Clinton concedes in regards to MI & FL

I'm passing this along from dailykos since many of you don't visit there.  Delaware Dem (YAY!!) has the scoop

This quote is from Big Tent Democrat at Talk Left:

In today's conference call, the Clinton campaign conceded any rules-based or fairness-based argument for the full seating of the Florida and Michigan delegations. The Clinton campaign declared that, unlike Iowa, NH and South Carolina, Florida and Michigan did indeed break the DNC rules and without justification. The Clinton campaign expressly disagreed with the Michigan Democratic Party's contention that the DNC had selectively enforced its rules by allowing New Hampshire and South Carolina to break the sanctioned primary schedule, that Florida was not entitled to a safe harbor or waiver, and that the DNC had acted properly and within the rules when it stripped Florida and Michigan of its delegates.

Basically, she acknowledged that MI and FL did break the rules and conceded that their circumstances were different than the other states who weren't punished by the DNC.

Delaware Dem says it better than I could:

The Clinton campaign cannot protest this, since they admit that rules were broken.   And the Obama campaign will do well not to object, since this result gets Hillary no closer to the nomination. Therefore, Ladies and Gentlemen, the race is officially over.

Barack Obama is the nominee.

Well, the end isn't really news is it? The news part is that now Senator Clinton is openly acknowledging that the DNC is justified in sanctioning FL and MI regarding their delegates. It completely destroys her "Count all Votes" mantra and even giving her half of the delegates is something of a consolation prize.  


Poll
What Barry Merchanidse Shall You Get?
T-Shirt
Latte Mug
Volvo Bumper Sticker
Obama Blue Jeans!

Votes: 50
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Lolly Gaggin for Tips n/t (2.00 / 14)


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:43:01 PM EST

Re: Lolly Gaggin for Tips n/t (2.00 / 4)

You beat me to it.  I just posted a diary on the same subject.  I will delete.


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:44:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's all good. (2.00 / 2)

As long as the word gets out.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:45:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's all good. (2.00 / 2)

Mine's gone.  I kind of liked the title of it though . . .

"It's all over but the shouting"


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:47:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's all good. (2.00 / 2)

Nice.  I like the words "Hillary" and "Concede" in the same sentence better, though.

:D


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:51:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's all good. (2.00 / 4)

Let's play nice peeps.

No use in rubbing it in.  : )


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:15:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lolly Gaggin for Tips n/t (none / 0)

Yeah, because there are never multiple diaries on the same subject here ;)


by Jay R on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:31:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

tipped (2.00 / 1)

for the diary, but mostly for saying "lolly gagging"

:)


by mffarrow on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:53:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lolly Gaggin for Tips n/t (2.00 / 1)

Arrgh, diary deletion time for me.  


John McCain: Healthcare for Kids? In America? No way
by bosdcla14 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:09:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Lolly Gaggin for Tips n/t (none / 0)

Golly gee Lollydee, better lolly gaggin than SD foot-draggin. Tipped, rec'd & memorexed.


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:43:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So all that talk about 100% or nothing (2.00 / 2)

was just talk


by notme54 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:44:46 PM EST

Sure as heck sounds like it. (2.00 / 1)

Talk Left ain't exactly pro-Obama...


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:45:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all that talk about 100% or nothing (2.00 / 1)

What a shock!


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:49:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all that talk about 100% or nothing (2.00 / 3)

RBC has the power to only reinstate 50%. She cant argue for 100% even if she wanted to. It was already ruled, (it was on the front page of MyDD a couple of days ago) that RBC cannot reinstate 100% of the delegates.


"Rankles and Rush Limbaugh, ruining the chaos brand since 2008."
by alyssa chaos on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:04:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But (2.00 / 2)

It's one thing to acknowledge what RBC can do and it's quite another to concede that what they are doing is appropriate.  Also, the differentiation between MI and FL and the other states was key.

Have to go now.  Kid dressing up as a Hedgehog for some mammal fair at school.  Am bringing cupcakes.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:08:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But (none / 0)

Save one for me  


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:14:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Totally Off Topic But (none / 0)

Did you make the cupcakes or bring store bought? The reason I ask is that my daughter can't make cupcakes for her kids' class (plural, twins) because of food allergy concerns. She (and all the other parents) have to bring store bought in the original containers so that the ingredients can be examined.


by Bob Miller on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:07:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Totally Off Topic But (none / 0)

I made them, but wasn't allowed to use any peanut ingredients which was fine.  It's a private school, though.  I think they make their own rules.

Such a shame about the store bought.  Homemade cupcakes are seriously yummy.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:20:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all that talk about 100% or nothing (2.00 / 1)

Rachel Maddow covered this from top to bottom last night on her radio show.  Was EXTREMELY informative.


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:29:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I always miss it (none / 0)

Why does Air america have to be so stingy with their podcasts?


by semiquaver on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:53:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I always miss it (2.00 / 1)

There are other choices:

http://www.green960.com/podcast/maddow.x ml

:-)


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:03:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Holy crap; thank you (none / 0)

I checked a few other podcast sites and they didn't have any recent episodes.  I guess I overlooked this one.  This is sweet; I love the show but am usually busy around this time.

Thanks again!


by semiquaver on Fri May 30, 2008 at 09:12:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all that talk about 100% or nothing (none / 0)

actully mostly your imagination


by trytobereal on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:27:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all that talk about 100% or nothing (none / 0)

Maybe a deal was struck between the campaigns.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:27:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

good news (none / 0)

Let's hope her lawyers remind her of this concession if she feels the urge to continue this charade after  June 3rd.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:46:38 PM EST

Not so fast (none / 0)

this still doesn't mean she won't go to the convention after a summer bloodbath campaign and hope enough of her voters threaten to bolt that Obama looks unelectable enough for superdelegates to throw it to her.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:46:57 PM EST

Re: Not so fast (none / 0)

It doesn't.  But she has no real rationale now for overturning the delegate result.

Obama will hit the magic number and this will end well ahead of the convention.  She's done.  I expect she will keep her options open to try and get the best deal she can and then let the vote play out.


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:49:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes she does (none / 0)

Obama can't win, look how unelectable he is.

Scary racist preachers, white women won't vote for him, Ohio/Florida, White women won't vote for him, elitist, white women said they won't vote for him, inexperienced, also white women won't vote for him, swing states, Did I mention white women won't vote for him?

Doesn't mean the party will pick her over him, but it sure as hell wouldn't HELP him.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:52:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not true. (2.00 / 1)

Since I posted a diary regarding the division of my white girlfriends and my black ones, my white girlfriends have now ALL switched their support to Barack Obama.

So SOME white women won't vote for him.  Well, if she had won after all the BS she pulled a heck of a lot MORE African Americans wouldn't have voted for her.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:58:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not true. (none / 0)

Didn't say it was true, but that's the next phase of this campaign. She will make the argument that he can't win white women, a core base of the party, and the Taylor Marshes and Geraldine Ferraros of the world will try to whip up white women to believe Obama is a sexist thug. Doesn't mean it'll work, just means she's not done yet.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not true. (2.00 / 1)

Once the delegate race has been settled, Sen. Clinton's campaigning against Sen. Obama will mean something completely different. When she attacks him now, she is within her rights as a potential nominee. But once the party does the group hug, Kumbaya moment next week, if Clinton were to voice anything but full-voiced support for the nominee-in-waiting, she would be considered off base. Continued criticism of Obama would be beyond the pale: she'd join Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman as "Democratic" pariahs.

I don't expect her to take that path.


by Twin Planets on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:08:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you, Lolly Lolly Lolly get your adverb here (2.00 / 3)

As an African American this has always pissed me off when reading posts from people saying:

"If it's not Hillary Clinton, then I'm not voting for him or I'm voting for McCain."

I would have had little problem voting for HRC had she won the nomination legitimately.  What those other people don't realize is that if it were perceived that she stole the nomination, African Americans would have left the party in droves and not voted period.

There's a different mindset in the black community when it comes to politics.  With respect to McCain, it would be a shoulder shrug and a simple: "We've been through worse than this guy."

I don't necessarily agree with it, but I understand it.

Obama played by the rules and is winning fairly; it's that simple.  Folks need to deal with it.


I'm riding the Low Road Express. Join me at www.lowroadexpress.com
by LtWorf on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:09:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you, Lolly Lolly Lolly get your adverb h (none / 0)

Hell, as a white guy it pisses me off. Is our system perfect? No, but it's all we've got, and he won fair and square within it. The idea that that should be overturned because Clinton really, really wants it is absurd.


John McCain
by Mandoliniment on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:14:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

Perhaps.  But that argument hasn't gotten and traction and it's largely played out.  Her stringest reason to stay in was to seat FL and MI.  I'm sure she'll say that why she's going to the convention but she's conceded the high ground on the issue now.

This concession also could set the stage for negotiations between the campaigns.


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:03:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (2.00 / 1)

Other than appalachia, your comment is lacking.

She was the front-runner from the beginning in this thing. And even though Obama didn't campaign in two of the most populous states (following the rules), and didn't even have his name in one of them, they still basically tied in the pop vote, even her with a 2 big state (big names always have the advantage with no campaigning) advantage.

She ran a lousy campaign. It was her nomination to lose, and she did.


by IowaMike on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:04:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

How do you respond to the arguements that she was losing from the very begining. seriously. I am always countered with, 'she was losing from the very beginning' all the time. Some Obama supporters claim that since Iowa, where she got third that people effectively thought she would lose and after NH and Nevada, she was losing to Barack.


"Rankles and Rush Limbaugh, ruining the chaos brand since 2008."
by alyssa chaos on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:53:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

I never claimed she was losing from the very beginning. She was the national front runner by a mile. She had all of the early advantages.

She ran a lousy campaign. She had huge polling leads in almost every state and ended up losing them to an unknown. Great campaigners don't do that.


by IowaMike on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:00:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

No I was just curious how you respond to some people who claim she was losing from the very beginning.


"Rankles and Rush Limbaugh, ruining the chaos brand since 2008."
by alyssa chaos on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:08:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

Ask them by what matrix was she losing? Because she wasn't as far as I could tell. She did lose Iowa, because she ran a tone deaf campaign here.


by IowaMike on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:23:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

Personally, I just pass over it.  It doesn't really matter.


by reenactor on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

Obama's been ahead in pledged delegates since Iowa. So by that sole measure, she's been 'losing' from the very beginning.

But because of her early super delegate lead, she had the lead in overall delegates for quite some time. Also, as has been pointed out, she lead in national poles and in name recognition for much of the race's first half.


by vadasz on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:26:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes she does (none / 0)

Although that would be true Clintonian style, I think she would be metaphorically eaten alive by the party if she tried it after conceding. As well she should be.


"More War Years! More War Years!" ~John McCain
by Tommy Flanagan on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:25:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

SHE DOESN'T CARE (none / 0)

I really don't believe she cares about her future in the party and neither do sources I talk to in NYS Government.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:48:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think she does (none / 0)

I think it'd be a terrible waste if she didn't stay around.  She's an intelligent and strong woman and i for one WANT her in the Senate.  I can't imagine she'd walk away.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:27:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SHE DOESN'T CARE (none / 0)

Could she get enough other people to leave with her to start a legitimate third party?

I don't think so, and I don't think it would be a good thing- but it would be an interesting conversation: a couple governors, a few senators, a few congressmen and a bunch of lower level elected officials looking for some Clinton love. Make Bill the head of this new party and see if they can raise the money...

Like I said, I don't think it would happen but it is an interesting thought. I have always wished we had more real parties personally.


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:57:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe not her (none / 0)

but I mean what would another party stand on. Even in countries that have multiple parties...in the end, there's usually a coalition government; a left and a right, so in the end there aren't two parties, but two coalitions.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:03:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Maybe not her (none / 0)

Sure, but it is still an interesting exercise in intellectual curiosity.

My guess is that they would be a centrist party with a slightly liberal social bent and a slightly conservative economic bent. Think "Gang of 14" on a large scale. They would try to be the "voice of reason."

Like I said HIGHLY unlikely, but interesting to think about... the one positive of something like this is it would free Democrats to be more openly progressive. I would say it would have a downside of allowing Repubs to be even crazier but I shudder to think of what that might look like.


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, it wouldn't (none / 0)

unless either side can win an outright majority, they'd have to form a coalition with said centrist party to win a majority of the seats.

This is similar to what is going on with Lieberman in the Senate now. In order for the Democrats to have a majority, they had to include HIM against their best wishes and interests.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:25:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She could (none / 0)

But she just destroyed her REASON for going to the convention.  Kaput.  Gone.  Outta there.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:52:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The reason (none / 0)

will be "the votes aren't cast until Denver"

Let's be real, if she was going to give up, she'll concede Tuesday. If she doesn't, she's in this to the convention, no matter what. Seriously, have we learned nothing?


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:53:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You know (none / 0)

I'm sorry you're disappointed with the outcome, but seriously, it's done.  Over. Are the Republicans attacking Hillary?  Why do you think that is?  People have stopped polling her.  

She'd FUND RAISING.  She's paying back her debt and then she's bailing.  


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:59:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My point is (none / 0)

I don't trust her, not that I want her to win. I don't trust she'll concede before Denver.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:01:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My point is (2.00 / 2)

That's fine.  Clinton ignored Brown in 92 after he did the same thing H. Clinton is doing now.

After Tuesday Obama just needs to pull a Clinton on Clinton.

(and because of how convuluted that sentence was we need to stop with the dynastic presidencies)


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:34:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

nrafter supports Obama (none / 0)

Hold your fire.  He is just more cynical about Clinton than you are.  


by JJE on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:03:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: nrafter supports Obama (2.00 / 2)

That seems to be the case, but I think we should try to expect the best from Clinton (as hard as that might sound to an Obama supporter after this primary).

She's been a democrat forever and I really have to believe she doesn't want to hurt the party's chances in November any more than she has*.  It's a nasty web in which we're entangled, and she has to be very careful how she disengages (if the supers don't suddenly change course and endorse her, obviously).

*Can't really argue that she was doing something wrong...a lot of people invested a lot of money and effort in her campaign, so I understand why it seemed like she got a little desperate, even if I wish she hadn't.


John McCain is surprisingly bad for this country
by minnesotaryan on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:23:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: nrafter supports Obama (none / 0)

She's my Senator, I know politicians in New York and their staffs who, despite supporting her, now believe she is going down a dangerous route.

The impression I've gotten from them (and be aware that I showed up at MyDD months ago in part because I didn't care who won the nomination), is that she has no intention of supporting Obama or leaving the race until the convention. The only thing that can defeat her was and is a complete repudiation by her own supporters...the voters, not the superdelegates. Governor Paterson has been trying to get her out and she's basically thumbed her nose at him.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:30:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: nrafter supports Obama (none / 0)

I agree with you about her intentions, but I do think the backlash will be so intense she will be forced out.  It will be ugly.


by interestedbystander on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:54:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree, can we just take a step back (none / 0)

and stop feasting???  Jeebus already, Hillary made the right call and it is good for the party, so let's not fear monger ourselves to death and alienating others until we see what happens.

It's FRIDAY, woooohooo!
 


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:35:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, as a matter of historical accuracy, she (none / 0)

hasn't been a Democrat forever. She began as a Republican and supported Goldwater. She had switched by Nixon, though.


by Wee Mama on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:10:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No, as a matter of historical accuracy, she (2.00 / 1)

Oh my.  I always give credence to the political leanings of 16 year old girls whose parents are Republicans.  She graduated college at 21 as a Democrat for life.

Goldwater supporter, meh...


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:54:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL (none / 0)

Hilarious.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:11:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not Tuesday: Thurs or Fri (2.00 / 1)

Tuesday is the statement of defiance.  Wednesday is "huddling with advisers."  Thursday morning is the "Come to Jesus" meeting, and either Thursday afternoon or Friday is the exeunt.

If that doesn't happen, this is going to get really ugly, because at that point the party will start acting as though she's attacking our nominee, not campaigning for the nomination.  And that will look...different.


by Jay R on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:34:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Diarist has been on MyDD 2 Wks. (none / 0)

During this time, diarist has published three diaries, with two of them being rehashes of stories on DKos, complete with links.

Tonight, diarist's diary starts out with the following sentence:


I'm passing this along from dailykos since many of you don't visit there.

There's a reason why "many of you (us) don't visit there."

It was to get away from diarists like yourself that shove quite distorted partisan spin down our throats.

If people wanted to go to DKos, they'd do just that. But they're here.

Clinton's proceeding with regard to the RBC event exactly as it's been noted in the press and on this blog over the past few days.

She's not giving an inch.

Depending upon the outcome of that, the level of abuse she takes from the Obama camp, and her own sincere grit and will, she very well might press on to the Convention, all in support of what is now the closest Democratic Primary in HISTORY!

Many candidates have proceeded to the Convention with far less of an argument than her.

And, whenever her opposition manages to get a clue, they'll realize that one of the driving factors in her decision will be the level of abuse she continues to receive from certain factions of the Party that absolutely, positively refuse to acknowledge truth.

Oh, one more thing, contrary to your rants, Obama is NOT "the nominee." In fact, as of this writing, and perhaps right through until the end of August, at the Convention, he won't have enough Pledged Delegate votes to secure anything.

As far as the SuperDelegates are concerned, their statements of support mean absolutely nothing, when in fact, all that matters is how and when they actually vote in Denver.


by bobswern on Fri May 30, 2008 at 06:53:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Diarist has been on MyDD 2 Wks. (none / 0)

I'm sure you think so, Bob, and I know it's technically true. But the superdelegates, once they make a decision, aren't going to change it- save for some game-changing scenario- and Clinton doesn't need to press it until the convention for that to happen, it'll just happen.

So he'll be the presumptive nominee, same as McCain is for the Republicans. But there won't be a floor battle, my friend. Sorry. If Clinton gets the nod, it won't be through a floor battle.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:13:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Democratic Party is split. (none / 0)

There's an even amount of support--for all intents and purposes--between two candidates.

Delegate math aside, this is the truth, no matter how anyone spins it.

If anything happens--up to and including polling data which shows Obama's numbers getting worse and worse as he's pushed solely to the forefront of the Party and while the 527's take aim at his negative recognition factor with tens of millions of dollars in coming weeks--you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be a very strong movement within the Party to go with "Plan C."

By mid-August, if it looks like Obama's tanking, SuperDelegates taking a second look at their options will be a common meme in the Party. Count on it! This is nowhere near as far-fetched as Obama spin may make it seem within the current zeitgeist. The Clintons know this is truth.


by bobswern on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:39:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Democratic Party is split. (none / 0)

Like I said, though, without something dramatic happening, it'll be over. As far as the "truth" goes, that's it- and we both seem to agree there. But it won't be a gradual thing- if something happens, it'll be sharp and sudden and massive. In any other circumstance, I don't see how either candidate could heal the rift in the party- an issue I haven't seen you address.

Now, I've yet to see you recognize the variety of reasons that explain why Clinton's numbers are polling positively that don't relate to a genuine upswell for her, or downswell for Obama. Realize there's less polls of her, which skews the numbers upwards; she's not being attacked like Obama is (she hasn't been touched by McCain in... ever, but months, at least), and Obama supporters will gladly note their support for Senator Clinton on these polling calls, where Clinton supporters have been more reluctant to.

But that trend has been disappearing- look at the Wisconsin slot on the electoral map on this page. Keep on hoping, Bob, there's nothing wrong with that. But don't be too offended if we take that prediction with a grain of salt.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:55:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This site's about to become a laughingstock. (none / 0)

And it will become one with the express approval of the site leader.

We have our nominee. Regardless of what it says on the front page, this is no longer a Democratic blog if it continues to attack Obama with right-wing smears.


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:48:57 PM EST

Re: This site's about to become a laughingstock. (2.00 / 1)

What your suggesting sounds like censorship. You folks sound more and more like the GOP circa 2002 each and every day. People have the right to express their own opinions even if you do not agree. Unity or else?


by Iceblinkjm on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:58:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This site's about to become a laughingstock. (2.00 / 2)

What censorship? The site's about to officially become a dead-end blog in the veins of H44. You're heading over a cliff, led by Dear Leader who petulantly diaries screeds against the Democratic nominee while pretending to support the party.

This has nothing to do with censorship. The founder of this site has made a decision to allow this site to descend into garbage. Who needs unity with that?


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:00:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This site's about to become a laughingstock. (none / 0)

where is your sig line from? I really like it.


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:59:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Censorship.... (2.00 / 1)


by JJE on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:01:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This site's about to become a laughingstock. (none / 0)

"Unity or else?"

No. Unity or another four years of George W. Bush's policies.

What we're getting close to is finding out who here would prefer that to a Democratic victory in November.


by JoeW on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:05:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton concedes in regards to MI & FL (2.00 / 1)

none of the above and that includes DKos


by soyousay on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:49:20 PM EST

Re: Clinton concedes (none / 0)

None of the above...?


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:15:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is really good to hear (2.00 / 1)

It makes me feel hopeful.....


by mffarrow on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:52:01 PM EST

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (1.66 / 3)

Totally false.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:52:48 PM EST

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (2.00 / 4)

What do you know from false? You post diaries quoting Holocaust-denier Andy Martin, for god's sake. You wouldn't know false if it bit you on the nose.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:01:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Um, okay. (2.00 / 2)

Should I perhaps translate it into another language?  Maybe in some alternate reality deadender speak?  Would that make it easier to understand?

She admitted they broke the rules.  The campaign conceded they should be punished.  Her very argument for staying in the race is GONE.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:01:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (2.00 / 1)

False how?

Is BTD not telling the truth?

Do you have a transcript of the conference call you would like to offer to prove your assertion?


by Same As It Ever Was on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:05:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (none / 0)

Big Tent is the only decent reading left on that blog.

I wonder if he will be called an Obama shill now.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:18:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (none / 0)

I hope not.


"Rankles and Rush Limbaugh, ruining the chaos brand since 2008."
by alyssa chaos on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:19:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a Ridiculous Diary! (none / 0)

Uh huh. Well, troll, willing to put your money (or, even better, reputation) where your mouth is?


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:16:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

GO HILLARY!!! (2.00 / 1)

Hillary is going to win this!  She is our next president!!  GO HILLARY!  Straight to the convention and then on to victory in November!  YEAH!

PS:  Send money!


by rf7777 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:54:34 PM EST

Re: GO HILLARY!!! (none / 0)

LOL.  <3.


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:01:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton concedes in regards to MI &amp; FL (none / 0)

Thats why she was living it up, yesterday.


Obama/Warner 2008
by MissVA on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:55:28 PM EST

Obama/warner '08 (none / 0)

Who would you want to run for that Senate seat if Warner got out of the race? I guess Leslie Byrne might be available but other than that...


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:09:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/warner '08 (none / 0)

I dunno. I like Mark Warner, but we need him in the Senate, man.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:16:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/warner '08 (none / 0)

That was my point. I don't think we can pull him out of that race.


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Sat May 31, 2008 at 05:35:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My suspicions (none / 0)

I've never had the heart to agree with Rachel Maddow's assessment that Clinton would take this to the convention.  It doesn't make sense, on so many levels... but honestly the Clinton camp has been so irregular with its actions that it was hard to refute her.

I hope you're right and that my original suspicions that most of what we've seen for the past two weeks have been attempts to drive up donations to pay off her debt.  That would be a bit dodgy, but at least sane.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Fri May 30, 2008 at 01:55:43 PM EST

Re: My suspicions (2.00 / 1)

She's finally realizing that this is fight that cnnot be won...She, and smartly so, isn't willing to lose her entire political career over it.


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, it depends... (none / 0)

I think it's going to the convention. I also heard that the RFK assassination incident and what was intimated against her has really hurt her, and that she considered it a game changer. I think she's probably becoming completely disenchanted with the Democratic party and I wouldn't be surprised if she blows it off and run as an independent. She's got 17 million voters and 90 million dollars in the bank for the GE.

Like I said elsewhere...the unity pony has been assassinated.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:21:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, it depends... (2.00 / 5)

So she's going to blow her and Bill's personal wealth on a doomed race? She's not carrying all of those 17 million votes through an Independent run, not by a long shot. Political suicide. I don't think she's that dumb or desperate to try it.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:24:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She's not blowing their personal wealth... (none / 0)

Hillary collected money for the general election campaign that she could not touch during the primaries, because it was over th 2300 limit.  The word on the street is that she's got 90 millions sitting for a GE run. So who knows what she will do. Is it a suicide run? Well it becomes a 3-way race, just like her husband and she could probably beat McCain & Obama in states she won during the primary.

After the way the party has treated her, I would not be surprised at all. I know I would. I'd give them the big ole middle finger.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:41:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's not blowing their personal wealth... (2.00 / 4)

The candidate that doesn't win the primary has to return general election funds. An independent run would have to be financed personally or with new funds. Not happening.

The party has let her lose fair and square. If she has a personal vendetta, that's her own decision to follow through on, but personal vendettas are often costly and personally destructive. I think she has a lot more to work towards that would be positive for her career than blowing it all on a grudge. What you would do isn't applicable.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:49:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now that's the whole point now... (none / 0)

isn't it. Nothing in this election season was fair & square. The media manipulated it all the way and suckers fell right in line. From what I can see with Obama's weakening support among key demographics, the Wright/Pfelar/Rezko/Ayers radical friends of Obama waiting to be hung about his neck in attack ads, we'll be lucky if we 10 states. As far as I'm concerned, we're going to lose anyway, cuz we're typical loser democrats afterall, we may as well go out with a big bang. So for me anything blows and anything goes now. Just need popcorn.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:57:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

now go eat some nice thistles and find your tail (none / 0)

Thank you for the update, Eeyore.


by emptythreatsfarm on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:15:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: now go eat some nice thistles and find your ta (none / 0)

Oh, bother.

Thanks for noticin' me.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Fri May 30, 2008 at 07:19:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Now that's the whole point now... (none / 0)

If you're that irresponsible and carefree about the result of such actions, then your motives and loyalty to the Democratic party is a little questionable - at the very least, your loyalty to Clinton supersedes it.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:27:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually I'm just tired of losing candidates... (none / 0)

or maybe just tired of democrats being too dumb to figure out who can actually win a GE. The republicans have figured it out in the last 7 of 10 elections and you guys just alienated the half the supporters of one of the men who won it twice in that rare 3 of ten elections.

I guess for those of us paying attention for the last 10 years or longer, we've had. We give up.

Edwards was actually our best chance to win big. But over time Hillary has gotten stronger because her tenacity has become admirable to even people in the republican party. I'm still not a strong Clinton supporter, but I do believe she can win the GE and he cannot.

As a side not for anyone interested, his astrological chart for election day in November is completely frakked. He will not have a good that day.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually I'm just tired of losing candidates.. (none / 0)

As a side not for anyone interested, his astrological chart for election day in November is completely frakked. He will not have a good that day.

Well, that about says it all for your take on the "popular" opinion.


by upstate girl on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:43:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually I'm just tired of losing candidates.. (none / 0)

So if Clinton was given the nomination has she not alienated half of the Democratic party also?


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:27:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's not blowing their personal wealth... (none / 0)

I am not sure if she would have to give them back IF she ran as an independent. But I am not an expert on such rules. I think of nothing else she could certainly make a case.


"And to my fellow Americans I say this... get off my lawn." John McCain, August 2008
by JDF on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:11:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's not blowing their personal wealth... (2.00 / 1)

What would possibly be her problem with how they party treated her?  That the didn't give her ENOUGH of a head start?  That she was only allowed to set up the primary schedule four years away from the election instead of the day before Iowa?

I don't understand what her beef is.  Except perhaps with the voters.


We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies.
by Jess81 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:04:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're right... (none / 0)

the monster bitch

with her white entitlement self

who ain't ever been called a n'ggr

whose husband was riding the dems & monica dirty

who would love to have Obama assassinated

is truly loved by all in her party.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:43:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're right... (none / 0)

Using other people's words against Obama...Classy...


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:28:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think she can run as an Independant (2.00 / 2)

I think the law disagrees with you on this one... specifically to prevent that sort of spoiler effect.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:36:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, it depends... (2.00 / 2)

the game was over before the RFK statement.

It has been mathematically over for awhile. Even if she would have gotten everything she wanted from the rules committee, it would have still been mathematically over.


by IowaMike on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:47:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's actually not over... (none / 0)

if it goes to the convention, which I'm sure she's planning to do. The chaos that is MI/FL is pointing that way. It should be fun.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's actually not over... (2.00 / 1)

I don't think it'll be fun watching McSame win this november, which is what will happen if she decides to turn this into a convention fight. We will look like the stereotypical leftists radicals and we will lose no matter the nominee. The Clinton's will then lose any political capital they had left and Hillary won't be the Senate Leader, Supreme Court justice, or anything she may still hope for.


by IowaMike on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:04:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No kidding (none / 0)

She'd be lucky not to get primaried for her Senate seat.

I mean, Kennedy took her aside and relayed his personal experience with that path not going well.  She's had her warning.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:37:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's actually not over... (2.00 / 3)

While you may think it is fun, I have a son in Iraq dodging bullets, so excuse me for not laughing.  Our kids are dying.  Personality politics will not stop the bloodshed.


by whognu on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:00:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll pray for your son... (none / 0)

and hopes he comes home safely. I have two of those myself still in school. Their future aint too bright right now. And here is the democrats putting up the weakest/least qualified racially divisive candidate against a warrior. I suppose that is why I am so angry at the party because from where I stand right now, things look pretty grim for the fall.

Peace to you and yours.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:15:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'll pray for your son... (2.00 / 1)

Thank you, the prayers mean a great deal to us.  I deeply appreciate them.  


by whognu on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:24:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Speaking of chaos... (none / 0)

...your talking points remind me of something...lives under bridges...takes marching orders from Rush Limbaugh...can't quite put my finger on it...


Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. -Voltaire
by kydoc2 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 04:14:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe you're thinking of (1.00 / 1)

Reverend Wright & Father Pfidiot. They have great talking points.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 05:01:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, it depends... (2.00 / 3)

Unless she can wave a magic wand and get put on ballots this late in the game, it's not an issue.  Ballot access for third parties is very hard to achieve and takes a long time to do so.


Beat McCain!
by thezzyzx on Fri May 30, 2008 at 02:57:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She's got money. (none / 0)

Money = access. She's not Ralph Nader. She's got money and enough support to do so and make sure it happens. There are a ton of pissed women out there. Just imagine the Lamont/Leiberman run on a large scale.


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:00:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's got money. (2.00 / 3)

It's an election, not an auction.


We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies.
by Jess81 on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:06:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's got money. (none / 0)

Clinton/Leiberman in 2008.


by Hoopy Frood on Fri May 30, 2008 at 03:55:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]