Why Hillary Won (Op-Ed by Karl Rove)

Wall Street Journal ^ | January 10, 2008 | Karl Rove

[Mad-Margaret]

I disagree with both of you. And I am a Hillary-hater from way back when.

I watched the debate last Saturday night. When Hillary responded to the question about like-ability (is that even a word?), I thought she was overdoing the “hurt my feelings” routine. It was almost as if she was mugging for the camera with a little girl act. But then, Obama’s reaction made this throwaway Q&A the unforgettable moment of the debate.

“You’re likeable enough, Hillary,” he sneered without looking up from his notes.

Hey buddy, that’s a former first lady. Who in the hell do you think you are? What an arrogant piece of crap he is.

Now if I feel this way — me, a Hillary hater, a proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy — how did a Democratic woman feel? You know? One of those female libbers who thinks that Hillary is the smartest woman in the world. How do you think she felt about Obama at that moment?

Karl Rove is right on this point.

[Beatthedrum]

Go away, no-one cares what this over-rated pompous ass has to say. All he’s doing is trying to build her up, because the “Almighty Rove” has decided she will be easiest to beat. Or maybe he's still got his tongue stuck up Clinton's butt, because he did nothing but suck up to them all the time he was working in the WH.

The advice her gave Bush over the years has left the party in shambles, as he helped push the GOP to the left. He was the “mastermind” of two elections won on a shoe string against two total morons - Kerry & Gore, who should have been blown out of the water - 2000, the stench of the Clintons, the Clinton fatigue was handing the Presidency to anyone the GOP ran - look what happened after 2 years of Clinton in 1994 - Clinton handed the GOP their best win in the modern era. Then in 2004, with a good economy, America standing up against terrorism, Bush nearly loses to the goofball Kerry.

Shut up Rove, nobody gives a sh$t !!

[Old Teufel Hunden]

“Do you suppose the Dem establishment is contacting Obama to cajole him to take a dive?”

I’m sure that certain party elders and the Hildabeast would want this. However, he has to be thinking that the stars are aligning for him right now. He may not get another chance as good as this. He has to be thinking about John Edwards right now. Kerry lost the nomination and is now supporting Obama.

Hildabeast is not assured of winning the election, thus having him become president. In 4 years, much less 8 years the political winds could be completely different, not allowing him the ability to run again. If she loses in 08, is there any doubt what the Hildabeast does in 12? Where does that leave him?

One other thing, I think that the true bigots (the dumbocrats) would not want a ticket of a woman and a black man. Fearing that America would not vote for that ticket. I really don’t see either of them being a VP on the other one’s ticket.

[Timeout]

You’re probably right. But I bet the party “elders” are putting feelers out. Hillary’s desperate.

[Gondring]

Hillary’s answer wasn’t powerful and warm—it was whiny.

Weak and weepy?

[Pining_4_TX]

Funny, I thought it was because she cheated. What about all the cars with the out-of-state license plates at the polling places?

Nothing the Clintons do is on the up and up.

[musicluvr]

I highly suspect that Hillary stole the NH primary. Check out this link, which tallies the percent of precincts that were counted by hand vs. Diebold voting machine: http://drunkardslamppost.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/diebold-and-new-hampshire/
Obama had a significant lead in the hand-counted precincts, and the margin is reversed in the Diebold precincts. The author of the site tries to write it off as “urban voters may like Hillary more than rural voters”. I don’t buy it - Rove’s article above suggests the complete opposite, that Hillary did better in rural areas while Obama did better in college towns. I don’t buy the whole crying thing as being what pushed her over the edge either, although I do believe that many Democratic voters are ignorant enough to vote for a candidate based on how they made them “feel”, rather than actually getting educated about the issues.
Now, I have no vested interest in either candidate winning, and I’m not sure who’s more defeatable by our Republican nominee, but I do care about our system of Democracy. Besides, the Democrats are always questioning the legitimacy of the 2004 and 2000 elections, and now the shoe’s on the other foot. Democrats can steal elections too - we should question these results.

[Havisham]

Right. And since when is crying for one’s self a virtue?