Comeback Kid, Take Two?

Newsweek Web Exclusive

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: democrastic @ 01/04/2008 9:19:11 PM

    Msnbc all their shows are bias to Obama not giving any leeway to the other democractic candidates constantly bashing Sen Clinton especially Chris Matthew instead of reporting the campaign they are promoting it for Sen Obama fact of the matter is its nice to make beautiful speechs and say what peop;e want to hear but with the short time in politics how feasible is it Hillary Clinton has been referred to as the status quo nothing further from the truth shes has been fighting specials interest for years check her record as far as the vote to go to war from the information the Senate was given about weapons of mass destruction if a Senator did not vote to go to war it was a big mistake if the wepons were found would Sen Obamas vote be incorrect also on a nother important vote on Iran Sen Obama didnt even show up to vote Lets stop looking for the knight in shinng armor and get to the business of nominating the right cnadidate for president

    • Posted By: thawkins @ 01/04/2008 9:40:38 PM

      Was it something I said....

    • Posted By: thawkins @ 01/04/2008 9:30:45 PM

      Just a month ago, the media were all singing Hillary's song -- she was the inevitable candidate. They are all still talking about her "experience" advantage. Let's see: 1) attorney and child advocate, 2) wife of the governor of Arkansas and then president Bill Clinton (complicit both in Whitewater and the pork bellies trading debacle), 3) boondoggle of an attempt at healthcare reform, 4) stood by her man (a plus in my opinion), and a two-term senator who rode her husbands popularity to that office who has flip-flopped on the big issues of the day according to what was popular in the polls, this last point being a veritable definition of status quo politics!

  • Posted By: rpbuffalo @ 01/04/2008 4:08:02 PM

    The Dems are falling for the Republican wish. The Republicans know that the only place they can win against Hillary is in the Democratic primary process which is very left leaning and activist controlled. Why do you think that no Republican has said one word against Obama? They secretly want to run against him and will crush him.........I smell a Mondale kind of loss coming on. The Clinton team has been totally soft on him compared to what the Republicans will do. NEW HAMPSHIRE............please don't fall for this.
    A voter from Florida is counting on you this time.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 4:36:24 PM

      You're completely wrong. They want to run against Hilary because they think she's divisive and will bring out their base who largely hate her. Obama is a wild card that the Repubs have no answer for.

      • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:26:52 PM

        The "Republican Base" hates all Democrats and when they find out that Barack's liberalism makes Hillary look like Ronnie, they'll GET energized!

        And I wish Johnsonium would spell Ms. Clinton's first name correctly if he insists upon using it so much.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:55:29 PM

          Wrong. Hillllllllllllarrrry is devisive, even among Democrats. I'll vote for her if she pulls some sort of miracle and becomes the nominee, but I doubt many independents will, and that's who sway elections.

          • Posted By: labrat07 @ 01/04/2008 9:38:55 PM

            Sad to say, Im a Dem but ill vote Republican if she gets the nom. Fairly certain, there are a lot out there who think similarly

  • Posted By: democrastic @ 01/04/2008 9:06:14 PM

    Chris Matthews and all other programs on msnbc continually bash Hillary Clintion every change they get they are supposed to be reporters not people trying to push ther political views on the public furthermore Sen Obama talks of change and hope how does he plan about getiing it with little experience in the ways of Washington its easy to say and nice to hear but how feasible is it They say clinton is the status quo but she has been fighting special interest s in Washington for yearsWe dont need beautiful speeches we need a strong leader Look at her credentials and than Obamas its perfectly clear who the candidate of choice is Everybody talking about history first black and first woman may be president I am looking for the best candidate

    • Posted By: thawkins @ 01/04/2008 9:23:19 PM

      In response, abridging my own earlier comments, Hillary's big opportunity to change healthcare was a notorious flop. Despite her much touted experience, she is a second term Senator with an inconsistent record on the big issues, whose only other real "experience" at the national or international level was how to be first lady -- not the job she's campaigning for. Personally, I give her credit for [pre-Washington] child advocacy and background in law; would that she gave as much weight to Obama's experience gleaned during many years of community activism (which Hillary used as subject for her dissertation, but not as an actual opportunity for service), Obama's term in the state legislature of Illinois (from which he became a US Senator -- he didn't just come out of nowhere), and the fact that Obama broke barriers as a student at Harvard Law School (being the first African-American to edit its Review) then went on to become professor of Constitutional law at the prestigious University of Chicago. [Respectfully I submit] Only the ill informed or devotees of political theater could claim with a straight face that Hillary has vastly superior experience to Obama, a gentle and brilliant leader whose international perspective developed in his formative years abroad and not from within the security bubble cacooning a first lady.

  • Posted By: tommyaw @ 01/04/2008 8:38:48 PM

    How can you write a line as shallow and irresponsible as "There are hints..." what are the hints? You don't go on to describe them. Furthermore, it is borderline offensive to even name Obama's "exotic ethnic background" as a reason he might undergo scrutiny. Why would you even name this? If he does incur this then its shameless but he certainly doesn't need this irresponsible line in a newsweek column in effect predicting it.

  • Posted By: PulSamsara @ 01/04/2008 8:37:32 PM

    Nepotism does not = Experience.

  • Posted By: PulSamsara @ 01/04/2008 8:36:23 PM

    Hey Come Back Kid !
    Come back to Arkansas and leave us alone !

    America is a Democracy - Not a Monarchy
    Say NO to Nepotism in the White House.

    Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.

  • Posted By: jbeltran @ 01/04/2008 8:13:00 PM

    In 2000 we choose someone with charisma rather than someone who had been active in making positive changes for our country. LETS NOT MAKE THAT SAME MISTAKE! GO HILLARY!!!!

  • Posted By: lycius @ 01/04/2008 7:36:39 PM

    It's a big mistake to assume that HRC will win big states in Feb. 5. Obama owns IL with Mayor Daley (Chicago) support.. California and Texas will probably be split even between the two. Hillary can only really count on New York, but if Bloomberg doesn't run and silently supports Obama, she'll have some competition.

  • Posted By: TomKennedy @ 01/04/2008 7:36:02 PM

    Hillary is old and backed more by powerful interests that will benefit by keeping things status quo Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton gridlock than manifesting any real positive change. Obama and Edwards are backed by real people, not invisible Republican PR voices that want to run against Hillary. The people have woken up and it is time to throw the bums out.

  • Posted By: TomKennedy @ 01/04/2008 7:35:21 PM

    Hillary is old and backed more by powerful interests that will benefit by keeping things status quo Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton gridlock than manifesting any real positive change. Obama and Edwards are backed by real people, not invisible Republican PR voices that want to run against Hillary. The people have woken up and it is time to throw the bums out.

  • Posted By: wodiej @ 01/04/2008 6:55:26 PM

    I wonder how you think Obama's supposed charisma will help him navigate all of the duties of President?

    • Posted By: jackel1229 @ 01/04/2008 7:03:41 PM

      two words---Ronald Reagen who went over the heads of the Congress and spoke directly to the people.
      He accomplished a lot that way. Obama is talking with the people, not at them as Hillary does

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:18:40 PM

        You are correct. As much as a disagreed with Reagan's policy, he was a very effective politician and leader. It's all about communication and warmth. Hilary has problems with both.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:05:30 PM

      Same way it worked for Clinton, the Bill version. Hilary will be very vulnerable in a general election. Independents don't vote for status quo Democrats. We've tried that several times and lost, trying to ride stiff, wooden establishment candidates. We need someone dynamic in order to win.

  • Posted By: cynwest @ 01/04/2008 3:52:58 PM

    I just want to say that I am personally afraid of Barack Obama. I think he is riding a big wave that will be dangerous for all of us. If he wins the nomination I will vote republican. I cant believe I said that. But this isnt supposed to be a popularity contest when we get down to it. Who has the experience to see us through this terrible time? Not Obama. I dont trust him. It is obvious we need change but we also do need experience. I think everyone is so tarnished by the Bush admin that we are seeking desparelty at anything new. But new isnt always better. I pray everyone will get a grip and see clearly what is ahead. I am a stead fast Democrat, but I will NOT vote for Obama. Im Hillary all the way. Signed a middle class female voter.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:06:33 PM

      I agree completely. Barack looks (and acts) just like a liberal version of George W. and that would be an utter disaster for this country. We have had quite enough change as far as I am concerned. What we need now is competence and I really don't get that from Obama.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:12:56 PM

        Now we really know you're crazy. Obama is the most brilliant candidate we've had since Bill Clinton. He's incredibly intelligent and articulate. Even his honest detractors admit that. Saying he's just like GWB is probably the dumbest thing anyones said in this discussion.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:02:24 PM

        She competently voted for war. She's competently triangulating to determine her next policy shift. Hillllllarrrry would be very vulnerable in the general election. She's abrasive, wooden. We've not faired well with candidates without warmth and the human touch. See Kerry, Gore and Dukakis. We need someone from the Bill Clinton mold. Unfortunately, he can't teach his wife his charisma and populist touch. Obama has it and it will carry him through.

  • Posted By: kimberlyp @ 01/04/2008 6:32:05 PM

    Thawkins
    Edwards talks of change. Obama talks of change. Clinton talks of change. What are the changes we desire? We can all agree we want to live better, have more money, etc. What are our priorities? What does it mean to live better? It is true that the middle class is being marginalized but should we not look for the causes and address them in a rational manner? The affordability of advanced education along with retraining programs open to all should be one of our top priorities. Why?... because the lack thereof increases poverty and shrinks the middle class.
    Venture capital needs to be focused not on just $30 Million deals and up, but on financing small businesses with seed capital all across the country. This can only happen if you have the right incentives for investors to take the risk. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the candidate that has addressed these issues and has worked on them for years. She established a tangible plan and has executed such in the private sector. Personally, I vote for freedom first, and then my pocketbook. Why?...because without freedom what do you have that is worth having? Without financial security you have no freedom. If you are voting on foreign policy then vote for Dodd as he is the most knowledgeable and capable in that arena. If you are concerned with the financial future of the country and your family, you owe it to dig into Clinton???s policy papers and into her personal history of accomplishment. In this day of 30 second sound bites it???s all about projecting an image. Packaging is nice but did you marry for beauty or did you marry for love?

    • Posted By: jackel1229 @ 01/04/2008 6:48:48 PM

      You are absolutely correct. No one in the history of trading has taken $1,000 and turned it inton $100,000 like Hillary did. Gee, you can't even get into the game with only 1K. Clinton's policy papers are locked up until 2012. And as far as education, the more money we pour into it, the lower the scores go. The one thing that is constant for Hillary and other insiders in Washington, is that they identify a problem and then subsidize it. What has Hillary really accomplished besides hiding papers from the FBI, bringing FBI files into the White House ( gestapo) of her enemies, enabling her Bill and given millions to wirte a book?

      • Posted By: thawkins @ 01/04/2008 7:10:23 PM

        I would suggest to you that Hillary's policy papers have weight only insofar as she herself has veracity and credibility. Any politician with connections and a little money to spend can put together a platform replete with position papers and policy proposals (or just pull them from the Brookings Institute for that matter), but we need a leader who can execute policy by uniting the country around civil discourse and honest politics. Contrast Hillary's talk once upon a time of a vast conservative conspiracy, with the fact that Obama has poker night with his legislative colleagues across the isle though he is no closer to their views than Hillary's policy papers are (whatever Hiilary herself really believes). As you said, packaging is nice but do you marry for beauty or do you marry for love?

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:48:29 PM

      Nice spin. Obama will still win. Charisma trumps all of that.

  • Posted By: clfdpa @ 01/04/2008 4:13:50 PM

    Hillary will bounce back with a vengence. Take away the iindependents and republicans who voted in the democratic party and you would have had a l% difference. Also all this talk about a huge history turning win....come on...62% of Iowans voted for someone other than obama.. LETS GET REAL FOLKS. i THINK OBAMA IS A FINE PERSON AND A PRETTY GOOD CANDIDATE BUT TO ELECT ANOTHER PRESIDENT WHO HAS NO FOREIGN POLICY EXPERIENCE MIGHT JUST GIVE US ANOTHER GEORGE W. BUSH. AND I SAY NO THANK YOU!

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 4:32:20 PM

      Hilary has no foreign policy experience either. Shaking hands in a receiving line does not experience make.

      Obama will be the nominee and will win the general election. I've been saying it from the beginning and now I'm even more assured I'm correct.

      • Posted By: kimberlyp @ 01/04/2008 6:55:51 PM

        Enter Clinton was a Wal-Mart's Board member.
        She was also on the Board of TCBY.
        She has also served on the boards of the Children???s Defense fund which she also chaired. Additionally she was on the Arkansas Children???s hospital board.
        She co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and families.
        She chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee.
        She also served as congressional legal counsel.
        We can see that she has practical experience in education, in healthcare, and business. She has not promised hope but delivered hope to many. This has been her life???s work. No other candidate is as credible as she is, on these issues nor have they done it.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:09:48 PM

          Yep. She's a corporatist all right. I agree with Michael Moore in 'Sicko'. It's sad. She used to fight these corporate powers, now she is courting their favor.

  • Posted By: SHIRLDUBO @ 01/04/2008 3:45:01 PM

    I AM ALWAYS AMAZED AT HOW THE DEMOCRATS SEEM TO ALWAYS TO FIND A WAY TO LOSE A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. HAS IT OCCURED TO ANYONE THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE HOPING WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT THAT OBAMA WILL WIN THE DEMO NOMINATION AND MAKE IT AN EASY WIN FOR THEM IN NOVEMBER? HAS IT OCCURED TO ANYONE THAT THE REPUBLICAN CROSS OVER FOR OBAMA WAS A WAY FOR HIM TO WIN IN IOWA?
    SHIRLDUBO@PEOPLEPC.COM

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:02:04 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

      • Posted By: kimberlyp @ 01/04/2008 6:42:31 PM

        I'm glad I m not the only one to thnk this? A least I'm not crazy.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 7:03:20 PM

          He thinks it so strongly, he posted it six times. Must be right.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:02:03 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:02:02 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:02:01 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:01:57 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:01:47 PM

      I questioned that last night myself. I wonder just how much this Republican crossover contributed to the Obama victory and how "organized" was it? The Republican Party has been running dirty tricks since the Nixon administration and Krazy Karl is not above trying to fix up the right (or should I say left?) Democratic candidate.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 4:42:02 PM

      The cons want Hilary to run. She's divisive. They can't handle Obama.

  • Posted By: jackjack @ 01/04/2008 4:01:26 PM

    Im for Obama. I used to love the Clintons...truly. The idea of having BIll back in the White House was great...but I look at them now and I just see 'the past'. I see something that needs to be put to rest. Old bad blood, old ideology, old politics. Obama represents that change, not because he's black...but because he's black. What do I mean? I mean that he is the epitome of a 360 degree change in the face of this country. There is a large portion of this country who didnt grow up in segregation. We dont see black and white and its irritating to be constantly reminded of it. I for one want to be proud of my country again. I want to live in a country where a black man CAN be president. I want someone who will LISTEN to all sides and take the highs and lows with grace and authenticity. I dont expect him to hit homers on every run. I expect him to stumble...but I believe he'll be honest about it. I believe he can stand on the world stage and command the respect of other leaders. I believe he can restore the greatness this country once had. Hillary doesnt give me that hope and I know that conservatives are praying she DOES get the nomination so they can rally the troops against her. She is divisive and there's nothing she can do to change that. The 90's are gone. Time for a change.

    Obama 08

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:12:15 PM

      Hasn't George W. changed this country enough for you? I say let's get back to some sanity and the simple ability to do the job.

      As far as the Republicans wanting to run against Hillary is concerned, I hope they get their wish. I don't think that they can beat her. Obama, on the other hand, is far too liberal to win a national election, and his liberal coattails would cripple the inroads made by Dems in swing congressional districts.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:59:21 PM

        He's mainstream America. He's not far-left. Compared to Republican-Lite Clinton, he may be. But, he's firmly in the mainstream of American thinking.

  • Posted By: SMPress @ 01/04/2008 4:01:38 PM

    Since when was Barak the one who couldn't go up against the GOP!?! Hillary's ALWAYS been viewed as a Democrat that would totally energize the GOP voters just because she's running!!! Also, don't mind the fact that Barak did MUCH better among independents in Iowa the Hillary, a clear sign that Obama is far MORE "electable" in a general election than Hillary. I just hope us dems don't loose the White House yet AGAIN because of sticking to the candidate who's "supposed" to win the nomination. GO BARAK!!

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:14:28 PM

      There is a lot more at stake than the White House in this year's elections. If Barack gets the nomination the Democrats will lose both houses of Congress and his presidency will be a disaster from day 1.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:58:13 PM

        Repeating the same unestablished assumption doesn't make it correct.

  • Posted By: ninodelamerced @ 01/04/2008 4:01:49 PM

    look at hilary and the people behind her, and look at obama..who would you trust? Obama all the way......we can do it..

    • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:17:46 PM

      The people (i.e.: advisors) behind Barack are the same people behind Hillary (and vice versa) come general election time, except that Hillary brings along back-room support that Barack will never see.

      I want the White House AND Congress solidly Dem. Barack can't deliver in No. 2!

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:57:46 PM

        Once again, you make a wild assumption, one that I've not heard made before, and don't say why you think that's the case. Is it racism? Why would he hurt the Congressional chances?

  • Posted By: rpbuffalo @ 01/04/2008 4:07:12 PM

    The Dems are falling for the Republican wish. The Republicans know that the only place they can win against Hillary is in the Democratic primary process which is very left leaning and activist controlled. Why do you think that no Republican has said one word against Obama? They secretly want to run against him and will crush him.........I smell a Mondale kind of loss coming on. The Clinton team has been totally soft on him compared to what the Republicans will do. NEW HAMPSHIRE............please don't fall for this.
    A voter from Florida is counting on you this time.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 4:36:58 PM

      Wrong the first time, and the second time you posted it.

      • Posted By: jfelcon @ 01/04/2008 6:21:48 PM

        Johnsonium is wrong every time! Even if Barack could manage to win in the Electoral College (remember that the popular vote win doesn't count for diddly, boys and girls), his coattails would wreck any chances for Congressional Dems to hold the House and move toward the magic 60 in the Senate.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:56:26 PM

          You have no facts for your assertion that he would lose the Congress. It's an assumption on your part, and a very poor one at that.

  • Posted By: kimberlyp @ 01/04/2008 6:29:23 PM

    We can see that she has practical experience in education, in healthcare, and business. She has not promised hope but delivered hope to many. This has been her life???s work. No other candidate is as credible as she is, on these issues nor have they done it.

    • Posted By: thawkins @ 01/04/2008 6:54:20 PM

      Hillary's big opportunity to change healthcare was a notorious flop. Her business dealings included Whitewater and little else notable so far as I know. I would suppose her practical experience in education makes her about as qualified as your average public school teacher to be president. Despite her much touted experience, she is a second term Senator with an inconsistent record on the big issues, whose only other real "experience" at the national or international level was how to be first lady -- not the job she's campaigning for. Personally, I give her credit for child advocacy and background in law; would that she gave as much weight to Obama's experience gleaned during many years of community activism (which Hillary used as subject for her disseration, but not as an actual opportunity for service), Obama's term in the state legislature of Illinois (from which he became a US Senator -- he didn't just come out of nowhere), and the fact that Obama broke barriers as a student at Harvard Law School (being the first African-American to edit its Review) then went on to become professor of Constitutional law at the prestigious University of Chicago. Only the ill informed or devotees of political theater could claim with a straight face that Hillary has vastly superior experience to Obama, a gentle and brilliant leader whose international perspective were developed in his formative years abroad and not inferred from within the security bubble cacooning a first lady abroad. And for any who yearn to see the first female president, please, shouldn't that accolade go to a self-made woman who is not merely riding her husband's coattails to power?

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 01/04/2008 6:37:59 PM

      Um....when? As first lady? If it's as senator, then that's a wash as so has Obama.

      One thing Obama has no experience doing. He hasn't voted to authorize a disastrous war and then refuse to take responsibility for the mistake.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse