POLL: What's your opinion of Clinton's Assasination Comment Today?

[RoadRage]

What's your overall opinion of the Clinton comment today?

[RoadRage]

1. Thanks for voting.. and please Kick this for a while to get some numbers. NT

[Abacus]

2. Only one Clinton supporter vote?

You must be on a lot of ignore lists... :evilgrin:

[RoadRage]

9. Either that.. or the 5 remaining Clinton supporters on DU have already gone to bed..

And, i'm probably only on 3 of their ignoor lists - so we should get one or two more Clinton votes by tomorrow. :)

I honestly don't think I post enough to be on many ignoor lists. But, I do have my moments- so who knows? :)

[greenvpi]

3. Funny to watch the childish, hysterical Obama supporters

Come-on, she voiced a serious concern that many here have also expressed.

[Muttocracy]

8. She was NOT talking about it out of concern for Obama's welfare! nt

[Gore1FL]

10. She wasn't concerned

she was using it as a reason why staying in the race because anything can happen.

It is one thing to be concerned, it is another entirely to base staying in a political race because of it.

[mckeown1128]

15. You might want to go talk to the other Hillary supporters...

You are straying from the talking points.

The Clinton talking points are that she wasn't implying anything about Obama being assassinated. So, she couldn't be voicing any concerns... she was merely mentioning RFK's assassination as an example of a primary going into June. Don't stray from the talking points again. Ok? ;)

[Muttocracy]

17. perhaps the fax machines are jammed? nt

[saltpoint]

4. The remarks were specious and were in the service of her not

answering the question posed.

She claimed not to know why some might feel her quest was without merit or point.

She spoke with less care than she might have had she been responding to a question that did not expose the lack of rationale for her campaign.

Note the even, steady, near-monotone of the questioner's voice and then compare it to the up-and-down fluctuation in tone of Clinton's answer, and the complete absence of a firm point in the process of that fluctuation.

She claimed not to know why anyone might question her fighting onward toward nomination, and this against the backdrop of the historical tragedy of Robert Kennedy's last moments alive in the Ambassador Hotel. The context was menacing. I don't care if she intended it to be or not. It sucked. It was heartless and careless and unpresidential.

At best, it was specious and the words ill-chosen. At worst, it was more strident grasping manipulation from her campaign.

If you are a super-delegate and pick up tomorrow's newspaper, your incentive for supporting Hillary Clinton will be significantly diminished, and likely wasn't that persuasive to being with.

Friends don't let friends over-reach for the nomination. Someone needs to hide the woman's car keys til she sobers up.

[Muttocracy]

5. the mistake has multiple dimensions though

(e.g., http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6103616)

and I expect most people would agree it was, at a minimum an unfortunate phrasing, and at worst, saying she's ready in case he's killed. So there's a lot in that mistake spectrum. The non-apology to the less-offended parties is a whole 'nother spectrum.

[tokenlib]

6. It was a huge mistake--in part becuse of the botched apology..

If she could just learn to say "I'm sorry." If she could acknowledge an understanding how and why her comments could be so hurtful if misunderstood...
But she is unable to do that...so it is a huge blunder.

[Redbear]

7. I think it was almost as horrible as when Mickey Kantor said shit in 1992

or was it shittin?

and possibly almost as bad as when Sen. Clinton used the word "Zimbabwe"

and maybe not quite as bad but close to when Rev. Wright said "God damn America"

and potentially as bad when Sen. Obama used the word "bitter."

I'm so glad we have abandoned all pretext of issues , policies, and who can make America a better place to live so that we can focus on what's really important.

[jsmirman]

11. I voted other- it clearly was not unintentional

it IS time for her to step down, but a proper apology and finally getting out of this race that she lost months ago and let's move on from this.

[Patsy Stone]

12. I don't know about the word "unintentional".

If she had said "still running in June" instead of "assassinated in June" her point would have been made and no one would have batted an eye. Instead, she chose the word "assassinated". Why did that word spring to mind? I don't believe it was unintentional, but I don't think she was saying she hopes something horrific happens to him either. On the other hand, if something did happen to him during the election, she's reminding us she's right there, waiting. Which is kinda gross and, unfortunately, enough of a turn off without the bad word choice.

[mckeown1128]

16. I don't think she's hoping for something to happen..

I think she wants voters to think somethings going to happen. She wants voters to think twice about the risk Obama would bring. That we could end up a month before the GE with no candidate.

[Patsy Stone]

18. Which, I think we can agree,

is a really stupid argument for her needing to stay in, possibly until August. I'm pretty sure if, heaven forbid, something did happen, the DNC isn't going to start the process from scratch. She's still number 2, and the next logical choice in that instance.

[ccharles000]

13. I am a Hillary supporter.

I think this thing is overblown.

[ruby slippers]

23. but charles, she said it too many times now.....

peace, but it was really tacky on the heels of Senator Ted Kennedy's health issue, too, especially when she just got done saying she was a "friend" of his. What a terrible thing to say about their family, too.

Peace, though. We will need you if she has to withdraw now because of this. We will welcome you to Barack's side and I will be the first as I know you would be to me if the shoe were on the other foot....

[saltpoint]

14. Politicians get in trouble when they mishandle the Kennedy file.

Dan Quayle had his fanny handed to him by Lloyd Bentsen after he, Quayle, compared himself repeatedly to JFK as a young political aspirant.

Senator Clinton didn't even manage an affirming attempt at a comparison, and shot her own foot off without assistance.

She may have been reaching for The Historical Perspective, but she came down with Tony Harding's Syndrome instead.

At best, it was a clumsy juxtaposition of contexts.

[GarbagemanLB]

19. It was a stupid thing to say and unintentional. Unfortunately for her, it ends her VP aspirations.

[TygrBright]

20. Other: Unintentional. But so far off the stupid chart it reveals a fundamental flaw...

...that tips me over the edge to believing that we'd DEFINITELY be better off (for now) with Obama.

When the stakes are as high as they are now, an intelligent, level-headed competitor ensures that the brain is fully engaged before putting the mouth in gear.

I don't question Ms Clinton's intelligence, I KNOW she is one smart woman. But apparently she is not level-headed enough to have thought out a couple of reasonable, compelling answers to the inevitable "why aren't you giving up?" question ahead of time.

BIG mistake. And when that mistake is compounded by letting something SO colossally clueless come out of her mouth, well...

Is that "Vissi d'arte..." I hear in the background?

I can handle an intelligent, calculating politician whose priorities and views have a reasonable (if not great) overlap with my own, though I think being seen to be calculating poses a challenge right now, especially in the face of an opponent whose calculation is so apparently effortless it slides right over into the "thoughtful and well-prepared" category.

But an intelligent, calculating politician who lets it slip when the stakes are so high...?

Ouch.

Stick a fork in her, she's done.

sadly,
Bright

[TwilightGardener]

21. It was an awful thing to say. You don't allude to past assassinations when

speaking of your current rationale for staying in the race. Even if you "didn't mean it that way". You just don't say it. And especially not now, with this particular presumptive nominee. I am trying to decide whether it was an intentional attempt to grab headlines, since it was repeated several times over the past two months, or just a terrible gaffe, or a Freudian slip.

[ruby slippers]

22. she has said it too many times....so it was intentional and not

forgiveable....

[TLM]

26. Exactly.... said it like 3 other times.

From the context, giving her the benefit of the doubt, it seems at best as if she's making an "anything can happen" argument.

And using the murder of RFK as an example of something that could happen.

Her race for the nomination was over weeks ago, lost beyond recovery... unless something bad happened to Obama. That's the hard real truth hillary reveals, her campaign is depending on something bad happening to the front runner. Be it a scandal, a gaff or, apparently, an assassination.

Now, more than just the race for the nomination, she's also probably just lost her position in the senate, and likely any political careerer at all.


I really wish she'd had the sense of rational perspective to step aside gracefully and with some dignity and integrity left intact.

[RoadRage]

33. I really hadn't realized she'd said this before..

Don't know if I was MIA those days or what - but it's amazing this is the first time it's been serioiusly discussed in the media. You're right- if she's said this before, then she obviously is doing it intentionally. You'd think she'd have learned the first time, right?

e

[ruby slippers]

24. lest we not forget the Bush/Reagan/Hinckley ties.......here

http://www.hereinreality.com/hinckley.html

[Douglas Carpenter]

25. I doubt there was any sinister intent, but my goodness it REALLY DOES sound bad!

[kenny blankenship]

27. I heard her the first time. This latest "gaffe" just confirms to me what she means by

"ANYTHING could happen."

[Raine]

30. Yes she's said it many times and now we know

that she literally means "ANYTHING". :-(

[grantcart]

28. It was significant gaffe

and even if you give it the most sympathetic possible hearing you have to rate it as highly incompetent.

Whether it revealed the way that she thinks - entirely egocentric in an almost amoral way or just too tired and weary from the campaign it is not the least presidential.

With Clinton needing 82 % of remaining delegates it is clear her campaign is finished and her effort to be VP severely damaged.

[fortyfeetunder]

29. She said anything can happen?

Maybe we ought to call up Ken Starr and see if there are any other stones left unturned from the Clinton Administration!!!!

[RNdaSilva]

31. Hillary's "misspeak."

If Keith Olbermann was correct this was not her first reference to Bobby Kennedy's assassination as it relates to her staying in the running. There were three other occasions, two were somewhat veiled.

Freudian slip? Doubtful.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

32. It was calculated. This statement has been made numerous times. It wasn't a mistake.

The real question is why is she doing it.

[WA98296]

34. It was calculated. It was a huge error in judgement. She will not apologize.

[Bad Thoughts]

35. Reveals a severe ethical deficit on Clinton's part eom.

[IndianaGreen]

36. It reveals a lot about Hillary's mindset and her inner rage at losing to Obama

Hillary needs intervention before she harms herself or others.

[Az_lefty]

37. it was calculated and intentional. Clinton's too smart to mis-speak so often

she's trying everything in the book to include Rovian tactics. She no longer belongs in the Democratic party and needs to go.

[Bucky]

38. Unintentional, but not inadvertant. The offense was unintentional, but then offense usually is.

It shows she doesn't hold up too well under the rigors of a national campaigning. People get sloppy as they tired, they make mistakes. I'm certain she thought reminding Democrats of the range of random things that could happen would keep us from solidifying around Obama. But it would be insane to suggest she wished him ill.