Campaign 2008

[Guest Vitamin X]

I like Kucinich, so I'm glad to see him get a good speech out there. What a dork, though.

[SuperJerk 0]

Hillary video recap:

"I'm a woman running for president, I'm a woman running for president, look at me, I'm a woman running for president!"

[EricMM 0]

Clinton has so far said, always, "me me me me me me me obama me me me me me me MEE"

 

sigh.

[SuperJerk 0]

Hopefully she's now (finally) starting the transition into "Why Obama should be president."

 

 

[bob_barron 0]

This is a great speech to vote for Hillary.....but she's not running.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

Michelle Obama just loathes Hillary, look at her face

 

Speech dragged in the middle, but it's pretty good at the end

[SuperJerk 0]

I think I've died and gone to Democratic Party cliché hell. Not a good speech at all, in either construction or delivery. The only time it came alive is when she was talking about Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and then the Women's Movement.

 

I actually agree with the Fox News analysis tonight: this was a minimal endorsement, with the only reason to vote for Obama is that he is a Democrat just like her. Apparently reminicing about the novelty of a woman running for president is a more urgent topic than explaining why Obama doesn't really suck as much as she said he did a couple of months ago.

 

By contrast, MSNBC's and CNN's analysts acted like she gave the best speech ever.

 

Hopefully, this is the last time we ever have to hear about Hillary during this campaign, but I just know Bill's going to mention her 1,200 times tomorrow night.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

the FOX audio feed sucks, the volume is so low. is that just me?

[SuperJerk 0]

Some Republican lady was talking to Greta Van Something on Fox later...Hillary is wonderful, and why oh, why did Obama scorn her? I'm guessing later she'll work in how Hillary said many damning things about Obama during the campaign in an attempt to show Obama won't be a good president, without any ironic appreciation of how she just answered her own question from earlier.

 

Meanwhile, the other networks continue to show Democratic operative after Democratic operative shower love on Hillary for being gracious enough to mention Obama a few times in passing in her "Hillary's Very Special Salute to Hillary" speech tonight.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

It was a good speech you jackass. I think your seething, pathological hatred for Hillary Clinton is perhaps clouding your judgment a tad.

[Gary Floyd 0]

Some Republican lady was talking to Greta Van Something on Fox later...Hillary is wonderful, and why oh, why did Obama scorn her? I'm guessing later she'll work in how Hillary said many damning things about Obama during the campaign in an attempt to show Obama won't be a good president, without any ironic appreciation of how she just answered her own question from earlier.

 

Meanwhile, the other networks continue to show Democratic operative after Democratic operative shower love on Hillary for being gracious enough to mention Obama a few times in passing in her "Hillary's Very Special Salute to Hillary" speech tonight.

 

Someone's bitter and petty.

[snuffbox 0]

It was as good (and meaningful) as any speech that Bill ever gave.

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

Just a procedural note here as a tealie, when we're bringing up articles in this, and really, any other thread, try to provide more of your own content than somebody else's. Really, just a link to the article and a few pertinent lines should suffice, followed by whatever your thoughts are. There just gets to be a lot of in-thread scrolling and reading after a while. So just consider that, please.

My rebuttal to that would be that: (a) it innoculates us from charges we are taking stuff out of context, and (b) sometimes people used to provide links to articles and then claim they said the opposite of what they really did.

Stop posting entire articles.

[Art Sandusky 0]

I have to sort of agree with the self-focused assessment of Hillary's speech (the first fourteen minutes anyway, whoops, there's a "things were awesome in the 90s" line), but the AP write-up stressed her hyping the actual candidate, as she eventually came around. I also agree that Michelle Obama looked like she wished she could zap her off the stage until she got a shout-out.

[SuperJerk 0]

It was a good speech you jackass. I think your seething, pathological hatred for Hillary Clinton is perhaps clouding your judgment a tad.

How is a speech (and video) that primarily celebrates her own place in the women's rights movement as the first woman to almost win a major party nomination (or whatever it is she thinks she deserves credit for) not an exercise in narcisism? I'm not the only person who noticed those things about it.

 

And, yes, it was poorly delivered. She pauses every five words. As if she is waiting. For the stupid teleprompter to. Catch up with her talking!

 

 

edit: In fairness, the task of running for this high of an office is partially an exercise in narcisism, and Obama will certainly have his moments in the coming days and weeks. The most important question wasn't "how good was it?" but "did it work?" Since I wasn't the target audience for the speech, I'll have to wait and see.

Edited August 27, 2008 by SuperJerk

[At Home 0]

I liked when she quoted the Seneca Falls Convention, which was a largely unsuccessful meeting that only about a hundred or so attended.

 

But it really wasn't anything that I didn't expect from Clint-dog. Every speech she's ever given was about HOW HISTORICAL IT WAS THAT SHE WAS RUNNING.

[godthedog 0]

it was a fine speech and all, but it seemed to exist in this other universe. i would've liked more specifics on obama himself and why he's the right guy for the job--she went a little bit in that direction for a while, but it was pretty quickly dropped. all the really rousing stuff tended to be "this is what i support, and this is why we need to elect barack obama," as if his name was an afterthought. she didn't even pretend to be talking to people who weren't her supporters ("when you voted for me...", etc.). she pushed women's rights into the ground, but not once did she mention anything about the first black nominee or first black president--if it weren't for the occasional cutaway to michelle, you'd never know any of the obamas were black.

 

but on the whole it seemed to work, and the frequent cutaways to the audience members who were visibly touched by it helped lot. i enjoyed it while i was watching it and appreciated that it did everything it needed to, but afterwards i thought, "wait...what exactly was the focus of the celebration there?"

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

she didn't even pretend to be talking to people who weren't her supporters ("when you voted for me...", etc.).

 

Which is fine, I think, as the main purpose of the speech was really to convince those supporters of her's who have yet to come around on Obama that voting for John McCain is not a very good idea. Could she have gone into more specifics re Barack? Sure she could have, but so what? How a speech is covered in the media is often way more important than than the speech itself, and this one seems to be getting near universal acclaim and is being portrayed as a full-throated endorsement of Obama, and so I think it ultimately has to be looked at as a success.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

not universal though. the people on Fox News right after the speech were talking about how it wasn't a good endoresment at all! that Bill Kristol, so unbiased. :-P

 

btw if McCain picks Hutchinson, as some chatter is speculating, he's going to win this election.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Obama is making all the right moves...AND THE GOP IS "SHOCKED and AWED"-- and shaking in their boots! That's why they have intensified their lying, out of context, and irrelevant smear attacks, and it was on FOX NEWS this morning that the GOP is making an all out move to get all the remaining disgruntled Hillary supporters to come over to them.

 

And if any Democrat is stupid or spiteful enough to follow after the GOP -- who is OPPOSITE to their interests and welfare, and McCain-- who hasn't got a "clue"-- then THAT'S where they need to be, where they can "wallow in it" because they obviously weren't Democrats anyway.

 

 

Someone's bitter and petty.

 

 

Video version of the Pokemon battle.

[At Home 0]

All that woman is saying is that she's ashamed that a woman didn't get nominated, barring people, you know, disagreeing with her or not.

[RepoMan 0]

 

All that woman is saying is that she's ashamed that a woman didn't get nominated, barring people, you know, disagreeing with her or not.

I can sympathize with women hoping to see a woman prez in their lifetime, but there has to be a way better female candidate somewhere. Remember, Hillary blew what the media was calling an inventible nomination. If someone in her campaign paid the slightest attention to the Dem's proportional allocation of delegates instead of just trying to win the big states, she would have probably ran away with the nomination.

 

I wish the media would look beyond the whole cult of personality, black guy vs. white lady rivalry within the Party. The biggest story of the primary was that the Democratic base moved to the leading populist candidate who appealed to the base’s core beliefs (at least during the primaries before Obama's positioning towards the center) vs. the establishment candidate, whose main argument was that she was the most electable (though given her baggage, I thought that point was a bunch of BS). In 2004, Dems chickened out on Dean, and went with the dull, yet supposedly more electable Kerry, and managed to lose to Bush.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

I can buy Hillary supporters being upset and staying home on election day, but this supposed trend of going over to McCain's campaign really befuddles me.

 

Wasn't Hillary's entire campaign, hell her entire political career based on things like universal health-care? Women's right to choose (ie - framing it into a women's rights issue)? All about giving women real respect and a real voice and all that? It's not like these "side issues". Frankly, i can't see how you could support Hillary WITHOUT feeling strongly about those.

 

Guess who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and is on the 'universal healthcare is socialism and evil' side? Who called his wife a cunt and who cheated on his first wife?

 

Clearly they didn't care all that much about the actual issues that Hillary espoused, and were more in it for the celebrity/cult-of-personality thing.

[snuffbox 0]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2601548_pf.html

 

Alaskans like to think long and hard before entering the poll booth.

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

He must've sent so much free money to that state over the years.

[snuffbox 0]

Sent to vs. took from?

[Guest Smues]

Oh don't get me wrong he took his share of money, but you have no idea how much money he's managed to get this state. The general consensus up here is yeah he's been indicted for some stuff, but those things he did are minor compared to how much he's helped the state. The native villages especially are fucked once he's gone.

 

Edit: And besides, he didn't have any serious opponents on the republican side. I think he's going to have a heck of a time beating Mayor Begich in November, but I can't imagine he was really worried in this primary. His opponents thought this was the perfect time to strike, as my TV was bombarded with TV ads for all these clowns, but other than David Cuddy no one else had a respectable showing.

 

Corey, Michael D. 1,283 1%

Cuddy, David W. 25,380 27%

Heikes, Gerald L. 500 0%

Sikma, Roderic H. 948 1%

Stevens, Ted 59,123 63%

Vickers, Vic 5,204 5%

Wanda, Rich M. 621 0%

 

 

And the funny part? Vic Vickers easily had the most advertising going on. Not a commercial break went by the last couple of weeks where I wasn't bombarded with at least one Vic Vickers ad.

 

[NoCalMike 0]

All that woman is saying is that she's ashamed that a woman didn't get nominated, barring people, you know, disagreeing with her or not.

 

. The biggest story of the primary was that the Democratic base moved to the leading populist candidate who appealed to the base’s core beliefs (at least during the primaries before Obama's positioning towards the center) vs. the establishment candidate, whose main argument was that she was the most electable (though given her baggage, I thought that point was a bunch of BS). In 2004, Dems chickened out on Dean, and went with the dull, yet supposedly more electable Kerry, and managed to lose to Bush.

 

Pretty much hit the nail on the head. This primary was finally some type of sign that voters are actually somewhat open to the idea of not going with the "safe candidate" and instead going with someone they agree with more on the core issues.

 

Whether you think Obama was the best candidate or not, one thing that is undeniable is that the voters followed through with their hearts & minds this time instead of claiming to want something different and then going back on that once inside the voting booth.

 

Of course if Obama is eventually elected it remains to be seen how "different" he ends up being.

[At Home 0]

I believe that universal health care is socialism and bad, does that mean that I should vote for McCain now?

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

Are we going to refer to the Obama presidency as Africamelot?

 

 

Your search - africamelot obama - did not match any documents.

Get me Ann Coulter and Jonah Goldberg!