Yeah, I'm worried about Hillary doing well tomorrow. Negative works.

[cali]

And she's gone sharply negative. Obama hasn't. If she does well tomorrow, he should change that and start to hammer her on stuff he hasn't touched to date. Instead of responding to her attacks, he should go on the offensive. He should attack her on Hsu and the jaw dropping $850,000 of bundled Hsu donations she had to give to charity. He should slam her on Giustra and her using his jet, and on Bill's unsavory connections with Giustra and Kazakhstan. He should run ads asking what Hillary doesn't want you to know about her tax information. He should bring up Gupta. He should go for her on outsourcing. In short, he should go for her jugular as she's gone for his. Run an ad showing Hill decorating the White House Christmas tree and remind people that First Lady is not all about policy.

Pay her back in kind, plus interest. If he's serious about getting the nomination, he needs to play as hard as she's been playing.

[NJmaverick]

1. I really hope we will see a change

That negative doesn't always win out.

[anonymous171]

2. He needs to destroy her.

First I think he needs to debunk her "experience." Then go after her "fighter" attribute by mentioning all the fights she has lost or ceded to the republicans. She will have no legs to stand on and will fall.

[msongs]

7. yeah violence works well against women. is that in obama's scriptures? nt

[anonymous171]

11. Did you even read what I wrote?

Kneejerk response. I would've said "dominate" but that would've been too troll-like.

[Yael]

37. Some skim the headlines, others read the whole article

I agree, but I am afraid of this backfiring. One of the best things about Obama's campaign is that he isn't rolling in the shit with her.

[Mme. Defarge]

52. Amen!

[backscatter712]

48. The Democratic party needs to throw Hillary under the bus.

We need to definitively repudiate the Rovian smear, slander and scandalize tactics that have poisoned America for the past two decades.

And the first step is to repudiate the Democratic candidate that makes the most use of Rovian tactics. Hopefully, the voters will have some sense, slap Clinton with a resounding defeat, and then the Democratic party insiders and superdelegates can pressure her into suspending her campaign.

That's the first step in the long process of recivilizing our politics.

[Kikosexy2]

64. Glad to know ...

that you all are giving Karl Rove exactly what he wants...dividing the Democratic party...keep it up people...the only winners will end up being Rove and McCain...

[sniffa]

3. She's not going to do well though

Unless she's beaten in every state by 20+ she's going to claim some sort of victory, and will probably keep going in her current vein. I don't think Obama should respond in kind. I'd love someone to give it to her, but Obama should start looking toward the GE, and keep up his current campaign.

I think her and her husband are going to get their comeuppance in the coming years, and I'll enjoy that when it comes.

[Cha]

10. Tomorrow wouldn't be too

soon.

"I think her and her husband are going to get their comeuppance in the coming years, and I'll enjoy that when it comes."

A little too much to ask for, I guess.

[The Stranger]

4. Hillary sent those young men and women to die in the sands of Iraq.

She did it because she thought it was the popular thing to do at the time.

She will never, ever live it down.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. She did it for oil, water and bases. Hill is a hawk and supports American Empire

Same as bush.

[Windy]

19. And for that reason, she will never get my vote.

I just can't support someone with such a flawed character and an overwhelming want of power that she will destroy others. And I don't mean Obama, I mean the men and women of the military.

As a veteran, there is absolutely no way I can cast a vote for her.

[Yael]

38. Thank you -- for keeping this in focus.

[Window]

5. I believe he will after tomorrow. Something tells me he's tired of Hillary's shit.

[Zachstar]

51. As are we.

I hate to say it but if for some reason voters give her what she wants for allowing such scum to come from her race. I think obama may need to finally expose her for what she is.

He does not want to do it yet. He still wants to forgive Clinton and be friends with her. He knows if he starts mentioning the shit behind the Clintons and it will be the end of their political future.

However Obama!... Clinton is not your friend anymore! Her and sadly most of her remaining supporters are some of the biggest pieces of filth in US politics. To go to the level of swiftboating Obama a day before the primary and accepting whatever trash they can try to paste on Obama was desperate and sickening. Clinton wins by destroying people. I said it before and I will say it again. Had it been ANYONE other than Obama (Even edwards) and this would have been over months ago with her the candidate before super tuesday.

Obama you have to start thinking about the future of the democratic party. You want change! You want to move away from this bullshit. Yet if this bullshit manages to sway weak voters who fail to do research on their own... It will give additional green lights to republicans do give their worst. They have been waiting for Clinton! They have everything on her all cued up and ready to strike. If she wins the democrats will lose the GE.

Clinton and many of her supporters have enabled and activated the swiftboat playbook of political destruction. To give the republicans such a WONDERFUL opportunity they never thought they could dream of was the worst thing that could of happened and I personally thought clinton was above this.

Clinton is scum. And sadly if voters fall for it you may need to expose her past Obama. With the SLOW schedule coming up she will have plenty of time to defend herself form her past from her votes from her actions. Obama if the voters demand you take action you must respond otherwise Clinton will use the months to eat your nice guy personality and spit it out.

Here is the problem fellow democrats. When Clinton allowed the swiftboating to happen and joined in like she did at a day before the primary. (Followed by the media VERY HAPPY to see this bloodletting continue for ratings) She in my view completely quit the job of being a leader and COMPLETELY changed the game. She destroyed any chance in hell of Obama and McCain having a clean fight in the ring for president.

Now when Obama wins he will face the republicans loading up the torpedo tubes on the proverbial swift boats they thought they had to keep in storage. Republicans cheering as they realize that Clinton has given them every ounce of ammo they need for a sick campaign.

So if Clinton Changed the game and has given up her political future. Then Obama must take action.

I nearly want to cry tho. Not because of anything that could happen tomorrow but the thought of what this will mean in the GE.

[LSparkle]

8. I hope it's over tomorrow and we don't have to go that route

but I agree with you if it isn't over ...

With all of her talk of him being "M.I.A." in not holding meetings of his subcommittee, I started wondering -- has she ever BEEN a chairman of any committee or subcommittee? Or did she KNOW she'd be concentrating on running for president, and thus turned down any such a post? It just seems odd that Obama would have that opportunity while Clinton may not have (unless she bowed to her higher ambition and avoided the responsibility to actually DO anything in the Senate).

[Lucinda]

23. Yes. She chairs a committee. And she calls meeting of it.

Google is your friend.

[carlotta]

9. Obama's troubles are of his own making

NAFTA lies, Rezko in the news--those are not Hillary's fault.

[anonymous171]

12. Both are her fault actually.

[JimGinPA]

13. Yeah, Hilly Would Never Bring That Negative Stuff Up, Huh?

:eyes:

[cali]

16. Some are. some aren't.

She's run a highly negative campaign over the past month. He hasn't. If Rezco is Obama's fault, than Hsu, Guistra, Gupta and Paul are Hillary's and he should go just as negative as Hill. He should have done it before, but he chose the rise above it mode of campaigning. There's a shitload more of NEW dirt on Hilly than on Obama and should use it. It works and there is so much more dirt on Hill than on Obama. Time to light the fuse on Hill.

[Yael]

39. He should, or the media should

Or his supporters blogging (or whatever) about it?

I think he needs to stay above the fray and not lower himself to her level.

[Zachstar]

57. The problem is if voters buy the bullshit swiftboating then he will not have a choice.

Clinton is taking FULL advantage of his stance and using it like glue to paste bullshit onto.

We saw what she could do to influence others wrongfully in the past.

Obama wants to be friends he wants to be good to her so that she will support him later. He is wrong to think she gives a fuck anymore. She has bet her political future and paid the down payment with the democratic party. And wants to go down in flames.

I am sorry if fellow Obama supporters still think that if this continues it can be clean. That ended today with this swiftboating. It ended when Clinton decided that she was above the future of America and the Democratic Party.

It may end tomorrow the voters may decide they are sick of her bullshit. Even then I highly doubt that Clinton will go quietly into exit race mode.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. He'll win Texas, bank on it.

[meow mix]

15. i hope not i cant wait to see some tombstoning of hillary supporters begin

they wont be able to control themselves.. and will continue attacking the nominee.

begin the purge!

[damonm]

17. Not so far...

Where Hillary has gone negative, she's lost big. SC & WI, anyone?

The mere fact that she had a double-digit lead in TX & OH not two weeks ago and now is having to scrap for every vote is a loss for her.

[BeyondGeography]

18. You're correct, and you're not alone in your thinking

http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/what-will-republicans-throw-at-hillary.html

[Tatiana]

27. I agree with this sentiment as well. n/t

[meow mix]

20. obama doesnt go negative because he cares about american democrats

and wouldnt want to overly tarnish a potential nominee.

hes a good and straight shooter all the way.

[Flabbergasted]

21. This strategy might backfire on Obama. I think he'll do fine tomorrow.

[MojoMojoMojo]

22. Obamas Entire 2 year campaign is based on negative

Hillary voted IWR and caused the war .
Thats not negative?
Hillary takes donations from Big Business.
Thats not negative?

[woolldog]

32. That's not negative.

[NorthernSpy]

33. the IWR is a substantive issue -- not just trumped-up FUD...

... intended to give voter a vague "bad feeling" about the candidate.



As if you didn't know the difference.


:eyes:

[DearAbby]

40. the truth is not negative

Just stick to the facts, ma'am.

And as for going negative, I don't feel that would be a good move for Obama. Hillary would play the poor victim to the hilt. Just stick to the facts.

[mudesi]

24. Again, SHE HAS TO WIN BIG

She can win Ohio by 10 points, as the polls are indicating. She can win Texas by 3 points, as the polls are indicating.

What she can't do is change the fact that that's not enough! Math is math is math is math is math. She can't catch up without enormous leads in every contest from here on out.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hillary's Making A Commmmeback And Youuuuu Don't Liiiiiike It...

:rofl:

[writes3000]

35. You are acting out in childish ways.

Taunting posts are immature. No matter which side does it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. Neener Neener Neeeeeeeeener!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Yael]

41. Let me guess

Ignored called you an "Idiot" for disagreeing with him?

Am I close?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

50. Youuuuuuu Can'ttttttt Seeeeeeee Meeeeeee Neeeeenerrr Neeeener Neeeeeeeeeener!

:P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

[NorthernSpy]

45. Obama might be lying about his true loyalties. He might let people hurt our kids...

He might be one of them.


That's what Hillary's purported "comeback" is based on.

There's no deniability here, either. It's not shit coming from some loose cannon in her campaign, or a few asshole pundits or supporters. It's her.



Long after her jubilant fans have forgotten, I will remember that.

[mudesi]

53. It has nothing to do with me. It's mathematics

Grow up, OPERATIONMINDCRIME!

:rofl:

[Laurab]

63. Yes, Obama might be a Muslim, and she prefers McCain.

WHAT a comeback! That's the type of Dem I'm really going to run out and vote for. :sarcasm: I thought you had changed after reading one or two posts of yours, but I see I was wrong.

Actually, I don't see HRC making a comeback, just dirty tricks. I don't think they'll work - they've backfired so far, and hopefully will continue to.

Enjoy the week or so you have left to post this childish crap.

[rug]

25. What a thread.

[JackORoses]

26. It is quite amazing how clean Obama has been in this fight.

All this time and not a mention of Impeachment or Adultery.
The most obvious Clinton flaws.

He is a stand up guy and it would really suck for him to fight them on their own level.
But he does have an unlimited ammunition supply if that proves necessary.

Do you still think that Hillary is not acting like a wounded bear, as far as you know?

[JimGinPA]

46. He's Been Tough, But A Gentleman Throughout

:toast:

[ecstatic]

28. Me too. And CNN is shilling for her BIG TIME nt

[Yael]

42. I was in the gym after work

Had the iPod on, but was watching the Sit room on the teevee.

First, there was a pic of Rezko, then the Canadian flag, then the Obama/Richardson photo (the hand over the heart) and then Tubbs-Jones was being interviewed about <whocares>.

I just had to laugh.

[phantom power]

29. I hope either one of them goes on the offensive against McCain.

[frazzled]

31. You know, I almost hope she does win the nomination

I've done my utmost to try to stay neutral and positive towards both candidates throughout this season, even though I personally voted for Obama in Illinois. But these last few weeks, after all the ugliness I've seen and heard, I almost hope Clinton takes it. Because I sort of want to see the karma paid back when the media and the Republicans throw stuff out about her that will make her own campaign's negative attacks look like child's play. I don't want Obama to do it: I want (admittedly, out of a sense of spite at the moment) the people we hate to do it. And I think they'd prevail.

That is just the anger talking. But a part of me has really had it. Give it to Clinton: she's so certain she's been thorough vetted and asks to have them bring it on. Let's see.

Personally, I think she has been treated with tremendous respect by the media during the campaign regarding all the potentially bad-sounding scandals listed in the OP, and no one but her could sustain losing these last 11 races and still be talked about as completely viable. But we know that will all change. And it won't just be the nominee under attack, it will be her husband. In my current vindictive mood, I almost want to see that happen--except for the fact that I know it might mean loss for the Democrats in the fall.

[BigDaddy44]

34. Negative has always worked

Negative WILL always work. I know we'd all like our presidential campaigns to be kumbaya sessions where everyone has pillow fights and then shares cookies and milk afterwards. Sorry, this is the real world. It inevitable, and I'm only surprised it took so long.

[thevoiceofreason]

43. And won't it be sweet when it doesn't?

Texans hate Hillary.

[GumboYaYa]

44. I am not sure that is true this cycle.

I was helping manage a state senate campaign two years ago. The race was close. In the last week, our candidate was attacked from the left and the right with push polls, negative ads and all sorts of rumor mongering. We had a bunch of DC consultants on the phone and they all wanted us to go negative. The candidate decided that he had run to change the system and that started with the way he ran his campaign. We hung up on the consultants and he and I wrote a press release titled Choosing Hope over Fear. He pledged not to go negative even in the face of withering attacks. The race turned after that press release and our candidate ended up winnning by double digits.

I think people really are sick of old school politics...at least I hope so!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

47. Sure, that would finish him off

Nobody wants to hear the scion of hope bitch about Bill's unsavory connections with Giustra and Kazakhstan.

It's terribly off message.

[BadgerLaw2010]

49. Yeah, Obama leaves that to his supporters.

[Faygo Kid]

54. Gloves off.

If you are right - and we both hope you're not - it's time to fight back. He has run a clean, above-board campaign, but if she hangs in there after tomorrow, it's time to go negative.

There is certainly plenty there, starting with her refusal to release her tax returns.

Let's hope he smokes her in Texas and Ohio and ends this thing.

[bunnies]

55. I 'm not sure he has it in him.

That is, the ability to sink to her campaigns level. And taking the high road may be the thing that costs him this nomination. That really sad IMHO.

[Meshuga]

56. I disagree

He should stick to his word and stay the way he is going. It would kill me to see Hillary succeed with her current strategy but Obama should not get down to her level even if he loses.

What kills me is that if Obama wins the nomination, her nasty words are going to be used against him in the GE. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist but it almost feels like Hillary has a win-win situation here: if she loses the nomination her words are going to be damaging enough to Obama giving her a chance in 2012. And obviously, if she wins the nomination she achieves her goal.

Hillary's negative campaign is what turned me off and I don't want to see Obama following the example. :-(

[mojowork_n]

58. Negative does work, but it's all good for the OPPONENT, when there's blowback.

I'm hoping there will be blowback, too, after the Canadian consulate/NAFTA b.s. is exposed.

On the surface, it did sound bad. I found this Reuters summary, which kind of glosses over a few inconvenient details in the rush to conclude "Canada says didn't misrepresent Obama over NAFTA"

"...Key Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee discussed his candidate's policies with the Canadian consulate in Chicago, which wrote a report suggesting Obama's words on NAFTA were designed for a political audience and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

The report was leaked to the U.S. media, prompting some Democrats to accuse Canada's right-leaning Conservative government of trying to interfere in the election -- a charge dismissed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper..."

This is the source link:

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0338038720080303

What Reuters failed to mention was that this was just two guys out for a stroll at the University of Chicago:

Close reading would also require one to consider that the named Obama adviser may just have been leery about having too much read into his statements, in the first place, since he may not have been in a position to be making "clear articulation of policy plans."

It was two guys walking across campus having a conversation that both may have remembered differently.

From CNN:

"...The AP obtained a memo from a Canadian diplomat saying an Obama adviser had told Canada's government the candidate's criticism of NAFTA was "more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

But Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser, told the AP his statements were mischaracterized.

Clinton said Monday the memo should raise doubts about Obama's criticism of NAFTA, which is highly unpopular in Ohio after a large loss of manufacturing jobs there in recent years..."

link:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/03/democrats.primaries/?iref=hpmostpop

The CNN piece goes on to include a response from the campaign manager:

"...Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Goolsbee's comments came during an informal conversation on a walking tour of the University of Chicago, where the adviser is a professor. Plouffe described the AP report as overblown and inaccurate.

"This is being reported as if somehow this is an official meeting of an Obama representative and the Canadian government," Plouffe said. "That was not the case. He was essentially doing a walking tour and was essentially having a casual conversation and the report on that conversation was not accurate."


The really ironic aspect of all of this, for me, is that on the day before the most important primary election, Hillary Clinton (let's not forget whose administration brought us NAFTA, in the first place) is cast as NAFTA's "true" opponent, at least in terms of "the latest breaking news" media narrative, and she's magically absolved from any (shared) responsibility she may have had, in originally supporting it. Or for ever having spoken out publicly, in favor of it.

Makes you proud to be a North American.

There's more, at CNN, where Goolsbee names his accuser, and denies making the statements mis-quoted in the Canadian "memo":

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/03/obama.nafta.ap/index.html?iref=werecommend

The only troubling thing is that looking at the text of both those CNN links -- one is from the 'most popular' list, the other's from the 'we recommend' list. Tomorrow both links will probably be gone. I looked around on the page, but couldn't find a permanent link to either story.

What may be remembered, tomorrow, is what I'm hearing Joe Scarborough telling Tweey, that this just goes to show you that Obama's a "politician", like the rest of them...

[JimGinPA]

59. Andrea Mitchell Said They Padded Her Rally In Ohio Today...

With union members because they had a nearly empty (small) venue.


:wow:

[Laurab]

60. I'm a little worried, BUT

negative hasn't worked well for her so far - it has backfired time and time again. Primary voters probably know a little more about the candidates than "Joe Sixpack" GE voters, so I'm guessing might not be as easily swayed as them. I hope.

"Desperately negative" is what she is. McCain is a better choice in her eyes?

I have lost every bit of respect I ever had for that woman. She won't win the GE, even if some miracle happened, and she won the primary. I will not vote for her for the NYS Senate, when that rolls around again, either.

I think Obama will do well tomorrow. As well, or better, than expected. Maybe she'll take her toys and go home then, although it doesn't look like her plan - she may be forced to.

[Cha]

61. You wrote my

thoughts very well, Laura! I voted for Jonathan Tisini in 2006 against hilary..the guy who was the anti-War On Iraq candidate whom she wouldn't debate.

[Bake]

62. That's okay, cali

You've been negative enough for several campaigns, from what I've seen.

And frankly, I'm disappointed.

Bake