I think I figured out why Hillary isn't dropping out of the race.

TheSatyr · 05-13-08, 12:10 AM

I think it has to do with the Rezko trial that starts in a few days. From what i've been hearing it is supposed to be a slam dunk for the prosecution and that Rezko's attorneys will only be putting up a token defense. There is also a rumor that Rezko may be willing to "finger" Obama in exchange for a lighter sentence. (He is already convinced they will find him guilty supposedly).

I don't know if this is all true or not,but it does bring up an interesting question. If Hillary were to drop out and then lets say that later Obama is forced out due to a scandal do the Dems still get to run a candidate in the General Election...and if so who chooses who the candidate will be? On the other hand,if Hillary were still running she would be the automatic winner I would think. (Which is why I think she is still in the race...to be the fallback candidate if Rezko decides to send Obama down in flames).

I can't recall if we ever had a similar kind of situation before.

Platapus · 05-13-08, 05:43 AM

I have been following the Rezko case and I don't really see the risk to Obama. I have not seen any indications that Obama directed any of Rezko's illegal activities nor that he may have even been aware of his illegal activities (It is also evident that Obama did not spend a lot of time checking up on Rezko but that is hardly illegal).

I see no way Obama can be charged with a crime and impeached from office because of Rezko's activities.

If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place.

However in this election where a candidate not wearing a "made in China" flag pin is a "big issue", this will probably be blown out of proportion.

A criminal giving money to a politician in Chicago. This is not exactly news folks

It will, however, give the political hyenas something to yap about instead of any real issue.

TDK1044 · 05-13-08, 06:13 AM

Hillary is staying in the race to damage Obama just enough so that he loses to McCain. Then in four years time, when McCain is 76 years old and looking and sounding even more like a frail old man, Hillary will run against him.

Tchocky · 05-13-08, 06:20 AM

I disagree. Can you imagine the swell of anti-Hillary opinion if she is seen to have cost the Dems the White House?
It would be like Nader running for the Dems in 2004!

2008 is her last, best chance.

Zachstar · 05-13-08, 06:27 AM

People have been following that trial for months. And no it is going to have nothing to do with Obama.

And I think you have it crossed on the defence part. Recent reports state that the evidence is likely weak.

JetSnake · 05-13-08, 08:29 AM

I think she is staying in because obama hasn't gotten the 2025 delegates yet (his luster isn't great like the media whores portray it). The election is McCains to lose.

TDK1044 · 05-13-08, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I disagree. Can you imagine the swell of anti-Hillary opinion if she is seen to have cost the Dems the White House?
It would be like Nader running for the Dems in 2004!

2008 is her last, best chance.

She's already done that in all probability. She'll run again...her whole life is based on the aquisition of power.

Tchocky · 05-13-08, 11:17 AM

I don't think she's wrought that much damage, to be honest. Her game is over, my inbox is stuffed with McCain/Obama general election talk, only Clinton is focusing on the nomination race. It's all in how she decides to lose.
Most of those Clinton supporters who say they'll vote McCain, c'mon, they're not fooling anyone.
Party identification is looking better and better for Dems, worse and worse for Republicans. In many counties, primary turnout exceeded 2004 general alection turnout. It's going to be a close race this year, but it's by no means decided.
Obama isn't playing the usual Democratic election game, and the traditional GOP points aren't going to work for John McCain.

SUBMAN1 · 05-13-08, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

...If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place.

...

I think its about time we start.

-S

Sailor Steve · 05-13-08, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

...If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place.

...

I think its about time we start.

-S

Now there's a sentiment we agree on!

PeriscopeDepth · 05-13-08, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

...If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place.

...

I think its about time we start.

-S

Now there's a sentiment we agree on!

No feckin kidding. Congress is corrupt. If every House/Senate member was under surveillance for six months, I wonder what we would learn...:hmm:

PD

Platapus · 05-13-08, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

...If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place.

...

I think its about time we start.

-S

Well I can't exactly disagree with that

Tchocky · 05-13-08, 04:54 PM

On McCain's enviro decision

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/..._in_oregon.php

05-13-08, 12:10 AM	#1
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I think I figured out why Hillary isn't dropping out of the race. I think it has to do with the Rezko trial that starts in a few days. From what i've been hearing it is supposed to be a slam dunk for the prosecution and that Rezko's attorneys will only be putting up a token defense. There is also a rumor that Rezko may be willing to "finger" Obama in exchange for a lighter sentence. (He is already convinced they will find him guilty supposedly). I don't know if this is all true or not,but it does bring up an interesting question. If Hillary were to drop out and then lets say that later Obama is forced out due to a scandal do the Dems still get to run a candidate in the General Election...and if so who chooses who the candidate will be? On the other hand,if Hillary were still running she would be the automatic winner I would think. (Which is why I think she is still in the race...to be the fallback candidate if Rezko decides to send Obama down in flames). I can't recall if we ever had a similar kind of situation before.

05-13-08, 05:43 AM	#2
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	I have been following the Rezko case and I don't really see the risk to Obama. I have not seen any indications that Obama directed any of Rezko's illegal activities nor that he may have even been aware of his illegal activities (It is also evident that Obama did not spend a lot of time checking up on Rezko but that is hardly illegal). I see no way Obama can be charged with a crime and impeached from office because of Rezko's activities. If we were to impeach all the members of congress who accepted money from criminals it would be a pretty empty place. However in this election where a candidate not wearing a "made in China" flag pin is a "big issue", this will probably be blown out of proportion. A criminal giving money to a politician in Chicago. This is not exactly news folks It will, however, give the political hyenas something to yap about instead of any real issue. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

05-13-08, 06:20 AM	#4
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	I disagree. Can you imagine the swell of anti-Hillary opinion if she is seen to have cost the Dems the White House? It would be like Nader running for the Dems in 2004! 2008 is her last, best chance. __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

05-13-08, 06:27 AM	#5
Zachstar Sea Lord Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shreveport, Louisiana Posts: 1,956 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	People have been following that trial for months. And no it is going to have nothing to do with Obama. And I think you have it crossed on the defence part. Recent reports state that the evidence is likely weak. __________________

05-13-08, 11:17 AM	#8
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	I don't think she's wrought that much damage, to be honest. Her game is over, my inbox is stuffed with McCain/Obama general election talk, only Clinton is focusing on the nomination race. It's all in how she decides to lose. Most of those Clinton supporters who say they'll vote McCain, c'mon, they're not fooling anyone. Party identification is looking better and better for Dems, worse and worse for Republicans. In many counties, primary turnout exceeded 2004 general alection turnout. It's going to be a close race this year, but it's by no means decided. Obama isn't playing the usual Democratic election game, and the traditional GOP points aren't going to work for John McCain. __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

05-13-08, 06:13 AM	#3
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Hillary is staying in the race to damage Obama just enough so that he loses to McCain. Then in four years time, when McCain is 76 years old and looking and sounding even more like a frail old man, Hillary will run against him.

05-13-08, 08:29 AM	#6
JetSnake Navy Dude Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 176 Downloads: 12 Uploads: 0	I think she is staying in because obama hasn't gotten the 2025 delegates yet (his luster isn't great like the media whores portray it). The election is McCains to lose.

05-13-08, 04:54 PM	#13
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	On McCain's enviro decision http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/..._in_oregon.php __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]