Senate Majority Leader?

Furthering rumors of an attempted back-room negotiation for the nomination, Adam Nagourney writes in today's New York Times,

The delegates said they hoped to avoid being portrayed as party elites overturning the will of Democratic voters. They spoke of having some power broker -- the names mentioned included Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee; former Vice President Al Gore; and Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- step in to forge a deal.

Yet even as some of them pleaded for intervention, they said they were not sure what could be done in a race with two candidates who have so much support.

"I think it has got to be brokered before the convention," said Bill George, the head of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. in Pennsylvania. "I think there should be a couple of people -- maybe Howard Dean and Al Gore, they have some credibility -- to do it. Dean should call a meeting, and the two camps should be forced to do it.

Might I propose my own backroom deal? The Hillary Clinton supporters here may not like it, but here goes nothing: Clinton for Senate Majority Leader.

It's hard to argue with the suggestion that Clinton is one of the most polarizing figures in recent American political history. This would make FDR-style consensus governing a tricky task for her as President, but would be irrelevant as Senate Majority Leader. Her record as a Senator certainly suggests she would excel in the position. She has done an excellent job of reaching across the aisle to get things done, wooed over thousands of hostile upstate voters (including members of my own family), and learned the ropes from former Majority Leader and anti-war Dem Robert Byrd. Way back in November 2006, Joshua Green wrote in the Atlantic Monthly,

There remains another option--one to which she is unquestionably well suited. As an admiring senator put it to me, "Hillary Clinton is everyone's secret choice for majority leader." It's a line you hear often on Capitol Hill, and it has two possible meanings. For some it's polite code for "Lord, I hope she doesn't run for president." But for others--I'd venture to say the majority--it is a compliment genuinely felt, an acknowledgment that she has satisfied the lions of the Senate and, should she wish to, might one day rank among them.

It's certainly not too early in Clinton's Senate career for the job - she's had just as much time in the chamber as one Lyndon Baines Johnson had when he took the position. But Reid, what has Reid done? Why, virtually nothing, unless you count caving to Bush on telecom immunity as an accomplishment. If I recall correctly, his approval rating in most unscientific Netroots polls is lower than Pelosi's. You may have noticed Nagourney didn't think to include him in the list of potential powerbrokers, perhaps for a lack of credibility. I've always like the boxer from Searchlight, but it would seem that Majority Leader is just not the right spot for him. My own choice for the job would be Chris Dodd or Byron Dorgan, but neither of them is central to party unity. If Reid would be gracious enough to voluntarily step aside for Clinton, he would restore his status as a party elder and perhaps virtually guarantee himself a spot in a Barack Obama administration.

Gore, Dean, and Reid, perhaps joined by Biden and Richardson, might be able to work out such a deal. The roommates Durbin and Schumer, as members of the leadership team and surrogates for opposite campaigns, could facilitate. Given her position, credibility, and even gender, I would add Pelosi to the list, but I accept the fact that she is clearly a closet Obama supporter, and as Jerome said this morning, that does color her role.

Of course, as a vocal Obama supporter, my own "role" is colored as well. I accept that. But please take me seriously when I say I am more interested in avoiding a convention fight than I am in pushing my own candidate, and that this honestly strikes me as the fairest deal I've yet seen for either candidate. Read through the diaries and comments I've made about Obama, Clinton, partisan infighting, and candidate diaries if you don't believe me - my feelings for both campaigns have always been somewhat tepid. Remember that Biden and Dodd were my first and second choices, and I didn't select Obama until the week I voted. I hope that this will dispel any notion of a hidden agenda.

Update 11:54 PM: I want to make it clear, I don't think this proposal should be implemented today. I don't foresee Pennsylvania and the other remaining states breaking the current bitter stalemate, but obviously we should give them a shot. Once all the voters have been given their say, and MI and FL have revoted, THEN the party leaders should step in, assuming the stalemate still exists.

Update 12:12 AM: I should also clear up, by consensus, I mean with the American people, not with Republicans in Congress. Bipartisanship is important, but it's not the same thing as leadership. Hence the phrase "FDR-style."



Display:


Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.73 / 15)

If Clinton for Majority Leader means that Obama is the nominee -
I could not disagree more.

First, Obama will lose the general election badly.
Second, there may not even be a Democratic majority in the Senate for Clinton to be majority leader over.

If Clinton steps aside from the nomination, so too must Obama.


by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:07:20 PM EST

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.90 / 10)

Is that supposed to be baseless speculation or did I miss the substance in it?


by marcotom on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:10:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.00 / 1)

Uprating only to join BBCWatcher in balancing out Indus' TR abuse.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:40:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

If Clinton supporters proposed a bamboozle like this for your candidate, we would be called racists who were trying to relegate Obama to the back of the bus.

Obama has tried three times to knock Clinton out of the race. It hasn't happened. You still don't take this campaign seriously, do you? You still think it's some kind of nuisance female campaign that is getting in the way of your hero being coronated. The Clinton campaign is going all the way to the convention. If Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean decide to thwart the will of the voters they will fracture this party like you have never seen. Prepare for a very ugly time in Denver. Prepare for a bloody fight.

Posts like this are incredibly offensive to Clinton supporters and it boggles the mind that you do not realize that you are pouring gasoline on a fire. You really do not understand where we are coming from, and you are too arrogant to bother to find out.


by cc on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:06:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.50 / 2)

If you read through all the comments, you'll see several folks accusing me of sexism. Supporters on both sides are the same - some honorable, some not so much.

I'd be happy to turn this deal around, except for the fact that I don't think Obama's skill set is a perfect match for the SML spot like Clinton's. My proposal has nothing to do with Clinton supporters, or with Obama supporters. It has to do with settling a nasty fight at high levels before the convention, since the remaing states aren't likely to do it.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:18:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)


Transplanted Texan,
My answer will leave the issue of sexism out of it. I would say and have said the same regardless of the candidates sex. No worries.

No.

Regardless of the person I vote for in this election. There is no way. No way. That I would ask Sen. Clinton to step down from her bid for the presidency in order to take any other job. I just wouldn't do that to the good senator nor her MANY supporters. Just as folks are very supportive of Sen. Obama, there are other folks equally supportive of Sen. Clinton. Imagine working so hard for Sen. Obama only to have him quit for any job other than the run for the presidency. This isn't to slight the other candidates that have run in this election. It's just look at the numbers. No other candidate has come as close as these two.

And yes, I hear all about the math for Obama,but it looks as if the Clinton camp disagrees. It's strange that folks have jumped over the vice president offer right to SML. Can't be because they don't like each other. Heck from what I hear Kennedy didn't like Johnson and yet they ran successfully on the same ticket.


by 12 dogs and a blog on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:53:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary is not polarizing, she is uncompromising (2.00 / 1)

Has the Democrats promoting this idea ever considered that THEY are the polarizing ones by being so amenable to compromises that are unworkable for a great many people in America.. working people?


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:59:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary (none / 0)

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking. Could you clarify just a bit.


by 12 dogs and a blog on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:29:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I haven't worked for Obama, but I did work hard for Biden, and had to watch him drop out for his Chairmanship. And Dean, for DNC. So I do know the feeling. I make this proposal not because of my vote for him, but because I don't think the remaining states are going to settle things before the Convention.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:29:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Thanks Transplanted Texan, thank you for your response.

I appreciate both responses.


by 12 dogs and a blog on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 10:46:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Dean did not drop out for the DNC Chair. In fact, he faced some competition for the DNC Chair, if I recall. You are conflating two independent acts as connected in order to bolster your argument.


by hctb on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 04:12:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I know he didn't drop out to BECOME Chair, but in the end the feel was the same. My candidate dropped out and wound up with a not-quite-as-good job in the end. And it's not like I expected him to stay unemployed when he dropped out.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 11:56:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I'm not really for this idea as part of a back-room deal to get Clinton out of the race, but Obama supporters probably don't feel like Clinton adds enough to a ticket: they likely want to get someone who can put a previously red state into play, and/or give military or broad international experience to the table.

Team Obama itself doesn't want to get into any VP picks or backroom discussions before he becomes the nominee... that's the politics that we're fighting against.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:06:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

"Team Obama itself doesn't want to get into any VP picks or backroom discussions before he becomes the nominee... that's the politics that we're fighting against."

by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:06:46 PM EST

You'll have to excuse me if I am-oh- abit blunt today.

But you know I am.

So honey, I respectfull disagree that statement.

That is the biggest bunch of BS I have heard in the last 48 hours.

Trust me.

In the last 48 hours?

I have heard some BS.

So to top it?

Congrats.

You really did something in the history of the creation of BS!

Team Obama has been out there slinging every bit as much mud as team Clinton.

And courting VP candidates too.

Say a governor and an ex-Senator. for the short list.

by the way Dracomicron, your  comment makes team Obama look like snobs. Arogant snobs.

IMHO


by 12 dogs and a blog on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 06:22:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks? (none / 0)

I feel effective.

I think I'll treat myself to a mocha latte.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:57:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

LatinoVoter, what exactly about my comment was trollish? Please explain yourself.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:27:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

CC,

Yes Obama has had 3 chances to knock Hillary out, but if you really think about it, Hillary has had just as many, if not more.

Had she won Iowa, it would have been over.

Had she won S.C., it would have been over.

Had she won a few more states on S.T., it would have been over.

And I think had she won WI, it would have been over.

I'd also add saying if Pelosi and Dean twart the will of the voters is a strange statement. At the  moment, Obama has more elected delegates, has won more states, and has won more of the popular vote. Sure that may change by June, but if it does not, how can you say the will of the voters isn't for Obama to be the nominee? Clearly this deal would not happen unless we get to the end of these contests and Obama still leads, and if that is the case, I would hope Clinton would have the grace she has shown in the past and do the right thing. Obviously if she is in the lead, this deal would not be an option and the nomination should be hers.


by duncin32 on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 03:37:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

How could HRC win when B.O. has hood-winked half the Democratic Party with his lies?


It's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there.
by excuseme on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 04:00:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

LatinoVoter, care to consult the TR rules and tell me how this fits?


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:44:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

nope..... (none / 0)

you didn't miss the substance. that was just baseless speculation. and delusion: below s/he states that mccain will beat obama 56-41.

i thought the obama supporters were supposed to be the delusional ones.......?


James
by james c on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:41:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Uprated your unfair hide -
It seems that MyDD has gotten nasty this afternoon.
Maybe some folks don't like their NCAA seeding.

Have you heard of parody?
Baseless speculation to match baseless speculation.

Of course 56-41 is in the realm of the possible.
Anything is possible.  Including HRC as Senate Majority Leader.


by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:46:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

Yeah, because there are so many seats the Republicans can pick up in 2008. There's Louisiana...

...

...


by johnny longtorso on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:11:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

If McCain beats Obama 56% to 41%
With Lieberman as his running mate -
Then Gov. Rell appoints a Republican - that's 50/50.

Then most of the potential Dem pick-ups are in red states - unlikely in a landslide loss.
So let's say the Dems gain Minnesota and Oregon, but lose Louisiana and South Dakota.
The Senate is 50/50 with Lieberman casting the deciding tiebreaker.


by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:15:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

we're unlikely to lose south Dakota, even in a repub landslide win.  Johnson currently has 30 point leads in the polls and token opposition.  aside from a maccaca moment, there will most likely be a lot of ticket splitting.


Mccain/Palin '08: Grandpa's losin' it.
by Doug Tuttle on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:38:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 3)

That's unlikely in so many different ways (the margin, the VP choice, the SD loss, and even your two choices of possible Dem pickups) it makes my head spin. Are you for real?


by epenthesis on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:43:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

He's not going to pick Lieberman, he needs someone to unite the conservative base. And with a 73% Johnson approval rating and no well-known GOP challenger, we're not going to lose South Dakota.

Remember also that Virginia is almost a lock, and why discount NH, CO, and ME, even in a McCain race? Especially CO.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:45:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I agree...  there is no way McCain will choose Lieberman.... the guy had a "D" after his name for quite awhile... They GOP would never, ever sign on...


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:47:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

You bring on a VP that brings in something you don't have. Joe Lieberman has exactly the same base as John McCain. Cabinet spot? DEFINITELY. VP? Doubt it. We'll see someone superconservative but that seems liberal enough to be palatable.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:56:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Granted that McCain and Lieberman are about the same age -
But Lieberman could bring the "appearance" of bipartisanship -
Plus some people think he could help McCain carry Florida - essential to any GOP win.
by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:03:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

McCain already has the MSM hoodwinked into believing that he will bring bipartisanship..  He does not need Lieberman...

If Florida is a must win, then he will likely tap Gov. Christ...  


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:45:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think Obama's support is as strong as (none / 0)

many people are saying it is.

I only know a few people who were supporting Obama and now two of them have switched to Hillary.

Granted, its a small, unscientific sampling, but a lot of people are worried about Obama's inexperience. The risks with Obama seem to be great and the payoff - what? I can't see any advantages in his platform and I do see quite a few disadvantages.

The Obama supporters never have explained why their candidate is better than Hillary to me.

All we see here is WHINE WHINE WHINE...


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:04:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think Obama's support is as strong as (none / 0)

I have no idea why you attached this to my post...

I know several people that were backing Hillary but are now firmly with Obama...  so, I guess like most things, that goes both ways too.

The whining does too believe me.

Oh, and the payoff vs. the risks for Obama...?  Well, if he gets the nomination, the payoff outweighs whatever risk...  The payoff of having a Democratic President vs. John 100 years war McCain.


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:12:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think Obama's support is as strong as (none / 0)

At this point, I don't care anymore. I hate Hillary's campaign style, I hate the fact that she won't try to win my vote here in GA, but I need one of them to break out in front and one of them to step back and admit it's over. If Hillary doesn't get it in PA, it needs to be her that steps back. If Obama loses in a landslide, it should be him. And he should take the VP slot.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:33:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think Obama's support is as strong as (none / 0)

And let's be clear. Hillary "not getting it" in PA could mean nothing more than just winning by 5% or so. It's still a sign that she can't win without resorting to trickery.

Likewise, Obama has to keep an eye on his numbers and trends. I don't give a damn if he's ahead in pledged delegates or not, if he loses by 15% in PA and then loses a pretty fair number of the other states as well, he needs to seriously consider dropping out.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 05:50:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.60 / 5)

Of course HRC can be the majority leader or even the governor of NY but say Goodbye of winning the presidency. There is no way BHO will be the president. Last week - Pastor-Gate changed the entire dialogue for the rest of the country including democrats. I am a HRC supporter and always said that I would vote for whoever got the nomination. But now it is any democrat but BHO - If it is BHO, I would writein HRC and vote for democrats for the rest of the ticket.


by indus on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:15:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry, I'm a little slow... (2.00 / 2)

  "Pastor-Gate", was it? In what way has this "changed the entire dialogue"? It sounds alot like the old dialogue to me, sorry. I've seen no major changes in policy position. I have seen alot of harsh words and threats flung back and forth, from both sides. I don't agree with Rev. Wright's opinions on alot of things, but I hafta tell you: I disagree MUCH more with Sen. McCain. All due respect to the man, but it's time for a Dem President....


by Kordo on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:08:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

It's easy to understand. He is running on JUDGEMENT. Wright has finally put that argument to rest. His judgement with Wright and letting Rezko buy his lawn means that he cannot ever say anything about his superior judgement again.


by georgiast on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:28:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (2.00 / 2)

Wright = Bill Shaheen, Geraldine Ferraro, and a number of similar inappropriate remarks she disagrees with from her supporters.

Rezko = Hsu


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:33:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

Hahahaha! Hsu didn't subsidize the purchase of HRC's home. And if you think you can compare Ferraro to Wright, then I want some of what you're smokin'!

You are not well-grounded sir.


It's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there.
by excuseme on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:32:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

I whole-heartedly agree that Ferraro's comments don't compare to Wright's, but it seems to me there's been more of an accumulation of such statements on Clinton's side, and they do add up. It's more a pattern than it is a one time damnation.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:41:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

What accumulation of statements are you talking about? Can you back up your assertion with some facts?


It's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there.
by excuseme on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:52:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

Ferraro, Shaheen, Bill in SC, Rangel, etc. It's a slow drip drip, and I don't mean to suggest it's intentional or top-down, or that any one comment links to the Wright remarks, but the feel does add up. And those are just the recent Clinton controversies. I'm not suggesting the old Clinton family scandals are legit - they'


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 02:18:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

Ferraro, Shaheen, Bill in SC, Rangel, etc. It's a slow drip drip, and I don't mean to suggest it's intentional or top-down, or that any one comment links to the Wright remarks, but the feel does add up. And those are just the recent Clinton controversies. I'm not suggesting the old Clinton family scandals are legit - they're not, but the Right will still use them against us in the General.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 02:18:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (2.00 / 1)

I think Shaheen made a remark about B.O.'s admitted drug abuse, right? That's not only not racist, it is a fair comment. Bill in SC? Do you think that observing that Blacks elected B.O. in SC is racist? Because it isn't and besides that, it is true.

As far as Ferraro is concerned, I read all of the interview. Did you? Because she is right on the money. Do you think a 47 year old white man with a year in the US Senate would have beaten HRC? Do you think ANY white man or woman for that matter would have taken the Black vote from HRC? It's impossible. If B.O. weren't Black, he would have had to drop out long ago.

It isn't racism to observe that B.O. got 90% of the Black vote in MS. It's a fact.

Last I looked Charlie Rangel is Black. Are you saying he is a racist?

I don't know what "old Clinton family scandals" you are talking about. I suggest you read a book by Gene Lyons and Joe Conason called The Hunting of the President. You will then understand that the Arkansas Project was run by a bunch of yahoos from Arkansas who were pissed off at Bill Clinton because during his 7 terms as Governor of Arkansas, he did more for people of color and women than any governor anywhere in the history of this country. He put people of color on commissions, on the benches, in his cabinet.

And that is why they hated him and why they tried to destroy him. Because Bill Clinton was and is the antithesis of a racist. That the GOP jumped on their bandwagon because they were sore they lost the WH is well known.

I'm not worried about non-legit scandals. I am worried about racism. Until I found out what B.O.'s so-called religious beliefs are, I might have voted for him in Nov. But I've fought racism since I was fifteen and I am not going to vote for a racist no matter what stripe of racism he embraces. And I don't think America is going to vote for a racist either. In  fact, I would bet on it.


It's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there.
by excuseme on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 03:34:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (2.00 / 1)

you're not being asked to vote for Rev. Wright, and this, of course, is granting that he is racist. You're being asked to vote for Sen. Obama, who I isn't racist, and you'd be hard-pressed to say argue that he is.


"Don't let it end this way; tell them I said something." -the last words of Pancho Villa
by shef on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 04:49:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

I'm not saying any of those people are racist. I haven't used that word at all except to reply to charges of sexism, but I can see why I'd give that impression, comparing them to Wright. I just meant they're inappropriate.

And I do think Ferraro was wrong. If being black helps in a political context, then where the hell is Henry Ford? Why is there one black Senator and 15 or so women senators? I would never make Ferraro's remarks about women, and she's just as bogus to make them about black people.

I haven't read Lyons and Conason's book, but I've seen the doc based on it. That's part of why I say her divisive reputation is undeserved - but it doesn't matter. The Swift Boat stuff was crap too, but it still worked. I'm looking at what the GOP will use, not what they should use honorably.

But please forgive my miscommunication. I don't thiink Bill Clinton is racist. I was excited to shake his hand here in NH late last year. I don't think Ferraro, Shaheen, or Rangel are racist, either - but I think all ahve been inappropriate this campaign and it adds up.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:15:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, I'm a little slow... (none / 0)

A) Clinton had the black vote until Team Clinton started making veiled race remarks.  They had, to that point, significant good will from Bill Clinton's presidency.  Don't you remember when Obama wasn't "black enough?"  It's not that Obama HAD the black vote, it's that Clinton LOST the black vote.

B) I think Clinton only had 4 total terms as Governor, not 7.  He was elected in 1978, ousted in 1980 and came back in 1982.  He won again in 1984, at which point terms changed from two to four years.  Just clarifying.

C) Barack Obama's religious beliefs are based on tolerance, helping the poor, and showing compassion to the disadvantaged, not racism.  His pastor is understandably but somewhat embarassingly tied to the views of the Civil Rights Movement of thirty-plus years ago, but that says nothing of Obama's own views.  Let's not blow Crazy Uncle Jeremiah out of proportion, shall we?  

If you're not going to vote for Obama because of racism on this evidence, you'd better not vote for Clinton on the evidence that she embraces spousal cheating because she didn't sever all ties to Bill when evidence of his indescretions came out.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:34:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.50 / 2)

LOL indus. Hyperbole much? Will your head explode January 19 2009 when Obama is sworn in as POTUS?


I love all people ... even fundamentally flawed ones -- me.
by pitahole on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:37:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Maybe - :)

But because of his Holier than Hou attitude and Rev Wright stuff - BHO is not going to get my vote.


by indus on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 11:13:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.33 / 3)

BO will not win in the GE.  I think if all the Hillary supporters stay home in NOV, maybe we will see positive changes in our party for 2012.  Hopefully, the DNC will make a democratic and uniform primary process and will not allow the MSM to use sexism and misogyny when discussing our female candidates. The DNC has shown poor leadership and has thrown women under the bus.  They cannot win without the women vote so let's stay home and stick it to them.  They will never take us for granted ever again.


by tiffany on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:50:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 5)

I'm sure you'll have that to console you when McCain nominates a judge that overrules Roe v Wade.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:59:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

I'm sure you'll have that to console you when McCain nominates a judge that overrules Roe v Wade.

Where's the evidence McCain would do that?  He was part of the Gang of 14 that insisted on moderate judicial appointments.  

And it's unlikely he would nominated judicial firebrands who would overturn his signature piece of legislation, McCain-Feingold.


by He Who Must Not Be Named on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:24:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

Where's the evidence McCain would do that?

It came out of Senator McCain's mouth on multiple occasions. He's promised repeatedly to nominate Roberts/Alito type justices.  


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:38:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Delusional much?


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 10:19:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Yes, check his positions recently. He's ALWAYS been anti-abortion, always voted against it. And lately, he's switched from his "maverick" stance of leaving it be to saying he'd want to overturn it quickly.

Everyone who thinks McCain would be an acceptable choice needs to really look at his positions. With a few exceptions, you won't like what you see.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:30:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

I used to think that he'd be a decent Prez. Even when he started winning the nomination this year, I thought, "Now I can at least feel OKAY no matter who wins". Nope. I was duped. I suspect a lot of us were. I wish Huckabee had gotten the nomination. At least I knew what he stood for. I have no idea what McCain would do in office.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 12:38:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

You'd be sticking it to the country, too. Better to have positive national change now instead of positive party change, as you view it, in four years. No more Republican rule!


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:00:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that wll never happen (none / 0)

just give it to McCain, Obama hasn't been straight with the Democratic Party about his pastor or his mentor, but I'm not suggesting he step down. He needs to stay in until he realizes he's lost and then support the winner. Look, he predicted this, after his big streak of wins he signaled that something could happen that might turn the tables for him.  it's happened, both his pastor and his donor, he's toast.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:06:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I will be writing Hillary in (2.00 / 2)

It is only when women stand up and say NO, you can not abuse and insult us an expect our support, that we will get any of what we need from the left or the right.

You can't scare me with Roe v. Wade. We will find other ways. If the democratic party cared about the Supreme Court THEY would be doing things to insure they have women's support.

This is what started the last phase of the women's movement. The sexism of men on the left. Women learned we had to say NO. No matter how positive some of your goals may be, you don't have our support until our rights become as important as other people's. And until you treat us with respect.


by foxx on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:07:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 3)

That's just crazy. If you feel that way about Barack, imagine how his supporters feel about Hillary as the kitchen sink campaign continues.

I know my perception is colored, as is yours, but if for no reason other than running a less negative campaign, Barack has a much greater chance of bringing some semblance of the party together in November. Without it, we will lose the POTUS GE regardless of our nominee, so give up the scorched earth campaign for a minute to consider the good of the party and the country.


by BeekerDynasty on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

If you are so interested in giving up the "scorched earth" campaign - then how about cutting back on troll rating for disagreement.  Not to mention your lack of courtesy of an explanation.  If you are all about comity, it has to go both ways, monsieur.

PS - I suggest you look up the meaning of "outrageous" too.
In the context of a proposal, "outrageous" means beyond credulity or possibility.


by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:14:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

Yeah McCaskill, Sebelius, Napolitano... they're all simply outraged by all of Obama's sexist comments.   Oprah and Shriver, too. But, um, remind me: what were those sexist comments again?


by mikeinsf on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:15:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

NO to your proposal: Hillary should be a nominee (1.20 / 5)

we see your childish stupid tricks.
After all I know about Obama, he better just resign from senate and try to run for IL governor.
If IL people stupid enough, they will let this guy learn on the job. But he better stop dividing democrats and helping McCain. Obama is not qualified and there is no reason for Hillary to stop doing what she is doing
Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:23:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ROFL (2.00 / 1)

   Glad to see all of you polite, generous, never-mean-to-opponents Clinton supporters have finally found a web-site free of invective and personal attacks. childish AND stupid? What do you bse your "not qualified" judgement on? plz be specific....


by Kordo on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:47:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i saw enough on dailykos of your politeness (2.00 / 1)

are you suggesting to close mydd and let dailykos to overrun the universe?


Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:26:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm (2.00 / 1)

still waiting, Lucy...


by UrbanRedneck on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:33:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, now I'm offended (2.00 / 2)

Poor grammar aside...

I live in IL which I now discover means that not only does my vote  (and, implication, me as a lifelong Democrat) not matter, but that I am stupid as well.  Somebody get on the phone to Chicago Kent School of Law let them know.  Should probably call Northwestern University and tell them to strip me of my Master's as well.  While your at it, notify Southern Illinois University and tell them I don't deserve my dual degrees.

But,  honestly, enough about me, after all I'm Stoopid...

One thing though: Was it Obama who said: "I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold," Clinton said yesterday. "I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."? (sourced at:http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/200803 07/cm_thenation/45295555)

So, esplain Lucy, Who is helping McCain & dividing democrats?"


by UrbanRedneck on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:05:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Obviously I don't agree with you, but I'm mojoing to balance out the TR rate. Your comment clearly isn't trolling.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:43:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.50 / 2)

My response was intentionally outrageous to match the outrageousness of the diary.  Call it parody, if you will.  However, I see it got me two drive-by troll-ratings from newbies.  Thanks for the uprate.


by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:28:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What role for Reid in a BO admin? (none / 0)

He's been worthless - what possible job should he be given?


by Shazone on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:53:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

Uh, maybe Harry Reid and/or Dick Durbin would object?  Could this be considered unpalatable to them, maybe?  Call me crazy, but I think they might not want to sacrifice themselves for the greater good.  Just sayin.


by Carlo on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:21:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

please stop with the ridiculous and blatantly false "obama will do worse in the general." its widely debunked


by ksquire on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 03:10:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (1.80 / 5)

HERES A WAY TO AVOID A CONVENTION FIGHT.

OBAMA WITHDRAW.

FOR THE GOOD OF THE PARTY.


by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:09:10 PM EST

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 4)

yeah, have the guy who's leading in the popular votes, states won, pledged delegates, and only a little behind in superdelegates quit.  give the person who's losing the prize, she deserves it.  besides it'll help her self-esteem.


Mccain/Palin '08: Grandpa's losin' it.
by Doug Tuttle on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:24:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

new rule.

the guy who has NO chance to win in november...

QUITS!


by John Wesley Hardin was a Friend to the Poor on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:31:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

sorry, I didn't realize you were clairvoyant, and already foresaw his defeat.  I concede your brilliant point.  also, could I have Wednesdays power ball numbers?  thanks a bunch.


Mccain/Palin '08: Grandpa's losin' it.
by Doug Tuttle on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 0)

OK, picture this. Forty-seven times a day there is an 527 ad showing Wright screaming gd America and that the US made the aids virus to kill blacks - and Michelle making comments and Obama not singing the national anthem.
All but the most fervent dems are going to either stay home or vote for McCain. Forget independents. Republicans voting dem? Forget it.
by georgiast on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 08:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Has it occurred to you or anyone else (2.00 / 1)

that Hillary has had it easy in this campaign so far? Obama has not thrown the kitchen sink at her and she has not been vetted (her tax returns, contributors to the Clinton library, white house documents from the Clinton years have not been released!). Hypothetically, if Hillary gets the nomination, you don't think the GOP will get this all out and throw the sink at her? I would be shocked if we did not see some shocking revelations from those disclosures. Don't be so sure to pass judgement on Obama when your candidate has not been vetted since Bill left office (that's 8 years of history not being vetted!)


by galwar on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 10:15:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Wait for polls. If he doesn't get affected by this in general election polls two weeks from now (and they keep this in the media, which they will if he drops in the polls), then he's golden.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:36:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

You mean Clinton, who gets fewer electoral votes when the head-to-head matchups are tallied?


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

new rule (2.00 / 2)

MAKE UP any rule that lets my candidate WIN!!!!


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:49:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think you have a typo (none / 0)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:29:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The good of the party? (2.00 / 1)

  How is it good for the Party if the front-runner concedes to the person in 2nd place? Help me out here....


by Kordo on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:44:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The good of the party? (2.00 / 0)

And how is it good to ask either side to quit before its over?


by 12 dogs and a blog on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 06:43:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

Hell no.  He isnt getting out until he falls behind in PLEDGED delegates.  


by Toddwell on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:03:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Don't be so sure. There is more to come from his church. The mining on this one has just begun. I'm guessing he will drop out over more developments there.


It's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there.
by excuseme on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:38:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let me get this straight... (none / 0)

you want the leader to withdraw?  


by UrbanRedneck on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:07:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

It is clear that LandStander is violating the FAQ on troll-rating multiple times.  
I would like to  draw the attention of MyDD frontpagers to this.
by johnnygunn on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:30:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why Is Obama Afraid of Michigan (none / 0)

and Florida voters?


by durendal on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Caps lock wins arguments (none / 0)

I'm convinced.


I rock knobs
by Etchasketchist on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:09:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Someone who is ahead in delegates is going to drop out?  Don't count on it.  


by Toddwell on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:31:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

How can you expect the Senate Majority Leader himself to take part in the negotiation of him losing his position within the Senate?

Makes very little sense.


by falcon4e on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:10:01 PM EST

Reid gave up some power (2.00 / 1)

to Jeffords when he was trying to get Jeffords to switch parties.

Reid promised Jeffords that if he helped Dems get a Senate majority, he could chair whatever committee that (in theory) Reid would have been in line to chair.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:12:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 3)

give reid a position in the obama administration.  something easy, something he can handle.  secretary of balloon doggies maybe.


Mccain/Palin '08: Grandpa's losin' it.
by Doug Tuttle on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:16:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

Nobody is ever made secretary of balloon doggies. The balloon doggies demand it.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks! (none / 0)

Thanks for the giggle. :)


In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. Thomas Jefferson
by Bella on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:15:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 1)

Regains his elder statesman status after a disastrous term and maybe a role in Obama's Cabinet. It's a longshot, but not out of the question.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:47:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

The problem is that if reid steps down then I'm pretty sure the Govenor gets to appoint his succesor and the current govenor of Nevada is a republican.

Also, Nevada is a hard state for dems to win top of the ticket state wide races.

The only people that have been able to do it have held the last name Reid and Miller. And to be honest, the netroots would errupt in complaints about the moderate democrat that would be required to take reid's place.

But still my point is that it would be hard to keep the seat in our column.

Maybe Rory Reid, reid's son could take over and keep the seat, but that'd be tough.

Jim Gibson, the former mayor of Henderson is a big possibility and he's popular statewide. Plus he's a well established mormon so that helps a lot. But I think he's going to run for, and probably beat, Jim Gibbons.


by world dictator on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 10:30:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I'm not asking that Reid step down as a Senator, just as Senate Majority Leader. He certainly keeps his Senate seat, just like Robert Byrd.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 11:29:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Whoops, we're talking about in the event of taking an Obama job. Apologies for the confusion.

You have a point, but given the number of seats we're likely to pick up this year, I'm not worried about it. And quite frankly, whether or the Netroots are pleased is not a major question when the bigwigs formulate Democratic strategy - nor, IMHO, should it be. (/ducks)


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 11:31:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

I would like my senator to represent me you know. So it does matter if we lose this seat to a Republican. But I'm sure you didn't mean to be callous. :-)

But regardless, until we get above 60 votes in the senate EVERY democrat vote counts.


by world dictator on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 09:27:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Fair enough.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:05:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (none / 0)

Reid has already said he's stepping down after this election to focus on his reelection campaign.

I don't think either of them should drop out. As long as its clean and substantive, I like it.

This is the greatest season of survivor ever (I think I stole that from Bill Maher)


by LiberalFL on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 09:14:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I prefer Chris Dodd for Senate majority leader (2.00 / 7)

but if Clinton loses the nomination, I predict that she will become a real force to be reckoned with as a senator.

Probably every mistake she's made in the past 7 years has been related to a fear of appearing too liberal in a general election.

If she is forced to give up the dream of being president, she can become one of the great senators of all time.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:10:46 PM EST

Re: I prefer Chris Dodd for Senate majority leader (2.00 / 1)

Hillary Clinton< not a closet liberal.


by hctb on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:18:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I prefer Chris Dodd for Senate majority leader (none / 0)

If we get a change in that leadership post I'd rather have Dodd or Patrick Leahy.


by Christopher Walker on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 07:47:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senate Majority Leader? (2.00 / 2)

First of all , why in the world do you have front page rights ?

Just curious lol

You should start pointing it out a little more explicitly right under the title.

The other front pagers Todd , Singer , Armstrong all have their biases but at least we know they run the blog.

But I have no idea why you have front page priviledges .

Lets leave that aside.

Read this paragraph in your diary and try to look for the contradiction.

" It's hard to argue with the suggestion that Clinton is one of the most polarizing figures in recent American political history. This would make FDR-style consensus governing a tricky task for her as President, but would be irrelevant as Senate Majority Leader. Her record as a Senator certainly suggests she would excel in the position. She has done an excellent job of reaching across the aisle to get things done, wooed over thousands of hostile upstate voters (including members of my own family), and learned the ropes from former Majority Leader and anti-war Dem Robert Byrd. "


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 06:12:00 PM EST