Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House better (UPDATED--NO FLAME WARS!)

Well, it appears that we are settled on the question of Florida and Michigan, in what seems to be, for the most part, a fair assessment for each person running in the race. It's now time to move on and deal with some of the more disturbing bits of today's news, like the talk of "going to Denver", which really worries me, and the behavior of some people at the meeting today.

I've been reading MSNBC and watching the live blog posting and just wanted everyone to know (in case you don't already), that the actions of today's Hillary supporters at the RBC meeting, from the Larry Sinclair jive to the chanting and booing, was unacceptable from my count and only helps to undermine our mission to win in November.

It's obvious this has been a hotly contested battle, but our final questions have been answered, and now's the time to accept the fact that after June 3rd, we are going to have a Democratic nominee for President. We reached a fair compromise to both sides today on the issues and the actions of Harold Ickes and his comments in regards to the seating of Michigan delegates was inappropriate and misguided.

"Going to Denver" is inappropriate and misguided as well; and this action needs to be swiftly denounced in the name of winning a Presidential election in November. Hillary Clinton is amazing; that's why I love her, but prolonging this nomination fight into August would inevitably harm her political standing and that's something I don't want to see, while, at the same time, a brutal floor fight at the convention while John McWar rides unopposed throughout the summer isn't something that's in our interest either. We got our final questions of the primary season answered today; and while I understand that they may not be favorable for the Hillary campaign; nobody wants us to lose in
November, and I don't need or want another 4 years of George W. Bush in office. So let's unify and rally behind Barack Obama.

"Going to Denver" isn't going to solve our nations problems, it's going to harm Democrats and the chance of getting a Democrat elected in November. And since the reason that I backed Hillary is because I want to solve our nation's problems, I certainly don't want to see our chances to do that thrown down the toilet because of silly party infighting. This is our time, our year, and we can and will win. Let's not do anything to hamper that, and I don't think Hillary would want to keep hurting our nation for the next 4 years by indirectly contributing to getting John McCain elected. It hurts her and us.

I know this is tough, but there's no reason to go to Denver because it hurts us as a party, her future, and our country by helping to elect a Republican through DNC infighting.

And besides, I'd rather spend January in Washington than August in Denver any day of the week.

Update [2008-5-31 20:5:2 by zcflint05]:Hey all--let's try to avoid feeding the trolls, keep the discussions civil, and no FLAME wars. This is the closest we've been to day 1 of the General Election--so let's just chill out. Just avoid the flame wars.

Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Nominee for President, RBC (all tags)

Comments

176 Comments

Tips, recs?

I wrote this at work, give me some love!

by zcflint05 2008-05-31 03:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips, recs?

Great diary.  Virtual rec.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-31 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Tips, recs?

me too

by lockewasright 2008-05-31 08:38PM | 0 recs
Tipped for speaking your mind, but I still DISSENT

I support Senator Clinton going to the convention, which is her right under the laws and rules of our country and our party.

I reject the talking point being pushed by the Obama campaign and others that it's against "unity" for Clinton to continue to pursue the nomination.

There are 3 main reasons she should go to the convention, in my opinion:

1.  Given that Florida and Michigan have been recognized, she now has the popular vote lead, which will be even more compelling after tomorrow's vote in Puerto Rico.  

2.  Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates before the convention.

3. She is more electable against John McCain, primarily because of her strength in a few key states, especially Florida.

You can call me whatever names you want -- I've heard it all. You've called me racist, repug, traitor, bitch, and other things I can't repeat here. Like my candidate, I am impervious by now.

This is a Democracy, and under democratic principles I urge Hillary Clinton to use the convention for its god-given purpose -- to select the best nominee for our party and best potential president for our country.

There is too much at stake to walk away.  And I am sure, after today, that she will NOT be conceding any time soon.

Sorry, it's not what you want to hear.

But this is about something much larger than a manufactured sense of "party unity."

Senator Clinton:  Please make your plans to take this nomination battle to Denver.  The people are behind you.

See you there.

P.S. -- Please do not troll rate me for this comment -- which is a matter of free speech and falls within the myDD guidelines.

Please do not attack me personally, call out personal information about me, or direct nasty hateful "snarky" comments AT me rather than at the substance of the discussion.  Abuses will be reported.  It is not okay to act like a thug towards other users.  And by the way, it only motivates me to be tougher.

In case you forgot, Democrats are permitted to dissent.  That's one of our bedrock principles.  I am NOT required to be a sheep to belong to this party.  Debate civilly, or keep your mouth shut.

I look forward to meeting you all in Denver this summer.

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-31 05:05PM | 0 recs
Hmmm

Well, you certainly have your opinions.

Here's an opinion from Chuck Todd at the RBC, right after the Michigan vote:  "It's now Obama's Party."

That's another thing to add to your "reject" list.  How long do you think that list will be by August?

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-05-31 05:22PM | 0 recs
Yeah...

Because what Chuck Todd says overwrites the 17 MILLION people who've turned out and voted for Hillary in this election.

Give - me - a - break.

by alegre 2008-05-31 06:05PM | 0 recs
Today is proof that Alegra, TexisDarlin, and
Linfar will never accept Obama period.
Not now. Not next week. Not in Denver.
And not in September. October. November. December .
You made yourselves clear. You only support Hillary, period.
Not him. Not the Democratic party. Not in our goal to win the White House and restore sanity and some goo.
You will continue to sow discontent -
I am resigned to your bitterness and anger and vitriol.
I am. And I will no longer comment on the hate.
by TheFullBerry 2008-05-31 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Today is proof that Alegra, TexisDarlin, and

Good decision.  Ignore them.

by tibbs 2008-05-31 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah...

That's not what I said at all Alegre. I have a feeling that you have an "Infinite Do Loop" going on in your head right now.

Try Ctrl-Alt-Del, take two aspirins, and post in the morning.

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-05-31 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah...

Who cares what Chuck Todd says.....he's  only a commentator...You follow your guy from Chicago and do what he tells you......Hillary's folks are not puppets...we have a mind of our own...See you in Denver!

by GendraX 2008-05-31 07:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmmm

Actually I think what he says quite apt.  It's no longer the Democratic Party.  It's "Obama's" Party.  

by BPK80 2008-06-01 07:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Hmmm

Are you hell bent on democrats losing because that is what it looks like. I understand that you don't like Barack Obama but he is still a democrat and honestly there is little policy difference between him and Hillary. If you want to continue with your doom and gloom campaign why not just come clean and say that you are supporting John McCain so we know where you stand and will deal with you accordingly.

by sweet potato pie 2008-06-01 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Tipped for speaking your mind, but I still DIS

I'm a Hillary supporter too and sometimes gain a little insight into what Hillary must be hearing from her closest advisers when I read diaries written by you and Alegre.

Ultimately, of course, the decision on how far to take the campaign rests with Hillary. So, I'm with Hillary until the end.

If she concedes the nomination in June, I hope you will join me and her in moving on to win the GE with Barack.

by RickWn 2008-05-31 05:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Tipped for speaking your mind, but I still DIS

I'd give you mojo if I could.

by lockewasright 2008-05-31 08:46PM | 0 recs
Bravo, TD!

I'm applauding you in California.

by izarradar 2008-05-31 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Tipped for speaking your mind, but I still DIS

Dissent is fine...but contesting the nomination after Obama has requisite delegations needed and she  has no chance to make up the difference would not make sense. We need to think back to why Hillary was such a strong candidate going in...smart and pragmatic are two of the words I'd use to describe Hillary earlier this year. Lately she seems exhausted and not always thinking straight...it must be awful to lose after so much work, so much money, so many supporters, but someone has to lose and unfortunately this time it was Hillary. I think once Hillary has a chance to rest and reassess the situation she will not want to do a Ted-Kennedy-1980 "Running Against the Wind" turn...that is so not who she is. She has promised to support the nominee, and I expect that once she has a chance to come to terms with what has happened, both she and Bill will support Obama and will not wait for the convention to do so.

by Alice in Florida 2008-05-31 05:34PM | 0 recs
Pssst

Got a little factoid for ya and you might wanna listen up...

He doesn't have a single vote until they're cast in Denver.

Besides - ya never know what might hit the news between now and Denver.  Stay tuned.

by alegre 2008-05-31 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

I assume you mean the purported Michelle Obama video? If you guys have it, use it.

by vcalzone 2008-05-31 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

And if you don't have it, find it. I may not like you that much, but I'd rather have you plunging the knife than John McCain.

by vcalzone 2008-05-31 06:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst
Pssst. He's your nominee now.
You hate that fact - you go register as a republican, okay? :-)
by TheFullBerry 2008-05-31 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

So, how was it today with the hordes of um, 200 in D.C.?  I'm assuming you were one of the merry band of protestors and/or unseemly screechers in the hearing.  Did the other 9,800 get lost on the Jersey Turnpike?

Of course, I am sure you are beyond being embarassed by a reprimand from one of Hillary's avid supporters on the committee -- a woman with grace and class.

I don't even pity you -- at this point I am actually relishing what you have become and what you further will become because you deserve every miserable second of it.

by gchaucer2 2008-05-31 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

yeah, what Geoffrey said!

by lockewasright 2008-05-31 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

Holy Crap! Is that really him! I loved him in "A Knights Tale"!

by futbol dad 2008-05-31 09:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

That movie can't be real.  They didn't have color movies back when he was alive!  They must have colorized it after the fact.

by lockewasright 2008-05-31 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

Damn, you're right!

by futbol dad 2008-06-01 05:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

It's nice when all that fancy book learnin' pays off.

by lockewasright 2008-06-02 10:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

You know, I was at the RBC meeting today.  That was 500 people with a small but vocal subset of Clinton supporters able to cause chaos (and ultimately taking their "Brooks Brothers Riot Redux" into the hall where they began chanting "President McCain!  President McCain!").

Now, try and figure out what the convention would look like with a similar proportion of disruptions.  Taking this to Denver is the single stupidest thing a person could do if they wanted to defeat John McCain, because there's no way it doesn't devolve into Bedlam, and two seconds' honest reflection would tell any rational person that.

by Jay R 2008-05-31 09:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Pssst

Pffffffffffft! I think that's my answer to your conspiratorial psssssst.

by Shiloh 2008-05-31 10:47PM | 0 recs
TR'd?

Troll rated by chatters71

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-31 07:05PM | 0 recs
Looking at your history

of giving HRs and TRs, it's hard to take your complaint too seriously. Really.

by Black Anus 2008-06-01 08:45AM | 0 recs
Mojo for respectful debate

In interest of furthing honest debate, I'll honor your tip with some mojo.  Also, here is some feedback and questions regarding some of the points you raised.  I would be interested in your response.

1.  Given that Florida and Michigan have been recognized, she now has the popular vote lead, which will be even more compelling after tomorrow's vote in Puerto Rico.

I've never understood this part of the whole popular vote argument.  Why should it matter in calculating that total if FL and MI delegations are recognized?  The pop vote is only relevant in as much as it sways the oppinions of super delegates and supporters; it has no official status.  SDs are capable of doing the math whether or not delegations are seated... so how does this change anything in that regard?  If the argument is that their vote should respect the 'will of the people', can't they do that regardless of the status of the delegations?

Related: If the goal of the popular vote argument is to reflect the will of the people, does giving Obama zero votes out of MI really accomplish that?

2.  Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates before the convention.

Technically true, but assuming enough SDs endorse Obama in the next few days to comfortably give him the nomination... does it really make sense to leave the party in limbo for three more months?  That would be a gift to McCain and the neocons.

3. She is more electable against John McCain, primarily because of her strength in a few key states, especially Florida.

Perhaps true by current polling, but you must admit that Obama is gaining ground and shows real strength in the polls against McCain (as shown even in the EV maps here at MyDD).  Really, both our candidates are really great.  Either could beat McCain.  Clinton has a stronger hold on various key states but Obama puts a broader array of states in play.  I don't see the electibility argument being big enough to tip the SDs away from Obama.  His effectiveness with grass roots organizing and fund raising probably carries more weight at this point than polls five months out from November.  We still have time to leverage that into an even stronger EV map.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

Thanks.

by protothad 2008-05-31 07:15PM | 0 recs
let it go

The only result of a convention fight is a democratic loss. That's it.

Is that what you'd want, even if in some far away land Clinton won? I'd think not.

So please, drop it.

by Yalin 2008-05-31 08:57PM | 0 recs
Re: let it go

I actually think they do - it would be their proof that they were right all along.  They are way too invested in this to see clearly. Deluded is the only word for it.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-31 09:59PM | 0 recs
Which one were you?

At the DRC protest, were you the blond woman from CA out front or one of the ones inside who disrupted the meeting?  When I saw video of the blond woman I thought she sounded a lot like you.

Just curious.  

by GFORD 2008-06-01 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Tipped for speaking your mind, but I still DIS

I agree that this whole party unity stuff is being a bit overplayed. If barak obama doesn't have what your looking for or if john mcain has more of what your looking for then by all means vote with what you feel is right. However if you want to take this to the convention there has to be a purpose. First off Hillary will not get the nomination by taking this to the convention. The only other reason to do so would be to either push some legislative issue, strenthen her political future or make an important statement.

by kbal 2008-06-01 08:41AM | 0 recs
It's time to move on to the general.

We have our nominee. The Rs have theirs. Let's beat theirs with ours.

by Firewall 2008-05-31 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: It's time to move on to the general.

I'm on board.

by lockewasright 2008-05-31 08:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

I beg to disagree. I think what hurts the party more is the fact that the democratic party just decided to disenfranchise 50% of Michigan and Florida voters. That is a dangerous precedent that ruins the brand of the democratic party.

by 1986dude 2008-05-31 03:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

MI & FL shouldn't have moved their primaries.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

We can argue all we want about the merits and events surrounding the MI & FL election that does not change the basic fact, the democratic party is now for disenfranchisement, just like the Republican party.

by 1986dude 2008-05-31 03:50PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

The people you've punished are the voters, who didn't do anything wrong.

Votes belong to the voters. The Democratic Party just took them away.

by OrangeFur 2008-05-31 03:57PM | 0 recs
Luckily

There's a great way for the voters to fix this problem: vote out the people that caused their problem in the first place.

I didn't want us to be at war in Iraq, but my country's leader took us there.

I can leave the country, or I can fight to restore honor to the country by the rules allowed in the Constitution.

If you're not in favor of democracy fixing the problem with Michigan and Florida, how can you be in favor of democracy fixing the country on a larger level?

by Dracomicron 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

Superb response to that canard!

by N in Seattle 2008-05-31 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

so it's now Love BHO or leave the country? how very republican of you...

by trytobereal 2008-05-31 05:19PM | 0 recs
Brilliant reply.

I'm sure you're proud of that one.

Point: Voters elect state legislatures.  State legislatures defy DNC and screw up primary calendar, thereby tainting results.  Therefore, voters should elect better state legislators.

Counterpoint: Love BHO or leave the country!  That's nasty and Republican!

No, but it would be great if YOU, trytobereal, would leave the Democratic Party, assuming you're even a member.  HRC's defeat is your perfect excuse, now just go.  Find a part where ridiculous fallacies are welcome.

by corph 2008-05-31 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

You're deliberately missing the point.

We could have honored the votes of the people today. We deliberately chose not to.

To imply that I don't believe in democracy as a whole is, well, bizarre.

by OrangeFur 2008-05-31 05:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

At the expense of dishonoring those states that followed the rules?  Great idea.

The RBC split the baby today, but Todd is right: it was about as good an outcome as either side could hope for, save for the zealots who insist on all-or-nothing, rules be damned.

by Jay R 2008-05-31 09:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

Only in theory.

The legislators are poised as fallen heroes advocating for MI/FL while the DNC is the draconian gremlin that said, "no, no, no."

The party deserves to lose both states in the fall.  Florida going GOP is a sure bet with Obama as nominee, so there's little ambiguity there.  Michigan is more of a tossup.  

by BPK80 2008-06-01 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Luckily

This is not about what "the party" deserves. We are the party. It's about what we deserve. Do we (you and I) deserve four years of McSame because party leaders in Florida and Michigan decided to jump the gun, and completely predictable consequences followed?

by Black Anus 2008-06-01 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

You don't seem to be concerned about disenfranchizing the voters who didn't vote because they were told the election wouldn't count; or who's candidate wasn't even on the ballot.

This is 'selective outrage'--it's pretty transparent.

by Brannon 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

They were then the only ones, b/c in one state over 200k decided to vote for Uncommitted, and in another over 500k decided to vote for their choice even though they didn't campaign in that state.

That arugment is a straw man at best, and just laughable in general with those type of numbers.

by TxDem08 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/ 03/who_didnt_vote_in_the_florida.html :"Based on a statistical comparison with turnout in other states' primaries, it appears that roughly two million more people would have voted in Florida and Michigan had they expected their delegates to be seated.
Although the Democratic turnout rate was impressive in Florida and Michigan, it was not nearly as high as it has been in other primaries so far. Of the first 37 states that have held either a primary or caucus for both Republicans and Democrats, only six states have had a larger turnout for Republicans than for Democrats: Florida and Michigan, plus heavily Republican Alaska, Alabama, and Utah, as well as Arizona"
by Brannon 2008-05-31 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

This is the biggest BS argument ever. Look at the turnout in FL and MI. They were record breaking. In MI they even had write ins. Clearly, the people who were really passionate and believed in their candidates came out anyways. Those who were unsure or indifferent did not.

by 1986dude 2008-05-31 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

1. Jerome Armstrong (from earlier today):
"That MI didn't have a write-in process disqualified 30,000 votes"

2. http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/ 03/who_didnt_vote_in_the_florida.html :"Based on a statistical comparison with turnout in other states' primaries, it appears that roughly two million more people would have voted in Florida and Michigan had they expected their delegates to be seated.
Although the Democratic turnout rate was impressive in Florida and Michigan, it was not nearly as high as it has been in other primaries so far. Of the first 37 states that have held either a primary or caucus for both Republicans and Democrats, only six states have had a larger turnout for Republicans than for Democrats: Florida and Michigan, plus heavily Republican Alaska, Alabama, and Utah, as well as Arizona"

by Brannon 2008-05-31 04:25PM | 0 recs
Alas for the argument about MI
First, what are you comparing turnout with? The 2004 Caucuses? Or what? There is no apples-to-apples comparison possible here as far as I have been able to determine (research continuing).

As for write-ins... you did hear the part of the meeting discussing those, where it said that due to the way the law in Michigan was written, those votes did not count if they were for Obama, Edwards, or anyone else who had pulled their name off of the ballot?

*sigh*

by Vancouverite 2008-05-31 04:39PM | 0 recs
They were not record breaking

Both MI and FL have had larger primary turnout in previous years.  They both had relatively low turn-out this year compared to the actual record breaking turn-out in other states.

These are the facts.  Feel free to look it up on wikipedia if you think I am wrong.

by protothad 2008-05-31 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

Pardon?

Michigan (population 9 million) had 600K democratic voters in their primary.

Kentucky (population 4 million) had 700K democratic voters.

Oregon (population 3 million) had 620K democratic voters.

If that was a RECORD turnout for Michigan, that's one really lame state.

And those 5% of the total votes for write in candidates that were not tabulated or included in the vote totals?  They were not for Hillary Clinton.

Florida did have an OK turnout but still not quite the turnout rate of other states.  Something about a property tax measure on the ballot.  Any chance those who don't own property (younger voters) wouldn't have shown up to vote in a primary that wasn't going to count?

Regardless, it is irrelevant now.  No point really in beleaguring and rehashing it over and over.

by Rick in Eugene 2008-06-01 01:09AM | 0 recs
Lies

Turnout for all states was relatively lower in January and February than in May.  See: New York, New Jersey.  

by BPK80 2008-06-01 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

will BHO use that as a tactic in the GE too? dicourage people to vote?

by trytobereal 2008-05-31 05:19PM | 0 recs
That make no sense.

It was the DNC that discouraged voting by declaring the elections as unsanctioned (and the state parties that precipitated that by jumping the schedule).  Obama had nothing to do with it.  

Furthermore, considering Obama recently kicked off a 50 state voter registration drive... well, I think you have your answer.

by protothad 2008-05-31 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

It's just too bad no one was informed about this until so late in the process.  If only someone had tried to fix this issue before the primary voting started we would have been able to have a debate without the charged issue of deciding if a questionable vote should stand.

If only someone had told Harold Ickes about this!  He could have found the people who voted for this and make them change their mind!  It's just too bad he didn't find out about this till later.

by libertyleft 2008-05-31 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

Yeah.  I think the Harold Ickes of the RBC, accidentally forgot to tell his twin, Harold Ickes of the Hillary Clinton for President campaign, that they were having a vote on this a while ago and he thought it was a good idea.  The humanity!

by minnesotaryan 2008-05-31 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

They counted the votes in FL and proportioned the delegates to 50%

by hootie4170 2008-05-31 04:21PM | 0 recs
Have you any idea how frustrating it is to be a

democrat in Texas? I've just lost my argument that the reason I was a fervent liberal democrat was that unlike the republicans, my party believed in democracy by counting all votes.

by suzieg 2008-06-01 04:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Then I guess you'll have to vote based on policy then, since either side isn't living up to your expectations.

by upstate girl 2008-05-31 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Troll alert.

by deminva 2008-05-31 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: The Democratic Party

The Republicans imposed a 50% penalty too.

by Shiloh 2008-05-31 10:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

indeed democrats aboard have been yelling this for years, why do they have to be only for 1/2 when no one else is?

and why don't you HRC supporters care about them? almost as if you only care about that which can get hillary the nomination and NOT about the actual voters.

hmmmmm

by TruthMatters 2008-05-31 03:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

????

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

This came up w/ one of the presenters. Some pointed to the DNC charter where it says super delegates are "super", and not subject to regular delegate selection rules like halving for time violations. Someone then said, what about VI, Dems Abroad, Guam? Must that mean their supers count as a full vote too?

by nwodtuhs 2008-05-31 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Fine, go vote Republican.   Oops, they did 50% too.  Oh well.

by libertyleft 2008-05-31 03:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Pleas read the comments you are commenting on. You are making a fool of yourself.

by 1986dude 2008-05-31 03:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

No need to descend into personal attacks and name calling.  I'll leave you to vent your rage in peace.

by libertyleft 2008-05-31 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

if you don't like name-calling then you should not start it. now you do not just look like a fool, you look like a liar as well.

by trytobereal 2008-06-01 08:49AM | 0 recs
why did you troll rate every commentof mine from

several diaries?

Bitter or Butter  you decide.

by Is This Snark 2008-06-01 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

How are we disenfranchising them again, remind me? Kentucky had more people turn out than Michigan and still got less delegates than they did at the penalty.

by ragekage 2008-05-31 03:52PM | 0 recs
yeppers

In Washington, almost half as many people turned out for our caucuses.  

Not only that, almost 700,000 Democrats voted in our absolutely meaningless primary.  So in a state with only a bit over half the population of Michigan, in a primary that every single participant knew to be meaningless, with no other important measures on the ballot, the Washington Democratic primary drew 100,000 more participants than Michigan's.

by N in Seattle 2008-05-31 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House
It's called compromise. Respect the party's decision.
by BlueGAinDC 2008-05-31 03:54PM | 0 recs
no it's called "behind closed doors brokered

compromise" - sounds good doesn't it - they did exactly what they did the exact opposite of what they told America they wouldn't do - have an open meeting which turned out to be closed after all - we look pathetic!

by suzieg 2008-06-01 04:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

This is starting to sound like that radio host on Hardball who kept shrieking "appeasement!" over and over but couldn't even begin to explain what it meant.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-05-31 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

lol Where have you been! Way past that! We are at the point where Chris M shakes his head and says that the circus has come to his show.

by futbol dad 2008-05-31 09:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

I did not get a real vote in MI.  They threw out an invalid election with only one candidate on te ballot.  I was told my Uncommitted vote would count.  

I know others who did not vote at all, as they didn't think it would matter.

I follow rules every day of my life.  Today is no different.

I was not disenfranchised, I was vidicated.

Thank you RBC

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-05-31 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

So valid of a point you make.  Clearly Hillary should get all the votes from MI and FL.

by jv 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Moot point now.  I suggest you figure out how to get over it.

by deminva 2008-05-31 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

That's certain to be helpful.

by Denny Crane 2008-05-31 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful,

I'm here to help!

by deminva 2008-05-31 06:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

They didn't disenfranchise half the voters.  The delegates those voters selected count for half.

Also, as there hasn't been too great a concern expressed about the millions who didn't vote in what was supposed to be a meaningless election -- voters who get NO voice in choosing our nominee -- please forgive me if I'm not willing to buy into the "democracy" meme.  It lacks the weight of honesty.

by freedom78 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Oh god

This is the mentality we have to put up with...

by jaywillie 2008-05-31 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Did you hear Don Fowler(who is a Hillary supporter) at the meeting today?  He stated he didn't like the MI compromise, but considering time factors and the restraints they are under at this point, that it was the best available option.  The perfect thing would have been to have a revote but that won't happen, sadly.

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2008-05-31 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

I respectfully disagree.

  1. Each of the two settlements was based on something the states proposed, rather than the O proposal in MI, which I think was thrown in more to counter Ickes and the MI people knew it, or the Ickes revised proposal which did give O the 55. Neither state parties were slapped away by the outer structure.
  2. It treated voters and SDs equally. So the probably guilty did not get away scot free, leaving the electors of the electeds holding the entire hit.
  3. The committee members were plainly concerned not only about those who got to vote, but equally about those who did not. After all, the way Southern voter mechanics worked in the old days was not to steal the votes after, but make sure that those they did not wish to vote never got near a ballot or a voting machine at all. I think the 30,000  MI write-ins that got pitched had a good bit to do with that. Outright ballot pitching.
  4. Once you gave one delegation a half haircut, both had to get it. I was afraid they'd be so mad at MI that it would get nothing at all.
  5. I think the only one Ickes reserved on was MI, which is the harder one for him to defend anyway.

All in all, not a terrible day, except for the deadenders who made HRC and all of her diligent and dignified supporters who would not do that, look bad unless we make the distinction early and often.

by Christy1947 2008-05-31 04:12PM | 0 recs
I respectfully disagree

I think this was the fairest settlement they could come up with.  You really couldn't seat them fully based on the January results.

The idea solution would have been new primaries, but that never happened.

The rules have been applied fairly. Obama will almost certainly reach the magic numbers (is it 2118 now?) on Wednesday.  I think it is in everybody's best interests that we accept the results and move on.

The war with is John McCain about to begin.

by psychodrew 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

The repubs took 1/2 of FL's delegates too, so there's no high ground for the GE there.

by proseandpromise 2008-05-31 04:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Nonsense.

Any disenfranchisement occurred last September-January when candidates were barred from campaigning here and we were told that Florida's delegates would not be seated at the convention (and when we elected delegates in March, those delegates were told they couldn't even reserve hotel rooms!)

Today the situation was rectified...our delegation will be seated, all of them. We didn't get to choose the nominee, true, but that is the fault of the dips***s in Tallahassee who moved the primary to January instead of March. It worked out great for the Republicans, who had their delegates cut by half but were allowed to campaign here. The difference, I think, was that the Republican nomination was not believed to worth much in 2008 while the Democrats assumed their nominee had a virtual lock on the White House this year, hence the vicious battle over the primary schedule.

by Alice in Florida 2008-05-31 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

But so did the Republicans. And you don't see them crying like babies about it. They move on. We should too.

by chatters71 2008-05-31 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

I agree.  I also admire and respect Hillary, but it is time to unite.

I am tired of reading hit pieces on her and smear diaries here on her.  Also, it upsets me, with her commitment to NY, that there are people who will work to get her voted off in her next Senate run - why?  Because of this primary?  Throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
 

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Being a New Yorker

there is always that feeling when a sitting senator, congressperson or governor runs in a presidential race.

Kerry is my senator and there was that feeling he was ignoring his state.

I believe that Hillary has made it to the Senate to vote on bills.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Being a New Yorker

Unlike McCain who skipped the vote on the new GI Bill.  

Thanks McCain you stay classy.

by CAchemist 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Being a New Yorker

McCain will also be skipping next week's vote on limiting green house gases.  Guess the earth isn't as important as fundraising with Bush.

by CAchemist 2008-05-31 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, but it's understandable

Just chill. The end is three days away, and we will all see what happens then. Between now and then the phones will be blazing (not ours, fortunately).

by Christy1947 2008-05-31 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, but it's understandable

It is potentially far worse than that. So much of the real action in the Senate takes place behind closed doors, based as much on personal friendships between senators as anything else.

As a New Yorker, I'm worried that my junior senator will lose the respect of many of her fellow senators - and thus her ability to exert power in the Senate - if the "take it to Denver" threat is carried out.

Want to talk disenfranchisement? This sure isn't what I voted for in 2006. (At least my neighbors in Connecticut knew what they were getting into when they chose to send Lieberman back to Washington...)

by ipsos 2008-05-31 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, but it's understandable

it didn't hurt Ted Kennedy, did it?  Senators are a close knit bunch.  I haven't heard anything bad from any senator about Hillary's performance as a Senator.

Even republicans praise her for her ability to reach across the aisle.  

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, but it's understandable

Ted Kennedy was a special case...a very special case. The Kennedy's were like the royal family of Massachusetts for decades. I would not use him as a comparison for what would happen to anyone else.

by Alice in Florida 2008-05-31 05:48PM | 0 recs
Is that sexism?

It's OK for Ted Kennedy but not for Hillary?

by catfish2 2008-05-31 06:54PM | 0 recs
I will never happen - she's too popular!

by suzieg 2008-06-01 04:45AM | 0 recs
I read people were chanting "McCain".

Classy!

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:47PM | 0 recs
really, that comment has

no place in this diary.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:48PM | 0 recs
It seems to me that such chants

and threats have no place in our Party.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

your comment has no place in this diary.  Start your own with your thoughts on it.  But this is a diary about unity.  Those folks are angry and have to go thru their process of grieving.

Anger is the 1st stage.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

Oh. I expect you'll be saying that to all the people saying take it to Denver then.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:56PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

Most of the time I ignore them, because I understand that anger is part of the grieving process.  

I certainly do not wish to throw gasoline on a fire.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

But you felt fine commenting to me. Interesting.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:00PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

because you are an Obama supporter, no?  Obama is going to be our nominee, so why add more fuel to the fire?

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

That doesn't  mean I'm any less pissed than those scumbags who would chant McCain and equate MI & FL slavery. In fact, they said it was worse than slavery. As a descendant of slaves they're very lucky I wasn't there to put my foot in some asses.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:06PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

I totally understand your POV.  However, was it necessary in this diary?  That is all I am saying.

okay?

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

I understand what you're saying as well but what I don't understand is you saying this only to me. You think they should get to vent for some reason but not me?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:12PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

I commented on the poster who stated that s/he wanted it to go to Denver.

it isn't just you.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

Eh no biggie either way. I'm done venting.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:16PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

Everyone gets to vent we just don't think you should it in this very nice unity diary.

Feel free to write a diary about how you feel Hillary's supporters did not do her justice today.  Many will comment there (for better or worse).

by CAchemist 2008-05-31 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

Okok. I'm done.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

please give the same admonition Here

Thank you

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: It seems to me that such chants

thank you for pointing that comment out - I missed it and have commented on it.

it also has no place on this diary

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: really, that comment has

I don't know that they were chanting McCain inside the room .. but when a bunch of Hillary supporters left the room .. they were saying that McCain was going to be the next Prez ... if you don't believe .. check out Firedoglake.com

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2008-05-31 04:09PM | 0 recs
Well since I we're going to lose the WH

with Obama as the nominee...I say...Denver's alright with me.

by cosbo 2008-05-31 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

You want Clinton to finish off her public career eh?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:48PM | 0 recs
Sure why not.

by cosbo 2008-05-31 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Sure why not.

Dunno. Fine with me but bad for the Party!

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 03:50PM | 0 recs
Why are you a Democrat?

Could you please tell me why you're a democrat?

Reproductive rights?
The environment?
Separation of church and state?
A distrust of too much economic power in the place of corporations?
The war?

Or, is it because of Hillary?

Because if it's any of the above non-Hillary issues, you should probably continue to be a Democrat in November.

by yankeeinmemphis 2008-05-31 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

no, not really.  It is time to unite.  Hillary has a strong future in the Democratic party with her current role and can achieve greater heights.

(somehow, I missed this comment earlier)

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:05PM | 0 recs
Indeed

I would love to see her use her power in the party to push her plan as the health care reform plan (or at least the aspect for a mandate).

by Student Guy 2008-05-31 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Indeed

me too.  I am hoping that President Obama :) will use her to spearhead that effort.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

How do you know he's going to lose?  Who is going to win the World Series this year?  the Belmont Stakes?  Will I win the lottery this year?

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2008-05-31 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

You won't win the lottery but I will!

by heresjohnny 2008-05-31 04:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

LOL!!     ;-)

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2008-05-31 04:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Well since I we're going to lose the WH

I can tell you that the Cubs WON'T win the World Series.

by fbihop 2008-05-31 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Obama was wise to advise his supporters not to attend. The Clinton campaign had plenty of rope and their supporters hung it for them.

by terra 2008-05-31 03:47PM | 0 recs
Props to you zfclint

I am going to direct traffic here from my sanity blog, in which I told people not to get into flame wars.

I have a hell of a lot of respect for you. and am reccing this.

I am going to ask people to go and rec your diary instead of mine as it is far better, only could you add something about not getting into a flame war.

by Student Guy 2008-05-31 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Props to you zfclint

Thanks! I will update that there right now, I wasn't anticipating the amount of animated discussion that has begun here.

by zcflint05 2008-05-31 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White

If you look at this as a cathartic moment, then perhaps it makes more sense.  This is probably the low point for party unity, but things will likely rebound over the coming weeks.

by rfahey22 2008-05-31 03:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful

yes, I agree with this as well.  Some of hard-core HRC supporters have made our way on our own over the last few weeks.  However, there is still work to be done.

let people go thru their stages of grief.  My mom & I talked about this the other day - she is saddened that Hillary will not be the nominee and she will never see another woman candidate with Hillary's strength and intelligence (my mom is 85, so I am not stretching here when I state this).  However, she is on board with Obama.  She saw him speak in 2004 and remarked on him back then in a positive light.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 03:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful

Yeah, many of my family and extended family are Clinton supporters, and in fact are far more invested in her candidacy than I am in Obama's, and on some level this pains me.  But, none of us would be able to live with ourselves if we voted Republican.  All wounds heal with time.

by rfahey22 2008-05-31 04:03PM | 0 recs
Recced

January 20 is going to be sweet.

by CAchemist 2008-05-31 03:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Recced

If we are going to rec this and unrec student guy and we tell Obama supporters that today is not the day to fight.

Let people vent but don't widen the bridge by stoking the flames.

by CAchemist 2008-05-31 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but

Denver is super humid in the summer anyways. and its hard to breath.

by alyssa chaos 2008-05-31 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but

no it's not, we have a very dry heat.  

We do however have thinner atmosphere but it's not THAT bad.  

Where is the convention going to be held anyway?  I think I'm going to need to get a camcorder and record it for posterity. :)

by DawnG 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but

Well, owing to relativistic effects, people in Denver do age some miniscule amount less than people at sea level, so you've got that going for you.

by rfahey22 2008-05-31 06:32PM | 0 recs
NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!
Get real.  This isn't about sitting FL or MI.  It's about bullying her way onto the ticket in November no matter what. From one tactic to another.  Can you say "bad faith"?
You wanna talk chutzpah, how about Ickes?  What a joke.  This has been the most embarrassing episode of Hillary's life and yet he has no shame.  "It's not fair".  Sounds like a 2 year old.  The only result she will accept is her nomination.
Think about it for a moment, while most would be sick to see her becoming the nominee through these ill gotten gains, she is prepared to turn her frown upside down and pretend to be entitled to victory.  That's chutzpah.  The fact she doesn't care who she is alienating speaks volumes.  She simply "deserves" this. B.S.
by jv 2008-05-31 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!

We won. Can't we be gracious ?
Let's move on.

And if you think I am pikcing on you, here is some insight as to what Obama wants us to do:Chuck Todd just said Obama had a narrow 1 or 2 vote majority for a 50-50 split in MI. But they decided to go with 69-59 to get more votes in order to be more magnanimous.

If he can be a grown-up about it, so can we

by Benjaminomeara 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!

"Gracious" or "low-key" don't seem to be in your vocabulary. or thought. Why would you throw fuel on a fire?

by VAAlex 2008-05-31 04:16PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!

I will leave the appeasement to you.  I personally don't spend time worrying about militant die-hards who won't accept party unity short of a Hillary nomination.

by jv 2008-05-31 04:22PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!

I'm not appeasing anyone but I'm sick to death of the insinuation that 'this is all about her', which your diary is all about. Do you understand that it's people like you that make reasonable Clinton supporters see red whenever they read your comments? You obviously can't stand her, but have a little respect for those of us who have dedicated a hell of a lot of time and effort to her candidacy. This sure isn't 'all about her'.

by VAAlex 2008-05-31 04:32PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!
Reasonable people see red?  Come on.  While you may scoff, I was originally a Clinton supporter.  I also understand the work that has went into her candidacy and applaud those who have graciously accepted defeat--albeit a tough and sad notion.
But to suggest this isn't "all about her", is simply naive.  Show me one contest in history where they change the rules part way through, with the tacit if not direct support of the leading candidate?  You can't.  And don't start some lame line about this being a unique contest.  The only thing unique is Clinton's refusal to abide by existing rules and formulas (i.e. delegate seating, caucuses that actually count etc.)
I have lost my respect for Clinton.  I am entitled to that.
by jv 2008-05-31 04:57PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT STOPPING TIL SHE WINS!

You're certainly entitled to losing respect for Clinton. Those of us who still do thankfully aren't this 'naive'.

by VAAlex 2008-05-31 07:20PM | 0 recs
To quote princess bride (sortof)...

That word? (Appeasement) I don't think it means what you think it does.

It's a night where it's probably best to be cool, lay low, and stay out of the venting process.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-31 04:37PM | 0 recs
Re: To quote princess bride (sortof)...

From Wikipedia:  Appeasement, literally: calming, reconciling, acquiring peace by way of concessions or gifts (the verb 'to pay' also goes back to the Latin 'pax' = peace). Most commonly, appeasement is used for the policy of accepting the imposed conditions of an aggressor in lieu of armed resistance, usually at the sacrifice of principles. Usually it means giving in to demands of an aggressor in order to avoid war.

As in, accept or onwards to Denver.

by jv 2008-05-31 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: To quote princess bride (sortof)...

Except we've made no concession here, so your use of the word is incorrect, but I'm outta here. If you want to fight tonight, you're going to find plenty of sparring partners looking for someone to strike out at. You won't be helping the candidate. You won't be helping the party. You won't be helping the country, but it may make you feel good.

by Travis Stark 2008-05-31 05:02PM | 0 recs
Re: To quote princess bride (sortof)...

concession: Obama giving any validity to seating FL and MI based on what transpired.

by jv 2008-06-01 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Thank you. I completely agree with you, and you know I'm a Clinton supporter as well. With FL/MI now resolved, we can look forward to ending this on June 4th. I will support her until then, but after that, my patience/support decreases exponentially (logarithmically?).

by VAAlex 2008-05-31 04:00PM | 0 recs
Very well said ZC!

You're words and your attitude both before you endorsed Obama and after has made me even prouder of my party and its members.  We'll get through these primary wars.  And after we're done with them, the Republicans are going to really feel the heat.  They lost three special elections while all our passion was invested in our presidential primary.  When we're battling them and not each other, they are going to be so utterly powerless that we'll be cruising into November.

by nklein 2008-05-31 04:00PM | 0 recs
That should say...

"When we're battling them and not each other, they are going to be so utterly powerless to stop our cruising into the WH and supermajorities in the House and Senate.

by nklein 2008-05-31 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful

We are all political geeks here...but we are all on the same team.  

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YcWXL8jpFGs&a mp;feature=related

by RockvilleLiberal2 2008-05-31 04:02PM | 0 recs
Agreed.

I believe that this was a fair settlement.  They could not be fully seated based on the original elections.

I do hope that our party leaders have learned a lesson from this.  The current nominating system is broken and needs to be reformed.

by psychodrew 2008-05-31 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Agreed.

yes, as ugly as this was, it was an eye-opener on what happened (Levin's explanation on NH defying the rules).

The DNC and its mistakes are out there in the open, thanks to this being televised and I do hope Dean gets the message going forward.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-31 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Agreed.

The only problem is that they'll probably pick an even dumber process next time!

by rfahey22 2008-05-31 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Agreed.

As president, Barack Obama will have a great deal of influence over picking the next DNC chari, right?  He's talked a great deal about bringing people together, so hopefully he backs somebody who will do that.  We'll see.

by psychodrew 2008-05-31 04:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Agreed.

Actually .. Paul Tewes(I believe is his name) .. looks to be the one to replace Dean .. so we'll see

by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle 2008-05-31 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Indeed.  We'll have the final 3 contests and then a nominee.  Huzzah RBC.  

by bosdcla14 2008-05-31 04:12PM | 0 recs
It is over.

Time to unify and move onwards to the general election.  Ickes and group can try to generate the "fight in Denver" all they want, but will alienate themselves and the cause in the end.

by shirley temple 2008-05-31 05:05PM | 0 recs
When Obama has 2118 delegates

he will be my nominee. He is not there yet. But I will vote for him if he is. God help us all if he loses.

by DiamondJay 2008-05-31 05:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful,

January is over folks ---- tomorrow its June

Its not the DNC's job to tell the GOP run legislature and GOP Governor Crist not to f-ck up our primary but they did.....

Florida Voters were disenfranchised by Florida politicians ----

Michigan screwed itself with a Democratic legislature and a Dem Governor Granholm.  To make matters worse, candidates removerd themselves from the ballot....the primary was f-cked up by MI

Michigan Voters were disenfranchised by Michigan politicians

Personally --- I think we should have sat both delegations in full an denied both states all their Superdelegates and refused to dredentail any delagtes who was an elected official from either state.

by kmwray 2008-05-31 05:15PM | 0 recs
Hey, my guy didn't even make the finals.....

But I want to beat John McSame so bad I can taste it.

by Sam Loomis 2008-05-31 05:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Rec'd - especially for posting this from work!

by TL 2008-05-31 05:44PM | 0 recs
Obama should have thought about it before he

objected to the re-do - we will get our day of reckoning in Denver after all his hate mongering friends are all out of the closet!

by suzieg 2008-06-01 02:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama should have thought about it before he

I don't think Senator Clinton has any intention of continuing this. She's that Great!!! She is a true leader and an amazing competitor. UNITE

by Politicalslave 2008-06-01 02:53AM | 0 recs
Denver

I don't see all that many trolls in here, unless you are calling people who disagree with you, trolls.

by Scotch 2008-06-01 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful, but I like the White House

Regarding your update, decrying the "trolls", how about a little moment of honesty on your part?

Do you really imagine that with all the provocative claims you've made in this diary, and the complete dismissiveness you've presented towards the arguments for Hillary's side, that you in any way deserve not to get any "flames"?

Really, I gotta say, many of you Obama supporters seem completely incapable of seeing things from the point of view of anyone else.

Which, for many of us, is exactly the problem we've had with you and Obama from Day One.

by frankly0 2008-06-01 08:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver's beautiful

I think it has been a distrubing trend during this primary - this general sentiment that "democracy's great and all, but let's not get carried away with it."

The most pointed example came when Barack had his top surrogates wage an 8-day, 24-hours-per campaign to get Hillary to quit before the PA primary.  Surrogates threatened Hillary's Senate career, and that was when this meme was born that too much democracy would be bad for us, because it would undermine our chances of winning in November.

Counting votes?  Hey now.. only some, and weigh them differently, will ya?

Following rules?  Well, sometimes.  It depends.  If following them makes things politically easier and simpler, yes.  But let's break the inconvenient ones, ok?

If you have a complaint about the convention's proximity to election day, that is a complaint for party elders, not HRC supporters.  If Barack did not want credentials challenges in Denver, he should not have gotten greedy with MI.  So, when you make choices, you have to deal with consequences.  I have to tell you that, were I an HRC adviser, there is absolutely no question in my mind that I would pursue a credentials challenge after the MI decision that was ratified yesterday.

It's all well and good to say "let's meet eachother half way", but that was a very dangerous precident, and when it comes to rules and law, precident is everything.  Hillary could drop out tomorrow and I still would fight the rules committee on that one.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 09:20AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads