Saturday, September 13, 2008

Why Replacing Biden With Hillary Makes Perfect Sense for Obama

Sen. Joe Biden's a perfectly appropriate vice presidential running-mate for Sen. Barack Obama. He's got 36 years of Senate experience, is a true intellect, a foreign policy expert, and a genuinely nice guy. But ever since Sen. John McCain added plucky Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to his ticket, the old adage nice guys finish last is beginning to take on new meaning in this year's presidential contest. It's time to dump Biden and replace him with Sen. Hillary Clinton. I don't care how it's done. Campaign chief David Axelrod can figure that out. And the sooner the better. Because I'm starting to think that if Team-Obama doesn't do something dramatic fast, it's gonna lose this election. There's a worrisome shift in momentum and in the polls. The Palin phenomenon, while truly unfathomable to Democrats, has energized McCain's campaign and allowed him like Houdini to snatch Obama's "change" theme right out from under him. It's time to snatch it back.

Conventional wisdom says replacing Biden with Clinton can't be done. That it's too late. That it'll make Obama appear indecisive, impulsive and lacking good judgement. Many Democrats believe this would cause irreparable harm to the campaign, ringing Obama's death knell. But this couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, it'd be a freakin' coup for Obama, and would instantly melt Palin's undeserving outsize political ice cap.

To be sure, a Biden-Clinton switch would cause quite a stir in the media. They'd accuse him of all sorts of things, from being politically expedient and flip-flopping to being irrational and ill-equipped to be president. The talking heads on CNN, Fox and MSNBC would be locked in a non-stop frenzied orgy of derisive rhetoric. But we also know that it would make about 18-million Hillary voters ecstatic at the same time. So, honestly, who really cares what Joe Scarborough, Keith Olbermann, Wolf Blitzer or Brit Hume thinks? These pundits don't constitute an appreciable voting block. What they think and feel would be utterly dwarfed by the euphoria from Clinton's faithful supporters. It's a pretty safe bet that an Obama/Clinton ticket would capture virtually all of these loyal Clintonistas. It's also a safe bet that many of those highly coveted 18-49-year-old women who polls show migrated to McPalin this past week would drop the spunky little hockey mom in a heartbeat for Hillary. Lastly, it's an even safer bet that Obama's current voters would stick with him as well. So, where's the downside? Show me a Democrat, today, who'd dump Obama for McCain if Biden was replaced with Clinton? They don't exist.

Obama should do what the Republicans would do in this situation. In fact, he should do exactly what his opponent did. Shake things up. Be unconventional. Roll the dice. Out-McCain McCain. Who cares how it looks. Who cares what the media thinks. One thing's certain: there's an 18-million deep pot of gold out there waiting to be mined. An Obama/Clinton ticket would slam the door shut on this election.


Athena Smith said...

No need to.The Sarah bubble just started deflating. Read NYT front page. There is more to come.

Anyway, he is not looking at national polls. Only at electoral votes.
And he is ahead there.
Take a look

Anonymous said...

I had thought an Obama/Clinton ticket would have been a sure winner but then again McBush might have picked Condi or Colin for VP... far more effective moves to Obama's hypothetical Clinton move than this nump Palin could ever be.

Now that it is Obama/Biden I am fairly comfortable with our ticket. To switch in response to the Palin move would expose our king to their queen...let's play the board we have and beat the liar, liar pants on fire drum from the sidelines letting Obama go after McBush...I like our chances.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Hillary has bigger fish to fry say maybe Supreme Court justice? Majority leader of the Senate who sets the agenda? Gov of NY? Who says she wants the job that has been described as "a warm pitcher of spit"? No one knows what was said in that meeting with Obama at Feinstein's house but I imagine the two came to an equitable agreement. Expect great things from Hillary in the future.

Anonymous said...

How about this.. have Hillery challenge Sarah to a debate.. and keep at it over and over.

Beyond that I think that if people are stupid enough to vote for McCain then let them have what they asked for. This country will get exactly what it deserves no matter who wins

Unknown said...

Barack -

If you want to win this election take the high road. Continue to take the high road at all costs. McCain will bash you and taunt you and try to drag you down into the dirt. Be patient…Because soon, very soon, America will get sick of McCain and the same old nasty campaign tactics, the choices he's made for purely political reasons(Sarah Palin). And when that happens, in the weeks before the election, people will come back to the idea of hope and dreams, not bitter, cynical politics. You have come along at this time to save America. You entered the race because you know the country needs a forward looking vision of the world, of the economy, of our spirit, our altruism, our innovation. If you allow McCain to bring you down to his level with lies in your ads and distortions in your speeches people will see you as just another politician and you will lose your biggest advantage, the yearning in our hearts for real change.

Anonymous said...

Hillary will be able to run in 2012 once Obama loses 2008. If she joined the Obama ticket and Obama wins because of it, Hillary won't be able to run for President until 2016 and she'd be trying to follow two Democrat terms.

Hillary is not stupid enough to join the Obama ticket. She is going to win in 2012. Plus it is fodder that Obama has very poor judgement. As another example, look at how Obama responded when Russia invaded Georgia. Obama had to change his position three times.

I'm waiting for Hillary in 2012 and will most likely not vote for Obama.

Anonymous said...

So in other words Andy, sell out just to win? It will also appear to be an obvious move out of panic for Obama. THis is exactly what McCain is getting criticized for from the left, that he picked Palin out of panic, so you want Obama doing the same? Unreal Andy!

The Ostroy Report said...

Um, if the choice is win/sellout or lose/high road...I'll take win/sellout ANY should any sane Democrat who isn't a damned fool. As for how it will "appear," again, I whom? The media? Who gives a shit what they think. Do you think Hillary's 18-million will be upset? Do you honestly think he will lose any current Obama/Biden voters by going Obama/Hillary? And if he does, will it be mroe than 18-million? Do you not understand what the bounty is here?

I am truly sick of the "losing is ok as long as we didn't stoop to their level" bullshit. God, what's wrong with you? This is war. If you can't see that, then get lost and let some real Democrat fighters lead the way.

Anonymous said...

Your argument completely undercuts Obama's empty promises of change. Obama has absolutely no track record backing up his campaign rhetoric and now you think it is OK if he sells out, as long as he wins.

So, what makes you think Obama will keep ANY of his empty promises if he does win the election ?

mw said...

Too late my friend. The right ticket was Clinton/Obama. No experience issues at the top of the ticket. No women issues. That was a slam dunk ticket. The Democratic Party did not choose wisely. Better luck in 2012.

Anonymous said...

all you maysayers....all you fairweather supporters....YOU GUYS SUCK ! obama will win this election.....just watch and see...the voter turnout will be HUGE. (if obama was a white man he'd be up 15% in the polls,it's just the truth) but it does not matter,HE IS STILL GOING TO WIN THIS ELECTION....SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN AMERICA.....IT'S A NEW DAY !!!

Anonymous said...

andy...have you read the times piece yet? if that doesnt sway independent voters, nothing will

the idea that the only way clinton will fight to get a dem into the wh is if she is on the ticket...then she is not a dem anymore, and i will not support her for a run in 2012...if there is even a country left...i believe that the wingnuts will come out fighting come monday, in order to take the sting out of the times piece...but how do you battle the truth? with more lies of course...and so, its time for the obama campaign to fight fire with fire...forget the smart ads...go after the gut...make the ad that shows mccain celebrating his bday with a convicted conman...tell the country that wasilla is the capitol of meth and unwed pregancies for all of a clip of palin with disgraced stevens, being all cozy...on thursday, in her sendoff to the troops, palin conflated the occupation in iraq to 9/11...even bush wont do this either she is ignorant, or she is just batshit crazy....i choose the latter...which therefore makes the whole, bristol and track are meth freaks seem much more logical...crazy mom...fucked up kids

Anonymous said...

Stupid idea.

Athena Smith said...

Look at today's polls and tell me for crying out loud why anyone thinks Obama is losing...
Compare them to respective polls of other elections and tell me why anyone thinks Obama is losing...

Based on what?

You have a great number of people -including Hillary voters- who say they are very likely to vote for the other guy. That was true however in many past elections. But what past elections also showed was that in the last moment, these people did not change ranks.

You had disturbing polls after the convention. Well... did you expect it differently? The Republicans were thirsty for a glimmer of hope. Anything... and it was not McCain that offered it, it was the media's presentation of it, that actually legitimized it. How? Because she read well a speech others had written for her! That was the basis of the evaluation. As if that were a "reading poetry" class!
But now the media are getting their act together.

Sarah was like a promising stock that people started buying wildly. However, try to remember this. She rose not through merit or personal history or strong political family ties (like Bush) but through McCain's whim. The faster these people rise, the steeper they fall.

I have no doubts, absolutely none that the independents and the undecided who are going to decide this election, have a cooler head than the rest of us. They wait and they weigh everything until the last moment. And I bet that up to the last moment Sarah will "keep on giving."Not that this would have mattered if McCain 's health were excellent... but unfortunately it is not.It is quite bad. The results of the latest biopsy of his mole removal five weeks ago were simply not announced.

Keep your chins up people. America is about to make history, is on its way to becoming a moral leader once again and destroy that horrific image others have of us, that of the bully of the schoolyard.

Panic is the worst advisor. Let's remain disciplined, focused and organized. This is the greatest country on the planet. Chill!

Anonymous said...

The only change Obama has effected is change on his policies and promises. It is far too late for this "sex" change. He has shown himself to be weak as it it; this would prove it beyond any doubt. Not only that, Hillary can win in four years. She would be foolish to accept the offer should Obama decide it's the only way he can win. THe problem that would remain should Hillary be vp is Obama would still be President. He is not capable.

The Ostroy Report said...

Bacci, there you again, being most Democrats. Yes, wouldn't it be a lovely world if everyone read the NY Times and understood the issues. If everyone voted based on ideology and experience, not because a guy seems cool to have a beer with, or because a woman is attractive, funny and has boobs. That McCain put Palin on the ticket says he's smarter than you. That he knows he can dupe the public and they won't even know. Won't even care. Democrats like you always sit back and wait for the logical to happen...and then you're shocked and heartbroken when it doesn't. "How can people think Palin's qualified?" you say. "How can she and McCain lie through their teeth and get away with it?" you wonder. "Just wait," you promise, "people will see the truth, and they will do the right thing...for themselves and for the country." Yup, just like in 2000 and 2004, right? Don't you get it? McCain/Palin is running now on lies, abortion, conflating Iraq/911...and running a nasty, dirty attack campaign. Sound familiar?

Athena, wake up. National polls are dropping McCain's way. The electoral map is changing each day (just yesterday Missouri became a "safe" GOP state). That you are waiting for "Sarah to keep giving" is delusional. What has she "given" us so far? She's pulled in an additional 20% of the 18-49 year old women. She's helped McCain shrink Obama's lead. She's hogged every minute of press coverage for the past 2 weeks. If you think that somehow she's "given" to the Dems' cause you're truly living in a fantasy world. Drowning in wishingful thinking. The facts just do not support your confidence.

I'm sorry, but after 2004 especially, I no longer reoply on independents or anyone else to "do the right thing."

Anonymous said...

It really would not help Obama and the world's opinion of him if Biden became yet another or Obama's "dumpees". That man just doesn't know what loyalty is to people and consistency is to policy. He is wishy-washy and weak.

Anonymous said...

I'm a Democrat and I want Hillary for President. I'll wait until the next election for that victory. She absolutely should not run as vp.

Anonymous said...

She's not going to run as Obama's VP - she knows that she'll win it hands down in 2012. For now, she has to act like she is helping Obama and watch him lose.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, Andy, but I can't disagree more with your idea. Remember what happened in 1972, when George McGovern was "1000%" behind Sen. Thomas Eagleton of Missouri until the story leaked about Eagleton's past electroshock treatments? McGovern then unceremoniously bounced Eagleton from the ticket and chose the hapless Sargent Shriver. Nevertheless, the damage was already done and was immeasurable: the Democrats carried only one state--Massachussetts--that year in the election.

Were Obama to do as you suggest, he'd be sending all voters a message of not only opportunistic inconsistency, but one of absolute desperation. Voters can smell desperation a mile away and will stay away from a doomed ticket. Just ask George McGovern if you don't believe me.

The Ostroy Report said...

Chuck, you are dead wrong. This election is like no other. You have to ask yourself two very simple questions: (1) do you honestly think that anyone who's currently a passionate Obama supporter will desert him if he drops Biden? (2) do you honestly think that Hillary's 18-million supporters would criticize and not welcome this switch to her? You are paying way too much attention to what you think the 24/7 news networks will say about...but what they think doesn't matter. Let them rant about it all they want. The voters...the Obama/Hillary voters, would be thrilled. And that's all that matters. Doesn't matter what Republoicans think, and it probably would also attractr back many independents.

BTW, here's some new polls out today:

-NBC News/WSJ: "Has strong leadership qualities needed to be prsident:" McCain 48% Obama 26% (from 42/31 in July)
-"Knowledgeable and experienced enough to handle presidency:" McCain 54% Obama 15% (from 53/19)

Newsweek: Among white women: McCain 53% Obama 37%

-Seniors: McCain 52% Obama 39%
-Men McCain 52% Obama 39%

ALso, don't fool yourself into thinking that McCain/Palin isn't likely to win...and here's why: he has the reputation (deserving or not)as being a maverick, and Palin's a woman. You don't think that's enough "change" for people...especially the uniformed ones?

If it isn't starting to look like "Hail Mary" time I think you're kidding yourself....

Anonymous said...

It appears that Obama has to keep "guessing" until he gets it right. He made his mistake when he didn't choose Hillary and it is now too late. However, better that we now know he has poor judgment than to discover that if he were President and had to decide about war.

The Democratic Party led by Ted Kennedy made the first losing decision by pushing Obama and throwing Hillary aside.

Anonymous said...

If Palin, with all the short=comings she has as the vp candidate, doesn't doesn't have nearly so many sort-comings as Obama has the Presidential candidate.

Hillary's voters were never sold on Obama, even if Hillary were his vp. Many did not think he wwa ready to be Presdient and chose not to vote for him even before his vp pick.

Anonymous said...

Read a NY Times piece?

I'm a democratic elected official and I never read the Ny Times

I hate NY. Hillary's OK, but never liked NY.

What makes you think any voter in any swing state who isn't a volunteer already will care what it says?

This is more like 1988... A popular senator peaks at convention and loses to give republicans their 12 years...

Then four years later... Clinton wins.

Anonymous said...

Andy, despite what I wrote earlier, I'm beginning to think you're right, especially when you factor in the 18 million Clinton supporters. From what I understand, many of Palin's fans are supporting her unquestioningly simply because she's a woman, and they know litle or nothing about her past and her policies. After reading the NYT article about her today, I fear that she's out-Cheney Chenry in her secretove. paranoid, crony-ridden dealings as VP. One thing we and this country don't need is another four years of an officeholder who treats the office of VP as his or her own personal fiefdom!

But would Clinton really want to replace Biden? There's the question!

Vleeptron Dude said...

oh christ, get over it. hillary clinton lost. she's out of the race for this cycle.

she's a United States Senator from New York, young enough for another shot at the White House. She can make good use of the next 4 or 8 years actually doing significant, clear things in the Senate.

She lost. Primary voters wanted Somebody Else. mccain's choice of a loony whacko ought not panic everybody into screaming for something no candidate in history has ever done.

Suck it up. It's Biden. It's not Hillary Clinton. I hope she has the brains to campaign ferociously and sincerely for the ticket.

Anonymous said...

Those of you praising the NY TImes for its wisdom seem to have forgotten the front page article about Obama before the campaign. It said he was very good at getting agreement between opposing sides because his method of conceding and "caving" to his opposition always ended in victory for the other side. Much like he's caved toward the Right in this campaign.

Yea NY Times for telling the truth about Palin and Obama. Oops -- the Times didn't really prove McCain's "affair", did it? And remember how the Times was pushing for the war in Iraq -- J. Miller and the rest

Anonymous said...

How woefully naive of you. This has nothing to do with being a sore loser over Hillary. Way too many of you have been convinced that Obama is in by cnn and msnbc over the last few months that you simpy don't get it now. He's losing. Unless there is a staggeringly powerful performance in the debates, which he was unable to do even in the primaries, the tide has shifted. It's starting to show in every state poll as well. He's in big trouble. He's got to do something to snatch this thing back.

Those of you who are so hell bent on taking the high ground, how many presidential elections are you willing to lose to those vicious lying bastards before you get it???

Take the high ground once in office. But fight like bloody hell to get there, like they do and win and win and win.

Listen carefully folks, the country is in terrible shape. By every standard. And yet, Mccain is AHEAD. If that doesn't show you how fucking stupid the American people are, and that dramatic things must be done to win, then shame on you naive, idealistic fools.

Anonymous said...

Hillary has the duty of standing beside "her man", supporting him after all his mistakes. Much like, well, like Hillary, and all the other humiliated women. Obama has really messed up and she HAS TO stand by him.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Chuck, many women will vote for Palin because she is a woman, as many men voted against Hillary because she is a woman.

Anonymous said...

4:45 at least was smart enough to use the right word,IF,IF,IF. If obama had voted yes or no those 130 times rather than saying present and took a stand.If obama wouldn't of let his people make Bill Clinton into a Racist and then didn't even condemn the people who did it.If he would of vetted hillary for the second spot,If he wasn't an empty suit.Theres to many IF'S

Anonymous said...

4:45 If Obama were a white man he woudln't be the Democratic candidate for the presidency. There were white men far more experienced than he who were not chosen on merit. If he were white every black person in the country wouldn't have voted for him; and, the liberal press wouldn't have supported him at the exclusion of "vetting" him. The white liberal Democrats were thrilled with the idea of having the first black President. And if he were white he would not have been given a pass for attending a church that condemned America.

Prius said...

Andy, I have been sitting back waiting for someone like yourself to say what I have been telling others ever since Palin came into the picture. As you all know on this blog, when Barack didn’t pick Hillary I said that the White House was going to be McCain’s. I then said that McCain would be picking a female to offset Obama’s major screw up. I told people here, that McCain would pick a female and I had thought it would be Condi but I did predict that it WOULD be a female. The day Palin was picked I had emails and phone calls saying I had called it.
Those that are huge Obama fans kept telling me I was all wet saying he should have picked Hillary, that Biden was a good pick. I told them that the GOP would win and that it would be a “Hat Trick” for the GOP.
Look, Biden is fine guy but damn it we need to win the White House and the polls are showing we’re going to lose. Obama had a sure shot with Hillary and he was going to be “Mr. Big Shot” and I’ll do it MY way. Well we’re going to lose this and it’s because of his poor choice.
His ONLY option is for Biden to take a hike and get Hillary on the ticket no later then by mid week.
Andy, people can say what they want by this is the ONLY way we can beat the McCain ticket.

Anonymous said...

This whole discussion shows that Obama has poor judgement. Vladimir Putin is licking his chops over the thought of an Obama Administration. Putin, China, Iran, and Venezuela will walk all over President Obama.

Anonymous said...

I have to admit that I was praising Obama on every blog I had the time to post on. I just wanted the Democrats to not elect Hillary as their candidate. I never intended on voting for Obama or any Democrat for that matter.

I wonder how many other people out there were doing the same exact thing. Silly Democrats believe that the internet is reality. Muhahahahahah.....

Anonymous said...

6:36 Strange you should have praised Obama. Here, in the South, where I live every white Repbulican voted for Hillary because they were afraid Obama would win. I think their preachers told them to do that. You evidently are a smart Republican.

Anonymous said...

this thread has now gone right into the rabbit hole

obama made a bad decision because he chose a man with gravitas as his vp

mccain made a good decision because he chose a candidate with a vagina

and as to the racist trolls on this thread...frack every one of you

and to anon 11:17 AM..what district do you represent?

you frackin liar

and no...hillary will not ride in on that big white horse come 2012

if she and bill do not campaign hard for obama...then 18 million voters will remember that...her career will be dead

how many people does rove have on the payroll?

andy...its time to stop allowing fully anon comments on your blog

it really is getting rediculous

Anonymous said...

Pruis -- How will you feel if you discover some Republican read Ostroy's blog and got the "woman as v.p." idaa from you. Shame.

May have been 4:36

Anonymous said...

6:54 The 18 million voters are women who will vote for Palin this time and Hillary next time. Get it??

Ostroy allows us anonymity so all of this can be kept cerebral and not erupt into personal vengeance as some posters indicate the proclivity for.

Or if, for safety, not anon. some fictious name with no reliable link like your pseudonym,

Anonymous said...


my name is connected to an email link...which you dont know, but the owner of the blog knows

18 million women will not vote for palin, because 18 million women didnt vote for clinton...she got 18 million votes...and again, you are proven to be a simple minded troll

not one troll post is cerebral, all you do is spit out what talking points you have gotten from the rnc

and if america chooses to buy into the lies of the mccain/palin be it

and if some women choose to vote against their own best interests because the vp candiates has a be it

but ill be damned to watch the dem party do stupid stunts in order to win an election

shoot...why not nominate a talking it knows more about the bush doctrine than caribou barbie

oh...and you may think your anonymous...but your ip addresses all show up...and im betting that they all come from the same place

Prius said...

anon 6:57pm: You don't have to be a math major to figure out what MCain was going to do for a VP. He had no other choice, he had no one other than Lieberman, whom he really wanted. Rove, I'm sure talked him out of it, and told him to go for broke and pick a female.

This is all it is, McCain had to reach out and pick a female to show the Hillary people that he could CHANGE what Obama would not.

I don't blame McCain, I blame Obama for not seeing this.

The GOP pulls a hat trick in 08.

Anonymous said...

grats andy...i see huffpo has picked up your the wingnut talkers will use it all week to show that there is division within the party...when there is not.

1500 people showed up for an anti palin rally in anchorage yesterday...that is compared to less than 1k who showed up to welcome sarah home.

women are not flocking in droves to the mccain party and when people wake up tomorrow, they will see more of the financial mess that bush has gotten us into...on mccains watch

if the dems again lose out because of "value voters" then we know one thing is true...with or without hillary, we will never win those people, because they truly have no values, except the belief that the most important thing in the world is a fetus...but once it leaves the womb...eff it if it aint mine...and you can never change the mind of such a disturbed individual....all you can do is lock them away and throw away the key.

now excuse me while i go stare at the moon...i want to pump up my resume for when i apply for the job of head of nasa in the mccain administration.

Anonymous said...

Biden or Hillary in the VP ticket will not matter. Palin (the cheerleader) will just fade and it is already starting. Obama will be the next president.

Anonymous said...

No to removing Biden. It would look desperate.

Why would women move to Palin if they believe in the Democratic issues? The press keeps saying women have moved to McCain because of Palin. I just don't get it and I'm a woman!

I vote the issues and McCain/Palin are for everything I'm against.

Wake up folks or we will be looking at a President Palin (McCain is on borrowed time with his serious cancers).

Is that what you want? She is a rabid religious right wing nut.

Anonymous said...

Obama is down to 6% in NJ! If he can't win NJ, the Democrats are in serious trouble.

Screw Hillary (not really), I think Obama should BJ himself on the ticket. Obama/Bill Clinton should do the trick.

They can make videos - Obama rolls a blunt and Bill Clinton sticks it inside an intern. I'd vote for that.

Anonymous said...

Andy, you are so desparate you have the stink of death around you.

How many times did you and your ilk say that the first important decision is a measure of a presidential candidate and McCain flunked because of his Palin choice?

Now the Palin choice is scaring the living piss out of you and you've come to the conclusion that your guy flunked your own test - he made the wrong choice for Veep.

Ah, but let's not think about that......

As for "changing" to abandon the high road/losing for the low road/winning, you are mistaken once again.

Long ago the Democrats took the low road.

Even they have a name for the hateful divisive political games they play, albeit a euphemistic one - "identity" politics.

In other word, parsing the country into as many subgroups as possible and imbuing them with a sense of victimization at the hands of big brother.

That's what you get when you spend the better part of 50 years dividing the nation.

Speaking of which, when do you think the blacks will get wise to your game? 54 years after Brown vs Board and you still have the overwhelming majority of blacks right where you want them - entrapped in substandard schools and living in substandard housing so that they can still be dependent upon your "benificence" - which always seems to never arrive.

I guess that's about what one should expect of a party that launched the bloodiest war in US history to defend and protect slavery.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of 'low road politics', the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, has declared that Obama tried to delay the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq so the next administration could get the credit for it.

Obama is such a slime ball. This is MORE proof that Obama's ego is one of his biggest weaknesses. He will do anything to make himself look good.

Anonymous said...

Obama and Hillary come from the same school. What they do is come to an issue with their pre-determined theory and then "listen" to the people. They then hear what bothers the people. Nothing shakes them from their predispositions - in Obama's case extreme socialism and black liberation theology.

Rather it's a major fake out - they weave the words and fears of people into a message to get their votes, all the while intending to keep with their own agendas, which are rarely explicitly stated.

Obama and Clinton have so much in common - it's why they can't be on the same ticket - they are careerists who don't care squat about anything other than their own personal advancement. That's why there's no room for both of them in the room.

The Clinton's sought to destroy Israel in the quest for a Nobel Peace Prize that would cleanse the stains off of their corrupt presidency. It was all about them.

Obama has basically thrown every person who helped him up the ladder over the side - Rezko, Wright, Ayers - all of the people whom he had a close relationship with that were the hothouse for his ascension. They became inconvenient.

But don't kid yourself - these are bad people and it would have to be a hell of an accident for one guy, especially a highly educated dual degreed Ivy Leaguer, to find all of them in the pool with him.

Obama is bad, bad, bad to the core. He stands for one thing and one thing alone - a ravenous appetite for self interest regardless of consequences to the nation.

Anonymous said...

Obama and Hillary come from the same school. What they do is come to an issue with their pre-determined theory and then "listen" to the people. They then hear what bothers the people. Nothing shakes them from their predispositions - in Obama's case extreme socialism and black liberation theology.

Rather it's a major fake out - they weave the words and fears of people into a message to get their votes, all the while intending to keep with their own agendas, which are rarely explicitly stated.

Obama and Clinton have so much in common - it's why they can't be on the same ticket - they are careerists who don't care squat about anything other than their own personal advancement. That's why there's no room for both of them in the room.

The Clinton's sought to destroy Israel in the quest for a Nobel Peace Prize that would cleanse the stains off of their corrupt presidency. It was all about them.

Obama has basically thrown every person who helped him up the ladder over the side - Rezko, Wright, Ayers - all of the people whom he had a close relationship with that were the hothouse for his ascension. They became inconvenient.

But don't kid yourself - these are bad people and it would have to be a hell of an accident for one guy, especially a highly educated dual degreed Ivy Leaguer, to find all of them in the pool with him.

Obama is bad, bad, bad to the core. He stands for one thing and one thing alone - a ravenous appetite for self interest regardless of consequences to the nation.

Anonymous said...

Obama will lose and a big factor will be racism within his own party. I talk to many Democrats who will not vote for him based on race. I have seen more racism and sexism among Dems than anywhere else.

Of course, libs think being pro-life is sexist, so I'm sure that will be challenged.

Sidney Condorcet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sidney Condorcet said...

In this time of economic instability, when America is teetering on the brink of economic collapse, we cannot afford to elect a President who has not even a passing interest or understanding of the American economy. McCain's consuming passion is Iraq, and Iraq only.
He will continue Bush's economic policies. With a rising deficit, he wishes to make Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy elite permanent, though he once said they were immoral.

A long term, large scale American military presence in Iraq, as McCain advocates, may be a blessing for Iraqi stability, but since we are paying for it with long-term debt via China, it will limit America's own economic stability. Add to that mix McCain's reflexively militaristic outlook and it's possible that a conflagration with Russia or Iran could further bankrupt our nation.

America simply cannot afford for John McCain to be elected President...

Anonymous said...

We can't elect a President who will raise taxes on everyone. He claims that people making under x amount of money won't get increased taxes, but there is no other way to pay for all his promises. Once Obama is in the White House, the economy will drop like a rock and taxes will shoot to the stars. It will be too late to do anything. Obama will have his 4 years to implement his socialist agenda. If anyone needs more proof that his promises are empty, I highly encourage you to look at his record and find a single example where he kept his word.

Anonymous said...

The Black Liberation Theology is based on Marxist socialism. Obama attended Trinity Chruch which preaches that economical philosophy. He is already planning on giving poor school children four thousand dollars to do "volunteer" work.

Anonymous said...

Oprah refuses to have Sarah Palin on her "women's" show.

Anonymous said...

"He's a liberal democrat."

Obama is not just 'a liberal democrat', he's the most liberal person in the Senate.

Here is a link that shows that Democrats make up 55% of John McCain's partners. Republicans make up 13% of Obama's partners.

John McCain can reach across the isle to work with the other party, and usually bucks his party to do so. Barack Obama has major problems reaching across the isle and has never went against his party for the good of the country.

The only time Obama can reach across the isle to work with the other party is when he is working to issue postage stamps.

John McCain has been the chief sponsor of 82 bills (since Obama joined the Senate in 2005). 120 of the 220 co-sponsors on John McCain's bills were Democrats. John McCain has worked with Democrats on 50 of his 82 bills since 2005; Democrats out-numbered Republicans in 37 of those 50 bills.

Barack Obama has no such record of bipartisonship. America doesn't need to be divided right now. The only person running in 2008 with the ability to unite Americans is John McCain.

Sidney Condorcet said...

Yeah, lord knows that Americorps, Public Allies, Teach for America, Big Brothers Big Sisters, Boys and Girls Club, American Red cross all are socialist programs and have a net negative benefit on society as a whole.

Colin Powell and John McCain have both supported volunteerism and community service by way of Americorps supported programs. They must be marxists too, huh?

Sidney Condorcet said...

Why should Obama have worked with Republicans in the Senate? Bipartisanship only works when the other side is competent. See American History, years 2001-2008 to get a sense of how competent Republicans are at governing...

Who cares if he's liberal? You say that like its a bad thing. :)

We've tried conservative. Didn't take. And now for something completely different...

Anonymous said...

Perfect idea. This is war. The
healthy existence and restored integrity of our country is at stake.

Obama should wait until the second week in October to make the change.
It will give less time for the shock to wear off and just enough
time for the momentum to build.

It has to come from Biden and it has to be put that in light of the irresponsible and morally reprehensible decisions on the part of the conservative party, we have decided to make a change in order to save our country.

Anonymous said...

1:55 PM

obama was rated most liberal by one publication...the journal....who amazingly in 04 rated kerry as the most liberal...

funny how many of the dem base dont find obama to be liberal enough, but some right wing rag does.

but keep lying...look around you, you are gonna lie yourself right into the pooor house and into ww3

idiocracy was not a comedy, it was a documentary

hey andy, maybe your next blog post should be on why obama shoulda picked obama girl as running mate...that woulda really shook up things

Anonymous said...

Even Karl Rove is now saying that McCain and Palin have been lying too much...

Sheesh, when Karl Rove things your ads stretch the truth, you know you're campaign is in the gutter.

Anonymous said...

Obama wants to spread the wealth like paying kids to do volunteer workl Marxist want to spread the money out equally. The Black Liberation Theology teaches Marxist socialism. Obama will give away government money to the poor making up any excuse -- like "volunteer" work. Welfare is a program which seems to work. Reckless disbursement of money is irreponsible.

Anonymous said...



Boiling_Mad said...

I don't think replacing Biden with Hillary Clinton is necessarily a good idea at this point. I believe the Obama-Biden ticket is strong ticket, and would make for a fantastic executive branch.

What I'd like to see Obama do, though, is appoint Hillary Clinton to his first opening on the Supreme Court. Perhaps, after consulting Clinton, he make this promise during the remaining days of the campaign.

Anonymous said...

yeah...Hillary on the Supreme Court. Can we start calling her Queen Hillary since she'll have no term limits and will be legislating from the bench ?

That'll really get people voting for McCain.

I encourage this suggestion.

Anonymous said...

Hillary will not be shelved for the rest of her life on the Supreme Court. She will be our President in 2012.

Anonymous said...

Obama's lead in liberal NY is down to 5 points. It looks like Hillary will have her chance to run in 2012.

Anonymous said...

Obama cannot fix the economy. He would be wise to hire Bill Clinton as his personal mentor/guru and financial adviser. McCain can't fix it either. We're in big trouble.

I have a money martket acctounr that pays .02 percent. And, the Feds are about to cut interest rates yet again.

Anonymous said...

I have a money market account

sorry -- my typing grade is also .02.

Anonymous said...

Obama's not losing NY for christ's sake...He's down to five in a poll that is clearly an outlier...No way Obama wins NY by less than 10 points...

New poll came out from Virginia, a state that hasn't voted for a Democrat since 1964. Obama's up 4 points. This thing will be close to the end. The debates will be crucial.

Anonymous said...

Palin doesn't need to know what the Bush Doctrine is....because SHE IS THE BUSH DOCTRINE!

Anonymous said...

Obama has resorted to traveling with his teleprompter because everybody knows he can't speak without it.

Anonymous said...

Even with a teleprompter Obama does not offer a solution for the financial mess. His idea to spend more money on all those programs he has in mind, will only make it worse.
I want to know why Greenspan is not being blamed for much of this mess. He gave Clinton good advice, but when the housing "bubble" was getting a lot of attention, he announced on TV that there was nothing to worry about. All was just fine. What happened to his judgment? Did he hate Bush? And why did the Democratic majority do nothing???? Even I knew Greenspane\ was wrong.

Anonymous said...

Biden was in North Carolina yesterday urging people to vote for Obama because of his skin color!.

I could be wrong but, isn't voting for or against someone because of their skin color racist ?

I'm looking forward to the liberal media giving Biden a pass for his racist statement. After all, we all know the media is voting for Obama.

Anonymous said...

It all changed yesterday, folks. The discussion shifted from lipstick to the market meltdown. Even the most disconnected voter knows that somenthing very scary is going on. All Obama has to do is make sure everyone knows that Gramps (R) helped cause the problem. After Obama/ Biden dismantle Gramps/ Caribou Barbie in the debates it will begin to open up. Hillary might have been a better choice but what is done is done. The chances of Obama dropping Biden are about the same as my being elected Pope. Also, why do we spend so much time obsessing over these polls anyway? I have a gut feeling that mostof them are bullshit. You certainly can't tell a damn thing about what anyone is going to do in November by what they say today. Also, most of them don't factor in the fact that many more people identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans so the data is necessarily skewed in favor of the GOP. They poll an equal number of each and the polls come out even. Duh! If I ask five Republicans and five Democrats who they plan to vote for, is it surpising that it comes out tied? In addition there's the cell phone issue. I think a huge percentage of likely democratic voters is being ignored. Let's revisit this thing on the last week of October and see if we're in such a tizzy then.
And finally to all of the PUMAS who plan to vote for McCain, fuck you. The blood of every kid killed in whatever henious wars that psychotic old goat causes or continues is on your self-centered hands. If he does get elected, may thier ghosts haunt you for every night of his term.

Bonita Applebum said...

Now, I am Team Obama all the way, all day, but, man, won't we be disappointed if they start playin' the same tricks on the American people that McIcan'tbelieveitsnotawrapforthisguy has been playing? That in itself would debunk the entire Obama campaign's message, which is for change and a new government--not a reactionary one.

Sarah said...

Don Van Vliet
I so agree....
God bless you!

Anonymous said...

2:05 "Hillary might have been the better choice but what is done is done."


2:38 It's not to worry. Obama has revived the tactic he used when running in Chicago. He played "gottcha" with unfair legal queations to remove opponents from the race.

Two of his supporters in Alaska, after talking to Obama it is told, are insisting Palin co-operate in the case of her firing an officer. She will be happy to when the Obama-supporters are no longer in charge and an impartial situation is created, she has replied. The supporters have said, publicly, it is reported, that they will "get" her. So, Obama will get her if she co-operates because the entire charade is "fixed"; and, the Obama camp will imply she's guilty if she doesn't cooperate with the investigation and "get her" that way. Obama is calling Palin paranoid to think he would stoop so low. He's an Ace Swiftboater.

Anonymous said...

Biden voted for the war too

Anonymous said...

"Two of his supporters in Alaska, after talking to Obama it is told, are insisting Palin co-operate in the case of her firing an officer. She will be happy to when the Obama-supporters are no longer in charge and an impartial situation is created, she has replied. The supporters have said, publicly, it is reported, that they will "get" her. So, Obama will get her if she co-operates because the entire charade is "fixed"; and, the Obama camp will imply she's guilty if she doesn't cooperate with the investigation and "get her" that way. Obama is calling Palin paranoid to think he would stoop so low. He's an Ace Swiftboater."


Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I had seen the Jill Greenberg pictures of McCain on TV. The station had the grace not show the gorilla that appears on the American Digest website.

I've been a Democrat all my life yet I'm stunned at the deep-seated hatred the Democrats are exhibiting in this campaign. They are hate-filled and on some blogs crude and vulgar beyond belief. I have never noticed that before this campaign. I was proud to be a a member of the Party and among such compassionate, and refined Democrats. I thought these attributes were characteristic of most member of the Party. What has happened? Jill Greenberg's pictures epitomize this hatred and vulgarity.

Anonymous said...

Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain

Things are getting interesting on the Hillary 2012 front. For now, I'm with Lynn Forester de Rothschild - Vote McCain / Palin 2008

Anonymous said...

Lynn Forester de Rothchild is one among many Democrats who will vote for McCain.

The Democratic Party should have defended Hillary against sexism the way the Republican Party has defended Palin. Maybe they'll be wiser in 2012.

Sarah said...

Lynn Forester de Rothchild?
Later in the week maybe Angelina Jolie as well...
So what?

Start getting used to the new polls. They are here to stay.

Anonymous said...

The so what is she's an important member of the DNC.