• on a comment on Barack Obama Speech Thread over 5 years ago

    I guess you totally missed Obama evicerating McCain on foreign policy during the entire month of May. I recommend checking it out, the man is a beast when it comes to a straight up fight.

  • sure there are, in a primary. but in an Obama v. McCain matchup where the voter previously supported Clinton it's a vanishingly thin space where you can support McCain over Obama. Even on the "arrogant sexist" argument, McCain trumps Obama's "sweetie" by calling his own wife a trollop and cunt, and by laughing when someone asked him of Clinton "how do we beat the bitch?"

    There is virtually no points on which a Clinton supporter could support McCain over Obama unless they were merely voting for Clinton as a woman and tend republican in their politics.

  • Alegre and Campskunk.

    I guess Alegre didn't take kindly to you not taking kindly.

  • comment on a post Barack Obama for President over 5 years ago

    Now this is a diary I can support wholeheartedly. Your candidate ran a fantastic race. Any other year, and she'd be our next president.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    perhaps. but the first point is arguably true, and the second is certainly so. it doesn't make him a "bad person"- it does make him incredibly irritating as someone who has some small level of influence amongst bloggers and the media as a whole.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    "And if so, Clinton's chances were lost with the closed-door 14-13 (15-14 with the proxy votes included) vote to award Obama half the delegates from Michigan (which led to adopting the MDP resolution instead of the Clinton resolution or going to the credentials committee)."

    1. Obama had a 14-13 vote for his 50-50 delegate split request.

    1. Instead of getting the 50-50 split, the group decided to go with the more Clinton favorable MDP position of 69-59.
    2. You're attacking Jerome, who is thoroughly in the tank for Clinton.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    given that he's up in WI and NM... even if he did lose MI, he can pick up VA and CO and it's a wash. Obama's electoral map is pretty open, the only places where Clinton has a massively better chance to beat McCain and Obama doesn't is Florida.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    it would still have him seeing Clinton's path to victory. He's got about as much personal integrity, and objectivity, as David Gregory or Susan Estrich.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    How was it one RBC member? The vote (which was the Michigan Dem Party position, endorsed by Clinton supporter Carl Levin) was 19-8, with 5 of the 13 Clinton endorsers signing on.

    Were those Clinton endorsers traitors?

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    so? Obama's going to be the nominee. Clinton might very well have made the better president, but we won't find out unless she wins in 2016.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    well, given it's what Jerome is citing, and it's what multiple news outlets have said, then you're basically arguing against Jerome.

    which is amusing, since he's on your side.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 5 years ago

    why does he need to make up FL? the Gore states + NH is a win.

  • on a comment on The Unity Express Derails in DC over 5 years ago

    Clinton's people, including Ickes, voted for the .5 vote solution. If you want to vent ire, you should also be targeting them for capitulation. No Justice, No Peace!

  • on a comment on The Unity Express Derails in DC over 5 years ago

    yeah, it was really much more the will of the Michigan Democratic Party, which is the group that asked for the 69-59 split.

    The will of the people went out the window when Michigan was told that its primary would not count, and this was borne out when it saw nearly 150,000 Democrats vote in the Republican primary on January 15th instead of their own primary where the only choices were Clinton, Uncommitted and Kucinich. This is born out by the fact that Michigan was the ONLY state with a primary where turnout was lower than 50% of John Kerry's total vote in 2004 (in an election where 3 states EXCEEDED the Kerry total and all but 3 were above 60% of the 2004 dem vote). Michigan saw turnout at barely 30% of the Kerry vote.

    As the RBC stated repeatedly yesterday, there was no good solution. To take the Obama 50-50 position was to ignore the fact that Clinton won the majority of votes. To take the Clinton position was to ignore the nearly one million Democrats who stayed home or voted to foil McCain after being told their votes wouldn't count in MI. And to take the Michigan Democratic Party's position was to just throw out the results while acknowledging that Clinton won the flawed primary where her only opponent was Dennis Kucinich.

    If you can't get that, you're not interested in having a rational debate, and you should expect that people won't view you well for it.

  • on a comment on Live Thread IV at the RBC over 5 years ago

    You must be mistaken, that commenter was upset with Obama supporters protesting. You clearly think he's talking about Clinton supporters.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads