Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 11th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Clinton's rally too weak to woo superdelegates



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 04 May 2008
HAVE Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the Democratic presidential nomination improved as Barack Obama has struggled through his toughest month of the campaign?
After weeks in which her candidacy was seen by many party leaders as a long shot at best, Clinton's advisers argued strenuously last week that the answer is most assuredly yes, and that the outlook offers her a real chance.

Yet Obama continues to
pick up the support of superdelegates – elected Democrats and party leaders – at a quicker pace than Clinton. Last week, he received a boost from a high-profile defection: Joe Andrew, a former Democratic National Party chairman who had been installed in the position by former President Bill Clinton, said he had changed his mind and would back Obama. Even after a Clinton victory in Pennsylvania, Obama has held on to a solid lead in pledged delegates, those selected by the voting in primaries and caucuses.

And while Clinton has cut into Obama's popular vote lead, it would be difficult for her to overtake him without counting disputed results in Florida and perhaps Michigan.

Last night, Obama extended his led by defeating Clinton in the Guam caucuses by just seven votes.

Islanders who came out to vote struggled to chose between the two, with Obama getting 2264 votes to Clinton's 2257.

The territory sends four pledged delegates and five superdelegates to the National Convention in August, where the candidate will be officially named.

By and large, the group that matters most at this point – the uncommitted superdelegates, who are likely to hold the balance of power – still seem to view their decision the way the Obama campaign would like them to see it. They suggest they are more sympathetic to the argument that they should follow the will of the voters as expressed by the delegates amassed by the candidates when the primary season is done, rather than following Clinton's admonitions to select the candidate they think would best be able to defeat John McCain and the Republicans in November.

"It's about the numbers," said Chris Redfern, chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party, who is an uncommitted superdelegate. "It's not about hand-wringing. And Senator Obama has the lead."

A series of polls signal that Obama's troubles have shaken confidence among Democratic voters, and it is too early to measure fully how much he may have been hurt by the incendiary appearances of his former pastor, Rev Jeremiah Wright, who has claimed that the US government deserved some blame for the September 11 attacks and had a hand in spreading Aids to blacks.

A big Clinton victory in Indiana on Tuesday and in West Virginia next week, combined with her big wins in Pennsylvania and Ohio, could give her that much more ammunition to say that Obama will fail to draw blue-collar support against McCain of Arizona in the autumn.

Yet interviews with many uncommitted superdelegates suggest the first things they will consider is who has the lead in pledged delegates and in the popular vote, both measures that would favour Obama.

David Plouffe, the manager of Obama's campaign, said that if even if Clinton wins 55% of the remaining pledged delegates she would still need to win about two-thirds of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to reach the threshold of 2,025 total delegates needed to secure the nomination.

Clinton's advisers did not dispute his calculation, in effect acknowledging the enormity of their task.

Senator Christopher Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat who ran for president and has since endorsed Obama, said that Clinton still had a chance – but it was something of a long-shot. "I still don't think the math is there," he said.

Most of what chance Clinton has rests on her ability to convince superdelegates that Obama would be a flawed general election candidate.

Many superdelegates said they were queasy about Obama and his former pastor, and fearful of how it will be used in the autumn. Still, they said they are not yet not convinced that it makes him a weaker general election candidate than Clinton.

Andrew, the former national party chairman who abandoned Clinton to join Obama, said that Obama's response to his problems with Wright convinced him that he was the best choice for the party.

"What's happened here is how he has handled each one of these crises – because you know there are going to be crises – has made him an even stronger candidate," he said.



The full article contains 747 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Angus Ogg,

03/05/2008 20:42:46

No disrespect to Senator McCain, he is a fine war hero, but it is scaring the rest of the world to have a George Bush Mark III in the White House.

PLEASE can we have President Obama, and Vice President Clinton.

IMHO. Thankyou.

P.S. If we in Scotland have to have the USA Ganaptic Cammembert posting on our website, then I reserve the right to reciprocate and put my two cents worth in about who the ROTW get for President.
2

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 04/05/2008 03:16:05
1 Angus Ogg

"but it is scaring the rest of the world to have a George Bush Mark III in the White House"

Get your head out of the sand and you won't be so scared.
3

Loki - The Scourge of the Schemies,

EH1 04/05/2008 08:23:10
Why can the candidates not get together and decided the outcome on a game of SNAP?
Only then might we be rid of the constant reporting from Hicksville on this tiresome subject.
4

Roy,

04/05/2008 09:09:08
2. Moreen - there's a lot of sand in Arizona...
5

Angus Ogg,

04/05/2008 11:25:14
#2 Moreen,

I don't wish to appear rude, but you have chastised me and told me to "get my head out of the sand".

Would that be getting my head out of the sand in Iraq, or the sand in Arizona? I have a great love of America and it hurts beyond measure to see America build up such bad relations with many world countries because, for example, the actions of George Bush II, whilst understandable post 9/11, were mis-directed towards an Iraqi Leader who so upset George Bush I.

Had George Bush II done the right thing and gone after Osama Bin Laden with the same zeal he went after Saddam Hussein, then I think America would still have many friends around the world.

My fear, for what it's worth, is that Senator McCain, who is clearly a good and decent man with a hugely impressive record of service to his country, will end up being a George Bush III !
6

Loki - The Scourge of the Schemies,

04/05/2008 11:39:09
#1 USA Ganaptic Cammembert

With his constant 'Dude' this and 'Dude' that, I suspect California's Big Cheese must be suffering the inevitable consequences of dining on cheeseburgers at McDonalds.
7

57Nomad,

california 04/05/2008 12:32:45
#5 AO

AO said:

"Had George Bush II done the right thing and gone after Osama Bin Laden with the same zeal he went after Saddam Hussein, then I think America would still have many friends around the world."

Really? Is that so? We would still have many friends? Wow! Hang on a second and let me check my, "Give a Damn Meter." How 'bout that? I hasn't moved off zero. You know what that means AO? It means we don't give a damn!

When is going to sink into your tiny yokel brains that the US will conduct it's policies with regard to the national interest of the US and not to please a bunch of second stringers kibitzing from the cheap seats. If you are so keen with your insights why aren't you in the government? I'll bet the Queen is sitting up right now thinking to herself, "If only that AO fellow would get on board everything would be better."

McCain will win the White House in a walk-away and the Republicans will recapture on of the Houses of Congress.
8

57Nomad,

california 04/05/2008 12:48:53
Re: #1 AO

Of course you get to put your two cents in and you don't need to reference the Murietta Mushroom to qualify. Despite the amount of criticism leveled at us, it is, in fact a compliment. So much of the worlds attention being paid to the elections in one country.

Your comments, anyones comments for that matter are always welcome. Suppose everyone agrees with me? Everyone! Not good. Suppose I'm wrong? There is no obnoxious SOB like you, AO, to call it to my attention. "Uhh, Nomad, I don't know if you've noticed or not but you are driving toward a cliff."

When the Constitutional Convention met to draw up a document to replace the Articles of Confederation, the person who was considered the wisest man in America, Benjamin Franklin, was called in to keep an eye on things. His constant admonition to the delegates was to urge them, at least momentarily, to set aside their notions of their own infallibility. It is one of the hardest things for anyone to do. That is why this forum is so wonderful. Thanks Scotsman! Even geniuses like you and me can be wrong and sometimes morons like him and them can be right. Everybody gets to speak their mind without fear no matter how violently another may disagree. This affords our societies the greatest chance to survive and succeed.
9

Silence of the Yams,

04/05/2008 13:00:39
Obama is a creature of Rev Jeremiah Wright. He's a weak personality, that's the reality.
10

Angus Ogg,

04/05/2008 13:31:36
#7, #8 57Nomad,

Wow, You say you "Don't Give A Damn", and call me a Son of A Bi7ch.

What a rude, intollerant person you are. Fortunately the vast majority of Americans I know are much more reasoned and temperate.

As for your ignorant assertion that I have a "tiny yokel brain", you don't know me. Technically my IQ is 139 - one short I know, but hey, that's the story of my life, so you are quite wrong to say what you have said.

Fortunately for me, I don't know you or want to know you, and if I did, I would start by trying to engage your vastly superior Arian Brain into accepting the fact that our Queen isn't in control of our country in the way your President is.

What genuinely saddens me, is some of your countrymen do give a damn. For example the one on television the other night who berated the fact she can no lobger travel the world with her Stars & Stripes flag embroidered to her back pack. Is the penny dropping yet Einstein?

The insularity you advocate is all very well, but it does tend to result in inbreeding and all the genetic problems that that entails.

What a bad taste in the mouth debating with you has left.

PLEASE do me a favour, go somewhere else and abuse people, I don't want anything to do with your sort, which luckily for many, I think are in the tiny minority.
11

Angus Ogg,

04/05/2008 13:42:05
#7, 57Nomad,

You say....

"the US will conduct it's policies with regard to the national interest of the US and not to please a bunch of second stringers kibitzing from the cheap seats."

Please answer me this: how cheap are our UK cheap seats my American antagonist?....

To date 176 British Military & Civilian citizens have been killed supporting the US led invasion of Iraq.

So you call that "cheap" ?

PLEASE understand, America has many friends and supporters around the world, including those whom you choose to abuse, or don't give a damn about. My only crumb of comfort in your comments, is, I suspect, your views are not supported by the vast majority of decent, fair minded Americans.

-----------------
Source: http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets/OperationsInIraqBritishFatalities.htm
12

Stuart 2,

Pennsylvania 04/05/2008 13:47:23
#1 Angus, I read this rag, especially the comments because I like to know what the average citizen of other countries like, dislike about the U.S. of A. Your comment shows how you feel and also respectful,and not a lot of rubbish talk. I as an outsider coment about international articles to this thread and was never told to but out.

As for Bush I, remember that was a colition of nations including Arab nations to get the Iraqi our if Kuwait and nothing else. A clear and definate goal that was met. If we decided to extend it to gettin Saddam then the Arab nations would have pulled out.

What we are seeing now is more than a power struggle. I am not a fan of suprdeligates. This is where the backroom wheeling and dealing goes on. It is a hold out form the country's begining where the elite didn't trust the average citizen'a ability to vote. Much like the electorial college. Should be done away with.
13

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 04/05/2008 15:39:35
I agree with Angus Ogg in #1. I think that unfortunately all 3 of the remaining candidates are puppets of the people that rule us, and I think the world has very large reasons to be very unhappy with the people who rule us just as we Americans also have very large reasons to be unhappy with them. However, Obama has the advantage over the other 2 in that the media has recently turned against him indicating that the people who rule us are less happy with him. And Obama has the advantage that he says he will withdraw all troops from Iraq in 16 months. I don't trust Obama on this issue, he is a flagrant supporter of the war on terror, he has a pre-disposition for war, he currently votes to fund the wars. But at least by voting for him we can try to tell the ROTW that we are not crazy war-nuts. and that is the only benefit I see in voting for Obama.

King Nimrod in #7 is hilarious when he asserts that the US government will make its decisions for the benefit of the American interest. I think he lives in another world.

I also agree with stuart in #12 when he says the superdelegates are not a good idea. see what we read above in the article. the people of Guam voted 50% for Obama, 50% for clinton in democrat primary. they have 4 delegates, will it be winner take all on those 4 or will it be split 2 & 2. and then they have 5 superdelegates. how did they get 5 superdelegates? And the superdelegates can vote however they want and not be concerned with the popular vote at all? Doesn't sound very democratic to me.

14

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 15:50:09
#13 - Wally, the stranger

>"I think he lives in another world."

Yes he does, like the rest of us Wally - a world without tin hats.
15

Dadd's little Girl,

Palma de Mallorca 04/05/2008 15:51:36
13 Wally,By The Rivers Of babylon (USA)

You are the nutter that wears the tin foil hat and thinks Ron Paul would be a good choice. I laugh when I read your comments about how you faught 57Nomad's behaviour and ideas.
16

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 15:57:53
#13 - Wally, the stranger

>"I think that unfortunately all 3 of the remaining candidates are puppets of the people that rule us"

They don't need puppets to rule us Wally, they already have implanted microchips in many people's brains that allows them to be controlled from a secret radio base in Area 51. They broadcast this message:

"Vote Ron Paul. Vote Ron Paul"
17

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 16:11:05
#10 - Angus

>"into accepting the fact that our Queen isn't in control of our country in the way your President is."

Your APPOINTED Prime Minister is, isn't he?

I believe that there are now considered efforts underway to appoint you a new Prime Minister, is that correct?
18

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 04/05/2008 16:35:06
I think that ROTW can just read comments by Americans here and conclude that a lot of them are rude & dysfunctional. The ROTW does have a reason to fear a war-monger like McCain or someone like Clinton that makes the 'obliterate Iran' remark. You know the Russians have more nuclear weapons than the Americans do. stupid stupid Americans for not being humble and aware.

I bring rational commentary with lots of facts and good links too. and some posters can only tell me about tin foil hats, about Area 51 - I've never mentioned Area 51, others have accused me of it though. with these types of participants we should not expect anything good to come out of the American election system.

Unfortunately, great evil is the norm among the clique that rules our country. and our citizens are so blind to it, as well as arrogant & proud when confronted on it. ROTW will remember these stupid statements by Americans and in the future will blame us Americans for what our government does. great hatred is coming our way. and after that - violence.



19

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 04/05/2008 16:50:44
as I've told you in recent days, the real news on the US election is that the media has turned against Obama. If obama does not win the nomination at the Democrat convention in denver which I think is in early August, the democrat activists & many of their voters will be very angry. there is talk of rioting in denver and a repeat of the 1968 Chicago convention of the democrats. it is possible that the whole thing will be stage managed including the rioting and the media will use it as a way of discrediting 'radical' democrats. You see 90% of the democrat voters are very anti-war. sophistocated propaganda may be used to ostracize them. even though a solid majority of americans are anti-war themselves. the Americans are stupid enough to let a spell like that be cast on them. and the media is just that good at propaganda. what I said about riots being stage-managed I meant. The people that rule us are very capable of orchestrating such events. Its happened before. undercover instigators are frequently put in the crowd at mass protests in order to cause violence to discredit the protest. It happens in Europe too.

please note that it is the 'liberal' media that is turning against Obama - all in lockstep. some stupid Americans who listen to 'conservative' talk radio love to assert that the media is liberal. Here's the liberal media turning against the liberal candidate.

These terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' have no real meaning in America as we use them. they're only used to confuse people & manipulate them. 2 important figures in the rise of the conservatives during the 1970's leading up to reagan's election were Paul craig Roberts & Richard Viguerie. Those 2 individuals were behind the scenes making it happen. both those 2 individuals are strongly against bush & the modern republicans who are NOT conservative.
20

Wally,

by The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 04/05/2008 16:51:48
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05042008/news/nationalnews/baracks_rev__stole_a_wife_109298.htm

The anti-Obama news stories have reached the ridiculous stage with this one above in the New York Post. I posted a message on Scotsman a few days ago detailing the scandals that they could attack both Hilary clinton & John McCain on. the scotsman pulled my message even though all I did was quote what authors have written in books, authors who quote real witnesses. Read Ambrose evans Pritchard's book on clinton. He's an English journalist.

there are extremely negative things about both clinton & mccain that the media could use to destroy either of them. this is how it goes in America. our stupid people watch tv and believe anything they're told. For many of them reality is tv and anything not spoken on tv is illegitimate information or opinion. they're like a brain-washed people who are taught that every proper sentiment is what the tv tells us to believe & think.
21

Wally,

By The Rivers Of babylon (USA) 04/05/2008 16:57:19
since datey who is a carpetbagger from Scotland mentioned Ron Paul, I don't mind telling you that Ron Paul said the best choice of the 3 remaining presidential candidates is Obama. and Ron Paul is a right-winger in American politics. Obama is considered very liberal. But in reality Obama has only veered slightly from the views that the clique who rules us wants him to have. he has said that he'll bring all troops home from Iraq within 16 months of taking office. for this he is crucified in the media. and for this Ron Paul says he's better than the others.
22

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 16:58:39
#18 - Wally

>"I bring rational commentary with lots of facts and good links too."

Uh, no - you bring unheard-of conspiracy theories and your links are notorious for not actually saying anything like what you claim they do - to the point of absurdity.

No Wally, you have no credibility here as most people have figured out that you hate America because we do NOT support your far right views - in fact, we hate the far-right Timothy McVeigh/Terry Nichols/KKK/Waco terrorists as much as the far right religious extremists of the Taliban - seeing little difference between them.

Your gripe is that McCain is too far to the LEFT!

Your value lies in demonstrating that the far right in America is no different than the far left in the rest of the world.

I imagine that this would cause the few thinking leftists of the world no small amount of alarm!
23

SouthernGent,

04/05/2008 17:07:53
Be careful what you wish for, as it may be worse than the alternative.

Although McCain is not a great candidate, he is heads and tails better than the 2 dems. And the 2 dems could create an even bigger "world" problem, economic meltdown. I'll take the war in Iraq over the dems promise of distribution of wealth. If you think the economy is bad now (and we are not yet in recesssion), wait and see what happens if the dems get their way. The US is certainly struggling now with our entitlement programs eating up almost 70% of our budget, what do you think will happen when the dems make them bigger. There comes a time when the doers of the world can no longer support the rest. If/when the US becomes a socialist country (Obama), then the rest of the world will truly have a bigger problem.
24

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 17:15:12
#18 - Wally, the stranger

>"great hatred is coming our way. and after that - violence."

Perhaps - after all, us moderates have become used to:

- extremists of the American right-wingers with their 'Oklahoma City' terrorist bombings crying 'remember Waco';

- international right-wingers (Islamofascists) with their suicide bombings crying 'jihad, jihad';

- and the far left with their 'revolution' crying 'Che, Che';

We're getting tired of being stuck between the self-infatuated, paranoid, wacko extremes - perhaps it will be us, the moderates, that finally decide to put an end to both ends of the extremist spectrum?
25

Sandi,

San Diego 04/05/2008 17:30:37
Hillary would never be Obama's VP. There's no up side for here there. She's already an influential US Senator and that's where she'd stay. Obama could benefit greatly from eight years as VP. He'd actually have some experience.

However, the Republicans have such a huge amount of nasty stuff to throw at him now-and we still don't know all of it regarding Rezko, who is rumored to be making a deal with the prosecutor that could lead to all kinds of information coming out about Obama's involvement.

IMO, Obama is too damaged now to be on the ticket at all. His presence will be the source of negative ads that will be used against every Democratic candidate, not just the presidential candidate. This has alrady happened.

The latest proof of Obama's plummetting fortunes is the result in Guam. Tiny and relatively inconsequential, Obama had paid staff there for weeks and spent a lot of money on ads, etc. Hillary Clinton did not. The result is so close that there will be a recount. It is quite likely that Hillary Clinton will end up being the winner, but you'll never hear about that.
26

Sandi,

San Diego 04/05/2008 17:31:09
Sorry, "there's no upside for her there".
27

Stu_R_20,

Edinburgh 04/05/2008 17:47:45
Clinton's chances are over but she would rather take the entire party down with her than give up. I have lost all previous respect I had for Bill as a result of their escapades.
Agree with #1, it's nice to see this thread not being polluted by, often ill-informed, Americans' calling Obama a muslim and the same old rubbish they argue about (check out threads on the Times).
If there is one thing these elections have taught me about America it's that they want low taxes, 4x4's full of fuel and plenty of guns, not alot more.
28

Dáithí,

San Jose 04/05/2008 17:55:21
#27 - Stu

>"If there is one thing these elections have taught me about America it's that they want low taxes, 4x4's full of fuel and plenty of guns, not alot more."

Seems that Iraq and the Economy are always listed as the top issues, for some reason that eludes you.

Buying into stereotypes is for the weak-minded, don't buy into them.
29

Stu_R_20,

Edinburgh 04/05/2008 18:04:03
#28
The problem is that most Americans do not understand the problems with their economy and even fewer know which candidate's proposals are best to fix them....

That isn't stereotypes mate, just check out any article in the Times' comments section, it's quite clear most people are concerned more about their own innate prejudice than anything the candidates are proposing...
30

bill-alba,

fife 04/05/2008 18:34:03
Stu... I wouldn't believe anything that is written in the Times comments section or indeed anything else they print... the American media is the same as ours, controlled by the people in power they will print what bests suits their own ends. As a Scot I don't believe that whoever is the Presedent will make much difference the democrats and republicans are like labour and tory virtually the same.
31

Browards,

04/05/2008 19:02:55
That Wally bloke is a real w-anker.
32

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 04/05/2008 22:01:22
If Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were presidential material they would long ago have negotiated between them who would run for President and Vice-president, and called off this destructive competition in order to aid a Democratic victory. They haven't, which means that they are too damn stupid to lead the USA, regardless of the quality of their ultimate opponent.
33

Sandi,

San Diego 04/05/2008 22:42:06
#32 Caora Dubh,Croit sheasgair

How sad that you have such a low regard for democracy.

34

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 05/05/2008 00:31:35
SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE and OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT! What a wonderful world this would be, you know, the song!!!!
35

American,

05/05/2008 01:25:09
#34-scotindy-shows how little you really know about obama. Or, you're just a young, impressionable college student lib.



#25-sandi- obama not only has to stay on the ticket, but the superdelegates have to name him nominee unless they want big riots on their hands. Sharpton is promising trouble and so is radical group recreate 68. Their website is giving helpful hints on how to riot.
36

American,

05/05/2008 01:40:36
#10-angus- Just a little fyi- our president doesnt have control the way you think he (or possibly future she) does. If it was up to the current president, we'd be drilling our oil in alaska for several years already. It is the other politicians that hold the real power (senators, congressmen, even mayors, governors, city councilmen, etc.etc.) The war was voted on by our politicians. I'd like to add, with the same info about saddam that clinton sited (as did much of the media during the clinton era)--not to mention the info was used in a book "saddams unfinished war against america" (something like that) which was written by someone from the clinton administration. I'm not such a big fan of gw's (cant stand his immigration policy-or lack of). Cant stand most of our policitians--especially the 3 choices for president that we have now. Time for a strong "really for the people" 3rd party in this country!
37

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 05/05/2008 01:43:26
regarding the question of possible rioting/disorder or violence in Denver when the DNC has its convention in August - we see that the right-wing radio shows are stoking their audience for it. Al Sharpton for all we know is a puppet and same with Jesse Jackson. if that violence occurs, there's no reason to think it wasn't instigated by undercover agents. That is what happened in Seattle at anti-globalist protest. The government had undercover agents in the crowd who committed crimes, then the whole crowd was blamed and the government came down with police state tactics that were very brutal on our standards.

The purpose of such violence would be to facilitate media campaign against 'radical' democrats. The radical democrats are the 95% of the democrat voters who want all the troops in Iraq to come home. and the media will explain this is why the democrat politicians must not cater to that radical group.
38

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 05/05/2008 01:57:57
oh, one more thing about that possible violence this summer in Denver - it would only occur if Obama does not win the nomination. If the super-delegates go for Clinton in a big-way and facilitates her victory, there would be many angry people.

because here's our situation in America - in 2004 just before the november election a poll came out documenting that for the 1'st time 55% of Americans wanted a complete withdrawal from Iraq as quickly as could be orderly done and simply abandon the mission. Yet in 2004 our 2 presidential candidates were both very pro-war. now 65-70% of our people want a complete withdrawal of our troops from Iraq quickly. and of our 3 major candidates left now 2 are very pro-war. Only Obama is between pro-war and anti-war in that he's always voted for the war including funding in recent months, but he says he'll withdraw almost all the troops in 16 months. So he doesn't get the nomination, the only candidate who we can even pretend will pull us out of the war, then many will be angry. and they may express themselves publicly. and then the undercover agents would do the violence, then the police crackdown would occur and the anti-war protesters basically be demonized in the mass media.

that is a potential scenario this summer with 2 pro-war candidates emerging again.

the only real anti-war candidates we had in the primaries were Dennis Kucinich (democrat) and Ron Paul (Republican).
39

Silence of the Yams,

05/05/2008 13:37:01
Please Americans, don't give this dangerous nobody Obama the presidency!
40

Dáithí,

San Jose 05/05/2008 14:56:27
#29 - Stu

>"That isn't stereotypes mate, just check out any article in the Times' comments section..."

No, it IS stereotypes, as you ignore the millions that DON'T write to 'The Times' because they understand the issues.

>"it's quite clear most people are concerned more about their own innate prejudice than anything the candidates are proposing..."

You don't bother to define what you mean by this, apparently it's just another condescending shot to feed your need to make yourselves feel better by running Americans down.

Perhaps you're they guy to ask, Stu - why do many of your lot feel that you can only build yourselves up by tearing Americans down?

Do you have some sort of inferiority complex from your loss of international status?

I don't think that you need to, but for some reason we see it a lot here.
41

Bryan H.,

Monterey Bay 05/05/2008 17:13:46
I'm going to be completley candid in my comments because to be honest I have a hard time with all of the canidates (rep and dem). Each one has their flaws and strengths but I don't see any of them as really having any leadership experience. For instance, we haven't had a president who was a senator since before reagan. Bush Senor gained his experience from being V.P. while some other presidents were governors first before they were presidents. To me that gives them more experience than arguing in the Senate. I realize that I have put down all the canidates in the race and I do know one of them has to win but I want to see a leader with leadership skills who will be able to lead this country and win through merit instead of making all of these empty promises that cannot be kept.
42

Black Beard,

05/05/2008 17:24:03
Too weak to woo. Try saying that 3 times quickly.
43

mike - across the pond,

wally 05/05/2008 20:57:19
what you repeatedly say is a misrepresentation of the facts at TWO levels...

first... the question that the polls ask
"do you want the troops out of Iraq?"... 70% of the people answer "yes"... god wally, what are the other 30% thinking? wally, we ALL want the troops to come home... and it is flat STUPID to think anything else...

SECONDLY, the media, and you, then reports this "70%" figure as if this was a landslide mandate to pull the troops out right now... which it is absolutely NOT...

this is like asking the question "do you want to discipline your children"... the answer would have about the same percentages from the same people...

then saying that 70% of those polled dont discipline their children... thats not reality... even the most uber liberazzi provide discipline for their children in some way or another... none of us WANT to... a good share of the other part answer 'yes' because they realize that they HAVE to...

all of us want them home.... none of us WANT our young men & women sent into harms way... but a majority of us understand the NEED for them to be there... are grateful for the sacrifices they are willing to make.... and support them and the decisionmakers they report to however we can...
44

57Nomad,

california 05/05/2008 22:45:26
#10 AO

Please read the entire paragraph. If you do you will see that what I am saying is that you may well be right and I may well be wrong. The "obnoxious sob" is a rhetorical device. It means that if we listen carefully that we can learn from and be helped by everyone, even those who oppose us. You're a big boy, you can take it. Nothing personal.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Who would make the best Democratic challenger for President?
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.