Not that it probably matters to anyone, but this report from ABC is just one more media "gotcha" although a subtle one. She is "ceding" rather than conceding. It's a little thing but the connotation is slightly snarky. I think Todd picked up on it because he puts the line in quotes before he gives us the article in block. Maybe it's just me.
p.s. Congratulations to Senator Obama on a great race and a great victory. He will win in November and I look forward to a great administration.
I think this would be a fine idea. Just change the start date until the first Wednesday in September following Republican convention. Then weekly until the week before the election. Lets see ST John reject that offer. He will cause he needs the publicity now, not later.
Poor little Jeffrey has had that one written and ready for ages. Little man just can't stand her. Did you notice how the other members of the row next to him were all" I disassociate myself from that" and "yeah me too". Dumb as a box of rocks he is.
It is unfortunate that Sen. Obama has let things get to this point. It has been obvious for months that Hillary was open to the VP position. It appears that Obama did and does not want her on the ticket. He made a calculated gamble that he would win by enough that there would not be credible pressure to force him to accept her. That calculation was incorrect. She is still a formidable force in the party and must be dealt with.
On the other hand, I was disappointed in the tone of her speech last evening. It was an historic night and I felt she should have acknowledged that in some way. Her need to force the issue is driven by her belief that if she doesn't, she will be shoved aside.
IMO, she wants the VP spot so she can mend fences with African Americans to position herself for 2016. I believe that she has always understood that if she didn't win this time, she would have to take 2nd place for 8 yrs and she is willing to do that.
Together we WIll make history. Obama/Clinton 2008
But isn't that a rephrasing of what has gone before? And therefore isn't the answer still the same? That the RBC does not have the authority to do this? Maybe I'm missing something here. (it is late). But my understanding is that this type of decision must be made at the convention.
You are correct, however, that decision is subject to appeal to the convention at large. The convention has the final say on seating of all delegations. This would be one of the challenges that could come before the convention to test voting strength prior to nomination balloting.
We will have just elected the first African American President and the first female Vice President and we're worrying about what an ex-President is going to be doing? I don't think even Bill Clinton can upstage that combination. It's going to be a great 16 years, just wait and see. Obama/Clinton 2008 and Clinton 2016.
Hopefully the next polls will give some alternative VP choices. I would be willing to bet that Obama/Clinton will outpoll any other combination. I have said for months now that we are picking our nominee for the next 16 years, and I believe that is the reason Hillary will accept the VP nomination. She has no problem playing second fiddle and will take the next 8 years to keep her head down and mend some fences in preparation for her next run in 2016.
Great diary Elrod. Good analysis and I think some of your points accord with the info in a diary from Carnacki earlier today. Take a look at Obamas closing commercial for WV and you can see he understands what you are saying. Its a super ad for this market, and really for all Appalachia.
p.s. My own take on this is that these folks have adopted Hillary into the clan (for whatever reasons) and therefore she is the familiar and Obama is from "away". Never a good thing with these folks. They will stay with Hillary until the end, even to their detriment.
Great post Carnacki. Regarding the ad, I think you are absolutely right, it is a very good ad for its target audience. I liked it very much, and I am a Hillary supporter. Obama/Clinton 2008.
Let's join together and whip some Republican ass.
I would like to revisit the delegate status of the other three offending states. It was my recollection that there was no final decision not to penalize them; but rather, that a decision on an appropriate penalty would be made later. That decision is still pending as far as I know. Now I'm pretty sure that they won't be penalized, but they could be.
This could all just go away if Obama would step up and say that if nominated, Clinton will be his VP choice. Obama/Clinton 2008. I would love to see some polling on that ticket versus McCain. I think we get most of the positives and very little of the negatives. And Hillary would only be 68 in 8 years, not too old to run. If only the anybody but Clinton people had not taken over the Obama campaign.
Well if we are going to talk about "The Rules" then I suppose we should give some thought to the penalty to be exacted on the other (I think 3) states that also violated the DNC primary timetable. Do we take all their delegates away? And if so, how in the world does Obama get to his magic number with no delegates from Iowa, New Hampshire and especially South Carolina? Just a question for Mr. Roosevelt the "rules geek".