Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Poll | 05/13/2008 6:31 am

Should Sen. Clinton pack it in?

Read more about: Election, Hillary Clinton, Politics

185 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

zut alors
what you think of me, seems to depend on what time of day it is.” no it’s consistent
By zut alors on 05/14/2008 1:45 am
Deni G
Really?
By Deni G on 05/14/2008 6:36 pm
Renata
Suzanne: I understand why you were CONFUSED. Sometimes posters say two things simultaneously and it is hard to know. I was confused as well, but now have some clarity by reading further.
By Renata on 05/14/2008 4:50 am
Renata
No worries. It will be interesting to see how far HRC supporters will go to “out” themselves as defacto Republicans, Conservatives and other unmentionables —on this particular forum. Loved Ann Richards. Didn’t like HRC inferring her support as if she were a live endorsement. Notice the absence of Marion Wrighte Edelman and the Children’s Defense Fund, upon which HRC bases a good deal of her years’ experience??? SILENCE. Interesting.
By Renata on 05/14/2008 4:44 am
zut alors
Today,James Carville, one of HRC’s hardest fighting, longest-time asscociates advisors/supporters/pitbulls…says it’s over and he suggests HRC or Wes Clark for VP.
By zut alors on 05/13/2008 5:08 pm
Renata
Unfortunately, thanks to the way he has conducted himself during this Campaign — his opinions and/or recommendations will be totally irrevelant to Barack Obama, the Democratic Party’s future and Clinton Inc. — who discard commodities (people?) who no longer are leveragable as currency. Carville has made himself irrevelant. So has George Stephanopolous/ABCNews. Governor Richardson and some others have REFUSED to do so, for the sake of this disasterous and MISMANAGED Campaign. Very wise. First step for consideration in the future of the Party. Wes Clark had better wake up. As Governor Richardson said — it isn’t about loyalty to the Clintons, it’s about LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Where will Wes Clark be? He’s smart and knows where the the lay of the land is as of today. HRC shouldn’t be asking good Americans to make this kind of choice. To the extent Clinton Inc. do make this kind of request — negates her (or Wes) being qualified as VP candidates. Our Nation comes first.
By Renata on 05/14/2008 4:57 am
Rachel B
Why is there a “new” old question about this every day? I hate coming to this forum and seeing the same thing over and over. When the popular votes are as close as they are, similar to the votes on this poll, I say let it play out. I wish there were no superdelegates to muck this up. There are many of us who think that Sen. Clinton is the only one who has the guts to deal with the mess that Bush is leaving. I don’t have anything against Sen. Obama, but based on how he presents himself, I don’t think he’s the one to be President.
By Rachel B on 05/13/2008 9:02 am
Renata
Perhaps there is no more important issue facing Americans than the current Election. We are in TWO WARS, the economy is on the verge of a Recession-which Jamie Dimon said today we are only at the beginning of, the boomers began signing up for ENTITLEMENTS 1/2/08 and amount to the beginning of a TIDAL WAVE Pete Peterson says will function like an undertow, our children’s futures are mortgaged to China and they cannot afford a first home let along getting married and starting a family, more than 40 million Americans STILL don’t have healthcare because of the FAILURE and heavyhandedness of HRC-who was not a Cabinet Member and had no legislative experience when she was given this important life/death task by her hubby —- The REASON every MEDIA/journalistic outfit is focused on this race — and openly discussing in forums of every kind — the REAL information we need to process to make an informed decision — is because after the last 7 years we ALL know the CONSEQUENCES of voting for the class clown you want to throw a beer back with. We ALL know we cannot have our fellow Americans lose their homes, drown in New Orleans w/out recourse (while we save the world), have tornadoes and other environmental/natural disasters destroy thousands of lives worldwide on a daily basis w/out address OUR contribution(s) to these disasters. We cannot allow America to falter any further than we have — almost a DECADE into the 21st Century, simply because Clinton Inc. have an AGENDA that we are a part of. This is THE QUESTION of the day, every day. We are now CONSCIOUS. For those who are not, there are other channels. For Republicans, there’s no hope — no matter how much you try to manipulate this Election cycle on blogs, etc. The die is cast.
By Renata on 05/13/2008 10:45 am
Jackie Blue
Rachel, I’ve been reading these posts all morning. You have made the most sense in the least amount of words. The posts are just intellectual crap. I’m so sick of it. Hillary is doing what she should as O’Bama. They both are doing what they have to do to get the nomination. The superdelegates have ruined this part of the race. Their title alone pisses me off. SUPER LOL… The people should be making this decision, the votes. Seems to me that is what all the networks look at anyway. If they didn’t care, if it didn’t matter, they wouldn’t show the results in each states. I think Hillary knows that the SUPERDELEGATES will be influenced by the people, she’s not going anywhere. I like all the candidates, they all are going to do something in each problem area; war, health care, enviroment and the economy. They have positive solutions and that is why it’s going to be a tough race, as it should. I think Hillary will be a good president, I think she will work hard for our country to get things back on track and touch each issue with consideration of the popular census. I really don’t think that Obama has the seasoning yet. McCain, the problem I have with him is that we will stay in Iraq. He wants to stay there until the Iraq people can take care of themselves. I don’t think this will happen for along time. I think their spirit is broken and it will take a long time for their faith and pride to return amongst themselves. I think it shouldn’t be desertion, but we should try and recruit more help from other nations. There needs to be stabilization fast and sanctions on those who will not cooperate. Hard and fast solutions. This is not a conventional war it is the fight against terrorism and the whole world should be involved. America cannot do it alone. I’m sorry for Iraq’s country people and the destruction and I’m sorry for our soldiers who are dying and come home to horrible health care, then go back again. So much debate on what should be done and so little action.
By Jackie Blue on 05/14/2008 9:30 am
Chrome Toe
Yes. I’m flat out irritated with her at this point. She is hurting the party in general. McCain gets to focus on acting, looking and talking like a presidential candidate and Hillary and Obama are having to struggle to maintain dignity at this point! It’s damaging damaging damaging. I’ve been irritated with her ever since she announced frankly. I’ve always thought it was selfish. She’s one of the most polarizing people in the country. For her to run at this time was just selfish. She needed to focus on doing good work, supporting her beliefs and making sure we had a candidate that was going to support the issues that the democrat party holds near and dear. But no… she had to get out there and do it and now she’s polarizing the dam party itself!
By Chrome Toe on 05/13/2008 9:06 am
Renata
New York — and its MEDIA/FINANCIAL (Clinton deregulated industries) — were just a stepping stone to a 3rd Clinton term. We now know this from HRC’s vote for the Iraq WAR she knew would deflect from Afghanistan/Osama bin-Ladin, who she and George W. NEVER even mention. Every wonder WHY??? Is this acceptable for a sitting Senator from the State of New York — where we STILL have a big hole in the ground and friends who DIED??? SILENCE…and Haliburton war profiteering via no-bid contracts. SILENCE, when Haliburton (and everyone else, it seems) relocates their HQ to Dubai. Must be nice to be both the former CEO of Haliburton AND VP during TWO WARS…for a company whose stock was declining just 7 years ago. Wonder what DEALS Bill Clinton has cooking — HRC is so desperate to regain The White House for, now — or functioning destructively to position for 2012? SILENCE.
By Renata on 05/13/2008 10:52 am
zut alors
Kelly Kelly, I could not have been a more ardent Clinton support, even attending anti-impeachment rallies, etc. The Clintons have done for me what the Republicans with their $82M investigation and the MSM with its non-stop screaming coverage of that horror show couldn’t achieve. They, no one else, turned me dead-set against them. If on the exceedingly slim chance that was VP on the ticket I’d wouldn’t vote…and Obama is smart enough that would turn all the anti-war liberals completely off the process. If others have no problem with supporting the massacre of innocents, the ruination of our treasury and reputation, and the destruction of two other countries, thus far, in an un-Constitutional action—I do. If HRC had no other piece of information—and she did—the floor speech of Senator Robert Byrd was enough to dissuade anyone with a true moral center not to capitulate that ultimate tp political expediency. Others may do as they wish. I’m not going to have blood on my hands, and I don’t imagine the Obamas want it on theirs either. There is no equivocating on the most important question of our time. She got it DEAD WRONG. As Senator Chuck Hegel (GOP) a decorated Vietnam Vet said….it was among the 5 worst blunders in history. So how is it a woman with a laptop can get that and not a Senator/former First Lady? Because she wanted to appease the Israel lobby. And for tens of millions of anti-war ACTIVISTS that’s enough said. She isn’t getting the nomination. And she doesn’t deserve too. Instead of voting their ovaries women should sit back and ask themselves how did they become so divorced with their own humanity to support someone who supported the ultimate preventable tragedy?
By zut alors on 05/13/2008 5:24 pm
zut alors
Kelly—“She’s one of the most polarizing people in the country.” Yes she is and am sorry ever supported the clintons and look forward to her going down in flames….she deserves it.
By zut alors on 05/14/2008 12:31 am
Renata
Suzanne: I pulled the lever for her TWICE as Senator, laying the foundation for this nightmare — when we were told she “had no Presidential plans.” We were all duped for the Clintons’ insatiable quest for ever more POWER that will not end. We are paying for our OWN sins by this excrutiating Nomination process — appropriately. We helped create Clinton Inc. as Democrats - so focused on the Republican excesses, we couldn’t see our own. Perfect triangulation of all interests. Now, the Democrats will have to end their reign. Republicans are now dismayed. They would have been so EASY to beat in the General Election, dragging out their skeletons (including the still untouched last 7 years HRC’s competitor gentlemen DID NOT TOUCH) and putting the Nation through absolute HELL, RELIVING THE 90s. Polarizing doesn’t come close to what this is…
By Renata on 05/14/2008 5:08 am
Lorraine Bates
If Hillary really had the best interest of the country and the voters she represents at heart, she would start campaigning for Obama to ensure those that she feels are loyal to her (the “white” working class) vote democratic in November. By continuing on, she is polarizing the vote more and more. If you tell a blue-collar white man, over and over, that the white candidate is better than the biracial candidate (because, let’s not forget, Obama IS 50% white), then you drive that voter to vote for the white man in November. And none of us want that.
By Lorraine Bates on 05/13/2008 9:31 am