The Hillary Beast Lives Another Day

The New Hampshire Primary is now in the books and while the votes are still being counted the major networks have called this one for Hillary Clinton. It would appear as if all the pundits were wrong on this one as they (I included) were predicting Clinton would lose this race by 10 points. There were two things involved here and they probably combined to change things a bit. Remember when Bill Clinton lost this race and went on to be the “comeback kid”? Well he remembers it too and he has mentioned it since Iowa.

It is likely that the polls in NH were exaggerated to show Obama with a huge lead so that if she came close or won she could be dubbed the second comeback kid. The people and the media of NH have always been Clinton friendly so it is not beyond reason that some things were exaggerated to help her out.

I think what was involved more than anything is that John McCain energized the Independent voters so much that he siphoned them away from Obama. In NH the Independents are allowed to in which ever primary they wish but only one). I believe that early polling showed Obama ahead and much of it was the Independents who were committed to voting for him. Then Hillary went on the attack over the weekend when she did Hillary redux and had her millionth make over. Her attacks made people wary of Obama but they also realized that there was no way in hell they could vote for Hilary so they migrated to John McCain who has always had great support in the state.

It is likely that some combination of these two events took place. However, while the Clintons probably played with the polls and the news to some small degree, it is much more likely that the voters in NH were in favor of Obama until Hillary counter punched and then they became worried about him and abandoned him for McCain.

If this is the case it shows that the Independent voters are afraid of Obama and will not vote for Clinton. This should make little difference in the upcoming primaries because I don’t think there are other states that allows Independents to vote for members of other parties. In this respect, Hilary and Obama will be fighting it out head to head while staying strictly in their party. They also cannot discount John Edwards. As long as he stays in he will split someone’s votes (he might have done a little of that tonight).

Where this issue of going for McCain hurts Democrats is in the general election where people can vote for any party they want. Conservatives will come out in droves to vote against Hillary. We have seen tonight the possibility that Independents will vote Republican rather than cote for the Democrats.

This could spell disaster for them in the general election. However, I am looking forward to Hillary getting knocked out of the primaries so we do not have to deal with her in the general election.

She is Satan.

Is New Hampshire Hillary’s Exit Poll?

If we are lucky, by this time tomorrow Hillary Clinton’s campaign will be gasping for its last breaths of air and it dies a long overdue death. I realize that even if she loses New Hampshire she could go on but there are indications that many of her supporters have secretly said she is not going much further and there are also indications that she is or will soon be strapped for cash. What once seemed a juggernaut of political and money raising efficiency is now heading down to the bottom very rapidly.

Hillary was out giving a please vote for me speech today when someone asked her how she does it. Hillary got tears in her eyes and her voiced cracked a few times during her answer which largely consisted of her her desire to make the country better and her beliefs blah, blah. The truth is Hillary expected to be the next president. She has been planning her chance for years and her pact with Bill looked like manifest destiny when she was way ahead in the polls and raising millions upon millions of dollars. She started out asking people to max out by giving the largest amount possible for both the primary and the general election. Now she is just asking for the amount needed to continue in the primary.

Hillary Clinton spent a fortune in Iowa and has a third place show for it. She has blown millions of dollars to convince people to vote for her and it is not working. She has brought out the big guns in her husband and while he is exciting many people it is because of their cult like worship of him and his decadent ways and not so much for her. They seem not to like her very much and I don’t really blame them. Hillary was all set to be the next president and now it looks like she might bow out. This is why she is crying though some might think she is trying to show she is actually a caring human. In reality, she can hear her dreams shattering and that shatter sounds like Senator Obama.

The other thing to consider is if she gets this emotional about this campaign how will she handle any issues that arise if she were president. Seems that this is the take that John Edwards has on the event and who could blame him? If Hillary drops out he has a better chance against Obama.

Big Dog

Others with similar posts:
The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Mark My Words, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, Right Truth, DragonLady’s World, Cao’s Blog, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Nuke’s, third world county, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Pirate’s Cove, Global American Discourse, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Wake Up America, Dumb Ox Daily News, Stageleft, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Let Me Answer for Hillary

Hillary Clinton told New Hampshire voters that their primary process would be more representative than the Iowa caucus. Clinton said that people who had to work or were out of the state would not be disenfranchised. The article indicates that candidates usually praise the grassroots of the Iowa caucus. Hilary was praising it prior to getting her hat handed to her in the caucus process. She came in third so the process, not the candidate must be flawed.

Nevada has a caucus coming up and its rules are the very same as those in Iowa. The Clinton campaign was asked if its candidate felt the same way about Nevada:

“No. Sen. Clinton is absolutely committed to the Nevada caucus and we expect to do well,” said Clinton campaign spokeswoman Hilarie Grey in an e-mail.

Grey did not respond to requests to explain why Nevada escapes Clinton’s critique. RGJ.com

Of course the campaign did not respond to explain because once again the smartest woman in the world stuck her foot in her mouth. Stevie Wonder can see why she did not answer but let me go ahead and answer for Hillary and her campaign.

The reason that Nevada escapes the criticism that she had for Iowa is that Nevada has not voted (or caucused) yet. Hillary still needs them and until the voting is over there she will heap praise upon them much as she did in Iowa.

She was full of praise for them and their process and after she lost she talked about how the system disenfranchises voters. I do not disagree with that but I have held that opinion all along and have mentioned it a few times. Hillary had two different positions. In reality, she pandered to the Iowans until she lost and then she left and talked badly about their process. However, since Nevada has not voted she refuses to have the same criticisms. She is a hypocrite and for the world’s smartest woman she sure is stupid. Remember, to Hillary only the unthinking in Iowa voted for Obama.

Remember, Hillary has use for anything only so long as it can benefit her. The minute it loses value to her it is worthless in her mind. Keep this in mind when you are voting. Make her as worthless as she really is by voting for any other candidate.

Big Dog

Hillary Has Howard Dean Moment and Other Debate Fun

There were two debates tonight the first being the Republicans followed by the Democrats. I will briefly say that the Republicans beat up Mitt Romney fairly well and that Fred Thompson looked like the winner in this one. Ron Paul held his own and John McCain was on target most of the night. Rudy invoked 9/11 and Ronald Reagan every other sentence. The Democratic debate was much more lively and was more fun to watch.

Hillary Clinton had a melt down and I think it will show on Tuesday. I admit that she did not go negative on Obama in the fashion that I thought she would but it might be because John Edwards sided with Obama and they tag teamed her pretty good. She did not hammer Obama when moderator Charlie Gibson gave her a huge opening to do so by asking her to describe the issues that separate them. Her Howard Dean moment came when she got very angry after Edwards said that the status quo (He pointed to Hillary) would always attack agents of change like him and Obama. She was obviously frustrated and when she addressed the comment she became visibly angry and animated. She would have done better if her answer was shorter and she was more sane. Her campaign is saying she showed strength but the reality is the media is hammering her and the undecided voters said that Obama was the change agent and did not appreciate her response.

As for the rest of the Democratic debate, I noticed a few other Hillary gaffes. One of the first questions dealt with Pakistan. The question dealt with al Qaeda building up along the border. The question was, if we had actionable intelligence that Osama bin Laden was there and the Pakistani government would not go attack him or the AQ terrorists would they, as president, attack the area? They asked Obama first and he said absolutely. Then Gibson said that this was the same as the Bush doctrine of preemption. Obama said no because we had actionable intelligence (as if the intelligence from all over the world that Bush had was not actionable). Hillary said that if we tried diplomacy and it failed she would but that we had to be careful. She then talked about how they (she and Bill) launched a missile based on intelligence that OBL was someplace and he was not there. She said we had to be careful. I believe that they launched the missile because soil samples indicated that a building was being used to make chemical weapons. It turned out to be an aspirin factory (I am sure this is what she was talking about). This means, if it is the ASA factory, that she lied about why we bombed it. Additionally, she failed to mention the three times that we had OBL in our sites, on camera or via witnesses, no doubt he was there, and she and Bill refused to pull the trigger. Details, details. They bombed the aspirin factory to take everyone’s minds off the Monica problems. There was one other instance where we launched missiles and then called the country to tell them and we gave them enough warning that they were able to warn OBL. If this is what she was talking about then the intelligence was right and the method flawed. Now there could have been other incidents but it is doubtful since Clinton worked hard at not getting OBL.

Another security question dealt with a nuclear bomb being detonated in a US city. It was a two parter and the questions associated were (paraphrased); 1. The day after what do we wished we would have done? and 2. What do we do now? None of them answered these directly though Obama got closest to the what do we wish. However, all who answered said that we would find out who did it and we would attack them with all we have. Charlie Gibson made the point that anyone who would do this would not be from a country or have a government’s blessing to do it. Hillary said that they might not have a country but they had to train and plan somewhere and we would find out where that was and attack it. She said there would be no difference between the people who did it and the the people who let them plan and train in their country.

Check me on this but wasn’t George Bush the one who said that we would make no distinction between the terrorists and those who harbor them? Wasn’t George Bush also the one who said that we will attack first to prevent being attacked? Their admission that they would violate the sovereignty of Pakistan to hit OBL means they would use preemptive warfare and wage war in a country that did not attack us to get our enemies, or the Bush Doctrine. I don’t disagree with the idea but I have not been using Bush’s name in vain and telling voters that I would be different than he. I am not out there saying that George Bush mismanaged the war. They have all been criticizing the war and the way Bush has operated and yet they are willing to use the same tactics to protect our country. The MSM will not likely focus on these things because they are Democrats. Only Republicans are evil in the eyes of the MSM.

I did agree with Hillary and she showed some foreign policy savvy when she said that once we launched the missiles toward Pakistan we would have to notify that government because of the tensions with India we did not want them to think that it was India attacking. I agree but we should not call until a few minutes before impact so that no warnings can be issued.

All in all the Democratic debate was more fun to watch than the Republicans. The Republicans were mostly civil (though they really beat up Romney) and had differing approaches to the issues. The donks attacked each other and were fighting like alley cats. Governor Richardson said he had been to hostage negotiations that were more civil (the quote of the night from the left).

Hillary did not have a good night. Her response to the change issue will haunt her and I think she will lose New Hampshire by 10 points.

I can just hear her now in her best Dean voice; Yeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaa.

Others:
Political Punch

Big Dog

ADDENDUM: I forgot a great part. Hillary, while claiming to be the champion of change, said something about being the first woman president and how that is change. Obama was too classy to say it but wouldn’t the first black guy as president be just as real a change? Hillary played her gender card. She said before that she was just another candidate. Now she is playing the woman part. Desperate times call for desperate measures…

Hillary Lies Again

Hillary Clinton, fresh off a tail whipping at the expense of B. Hussein Obama and John Edwards, is not trying another make over that she hopes will resonate with the voters. Personally, I think she would have run if she never campaigned. People were in awe of her and she was the front runner when she entered. Then people got to meet her, listen to her and see her perform at the debates. That turned a lot of people off. Hillary is now retooling and it is a sure bet she will go real negative and that she will be in attack mode in the debate. Hillary is also out there lying again (still):

“Of all the people running for president, I’ve been the most vetted, the most investigated, and — my goodness — the most innocent, it turns out,” she told a cheering crowd in an airport hangar. The politico

Hillary Clinton is surely the most investigated of the people running for president. This is a new twist because she use to say the most investigated person and then it was shown to be untrue. That aside, the whopper comes when she says that she was the most innocent, as “it turns out”. First of all, since she was talking only about those running for president, how can she be the most innocent when none of them have been found guilty of anything? If this were true, she would be as innocent as the others.

However, Hillary has not been found the “most innocent.” There is a big difference between being innocent (which means you did not do it) and not being found guilty or not having charges pressed. Hillary has been caught in several lies during those many investigations but charges were never brought. She is guilty of campaign finance violations and there is video taped evidence of it. A judge appointed by her husband decided that the case could be dropped. She was guilty of holding secret meetings on health care reform and had to stop but no sanctions were ever imposed. Hillary deliberately hid documents to keep them out of the courts. They miraculously surfaced after the statute of limitations on her potential crimes had expired.

Not being sanctioned for wrong doing is a hell of a lot different than being completely free of sin, legal guilt or fault. She has done a great number of unethical and illegal things but they have either not been investigated or she was protected by the media and friends in high places. The book Whitewash has an in depth look at these issues and many more.

However, given Hillary’s position on this I must ask how she feels about one thing. President Bush has been investigated time and again and he has not been found guilty of anything. Is it fair, under Hillary’s definition, to assume he is INNOCENT? This will be tough for the moonbats who support her because if they answer yes then Bush is INNOCENT and it puts an end to their vicious attacks on him. If they answer no then they are saying Hillary is not innocent.

Being found not guilty or not being charged is not the same as being innocent. Perhaps if Hillary had actually used her law degree to practice the profession (instead of being employed as an over-billing, paper pushing lawyer as a favor to her hubby) she might know that.

Big Dog