Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article is bad news for us. We will lose with numbers like that. He is going to have to do whatever he can to get the white women back in the fold. And if that means a Hillary VP, so be it.
Goodness gracious. If only they showed as much passion for the other issues that have affected them all of these years. Why haven't they banded together to change the PAY scale - something that has directly affected them for years? Senator Clinton has effectively manipulated all of these women, and possibly created a perfect storm which will never see her elected to any position of power in the future. I'm betting if this keeps up she will not only lose her congressional seat, she'll be done in politics. She cannot have it both ways and just as forces across the Nation may be allied with her, the demographics in New York will not support her. She's going to lose somewhere and voters memories are long indeed.
The sentiment will not be Senator Obama lost the White House - it will forever be Senator Clinton destroyed it through the most divisive campaign in Democratic History. She wants a footnote, it will be bigger than she anticipated.
Senator Clinton will have to deliver the healing, Unity speech of her career - or lose it.
I think this is going to split at about 45 years. I can see how those of us who were fighting the good fight, way back, are still touchy, but we are in a post feminist era where young women are more "Sex in the City" than Maude or Julia. But if women really sit back and think for a bit, they still have more to gain with Obama than with McCain. I base this on my observations of both men's personal and professional treatment of women. I will take sweetie over unequal pay.
If that's who you really think is the best candidate, then by all means that's who you should support.
But.... is that what's going on here?
Your strategy doesn't seem logical. For months the big argument to vote for Hillary was that she was the only one who could beat McCain. Certainly the campaign workers who called me for support emphasized over and over that Obama might have good ideas, but getting the republicans out of the white house was the primary goal... and only Hillary was enough of a fighter to do that.
Now the primary goal has changed? Hmmmmm, I wonder what Hillary would say about that?
Clinton did not cause the divisiveness within the party. The power players within the party caused it by manipulating the process to exclude Clinton.
Frankly, I don't believe it had anything to do with her gender; it had to do with her husband and all the controversy surrounding the couple. The Dem Top Dogs didn't want to bring all that (the blue dress, travelgate, Whitewater, Vince Foster, etc.) back into the forefront.
Their mistake was that they pinned their hope on someone who is equally flawed and is also inexperienced. Many of us listen to Obama, see no substance and walk away wondering why he's become such a Rockstar.
I think it's safe to say that the GOP didn't hand pick and push to the front their candidate. The GOP upper echelon does not particularly care for McCain. The people put him there. That's the way it ought to be, win or lose.
Clinton did not cause the divisiveness within the party. The power players within the party caused it by manipulating the process to exclude Clinton.
Frankly, I don't believe it had anything to do with her gender; it had to do with her husband and all the controversy surrounding the couple. The Dem Top Dogs didn't want to bring all that (the blue dress, travelgate, Whitewater, Vince Foster, etc.) back into the forefront.
Their mistake was that they pinned their hope on someone who is equally flawed and is also inexperienced. Many of us listen to Obama, see no substance and walk away wondering why he's become such a Rockstar.
I think it's safe to say that the GOP didn't hand pick and push to the front their candidate. The GOP upper echelon does not particularly care for McCain. The people put him there. That's the way it ought to be, win or lose.
Can you explain how the process was manipulated? Are you saying that the DNC planned for Florida's Republican party to change the primary date and Michigan to abandon common sense?
I suspect everyone will calm down by the end of the summer at the latest. Hillary isnt going to disappear; she'll continue reminding her followers to stay within the Dem party.
The article is bad news for us. We will lose with numbers like that. He is going to have to do whatever he can to get the white women back in the fold. And if that means a Hillary VP, so be it.
It would have been bad news either way you slice it. Had Clinton actually succeeded in her race-baiting, and Democrats elected her instead of Obama, it would have been Black and Brown voters who took off the gloves. It would have been Black and Brown voters who bolted the Party.
And what would have been the response from everyone else? "Who needs 'em".
So if those folks want to vote for John McCain because some upstart brother from Chicago ran a better organized, classier, and more tasteful campaign, then let 'em vote for McCain.
The Clinton supporters of good sense, decency and goodwill will eventually see that Clinton failed; not that Obama stole something from them. They will eventually see that Clinton crossed the bounds of decency time and again, where simply Obama took it on the chin (as if he were somehow required) and brushed it off.
The better candidate has won. And there are hundreds of thousands of White women who agree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.