« Obama's March: $40M+ raised | Main | Clinton: No "typical" ad from me »
Clinton's Howard Wolfson put on his media analyst hat this morning and notes he isn't sure what it signals but there is an "interesting confluence of events" - both Drudge and HuffPo have same lead headline:
— Christina Bellantoni, national political reporter, The Washington Times
|
|
Privacy Policy |
About
TWT |
Site
Map |
Contact
Us
Advertise |
Subscription
Services
All site contents copyright © The Washington Times, LLC.
Comments (3)
After wading through the Huffington simulacra, and the Drudge Report, I couldn't determine in either article why Obama can't win. Is it because Richardson is Judas? Because Obama doesn't have a Sandy Berger to pilfer national security documents? Maybe it is because Hillary like Bill is "misspeaking" again. Whatever the case, this type of arrogance went out with the Nixon administration and believe me, we don't want it back.
Posted by Larry Stone | April 3, 2008 11:53 AM
As much as I respect Senator Clinton's capabilities, drive and optimism, she cannot win against McCain.
Rightly or wrongly, deserved or undeserved, there is too much history to the Clinton name that makes a vote for Clinton impossible for too many independant voters.
Many of "us" republican and independent minded voters, can and probably will vote for Obama.
Senator Clinton can best serve by withdrawing.
Posted by Tony T | April 3, 2008 4:26 PM
In respecting the language of the Constitution as written, I find Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the Un-Constitutional candidate. The office of President calls for HE, HIS, or HIM, not she,her, or hers. Senator Clinton needs to remain in NY, not in the White House.
Posted by Tom Clement | April 5, 2008 11:09 AM