One Great Dame
by Susan Estrich
As I write this, the last voters in the last states in this seemingly endless primary process are heading to the polls, even as various news organizations have already announced that Barack Obama has reached the shifting magic number to claim a majority of the delegates.
There will be many days ahead to write about Barack Obama, who deserves enormous credit for his success. Most people who run for president with far more experience than he has in the national circuit have far more diff ...
( Back to Article )
Join the Discussion
|
10 Comments | Post Comment
|
Posted by: Penman
Comment: #1
Fri Jun 6, 2008 1:47 AM
Hej, Sue!
Tuesday was Barack's night, not Hillary's. Congratulate her on Monday.
//P
|
Posted by: D
Comment: #2
Mon Jun 9, 2008 3:46 AM
Thank you for your thoughts. I think you said it all. You got her and that has been rare.
|
Posted by: Kathaleen McCausland
Comment: #3
Thu Jun 5, 2008 11:15 AM
Hillary lost because she is Hillary. I feel she stayed in the race to help herself in the next election. John McCain will be to old to run again and if Barak gets in she will lose her chance in 2012 due to age. If Obama picks her as vice president I would watch my back if I were him. She is desperate to be president and would have him assassinated.
|
Posted by: AL HANDA
Comment: #4
Thu Jun 5, 2008 11:17 AM
Susan talks about Hillary in the classic way that a campaign staffer would, but for all her experience, Susan never won one so her views aren't infallable, and her view of Clinton omits her unmistakable disrespect shown to Obama. A lot of mud was thrown in this one, and Hillary did her share via proxies, and she's being an ungraciouis loser now. Susan likes Hillary and it shows, and that's OK, but the better candidate won, and he played by the rules, unlike his opponent who kept trying to move the finish line. I'm sure it will go on and on, the arguing, but those who do will find that events will move on and the complainers will either become irrelevant or have the honor of being called the Nader's of 2008.
Al
|
Posted by: isitoveryet
Comment: #5
Thu Jun 5, 2008 7:41 AM
Re: Julianne
"virulent wrath" Wow, you must not have listened to many of Hillary speeched if you think what I said was so terrible. And no I didn't rush on line. I read as much news as possible every morning so I can be as informed as possible. This allows me to see ALL sides
|
Posted by: robert lipka
Comment: #6
Thu Jun 5, 2008 7:45 PM
I started out as a Joe Biden supporter and after he dropped out, it was obvious who was the better candidate. but things happened in the caucus states that derailed Hillary Clinton's candidacy. The final ten contests were very telling. The public has definately turned away from barack Obama. I believe that it is unlikely that he can turn enough of the disillusioned voter back to vote for him. The brutal manner in which the Obama campaign was run, all the while with Obama keeping his hands in white gloves, did not set well with many Hillary supporters. We are not a dumb as that campaign thinks we are and we will not vote for Obama. I for one, will stay home. I have better things to do in November than vote for a person who ran the kind of campaign that Obama put forth especially with respect to engineering the Michigan Compromise in the Rules committee. Stealing delegates won by a candidate and getting the Rules committee to go along with his proposal was morally bankrupt. Not with my vote.
|
Posted by: Julianne
Comment: #7
Wed Jun 4, 2008 12:03 PM
Thank you for writing this, Susan, and I agree wholeheartedly! I understand that newspeople can never be totally unbiased, although that should be their aim; however, the doting on and fawning over Obama by the toadying press became very hard to stomach. SNL was right on the money with their parody of these sycophants, who played a key and unjust role in this primary. Hillary was and is one tough fighter and I wish her even more success and greatness in her future!
|
Posted by: Julianne
Comment: #8
Wed Jun 4, 2008 12:22 PM
Re: isitoveryet
And even more importantly, how we WIN speaks to who we are. You have won, since you obviously rooted for the other candidate, and yet instead of wearing that victory with pride and civility, you immediately rush online to spew your virulent wrath upon someone who has suffered defeat. This type of behavior is boorish and, in sports, you would have been penalized, ejected, or both, for unsportsmanlike behavior.
|
Posted by: Jen
Comment: #9
Wed Jun 4, 2008 1:05 PM
WAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYY...she lost because she is a woman...WWWAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY
Baloney. Obama was the better cadidate and ran a better campaign. Trust me Susan, most people are really sick of the self pitying Clintons. It's always some Vast something or other that is trying to keep them from getting something they are entitled to. Baloney.
And quit blaming the media. You sound like Rush Limbaugh. Are you not aware of the Pew Research Center and Harvard Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy study on the media coverage of the two candidates? The result was that coverage of Clinton, Obama ‘Almost Identical'.
|
Posted by: isitoveryet
Comment: #10
Wed Jun 4, 2008 7:32 AM
sometimes how we lose says more about who we are than how we win. Hillary showed no class last night. I understand your connection to the Clintons but they have shown over time that they live in another world.
I have never heard them admit to a mistake
It's always someone else's mistake
blame the media
The Obama campaign has gone out of their way to complement Hillary. It's sad the same was not done by Hillary
The Clintons need to go home now. Please go home "We can't mis you unless you leave"
|
|
|
|
