Let the people vote dammit - and count MI & FL while you're at it. We'll need them come the GE.

Let the people vote.  

Allow the DNC Rules Committee to sort out FL & MI.  

"The thing is - Hillary proved a LONG time ago that bullies don't scare or intimidate her. "

hell no....she'll obliterate those bullies.

MI wanted to count, they even proposed a plan Hillary said no.

Why won't Hillary let Michigan count?

If the media tries to make some huge comeback narrative after Hillary wins West Virginia (which we all expect), I will be very suspicious of them.  They sensationalize everything.  

Hillary outperformed the task set for her on April 22.  She was in danger of losing NC by 25-30% and Indiana was a dead heat.  She won Indiana and narrowed the NC lead down to 14%.  

But the media circled around her like vultures.  I think the whole tone of the evening would have been different if Lake County had reported its vote tallies in increments, allowing Hillary to give a real victory speech instead of one where "Too Close to Call" flies across the screen all night.

Still, perception is a tough nut to crack and the media did a lot of damage to Hillary on Tuesday.  

I didn't read your diary but I'll answer your question  - I think Hillary is staying in it for selfish ambition

On what planet did Hillary kick butt on Super Tuesday?

some of Sen. Clinton's supporters want to run as an Independent in the fall, would that be selfish ambition or her part if she took that up

(I don't think she ever will, but clearly the worst of her supporters think so).

Also wouldn't voting for someone be considered selfish ambition, because there was a diary on the rec list that was full of rage that endorsed that though and a lot of the people who endorsed that will endorse this.

Your diary is filled with references to "they." Who is this "they" you speak of constantly?

Your diary takes for granted that MI and FL won't be seated.  They will.  But your conclusion is that the numbers will be counted in spite of the fiasco in place  at the time such votes were cast.

Why do all you "democracy" touting people forget those who did not vote in FL or MI because they chose to sit on their hands in protest of the fact that there votes would not count?  

The meme you perpetuate is that Obama, not the DNC (including Ickes) stripped FL and MI of thier delegates.

Its truly disappointing that Clinton has resorted to this "controversy".

You point out that people have been saying the race is finished for so long...truth is, it has been!  The same people continue saying the same thing.  This is not evidence that their position was premature, but rather has endured the test of time.

i think some people write diaries for selfish ambition.

if certain people fart, it ends up on the rec list here. once hill is out, your celebrity status will fade quickly. in a way, i feel sorry for you.

I like your title.  It very neatly sets up the contrast between one candidate, who has been preferred by more voters so far and who is winning in every metric, and another, who is struggling on despite being broke and virtually mathematically eliminated.

Thanks for keeping it positive, at least.  Your arguments are always best when they focus on your candidate's considerable strengths.

I'm all for letting the process play out as long as her campaign stops trying to tear down the likely nominee.

What about most primaries, where it never goes all the way? Was the 2004, 2000, 1996, etc...were all those primaries undemocratic?

I expect her to suspend campaigning sometime this month.  

Considering how there's only five states left, we might as well just let the schedule play out.  Once the last states have voted (Montana and South Dakota), the superdelegates should come off the fence, and whoever wins is the nominee.

That's entirely fine by me.  We can afford to wait another few weeks to determine the nominee.

and it's no longer any real use hashing and rehashing the same old arguments. Many, many people believe that the math for Hillary is now impossible, that it's over, and that what's happening now is just the politics of the end game. Some of you don't believe that, and that's OK too.

We'll move forward over the next few days and weeks. We'll probably try to influence what few parts of this process we think we can still affect, but largely it's out of our hands.

Emotions are, and will continue to be high, and it would be great if we could treat each other as human beings again. No matter what's happening, maybe it's time for that.

We'll watch events unfold together. We'll waste too much time on blogs. We'll obsess over all the numbers. We'll look for signs everywhere, and then it will be over, and we'll have a nominee. We'll all have decisions to make then. Some will move forward to put a Democrat in the White House. Some will move to the McCain camp. Others will retreat to inactive status. Life will change. That's what life does. Peace to us all.

I don't really have a problem with Obama celebrating if he wins Oregon on that day; I doubt he will explicitly say "we have won the nomination" but rather state that "we are very close to sealing this nomination."  McCain said a similar thing on Super Tuesday.

It's a big day for him and his campaign staff; I doubt that they gave themselves much of a chance to even get this far.

this won't work for Obama.  Hillary has over half of the democratic party voters behind her.  Why would he choose to say this unless he is afraid of something.  People, a large number will decide this is arrogant and elitist, just the thing he is trying to live down in order to get Hillary's voters.  You know the bitter ones, who cling to their religion.  It makes no sense at all.  But then I have never looked at him as one who looks at the big picture like how his actions might affect his chances in the GE.  This one would bring them down further.

Ask yourselves this... how many times have they trotted this old nag out of the barn and asked us to believe it was a champion racer?  

Not your best choice there.

Look, if she can cut the BS and run on policy and keep it positive then no one will beef about her running.  Of course there is every good reason for her to take it to finish, but not in the manner he's been going at it.  

My own totally out-of-my-hat two cents:

After the last contests, I was hoping she would kick Bill off the team for awhile and just be herself.   I heard the audio of the 'white' comments today, and it sounded like she did not believe it even as it came out of her mouth.   Reports seem to be saying that Bill is pushing the negative divisive campaigning.   Bill had his chance when he hustled hard for her in NC but still got beat hard.   That unrealistic "game-changer" moment of over confidence in NC had to have come from Bill, and he couldn't deliver, so please allow HRC to be the NH HRC again.    Please, for all of us.

Erm... you didn't read the diary - did you?

If you had, you'd know the magic number is 2209 when you include FL & MI.  And even Dean said they'll be included.

The rules keep changing!  I can't keep up with them.

And I thought by the title of the diary that it was going to be about Hillary.  :)

You do know Hillary Clinton said it would be over on Super Tuesday, right? Was she trying to disenfrachise all the states that vote after 2.5 when she said that?

Why don't you wait until the rules committee decide before you start re-writing the rules?

The hurry is we are wasting precious time by not focusing on McCain.  

I'm beginning to think Alegre is a troll.

And why don't you call Hillary selfish ambition?  She's the one who's behind, you do see that right?

OK Alegre, if Obama gets the 2209 magic number, will you concede?  Because I think Hillary will.

You can support Hillary but you don't have to call Obama selfish.

Here, Obama has agreed to seat the Florida delegates.  Now will you stop the name calling already?

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/pol itics/blog/2008/05/obama_vows_to_seat_fl a_delegat.html

Senator Clinton rejected the Michigan compromise.  And with that she sealed her fate.  Michigan will not be seated on her terms.  She's done.

Only a fool wants this to go to the convention and Senator Clinton is no fool.

I know that wanting it to end implies that Clinton loses, but I am tired of watching the death throes of hope.  I know you all really wanted Hilary to win, but this is painful to watch.

yet it was you're candidate who rejected the most recent proposal by the MI Democratic party.

Hillary is trying to bully the party into getting what she wants.

But if you believe those delegations should be sat based on the current results, you're fucking insane and I really don't care if you vote for Obama if he's the nominee or if you ever vote Democatic again.  Frankly, I wouldn't want the vote of people who are trying to force bullshit elections on the rest of their party.

Sorry if you don't see those as two junk elections.

And it's interesting how this is being reframed as a "resolution."

Look, MI and FL are settled - they moved up their primaries, they lost their delegates.

What remains is the possiblity of negotiating circumstances by which they could be sat, but if you think that it's going to be on Hillary's terms, fuck off.

She agreed to the party's rules, she stood by the other candidates.

Only after her campaign of inevitability fizzled and her December prediction that it would all be over on Feb. 5th went "poof!" did she care about MI and FL.

MI and FL only mattered when she needed them, not because this is some issue of defending voters' rights(which its not btw - party's have jurisdiction on their nominating contests and no rights have been violated).

I think everyone is open to discussing seating MI & FL and would like to see it happen, but it's not going to happen if the Clinton camp insists that it's according to the current results.

Sorry.  That's nuts.

And I really don't think you're going to have much success in bullying the party on this matter.  What's more likely is that a resolution is achieved whether Hillary likes it or not.

I mean, she's rejecting the proposal of MI's own Democratic party.  She's standing by the results, calling them fair elections(elections that don't count for anything aren't fair - their meaningless), in an attempt to screw over her opponent.

No reasonable person would look at FL and MI and say that they were genuine contests - not w/ one candidate on the ballot(Obama took his name off, as did Edwards and others, to support the party's rules, though I believe Kucinich kept his name on too), not w/o campaigning.  And saying that Obama ran ads in FL is tit-for-tat nonsense that gets us no where.

I even support giving Hillary an advantage in the allocations, but no fucking way would I take 70 delegates to nothing out of MI.

There isn't just one side at the table and nothing is going to be resolved so long as the Clinton camp attempts to bully the party and the Obama camp into bending to its will.

If the Clinton camp continues to push in this manner, I'm pretty certain we'll reach the point where they can take or leave what they're given on May 31st.  At this point, I would like nothing more than for the Clinton camp to have to ask elected officials of the party to go back on their own rules and reward states for breaking those rules.

Let me say in closing that just a few years ago Terry McAuliffe, still DNC chair, told Carl Levin that if MI moved up its primary, he(McAuliffe) would strip it of its delegates.

The Clintons do not control this party any more.

When reeking turds like this no longer make the "recommended" list, MyDD will have restored its reputation.

I have no problem with Clinton staying in the race through June, but there will come a period of approx. 2-3 months where the outcome will be clear, the Dems will have to prepare for the convention and the general, and the party will face a choice: should we spend that time engaged in a faux contest (where NO additional information can affect the outcome) or concentrate on winning the general?

My opinion of Hillary Clinton will probably turn on what she does at that point.  Barring some exceptional change in circumstances, she'll have two choices: concede with grace; play the spoiler.  And if she chooses the second, well, she'll have failed one of the most basic tests of leadership (and a lot of what critics have said about her will turn out to have been right).

the number 2025 totally ignores Fl and Mich.  Is that what your candidate supports?

myDD should start focusing on McCain, for example, Cindy McCain says she won't disclose her taxes.   What does she have to hide?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/08 /cindy-mccain-i-will-never_n_100769.html

Mame Reiley of Virginia is also a member of the R&BC and a long-declared superdelegate for Hillary Clinton. She says she will keep an open mind and try to be fair to all parties involved on May 31. She feels that both states have paid a price by not hosting full-out primary campaigns, which would have brought considerable revenue to them. In Florida, she is inclined to seat the delegation as is, due to the full slate of candidates there. "But," she says, "this is a whole different ballgame with Michigan." Her decision there, Reiley said, "might make Hillary not happy with me."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chip-colli s/mi-dems-clinton-superd-be_b_100895.htm l

Different words.

Same diary.

Over

and

Over

and

Over....

I just sent her another 100 dollars.  

This is a pattern.  They always ask her to leave the race before she wins another state.  We should let this thing play out.  

I cannot BELIEVE the NYTimes is calling on Hillary to stop asking for Mi and Fl to be seated!  

it's divisive and you are personally advocating for disenfranchising my family who are Michigan voters who never got to have their vote counted. Listen, YOU, to advance your candidate, are willing to disenfranchise many Michigan voters who were told that their votes wouldn't count and believed it. YOU   ARE ADVOCATING A PLAN THAT WOULD STEAL THE VOTE OF PEOPLE I KNOW. Do you understand that? Please explain that to me. There are only two options that would be fair to all Michigan's voters: 1. new election without bizarre rules that would still disenfranchised MANY voters that I KNOW PERSONALLY (such as the "election" HRC favored.) 2. don't seat the delegates at all. That at least protects Michigan voters who respected the rules laid out by the party and treats them all the same.

Alegre -
You are starting to get trollish.
"Coronate their new king"?

Last time I looked, Obama has more votes, more states, and more delegates - even WITH Florida and Michigan counted.  No.  There are just some people who think it's time to recognize when the campaign is over - like, for instance, George McGovern.

Alegre is following Hillary Clintons lead - neither one of them will be satisfied with anything less than a solution to Michigan that awards no delegates to Barack Obama.

Which is absurd and anti-democratic.  It's an attempted coup.

She's rejected compromise solutions from both the Obama campaign and the Michigan Democratic Party itself.

"people act like I'm nuts when I ask the $64,000 question - What's the hurry?"

The hurry is that Senator Clinton has absolutely no chance of overtaking Senator Obama in the pledged delegate count and so will not be our nominee.  The hurry is that with each passing contest, our Party is driven further apart, with now 50% of each candidate's supporters saying they won't support the other.  The hurry is its time to start spending money and resources on defeating John McCain.

"Because they know they can't beat her in a fair - toe-to-toe fight so they have to manipulate and bully."

Actually, they already have beaten her in a fair fight, 32 of the 47 fair fights to be exact.  And they have beaten her in the most important fair fight, the fight for the most pledged delegates.

"On May 20th, BO will stand before us - place the crown on his own head - and tell the people who have yet to vote that he's our nominee because he's reached some magic number of pledged delegates.  Screw Michigan and Florida.  Screw the Superdelegates.  He figures he'll have the majority of the pledged delegates so to hell with Hillary and to hell with the millions who have voted for her and are looking forward to deciding this according to the RULES as laid out by our party."

The magic number of pledged delegates is the majority of them.  That's 50% + 1.  That's the ballgame.  Also, you can't whine about "the RULES as laid out by our party" and Michigan and Florida in the same breath.  It makes you sound like an idiot since "the RULES laid out by our party" are why Florida and Michigan do not count.

"So what's it going to be? DEMOCRACY? Or more games designed solely to feed your selfish political ambitions?"

You also look like an idiot when you talk about "DEMOCRACY" right after saying that the winner of the pledged delegates doesn't matter because the super delegates should decide the election.

"Let the Superdelegates have their say on the convention floor in Denver if that's what it takes but please stop trying to short circuit this process and quit trying to disenfranchise millions of Americans."

If we have to decide this thing at the convention, neither candidate is going to beat John McCain.  The primary is over.  Senator Clinton has lost.  There is no way for her to win the majority of pledged delegates and super delegates are not going to over turn the will of the people.  Let the general begin.

I totally understand the disappointment of supporting a candidate in the primary season who loses (and--self-disclosure--if Obama wins the nom he'll be the FIRST winner I've backed in the primaries since I became old enough to vote, erm, 25 years ago).

C'mon, though.  If a Hillary Clinton supporter spends months arguing that her winning the popular vote would create some basis for super delegates to give her the nomination, and Obama wins by that metric, even if one includes the Michigan and Florida races as run, doesn't that suggest, in the eyes of this supporter, that Obama deserves the nomination?  Doesn't the minimum requirements of consistency demand this (not, "I'll gladly vote for him now", just, "Okay, I guess he won").

As I said, I understand what it's like for my candidate to lose.  What some Clinton supporters seem to be saying, though, is that there is no way Obama can win legitimately.  Glad we're nearing beach weather--we're gonna need it.

Oh, and please put the donate link on your diaries.  Hillary Clinton is sure to insist that Barack Obama assume her debt, and if that's what's going to happen, I'd prefer as little of my donations as possible to keep her and Mark Penn in the style to which they are accustomed.

1. Obama has never called for Clinton to drop out.
   
2. He will have the most pledged delegates, even with Florida and Michigan being counted.

we lived in a democracy, right?  If the Democratic party can't withstand the full practices of a democracy, then maybe it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

I don't get the obsession about "going to the convention."  Sorry, but that guarantees a McCain victory.  Clinton's within her rights to figure out a way to win by June 15, which McAuliffe said would be the end of the nomination fight, but no one will allow it to continue beyond that.

Do you realize how ironic the title of this diary is?

Perhaps you can answer a question for me:

If a candidate continually attacks her opponent in hopes of making him so unelectable that party insiders take the nomination away from the candidate who has won the most pledged delegates, popular votes, and states,is that democracy or self ambition?

I am on the side of allowing Hillary to compete all the way. But how dare you accuse the other side of being the only selfish people here when your candidate was the one at the beginning of the primary using strong arm tactics and semi bribery to try to lock in a lot of support to finish the primary before it got seriously underway. You seriously expect me to believe that if Hillary was leading, she would be any different in not letting her people try to end the primary prematurely?

I think I get the SOC of the diarist.

"Democracy or Selfish Ambition?
the coronation...new king...and people act like I'm nuts..Ask yourselves this...

how many times have they trotted this old nag out of the barn and asked us to believe
it was a champion racer?... she was finished...
ratchet...up the noise to deafening levels in the hops of driving her...before she won...told us she'd be out...by double digits...IN
would be a tie-breaker and guess...How many times are they going to try to get away with this?

Hillary proved..bullies scare or intimidate...

Screw Michigan and Florida. Screw the Superdelegates...

he'll have the majority of the pledged delegates
so to hell with Hillary and to hell with the millions who have voted...and...deciding this according to the RULES as laid out by our party...

place the crown... according to the RULES ...magic number...doesn't clarify much - it sounds like...repeating...
Guys there's only one candidate... in this election. (Hint - Hillary!)... pulling out all the stops to make sure millions of us are excluded from this election...

selfish political ambitions...So far you've made yourself abundantly clear as to where your loyalties lie. Maybe it's time you started thinking of someone other than yourself for a change...

Let the...DNC Rules Committee...disenfranchise millions of Americans."

Yup.

I'd support Hillary Clinton going all the way to the convention if it were being held in June.  As it's being held in late August, though, that would be insanity.  An eight-month primary season followed by two months of prep for the general?  The race will end in early June.  If Clinton continues past that point, it can only be as a spoiler.

I am perfectly fine - as is Obama - with her staying in the race as long as she ratchets down the rhetoric and focuses on the own case for her candidacy - which is very strong and does not require to attack Obama.

I just think it is not good for you to entertain too many hopes that there is a chance that Hillary will be the nominee. Keep fighting for her if you want but ... I think you should slowly think about what is likely to happen.

I just wanted to say, for the record (and not that my opinion matters) but I really am tired of arguing these same points over and over again.  Really.  Someone email me when everyone decides to quite wasting everyone elses time and accept things as they are and actually work together to win this election... or don't bother.

And one other thing... Alegre et all... for the love of God quit finding faults and taking personal offence to anything and everything you can find that you don't agree with.  The trolls and the assholes arent the problem.  This is an election.  People are emotional.  Someone that you all seem to disagree with about everything was right... this is the "silly season".

Get over it.  You can spend the rest of your life running from it... but you can't avoid it.  It's life.  This is real.  Here and now.  Tune in. This election is over.

Yes it is stupid that the system is so messed that even the simple facts of one person=one vote still produces a result that is up for interpretation.

But in the end it is what matters.  Not winner take all (in each state).  Not who has won the most big states.  Not who is more electable in an election that hasnt even started yet.  Not who has more white votes. (or who has more black)

It is who has the MOST votes.  Period.  And by all metrics possible this election is over.

Anything past this point is just a waste of everyones time... yours and mine.

If you have any interest in doing anything productive anytime near now, then you might want to start thinking about refocusing your energies on the GE and winning the election that for everyone.

The folks you are speaking of, I want to be clear, are the same media that said Clinton was inevitable,  that Obama was the nominee post Iowa, etc etc. It is unfortunate how much groupthink seems to exist - the question I wanted someone to ask if why no one told us she was "on the ropes" before NC and IN.

The reason Obama wants this to end sooner instead of later is because he DOES NOT want MI and FL to have a contribution to the choice of the nominee. Those votes were clearly stated to "not mean anything" by both sides, and he doesn't want them to.

I do not recall anyone saying that she was near the ropes on Super Tuesday, and I will entirely agree that the post-Iowa craze fest was dumb (and helped her to win NH, I think)

However, the fact remains that Super Tuesday was her best shot. As much as you may not like him, Kos was right in her pre-Super Tuesday diary: She needed to win by more than 100 delegates, and she didn't. He won in delegates, and the contests post super Tuesday favored Obama save Maine, which he also carried.

It has not been a good road - because she has always been behind in pledged delegates. The first night she gained on him in that metric was March 5th.

Yes, Alegre, I will stand in the way of the results from MI and FL, because I view them as flawed and incorrect. I do not think they should be counted. Senator Clinton's campaign REJECTED a compromise proposal from MI that would have given her more delegates.

The other factor here is that even with those flawed elections counted at full weight, she still cannot win the pledged delegates. Mr Super, a DNC member, has blogged about a number of Supers in the Pelosi club - a group that will back the pledged delegate winner.

Even with MI and FL, her chance of getting the pledged lead is VERY, very slim.

Barack Obama is far too smart a candidate to declare victory while she continues to campaign. He will use May 20th to make a case to supers and to her supporters that he should be the nominee, to put pressure on her. To do otherwise would be like the "You're likable enough" moment - supremely unhelpful to him and his cause.

I hope you will also note that the Obama website has the total number of delegates needed to clinch the nomination INCLUDING supers listed. They are not making the case that Supers don't matter.

Remember, a fair and quick resolution was proposed by Michigan, and Senator Clinton REJECTED it.

My personal belief is that the delegates should be counted at half-weight, just like the GOP. Obama's lead will still be nigh-insurmountable, save an act of God, and it would remove political issues since the GOP did the same.

However, Alegre, I reject your implication that this is a choice between Democracy and ambition. MI and FL are culpable, and the voters cast ballots knowing that they wouldn't count. Those voters needed to protest if they wanted to be fully counted, and they did not, becuase MI and FL  made a very bad bet:

They bet that the race would be over after Super Tuesday, and they wanted to affect more than they would have that day.

Those two states badly miscalculated, and I refuse to grant them a special exception from ethics and rules just because they have near equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats. Non-swing states count too.

I would argue that Senator Clinton has also had some undemocratic leanings: arguing that certain states mattered more than others, that caucus votes didn't count, and that the high level of AA support for Obama was meaningless. Bill Clinton compared Obama's SC to that of Jesse Jackson - a vote that was taken AFTER a nominee had been picked by other states.

Alegre, that doesn't seem very democratic to me. Barack Obama will not declare victory on May 20th, but he will claim an important metric. Even if MI and FL are brought in, he is going to win that metric. The math isn't there.

The superdelegates do have a role to play, but they DO NOT WANT this going to the convention. If they choose to end this earlier than that with endorsements, I hope you will abide by their decision.

Please?

Note to Alegre:

If you can't play by the rules, you shouldn't be in the game. If you want to bitch and moan about Florida and Michigan, then maybe you should talk to the Clinton allies in both states that made this mess possible. You also talk about disenfranchisment, but you won't admit that by allowing the Michigan vote to stand would be to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of, not only Obama supporters, but other supporters who didn't support Hillary Clinton. Alegre, this is dishonest, and you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to force a tactic (one which will probably doom us in November if it is successfully shoved through) for a small chance at the nomination.

Alegre, you should be ashamed of yourself.

You said, "The thing is - Hillary proved a LONG time ago that bullies don't scare or intimidate her."

One thing she hasn't proven is that she knows how to win the pledged delegates over Barack.  I am assuming that was her strategy back in January, not to depend on the SDs to overcome an PD deficit.

If she wants, she can stand up to the Democrat bullies until the day she dies, but she's not going to win the Dem nomination on her own merits.  At this point, only a ridiculously major Barack problem gives her a chance.

By the way, there are about 800 superdelegates, how many of them are bullying her to quit?  It seems like far less than 10%.  I don't see her being bullied at all.

And democracy for Obama.

You are missing something Alegre,

After Íowa, she would lose unless she could win New Hampshire.
After Super Tuesday, she would lose unless she could win Ohio and Texas.
After Ohio, she would lose unless she could win Pennsylvania.
After Pennsylvania, she would lose unless she could win in Indiana and North Carolina.
After North Carolina she would lose unless .....

There is nothing left Alegre, she has lost.

Another appreciated diary, alegre.  Thanks for posting it!

You know, something just finally hit me as the revelation as to why Barack Obama adamantly decided to run at this time rather than waiting as so many of his insiders were advising him to do.  In his interview with Wolf Blitzer today when being asked about his policies (just after he'd been asked to respond to Mitt Romney's comments that the Presidency was not an internship...), he made a comment to the effect that his policies would of course be viewed as good "because look what we're following."

And that just made it click with me.  Think about it--we had good long-established Democratic individuals who were already running for President and would have no doubt allowed for an easy win against whatever Republican might run and get this country turned around just fine.  Yet following Bush, what better time for a smooth talker to come in and rile things ups, to "look" like a "savior" versus what we've been faced with for the past 7 years--what better time for somebody with virtually no experience but good sound bites to be able to slide by much better experienced individuals.  Had he waited to run, our country would have already been saved by another Democrat and not been so desparate, so eager to fall for a smooth talker who hasn't done much to turn his words into action.  (And for all the Obama supporters who will flame for that--I'll just note that I'd been an early Hillary supporter, but then briefly did get lulled in by Barack's smooth talking and thought I'd vote for him...until I truly did my investigative work and realized he truly was just a smooth talker who really hadn't put anything meaningful into action once given the opportunity [i.e., the subcommittee he chairs that could have had an impact on Afghanistan, but didn't and instead allowed the cherry picking that NATO reports at least Germany has partaken in that's undoubtedly been partially responsible for the higher number of American deaths this past year because we're left fighting in the more extreme areas of Afghanistan.  Yet he's chosen to instead "talk" about what he'll do to fix Afghanistan "when he becomes President."  Sorry, but I see he already had a chance to do something and flubbed it--and that gives me no confidence and great concern for his Presidential skills at this very precarious time in our country's existence.)...while I likewise realized just how very much Hillary had been doing all this time, how much meaningful impact she's had on people's lives around the world in a big way (beyond a single city's limits--but even that record of Barack's seems to be in question).  

Anyway, I just needed to ramble a bit as that realization hit me.  I've thought that he would eventually make a good president, just not yet--but now I realize that's not likely the case either, or he wouldn't have been in such a rush to try and get it now, at the only time he likely realized he could possibly get it.

I truly pray that God is watching over Hillary and our country as this race goes forward.  

Go Hillary!

If you think that the ballots and delegates should be counted in MIchigan, then you are talkin FIAT...by superdelgates and by crook.  Both agreed not to compete in MI and FL.  As an BO supporter, I do not blame him for sticking with the rules.  But when did Clinton stick by the rules, or rather...she agreed to them on paper.  I am confident that BO will be competitive if not outright win MI.  Since Hillary won Florida before BO became a rock star...be careful for what you wish.  You keep on moving the goal posts.  The facts are:  Hill loses every paramater even with FL and MI as it stands...and BO wasn't on the ballot.  The only way for Hill to win is if there is a superD FIAT, or a catastrophe in the BO campaign.  It is as simple as that.  Barrack is beating Hillary handily.  

The facts are that many world leaders have been dismayed at the Clinton Flip Floppin, militaristic attitude.  We need a new bunch of hard liners.  Hard peace liners.  Not political opportunists.  Hillary miscalculated her own party by 2 years.  SHe has flip flopped more than I can ever count.  She and Bill are destroying what was a fantastic legacy for its time.

One reason I'm looking forward to the end of this primary is I'll be able to get honest answers from friends of mine who are Clinton supporters.  What did they make of her comment that the US might "obliterate" Iran?  Expect anything and everything, I remind myself, but that came as a shock.  It was so clearly the sort of thing a John McCain, Newt Gingrich, or even Rush Limbaugh would say.  Or the "new" relationship between her and Scaife.

I mean, c'mon.  This stuff was shocking.  In the heat of the primary season it's understandable that many will back their candidates no matter what, but a lot of freaky stuff happened which requires explanation.

Hillary lost super tuesday, did not win PA by double digits and lost the delegate count in TX.  Whats the deal with the lying and misrepresentation algere?  It's not good for the party ya know?

I am 100% for HRC.  Have been.  Will be.   That said, my desire is that the campaign wraps up on a completely positive note.   That means no democrat vs. democrat attacks from here on in.  That means letting the last six contests play out and holding off on deciding anything until they have voted.   At that point, the remaining superdelegates are more important than FL and MI.   If FL and MI are still relevant to the discussion - if w/those states Clinton would have a PD and/or a PV lead - then we need to have a vigorous discussion.

If not, and regardless Senator Obama is in the lead, then we need to declare him the nominee w/no further discussion.  

In the meantime, let's keep it positive.

Yesterday, as he was making his celebrity rounds at the DCCC, thronged by adoring fans, a woman shouted out to him in ardent worship and devotion cheering him on to become president.

Barry responded, "that's why I'm running, SWEETIE."

Ugh.

There's nothing more offensive than an arrogant man who has such preening confidence in his ability to CHARM women and make them swoon, by his very presence.

"That's my cell-phone buzzing, didn't want you to think I was getting fresh or anything."

Oh, Barack! Swoon.

Ew.

This is not a serious man; this is an adolescent, thrilled by his new-found BMOC status.

Caucuses are not democratic, not fair, because many people are not able to participate, so you can throw those results out. The Texas selection process proves the point--two (2) different results. If the caucus results had matched the election, you might question the fairness. But the exact opposite resulted. Nevertheless, we are forced to accept those results.

We will not accept FL and MI not being counted fairly.

We'll go to the convention!

This is over...Barack Obama has won the nomination and all that is left is for Hillary to admit it and she will have to do so soon...

I think Alegre deserves a break. It must be hard having fought so tirelessly for her candidate to see the superdelegates tip over to the delegate winner, and the nomination finally fade out of sight for Hillary.

I admire Alegre's determination and fighting spirit. I hope she will put all that wonderful energy into supporting the democratic nominee in the fall.

The primary process is not "democracy." It is a process where the state parties select delegates to the party convention. Each state sets its own rules approved by the national party.

Are you just making things up? Do you know any political history? Weird.

The US is not a Democracy, it is a Democratic Republic.

The Democratic Primary race is not a popular vote. It is a delegate race. Obama won that delegate race.

Bill Clinton finished his primary battle way early. When it was clear that he would be the nominee the party coalesced around him.

By your logic Bill Clinton was "crowned king."

By your logic a LOT of President's were "crowned king."

Even if Obama is the nominee the voting continues. Nobody "loses out." Historically later states don't get much sway in any case. I find the sudden "We need Democracy!" line to be tired, inaccurate to how our process works, and a silly distraction. Democracy has spoken. Hillary won't be able to catch up to Obama by any measure barring a complete meltdown.

Can we at least stop the divisive crud?