I always find it interesting when Republicans offer Democrats election advice. I'm reminded of Karl Rove predicting "landslide wins" for the GOP congress in 2006, unless Dems followed his advice.
I find it amazing that people actually take his fork-tongued advice seriously, since it's clear he is only advising us on how to lose.
Similarly, Huckabee's campaign manager Ed Rollins published an "advice" piece for Democrats on CNN, advising us that we "should have picked Hillary for VP."
However, despite the fact that I actually kinda like funny ol' Huck, Rollins advice stunk of Rovian spin.
Among Rollins claims,
I'm sure GOP Strategists would have loved to have her on the ticket - she would have fired up their base at least as much as our own, if not more.
Rollins further claims that McCain would never have picked Palin if the Dems had Hillary on the ticket. In doing so, Rollins slips up a bit: he's acknolwedging that the ONLY reason he picked Palin was to divide Democrats.
In other words, the McCain campaign didn't pick Palin because of who she is and what she's done, but rather because she was the best female they could find to divide Democrats.
I think Hillary Clinton is a great leader and orator, but Ed Rollins "advice" comes at a suspicious time: the GOP is trying to drive a wedge into the Democratic Party with the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate.
Rollins' "advice" is timed perfectly to drive this wedge deeper by instilling doubt in our party over the pick of Biden, and by reminding people once again about Hillary.
It's all about divide and conquer for them.
We should expect the Republicans to continue to cite Hillary and remind use about our heated primary in-fighting; for, without a divided democratic party the GOP will not stand a chance in this election.
I find it amazing that people actually take his fork-tongued advice seriously, since it's clear he is only advising us on how to lose.
Similarly, Huckabee's campaign manager Ed Rollins published an "advice" piece for Democrats on CNN, advising us that we "should have picked Hillary for VP."
However, despite the fact that I actually kinda like funny ol' Huck, Rollins advice stunk of Rovian spin.
Among Rollins claims,
"If Obama had done the smart thing, he would have picked Sen. Hillary Clinton for vice president. If he had, he would have united his party for sure and energized his base."Hillary would have been a controversial choice either way you look at it, but with Hillary set to testify in the Clinton's upcoming civil trial and with herlow "trustworthy" ratings, there's a lot of good reasons for her *not* to be on the ticket with Barack.
I'm sure GOP Strategists would have loved to have her on the ticket - she would have fired up their base at least as much as our own, if not more.
Rollins further claims that McCain would never have picked Palin if the Dems had Hillary on the ticket. In doing so, Rollins slips up a bit: he's acknolwedging that the ONLY reason he picked Palin was to divide Democrats.
In other words, the McCain campaign didn't pick Palin because of who she is and what she's done, but rather because she was the best female they could find to divide Democrats.
I think Hillary Clinton is a great leader and orator, but Ed Rollins "advice" comes at a suspicious time: the GOP is trying to drive a wedge into the Democratic Party with the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate.
Rollins' "advice" is timed perfectly to drive this wedge deeper by instilling doubt in our party over the pick of Biden, and by reminding people once again about Hillary.
It's all about divide and conquer for them.
We should expect the Republicans to continue to cite Hillary and remind use about our heated primary in-fighting; for, without a divided democratic party the GOP will not stand a chance in this election.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment