When either Edwards or Obama drops out of the race the supporters of one will rally to the other. That will give the survivor enough votes to beat Hilary. I don't think many supporters of either Edwards or Obama will switch over to support Hilary if thier candidate gets knocked out. They prefer fresh blood and she is definitely old school.
Originally posted by lepomisThe dirt I see being dug is from you aimed at them. Maybe the machine belongs to someone else and you're one of the little cogs in the machine.
Well, the Clintons have ruthless, dirt digging spin machine that makes Rove seem like a girl scout. Its no secret how they plan to beat everyone.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThe most recent one I have noticed is with Obama and his wife. He is putting alot if his eggs in the 'New kind of politics' basket. Clean campaigning and such. You have heard the news with Michelle's statement aimed against Hillary. If you take a look at the whole statement it is nothing even close to an attack on Hillary. Obama can not look to be playing dirty, but it looks that way to some in the media. How does a benign statement get press like that? The Clintons have a superb press release team and they know no one wants to get scooped.
For example?
If you pay attention you will see more to come. What kind of opinion do you have of the folks that have run against the Clintons in the past?
Originally posted by lepomisI am counting on it. I have a sizable bet on Mrs. Clinton to win the Presidenial Election!
Well, the Clintons have ruthless, dirt digging spin machine that makes Rove seem like a girl scout. Its no secret how they plan to beat everyone.
I need the win to make up for the miscalculation I made with Sarkozy. Who thought Bayrou voters would not go to Madame Royal? Especially after she promised Bayrou the Prime Minister-ship.
If the Clinton machine is inoperable I will be very sad. :'(
Originally posted by lepomisMichelle Obama said ""If you can't run your own house, you can't run the White House."
The most recent one I have noticed is with Obama and his wife. He is putting alot if his eggs in the 'New kind of politics' basket. Clean campaigning and such. You have heard the news with Michelle's statement aimed against Hillary. If you take a look at the whole statement it is nothing even close to an attack on Hillary. Obama can not look to be playi ...[text shortened]... What kind of opinion do you have of the folks that have run against the Clintons in the past?
The Sun Times claimed that this "could be interpreted" as an attack on the Clintons.
http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/aug/21/obama_campaign_denies_michelles_speech_was_attack_on_hillary
I don't think this is an unreasonable speculation. Do the Clintons own the Sun Times or something?
Here's the Republican smear machine in action:
When insightmag.com, a website owned by the right-wing Washington Times, put out a breathless report trumpeting the fantasy, Fox News immediately jumped on board, as did Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest of the talk radio bile spewers. “Why didn’t anybody ever mention,” asked “Fox & Friends” co-host Steve Doocy, a man who makes Larry King look like Oscar Wilde, “that that man right there was raised—spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father—as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa?” This sentence contained no fewer than five falsehoods: Obama wasn’t raised by his father, his father left the family when Obama was two years old, his father wasn’t a practicing Muslim, Obama wasn’t raised as a Muslim and he didn’t go to a madrassa . “Well, he didn’t admit it,” chimed in co-host Brian Kilmeade. “I mean, that’s the issue.”
But then, perhaps spurred by their more or less constant feud with Fox, CNN sent a reporter out to—get this—check to see if the story was true. ABC and the AP followed suit, and all reported to their audiences that what Obama had attended was nothing more than an ordinary public school. In other words, they did what journalists are supposed to do when confronted with a potentially scandalous story about a candidate: investigate before reporting it, then tell the public the facts. That those news organizations doing the right thing seems so remarkable is a testament to how debased American journalism has become.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/13/cue_the_smear_machine.php
The Sun-Times's best-known writers are the prominent Washington veteran Robert Novak and the influential film critic Roger Ebert. The newspaper gave a start in journalism to now disgraced Bob Greene. Legendary Chicago columnist Mike Royko, previously of the defunct Chicago Daily News, came to the paper in 1978 but left for the Tribune in 1984 when the Sun-Times was purchased by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. Irv Kupcinet's daily column was a fixture from 1943 until his death in 2003. Current Sun-Times writers of note include Richard Roeper, Mary Mitchell, Zay N. Smith, Jay Mariotti, Neil Steinberg, Rick Telander, and Jim DeRogatis.
Lynn Sweet is the Washington Bureau Chief.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Sun-Times
Robert David Sanders Novak (born February 26, 1931) is a conservative American political commentator.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Novak
A supporter of the Democratic Party,[17] Ebert...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert
Can't find anything on Bob Greene's politics.
Mike Rokyo] covered Cook County politics and government and wrote a weekly political column. He soon supplemented that with another weekly column on Chicago's active folk music scene. These columns were successful, and soon he was given a regular slot writing on all topics for the Daily News, an afternoon paper with a strong liberal slant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Royko
In the US [Rupert Murdoch] has been a long-time supporter of the Republican Party and was a friend of Ronald Reagan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
So far I'm seeing more of a conservative/Republican influence there than a Clinton one.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI don't know... she's a pretty woman, married to an ex-president, and has $45 million to spend... gee, I wonder how's she gonna win...
A spin off thread which is coincidentally worthy of actual debate.
If you didn't figure it out yet, try throwing in 51% favorable opinion in the last poll...
Yeah, it's SO hard... 🙂
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou think that someone has to own a newspaper to get an article in it?
Michelle Obama said ""If you can't run your own house, you can't run the White House."
The Sun Times claimed that this "could be interpreted" as an attack on the Clintons.
http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/aug/21/obama_campaign_denies_michelles_speech_was_attack_on_hillary
I don't think this is an unreasonable speculation. Do the Clintons own the Sun Times or something?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYes, the republicans have a political machine... do you have a point?
[i]The Sun-Times's best-known writers are the prominent Washington veteran Robert Novak and the influential film critic Roger Ebert. The newspaper gave a start in journalism to now disgraced Bob Greene. Legendary Chicago columnist Mike Royko, previously of the defunct Chicago Daily News, came to the paper in 1978 but left for the Tribune in 1984 when ...[text shortened]...
So far I'm seeing more of a conservative/Republican influence there than a Clinton one.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIs that a blog? or a political opinion website?
Here's the Republican smear machine in action:
When insightmag.com, a website owned by the right-wing Washington Times, put out a breathless report trumpeting the fantasy, Fox News immediately jumped on board, as did Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest of the talk radio bile spewers. “Why didn’t anybody ever mention,” asked “Fox & Friends” co-host St ...[text shortened]... nalism has become.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/13/cue_the_smear_machine.php