|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:26 AM Original message |
Was the deal made long ago and this "drama" all just for show? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onehandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:35 AM Response to Original message |
1. Do you think that Obama is this weak? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:36 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. Exactly. Think higher of Obama. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:13 PM Response to Reply #3 |
39. Nothing in believing a deal may exist puts down Obama or Clinton. They |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:50 AM Response to Reply #1 |
5. Well, if he did strike a deal, he would want to go out of his way to hide it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sufrommich (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:20 PM Response to Reply #5 |
22. So he's not weak, just a devious phony? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:54 PM Response to Reply #22 |
29. He's a politician who wanted to sit in the Whitehouse. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sufrommich (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:01 PM Response to Reply #29 |
34. Why would he need to strike any deal with Hillary Clinton to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:55 PM Response to Reply #22 |
30. What does "phony" have to do with it? All politicians make deals all the time. Has he ever said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:44 PM Response to Reply #1 |
25. not weak |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:53 PM Response to Reply #1 |
27. Who said anything about weakness? Striking a deal means that each side got something he or she |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:35 AM Response to Original message |
2. Bill Clinton ran a good government. It's that simple. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:53 AM Response to Reply #2 |
6. Because the damage caused by NAFTA and deregulation didn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:02 PM Response to Reply #6 |
35. Bingo. He rationalizes signing Glass Steagall, but that is one of about 3 keys to the mess |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:53 AM Response to Reply #2 |
7. No - if it was ACTUALLY good there'd be no way Bushes would be back in WH by 2001. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Double T (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:39 AM Response to Original message |
4. Who cares? There is a strong BO Administration being put together......... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:54 AM Response to Reply #4 |
8. You mean a strong Obama/Clinton admin being put together? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Double T (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:59 AM Response to Reply #8 |
11. It will no longer be with bush/cheney; that's really all that matters. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shanti (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:12 PM Response to Reply #11 |
18. THANK YOU! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:40 PM Response to Reply #18 |
24. Isn't that sentiment how Bush got into the Whitehouse? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shanti (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Nov-22-08 02:15 PM Response to Reply #24 |
57. good grief |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:14 PM Response to Reply #8 |
40. Make no mistake. It lies with Obama, both by law and by his nature. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ginnyinWI (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:56 AM Response to Original message |
9. if there was a deal, what did Obama get out of it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:03 PM Response to Reply #9 |
14. She could have threatened a floor fight at the convention or other things. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:17 PM Response to Reply #14 |
20. no actually she couldn't have. She didn't have the SD support for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:00 PM Response to Reply #20 |
32. I think in Newsweek it was reported she was threatening some kind of fight . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:17 PM Response to Reply #32 |
42. I heard the same thing. However, that, too, could have been rumors floated by the Clinton camp, to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:11 PM Response to Reply #9 |
38. IF there was a deal, it was made AFTER the primaries, not before. And I would guess not long before |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:41 PM Response to Reply #38 |
49. Per the NY Times, John Bolton said Clinton would be SOS back in July. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberal N proud (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 11:58 AM Response to Original message |
10. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton are good politicians and know how |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:06 PM Response to Reply #10 |
15. Backroom deals are common practice in politics and it would make this whole thing make sense. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WI_DEM (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:00 PM Response to Original message |
12. No, it's a major decision and a week isn't that long to reflect on a important decision |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:01 PM Response to Original message |
13. If you want people who have had experience in a Democratic White House... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:09 PM Response to Reply #13 |
16. Did the Clinton people all have prior Whitehouse experience? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:18 PM Response to Reply #16 |
21. duh. yes. unless you want to use bushy people. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:33 PM Response to Reply #21 |
23. Did you understand my question.? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:54 PM Response to Reply #23 |
28. No, Clinton didn't pick experienced people and he had a very difficult time getting started |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:27 PM Response to Reply #23 |
46. All the people being put in now will have new people working with them and learning from them. The |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:23 PM Response to Reply #16 |
45. Before Clinton? No. But the Clinton transition was not an especially good one. Now, they do have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occam Bandage (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:09 PM Response to Original message |
17. No. In fact, Obama is moving much more quickly than most President-elects do. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:44 PM Response to Reply #17 |
26. We heard before that he was working on his transition for some time. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occam Bandage (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:56 PM Response to Reply #26 |
31. Bill Clinton's process was so entangled that he didn't announce most of his picks until January. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:06 PM Response to Reply #31 |
37. Hmm.... silly? Sounds like a logical guess as to why he went down this path. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:30 PM Response to Reply #31 |
47. I don't know if there was a deal or not. But, since when is a deal a "conspiracy?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 02:22 PM Response to Reply #47 |
54. When you want to sell the idea that Obama needs Hillary for her brilliance and qualifications |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 12:15 PM Response to Original message |
19. I don't know why I bother with your posts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FrenchieCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:00 PM Response to Original message |
33. I'm trying to think of what the Clintons could have done during the convention |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:16 PM Response to Reply #33 |
41. It's threatening the scorched earth option or other things. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:38 PM Response to Reply #33 |
48. When the primaries were over, they met. There was clearly a deal that he help her with |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:45 PM Response to Reply #48 |
51. Did you read my post about Bolton above? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jennicut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:04 PM Response to Original message |
36. So the Clintons picked Biden as VP, Emmanuel as COS and put Hillary in as SoS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:20 PM Response to Reply #36 |
44. Rahm is the perfect person that both sides would have agreed upon. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:44 PM Response to Reply #36 |
50. It doesn't have to be either that they agreed on everyone or that there was no deal at all. And |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 02:03 PM Response to Reply #50 |
53. Because it doesn't fit in with the storyline that Clinton was only picked b/c |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:19 PM Response to Original message |
43. Who cares |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Skwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 01:57 PM Response to Reply #43 |
52. Big difference between being asked to serve and forcing your way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 02:35 PM Response to Reply #52 |
55. You can enjoy all the speculation you want about the "girl" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Nov-21-08 02:42 PM Response to Original message |
56. You could override the White House by replacing the DINOs in Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Sep 16th 2024, 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC