Hillary’s Consolation Prize? | Print Article | Newsweek.com Basically in a nutshell the story is this. Spitzer obviously resigned with shame and now the new governor Paterson has admitted to extensive drug use and numerous extra-marital affairs. Democratic insiders are counting the days until he gets replaced (2010). But who ...
03-29-2008, 11:46 AM
| #1 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur.  Reform Party NJ 
| Dems wave a carrot in front of Hillary Hillary’s Consolation Prize? | Print Article | Newsweek.com Basically in a nutshell the story is this. Spitzer obviously resigned with shame and now the new governor Paterson has admitted to extensive drug use and numerous extra-marital affairs. Democratic insiders are counting the days until he gets replaced (2010). But who to replace him? Well the first name that comes to mind for many is Hillary. Even many of her supporters are trying to convince her to take the position as governor of NY. The reason is simple, she's already lost the presidential nomination. She's going to win in PA and so they're saying she should drop out when she does so that she'll be on the up and in better position for NY. The reality is she's already lost the nomination for president whether she's willing to admit it or not. I think most people realize this, they just won't say it publicly. But the other factor here is that Hillary and her supporters have convinced themselves that Obama cannot win against McCain. If that's true, and if they really believe that then Hillary's best shot for president in 2012 is to take the executive position as governor of NY. This gets her out of the Senate where her voting record won't be tracked. This is the route a lot of super delegates are urging her to take. Most likely because they realize that they're going to be supporting Obama or they realize Hillary won't win in a convention. She still has time to make up her mind. Bill Clinton has scoffed at the offer, but Hillary hasn't given it a yes or no just yet. She's keeping her options open, which to me shows she's not as secure in her victory as she portrays. You also have to figure the job in the Senate may not be as attractive to her anymore now that Hillary feels she has been "betrayed" by many of her friends: Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, Claire McCaskill, Ben Nelson, Chris Dodd, Bob Casey, etc. She's running out of allies. We'll see if she takes the offer.
__________________ No good decision was ever made in a swivel chair. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid: As we look back in history, the Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks. Last edited by JaJae; 03-29-2008 at 11:54 AM. | ||||
     |
|
03-29-2008, 11:51 AM
| #2 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est  Pragmatist Greensboro, NC
| If she did good things as Governor of NY, it'd help make a case for her as a leader in an executive role as well if she wanted to run again in the future. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 11:56 AM
| #3 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by motivez If she takes the position as governor of NY she'll be in a much better position for 2012. The other factor is that her opponent in 2012 would likely be Rudy Giuliani which I think she's confident she can beat. 
| ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 12:00 PM
| #4 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist Greensboro, NC
| Her only chance for a political future outside of a NY Senator is to end this thing without fucking over the entire party If Democrats somehow lose in November with her as the nominee, or with Obama as the nominee, she will be blamed and hated and she'll never have another chance | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 12:12 PM
| #5 | ||||
| Friend to all.  Socialist Maryland
| I am pretty sure neither candidate has lost until all the primaries are over. If Obama was "behind" nobody would be asking for him to quit...they would be trying to think of ways to get him over the top. These types of ideas and threads are nothing more than wishful thinking by Hillary haters. If she has "no chance" then those people should be happy because it will play out exactly how they think it will. But no, people have to beg and plea and bargain for her to quit...why? Because obviously it's not over. Until the Democratic party nominates someone, it's not over. But please, keep the dream alive. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 12:31 PM
| #6 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist Greensboro, NC
| It's over, and has been for awhile.. she wont win the nomination without taking the party down with her for the General in november.. It has nothing to do with hating Hillary, that's a non sequitur if I've ever heard one. Why would anyone who wants to see a Democrat in the White House next year be happy to let it play out, watching McCain rise in the polls while the Democrats fall? Why would they be happy to see the party unable to rally around a candidate and help prepare them for the general election? That makes no sense. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 12:54 PM
| #7 | ||||
| Leges sine Moribus Vanae  Liberal University City, Philly and Buffalo
| Originally Posted by motivez Exactly.
Perhaps it isn't completely over for Hillary in the primaries, but in reality, she CANNOT win the general election. If she pushes this all the way to the convention and then begs, borrows, and deals with the superdelegates to get them to overrule the public and give the nod to Hillary, she WILL be beaten by McCain in the general. She'll split the party in half and take the ship down with her. The other thing I don't understand is how "Hillary supporters have convinced themselves Obama can't beat McCain." I don't get how that works. She has put her political ambitions ahead of her political beliefs in importance. And that is dangerous. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 01:02 PM
| #8 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by Donkey® Please explain to me a detailed logical course of events that lead to Hillary receiving the nomination? The only way it is possible is if Hillary is handed the nomination by super delegates despite having lost the popular vote and the delegate race. The odds of that happening are slim to none.
If she wants to be president, this really is the option that gives her the best chance. If she plays this nomination out and loses, she'll likely divide the party and it won't be easily forgotten in 2012 or 2016. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 01:36 PM
| #9 | ||||
| Friend to all. Socialist Maryland
| It's funny that on one hand you people are saying "she has no chance" yet in the next sentence you'll come out with "the only way possible..." That's why there's a direct correlation to Hillary haters and these hair-brained "ideas" such as "hey, take NY Governor" or "hey, you're ruining the Democrats chances in the General election." Complete fallacy. They want her out of the race for one reason and one reason only...hate. There's not going to be a "split" in the party. Once the nomination is settled, the Democrats will easily rally around their candidate and win the general election. Obama can easily beat McCain...Hillary can easily beat McCain. But please...carry on. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 01:44 PM
| #10 | ||||
| Leges sine Moribus Vanae Liberal University City, Philly and Buffalo
| Originally Posted by Donkey® No. You are wrong.
I don't know how else to say it. You are flat-out wrong. Hillary has no REALISTIC chance of winning the nomination. That is not to say she doesn't have any chance at all. And she WILL split the party if she forces it to the convention and gets the superdelegates to give it to her. Whether you want to believe it or not, there are many Obama supporters who WILL NOT vote for Hillary if she wins that way. And that will handicap her greatly in the general, whereas most, if not all, Hillary supporters will vote for Obama. Whether you like the situation or not, that's how it is. You are going to have to deal with it. For the record, I usually like Hillary and I will vote for her if she wins the nomination fair and square. Even if the superdelegates give it to her. She's been a good senator and a good politician. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 01:49 PM
| #11 | ||||
| Friend to all. Socialist Maryland
| Originally Posted by A_C_E
I don't care either way so let's not start with the more personal accusations. I voted for Obama in the primaries...so obviously he's my candidate. If Hillary won, I would NOT vote for McCain. There's no way in hell I would vote for McCain and most of the Obama supporters I know wouldn't either. Period. I think most of us are pretty disenchanted with the way elections have gone the past few years and there's no way we want to call it "over" until it actually is. If Hillary is losing and that's pre-ordained, then it's pretty much time for people to STFU and let it happen, no? If she has absolutely zero chance in hell then why all the threads about how much she lies...how bad she is...how she cries....how she has no experience? Who are we trying to convince here? | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:04 PM
| #12 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by Donkey® You keep talking about about "you people" and the "hate", but you've made some comments in this thread as well. Are you going to back them up? Without discussing other people in this thread, how exactly do you see Hillary winning the nomination? You said it's obvious it isn't over. What course of events would be needed for Hillary to win and how likely do you think it is?
Obviously as long as a nominee isn't selected technically it isn't "over", but when you're in the final quarter with 1 minute to go and you're down by 30, most people would get up and try to beat the traffic going home. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:10 PM
| #13 | ||||
| Friend to all. Socialist Maryland
| Originally Posted by JaJae Yes. The primaries are not over. Period. There's all the evidence I need. Ron Paul had ZERO chance of winning, yet when I was saying "he should drop out" back in 2006 (I know, exaggeration get the fuck over it) everyone PRAISED him...STOOD BEHIND him...CHEERED him because he was the candidate that stood for THEIR wants and needs. Well, how about the same respect for the Hillary supporters? They believe in her. She stands for what they want. It is her duty to fight to the bitter end...just like any other candidate.
| ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:15 PM
| #14 | ||||
| Leges sine Moribus Vanae Liberal University City, Philly and Buffalo
| Originally Posted by Donkey® Even if it gives the election to McCain?
Hypothetically, I'm not looking at actual evidence. But hypothetically, if her going down to the bitter end gives the election to McCain, should she still stay in? | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:23 PM
| #15 | ||||
| Friend to all. Socialist Maryland
| Originally Posted by A_C_E
If people would rather vote for McCain than Hillary, then the people will get what they deserve. | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:25 PM
| #16 | ||||
| Leges sine Moribus Vanae Liberal University City, Philly and Buffalo
| Originally Posted by Donkey® I take it that's a "yes, she should stay in"?
| ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:26 PM
| #17 | ||||
| Banned  Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| I am still of the opinion that 1) It would have been nice if PA's primary was earlier, but we needed a situation where Obama, if he's the nominee, get's a feel for how to turn out the vote in PA...runs a lot of ads, gets his offices/teams in place...etc...it's ridiculous that McCain had that fat lead in PA, we don't need to be wasting our time there 2) The Rev Wright Controversy would have been 100x worse if it wasn't for Clinton...it would have been seen across the nation as "its Obama or McCain...we HAVE to pick mccain now because look at all this radical obama shit" now people had to go "do I REALLY want to vote for Hillary"...and in places like NC, that debate was made, and Hillary got close, now it looks like Obama recaptured the lead...and i think finally the more the RNC pushes this, the less the muslim thing gets out there, which was IMO the much more lethal thing...its far easier to denounce your pastor than prove you are not a muslim On a final note, I am very disappointed with the Obama campaign...they just finished up a big campaign in VA...and did very well in MO...McCain is absolutely desotrying him in those two states...which gives McCain the option of going on the offensive in MI, PA, WI, NM, IA...so much for that expanded map As of now, the only way he wins is through Colorado or Ohio, and neither state looks like it's leaning towards him, AND he has to hold of the McCain offensive to pick off PA like Bush picked off IA and NM Gore states from Kerry | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:27 PM
| #18 | ||||
| Friend to all. Socialist Maryland
| Originally Posted by A_C_E I've said it a few times. She should stay in because her supporters have paid lots of money...put in a lot of time...and believe in her. She's not there "for the good of her party." She's there for the good of the people that support her.
| ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 02:30 PM
| #19 | ||||
| Banned Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by A_C_E Obama, so far, as being a subpar candidate, will have lost it himself, like people say about Gore in 2000
Kentucky used to have Hillary beating McCain and they were both in the 40s...now Kentucky has McCain winning by 20+ points...Obama in the pathetic 30s It's like that in almost all the states Obama was supposed to "change the electoral map" It now looks like he'll be very lucky if it looks like 2000 + 1 state | ||||
| |
|
03-29-2008, 04:40 PM
| #20 |
| Political Genius < |
