Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Reasons for Hillary Clinton to keep campaigning
Top 10 reasons for Hillary Clinton to keep on campaigning
10. Loves appearing on late-night talk shows
9. Raise money to offset debts
8. Three words: One More Debate!
7. Won’t have to go back to the Senate to write DOA “gas tax holiday” bill
6. Has a warehouse full of “Hillary’n’Wes in ‘08” buttons manufactured in 2006
5. Raise money to offset debts
4. Gives her a reason to get out of bed on Sunday mornings
3. Rigorous campaign schedule allows her to keep close tabs on Bill
2. Did we mention raise money? Go to HillaryClinton.com!
And the #1 reason for Hillary Clinton to keep on campaigning:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1. Puerto Rico is lovely this time of year
Advertisement
Comments (62)
That's a very ugly post. I can't imagine how ugly it might have been if your candidate were not winning. Maybe it feels good to you, but it doesn't help roughly half the Democratic party to support the candidate they don't support.
May 7, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto, what do you have against Puerto Rico?
May 7, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The question you should be asking is:
Because all this anguish about Hillary supporters not voting for Obama is a distraction from the core question.
Keep in mind personal blogs are the breeding ground of snark and contempt so try not to take it too personal. Your diatribes were not particularly attractive either when you thought your team had a chance.
May 7, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is ugly?!? C'mon, Otto. This is something you could find on national television.
Now if I suggested everyone watch this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cywyKHqvZxo
maybe you'd have more of a point.
May 7, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's your ball. I believe your house is that way.
May 7, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sheesh... and all this time I thought Otto owned the bat.
May 7, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
How dare you destroy all prospects for party unity by having a sense of humor on an Internet message board?
May 7, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's your ball. I believe your house is that way.
---------------------------------------------------
You Obama supporters just keep saying that and more and more Clinton supporters will take their ball and stay home in Novenber.
May 7, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, now that's irony!
May 7, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it's 14 million balls, DF.
May 7, 2008 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now the three of you command 14 million balls? That's impressive.
I sincerely hope that all those who would make their voting decisions based on a post that someone put on an anonymous forum would recuse themselves from voting ever again. So that covers those of you that are here.
As for the other millions of people that aren't reading this and never will.. well, you don't speak for any of them.
May 8, 2008 2:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Holy crap, DF! I sincerely hope you lighten up soon.
May 8, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I hope you'll forgive me if I have a hard time determining when you're joking at this point. You have plenty of "lighten up!" moments yourself. I do think it's patently ridiculous for people on message boards to keep insisting that no one will vote for Obama in November because people on the Internet criticize Clinton. Having that said, I'm sorry if I missed a good joke!
May 8, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
So many of Hillary's supporters claim that the SCOTUS is one of their main voting issues. If that is truly the case, to sit home would be to cut your nose to spite your face. But maybe the SCOTUS wasn't your issue, Oceankat, so I can understand your position.
It's your choice, that's the sure. Everyone should vote their conscience as best as the candidates allow them.
May 7, 2008 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Staying home will only verify the earlier media assertions that Hillary could be the Ralph Nader of 2008.
It was in good humor especially considering the seriously aweful attacks and tactics that have come out of the Hillary Campaign during this contest.
If you want to get mad, you should e-mail those meanies at Wonkette.com:
"So Hillary Clinton has announced that she will stay in the presidential race until there is a nominee. By most measures, there already is one, so she is stupid. But Elite Math still says that she has a chance of winning this thing, as the above scenario from CNN's thrill-a-minute delegate counter shows. In this one, she will clinch the nomination (with one extra delegate!) by winning 45% of undecided superdelegates and 100% of remaining pledged delegates. Yes She Can! "
http://wonkette.com/388157/how-hillary-clinton-will-win-the-nomination-now
May 8, 2008 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I try to call Obama supporters on unnecessary use of ugliness, but this one's just funny. It would be just as easy for me to laugh at it if it were Obama instead of Clinton. The only one that might be in bad taste is #3, but if that one bothers you that much, then I have to wonder why you'd be supporting her in the first place.
May 7, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think clearthinker's list is funny enough.
Except for #7, actually, since the New York state legislature is trying to push through a "gas tax holiday" bill for NY State. The governor doesn't want it, but the gas tax holiday concept may not be DOA—at least for NY—when HRC gets back to the Senate. Whenever she decides to get back.
I think many Obama supporters are sore winners (you are the rare vocal exception, Ben). According to Obamanauts, their guy has been winning for months now, yet they still say crabby things to us treacherous Clinton supporters. Then they wonder why we snipe back. Bad sports.
May 7, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi called a gas tax holiday DOA.
True, she isn't in the Senate.
But she does have sway over another body.
Besides Mr. Pelosi.
May 8, 2008 1:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi may well have called the "gas tax holiday" bill "DOA."
However, when Clinton "goes back to the Senate" (as you say), the state she represents (NY) will be mulling over its own state-specific bill:
To continue the ball motif: Republicans are taking this ball and running with it, state-by-state.
NB: I'm not arguing in favor of a gas tax holiday! I am simply pointing out that Republicans favor it.
May 8, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
The post is far less ugly than the campaign being run by Hillary.
May 8, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is how I feel after Tuesday's results from NC and IN :) :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmbmPalsRi4
May 7, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, if Otto and the rest of these sore losers think that THAT was bad, this is my posting to describe Hillary to a T: Enjoy, bitter people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac_7EmYGXs
May 7, 2008 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol! Like Clintonistas are going to read anything you write, Soy Boy.
That's even funnier than clearthinker's list.
May 8, 2008 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
And here I thought you a fan!
May 8, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love the one about going back to the Senate for that gas tax vacation bill. If she were to drop out I have the SNEAAAAKING suspicion she wouldn't be working it too hard.
May 7, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on. That's just cynical.
May 7, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it's kind of stupid. The woman works very hard, but I'm not waiting up nights for people to notice.
May 7, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one was saying she didn't work hard. The Atomic Punk was merely saying she wouldn't be pushing the gax tax holiday so hard if she weren't in the race. I assume you agree with that, no?
(Just as I assume there are issues that Obama wouldn't be pushing as hard if he weren't in the race.)
May 7, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought it was going to be an empty post.
May 7, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Meta posts are soooo post-modern... which means that they are soooo yesterday. ;-)
I strive for a simpler age... although the age of irony followed the age of brass ones if I recall correctly.
May 7, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good old drop-forged irony. They don't make 'em like that anymore.
May 7, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's no way to ride the Magical Unity Pony.
The real question is what various pockets of the MSM are going to do without a permanent intraparty war to fan, er, report on, without dishy racial and gender exploitation of our voter base for ratings.
May 7, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
If this little blog upsets someone, do you honestly think they were serious about voting for Obama?
Does that cast of SNL worry about offending Obama or Hillary supporters?
And I have more respect for Hillary's supporters than that. If they can be "bought off" with ass-kissing by our pretending certain issues didn't exist, then they either are (a) stupid or (b) just wanting their ass kissed.
By the way, why isn't Hillary more interested in party unity? She benefits from the Dem Party structure more than you and I!
May 7, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's why:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac_7EmYGXs
May 8, 2008 12:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amazing. James Carville trys to emasculate Senator Obama, and claims that his examination of Hillary's undercarriage revealed that she has three testicles: but not a word of condemnation from Hillary or any of the Hillary supporters, who are now outraged by this mild lampooning of Hillary's own top ten list.
Where is all the feminist outrage when the Hillary camp makes the sexist attacks on Senator Obama.
May 7, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe Freud's debunked penis envy theory has legs after all...
May 7, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't get the image of a penis envy theory with legs out of my head now. Thanks a lot, clearthinker.
Also, If I were a Hillary supporter reading this thread, I'd be embarrassed. Isn't my candidate supposed to be the tough-as-nails one who's heard all this before, who this stuff rolls right off of? Why make such a big deal out of such a mild lampoon?
I'm all for us coming together, but it shouldn't mean we have to lose our sense of humor in doing so. And if you don't find the stuff funny, write your own, funnier version (or take-off) in the comments section. Fight fire with fire, friends. I'll point you to my response to a satirical post in late-February if you're looking for examples of countersnark:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/02/women-need-not-apply.php#comment-2619152
May 8, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
A third leg, one presumes. Or a third testicle.
May 8, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure. If you don't happen to think she's the best choice for the job, you're a misogynist. If you say that what we need in the White House is more testicular fortitude or claim that she's swinging a healthy pair (or trio), well.. that's just fine.
May 7, 2008 9:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing Hillary did correctly: she allowed me a reason to point out peak oil and it's attendant issues again. I will always be grateful to her for that!
May 7, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS... as I said above, the age of irony followed the age of brass ones....
It all ties together.
May 7, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is interesting.
There's a difference between using sexist language to put down vs. raise up.
So to speak. :-)
May 8, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is interesting. And complicated. While I am no HRC fan I am delighted that for the first real female contender for the white house there was never an issue of her suitability to be CIC. And HRC played this masterfully--she CRIED, she said, "I found my voice," she complained about men ganging up on her in the debate, getting the first question, media bias--and STILL is considered "a fighter." There are whole graduate courses that can be taught about gender roles in this campaign
BUT the testicular fortitude is not just to bring Hillary up, but to put Obama down as "limp-wristed," lacking balls, etc. And there's something very peculiar about this particular campaign using and endorsing words that align femininity with weakness.
May 8, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Know why? Here's why:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac_7EmYGXs
May 8, 2008 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amen, anneeliz. (Speaking of Amens, there are whole graduate courses that can be taught about religious taboos in American society from this campaign, too.) I have thought the same thing as you, only not nearly so succinctly!
Did someone in the Clinton campaign actually call Obama "limp-wristed"? If so, I thankfully missed that one.
The person who consistently "feminizes" Obama is Maureen Dowd. Somehow it bothers me more when she does it than when Carville made his cajones comment, possibly because I think Carville ended up insulting both Clinton and Obama. Dowd's smears are less crass.
But you're right, anneeliz, it's complicated.
May 8, 2008 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, no, Chris Matthews, I think, said limp wristed. A couple of HRC supporters here echoed it, but I should not have attributed that to the campaign. Everything else stands : )
I think it's actually a symptom of the brand of feminism that tends to be behind Hillary, those who are voting for her on gender, on seeing a woman president in their lifetimes--all about succeeding in a man's world. Hillary is "man enough." (This does not include the Hillary in the House guy who says something like, "We need a cleaning in the white house! And that's a woman's job!"
Maureen Dowd is appalling. Talk about your gender issues...
May 8, 2008 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about this. I personally think feminism is dead.
I think that's "identity politics," not feminism.
I don't blame anyone for voting for Clinton because of her gender or for Obama because of his race. Like I understand when Catholics turned out for JFK.
I do have a problem with people who vote against Clinton because of her gender or against Obama because of his race.
Both groups—women and blacks—have good reason to suspect that they won't get another chance to vote their identity for a long long time.
I just think that's marketing infiltrating our dialogue. And marketing is crass.
In other words, anyone who actually talks like that in real life is unable to articulate the complexity of their own life experience. And so they resort to catch phrases.
Just so you know, I'm not trying to kill the dialogue about this by sounding so definite. But I do think the discussion of race and gender issues raised by this campaign are a muddled mix of issues.
I am absolutely certain of this: Dowd and Matthews are a blight on our culture.
May 8, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I agree, it is identity politics. There are people supporting Hillary who are feminists and give feminist reasons for supporting her, but it is a feminism steeped in identity politics, and I think there's nothing at all feminist about Hillary candidacy or the feminist arguments for it. And if I haven't made the word "feminist" lose total meaning in your mind by this point, I shall be shocked.
May 8, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The difference being cui bono rather than the presence or absence of sexist language.
May 8, 2008 2:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely.
But which side is pushing it?
May 8, 2008 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, if it pisses off Otto, I'm all for it.
I'm just saying, clearthinker, I'm two months past sick of fighting over Obama-Clinton, and now that even her supporters are now accepting the reality of defeat after the Battle of the Bulge that was Indiana, threads of belittling Clinton seem to me like the Star Trek episode where the half-black half-white guys (where's Matt Weaver when you need him to keep score?), I think played by Frank Gorshin, chase each other through eternity. It's kicking a corpse.
And at this rate, we'll _never_ get them into re-education camps.
May 7, 2008 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
To points 9 and 5-- anyone care to guess how much money she could possibly raise before Oregon? Would it even be enough to offset the costs of campaigning?
May 7, 2008 11:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinking not much. Seems like she's pretty much playing for position now.
May 8, 2008 1:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
The longer her die-hards think she is in the race, the more chance she has of collecting bucks.
I think we are in uncharted turf. Once upon a time, the large donors would vanish at this point -- and I believe they have, or been tapped out to the tune of $2.3K. But, the large number of Hillary's supporters out there haven't put dime one into the campaign. So, it's possible to still grab a few million perhaps in $25 chunks. About the same size as the gas tax "relief".
I still personally think it's #1. She gets a Puerto Rican holiday paid for by donors.
Not a bad gig, that!
May 8, 2008 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
If we could post pictures here, I would absolutely photoshop a picture of Chelsea digging on some arroz con gandules with Menudo, and Hillary shaking some maracas and dancing with Huggy Bear.
May 8, 2008 2:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can always put it up on imageshack or similar and paste the link!
May 8, 2008 2:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
The main reasons why Hillary is still campaigning?
Cuz she's a dope?
Cuz her big fat, humiliated ego can't accept facts?
Cuz if she stops campaigning now, sooner or later she'll have to face that lying, conniving, sleazebag of a person in the mirror.
Cuz she got a few more varieties and hues of pantsuit to model for CNN's and CBS's cameras.
Cuz the writers haven't polished off her script for her new starring role on an intergalactic soap opera, since she craves the Universe's attention so damn bad.
Or, number one -- drum roll please --
Cuz she doesn't know what "bounce" means.
May 8, 2008 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
How's that Otto? Offended? Good!
May 8, 2008 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
OMG Bionic! You posted without a reference to your video.
Here, let me help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac_7EmYGXs
That's for the people who missed the other 3 times you listed it above.
You're very welcome. ;-)
May 8, 2008 1:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm truly stunned.
Oh what the heck. Make it four:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac_7EmYGXs
May 8, 2008 7:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
The point is that her remaining in the race now is probaby good for Obama:
- continues press coverage of him, leaving McCain on the sidelines for a little longer
- he'll need to campaign in these places, so running ads now is good for the general
- with no fear of losing, he can take the high road and be even more gracious
- letting Hillary hang on will assuage her hardcore supporters as they learn to accept reality
- It will be a good quiet period before the general election heats up
- Quietly work behind the scenes to mend fences, plan for the general, research appointments, push voter registration
He should use the opportunity to talk only about general election issues, learn about the states, meet voters, etc. He should avoid engaging too much with her on her usual attacks.
May 8, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
IT'S ELITE TO COUNT BACKWARDS IN LISTS!
UNLESS YOU ARE TELLING ME HOW MANY BOTTLES OF RUM ARE ON THE WALL!
WENCH HILLARY NEEDS NOTHING FROM OBAMA. INCLUDING A SENSE OF HUMOR!
SHE'LL BRING BACK THE CORPORATE RAIDER 1990S!
ACQUIRE! MERGE! MARAUD! DILUTE! DILUTE!
ARGH!
May 8, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment