Arkansas Blog

Huckabee wins West Virginia on second round of voting.

All McCain votes break to him.

blue name

/clinton

How do you spell Hillary homer?

M-A-X-B-R-A-N-T-L-E-Y

While buyers remorse can always happen, it is also possible for folks to still be in love with that old sweater that's full of holes, and although it reminds you of a happier time, can never make you as warm as you once were no matter how much you want it to.

I too went in undecided and ended up putting a mark next to Obama. I am still not convinced that a single person can fix the mess that has been created in Washington DC. If Hillary or Obama wins the democratic nomination, they will get my vote in the general election.

I don't dislike Obama, find him inspiring at times. But I know how ruthless the Repubs will be this fall If they can't find dirt on the Democratic nominee, they've make it up. And with the fat cats feeling threathened, there will be plenty of money to spread their lies. We know Hillary's background, she's been through their ringer. What about Obama's? So much about his past is unknown or murky. I fear a "love" vote for Obama now risks putting a Repub in the White House next year. Given the failed Bush adminstration and the public disgust in his leadership, the only way a Repub gets elected next November is if the Dems put up a nominee who gets ruined by the Repub propaganda machine. Hillary has been tested by fire. The unknowns about Obama are risky. It's a risk i'm unwilling to take.

I early-voted yesterday, and I went into the booth not sure which way I was going to go. I finally decided that I agreed with PVNasby, and that Hillary's experience counted for something. I really like both candidates, and I think we win (literally and figuratively) with whichever one comes out on top.

What? Vote for Hillary because she's already been smeared?

Why let the Republicans to tell you who to vote for? If the background situations were reversed, and Hillary hadn't been yet drug through the mud but Obama had, would you then back him?

And if neither candidate had already been smeared by the Republican lie machine, would you then go to a third party candidate? Searching high and low for someone with mud clinging to them?

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

If I had voted this morning, I think I would have voted Obama.

Now I think I lean Hillary.

I like her health plan better. She has Bill to consult with on the economy and a good road map for recovery from his time in office. She wants outta Iraq but not at any cost.

If she had half the sparkle of Obama the election would be wrapped up.

Obama I fear still has skeletons to emerge that four years of high profile public life haven't had a chance to expose, especially since he sort of backed into office with the Democratic primary leader fading due to domestic abuse charges and the discovery that the GOP nominee was a pervert (why anyone would want to share Jeri Ryan when you have to yourself is beyond me).

Obama missed my vote because I didn't vote on the way to work like I normally do.

The excuses of "not enough known" about Obama is a straight cop-out...

I know plenty about Hillary, Huckabee and McCain...that doesn't make me think they are more qualified...

And voting for someone because of a longer track record that is more easily measurable is just more of the same...

For the first time there is real inspiration in the race, man...

Sorry...but Hillary will be more of the same...

Max, apparently your girl Hillary has decided to end the embargo on Democratic primary Fox News debates.

You know, the same Faux News that created the hit-piece on Osama saying he attended a madrassa, or Muslim extremist school? Or the one whose owner, Rupert Murdoch, had a private fundraiser with Clinton? Or the one which has almost singlehandledly heralded in an era of mass-media slipshod journalism that's currently a trademark of the modern age?

Yeah, that's the one.

Nice gal, your Hillary.

Link in my name. Care to repost this on the blog?

Link in my name.

Jacob the Wrestler, it's a shame that we must consider the Republican machine when choosing a nominee, but that doesn't make it any less true.

Jacob, Hillary has hardly "been smeared". She has been the target of a ruthless, well-financed effort to destroy her and her family, and she won. How many millions did Kenneth Starr spend? $12 million? They dug to China looking for dirt on Hillary. Vote for Obama if you want to buy your smile and a shoeshine, I hope he plays an important role in the future, but don't discount Hillary's knowledge or seasoned experience.

Why do Obama supports trash Hillary? Even Michelle Obama says she "would have to think about it" before working for Hillary. As a lifelong Democrat, I'm proud we get to choose between two such attractive candidates. I'll support either one in November. Michelle needs to get her foot out of mouth and show some loyalty.

Rosso, our economy was strong, we produced historic surpluses, all while the world was mostly at peace during the first Clinton Administration. If that's more of the same, BRING IT ON!

Jacob, we know that Hillary can stand up to the Repuke tactics, she already has and probably wants to return the favor. That is not letting them dictate our nominee. There is more than enough in Obama's campaign already to disqualify him in my mind. The Reagan hagiography, 'Social Security crisis', health care mandates and primarily his idea that both parties are equally culpable for the mess in DC.

And JD, I find it strange that such a momentous thing would only be on dKos (a totally unreliable source, in fact their fanatacism is what cost Dean the nomination 4 yrs ago). So, I used AlGore's great invention and searched for other first sources. From Media Matters to TPM, I even sullied myself by going to foxnews.com. But, nowhere else was there confirmation. I'm beginning to think this is not true, but the wet dream of some sore loserman Obama backer.

I like both of them, but proudly cast my vote for Hillary because I believe she is the best candidate. I came to that conclusion as a result of the debates. She has such a depth of knowledge, and detailed plans for everything. I hope she gets the nomination, but I will enthusiastically support Obama if she does not.

Agreed, Pippy. I thought Obama showed his policy weakness when trying to explain his voluntary health insurance plan. Yeh, right. It's never going to work if the young and/or healthy opt out, then the responsible ones pay their own way plus pick up the tab when others are no longer young or healthy. It's gotta be universal participation.

When was the last time a US Senator won a presidential race?

Yep. 1960.

Sure...times were better, PVNasby, under Clinton's watch (and a Republican controlled Congress for much of the time)...

I am a huge Bill fan and his presence somewhere inside the White House would be welcome...

But Obama has a better chance to get things done in a more effective manner than Hillary will...just sayin'...lots of Clinton fatigue...

First Billy compares Obama to Jesse Jackson then Max compares him to a hula hoop.

>>

'08 will probably be the year, since just about everyone left will be a Senator of some flavor or other.

Made the decision in '06 after too many years of the Decider, that henceforth, _No_Republicans_. Period. The Green Party ran an excellent ticket here in Arkansas, and so they got my vote, straight down the line in '06. I was deeply disappointed to see the list of clowns, especially McKinney, who ran under the Green banner this year. So it looks like a temporary retreat to the folds of the Democrats for this one.

Obama gets my vote. Sure, he's an Illinois Yankee from the Land of Lincoln/Sucker State. If for no other reason than how much that ticks off the League of the South/Sons of Confederate Veterans and all the other Lost Causers, I'd vote for that, just for the fun of it.

Not Hillary. Dude would say whatever it takes just to get elected. For Mr. Bill, campaigning was always the fun part of the job, and as long as he won, he was happy to leave things more or less alone. Not the Missus. She has an agenda and a mean streak a mile wide, and intends to use both of them.

Team Lwood hasn't cast our deciding votes , it's really storming up in the hills.
But, just for fun I'm leaning Green. It does encourage them.

I was forced in the voting booth to make a decision this morning. I had given Obama a considerable chunk of change in order to have a one-on-one with him in Chicago a few months ago. He is brilliant, charming, fast on his feet, thoughtful and has depth. The cadences are different but at various times over the past 6 months I am reminded of another great orator we are all familiar with, Dale Bumpers.
I have known Hillary for decades, shared platforms with her at the University, and been witness to the steel trap mind and fluid presentation of complex information. Also just sat next to her at events and talked kids, education, race, etc. To my mind she is brighter than Bill and that says a great deal.
I made my decision based on the previous history in which I had participated in the 60s and 70s. While in Wisconsin I worked to help George McGovern win his first primary. Then living in Little Rock for the general election, I worked the downtown neighborhoods for him. My enthusiasm, my anger, my [as someone above stated my "love" votes] led to the exact opposite of what I truly wanted the outcome to be in that election. Instead of ending the war I saw the war continue. Instead of replacing a shady administration I saw the Constitution come under its severest challenge up to that time. Instead of an era of progress and reform we witnessed an era of reactionary retrenchment. I made the mistake in 72 of voting my passions - I did not make that mistake this morning.
Now the above does not equate Obama with Nixon. What its meaning is to me is the historical mistakes our fellow Democrats may be making this time around. I was against the war before it started, marched in California against it, and rallied in front of whichever administrative lackey appeared anywhere near my city. It was wrong then, it is wrong now, and history will assuredly judge it wrong forever. But being against the war does not entitle me or anyone else to be President. And it is a different set of responsibilities one has as a US Senator vs. an Illinois State Senator. These different positions are not equivalent and in no way serve as a basis for sound judgment or unsound judgment. If we continue to see these things as a moral crusade we Democrats will soundly loose in 2008 as we did in 1972.
The mantra of change too is wildly out of whack with reality. There is not a Democrat [and few Independents] who do not want change. Our country as been economically, morally and constitutionally decimated these past 7 years. If all of them weren't for change they would not be running. Indeed the changes both Clinton and Obama want are fundamentally the same - the policies are nearly identical. What is different is the style. He talks in uplifting prose she in a linear logic which buries the passion which I know is there.
So in the end I voted for Hillary. I did not want to repeat my enthusiastic mistake of the past, I see change the reality of this election, I see the complications of ending this war more complex then just saying it's over, I see great orators in executive positions too often ending up being just that or worse - dangerous, I see nuance being the coin of the realm in fixing our foreign and domestic policies, and I see elect ability as a final touchstone. Let's not, my young Democratic friends in particular, make the same mistake we made in 1972. We will again be out in the cold. This time a lost election may mean the beginning of the end of the Republic. I don't want that stain on my soul, and neither do you.

70%er

Jane Hamsher @ FDL reported the following earlier today. The way she posted it suggests to me she heard it herself or has at least two confirmations.

On a conference call today, Howard Wolfson of the Clinton campaign has said that Hillary Clinton will appear in a Fox News debate on February 11 in Washington, DC.

Link to full post at my name.

Thanks for a terrific post, Janus.

"She has an agenda and a mean streak a mile wide, and intends to use both of them."

What? A presidential candidate with an agenda? How wrong that would be--you know, to actually want to get some things done.

How do you know about Hillary's "mean streak?" Did she come over to your house and kick your puppy? Did she whack you in the balls at some point? Or are you, as is more likely, just repeating the Fox News talking points? Don't forget, she had Vince Foster killed! Don't forget, she's really a lesbian! Don't forget, it was her that killed Dumbledore. She smothered Suzanne Pleshette, and it was Hillary--yes, Hillary--who actually stole Christmas from the Whos. It was HIllary who shot Bambi's mother, and she's who the Mr. Burns character on The Simpsons is based on.

Also, Al Gore invented the internet.

I had to actually choose between two quality, if flawed candidates. In the end, it came down to a willingness to bring new ideas to the table and despite talk of Obama's critics suggesting he would be soft on the Republicans, I disagree. I did not choose Clinton prmarily due to several senatoral votes, and her annoying habit of appeasing conservative Democrats when she doesn't need to.

However, if Hillary Clinton is the nominee I will vote for her this fall. I'll take her shortcomings any day over the "best" the GOP can muster. The Bush Crime Family and their cohorts have driven our national reputation, econmony, and goodwill into the ground. Hopefully Obama or Clinton can clean up this mess, but it won't be easy, cheap, or pretty.

Just to add a little more fuel to the 'mean streak' fire and to second Archaeopteryx:

From John McCain:
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

From Dick Cheney to Pat Leahy:
"Go fuck yourself"

And from Barack Obama to the meanie in question:
"You're likeable enough, Hillary."

Pointing out a mean streak as a defining characteristic of Hillary, especially when compared to the um, charm, of other politicians smacks of misogyny, in my humble opinion.

If you are sitting on the fence between Obama and Clinton, the following will give you food for thought. If this is not your fence at all, the following is interesting reading nevertheless.

www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/020108.html

Interesting post, Janus. That said, I think basing a vote upon who you think other people will vote for is a mistake. Mostly, because it essentially turns every voter into a pundit who is using his or her own assumptions and biases in attempting to discern who is the most likeable or the most camera-friendly or whatever criterion you might think everyone else, but not you, bases his or her vote.

The Democratic party is large and diverse enough to represent a pretty good sample of the American people. If we all vote for the person who best convinces us that he or she would make the best president, I think that person will have the best grasp on how to convince the population at large. If we attempt to short-circuit the system by voting for who we think might appeal to the population-at-large, I think we end up with safe, uninteresting candidates (see John Kerry).

"The primary is for falling in love; the general election for falling in line,"

What a great line...

Well said Janus...................I was/am on the fence about Hillary not because I don't think she is bright and well qualified .. I think its style " he talks in uplifting prose she is a linear logic which buries the passion I know is there". Well said!
I voted for Hillary too!