The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Iowans name Hillary the most negative candidate even before her "fun" began

SixPackInBoxers

Sex God
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Posts
874
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Before Hillary announced that the "fun part" would begin with her attacking her fellow Democratic candidates the highly respected Iowa Poll in the Des Moines Register (reported December 2, 2007) had asked Iowans which candidate they thought was the most negative. Hillary led by over twice the number of the next in line. These were the results:

Which Candidate is the most negative?
Hillary Clinton 21%
John Edwards 9%
Dennis Kucinich 9%
Barack Obama 8%
Joe Biden 3%
Mike Gravel 3%
Christopher Dodd 3%
Bill Richardson 3%
None/Not sure 43%
* *
Source: The Iowa Poll
[Des Moines Register, 12/2/07]
 
Before Hillary announced that the "fun part" would begin with her attacking her fellow Democratic candidates


She never announced that.

Since you consistently misrepresent what Senator Clinton says, nothing you say can be trusted.

The truth:

“I have been for months on the receiving end of rather consistent attacks: well, now the fun part starts,” Mrs. Clinton said. “We’re into the last month, and we’re going to start drawing the contrasts.”

Senator Clinton announced "we're going to start drawing the contrasts."
 
How soon we forget...

Senator Clinton did not start the attacks. First it was Edwards and then, realizing he couldn't win in any policy argument, Obama who launched these smears against Senator Clinton. And when she actually stands up and responds to these attacks (unlike Kerry in 2004) and actually draws distinctions between herself and the other candidates, they accuse her of "negative" politics. If they can't handle this, how do they expect to handle the Republican onslaught in the general election?
 
Six, can you provide a link to a quote or a portion of her speech where she says she's going to attack her opponents?

Glad to be of help as long as you don’t squeal like a stuck pig, which a number of the arrogant Clinton supporters, you excepted, are doing now they are losing and how they hate not to be able to crow that they are winning, now that the Devine Right that was going to propel her to the President has evaporated. This is not just a Clinton meltdown but one lacking in grace and completely pathetic sight. Sad to see such sore losers but thank goodness she is history.

Asked directly whether she intended to raise questions about Obama's character, she replied: "It's beginning to look a lot like that."

The Obama campaign quickly fought back, and the candidate himself called the new effort a sign of desperation. A new Des Moines Register poll released Sunday finds Clinton three points behind Obama, within the poll's margin of error, among likely Democratic caucusgoers.

"I think that folks from some of the other campaigns are reading the polls and starting to get stressed and issuing a whole range of outlandish accusations," Obama said. His advisers -- and some of hers -- believe that if Clinton loses the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3, her status as the front-runner nationally will evaporate.

Clinton, campaigning across Iowa on Sunday, appeared to be spoiling for a fight with her chief Democratic rival in national polls -- even at one point describing the battle as "fun."

"I have said for months that I would much rather be attacking Republicans, and attacking the problems of our country, because ultimately that's what I want to do as president. But I have been, for months, on the receiving end of rather consistent attacks. Well, now the fun part starts. We're into the last month, and we're going to start drawing the contrasts," she said.

That drew a swift rebuke from Obama. "This presidential campaign isn't about attacking people for fun, it's about solving people's problems, like ending this war and creating a universal health care system," he said in a statement. "Washington insiders might think throwing mud is fun, but the American people are looking for leadership that can unite this country around a common purpose."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../12/02/AR2007120202194.html?wpisrc=newsletter

As Democratic primary voters experience pre-emptive buyer's remorse--that is, second thoughts about Hillary Clinton's "inevitability"--a desperate Mrs. Clinton stands on the brink of losing all dignity. This is from a press release she put out last night:

At an event in Boston this evening, Senator Obama claimed for the second time today that he is "not running to fulfill some long held plans" to be elected President, contradicting statements his friends, family, staff and teachers have all made about him. . . .

In third grade, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want To Be a President.' His third grade teacher: Fermina Katarina Sinaga "asked her class to write an essay titled 'My dream: What I want to be in the future.' Senator Obama wrote 'I want to be a President,' she said." [The Los Angeles Times, 3/15/07]

In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.' "Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07]

Honest, we're not making this up. Mrs. Clinton really is attacking Obama for something he wrote in kindergarten. It's as if she took those adorable Swift Kids for Truth ads seriously.
http://opinionjournal.com/best/

DES MOINES, Dec. 3 -- Just two months ago, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York appeared to have turned a corner in Iowa. Now, as the race here enters its final month, she is once again fighting to fend off concerns that have dogged her from the start of her campaign in the state.

"Around the time of the October poll, what preceded it was sort of a golden age for her," said J. Ann Selzer, the director of the respected Iowa Poll. "She was in control of the message, the debates were going well and she was grinding down the naysayers. It sounds like it didn't take much for that image to stumble. All those things that were lurking there have come back."

Selzer described a cluster of concerns that voters here have about Clinton. She is seen as capable, experienced and the most knowledgeable about the world. But her negatives are significantly higher than those of any of her leading rivals. Asked which candidate they would be most disappointed to see as their nominee in the Iowa Poll, Democrats put Clinton at the top of the list, with 27 percent citing her. "That's more people saying she would be the worst choice than who say would be the best choice," Selzer said. She called it "that 'ick' factor."

Clinton's response has been to turn aggressive. For the second day in a row, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination in national polls sharply attacked her leading rival, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, using some of the harshest language of the campaign. Arguing that her campaign is in a "very strong position," Clinton hammered Obama for offering "false hopes" rather than action. She predicted that voters will want, in her words, "a doer, not a talker."

Obama offered only the briefest of responses at an event in Des Moines on Monday. "It's silly season," he said. "I understand she's been quoting my kindergarten teacher in Indonesia," a reference to an essay titled "I Want to Become President" that Obama supposedly wrote as a child. He declined to say anything more.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/03/AR2007120302112.html?hpid=topnews
 
Semantics. Pure and simple. WHat do you think she means? What has her campaign done?

Try finding the truth in reality.
 
50% will never vote for her. Her numbers are down from 49% to 34%. Of course she's going to attack. She has no choice. I'd be surprised if she didn't go negative.
 
Back
Top