home

Hillary Responds to Obama Saying McCain Would Be Better Than Bush

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:20:00 PM EST
Tags: Barack Obama, 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Bump and Update: Hillary responds to Obama (audio here with audience joining in):

"Sen. Obama said today that John McCain would be better for the country than George Bush. Now, Sen. McCain is a real American patriot who has served our country with distinction, but Sen. McCain would follow the same failed policies that have been so wrong for our country the last seven years.

"Sen. McCain thinks it is okay to keep our troops in Iraq for the next 100 years. Is that better than George Bush?

"Sen. McCain will continue the failed economic policies of George Bush that have brought us deficit and increasing debt. Is that better than George Bush?

"Sen. McCain does not have a health care plan that will cover every American. In fact, we will have more and more uninsured Americans. Is that better than George Bush?

More...

"Sen. McCain has no plans to end the housing foreclosure crisis or cut the cost of gas at the pump. Is that better than George Bush?

"We need a nominee who will take on John McCain, not cheer on John McCain, and I will be that nominee."

Original Post

Obama Says McCain Better Than Bush

Here's Obama at a campaign stop today:

"You have a real choice in this election. Either Democrat would be better than John McCain," Obama said to cheers from a rowdy crowd in central Pennsylvania. Then he said: "And all three of us would be better than George Bush."
Whoops.
The comment threatened to undercut Obama's efforts — and those of the entire Democratic Party — to portray the GOP presidential nominee -in - waiting as nothing more than an extension of Bush's unpopular tenure. At the very least, it provides fodder Republicans can use to prop up McCain.
Hillary should be able to drive a truck through this one.
< Worst Pollsters On PA: Clinton Comfortably Ahead | Open Thread >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary Responds to Obama Saying McCain Would Be Better Than Bush | 182 comments (182 topical)
    Whoops! (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by phat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:22:09 PM EST
    Is right.

    ISN'T THIS AKIN TO WHY CLINTON GOT SKEWERED? (none / 0) (#24)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:49:26 PM EST
    What a ringing endorsement.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually, she said that she and McCain... (5.00 / 3) (#100)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:01:42 PM EST
    ...both had more experience than Obama. This is demonstrably true. She never, as far as I know, said that McCain would be a better President than Obama, or even that he would be a better President than Bush. She has not said that McCain would be a good President at all.

    [ Parent ]
    She didn't even say that. (5.00 / 3) (#116)
    by echinopsia on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:34:55 PM EST
    She said she and McCain had passed the CinC test with foreign relations experience, but Obama would have to make his own case in that area.

    Which he did by saying he was more experienced than either of them because he lived in Indonesia when he was a little kid.

    EPIC FAIL

    [ Parent ]

    and whats more (none / 0) (#139)
    by dotcommodity on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:26:49 PM EST
    right before that she said something like

    "Now...while none of us has been the President..."

    and then

    "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he'd bring to the White House. And Sen. Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

    everyone leaves that first reference to her years as informal de facto counsel to the President on domestic policy, (and now I can't google up the original), but she clearly established her superiority over McCain first.

    [ Parent ]

    this is what she said (none / 0) (#162)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:23:55 PM EST
    "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House and Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

    "clearly established her superiority???

    no.  you casually left out the "I know" part.

    [ Parent ]

    I don't have access to the original (none / 0) (#185)
    by dotcommodity on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 12:50:28 AM EST
    for the much quoted part you mention, but my point was, she prefaced it with something I will now quote again, and it was that that established her superiority to McCain (and Obama):

    "Now...while none of us has been the President..."

    ...because she has come closest of the three to being just that, as his (informal) council.

    [ Parent ]

    RE: (none / 0) (#167)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:30:16 PM EST
    you forgot the "I know" part too.  well done.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, in March she said McCain would be (1.00 / 4) (#101)
    by 1jane on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:05:22 PM EST
    a better President 3 times. Stange strategy, bad mouthing a fellow Democrat. Her handlers need to get her back in control.

    [ Parent ]
    Links please? [nt] (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by ahazydelirium on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:11:41 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    1Jane- are you joking???? (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by kenosharick on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:30:47 PM EST
    Get her "in control?" Obama and his minions have been "bad-mouthing" her (and Bill) for months. The Obama campaign started the negativity and have taken the low road since before SC.

    [ Parent ]
    Handlers? (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:44:40 PM EST
    In Control? I think you are referring to a different candidate. Hillary Clinton does not strike me as the kind of woman who lets herself be "controlled" or "handled" by anybody.

    [ Parent ]
    Not what she said. (none / 0) (#119)
    by echinopsia on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:35:33 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    That is what I was thinking... (none / 0) (#105)
    by Leisa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:12:36 PM EST
    It is hard for either of them to bash McCain on patriotism.  

    If you analyze the debates, I think that Hillary always comes off as more patriotic.  Stupid flag pin and are you more patriotic than Wright questions excused.  She always refers to our constitution and the foundations of our country.  She shows that she loves and values our country in the references she makes to our forefathers and the foundations of democracy.  That never escapes me.  It does, somehow, escape our media however.  Hmm...

    [ Parent ]

    and she said this country is worth fighting for. (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by thereyougo on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:58:25 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Given that McCain just called Obama a liar ... (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ellie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:27:19 PM EST
    ... the conversation might go like this:

    Obama: "Either Democrat would be better than John McCain ... and all three of us would be better than George Bush."

    McCain: "Don't believe him!!"

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah, but would McCain be as (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by MarkL on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:25:50 PM EST
    good a CIC as Bush? Inquiring creative class bloggers are dying to know.

    Oops he did it again (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by stillife on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:28:41 PM EST
    5-4-3-2-1 - countdown to the WORM explanations by the Obama campaign.

    It Will Be Real Interesting To See What Rationale (5.00 / 7) (#10)
    by MO Blue on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:33:38 PM EST
    Boyz in the Blogs and Obama's supporters come up with to explain how this was really a brilliant move on Obama's part.

    If it didn't have such serious consequences, these antics would be down right funny.

    [ Parent ]

    Can you imagine (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by stillife on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:42:00 PM EST
    the fallout on the blogs if Hillary said this?

    Jeesh, all she did was compare Obama's experience unfavorably with McCain's (which, no matter how you feel about McCain, is undeniably true) and they went batsh*t.  

    I'm sure they'll all be saying this proves that Obama is the ultimate post-partisan candidate.  

    [ Parent ]

    Can you imagine a dem nominee (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:52:22 PM EST
    reeling from one gaffe to the next? OMG

    [ Parent ]
    So far WORM is... (none / 0) (#62)
    by echinopsia on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:27:32 PM EST
    He's just telling the truth. (tm)

    [ Parent ]
    I'm late to this game... (none / 0) (#125)
    by mg7505 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:24:31 PM EST
    ... so what is WORM?

    [ Parent ]
    What (none / 0) (#128)
    by superjude on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:31:59 PM EST
    Obama Really Meant

    [ Parent ]
    We don't have to imagine it, (none / 0) (#76)
    by FlaDemFem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:59:47 PM EST
    we are watching it!!! LOL

    [ Parent ]
    She didn't even do that (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:36:44 PM EST
    She told the press to ask Obama himself to give his creds for being CiC.  Obama's response: "WAH!!!  She said I couldn't be commander in chief!!!!"

    It took him--what?--two months to come up with "my fp experience is better than either of them because of my four years in Indonesia talking to the little people." (haha, really little--less than thirty six inches tall in most cases)

    I suppose the fanboyspin on this latest from O will be that he is speaking truth to power, or some such.  Frankly, why would anyone be shocked that he's complimenting a republican?  He did it with Bush 1, he did it with Reagan, and now he's propping up McCain.

    [ Parent ]

    This is why (5.00 / 6) (#69)
    by stillife on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:42:20 PM EST
    I don't believe he's a true Democrat.  I don't know if he adheres to Republican beliefs (although his anti-gay, anti-feminist religious connections are extremely suspect), but either way, I don't trust him.  He's just weak.  The only way he can make a name for himself is by tearing down the Clinton legacy.

    [ Parent ]
    If he hadn't torn her down (5.00 / 6) (#71)
    by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:44:48 PM EST
    there would be nothing for him to stand on right now.

    I think folks are seeing that.  I read an article a long time ago that stated the more Obama looks like a politician, the worse he does.

    He yam what he yam.

    [ Parent ]

    Odd (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by phat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:28:46 PM EST
    He actually admitted that either Democrat would be better than McCain.

    When was the last time he said that?

    I know! I find it odd too... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by NOBAMA08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:50:08 PM EST
    this is actually an improvement from previous statements he's made to ruin the Clinton legacy.

    [ Parent ]
    we've heard nothing of the sort from Hillary (1.00 / 2) (#164)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:25:26 PM EST
    unfortunately.  Would be good if they both elevated the party (and the discussion) a bit.

    [ Parent ]
    What? (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by kayla on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:49:08 PM EST
    Are you saying that Hillary Clinton has never emphaticcally spoke om the importance of getting a Dem (either Dem) in the White House?  Please tell me I'm misinterpreting this comment.

    This is the first time Obama has said anything like that that I've heard.  The last debate was probably the third or fourth time I'd heard Hillary make such a statement.

    [ Parent ]

    Where have you been?! (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by nycstray on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 12:39:17 AM EST
    She says it at campaign events, interviews and debates. This is pretty much common knowledge. In fact she was saying it when they all jumped on the bandwagon calling on her to quit (and before).

    She's been promoting party unity no matter what, NOT Mr. Unity Pony.

    [ Parent ]

    Would it be inappropriate (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by waldenpond on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:29:11 PM EST
    to laugh?  That's going to get some play.  Could someone please tell me what is this new direction, better path he doth speaketh of so often?

    Super D's should be appraised of this. (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:31:00 PM EST
    This candidate is at best a bumbler; at worst, does not care about the party or winning in November, juswt his nomination. Bad,bad,bad!

    Oh dear... (5.00 / 5) (#8)
    by outsider on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:31:19 PM EST
    I have a sinking feeling in my stomach, prompted by the realisation that, since they have to defend their man to the death on everything he says, no matter how unlikely, all we will hear from the Obama blogs now is ream after ream of analysis showing how, yes, it's true, McCain would in fact be significantly better than Bush.

    Selective Outrage. (5.00 / 11) (#35)
    by Iphie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:57:27 PM EST
    I don't  think they'll defend it -- I think they'll just ignore it. Just like they ignore the evidence of media bias against Clinton, or the other gaffes that Obama makes. Just like it was much easier to lash out at the ABC debate moderators than to critique in any way Obama's performance. They'll pretend it didn't happen unless it becomes big enough news that they have to acknowledge it, at which point their only option will be to attack the messenger.

    [ Parent ]
    Just like Bitter (none / 0) (#112)
    by owenaprhys on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:25:06 PM EST
    They will ignore it until the MSM can refashion it into a joke, like Bitter.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, you're right (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by daria g on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:17:57 PM EST
    I'm sure that will be forthcoming - 1) What Obama Really Meant and 2) fierce insistence on big differences between McCain and Bush (these, from the folks who are happy to say things like "Bush-Clinton era").

    I don't know how Obama can be so careless with his language.  That's not a trivial thing to say about this election.  The press isn't going to cover up for him forever!

    [ Parent ]

    I think the main defense will be (4.90 / 11) (#9)
    by MarkL on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:33:05 PM EST
    Hillary did it first.

    [ Parent ]
    It was a foolish thing to say of course (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:36:01 PM EST
    But it is true that Bush is the worst President in history and thus McCain would be better.

    Let me add that Clinton has been too cozy about McCain in this campaign and it will not be quite so easy for her to use this slipup as Jeralyn implies, imo.

    Well I'm still not sure McCain would be (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:39:42 PM EST
    better.

    [ Parent ]
    Some of us are not sure that Obama (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by MarkL on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:42:58 PM EST
    would be better than McCain, frankly.
    Obama's tendency to needlessly insult other politicians and huge constituencies does not bode well for his ability to implement an agenda.
    McCain is a real wild card, to me.
    He has taken so many stands on issues, it's very hard to predict what he would do if elected.

    [ Parent ]
    Heck, I'm not sure Obama would be better (5.00 / 6) (#34)
    by angie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:54:37 PM EST
    then Bush -- yeah, that's right, I'm saying it.  At least W was able to win re-election in 2004 -- if Obama gets in the WH, I don't see him being able to do the same in 2012.

    [ Parent ]
    Iraq and choice (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Nasarius on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:17:47 PM EST
    Those are some pretty clear life-or-death deal-breakers when it comes to contemplating voting for McCain.

    Obama will, at worst, be a do-nothing centrist.

    [ Parent ]

    Cutting the budget (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:21:24 PM EST
    by 30% core programs.  McCain today said.  Is Obama on this planet?

    [ Parent ]
    Rhetoric vs reality (none / 0) (#126)
    by boredmpa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:25:30 PM EST
    Good luck with that...even if he did have a repub majority in congress they wouldn't be able to hold the party line on such a cut.  McCain is pandering to energize the donor$.

    [ Parent ]
    get off the partisan bandwagon (none / 0) (#83)
    by diogenes on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:56:50 PM EST
    We all knew both in 2000 and now that McCain is better than Bush.  Attacking Obama for saying what everyone knows to be true is likely to backfire.  Heck, it isn't as if he said that "McCain would be better than Bush...Hillary has yet to prove that".

    [ Parent ]
    That was then... (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by kredwyn on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:43:07 PM EST
    Now he's sung the "Bomb Iran" song and pointed out that 100 years in Iraq would be fine with him.

    Those two items seem to be right in line with where the Bush admin is.


    [ Parent ]

    Hasn't she already said both (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by nycstray on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:43:59 PM EST
    would be better than McCain in a manner that implies McCain would be a nightmare? She has room to point out how his economics would be worse than Bush, or a continuation. Same with health care and I'm sure a few other issues.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama said that too (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:49:30 PM EST
    The problem was Obama said McCain would be better than  Bush. Of course anyone would be but you don't like to say that when you will be arguing that McCain is running for Bush's 3rd term.

    But Clinton does not have clean hands on this.

    [ Parent ]

    She was asking voters (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by pie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:53:49 PM EST
    to compare her experience with McCain's.  McCain has supported every single one of Bush's policies.  Bush is extremely unpopular.  You could even say that he's the worst president ever.  :)

    I think she'd do all right.

    [ Parent ]

    you nailed it pie (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by dotcommodity on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:04:20 PM EST
    she was setting up a softball.

    first: he's my equivalent in experience...

    then in the GE:

    but what kind of experience!

    supported every single one of Bush's policies.  Bush is extremely unpopular.  You could even say that he's the worst president ever.  :)

    So its a fair fight between Democratic v Republican = worst brand ever.

    while Obama was boxing himself into the typical neophyte corner of I'm a bipartisan wannabe...wheres he gonna go against McCain?

    cos McCain already has that 'bipartisan' brand down!

    [ Parent ]

    Not so sure ... (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:01:03 PM EST
    of that.  Think McCain will be Bush with the loony switch pushed to 11.

    "There will be more wars, my friends."

    [ Parent ]

    It's not a switch... (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by white n az on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:06:20 PM EST
    it's a knob that goes all the way to 11 because - well, you know, most knobs only go to 10 but sometimes you need that little bit extra...

    [ Parent ]
    there will be more wars (none / 0) (#45)
    by dotcommodity on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:07:02 PM EST
    heres where I agree with McCain.

    Unless we radically switch this country to a clean energy economy, we will be scrounging under the unwilling for the last of their oil.

    Under veto every bill Mccain, that won't change. So, yes.

    [ Parent ]

    You got that right (none / 0) (#102)
    by 1jane on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:08:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I dont think that it is so hard/ (5.00 / 8) (#27)
    by ajain on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:51:26 PM EST
    While she did imply that McCain would be a stronger Commander-in-Chief than Obama, she also said that McCain is proving that he knows nothing about the economy and that he is digging deeper in hole Pres. Bush has dug us into. Infact she described his economic policy as digging a hole to China.

    So she has been pretty critical on him, even though she has been respectful towards him.

    [ Parent ]

    She has to be careful (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by eleanora on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:59:55 PM EST
    in how she uses it, but Senator McCain promises to continue Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy and the economic policy that has sunk the US into a deep recession. Clinton's already been pretty successful at being friendly to John McCain "nice guy war hero" (ew) while still pointing out the multiple problems with John McCain "Bush follower."  

    [ Parent ]
    I think Hillary will not (none / 0) (#48)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:10:26 PM EST
    make this a distraction for the Pennsylvania primary.  She might say something before Indiana or North Carolina.  She doesn't really have to do anything.  Obama can defeat himself all by his lonesome.

    [ Parent ]
    I think BTD is right on this one (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by fuzzyone on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:57:25 PM EST
    Hillary is going to have a tough time using this given the love she has shown McCain.

    It was another example of Obama saying something that is probably true, but should not have been said.  Its pretty amazing what a non stop gaffe fest the dem race has been on both sides.  Luckily for them McCain is a gaffe machine himself.  No matter who gets the nomination the big winner: John Stewart.

    [ Parent ]

    Worst Presideent SO FAR (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:15:16 PM EST
    If McCain continues pushing Bush's failed policies, even long after it has become obvious that the policies are hurting the nation, he might supercede Bush as "Worst President Ever". He has shown no indication that he would do otherwise.

    [ Parent ]
    Clinton will tear McCain a new (none / 0) (#52)
    by Chimster on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:14:22 PM EST
    you know what. Just as Obama and Clinton agreed to come together after a nominee is chosen, the opposite applies to the GE match up with the Republicans.

    Any snuggling up to McCain will be short lived. This primary is only the pre-game show. Just wait till she gets in the ring with McCain. Old man won't know what hit em.

    [ Parent ]

    I (none / 0) (#131)
    by sas on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:45:32 PM EST
    think the worst(s) would be (according to my history teacher friends)

    Warren Harding, James Buchanon, US Grant-all below GW Bush

    but he is down among the lowest

    [ Parent ]

    So here's that logic that... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by txpolitico67 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:37:26 PM EST
    one of the Dem candidates is doing the work for the GOP.  Wow.  Differentiating Bush43 from McCain.  Nice work senator, very nice.  Certainly will be used by the right-wing noise machines.

    I don't believe it is a slip up (5.00 / 7) (#26)
    by angie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:50:15 PM EST
    I think he really believes it -- his attitude seems to be that the most important thing is that Hillary NOT be President. Nonetheless, undercutting the entire "3rd Bush term" the Dems have going for them is plain old suicidal. But you know, you can't blame him really, he seems to prefer Republicans to Democrats overall.

    good point (none / 0) (#57)
    by kimsaw on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:24:47 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I agree with you. (none / 0) (#85)
    by miguelito on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 06:49:18 PM EST
    I don't think it was a slip-up either. I think he's dog-whistling to get his supporters to know that he thinks if HRC is the nominee, it's alright to vote for McCain or let McCain win.  

    [ Parent ]
    One more piece of the puzzle (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:51:50 PM EST
    I could not understand how Obama could be so willing to attack Clinton the way he has. He has essentially made it likely that if she does win the primary, she will be poisoned to the point that she can't win. After seeing Wright's speeches, a puzzle piece fell into place. I think that Obama has bought into the victim mentality promoted by Wright, who thinks that all whites are privileged. This is a 2nd puzzle piece. Obama does not think that McCain is that bad of an option. This allows him to tar Clinton with impunity, secure in the belief that even if he loses then he will be handing the Presidency to a decent person.

    clinton will do fine against McCain (none / 0) (#70)
    by kimsaw on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:44:00 PM EST
    and she will almost (I say with a hard swallow) have to pull Obama in as her VP and Obama is almost at the point of the reverse if he is the nominee. A deal will be cut.  Voter demographics for Obama and McCain don't match up as well as Clinton and McCain, McCain will draw from Clinton supporters if he's the nominee. If Obama supporters leave Clinton, many are the young voters who historically didn't vote anyway. Clinton and McCain will be on equal footing and  Clinton will easily handle McCain in the debates, where Obama and McCain stammerings unify their capabilities it will be more of a toss up. The patriotic valor of McCain will trump the nearly Republican wanna be Obama.

     Clinton and Obama may need each other as much as I don't like the idea. I don't trust Obama. He hasn't earned it, hasn't worked hard enough on policy issues. His debate performances proved that point.

    Neither of the Dems have an absolute blanket of support, but in the long haul Clinton will fair better against McCain.


    [ Parent ]

    If you think Obama will take second place (5.00 / 6) (#97)
    by FlaDemFem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:51:21 PM EST
    to a woman, think again. He won't go for the VP spot, he will see it as second best and as making him a loser. Which he will be, but since it's all about him and not the party, how he feels is more important than what is good for the Democrats. I think Hillary will offer it to him and he will decline, take his marbles and go home. I think Obama is in this for Obama and no one else. Unless I missed it, he has yet to say that his supporters should vote for whoever the nominee is. Hillary has said that on several occasions, if I recall correctly. Obama isn't a Democrat in the real sense of trying to get policies in place, he is a Democrat because they gave him the easiest and fastest leg up to national office. Don't count on him to back us up if he isn't the nominee.

    [ Parent ]
    I kind of hate (none / 0) (#148)
    by IzikLA on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:53:48 PM EST
    that you are right in those last two sentences.  In similar fashion, I watched that whole compassion forum on CNN and was shocked (well not really at this point) that no one mentioned the fact that Obama basically said he joined the church because it would be good for his political career.  Did anyone else see that or I am just imagining things at this point?  Sometimes I can hardly believe my own eyes and ears.  Especially when no one else calls him on it.

    [ Parent ]
    I hope you're right (none / 0) (#86)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:08:17 PM EST
    I believe that the only possible win we have right now is Clinton/Obama. I don't think Clinton would do any good for Obama as his running mate. She would draw the ire of the right wing without seriously countering any of his negatives. I'm just not sure it will happen. Obama has the lead right now, and the race is pretty far along. They're going to have a hard time giving the win to Clinton at this point, and even if they manage to it's not clear that Obama will be willing to play 2nd fiddle to Clinton.

    [ Parent ]
    HIllary should be able to drive a truck through (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by eRobin on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:51:51 PM EST
    this one ...

    And if she does, she'll be criticized for "swiftboating" Obama because what he really meant was blah blah blah  ...

    Seriously, she'd do better to stick to her health care plan and talk up linking energy to jobs.  

    Hillary doesn't have to do anything (none / 0) (#36)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:58:25 PM EST
    I agree, she should stay positive and talk about what she will do in the first 100 days.

    I think that Obama has pretty much accepted the possibility that he would eventually lose the nomination.  He is laying the foundation for poisoning the water for Hillary.  I don't think he can accept the idea of being bested by a woman.  That's why he gives an assist to McCain.

    [ Parent ]

    He sure must miss that time ... (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:53:28 PM EST
    when all he had to say was "hope" and "change," and audiences cheered.

    Obama's foot has been spending a lot of time in his mouth of late.

    Perhaps now he understands (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:06:47 PM EST
    the Miranda warning:  "Anything you say can and will be used against you."  I bet neighter he or his campaign staff imagined that anyone would publish what he said there.  However, he does just ast badly in public as in private.

    [ Parent ]
    People laughed ... (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:16:16 PM EST
    few months back when I suggested that Obama might end up with a Dukakis level defeat.

    Doesn't seem so ridiculous anymore.

    [ Parent ]

    They still do (none / 0) (#87)
    by dianem on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:09:28 PM EST
    Heck, now all he has to do is brush his shoulder or scratch his nose and they cheer. It's surreal. Bono doesn't have a better fan club than Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    I eagerly await (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Nadai on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:02:08 PM EST
    the rabid condemnation of Obama by Kos, WKJM, et al. for cozying up to John McCain.

    Waiting...

    Waiting...

    Keep breathing (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by themomcat on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:04:49 PM EST
    because I think you will have a long wait.
    / "By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes." Macbeth, Wm. Shakespeare
    [ Parent ]
    If you wait a few days (none / 0) (#40)
    by lilburro on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:03:42 PM EST
    for the NYT's columnists to type up some loving trash about it, you might at best get a rabid defense.  Sorry.  :(

    [ Parent ]
    Crickets chirping.... (none / 0) (#63)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:28:33 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    The question again... (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Chimster on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:07:05 PM EST
    Was this scripted or was this one of those I-think-I'll-make-up-my-own-speech quotes?

    This is off-topic (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by ajain on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:13:48 PM EST
    But I just saw this new Clinton ad
    Link

    I have to say, I wish we had seen more of this throughout this election. makes me think Geoff Garin is doing a really good job and I wish he had come in much earlier.

    Wow (none / 0) (#68)
    by eleanora on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:42:00 PM EST
    that's my favorite ad this election season. And I truly believe every word of it--she's for families, for people like me. Thanks so much for linking that :)

    [ Parent ]
    Garin may be worth his money (none / 0) (#78)
    by RalphB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:10:55 PM EST
    if this came from him.  It's really good!

    [ Parent ]
    Vote depression (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:20:18 PM EST
    Fits with earlier thread:  "YO, undecideds, don't ya worry your pretty little heads, stay home, McCain not that bad, and if I Obama lose to him, it's ok".   People who feel the urgency to vote will think, I guess in the end, he's no Bush.

    Obama, we were not born yesterday.  

    This should not be a surprise to anybody (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by LCaution on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:26:50 PM EST
    After all, the Presidents Obama has openly admired are Reagan and Bush 41.  His implicit explanation for "standard Washington politics" is that Democrats are as responsible as Republicans.  

    In spite of 15 years of experience to the contrary, he apparently believes that if only Democrats would just try to get along with Republicans, we could solve all of our problems. Reality? The only times Republicans are interested in bi-partisanship are those times when they are in the minority.

    If anybody's Democratic credentials are suspect in this campaign, they are certainly Obama's.

    Heh...I got it (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:29:20 PM EST
    It would justify him being McCain's VP.

    Machiavelli? (none / 0) (#106)
    by feet on earth on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:13:02 PM EST
    More scary: Planting in McCain's mind the idea of offering him the VP position to screw Hillary if she is the nominee?

    [ Parent ]
    Bill Clinton = Bush < McCain (5.00 / 5) (#65)
    by ineedalife on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:33:30 PM EST
    Obama math has to be giving the superdelegates the willies.

    If I were Clinton I wouldn't even address this (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:41:55 PM EST
    thing.  And if asked I would answer with a "Ask him what he meant"

    Well, he's likely right. It would be pretty hard (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by tigercourse on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:45:50 PM EST
    to be a worse President then Bush. Short of giving the country back to England, I don't know what McCain would have to do.

    Giving the country (5.00 / 5) (#79)
    by Nadai on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:30:53 PM EST
    back to England wouldn't have been as bad as Bush has been.  The English, at least, still have the Magna Carta.

    [ Parent ]
    Brilliant (none / 0) (#84)
    by Cream City on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 06:09:00 PM EST
    comment, as the Brits say.  And, sadly, so true.

    [ Parent ]
    He equated Clinton w/ Bush but McCain's better? (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by Ellie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:47:43 PM EST
    IMO he just gave a sweet gift to Repugs and walked back any Dem PR gains made in attaching McCain to the Worst President Ever.

    Now all any wagon-circling, rubber-stamping Repug incumbent tip-toeing backwards away from Bush has to do is work a group hug with McCain into their campaign ads and run Obama's sound over it.

    And nice work dismantling the biggest Dem successes of the past 25 years.

    If he thinks McCain is better than Bush, (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Anne on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:22:55 PM EST
    then how, as the nominee, does he make the argument that electing McCain is like giving Bush a third term?

    And how does he make the case to Republicans and independents that they should vote for him, and not McCain, if what people are looking for is someone better than Bush?

    Obama has an eerily familiar problem - when he goes off-script, he's a disaster.

    That's a pretty easy one.... (none / 0) (#142)
    by Alec82 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:35:38 PM EST
    ...because Senator McCain is only Bush II in certain respects, albeit large ones.  It is one thing to argue that the major policy initiatives McCain supports (tax cuts, Iraq) are disastrous and will continue to be so, and that on these big items he is indeed a third term for Bush.  But obviously he is better than Bush on the environment and campaign finance.  Additionally, as Nicholas Kristoff noted, when he panders to the Republican base he is really, really bad at it.  

     The mistake you make in evaluating his comment is that you assume that people are only looking for someone better than Bush.  They are not.  They are looking for someone fundamentally different from Bush in tone, policy and approach.    

    [ Parent ]

    he is not better on the environment (none / 0) (#187)
    by dotcommodity on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 01:01:33 AM EST
    Bush could say global warming too on the campaign trail.

    John McCain already vetoes every energy and climate bill. June will be interesting: his buddy Lieberman has another stab at mediocrifying another attempt at a cap and trade bill its about as toothless as you can get...lets see if cranky McCain will break his veto record.

    [ Parent ]

    Nice spin from Clinton (5.00 / 3) (#92)
    by Kathy on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:26:16 PM EST
    that's how the dem nominee for the presidency talks.

    Hear hear! (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by rooge04 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:28:46 PM EST
    See Obama...no need to disrespect your opponent and attack them personally because you disagree with them!  Take a cue from Hillary. She can show you how to destroy your opponent with truth AND class.

    Great response from Clinton - (5.00 / 4) (#95)
    by Anne on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:45:22 PM EST
    she makes two important points: (1) that McCain is not better than Bush, and (2), that Obama's vaunted judgment must be out of whack if he thinks McCain would be.

    I really think a lot of this comes down to Obama having no clue who he is or what he believes in - and the last thing we need is another president who thinks it's all about him.

    Obama's poor judgement (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by sas on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:12:17 PM EST
    This guy is a neophyte. It seems like every few days he is "flaming up" and then spends several days putting out the fires.

    This is what he will do as President.

    This is why experiance matters!

    REPOST-Hillary's Big Push, Boots on the ground (5.00 / 5) (#113)
    by Mrwirez on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:26:01 PM EST
    Hillary must have had A HUGE turn out for volunteers today. I saw Hillary supporters on corners of busy roads, and packed shopping malls, and plazas in the Pittsburgh area. Phone calls, signs, and gatherings are going on everywhere. This must be the major push I have been hearing about. I was in Monroeville PA today on a VERY busy US Rt. 22 east of Pittsburgh, but still in Allegheny county. My GF saw the same things in Greensburg even farther east in Westmoreland county on US rt. 30. These are VERY busy suburbs with middle class white people, east of the city. Huge signs, honking of horns, etc. I have NEVER seen anything like this for a primary in my 42 years......... It is simply amazing. Barack Obama has been spending money for months here on advertising while Hillary has not been as visible. It seems she has been waiting to pounce. Bill, Hill, Chelsea, Governor Ed Rendell, Jack Murtha, Dan Onorato (chief executive of Allegheny county) and the 100 mayors that have come out to endorse Hillary are criss crossing this area and the whole state. What is even more bizzare is The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, which is owned by Richard Mellon-Scaife endorsed Hillary today. That is the man and newspaper that pushed VERY hard against the Clintons in the 1990's......I would assume all this is going on in Philly, Harrisburg, and Erie too. Is this part of the Clinton machine people talk about? I really don't know but, it is very uplifting as a Clinton supporter I must say.

    I think that Obama is simply highlighting (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:35:05 PM EST
    the difference between him and Hillary.  The gaffes and careless statements of recent days reflect badly on his claim to having good judgement.  At the same time, they also highlight  the advantage to Hillary by having experience and judgement in these critical stage of the campaign.  She is showing her steady composure/poise and Obama demonstrating his susceptibility to being rattled into making careless statements.  I am so pleased with my candidate.

    I am confident that in the GE campaign, Hillary can go toe to toe with McCain without being disrespectful or attacking his character.  They have great differences in philosophy and policies; but they don't have to be unchivalrous to one another; unlike what Obama has been doing.

    their candidate is off message (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by miguelito on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:44:11 PM EST
    what a clown, the Democratic points are that McCain will be a continuation of the Bush years and Obama can't even keep on that.. was the teleprompter broken?

    I'm sure this is the magic talisman (1.00 / 3) (#51)
    by AdrianLesher on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:14:13 PM EST
    that will give Hillary the nomination. Obama states what we all know to be true (except those crypto-Republican Hillary supporters who like McCain better than Obama) and the Clinton drones go crazy.

    Ding, ding, ding! (5.00 / 4) (#81)
    by angie on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:54:28 PM EST
    First WORM of the thread -- and the "but it's TRUE" meme is the winner!!!
    Bonus points for that nice little jab at all us "not even Democrats" Hillary supporters too.  

    [ Parent ]
    Good call on the WORM :-) (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by RalphB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:22:42 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Not of case of liking (none / 0) (#82)
    by Molly Pitcher on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 05:56:01 PM EST
    McCain better than Obama .  It is just that some of us are running scared about who and what Obama really is.  He's a pig in a poke (poke = sack),  And we do probably know the worst about McCain.  (Sitting out an election in a wholly red or blue state is NOT the same as voting for McCain.)

    [ Parent ]
    Perhaps it was deliberate on Obama's part (none / 0) (#3)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:28:27 PM EST
    a dog whistle to his supporters saying it is ok to vote for McCain if he is not the nominee.  However, it this is the intent, he did not take into consideration that it goes for Hillary supporters too.

    Whether or not it was deliberate on his part, this guy is guaranteeing democratic defeat in November.

    I agree. (none / 0) (#88)
    by rooge04 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:11:24 PM EST
    That's my feeling on the matter.  It wasn't a misstep.  His campaign is unraveling and he wants to make sure to assuage his supporters that should he not be the nominee--John McCain winning wouldn't be so bad.

    [ Parent ]
    While true, what a truly idiotic thing to say! (none / 0) (#11)
    by barryluda on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:34:53 PM EST
    I agree with the comment that the Supers should know about this.  We have to win in November, and anything that's relevant to that decision matters.

    We Need To Give SD's Some Credit (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:53:04 PM EST
    Many of them refuse to heed the call Howard Dean sent out about deciding now who to back.  In a piece today in the AP they are holding back and reserving the right to vote against the will of the people, basically.  I hope it is okay to post this one more time.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080420/ap_on_el_pr/undecided

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks PssttCmere08, I hadn't seen that (none / 0) (#47)
    by barryluda on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:09:25 PM EST
    I'm surprised that only 1/3 of the Supers think electability is the key factor.

    [ Parent ]
    Those are the only ones (none / 0) (#49)
    by felizarte on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:13:17 PM EST
    who would respond to the question.  The rest did not want to give any answers for fear of giving their inclinations.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well we have the WORM now I guess (none / 0) (#12)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:35:29 PM EST
    we will get WMRM.

    Ok. I'm gonna ask (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:37:23 PM EST
    What is WORM?

    Does it must mean how Obama worms his way out of all of his gaffes instead of owning them and moving on?

    What Obama really meant (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:38:13 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Ha! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:39:57 PM EST
    I get it now.