Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead"

Listening in on the Clinton conference call. The Clinton's have loaned their campaign another 6 million plus, bringing the total up to about $11.2M that Clinton has loaned her campaign, and they are open to loaning even more if necessary.

In regards to the delegate math, their campaign does not agree with the delegate number of their being a 2025 total with just 48 states, but instead argue that there are 2209 total, including MI and FL.

So, as far as any indication that this might be over, there's no hint of that coming from the Clinton campaign. The FL and MI results will be determined on May 31st, so that battle won't be decided until the end of the month.

The Clinton campaign emphasizes that they believe the FL and MI delegates "should be seated in full representation". If you do add in FL and MI, with both the delegate total and the popular vote, it currently stands at Obama having a lead by 26 delegates, 1916-1890,  with 55 being uncommitted from MI, 32 with Edwards, and 522 remaining delegates to be chosen (217 delegates and 305 superdelegates).

On the allowing for the full seating of MI and FL, if Obama gets to the point where he has enough delegates to win the nomination despite MI & FL being seated, then ultimately, that would be the best route for Obama to go through, even though it seems unlikely.

At this point, I'm personally about as detached from whomever wins as I've ever been. If Obama gets the nod, that's fine with me; but it does look like the Clinton campaign is going to keep on going and making their best argument for getting the nomination.



Display:


Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Oh dear.


by Bobby Obama on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:56:30 AM EST

Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrfJLUsmL fk


by internetstar on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:48:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

this is exactly what we don't need.


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:49:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

The NAFTA lady can't even win the nomination.  Put down the pipe.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:46:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (2.00 / 0)

Either of them can beat McCain....

It's weird... I know we are used to underestimating our candidates... especially if they are not our first choice, but geez oh man... Some of you are VASTLY overestimating McCain....


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:01:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

Everyone thought Kerry could beat Bush in 2004, too.  

Dems have taken for granted the quality of our  national candidates in the last couple of elections.  That's why we've been losing.


by Betsy McCall on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:04:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (2.00 / 2)

We've been losing because we have allowed the Republicans to control the narrative and define our candidates...

Change those two things, change the outcome.


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:14:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

Well then thank god we're going to nominate the candidate that won two thirds of the states, locked up the popular vote as early as February, has a HUGE pledged delegate lead, will have the SD lead shortly, expands the map (even to states that don't matter), brings reagan dems back to the party, adds a humongous youth vote, and has the honor to be good for his word after coming to an agreement with all of the other candidates with regard to Florida and Michigan.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:17:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

Sheer spin, no substance.


by doyenne49 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:07:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

He doesn't have those things?  What part was spin?


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:10:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

crickets


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clnton can (none / 0)

Pretty stupid analysis - let';s decide what the battleground states are and decide that clinton can win them and ignore:
the popular vote
the pledged delegates

Clinton is history - that argument just doesn't fly. Clinton has simply had a poorly run campaign that started with every advantage and has managed to lose. Obama has weathered the ridiculous Wright flap and the math doesn't lie - clinton has no chance. In the general election Obama will do better - he doesn't have to defend a vote for the Iraq war (like Kerry), he doesn't have to defend being for Nafta before being against it, he doesn't have to defend a pandering gas tax rebate for the oil companies.

Time to unite around the democratic nominee and go after a vulnerable McCain. His age, his mistatements, his anger problems and his lack of integrity make him very vulnerable. Plus - he will say something stupid to damage his campaign or credibility.


by correctnotright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:38:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama cannot win the GE, Clinton can (none / 0)

Well, to state the obvious, she can't win the GE until she wins the nomination and as of last night Slate is giving her a 4.2 percent chance of doing that.  So you can argue all you want about who would be the better candidate in the general election but if she doesn't get the delegates, she's never going to get there.


by Gene In PA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:44:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The electability argument makes no sense (none / 0)

since she's losing the nomination. If she can't even get the majority of her own party to vote for her (with Limbaugh's help), how in the hell does it follow that she can win nationally.

I agree with an earlier comment; either could beat McCain. But it's the height of silly season to say that her chance is better when she's losing the nomination.


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:54:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 3)


by The Animal on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:03:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Jerome, I think you're pretty obviously attached. And there's nothing wrong with that - but you're one of the only people around still pretending that Clinton has a shot. McGovern just defected, and apparently Wes Clark realizes that it's over.

Every impartial observer, and a lot of the partial ones on Clinton's side, realizes what has happened here. That you don't is symptomatic of attachment to a candidate.


Unable to rec or rate
Still supporting Obama
Still not putting up with "preening" posts
by jaiwithani on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:58:49 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Hey, for Jerome, this is a HUGE step! Don't get greedy.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:59:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Wow, you have special powers.

Look, I'm listening to the CC and telling you what they are saying. If you feel that I'm being partial in relaying what they are saying, point it out.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:01:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

In My Opinion (2.00 / 3)

only a partial commenter can report on the Clinton campaign's call to include MI and FL in the delegate and popular-vote totals without pointing out that, back in October, Clinton explained that she was keeping her name on the MI ballot because everyone knew the primary wasn't going to count.


by deminva on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:05:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

It's not clear at all in your post where the conference call stops and your own analysis begins. Specifically,

The Clinton campaign emphasizes that they believe the FL and MI delegates "should be seated in full representation". If you do add in FL and MI, with both the delegate total and the popular vote, it currently stands at Obama having a lead by 26 delegates, 1916-1890,  with 55 being uncommitted from MI, 32 with Edwards, and 522 remaining delegates to be chosen (217 delegates and 305 superdelegates).

On the allowing for the full seating of MI and FL, if Obama gets to the point where he has enough delegates to win the nomination despite MI & FL being seated, then ultimately, that would be the best route for Obama to go through, even though it seems unlikely.

No one believes that FL and MI are going to be seated at full strength with no MI delegates for Obama.


Unable to rec or rate
Still supporting Obama
Still not putting up with "preening" posts
by jaiwithani on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:08:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Well, if you were on the call, you would have heard, that the Clinton campaign does in fact say that those 55 are uncommitted.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:10:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Yes, but in your post it's not at all clear that these are the Clinton campaign's words, and not yours. Read over it again and I think you'll see what I mean.

The wording, combined with what many (including myself) perceive to be a long-running strong pro-Clinton/anti-Obama personal preference on your part, make it look like you're parroting Clinton talking points.


Unable to rec or rate
Still supporting Obama
Still not putting up with "preening" posts
by jaiwithani on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:14:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (1.00 / 3)

The Clinton campaign has been in fantasy la la land since February.  I don't see you lending credence to the views of other delusional crazies.  Why do you want to risk your credibility by continuing to cling to the utter crap coming out of the Hilaryous camp?  Why not do your continued credibility as a voice in the effort to get democrats elected a favor and reject this clap trap completely. Just ignore it like you would a toddler throwing a fit after a loss at Chutes and Ladders.  It's not like she's really a democrat or shows any loyalty to the party anymore.  

The sooner we all start to ignore her and let her go about screaming and frothing at the mouth as she heads down the path to irrelevance that begins with betraying one's party, the sooner we can force McSame to start paying for his own opposition research instead of getting a free pass while Hilaryous goes 11 million in debt to do it for him.

The stated goal of your website is to help democrats get elected.  If that's truly what you want, then the most productive thing you can do is to encourage Hilaryous to get the hell out of the way.

At this point if she keeps up with this bullshit about Michigan and Florida even though the average 5 year old knows her argument is disingenuous (the sham contests in Fla and Mi don't count per her own campaign's arrangements), it WILL destroy her career and legacy.  Florida and Michigan will NEVER be seated as is and an arrangement will only be reached after it makes no difference.  

If she keeps this up, I will start a conversation on various blogs about funding a primary challenge for her when she next has to defend her seat in the senate.  I'm always happy to see a DLCer replaced by a democrat anyway.  She can start acting like a democrat or many of us will work to get rid of her.  More and BETTER democrats.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:42:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you, lockewasright, your (1.50 / 2)

trollish post has reminded me of why I will continue to support Hillary until the last delegate, super or otherwise, has cast his or her vote and FL and MI has been resolved. While I admire Obama tremendously and would gladly support him as our nominee, the thought of working with persons such as yourself deeply saddens and troubles me. I have been a passionate supporter of Hillary for quite sometime now, but after last night I was forced to begin coming to terms with the idea of letting go and how it is very much like the grieving process. Your post was like a jolt of caffein to my system, and I realized I am no where near ready to let go. As long as Hillary continues her fight, I will be there with her. I believe she has the best chance to beat McCain and it is on to West Virginia! I do know that the vast majority of Obama supporters are fine, reasonable, spirited individuals. There are some, however, that really don't get what Obama is saying...


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:48:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you, lockewasright, your (none / 0)

Every candidate is going to have supporters who act like a**holes sometimes. Clinton has them, too. They key is to not let those few awful supporters distract from all the decent folk.

When you're ready to come around, there's plenty of good folk on this side to talk to. Sidestep jerks and you'll find us quick enough.


Unable to rec or rate
Still supporting Obama
Still not putting up with "preening" posts
by jaiwithani on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:59:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you, lockewasright, your (1.50 / 2)

So now I'm a jerk for not forgiving the horrible person that is Hilary Clinton.  I'm sorry.  It's not all ok.  As I said, she can get out of the way and I'll drop it.

I can list the grievances if you want, but the point is this:

I liked Hilary before the primary season started.  I find a whole lot about her behavior in this contest to be offensive and dishonorable.  I am no more of a troll for that than the people who've bought the taylor marsh and alegre and little otter lies (and those people peddle almost exclusively lies) are for their disdain for Obama.

The part that really gets me though is this:

I will NEVER be convinced of anything but that almost all of her supporters know but won't admit that the Florida and Michigan issue is absolutely dishonest bullshit.  HILARY'S campaign took part in crafting the agreement and the agreed to it.  Hilary's failure to take her name off of the Michigan ballot was dishonest.  It was not a mistake for Barack to be good for his word by removing his name from the ballot like just about all of the other candidates did too.  I am partially mad at Hilary for insulting america by pretending like we're all a bunch of 3 year olds who won't get it.  I am even more angry at her supporters for pretending like they ARE 3 years old and don't get it.

I also will never forgive her for functioning as a McCain surrogate.  "The GOP will do it anyway" is no excuse.  We're better than them because we aren't that sort of creep.

Lastly, I am an engineer and an atheist.  I live my entire life based on the idea that making decisions to disregard math and science is a VERY dangerous thing to do and has about a 95% failure rate (as is now evidenced by Hilary's campaign's collapse).  All Hilary's supporters have had for strategy since super tuesday is to look at the math and go "Nuh-uh."  It's really stupid and it's McCain's best chance.

You want trolls, look at the other side of the conversation.

I have a 3 year old son and a 2 year old daughter.  The need for a democratic president that doesn't serve as a veto pen while our congressional majorities that our party enjoys make an effort to restore for my children the civil right that I have enjoyed is far more important than Hilary's stupid fucking ego if it comes at a cost to the actual nominee's chances in November especially if the tactics have to be flagrantly dishonest shit like the Michigan/Florida shit.

The mood in this country is anti- republican more so than anytime in decades.  McSame is an extremely week candidate.  It's a dream for those of us who want a democratic president.  The only thing that can stand in the way is Hilary destroying Barack's chances.  She cannot win the nomination.  The only thing she can do is to cripple Barack not getting the fuck out of the way and SHE'S DOING ALL SHE CAN TO FUCK IT UP!!

She is a horrible human being.  I will never forgive her.  I WILL drop it if she gets out of the way.  If not, I WILL try to find a way for this to cost her.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you, lockewasright, your (2.00 / 0)

I couldn't agree more with a post than this.  Hillary chose this path and it's become a spiral of death.  Not only for her candidacy but for the Dems chances of winning in November.  Every time I thought she couldn't go any lower, she did.  

I seriously can't tell the difference between most of the "logic" her camp uses these days from the typical Republican crap we've been forced to deal with these last 8 to 10 years.  The biggest pile of dog shit is their Florida and Michigan strategy.  I can't stand people who change the rules after the fact to suite them.  Democrats here ought to be sickened by her efforts, not applaud them.  "Do anything to win" isn't something I've EVER supported and besides that, it's so damn short-sighted.  

The energy of this campaign has been generated by one candidate, Obama.  He's winning by all legitimate measures.  Hell, he's won!  To send those new troops home now by stealing the election will prove, once and for all, that our government is really run by one party.  We're supposed to stand for something better.


by crackerdog on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:31:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Please don't put words in my mouth. (none / 0)

I never called you a jerk and I certainly know you are entitled to your own opinions. I called your post trollish because it is. It's not necessarily what you say, it's the nasty way you say it:

she is a horrible human being

that gets you a troll rating here everytime.


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:09:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please don't put words in my mouth. (none / 0)

So, I am entitled to my opinion unless my opinion is that she is a horrible human being?!

Basically I got trolled for my opinion.  That's specifically against the rules for troll rating.  

Besides... she IS a horrible human being.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:16:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please don't put words in my mouth. (none / 0)

Again with you Hilary folks the rules apply to everyone ELSE.  For you though, the rules change according to your convenience.  

Undo your TR or you're as big a hypocrite as your lost cause candidate.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:23:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, you did not get TR'd (none / 0)

for your opinion. You got TR'd for:

from the rules

Users who are bashing or attacking any other user on the site, including authors of diaries and frontpage postings, will be banned. Candidates and politicians are fair game (but that doesn't mean you can use inflammatory language against candidates).

Please reread your posts. You will see that your descriptions of Hillary are inflammatory.


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:47:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No, you did not get TR'd (none / 0)

How should I state that Hilary is lacking entirely in any honor and is a basically bad person who has used her station in life to amplify her bad deeds and intents over the course of the nomination race?

It is my opinion that Hilary is a terrible human being.  I didn't start singing "DING DONG" from the Wizard of Oz or drop a C-bomb or anything like that.  

If you can't handle somebody pointing out that your candidate is not honorable and that the party would be better off without someone so disloyal as to place personal ego above the well being of the party then perhaps you should spend your time on something other than politics (like maybe a trip to Woolworth's for some Kleenex) as you haven't a thick enough skin for it (or an aptitude for picking a winner evidently).


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:06:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No, you did not get TR'd (none / 0)

crickets


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 08:27:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you, lockewasright, your (1.33 / 3)

sweet!  Please encourage her to ruin her career.  Not only will my candidate still win, but Hilary will be exposed for the creep that she is too.  Please, encourage and support her.  It's the only way that I can have both of my goals:

An Obama candidacy AND Hilary paying the price for her behavior.

Please continue.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:11:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

"The sooner we all start to ignore her and let her go about screaming and frothing at the mouth as she heads down the path to irrelevance that begins with betraying one's party, the sooner we can force McSame to start paying for his own opposition research instead of getting a free pass while Hilaryous goes 11 million in debt to do it for him. "

Bravo!


A PROUD Hopium user!
by xodus1914 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:34:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I think what a lot of people are responding to Jerome is your tendency to report without editorializing the analyses of the Clinton spin machine, while, with Obama's spin you tend to get brutal and sarcastic. Yes in this case you seem to just be telling us what they are saying but its hard to let go of the whole pattern.


by wasder on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:01:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I think what a lot of people are responding to Jerome is your tendency to report without editorializing the analyses of the Clinton spin machine, while, with Obama's spin you tend to get brutal and sarcastic. Yes in this case you seem to just be telling us what they are saying but its hard to let go of the whole pattern.


by wasder on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

And if the Clinton campaing says that the delegates from Mars are going to be seated - you would dutifully report that. Clinton is finished -no momentum, no money, not enough delegates to catch up and the media are finally realizing it. thye can spin all they want - but it is over. the only question is how graceful the exit will be. Obama can challenge McCain on the unnecessary war in Iraq - and clinton can't. He makes the better candidate - period. the polls will reflect that in the next few weeks and Clinton wil drop out as more people realize the inevitable.


by correctnotright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:46:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Mathematically, she DOES have a chance.  Logically, it probably won't happen.  But just like the baseball team who has to win 10 straight and have their opponent lose 10 straight to make the playoffs... its possible, but not probable.  That is all Jerome is saying.  


by yitbos96bb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:01:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Jerome, does that MI number include NO delegates or votes for Obama?

Can anyone really take a call to seat MI, as is, seriously?


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:58:50 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

it could happen now with an understanding that NO Hillary cannot use them in her arguments anymore.

otherwise yes Obama will get the uncommitted and will stay at about 100 delegates ahead.


Dream for tomorrow but fight for it today.
by TruthMatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:00:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Yes, they say that "Senator Obama made the decision to remove his name from the ballot" and that he campaigned for uncommitted. They also point out that Obama got in the way of having a re-vote.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:02:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Jerome, If they were using this argument against Edwards, who also removed his name from the ballot, would you be buying it?

(Better question: are you buying it?)

Or would you be posting all her quotes to the contrary, in which she too supported not just campaigning, but not being on the ballot. Or her campaign staff, who actually led to MI not being on the ballot. Or her Gov. supporter Granholm, who could have stopped the claimjumping but didn't.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:11:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

There is no truth to that. You need a reality check.


by kitebro on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Well we know for a fact Obama will get SOME of those votes.... His people won the Delegate slots in Michigan.  Some are still uncommitted and I'm sure some will go for Hillary.  But at the least, we know it won't be seated with Hillary having a 70 plus delegate lead.


by yitbos96bb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:06:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

October 07, huh. Anonymous sources to a blog, huh.

I'm so sorry this was such a mess, but it's no more Obama's fault than Clinton's fault that FL and MI got messed up. In many ways, it's MORE her fault since HER campaign has so many DNC decision makers on it who MADE this stripping of delegates happen in the first place.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Please provide us with a voting list, their votes and links to their publically declared support for a specific candidate.  Because Brazille and Dean haven't publically supported anyone and many feel Brazille is a Clinton supporter.


by yitbos96bb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:08:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More? (none / 0)

I have heard this account many, many times, and it conforms to my sense of what happened.  Nonetheless I have only ever seen this single alternative newspaper article as published confirmation.  The story sounds solid with the five anonymous campaign insiders, that I grant.

Do you or anyone else have a link to a reputable paper corroborating this account?  I have googled for a while and found nothing else with this description of the events, only the reasons provided by the campaigns of the withdrawing candidates, usually citing back to the orginal DFP article.


"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC
by Trond Jacobsen on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More? (2.00 / 1)

Note: Nothing "sounds" solid if it's 5 anonymous anything. Anonymous, plus copious documents proving it (ala Watergate) is one thing. But this is just anonymous confirming anonymous and its lack of other coverage makes it hard to believe a cnospiracy. Impossible, actually. The burden of proof in a conspiracy accusation in on those doing the accusing.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:42:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Snark (none / 0)

That line was snark, poorly delivered.  Anonymous = not solid.


"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC
by Trond Jacobsen on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:03:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Snark (none / 0)

My apologies!


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:18:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More? (none / 0)

Well, I talked with the officials in Edwards campaign after theirs ended, and that's what they said happened.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:06:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who? n/t (none / 0)


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:01:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More? (none / 0)

Why don't you figure out who the top 3 persons were on the Edwards team and you'll know.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:19:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

If Clinton keeps going, which she has every right to do, I really hope she runs an issues campaign.


by mefck on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:59:40 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I think a decision to do anything BUT lead an issues campaign for cause a serious run for the doors by the SDs. There's already so much coalescence around Obama, her first attack would push it over the top.

I'd love to see her do an issues campaign, win WV, take KY while Obama has OR and then everyone can exist with dignity. She can end on a winning note, but acknowledge his victory overall. He can end the primary on a win, and still acknowledge her strengths as a campaigner in light of the KY or WV wins, states he'd never take if he personally won the Daytona 500 AND saved an orphanage from a rogue Appalacian Volcano.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:02:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

ha, funny (2.00 / 1)

This demonization of our Democratic presidential nominee is not productive.


by Slim Tyranny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:06:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

he's still not the nominee (none / 0)

and its all fair game now.  Obama still has to prove himself.  His supporters need to understand that arrogance and gloating will get you no where.


by 4justice on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:33:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Ummm... okay....

Personally, I would like to see both candidates take on McCain... that guy has had a smooth, easy ride with the exception of the raking over the coals he gets from Dean and the DNC...

Clean his clock already!


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:08:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

No, you're right. Crushed upon girls and those who think Clinton is racist make up the vast voting majority in the Democratic party, thus Obama's remarkable upset this cycle of one of the most popular Democrats of all time.

Ever read Neil Stephanson's "Diamond Age?" Those crushed Obama girls are the real Mouse Army.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

issues are fine (none / 0)

and Clinton definitely talks about issues.  I just don't like these electability arguments that leak out to the media.  She isn't running on these, but her campaign talks about them in the press conference calls (probably did on the one Jerome is talking about).


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

But look at the "issues" she's chosen -- makes you wonder what kind of President she'd be.  Like the "gas tax holiday."  That's an issue, a supremely stupid one.  And not only won't it work as a policy matter, in addition, it didn't even work as an electoral matter.  Obama seems to have done much better in IN since that became the focus.

Also, wasn't this a McCain idea in the first place?  Getting your economic policies from Republicans is like getting your views on avoiding divisiveness from Pastor Hagee.


by David in NY on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:05:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The solution (none / 0)

1. Seat all Michigan and Florida delegates

2. Do not include Michigan or Florida in the first round of voting

3. New Magic Number 2208


by Wiseprince on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:00:00 AM EST

Re: The solution (2.00 / 2)

You can't change the "magic" number because you want a new magic number.

The DNC is the arbitor of this. Their number is THE number. You can argue MI and FL need to be seated in someway, but the attempts to "change the number" smack of despiration. But not the good kind.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:04:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The solution (2.00 / 1)

All the same, it's best for Obama if he gets the nomination on first ballot with Fl and MI seated as is.

Being able to win on the worst terms for him wil give him a lot more leeway and is simply the best for legitimacy.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Ernst on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:38:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The solution (none / 0)

how about this new, new magic number: 1844.5


by grasshopper on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:51:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That's what he should offer (none / 0)

then we can settle on 2025. Sound good?


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:06:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

perfect! n/c (none / 0)


by grasshopper on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:15:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

If Clinton stays in the race I hope she turns her sights on McCain.  That would be good for the party.    If she continues to attack Obama then she is hurting herself even more than she can hurt him.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:00:02 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Hillary already turned her sights on McCain - blasting his gas tax suspension that would be paid by the government (taxpayers).

Say what?  She was against it after she was for it, or what?


by David in NY on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:07:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

She's going "full speed ahead" with one intention in mind, fundraising.  She knows she has no shot at the nomination, even with Florida and Michigan seated.  All this is just a show that lets her stay in the race long enough to start getting back that $10 million her campaign owes her.  This economic slowdown is really hitting regular ol' folk like the Clintons pretty hard.  $110 million dollars doesn't go as far as it used to.


"We have said since Iowa that this is a race for delegates."
-Howard Wolfson
by belicheat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:00:14 AM EST

I'll give her campaign some money (none / 0)

If she pivots and helps Obama double-team McCain rather than do his work for him.


by JJE on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:07:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

even if that's the case... (none / 0)

and i had the thought myself, you could never admit it.  you can't raise funds that way this close to a general election, especially after you've already tapped out your big contributors.  she needs the "impulse" contributors, the small contributors, to believe that she has a chance -- if only they'd get behind her.

one last thing: i think it's incredible unrealistic to think that hillary is the only decision-maker here.  bill, possibly even chelsea, will have something to say about what hillary does next.  this is not a family of quitters.  as far as they are concerned, the writing has been on the walls before -- and they still came out on top.  why can't they do it one last time?  i'm sure they are asking themselves that.

that is their right.  the legacy of bill clinton is that he's never understood it was time for him to move off the stage...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:13:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

This is a good example of what the Party doesn't need right now.  If you think Brazile or anyone else in the Democratic party hates white people then you are crazy.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:21:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Then I suppose we could take the leap that Paul Begala hates eggheads and African Americans given he said...

"We can't win with eggheads and African-Americans."


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:32:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop lying (2.00 / 2)

Brazile never said or implied that.

Also, stop with the Rev. Wright stuff; beyond the fact that it doesn't work against Obama, the smear makes YOU look bad.


by Slim Tyranny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Brazile hasn't ever really come out for either candidate either.  She just took exception to Clinton supporters questioning the Rules committee as if they had done something wrong


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Brazile is ONE superdelegate who gets to talk on TV due to her notable, and noble, past experience in the party.

She shares just one trait with Obama. Why were focused on Brazile, as opposed to any other Superdelegate or former campaign manager is a little disconcerting, even amidst the conciliatory nature we Obamabots are trying to strike right now.

Brazile's words, plus a cup of coffee, equal a cup of coffee. Just saying.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:26:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Actually, here's the context of what she said in a follow-up piece in Salon. Quoting Donna Brazile out of context like that is a bit petty, IMHO.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/elect ion_2008/2008/05/07/brazile_begala/


by alteran on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:28:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

How do you turn "we don't just have to rely on", which is not pejorative, simply a statement of fact, into "the Dem party hates white people"?  I see nothing offensive of untrue in what Brazile said.


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:28:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I conclude that you cannot read very well, if you think that Brazile was saying that Democrats hate white people.  Please, you lose credibility with comments like this.


by David in NY on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:09:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

If JoseyJ lost 1 internet of credibility for every similar comment, she would be hundreds of internets in debt right now.


unapologetic Obama supporter
by dantes on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:24:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, no, no (none / 0)

You left out the other $24 of Bill's that she didn't report.

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Hillary Clinton excluded nearly $24 million of her husband's earnings from Senate financial statements from 2004 through 2006, capitalizing on rules that permit senators to limit disclosures of some of their spouses' income.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/359 29.html


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:09:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Well so much for the graceful exit theory I'd addressed earlier.  

It must be nice to have extra millions of dollars laying around that you can just throw overboard in the hopes it will make you less likely to sink.


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:00:25 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Obama's billionaire donors? All 1.5 million of them? The economy must be doing GREAT!

I'd bet there are more 8-figure earners at the Clinton Christmas dinner than there are in all of Obama's donor rolls.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:29:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I am currently rolling in hundred dollar bills (none / 0)

of course its monopoly money.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Then how do explain the fact that his average donation is lower, and so many of Hillary's donors were already maxed out on the primary so had to donate only for the GE?

Josey you are clearly angry - I get that - but you are clogging up this diary with a heapload of unsubstantiated nonsense.  


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Free Republic links FTW!  Good thing you used the IP address instead so no one could figure that out...


"I'll bite your legs off!" -- HRC 2008!
by username3 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:58:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Sorry, can you explain what you mean here?  


by David in NY on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:13:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fa, fa. (none / 0)

Yes, I rent in the most upscale lower middle class neighborhood in the city and have paid off my ten-year old Civic hatchback. When I travel, I stay in the finest hostels and eat at the most critically-acclaimed food carts.

We're all very elite and effete, we supporters of Obama.


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:14:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nice Free Republic link (none / 0)

Is this what you're now left with?  The dregs of political discourse?


You haven't seen impatient until you've seen a monkey waiting for a donut.
by bjones on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:14:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Pretty detached myself... I want this to be done and or the blogs to be full of diaries on just how much McCain really does suck...


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:01:36 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Amen!  It is time to focus on McSame being senile, mean, a flip-flopper, and just plain WRONG on many issues.  

I hope that everyone will now pull together and stop the bad-mouthing of our front runner.  Whether Obama was your personal choice or not, he is destined to be the nominee (and OUR PRESIDENT!)  So, get over yourselves, and start helping our cause to put a DEM in the W.H.


by citizensane on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:53:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Two Break (2.00 / 2)

Official - MSNBC: Former Sen. George McGovern, a Clinton supporter, is urging her to quit the race.

Reported - Wes Clark is calling on Clinton to leave the race


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:01:58 AM EST

Re: Two Break (2.00 / 1)

Further McGovern is calling Bill Clinton to inform him he is endorsing Obama.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:07:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope this is not gonna get embarrassing (2.00 / 2)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:10:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope this is not gonna get embarrassing (2.00 / 1)

I think it may be apparent by the weekend that several of her backer has turned.  It won't be too hard...her and Bill just need to keep cool in public.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:11:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

the McGovern switch will probably do it. (none / 0)

it just has not settled yet


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:19:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the McGovern switch will probably do it. (none / 0)

She is campaigning in South Dakota later this week...McGovern's home state


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope this is not gonna get embarrassing (2.00 / 1)

why not?  Clinton deserves it.  She dug her grave.  Roll in it baby

http://hillaryis404.org/


SquareState.net - Colorado Politics
by pacified on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:58:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Brilliant! (none / 0)

Great work, fellow nerd political junkies!


"I'll bite your legs off!" -- HRC 2008!
by username3 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:59:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

Probably not what Obama needs in the headlines.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:11:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

That is true - I get the feeling he may be the first of several though.

I was always a little shocked McGovern was backing Hillary anyway.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:12:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

Have you heard any elected Clinton spokespeople on any network?  I'm just wondering where Bayh, Randell, Corzine, Jackson-Lee and the bunch are.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:17:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

I wouldn't expect a peep out of Bayh until HRC formally concedes.  He's in WAY to deep.


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:01:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

Why not? It's not like it's Eagleton endorsing Obama, who was the party hack who brought McGovern down in '72.

Oh yeah, Americans can remember last week much less 35 years ago.


"I hope the two wings of the Democratic Party may flap together." - William Jennings Bryan
by pinche tejano on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:18:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and George McGovern three aspirants to the White house that ran really stellar campaigns backing Obama.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:52:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

And all three are failed Dem presidential candidates.  Just sayin'.


by Betsy McCall on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:06:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (2.00 / 1)

Hell, Hilary's a failed nomination candidate.  Also, just sayin'.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:11:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

Good for McGovern.

I hope this doesn't start a new round of trashing McGovern. He's a legitimate war hero and the last thing from a Judas.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:27:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

In other (turncoat) News Joe Andrew is on MSNBC and has not changed clothes since last night when he was on CNN - think it was a late night for the campaigns?


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:14:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

I think this also increases the chances Clark is now in the top 5 VP candidates?

I would certainly go for that pick, though I prefer Seibilus or Richardson, for the demographic reach they bring.

Clark brings the Military background, but Obama needs to reach the rural crowd, and the Latino voters as well...


Support the separation of Church and State: Vote YES on WA R-71!
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:19:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (none / 0)

He is quickly becoming my choice.  We'll have to see how he reacts in the coming days to get a clue of where he is...but he undercuts the whole McCain claim.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:21:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Two Break (2.00 / 1)

And can you imagine the number of "Obama/Clark Girl" videos? They make a pretty poster those two.

Clark's blinking rate continues to impress me. The guy is the Siddhartha of the blinking metric.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

"but it does look like the Clinton campaign is going to keep on going and making their best argument for getting the nomination."

Which is what? McGovern is calling for her to get out. More on their way. She is every bit the great politician that her husband was, and a more capable and intelligent person. She knows what's happening and it's only a matter of time now. A victory in WV and a split with Oregon and KY will be enough to let go.


by mikeplugh on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:01:58 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Why the long face, Jerome?  Your candidate lost, but we have a candidate who can win the White House and end 8 years of incredibly destructive Republican rule.  There is cause to celebrate.


by rayspace on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:01:59 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Bill Clinton was the US President for 8 years.

How can anyone be more Washington Establishment than that? Eight years of staffers and aides who now run the party? Come on. At least focus your bitter on something real. Like those pesky kids and their "changespeak."


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:33:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He was never Washington Establishment (2.00 / 0)

He was the best advocate for the middle class since Roosevelt.


by internetstar on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:50:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He was never Washington Establishment (none / 0)

Really? Nafta? Welfare "Reform?" Don't Ask Don't Tell? But middle-class savior doesn't mean "not establishment."

Trust me, I love Bill as much as any straight male, but as much as the snooty and meaningless punditocracy may sniff at Clinton over the years, his people are the Democratic Washington Establishment. Keerist, McAuliff and Rendell were the party chairs prior to Dean -- Andrew too. They were all in the tank for Hillary.

She had the establishment. The wind changed. The establishment moved on. But don't pretend there's a conspiracy unless it makes you feel better. But even then, don't pretend its real.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:02:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are either too rich to understand (none / 0)

what Clinton did for the middle class, or you were too young to know what was coming off.
Our standard of living was unprecedented.  He balanced the budget, kept us out of war, and made the middle class wealthy.

Clinton was a once in a lifetime lucky break.

Jimmy Carters, Barack Obamas are a dime a dozen.

This is the last chance in my lifetme to get a good, effective president who will make this America again.


by internetstar on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:50:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He was never Washington Establishment (2.00 / 0)

One of the most harmful tactics of Obama's campaign is his exploitation of GOP talking points to negate the successes of Clinton and other Dem presidents in solving our country's problems.  

Many years of hard work and success by good Dem leaders in proving to the public that Dem policies work and GOP voodoo policy doesn't have been obliterated. Thanks to Obama, Dems record of proven policy success has been weakened in the public opinion.  A very, very, very big mistake.

Those same arguments will be used against Obama if he makes it to the GOP.  He'll have to run on the false premise that he's a Democrat and represents a party of failure in the WH.  Good luck overcoming that one.  

I guess DC Dem leadership doesn't mind Obama trashing their record as long as they get those corporate donations for their next race.


by Betsy McCall on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:16:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He was never Washington Establishment (none / 0)

Can you show some examples to match your blather?


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:12:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He was never Washington Establishment (none / 0)

Unless you were gay and middle class. Just saying.


by Rationalisto on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:43:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

And Obama endorsers McGovern, Kerry, and Kennedy won how many terms? It ain't over until the fat person votes.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:55:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

What does that mean? It's more proof that Obama doesn't have the "establishment."


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:02:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Okay, seriously, if these three DEMOCRATS had endorsed Hillary, would you be bashing them...?


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:12:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Well, since Jerome is a Hillary supporter and last night was somewhere between a devastating blow and a fatal one to Clinton, I imagine a long face is in order.

I'd feel the same way if it was the other way around, I'd probably even mumble about maybe sitting out the election for a few days before getting over it and getting behind the nominee.


by alteran on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:33:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

...and propped up with 1.5 million individual donors and the majority of delegates and popular vote. He'll be fine. Especially if Clinton supporters come around to realizing that at some point you have to actively stop campaigning against the Democratic nominee just because he wasn't your first choice.


by upstate girl on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Why not spend a day on the repub blogs to reassure yourself - they are preparing for a blowout in November


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I feel bad for the Republican blogs then. The last "certain victory" they celebrated early didn't work out so well either.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:03:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Sorry I wasn't clear - a losing blowout:)


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:01:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Just watched McCain speak...  he sounded AWFUL and he was just addressing supporters...

He's so beatable, I could do it.


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:36:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Beer?

I thought I was supposed to have a Latte in my Volvo with Obama, since obviously I am some kind of Elite....

Seriously Jose, I hear your anger, and if you (and I suspect a number of posters here) decide to sit this one out in the fall....

But, what is NUTS is someone telling me voting for McCain is an option?

All I have to say to that is:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and John Paul Stevens.

THOSE TWO are hoping all TRUE democrats like you put a democrat in the WH, so they can retire and not have Alito version 2.0 put in their place.


Support the separation of Church and State: Vote YES on WA R-71!
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:59:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

You are 100% wrong.  And making heavy-handed assertions with no evidence.

Please understand that McCain is positively loathed by many Republicans; of which there are far less then Dems these days in America; and he's taking the Bush position on pretty much everything.  How can he win?

The idea that millions of Dems are going to defect and vote for McCain is a fantasy, nothing more.  It's up there with the super-delegate defection fantasy.  No facts behind it.


by Lawyerish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:32:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Josey, surely you jest.

Obama can put states in play that Clinton would have lost decisively.

And the hatemongering went the other way, if I recall, starting with the Big Dog himself.

A black man in America being the candidate of the Establishment?  LMAO.


by rayspace on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:09:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

As long as Florida and Michigan count in the delegates, then that is the magic number.

Not seating them would hand both MI and FL over to McCain as the Democrats would disenfranchise both states.

I am curious in seeing what the numbers would be like if every state had closed primaries.


The Kentucky Democrat
by kydem on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:02:51 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Fine. Count them. She has no money, and still would be a long shot to get to 2209 with the current climate among supers. Seat them today.

If you're curious about the numbers if they were all closed primaries, campaign to the DNC to change the rules next time. This one is over.


by mikeplugh on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:04:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Look at Jerome's map on the front page.  Obama is winning MI.   How do you explain this if Michaganers care so much about their primary?


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:05:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Stop it with the kidz namecalling - I'm 50, how old are you?


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:36:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I'm 40 myself... and I agree....

Florid has a popular Republican Governor who may well be tapped as McCain's veep and they also have a Gay Marriage Amendment (aka conservative red meat) on the ballot this Fall...

It will be an uphill battle regardless....


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:38:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

HEAR, HEAR!

For the life of me I can't understand why Democrats are constantly buying into this nonsense that Florida is a swing state.
For the record. Flordia is a red state just like TX, and the rest of the Southeast US. Obama has raised enough money to make McCain have to defend these states, but's that's only a tactic so that MCcain doesn't have enough money to go after the real batleground states out west, like Colorado.
Between Libermann campaigning for MCcain almost 24/7 in FL, there is no way that Obama or Hillary is beating a 70+ War Veteran in a state that is made up of mostly Jews, senior citizens and retired military. And from what I hear, the Cuban population down there is in the bag of the GOP after years of Jeb Bush , a moderate Republican who has a Hispanic wife.
Hillary may do better that Obama in the Sunshine state, but nobody is turning Florida Blue in 2008.


A PROUD Hopium user!
by xodus1914 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:23:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

no democrat can win florida... (none / 0)

it's one of the quirks of polling that democrats running statewide in florida always look good in the spring only to lose in the fall.  this is partially due to the fact that random dailing apparently polls disproportionately in south florida (where democrats are strong) and is not geographically proportionate to the actual voters in the state.  katherine parker once asked, does anyone get polled in orange-seminole-brevard?  apparently not, but this is the popular center of the key i-4 corridor (hillsborough, which is geographically in the i-4 corridor is not politically in the corridor as it is not a swing county).

hillary had no more chance of winning florida than barack does (well, she might have, had she done what florida democrats told her was necessary to win -- devote millions of dollars and thousands of organizers to the state starting in april)...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:55:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

55 here, and I walked with my Mom for Jack Kennedy door to door.

But, If you want to call me kid, that's OK by me?

I have been called worse.


Support the separation of Church and State: Vote YES on WA R-71!
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:02:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Well my son did vote for Obama in the primary but the fact that we have an adult son probably means that my wife and I are not very young and we voted for him too.


by Gene In PA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't bother responding to it (none / 0)

All it does is buzz around your ear until you swat at it, then it flies away until you've forgotten about it. There's really nothing you can do about that sort of annoyance except do your best to ignore it.


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:26:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I hear people claiming this, but just don't find it necessarily credible.  I've seen no polling which suggests that whether or not MI and FL are seated at the convention will influence whom they pick for president.

I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just saying that if there's evidence to support your claim, I've yet to see it.


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:06:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

FL and MI would not be "disenfranchised".... nor were they.

Let's be careful with the use of tat word... especially in light of the SCOTUS ruling regarding Indiana's voter i.d. law and the others that states will implement as a result...

THAT is disenfranchisement... it is real... it is here... and it will take work to keep it from hurting us in the general election.

If FL and MI voters decide themselves not to vote for whatever reason, that is their choice... it is not disenfranchisement.


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:11:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

it's amazing how floridians feel differently... (2.00 / 1)

than hillary supporters elsewhere.  the phone call from one of my friends asking me, "why does the media keep telling me my vote didn't count?" is etched into my brain.  well, it did count.  just not the way some wanted...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:18:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's amazing how floridians feel differently.. (none / 0)

Well, to be honest, I live back in Ohio again, but was in Florida until April...  I voted in the new mayor in my town... and my vote got counted... and I was able to do it... so I was not disenfranchised....

But I understand the confusion....


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:28:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Clinton still has one bullet left in her chamber with Oregon. It's a long shot but an upset there could create the same "disruption" in superdelegate psychology that they were looking for with North Carolina. The real problem they face is that it's really hard to see how they establish a moral claim on the nomination -- they needed to be able to establish a popular vote lead, and that's leaning towards implausible after last night.

The one good thing about where we are is that maybe the Obama fans will stop the apocalyptic whining and focus on actually delivering on all the hope and change they've promised us.


by blueflorida on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:03:45 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 4)

You hope.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:05:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

they're convinced that they've whined their way to victory ;-)


by campskunk on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:08:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

oh my god (none / 0)

is there anything you say thats not insult of some sort?


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

You chose your name wisely.


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:38:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I love how you apply that (none / 0)

selectively. I could have sworn that no less than a couple of months ago, all we heard from Clinton supporters was, "Woe is me. The media is sooooo MEAN." No wait, I've seen that used pretty recently, too.

I guess it takes a whiner to know a whiner.


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:52:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Hillary will never win Oregon, short of an Ayers/Obama/Wright threesome with US Flag condoms all around.

Surely you realize that.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:07:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

To repeat myself: It's a long shot. Again, repeat: it's a long shot. One more time: it's a long shot.

Good enough?


by blueflorida on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:10:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I guess after months of "it's a long shot, but..." goalpost changes, I'm a bit sensative. It's a long shot that Obama could win West Virginia, but it ain't going to happen and isn't worth factoring into any potential scenarios.

Too often "ridiculously long shot" has equalled "shot, so let's go for it!" and the Oregon question, even if we were talking "winner take all" or even "Oregon Winner Take All" it still won't happen -- and still has the chance to keep this thing dragging out past the point of anyone's positive future.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:37:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 3)

I don't think you're reading the tea leaves. The superdelegates aren't going to see Oregon as anything. The goal posts have to stop moving at some point. Obama "fans" aren't a monolithic group. They're Democrats of various stripes, as are "Clintonistas" and it's time we all started acting like grown ups to get McCain.


by mikeplugh on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:07:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

As I said above, clearly, winning Oregon is a very long shot for Clinton. That said, especially after last night, despite there being a very remote chance of it happening, if it were to happen, an Oregon victory by Clinton would throw at least some of the media and superdelegates back into a "what's up with obama?" mode.

Just let me be clear: I agree with the consensus that, as of last night, Obama moved from being likely to being the nominee, to having removed any and all of the nagging doubt.


by blueflorida on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

I guess most people have never really been to the PNW?

Hillary wasn't going to win Oregon before last night, now, there is even less chance.


Support the separation of Church and State: Vote YES on WA R-71!
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Exactly right.


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:15:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Sorry, but said "apocalyptic whining" is just the noise our servos make.  You can't have the change without it.


"I'll bite your legs off!" -- HRC 2008!
by username3 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:06:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

Jerome, given you comments to the contrary, I would be interested in your final thoughts RE the Gas Tax. I know you felt it was a loser for Obama, but do you see his newfound strength in IN to be a result of this issue in anyway?


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:05:47 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

What happened, at least from what I gathered in the previous post on the exit poll, was that it gained Clinton conservative voters, but lost her more liberal voters. My perspective of it was from looking at it as an issue that Republicans clobber Democrats on, and Clinton had a 'divide and conquer' strategy to take it away from McCain for a GE, but within a Democratic primary, Obama's portrayal of it worked to his advantage with liberals. Clinton probably felt she would hold onto her liberal support, while gaining more conservatives. I still do think, as a way to frame the issue against the Republicans in a GE, that Clinton did very well-- it just wasn't the solution for a Democratic primary where the other candidate can go to the left.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:16:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

within a Democratic primary, Obama's portrayal of it worked to his advantage with liberals.

By "Obama's portrayal of it," you mean his being truthful and honest about it, right?


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

beyond the politics (none / 0)

do you think it is a good solution?

and, it might be hard to separate it from the politics if you think that it was never going to pass but still would like to hear your thoughts


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:30:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: beyond the politics (none / 0)

It seemed pretty clear that he wasn't interested in that question.


by The Animal on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:58:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: beyond the politics (none / 0)

I don't know, I've seen conflicting arguments, and don't really have a personal opinion on the matter.

Overall, I'd like to get out of oil consumption and onto renewable fuels. Whatever course of action that did that as soon as possible is what I would support on this issue.

I don't think too much about the incremental solutions, just the political implications.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:12:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But the strategy argument makes no sense to me (none / 0)

The reason I find that line of reasoning strange is that, by any reasonable standard, Hillary's job was to win the nomination at this point.

She has been polling somewhat better than Obama in national tracking polls, and due to Florida has, right at this moment, clearer electoral math (please don't hurt me Obama supporters I'm one of you I'm just saying!) However, she had, before last night, a somewhat problematic path to the Democratic nomination at best.

Your argument about the gas tax seems to be purely political - she wanted to get on the right side of a politically good issue in the sense that it attracts the center and the right. Taking political positions is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, but that makes no sense as a strategy - she had a little capital to spend in the GE, but it was all over if she didn't secure the Democratic nomination.

In terms of strategy, I just can't possibly see how she would intentionally take GE-focused position that might hurt her in the primary at this juncture.


by Exhausted Pennsylvanian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:02:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the strategy argument makes no sense to me (none / 0)

And I should have clarified - she's been doing a bit better in the national tracking of head-to-head matchups versus McCain.


by Exhausted Pennsylvanian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:03:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the strategy argument makes no sense to me (none / 0)

They probably miscalculated that the liberal women would stick with her in their high numbers regardless of the issue.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:14:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But the strategy argument makes no sense to me (none / 0)

(shrug) Okay, I suppose that's a reasonable argument - if it seems like a huge strategy blunder to me, that's probably just because it came at the worst possible time.


by Exhausted Pennsylvanian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:22:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

nope... (none / 0)

barack didn't gain support because he took a firm stand on the gas tax holiday that hillary proposed.  he just didn't lose the support that some may have expected.

barack's indiana voters stood with him for other reasons and that issue wasn't the wedge that it may have polled.  there were definitely obama voters who supported hillary's position.  they just didn't support hillary.  it might have done better if a.) she had come out on this earlier, as absentees had already been sent out, and b.) north carolina wasn't voting at the same time.  the hoosiers i talked to overwhelming believed that barack would win big in carolina.  it did damper the enthusiasm hillary's campaign might have otherwise received...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary Supporters (2.00 / 1)

Please answer:

How can you possibly think of not seating any Michigan Dels for Obama? If you even sit 2/3 of undecideds for him, and let the Florida vote stand Obama still wins.

My biggest problem with prolonging this race is something none of the blogs or pundits have noticed. McCain cannot stand up to a long, arduous campaign. With no pressure on him at all, he is having frequent "senior" moments, whispers in his ear, and having to explain things.

Imagine how he will be when there is pressure. He can probably take the pressure of a short, 2 month campaign, which is why we have to be able to go at him  now. I gurantee he will break down.


by alectimmerman on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:14:11 AM EST

Re: Hillary Supporters (2.00 / 2)

Oh, I think Obama will get delegates from MI, without a doubt.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:17:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

Is there any evidence that anyone outside of the Clinton camp find the Michigan election where Obama is given 0 delegates to be a fair result?  Can you make an argument?  Sure.  But if you aren't convincing anyone, what's the point?


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:15:11 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

He'll get delegates, that'll be part of the May 31 decision.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:18:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

If that happens though, then it's not enough to help Clinton.  

My feelings about MI/FL is that they will be seated if and only if they can't flip anything.  People might accept a SD decision, but it would be very hard to retroactively change the rules to make the candidate who would have lost without that become the winner.  It would be very hard for that nomination to be sold to Obama's supporters.


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:30:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The end game (2.00 / 0)

The super delegates will not want to look like they are piling on and kicking Hillary while she is down. They don't want to piss off her supporters but they do want to move against McCain and prevent any more damage to the presumptive nominee.

If Hillary focuses on McCain from here on out they will be happy to hold off until after PR. You will see a steady stream going to Obama but no tidal wave. You will likely see the climbing negatives of both candidates reverse course if they are training their fire on McCain and focusing on issues. Hillary's negatives post-Wright are higher then Obamas. The kitchen sink has done more damage to her then Barack. If Obama gets hit by a meteor between now and June Hillary will be there to take up the banner.

However if the kitchen sink continues watch for a flood of supers to move to Obama including many Clinton supporters. It's Hillary's move. If she goes nasty they will shut her down, if she carries on with class they will do everything to support her and unify the party.


by hankg on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:16:25 AM EST

Re: New Obama Strategy, Win by Losing (none / 0)

Now how do you suppose Obama is going to look in the  next couple of weeks when he loses in a landslide in West Virginia and Kentucky. That is sure going to make him look like a real champion not isn't it? I believe that Hillary made it perfectly clear this morning that this race is going to continue despite the media bashing and Obama "rap it up" convention.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:26:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Obama Strategy, Win by Losing (2.00 / 1)

Probably about the same as McCain looked when he lost some late elections in Huckabee territory.

It'll help that he'll win OR big on the same day as KY.


But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.
by thezzyzx on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:32:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Obama Strategy, Win by Losing (none / 0)

How will it look?

It will look like a race being held in WV and KY.

He could personally raise the economies of both states a good 300% and he'd not crack 40%.

I think a bigger concern is McCain still not breaking 75% in North Carolina, running unopposed. (where did it end up, 72?%) That's a state he NEEDS.

Telling.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:08:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Same old Obama Strategy, Win by Winning (none / 0)

It won't change a thing. Problem is the super delegates can count and when you have the most votes, the most delegates, the most money raised and the most states that is called winning by winning.

The remaining states being split by Obama and Clinton will have zero impact on that.


by hankg on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:17:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Well said, Jerome:

At this point, I'm personally about as detached from whomever wins as I've ever been. If Obama gets the nod, that's fine with me; but it does look like the Clinton campaign is going to keep on going and making their best argument for getting the nomination.

So am I.

The real question to me is whether there is any room in the Obama Democratic Party for progressive populists. He reaches out to right wingers, but never to the progressive populists.  My experience with many Obama supporters on Daily Kos is that no dissent is allowed.  "Clean coal" will be the mantra now.  He's running ads in Kentucky.  The environment thrown under the bus after FoE Action endorses him. A real message to environmentalists there.

I will not betray progressive beliefs for a person.  Is there a place for progressive populists in the Obama Party?  Clinton is a realist, and she will deal with the progressive populists if we have leverage. Obama, however, seems to believe his supporters.  We may need mroe leverage with Obama, for some of his supporters define a centrist as a progressive and will attack all dissent.

This is why issue activism must continue no matter whether a Democrat or Republican is in the White House.


by TomP on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:16:53 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Daschle will be the one with leverage.


by Jerome Armstrong on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:19:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 2)

I agree with this... I think we have to be Cornell West style supporters "I'll work my butt off to get him elected, but go right back to yellin' at him when he gets in the house"


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:19:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 3)

Tom -

No one has been a bigger HRC supporter than I have been, but it just isn't going to happen.  Rather than focus on what Obama ISN'T, let's focus on what he IS.  

He is the presumptive Democratic nominee.
He is a far cry better than McCain.
He is the best hope for a moderate Supreme Court.
He is about ending the Iraq War.
He is about reform in health care - albeit not quite what I want.

Obama has a tough road ahead of him.
It won't get any easier if Clinton Dems are nipping at his heels.
I, for one, am prepared to offer my full support to Obama.


by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:30:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think you misunderstood my (none / 0)

comment completely.

First, I never have been a Clinton supporter.  Second, nothing in my comment indicates I was not going to vote for the Democratic Party nominee.

But I fear your depiction of "nipping at his heels" is an attack on any issue dissent.

I will not lie for Obama.  I will not turn my back on my fundamental beleifs.  Where Obama is wrong, I will say so.  If he betrays the environment or wokers, I will say so.

I will not be a ditto head for Barack Obama.  These issues existed before Obama and will exist after him.  issue activism is essential.

If he refuses to end the Iraq occupation, I will protest in the streets.

And if Clinton prevails, I will do the same.

I supported Kerry in 2004 with a lot of money and work, even though he voted for the AUMF and was weak in his opposition to the Iraq occupation.  While I supported him, I did not change my views or efforts to end the occupation.  And had Kerry won and not acted, I woudl have protested against him also.    

Supporting the Democratic nominee does not mean turning one's back on progressive issues and fights.    

The struggle continues.  Where Obama acts in accordanace with the interest of workers and the Earth (the environment) he deserves our praise.  Where he does not, he deserves criticism,


by TomP on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:17:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

This is my concern - with both Clinton and Obama.

I currently support Obama (who was my 4th or 5th choice) only because, of the two, I feel more confident that progressive activists will at least find his door open. With the Clinton usual suspects back in place (and with her active disparaging of the left), I can't see as we'll have any more of a seat at the table with Clinton II than we did with Clinton I (which was almost none).

But I'm not fooling myself. Neither of them are any more progressive than their primary political calculus has - in their views - necessitated.


by odum on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:43:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Excellent points.  We need that realism.  And that is the hope with Obama.  But we need to build a movement for change that is issue based and use it to ensure that Obama has to do more than give us a seat at the table.  We must be so strong that he cannot ignore a progressive populist agenda.  We cannot rely on the king's whims.  If the progressive populist left fails to push, it wil be marginalized by Obama.

Jerome points out that this is Dashle's victory.  

(In the end, it's all DLC, isn't it?)

I think you and I see things in some similar ways.  


by TomP on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:30:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Back Off (none / 0)

Nice to see everyone pile on Jerome.  Thank you Jerome for being a rare voice of civility in all of this. I am not detached like Jerome, I have become a Hillary die-hard.  That may even be a literal statement at this point- DIE HARD.  I am a loyal, activist Democrat.  I donate lots of my own money (which my partner yells at me about)- and I follow politics with an almost obsessive interest.  For the life of me- I WANT to love Obama.  I really do- especially now that he is probably going to be the nominee (though I don't count Hillary out yet).  I am just not that into him (for more reasons than I have time to list in this simple comment).  I do not believe that he will be able to win the general election- for a variety of reasons.  More than all of that, I think Senator Clinton is one of the best candidates the Democratic Party has seen in a long time.  I really and truly do.  That is why I will fight this fight with her until it's REALLY over (when she says it is).  I think what last night showed everyone is that Obama wins when the demographics work for him- Clinton wins when they don't (even though he outspends her 3 to 1).  What does this say about the general election?  Let the Superdelegates decide.  I'm moving on the West Virginia.  


by easyE on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:18:24 AM EST

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

Fortunately for you and your bank account -
The super delegates will be deciding this one quickly this week.
By the weekend it should be, mercifully, all over.
by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:27:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

Thank you for your candid remarks. I like yourself am a die-hard Clinton supporter. I agree with your thoughts and feelings on this campaign, and admire Hillary for all she has been able to accomplish during this long process. She has accomplished probably more in her lifetime than any woman in American History. Although the media and the Obama campaign would love to have the fight over with, those of us who have followed the tenacious campaigning of Hillary, understand her passion and her commitment to continue this until the bitter end, and it looks as if that is going to happen. She has scheduled events for West Virginia and Kentucky, which means she is going to fight on, which we all knew in our hearts that she would. She told us as much, we believed her, and she is keeping her promise. What a remarkable woman and great candidate. It sympathize with the Democratic Party for getting themselves into such a fiasco, and would like to see a Democrat in the House, but have some serious reservations about Obama.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:37:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (2.00 / 2)

She has accomplished probably more in her lifetime than any woman in American History.

Right on!  Take that, Sojurner Truth, Hellen Keller, Rosa Parks and Elanor Roosevelt!  


I'm only a click away
by juliewolf on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:48:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

Hillary is great, sure, but she's not accomplished "more" than some of these leaders, upon whos shoulders she stands. (I didn't realize that spouses of former Govs. were the first female govs in the country. Interesting context with Hillary's First Lady stint.)

From the Women's International Center
http://www.wic.org/misc/history.htm


Women in Politics
American women have had the right to vote since 1920, but their political roles have been minimal. Not until 1984 did a major party choose a woman Geraldine Ferraro of New York to run for vice-president (see Ferraro).

Jeanette Rankin of Montana, elected in 1917, was the first woman member of the United States House of Representatives. In 1968 Shirley Chisholm of New York was the first black woman elected to the House of Representatives (see Chisholm). Hattie Caraway of Arkansas first appointed in 1932 was, in 1933, the first woman elected to the United States Senate. Senator Margaret Chase Smith served Maine for 24 years (1949-73). Others were Maurine Neuberger of Oregon, Nancy Landon Kassebaum of Kansas, Paula Hawkins of Florida, and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland.

Wives of former governors became the first women governors Miriam A. Ferguson of Texas (1925-27 and 1933-35) and Nellie Tayloe Ross of Wyoming (1925-27) (see Ross, Nellie Tayloe). In 1974 Ella T. Grasso of Connecticut won a governorship on her own merits.

In 1971 Patience Sewell Latting was elected mayor of Oklahoma City, at that time the largest city in the nation with a woman mayor. By 1979 two major cities were headed by women: Chicago, by Jane Byrne, and San Francisco, by Dianne Feinstein. Sharon Pratt Dixon was elected mayor of Washington, D.C., in 1990.

Frances Perkins was the first woman Cabinet member as secretary of labor under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Oveta Culp Hobby was secretary of health, education, and welfare in the Dwight D. Eisenhower Cabinet. Carla A. Hills was secretary of housing and urban development in Gerald R. Ford's Cabinet. Jimmy Carter chose two women for his original Cabinet Juanita M. Kreps as secretary of commerce and Patricia Roberts Harris as secretary of housing and urban development. Harris was the first African American woman in a presidential Cabinet. When the separate Department of Education was created, Carter named Shirley Mount Hufstedler to head it. Ronald Reagan's Cabinet included Margaret Heckler, secretary of health and human services, and Elizabeth Dole, secretary of transportation. Under George Bush, Dole became secretary of labor; she was succeeded by Representative Lynn Martin. Bush chose Antonia Novello, a Hispanic, for surgeon general in 1990.

Reagan set a precedent with his appointment in 1981 of Sandra Day O'Connor as the first woman on the United States Supreme Court (see O'Connor). The next year Bertha Wilson was named to the Canadian Supreme Court. In 1984 Jeanne Sauve became Canada's first female governor-general (see Sauve).

In international affairs, Eleanor Roosevelt was appointed to the United Nations in 1945 and served as chairman of its Commission on Human Rights (see Roosevelt, Eleanor). Eugenie Anderson was sent to Denmark in 1949 as the first woman ambassador from the United States. Jeane Kirkpatrick was named ambassador to the United Nations in 1981.

Three women held their countries' highest elective offices by 1970. Sirimavo Bandaranaike was prime minister of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) from 1960 to 1965 and from 1970 to 1977 (see Bandaranaike). Indira Gandhi was prime minister of India from 1966 to 1977 and from 1980 until her assassination in 1984 (see Gandhi, Indira). Golda Meir was prime minister of Israel from 1969 to 1974 (see Meir). The first woman head of state in the Americas was Juan Peron's widow, Isabel, president of Argentina in 1974-76 (see Peron). Elisabeth Domitien was premier of the Central African Republic in 1975-76. Margaret Thatcher, who first became prime minister of Great Britain in 1979, was the only person in the 20th century to be reelected to that office for a third consecutive term (see Thatcher). Also in 1979, Simone Weil of France became the first president of the European Parliament.

In the early 1980s Vigdis Finnbogadottir was elected president of Iceland; Gro Harlem Brundtland, prime minister of Norway; and Milka Planinc, premier of Yugoslavia. In 1986 Corazon Aquino became president of the Philippines (see Aquino). From 1988 to 1990 Benazir Bhutto was prime minister of Pakistan the first woman to head a Muslim nation (see Bhutto).

In 1990 Mary Robinson was elected president of Ireland and Violeta Chamorro, of Nicaragua. Australia's first female premier was Carmen Lawrence of Western Australia (1990), and Canada's was Rita Johnston of British Columbia (1991). In 1991 Khaleda Zia became the prime minister of Bangladesh and Socialist Edith Cresson was named France's first female premier. Poland's first female prime minister, Hanna Suchocka, was elected in 1992.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

Die hards die hard.

Obama out spends Hillary 3 to 1 because he out raises Hillary 3 to 1.


We shall overcome. Yes we can.
by Sam Wise Gingy on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:31:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

That is why I will fight this fight with her until it's REALLY over (when she says it is).
Um, that's not how it works. She doesn't actually get to say when it's over, that's the voter's job. And I think that they said it pretty loudly yesterday. She's just not listening.
by Gene In PA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:13:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back Off (none / 0)

well then, fight for her. That's a good spirit to have. And loyalty can be a great attribute to posses.

and if you never warm up to Obama, that's also fine.   That's not something you need to come to terms with yet.


!
by alex100 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:12:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

It is the media that wants to have a hay day over the loss in NC, knowing perfectly well that she wasn't expected to win there. Now their ranting and raving for the fourth (4) time in this campaign that she should give it a rest. Doesn't look like they are going to give the media the satisfaction, and most importantly she is going to make sure that Michigan and Florida are counted. So yes it is full speed ahead into WV, Kentucky and Oregon and lets see what  happens.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:20:13 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

But plenty of folks here predicted she would win NC and the Clintons had about a hundred stops there between the three of them.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:24:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

The RNC campaign ad will open with grainy footage of student riots during the '60s and shots of arrested Weather underground members. Then it will cut to Obama's statment in defense of his relationship of William Ayers that he was only 8 or 9 years old when these events took place. Next the ad will cut to the photographs of Ayers stomping on the American flag as the narrator asks, "Tell us Barak Obama how old were you when Bill Ayers, unconvicted terrorist, did this?"


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:21:17 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

There are similar ads that could be run against Clinton.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

Well, it appears that most Americans could give a shit about all those old grainy newsreels.  The right-wingers will scream and yell, but they were never going to vote for Obama anyway.


by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

You mean unlike the reaction of Americans to the Reverend Wright DVD's and subsequent TV appearences?
The medium is the message?
by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:27:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

hahahahaha (2.00 / 2)

If that's the best the RNC can come up with, I look forward to an Obama landslide victory and supermajorities in both the House and the Senate.

This "guilt by association" crap won't work, because it's a f'ing joke.


by Slim Tyranny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahahahaha (none / 0)

Guilt by association is reserved for casual acquaintances, not for two former terrorists who held Obama's kick off fund raiser in their house.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:30:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahahahaha (2.00 / 2)

A single event arranged by someone else and hosted by those people is the very definition of a casual acquaintance.

There is NO substance to the Ayers smear, and it's disgusting that you'd continue to engage in it.


by Slim Tyranny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:33:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahahahaha (none / 0)

That you think it is a disgusting smear isn't going to make it go away.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:41:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahahahaha (none / 0)

Yeah, the worse economic crisis since the depression, a war that has destroyed the economy AND the military...

And, 16MM footage of the sixties is the key to the election?

Did you SEE the exit polls?

As the big dog said "It's the Economy, Stupid!"

Obama will hang Bush's economic policies around McCain's neck, and, YES, Bill Clinton, campaigning for Obama, will shove McCain into the river with that anchor around it.


Support the separation of Church and State: Vote YES on WA R-71!
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:08:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahahahaha (none / 0)

Even Newt Gingrich has warned this crap won't fly this time. But the most absurd aspect of this is you think Hillary would be immune from the same crap.

They would trot out the families of the cops that were murdered by convicted Weather underground terrorists that Bill Clinton pardoned. Those were Hillary's constituents that got murdered. They would follow that by the family members of Wall Street workers murdered by FALN terrorists that Clinton pardoned.

The voters have had it with this garbage. They can see the  emperor has no clothes. The Wright 'scandal' failed utterly and completely to stop Obama actually Hillary's negatives took a bigger hit.

I'm looking forward to the general.


by hankg on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:27:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

That crap ain't gonna work this time around.  When people are up in arms about the mortgage crises, gas prices, health care and the war in Iraq no one is going to care about something that happened when Obama was in kindergarten.  

The Republicans lose on the issues and that is why they try to avoid them with this kind of shit.  They won't be able to do it this year because there are just too many issues.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:29:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Depending on the day of the week, the hour of the day, or the rising of the tides, polls have the three candidates within the margin of error.
How do you think this will play out if
Hhillary drops out and the Old Media turns their full attention on Barak Obama as they have done to the Clintons?
by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you really think (none / 0)

that they wouldn't use the same against Clinton? After all, her hubby pardoned two WU members who were convicted of killing two Nyack police officers.

Fair?


by bookish on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:04:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

It is the media that wants to have a hay day over the loss in NC, knowing perfectly well that she wasn't expected to win there. Now their ranting and raving for the fourth (4) time in this campaign that she should give it a rest. Doesn't look like they are going to give the media the satisfaction, and most importantly she is going to make sure that Michigan and Florida are counted. So yes it is full speed ahead into WV, Kentucky and Oregon and lets see what  happens.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:21:41 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

I'll tell you what happened -
Clinton needed a big win in Indiana and a close call in NC.
The exact opposite took place.

Good Lord!  She didn't even do as well in Indiana as she did in Ohio or Penna.
It's time to support the Dem nominee and focus on beating McCain.


by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:24:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's Over - (2.00 / 0)

It's over.
It's over.
It's over.

What part of that simple statement is Hillary Clinton unable to understand?
To quote Karl Marx -
"History repeats itself - the first time as tragedy, the second as farce."


by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:09 AM EST

I don't get HRC supporters, please explain (2.00 / 0)

I started out as an HRC supporter.

She lost me when:

She wanted me to vote for her out of fear of a 3 a.m. call.
----You should not make decisions out of fear, they are rarely well thought out. It is also a right wing tactic, vote for me or "they" will get you and your kids too! I don't vote out of fear.

No matter how tired you are, you do not misremember whether you have been shot at. I served in Iraq, you remember these things when they happen.

She puts no stock in experts when making decisions about complex issues. Sounds so Bushie.

She has aligned herself with McSame repeaatedly.

Her gas tax holiday is laughable(aligned with McSame too)

Do you actually believe her on NAFTA?

She cannot win, even with seating MI and FL, so what is the point exactly?

And she has aligned herself with Karl Rove politics.

Thanks,
Alec


by alectimmerman on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:23:18 AM EST

Well (2.00 / 1)

I don't feel that Hillary should stay in the race. If she were a a real leader of the democratic party she would leave this nomination process graciously; and urge her supporters to embrace Barack Obama  and remember what this fight was about to begin with.

The goal: to choose a nominee who could best defeat McCain in the fall. The voters, in essence, have spoken.

For her to continue, just amplifies the notion that she is selfish and divisive. This is for the POTUS, for crying out loud..not her own egomaniacal pissing contest.


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:25:30 AM EST

Re: Well (none / 0)

You must have missed the statement Senator Clinton made about supporting Obama with all her heart should he be then nominee.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:43:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well (none / 0)

Didn't miss that statement at all. However, do you really think that her continuing on, with virtually no chance of winning, is helpful at this point? Does the party really need any more division?


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:50:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well (none / 0)

I want a candidate that fights to the bitter end, not one that takes a Kerry. Hillary is that candidate.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:00:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well (2.00 / 1)

We've already seen when a President will fight  the bitter end. And thousands of lives have been lost and families shattered because of it. Do we actually need someone who will fight to the bitter end,or someone that knows that "discretion is the better part of valor" Hillary is an effen idiot if she tries to keep carrying on this fight. It will ruin her credibility, and hurt the party nominee for any crossover vote.


John McCain: Everyones nowhere man
by johnny sexton on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:41:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

I am glad she is still going on.  When polls break down the demographics and she is clearly the registered democrats choice, she has the right to continue on.

I do believe(alas) that Obama will get creamed in the GE.  I want to WIN in the GE, not lose it.


by colebiancardi on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:26:37 AM EST

breathe, please (none / 0)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:28:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: breathe, please (none / 0)

huh?


by colebiancardi on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:30:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

delegates WITH FL and MI (2.00 / 1)

FL and Michigan won't help.  As Chuck Todd explains:

on the delegate front, if Florida and Michigan were seated as is and Obama got the uncommitted delegates in Michigan, Clinton would net an additional 32 delegates from Florida and 18 from Michigan -- for a total net of 50. So add those numbers into the current pledged delegate count and Obama still would lead in the pledged delegate count by more than 100, approximately 110 in fact. So let's use 110 as the baseline. For Clinton to overtake him in the pledged delegate lead using THEIR math on Florida and Michigan, she'd need to win 75% of all remaining delegates. That's an impossible task.

Most importantly, knowing the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee the way we THINK we do, the likelihood of the committee NOT punishing Florida and Michigan in some way (say a cut in half of their delegates a la the Republicans) would then make this FL/MI exercise moot.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 008/05/07/989476.aspx


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:29:58 AM EST

Personally detached?? (none / 0)

Now that's funny.


by AdrianLesher on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:21 AM EST

Jerome... (2.00 / 0)

I realize this is how Hillary is spinning it, but haven't 33 or so of Michigan's uncommitted delegates already been snagged by Obama supporters, even if they are officially uncommitted?  My understanding is some of them may be "shaky" supporters, insofar as they aren't all personally vouched for by the Obama campaign, but the idea that Obama is going to get none of them is ludicrous.  


by telephasic on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:24 AM EST

The argument for seating MI and FL (2.00 / 1)

as is smacks of idiocy.

The DNC rules clearly do not allow for such a move.

50% without unpledged delegates from Florida is the best that Clinton can realistically hope for.

Michigan can be seated for the acclimation vote.


Howard Dean is my go-to guy
by lojasmo on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:31:47 AM EST

may 30th is too long (none / 0)

i will fault the obama camp for not settling this MI and FL thing a long time ago.  I don't know how much feet dragging they did with the revotes but they certainly should take the initiative on the compromise.  I can't imagine many ways in which Obama would lose if indeed there is a real compromise in terms of the delegates.  If he can get some of the delegates from both states, just take it and put the issue to rest.  

I hate that word being bandied about and I don't want Republicans to campaign on it either


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:33:43 AM EST

Re: may 30th is too long (none / 0)

They will settle it when it's to their advantage, not a moment sooner. If that means the voters in MI and FL are disenfranchised, too bad.


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:09:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

The mayor of Gary should be ashamed of himself for what he tried to pull last night. Does not bode well for unity.


by Iceblinkjm on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:33:56 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

What exactly did he try and "pull" last night?


by Slim Tyranny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

I am an Obama supporter but was so glad she squeaked out that win in Indiana.  I agree, something very fishy was going on in Gary with the tallies being delayed such an extremely long time, and the mayor of the city never giving CNN a clear answer on why exactly that was happening.


by mady on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:40:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

yeah that was hard to watch.


by doberman pinche on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:57:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Is it the Clinton campaign's assertion (2.00 / 0)

that Obama should get zero out of MI? If so, they lost any ability to pretend that they're concerned with the "will of the voter".


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:34:01 AM EST

This is great news. I am so glad (none / 0)

Clinton is going forward with this.  I really doubt Obama can pull ahead in the end if Florida and Michigan are not seated - as they should be.


by Molee on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:34:25 AM EST

Senator Obama's campaign calls popular vote (none / 0)

" a deeply flawed and illegitimate metric for deciding the nominee". Read more in their letter to the superdelegates today.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community /post/samgrahamfelsen/gGCNJj

It is still their apprehension that after Puerto Rico they might wake up to find themselves behind in the popular vote but may be little bit ahead in delegate count. Most of us who remembers 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote and GWB won the electoral vote math (with FL debacle). This election may still have few more surprises in its bizarre twists and turns, ups and downs.. So HRC supporters, it's too early to call it a day and throw in the towel..As President Clinton says..."till the last dog dies..."


by louisprandtl on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:35:13 AM EST

Re: Senator Obama's campaign calls popular vote (2.00 / 1)

That letter makes perfect sense for them. Their intention is to ignore the popular vote and disenfranchise the voters of those two states, but Hllary isn't going to let that happen, and until it is satisfactorily resolves this race is going to continue. So for Dean and those who are going to meet with the bylaws committee at the end of May, they had better make a good decision or there will be blood on the floor of the convention.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:42:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Obama's campaign calls popular vote (none / 0)

Obama more than made up for the PA win last night in the popular vote. She can't get a majority of the popular vote now.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:47:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ok..then there is no need for Senator Obama's (none / 0)

campaign to worry about. Why raise that aspect at all in their letter to SDs?


by louisprandtl on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:56:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

With Puerto Rico heavily favored to vote (none / 0)

for HRC, it is very likely that the delegate count will be within 100 and HRC winning the popular vote especially if FL and MI are counted. Senator Obama's campaign is positioning themselves to win with superdelegates votes ignoring the popular vote, thus the aggressive posture. Last time I heard that rules are rules type of argument, it came from GWB's supporters in 2000. It is rather unfortunate that the potential Dem Party nominee will be following similar logic...


by louisprandtl on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:52:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I bet Oregon will cover any Puerto Rico losses (none / 0)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:47:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 1)

I've heard from a ton of People the Clark should be Obama's VP pick.  Does anybody know if Obama and Clark even know each other.  It is smart.  Clark is an outspoken Clinton backer...so it helps unify the party.  He is a D.C. outsider, so it does not undercut Obama's change message.  He opposed the war.  And, he undercuts McCain biggest strength.

He also could make Arkansas and Oklahoma close... and if Rasmussen's Texas numbers are accurate, Texas as well.


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:38:51 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)


"I've heard from a ton of People the Clark should be Obama's VP pick."

I'm going beyond conventional wisdom to suggest it will be Napalitano or Sibelius. Either would attract women voters, Republican voters, and put what should be a solid GOP state into play.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:49:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Those are good thoughts... Napalitano, sadly, is dogged by lesbian rumors


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:53:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

All the better. Democrats can put forward the first AA, female, alternative lifestyle ticket. Napalitano is also a former Republican which should deflect any attacks against her.

One thing's for certain, the GOP would attack and smear even Jesus Christ or Mother Theresa if they ran on the Democratic ticket.

To paraphrase Gen. U.S. Grant, Democrats shouldn't make decisions based on fear of what Republicans will do, but should rather make decisions based on what they will do to Republicans.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:26:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the next stage (2.00 / 0)

Acceptance:
At this point, I'm personally about as detached from whomever wins as I've ever been. If Obama gets the nod, that's fine with me; but it does look like the Clinton campaign is going to keep on going and making their best argument for getting the nomination.

It's over. Everyone will come around to this fact soon. There will be a "superdelegate avalanche" this week. FL/MI will get seated 50/50 or something to that effect, but that won't give Hillary the nomination. It's too little, too late for her...

by power of truth on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:44:44 AM EST

"full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

with an engine room submerged in debt.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:46:08 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

A giant hug to all the Clinton supporters out there. I have been there , as we all have, with tough days. We are family in a greater cause of bring social and economic justice to this country.


by sacca28 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:46:55 AM EST

"full speed ahead" down a dead END (none / 0)

Has anybody noticed Hillary's win in indiana was predicated on the Rush Limbaugh's campaign incouraging rethuglicans to vote for her. This is absolutely HUMILATING! A Democrat who had to rely on an extreme wingnut to squeak out a win in a DEMOCRATIC primary. As a Dem I don't appreciate Rush Bimbo's interference but I also think we should realize that were it not for his meddling Obama would actually won Indiana.


by eddieb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:49:30 AM EST

Re: "full speed ahead" down a dead END (2.00 / 1)

we don't need this.  that stuff is over and done with and makes very little difference


by ab03 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:52:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "full speed ahead" down a dead END (none / 0)

What is over and done with? Hillary has said she hasn't given up and I believe her. Jerome's tone doesn't seem to suggest the "Stuff" you mentioned is over either. He still thinks it's OK to change the rules in mid stream to drag things on for Clinton's benefit. I just stated my observation and I didn't blame Clinton for Rush bimbos attempt to effect the election just the reality of his effort.


by eddieb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:03:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "full speed ahead" down a dead END (none / 0)

And how many voters cast their ballots for Obama as a result of the intense negative coverage the Old Media has given the Clintons these past 16 years?


by usedmeat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:05:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "full speed ahead" down a dead END (none / 0)

Good point and it is something the Supers should keep in mind when considering Clintons claim that she has OVERCOME every thing the media and wingnuts have thrown at her. I guess you think she hasn't done a very good job of overcoming those Vicious attacks and they are still after all these years driving voters to Obama?


by eddieb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:19:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (2.00 / 0)

We all need to come together after this "Spirited" contest ends. Together we can "Crash the RETHUGLICAN Strangle hold on our country and get our Democracy back!


by eddieb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:53:58 AM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

In part it is about the money.

If the donors keep on giving she will carry on fighting - even if the money is only enough to pay off debts instead of paying for new campaign advertising etc.


by My Ob on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:54:32 AM EST

that 26 delegate margin (none / 0)

can narrow significantly with KY, WV, and PR.


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:01:02 PM EST

The Hillary End Game (none / 0)

She is a pragmatist.
Right now she is exploring the options if, as she realizes is likely if not yet certain, she won't win.

What does she want from Barack?

Does she want a position in his administration?

Does she want a major say in picking the Veep?
Would she want to be Veep? (Look if Kennedy and Johnson could get together with Bobby truly hating LBJ and vice versa anything can happen! Hillary and Barack would personally get along better than those guys!)

Does she (and does he) genuinely want a healing between them?

Would she prefer to be Governor and opt out of Washington?

She'll go through Oregon, but all of this is being discussed.

MP


by markpsf on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:07:10 PM EST

The issue of Gas Tax (2.00 / 1)

The gas tax holiday issue was Clinton, and Obama, both, in demo mode as president.

Clinton chose a populist, conservative approach. Obama stuck to his guns.

In the end, the analysis that predicated Obama being hurt by his position was wrong.  He stayed in touch with the base.

The people who have been chain-recommending diaries at myDD, and also those who have banished certain front page authors for supporting Barack Obama in this viewpoint were simply aligned against the fundamental views of their own party.

As measured by the electorate.

Full speed ahead wastes a lot of gas.

More than you can get back , by being friendly with republican districts - that in fact - Bill Clinton actually tried to campaign last week .
And more than you can get back by cutting infrastructure and services and the drive to wean us from middle east oil.

I think it would be a nice gesture to re-instate front page privilege to those authors who were popular here, who have been banished from the front page by simply posting their thoughts on the subject.

Esp. given the fact that , in reading the banned posts from myDD during that timeframe, that criticism, if taken to light - would have aided the clintons.

MyDD is not a shill site for candidates. It is a place for objective analysis. It would be nice to return to that state.

I strongly suspect that there have been other conference calls doing the chain-recommendation on this site - and general shill posting.

But having said that. In the end, the issue of Gas Tax holiday became the final nail in the coffin for the Clinton campaign. She showed her colors as someone who would do anything, even compromise to the GOP - to get elected.

She did that with the issue of War in Iraq.
She would do that as president.

Makes for a good vice president. But not a good president. Qualification number one: Be someone that inspires, leads, and follows a strong path to reform.

She might have been technically qualified, but she was definitely the wrong person to be given the power and responsibility of a post-bush presidency.

I would like for everyone who backed clinton to be watchdog to Obama. Clinton had a lot of good ideas, we shouldn't lose them.

And maybe who knows - myDD can get back into shape again?


by Trey Rentz on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:13:23 PM EST

Re: The issue of Gas Tax (none / 0)

On the last comment - let's hope MYDD can. The trail on comments on this diary are at least encouraging. Maybe Jerome is acting as lightning rod for the undischarged anger - but it's passing. April was a cruel month for both sides, false hope and false despair. May is brighter, and more real


by duende on Wed May 07, 2008 at 12:42:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

When did MYDD become (none / 0)

My Damned Denial?


by IowaMike on Wed May 07, 2008 at 01:32:21 PM EST

A fighter never quits. (none / 0)

Enjoyed your sane posts in this insanity the dems call an election.

What a freaking mess.

Anyhoo, Americans did not choose the fighter with solutions so now it is Obama who will have to come up with the solutions for increasing gas prices. Then he will need to address how exactly is he going to change the gop blocking everything the dems try to do.

How excatly is he going to save this country?

All I hear is words and see no actions.

Good luck with that.


by gotalife on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:02:59 PM EST

Re: A fighter never quits. (none / 0)

if HIllary is the fighter your side claims she is, her help beating off filibusters will be essential to a progressive America.


!
by alex100 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:58:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Since when does the nominee need 2208 delegates? (none / 0)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OsYnegoV 28


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:25:53 PM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

She's just gonna get as many votes and delegates as possible and then she will try and cut a deal for a spot in the cabinet or on the Supreme Court.  But she will bow out gracefully then give him a warm endorsement in Denver. she's not the monster she's been portrayed as by many of you.

And I would keep the gloating and grave-dancing to a minimum, if you expect any of us to back your guy (and I'm not sold yet) you can start by being respectful to our heartbroken 48% of the party.


by BlueDoggyDogg on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:28:35 PM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

With all due respect, threats not to back Obama do not advance the dialogue, either.

If you respect Clinton and trust her judgement and she has pledged to support the nominee, why would you hesitate?


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Wed May 07, 2008 at 02:44:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

maybe because some of BHO's more zealous supporters have repelled more of us than endeared us to them or their candidate. but it sounds like we are in agreement, that was just a warning shot, we wouldn't want a Hillary 2012 movement to take off, no?


by BlueDoggyDogg on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:55:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Sorry - I could care less about a 2012 movement. Begin campaigning now if that is your choice. I am focused on 2008.


We don't need a thinker. We need a doer: someone who'll act without considering the consequences. (H.J. Simpson)
by Newcomer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:50:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

Clinton's intentions will be made clear this week.  If she avoids Wright, bitter, etc and attacks McCain then the campaign is over... that will be a sign of conceding.  If she attacks obama just as hard, then she will fight to the floor.  Either way, I think she stays in the next 6 races even if just to boost her VP argument.


by yitbos96bb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:16:05 PM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahea (none / 0)

Clinton's intentions will be made clear this week.  If she avoids Wright, bitter, etc and attacks McCain then the campaign is over... that will be a sign of conceding.  If she attacks obama just as hard, then she will fight to the floor.  Either way, I think she stays in the next 6 races even if just to boost her VP argument.


by yitbos96bb on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:22:55 PM EST

Re: Clinton's CC: "full speed ahead" (none / 0)

i'm not sure what "I'm as detached from whomever wins as I've ever been." means.

obviously it somehow implies you've accepted the outcome of this primary but the framing is as questionable as your posts have been ever since Wisconsin.

i'm still puzzled at how you've gone from a very good writer to one that got sucked into the Hillary PR ploy. I would have expected your writing to be more poignant through Clinton's March tailspin and prop her up in a way that was dignified and honest. Didn't happen.

In my opinion, watching you morph wasn't a bad thing per se. It reaffirms my belief that people have the ability to change in unexpected ways.

anyhow...best to you moving forward.


!
by alex100 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:55:10 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.