that would be crazy! but yeah, if she went third party, I would vote for her as well.

Maybe our country could move out of our two party system.

And Hillary would be viewed as the savior of American Politics if she won. Well, at least the one to end the two-party system.

If it happened (the chances...really), I'd love a Clinton/Rendell ticket. And I doubt Obama could match it. There are no rules saying you can't have a member of another party on your ticket.

Many think REPS hate Hillary. Many in the public may, but not so much in Washington. She has worked very well with REPS since she joined the Senate. It's....."possible" she could run a unity campaign if she decided to run as a 3rd party candidate.

And IF it happened, don't forget that she has argued MI and FL should count all this time. She left her name on the ballot in MI too. She could make the case to the voters of those states, that Obama said they broke the rules, they shouldn't count. But that the VOTERS did NOT break the rules, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY of their state did. She could make the race in those states very interesting.

Ignore the PM I sent you, clicked PM on accident....

hahahaha shes wayyyy to love/hate to be viewed as a savior. her supporters would and the rest woudf look at her as a destroyer.

She would never run 3rd party, it would be political suicide.

there's no way anyone would really think that she'd be moving the country away from of a 2 party system. If she won as a 3rd party it'd be in name only and the next election the "real" third parties would again never have any chance, ever.

She's kind of ruthless. And very aggressive. And we know she doesn't stop when she wants something.

Not to mention that she;s strapped for cash.

Agreed, her campaign is strapped for cash, I don't see her pulling a Romney and throwing her own money into now, so why do that later?

She did it once before. Apparently after Tuesday she had a banner night for campaign contributions as well.

I would really love to see Hilary run as a third-party candidate. It would make the elections completely hellish, long, drawn-out, and painful. And I'd love every minute of it.

It is too late for her to do so since to get on the ballots you have to meet state deadlines. The big parties put a placeholder for theirs but states like Texas the deadline has long since passed.

It's the Clintons. Being short on cash (as in having next to nothing) is overblown to an extreme. The Clinton name alone is enough.

She has raised 10M in just 24 hours after her PA win, from 80,000 new donors. That 10M is neary half of what she raised for the entire month of March (she raised something like 20/25 for the entire month), so people aren't giving up on her yet.

I hope someone breaks her face.

It seems as though some cheating (probably on behalf of hilary) has already begun :

http://my.barackobama.com/page/communit ... lls/gGCVyR




at hilary

Of course, blame Hillary, who (along with her husband) has been very supportive of the Black community. I'm not saying there wasn't fraud, as racism runs rampant in our society and disenfranchisement, though I hate to say it, does occur.

But instead of instantly saying it was Hillary's campaign why not look at those who have access to the machines and such, I think you'll find the answer is much more small scale.

Giving is largely based on perception of return on investment so when her campaign was revived it brought a huge surge of donations.

Agreed. Clinton has thrown quite a bit of mud so far this year, but voter fraud is a level to which she would never sink IMO. It looks pretty clear that was done to help Clinton. That doesn't mean she is the mastermind for it, or even partially responsible for it.

You guys believe everything you read anywhere on the internet? Its not even posted in a local publication or officially certified (as a complaint) by Obama. Its a rumor some individual blogger from Mansfield, Ohio posted on Barack's website because some individuals like to think the only way Hillary would ever win a state is by literally running around on voting day and sabataging machines and pre-stacking votes.

He didn't cite who the "local community leader" was who called it "Dirty tricks," the "poll worker," who commented on so many machines going down, etc. The only person he does cite is Voight, who actually said things went relatively smoothly after early missteps. Also, the blogger randomly attaches an unidentified quote onto the back of a note that the Justice Dept. oversaw compliance with voter laws, therefore attaempting to connect the two sentences as though they were related and someone from the justice dept. was the speaker. When clearly, no one is the speaker.

Seriously people, even Obama didn't give this blogger the light of day, why are you? Can't you sniff out the rumor mill when its in action?

I admit there probably were problems with voting machines, and also that poorer/ denser neighborhoods had more trouble, but that's been a nationwide problem long since it was illuminated with the chad incidents in Florida. This country needs to update its machines and plan better for election days, yes. But this blogger is ridiculous, and gives Obama followers a bad name. I also love how when Hillary wins a state its gotta be because mechanics in every single district stacked the machines, but when Obama wins a state, its because he naturally appeals to the people in that state. Interesting theory.

But... but... it's on the internet so it has to be true!!!!

I just wanted to point out, how much I utterly adore your comments. You couldn't be more right here.