So what should happen next for the Dems

[Edie]

I know there are many Obama supporters on the board -- so an additional Q might be if the Wright thing changed your opinion of Barack Obama.

[myboyblue]

I don't think it's necessarily damaging for either to stay in, however, think of how powerful they could be unified.

[remphish1]

I don't think it's necessarily damaging for either to stay in, however, think of how powerful they could be unified.

 

They should team up! Go for it! What a ticket!

[myboyblue]

They should team up! Go for it! What a ticket!

 

Yea, i want to like that idea but i think that they both need someone more experienced as their running mate. Not dick cheney experienced but experienced.

[mountain bed]

Edie don't let the so-called "experts" get to you. I'm so sick of hearing this "damage to the party" angle I'd like to bitch-slap Campbell Brown and her ilk.

 

I know the Dems are notorious for eating each other alive, but not this time - they both gotta know not this time.

[tugmoose]

Gore '08!

 

"This time we'll win Tennessee fer-sher!"

[IATTBYB]

I am truly puzzled by media reports that supporters of Clinton and Obama claim that they will not support the other should their candidate not win the Dem's nomination. I have heard reports that up to 20% of the supporters of both candidates have taken this absurd position. Once you get past Clinton's and Obama's backgrounds and public perceptions, there really is not that much of a difference between the two when it comes down to substantive policies and positions on the issues. Who are these people going to vote for if their candidate does not prevail, McCain?

 

I have to believe (although I have no evidence to support this belief) that if Clinton wins the nomination, a larger portion of Obama's supporters will either sit out the election or vote for a third-party candidate like Nader. On the other hand, if Obama wins the nomination, I believe (again with no evidence to support this belief) that Clinton's supporters will come around and support the Democratic nominee. My belief is based primarily on my impression that Clinton's core supporters are the traditional Democratic voting blocs that will tend to vote the party rather than the person, while Obama's supporters are the more idealistic types, similar to Gene McCarthy/Bobby Kennedy supporters in the '68 election.

 

But then again, I could be full of crap.

[ikol]

I voted yes for the first 2.

[cryptique]

I would love to see Hillary drop out now, but I guess I can't fault her for wanting to hold out until the Pennsylvania primary. The thing is, even if she wins Pennsylvania by a fair margin, it still won't close the delegate gap significantly -- so this is all academic, in my eyes.

 

I have become progressively more disillusioned about Hillary as this has dragged on. I don't like the tactics employed by her campaign recently, and I don't like the things she has said. She seems almost maniacal in her determination to find a way to win the nomination at all costs, and it's not a very flattering image.

 

Do I think this hurts the Democratic party? Well, it doesn't help. I do think there's a short-term hit, but if anything it'll toughen up Obama for the general election (yes, I'm anointing him as the nominee, you heard it here first). Over the long term, I think the effects will be minimal -- unless Hillary steps up the nastiness even further, which is certainly not out of the question, given the direction her campaign's been heading.

[fickerson]

I would love to see Hillary drop out now, but I guess I can't fault her for wanting to hold out until the Pennsylvania primary. The thing is, even if she wins Pennsylvania by a fair margin, it still won't close the delegate gap significantly -- so this is all academic, in my eyes.

 

I have become progressively more disillusioned about Hillary as this has dragged on. I don't like the tactics employed by her campaign recently, and I don't like the things she has said. She seems almost maniacal in her determination to find a way to win the nomination at all costs, and it's not a very flattering image.

 

Do I think this hurts the Democratic party? Well, it doesn't help. I do think there's a short-term hit, but if anything it'll toughen up Obama for the general election (yes, I'm anointing him as the nominee, you heard it here first). Over the long term, I think the effects will be minimal -- unless Hillary steps up the nastiness even further, which is certainly not out of the question, given the direction her campaign's been heading.

 

well said. my thoughts exactly.

[tugmoose]

We are

.

[MrRain422]

An extended primary isn't inherently damaging to the party, but the way the Clinton camp is persuing it, it sure could be.

 

Of course I wouldn't mind her staying in if she had some chance to win. But she has literally zero chance of winning the nomination unless Obama is completely destroyed between now and the convention so that the superdelegates have no choice but to vote for her. There is no other possible way for her to win and she knows that. In this context, yes, it is damaging because if she is successful in doing so, then a great deal of the electorate will resent her for it (and rightfully so). And if she fails, then Obama could still be damaged enough in the process to hurt his chances in the fall.

[Griddles]

All I can say is: McGovern.

[MrRain422]

Care to expand on that at all?

[bobbob1313]

I don't think this hurts their chances. I think McCain would love to get even a little bit of the press they have right now. Both Obama and Clinton have out fundraised him in recent months.

[NightOfJoy]

All I can say is: McGovern.

 

No way man, Wavy Gravy is where its at. I'm waiting for him to announce his candidacy. ANY day now......

[Good Old Neon]

An extended primary isn't inherently damaging to the party, but the way the Clinton camp is persuing it, it sure could be.

 

Of course I wouldn't mind her staying in if she had some chance to win. But she has literally zero chance of winning the nomination unless Obama is completely destroyed between now and the convention so that the superdelegates have no choice but to vote for her. There is no other possible way for her to win and she knows that. In this context, yes, it is damaging because if she is successful in doing so, then a great deal of the electorate will resent her for it (and rightfully so). And if she fails, then Obama could still be damaged enough in the process to hurt his chances in the fall.

 

A reporter, a person who

[MrRain422]

A reporter, a person who

[Good Old Neon]

So all she needs is for Obama to either be caught banging a prostitute, or to get cancer. Yeah, sounds reasonable to me.

 

By the way, if either of those happened, it would have nothing to do with her campaign, and so there's still no reason for her to be continuing on at this point. She could drop out and then get back in if something major happened that was outside of her control. She's trying to bring him down herself though, by creating scandal. That's not the same thing.

 

The point is not that either of those things will happen, but that, anything can happen.

 

Obama was coasting along pretty much unscathed until the Wright scandal broke, no one saw that coming, he himself has admitted that it shook him.

[Griddles]

Care to expand on that at all?

Sure

 

Much could happen between now and the convention. Hillary has been vetted fairly thoroughly over the last 16 years, most of her dirty laundry has been hung on the line for all to see. Obama, on the other hand, is relatively new to politics, and has not received as thorough a wash. The Wright scandal is still, to some extend, evolving

[ikol]

So all she needs is for Obama to either be caught banging a prostitute, or to get cancer. Yeah, sounds reasonable to me.

 

Considering the government created prostitutes and cancer to oppress black people...

[Good Old Neon]

Sure

 

 

 

While Hillary has been vetted, she seems to be creating new problems for herself the longer she drags on ie the whole Bosnia things. While not a point of policy, it is still relevant because she bought it up making it relevant. Leading to the, maybe, 'if she lies about that what else has/will she lie about?' argument.

If the race was over, in Obama's favor, when would Rev. Wright's remarks come to light? Or the fact that he is a Muslim? (Just Kidding)

The point is that the longer these two candidates poke holes in each other the easier it will be for John McCain, to poke even more holes, or just the same ones without looking like a bad guy.

 

note; I am not supporting any of these candidates.

 

Those are good points - I'm not saying I necessarily agree with her, the correspondent, but, I think her point is valid.

 

Have a listen:

 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=89119303

 

The conversation in reference took place at the latter portion of the show.

[John Smith]

I don't think this hurts their chances. I think McCain would love to get even a little bit of the press they have right now. Both Obama and Clinton have out fundraised him in recent months.

 

The last thing McCain needs right now is for the press to focus on him and his ever shifting views, his total lack of knowledge abotu Iran and Iraq, the words of his supporters and the fact that he is telling the die hard 30% crew that wink wink he will carry on the policies of GWB. Nope, the lack of press is blessiing for McCain right now. No need for him to get 70% of the population stirred up more than they already are.

[quarter23cd]

The last thing McCain needs right now is for the press to focus on him and his ever shifting views, his total lack of knowledge abotu Iran and Iraq, the words of his supporters and the fact that he is telling the die hard 30% crew that wink wink he will carry on the policies of GWB. Nope, the lack of press is blessiing for McCain right now. No need for him to get 70% of the population stirred up more than they already are.

I dunno, the press seems to love McCain. Dude, he's a "maverick", remember? How awesome! Its true that at this point in the race he seems like kind of an afterthought. He really isn't getting a ton of attention right now, and what he does get seems to be a lot of fluff stories. As the Dem campaign drags on and continues to gets nastier, a fair amount of people will get fatigued and turned off by it. McCain is undoubtedly hoping to lay low and ride the backlash.

 

Not that its all negative for the Dems, though. At least they have two strong candidates--why not let them battle it out to the end? Quite a few of my GOP-inclined friends/family aren't too thrilled that their party already keeled over and settled for a candidate that an awful lot of them don't like at all, but they couldn't come up with anyone better.

[moxiebean]

If the race was over, in Obama's favor, when would Rev. Wright's remarks come to light? Or the fact that he is a Muslim? (Just Kidding)

The point is that the longer these two candidates poke holes in each other the easier it will be for John McCain, to poke even more holes, or just the same ones without looking like a bad guy.

You can bet your sweet life that the Republicans would've brought up the Rev. Wright stuff, probably a week or so before the general election - best to get it dealt with and out of the way now.