In New Hampshire the Only Thing Holding Back an Obama Win is a Howard Dean Scream


Most all polls prior to Tuesday’s New Hampshire Primary showing that Barack Obama is leading Hillary Clinton quite comfortably. It is no wonder that Clinton advisors are fearing a loss Tuesday night. Really? What was your first sign? This loss could be quite embarrassing and politically damaging for Hillary Clinton.

The only thing that can prevent the Obama train from cleaning Hillary’s clock in the New Hampshire Primaries is the following:


If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Former VT Gov & DNC Chair Howard Dean Threatens To Leave Democratic Party Over Obama’s Budget
  • Howard Dean, Democratic Mouth Piece
  • Howard Dean, Just Keep Talking
  • VP Cheney; Dean Has Never Won Anything
  • The Dean Comedy Tour Continues

  • Comments

    8 Responses to “In New Hampshire the Only Thing Holding Back an Obama Win is a Howard Dean Scream”

    1. richard on January 7th, 2008 12:17 pm

      One thing I don’t understand (well, one of many):

      A few decades ago, some nominee for the Supreme Court (I forget his name) was found ineligible because he had tried marijuana in his youth.
      Either he was told that he couldn’t serve, or he withdrew from consideration when the news became public. I don’t remember exactly; does anyone?

      Whatever you think of this (i.e., whether it was justified or not) … if that was true for a potential Supreme Court justice THEN, how is it that NOW a serious presidential candidate gets a free pass on his own admission of drug use?

      I’m not saying that Obama should not be eligible because he tried drugs (that’s what we know, anyway) … but how can it be that an action that caused a potential Supreme Court justice to be ineligible is acceptable for a possible president?

      Meanwhile, I read an article the other day allowing as how all the media “experts” had chimed in on the party line that Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in, and that Obama was a light diversion at best. (Same with Huckabee, in their view.) Consequently, the media were putting their views out as established truth.

      Now, of course, they’re all scrambling to put Obama in the best possible light.

      This is one of the real problems with the whole electoral process (in my view): the so-called “experts” make a very good living telling the rest of us unwashed slobs what is going to happen, blah, blah, blah … and when it doesn’t, they go on and on about something else.

      Just like the talking heads in Natalee’s case, who have contributed little or nothing.

    2. richard on January 7th, 2008 12:23 pm

      Just found it! The nominee in question was Douglas Ginsburg, in 1987.

      Here’s a passage from a Washington Post story:

      In November 1987, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg was forced to withdraw as President Ronald Reagan’s nominee for a vacant U.S. Supreme Court seat that had been earlier denied to Robert Bork. The reason: Ginsburg’s admission that he had used marijuana in the 1960s and 1970s while a college student and Harvard Law School professor. Ginsburg’s nomination was never voted on by the Senate

    3. brie on January 7th, 2008 1:22 pm

      I don’t see a candidate worthwhile on either party…this is the best we can go….!!!!!

    4. brie on January 7th, 2008 1:26 pm

      #3..sorry I meant to say this is the best we can do!

    5. John Ryan on January 7th, 2008 2:27 pm

      Well of course our current President would NEVER deny being a user of cocaine.
      Obama is nationally a stronger candidate than Clinton, also much more likely to end the occupation of Iraq sooner.

    6. Sherry Goodman on January 7th, 2008 3:20 pm

      I’m hoping that even if Hillary Clinton loses New Hampshire
      tomorrow night, she’ll make a comeback. I (like many others) have
      been waiting for her to run for years.

      Obama talks a good talk (about change) yet he has Bill Clintons
      former advisors on his staff – what kind of change is that. Not to
      mention that his co-chair is a lobbyist, and that he too voted for
      the patriot act. All of the above has come out in the debates – but have been ignored by his groupies.

    7. brie on January 7th, 2008 5:06 pm

      Who wants the Clinton’s back in the white house…in fact, did they replace everything they stoled?

      Obama. Islamic….I don’t think so! His loyalty is to Africa! He should not be trusted! That is a death warrant!

    8. brie on January 7th, 2008 5:15 pm

      Isn’t there a true American than can run for President…????????????

    Leave a Reply

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
    E-mail It