|
|
Post by Buckeye GOP on Mar 5, 2008 18:25:31 GMT -5
www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/03/05/an-obama-clinton-ticket.aspxBillAry gave the clearest sign yet that she would give serious consideration to picking Obama as her Veep. The big question is why would she choose someone who has a curfew their phone privileges? Do people think that this is a good idea or does she need more balance to the ticket. Would she be better off picking a governor, someone with more experience, someone who could deliver a state that is not in play or a toss-up. I think that Gov. Strickland would be a good choice (maybe not the best - maybe he is), though he clearly does not have the following that Obama does.
|
|
Sabio
New Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by Sabio on Mar 6, 2008 9:45:48 GMT -5
Hillary should choose Chelsea. Might as well keep that dynasty alive. Her comments about a Clinton-Obama ticket seemed a little premature, and really smug, especially since she's still behind in the delegate count, and Howard Dean (DNC Chair) is holding firm (it seems) on not seating Michigan and Florida. Gov Crist of Florida says he won't pay for a second primary, either (estimated cost $18M...a reversal and loss for Hillary, priceless). It was especially in bad taste, since she lost 11 contests in a row. She has some big states behind her, but she still doesn't have the lead. And it's not like her win in Texas was by large margins (maybe it was her thumping of Obama in Ohio that gave her the smugness...Ohio has been a key state for elections lately).
|
|
sbm
New Member
Posts: 6
|
Post by sbm on Mar 18, 2008 10:44:20 GMT -5
Hillary's campaign might be in more trouble now that a CNN poll shows she and Obama do equally well against John McCain. Most campaigns would love it if their candidate were more competitive in the general election. But Hillary has been riding a 5-7% boost in the primaries from cross-over conservatives who want her to win the primary because she's easier for McCain to beat in the general election. These conservatives will stop voting for her if she's tied with Obama. In short, if she gains much more in the polls she should could really lose this thing.
|
|
Sabio
New Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by Sabio on Mar 18, 2008 13:34:17 GMT -5
This cross-over voting for Hillary just to defeat Obama is a bad idea. A pox on Rush Limbaugh and his house (probably already have one, but just thought I'd add another) for suggesting that Texans and others should look to this strategy. Any step for Hillary in the direction toward the White House is a bad one. Most Dems will unite behind Hillary...McCain just doesn't woo that many Dems, especially since he has been touting some pretty conservative stances and credentials since he clinched the nom. Even McCain choosing Lieberman as VP (unlikely) wouldn't pull many Dems over, since most Dems view Lieberman as a turncoat. Even though McCain has a better chance against Hillary, I wouldn't take the risk that Hillary loses to McCcain...it just seems like betting the farm, and the farmhouse, and our souls to boot. Bad strategic move by Limbaugh. Although, he will have plenty to rant about if Hillary wins...so maybe it's in his best interest to get Hillary elected...anyone ever think about that? Limbaugh rose to notoriety and prominence largely due to his opposition to Bill Clinton (and I will not make many jokes about his "prominence" as it relates to his size). With a Hillary win, Hannity, Limbaugh and the bunch are looking at a whole new era of moneymaking via anti-Hillary propaganda/vitriol. Perhaps Limbaugh should provide a disclaimer that he stands to make a lot of money if Hillary wins...and if McCain wins, his shows will just be boring. If Hillary wins, Limbaugh and his ilk get to go on the offensive (I could write his next four years of shows just on Hillary's "record" without even thinking, let alone the decisions she'll be making). With McCain, Limbaugh has to go on the defensive (or the occasional offensive if he doesn't like McCain's policies), but the defensive has never been as sexy as the offensive. And Limbaugh is really good at being offensive.
|
|
