-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/effort-by-rich-clinton-supporters-to.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
.
.
.
You guys at ABlog are a bit wacky. If you were anti Obama you could just as easily read the article and scream "OBAMA NOT INTERESTED IN PONYING UP HIS HALF FOR MI DO-OVER" or "OBAMA ONLY INTERESTED IN SIMPLE MI SPLIT, DOESN'T CARE ABOUT MI VOTERS". Calm yourselves down boys, your perspectives are shot.
It's bad enough that Hillary and Obama may spend a HALF BILLION before Denver just to fight each other while John McCaIn now gets to spend his money and message on defeating the Democrats.
Timothy Egan in the New York Times says we have become the "Donner Party Democrats" cannibalizing our own. "These modern Dems press on, tearing into each other, crawling to get to the summit, still five months away, in the mile-high city. They are now ravenous with hunger, and it is starting to show."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/opinion/22ega...
With the many failures of the Bush administration, McCain as Bush III should have been an easy push over. But thanks Hillary, it appears the Democrats are about to pull out a defeat from the "jaws of victory."
MY big question is - if Michigan and Florida delegates are NOT counted - what does that do to the number of delegates needed to win the nomination? I am not that familiar with the Democratic party nominating rules and regulations - is it a simple majority or what? If the winning nominee needs 2035 delegates, what will they need minus Michigan and Florida?
Thanks for stopping by. As a member of the Democratic Party, I think I'll take your comments with a big (troll-sized) grain of salt.
Unless... they want this civil war to continue all the way to Denver this summer.
http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/10/democrat...
btw, my apologies to Biden and Kucinich who did pull there names from the ballot. Dodd is the other one who did not.
.
I like no-indent threads much better, but it is still a good idea to click Reply on the comment you are responding to. Even 'tho it will not show there, the reply will show on an individual's 'View Full Profile' page.
*
All that is needed to find your newly published comment is set your option for it to appear at the top or bottom of the thread.
*
The delegate issue(s) for both FL and MI are between the citizens of those states and their state Dem leaders. They lost out on helping to select a candidate. They'll get to vote in Nov. That's just the way it is. That's the way it should stay.
This profile business and indent just make things more complicated in my view. Sometimes I like to comment on more than one thread at a time and follow different conversations. That's harder now. No big deal but I hope everyone from before the switch manages to figure things out and comes back around.
I kinda feel bad for FL voters because the republicans played no small role in moving their primary up but I do agree that either a revote (paid for by the states) be made or a split of the delegates 50-50. I don't think it right not to seat them but if that is to be the case then so be it. The votes (MI anyway) can't stand and be counted as is.
This is a busy weekend for many. Once the new week gets started, I bet comment #s begin to pick up. Change is hard for many people, but eventually they adjust.
I added an AB icon to my browser toolbar and with it and the browser Refresh arrows it's much easier to refresh the thread or return to the Homepage by clicking them. Using Firefox makes those refreshes much faster than when I used IE.
The FL & MI thing is a mess. Re-dos are not going to happen and to split the delegates, which will not reflect the wishes of the citizens, is even more unfair, imo. The citizens of these states will have to take their frustration out on their ridiculous party officials.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008...
Texas needs to decide in the future if they want either a primary or caucus system as having BOTH makes no sense. However, it's not only Texas....Washington State Democrats have both but they only count the caucus votes and NOT the primary votes plus they have 17 SUPER delegates! The Washington Republicans count BOTH the primary and caucus votes giving about equal weight to each.
She is bringing the Democratic party down, and spoiling its chances in November. If we lose this election, we have to thank Hillary Rodham Clinton, for bringing Obama down in the polls against McCain.
I cannot understand why Democrats support this candidate who has HIGH negative ratings, and is the least trusted in most polls. She has openly lied, and play gutter politics, and the rethuglicans are salivating to run against her.
I know there are women out there who want to vote for her, because "she is a woman", but these sisters have to think a bit. Do we want a damaged candidate, with high negative ratings, and who has shown no loyalty to the party, and who has not hesitation to bring another Democrat down?
We need to have an honest, straightforward, woman, with low negative ratings to be the first woman President, not Hillary Clinton
Some of us adapt faster than others. And some (like me) will probably never adapt. I am sort of embarassed to ask for help. For fear of looking REALLY stupid.
AC
I really appreciating hearing about the Michigan primary from the perspective of an actual Michigan voter, and I don’t blame you – especially, as a registered Independent voter -- for feeling frustrated with the arcane rules and regs of the Democratic Party.
I’m a life-long Democrat, and I find the DNC versus the various state Democratic Party rules completely baffling, if not downright byzantine, and I think the Superdelegate system is totally undemocratic and elitist and is nothing more than a gate-keeping device to make sure that a truly progressive candidate -- like the late Paul Wellston or Dennis Kucinich or even Howard Dean -- can never win the nomination.
Also, I agree with you that for Hillary to insist that the flawed primary was a true indication of what the people of Michigan desire and that the delegates should stand is not only a lot of BS, it’s an insult to the intelligence of those voters in Michigan who didn’t have the opportunity to vote for Obama followed the DNC rules and didn’t participate in the primary. How fair is that?
Finally, with regard to your “big question” concerning how the delegate count will reach the required 2035 without including the delegates from Michigan and Florida by Convention time, your guess is as good as mine. I don’t think the so-called “experts” have that one figured out yet, even though they’re being paid to do just that. Go figure....
:)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's an excellent point about fishy primaries in more states than just Florida and Michigan.
Actually, the New Hampshire primary was moved up to an earlier date -- I think it was two weeks earlier than the traditional distance between the Iowa Caucus and the NH primary -- and yet NH was not penalized by the DNC! And why should candidates like Edwards and Obama -- who played by the DNC's penalty rules -- now be penalized for playing by the rules?
Of course, the Clintons are going to pull every trick in the book to force a Clintonian "mulligan" in Florida and Michigan in a last-ditch effort to beg, borrow, and steal delegates away from Obama, but that doesn't mean that they should be allowed to get away with it. Actually, Hillary's "Big Win" in Ohio is very much in question given the documented number of illegal cross-over voters in that race:
"Will Rush Limbaugh Be Indicted for Voter Fraud?"
By Steven Rosenfeld
http://www.alternet.org/story/80392/?page=entire
"As Ohio election officials investigate illegal crossover voting in the 2008 primary, questions arise on Limbaugh's role.
"As the board of election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where Cleveland is located, launches an investigation into illegal crossover voting in the state's 2008 presidential primary, a big open question remains unanswered: Will county officials go after the ringleaders of apparently illegal electioneering where thousands of Republican voters swore -- under penalty of law -- allegiance to the Democratic Party in order to vote for Hillary Clinton?"
Also, week before last, Thom Hartmann went through the election results in Ohio county by country and found – much to his amazement -- that in many rural areas of the state with small populations that have traditionally voted Republican for generations not a single vote was cast for McCain. Not a single vote for McCain! Now, that bizarre finding struck Hartmann as such a statistical improbability that it can only suggest illegal cross-over voting to deny Obama his likely proportional share of Democratic delegates by stacking the deck in favor of Hillary -- and all because Limbaugh told them to do just that! The GOPers are still drooling at the prospect of running against the Clintons, and they aren’t even shy about saying so.
So, forgive me, if I remain more than a wee bit confused....and plenty disgusted!
:)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also think that Edwards is a phony and a coward. It shows his character of being dishonest, if he will only endorse the candidate because they might be the winner, nothing to do with him thinking that particular candidate might just be the best one!
I've said it before and I will say it again. Either this is a democracy or it is not. Using the Democratic parties inability to make sound decisions is a poor excuse at best. Both candidates should be scrambling to do everything possible to correct this situation.
This last part of Dan Balz' article is way off the mark. Texas is not still counting votes from the March 4 caucuses. The delegate nominating process is going along as normal. The caucuses on March 4 elected precinct level delegates to attend their respective State Senatorial District conventions on March 29. I am one of those delegates. At the District Conventions delegates will be elected to attend the State Convention in June. Only at the State Convention in June will the results of the caucus process be finalized when the final slate of delegates will be elected from Texas. That is the normal process and it is not in question. The Clinton campaign has been trying to challenge this process and interrupt it. They have been threatening legal action. So far their efforts have been denied.
While I was willing to give Hillary a chance to earn my vote and support for November, her recent behavior and the behavior of her campaign spokespersons and advisers have pretty much ripped it for me. I now believe that she and her campaign WOULD say ANYTHING and do ANYTHING to get elected, and that is what we have already had in the White House for going on eight years now. Enough is enough. She no longer helps the Democratic Party, she hurts it. It is time for her to just go away.
I'm gonna send Obama some money.
— You are unverified.
2 /people/Mykel1/ /people/Mykel1/follow/
#
* ^
* v
* Permalink
KatherineHepburnEyes 6 hours ago 2 points
Chandler, I see your point, but the fact Obama is going by the rules Howard Dean put forth for the two states seems to me he's good at going by the law rather than breaking it to benefit himself.
=================
The whole can of worms was opened up by the disenfranchised Obama voters. They cannot have it both ways.
Their message to Democrats is that they will insure that the Democratic party will NOT win the White House unless the name of their nominee is CLINTON. The sad irony is that, if they are successful now in winning the nomination by sliming and swiftboating Obama, they will have alienated enough Democrats and empowered enough McCain support that Hillary will almost inevitably lose. And, if their tactic fails, they will most likely have so sullied Obama that he, too, won't be able to win against McCain.
The Clintons are willing to destroy the party to get their way. They do not care for this country, the Democratic party, or the ideals and vision of a long history Democratic progressive policy. They care only about themselves and getting back into the ultimate seat of self-aggrandizing power.
And now it appears likely that, for the third time in a row, the DLC wing of the Democratic party (also known as the Republicrats) will have lost a Presidential election against a weak and dangerous Republican candidate that a yellow dog should be able to beat by 30 points.
Time to stand aside, let the party crash and burn, and start again.
I created this account specifically to respond to this post, Joe. I'm a Michigan voter, and when I was home for Easter, there was a lot of resentment over the Michigan Primary within my Catholic family. From some Dems, it was the fact it wasn't counting. From others (including my mother, who by "statistical polling" should be an HRC supporter but supports Obama) it was because they didn't vote because Obama wasn't on the ticket. From Republicans in the family, it was because we wasted State money for nothing.
Any way you slice it, there's a lot of resentment floating around Michigan.
Clinton financiers want a revote? REALLY?! Of course they do! They want the delegates to count, and think Hillary could win again in a general election. Obama could win as well if he tried, but with the Kwame Kilpatrick controversy, I doubt anyone from his camp wants to touch the state as all the big name Dems aside from Kilpatrick and the rest of Detroit (Granholm, Levin, Stabenow, Brewer, and other smaller Dems on the State level) support Clinton. And, gee, who do you think many Michiganders will side with? "Corrupt Detroit" that is blazing headlines for the past month, or the rest of the Dem party that adroitly avoids the Motor City when it comes to race issues?
This is why State Dems won't touch the revote. It's why Obama will not touch the revote. Hillary desperately wants her win that suburban, exurban, rural, and union workers will re-deliver if they can have it. So her "backers" will pony up the money.
It's not BUYING the State. Hillary can't BUY Michigan. But Obama is buying time.
And it's costing this State. We WANT our votes to count. Or we want a re-vote. If Obama doesn't come to the table, neither will happen, and it will be a terrible sight to see for the people (55%) who DID vote Hillary in the State, Democrats or not. It will turn the party off of Obama, and if McCain can court the Clinton Dems here on Economic issues, and the State leaders don't rally around him (Granholm, Levin, Stabenow, Brewer, et al), then he is in for a world of hurt.
As a Michigan voter, to claim Hillary is trying to "buy" the State is completely disingenuous. She wants our voices to be heard. Albeit, it's for selfish reasons, but she wants it. If the coin was flipped and Obama thought the state was a lock, and Clinton was trying to obstruct a revote, I'd be mad at her too.
You coastal voters have no clue how irritated voters are over this. But keep churning out the headlines about Michigan on the Primary. At least suddenly we matter, in whatever capacity.
Obama and Clinton spend 500 million on their elections and Michigan would be a drop in the bucket at about 15 million. Spending 500 million seems more "unseemly" to me. That kind of money would buy 5,000 or more low income homes for the victims of Katrina.
So much about the Dem party has been revealed in this political season!