Skip to comments.
Does Clinton want Obama to lose?
The New Republic ^
| 03/24/08
| Jonathan Chait
Posted on 03/25/2008 8:48:48 AM PDT by CondiRice08
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
The Clintons were probably the worst fate to ever befall the rats. They lost the senate, house and governorships and state legislatures across the country under Bill Clinton. Also if she couldn't care less about her party, imagine what she'd do with this country if she [shudder] should become president.
To: CondiRice08
THE DAMAGE DONE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY by Bill Clinton was the worst experienced under any incumbent president since Grover Cleveland. Here are some of the stats:
- GOP seats gained in House after Clinton became president: 48
- GOP seats gained in Senate after Clinton became president: 8
- GOP governorships gained after Clinton became president: 11
- GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254 as of 1998
- State legislatures taken over by GOP after Clinton became president: 9
- Democrat officeholders who became Republicans since Clinton became president: 439 as of 1998
- Republican officeholders who became Democrats: 3
2
posted on
03/25/2008 8:53:15 AM PDT
by
digger48
(http://prorev.com/legacy.htm)
To: CondiRice08
If Obama is the nominee, clinton will sabotage him. No way she waits 8 years to run again.
3
posted on
03/25/2008 8:53:58 AM PDT
by
icwhatudo
To: CondiRice08
Sometimes I think the Clinton's are like Anakin Skywalker -- he became Darth Vader and worked to promote the dark side for many years, but in the end, it was only through his actions that the Sith Lord was destroyed.
The Clintons are bad people. Perhaps in the end it is only they who will remove the scales from the eyes of America and help the sheeple to turn away from Liberal Fascism.
To: digger48
” Republican officeholders who became Democrats: 3”
Unfortunately, one of those is Mccain.
5
posted on
03/25/2008 8:57:05 AM PDT
by
wilco200
(Typical White Person)
To: CondiRice08
I was rooting for hillary to be the nominee. I still believe that our liberal McCain would beat her, but McCain actually leads Obama by greater margins in PA and Ohio than he does hillary.
Anyway the economy will be ok on election day. Gas prices will fall a bit, and the tax rebate checks will have a short term stimulus on the economy. And we're winning in Iraq. Obama’s past is catching up with him big time, he's a fading rock star hoping to cut it on the oldies circuit.
And a McCain win is the only way hillary can ever hope to be president. So she'll definitely sabotage Obama’s campaign.
To: icwhatudo
The Democrats do not like their “losers” to run again. Gore and Kerry were not the “annointed” frontrunners for the 2008 election. She will lose all of her power after this cycle.
7
posted on
03/25/2008 8:59:02 AM PDT
by
LetsRok
To: icwhatudo
Some people are wondering why the Republicans are keeping their powder dry attacking Obama. The answer is that Hillary is doing an OK job right now on that front. Personally I think Obama will start faltering when it sinks in to most people his church/pastor problem and the fact that someone who’s name is Hussein might become president. Hillary will likely win the nomination and then the battle will begin.
But if Obama wins the nomination there will emerge groups who will make the Swift Boaters look like choir boys, then things are going to get real ugly real quickly.
To: icwhatudo
If Obama is the nominee, clinton will sabotage him. No way she waits 8 years to run again. If Obama becomes President, there is no way Clinton could wait 8 years. To do so would require her beating Obama's VP in the primary. That is a tough prospect, unless his administration is just a total disaster the last 4 years, in which case she could do it, but beating the GOP nominee would be even tougher.
She needs Obama to lose to McCain. Period.
There are 3 available scenarios to Hillary. Sabatoge Obama so McCain wins, she runs in 4 years.
Steal the nomination at the convention.
Accept the VP spot and have Obama whacked.
9
posted on
03/25/2008 9:01:20 AM PDT
by
Phantom Lord
(Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
To: CondiRice08
Her continued campaign is significantly damaging Obama's general election prospects The sense of entitlement among Obama supporters is breathtaking. The man is so insubstantial it is laughable.
To: CondiRice08

Is this guy Catholic?
11
posted on
03/25/2008 9:08:25 AM PDT
by
xp38
To: CondiRice08
I agree with the notion that 2008 represents Hillary Clinton's only real chance to win the White House. This is an ideal election year for a Democratic candidate to win (mainly because the current GOP administration is on its last legs and because John McCain is a miserable candidate), and history doesn't bode well for candidates on the national stage who lose during previous primary or general elections (note how thoroughly Walter Mondale was trounced in 1984 after losing on the Carter ticket in 1980, and how Joe Lieberman was generating Sharpton-like numbers in the 2004 Democratic primaries after losing as Gore's running mate in 2000).
For some reason I find myself wondering if the stars are lining up perfectly for Mitt Romney to be the ideal presidential candidate in 2012 -- regardless of who wins this year.
12
posted on
03/25/2008 9:10:36 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
(I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
To: ClearCase_guy
Sometimes I think the Clinton's are like Anakin Skywalker -- Similarly, I see Barak Obama as Spock, (from Star Trek) -- ashamed of his earth (white) mother.
To: sportutegrl
And there are the ears, as well ...
To: CondiRice08
Clinton is acting as if she doesn't care about the Democratic Party's interests at all, except insofar as they coincide with her ownDamn, these liberals learn slowly.
15
posted on
03/25/2008 9:13:20 AM PDT
by
T. Buzzard Trueblood
("a wee bit silly." -Lord Trimble on Hillary Clinton's claim of foreign policy "experience".)
To: CondiRice08
The Clintons were probably the worst fate to ever befall the rats.
And still better than Obama. Says a lot about the state of the Party.
In addition, dems now are into conspiracy theories big time... with Clintons deemed omnipotent no less!
16
posted on
03/25/2008 9:24:58 AM PDT
by
alecqss
To: wilco200
McCain may have become a “democrat”, but he still supports our troops and our mission in Iraq.
17
posted on
03/25/2008 9:25:01 AM PDT
by
LottieDah
(Democrats and liberals never fail to disappoint.)
To: Phantom Lord
Accept the VP spot and have Obama whacked.I find that comment repulsive, ignoble, and shocking. However, I have no problem believing it could be a plausible outcome. Is that not an amazing thing? Name another recent political figure about which the same could be said with little or no argument from vast number of the American populace. John Gotti? Pol Pot? Chavez?
Astounding!!!
18
posted on
03/25/2008 9:26:25 AM PDT
by
jimmyray
To: ClearCase_guy
And there are the ears, as well ...
And with still pervasive theory that if we only kiss him passionately enough, he will become a prince.
19
posted on
03/25/2008 9:27:55 AM PDT
by
alecqss
To: jimmyray
Someone else said several months ago that an Obama/Clinton administration would be the first one where the secret service had to protect the President from the Vice President.
20
posted on
03/25/2008 9:28:12 AM PDT
by
Phantom Lord
(Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson