The winner tonight is : The Status Quo.

[AzDar]

And we all know it.

[Mutineer]

1. And the loser come November?

The Democratic party and the American people, yet again.

[xultar]

9. Exploding head #19

[bvar22]

77. Some American people will do well under Hillary.

If you are in the top 6%, Hillary will NOT raise the SS cap, so you will get more money.

If you work in the Health Insurance Industry, you will make a killing.

If you are a CEO, you access to cheap foreign labor will increase.

If you work in the Armaments Industry, Hillary will be giving you MILLIONS.

If you are in Commercial Banking, or Wall Street, you'll see less regulation and accountability.

But the BIGGIE:
If you are a Corporate Lobbyist...Let the good times ROLL!
Start shopping for that new Mercedes Limo and the 2nd Home in Aspen.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[maddiejoan]

yes of course

Because we all know a woman and a black man represent the status quo far more than a white guy from the south.

spare me.

[AzDar]

8. So ANY woman will 'do' for you? That's pretty sexist.

As for 'a black man', he didn't win.
The Status Quo DID.

[maddiejoan]

21. sorry

Edwards' rants ring false to me.

He's NOT status quo?

give me a freakin' break.

[AzDar]

32. One break, comin' up.

Truth hurts, I guess.

[maddiejoan]

33. Guess so

you do seem fairly hurt.

[AzDar]

34. Disgusted would be a more apt description.

And if The Status Quo is nominated, we will all feel the same in November.

[maddiejoan]

46. Edwards painting himself as

the non-status quo candidate is ridiculous.

[LostInAnomie]

11. It's not what they are, it's what they represent.

[AzDar]

Exactly.

:thumbsup:

[maddiejoan]

25. It's not what they SAY they represent

It's what they DO.

Look at the things Edwards has DONE.

[JAbuchan08]

48. Look at what Hillary has DONE (and not done)

If Edwards is lying we're no worse off than if Hillary is telling the truth. It's the same old status quo only with a woman at its head.

She didn't tear down the clubhouse, she joined it.

[maddiejoan]

52. I have looked at what Hillary has done

and I applaud it.

[earth mom]

56. This is NOT about race or gender. It's a class war being waged on ALL of us.

Do some research, connect some dots. Stop idolizing your heroes and look at them through an unfiltered lens. Maybe then you will get what people around here are trying to tell you.

[maddiejoan]

66. right back 'atcha

[bpeale]

58. then you';re either playing at being stupid or you actually are

how can you justify to yourself her stands on supporting the war in Iraq to this day and her support of Kyle-Lieberman? same for obama. how can they justify themselves in america's eyes? the American people LOST last night. all of us lost last night.

[maddiejoan]

67. I'm not a one issue kind of gal

that's how

and if I was --I certainly wouldn't be backing the co-sponsor of the IWR (talk about status quo candidate!)

[JAbuchan08]

71. One final time.

Edwards changed his vote. Hillary won't even apologize for hers "right thing to do at the time" and all. Edwards in 2004 is pretty much where Hillary is at in 2008. At this point you're simply deflecting from your own candidates flaws.
I have my own questions about his sincerity, but I have questions about Hillary's sincerity as well and at least he is SAYING the right things.

On edit: I'm curious, would you vote for Dennis Kucinich if he were a woman?

[maddiejoan]

72. You call them flaws

I have no need to defend Hillary for taking actions, she deemed necessary at the time.

She hasn't apologized --because she has nothing to apologize for.

She has said she regrets her vote. She has said it was a mistake.

You trust Edwards flip-flop on his entire Senate career. I don't.

[JAbuchan08]

75. Well it might have been a mistake, but she takes the tack

that "given what she knew" she was justified in voting the way she did. The pragmatic and reasonable thing to have done would have been to force George Bush to prove his case against Iraq and (if he did) then vote on a congressional authorization of the war. The way it was handled was to maximize political expediency for George W. Bush and that alone should have disqualified it from rational consideration.
Basically Hillary has admitted that her vote was a mistake without ever admitting that it was wrong. Edwards actually used the word wrong.


Secondly, I never said I trusted Edwards. I'm not sure I'll vote for him. I said I have questions about his sincerity (and Hillary's as well), but at this point he is saying the right things. If I take them both at their words, Edwards is the better candidate. If I don't take Edwards at his word, he's still no worse than Hillary. Ultimately I think Kucinch is the best candidate. Which is why I'm curious to know if you would vote for him *if* he was a woman.

Incidentally, I really do love Amelie.

[maddiejoan]

76. Gender isn't an issue for me.

So Kucinich would still be Kucinich whether Mr. or Ms.

It is far easier for Edwards to say it was 'wrong' than it is for Hillary.

For one, Edwards is no longer in the Senate. He doesn't have to work across the aisle. She still does.

My problem with Edwards is the 180 degree which he has turned is simply too much for me to believe.

Yes. he says the right things --I hope he campaigns to the bitter end and uses the convention to plank some of his policies.

Obama is the great unknown to me --even his thin experience is made thinner with the amount of 'no votes' he has taken.

Hillary I can trust to be Hillary. and Hillary is just fine with me, and frankly seems more likely to accomplish the changes she talks about.

[JAbuchan08]

80. "the changes she talks about."

and those would be?

She might as well make her campaign slogan "more of the same changes"

[maddiejoan]

81. here, sport

http://hillaryclinton.com/

[JAbuchan08]

83. Sport?

Condescension from a Hillary supporter? That's rich!

[bpeale]

82. and i won't back someone who voted for it & still won't take it back

and then turned around to vote for Kyle-Lieberman. how big of a slap in the face do you need? and i definitely won't vote for someone who takes all that big money from big pac's, rupert murdock, and all the big corporations. she's bought & paid for already.

[JAbuchan08]

69. What Hillary has DONE

has been to trust the judgement of Bush Republicans over that of the Democratic base on lynch-pin issues time after time. On Iraq and Iran and on the Patriot Act she has followed the responsible adult line (otherwise known as conventional "wisdom") and continues to do so, citing it when her past misjudgements are brought up (ie. given what she "knew" then she was following the responsible course of action). The problem is, even if it is in support of a liberal social agenda and a less aggressively belligerant foreign policy she still accepts certain flawed premises from the Bush administration, such as that Iran is a serious threat, or that we have to maintain troops in Iraq in order to provide stability.
Hillary Clinton is, in a word, condescending and I'm sick of being infantilized.

[maddiejoan]

73. How convenient

that her opponents either didn't have to make those choices --or sat them out--or voted the same as her, but have now changed their minds.

[JAbuchan08]

79. How inconvenient for Hillary

that the worst that can be said of any of her opponents, is that they are almost as bad as her!

[SammyWinstonJack]

61. Right!

[AndyA]

13. Follow the money.

Look at how the media is dealing with the candidates. It's very clear if you look at it honestly.

Which one candidate is largely being ignored? Who isn't getting the press? And why?

It's not the woman or the black man.

Our corporate-owned media is very fearful of one candidate. You should want to know why.

[avaistheone1]

17. Well said.

[SlowDownFast]

22. K&R that post.

That says it.

[maddiejoan]

30. Yeah yeah yeah

where was he on these issues in 2004?

[JAbuchan08]

49. With Hillary circa 2008

Hey, Hillary's been wrong on some issues for eight years - but at least she's been consistent.

[SammyWinstonJack]

63. They don't want too know or they don't care too know. I wonder which it is?

:shrug:

Now if it were Obama or Clinton being largely ignored, that would probably get their attention.

Just wait until either gets the nomination. Ignore will be on.

How much did we see of either Gore or Kerry?

It was mostly all georgie all the time.

Ah well. :shrug:

[stimbox]

65. ehem.

"Our corporate-owned media is very fearful of one candidate. You should want to know why."

Yep, they sure are fearful of Kucinich, Gravel, and now Edwards,

[mmonk]

35. This is one of the reasons we say the status quo.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2635661

[maddiejoan]

45. I know the reasonings behind it

I just think when 2004's Democratic VP candidate accuses his opponents of being the status quo and running on celebrity status as well that he is being disingenuous.

.

[JAbuchan08]

50. Again

IF Edwards is disengenuous he's no worse than IF Hillary is being genuine - and if Hillary is disingenuous (have you seen her crying video BTW, brrrr.... can you say creepily insincere?) than she's even worse than we think.

[maddiejoan]

51. No I haven't seen any crying videos

I've seen one where she chokes up a little while speaking at a diner though.

[JAbuchan08]

64. Well that's the Youtube tag it had, so please excuse my greivous error

Woe is me! How may I rectify this injustice? :nopity:

Boy you sure got me on that one! One point for maddiejoan...

but my point stands. I don't like Hillary. I've said some mean things to her supporters, and about her record, but I've never been creeped out when I heard her speak. It was incredibly insincere and manipulative and had this undercurrent of contempt.

I am a pretty empathetic person and I have felt sorry for Clinton before with the attacks from the right etc. I had hope for Clinton as a senator, but that "Crying Video" made me super uncomfortable. I don't know how it could have been more strikingly insincere. Maybe she didn't cry because she's not that good an actor?

[rhett o rick]

37. Will either Sen Clinton or Sen Obama end the war, repeal the Patriot Act, repeal the MCA

dump NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO? Stop the spying, end the war, take on the corporitists? PUNISH BUSH AND CHENEY??????? I will say that at least Obama is against torture. Clinton says there may be cases when humans need to be tortured. Status f******* quo.

[mmonk]

40. The Nation post link I provided in post 35 gives you a pretty

good idea.

[earth mom]

53. self delete

[Tatiana]

62. Not necessarily. What if Condoleeza Rice was running? n/t

[bvar22]

78. Oh Yes! Clarence Thomas and Rep Jean Schmidt (Mean Jean)

have done so much to change America.

Do you realize that YOUR comments are "Sexist" and "Bigoted"?

[AndyA]

2. Amen.

The truth isn't always pretty.

[xultar]

18. Exploding head #20

[AndyA]

23. Dupe - DU froze. n/m

[AndyA]

24. Dupe - DU froze. n/m

[xultar]

31. The only person who would have brought it is Kucinich.

[AndyA]

29. You're going to run out of exploding heads at the rate you're going.

I want change because I don't like things the way they are. The winners so far aren't going to be the ones to bring it.

We should all be smart enough to not let money and the media elect *ANOTHER* President. Get a clue, folks.

[greyl]

3. Psst... A woman won. nt

[LostInAnomie]

16. Woman doesn't equal change.

Especially, if they are a shameless shill for corporations and the most fortunate in this country.

[greyl]

26. Relative to the entirety of the USA's history, it sure as hell does. nt

[LostInAnomie]

36. Not as far as government is concerned.

If you push the same corrupt shit that every corrupt politician has pushed, it does not make one god damn bit of difference what your gender is.

And, if you let gender sway your vote you are as big of a sexist as the past you are lamenting.

[JAbuchan08]

57. where do you draw the line?

where a woman is a bad enough/incompetent enough and/or insincere enough not to recieve the a feminist bump? Nancy Pelosi bad? Diane Feinstein bad? Olympia Snowe bad? Margret Thatcher bad? Anne Coulter bad? Help me out here, because if some of these women should not recieve our votes simply because they are women than perhaps none of them should.

I am also interested to know to what degree womanhood trumps progressivity in a presidential race. I have pretty high standards. I think Kucinich is the best candidate, but like Edwards somewhat because he is at least SAYING the right things. Let me put it this way - all else being equal and the "electability" standard notwithstanding - if John Edwards or Dennis Kucinich were women, would you vote for them based on policy? I know I would.

[GreenTea]

4. Exactly...corporations know little will change with either of the two moderates!

[wildbilln864]

10. Exactly! n/t

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[winga222]

27. My god, could you BO people be any greater of sore losers?

Show some class. Or rent some if you don't have any.

[Marrah_G]

28. Your sexist remarks have no place on DU

[NYC Liberal]

38. OR they looked at the choices and CHOSE who they thought the best candidate was.

Just because they didn't vote for YOUR candidate does not make them "idiots" - your word.

[mondo joe]

39. Or maybe women actually made a thoughtful choice. They do that, y'know. NT

[xultar]

6. Exploding head #18

[Naturyl]

7. Yep, bingo. (n/t)

[bdamomma]

12. it has just begun, we have a long way to go!!

[Pastiche423]

15. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

And this is exactly what the republics want.

[xultar]

20. Exploding head #21 and you get two...

[JAbuchan08]

60. Ahhh smilies and snark....

Powerful argument you've got there

[mmonk]

19. You are correct.

The funny thing is many people out there voting aren't aware of it. And I have to disagree with those that say it doesn't matter which democrat wins.

[Redneck Socialist]

41. Yup. And disappointing it is. n/t

[pinto]

42. The winner tonight is the Democratic Party. What a great turnout,

great speeches from each (D) campaign, and it remains a race.

Why disregard the thousands of people in New Hampshire who cast a ballot? It's called an election. They voted, one candidate won. It was close. 3 Democrats remain viable candidates for primaries down the road.

[dysfunctional press]

43. exactly right...change will have to wait. again.

it's not going to be a pretty 4 years, as we slip further down the hole.

[Fire Walk With Me]

44. Meanwhile, please make certain that you've signed in at wexlerwantshearings.com, for impeachment!

Gotta make sure that we use the tools that are at hand!

http://www.wexlerwantshearings.com

[genie_weenie]

47. "Establishment, Establishment

you always know what's best..."

[mondo joe]

54. What kind of fool would you have to be to expect anything else from an election?

Elections are slow moving politics - not radical change.

[Echo In Light]

55. "Great sweating Jesus!" - H.S.T. ....agreed

[earth mom]

59. Most of us know it. Some are in denial and some benefit from the status quo in some way.

The founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves!

[BigDDem]

68. As I said before....83% did not vote for Edwards.

This just in.... the guy running for the last 5 years is the
"change agent." :rofl:

[LeftCoast]

70. Honestly, it's threads like this that make me want to vote for Clinton

x(

[SIMPLYB1980]

74. We really should think about opening a DU winery.

What with all the sour grapes.