Clinton Supporters, do you deny that Hillary is willing to destroy the party to get the nomination?

[atufal1c]

On another post, I stated my opinion that "these Clintons" are are willing to destroy our chances in the General Election to win the nomination.

A Clinton supporter has just suggested that I am being deceived by the MSM into believing that these Clintons are different than the ones that I supported for so many years.

The poster said that I've fallen prey to MSM distortions of the Clintons as racist and as attackers of Obama, as if I can't see with my own eyes what is happening.

Here is my response:

The MSM is not "spinning" the fact that the Hillary Clinton was okay with Michigan and Florida delegates not being counted until she decided that she needed them.

Until her arrogant, uppity, over-confident plan to see the contest over by "February 5th" didn't work out.

Do you deny it?

Bill Clinton said that the Republican Party cares more about counting votes than his own Democratic Party.

Do you deny it?

Hillary Clinton is whipping the Floridians into a frenzy with talk about how the Democratic Party wants to not count their votes and cheat her of the nomination.

Do you deny it?

Hillary Clinton actually suggested to people that maybe if the Democratic Party didn't want to count their votes that the Republican Party would love to have them.

I took that to mean if the Dems don't count your vote, vote Republican.

Do you deny it?

Hillary Clinton at best, callously, and at worst, viciously, shoehorned into her talking points the assassination of Robert Kennedy to further her pathetic case that she should stay in the race when she is losing the contest by EVERY measurable metric.

Do you deny it?

Finally, as a bonus, NOTHING that Hillary Clinton has shown in this campaign--not fundraising ability, not money management, not debates, not winning of new voters, not winning of pledged delegates, not winning of super delegates, not winning of states, not winning of caucuses, not ground game, and especially not campaign management, has shown that she has the ABILITY to win the General Election. Nothing at all.

Do you deny this?


Please notice that none of the above mentions attacks on Obama or racism.

attacks on the Democratic Party and the democratic process ALONE are enough to make anyone scream.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

1. Just curious... Do you really consider this to be productive?

[Ioo]

2. I do, Hillary is willing to distroy the dem party, I think it is proper to question...

[Bensthename]

24. me too.

[apocalypsehow]

35. Ignoring the ugliness that is the HRC campaign doesn't mean it goes away. n/t.

[papau]

3. Obama was and is ready to destroy the party to get nomination - from his playing race card to

his refusing Hillary on the ticket -

but smear and lie about Hillary if that pleases you - to many folks it is close to longer mattering what their Dem Party partners do because they are no longer thought of as Dem party partners.

[Ioo]

5. Fuck her, He won, he does not have to offer her shit. Ppl are just making shit up

I do not mean to be so gruff, but really, this is getting to be to much

I mean it when I say, they both suck, but really people. We all get smart and know everything that Bush did, half the people here can quote FISA and all sorts of other laws because of the current POS in office... and then they to retarded over Obama and Hillary... saying the dumbest things.

[Oleladylib]

8. Oboma?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cui bono]

19. Link please on Obama playing race card?

Thanks.

And can tell me how him not picking a woman who invokes assassination as a tactic to be on the ticket with him is an example of him destroying the party?

Thanks.

[mopinko]

23. refusing hillary on the ticket?

destroying the party by beating her? and letting her stay beat?
oy.

[jgraz]

25. Exactly! How dare he be all black and electable!!

Plus, IT WAS HER TURN!!!! :cry:

[VotesForWomen]

32. electable. heh. clue: dem primary voters don't really represent the general electorate.

[Kittycat]

34. Get a clue. You don't get to the General unless you win the Primary

Sorry to bring you down, someone should have explained the rules to you sooner :(

[jgraz]

40. And yet your Queen seems to think they do

Why else would she count her prospective electoral votes based on her few primary "wins"?

[anigbrowl]

37. Clinton supporters regularly attack Howard Dean an the DNC

Show me one public attack by Obama or any of his team on Democratic party institutions or procedures. You seem to think Hillary is the party: she isn't.

[cui bono]

50. Yeah, didn't think you had a link.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

4. Your allowing her far to much power. It's our party

Bill and Hillary are only as powerful as you allow them to be. Enough of this.
It's time to concentrate on the GE with or without their co-operation.

Leave her in the dust and move forward.

[dana_b]

56. yes!

Everyone seems afraid of the Clintons but, realistically, they don't have the power withous us. Yes, 16-17 million people should not be ignored, but I wonder if the people in Iowa, NH and other states would still be so supportive of her if they knew what kind of campaign she was going to run.

[cliffordu]

6. Excellent analysis. K&R

The only real issue I see with it is it has too many of those nasty things called "facts", those things the the Hill astroturfers avoid like vampires avoid garlic.....

[Oleladylib]

7. yes, I deny it...

[liberalmuse]

9. I'm a fucking Democratic candidate supporter.

And this is flame baiting. I'm so disgusted with liberals right now, I'm ready to blow my brains out. I fucking HATE this shit, and it's going to get us a President McCain, which is unforgivable. Fuck all you divisive assholes.

[atufal1c]

16. No. Not facing up to our problem is going to give us President McCain.

And our problem is that we have a candidate that has lost to a very viable candidate, but won't get out of the race. And she is prepared to use ridiculous and shameful justifications to stay in until that candidate's chances are seriously damaged and she doesn't give a shit.

Not all of that candidate's supporters are like you and I. She whips them into a frenzy and they eat her bullshit up with a spoon. Surely some of them are becoming frustrated by the voting process. When things don't go her way, surely some of them won't vote. And some may even vote for McCain.

And why not, since their favored candidate is fucking telling them the Republican Party is BETTER?!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. You are dead balls on. The only thing that matters to Hillary is Hillary.

[Beaverhausen]

11. no one is destroying the party, chicken little

calm down already.

[Saturday]

12. You have the right to your opinion but the 18 million that voted for Clinton

don't agree with you.

[Ioo]

13. I guess those Caucus states are just pesky inconveniences? She Gambled and Lost

Listening to Clinton is almost as bad as watching Bush explain about toucher... there are more * at the bottom than a Credit Card Application.

[Saturday]

14. What do the caucus states have to do with my 18 million number?

[Ioo]

15. Gore 50,996,116 vs Bush 50,456,169 - Bush Wins - Votes are not how we pick this.

And you know it...

[VotesForWomen]

33. when did the GE become a caucus? nt

[mkultra]

47. since the main purpose of a causcus is to narrow the vote down from several to two

i would say that a GE is more like a caucus than a primary in many respects since there will only be two.

[atufal1c]

22. I'd be willing to bet that some of that 18 million would vot e differently today. NT.

[jgraz]

42. Really? You know what all 18 million HillVoters think?

That's pretty impressive. :eyes:

[smiley_glad_hands]

43. 18 million? It was 17 just yesterday. You guys just make up shit as you go. eom

[napi21]

17. I voted for Barack, but you're wrong about Hillary. TThey are opponents in

a campaign for a job! Candidates don't destroy the Party by being opponents any more than two candidates who are vigorously vieing for a job would destroy that Company! If the Party gets destroyed, it will be by it's members, not the candidates! I've seen quite a few campaigns in my lifetime, and this one was quite mild in comparrison to some in the past!

I realize emotions are high, and opposing sides have taken a lot of the comments made very personally. The primary campaign will be over soon, and we all need to direct our anger against McNut!

[cui bono]

20. No, it's Hillary's blind selfish ambition that is destroying the party.

If we don't win in November it will be her fault.

[napi21]

26. Why do you say that? Yes, she's ambitious, but that's NOT BAD!

Nobody without ambition and what everyone has called "fire in the belly" in recent years can ever WIN the WH! I think you don't understand what someone has to do to beat an opponent. She's not told any lies about Barack that I know of. If you're complaining about her saying "I can WIN" that's the kind of things you SAY!!!! To point out faults or problems in your opponent is what you have to do!

If I have ANY fears about Obama winning in Nov. it's that I'm afraid he's not going to be willing to go for the jugular with McNut! You KNOW the Pubs will do that, and you can't win a gun fight with a pocket knife!

[cui bono]

49. Yeah, she is that bad.

Just look at the bag of tricks she pulled out for the primary season. She has crossed the line many times already. It's not okay for her to do anything to win the primary if that means ruining our chances to win the GE in the fall.

She should want ot be president so that she can help this country. Setting it up so that if she can't have it the Repubs will is not in the interest of this country or it's people, it is solely in her own self interest.

That is not okay.

[Olney Blue]

54. Smartest post all day.

[StevieM]

18. Here is a prediction for you--tell me if you deny the second part

First, I predict that if Barack is the nominee that Hillary will offer to nominate him at the convention.

Second, Obama supporters will be totally ungrateful and take the opportunity to either complain that she is unworthy of such an honor, or more likely, make condescending remarks like "it's so decent of Barack to give her the opportunity to redeem herself."

Steve

[atufal1c]

21. I'll take that bet. NT.

[scheming daemons]

29. I predict you are right... I also predict she will...

...give a half-hearted nomination speech, with backhanded compliments and full of indirect praise for McCain.


Because she wants to win in 2012.... and she can't do that unless Obama loses in 2008.

[StevieM]

46. I think she will do everything in her power to help him win and I think he will lose by such a

wide margin that even Obama supporters won't be able to say it was her fault. It is hard to blame a 20-point loss on Hillary. But I guess a few people will try.

Steve

[smalll]

27. Destroy the Party? I'll deny it: She'll FIGHT, FIGHT AND FIGHT AGAIN TO SAVE THE PARTY WE LOVE!

No more McGoverns!

Cluetrain for the Obamatrons: we tried to win an election in '72 on the basis of kids, black people and "well-educated" liberals (I guess we'd have to call them Brie-and-Chablis Democrats rather than latte liberals because of course Starbucks didn't exist back then) -- IT DIDN'T WORK!

[Steerpike_Denver]

41. We don't use the term "Obamatrons" anymore

We also don’t say "Obamabot", “Obamamaniac”, or “Barackanoid” or whatever snarky little term you dream up for passionate supporters of Barack Obama for president. The proper collective term is “Democrats”, as in: “Because of his insurmountable lead in popular votes, number of states carried and, most importantly, delegates, the Democrats will undoubtedly choose Barack Obama as the party’s nominee for the 2008 presidential election.

The term “Hilbot”, on the other hand, is still perfectly valid, as is “Hillaroid”, “Clintonista” and, for our Appalachian friends, “Hillbillary”. Any of these terms is perfectly acceptable to describe those who refuse to accept the fact noted above.

Within this group is a small, shrill subset who has vowed not only to withhold their support of the Democratic nominee, but to either vote for McCain, or a “protest” candidate, or withhold their vote altogether.

These people should also be referred their rightful name:“Republicans”

[smalll]

28. (dupe)

[VotesForWomen]

30. uh, no. O and his supporters are responsible for evry vote they don't get. plus, O will lose the GE

hillary will win. obama losing the GE would not be especially good for the democratic party, especially if repugs succeed in framing him as a muslim manchurian candidate.

[panader0]

57. Judging by your name, I would tend to think you have a very

narrow agenda. Maybe you can form a third party.

[grassfed]

36. you're wasting your energy on sour genitalia obsessed narcissists...

[VotesForWomen]

38. what exactly are you saying? hillary is a "women's" candidate, while O is for 'everybody?'

seems like you're the one obsessed with genitals.

[grassfed]

39. boring

[ccharles000]

44. I do deny that Hillary is willing to destroy the party to get the nomination.

I think she loves this party.

[angrypoet]

45. Thinking out loud

I have been a member of DU for a while now and I have been an observer for several years. I have never replied to any of this back and forth about BO and HC as I have been content to observe and be amazed at the visceral hate and discontent between the two camps. That is no line, you are free to look at all of the handful of times I have posted on DU. My first voting experience was in 1992 for BC and I am very proud of that vote. I have voted in EVERY local, state and national election since, no matter where I lived, as a democrat and I am proud of that. I am a very logical and thoughtful person as anyone that knows me will attest to that fact. I can be very cold and factual, to the determent of others feelings sometimes. I believe the RNC party planks and the massive and insane influence of the religious conservatives on the RNC is harmful to the life, liberty and happiness of the majority of Americans and find the DNC and progressives, like those on this site, to be better suited to the ideals and vision of our Founding Fathers. I want everyone to remember the great harm that has been put on our country over the last several years, from both inside and out. At this current moment we are being our own worst enemy. We are attacking each other with all the passion and emotion that a campaign can generate. We have stopped looking at this logically and with dispassionate distance.
I admire HC supporters and their pride and loyalty. God bless the DNC and progressives alike that we have such amazing loyalty and honest love for their candidate. I am making great pains to be kind and loving toward you but I also feel it important to be honest.
Look back at how democracy works in our country. Look back at the history of how primaries have worked. Ask yourself why do others suspend their campaigns? Why do others concede and endorse others? It is not to the determent of democracy, its to the benefit of it. Can HC stay in to the very last moment? Yes. Is their historical precedence for it? Yes. Has it ever been to the benefit of the party in that election year? No. If we are honest with ourselves, by every reasonable measurement, is BO a viable candidate for our party? Yes. Has his campaign, by every reasonable measurement, met the conditions to be our candidate? Yes (the final 2025 is a foregone conclusion). Why does it matter if HC stays in the race. Only perception and perception can be everything. We have our own value system, being democrats, we are supposed to be the "good guys". We put a higher standard on honesty, integrity and party politics aside, what is best for people, all people, in general. I will take ANY honest feedback, I want to address the core issues, one by one, with anyone, as to why this is best for the party and the country, for their to be only one candidate for the democratic party, sooner rather than later. I honestly respect and admire all of you for your passion and drive but DU members need to stop the name calling and attacks on both sides. All of you have your own spheres of control in your own world outside of DU. You are taking what you are saying out there and it is not to the benefit of your party or your candidate.
Work hard for your party and our chances to have a Dem President and a super majority in the House and Senate. That should be your focus. That is how you make your country better.

[SlipperySlope]

48. The PURPOSE of the party is to nominate Hillary

The Democratic party has only one purpose; to nominate Hillary Clinton as President of the United States.

If the party fails, why shouldn't Hillary scrap the party?

Look at it like this. You have an old car. The purpose of that car is to transport you to work every morning. One morning your old car won't start. You try very hard to get it to turn over, but it just won't budge. You hire a mechanic to look at it, but he says there isn't any easy fix.

Now what?

You get a tow-truck to haul your old car to the junk yard, scrap it, and then find another way to get to work.

Same thing with the Democratic party. If it won't nominate Hillary, then it has failed at its SINGLE SOLITARY reason for existing, and needs to be scrapped.

[Maat]

51. HeeHee (n/t).

[panader0]

58. Damn! You are whacked out!!

I can only hope you forgot the sarcastic emoticon.

[paulk]

52. more newbie flamebait

from an RNC troll.

:puke:

[anamnua]

53. No she is desperately trying to save the party from creeping,

malign, viral, Obamanisation.

[Marrah_G]

55. Yes I do and I think your post is absurd drivel.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

59. I Don't Deny That You Are. n/t

[juajen]

60. No, that's what I think O is doing? Perspective is a bitch. NT