RK77

I don't know about this. I can't find anything that indicates that others have ended up in debt. Kerry and Gore had surpluses.

You have any examples?

Can't find an example of this either---tried to see if Bush helped McCain pay off debt in 2000 --- can't find it.

Are we sure this is not just another "conventional wisdom" thing the press has created?

Her husband commands that much annually in speaking fees. They could pay it off.

They had no business running up this much debt without a plan A and plan B for paying it off.

.

given the posts at all the Hillary sites I would not suggest that is a very good bet on the part of Obama.

Fortunately he is only---requesting.

Hey---where are all those big money donors who had the GALL to write Pelosi?

And maybe Sheila Jackson Lee and Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Geraldine Ferraro should all pick a corner in NYC (or where ever) and elevate the political prostitution they have been practicing to a cash exchange endeavor.

Wasn't it Ferraro who suggested that Obama should tolerate her racist remarks since she was SOOOOOOOO good at fundraising?

It is a damned INSULT to all women that these worthless wenches have to beg a MAN to bail them out!

Where are all those "history making" enthusiastic fruitcakes now?

RK77

Honestly----- at some point when your stomach is very settled---go read at the Hillary sites and see how they are looking at this!

They want to SUE the DNC to get the donations they made back-----I kid you not!

guest1234567

just butting in here, but Kerry and Gore has successful primary campaigns, and that isn't the same as HRC.

RK77

No problem----I just know that I can't find ANY example of any candidate ever needing to ask someone else to bail them out of campaign debt. Kerry and Gore had surpluses at the end of their primaries and WERE NOT asked to use that money OR to squander their big donor supporters attention or funds to bail out anyone!

Until I see otherwise I think it is a crock of shit that the Hillho press has made up and repeated until everyone is accepting it as some sort of fact!

Look---the RNC is a zillion bucks ahead of the DNC and Obama did NOT out raise McCain (EVERYONE here keeps seeming to forget that a GOOD PORTION of Obama's support was ANTI- Hillary. Everytime the witch said something else crazy people she reminded folks WHY they would rather skip a meal or two than have her in office--- and VOILA! Millions---overnight!).

Can we as a party REALLY afford to spend time financing Hillary's delusions? NO BODY can possibly be stupid enough to think that the sort of trashy support Hillary got gives a shit whether we compromise ourselves in the general election.

They are NOT going to UNIFY, HEAL or any other sort of bullshit just because we place ourselves at a financial disadvantage-----that is a RIDICULOUS assertion!

EvilMonkey

Actually I remember hearing Chuck Todd talk about this being done several times in past Primaries. I don't have any examples off hand but I have no doubt that he was telling the truth it's just a matter of election laws so he can't just give her money that he's already received but he can fund raise on her behalf.

There is still a lot of division unfortunately but the sooner we all get on the same page, the better. I understand supporters from both sides may not support this but both of the candidates sure are and as their supporters we should start taking their advice.

__________________
Barack Obama - Get the facts at BarackObamaWatch.com

RK77

Yes---and when Chuck Todd said it the second or the third time is when I started trying to find an example of it EVER occuring before. I have not found one. He has NOT responding to emails requesting examples (from myself or others).

Todd has been wrong at least 7 times that I know of in the primary season (which is NOTHING compared to others or for anyone who is relaying so much information).

Continuing to suggest their is "still a lot of division" presupposes:

1) Unity that has never to the best of my knowledge existed inside any party much less the democratic party.

2) Those who are NOT joining in with the majority would have been part of the party had both candiates been men in the first place.

3) There were no racists in the Democratic Party to begin with.

If we spend the next 4 months bemoaning the lack of "Unity" instead of working to elect Obama...........if we buy into the repuke "My way or the Highway" or "One Path to God" model then we will still be spinning our wheels long after the election!

Different people will need to find those whom they feel comfortable working with and associating with and do what they can to get Obama elected.

It is actually the way that things have gotten DONE since the country was founded! It is WHY the founding fathers codified tolerance instead of allegiance into our constitution.

Focusing and stressing over everyone not being best buddies and agreeing with everyone else is a waste of effort. There is room enough in America for people to share goals and NOT ideologies---- that is what makes us great!

As for doing what Obama asks (cause surely you know I could give a shit about what Hillary asks) --- I will say again---and likely NOT for the last time---Obama is NOT planning to try to dictate to us what we should or should not do. He is laying things out as he sees them.

He takes the cue of his supporters and you will note that in the ever so careful wording he has chosen. He KNOWS that a good chunk of his supporters will not contribute to him at all if a red cent goes to Hillary.

We don't "demand" that he not beg for her---but we are showing him that he could very well be chosing to drown with Hillary if he prioritorizes supporting her over raising money for the General Election.

All we have done---collectively and/or individually is let him know where we draw the line for ourselves. He can do with that what he choses. We are not Hillary people who will throw the election if we don't get our way. He knew when he did this he would NOT get much support on it.

guest1234567

Thomas Edsal said "...it is not uncommon for winning presidential campaigns to pick up some or all of a competitor's debts and obligations..."

Big Rewards Await Clinton If She Ends Campaign Now - Politics on The Huffington Post

And I can't find any examples either. But she has this option, which of course would immediately mark her as an incompetent boob and any chance of future office holding above dog catcher would end.

The campaign can declare bankruptcy.

What happens to Hillary Clinton's campaign debt when the primaries are over? - By Jacob Leibenluft - Slate Magazine

I also thought of this scenario. Some kind hearted individual or campaign might extend a loan to her campaign for which the enforcement of repayment might be lax, if you know what I mean. But I don't know if that's legal. I don't know how loans are handled in campaign financing.

TrueBlueAmerican

I say let her burn. No sense helping her out if shes going to run again.

Maybe.. just maybe id be willing to help her out if she renounced her citizenship and was placed in exile on an island off the coast.

guest1234567

If she does run again, she can legally carry over her debt to the next campaign.

bornright

Do you think McCain paid Huckabee's campaign debt? I think this must be just a Hillary Obama thing. If your fearless leader says pay her debt off then perhaps you should.