Is Hillary Done?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

To date, she has lent herself more than 10 million dollars. How does a presidential candidate loan themselves money, and where do they expect to get it back? I doubt she is going to make another $10 million from more sales of "It takes a Village".

I think that John Glenn is STILL saddled with debt from his 1984 election. Like $3 million worth.

Still, that's probably only a couple of speaking engagements for her husband.

Just back 20 years, it was a different era for making money after leaving the White House.

But Hillary can probably get one more book out before being put to pasture, so she can earn enough to pay most of that debt herself. Or if she retired to practice part time law again, her salary would be pretty hefty as well.

But can one really lend themselves money? Is it called a loan to still qualify for federal campaign funds? (does anyone actually check the box for $3 on their 1040?)

[lawrocket 3]

She loaned the money to her campaign. The campaign should pay her back.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I suspect that really amounts to her guaranteeing 3 mil provided by lenders in the event the campaign actually runs a deficit.

[lawrocket 3]

I think, according to the most recent campaign finance disclosure that the campaign was a million in the red.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

So does the campaign owe her that million? Has it paid her back the previous millions she lent it?

[KidCannibus 0]

Hillary should chill....she could puff up a big one and blow smoke up Bill's ass!

Don't waste that smoke.....inhale it baby.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Hillary should chill....she could puff up a big one and blow smoke up Bill's ass!

Instead of the country's?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

The campaign does NOT need to pay a candidate back, as far as I know. BUT - the committee is only required to pay back $250k AFTER the election. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/janqtr/pdf/11cfr116.11.pdf. Thus, any payback contributions are, yes, money directly to Hillary Clinton.

If, say, a bank lent the money (say, $3 million) and it was not paid back, wouldn't that look a LOT like an illegal campaign contribution? So the creditors are required, by law, to try to collect.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I suppose you are right. US political fundraising laws are a little too byzantine for me to understand.

[tbrown 26]

I can't see her dropping out either. It's all about her. this afternoon, I HEARD her say on NPR, "If we played by the Republican rules, I'd already have the nomination'> That's what she said. Well, Heil Hillary and fuck you. She disgusts me.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

this afternoon, I HEARD her say on NPR, "If we played by the Republican rules, I'd already have the nomination'

I thought that was hilarious! She was referring to the "Winner Take All" nature of Republican delegates - like that of the general election.

This is despite the fact that Obama has won more popular votes and more states. The holy trinity of the Dem nomination is: 1) most delegates; 2) most states; and 3) most popular vote. And Obama has all of them.

She is also pressing to get the delegates from Florida and Michigan seated - even though Obama withdrew from the Michigan election and she did not.

A Time articleTime Magazine article suggested 5 reasons why her campaign failed. They were:
1) She campaigned as an insider, which strengthened Obama because the voters want change;
2) Her campaign staff, all cronies, focused on big states under the same Republican method of delegates, forgetting about proportional pledged delegates;
3) She ignored the caucus states (I remember she actually put down the caucuses after losing them);
4) Her fundraising dried up too soon because she used an archaic method; and
5) She thought she'd wrap up the nomination early on.

I think No. 2 is the most prescient. The rules. It is about playing by the rules. Know the game and play the game by the rules as defined.

Counting on big states is an excellent strategy in the general election. Counting on the big states is an excellent strategy in the Republican primaries. It doesn't work in the Democratic primary because delegates are based on votes, not who wins.

Her losses are based on a lack of appreciation for the rules. This has led to her demonstrated contempt for the rules and her desire to have them changed to work in her favor - she wants the rules changed to reflect the game she played - the game she wanted to play.

Of course, this constitutes a nightmare for the Democratic leadership that a Clinton is advocating to change to the rules that caused Al Gore to lose the general election when he won the popular vote. Hillary can only win now by altering the rules.

This, of course, shows a profound disrespect for the rules.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[idrankwhat 0]

All good points. She's going to have to do some very careful dancing over the next couple of weeks if she wants to stay in the race without creating some serious problems for the party. It can be done but it's got to stay clean.

[TankBuster 0]

They're gonna have to pry the nomination from her cold, dead hand. I think she'll hang on till the bitter end - and she should, you never know what scandal/terrorist buddy/black militant mentor is looming that could send some super delegates her way.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Quote

this afternoon, I HEARD her say on NPR, "If we played by the Republican rules, I'd already have the nomination'

I thought that was hilarious! She was referring to the "Winner Take All" nature of Republican delegates - like that of the general election.

This is despite the fact that Obama has won more popular votes and more states. The holy trinity of the Dem nomination is: 1) most delegates; 2) most states; and 3) most popular vote. And Obama has all of them.

She is also pressing to get the delegates from Florida and Michigan seated - even though Obama withdrew from the Michigan election and she did not.

A Time articleTime Magazine article suggested 5 reasons why her campaign failed. They were:
1) She campaigned as an insider, which strengthened Obama because the voters want change;
2) Her campaign staff, all cronies, focused on big states under the same Republican method of delegates, forgetting about proportional pledged delegates;
3) She ignored the caucus states (I remember she actually put down the caucuses after losing them);
4) Her fundraising dried up too soon because she used an archaic method; and
5) She thought she'd wrap up the nomination early on.

I think No. 2 is the most prescient. The rules. It is about playing by the rules. Know the game and play the game by the rules as defined.

Counting on big states is an excellent strategy in the general election. Counting on the big states is an excellent strategy in the Republican primaries. It doesn't work in the Democratic primary because delegates are based on votes, not who wins.

Her losses are based on a lack of appreciation for the rules. This has led to her demonstrated contempt for the rules and her desire to have them changed to work in her favor - she wants the rules changed to reflect the game she played - the game she wanted to play.

Of course, this constitutes a nightmare for the Democratic leadership that a Clinton is advocating to change to the rules that caused Al Gore to lose the general election when he won the popular vote. Hillary can only win now by altering the rules.

This, of course, shows a profound disrespect for the rules.

To me, this demonstrates her greed and lust for power. She'll do ANYTHING she can to get the nomination.

Just what we need - more greed and powermongering in Washington.

I don't think there's a shred of integrity to her.

Performance Designs Factory Team

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

you never know what scandal/terrorist buddy/black militant mentor is looming that could send some super delegates her way.

Maybe an endorsement from some white ones would help her game. Works for McCain.

[billvon 2,990]

>ou never know what scandal/terrorist buddy/black militant mentor
> is looming that could send some super delegates her way.

True, although that could work both ways. She could have another brainstorm about a tax holiday and lose a few more superdelegates.

"And then the militant priest come and get me released
And we is all on the cover of Newsweek

Well I'm on my way
Don't know where I'm goin
But I'm on my way
Takin my time but I don't know where . . ."

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

To me, this demonstrates her greed and lust for power. She'll do ANYTHING she can to get the nomination.

Just what we need - more greed and powermongering in Washington.

I don't think there's a shred of integrity to her.

Actually there are some good arguments for her staying in the race. Tankbuster does have a point in that one of the candidates might get successfully swiftboated over a non-issue. Then you've got a backup. Secondly, having both candidates running as strongly as they are is keeping them as the lead story every day for the last year. Also, it's driving record voter registration for the Democratic party. It's not a bad plan if one of them doesn't go overboard and blow it for both of them.

[SpeedRacer 1]

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/votes/index.html

By the way, I would say the best coverage of the election has been on the New York Times website. They've got all kinds of things like delegate calculators, the popular vote, graphs, charts, etc. If you want to keep up with what's going on click on the link.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[AWL71 0]

This is going to be one hell of a democratic convention. Clinton Inc. is banking on the superdelegates to give her the nomination. I'm sure Bill and friends are doing whatever it takes to get the superdelegates in her corner. Could you imagine the fallout if Hillary got the nomination from the superdelegates? Doubtful, but possible.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Secondly, having both candidates running as strongly as they are is keeping them as the lead story every day for the last year.

I was watching the coverage on MSNBC a couple of nights ago and there were some intriguing polls. It mentioned that something like a quarter of Clinton voters would not vote for Obama in a general election and that a similar number fo Obama voters said they would not vote for Clinton in the general election.

This race has really seemed to polarize the Democratic party, as well.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SpeedRacer 1]

those results could be from people who were Republicans or Independents, but registered as Democrats to affect the Democratic Primaries, since the Republican primary decision is over.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I was watching the coverage on MSNBC a couple of nights ago and there were some intriguing polls. It mentioned that something like a quarter of Clinton voters would not vote for Obama in a general election and that a similar number fo Obama voters said they would not vote for Clinton in the general election.

This race has really seemed to polarize the Democratic party, as well.

I've heard that as well but my hunch is that it's only emotion talking. I seriously doubt that when it's down to McCain and Dem X that those voters will vote for four years with "Bush Light". I suppose it will all depend on how the Dem loser handles the exit.

I wonder what the chance would be that Obama would allow her on the ticket as VP.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Quote

I was watching the coverage on MSNBC a couple of nights ago and there were some intriguing polls. It mentioned that something like a quarter of Clinton voters would not vote for Obama in a general election and that a similar number fo Obama voters said they would not vote for Clinton in the general election.

This race has really seemed to polarize the Democratic party, as well.

I've heard that as well but my hunch is that it's only emotion talking. I seriously doubt that when it's down to McCain and Dem X that those voters will vote for four years with "Bush Light". I suppose it will all depend on how the Dem loser handles the exit.

I wonder what the chance would be that Obama would allow her on the ticket as VP.

I agree on the emotion comment. I think, if there's enough time to settle down after the nominee choice, that those polls won't ring as true.

I'm excited though, this will be the first election I'm eligible to vote in
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I don't think there's a shred of integrity to her.

I believe that's true of Clinton, McCain, and Obama.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[ianmdrennan 2]

Not sure I agree there.

I don't lump McCain and Obama into the same category as her. My personal fav is Obama, and I genuinely believe in the message he stands for, but I'm also not naive enough to think that he can single handedly turn the current washington mindset around.

Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team