Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65387)	5/12/2008 4:23:19 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541965

This is terribly discouraging. We can't even agree to disagree. You are not even for letting the nomination process go to a logical conclusion where one of the candidates wins the election out right (eg getting the necessary delegate count). You want Obama to be given the election. If you wish, I'll be happy to agree to disagree. But I certainly don't want Obama "to be given th election." If Clinton wishes to take this all the way to June, she certainly has the right. But I can't see any path by which she gets the nomination, save some catastrophe for the Obama campaign. And campaigns are not, should not be, premised on that. I see those points you make about Obama and I can see how you get there. But the stark reality, Mary, is that the voters didn't see it that way. Obama is in the position he is in now because he has won every metric one can imagine. There is, of course, only one metric that counts--delegates. But Obama has so many delegates that no one outside the Clinton camp can see a path to a win; he has won the most states; and he has won the most popular vote. I don't see where I demonize her. I've typed here that I've grown discouraged by her as I've watched the kind of campaign she's run. I don't see how that's demonizing. But if you consider it that, then I'll grant you, we can agree to disagree as to what counts as demonizing.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (65387)	5/12/2008 5:20:55 PM
From: biotech_bull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541965

She is very specific on why she thinks she is the better candidate. 1. She is more experienced. 2. She is more knowledgeable on the issues. (She wins debates and he refuses to debate her). 3. She connects with blue collar middle class white and hispanic voters in ALL the big states that a democrat has to win. 4. She has a better health care plan on the table. 5. She has a track record when she was a full partner in the Bill Clinton administration. Meanwhile he: 1. Has far less experience. 2. Vague on the specifics as to what he stands for. 3. Has some explaining to do with regard to his 20 year association with Rev Wright and his church. I don't think there is anything wrong in that regard, but for many Americans, he will have to fully explain this part of his life. 4. He still has to prove that he understand white middle class culture. Where is his exposure. 5. He has only recently been put in the national spotlight, who knows what else will pop up. He is not fully vetted. 6. The democratic party is taking a gamble going forward. Mary, I actually agree completely with every one of those points. Do you have an explanation for the way the results stand right now that wouldn't appear to be demoinizing her?