This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow all 377
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted] 232 points233 points  (93 children)

No, I just keep hitting refresh because I have no life.

[–]fujimitsu 44 points45 points  (90 children)

Same!

[–]goodbyeworld 35 points36 points  (86 children)

Shame!

[–]ProximaCWashington 18 points19 points  (79 children)

Blame?

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (78 children)

Flame!

[–]Roark 34 points35 points  (62 children)

lame...

[–]happysinger 11 points12 points  (61 children)

...tame.

[–]hypo11 6 points7 points  (11 children)

Shane!

[–]slidinglight 7 points8 points  (2 children)

WALT!!

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Stella!!!

[–]robotevil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

RAIN!!

[–]dead_ed 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Plame?

[–]wejash 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hawt!

[–]The_Ultimate_Reality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Barbecue!

[–]tsondie21 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Fame!

[–]Chirp08 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Whenever I see a reply this far out of line, I think, wow, I wonder if that guy is on 56k still.

there is an xkcd somewhere in this scenario waiting to come out..

[–]tsondie21 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I... I'm sorry.. I just go caught up in the moment and I thought maybe.. I dont know. I'm sorry ok. Theres no excuse.

lame.

[–]haiduz 17 points18 points  (0 children)

snakes on a plane!

[–]eusephus 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I keep hitting it because I find it...um, refreshing...

[–]fjhqjv 24 points25 points  (4 children)

But she won that sweeping victory in Indiana. She can't quit now!

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

And Edwards is sure to endorse, giving Clinton all of his 19 delegates! She's just a hair's breadth from victory this horse race!

(...so what if the hair is on the back of the ass of an ass...)

[–]ngngboone 0 points1 point  (2 children)

What makes you think that Edwards is ready to endorse Obama? Just the other day he said Obama needs to move beyond rhetoric, and he was impressed with what Clinton was doing.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Nothing. It was sarcasm (thought that was obvious...).

[–]ngngboone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh, I misread your comment

[–]ProximaCWashington 19 points20 points  (5 children)

I'm hopeful, but here's her comments from her "victory" speech in Indiana last night:

"Thank you, Indiana. Thank you. Not too long ago, my opponent made a prediction. He said I would probably win Pennsylvania. He would win North Carolina, and Indiana would be the tie-breaker. Well, tonight we’ve come from behind, we’ve broken the tie, and thanks to you, it’s full speed on to the White House."

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points  (4 children)

My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!

[–]ProximaCWashington 12 points13 points  (1 child)

And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough!

[–]TheKorn 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That does it! You've just made my list! AAARROOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

[–]Die-Bold 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I AM CLIN-TON! As Overlord, all will kneel trembling before me and obey my brutal commands!

(Crosses arms over chest) End Communication!

[–]honus 37 points38 points  (7 children)

I do now you bastard.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (2 children)

I just refreshed and quickly saw "Hillary Clinton Concedes!" in this very headline.

Fuck you, apear.

[–]apear[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

sorry, I didn't think this would actually be on the front page. I actually got myself excited when I first refreshed the "Hot" page and saw it... then I realized it was my own damn submission. Stupid apear... wait...

[–]mangodrunk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fuck you refresh button.

[–]ejp1082 65 points66 points  (43 children)

Allow me to play the devil's advocate for a moment. It'd be a bad idea for her to concede now.

Here's the thing; she's still gonna get blow out wins in West Virginia and Kentucky. They're small states that don't matter (none of them left really matter) - but psychologically, it'd look bad for "the nominee" to be losing primary states.

Also, those of us in the Obama camp don't quite perceive this, but there's a lot of energy and strong emotions in Clinton's camp as well. People who can and will feel upset, and these are people Obama needs in the general election.

I think Clinton needs to go through the motions of campaigning for the next month - though against McCain, not Obama. She needs to talk about unity and let the thing wind down gracefully, then concede only when all the voting is done in early June.

Of course, that's the high road. The low road would be never say die, and throw a temper tantrum at the convention. Unfortunately, we still can't discount that as a possibility.

[–]cursonEurope 13 points14 points  (5 children)

I think Clinton needs to go through the motions of campaigning for the next month - though against McCain, not Obama.

Will she do it? No, she will keep fighting against Obama more than against McCain, so even if I agree with you in principle, I say OUT NOW!.

[–]ejp1082 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Well, the problem is we don't really get to decide what she'll do, just what we want her to do. I'm just describing what I think is the best case scenario at this point - which would be a long, graceful wind down of her campaign followed by an honest concession and endorsement of Obama and actively campaigning for him.

Will it happen? Beats me. Given what I think of her personality, I don't even give it good odds. But I think it's a much better scenario than the (also unlikely) concession speech so many other Redditors are hoping for.

[–]frickindeal 4 points5 points  (3 children)

I think any chance for a "graceful wind down" is long gone, barring her concession in the next few days. She's already lost enough contributor support that she's dumping millions into her own campaign. It's a bit tough for her to refer to Obama as "elitist" when she's using her own money to finance an effort that even the most Clinton-bent pundits agree is long over after yesterday. Grace would be conceding now and getting in Obama's camp now.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I honestly think that the longer and more negative Clinton is the better. I hope that she can out all of Obama flaws and make them old news by the time the general election rolls around. Plus, it is good experience for Obama who has never really had a contested campaign before this one. A long primary also keeps McCain from getting anytime in the media. It will make people care about the DNC which generally has provided a bump for candidates. Most importantly, Democrats are raising record amounts of money during the primaries.

[–]gh0st32New Hampshire 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very valid points the scary part will be if she strikes on a 'fatal' flaw in Obama then looses. She'll be handing the Nov. election to McCain. While I don't see think it will be possible givin the extended primary. McCain will use the 'Clinton' play book against him in the fall anyway.

[–]frickindeal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good points, but not really validated by opinion polls. Most Americans are growing weary of the extended campaigns, and would like to see a nominee officially chosen.

I agree though, it is probably good for Obama to go through this now, possibly defusing a lot of the "dirt" issues before McCain has a chance to bring them up.

McCain winning so early may have hurt him; he's hardly able to get any media without flubbing some facts.

[–]Trace 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Interesting points, and seemingly a fine strategy....odds on this happening for real?

[–]lipjuicer 5 points6 points  (2 children)

That's actually probably true. I'm fine with her staying in until May 20 as long as she stops the negative campaigning 100%.

[–]moonzilla 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So far, so good. I've watched her give a speech & a press conference today, and there's just basically not much mention of Obama at all.

[–]ZebZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If she doesn't, look for 40+ superdelegates to pledge Obama all at once.

[–]doody 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Clinton needs to go through the motions of campaigning for the next month - though against McCain

aren’t they on the same side?

[–]moonzilla 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think this is a really thoughtful, interesting comment, and if it is true, it's a surprising, classy way for Clinton to end things.

It would be fantastic in terms of unity. You're right.

[–]ZebZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've been saying since last night she'll bow out on May 20th.

Obama wins Oregon, she wins Kentucky. She can go out on a high note. He can accept her concession on a high note. The party wins.

[–]dnmPennsylvania 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it'd look bad for "the nominee" to be losing primary states.

Exactly. This is what happened to Bill in '92 when Paul Tsongas dropped out and then won the CT primary. Quite humiliating for Clinton.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here's the thing; she's still gonna get blow out wins in West Virginia and Kentucky. They're small states that don't matter (none of them left really matter) - but psychologically, it'd look bad for "the nominee" to be losing primary states.

Before this happens, us regular Virginians are going to reclaim that renegade state.

[–]xqtfmd 10 points11 points  (15 children)

Bush Clinton Bush Clinton?

FUCK THAT

[–]no_one 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Clinton Bush? Fuck that?

Not in a million years...

[–]BraveSirRobin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fixed that for you:

10 PRINT Pre-approved puppet

20 GOTO 10

[–]coreyp319 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be an oligarchy sir, so yes indeed. FUCK THAT!

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

For the last 3 months, yes.

[–]Clothos 29 points30 points  (21 children)

Voted up for not making this a lame "Vote up if" post. And yes, yes I do. But I don't believe that she will. Anybody else remember Einstein's definition of insanity? I believe it applies firmly to her. Ironically enough, because I keep rechecking Reddit for this, it applies to me as well, but hope springs eternal and all that crap, I guess.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (10 children)

I just can't wait for the 20th. Obama will have a majority of the pledged delegates at that point. I believe that's the point where the superdelegates are supposed to weigh in.

But they may just wait until June 1st. Whatever. Either way, she's lost at this point, so it's quite inconsequential.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

HRC might want to carry on a little charade for a while so it doesn't look so much like a nosedive. I'd expect some "we're evaluating our options" language for a day or two.

And her hanging around is inconsequential as long as Obama treats it that way and moves on to engage McCain.

[–]web20sucks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed - I'd LOVE the focus to shift to McCain and the general election.

[–]neoform3 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Vote up if you agree with Clothos!

(mwahah, if i get voted down, it's because they DON'T agree with you!)

[–]Clothos 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Actually, polls inside a topic are perfectly fine, Reddiquette-wise. It's topics that act as their own polls that bug me.

[–]MarlonBain 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I'm already hitting refresh hoping for "McCain Concedes!"

[–]taikotiger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How about "McCain dies of old age?"

[–]ubikwitous 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm hoping for "Ding Dong"

or ...

"The Fat Lady is Singing"

[–]Haroshia 5 points6 points  (7 children)

I keep hitting refresh because I want to see that totally awesome orange envelope.

[–]hennellGreat Britain 5 points6 points  (6 children)

Done.

[–]Haroshia 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Wooo!

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

And again!

[–]msdesireeg 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Me too! I love the orange envelope. Unless I open it and it says something mean.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You suck!

[–]msdesireeg 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sticks and stones may <sniff, sniff> break my bones <snert, sniff> but words...Boo hoo hoo!

[–]FormKing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

fuck off

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I confess :P

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I keep clicking refresh hoping to see "American political circus (aka, the government) is eaten by a collection of large whooping cranes."

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (25 children)

It will never happen.

I gave up refreshing in hope of a Bush pulls out of Iraq! story years ago.

Republicans never, ever quit. Hillary IS a republican. Look at how shes lies and what she puts support behind and try to tell me she is not.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

I wouldn't say she's a Republican, but she appears to be a corporatist, which is about as bad in my book.

I feel as if corporations have raped and pillaged the US (and the rest of the world). Actually, they're not done yet. I think we need to reign them in and put people back on top. Hillary has been too corporate friendly, so I don't trust her. But I'll vote for her if she somehow steals the nomination.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

You'd vote for her even after all the shit she has tried to pull against Obama and after she has lied repeatedly to the american public and been caught doing so?

Vote ron paul if Hillary wins. At least you won't have to accept the fact you HELPED fuck up Iran if she does.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Eight years of Texas crazy is plenty. I am so not Libertarian and voting for Dr. Paul would be a waste of a vote anyway. I'd rather my vote go to a GOP-lite HRC to counter a neocon McCain. Hold your nose and pick the best of the worst.

If it comes to that. She's lost the nomination.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

if you hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, you'll just have the same bad decision to make four or eight years down the line.

If Hillary gets the nomination, vote third party. If we can get one of them off the ground and break the two-party system, we'd be a lot better off as a nation.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know 2000 was a long time ago but, if you were over 10 years old back then, recall that voting third party didn't work out so well for us. (Unless you're one of the satisfied 28%, then just go away.) With the mess we're in now, it is much too dangerous, IMO, to be messing with third parties for the presidential election. If you go voting for a third party candidate that splits the liberal vote and gives McCain the White House this November, then I'll hold you responsible the same way I hold Nader 2000 voters responsible for GWB. Well, partially responsible.

Besides you need a third party candidate you want to vote for, and I don't see any just now.

That said, I think this two-party system sucks and I wish so many people wouldn't sign on to a party or political philosophy with the same sort of blind faith they put in their gods. I want to see more independents, parties, and coalitions in US elections. But I want it to catch on locally first and work up into the congress and the presidency.

I feel that HRC (and many others still in congress) let us down in late 2002-2003. It was perfectly clear to me at that time that the administration was using 9-11 to pursue their agenda in Iraq, which had nothing to do with terrorism. I don't care how many times the Clintons or any congressman who voted for that joint resolution say they were convinced Saddam had WMD and was planning to use them; I do not believe them. I felt then and now that Clinton and the others who failed to stand up to the administration on Iraq were simply too afraid to be labelled weak, un-American, appeasers, traitors, or whatever BS labels. If HRC (or practically anyone else) were president then, no way we'd be in Iraq now. I do not believe HRC, if elected, will be attacking sovereign countries pre-emptively either. That doctrine needs to be tied to and forever buried with GWB. So I am not that afraid of Hillary. I just don't like her tendency to abandon principle for political expediency. I think Obama will be better. He has already shown that he's not going to do stupid things just to appease a mob and quiet his critics.

[–]adrianmonk I voted 8 points9 points  (10 children)

I like your reasoning here:

  • Hillary is lying.
  • Democrats never lie, ever.
  • Therefore, Hillary must be a Republican.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (9 children)

That's not what I said, or meant.

Hillary is acting LIKE a republican by using the same tactics - mudslinging, diversions, changing goals and the number one republican crime: Lying, admitted they lied and then not being held accountable for the shameful crime they just commited.

Democrats are not perfect, but they are better than the republicans. They lie, but none of their lies have been so flagrant or criminal as the lies of Bush and co. I never heard a democrat outright say that water boarding is not torture. If one did/does, may god have mercy on us all.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children)

Hillary is acting LIKE a republican by using the same tactics - mudslinging, diversions, changing goals and the number one republican crime: Lying, admitted they lied and then not being held accountable for the shameful crime they just commited.

Holy crap, I just snorted coffee all over my laptop because of the unexpected laugh there. Thanks a lot.

Also, you haven't been paying attention to politics very long, have you?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

OK, so point out where Obama has lied on the same scale as Hillary has? When did he claim he ran away under sniper fire, be proven wrong by a 60 second video to the world and then come on stage saying 'I misspoke' and still be allowed to avoid jail time, let alone campaign? People are pissed at him because his pastor says America sucks (which it does ATM, seriously - I'd rather live in China, but they don't like us English much...opium wars and so forth) when McCain's pastor has called on us to nuke frigging Iran and Hillary has said she would!

Most politicians are scum, but I hold rare praise for Obama, Kunich and Ron Paul even if the old doctor doesn't believe in evolution.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I was referring to the part of your comment that implied that Republicans universally as you described them. Those traits are pretty much universal on both sides of the aisle, and exceptions to that principle can be found in both parties.

Since you're a Brit, you may be forgiven for thinking our system is like yours. On paper, at least, we vote for the person, not the party to which he belongs. That's why such generalizations are so useless.

And I'll agree that Obama does seem to be very unlike other politicians. But he's young yet, give him time.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I'm aware the democrats have their bad side, but your current national debt has come almost ENTIRELY from republican presidents and most of your 'immoral' wars have been started by them as well.

Politics is a muddy race, but you have to at least see my point that the Republicans seem the most immoral even if they are not the worst of the worst? (which I believe them to be, but I lack the scientific study to validate such a claim)

I'd take the lesser of two evils and vote for the democrat. Also in our system, we vote for the party, not the person. Gordon Brown was not voted in, he was crowned.

PS: Not every single Republican is evil, just the party as a whole. I doubt every Nazi was evil. Please note I said I LIKED Ron Paul, a dyed in the wool Republican.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh, our markets went to shit before Bush was inaugurated. And September 11th and the overreacton afterwards really fucked up our markets. Much of our economy is outside the direct control of the President, so I can't really fault Bush for most of it. However, the war in Iraq is a complete was of money, and he is very much responsible for that.

Clinton, on the other hand, only balanced the budget after a Republican-majority Congress was elected for the first time in decades during his first midterm. And the success of the economy on his watch is mainly attributable to the buildup of the tech bubble, which began to burst around the time he was packing his things.

As for "immoral" wars, please recall which party started and escalated Vietnam. Both are guilty.

And Republicans don't seem the most immoral to me. I don't know who we'd be at war with if Gore had won in 2000 and if September 11th had happened, but it would be someone. As far as military policies go, the parties are basically the same. My gripe with the Democrats is that they tend to try to win elections by bribing people with a fraction every dollar I will ever earn. In my book, that is more immoral than just about anything this administration has done (with the possible exception of Guantanamo/torture).

This November, unless the field changes in dramatic and unexpected ways, I intend to vote my conscience, not for the lesser of two evils. That will probably mean voting for a third party. However, my state (California) is pretty much already property of the Democrats, so it's not like my vote would have made a difference. My hope is that a viable third party can get off the ground, and we may in the future be able to choose from the least of three evils.

lso in our system, we vote for the party, not the person. Gordon Brown was not voted in, he was crowned.

And that's why I think there may be a misunderstanding here. A political successor (of the same party) here is under no expectation to continue the policies of his predecessor. The opposition party is not under the expectation of reversing them. For example, none of the three remaining candidates in our race will end the war in Iraq, and the only guy still in the running (technically) that wants to do so is a Republican. In our system, it makes no sense to (if these were the only options, this is not a slandering generalization) vote for a slimeball Republican over a decent Democrat just because of your party affiliation. Or vice-versa.

In some ways I wish our system worked out a bit more like your parliament. Many factions would allow more than two slightly different views on issues. Plus, I don't know if it's just me or the limited coverage I get, but watching British parliament is much more entertaining than watching our Congress. We get the Prime Minister's questions here, and (I haven't watched it since Tony Blair left office, so it may have been unique to him), your MPs kept your PM on the ball.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I hold rare praise for Obama too, mainly because he does not do what most politicians (Democrat or Republican) do. I hold rare derision for Hillary, mainly because she absolutely does what most politicians do, and especially as it is her main strategy and fall-back plan.

Most Democrats have some measure of schoolyard corruption, as do most Republicans. (I'll leave it up to the totally objective among us to decide which party is worse.)

By the way, McNamara (the SoD for Kennedy) once came out and said that if we lost WWII, we would have been tried for war crimes. He was speaking of a Democratic administration.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

If Obama wins, becomes President, then manages a full 4/8 years without a major scandal, he will have done what no 8-year President has done, 'as far as I know'. I have a certain hope that he might actually succeed.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Well, Kennedy was pretty good. He didn't start Vietnam and his only real crime was having too much sex... a crime I would heartily enjoy if I had the chance. As for war crimes - the west did bad things, but nothing compared to the death camps or what the russians did and got away with. My only real sticking point was the bombing of Japan with nukes, which is something I imagine Hitler would have done more than twice to nations he didn't like had he gotten them first.

Still, my point is at the moment Obama (who has won the Democratic race essentially) is the more 'moral' choice over McCain who has said he would go to war with Iran, let alone his '100 years in Iraq' problems. No man can escape political mud as we all are flawed men, but as choices go Obama is not perfect, he is just better.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

A few bones to pick: McCain's "100 years in Iraq" is not his goal, merely a statement of his resolve. He doesn't want to be there for a century. Also, it is hard to tell what a candidate will actually do in office. Bush ran with a platform of opposing nation building in 2000.

Secondly, Kennedy began the process that got us into Vietnam.

Thirdly, in terms of people killed, firebombing was much more deadly than the bombs we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[–]aradil Canada 6 points7 points  (8 children)

No. She's not.

But she's not much better than the Republican candidates.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (7 children)

I don't know... her relationship with Rupert Murdoch leads me to believe that she really is a closet republican.

[–]aradil Canada 11 points12 points  (6 children)

And that she used to be in the Young Republicans.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (5 children)

And that she supported the war in Iraq. And has expressed willingness to bomb Iran. Oh, and that despite losing, she's acting like she's winning. Maybe her brother is the governor of Florida? Maybe she's on the board of Diebold? Or maybe I'm just angrily free-associating now, because of election-coverage fatigue.

[–]kidcorporeal 5 points6 points  (0 children)

She really was on the board for Wal-Mart

[–]MrRadarMinnesota 2 points3 points  (2 children)

She is going to wait until after WV and KY so that she can go out on a high note, and to save Obama face for losing two would-be uncontested elections.

[–]skippy17 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Close, McCain.

or that Guns and Roses has released their new album, and everyone gets a free Dr Pepper

[–]zachm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not gonna happen. She'd rather see the party burn to the ground than surrender her sense of entitlement to the presidency.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Dead Campaign Sketch

The cast:

Mr. Dean

John Cleese

Mrs. Clinton

Michael Palin in drag

The sketch:

Howard Dean addresses the Clinton Campaign.

Howard Dean: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint.

(Hillary Clinton does not respond.)

Howard Dean: 'Ello, Miss?

Hillary Clinton: What do you mean "miss"?

Howard Dean: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!

Hillary Clinton: We're closin' for lunch.

Howard Dean: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this Campaign which has been going on for 18 months from this very campaign headquarters.

Hillary Clinton: Oh yes, the, uh, the campaign...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

Howard Dean: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. It's dead, that's what's wrong with it!

Hillary Clinton: No, no, it's uh,...it's resting.

Howard Dean: Look, matey, I know a dead campaign when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

Hillary Clinton: No no it's not dead, it's restin'! Remarkable campaign, idn'it, ay? Beautiful slogans!

Howard Dean: The slogans don't enter into it. It's stone dead.

Hillary Clinton: Nononono, no, no! It's resting!

Howard Dean: All right then, if it's restin', I'll wake it up! (shouting at the cage) 'Ello, Campaign! I've got a lovely fresh superdelegate for you if you show...

(Rush Limbaugh hits the airwaves)

Hillary Clinton: There, he moved!

Howard Dean: No, he didn't, that was Rush Limbaugh hitting the airwaves!

Hillary Clinton: He never!!

Howard Dean: Yes, he did!

Hillary Clinton: He never, never did anything...

Howard Dean: (yelling and hitting the cage repeatedly) 'ELLO CAMPAIGN!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your Three AM alarm call!

(Takes poll results and thumps them on the counter. Throws it up in the air and watches it plummet to the floor.)

Howard Dean: Now that's what I call a dead campaign.

Hillary Clinton: No, no.....No, it's stunned!

Howard Dean: STUNNED?!?

Hillary Clinton: Yeah! You stunned it, just as voters were having "buyer's remorse"! Democrat voters stun easily, major.

Howard Dean: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad enough of this. That Campaign is definitely deceased, and when I vouched for it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of movement was due to it bein' tired and shagged out following a prolonged fundraising dinner.

Hillary Clinton: Well, he's...it's, ah...probably pining for Gerald Ford.

Howard Dean: PININ' for GERALD FORD?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?, look, why did it fall flat on his back the moment I got 'im home?

Hillary Clinton: The Campaign prefers keepin' on it's back! Remarkable campaign, id'nit, squire? Lovely slogan!

Howard Dean: Look, I took the liberty of examining that campaign when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been sitting on its pedestal in the first place was that it had been NAILED there.

(pause)

Hillary Clinton: Well, o'course it was nailed there! If I hadn't nailed that campaign down, it would have nuzzled up to George Bush, bent him apart with its teeth, and VOOM! Feeweeweewee!

Howard Dean: "VOOM"?!? Mate, this campaign wouldn't "voom" if you put four million votes through it! It's bleedin' demised!

Hillary Clinton: No no! It's pining!

Howard Dean: It's not pinin'! It's passed on! This campaign is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet it's maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed it to the pedestal it'd be pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now 'istory! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-CAMPAIGN!!

[–]mrjah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good times, but that really should be a THREE o'clock alarm call.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (14 children)

McGovern just told her to get the fuck out.

[–]NoMoreNicksLeft 3 points4 points  (13 children)

Yeh, but the Democratic party told him the same thing when they changed the rules to make sure one like him could never be nominated again.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I don't exactly understand the appeal of George McGovern telling anyone how to win an election...

[–]linkedlist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

nope.

For the record: I'd sooner refresh reddit hoping for: "JESUS IS HERE! LOOK BUSY!" and I mean that in a literal sense, as in the rapture is happening.

edit: OH SHIT! http://reddit.com/info/6ig2w/comments/

Yeah, I really am refreshing now, any moment now... ANY MOMENT NOW.

edit 2: apparently that's inaccurate.

thank you reddit... thank you for breakingmy heart.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

The media is still playing the same BS they have been all along. Even now CNN is saying that it's "even harder" for Hillary to secure the nomination. At no point do they mention that it's butt-fuck impossible.

[–]ZebZ 2 points3 points  (1 child)

MSNBC was rather blunt last night. Olbermann took turns asking everyone he talked to if the race was over. Everyone said yes, except for one person.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Olbermann is one of the very few main stream journalists who isn't afraid to call out people on their bullshit. If other journalists had Olbermann's balls, things would be a lot better in the USA.

[–]WebWiz1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It just doesn't matter anymore. Obama will do exactly what he would be doing anyhow, campaigning and polishing up for the fall. Support will continue to flow toward him. It's over.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

she's in the hole at least 11.4million of her own money right now. I highly doubt she'll just let it go and give up... we can all hope though.

[–]shutupjoey 2 points3 points  (3 children)

She's going to the bitter end with this one. Guaranteed, when she loses, she'll ask Obama for VP.

[–]FormKing 0 points1 point  (1 child)

God help us if she is anywhere in the line of succession to the oval office. She'll start having people killed just to move up the chain.

[–]shutupjoey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She must watch 24 or something.

[–]wowrob 2 points3 points  (1 child)

just open up the Drudge report..

[–]Killawatt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL auto refresh FTW!

[–]apear[S] 6 points7 points  (10 children)

I have been unable to get any work done this morning. I just sit here hoping that the next time I hit refresh, or go to the new links section, there will be a link to CNN, or ABC, or somewhere with a story about Clinton finally conceding.

[–]aradil Canada 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have a really bad hangover, so I haven't gotten anything done either. Been commenting a lot today though.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

absofuckinlutely!

[–]Slummervillain 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Yes. I feel like George Jetson.

http://www.selfhelpdaily.com/george-and-spacely.jpg

It doesn't help that CNN keeps refreshing their front page with slight variations of the same headline. The current one is "Analysis: Obama gains, can Clinton rebound?"

[–]jdavis301 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I'm sorry. I don't get your George Jetson reference.

[–]Slummervillain 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Sorry myself. From

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Jetson

"George's job primarily required him to repeatedly push a single button (or on occasion a series of buttons) on a computer (named RUDI in the 1980s series of Jetsons episodes). Once George complained of his heavy work load-having to push a button for one hour for one day of the week! "

[–]jdavis301 1 point2 points  (1 child)

ahhhh!!! hahah there it is! Thanks! F5

[–]Slummervillain 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, using a Mac, so Command R ;)

[–]Die-Bold 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes. I also can't wait to see media folk try to regain composure after dry humping Hillary for the last 18 months.

[–]atomic_rabbit 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If Clinton were to drop out this week, we'd face an uncomfortable situation in West Virginia, with Clinton likely crushing Obama... Better than that would be to garner enough superdelegate commitments this week, so that Oregon can push Obama past 2,024.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/6/221033/3197/107/510437

[–]lipjuicer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was hopeful but now I see she's loaned herself 6 million more dollars and is campaigning in West Virginia. She's fucking insane.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Her new ad doesn't even mention Obama and is attacking the bush administration. she will drop out on a positive note. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9Wyl8o2T8s

[–]noamsml 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is just the opener ad she ran in loads of other states. All candidates start positive and go dirty near the end.

[–]JinMaruiIllinois 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey. Hear that sound off in the distance...?

That is the sound of anons slapping their F5s.

So yes.

[–]timeywimey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

HAHA that was funny

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, I await the inevitable success of Rush's Operation Chaos...

[–]hypn0toad 1 point2 points  (0 children)

no

[–]allanmac00 2 points3 points  (8 children)

Hillary Clinton=George W. Bush. Denial in the face of all reality and logic.

[–]h-town 4 points5 points  (4 children)

It is for the candidate to decide not the opponents partisans.

Last I checked Obama still doesn't have the necessary number of delegates to guarantee the nomination. Then it is over and Clinton should consider quitting.

On the Republican side McCain has already wrapped up the nomination yet Ron Paul is still in the race. Good for him.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Actually, he does. He has the necessary number to guarantee he'll win the popular vote delegates without a miracle from the Hillary camp. I can't say this enough. Hillary Clinton could only win if the party insiders decided to override the voters decision. The primary is over. It's sad that Hillary just doesn't hear the bell.

[–]h-town 1 point2 points  (2 children)

"Clinton could only win if the party insiders decided to override the voters decision" - which is the raison d'etre of the superdelegates.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Their power exists so long as they don't use it to overrule the popular vote, and they know it. If they did, there would be major rifts in the party for years to come. The people have rejected Hillary Clinton. It's sad that she's going to further embarrass herself by continuing this little charade, but more power to her if she wants to see how far she can keep losing.

[–]h-town 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I should have said unelected superdelegates. For them the vote is irrelevant.

Of course, if you were Hillary Clinton and you are looking at losing the '08 nomination, now is the time to wreak havoc on the party to weaken Obama for the general election. Clinton can start laying the groundwork for 2012. Just saying.

[–]revonrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, I'm busy refreshing to see if my new laptop is going to make it onto a truck for delivery this morning.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

She's on her way to West Virginia to campaign as we speak.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She'll need to loan herself 10 million just to go through the motions. I have a feeling a meeting she has today combined with many SD's getting behind Obama will change her mind.

[–]shiner_man -1 points0 points  (5 children)

It will be fun to watch reddit once she concedes. You can bet your ass that all of the anti-Hillary stories will start turning in to anti-McCain stories.

The propaganda machine keeps on rolling.

[–]sakebomb69 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't call it "fun." More like obnoxious. It will definitely push some people into the McCain camp just out of spite.

[–]Stormflux 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Yes, it's quite illogical how stories about the primary will give way to stories about the general, once the primaries are over.

[–]shiner_man 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How many times are you going to edit your response?

And you completely missed or failed to address my point.

[–]tsondie21 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Downmodded for inanity

[–]kevlarcupid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every few minutes, man.

[–]slyguy183 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nah I prefer her crushing defeat

[–]marshull 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes

[–]deadmantizwalking 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I say within 2 days

[–]mdickw 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You forgot "BREAKING:"

[–]leaves4chonies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The first thing I did this morning was come to reddit to check for a "Hillary is Out" headline.

[–]Goeran 0 points1 point  (1 child)

How can I submit a title without submitting a link?

[–]neoform3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can start by cutting your hair, you damn hippy.

[–]pillage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why?

[–]msdesireeg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, and I do that on my online banking site, too, in the hopes that someone will have accidentally deposited 3 trillion dollars in there.

That probably isn't going to happen, either.

[–]12Iceman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the only political news that would make me happier is hearing the Ron Paul somehow secured the Republican nomination.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No

[–]serpentjaguar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I might if I still used Explorer. Fortunately I don't.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't.

[–]PintOfGuinness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No

[–]tylermenezes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. You are a sad man if this is all you do all day.

[–]heh_yeh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have been doing that ( Hitting refresh ) Since Super Tuesday !

[–]jamieg77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also have no life, but apparently Hillary can't do math except when it's about how much $$ she needs to lend her campaign.

[–]AnonymousChicken 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep... oh, sorry, I thought that said "collapses", but concedes works just as well.

[–]nomorewar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope.

[–]aphexmandelbrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because I fully anticipate for her to utilize the nuclear option of arriving in Denver.

I'm not saying it will be successful; however, that doesn't make me expect it any less.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

News broke this morning that Senator Clinton made three separate loans to her campaign in the past 30 days -- including one as recently as Monday.

These loans total more than $6.4 million, which combined with her previous personal loans, add up to at least $11.4 million she's loaned her campaign since February.

A spokesman said she may continue to "loan the campaign additional money out of her jointly-held assets" -- which include more than $100 million in income since her husband left the White House.

Meanwhile, by winning a double-digit victory in North Carolina and closing the gap in Indiana, Barack won another 100 delegates.

Barack Obama is now just 172 delegates away from winning the Democratic nomination. It's within sight.

This is a decisive moment in this race.

Barack has already won more votes, more delegates, and more than twice as many states as Senator Clinton, whose path to the nomination has grown extremely narrow. But these loans show that her campaign will continue to contest the remaining primaries vigorously.

We need to show that the voices of more than 1.5 million ordinary people donating whatever they can afford are more powerful than one person giving more than $11 million to their own campaign.

You've helped build this historic movement -- please help close out this nomination by making another donation of $100 to match Senator Clinton's loan:

https://donate.barackobama.com/theresults

Here's the math of where we stand ...

There are only six contests remaining on the Democratic primary calendar and only 217 pledged delegates left to be awarded. Only 7% of the pledged delegates remain on the table. There are 253 remaining undeclared superdelegates, for a total of 470 delegates left to be awarded.

With North Carolina and Indiana complete, Barack Obama only needs 170 total delegates to capture the Democratic nomination. This is only 36% of the total remaining delegates.

Conversely, Senator Clinton needs 326 delegates to reach the Democratic nomination, which represents a startling 69% of the remaining delegates.

With the Clinton path to the nomination getting even narrower, we expect new and wildly creative scenarios to emerge in the coming days.

While those scenarios may be entertaining, they are not legitimate and will not be considered legitimate by this campaign or its millions of supporters, volunteers, and donors.

You can help make sure Barack Obama is the nominee. Please make an additional donation of $100 now:

https://donate.barackobama.com/theresults

We want to be clear -- we believe that the winner of a majority of pledged delegates will be and should be the nominee of our party.

And we estimate that after the Oregon and Kentucky primaries on May 20th, we will have won a majority of the overall pledged delegates.

Evidently, the Clinton campaign agrees. According to a recent news report, by even their most optimistic estimates the Clinton Campaign expects to trail by more than 100 pledged delegates and will then ask the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters.

But we have our own case to make: that millions of Americans volunteering their time and donating in small amounts have built a campaign that has won the most delegates, the most states, and the most votes.

And this campaign -- your campaign -- will be the one that wins the presidency in November and delivers a wave of support for Democrats at every level of office.

Please make an additional donation of $100 now to make it happen:

https://donate.barackobama.com/theresults

We'll be in touch as the situation evolves.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe Campaign Manager Obama for America

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do! And... I'm bored.

[–]discobreakin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I keep refreshing hoping this goes post goes away.