If Obama Wanted to Crush Clinton

[Cypress]

here's what he'd do.

He'd get away from the "who hired a slumlord" and whether the reagan adminstration deserves noble mention, as an agent of change.


He'd attack hillary, where she is weakest: The clinton adminstration's capitulation to special interests, and the sell out of working americans. Hillary's position on NAFTA, "free" trade", and unfettered WTO-style globalization.

Those clinton policies did enormous harm to working americans. Which isn't always apparent to keyboard warriors, but is glaringly apparent to working people in Wichita, Buffalo, and Toledo.

Obama would effectively take the economic populist issue away from Edwards, and solidify edwards supporters behind him, should edwards fade away.

Obama has more of a clean slate on the issue. Clinton has a track record, as a pro-NAFTA, pro-corporate democrat. The problem is, Obama appears to be cut from essentially the same mold as clinton; in short, I'm not sure if he could pivot on a dime, and attack Hillary where she is weakest.

[blackascoal]

here's what he'd do.

He'd get away from the "who hired a slumlord" and whether the reagan adminstration deserves noble mention, as an agent of change.


He'd attack hillary, where she is weakest: The clinton adminstration's capitulation to special interests, and the sell out of working americans. Hillary's position on NAFTA, "free" trade", and unfettered WTO-style globalization.

Those clinton policies did enormous harm to working americans. Which isn't always apparent to keyboard warriors, but is glaringly apparent to working people in Wichita, Buffalo, and Toledo.

Obama would effectively take the economic populist issue away from Edwards, and solidify edwards supporters behind him, should edwards fade away.

Obama has more of a clean slate on the issue. Clinton has a track record, as a pro-NAFTA, pro-corporate democrat. The problem is, Obama appears to be cut from essentially the same mold as clinton; in short, I'm not sure if he could pivot on a dime, and attack Hillary where she is weakest.

Obama is fighting the most powerful political machine the democarts have ever seen, and he's bringing up some of the same issues you've suggested .. and he's doing better than anyone could have previously imagined.

The trick is to do it without burning all bridges that he will need to cross later.

[Chapdog]

hes doing a pretty good job if u ask me. BUT unfortunately by mud slinging even if hes got better chance to win that war.... he brings himself away from the message of hope and change that is so appealing to voters. so even if he can manage to win the mudsling war he lost because his message gets lost.

[Cypress]

Obama is fighting the most powerful political machine the democarts have ever seen, and he's bringing up some of the same issues you've suggested .. and he's doing better than anyone could have previously imagined.

The trick is to do it without burning all bridges that he will need to cross later.

Obama supports the Peru Free Trade agreement, and other NAFTA-style agreements. Now, he doesn't have the long track record that Hillary does, and maybe he could pivot to a more populist position. But, I dont' see him doing that. I think if he did, he could bury clinton.

[blackascoal]

Obama supports the Peru Free Trade agreement, and other NAFTA-style agreements. Now, he doesn't have the long track record that Hillary does, and maybe he could pivot to a more populist position. But, I dont' see him doing that. I think if he did, he could bury clinton.

In some ways, Obama is already running in the general. Independents and republicans are starting to see him as an intelligent man capable of getting past political divides and capable of reaching compromise.

That's smart.

[theMAJORITY]

Unfortunatly---this is another mute thread by a dreaming liberial. Obamma supports the same programs Hillery does, and the same special interests---who fund their campaigns and tax free offshore accounts.

When your a people person and not a party person--you might see that.

[theMAJORITY]

In some ways, Obama is already running in the general. Independents and republicans are starting to see him as an intelligent man capable of getting past political divides and capable of reaching compromise.

That's smart.

Again---words with no magnatidue or direction motivate the emotional.

[blackascoal]

Unfortunatly---this is another mute thread by a dreaming liberial. Obamma supports the same programs Hillery does, and the same special interests---who fund their campaigns and tax free offshore accounts.

When your a people person and not a party person--you might see that.

What party would that be?

[blackascoal]

Again---words with no magnatidue or direction motivate the emotional.

You're a republican here gasping for straws.

Your party is on life support dude and their "leadership" has been a disgraceful failure of historic proportions.

Thus, leaving you with laughable comments.

[Cypress]

In some ways, Obama is already running in the general. Independents and republicans are starting to see him as an intelligent man capable of getting past political divides and capable of reaching compromise.

That's smart.

I don't think a candidate has to shy away from attacking the Reagan/Clinton economic policies on trade, globalization, and the hollowing out of our manufacturing base, to be set up for a good general election campaign.

Those are winning issues. And voting for the Peru free trade agreement, and supporting NAFTA-style trade, is not going to win votes, or give one credibility as a candidate for working americans.

[Epicurus]

Cypress has now entered a full fledged campaign for a reactionary return to pre-1980 economic policies.

He has managed to link Reagan, Bush 41&43, and Clinton.

[Cypress]

Cypress has now entered a full fledged campaign for a reactionary return to pre-1980 economic policies.

He has managed to link Reagan, Bush 41&43, and Clinton.

Maybe you haven't been on your candidate's website, but Ron Paul also thinks NAFTA-trade, and the takeover of our government by corporate special interests is destroying this country.

He recognizes the same problem, that John Edwards does, albeit with different solutions to the problem.

[Epicurus]

Maybe you haven't been on your candidate's website, but Ron Paul also thinks NAFTA-trade, and the takeover of our government by corporate special interests is destroying this country.

He recognizes the same problem, that John Edwards does, albeit with different solutions to the problem.

NAFTA is not free trade. Period. As long as you have the government involved in regulating every facet of the economy, corporate interests will continue to have a reason to buy politicians.

But I was mostly just observing and thinking that while Clinton probably wouldn't be happy with that evaluation, it's largely true.

[Cypress]

so we agree, that attacking the core of Reagan/Clinton trade policy and globalization, is a winning issue. Good deal.

[Epicurus]

so we agree, that attacking the core of Reagan/Clinton trade policy and globalization, is a winning issue. Good deal.

I didn't say it would win, but it's a fair criticism to link them.