OK. It’s Official. I hate Hillary. 90


After a year and half of campaigning, I officially hate Hillary.  I am neither proud of that fact nor willing to let it change my tone, but I am done giving her the benefit of the doubt.  I am done with the idea of ever voting for her for any position at any time for any reason until the day I die.  I would feel dirty and less human if I cast a vote for her.  The depth of my disgust is really too deep to ever impart on a blog.

Maybe when I get my radio show going that will help.  I love to talk.

This morning on CBS at 7:02 eastern, I saw a woman who was clearly insane.  The female equivalent of Nicholson’s Joker in Tim Burton’s Batman.  Minus the make-up job and over-the-top acting.  Hillary’s make-up is clearly better than Jack’s, and she is playing the role of a life-time.  The acting job Hillary is pulling seems transparent to me but is clearly Oscar-caliber for many democratic voters this year.

I started off as an Obama supporter but moved to Kucinich as his platform was much closer to an America that I would love to live in, though wasn’t all that likely in the short-term.  I like an underdog, so he got my support.  That he was a scrappy dude and brought things up that needed discussing was enough for me. He initially got my time on the blogs and my money.

However, I always knew that I would be back to Barack as the only realistic choice for president.  His history and background makes me feel he is every bit as progressive as Kucinich, but Barack knows instinctively that he can’t run that way and still expect to win.  Not this year.  This year he needs to tread a very fine line indeed.  Angry Man of Any Color doesn’t get elected president of the United States in 2008.

That an angry Hillary has gotten as far as she has despite the utter tragedy that is her campaign team and its ham-fisted strategy is something I wonder about constantly.  I amazed at the bold idiocy that somehow never leads to ruin.  The things that she has gotten away with are incredible.  The things her husband has gotten away with are equally without compare.

Hillary has run like a neocon (I call her a neolib, the opposite side of the same filthy, fascist coin – government of, by and for corporations) and a good portion of the Democratic Party were (and still are) completely fooled.  The same way they have been fooled since 1992 when the DLC took over.  All an enormous lead did for Hillary was make her loss take that much longer.

I fell in love with Philadelphia this weekend as I visited the birthplace of our nation and saw a TON of Obama support.

I sure hope Pennsylvania will put us out of Hillary’s misery today.

IT'S EASY TO SHARE

Facebooktwitterredditmail

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

90 thoughts on “OK. It’s Official. I hate Hillary.

  • "Present"

    Yawn
    You guys have been recycling this headline since last October.
    Is your imagination so depleted that you can’t think of anything else?

    • fabooj

      Yawn, you’re using avatar that shows he used two fingers, yet you’re clearly clinging to the one silly thing that’ll get you through today, even though your candidate is going to win anyway. Is your imagination so depleted you couldn’t post anything else?

    • JasonEverettMiller

      Not sure which “guys” you are referring to, but up until the interview I saw this morning, I would have reluctantly voted for her in November if somehow she pulled it out at the end.

      I have no doubt that she is the absolute worst choice for president and would enable the destructive forces that have been in control of our government for the past 40 years to continue their rein.

      That’s not to say I would vote for McCain, but a Hillary vote is an impossibility for me now. At least if McCain is elected, we could count on a newly democratic Congress to keep him in check and elect Barack in 2012.

      We could still push this country toward progressive change with McCain as president. But Hillary, the neolib, with a democratic Congress will hasten our destruction.

      That is why I won’t vote for her. Hate is used as a play on words because that is what Obama supporters are accused of.

      Of course I don’t “hate” her. I don’t even know her.

      I hate what she stands for. I hate the policies she has enabled her entire adult political life that promoted the DLC over the DNC. I hate the she think bombing Iran into the stone-age is a legitimate stance for a democratic president. I hate that she would rather leave Barack Obama as a nominee with two black eyes and a bloody lip rather than run a clean campaign. I hate that the same old goons who have destroyed the progressive wing of the democratic party are in charge of getting her elected. I hate that if I close my eyes I can’t tell if she is a republican or a democrat.

      Anyone who doesn’t hate these things, and still calls themselves a democrat, leaves me in serious doubt over their ability to consume complex information and form rational conclusions.

      • BevD

        You know, it is this immaturity, this level of animosity, this inability to envision a future that extends beyond August that I find most disheartening.

        This comes as a shock to many, but there is more at stake here than you. Without a democrat in the White House, we’re not going to be able to stem the tide of a complete oligarchal take over of this country.

        I don’t much care for your silly, shallow labels that you throw around without much thought, background or research. Clinton is not a “neolib”, she is a democrat. On all issues her policies are very much the same as Obama’s policies. She believes in national health care, she believes in raising standards in education, she believes in the right of workers to organize, she believes and practices neutral carbon footprints and environmental laws and enforcement, she believes in ending the war in Iraq. She’s founded organizations that promote women entering the political process worldwide, she’s worked very hard at promoting human rights, especially the rights of children, she’s set up foundations to promote and protect children’s rights, she’s held and participated in seminars, workshops, foundations, hearings and charities worldwide. She’s well traveled, well read, intelligent, pragmatic and understands the basic system of compromise that governs politics in Washington D.C.

        Now maybe you don’t “like” her, but millions of voters in this country do. The vast majority of people in this country are centrists and whether you like it or not, they do not want radical solutions to problems – they want practical, pragmatic solutions and both candidates are capable of delivering that to the people. So maybe you “hate” her, but quite frankly, that’s the way children think – everything is black and white, there are no nuances in a child’s world. They have to learn compromise, they have to learn unselfishness and they have to learn that they don’t always get their way.

        • JasonEverettMiller

          Immaturity and animosity? Can’t you see that the very first sentence of your rant against reason loses the high ground?

          Hillary is losing for the very same reason.

          Let me slow it down for you: Putting Hillary in the White House would be every bit as damaging as Bill Clinton was in the White House. The democrats you refer to have been PART of the oligarchical take-over of this country. Where have you been? This shit has been going on since the end of World War II under democrats and republicans alike.

          I suggest reading People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn for some perspective.

          Hillary Clinton, by both word and deed, is most certainly a neolib, whether you agree with the definition or not. So is her husband. She is a “stealth” republican. She is part of a group that took over the democratic party in 1992. She is a founding member of the DLC. She sat on Wal Mart’s board. She voted yes for the bankruptcy bill and for more war and talks about turning Iran into a parking lot and dodging sniper fire in Bosnia.

          She is NOT a democrat by any common definition – unless if by “democrat” you mean corporate-controlled politician who has helped enable the complete subjugation of the people’s government to special interests. Then, yes, she is a “democrat.”

          She believes a lot of things and makes a lot of liberal-sounding noises, but she has done nothing for any of those causes you cite while being at the center of power for the last sixteen years.

          Why I am supposed to think she would be more effective than Barack Obama?

          Barack has a long record of achievement at the local, state and federal level. He consistently brings disparate groups of people together to craft and PASS common sense solutions. Unlike Senator Clinton, Barack shows character and courage in how he conducts his affairs and how he treats other people.

          I don’t like what she has done to this country. I don’t like what her husband has done to this country. I don’t like what their brand of “democratic” politics has meant to the VAST majority of this country. We are worse off as a nation for having had the Clintons in positions of power. Sure, I am doing great. A lot of people are doing great because of Clinton’s policies. Especially rich people. But for all those homeowners being foreclosed on, they can thank President Clinton for repealing the Glass-Steagall Act.

          I care a lot that millions of my fellow Americans are disinclined to seeking out the truth on matters of such grave importance. I care that millions of my fellow citizens can’t see the forest for the trees. You find my opinions silly or immature? I have anecdotal evidence that your opinion is in the minority.

          Barack crushes Hillary in open primaries because he appeals to all Americans, not just a narrow slice of the electorate. If every democratic primary was an open event, this contest would already be over. We should tell Howard Dean to step-up. Use the Texas Model – a primary for the masses and a caucus for the political junkies or those who really want to stay involved. Popular vote only for both contests. Whoever wins the popular vote wins the nomination. Anyway, tangent over.

          Barack Obama is a true cross-over candidate, the likes of which progressives haven’t seen in a generation. He would be a president unlike any since FDR. He is winning because the country are not centrists. They are realists. They love Common Sense. The “center” is actually not the corporate rule that the Clinton’s espouse.

          The center is republicans, democrats and independents – scattered across four generations of Americans – who are lining up to support Barack Obama for president.

          Welcome to the 21st Century.

          • BevD

            And I suggest you read “The Lincoln Persuasion”, “Fools For Scandal”, “The Hunting of the President”, “Blood Sport” and Bob Somerby’s archives. You didn’t look at Clinton’s record, you looked at articles that reflected your own bias about Clinton’s record, in fact, when I read your bibliography I found nothing but second sourced and no sourced and sources with no provenance whatsoever articles, biased assessments, not one book of course, no understanding of neoliberalism, no cites on neoliberalism, no cites on demographics and not one orginally sourced, researched and provenanced essay, historiograph, article, book or any document that would support your argument.

            Your silly headline gives you away before the essay is even read. So it’s official, you hate Hillary. That would be cute if we were voting for the students’ favorite teacher of the year, but we are voting for the president of the United States and we’re going to elect a human being with faults, virtues, policies we may not support, policies we may support, talents and lack of talents and all the things that make up a highly complex personality that would be ambitious enough to want the job in the first place.

          • JasonEverettMiller

            Yet, with all your moral high-ground and sources of information that confirm your world view, you offer not a single link refuting my arguments and instead hurl grade-school insults. Interesting debate style.

        • hrebendorf

          “The vast majority of people in this country are centrists and whether you like it or not, they do not want radical solutions to problems…”

          I think you just explained the unexplainable. Is this the essential problem? Do Hillary’s supporters believe Obama’s solutions are “radical”? I guess that makes sense. So, given the choice between real change (the unknown) and more of the same, you choose more of the same. Is that correct? Is this where the lesser of two evils choice lies?

          Oh, God, that’s just so incredibly depressing. We have our first real shot at fixing some of the festering problems in our government, and you don’t want to take the chance of screwing anything up. I’m afraid that’s it, isn’t it? Fear?

          God, how depressing.

    • Joe Lisboa

      What you fail to realize, good sir/madam, is that what you see as a small group of posters “recycling” a headline is in fact empirical evidence in support of the claim that just about the only thing your candidate is succeeding in doing is repelling once-supportive Dems. This is isn’t one or two posters “recycling” headlines: this is the exodus of sensible people from the crippled ship Clinton.

      But go ahead and keep pretending your fellow Clinton backers aren’t (wisely) defecting. Shit, “defecting” is just buying into your ridiculous portable goalpost frame: they’re not defecting, they’re throwing their allegiance behind the likely (and, in my and many other, wiser people’s opinion, the stronger) Democratic nominee. I don’t want the Democratic equivalent of Rovian bullshit, and it seems that a good deal of my fellow Dems don’t either. You’re welcome to join us: it’s going to be (to use your candidate’s word) awfully “fun” taking on McCain in the General.

  • Obamawon, formerly Lville1975

    I agree, its really tired after about the 1000th time and I have only been here 2 months! Please tell me which policy of hers that you find so out of touch with mainstream Democrats. I suspect that you didn’t really like Bill Clinton as President either.

    Just as an aside. As Dennis was running about trying to be President the District he is representing went into the shithole of this economy. He nary raised a hand to help. If that is the kind leadhership you want. No thanks.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      See above. It is a pretty easy point to get. Hillary has never hidden the fact, through words or deeds, that she is DLC all the way. The DLC has turned our country into a one party system – the Corporate Party.

    • bluebell

      Policies? War with Iraq and her insane policy towards Iran. I could not vote for her for moral reasons. It’s a core values issue for me. She supports unjust wars on civilian populations.

      I have a long list of other reasons for not voting for her, but the war issue is a voting issue for me. I cannot in conscience cast a vote for a person with her positions.

    • BrookD

      I’m not asking this to be combative — just curious. Hillary is demonstrably dishonest, so I’m wondering how you’ve managed to overlook that? Doesn’t it bother you that she can tell a lie like Bosnia with such ease?

    • The Robots

      Louisville1975 said: Please tell me which policy of hers that you find so out of touch with mainstream Democrats.

      She has some campaign policies, and some actual governmental policies I disagree with:

      1. Her policy to meet with Richard Mellon Scaife, mastermind of the “Right Wing Conspiracy” to snafu the Clinton presidency. Scaife endorsing her is further evidence that she is making the corporate back room very pleased one way or another. That she laughed like it was a joke, when Olbermann started a question about their meeting with a heartfelt story of him leaving a network job because of Scaife and his tactics, is evidence that she is either blind or does not care about progressive VALUES… at least one as important as never wooing and cheerfully being duped by a clear enemy. Would you want our president to be duped by a clear enemy because she was “curious” about an invitation to meet?

      2. Her policy to talk about Iran as a nuclear threat, and her policy to continue playing with war toys in the sand in the middle east. A progressive friend talked directly to her at a campaign function, and asked her if she would commit to fully removing forces in Iraq, and she said she would not, that it was important for the U.S. to maintain a presence there. Focusing on home, with a full-scale domestic energy policy, would erase the need for any ties to the Middle East beyond humanitarian aid.

      3. Her policy of accepting a GIANT contribution from Rupert Murdoch early on in her campaign. How does this show up now? She and her close associates complimenting and defending Fox as a legitimate news source, calling them fair, and agreeing to debates on Fox. This is her policy of continuing to defend a known enemy to progressive values.

      4. Her policy to play to the fears of patriotic Americans, and victimhood in women, to get a couple more votes, while the conscious majority walks out in disgust.

      5. Her policy of giving George Bush ANOTHER free pass to invade ANOTHER non-threatening middle eastern country, the vast majority of whose citizens LOVE America, ANOTHER country (like Iraq was) easily controllable without all-out warfare.

      6. Her policy of repeatedly lying, admitting to lying, and shooting herself in the foot while it’s in her mouth, over and over again in this primary. Examples: Bosnia, her White House “experience”, insinuating Obama has nefarious ties on Network T.V. That good Americans who care about our future would “have to hold their noses” and vote for her to protect this country from 30 years of a right wing court, is pathetic, when the alternative is to have rousing, new and young interest in politics trounce an old, doddering status quo candidate.

      7. Her policy of stamping all over the new, young, rousing support from all corners of the nation, by deriding words of hope, and undercutting and shaming a clearly agile and conscious candidate (who is on her SIDE!)

      I don’t want America to have the choice between the lesser of two evils. Damn right, not this time! Not this time, Indiana.

      • JasonEverettMiller

        Thanks for helping out with this comprehensive (but still not complete) list of Hillary’s issues.

        I get sick of making the same list of “issues” over and over to justify what was really a visceral feeling that has been shown to be accurate out over time.

        I guess my “blink” reaction to Hillary was the right one.

  • RemyD

    I offically hate Hillary as well.
    I believe PA voters can deliver us from evil today. A majority of these folks see the beacon of light through the Clinton smokescreen of lies and deception. They will not be fooled.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      I sure hope so, Remy. The ones I met this weekend give me hope for a possible upset. Barack was up double-digits in New Hampshire and still lost by 2.

      This year has been nothing but a big bunch of hope-mongers in pursuit of the impossible – a Hillary Clinton upset and a Barack Obama presidency.

  • mageduley

    She talks the talk, but she doesn’t walk the walk.
    If she runs our economy like she’s run her campaign we’re in deep shit.

    • ziggymondais

      exactly!

      I wonder if she will find the money to erase Obama’s lead in NC while trying to tip the scales in Indiana . She has an amazingly hard road to run from here on out. Obama can potentially play prevent defense and still come out on top with popular vote, delegates, and states won.

  • Navy Gray in PA

    I agree, Jason.

    Some disagreements I have with her (in no particular order) are:

    * The war in Iraq

    * Her playing up the ‘victim’ card.

    * Her take-no-prisoners attitude. If she does that, and still wins the GE, then it is doubtful she’ll get even a handful of Republicans to help her out.

    * Her idea that we should expand our nuclear umbrella over the entire Arabian Peninsula and much of Asia Minor.

    * Her attitude that she’s OWED. That is, IMHO, the reason she’s in the crap she’s in now, because she acted like she’s owed the nomination and the presidency. I could speculate on why she feels that way, but I don’t have anything to back that up.

    If she won the nomination – at this point, a BIG if – I wonder how hard she will work to reach out to Obama supporters or just assume, that, naturally, since she so commands, all of us Obama supporters will just run to her side and bow down to her.

  • DemDave1972

    I was a Shrilliary Clintjoke supporter at the beginning of this campaign.

    I was blind to the evil, self-serving ways of the Clintjokes in the 90’s.

    I even defended Billdo’s dna stain..saying if our Presdient needed a hummer to relax, he should have one.

    NO MORE! She’s evil incarnate and would eat Chelsea’s barbecued head if it would win the White House.

    Dear God save us from this nightmare. Send The Clintjokes back to New York.

    • Billy Glad

      Who gives a fuck who you hate or don’t hate? Get a grip. Your personal feelings about Hillary Clinton are totally irrelevant to the outcome of this election. I’ve never trusted people who make it a point to put Dem in their nicknames. Why not use your own name? Then she’ll know who hates her.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      You’re missing a couple words in this little rant, but “kool aid” is enough to determine your lack of understanding.

  • DemDave1972

    Check my profile…. Billy “asswipe” Glad. My name is clearly stated.

    One click and you can see the truth.

    But the truth must scare you, that’s why you are clinging to the hopeless Shrilliary Clintjoke’s campaign.

    Awwwwww so sad….. I wonder if Shrilliary will pull out some more fake tears when she drops out of the race after losing NC and IN.

      • Billy Glad

        I’ve come back to her after the debate. I think “Dem” dave is sort of the Beavis and Butthead of the echo chamber. He’s right about one thing. You can get to a real name. I was wrong about that and I apologize.

      • Billy Glad

        No. That was Obama’s sponsor Ted Kennedy in 1979. After almost destroying the Party by challenging a sitting President in a bitter and unreconciled campaign in 1979, giving us Reagan/Bush, Kennedy helped create another challenge to the “apparent” candidate in this primary season. Quite a guy old Teddy. I’m sure nobody really wants to think about his real motives.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      There was an interview with her that peeled back the camoflague on her crazy. It was really the straw that broke the camel’s back, whcih also answers the question, “What took so long?”

  • GMan

    I’m sorry to see this thread on the Recommended List. The title is another example of really poor judgment for those who indeed want to see Obama win in November. Yep, keep spreading the venom about Clinton and give her supporters another reason to stay at home in the fall.

    I strongly support Obama and I have no affection for some of the tactics HRC’s been using in her campaign, but I want to see a unified party putting a Democrat in office in November. Personal vitriol that’s fostering animosity among fellow Democrats is just irresponsible if you genuinely want to see Obama win in November. The question is: do you prefer Obama over McCain? Obama will be the nominee and it’s going to take both Clinton and Obama supporters to beat McCain. Also consider, when Clinton hits the campaign trail on behalf of Obama this summer, you’re going to have some serious cognitive dissonance to work through to appreciate her efforts.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      The title was meant to be an ironic take on the fact that my blog would be anything but venomous.

      Hillary supporters have been calling us Obamabots for months now, but you can’t read a headline and then somehow imply that what was written somehow rises to the level of “venomous” blogging.

      I just finally saw a view of Hillary on TV that matches the record I have come to discover as I took a closer look at her years in the senate. I have done my homework and have finally heard one slander too many. One lie too many. One too many attempts to treat the voters like idiot children who can’t understand what is or isn’t playing dirty.

      What I am saying is there is no difference between Hillary and McCain. That they are equally representative of what ills our nation.

      For the small percentage of Hillary voters who somehow conflate my opinion of their candidate and Barack Obama’s candidacy as being connected in some way, I can’t help them. They issues that no amount of blogging will solve. The rest will most likely join in the conversation and hopefully stay involved past November.

      However, I have as much a right to explain why I detest this woman, her tactics and the very notion of her presidency as anyone else. If I do so in a calm and reasoned manner, there should be few complaints and few ruffled feathers. We can’t be such a wilting nation that the very word “hate” is now somehow off limits. That’s not an America I recognize. Sounds like the political equivalent of all those damn anti-bacterial sprays. I wonder how our folks were able to raise without that shit. It’s the instinct that let’s the terrorism card work.

      I am sick of it.

      I would suggest that if Hillary fans still have issues with Barack once he is the nominee then maybe they should put away their talking points and condescension and have an adult conversation. I have plenty of resources to point them to in order satisfy any question. Sources from the nation’s top editorial boards who have spent countless hours with the man.

      Other than that, I can’t help them. Sorry.

      • GMan

        You seem to have trouble seeing your own harsh words and level of disrespect. If you indeed engage in “calm and reasoned” debate and not a perpetuation of personal smears, you will earn the respect of those who disagree with you about Clinton’s appropriateness as either the Dem nominee or the next president. But you haven’t made a case beyond your evident offense at the conduct of the campaign. Saying you’d feel “less human”, stating the “depth of your disgust”, comparing her make-up to the Joker, and casting her campaign in terms of “bold idiocy” are hardly the subjects of a calm or reasonable debate.

        You are certainly entitled to your feelings. You’re entitled to express them here however you like. But I strongly believe that this kind of personal, selfish emoting is not going to help us move together in support of Obama in the fall.

        • JasonEverettMiller

          Those are all my feeling that you cite as somehow being venomous attacks on Hillary. That doesn’t compute. I did not write that Hillary is disgusting or less than human, though I certainly think that is the case.

          I used a metaphor to explain how her interview came across to me – plastic and manic and crazy. Again, those were my impressions. You can agree or not agree as you choose, but saying I said something that I didn’t isn’t making your case any more clear or compelling.

          I could compile all the various and sundry reasons that inform my disgust, but there would be no point.

      • Obamawon, formerly Lville1975

        Your rant was an adult conversation? Come on Jason you know better than that. If you don’t review what you wrote. It isn’t that difficult to see.

          • JasonEverettMiller

            You clearly don’t understand the term Troll. By definition, someone who uses their own name to blog can’t be a Troll.

          • Billy Glad

            Of course they can. You’re a troll. But you’re a clever troll. Sort of. Not that hard to con the echo chamber or I’d give you higher marks.

          • exregis

            How does Clinton get the nomination? What plausible way?

            Barring a really major problem for Obama (which will likely win Clinton some nose-holding votes), she only gets the nomination if she pulls off a superdelegate coup, in which case we need to clean up the Democratic Party more than we need to elect her.

          • readytoblowagasket

            Jason is new. Jason looks young and happy and open. Jason looks like Obama’s demographic should look.

            Jason sounds educated and energetic. Like Obama’s demographic should sound.

            Jason has a name that Obama’s demographic should have: Jason Everett Miller. Lovely. Perfectly innocuous name. Has a cadence like Joshua Micah Marshall.

            Unlike Josh, however, everything Jason has ever posted is either inflammatory or concerned. He gets a little hostile when someone corrects his facts or points out that he misuses the terms “neocon” and “neolib.”

            Jason has a peculiar Kenneth Starr-like hatred of the Clintons. His very first TPM post bashed Bill. Called Bill a neocon. I mean, a neolib. You know what I mean.

            If Jason is the person in his picture, he would have been 8 years old when Bill was elected. Pre-teen at the most.

            Too young to have such old, cynical ideas about the Clintons. Yet too old to not know what a neocon is.

            Jason is a Republican trolling TPM.

          • JasonEverettMiller

            You are clearly a Troll who has no concept of how to judge reality.

            That you would denigrate my appearance rather than comment to specifics in what I post, simply proves most of my points for me. That you would assume anything about my age based on a picture is also absurd.

            Might it make more sense – given my bio and my age-inappropriate cynicism – that I simply look very young for my age? You caught me! I admit it. I was blessed with youthful looking parents.

            However, I post under my own name, so it requires a bit more information and a bit less opinion masquerading as fact. I provide links and fact-based rationale for my arguments. You offer innuendo and taking quotes out of context.

            I am not surprised that you can’t understand the DLC and the RNC, neolibs and neocons, are simply opposite sides of the same filthy, fascist coin that runs our country. We discussed it at length on the post you cited, yet you still couldn’t see a single point I was making.

            It is clear that you have no idea what a Troll is. You project your own identity, since it is clear that you are totally unaware that you are in fact a Troll.

            That you also support Hillary Clinton is a delicious irony that you also can’t or won’t see.

            Brilliant!

  • BlueinColorado

    Got there last week with her repulsive race-baiting and scare-mongering about Farrakhan and Hamas. She’s repulsive.

    And now she’s trying to out BombsAway BombsAway McCain, while her husband plays the victim card for his own race-baiting and trips over his tongue trying to walk it back…

    Hey, Clintons. Both of you: Go away.

  • HusseinTenaX

    That an angry Hillary has gotten as far as she has despite the utter tragedy that is her campaign team and its ham-fisted strategy is something I wonder about constantly.

    I keep thinking about this – I have decided it’s the media keeping her going. They love this drama.

    That’s sounds like a very easy answer, but the reality seems so disconnected from what I read in the media and what she says, too, that it’s kind of breathtaking. And I think they’re pumping her up cause they want to keep it alive.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      I agree. The media, meaning corporate America, is certainly extending for drama. I think they are also hoping that something comes out during the artificially extended primary that can derail Barack. The status quo is very afraid of this man.

  • 1849

    I keep thinking about this – I have decided it’s the media keeping her going. They love this drama.

    They do love the drama indeed!

    Watching Sen.Clinton and Sen.Obama on C-SPAN without the commentators is very illuminating. The candidates said what they said, the viewer believed or disbelieved what they said and then it was over. Sen.Clinton’s words came out her mouth and Sen.Obama’ words came out his mouth. Their words did not come out of mouths of commentators. The video wasn’t edited to a soundbite. I really prefer the unedited version instead of mediated, parsed and sometimes distorted version (see, Rev.Wright in the Fox editing room)

    • GMan

      Are you referencing the compassion forum? That was a really positive exposition by both of them. There were tough questions, but neither candidate seemed compelled to do a reverse gotcha on stage. Personally I thought Obama was excellent in that venue… Clinton not as impressive.

      • ziggymondais

        I convinced my conservative Christian brothers to watch that forum. They were already doubting McCain, but that forum tipped the scales on them. Obama convinced them that he was closer to the ‘Christian ideal’ than anyone else running (they were Huckabee supporters). They’ve since changed their affiliation to independent so they can vote for Obama. I’m still trying to turn them into Democrats, but Obama definitely showed them that a political label has nothing to do with one’s religious/spiritual orientation. Hillary did not impress them because her answers seemed to be vague, overly generalized, and hollow sounding to them.

        It was definitely a coup for me.

  • DaddyD

    This thing is all but over, so now is a good time for Obama supporters to be graceful and embrace the Clinton supporters – even while they vent their final frustrations. Part of Obama’s pitch is that we can all work together – even with Republicans. If we can do that, then we can certainly work with our Democratic Clinton supporters. But, it won’t happen if we keep up the fighting. Someone has to lay down the verbal weapons first. We are supposed to be the ones we’ve been waiting for, right? Can we mend fences? YWC.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      I have nothing against a single Clinton supporter. They want who they want, that is the nature of a political race.

      My issues are entirely with Hillary Clinton, her record as a senator and the destructive campaign she has run.

      I believe everyone is free to choose whomever they like, so her supporters only hear from me when they have misunderstandings of my candidate.

      • DaddyD

        I meant that in a more general way, reading the responses, etc. (Believe me, I feel the same way about HRC, which is a pity because I really did like her not that long ago.)

        • JasonEverettMiller

          That clears it up. I actually quite agree with you, which is why I started posting as myself and really dialed my tone down a couple notches. That isn’t to say I don’t have opinions (obviously) but I do try not to get into “screaming” matches with Trolls.

  • DW

    I can’t hate her. I’m just disappointed. I was never excited about the prospect of her being POTUS, but I still think she’s been a good senator, Iraq2002 notwithstanding.

    It’s just sad to see Bill out there lying about the race card, and seeing Hillary slam Barack for “cheering on” McCain when she did the same thing last month.

    It’s all just a big-ass drag.

    I hope BO pulls this out tonight…

  • PaDem

    Chris Matthews just made the metaphor of the evening so far:

    Hillary Clinton’s campaign is the Titanic, and Barack Obama is the iceberg.

    Howard Fineman just reported that his sense is that Obama’s strategy in Pennsylvania was to spend her into oblivion, and to try to keep it within 10 points. It looks like it works. She has little money to compete now effectively in NC and IN, and a 10-point or less ‘win’ will help dry up donations. Big donors want more than 10 points.

  • wren452

    THANK YOU DaddyD for reminding me! It’s so easy to get down in the mud and start slinging — in defense, in anger, in fear of loosing everything.
    The important thing is to keep our integrity. Not loose sight of the goal.
    I will, as of this minute, stop thinking negative thoughts about Senator Clinton and her supporters, and begin thinking of them as fellow Democrats that I will be happy to work with to make this a better country.
    That’s what it’s all about… I nearly forgot that.

    • DaddyD

      Believe me, I’ve been down in the mud too. Easy to get hooked when we’re all so passionate about our candidates. We just gotta remember the other side – Clinton supporters now, McCain supporters later – are also as equally passionate and believe they’re just as right about it as we are. No need to hate, just listen, and be the example of change we want to see in others.

  • Les Ismore

    Sorry, but we cant accept the politics of hate from yet another Obama supporter unless it is in the form of an Open Letter to Hillary Clinton.

    Please rewrite and resubmit.

  • Qwerty

    I’m in. The only other person who has turned me off so completely in politics is George Bush. And her pathological lying, the ability to keep repeating her lies about Bosnia even when reports contradicting her account surfaced, convinces me that she’s right up there with the worst of them. I hate her cackle, her crazed stare, her pantsuits, her chutzpah, I hate everything about her. I don’t like Obama as much anymore either, but It’s carthartic to say this, I hate Hillary Clinton above all.

    They will be attacking Howard Dean next. i really think there should be an exodus of voters out of both parties if Dean, Obama, Kucinich, etc. will form a 3rd independent party.

    The Clinton Party is NOT my party.

  • Qwerty

    I HATE HILLARY CLINTON. In case that got lost.

    Btw, I don’t think the media loves the drama, it’s backfiring on them so bad. They genuinely do *not* want Obama to win. We’d find out some day how they all conspired to deep-6 his candidacy even if it is inconceivable that they would do something so undemocratic. It’s like the Iraqi non-existing WMD, but every media was pushing the story in 2002 without even LOOKING at the “evidence”. They do a little mea culpas, like Hillary does now, and we FORGET. We deserve this, really. There are no consequences for lies, for swift-boating, for guilt-by-association, we all let it pass, and we wonder why we don’t get an honest politician any more.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      I actually think that Barack having won the way he did is throwing off their game. By the time they understand how to combat his message, it was too late. His lead was just out of reach and has remained that way.

      They try to use the same tools and techniques with only limited success. I am actually happy to see them pursue the same strategies, despite their obvious ineffectiveness.

      It convinces me that all despotic systems eventually become their own worst enemy – whether it is a system based on corporate rule or the rule of a dictator.

      They reach too far and fail to understand the changes even as they are taking place in real time.

  • cfarnham

    the only thing more frightening than Hillary as president is McCain as president. Fellow Democrats, we can NOT let this bitterness deter us from reclaiming the White House. I would take ANY Democrat over 4 – 8 more years of a continuation of Bush policy which is what a McCain presidency is starting to look like. As painful as it would be I can stomach Hil as pres. – if it’s McCain I’m moving to Canada.
    But PRAYING for Obama!

  • Yvaughn

    I seriously hate Hillary Clinton. I have nothing against her supporters, except when a few of them:
    a) attack Obama’s supporters as some kind of cultists, or
    b) use “hold my breath ’til I turn red,” vote-for-McCain rhetoric, as if they want to blackmail the party into choosing her.
    But I know that’s not all of ’em, just as they should know that not all Obama supporters are the ones who get frustrated and snarky.

    But Hillary Clinton? HATE. That’s not likely to ever change.

    Were she to win the nomination, she and her supporters–and our country–had just better hope that I can hate McCain more.

  • TerryCarroll

    Joe Lisbon said it well earlier in this thread.

    I’m amazed that Clinton supporters don’t seem to suspect anything but “Kool-Aid” as the reason so many life-long Democrats and long-time supporter and defenders of the Clintons have been so thoroughly turned-off to all three of them through the course of this campaign.

    We didn’t arrive at this state of emotional revulsion through some secret plot (“Remain in place behind the Clintons for 16 years; campaign for them; send them money; buy their books; join MoveOn to help defend them … then, in 2008, when Hillary is all set for the nomination, go Judas on them!”).

    Sometimes the person who has a lot of former friends did something, or a series of somethings, to turn those former friends against them. Sometimes it IS the personal that is the political.

    It doesn’t have to do with “policies” and “positions”; it has to do with tactics and behavior. We came to hate her — against our long-held opinions — because she presented us with a person, a family, who we now can’t help but hate.

    Doesn’t that bother those of you who still support the Clintons?

  • libgirl

    Sorry I am coming to this discussion late. I am in the NW and you all are probably asleep. If anyone has done this already please forgive me for having missed it, but has anyone run the numbers/projections of an independent Obama candidacy if Bill/Hill get the nom? I know Bill/Hill can’t run one because they don’t have the funds or support, but what about Barack? Since Bill/Hill are coming closer every day to absolute parity with McCain (such as nuking Iran and embracing AK47 fanatics, and choice is no doubt next), Barack will stand in stark contrast to the three of them, if in imagery alone. Do we really know many voting age republicans/probable McCain voters there are? Just curious is all.

    • GMan

      Sounds like a good idea for a new blog post. Start a new discussion and see what folks have to say!

      Personally, I think it would be impossible for either Clinton or Obama to win in November if either of them ran as an independent. Consider that they are splitting the Dem vote almost 50-50 now. It’s really hard to see beating McCain without the full Dem base behind one of the candidates.

  • BP in NJ

    As much as I would loathe voting for Hillary, I would if she were the nominee. I despise her lack of character and honesty. That really concerns me. To think of her representing the U.S. around the globe makes me nervous because even the foreign leaders must know her word can not be trusted.

    But that pales in comparison to the damage possible to the Supreme Court should McCain win the election. There’s a very real possibility he will have the opportunity to nominate three justices. If that happens were screwed for the next fifty years. The Constitution has already been eviscerated. I wouldn’t want that to be rubber stamped by conservative justices.

    • JasonEverettMiller

      See, that is the false choice we are being presented. At least with McCain in the White House, a democratic Congress can block any appointments that are outside the middle.

      We can also force McCain back to who he was earlier in his career, which was much closer to true republican ideals than any of the current crop of losers.

      The problem with Hillary is the same problem we had with Clinton – sneaking in drastic corporate-friendly changes while pretending to be progressive. Espousing high ideals then using a bitterly partisan environment to distract us from the continued looting of our country. I don’t trust one party being in control of anything, especially not a party that has so often demonstrated a liking for DLC-shaped “compromises” to the common good.

      That’s what took me so long, wrestling with just who this woman was independent of her husband. After a long look, I can’t say that I like what I see at all. I’ll still vote, but not for her. Nor for McCain.

      Most likely a write in for Barack in the sad musing came to be fact.

      • GMan

        See, that is the false argument you have bought into. McCain will appoint right wing justices to the SC. The Repub base won’t go for a traditional moderate (and to be moderate a judge has to be pretty far to the left of what is now typically right-wing). The Dems controlled the Senate when W. appointed Roberts and Alito. Their control of the Senate did not help them move W. to appoint more moderate justices.

        And if you think McCain will govern as a moderate, I give you the example of W., the compassionate conservative in the 2000 campaign, the uniter, not a divider. Yep, we can use another one of that flavor of Repubs in the WH, eh?

        • JasonEverettMiller

          No, I don’t think McCain would govern like a liberal at all. Nor do I think Hillary will. However, the danger of Hillary is that she will pretend to be a progressive while a rubber-stamp democratically controlled Congress will give her an entire corporate agenda tied up with a bow.

          At least democrats in Congress will be obligated to give the appearance of fighting against an extreme, though obviously pliable, republican president.

          No matter who wins the presidency, Congress is going to have a strong plurality for democrats, many of them brand, spanking new. Plus an electorate who has a large percentage of disgruntled, yet newly involved, progressive democrats, independents and moderate republicans. We have had a taste of how we would see things run. That genie isn’t going back in the bottle no matter who gets elected.

          I prefer a progressive Obama administration with a newly progressive Congress leaning heavily democratic or with a new breed of republicans,w which actually do exist.

  • psyclone

    And to think….there’s only 4 more months of posts and threads like this. Hillary is going to take this to the convention, obviously, and attempt her elitist superdelegate coup. (In that respect, Pennsylvania changed absolutely nothing, except stroking the ego of Hillary).

    And then after that, there’ll be 4 more years of posts and threads like this, where we argue over who is to blame for blowing what should have been an easy election win, and creating President Mccain. It’ll have been Hillary’s fault of course, but her apologists will be out in full force anyway, saying the candidate who had the most votes and pledged delegates and won the most states should have stepped down earlier.

    How sad.

  • exregis

    @cfarnham,

    The only thing more frightening than Hillary as president is McCain as president.

    Nope. McCain is not going to be able to do much without congressional support, which he doesn’t have. The Supreme Court will be a wash, with neither Clinton nor McCain able to get past a filibuster with a left or right candidate. The war will be a wash because Clinton won’t end it any faster than McCain. She is a hawk, despite her current soothing words. Health care reform will be a wash because McCain won’t try for it and Clinton The Fighter hasn’t the least clue as to how to work with Congress to pass a bill with teeth. The economy will do what it does without any help from any president. No way Clinton will be able to pass an infrastructure bill, for example, with a split Congress.

    In fact, progressives might be worse off with Clinton because her offensive nature will drive Republicans to vote for enough Republican senators to maintain a filibuster. She will probably trail the Democratic candidates instead of providing coattails like Obama.

    The only way Clinton can win the nomination is if Obama commits a mortal sin or if she plays so dirty the superdelegates will vote for her. The latter is so repulsive that it is worthwhile defeating a Democratic candidate to get these non-democratic superdelegates out of the nominating process.

  • hrebendorf

    I can’t even stand to look at her face anymore. She makes me want to puke. She’s determined to turn this into another “lesser of two evils” election, and I hate her for it.

    She’s holding the nomination hostage until the Party gives in to her demands, and the ONLY reason she’s getting away with it is because she’s the wife of a former president. If Hillary had been forced to run on her own merits, she wouldn’t have made it past Iowa. Any credibility she has left, she stole from her husband.

  • sleuthiness

    Does Slumlord WORK for HRCs campaign. Is Slumlord a bot, programmed to the “first responder” yawning at every anti-HRC post with his, her, or its nonsense?

  • on2them

    It didn’t take this post, last night or this primary to make me despise Hillary Clinton. My revulsion for her has developed over the course of the last 15 years.

  • Les Ismore

    Thank you! It has been estimated that every time a TPM Hillary Hater posts an Open Letter to Senator Clinton, 10 more people vote for her.