Replies

And you don’t think the Clintons know how to cover their asses?

Btw, this is what I meant by sadly:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/hillary-clintons-popularity-reaches-near-record-high/2011/03/31/AFJWTXAC_blog.html

Hillary poll numbers. She’d be tough to beat. This would be her time — last time was ‘her time.’ You really think the Clintons wouldn’t dagger Obama? They’d do it indirectly.

Real question is, “What’d he do to stop them from doing it last time out?” Maybe destroying the Dem black base vote if they did him in? Other skeletons? That’s how Obama won the other elections he ran in.

~~~

Totally .. I’m sure they each had cards to play against the other. He’s the classic bullying, Chicago thugster, and she of bimbo control, FBI files, cattle futures and Arkancide fame. Whether it was paying off her campaign debts or something else nasty he’d spill or threaten, I think she settled or insisted on the SOS position.

And you don’t think the Clintons know how to cover their asses?

You give the Clintons entirely too much credit. They thought 2008 was "their time." It's why she ran. She got "Chicago'd" and neither Reid nor Pelosi wanted a strong Clinton and her agenda to have to deal with. They wanted the limp-wristed Obama all along, so that they could do whatever they wanted to do after the 2008 election. And they did.

So, you think Clinton planned for this to work out this way: Obama takes a drubbing in 2010, so that Hillary can ride to the rescue in 2012 because the poser turns out to be a fraud all along -- you mean THAT was the plan??

Clinton's are not historically known for delaying gratification. Get a grip.

Hillary poll numbers. She’d be tough to beat. This would be her time — last time was ‘her time.’ You really think the Clintons wouldn’t dagger Obama? They’d do it indirectly.

You manifest a novice's command of the meaning of polls 18 months out from an election. Assuming you were of voting age in 1992, one should recall that GHWB had a 91% approval rating in March 1991 following Gulf War 1. Now tell me how significant that fact is in light of how that worked out for him in November, 1992.

The story of Hillary and Obama is this: Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. If she's bottled up in the State Dept she HAS to support him, else she'd already have been sniping at him.

If Obama goes down with scandal, she goes down with him as an accomplice who had already done opposition research on him in 2008. Again, the DNC didn't get behind her because they couldn't control her like they have been able to control him. Congressional Dems wanted a weak Chief Executive and they got him.

Now all they have is an ineffectual opposition in the Senate and a vanishingly weakened Chief Executive right at the time that they need to mount opposition to the Tea Party motivated House Republicans.

Hillary ain't got spurs and a hat big enough to reverse this slide in 2012 - despite some stupid poll 18 months out. All this is is a reflection of how truly weak Obama is, not how "strong" Hillary is.

FReegards!