Streams

The Day After

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

The final primary has come and gone. We analyze the results and talk politics with local political leaders and analysts including House Ways and Means Committee Chair Charles Rangel (D-NY-15th District-Upper Manhattan), Marie Cocco, syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group, and Melissa Harris-Lacewell, associate professor of Politics and African American Studies at Princeton University.

Guests:

Marie Cocco, Melissa Harris-Perry and Congressman Charles Rangel
News, weather, Radiolab, Brian Lehrer and more.
Get the best of WNYC in your inbox, every morning.

Comments [209]

Mike from NYC

Seth from Long Island states: "The longer Hillary refuses to formally concede and endorse Obama, the stronger the bruised feelings of her supporters will grow. Hillary is smart enough to grasp this fact. This is why I'm frustrated. The media narrative is now frozen and the pundits won't let it thaw out until they see Hillary concede and endorse."

Seth: Have you actually looked at the numbers? It takes 2118 votes to win the Democratic primary. Obama has 1763 pledged votes, 123 more than Clinton's 1640. There are 681 super delegates who can change their mind right up until the Democratic convention. They've been shifting back and forth and currently favor Obama, but that could change. Why should Clinton concede at all? If this were the other way around, I doubt the Obama supporters would be demanding hisconcession.

Jun. 05 2008 03:15 AM
eva

seth,
don't worry, jimmy carter will soon be derided by Clinton supporters as a sexist nitwit who bends over backwards for Obama because he's racist.
David Brooks on the Jim Lehrer Newshour just said Obama absolutely CAN'T afford to pick Hillary after the way she's behaved, especially after "raining on his parade" by saying on Tuesday that she's "open" to VP, which was totally unacceptable. Mark Shields just agreed.
The die-hard Hillary supporters need to be deprogrammed. They're the only people who don't get how revolting her behavior has been.

Jun. 05 2008 12:30 AM
seth from Long Island

Jimmy Carter said it would be ``the worst mistake'' for Barack Obama, the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee for president, to pick Hillary Clinton as his running mate, according to the Guardian.

Jun. 04 2008 06:16 PM
lkn from new jersey

I am simply shocked at the many Clinton supporters who want to vote McCain as a revenge on Obama for having won the right to be the Democratic Presidential Candidate. McCain represents pretty much all the worst this country has to offer: arrogance, narrow-mindedness, small-town attitudes. Let me remind you, Clinton had ALL the odds in her favor. Too bad that she can't handle not moving back to the White House. If you have any love for this country, this is where you mope for a day or two and unite behind the winning Democratic candidate.

LKN

Jun. 04 2008 06:01 PM
seth from Long Island

Barack Obama should not pick Hillary Clinton as his vice-presidential nominee, former president Jimmy Carter has told the Guardian.
"I think it would be the worst mistake that could be made," said Carter. "That would just accumulate the negative aspects of both candidates." Carter: "If you take that 50% who just don't want to vote for Clinton and add it to whatever element there might be who don't think Obama is white enough or old enough or experienced enough or because he's got a middle name that sounds Arab, you could have the worst of both worlds."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/04/uselections2008?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

Jun. 04 2008 05:58 PM
seth from Long Island

Pat Buchanan and Joan Walsh: The lady (Hillary Clinton) needs time

Hardball 6/4/08

Jun. 04 2008 05:54 PM
Tony from Brooklyn

Let's forget about entitlement, disappointment, and the absurd "she hasn't lost yet" arguments. That's emotional, and it'll subside for all but an irrational fringe group. People will get a grip and come back to their senses. The election isn't for 5 months. What are Hillary's qualifications for V.P.? That's the job she's APPLYING for at this point.
What are her qualifications? She was first lady. Never mind the implicit sexism of marriage being a "qualification" for public office, would anyone consider Laura Bush a VP candidate? Hillary had no security clearance. Her health plan flopped because she couldn't bring people together. She had tea with the spouses of a few heads of state. Hmmmm?
Most recent experience: Unsuccessful presidential candidate. I'm no career counselor but try telling a potential employer that you had a 20 percentage point lead over your competitor, more money, more name recognition, and then you blew it all and somehow lost all of that in just 5 short months.
Then there's the whole question of presentation. Her speech and the behavior of her and her surrogates the last 18 hours hasn't exactly been conciliatory and gracious.
She's shown herself to not be unqualified for the position once you remove the emotional and irrational argument about her "supporters." Perhaps she'd like to be Ambassador to Iraq. She adds nothing to the ticket that half a dozen other people couldn't without the baggage of her and her husband.

Jun. 04 2008 04:05 PM
eva

hjs,
happy to stick with facts, but the fact is that she lost an early advantage in terms on name recognition, money, establishment support. You might not call that blowing her out of the water, but a lot of people will. And for a guy who came out of nowhere, a lot of people would concede they'd found someone potentially a lot stronger than either of the Clintons ever were. The delegate count, and many of the popular vote counts would also say that he's our best choice.

Jun. 04 2008 02:23 PM
hjs from 11211

eva
51-49 isn't blowing anyone out of the water. can we agree to stick to the facts not fantasy

Jun. 04 2008 02:19 PM
mc from Brooklyn

Guy #189, I was a late comer to HRC, so much for changing minds. I support BHO now because he won the nomination and because he is a better choice than McCain. I do not feel I was "wrong" about my candidate, most primary voters picked him - that is all.

Jun. 04 2008 02:18 PM
hjs from 11211

fivealive
nothing, binLaden has nothing to do with iraq. besides no one is looking for him.

Jun. 04 2008 02:17 PM
patricia from new york

to women who supported HRC and are seriously considering voting for John McCain....

I for one was not amused seeing a possible future president laughing when asked "how do we beat the b**ch?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLQGWpRVA7o

Jun. 04 2008 02:02 PM
fivealive from Brooklyn

Now we have Obama the anti-war candidate, and John McCain the pro-war candidate. This is the biggest issue in the campaign. Obama has the advantage because the war is so unpopular right now. What happens if bin Laden is captured?

Jun. 04 2008 02:01 PM
eva

#193,
hjs, take heart
Obama was a long shot, he blew HRC right out of the water, despite her early name recognition, money, and established early lead.
The only non-long-shot was Biden. And he had no motivation, sadly.
I'm grateful we have someone of Obama's caliber - both in terms of strategy and ability to build the FUTURE of this party.

Jun. 04 2008 01:52 PM
hjs from 11211

Guy
i won't say i'm 'passionate' for HRC but i did want someone who could win a general election. BO is a long shot but i'm going keep my fingers crossed and hold my breath. i feel mccain will be the blow that the US can't recover from.

Jun. 04 2008 01:26 PM
D Torres from Manhattan

Barack Hussein Obama should not be
pressured into selecting Hillary Clinton,
as his Vice President.

Hillary should just go home.

She's been around the block long enough.

Time for a completely brand new fresh start.

Jun. 04 2008 12:56 PM
seth from Long Island

This is a nice Q and A for people who aren't fully informed.

Obama's Faith: Rumor vs. Reality http://www.beliefnet.com/story/230/story_23053_1.html

Jun. 04 2008 12:52 PM
seth from Long Island

Guy #187,

You nailed it, especially your 2nd paragraph.

Jun. 04 2008 12:47 PM
Guy from Bangkok

(part 2)

I'm of the opinion that so many people make up their minds about someone very early, and rarely change their minds. Her support dates back to Bill's early years as president when many women and some men began salivating at the thought of her for the top job. Look, I understand, it's tough to admit being wrong about someone you were so passionately in favor of, but I expect better from Democrats, who generally pride themselves on being more open minded.

Jun. 04 2008 12:45 PM
seth from Long Island

I wish Ralph Ellison and James Baldwin had lived long enough to witness Obama's victory. I would love to have heard their reactions.

Jun. 04 2008 12:44 PM
Guy from Bangkok

(part 1)
The claims of sexism and the talk of a "healing" that must occur, are nothing more than sour grapes. Mrs. Clinton's problems in not gaining the acceptance she needed to achieve the nomination stem far more from her being a Clinton than from being a woman. Let's not forget, Al Gore is not in his 8th year as president because he was VP to Bill Clinton. You take the good with the bad, being connected to a previous president. I thought Bill Clinton was a good president, but he hurt this nation deeply with his extracurricular activities. I hold him personally responsible for what we've had to endure for the past 8 years. There's no way he deserves to occupy the White House again, even as "co-president".

Mrs. Clinton can nip this "healing" nonsnse in the bud with a few words to her supporters, but she hasn't the class to do it yet, she needs more time to deal with her self-righteous indignation at not getting the nomination that she seems to believe was owed her. She showed her true colors in the way she waged her campaign. She's a liar. She continues to claim the edge in popular vote which is a fantasy, insulting to her supporters, and frankly, I'm seriously dismayed that they continue to support her. Even as recently as today, when speaking of Obamas's support for Israel, she subtly alluded to the idea that his support for Israel is recent and politically expedient, rather than long held and sincere as her support is.

Jun. 04 2008 12:44 PM
hjs from 11211

SG
thanks, one of the few sensible things i've read hear for a long time. i can only assume living in europe has cleared your head.

Jun. 04 2008 12:31 PM
RC Tobin from Manhattan

I think that we need to speak, as Brian did, about Obama's incredible achievement, and not permit that achievement to be diminished by Clinton's narcissism.

Last night, a man whose father was born in Kenya was nominated as President of the United States. When that father attended Harvard and the U. of Hawaii in the 1960s, segregation was still the "defacto" law in much of America. Goodwin, Cheney and and Schwerner were murdered for registering black voters in the South. Four black children were killed by a racist bomber in the same church attended by Condoleeza Rice. It took the national guard to integrate Southern colleges.

Yet Obama grew up in a world that was changing, and which allowed him to become the man he is today: multi-racial culturally as well as genetically; undamaged mentally and emotionally by the "little clouds" of prejudice that Dr. King feared would appear on his daughter's horizon; able to win the support and admiration of Americans of all racial, ethnic and class backgrounds.

Last night, a brilliant, eloquent, politically-gifted public servant was nominated as the Democratic candidate for President of the United States. That man just happened to be the son of a Kenyan.

On to November and the White House!

Jun. 04 2008 12:30 PM
SG from Budapest

I'm a 29 year old Jewish woman, transported New Yorker living in Budapest. I'd just like to say that I couldn't be more proud to have Hillary as my senator and Obama as my presidential nominee. I haven't felt so proud to be an American in a very long time. I'm also enjoying the new respect for America that this nomination process has inspired in my friends from around the world.

This was a fair fight, in my opinion. Any candidate coming in with Hillary's type of baggage would have gotten the same scrutiny. And I have to say that while I've been a lifelong Hillary fan – hell, I've defended her to Arkansas relatives – I was pretty turned off by her attitudes and actions in the race. Even grosser to me, though, have been the nasty comments unleashed from rabid Hillary supporters, who seem to think they can't like HRC without hating Obama. I don't get it. I voted for Obama not because I drank any cool aid, not because I'm stupid, not because I'm young, not because I was manipulated by the media, and DEFINITELY not because I hate women. I voted on the issues. And I know there are millions of others across the country who did the same.

HRC voters do deserve respect. I hope that some of the more hard-core Hillary fans can remember to give their fellow Democratic voters who supported Obama the same sort of respect that they demand.

Jun. 04 2008 12:18 PM
mc from Brooklyn

eva #162,
Look at Post #94. Where is Bush Sr.? That was my only question.

#165, interesting idea

Jun. 04 2008 12:18 PM
eva

180, Rita
richardson, webb, all good
also biden

Jun. 04 2008 12:14 PM
Chris O from New York City

169-Chestinee,
There are no qualifications to be on the Supreme Court, you just have to be picked by the President and approved by the Senate. In Hillary's case, though she has never been a judge, she is clearly qualified. She graduated from Yale Law School and went on to be one of the top lawyers in the country. She has been a Senator. She got more votes than anybody in history except Obama in a primary campaign. And she has very good relations with her colleagues in the Senate.

Jun. 04 2008 12:13 PM
Rita from Manhattan

Either Richardson or Webb would be a good choice.

Jun. 04 2008 12:13 PM
johnjohn from New York

On Obama achieving the nomination

Marie Cocco here is so one-sided. For days now I have heard Obama and Clinton speak, down to yesterday's speeches. Consistently Obama has been gracious, magnanimous and empowering while Clinton has been dismissive, disparaging and making it all about her. I agree as an Obama supporter that we need them to win. God I don't want to do anything with them. Probably these people will not vote for us and I am sad about it, but maybe the true side of some people is finally being revealed. Maybe we will have the angry, self-righteous and resentful people on one side and people who believe in hope and change on one side

Jun. 04 2008 12:13 PM
Libra from NYC

To Herb and others: I guess you can call me a simpleton then!

Jun. 04 2008 12:12 PM
seth from Long Island

"I Am Not a Bargaining Chip, I Am a Democrat" - Hilary Rosen http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/i-am-not-a-bargaining-chi_b_105133.html

Jun. 04 2008 12:10 PM
MG from Park Slope

#171

I meant to say, at the end of a speech. I think it may have been either Thursday or Friday.

Jun. 04 2008 12:08 PM
Rita from Manhattan

Thanks, Brian, for putting me on the air. My husband just called to tell me that he turned on the radio during the last minute or so, and was thinking, "Gee, that's exactly what Rita said this morning while we on our way to work," only to realize "Oh my god, that is Rita."

I was really nervous, but wanted to express my views and appreciate that you gave me the opportunity to do so.

Jun. 04 2008 12:07 PM
MG from Park Slope

#171

Yes I have heard this. He said it last week in a speech.

Jun. 04 2008 12:05 PM
RMCT from Westchester

P.S.:

If you call and talk to the campaign "off-media," the Obama people are saying "Sunday or Monday" as Clinton's drop out date.

She is not getting the vice-presidency. The Obama people are letting her try to bow out with dignity and allowing the media to wind down, but no one thinks that putting her on the ticket is a good idea (this is what I was told) and it isn't going to happen (ditto). Lastly, the campaign worker told me that nobody was happy about what she did last night, that the gloves will come off next week if she is not out by then, and that she knows this. They are waiting to see if she gets the message.

For what it's worth -- but I think this guy had real information, because the Israeli speech happened half an hour after I'd spoken with him.

Jun. 04 2008 12:02 PM
seth from Long Island

Analyses of Clinton's AIPAC speech

Megan McArdle
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/exclusive_to_the_atlantic_prev.php

Rod Dreher
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/05/hillary-clinton-pinin-for-the.html

Jun. 04 2008 12:02 PM
linhelen from nyc

Someone just called and reported that Obama asked people to pray for him for what he and his family are about to undertake. Has anyone seen this anywhere else? Thanks.

Jun. 04 2008 12:00 PM
chestinee from NY NY

But how would Hillary be a supreme court justice if she has never been one

Jun. 04 2008 11:56 AM
John from Woodside

Brian:

How could any nominee even consider putting a candidate like Hillary Clinton on his ticket? She has run a nasty,scorched earth policy which has included race-baiting and even suggesting her opponents assassination!
You can't get any lower than Hillary.
The ticket?
Obama/Edwards...thats the real dream ticket.

Jun. 04 2008 11:56 AM
RMCT from Westchester

Don't try post on Clinton's website; you aren't given the choice of asking her to drop out. Instead, go to the Clinton website, then click on "contact us" for phone numbers and call the campaign. Leave a message or talk to a campaign worker and say "Stop!"

Jun. 04 2008 11:56 AM
RMCT from Westchester

Watch out -- that's what happened with LBJ, and he said "Yes."

Jun. 04 2008 11:54 AM
Peter from Rockland County

Yes Clinton should be running mate - that way she can play bad cop to his good cop with the republican partisan machine.

Jun. 04 2008 11:53 AM
chestinee from NY NY

this caller is so patronizing - he should pick a woman

Jun. 04 2008 11:53 AM
chestinee from NY NY

I odn't think he can win without her

Jun. 04 2008 11:50 AM
eva

#160, mc on "worst presidents"
First, sincere condolences that your candidate lost. It's not your fault that she lost, nor your fault that she behaved,, in the view of the majority of posters here, in a despicable manner. I hope she will concede, so we can move on, it will do everyone on both sides a world of good. Please note, however, the direction of the majority of posters on this board. They're fed up, and not without reason.
Second, if Clinton had not been waylaid by the fiasco-controversy created by his insistence on LYING UNDER OATH about behavior he should hever have engaged in with a female subordinate (his behavior which, because she was a subordinate, should have been called sexist by feminists, but it wasnt convenient and anyway, she was just a Bev Hills airhead so didn't deserve feminist support...), then he might have been able to focus on one of his major tasks.... capturing or killing Osama bin Laden.
My criticism of BC for failing in this regard does not mean I think he is the worst president, and I am not leaving W off the hook for blatantly ignoring warnings about an attack. But yes, in many ways, the extreme narcissism of both Clintons lessened the enormous opportunities we set at their feet.

Jun. 04 2008 11:47 AM
Dan from Queens

She is going to run as INDEPENDENT!

We are about to see the demise of the two party system as we know it!

Look at the Blog in Hillary's website, where she wants people to post "their thoughts" on what to do now. That has just opened the door for people to feel she wants to keep fighting either in Denver or in an Independent ticket.

Jun. 04 2008 11:38 AM
mc from Brooklyn

Interesting, Gary's post #99 of the worst presidents. Where is papa Bush?

Does that mean he was better than B. Clinton. Interesting.

Jun. 04 2008 11:36 AM
eva

I'd like to second the idea, expressed somewhere on the middle of the first page of posts, that this discussion SHOULD be about Obama's hard-won, foxily strategized, watershed win.
Unfortunately, as Toobin expressed so bluntly, there are two narcissists in the room named Clinton who need to rain on anyone else's deserved victory.
I for one will be happy never to hear or speak or write the name Clinton again. But that will require her acknowledging that she lost, he won, and it's time to MOVE ON.
Also, Tony, #112, the inhaling bon-bon comments weren't quite fair to Hillary supporters. On the other hand, I, like apparently most on this board, am so exasperated by their stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality that I admit I laughed out loud. And was grateful to do so. This is supposed to be OVER.

Jun. 04 2008 11:35 AM
Chris O from New York City

Winifred and hjs, you seem to be concerned about sexism when people refer to "Hillary" instead of "Clinton". Her whole campaign literature and paraphanalia say only "Hillary" - they do not even say "Clinton" (or Rodham).

This is an example of how ideas get in your head (mine too) and we perceive things differently through that prism? And things get conflated, we project this prismatic input, and it is reallly mistaken because now we are on the lookout for things and find them even when they are not there, or there are perfectly innocent explanations.

Jun. 04 2008 11:34 AM
seth from Long Island

Lesson for Obama from 1968 http://www.slate.com/id/2192865/

Jun. 04 2008 11:29 AM
Turbo from Brooklyn, NY

MS: Clinton doesn't have half the party with her. She HAD half the party with her. Nobody with any sense is going to be switching sides just because she lost.

I wanted Obama to win, but I'd have voted for Clinton all the same. Too many people are focusing on gender and race and forgetting that this is about defeating McCain and undoing 8 years of Bush incompetence.

Jun. 04 2008 11:27 AM
hs

So yes, I did predictably see a lot of commenters with male names trashing Clinton yet again. Don't get me wrong - I'll certainly vote for Obama this fall because he represents my beliefs more than the Republican candidate. No matter what your thoughts on Clinton, I think some men still fail to grasp exactly what happened to her:

http://www.womensmediacenter.com/sexism_sells.html

Honestly, I haven't even seen this kind of compounded abuse heaped upon a Republican, mabe ever?

This is why many Clinton supporters are angry...we're not angry at Obama, but rather the sexist bile from supposedly "progressive" people.

I cite again the "joe on the street" interviews, men of ALL races chuckling about the possibility of a female president. Yeah, I can't imagine they would have approved such segments on the question of race.

For the record, I think Clinton's perceived campaign dirtiness would actually be an asset to Obama's fight against McCain. Democrats so easily forget exactly what happens when the Republican attack dogs are released from the cage.

Jun. 04 2008 11:27 AM
Chris O from New York City

Her signs say Hillary, I am not even sure if they say Clinton.

Jun. 04 2008 11:25 AM
Chris O from New York City

Because everyone calls her Hillary.

Jun. 04 2008 11:25 AM
hjs from 11211

Winifred
i hope because if i said clinton i could be talking about bill or hill. but it might be sexism

Jun. 04 2008 11:24 AM
Winifred Donoghue from NYC

Interesting that a linguist is calling John McCain, "McCain", Barack Obama, "Obama" and yet calling Hillary Clinton, "Hillary".

Why?

Jun. 04 2008 11:21 AM
hjs from 11211

Laramie ,
she likes to drink

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/NYT_Senators_Clinton_McCain_held_vodkadrinking_0728.html

anyone see that mccain speech with the green background, he looked sickly. was it the green color or does he look that bad? very concerning.

Jun. 04 2008 11:19 AM
Chris O from New York City

hs #147,
of course (from my reading) BORED does not think Clinton is responsible for the photo, but the point is that Obama is not responsible for the Iron shirt crap or the nutcracker. Yet many Clinton supporters seem to be blaming him for the (largely unreported or glossed over) sexism that was part of the campaign

Jun. 04 2008 11:18 AM
MS from Manhattan

The speaker wanting the Obama camp to heal wounds is out of touch. No one is denying that African-Americans have suffered, but frankly, they've had the vote since the end of the Civil War (not getting into Jim Crow here), at least black males, whereas women have been waiting a long time for real equality, irrespective of their race! Women only got the vote in 1920 - and we're still waiting. Hillary’s lost.

The most important fact that everyone, to a person, is ignoring, is that she has half the party with her! Most often when this has happened, the white male launched a third party attempt to win! Hillary Clinton won’t do that - it is against everything in her nature, but if Howard Dean hadn't totally screwed up letting some states do primaries early, but not others, (Florida and Michigan), Hillary would have been the nominee a few months ago. Despite this, the race has been very close. When it's this close, just as in a general election, there's no "mandate" for the winner; he definitely needs the loser's team to sign on. He's got a major problem.

One way to resolve it is a joint ticket. I’m beyond furious at the way Hillary Clinton has been treated by the media, her party, and Obama's team (on many occasions). I'll either be staying home or writing in her name. I can't vote for McCain & I can't vote for Obama.

Obama has yet to demonstrate he's more than the sum of a great speech.

Jun. 04 2008 11:16 AM
seth from Long Island

Unity Watch: Pro-Clinton Group "Breaks Ranks" With Party
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/unity_watch_proclinton_group_b.php

Jun. 04 2008 11:15 AM
hs

Bored, do you really think Clinton was responsible for the photo? And please direct me to where she said, "inadequate black male."

Jun. 04 2008 11:14 AM
seth from Long Island

BET founder to push for Clinton as Obama's VP pick
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/04/bet-founder-to-push-for-clinton-as-obamas-vp-pick/

Jun. 04 2008 11:11 AM
Chris O from New York City

Good point, BORED. Not only did the Obama campaign treat Clinton respectfully, when you compare how Clinton treated Obama and Obama treated Clinton, you see who needs to apologize. She said McCain and her were the only 2 that were qualified to be Commander in Chief. She said "hardworking white Americans support me". Hey, I won't decry her for this, I don't approve but this is a fight for the most powerful position in the world. But the world is upside down when the gentlemanly, polite and no low-blow Obama is said to be the one that was dirty.

Jun. 04 2008 11:10 AM
Laramie Flick from Brooklyn

To begin with, I voted for Clinton in the New York primary though I was pleased with both candidates. As the campaign progressed, however, I've come to despise Clinton for her hypocrisy, her hubris, and her fuzzy math - all of which are very Bushesque.

What hypocrisy? How about her attempt to recast herself as Mrs. Billy Ray Cyrus, knocking back shots, shooting a gun, and indulging in talk of 'elitism'? I suspect a good portion of such voters were actually Republicans interfering on the behest of Limbaugh and would never vote for her in the fall.

What hubris? Remember her about face on what to do with Florida and Michigan? First of all there is audio of her saying they're votes aren't going to count. Suddenly she's screeching about disenfranchisement (except for those who voted uncomitted or the 30,000 that wrote Obama's name on the Michigan ballot.) She's like a little kid who has lost and is trying to change the rules.

Fuzzy math? Newsweeks has a great cartoon where Obama has "2+2=4" on a blackboard behind him. Hillary Clinton has a wild formula to equal 4. Her claims to popular vote victory involve a 100% win in Florida and Michigan as well as not counting any of the votes from the states that didn't hold popular votes but caucuses instead.

It will be interesting to see now if her supporters rally behind Obama. I think the chances are good I will vote for whoever her opponent happens to be in the next democratic senate primary.

Jun. 04 2008 11:08 AM
BORED

@ libra
This is a democracy. Its now someones turn. How did it become her turn. What about Biden, Chris Dodd, B Richardson. Was it not their turn. People like you need to learn a littlem ore how are system works. This is not a monarchy and HRC is not the crown princess.

Jun. 04 2008 11:03 AM
David G. Herrmann from Manhattan

It's time for Sen. Clinton to honor her often-repeated promise to "work her heart out" for the eventual Democratic candidate. The longer she calls into question Sen. Obama's legitimacy as the nominee, the longer she insists that she would be more likely to beat John McCain, the longer she implies that various demographic groups or swing states won't vote for him, the longer she encourages the accumulation of a constituency of towering grievance against him, the more she actually undermines his candidacy rather than promoting it. Yes, he needs her help, but the longer she withholds it, the less good it will do him.

Jun. 04 2008 11:01 AM
BORED

@ hs
Will clinton apologize for trying to paint Obama as a muslim (the picture of him in african garb). Clinton supporters want obama to apologize for this and that. Will she apologize for him being called an affirmative action candidate or and inadequate black male. This is silly. They should apologize for what they do or say not for what i or you say. That being

Jun. 04 2008 10:59 AM
Libra from NYC

Obama is too young, too inexperienced on foreign policy. And he is as boring to listen to as kerry was. I will be tuning out for the next 4 yrs, I guess. I also plan to vote for McCain in protest - I was a Hillary supporter. It was Hillary's turn; he is young and could have run countless times. Bad positioning by the party. There; I am done.

Jun. 04 2008 10:59 AM
Brian from Forest Hills, NY

Yes, Clinton is right: voters should be respected. Every Senator should fight hard on behalf of the voters that every vote count and every voter respected.

So lets look at the record. When members of the House stood up in the joint session of Congress in January 2001, shortly after being sworn in as Senator from New York, to challenge the Electoral College fiasco and the Spupreme Court's stoping of the vote in Florida, did Senator Clinton join in with those House members to make sure every vote be respected? NO!!!

Where was her respect back in 2001???

Jun. 04 2008 10:58 AM
hs

"I for one, as much as I admire and support Senator Obama, cannot support him if she is his vice presidential running mate."

Again, Obama would not approve of your attitude.

Jun. 04 2008 10:58 AM
Steven from Ridgewood

Hillary Clinton's fatal mistake in this campaign was allowing her husband to campaign for her. The idea of a former President actively campaigning was outrageous. Bill Clinton's role in helping to et the tone of the campaign can not be underestimated. Bill Clinton's tirades, temper tantrums and general defensiveness is what ultimately lead me away from even considering Hillary Clinton. Imagine if Bill Clinton has continued the work of his Foundation and stayed out of the campaign? Hillary would have benefited indirectly from his global work. All of that potential was squandered by Bill's believe that he could say anything and not be called out for his comments. Many of his campaign speeches for Hillary were much more about his Presidency. This was a terrible miscalculation. I voted twice for Bill but I really wanted him to sit this one out and have faith in his wife's ability to win. The Clinton's were certainly in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation but I think they went too far in one direction. It's a pity.

Jun. 04 2008 10:57 AM
SF from NYC

This is just another example of how divided Americans are. This being said, The reason I turned away from Clinton. In my opinion she played into these divisions numerous times while Obama always took a more level headed aproach and did not always chose the easy political way out. This I believe is why Obama is in the position he is now. Not the media, not the money.

Jun. 04 2008 10:57 AM
Tony from Brooklyn

Kysha (87). I'm humbled by the simplicity and directness of your remarks. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Jun. 04 2008 10:57 AM
RMCT from Westchester

I agree with Anthony and TC. She lost my vote the day that she voted for the Iraq resolution. I called her office on the morning of the vote to register my protest and distress, and was told by one of her aides that "we have to be practical and think about 2004." Her vote was completely dishonest.

The Democrats lost in 2004 due to the correct perception by the voters that they had been too weak to stand up to Bush but were belatedly trying to disavow the War, and Clinton has lost in 2008 because she miscalculated the determination and resources of liberal Democrats: we did have someplace else to go, Hillary, and we went there.

Jun. 04 2008 10:55 AM
Jeffrey Slott from East Elmhurst

How interesting... McCain simply utters the word "liberal" and his audience boos. And he's claiming that he's going to bring the country together? How? By purging liberals from this country? By bullying us?

Jun. 04 2008 10:55 AM
Bobby G from East Village

If Obama does not disassociate himself from the angry, divisive African-American argument made by Melissa Harris-Lacewell he will lose.

What was most disturbing about the Father Pfelger taunt was it's enthusiastic reception by the congregation of Obama's former church, Trinity.

Jun. 04 2008 10:55 AM
seth from Long Island

BET founder to push for Clinton as Obama's VP pick
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/04/bet-founder-to-push-for-clinton-as-obamas-vp-pick/

Jun. 04 2008 10:55 AM
Anthony Gentile from Hastings NY

The driving force behind this election campaign has been the theme of change that has had such a powerful attraction among the electorate. Hillary does not represent change. She is old news. Her refusal to accept the will of the people is symbolic of her refusal to accept reality. The Clinton rationale, that they have been unfairly treated, rather than admitting their own strategic campaign blunders is the real reason for the current divide in the democratic party. There would be no question of who is the democratic nominee if any one other than a Clinton had been a rival candidate. Message to Hillary and Bill, IT IS OVER!

Jun. 04 2008 10:54 AM
Peter from Brooklyn

to #94:

The Statments made about Mrs. Obama are the same ones made against Mrs. Clinton in 1992.

and That is That!

Jun. 04 2008 10:54 AM
alice from queens

Too much, too many comments in public. She said this, he said that!
What is badly needed is a PEACE CONFERANCE! Just the two of them in a private room across the table from one another. JUST THE TWO OF THEM, NO AIDES, ETC.

They really do not know one another. Let them sit across a table from one another and talk, talk, talk. Get to really know each other without the public shouting and listening in!!

Jun. 04 2008 10:54 AM
hs

"The more I listen to this woman the greater my sympathy for her husband."

Another classy dude.

Jun. 04 2008 10:52 AM
hs

Albert,

"the guy holding up the 'iron my shirt' sign, do not reflect how Obama has personally treated her."

No, but I'm still waiting for Omaba to figuratively slap these cretins on the side of the head and say "WTF?" It would be beneficial for his daughters.

"And if any of you want to point out the 'sweetie' reference to the reporter, I guess, I as a man should claim sexist treatment whenever a woman I don’t know refers to me as ‘sweetie, honey, sugar, dear, pumkin…etc.'"

Dude...as a man you're really not qualified to comment on this incident. While I personally don't believe it was an intentional mistake, there are some serious power-gender implications here.

Jun. 04 2008 10:52 AM
KC from NYC

Anthony – I agree. She clearly thew her constituents overboard with an eye on winning the presidency. It's almost too poetically perfect that her Iraq vote may have been her greatest undoing. I don't want to say "I told you so", but it's hard not to feel a little vindicated, especially after how callous and dismissive she was toward us. Such foolishness on her part.

Midway through her speech last night, I thought he was making the best concession speech I had ever seen, one that would put her in a great position, either as a senator or potential VP. Then it just became bizarre. And pretty awful, frankly. Boomers are going to have to get over themselves, admit that they blew their chance to lead this country, and get out of the way.

Jun. 04 2008 10:51 AM
BORED

Abigail the caller did not say that the Clintons were racist. The record does show that they did use race baiting.Its always been a tried and true political tool that is bound to offend someone. Also you speak of African Americans entitlement and how its wrong but then goes into gender equality. Is this some oppression olympics. I had to put up with this in my American history classes but in the end who cares. HRC lost, She lost by the same rules that her husband won by. If you don't like Obama then dont vote for him but cut the spinning.

Jun. 04 2008 10:51 AM
RMCT from Westchester

I MEANT THAT TOOBIN WAS RIGHT.

Jun. 04 2008 10:50 AM
Diana from NJ

Kysha,

I intend to vote - for McCain! I am a long time Independent who crossed over to the Dems because I was inspired by Hillary's candidacy.

Again, the Dems blew it. Go McCain!

Jun. 04 2008 10:50 AM
Roger from Brooklyn

#100

Most progressives and Liberals agree with Obama's Pastor and mentor! so you are of touch and represent the 20th century thinking this is a new Millennia!!

it is a whole new world!

Thank goodness.

Jun. 04 2008 10:50 AM
RMCT from Westchester

This is outrageous and, finally, I am angry. Last night on CNN, Jeffrey Toobin accurately described Hillary's -- and Bill's -- behavior as "rampant narcissism." David Gergen was scandalized and "disassociated" himself from Toobin's remarks, but Gergen was right.

It is the height of arrogance for Clinton to demand the vice-presidency based on an effort which, as Toobin pointed out, she has lost. Obama does not need her on the ticket; most if not all of Clinton's supporters will vote for him in November, and the hard core that won't is not large enough to derail him.

Further, Clinton's behavior last night illustrates why she should not be on the ticket. She has not wavered in her belief that she should be President, and she will challenge him for power every day of his administration. She is not for "change," but rather for a return to the White House by an administration that was "over" 8 years ago.
Finally, if Obama caves to the Clintons, he will lose stature. It's time for the Party leaders to stand up to these -- dare I use the phrase -- greedy pigs.

Jun. 04 2008 10:48 AM
hs

Herb, I assume you are a dude. Clearly you have never seen heard about the whole Facebook "Make Me a Sandwich" group.

I think you're as likely to be "sitting out" if Clinton is on the ticket as I am because she isn't.

Obama himself would disapprove of your message!

Jun. 04 2008 10:48 AM
DeeNile from NYC

Are we finally rid of the self centered, egotistical, self important political Clintons?

Their era is over.

And John McCain is a extension of the Bush regime, so he should not be allowed in either.

The only way this country stands a chance is if we the people "clean house" every four years or so. Otherwise, whoever is in power gets too "entrenched". Those in power "connect the dots" and do nothing but make money off us and line up the high paying job they they get when they are out of office.

Jun. 04 2008 10:47 AM
Kahb Ablee from New Jersey

I feel compelled to send this comment--for what it is worth. With the Democratic Primaries now concluding I can actually say that I do wish Senator Clinton well. However any talk of an Obama Clinton ticket will surely lose my support, (and I suspect that I may not be the only one); simply because the two of them, Clinton and Obama together, does not equal change. Senator Obama needs to be free to choose a Vice President--and that would be whoever would best support his ideas and beliefs. For him to choose Senator Clinton as a running mate would seem to contradict his messsage no matter what the rationale could be. It would epitomize a kind of political expedience at the very least that speaks of business as usual--politically speaking. And that counteracts the essence of his message of change. Not to mention that his principles have never seemed to be about winning at any cost. Thus to now go against his principles and choose someone who is all about winning at any cost seems counter intuitive. I for one, as much as I admire and support Senator Obama, cannot support him if she is his vice presidential running mate.

Jun. 04 2008 10:47 AM
Steve from NY, NY

1a. Obama could/should pick a woman, but not Hillary Clinton.

1b.He must NOT pick a misogynist anti-female male such as Jim Webb.

2. Very scary for Dems, if McCain picks a woman, and these insane Clintonista's swing towards anti-choice, anti-equal pay, misogynist horndog (called wife c*&t, cheated multiple timoe on fist wife, etc.).

3. If Obama loses with Clinton having undercut him, there is no way she get the nomination in 2012. There will be new new people running, including new women, and Clinton (both of them) will be rememebered as having destroyed the Democratic party and the country.

Jun. 04 2008 10:47 AM
MG from Park Slope

#93

I agree. I would find it difficult to be excited about an Obama/Clinton ticket. If you're serious about change, you can't be lugging around that kind of baggage.

Jun. 04 2008 10:46 AM
seth from Long Island

"BET founder to push for Clinton as Obama's VP pick" CNN Political Ticker
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/04/bet-founder-to-push-for-clinton-as-obamas-vp-pick/

Jun. 04 2008 10:46 AM
Voter from Brooklyn

Ok, when “people” without college educations vote, Democrats win. How many Black Americans don’t have college diplomas? I’d bet my hat (and keep it) it’s more than those whom do. Why doesn’t anyone call Clinton supporters out when thinly veiled racist comments like these are made? The same goes for "working class people".

Jun. 04 2008 10:46 AM
sheela from east village

Hillary, go away. Please stop it. I'm a middle aged woman who went from thinking people who hated Hillary were crazy to completely understanding where they are coming from.

I do not want the Clintons in the White House even in the VP spot. It wouldn't be so bad if it would just be Hillary but the thought of Bill hanging out is really awful.

And it pisses me off that she keeps saying she won the popular vote. She did not. Argh. Obama ran an excellent campaign and he won the delegates which was the point. She can't call a do-over. Infuriating.

Jun. 04 2008 10:45 AM
Stuart Cadenhead from Hastings-on-Hudson, NY

The supporters of each candidate have alot to answer for. Many Obama supporters (men and women) have said things about Hillary that they should not have said. Many Hillary supporters have said things about Obama that they should not have said. But it's worth noting that apart from "sweetie" and "likable enough" Obama himself has been decent and gracious to Hillary and cannot fairly be said to have run a sexist campaign.

Many Obama supporters (including this one) would like to have seen Obama respond more forcefully to the Clinton campaign factually dubious assertions that Obama is inelectable, is losing the popular vote, and does not respect women. Had he gone on the attack, he might have won Indiana outright (he lost by 1%). To his credit, he has resisted the temptation to drive up Hillary's negatives and instead has begun a sincere campaign to mend fences.

Hillary supporters and understandably angry today, but it is wrong to equate the nastiness of a few anonymous pro-Obama bloggers, with the essential decency of the man himself.

Jun. 04 2008 10:44 AM
Tony from Brooklyn

I think Obama should just let Hillary sit out there and fester. She'll eventually implode and maker the VP question moot. I'm expecting her to announce tomorrow that she'll make John McCain ambassador to Lichtenstein if he'll drop out of the general election and acknowledge her divine right to be president.
Of course Obama won't do that. He'll continue to be elegant, magnanimous, and dignified. He will not however allow himself to be held hostage by the Clintons.
The very idea that Obama can't win without Clinton is absurd. A white male(grey at the temples, square jaw, flag pin, and mousy but attractive age appropriate wife) will give him a far more balanced ticket.
Emotions are running high at this point. But I think after Hillary's supporters spend a weekend watching Norma Rae on DVD and inhaling bonbons they'll come around to their senses and realize that Obama won the election no matter how flawed.

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
Chicago Listener

...also, i'm mystified by the claims of sexism and unfair treatment. maria cocco is saying it's obama's job to unify the party, effectively stating that clinton has NO POWER to unify the party. it's the feminist who is saying the woman has no power in this equation.

also, she talks too much.

is that an anti-woman comment?

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
sue from NJ

Melissa is a bit too angry ....

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
Herb from Scotch Plains, NJ

Kysha, #76,

Clearly, you don't get it. I'm not about doing anyone any favors. A non-vote is a vote.

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
chestinee from NY NY

That's right, Hillary has delivered popular swing vote

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
Leonardo Andres

Robert I agree 100% with what you say.

Jun. 04 2008 10:43 AM
Sue from North Salem, NY

"Angly" first lady?

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
MG from Park Slope

Yikes Diane. You're sounding a bit shrill. What is insulting is the sense of entitlement that you and your candidate share.

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
mike from manhattan

What was this terrible thing that Obama did to Clinton that he has to apologize for? Besides beating her, that is.

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
chestinee from NY NY

Hillary needs to honor her supporters which is what she is doing - trying not to alienate them - I am one of them and I feel pretty darn alienated!

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
Peter from Brooklyn

They are 95% the same on Policy - Now is the time to get in line and Vote Down McBush!!!!!!!!!!!!

VOTE DOWN McBUSH!!!!

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
stephanie from ringwood

45 yr old life long registered Democrat...
I decided over 2 mths ago to vote for McCain.
Now, I'm not voting at all.

And the DNC is no longer getting contributions until I see a change in attitude.

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
Abigail Simon from Brooklyn

The comment from the caller who talked about racially offensive comments from the Clintons, etc typifies the problem I as a clinton supporter have with the Obama people---the Clintons have a long historical record to fall back on that proves they are not racist, and to call them racist is ugly and a tactic. I agree with the caller who called attention to the rudeness of the remarks about Hilary,etc. Also, I think it is time for African American voters to stop thinking of themselves as somehow more entitled to be judgemental, and to privilege their hurt and wounds, and their importance as a group over those of others. There is a historical problem with racism, but there is also a huge historical problem with gender inequality.

There is also a problem when the racism of African Americans, typified by Mr. Obama's former mentor and pastor, is considered a kind of cultural perogative.

Thanks

Jun. 04 2008 10:42 AM
Gary from Manhattan

hjs: I'll give you Hoover at third worst, and then Carter at fourth and LBJ at fifth and Tricky Dick at sixth.

For those on the board following this, in order of worst presidents:

1. Baby Bush (son of Papa Bush)
2. Clinton
3. Hoover
4. Carter
5. LBJ
6. Nixon
7. JFK (yes indeed; the Cuban Missle Crisis was almost the end of the world, as Dana Perino knows)
8. Warren Harding
9. Andrew Johnson (disastrous Reconstruction policies)
10. Thomas Jefferson (yes, he's a founding father, but if you read your history, he was a disastrous president and brought the fledgling economy to its knees.)

Jun. 04 2008 10:41 AM
Sue from North Salem, NY

I agree, Kysha, about the bigger picture: The next president is going to appoint Supreme Court Judges who are APPOINTED FOR LIFE. These are the people making decision that can affect the civil rights of our children and grandchildren, PLEASE let's keep that in mind!

Jun. 04 2008 10:41 AM
Anthony from NYC

I fully respect Hillary's intelligence and capabilities, but Have we no memories?! At a time for her to show true leadership, when it counted most, and for which we are paying dearly, she was silent. There was no caring for the American people, no leadership from our Rep. No one standing up to Bush Cheney except for the Presidential race. Thousand of us remember those days before Iraq, and for the first few years after, she and her office remained silent and would not come out to speak with us, to support us, to listen to us. Politically safe for the moment, that's not the leadership she and her followers claim she has. The form letter received way back when as to why we needed to go to "war" and why she voted for it never answered or served us. She still tries to maintain this excuse. I believe in redemption, but there's been an obliteration of the past here. This is a most critical point that presently effects us deeply each hour. This is not kind on non leadership we here in NYC and the country need or need in a VP.

Jun. 04 2008 10:41 AM
Robert from NYC

As the BBC stated this morning, the American political process is like that of a third world country's political process. I don't care about any of this nonsense, it's really very childish, silly, but dangerous. USA has never grown up, we are the spoiled children of the world and that culminated in our most recent spoiled child administration head.

Jun. 04 2008 10:41 AM
Leonardo Andres

The media will favor Obama till November. Because of you know there bias, excluding fox news of course. This favoritism will upset a lot of the clinton supporters because they will be reminded of what they went through in the primary. I am not sure how this will affect them in November, but like somebody else said. Dems are shooting themselves in the foot.

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Jesse Califano from NYC/Tampa

It won't matter WHO IS-
or WHO IS NOT running with O-Ba-Ma. . .

America is NOT going to elect Michelle to be the angly First Lady of America!

And THAT (my friends) is THAT!!

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Kahb Ablee from New Jersey

I feel compelled to send this comment--for what it is worth. With the Democratic Primaries now concluding I can actually say that I do wish Senator Clinton well. However any talk of an Obama Clinton ticket will surely lose my support, (and I suspect that I may not be the only one); simply because the two of them, Clinton and Obama together, does not equal change. Senator Obama needs to be free to choose a Vice President--and that would be whoever would best support his ideas and beliefs. For him to choose Senator Clinton as a running mate would seem to contradict his messsage no matter what the rationale could be. It would epitomize a kind of political expedience at the very least that speaks of business as usual--politically speaking. And that counteracts the essence of his message of change. Not to mention that his principles have never seemed to be about winning at any cost. Thus to now go against his principles and choose someone who is all about winning at any cost seems counter intuitive. I for one, as much as I admire and support Senator Obama, cannot support him if she is his vice presidential running mate.

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Erin from Manhattan

"wounds" need time to heal, and usually they do. It's been one day, let's not go overboard.

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Chris O from New York City

Great point Heilene #55, especially this line which is the key point for me: "She ran as an entitled female candidate, NOT as a competent, experienced, intelligent candidate (which she is)."

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
AWM from UWS

Uhhhh...

About that "media bias against Hillary" thing...

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/854/candidate-character

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Kira from Rochester, New York

I find it interesting that people are complaining that Hilary was treated unfairly by the media and the Obama campaign throughout the primaries. It's called politics, people!

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
Anne

Can someone tell me how the Obama campaign vilified Clinton?

Why do people not accept that if she ran a smarter campaign she would have won this a while ago? The seeds of her undoing were her own decisions.

Jun. 04 2008 10:40 AM
doctor david from Lower East Side

Does AMerica really want Bill Clinton on TV every single day as first husband to vice president Hillary?

And if Bil has another dalliance / sex affair during the Obama presidency..... it would drag down the entire presidency into the media sewer for years... like happened with president Bill CLinton.

The risk of Bill ob board is too high....

Jun. 04 2008 10:39 AM
Kysha from NY

Diana - SHUT UP AND VOTE. This is the presidency, not the prom. But if you need high school analogies: even if you believe your team is going to lose the big game, go to the gym anyway and show your support. We need a united party here, why can't people start looking at the bigger picture!?

Jun. 04 2008 10:39 AM
Chris O from New York City

It is outrageous for Marie Cocco to say the Obama campaign treated her disrespectfully. Sure, many parties have mistreated her, but not the candidate.

Jun. 04 2008 10:38 AM
mc from Brooklyn

I hate it that there is a petition going around. Bad idea, folks. Dems shooting themselves in the foot.

I disagree with the analyst on the air who seems to think that the half that voted for HRC will just come over regardless.

Jun. 04 2008 10:38 AM
Chicago Listener

just in those two snippets of obama and mccain, you can hear how one is more nimble, hopeful and inclusive and the other is tired, divisive and programmed. already, mccain has to bend toward obama's themes in an effort to belittle them.

mccain already sounds exhausted.

and, of course, mccain trotted out the liberal tag. obama can swat that away by pushing for universal health care.

what didn't mccain like about the sixties? the idealism? the youth movement? Head Start? the voting rights act?

even the elderly can be reached by obama if he asks them what they want their legacy to be and what kind of world they want for their children and grandchildren.

Jun. 04 2008 10:38 AM
Herb from Brooklyn, NY

Personally I think if Obama is really going to campaign on "change" he shouldn't have Clinton as a running mate. Hillary and Bill have too much history in Washington, alot of which is negative.

Jun. 04 2008 10:37 AM
MG from Park Slope

Why do HRC supporters think that she has a right to be on the ticket? I'm pretty sure that if the tables were turned and Clinton had won the nomination, Obama wouldn't carry the same sense of entitlement - the sense that he would have a right to be on the ticket as VP. It's disgusting.

Jun. 04 2008 10:37 AM
seth from Long Island

Heilene #55

You nailed it on why the petition is wrong.

Jun. 04 2008 10:37 AM
Marco from Manhattan

Leave it to Mrs. Clinton to step on Mr. Obama's big moment. She lost and now wants to give the impression that she may graciously deign to accept the VP spot. The more I listen to this woman the greater my sympathy for her husband.

Jun. 04 2008 10:36 AM
hjs from 11211

voter
which candidate has spent more time in elected office? MCCain, what's your point

Jun. 04 2008 10:36 AM
Herb from Scotch Plains, NJ

John Edwards needs to be attorney general. That's much more important than who the vice president will be.

Jun. 04 2008 10:36 AM
Diana from NJ

No Hillary, No Vote! She should not be his VP, it is an insult. I will not vote for a ticket with him on the top. I did not drink the Obama Kool-Aid. She should wait 4 years and run in 2012 (because Obama will lose in November).

Jun. 04 2008 10:35 AM
Kysha from NY

Herb, shut up and vote. Vote Dem, vote Rep, vote otherwise, but do your damn civic duty and exercise that right that your people fought so hard for. You're not doing anyone any favors by staying home on Election Day.

Jun. 04 2008 10:35 AM
Voter from Brooklyn

Senator Clinton Supporters, please explain the following:
If Senator Obama is inexperienced, which candidate has spent more time in elected office?
If Senator Obama cannot win Senator Clinton’s big historically democratic primary victory states, will these states go red in the fall?
How is it possible for the winning candidate to get fewer votes; is this only possible if you exclude people who DID vote in a caucus or as a super-delegate?
Also, with racism being a factor in American elections (which Senator Clinton was more than willing, albeit in thinly veiled language, point out to us) how do you suppose a “liberal, inexperienced, Black man” got the nomination? Would it be through not following the rules (like those agreed upon in dealing with Michigan and Florida befor the votes.)
What sexist things did Senator Obama say about or do against Senator Clinton?
Why would senator Clinton want to be on the ticket of this “naïve and inexperienced” minority full of nothing but hyperbole and platitudes?
I could go on, but really... reread and think about what you’ve been saying.

Jun. 04 2008 10:34 AM
AWM from UWS

Obama CANNOT choose HRC as VP.

It would be like putting on concrete boots before swimming.

Jun. 04 2008 10:33 AM
Jim from Brooklyn

How about Richardson for VP and promising Hillary AG cabinet post. Richardson could campaign in fluent Spanish and Hillary would be a fighter as AG. No?

Jun. 04 2008 10:33 AM
Caryn from Jersey City

As someone who would have voted for either Obama or Clinton in the general election (I voted for Obama in the primary) I don't think it's advantageous for Obama to choose Clinton as VP. It seems to me that he needs someone with more experience and less liberal to win. Obama / Clinton seems like a dream ticket for the Republicans.

Jun. 04 2008 10:31 AM
Ben from Manhattan from Manhattan

I remember during the Get Out The Vote work I did on NYC primary day, some months ago, when I stood by the B'way and 110th St. subway station.
Obama supporters smilled hopefully and occasionally cheered.
Hillary supporters often shook their head ruefully at me, in a mix of dismissiveness, scorn and general negativity.
In a way, this sort of air permeated the Hilary campaign and its early treatment of Sen. Obama and his candidacy.

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
Chris O from New York City

Thank God for Melissa Harris-Lacewell and real math and not Brian's re-hash of Hillary's fuzzy math.

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
Maya from Brooklyn, NY

Yeah, if Hillary had clinched the nomination I sincerely doubt Obama supporters would be circulating a petition pressuring her to make him the VP because he's somehow entitled to it and I sincerely doubt she would entertain the idea that she owed him ANYTHING.

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
Heilene from Manhattan

I APOLOGIZE FOR THE REPEATED POST

The last bit for that truncated link is "democratic_vote_count.html"

or just go to realclearpolitics.com and go to the "Popular Vote" link on the right

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
MG from Park Slope

#55

Hear hear!!!! I agree wholeheartedly.

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
Herb from Scotch Plains, NJ

I believe that I speak for many African Americans and others when I say that I'm going to stay home on election day if Hillary is on the ticket. It's time for Obama to show some real backbone!

"A man can't ride your back unless it's bent."
Martin Luther King

Jun. 04 2008 10:30 AM
Steve from Manhattan

Yeah David - let McCain win - it won't matter. Sure, thousands more soldiers and hundreds of thousands more Iraqis (and maybe a few Iranians!) will die; sure more atavistic right wing judges will grace the federal bench, and sure what's left of your civil rights will disappear, but what do you care ....

Jun. 04 2008 10:29 AM
Herb from Brooklyn, NY

Leonardo: There's nothing wrong with people being excited about a candidate they believe in.

Jun. 04 2008 10:29 AM
seth from Long Island

Maya #36

You said it perfectly

Jun. 04 2008 10:28 AM
Chris O from New York City

#58 - Good point.

Jun. 04 2008 10:27 AM
John from Brooklyn

It's not as if Clinton has the right, at this point, to sit back and say, well, I'm just going to do whatever my supporters want me to do.

Of course, many of Clinton's supporters want her not to concede to or to endorse Obama. Of course, many other of her supporters think that she has the right of first refusal to the VP slot.

Clinton knows this. She knows that the only way her supporters will rally around Obama is if she gives them permission to do that.

Every second that she refuses to give them that permission -- refuses to concede, refuses to endorse, refuses to tell her supporters that they must rally around Obama as the Democratic standard-bearer for November -- is a second that she is actively denying Obama his right and his ability to unify the party.

Jun. 04 2008 10:26 AM
Heilene from Manhattan

Let's try that link again. i think it's really important to see this because it points to underlying issues that go beyond these two politicians.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Jun. 04 2008 10:26 AM
James from brooklyn

"HOPPING" IS RIGHT BRIAN.
HOPPING MAD. IT'S LIKE 100 YOSEMITE SAMS UP IN HERE.

Jun. 04 2008 10:26 AM
Edwina from Briarwood

Brian,

This day should have started with the historic and in many ways revolutionary nature of Obama's campaign. Less time on Clinton and her bad manners. More on the future.

Jun. 04 2008 10:25 AM
chestinee from NY NY

Seth - the thing MSM and NPR alike seem to forget is that Hillary has delivered a great many votes and blocs that Obama cannot afford to dis. She has been systematically dismissed while being only a hair's breadth away from Obama. I am afraid that Obama's Harvardness will not stand up to mcCain without Hillary's help because teh Dems ahve thrown a good many of us under the bus with their sexist (?) treatment of Hillary. You'd think she was a Republican!!! Wait till McCain & Co. start going after Obama - he has no experience with this kind of onslaught. Once again the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot - and the ones that lose are all Americans.

Jun. 04 2008 10:24 AM
Leonardo Andres

I can't stand this rockstar image that obama has. That alone makes me not want to vote for him, (ignorant? probably) I was watching his speech and had to turn it off after hearing the yelling of his name by some girl from the audience.

Jun. 04 2008 10:23 AM
Heilene from Manhattan

As far as the petition for Clinton to be put on the ticket, I think this is unhealthy, and antithetical to the process, which unfortunately, has been the hallmark of Clinton's campaign. She ran as an entitled female candidate, NOT as a competent, experienced, intelligent candidate (which she is). She should have won this primary season, hands down. She didn't, and she pulled the gender card far more than Obama ever pulled the race card (in fact he did not pull the race card until forced to do so).

I was ready to support her, and wavered between both candidates (I originally supported Kucinich), until way after the New York primary. Now, I won't vote for her for dogcatcher. She has been disappointing and lacked the grace and character to even abide by the rules because she was losing. And while she has a good point about her strength in several constituencies, she loses credibility by her tactics. She is divisive and damaging to the Democratic Party, and I would only hope that she be censured accordingly.

Jun. 04 2008 10:22 AM
Aethiops from Brooklyn

Charles Rangel NEEDs to be IMPEACHED ASAP!! Where was he in the Sean Bell case? Where is he on the gentrification of Harlem. What a HOUSE NEGRO...literally!!!

Jun. 04 2008 10:22 AM
Heilene from Manhattan

For those who say Hilary won the popular vote:

The popular vote calculation is a bit of a boondoggle actually. If you you go to Real Clear Politics you'll see that there are SIX different scenarios - 3 in which Obama has the popular vote, 3 in which Clinton has the popular vote:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Jun. 04 2008 10:22 AM
mc from Brooklyn

zuwena,
Re: "real." His coalition looks a little incomplete. He is going to have a tough climb in the fall. He needs Latinos, women, blue collar workers and old people. Hate to burst your bubble but we need to include all Democrats for this tough climb.

Many of those people do not want to be taken for granted, so the case has to made for them to get on board. Some of them are feeling deserted by the party, whether that is reasonable or not.

Jun. 04 2008 10:21 AM
MichaelB from UWS of Manhattan

I love it. Rangel being Rangel: Principal is OK, until it interferes with the ability to win. Then, prinicpal takes a back seat.

Change? Not really.

Jun. 04 2008 10:20 AM
Steve Mark from NYC

Did I just hear Charlie Rangel suggest Obama break his word in order to win? How many times have we watched other politicians do whatever it takes to win. Doesn't sound like change to me.

Jun. 04 2008 10:20 AM
Jesse Califano from NYC/Tampa

FYI: On an historical note:

America has NEVER elected a Liberal to the Presidency of The Unted States of America!!

Jun. 04 2008 10:19 AM
hjs from 11211

jfk-lbj
reagan-bush
clition-gore

all rough primaries, all united after, all won.

Jun. 04 2008 10:18 AM
Albert from Greenwich, CT

To all of Sen. Clinton’s supporters that are going to vote for McCain because of the sexist treatment throughout the campaign; remember when that woman directly addressed McCain at a rally last November referring to Sen. Clinton as the “b” word that rhymes with “witch”? What has he done to rebuke that statement? You all need to examine your true motives for picking McCain over Obama. Repeating the same talking points about how the press treated her and, the guy holding up the “iron my shirt” sign, do not reflect how Obama has personally treated her. And if any of you want to point out the “sweetie” reference to the reporter, I guess, I as a man should claim sexist treatment whenever a woman I don’t know refers to me as ‘sweetie, honey, sugar, dear, pumkin…etc.”

Jun. 04 2008 10:18 AM
rick from brooklyn

Rangel is full of it since yesterday he told Andre Mitchell that HRC deserved the VP nod. He was the one applying the pressure that he is now saying is a bad idea! get your story straight, charlie.

Jun. 04 2008 10:16 AM
Chris O from New York City

Brian,
You should not repeat this "most liberal voting record." John Kerry got this same label from the same group in 2004. It is a bogus rating meant top smear someone yet you perpetuate it. More liberal than Bernie Sanders, Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, etc. (I love those 3 - I am just saying...)

Jun. 04 2008 10:16 AM
mc from Brooklyn

Yeah, Chris (#35), where are they?

Jun. 04 2008 10:15 AM
mc from Brooklyn

Park Slope is considered progressive. How anyone who displays something like that can consider him/herself a progressive is beyond me. Maybe it belonged to an odd Republican in Park Slope.

Jun. 04 2008 10:14 AM
zuwena from manhattan

Let's get real here. HRC's supports are saying things like "He's lost the whites, he's lost the seniors, etc and he's in a lot of trouble." This is sour grapes. They had better wake up and realize that if they don't unite behind Obama we as a nation are in trouble. People like Rangel and others will loose all of their integrity with their own constituencies if they pressure Obama to take HRC--let's not forget the story of the Frog and the Scorpion.

Jun. 04 2008 10:13 AM
hjs from 11211

Gary 9
2nd has to go to hoover

Jun. 04 2008 10:13 AM
B.R. from Manhattan

Looks like the self-professed career community organizer managed to finally pull it off.

Wikipedia defines CULT OF PERSONALITY as:

"...when a country's leader uses MASS MEDIA to create a heroic public image through unquestioning FLATTERY and PRAISE. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships but can be found in some DEMOCRACIES as well.

A cult of personality is similar to general hero WORSHIP except that it is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be applied by analogy to refer to ADULATION of non-political leaders."

Jun. 04 2008 10:12 AM
Jesse Califano from NYC/Tampa

Charles 'WRangel'- the political HACK that all other political hacks look up to...

What a jerk- Thank goodness he's not an Italian/American- I don't think I could stand that in polite company!

Jun. 04 2008 10:09 AM
hjs from 11211

mc 32
TOO Liberal park slope

Jun. 04 2008 10:09 AM
Maya from Brooklyn, NY

Hillary needs to put on her big girl underpants and deal with it. If she loves this country like she so tearfully said she did in that famous clip, she would concede with grace and dignity and put the country's interests ahead of her own selfish ones. She should concede, congratulate and endorse Obama, and ask "What now can I do for you and my party and my country?" Set a god damned example already instead of acting like a sulking adolescent who didn't get Prom Queen.

Jun. 04 2008 10:09 AM
Chris from Brooklyn

RE: This morning's statement by Pelosi, Reid and Dean

I may have missed this, but have Pelosi, Reid or Dean made their endorsement known yet? All I've heard since March is that they strongly urge Supers to make their pledge known after the final primary. Okay. But how about putting your money where your mouth is. The best way they can encourage any stragglers, still hopeful that this could go on to the convention, is to follow their own advice by clearly pledging and endorsing.

Jun. 04 2008 10:08 AM
jj from nyc

I hope hillary gets her ass kicked to the curb.
Thank god this crap is over.

Jun. 04 2008 10:08 AM
Leonardo Andres

Its good to see in this boards how the "democrats" are divided by this ridiculously long race. Good luck in November, not that i want a mccain in office, but that what it seems like we are getting. Whoohooo!

Jun. 04 2008 10:07 AM
mc from Brooklyn

Yeah, airport nutcrackers. I saw one in Park Slope of all places. Liberal, progressive Park Slope.

Jun. 04 2008 10:04 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth #24,
I'm glad you did not mean it as a low blow. Can you see why it looked that way to me? I think she'll come around.

#26 Agreed about being nauseated. I also think the pious Anderson Cooper types are so busy congratulating themselves on how not racist they are that they missed how racist they ARE, as well as how sexist. Very shallow.

Chris O, Agreed. Oyy!

Bobby G. Forget Maureen Dowd. She's the Ann Coulter of the left. She bashed Al Gore in 2000 and a few weeks ago was asking him to settle the race. Just because she's a lefty does not make her any better than Coulter.

Jun. 04 2008 10:03 AM
Jesse Califano from NYC/Tampa

The shallow American electorate will NOT elect Michelle O-Ba-Ma to be the terminally angry 'First Lady' of the United States of America.

The More intellectual of the American Electorate will NOT elect a flashy, ½-term Senator who is terminally 'Liberal'-> no matter what color his skin is!!

Not to worry- Senator John McCain will be elected President of the United States by America's 'Silent Majority'!

Jun. 04 2008 10:03 AM
Susan from Kingston, New York

Hillary needs to use her political capital! Hillary has a lot more substance than the preacher that won the nomination!

Jun. 04 2008 10:01 AM
Bobby G from East Village

This Clinton supporter congratulates Obama and now supports him, although there was much in the primary process I considered unfair.

She should now leverage her political capital for the public good.

My question now is WILL THE HILLARY BASHING STOP?
Did you read Maureen Dowd this morning? "Hillary has been trying to emasculate Obama," is only one example of her shallow, sexist assaults. Maybe Ms. Dowd should pick up one of those airport gift shop nutcrackers.

Jun. 04 2008 09:51 AM
Chris O from New York City

And on another note: McCain's speech was pretty lame. I heard he said "change" 31 times. He speaks of this election being about the future and I'm like, "Oh you are endorsing Obama?"

Jun. 04 2008 09:45 AM
seth from Long Island

mc #22,

The MSM loves drama and suspense and Hillary's speech has them salivating like crazy. The pundits are in ecstasy talking about every possible Hillary scenario. I had to turn off the TV because it was becoming too nauseating for me to watch.

Jun. 04 2008 09:44 AM
Chris O from New York City

I do believe it is quite unseemly the way Clinton surrogates are making such a big deal that she should be VP. I think this is unprecedented in history. It is very inappropriate and negative. It is almost literally un-believable.

Jun. 04 2008 09:41 AM
seth from Long Island

mc #20,

"suck it up" was not intended as a low blow. I couldn't think of a better phrase. Hillary's race was historic because of her gender. but candidates win and lose all the time. It's a 50/50 proposition. Supporters of losing candidates are justifiably disappointed. It's up to the losing candidate to set the tone for her followers. Hillary missed her chance last nite. I hope she does the right thing by the end of this week.

Jun. 04 2008 09:32 AM
BORED

David! you owe this board an apology. Its kind of sad that who have taking up the mantle of victim hood.

Jun. 04 2008 09:30 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth,
Interesting point about the media narrative. I call it the mega-narrative. I sense the beginning of a shift. From my point of view they have had a crush on him for some time now, and the loop we kept hearing is that there was no way she could win and when would she quit. Well now it's over and now I see a shift. They are starting to question his qualifications and experience and they are starting to go soft on her. Weird, isn't it? What makes me nervous is that they like an arc (it makes a good narrative). He has been built up; when will they start to tear at him? The story is always, build it up then tear it down.

Jun. 04 2008 09:29 AM
seth from Long Island

The longer Hillary refuses to formally concede and endorse Obama, the stronger the bruised feelings of her supporters will grow. Hillary is smart enough to grasp this fact. This is why I'm frustrated. The media narrative is now frozen and the pundits won't let it thaw out until they see Hillary concede and endorse.

Jun. 04 2008 09:17 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth,
I think you are right, we should expect a concession and an endorsement sooner rather than later, and I think it will come.
I appreciate your remarks about her not grovelling and that possibly she has suffered unfair treatment, but I still think he won fair and square, the sexism did not change the outcome in my view, just made it nastier.

"Her supporters need to suck it up" is a low blow. Those are the people we need, and that ain't going to get it done.

Jun. 04 2008 09:16 AM
superf88

Well, Hillary definitively demonstrated that she is no "Gore 2000" -- by refusing to give up without a fight.

Now will she try to take a page from Cheney's book -- and steer the White House from the Naval Observatory?

Very very easy to imagine.

Jun. 04 2008 09:12 AM
seth from Long Island

mc #10,

I was serious about a response which is why I raised the issue. All I expect from Hillary is for her to announce a suspension of her campaign and an endorsement of Obama. I'm not asking for her to grovel or humiliate herself. I'd like to see her acknowledge the fact that Obama has won. I don't understand why she needs a cooling off period. She was the victim of sexist remarks, but she finished the race. Her supporters need to suck it up and move on.

Jun. 04 2008 09:07 AM
mc from Brooklyn

David!
I don't know what district you live in, but consider that if you drop out of the Dem party you may lose any voice you had in local elections, which are often decided at the primary level. I have a nasty councilman who is now running for State Senate, so I need to stay in to help stop him.

If that were not the case I would have dropped out a long time ago. I hate party lines, and I hate the NY Dem rules of ballot access, etc. So in general elections I always vote my choice on the Working Families line if I can, just to keep them on the ballot.

Jun. 04 2008 09:06 AM
Jeffrey Slott from East Elmhurst

Umm, David:
What's with this claim of being personally attacked? Ok, so you're a little bit pissed that your candidate didn't get the nod. Your reaction to certain posters on this site is way, way, way, over the top.
Really man, get your priorities straight. Either the republican or the democrat is going to take over the White House this year. Is Sen. Obama so horrible, so wrong, so damaging to what I assume are your democratic political principals that you would rather see a continuation of the damage that has been committed by, literally, one of the worst presidents in the history of this country?
Can any one of us really afford to be that self-righteous?

Jun. 04 2008 09:04 AM
mc from Brooklyn

David!
Where ever have you been?

Jun. 04 2008 09:00 AM
mc from Brooklyn

What I would like to see from Obama is a sharpening of his economic message and he needs to re-think that ridiculous health care plan. That is something I do care about, more than either BHO or HRC. So far, his refusal to do that reads to me as a message that he doesn't think it's important enough.

That said: it's still better than McCain, so no contest there.

Jun. 04 2008 08:59 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth,
So here we are. We need her supporters to win in Nov. I don;t know what the solution is - I don't want him to feel forced to choose her as VP, but I do think he needs to acknowledge the raw feelings on the part of many of her supporters and find a way to make them feel they are not taken for granted, lest they stay home in Nov.

I am not that emotionally tied into this, despite what eva and some others seem to think. I will never vote for McCain, but I can also imagine worse, particularly with a Dem Senate holding him in check.

Jun. 04 2008 08:57 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth,
To continue. I gather from many of the posters here that many think that either she was not treated unfairly or that she deserved it. We could argue that forever - the problem is that there are many who feel that way, and we need them in Nov. I have said over and over, that I made my choice based on who I thought had better solutions but that if he were the choice of most Dems I was OK with that. I accept that he is the choice of most Dems. I am OK with that. I am tired of being characterized as being somehow deficient (Wright's word), because I don't completely reject her.

Jun. 04 2008 08:55 AM
seth from Long Island

Hillary supporters,
Did any of you watch the morning cable shows? All of the talk was What does Hillary want? How should Obama deal with Hillary? Hillary could have prevented this chatter if she had announced a suspension of her campaign last night and endorsed Obama and if she stated she wasn't interested in the VP spot. Hillary's ego is delaying party unity. The MSM won't focus on McCain vs. Obama because Hillary is refusing to concede. David, hjs - You're living in another universe. Hillary lost fair and square. If results were reversed, I would have called for Obama to endorse Hillary on the night she clinched the nomination.

Jun. 04 2008 08:54 AM
mc from Brooklyn

seth,
I am not sure if you are serious about a response from HRC's supporters, but I will give it the benefit of the doubt. I will not consider speaking for her campaign, I have no position on how long this should take. I have no position on who should be VP.

Here is what I do think. This is not about her any more, it is about the Nov. race. I know that you probably think that means she should just disappear but I think that there are millions of her supporters who feel that she was not treated fairly, not necessarily by Obama, but by the media and by some of the Dem. leadership.

Jun. 04 2008 08:52 AM
Gary from Manhattan

The Clintons have always been selfish and couldn't care less about the greater good. Bill dragged the country through the tortuous period of Monica/Impeachment to hang on to the presidency. Hillary couldn't give a damn about what happens to the Democratic party if she's not the nominee and would like to see Obama lose in November so Lady Macbeth can come back in 2012.

By the way, I'm a Reagan Republican (and a WNYC member--believe it or not). I have been amused seeing the Democrats (who I was told are ones that aren't mean-spirited like the Republicans, right?) being at each other's throats. I NEVER voted for Bush, either in 2000 or 2004. I'm looking forward to John McCain restoring the Republican party back to its Reagan roots of peace, prosperity and global leadership, and disassociating itself from Bush forever (kind of like what the Democrats did with Carter). I'll agree with my fellow WNYC listeners on this point: Bush is the worst president ever; Bill Clinton has moved up to second worst ever.

Jun. 04 2008 08:48 AM
hjs from 11211

d!
it's time to look at the big picture. who do u want to pick the next supreme court judges?
why judge obama by a few posters?

Jun. 04 2008 08:23 AM
David! from NYC

mc, hjs, james, chestinee, and others...

I had hoped to login early enough to escape any of the Obama gloating. Alas, too late. The jackboots are already on Sen. Clinton's throat this morning. This message is for you, for people I've stood with on these pages.

I've had it. If the Democratic leadership wants to fly in the face of the will of the people, if they want to push Sen. Clinton out, so be it. They pushed her out, and they push me out. I posed the question last week whether there was room under this "Democratic umbrella" for me. The answer is no, there isn't.
The slime of the Democratic leadership is nastier than anything I've ever seen the GOP do, even Rove.
I've already printed out my voter registration change and just have to decide whether to go with unaffiliated or Working Families Party. (mc, thanks for the suggestion. I will look into it before deciding.)
Nor do I intend to return to these boards. Tolarance of other opinion is one thing, but immersion in the Obama shark tank is another.

I'll miss you guys. Too bad it did not turn out the way it should have, the way the majority of the people wanted it to.

Jun. 04 2008 06:37 AM
seth from Long Island

Congrats to Barack Obama for his historic win!! This was truly a David vs. Goliath story. An unknown senator going up against the media's anointed nominee. Hillary had all the advantages of an incumbent and yet Obama managed to take it away from her. Obama has 2 more obstacles to overcome. First, resist the frenzied, hysterical demands by the pundits to take Hillary for VP. Second, beat McCain in Nov. Good Luck with final chores Senator!

Jun. 04 2008 03:42 AM
seth from Long Island

Question for Hillary supporters: How much time and space does your candidate require to work out the final details of her exit strategy? How much slack are we obliged to cut her? I know she got millions of votes. It was a close race but she lost. Obama does not owe Hillary a job in his administration. She is a sitting US senator from the 3rd largest state in the Union. NY’s GOP is a joke, so Hillary effectively has this seat for life. To Hillary fans who feel that it’s a horrible injustice for Obama not to choose Hillary for VP, I say cry me a river.

Jun. 04 2008 03:30 AM
seth from Long Island

I hope Hillary’s supporters (mc, hjs, etc) were impressed by her "unity" speech. Forgive me for not clapping. I second Andrew Sullivan’s reaction: “Classless, graceless, shameless, relentless. Pure Clinton.” If mc and hjs truly value unity, I hope they contact Hillary’s campaign and call for her to endorse Obama now. Any sane, rational person in Hillary’s situation would follow Katrina vanden Heuvel’s advice and “exit this historic race, gracefully, with dignity.” Hillary had her chance to do so last night and she blew it. She is the ultimate anti-gravitas candidate of the 2008 season.

Jun. 04 2008 03:27 AM
seth from Long Island

Hillary pulled an A-Rod yesterday. She stepped on Obama’s nomination win just like A-Rod stepped on the 2007 World Series. News that A-Rod opted out of his contract broke just as the Red Sox were about to win the World Series. News that Hillary was open to being the VP nominee broke on the day that Obama reached the magic number. To Hillary supporters who can’t fathom my dislike of her, it’s hubris like this that gets under my skin. Hillary is trying to bully her way on to this ticket and it’s a disgusting spectacle.

Jun. 04 2008 03:22 AM
eva

Presidential historian M. Beschloss put it best on Tuesday's Jim Lehrer show: “we've heard so much from her about how she has benefited from her experience. I think, in this process, she was a victim of her experience.” His point was that she used king-kong-style 1996 and 2000 strategies she'd learned from her husband... but that no longer worked against an opponent who was so adept at exploiting internet-based social networking.
Okay, also, as Andrea Bernstein put it, "he's a force of nature." I hit the beach tonight and everyone was just pumped about the nomination. I think Hillary's been conned into thinking she can only be great in politics. She likely has talents far outside the political sphere - she'd make a bad-assed and very saucy TV talk show host. It would give her a chance to loosen up and who's to say you're not more influential as the next Oprah? Who's to say the person who solves the health care crisis has to be inside the white house?

Jun. 04 2008 02:12 AM
Steven from Manhattan

Yes, I agree with Marie that Hillary was gracious in her speech last night no matter what the other pundits say. Obama needs to show the proper respect and give the nomination to Hillary. Yes,I agree with Marie that Hillary won in all the important states. Toobin on CNN should be fired for disrespecting Hillary. Hillary won the popular vote by anyone's calculation except the bias media. Hillary needs time to think about her loss for a couple of days because it came to a complete suprise to her.
(I think this will summarized Marie Coco's unbiased comments later this morning.)

Jun. 04 2008 02:02 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.