Posting Tip:

If you want your link to show up correctly, place a "<" at the start and a ">" on end.

For example:

This: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2008/03/aquestionfor.html#comments

Becomes this: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2008/03/a_question_for.html#comments

Links to support for my vote of "No, but she leaves that impression."

First

Clinton was asked by a questioner in the audience here what she would tell frustrated Democrats who might consider voting for McCain in the general election out of spite. "Please think through this decision," Clinton said, laughing and emphasizing the word "please." "It is not a wise decision for yourself or your country." The crowd applauded loudly.

Ok, and now for the second part of the statement:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/28/223113/610

and

http://wonkette.com/364318/hillary-clinton-endorses-john-mccain-80-million-times

Is there a reason there isn't a simple (neutral) "no" answer to serve as a counterpart for the simple (neutral) "yes" answer?

As for me, "I don't know" seems to be the response to give. If she does, she's not telling, and frankly I don't think it really matters. Although when it comes down to who she votes for, she's probably got Obama's back anyway, 'cause politicians tend to vote straight-ticket anyway. Regardless of who she supports, she's still trying to do whatever she can to take the nomination (as improbable as it seems for her to secure) or at least be in position to muster some sort of consolation prize. She's got that right, after all.

Kind of the silly thing is that this is framed as a straight yes/no question. I mean, granted, there's multiple versions of "yes" and "no," but these are really more to reflect our own opinions rather than her feelings. In reality, something of greater significance is not just which candidate she would support, but how much she supports that candidate. Would she just offer perfunctory support of Obama's campaign (demonstating relatively neutral feelings), or would she spend a few days actively campaigning on a candidate's behalf (perhaps showing strong support)?

That all said, I'm not sure this question really matters in the first place. This obsession with party allegiance makes me a bit uneasy, to be honest. The only things that we should really ask is that a person should [1] vote on the basis on what the candidate has to offer in terms of ideas, policy, and leadership, and [2] not let spite be what sways them to choose a particular candidate.

Hillary Clinton said:

"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002,"

Sounds like she prefers McCain to me.

JoAnn:

Ding ding ding! We have a winner.

Richard (on the poll thread) is totally correct. Hillary is many things, but stupid is not one of them. She knows that 2008 is lost, McCain is a one-termer, and her best bet is 2012.

Fun fact: in 2016, Hillary Clinton will be 69 years old- which is the same age Ronald Reagan was when he was elected President.

Fun fact: in 2016, Hillary Clinton will be 69 years old- which is the same age Ronald Reagan was when he was elected President.

Yep, Zaphod, this is what has been going through my mind. I can't help but feel that Hillary may consider herself too old to run for president eight years later...

It would no doubt be better if Hillary won the election with Obama as vice president since he's much younger, and I wonder how many other people have thought about this.

However, this is not likely to happen. I believe that Hillary's tale of dodging sniper fire and no ceremony and corkscrew landing blah blah blah really hurt her.

I voted I dont know but she has obviously made commets that apparently she thinks mccain is more qualified. So has bill.

And while we're parsing out all of this petty bullshit, the United States ranks #8 as concerns murders with firearms (per capita). The countries with more murders by firearms?:

South Africa, Colombia (Hi Charles Lemos), Thailand, Zimbabwe, Mexico, Belarus and Costa Rica

U.S.A.! U.S.A.!

TEXAS

the month long decision.;~)