digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Hillary Clinton $7.6 MILLION IN DEBT at end of Jan.!

politico.com — She ends January with $7.6 million in debt; rival's campaign finances continued to be robust.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • or3n, on 02/21/2008, -12/+111It's only a matter of time before she throws in the towel.
    • Nougat, on 02/21/2008, -4/+29And there's only one person who needs to be aware of this, and she's apparently not.
    • robbob, on 02/21/2008, -3/+32Her ego won't allow it
      • hangtown2004, on 02/22/2008, -2/+1You mean Bills ego wont allow it!
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/21/2008, -4/+6I think you underestimate the Clinton Ego. you'll see how much a democrat really cares about counting the vote if she takes it all the way to the convention.
      • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -4/+3republicans care about votes too. ask florida
        • NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1yeah, ask Gore who only cared about the vote counting in 3 counties, and didn't seem to mind the recount tally changing every time as long as it was in his favor. Ask the democratic party who sued Ralph Nader all over to hell and back to keep him out of the '04 election.
    • skinkaid, on 02/21/2008, -3/+41She can't afford a towel
    • Smuikas, on 02/21/2008, -3/+16It's not just that she's running out of money. Her campaign's financial situation mirrors many american's financial situations.

      If our government is in debt, and our people are in debt, do we really want a leader whose own campaign she can't keep out of debt?

      It shows a great deal about her fiscal responsibility.
      • TheCount, on 02/22/2008, -1/+3I'm not pro-Hillary in the slightest, but this post has all the makings of political hyperbole. You think she, or any president, sits down Sunday nights with a glass of whiskey and tries to balance the budget and fix the economy with a #2 pencil and a calculator? The fact that her campaign is in debt has more to do with the fact that she is completely over matched by Obama's charisma and ability to speak to the people than anything else.
    • moush, on 02/22/2008, -3/+1Yes, 7 monthes in the general election.
    • dreamflows, on 02/22/2008, -4/+3Either way it's a steep climb for the Clintons. The math isn't there for her to win.
      http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Obama_Clinton_Hi ...
      • MacEnvy, on 02/22/2008, -3/+1Stop it! You were spamming your own submissions yesterday too. And this time, it's a damn dupe anyway - that was on the front page this week already. Knock it off, douchebag.
    • LeeSoong, on 02/22/2008, -4/+5The McCain campaign has also borrowed a huge sum of money, according to the Wall Street Journal.

      Funny how all these 'popular' candidates are all deep in debt - but Ron Paul is still sitting on a cash reserve.

      • mOdQuArK, on 02/22/2008, -1/+2Unfortunately, Romney could step back in at any time, and he has no problems with cash.
    • kennster12, on 02/22/2008, -0/+4So, if this is how she runs (or ruins) her own campaign.... How devastating would it be if she were elected president...... scary
    • DeFex, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1i hope she remembered to bring one..
      • reiner15, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1she had her nice secret service guy give it to someone sweaty in the audience.
    • ThinkAwake, on 02/22/2008, -2/+1http://knowbeforeyouvote.com/
    • insecuregirl, on 02/22/2008, -9/+0Hillary won in states that have intelligent people...vis-a-vis calif and NY...
      Let other stupid states vote for obama.. Go hillary 2008!
      • ch33sehead, on 02/22/2008, -0/+6Read the exit polls. All the intelligent people in those states voted for Obama. All the apathetic and just-want-a-woman-president people voted for Hillary.
      • adrenaline33, on 02/22/2008, -0/+4Obama has consistently dominated her among college graduates, idiot.
        • MacEnvy, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Hey, take it easy on her. She's clearly an "insecuregirl".
    • woohalladoobop, on 02/22/2008, -6/+1Imagine if America was $7.6 million in debt, we'd be *****. That's what will happen if Hillary becomes president.
    • zardoz73, on 02/22/2008, -0/+2If she loses Texas and Ohio on March 4th, she'll quit. If she wins both of them, she'll probably stay in but it'll be tough for her to win. If she wins one and Obama wins one, she'll probably stay in.

      March 4th is the day. The Democrat bigwigs do NOT want Hillary and Obama still competing come convention time this summer.
    • ShokDoktor, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1She's Histllory!
    • diskit, on 02/22/2008, -0/+2Why would she quit when she can easily rig the election/primaries?
  • kschramm, on 02/21/2008, -8/+182"Hillary Clinton ended January with $7.6 million in debt – not including the $5 million personal loan she gave to her campaign in the run-up to the critical Super Tuesday elections, according to financial reports released Wednesday."

    So she's really $12.6M in debt. Yikes!

    • or3n, on 02/21/2008, -19/+4actually I think she was able to pay her campaign back for that loan with funds raised later
      • Gabberwok, on 02/21/2008, -5/+2She hasn't paid it back fully yet...
      • greenlight2001, on 02/21/2008, -0/+23She didn't borrow money FROM her campaign, she loaned money TO her campaign.
    • listrophy, on 02/21/2008, -2/+100but she has a "solution" for the nation's debt problems?
      • Karen07, on 02/22/2008, -12/+1The only reason Obama has the money is because he's gotten mega bucks from Big Oprah - and of course she's going to back Obama - she'd back OJ Simpson if they put him on the ticket too! That shows the difference between whites and blacks and shows that it's not the whites who are racist - it's the blacks - they'd back their own no matter who they were - the whites will vote either way they think is the best! Beginning to see my point?
        • dragonrice, on 02/22/2008, -0/+5no
        • Fuzzyslippers, on 02/22/2008, -0/+7That has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. I can't help but laugh at how narrow minded you are. To say that Oprah speaks for all blacks would be incredibly false.
        • reiner15, on 02/22/2008, -0/+6Just because she is Oprah doesn't mean she can give more to his campaign than anyone else.
        • carl0ski, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1You sick girl,

          Hilary Clinton is an example of American democracy, she is trying to buy her way into office. Obama has some genuine supporters.

          Hilary claims she can manage the economy, however she can't even maintain the budget for herself.
          She also plays the feminist card religiously trying to tug at the hearts of women.

          Why aren't there hordes of successful women pooring money into Clintons campaign?

          Her bank balance is a pretty good example why.
    • aramova, on 02/22/2008, -0/+3Just have her husband sell some more of America's nuclear secrets to the Chinese.
  • hel76, on 02/21/2008, -8/+393is this how Hillary Clinton manages a budget? Scary...
    • CountryTime, on 02/21/2008, -4/+35just imagine what would happen if she had unlimited funds at her disposal as president.
      • sparql, on 02/21/2008, -4/+24She'd probably blow it all on shoes and legwarmers to hide her cankles.
      • carrett, on 02/21/2008, -1/+8Actually Congress has the power of the purse, not the executive branch.
        • iainc, on 02/21/2008, -2/+1It's a bloody goody job they do if Hell freezes over and she gets the nomination.
        • kreneskyp, on 02/22/2008, -1/+9that was before W took office. now its congress' job to just rubber stamp whatever the president asks for.
        • shakbhaji, on 02/22/2008, -0/+2Just the House, not all of Congress.
        • carl0ski, on 02/22/2008, -0/+3Explain George W. Bush 's national deficit
      • CaptainTater, on 02/22/2008, -1/+1I think that was his point.
        • CountryTime, on 02/23/2008, -0/+1yeah i was gonna say the same thing, but he beat me to it. i had to make it seem like more than one person cared about it. but thanks for the input.
    • Enfenestrate, on 02/21/2008, -1/+25Same way the federal government manages a budget. She's using the campaign as a warm-up for the real thing.
      • ricepicker4000, on 02/21/2008, -1/+10I'm not a huge Ron Paul fan, i know lol, booo! But he is the only person who addresses the national debt and takes it seriously
    • soot, on 02/21/2008, -2/+3B-b-but Obama needs someone to help organize his papers for him!!1
    • inverselogic, on 02/21/2008, -1/+5Yes we will! Yes we will! .... what a joke..
    • d03boy, on 02/21/2008, -15/+1Obama would have done the same had he not received 121312 donations. Don't be all high and mighty
      • piratehead, on 02/22/2008, -0/+14Good argument - "Obama would be in debt too, if he didn't have income."
    • p51d007, on 02/22/2008, -1/+1Hey.......12million? No problem! With what Bill is pulling down for "speaking" engagements, he'll have that paid off in no time LOL.
    • dn11, on 02/22/2008, -0/+3the NYT has an even more detailed and scathing analysis of her spending:
      “The problem is she ran a campaign like they were staying at the Ritz-Carlton,” Mr. Trippi said. “Everything was the best. The most expensive draping at events. The biggest charter. It was like, ‘We’re going to show you how presidential we are by making our events look presidential.
      For instance, during the week before the Jan. 19 caucuses in Nevada, the Clinton campaign spent more than $25,000 for rooms at the Bellagio in Las Vegas; nearly $5,000 was spent at the Four Seasons in Las Vegas that week. Some staff members also stayed at Planet Hollywood nearby."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22cl ...
    • Karen07, on 02/22/2008, -6/+0Are you people that clueless? Duh - I don't think Hillary is balancing her own checkbook - there are campaign managers for that! Also, she doesn't have Oprah in her back pocket like Obama does! I think he's doing her!
      • joot2112, on 02/22/2008, -0/+4Guess what? Hillary picked the campaign managers, just like a president picks cabinet members. Hillary just solicited 100,000 from a handful of donors, while Obama has solicited a handful from 500,000 donors. That is the difference between them. It has nothing to do with Oprah.
  • entrophize, on 02/21/2008, -8/+77And I thought *I* had credit problems.
  • AtHomeBoy2000, on 02/21/2008, -4/+54So, she was in debt 7.6 and LOANED (not gave) her campaign 5 million... that makes her 15 million raised in the first 15 days in February even more interesting. Basically, she netted $2.4 million the first half of February.
  • Maurina, on 02/21/2008, -5/+278Bill needs to take away her credit cards.
    • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -2/+48but she needs pant suits!
      • skinkaid, on 02/21/2008, -0/+8Polyester doesn't grow on trees ya know!
      • rhabd0mancer, on 02/21/2008, -1/+7She needs to ditch the hideous blue pantsuit she wore the other day.

        She looked like a blueberry. An angry, bitter blueberry.
      • Jimmeeee, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1I lol'd
    • digjam, on 02/21/2008, -1/+1But she needs teeth whitener to show them off !
    • kreneskyp, on 02/22/2008, -0/+10kobe had to buy his wife a multimillion dollar necklace. bill has to buy hillary a presidency.
  • yodaj007, on 02/21/2008, -22/+5She should punish her accountants and tax advisers, sell of her flying monkeys with fez hats, cease funding her gundam research programs, and file bankruptcy Chapter Uber wherein she gets bailed out by the Federal Reserve. I also suggest she stop the extensive plastic surgeries... come on, we all know it's you, Michael Jackson.
    • NSResponder, on 02/21/2008, -2/+10She can't be Michael Jackson. Michael Jackson likes boys.

      -jcr
    • falese, on 02/21/2008, -1/+0craziest. comment. ever.
  • wtfpwned98, on 02/21/2008, -4/+32She has spent $33 million dollars on political consultants. The problem is that democrats just aren't crazy about her, or the image of her being created by consultants. Just imagine how much money she'll need to win a general election!!
    http://www.digg.com/political_opinion/The_Politico ...
    • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -1/+5how much has she spent on pant suits?
    • dreicher, on 02/21/2008, -4/+8"Just imagine how much money she'll need to win a general election!!"

      Due respect...I think anyone with a pulse and a (D) by their name could beat John McCain with the cash in their pocket.
      • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -0/+13Remember where that attitude got us in 2004.
        • buzzkilled, on 02/22/2008, -0/+2John Kerry didn't have a pulse unfortunately =(
      • TheJokerV, on 02/22/2008, -0/+7I really think you are underestimating public stupidity.
  • widgetmaker, on 02/21/2008, -5/+75The Democrats might actually get this race right for once..
    • GhostyBoy, on 02/21/2008, -0/+21Except for Hillary can still screw it up. She is going down like a sore loser and spewing all kinds venom into the democratic party. A divided party is much easier to defeat. She's carrying on like a brat and actually hurting her party's chances.

      Then again, I don't really think she cares if the democrats win, only if she does.
  • NaziHatinChimp, on 02/21/2008, -20/+11The question is how is she going to make this money back. I don't think candidates should be able to use there own money and heres why. Let's say I have 40 mill and I spend it on my campaign. I barely win. So 4 years later it would make sense that I would need another 40 mill. Where am I going to get this? I would have to make it during my presidency which means I am probably up to some shady deals. Either that or I can make a deal and give someone a ton of money knowing they will run, and they can use that money when they do.
    • mwolfzorn, on 02/21/2008, -1/+11Hopefully in 4 years the public approves of the direction you are taking the country and you don't need to have a huge spending war to get re-elected.
    • Donboy2k, on 02/21/2008, -5/+2can someone please explain why this is getting dug down? I had the same question myself. These candidates are sinking in tons of money into their campaigns. When do they get it back? They sure aren't going to make it back on a president's salary. My feeling is they are going to make it back using the Dick Cheney method where you put a company to which you're heavily invested to work fixing a broken country after you deply troops there to wreck it up.
      • mntalkase, on 02/21/2008, -0/+9This is getting dugg down because the logic is faulty... it completely ignores the power of incumbency. Yes, someone may need to spend $40 million of their own money to get elected. But once they are elected, it becomes a whole lot easier to raise money for a re-election campaign. People are much more willing to drop thousands of dollars on a re-election campaign of a sitting president than a campaign of a presidential hopeful that has to go through all the primaries and such.
      • mntalkase, on 02/21/2008, -0/+9Also, remember that in Presidential campaign politics... it's never really about "getting your money back". It's about winning the Presidency of the United States. Mike Bloomberg is about to drop a quarter of a billion dollars for a shot at it. The presidency is such an institution... there's no price that can be assessed to it. You want to become President, just because. Not because it can make you money.
    • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -0/+6Bill Clinton easily makes $5-10 million a year just in speaking fees at $100,000+ a pop. Add in consulting fees and book deals and we're talking about serious money. I'd rather have a politician investing their own money than taking money from lobbyists and PACs.
      • draftingtableX, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. While you're correct, I think the tremendous stupidity of those kinds of arrangements escape most reasonable people - so they wonder.
  • RobotMojo, on 02/21/2008, -13/+4YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN! YES .... we ....... ahem.
  • jlee2081, on 02/21/2008, -3/+170It's ok Hill -- Obama's plan will make sure your health care is subsidized
  • thelock65, on 02/21/2008, -15/+5bitch
  • mal1964, on 02/21/2008, -8/+3"If you tear it down,They will come"
  • Tex, on 07/28/2008, -12/+6"Yes we will!"
  • megapeg, on 02/21/2008, -7/+30That's because she sucks.
    • GoneGreen, on 02/21/2008, -1/+5well the evidence on that little blue dress disproves she sucks ^^
      • KSUdesigner, on 02/21/2008, -1/+6No, that just disproves that she swallows.
        • Memitim, on 02/22/2008, -0/+2Why, did she spit it on Monica? And why does that thought turn me off instead of on, like it normally would with other women?
      • jcalex, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Come on! Look at the bright side.That`s one thing men will not have to worry about.
    • rficwizard, on 02/21/2008, -0/+15Then why did Bill need Monica?
  • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -28/+3So what the submitter is saying is that if Obama wins, it is because he has more money.
    • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -4/+6nothing beats limbaugh logic
      • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -15/+2Nothing beats your logic either. Crystal meth logic, I think they call it.
    • bthug7, on 02/21/2008, -4/+5His money comes from supporters, her money comes from supporters. He has more money, she has less money. --->He is more popular and should win in a democracy.
      • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -4/+6Unless of course his supporters have more disposable income than hers.
        Money shouldn't have a bearing on election results.
        • bthug7, on 02/21/2008, -0/+4How should campaigns be funded then? I don't think Hilary or Barack hour on NPR would spark national interest.
        • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -3/+1Well I don't know, but perhaps if campaigns could be funded to an equal extent from the public purse, or some other system which removes the magnitude of cash from the equation. It's preposterous that the more a candidate has, the better chance they have of winning. Politics isn't a business; it's about policies.
        • bthug7, on 02/21/2008, -1/+6When a candidate with money is doing well it's a corrupt system and when a candidate is doing well with little money it's a miracle (McCain v. Romney). There is less of a correlation between money and victory than people think. I hope not to many people say, "well I heard the Obama commercial 20 times and the Hilary commercial 5, I guess I better vote for Obama." Quality beats quantity, quality and quantity together are unstoppable, Hilary has neither, Barack has both.
        • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -0/+9Doubtful. The average donation from Hillary supporters is WAY higher than Obama's. In fact a large portion of Hillary's supporters have already given the maximum contribution of $2,300--one of her fund raising problems.
      • ronaldinho, on 02/22/2008, -1/+1Your logic is somewhat correct, but money winning a presidency is not something I want either. I get what you are saying though, and you are right in a sense. Obama is getting more money because he has more supporters, yes, more people are donating to him than Hillary. But Obama is winning because he's simply the better candidate, and thankfully people are starting to realize that
  • borez, on 02/21/2008, -6/+15Quit while your ahead.

    No..wait
  • robbob, on 02/21/2008, -7/+29...Too bad she isn't Kerry's wife.
    --"Da Bitch ownes Ketchup!"
  • mlrigsby, on 02/21/2008, -3/+66Hopefully this comes up in the debate. Clinton keeps talking about results vs. rhetoric, but has proven to be utterly incompetent in planning and running a campaign. Meanwhile, Obama's campaign seems to run like a well-oiled machine. Clinton expects us to believe she can run the country when she is dramatically failing this first test?
    • theDunedan, on 02/21/2008, -1/+6I volunteered for the campaign in Florence, SC on the day of that primary. There were about 200 or so volunteers coming in and out of that office. The sophistication of Obama's organization in Florence and Darlington (under Florence in the hierarchy) impressed me quite a lot.
      But here's the thing. We drove past Hillary's headquarters in Florence which was on the same street. I am sure there were people in there, but we could not see them just driving by. It looked like a closed building except for the Hillary sign out front. My point? mlrigsby, I concur with your comment based on my own experience in South Carolina. I figured she was not organized there in SC because her organziation was spotty and I encountered a low spot. But now I am starting to suspect that she just does not administrate things very well, at least not when compared to Obama.
    • Xanadude, on 02/22/2008, -1/+4Bush (and Rove) ran masterfully orchestrated campaigns in 2000 and 2004 - they are practically legendary. That doesn't make Bush a good President. Campaigning and governing are not the same.
      • copyland, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1not to mention that Bush and Rove got none of their major agendas thru, except tax cuts, an easy sell. Campaigning was the ONLY thing these guys are good at.
        • kreneskyp, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Bush also is as partisan as they come. He treated the democrats like second class citizens and they went after everything he tried to accomplish.
          Hillary would face the same thing. Look at her record of bills, she rarely had sponsors for the few bills she proposed. For some reason she was unable to work with people to get support for what she was doing. Obama on the other hand has proven he can work with people on both sides of the isle. The key to change is bipartisanship, and not the bipartisanship that just means buying people with earmarked pork.
  • GoneGreen, on 02/21/2008, -14/+8Get rich or die trying... hopefully she will just die.
    • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -4/+4What a *****.
    • booshack, on 02/21/2008, -0/+4I don't understand why GoneGreen is getting buried. Diggers are weird, like the guy bashing mac users who suddenly got +500, only this time people are burying an obvious digg instead of the other way around Oo
    • Tebixan, on 02/22/2008, -0/+3Because diggers are not psycopaths. We want Obama to be president, that doesn't mean we want Hillary to die.
      The guy who made the joke about Mac users in the other thread was trying to be funny. Hopefully this guy is too, but it's not a very good joke.
      Plus, the "get rich or die trying" line is kinda lame. Everything lame gets dugg down no matter what the point of the comment was.
      • booshack, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Yeah but that's the whole point.. That sounds way too complicated and thought through and un-kneejerk for average diggg. Argh i give up
    • BiafranMafia, on 02/22/2008, -1/+150 cent supports hillary clinton
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqELIg-gWXw
  • GreatSunJester, on 02/21/2008, -5/+11No biggy -- if she charges $50,000 per weekend for the Lincoln bedroom she can pay that off in two years and turn a tidy profit for the remainder of her reign.
    • underburn, on 02/22/2008, -2/+2in order to do that, she has to win the race. DUMBASS.
    • Xanadude, on 02/22/2008, -2/+1Yeah, Tony Rezko could stay there.

      Oh, wait...
    • shawnanigans, on 02/22/2008, -0/+150,000 x 104 = > 7,600,000?
      • joot2112, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1times 2 days -- er, nights -- in a weekend.
  • Smeed, on 02/21/2008, -3/+4But think of all the shoes!
  • iPwn, on 02/21/2008, -5/+13Obama ftw
  • NSResponder, on 02/21/2008, -8/+45Ding dong, the witch is broke.

    -jcr
    • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -1/+21I was going to digg you up, but your signature with all your comments is annoying. Please stop doing that.
      • SlimFastForYou, on 02/22/2008, -3/+2I was going to digg you up, but your face with all your comments is annoying. Please stop that.
      • NSResponder, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1What's it to you?

        -jcr
  • vermax, on 02/21/2008, -1/+24funny, she's been hoarding money any way she can all these years from whatever shady graft and conniving lie-cheat-steal she could find, ***** over anybody it takes, and now she's pissed it all away on this wild crushing failure. FUNNY!! guess she better hurry and find some more bribes. she's like a cornered badger at this point, really want her to throw in the towel but there's no way she isn't going to try every last sneaky desperate trick she can think of right up until her final rancid gasp. I do hope that final puke makes it to youtube.
    • Xanadude, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Whom has she ***** over for money, exactly?
    • vbullinger, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Damn, you almost stole the words from my mouth, vermax, I was going to say the same thing.

      She'll just pull another Whitewater type thing. Don't cry for Hitlery.

      And if you don't let her make her money back, you might end up on the Clinton body count: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-610788503 ...
  • bthug7, on 02/21/2008, -3/+29Watch the debate tonight everyone. I hope Barack goes for the throat instead of going easy on her to protect his image like last time.
    • stellarceltic, on 02/21/2008, -2/+3I'm reminded of that scene from the latest Rambo movie...
      • jspania, on 02/21/2008, -3/+0dugg down for watching the latest Rambo movie.... that movie sucked almost as much as meet the spartans!
        • stellarceltic, on 02/21/2008, -1/+1It's called a trailer, son. You think I would pay to see that *****?
          • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -1/+1you certainly implied so
          • nmckinlay, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1"from the latest Rambo movie..." I suspect if he had actually seen it, or wanted to imply that, he would've at least known the proper name. Dugg down for being ignorant.
    • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -0/+7he can also just hang back and let her do herself in
    • theDunedan, on 02/21/2008, -1/+7Haven't you noticed, he is the consumate gentleman when he is left alone. But start shooting him in the back, and he turns and stands up to it. Expect to see some more of that standing up to it tonight.
      I relish the thought.
    • iainc, on 02/21/2008, -2/+2***** yeah!
  • fredricko, on 02/21/2008, -3/+9It really raises a red flag for me when someone is that 'ambitious.' It's the same reason I detest Mitt Romney. Sure, it is their money and they can do what they want with it but can you really trust someone that goes to such lengths to become president?
    • subliminalurge, on 02/21/2008, -0/+8Like they say, anyone who actually "wants" to be president should automatically be disqualified from holding the position.
    • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -2/+2"but can you really trust someone that goes to such lengths to become president?"

      As opposed to the easy way of raising hundreds of millions of dollars for a campaign? I respect somebody willing to put their money where their mouth is.

      /still can't stand Hillary
    • Tebixan, on 02/22/2008, -0/+4The day Romney dropped out I felt a bit of pride as an American. We didn't let someone buy the presidency, no matter how hard they tried. In fact, I felt almost as good as when Guiliani dropped out.
      • Memitim, on 02/22/2008, -1/+2Yeah, the day when the American people weren't terrorized into choosing their next president. Again.
  • nexmachina, on 02/21/2008, -9/+1BLAH BLAH BLAH
  • barnett03, on 02/21/2008, -1/+9She should quit while she is behind in both the polls and financially.
  • yikiad, on 02/21/2008, -1/+2Yay!
  • DangerCollie, on 02/21/2008, -1/+22Her Texas campaign is in disarray, she's short on cash, momentum has shifted to Obama. The best thing she could do for the party is bow out gracefully. But her staff are some of the most arrogant people on the Beltway, so there's no way she'll quit.
  • swellchaser, on 02/21/2008, -2/+5Mo Money, Mo Problems!
  • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -12/+3Has anyone else noticed that as soon as the Ron Paul spam stopped, the Barack Obama spam began. It wouldn't be the same people would it? Naaaa, course it wouldn't.

    :)

    Many a true word spoken in jest :)
    • TheG2, on 02/21/2008, -0/+9Has anyone else noticed how much YOU'VE spammed this thread? I sure have...now who has the agenda?
      • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -7/+1I do have an agenda. It's to point out that:
        "Has anyone else noticed that as soon as the Ron Paul spam stopped, the Barack Obama spam began. It wouldn't be the same people would it? Naaaa, course it wouldn't.

        :)

        Many a true word spoken in jest :)"

        as I wrote above.

    • nblsavage, on 02/21/2008, -1/+5Um, no it isn't The Paulites are almost diametrically opposed to Obama.
      • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -1/+1It's funny though isn't it that as one spam stops, another starts. A casual observer might think that it was the same people or something.
        • nblsavage, on 02/21/2008, -1/+2I think it's as simple as a combination of Obama becoming the front-runner and the new digg algorithm slowing down the Paul spam.
    • kfed2, on 02/21/2008, -1/+2ABM is a socialist, Paul is a constitutionalist. The only thing they both agree on is leaving Iraq.
    • GhostyBoy, on 02/21/2008, -1/+2The Paul spam was severely weakened as soon as he lost the Iowa caucus. I like Paul, but there is definitely a certain amount of "shut the hell up" that you have to eat when your dude loses.

      On the digg article of Obama's Iowa victory there were comments from Obama supporters like "Thank god, it felt like I was the only one here." To be honest, many Paul supporters were being dicks to Obama supporters.

      I'm not about to jump on the Obama bandwagon just yet, because he IS going to be the President, and I don't want to be even partly responsible just IN CASE he screws it up.
    • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -2/+3Ron Paul had a small but extremely dedicated following. Obama has a broad group of supporters. I won't speak for anybody else but I've been an Obama fan for years, and I've been vocal about it ever since things started getting geared up for primaries. Feel free to dismiss all of Obama's supporters as mindless drones, but you'll be making a big mistake.
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/21/2008, -5/+5And that's why ladies and gentlemen, a president should be sure to sell at least 500 pardons, not just 140.
  • cabooglio2, on 02/21/2008, -8/+14Obama got $100 from me... so far.

    ... did you guys know that every time you think about donating to Obama, but fail to do so, a puppy cries itself to death? Save The Puppies! Donate!
    • shredswithpiks, on 02/21/2008, -3/+10Save the puppies: don't even think about donating to Obama
    • gsadamb, on 02/21/2008, -0/+5I donated another $100 today. $250 total so far. :)
    • GhengisKhan, on 02/22/2008, -2/+1I laugh my ass off AT people who donate to politicians. Keep it up pinhead.
    • joot2112, on 02/22/2008, -0/+4I donated because of this thought: how much would I PAY to see Obama beat Clinton?
  • nibbers, on 02/21/2008, -9/+4Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas.( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)

    Sound familiar?
    • poidh, on 02/21/2008, -3/+2It sounds very familiar in the echochamber which is Digg.
    • nblsavage, on 02/21/2008, -3/+2Yeah, the Ron Paul crowd.
    • gypsi, on 02/21/2008, -0/+6church?
    • theDunedan, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1I dugg you up one because it is so important that we all be aware of this important phenomena, groupthink. I only regret that you avoided conflict by not telling us what the heck you are referring to.
  • soot, on 02/21/2008, -0/+16Honestly, she should just concede and drop out today. She's already millions in the red, and Obama is out-raising her three-fold in small online contributions. He's won twenty-five out of the thirty-six state contests so far, while she's only won eleven. He won over sixty-five percent of the popular vote from Democrats abroad, while she scraped thirty-five. Most Democrats have already decided on their candidate, and they're excited about him.

    If she stays in this race through March and all the way to the convention, the only thing it will serve to do is divert campaign time and resources away from the general election.
    • runCMD, on 02/22/2008, -2/+2Except that logic doesn't work for those of us that believe she is the better candidate. I stand by her and raise you another hundred. : )
      • MJDub, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1I'm curious as to what makes her the better candidate.
  • RRJackson, on 02/21/2008, -19/+3The audacity of hype
    Just what else has Obama wrought?
    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, February 15, 2008

    WASHINGTON - There’s no better path to success than getting people to buy a free commodity. Like the genius who figured out how to get people to pay for water: bottle it (Aquafina was revealed to be nothing more than reprocessed tap water) and charge more than they pay for gasoline. Or consider how Google found a way to sell dictionary nouns - boat, shoe, clock - by charging advertisers zillions to be listed whenever the word is searched.

    And now, in the most amazing trick of all, a silver-tongued freshman senator has found a way to sell hope. To get it, you need only give him your vote. Barack Obama is getting millions.

    This kind of sale is hardly new. Organized religion has been offering a similar commodity - salvation - for millennia. Which is why the Obama campaign has the feel of a religious revival.

    “We are the hope of the future,” sayeth Obama. We can “remake this world as it should be.” Believe in me and I shall redeem not just you but your country - nay, we can become “a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world and make this time different than all the rest.”

    And believe they do. After eight straight victories - and two more (Hawaii and Wisconsin) almost certain to follow - Obama is near to rendering moot all the post-Super Tuesday fretting about a deadlocked convention with unelected superdelegates deciding the nominee. Unless Hillary Clinton can somehow do in Ohio and Texas on March 4 what Rudy Giuliani proved is almost impossible to do - maintain a big-state firewall after an unrelenting string of smaller defeats - the superdelegates will flock to Obama. Hope will have carried the day.

    Interestingly, Obama has been able to win these electoral victories and dazzle crowds in one new jurisdiction after another, even as his mesmeric power has begun to arouse skepticism and misgivings among the media.

    ABC’s Jake Tapper notes the “Helter-Skelter cultish qualities” of “Obama worshipers,” what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls “the Cult of Obama.” Obama’s Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience - to such rhetorical nonsense as “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek.”

    That was too much for Time’s Joe Klein. “The message is becoming dangerously self-referential,” he wrote. “The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is.”

    You might dismiss The New York Times [NYT]’ Paul Krugman’s complaint that “the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality” as hyperbole. Until you hear Chris Matthews, who no longer has the excuse of youth, react to Obama’s Potomac primary victory speech with “My, I felt this thrill going up my leg.” When his MSNBC co-hosts tried to bail him out, he refused to recant. Not surprising for an acolyte who said, “This is the New Testament.”

    I’ve seen only one similar national swoon. Growing up in Canada, I witnessed a charismatic law professor go from obscurity to justice minister to prime minister, carried on a wave of what was called Trudeaumania.

    But even there the object of his countrymen’s unrestrained affections was no blank slate. Pierre Trudeau was already a serious intellectual who had written and thought and lectured long about his country.

    Obama has an astonishingly empty paper trail. He’s going around issuing promissory notes on the future that he can’t possibly redeem. Promises to heal the world with negotiations with the likes of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad. Promises to transcend the conundrums of entitlement reform that require real and painful trade-offs and that have eluded solution for a generation. Promises to fund his other promises by a rapid withdrawal from an unpopular war - with the hope, I suppose, that the (presumed) resulting increase in American prestige would compensate for the chaos to follow.

    Democrats are worried that the Obama spell will break between the time of his nomination and the time of the election, and deny them the White House. My guess is that he can maintain the spell just past Inauguration Day. After which will come the awakening. It will be rude.

    Talk back at letters@charleskrauthammer.com.
    • Hetman, on 02/21/2008, -1/+8hyperbole much. Every politician promises a great future. What do you want them to promise a mediocre future?
    • TheG2, on 02/21/2008, -3/+5When bashing someone for religious overtones, it doesn't help when you use things like "sayeth". Buried.
    • kfed2, on 02/21/2008, -2/+2It worked for the Communists, then it collapsed as social programs tend to do.
      • Hetman, on 02/21/2008, -1/+2Selling hope is what all presedential candidates do. Im more worried about the healthcare plan that Clinton has purposed than anything Barak has. Universal healthcare is not the answer. Either way all presidents do this. I would love to see a president have a speech like "I promise to be average on Crime." I promise to make the world a more mediocre place for our children to grow up in, I promise a mediocre tax plan etc. It just doesnt work like that.
  • henhouse0, on 02/21/2008, -5/+7Her and Bill alone get around 50 Million dollars a year and secret service for life. Guess where the money comes from? Us.
    • EtherGnat, on 02/21/2008, -1/+5Secret service protection is for our benefit, not theirs. Do you really want a foreign agent to capture an ex-President? The pension for ex-Presidents is $180,000 per year.

      Yes, any ex-President will receive lucrative speaking fees, book deals, and consulting fees, which is where the Clinton's money is coming from. What exactly are you implying?
      • xtc46, on 02/22/2008, -3/+2nothing being implied, he is saying out right, tax payers spend 50Mil a year on their security (I dont know if Id buy that number though) citation?
        • adrenaline33, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1Are u retarded? They get protection and their pension(which was stated above as 180k). They make millions from the FREE MARKET. People pay a lot for their books and to hear them speak. That is how the Clintons pull in so much money. The government does not pay them 50 million dollars a year.
  • jspania, on 02/21/2008, -6/+6Obama: "I'm Rich Bitch!"
  • JPamplin, on 02/21/2008, -1/+32I'm a moderate by trade. Socially progressive and fiscally conservative, as I think most Americans wished their government was. I just have this to say:

    All those years in the White House, with all the scandals, bad treatment of White House staff, waffling on issues while in the Senate, leading the pack in earmarks, and the general demeanor of this woman screams the same message -

    SHE'S GETTING WHAT SHE DESERVES.
  • SirMolle, on 02/21/2008, -1/+6She should resign
    quit dividing the party.
    but shes acting like a spoiled brat who will get her way anyway she can even by starting slander groups
  • aimhelix, on 02/21/2008, -1/+9Not even president yet and she's already in debt!? That's commitment.

    "yes we will! yes we will! yes we will!" lol.
  • apc3161, on 02/21/2008, -7/+4Am I the only one who can't digg someone up with an Obama symbol as their avatar?

    Nothing against Obama, I just can't take their comments seriously. They are the definition of biased comments.
    • booshack, on 02/21/2008, -2/+6How about you judge their bias by the content of their posts? Your comment is like saying you can't take women's opinion on abortion seriously because they obviously have *****. That's the definition of bias! *****
      • vikingdiplomat, on 02/21/2008, -1/+3dugg for "That's the definition of bias! *****" at the very least! :D
      • iDHype, on 02/22/2008, -0/+0Best. Reply. Evar.
  • rediculous, on 02/21/2008, -0/+5I don't understand.

    according to: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/money/dems.html

    She has like 37 mil on hand.

    I'm confused.
    • kfed2, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1some if it is likely her borrowed money, but she is definitely preparing to spend more than she has.
    • TrikkyMakk, on 02/21/2008, -0/+4What do you not understand? Politicians have been spending more money than they have for years...its nothing new.
    • jbreckman, on 02/21/2008, -0/+5look at the dates... that was last updated December 31st, 2007.
    • stiffdawg, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1Check opensecrets.org. She had 29.2 million on hand to Obama's 24.9 mil as of January 31. She's obviously got money problems, but why not rack up the debt now? She can continue raising money to pay it off even after the election is over...or she drops out.
      • ZebZ, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1$20 million of that $29.2 is from people who've already maxed out on donations during the primaries. It's useless to her unless she gets the nomination.
  • digjam, on 02/21/2008, -0/+11I hope she looses by super delegates not supporting her...
    • topgigmedia, on 02/22/2008, -0/+3I hope you learn to spell... "looses" -- you meant "loses", right? ;)
      • spyd3rweb, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1I hope you get a better hobby than to correct peoples' spelling mistakes on digg.
  • bhartzer, on 02/21/2008, -0/+12Put a fork in her, she's done. Take her off the grill.
  • nirav72, on 02/21/2008, -1/+11Ahhh..can't wait till her whole campaign implodes.
    • AndrewDB, on 02/21/2008, -0/+3You mean.... it hasn't already?
      • runCMD, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1nope. How can you not see these guys are at a virtual tie ... ? Would you give up so easily on something you believe so strongly about ? You really shouldn't expect others to either.
        • Mejari, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1well, 'so easily' has different definitions for different people. To a lot of people it's looking like Hillary's definition of 'so easily' is 'Hang on tooth and nail beyond all reasonable hope and without regard for the damage you're doing to your party and the American people'
  • MDTrojan10, on 02/21/2008, -0/+1She obviously doesnt know how to use her money wisely. Meanwhile now Barack is rolling in dough and shes royally screwed.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.