Hopefully Terry McCauliffe's career is over!!!!

[KansasVoter]

Hillary had every advantage in the world. More than any candidate in history!

Well known, popular husband, money, money raising ability like no other candidate in history. Political pull. Polotical knowledge.

Terry McCauliffe took these assets and turned her into a losing candidate.

There will be many a book written about the total and complete failure of the Hillary Clinton Campaign for President.

Maybe a whole book just about her failure to be prepared after Super Tuesday.

And forget the "it is a close race" crap, Hillary started on third base and is now on second base.

Terry McCauliffe, worst campaign chair in history!!

[Evergreen Emerald]

1. "total and complete failure"

Have you looked at how close the race is? You mistake DU for reality, I fear.

[shadowknows69]

11. Lol close?

I think you're the one with reality problems

[Evergreen Emerald]

14. How many people voted for Clinton?

[shadowknows69]

31. Not as many as did for Barack

And he leads in delegates, states won, super delegates, the media is treating him like the presumptive nominee, McCain is treating him like the presumptive nominee, old school Clinton cronies like Snuffleuppagus are treating him like the presumptive nominee, do I really need to go on?

[Evergreen Emerald]

34. Actually, you are attempting to change the subject.

You said she was a "total failure" And, if you know how many votes she received, you would know that your post is a lie.

[shadowknows69]

37. Sorry to interrupt your crazy time but

I'm not the one who posted the original premise. You said the race was close and I was pointing out how that was an unreasonable statement given the facts. I don't know off-hand how many sanctioned votes Hillary has recieved, but last I read on the matter Obama was still ahead by over 700,000. You want to explain again to me how that's close? Do we not remember the ass kicking Obama did Tuesday night? Despite your ally Rush Limbaugh's best efforts. Next?

[Evergreen Emerald]

41. How offensive you are. Rush is no more my ally than yours.

You own the "progressive" title less than I do, based on your posts.

You suggest that her campaign is a total failure. And the fact that it has been a close race since the beginning and that she is nearly even with him and that he has been unable to close the deal indicates that it has not been a total failure. She may not win. But, she did one hell of a job, despite the ugliness of media and "progressives" like you who have been spewing the right-wing talking points for months.

[shadowknows69]

44. You can say it a million times

Still doesn't make it true.

[virtualobserver]

dup

dup

[virtualobserver]

47. He may not be your ally, But Bill Clinton did go on his show, and he has been telling his listeners.

....to vote for Hillary

[Evergreen Emerald]

52. I know I know...when Obama does it , he is reaching out to the other side

He is uniter. When Obama sends fliers to republicans telling them to change their status to join the caucus and vote for him, that is a uniter, good politics, reaching out.

When Clinton does it--it is a betrayal of the party. I got your double standards loud and clear.

[virtualobserver]

54. going on Limbaugh, when he is publicly supporting Hillary, is not reaching out to the other side

[Evergreen Emerald]

56. I know I know....when Obama goes on right-wing shows he is standing up to them

When Clinton does it, she is betraying the party.

I get it...the Obama rules are clear on DU.

[virtualobserver]

57. I wish you continued success with Operation Chaos

[Evergreen Emerald]

61. rightbackatcha

[Liberal Veteran]

15. When you lose to someone who shouldn't have had a chance, that's failure.

Hillary didn't run a very good campaign.

[Evergreen Emerald]

17. shouldn't have a chance?

That is kind of a bizarre statement. Clinton should not have had a chance. She has been vilifed by the media and the right-wing for over a decade. She was re-defined by those who hate her and then attacked. The media treated her with such a lack of respect--that is well known and verified by a number of sources.

It was a perfect storm: Bush destroyed this country. We tried voting them out of congress, but it did not work. So, America go together (Bush is the uniter after all) came out in record numbers and is throwing everything out.

They are misinformed, and duped into thinking that Obama is different. He is a typical politiican with nothing new to offer. But the masses see change. Newby. And we are fed up.

It is not that Obama did not have a chance. It was that Clinton has been so dehumanized she had an uphill battle.

She won that battle in NY, but could not overcome the re-definitions created by the republicans (who still have the power to choose our candidates for us, it seems).

[Liberal Veteran]

18. A freshman senator with a strange sounding name who is not white....

....and doesn't have the party machinery behind him is hardly the candidate you'd expect to beat the wife of a popular ex-president who very much has the name recognition, is a senator, has the funding, and political machinery behind her to waltz to a nomination.

I don't think it boots anything to recover this ground, but the fact is that Clinton came into this race as the presumptive nominee.

[virtualobserver]

19. the fact that you can support Hillary after some of the tactics that she has used....

interferes with your ability to see the kind of change that Obama offers.

[Evergreen Emerald]

21. The fact that you only "see" tactics in Clinton and ignore the very same

tactics in Obama shows me that you cannot see past your Obama glasses.

[virtualobserver]

39. the difference is that I started as a Hillary supporter and was turned off by her tactics

and Obama's unwillingness to use them attracted me. So Hillary bought me the Obama glasses.

[Evergreen Emerald]

55. what a shame that instead of seeing the reality of what was going

on you bought the spin of the campaign. That is the only explaination I have for you disapproving of her "tactics." She has done nothing different than Obama has. The difference is that her behavior is dissected, distorted, and aird 24/7 while his is hidden, ignored, justified, minimized.

She did one thing different: he used race in SC to divide when he shouted "Racism!" from the rooftops of SC and tried again in NC with Clyburn coming out and attempting to rehash Clinton's now infamous "fairy tale" statement.

[virtualobserver]

60. What dislodged me was her attack on Obama attacking the depth of his support..........

of abortion rights, which she did in both Iowa and New Hampshire. It caused me to take a closer look at what she was doing. The closer I looked, the worse it got.

Obama never shouted racism from the rooftops. But his campaign did point out Bill Clinton's reference to Jesse Jackson, which was an attempt to diminish Obama's win in SC.

but race related statements have been common in the Clinton campagn

“The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.”

—Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen

“You’ve got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate,”

-- Clinton Supporter Ed Rendell

"I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."

"There's a pattern emerging here," she said.

Damn straight, Hillary

[KansasVoter]

20. Know the facts first.....

In April of 2007 she had a 40% lead over Obama dna Edwards COMBINED!!! What do you mean no chance??

[Evergreen Emerald]

22. Of course she did...name recognition alone! For goodness sakes

I know you what Clinton to be everything evil and blame her for everything, but lets not ignore the reality of what happened! Let's look at why she would have been ahead, and the attacks she withstood and dehumanization done to her.

I agree that she did some things wrong. But so did Obama. The difference? Her mistakes are highlighted and his are ignored. And the masses only see what is told to them.

[JimGinPA]

27. The Only Qualification She EVER Had To Be A Senator From NY Was Being Married To An Ex-President...

Let's get real, shall we?

[Evergreen Emerald]

28. Get Real :

If that is the case, then what qualification did Obama have for getting into politics? He was a lawyer, she was a lawyer. She worked for progressive causes, he worked for progressive causes. She worked in the white-house on many projects (history has proven that), he did not.

He ran for office and won...she ran for office and won. She has done a fantastic job as a Senator.

[JimGinPA]

30. False Argument...

He was a state senator that went on to win a senate seat. She's a carpetbagger.

[Evergreen Emerald]

32. So you are suggesting that she should not have run in NY?

But that she had the qualifications, but not the jurisdictional requirements? NY did not think so. ummm....was he born and raised in Ill?

[JimGinPA]

43. Did He Move To IL. To Run For The US Senate?

No, he had been an organizer and then a state senator.

She held no previous office, won no previous elections. Period. No experience whatsoever, just exposure.

You alawys seem to want the last word, despite your argument having no merit. So feel free to win this argument (in your mind) by making more illogial statements or asking more non sequitur questions if you want, but I'm finished with this useless conversation. Face reality, Hillary has lost.

[Evergreen Emerald]

46. You make me laugh. I do not want the last word, I guess I am surprised at how your

argument morphed when confronted with facts. First you say that she had no experience to be a Senator. Then, when confronted with facts you suggest that it is not her experience but the fact that she was not from NY. When I point out that Obama was not from Ill, you state that he did work in Ill. even tho he was not raised there.

What work did Clinton do in NY?

And then of course when confronted with facts, you turn to attack me instead of commenting on the issues. Lovely.

[MikeDJohn]

51. If I recall when Hillary was elected Senator from NY,

She lived in Washington, DC, in the White House. She may have owned a house in New York state, but she had NEVER lived there, and had NEVER worked for pay a day in her life in New York state.

Obama, something quite different, over ten years of working for the people of Chicago, paid work, not just house-sitting.

[Liberal Veteran]

53. Hillary apparently grew up in many places as a child...NY, PA, CA, FL, NH, AR, OH, IN, TX

....so she has deep roots.

[MikeDJohn]

64. With so many places, she looks like a transient to me! nt

[shadowknows69]

33. She has been vilifed by the media and the right-wing for over a decade.

Which is why she should never have fucking run in the first place. It's not rocket science knowing that Hillary could NEVER win the GE. Too much freaking baggage, it's always been the case.

[Liberal Veteran]

38. That's a cogent point that has been glossed over by her supporters.

The fact is, while she had a great deal of support among the party base, it was always going to be an uphill battle in the general election with her at the helm.

[Evergreen Emerald]

42. She proved that premise wrong in NY. And felt that if given a fair

looking over she could show the world that she is not what the right-wing defined. What she underestimated was the misogyny in the media and in America and how entrenched her re-definition was by the republicans. Even the left-wing used the right-wing talking points to dehumanize and hate her.

She was fair game by all, and everyone reveled in it. We need to look no further than Tweety, Timmy and DU to see that.

[Liberal Veteran]

48. How silly of me to forget her victory in the vast conservative stronghold of deep red New York.

:D

[MH1]

2. Wasn't McAuliffe also in charge of the DNC in 2004?

'nuff said.

[natrat]

4. he's gross-in charge of the designated party of failure

[MonkeyFunk]

3. Heheh

a few months ago, the argument was "hillary can't win! She's got HUGE negatives, way too much baggage, half the party hates her!". Now it's "There was nothing stopping her! Everybody loved her! She should've flown to the nomination!"

[KansasVoter]

5. LOL.....you are a fool.....

In April 2007 she had a 40 point advantage over Edwards and Obama COMBINED!!!

You Hillbots don't get it.

She started on third and you think she hit a triple!

[mac2]

7. Amazing what the media can do.

[KansasVoter]

8. LOL.....I knew the MSM whine was coming.....

You have a standard set of complaints and keep using them.

Obama out campaigned the Clintons. That is the truth!

[mac2]

9. I don't watch MSM

but I do want a Progressive for President. Guess I will have to wait another four years (or two in the Congress).

[MonkeyFunk]

16. Nope

Only you guys ever asserted that she was a shoo-in. Her own campaign never said it. Bill said over a year ago that he told her if she runs, she may not win the nomination. If she won the won the nomination, she'd win in the fall, though.

[Egnever]

63. So she ignored him?

How does the fact that they had no plan after super tuesday jibe with that statement?

[JeanGrey]

23. Well, MonkeyFunk, that fact is it doesn't really matter does it?

She isn't going to win. The sooner she leaves, the less egg she will have on her face, but she is a glutton for punishment.

[MonkeyFunk]

25. The fact matters as far as rebutting the argument

in this thread, which is what I'm doing.

This is more of the big lie you guys keep spreading that Clinton is an abject failure, is unpopular, is widely hated. The fact remains, she's about as popular as Obama, and it doesn't help your side to deny that.

[Vote2008]

40. Monkey.....Hillary campaigned BAD. Admit it. No plans after Super Tuesday......

And Obama campaigned GREAT. People on the ground in all states. Offices in all states.

Hillary quote: "It will be over after Super Tuesday"

Her arrogance cost her votes.

Obama raised more Money than the CLINTONS.

Admit it, that says a lot.

[JeanGrey]

69. She's lost, period. That is simply the facts. There is no

getting around it.

[Exilednight]

67. Most people I know never said she couldn't win the primary. By all accounts she should have .......

had it locked up by Super Tuesday. The same group said she couldn't win the GE because of her negatives.

Two different elections.

[mac2]

6. They decide before we even vote.

I'd like to think otherwise but it is true. They have a dog and pony show that is endless and people suck it up.

When will we get back our party for the workers? Stopping the flow of criminals from all over the world is a security danger. The drug wars are taking over Mexcio and moving up into the states. Where are our National Guard to protect us? All over the world fighting for corporate profits.

We need leadership and action now not after the election. They still have jobs to do. All three candidates are Senators.

[lojasmo]

13. "They" decided on clinton over a year ago...

How did that work out?


McAuliffe sucks. I hope we never hear from him again.

[mac2]

29. By they I mean the "world elite"...the money people.

Not the party leaders. They belong to those elite organizations but only a few control it.

It violates the Logan Act since we don't decide our fate or goals. A few non-elected and even foreign members do (Rothschild's, etc.). We lose our democracy. They gain power because we ignore it and refuse to challenge them.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. If baghdad Bob had a future, so does McAwful.

[cosmik debris]

12. The Peter Principle sweeps up HRC and McCauliffe

They have both been promoted to the level of their incompetence.

[burythehatchet]

24. I would not purchase a used car from that person.

[roseBudd]

26. A movie parallel comes to mind, Bonfire of the Vanities

The film itself was a critical and commercial flop when it was first released. The film cost an estimated US$47 million to make, but initially grossed just over US$15 million at the U.S. box office.

Many critics complained about the casting, especially the casting of Hanks and Willis as McCoy and Fallow. Others complained that despite opening with a well-executed tracking shot, the first two acts of the film were horribly paced and that too much time was spent making Sherman McCoy a likable character rather than advancing the plot of the story.

[WA98296]

35. That might explain the speed with which his mouth was moving!

High Speed Spin

[tabasco]

36. He did not have every advantage in the world.

He had to sell vinegar as French perfume.

Hillary is a weak candidate and that is the primary reason she has failed.

I do hope to never see slimy McCauliffe ever again.

[kevinmc]

45. I am glad he left after 2004 ..... we wouldn't have won in 2006 with his strategy n/t

[virtualobserver]

50. and after Dean was successful in 2006......the Carville/McAuliffe crowd said that the success.......

was in spite of Dean. This crowd has been holding our party back

[DS1]

49. He's terrible. He's just as bad as Donna Brazille

They're both useless in my books

[RoadRage]

58. I agree to an extent - but give some Credit to Axelrod

I think that as paltry as Hillary's campaign was.. against almost any other candidate (Edwards, etc.) she would have wiped the floor with them - and their strategy would have worked as planned.

They were very very seriously outsmarted by David Axelrod and Obama's staff. They knew it was a David vs. Golliath campaign, and they executed it almost flawlessly.

They decided that they couldn't win over enough of the "tried & true" dems, so they went out and built their own (college kids - first time voters). They rallied them to the point where they really did become vested. They asked for $5 & $10 and used the internet to get these funds.. as opposed to asking for $2300 in one big swoop.

Clinton's campaign failed - but frankly it probably would have been just fine against any other ordinary candidate. They just realized far to late that Obama was a very un-ordinary candidate.

[uponit7771]

62. true

[still_one]

59. Senator Clinton is resposible for her terrible campaign, which are also a reflection of her judgment

[Frank Booth]

65. Wouldn't it be great if we never saw McCauliffe, Carville, Lanny Davis,

Howard Wolfson, Mark Penn, Geraldine Ferraro or the rest of these vile Clinton apparatchiks ever again?

[PatGund]

66. Why are people surprised??

Terry McCauliffe was the best party leader the GOP ever had. Just about everything he did while ruining, err, running the DNC gave the advantage to the Republican party.

He's a hack. A hack with power but a hack none the less.

What he did to Sen. Clinton's campaign is very much what he did to the DNC.

Maybe if Sen. Clinton wants to win in 2016, she'll hire Howard Dean to run that campaign.

[Elidor]

68. Terry is primarily a bagman

And there will always be a demand for good bagmen. He may not chair another campaign, but he's not going anywhere.