Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Last Week on Drugs | Flickr Photo of the Day »

Monday, January 28, 2008

Slog Poll: Clinton or Obama?

posted by on January 28 at 11:50 AM

Sorry John Edwards fans, but your guy is finished. Time for a new kind of Slog poll.

Who do you want to be the Democratic nominee?

RSS icon Comments

1

clinton is looking more and more like a bitch, and hillary isn't doing herself any favors either.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | January 28, 2008 11:52 AM
2

Uh oh. This won't make ECB very happy.

Posted by heywhatsit | January 28, 2008 11:54 AM
3

there are a ton of clinton supporters that aren't ECB, just for the record.

Posted by kim | January 28, 2008 11:58 AM
4

Ouch that is a landslide

Posted by vooodooo84 | January 28, 2008 12:02 PM
5

@3 - That's true. But there are people like my 60-year old in-laws (life-long republicans who live in the rural midwest) who are going to cross party lines if Obama gets the nod.

Posted by ed | January 28, 2008 12:03 PM
6

Woohoo! 17%! Go Hillary!

Posted by Mr. Poe | January 28, 2008 12:04 PM
7

I'll vote for Clinton over any of the Reoublicans, but I think Obama has the only chance to win.

Posted by elswinger | January 28, 2008 12:05 PM
8

Stop victimizing ECB by voting for Obama! Sheesh!

Posted by Ziggity | January 28, 2008 12:11 PM
9

Go to the caucuses Feb. 9th, Obama people, and bring all o your Obama-loving friends!

Posted by Jake | January 28, 2008 12:12 PM
10

Oh and here's the Web site to find your caucus location:

http://www.wa-democrats.org/caucusfinder

Sorry about the poor spelling above. Damn WWU computer lab keyboards.

Posted by Jake | January 28, 2008 12:15 PM
11

LOL, Ziggity.

I'm thinking if it's a Clinton/McCain race we're getting another GOP president. If it's Obama/McCain, we've got a hell of a shot.

Back to mourning the loss of Edwards for me.

Posted by Dianna | January 28, 2008 12:15 PM
12

Wow. Despite supporting Obama, I increasingly feel my annoying contrarian instincts now telling me to start fretting about the risks. What if he doesn't have what it takes? He's never faced a truly difficult election, has he? (Granted, neither of Hillary's opponents were exactly worthy adversaries either, but ... still.) And we're trying to avoid a Clinton, but Clinton had pretty Obama-ish qualities himself in 1992.

(I'm still caucusing for him.)

Posted by tsm | January 28, 2008 12:18 PM
13

This is very upsetting.

Posted by Amelia | January 28, 2008 12:18 PM
14

Edwards was a fine candidate who got marginalized by the Corporate MSM due to his attacks against corporate greed.

That being said I'm with @7

Posted by neo-realist | January 28, 2008 12:20 PM
15

I was going to suggest that everyone annoy ECB by voting for Obama, but it looks like everyone already had the same idea.

Posted by also | January 28, 2008 12:21 PM
16

@10 use the ones in The Communication Building, my favorite is room 314

Posted by vooodooo84 | January 28, 2008 12:21 PM
17

It's a bit odd to call Edwards out of it this early. I'd call it irresponsible if the Stranger were MSM rather than a mag for Seattle queers*.

"It's the delegates, stupid." And he's not out of it as yet, especially if the nat'l convention is brokered:

http://politicalinsider.com/2008/01/the_edwards_scenario.html

Posted by delegates much? | January 28, 2008 12:32 PM
18

Sorry, but South Carolina, a come-to-Jesus victory speech and three Kennedys (one of them sober) does not a presidential nomination make. See, it's like Bill wants to one-up the father-son succession phenom by securing a husband-wife succession. And who can blame him? getting into the Trivia books ain't easy. So if you have some eggs and a basket, get another basket.

Posted by BELMONT PLACE | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
19

This poll is sexist.

Posted by torrentprime | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
20

I look forward to seeing the crowds at the Fremont Public Library!

Try to get there early if you can - thanks!

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 12:45 PM
21

I AM CRYING HERE ON THE HILLARY HATE :( :( :(

Posted by N | January 28, 2008 12:46 PM
22

Yippee!

We get to pick from C.F.R. candidate A or B

Posted by Bald Face Lie | January 28, 2008 1:01 PM
23

Hillary hate? Where? Not in this meaningless poll. Obama's been leading the Slog polls since day one.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 1:03 PM
24

Sweet! I was vote number 666.

Posted by Matt from Denver | January 28, 2008 1:09 PM
25

@22,

I guess none of the Dem front-runners see the value in pandering to the conspiracy nutter constituency.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 1:11 PM
26

dear obama supporters-get an education and realize you are making the wrong decision for this country. we are more fucked than ever right now and obama is NOT the answer. he will not be able to unravel the horrible web that the current asshole has woven. it's just that simple. we need EXPERIENCE, not hope. hope ran out a long time ago.

Posted by movintobc | January 28, 2008 1:11 PM
27

@26

You seem to be forgetting the role the Clintonistas played in fucking this country in the first place. I still remember Bill saying that the 1st Amendment was too extreme. Fuck the Clintons.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 1:13 PM
28

@12: Are you suggesting that Hillary did?

At least I'd heard of Alan Keyes before he was shipped out to run against Obama.

Posted by K | January 28, 2008 1:18 PM
29

#26 is a quintessential hillary supporter.

Posted by Judith | January 28, 2008 1:19 PM
30

#26 is everything i know and love about hillary supporters. behold.

Posted by Judith | January 28, 2008 1:20 PM
31

Edwards.

If he drops out? Probably Obama, though it's entirely a stylistic choice. If either Clinton or Obama runs the government on the substance of what they're campaigning on, we're fucked. We need a new FDR, not Bill Clinton 2.0. I'm sorry, but Obama's just another version of BC 2.0 so far, and the first version wasn't worth an upgrade.

Posted by Cascadian | January 28, 2008 1:23 PM
32

@25, all

Clinton advisors = CFR members
Madeleine Albright, “Sandy” Berger, Lee Feinstein, Leslie Gelb, Richard Holbrooke

Obama Advisors = CFR members
Richard Clarke, Jeffrey Bader, Gregory Craig, Ivo Daalder, Richard Danzig

Posted by Bald Face Lie | January 28, 2008 1:24 PM
33

Edwards.

Posted by ivan | January 28, 2008 1:25 PM
34

@32

And?

Do you even know what the CFR is? I'll give you a hint by telling you what it's not: a supar-sekrit plot to control you via fluoridation.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 1:28 PM
35

Well, actually, AMB, it kind of is. The Committee on Foreign Relations is part of the controlling levers of our elitist society, and most of the powerful are directly connected to it.

Their journals a nice read if you're into that kind of thing, even if they're usually wrong in retrospect.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 1:31 PM
36

Oh God, wait until the Republicans get ahold of Sandy Berger again. And you think Obama has negatives. Albright and Holbrooke are good, though. To be honest, I don't know Obama's guys, except Clarke, who is an impressive name.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 1:32 PM
37

This whole thing is rigged. I'm going to start cheating seeing how Anthony is letting someone else get away with it.

I guess I'll be the better man, like all HRC supporters, and just let it be.

Posted by Mr. Poe | January 28, 2008 1:36 PM
38

@35

I kind of like the idea that people in the cabinet be informed about stuff going on in the world. It's a lot better than the rootinest, tootinest cowboy douchebaggery we've had for the last 8 years.

The people who are most critical of the CFR are people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job, that the UN exists to enslave us all, and that global warming is a liberal hoax.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 1:39 PM
39

count me in for edwards, too.

Posted by feb 9th caucusser | January 28, 2008 1:41 PM
40

I'm in for Edwards, too. (You bunch of MSM-led sheep!)

Posted by cracked | January 28, 2008 1:55 PM
41

I like Hillary, I really do. Wherever there's a policy difference between her and Obama, I always find I agree with hers. Maybe because she seems to have a much better grasp of the specific, where as Obama seems more to be about empty rhetoric. That said, Hillary would be a disaster in the general. The GOP hate her - the left of her own party hate her. So, I'm hoping for Obama.

Posted by 4dSwissCheese | January 28, 2008 2:02 PM
42

Why no button for "Why, I'd be happy with either one"

Because that's what I'd vote. The pool of candidates is much better than 2004.

Posted by catalina vel-duray | January 28, 2008 2:05 PM
43

You do realize that Edwards reads CFR journals for fun, right?

No, I am NOT joking.

(silly silly Americans who don't understand how their political system "functions")

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 2:14 PM
44

@43

Costco has a pretty good deal on Reynolds Wrap. I think you get like 500 sq. ft. of it for the same price as 250 at the supermarket.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 2:22 PM
45

@26, or "Obama has no experience", is operating on sound bites.

Obama has more than 10 years' experience in the clusterfuck that is modern politics. That's a pretty long time-- longer than Hillary's held any office, if you don't count "Bill's wife". Which you shouldn't. Before that, Obama was a community leader, an organizer, a civil rights lawyer. He has a prestigious education and a strong grasp on what can be done that won't alienate half the country (or the rest of the world) and he's a great orator. A president isn't much else.

If he was more "experienced", or more deeply involved in the political machine, he'd likely be a divisive, accusatory, conniving candidate. I'd rather he bring something different to the table.

Posted by Lemma | January 28, 2008 2:23 PM
46

Council, not Committee. Once again Will is confused.

It's an organization of powerful people. God forbid powerful people should talk to each other or anything.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 2:48 PM
47

@25 acknowledging CFR advised candidates = "nutter"
@38 I like CFR advised candidates

I will buy you that COSTCO reynolds wrap if you name the CFR advisors/members in the current administration.

The Council on Foreign Relations write the papers that have dictated much of American policy for the last 60 years.

Expect much of the same.


Posted by Bald Face Lie | January 28, 2008 2:52 PM
48

Edwards

Posted by Will/HA | January 28, 2008 2:55 PM
49

Still for Edwards. It is my vote. Despite whatever the Stranger staff may think.
"Simplifying" the contest is something I'd expect from Fox. What's next a colorful USA Today graph of useless trivia on the cover?

Posted by Zander | January 28, 2008 2:55 PM
50

Edwards is the Democratic answer to Ron Paul: passionate supporters, no chance of winning the nomination, extremist views that are hard to take seriously but sure mobilize some of the internets.

It's not going to happen. He may, possibly, be a power broker at the convention. Neither the main nor his policies will see the White House.

Posted by also | January 28, 2008 3:22 PM
51

Nader

Posted by Mahtli69 | January 28, 2008 3:32 PM
52

how did we get down to the the two most least experienced candidates?

Posted by Cale | January 28, 2008 4:27 PM
53

@52 - wrong post - you want the GOP poll thread.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 5:13 PM
54

Edwards

Of course he has no chance at president ... however a sizable block of delegates can have great influence in the party. Look at how much Dean has changed the party(much for the better IMHO) after the MSM declared him dead.

Posted by anna | January 28, 2008 7:44 PM
55

I missed the vote. Go Obama!

Posted by Deacon Seattle | January 28, 2008 11:10 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).