

[Lerkfish]

12. you're ignoring the elephant in the room

your candidate is writing McCain's campaign speeches for him.

why?

no trying to deflect away from that REALITY by feeble speculations on what Obama MIGHT do.

answer the question.

WHY is your candidate campaigning for the republican candidate?


I"ll wait for your reasoned response. Here's my rules for what is a reasoned response:

1. you have to directly answer the question
2. you cannot ask a different or distracting question
3. you cannot attempt to deflect by attacking Obama

simply answer the question, directly, honestly, and forthrightly.


WHY is your candidate putting the republican candidate in a BETTER light than another democrat?

thanks.

[aquart]

20. Too ridiculous to answer.

When your talking points are insane, don't expect sane people to bother with them.

[Lerkfish]

22. I agree your candidate is insane, just answer the question directly, once again

we see that the clinton supporters here are physically incapable of answering direct questions.
and, they always insult the questioner.


Karl Rove would be very proud of you right now.

[sam sarrha]

4. this bullshit belongs in GDP, so i can avoid it.... this is a stealth post..

[tpsbmam]

6. If you look at my posts......

I've consistently tried to be fair to both candidates. Yes, I support Obama but I've stood up for HRC when I thought Obama supporters were being unfair to her, as here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4794030#4795677
Though I can't swear I've succeeded, I've tried not to bash either candidate. I wish more, including the candidates, would do the same. I don't use "stealth posts" -- I'm posting an opinion piece written by someone I respect. Period. Why is that any different than posting a New York Times editorial that is in favor of (or not) either of the candidates?

[sam sarrha]

7. It is GDP subject matter.. i dont go there..i dont like being tricked into it. it is GDP crap, keep

it there. please

[tpsbmam]

8. There are multiple posts here that you could say the same thing..

about. This is a forum for "editorials & other articles." I don't see you weighing in on this one, just on two opinion pieces that you don't personally like.


Why Obama is scared...The $50 million contract for Companion Security "turns up in Iraqi
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=343216&mesg_id=343216

[femmedem]

9. If you think it belongs in GD:P alert the mods and they can decide.

It's not your call.

[CherylK]

18. What? I think that's an absolutely ridiculous position

As someone already pointed out, this is the "articles and editorials" section. There are pro and anti Hillary articles and pro and anti Obama articles here sometimes.

I don't see the problem with that. If someone is uninterested in such material, the Title of the original message and or reading the first few sentences allows a person to avoid having to waste their time reading the entire post.

The End

[TwilightGardener]

5. It's clear that if she's not the nominee, she wants McCain elected.

The Republicans never said such damaging things about each other during their campaign. Democrats should be ashamed of her, and should marginalize her in the party, rather than even THINK about nominating her. Because she only represents herself.

[many a good man]

10. It is totally beyond the pale

I have never heard one Democrat smear another like that in all my years. Hillary needs an intervention. I wish we had some strong party leaders that could sit her down and talk some sense to her.

[TwilightGardener]

11. Yep--how long are they going to let these daily ads get written

against Obama in the fall, before they shut her turncoat ass down? The party elders need to grow some balls against the Clintons. Because they're not for the party, the party is just a vehicle to power for them.

[Lerkfish]

14. there's the problem "strong party leaders"

there's a cancer within the party that has weakened anyone's ability to function.

DLC

[Lerkfish]

13. That's the ONLY conclusion for this that I can come up with, the question is WHY?

as for Why, I can think of only these 3 possibilities:

1. she wants a republican in office to set herself up for 2012
2. If she herself cannot be in office to continue the neocon "forever war" in the middleast, to please her AIPAC and neocon handlers, she has to make sure another person willing to perpetually promulgate war forever is in office.
3. she is vindictive and wants to destroy her primary opponent and the democratic party if she cannot win. A scorched earth mentality.



I can't support someone who uses any of the three as a reason for what she's doing.

[TwilightGardener]

16. Any of those three will do. What makes me sad is how much entrenched

support and "loyalty" she and Bill still command in the party. I have to imagine that all those weak-kneed kiss-ass Dem elected officials and party leaders who publicly support her are just trying to look out for themselves, because they know that she'll burn the fucking house down, with them inside of it, if she doesn't get her way.

[1776Forever]

15. McCain Clinton Love Fest Goes Way Back - Check this article out! Vodka Contest!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4938943&mesg_id=4940089