Just as I predicted, Sal couldn't bring herself to acknowledge her latest blooper about the national polls. As I've said, she has zero integrity.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Apr 20, 2008, at 7:02 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > In any case, her big early national lead was more a > > function of name recognition than anything else, so > > it's no surprise at all that she didn't hang onto it. > > Yeah, that's right, Judy, her name recognition > just evaporated after her stunning--and > unexpected--loss in Iowa. I could swear > I remember thousands of people as > well as columnists and talk show hosts > scratching their heads the next day > and saying, "Clinton...Clinton?!? > Now where the hell have I heard > that name before..." Boy, can you get any *more* stupid, Sal? Did you think I said something about her *losing* her name recognition? Do you need a new prescription for your specs, perhaps? <snip> > >> And, I'm proud to say, I believe Iowa played a major role > >> in that. Once the myth of Hillary's "inevitability" was > >> shot, which is basically the kiss of death to any kind of > >> democratic process,) her chances seemed to evaporate almost > >> overnight. > > > > No, they didn't, not after she then went on to win > > New Hampshire. It took a lot longer for her chances > > to begin to "evaporate," and they're not gone yet > > despite Obama's best efforts. > > Which of course he shouldn't be making, > since everyone knows that Hillary will > "be the nominee." ROTFL!! And *I'm* supposed to be the one who tries to change the subject? And with the very most flimsy and silly straw men, at that. > > You've also forgotten that it wasn't a two-way race > > in Iowa; Edwards came in second. He'd been a frequent > > presence there for the past two years. And Obama had > > a head start in getting his organization on the ground. > > Right, thanks for reminding me of that, Judy. He had a > head start here which was denied her. She was forbidden > by law from campaigning here until she did, whenever > that was. You're going to run out of those straw men, Sal. > She's run a lousy campaign, Judy, and all the twisting and > turning in the universe won't change the fact that, as a test of > "executive" experience, she's blown it by a country mile. I've already acknowledged that, Sal. Iowa > was only one mistake that she *could* have seen > coming if she hadn't been so blindsided by the belief > in her own inevitability. The Mark Penn fiasco was > another, and Bill's loose-cannon comments are yet > a third. At least two of those situations were well within > her ability to manage and change. Yes, as I've already acknowledged, Sal. > > She was never expected to have an easy time in Iowa, > > so her loss there, while disappointing, wasn't some > > huge upset. > > Yep. That's why she and Bill were frantically running around > the ballroom of the DM hotel they were staying in right before > the caucuses, trying to scare up whatever votes they could. Again, you're making no sense at all. How on earth have you managed to twist what I said in your mind so as to think you're somehow rebutting it? That's what people *do* when they're worried that they aren't going to have an easy win. Sal, debate about politics just isn't your best thing.
