Not saying this out of defending Democrats or Clinton however Roger Simon is a Dowdifing journalist, after the last six years of this crap I have no respect for this type of journalism.
Can you really turst what he says is true or is he just making up what he thinks is true.
I hope serious bloggers don't let these types of journalists drag bloggers down into the sewer; it's already hit some I hope it doesn't hit everyone.
NoDonkey
· 1 year ago
How can you see "competence" at this level when she has no proven record of competence at any other level?
In the Senate, she's cast party line votes. A chimpanzee can do that. She's moved no significant legislation of her own.
As first lady - she was first lady. Marie Antoinette would not have made a good king.
When the main thing you have going for you is a major stretch of the truth, why should the voters buy or be excited about it? At least Obama's interesting.
Phothus
· 1 year ago
I would like to believe that Clinton is turning off crowds whenever she speaks, but the reality is that the Politico is not a reliable source. Too often they've said one thing about Thompson events and the tape of the event shows just the opposite. Then there was the "rumor" of him dropping out just before the voting in Iowa that was also a false rumor.
They are no longer a reliable source for this sort of information. IMHO
Del_Dolemonte
· 1 year ago
How can you spin what the NY Times said last night? Her husband is speaking to half-empty halls.
Proof
· 1 year ago
According to Christina Bellatoni at the Washington Times, a lot of those people streaming from the exits were Clinton volunteers bussed in from other states to pad the audience and then do some canvassing. (All expenses paid by the Clinton campaign!) Either they were leaving early for the long ride home, or having played the "extras" in Hillary's little show, they were leaving to do some actual campaigning for the former First Lady.
While I am encouraged by the poll numbers on both sides for New Hampshire (particularly on the Democratic side) I'm forcing myself to remember that they are just that... poll numbers. And also that New Hampshire, while possibly a bit more influential than Iowa, is still a small, early state. The rest of the nation no longer feels a need to read the tea leaves of whichever primary happened last for cues on "momentum" and such, and seem ready and willing to deliver surprises.
The numbers for McCain and Romney are still within the margin of error. But then again, Romney was still being called to do very well, or at least very close, in Iowa up until the time people were filing in to the caucus halls. Romney may still squeak out a win.. anything is possible. But as much as some of his supporters in the pundit class (most especially Hugh Hewitt) are trying to spin everything into signs of Romney dominance, the voters can yet show up and pull another Iowa out of their collective butts. Calling him a "frontrunner" after that would be a tough assignment. (Did anyone catch Hugh's townhall post declaring that Romney winning *Wyoming* was the real news and indicator? I smell some desperation in the air.)
On the Dem side, even if Obama gets another double digit win (which would be great) I still get the feeling that there's a bit of wishful thinkingn going on here regarding Hillary if anyone wants to proclaim that "she's toast" after New Hampshire. She's got the money to keep plowing forward and there are still the vast majority of delegates to be picked up. Super Duper Tuesday can still change anything, and some folks like Rudy Giuliani are counting on that.
Even with double digit losses for both of them, I think Wed. morning would be far too soon to count out either Clinton or Romney, though the slope ahead of them gets much steeper in that case. And if you're trying to declare one of them out and not the other given the same performance, then partisan leanings may be feeding some denial.
We *may* start to get a good indication of where things are going after Michigan, South Carolina and Florida, but even then the GOP probably won't have a clear leader unless somebody can come up with three wins by then. (Three not counting Wyoming... LOL)
Del_Dolemonte
· 1 year ago
In 5 out of the last 7 Presidential elections, the winner of Iowa has been the eventual nominee. Same with NH.
MarkC
· 1 year ago
Muhammad Ali used the rope-a-dope strategy in boxing, but I don't the hope-a-dope strategy will help Obama in the general election.
Micah_B_Free
· 1 year ago
CE: "Why would anyone want to vote for her?" Because.... I think we all know this, they're voting for Bill. People that vote for Hillary just expect Bill to take over once she would be inaugurated. (sp?) I've met way too many people that Bill didn't leave a bad taste in their mouth. oh, sorry about that!
ClydeS
· 1 year ago
"If Hillary can't demonstrate competence, why else would anyone want to vote for her?" asks the Captain.
Well, in some quarters, "Gee, wouldn't it be great to show how liberal we are by electing the first woman president!" would probably do it. Of course, Obama trumps this by being the possible "first black president * ." Republicans understand that the presidency isn't an affirmative action hire, of course. I wouldn't vote against any candidate based on sex or race, but I wouldn't vote FOR them for those reasons, either.
ClydeS
· 1 year ago
* - "Not counting Bill Clinton, of course."
paul_abarge_at_email_dot_com
· 1 year ago
Roger Simon? This man is a proven fraud. His hit piece on Thompson clearly portrays that the Simon of Politico is dishonest. You need to question why you would repeat this loser's talking points.
Theflyman
· 1 year ago
Ah, isn't it refreshing to actually read something about Mrs. Clinton that reflects genuine criticism against her sheer performance abilities other than some over hyped, super micro analytical thread of her expertise in malice? I'm hoping that the rest of the Democratic voters see this as well and award Mr. O with the nomination. that truly would be the Right's worse nightmare. Just imagine all that precious material all for naught. the great thing about Mr. O is BECAUSE of his lower profile resume and experience he seems fit to be pretty well insulated. But I'm sure you all will be looking for a Dean Scream moment cause that is really what the GOP needs to elevate whomever, above the GOP's massive collective level of mediocrity. Think about the after election apologies, We couldn't even beat Barack Obama. I can't wait. Conservatism, dead principles espoused by self serving stooges and delivered by no one. Look what has become of your party RUN by Dear Leader. I don't see oil being run up to $100/ barrel as anything worth wasting 8 years on having that snake oil salesman for conservative values as leader. greedy bastards. now it's time to put your little opposition hats on and tell the country how your going to stop those mean ole tax and spend liberals from acting like you have done, for 6-years. man I can't wait to hear all the contrasts and the subsequent hypocrisy.
Barnestormer
· 1 year ago
Nothing like an incoherent leftie snarl to start the week.
keemo
· 1 year ago
Amen... The fly is simply trying to beat Teresa to the early morning award for incoherency.
SwabJockey05
· 1 year ago
lol
Otter
· 1 year ago
O has experience?
'We should not be the world's policmen'
but
'I'll go into Pakistan at a moment's notice'?
That kind of 'experience'? The kind that has one hand not knowing what the other is doing?
Barnestormer has it right. If that is the level of Coherence we can expect...
NoDonkey
· 1 year ago
He's inexperienced. So's Hillary.
Since it's between a fresh-faced neophyte and the tired old retread neophyte, why not go with the fresh face?
Time for spring cleaning in the Democrat Party. I see at the DNC HQ, the geriatric hippies are on the curb, occupying the space next to the empty bottles and old newspapers.
Time for a fresh-faced neophyte, with the same old, tired, unworkable ideas.
Otter
· 1 year ago
'geriatric hippies'
Thanks, ND! I just came to a realization of whom one Major block of the homeless really are- failed 60s liberals. A small Majority at any rate.
NoDonkey
· 1 year ago
Geriatric hippies are just "keeping it real".
They haven't sold out "to the man".
But really, is there anything more pathetic than a misguided group of people, who bought what "the youth culture" was selling in the 60's, clinging to the 60's into their 60s? The same culture that told them that anyone over 30 should be ignored?
Unfortunately, while the homeless are harmless, the geriatric hippies that make up a good part of the Democrats in Congress are not. These people need to be shown the door in politics, their "sell by" date was almost 40 years ago and they aren't smelling any better with age.
We need an old folks home for geriatric hippies, where they can be seldom seen and never heard.
All Comments
Can you really turst what he says is true or is he just making up what he thinks is true.
I hope serious bloggers don't let these types of journalists drag bloggers down into the sewer; it's already hit some I hope it doesn't hit everyone.
In the Senate, she's cast party line votes. A chimpanzee can do that. She's moved no significant legislation of her own.
As first lady - she was first lady. Marie Antoinette would not have made a good king.
When the main thing you have going for you is a major stretch of the truth, why should the voters buy or be excited about it? At least Obama's interesting.
They are no longer a reliable source for this sort of information. IMHO
Either they were leaving early for the long ride home, or having played the "extras" in Hillary's little show, they were leaving to do some actual campaigning for the former First Lady.
I love the smell of desperation in the morning!
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/bellantoni/20...
The numbers for McCain and Romney are still within the margin of error. But then again, Romney was still being called to do very well, or at least very close, in Iowa up until the time people were filing in to the caucus halls. Romney may still squeak out a win.. anything is possible. But as much as some of his supporters in the pundit class (most especially Hugh Hewitt) are trying to spin everything into signs of Romney dominance, the voters can yet show up and pull another Iowa out of their collective butts. Calling him a "frontrunner" after that would be a tough assignment. (Did anyone catch Hugh's townhall post declaring that Romney winning *Wyoming* was the real news and indicator? I smell some desperation in the air.)
On the Dem side, even if Obama gets another double digit win (which would be great) I still get the feeling that there's a bit of wishful thinkingn going on here regarding Hillary if anyone wants to proclaim that "she's toast" after New Hampshire. She's got the money to keep plowing forward and there are still the vast majority of delegates to be picked up. Super Duper Tuesday can still change anything, and some folks like Rudy Giuliani are counting on that.
Even with double digit losses for both of them, I think Wed. morning would be far too soon to count out either Clinton or Romney, though the slope ahead of them gets much steeper in that case. And if you're trying to declare one of them out and not the other given the same performance, then partisan leanings may be feeding some denial.
We *may* start to get a good indication of where things are going after Michigan, South Carolina and Florida, but even then the GOP probably won't have a clear leader unless somebody can come up with three wins by then. (Three not counting Wyoming... LOL)
Because.... I think we all know this, they're voting for Bill. People that vote for Hillary just expect Bill to take over once she would be inaugurated. (sp?)
I've met way too many people that Bill didn't leave a bad taste in their mouth. oh, sorry about that!
Well, in some quarters, "Gee, wouldn't it be great to show how liberal we are by electing the first woman president!" would probably do it. Of course, Obama trumps this by being the possible "first black president * ." Republicans understand that the presidency isn't an affirmative action hire, of course. I wouldn't vote against any candidate based on sex or race, but I wouldn't vote FOR them for those reasons, either.
'We should not be the world's policmen'
but
'I'll go into Pakistan at a moment's notice'?
That kind of 'experience'? The kind that has one hand not knowing what the other is doing?
Barnestormer has it right. If that is the level of Coherence we can expect...
Since it's between a fresh-faced neophyte and the tired old retread neophyte, why not go with the fresh face?
Time for spring cleaning in the Democrat Party. I see at the DNC HQ, the geriatric hippies are on the curb, occupying the space next to the empty bottles and old newspapers.
Time for a fresh-faced neophyte, with the same old, tired, unworkable ideas.
Thanks, ND! I just came to a realization of whom one Major block of the homeless really are- failed 60s liberals. A small Majority at any rate.
They haven't sold out "to the man".
But really, is there anything more pathetic than a misguided group of people, who bought what "the youth culture" was selling in the 60's, clinging to the 60's into their 60s? The same culture that told them that anyone over 30 should be ignored?
Unfortunately, while the homeless are harmless, the geriatric hippies that make up a good part of the Democrats in Congress are not. These people need to be shown the door in politics, their "sell by" date was almost 40 years ago and they aren't smelling any better with age.
We need an old folks home for geriatric hippies, where they can be seldom seen and never heard.