Hillary continues lying while insisting Obama is just as bad as she is

[ProSense]

Hillary is still claiming she opposed NAFTA.

Despite evidence to the contrary: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/25/223848/497/804/484307">MSNBC Questions Clinton's Truthiness, Says She Was Pro-NAFTA (more)

Hillary is pushing debunked information about Obama on her site in attempt to claim that, like her, Obama is in bed with lobbyists:

False Advertising: New Obama Ad Falsely Claims He Does Not Accept Money From Oil Companies

Fact Check: Sen. Obama on Lobbyists

One of the most dubious claims in the above: "Sen. Obama takes money from employees of firms that lobby and has lobbyists as advisers."

So now Hillary is equating employees to lobbyists? Wow!

Anyway, the lobbyist claim debunked: Fact Check On Public Citizen's Claim That Obama Has Bundler Lobbyists (includes searchable database)

Obama



Hillary



In fact, Hillary takes more money from lobbyist than McCain, and she is proud of it (video).

Meet Janice Enright, Hillary’s Lobbyist Friend and Fundraiser

This is good, Hillary claims she'll still be behind in the popular vote on June 3 (see video of Rendell vs. Kerry for relevant discussion)

The Atlantic: How to Count the Popular Vote

By Marc Ambinder

The hyperintelligent Jay Cost at RearClearPolitics has produced for us a most helpful spreadsheet computing the various popular vote scenarios.

But this paragraph, is, to me, a very crucial point that both Clinton and Obama campaigns would rather ignore:

We have a large number of unknown factors. For many of them, we have very little idea what values they will ultimately take. What we do know is that small changes in several of them could induce large changes in the vote count. This makes it extremely difficult to be as precise as many commentators have been. We need to be wary of all the uncertainty we face here.

So -- my fairly conservative calculation has Clinton netting about 446,000 votes between now and June 3. Under all scenarios that exclude Florida and Michigan votes -- and count the votes of Washington's primary – Obama still retains a popular vote lead of not more than 330,000 -- or an advantage of less than one and a half percent.

Now that's desperation!

Reality, Obama ahead even with Florida and MI:

Actual Popular Vote Total
Obama 13,355,437 (+717,262)
Hillary 12,638,175

FL
Obama 576,214
Hillary 870,986
Total votes 1,447,200

Popular Vote (w/FL)
Obama 13,931,651 (+422,490)
Hillary 13,509,161

MI
Clinton 328,151
Uncommitted 237,762

Popular Vote (w/FL and MI)
Obama 13,931,651 (+94,181)
Clinton 13,837,470

Let's say Obama got the uncommitted MI votes

Popular Vote (w/FL and MI)
Obama 14,169,413 (+331,943)
Clinton 13,837,258

In these scenarios Obama is clearly ahead, even with no MI votes going to him.

Assuming a revote of MI and FL in which Hillary gets 58% of the MI and 60% of the FL vote as indicated above, Obama would still be ahead. The reality is that Hillary would probably lose ground in a revote.

What's even worse for Hillary is that there is no realistic scenario in which she could regain the pledged delegate lead.


Is it any wonder Hillary is losing credibility:








Video: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com">Hillary's Bosnia train wreck

[Debi]

1. Good work again ProSense! n/t

[ProSense]

7. Thanks!

Thanks all for the comments and recs.

[dchill]

2. Nice work. Kick.

[ProSense]

3. Dems, Reps Agree: Obama Tougher Opponent for McCain

Dems, Reps Agree: Obama Tougher Opponent for McCain

[merh]

6. Hillary and her supporters don't realize

the more they attack Obama for "wrongs" that she has done and done worst, the more desperate and WEAK she seems.

nasty, whiney and weak

[K Gardner]

4. Their ENTIRE Campaign TPs are based on lies. The Meme for the Day: Obama is Afraid

of Hillary. You can see that reflected here. "What is Obama Afraid Of?" etc.

Wolfson just lied for 5 straight filibustering minutes on MSNBC and Andrea Mitchell did absolutely nothing to correct him. After she had just run the story on Obama saying "Hillary can stay in the race as long as she wants..", Wolfson stated over and over he was "attacking her and calling for her to get out and trying to shut down the vote."

These people are shameless and I cannot wait until they are gone. A blight on the political landscape.

[Cha]

5. Good job, Pro!

hilary will continue lying until her last dying breath so Obama has to keep building his campaign stronger against hilary's and mccain's lies.

z --

If you donate before midnight tonight, your donation will be part of our March financial report to the FEC.

Why is that important?

This will be the final report before the next series of primaries, and the results will be sized up and interpreted by everyone trying to gauge the strength of our campaign.

Thanks to you, we've won more delegates, more votes, and twice as many states as Senator Clinton.

But this race isn't over yet.

We're fighting a battle on two fronts. Senator McCain is attacking from one side, intent on suggesting that a third term of George Bush's policies is somehow the best path for our country. Meanwhile, Senator Clinton is attacking from the other, because her campaign has flatly stated that tearing us down is her only chance to win.

There are 10 primaries and caucuses remaining in states like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Indiana. This two-front battle will require unprecedented resources, and we can't let up.

Your donation, before midnight tonight, will build our campaign for the remaining contests and send a message of strength to all those scrutinizing the campaign finance reports.

And don't forget -- tonight is also the last chance to become one of the donors eligible for a dinner with me we'll be having soon.

Will you make a donation of $25 now?

https://donate.barackobama.com/deadline

There's one thing we already know about the March fundraising results: Senator Clinton and Senator McCain have raised a significant portion of their money from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.

We've never done that, and we never will.

Instead, we will continue to rely on more than a million individual donors who support this campaign by giving only what they can afford.

Change does not come from the top down -- it comes from the bottom up.

So rather than having expensive fundraising dinners to take contributions from Washington lobbyists, I'm hosting a different kind of dinner. If you are chosen from among the donors who give before midnight tonight, I'll get to hear your personal story and ideas about how we can solve America's biggest problems together.

Donate before 11:59 p.m. EDT tonight, and you could join me for dinner sometime soon:

https://donate.barackobama.com/deadline

The pundits are slowly realizing something about our political process that we've known from the beginning: people matter.

In unprecedented numbers, ordinary people are volunteering and donating to this campaign. They're taking true ownership in a way that has never happened before.

When we started this campaign over a year ago, the pundits and the political insiders didn't think it was possible to mobilize ordinary people to reject conventional thinking and fight for real change.

We have a chance to prove them wrong, and tonight is a critical deadline on this journey.

Help us finish this quarter strong:

https://donate.barackobama.com/deadline

Thank you for your support,

Barack

[ProSense]

9. Thanks for posting. n/t

[WillyT]

8. Hey Pro ??? - Did You Catch This From John Nichols (The Nation via Alternet) ???

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5221553

:shrug:

BTW - K & R !!!

[ProSense]

10. I did, thanks.

What's disturbing is her supporters appear unconcerned about the lies Hillary would tell if she became president.

She's definitely not Bush, but it doesn't have to be a lie about war to be damaging.

[Cha]

13. Thanks for this, Willy..I

needed to see this again.

[WillyT]

17. Anything For You Z !!!

:bounce::hi::bounce:

[Cha]

18. Thanks, again!

:patriot: :bounce: :kick: :party: :hi:

[Mooney]

11. I keep noticing this myself.

The argument I keep hearing is that Obama is unelectable because his negatives are almost as high as Hillary's... so we should support Hillary.

So if you're keeping score, it's like this: If Johnny has 2 apples and Jane has 1 apple, then Johnny has almost as few apples as Jane, so Jane has more apples.

[ProSense]

21. LOL! n/t

[DerekJ]

12. Thanks ProSense... We do need some Sense in here...

They are fucking defending FOX NEWS ?!!!
How low can they get !!!
:wtf:

[Erin Elizabeth]

14. The longer I listen to her

the more worried about her I get. Months ago, when I was just leaning toward Obama but hadn't really decided, I felt either one of them would be good. But then my husband and I watched all the debates, I've been reading and listening to her a lot and I just get more and more concerned about the stuff she says (the sniper fire thing being a biggie). Why lie so blatantly about these things? Like no one's going to find out?

[autorank]

15. Sublime K*R n/t

[Scurrilous]

16. K & R

:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

19. Someone was shopping that "Bundler" business to me via PM last week.

I didn't pay any attention, as I figured the info was as reliable as most of that campaign's claims.

I guess credibility isn't something they're particularly concerned with.

[ProSense]

20. Wow, Media Matters lays its credibility on the line

ABC's Tapper distorted Clinton's comments on NAFTA

In a March 31 post on his Political Punch blog, ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper wrote, "Campaigning in Indiana on Friday, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, claimed to have been a 16-year vocal opponent of NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement)." But in the very comments Tapper cited, Clinton did not assert that she had "been a 16-year vocal opponent of NAFTA"; rather, she said she "spoke out" against NAFTA starting in 1992. As Tapper himself reported, Clinton said, "I spoke out against it starting in 1992 -- the president made a different decision. ... I think now with 14 years of experience under our belt, we can see that in some parts of our country there have been, perhaps, some economic advantages, but in other parts of our country, like where we are right here in northwest Indiana, it hasn't worked as it was promised, and therefore I think we need to renegotiate it."

Moreover, Clinton's comments are consistent with past comments -- previously reported by Tapper, but not included in his March 31 blog post -- by former presidential adviser David Gergen: "I was actually there in the Clinton White House during the NAFTA fight and I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that's putting it mildly. I'm not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn't see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care. So I do think there's some justification for her camp saying, you know, she's never been a great backer for NAFTA."

So 1992 was 14 years ago?

David Gergen, again?

Media Matters received funding from the Clintons, but this is simply a dishonest criticism of Tapper.

[apocalypsehow]

22. K & R.

:thumbsup:

[Ysabel]

23. k and r and thanks (n/t)...