Newsflash for Progressives: Hillary doesn't give a rats ass if you like her tactics or not...

[Postman]

You have no where else to go.

Subtle endorsements of John McCain over Obama? Hey, thats how she sees herself defeating Obama in the Primaries for the nomination, Democratic Party unity be damned.

Will it damage her chances of defeating McCain if she wins the nomination? No. She loses to McCain regardless. Why vote for a fake republican when you can have the real thing?

[Bright Eyes]

1. That's been the DLC strategy since day 1.

Anything to win.

[movonne]

4. The problem is we have not been winning..

[KittyWampus]

16. Exactly, THAT is the DLC strategy. Don't threaten the power structure.

[bvar22]

17. The poeple who fund the DLC HAVE been winning everytime.

They could care less if it is a Republican Corporatist or a Democratic Corporatist who produces their legislation and give them protection.

Hillary or McCain...doesn't matter...all the same for them.

As long as no REAL Pro-LABOR Democrat gets elected...its all good for the owners of the DLC.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

2. Tell us something we don't already know.

[GumboYaYa]

3. If Hillary is successful, I will finally go Green Party for good.

The Greens refelect more of my fundamental values anyway. The only reason I have been voting for centrist dems is that they weren't Republicans.

The Clintons' power grab and dirty politics may push me out of the Democratic party.

[tabatha]

5. Yes, but the irony is that she is hurting herself.

Her tactics worked in Ohio because that was where she used them first.

But now that people have woken up, she is just shooting herself in the foot.

[Tribetime]

15. I think it's wishful thinking

but I hope like crazy you right.

[earthside]

6. Hillary Clinton(s): Bush's Third Term. n/t

[jackson_dem]

7. Thankfully the netroots doesn't represent the real world!

It is amusing how out of touch with the real world the Clinton hating far left and far right are.

[Tesha]

10. Yeah -- only 49% of the real world hates Clinton. (NT)

[jackson_dem]

11. That must mean 47% of the real world hates King 0bama the inevitable

:eyes:

[Tesha]

12. No, his negatives aren't nearly that high. But hers are. (NT)

[casus belli]

14. A lot of people ignore this point.

Bt in disapproval ratings, she's off the chart with Republicans. And, I really don't feel like stirring up the GOP base to show up to vote against our candidate. We've got a perfect storm of opportunity to lock down the house/senate, and WH for the first time in a long time. The last thing we need to do is pull a "Bring it on" moment to stir up their base for them.

[NMMatt]

8. I sure as hell have somewhere else to go

I'll be the concientious objector and either write in Obama or skip the presidential ballot all together. If in my state, if she stole the election and enough people were to do what I would do resulting in Udall getting more votes than Hillary, it would be a loud rebuke to the Rove-Clintons no matter if McCain were to end up winning.

As I've said before, after Obama... there is no more "lesser of two evils" at least for me.

[tabasco]

9. That's why she doesn't release her stinky tax records or White House records.

She will not release this info to Democratic voters because she thinks it is harder to beat Obama than McCain.

The strategy is good for Hillary but bad for the Democratic party.

It's all about Hillary and her power grab. She thinks we're too stupid to notice and she is largely correct.

[Voice for Peace]

13. Newsflash for Hillary: I have somewhere else to go.

She won't get my support under any circumstances.

[K Gardner]

18. See article at link below for truth about Hillary's motives..

"You don’t want to get in their way, man. Road kill is no mere metaphor when someone’s intensely-held life aspiration is on the line and their moral bearings got tossed overboard sometime back in their twenties. You don’t get that sense of desperate pathological need from, say, Jimmy Carter or George McGovern, while individuals like George H. W. Bush or Richard Nixon fairly reeked of it. In the case of Bush the Elder, clearly the whole point of being president was to be president. He didn’t seem to have any ideas of what to do with the office once he got there. In the case of his son, the whole point was to do it better than Dad, and so he had lots of completely insane ideas of what he wanted to do once he got there, particularly in areas like taxes and Iraq, where Poppy had screwed up on the way to losing a second term (amateur!).

The Clintons are very much cut from the same cloth as Old Man Bush. Actually doing something in office is incidental to the main project, which is the psychological satisfaction (and reassurance) that comes from all the attention, glory and power attached to the White House. Compared to that overwhelming goal, they no more care about national health care than does Sean Hannity. If they can win by going single-payer, so be it. If they could win by war, the death penalty and welfare slashing instead, they would. Indeed, they have. The point is that the Clintons will do anything to secure the presidency, even if that includes wrecking that part of the Democratic Party they didn’t already wreck during the 1990s, and/or tossing a few body blows in the direction of American democracy."

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/07/7536/

[MonkeyFunk]

19. The notion that this is about

Clinton vs. progressives is laughable. She and Obama don't have a dime's worth of difference between them on policy.

[BadgerLaw2010]

20. Tell that to the Obmaniacs.

[stop the bleeding]

21. DUH

:D