Who has been saying that? Perhaps this is hypocritical of me, but I've started noticing Clinton supporters saying Obama supporters are saying this/that and not backing it up with evidence. Maybe it's happening *shrug*, it'd be nice to see the evidence behind your claims about "many of Obama's supporters" are saying. (oooh, who does that phrasing sounds so familiar?).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivbDw
I hang out in the blogosphere more than any reasonable person should, and I haven't seen evidence of Obamites suggesting that Hillary ought to drop out now. Sure, it would be nice, but we're not expecting it, given who she is.
But it won't be much longer before we start seeing signs that the Democratic Party in general wants to see some closure and designate our nominee so we can start focusing on November.
I haven't seen anyone at DailyKos call for Clinton to withdraw from the race now, and the place is thick with Obama supporters. The basic attitude is that she is welcome to give it her best shot so long as her odds of getting more delegates are significantly greater than zero. That doesn't mean we aren't skeptical, but we are willing to wait three weeks and see what Texas and Ohio say.
Posted by CA Pol Junkie at February 13, 2008 03:48 PMthe obama movement is full of people saying hillary should drop out - there is a general sense that she is standing in the way of destiny - standing in the way of the future
Posted by doyoureadme at February 13, 2008 03:49 PMi've seen plenty of comments, and several diaries, at daily kos suggesting that. it's good that you three don't ascribe to the idea. obama's supporters need to keep working as if he were ten points down.
Posted by Turkana at February 13, 2008 03:50 PMIt is important what Obama is saying not few of his overly enthusiastic supporters are saying. In his last speech at the Univesity of wisconsin he told his people to work hard to win the upcoming primaries. I did not see any hint in his speech that he has no competition and he is sure of the nomination.
Only reference I saw that would indicate that Obama considers himself as a front runner was that he was criticizing McCain saying he can debate with him on all issues.
Posted by suresh at February 13, 2008 04:02 PMJust as a sanity check I went the "Obama central" dailykos and looked at the highest rated diary regarding how tough a battle Hillary has ahead of her.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/13/135926/069/564/456071
I saw exactly one comment out of 180 which called for her to "quit" (i searched on a few key words). It wasn't rated or replied to by anyone.
So we are talking just shy over 0.5%...
I'd say the best you could call current pro-Obama thinking right now is justifiable optimism.
Posted by Gryn at February 13, 2008 04:23 PMOf course it would be very convenient to suggest that she quits. Of course, it would be just as convenient if he quits. It's ridiculous, and frankly, I think, a bit sexist. And I have read several reports/articles on the subject of how it would be a good idea for her to be "gracious" about losing, when it's by no means clear that she'll do so.
Posted by Alexandra at February 13, 2008 04:28 PM"And I have read several reports/articles on the subject of how it would be a good idea for her to be "gracious" about losing"
Wait, first links please?
Second, right now? or at some point where it looks quite impossible to get the nod through elected delegates?
We do face the possibility of a brokered convention hell even if he has a lock on the elected, but will be just shy of the magic number required without superdelegates. That's not a sexist reason, but a pretty legitimate one.
But again, this is pointless arguing against said "articles" I have to imagine in my head.
Posted by Gryn at February 13, 2008 04:42 PMHillary, it's time to pull a Romney
Read the comments.
Posted by iamcoyote at February 13, 2008 04:47 PMI think Clinton is obligated to give it a good, hard, clean run up until March 4.
After that, well, there's a lot ground between here and there. But, her campaign has drawn its own line in the sand and if she doesn't come away from those two contests with a meaningful delegate advantage, I suspect Dean, Pelosi and other superdelegates will hold an intervention.
Of course, if she wins big this may go to the convention. But, I just don't see that happening--especially given Texas's funky delegate allocation scheme.
The big problem with the Alamo strategy is that you're defending turf, not taking it away from the other side.
Posted by Geek, Esq. at February 13, 2008 04:56 PMObama has really got to show he can pull in some more big states. I think one of the big three is not enough; to put it away he needs two.
Posted by bob h at February 13, 2008 04:57 PM"It's ridiculous, and frankly, I think, a bit sexist."
Sexist?! Huh?! Okay, then, is it also sexist that quite a few people have been suggesting for the last couple of weeks that Huckabee should quit?!
Posted by Shirin at February 13, 2008 05:05 PMFinally something to work with! Thank you.
Okay, looks like a flamebait diary, has some recommends but nothing "recommended list". Some of the "clinton will never do it, even if it ruins the party" schtick which I find retarded. Then the dogpile of people saying it's stupid to have diaries like this.
I don't doubt there exists such sentiment at dKos, but it's a pretty freakin huge community so you can't call it "many of Obama's supporters" unless you want to say even small percentages of a really big number counts as "many of".
If diaries start making the recommend list then maybe we can talk, but I'd like to see A-C list Democratic blog posting links rather than cherry pick diaries or comments like Bill O'Reilly does. Both sides can play that game 24/7.
Posted by Gryn at February 13, 2008 05:10 PMYeah, it's sexist. It's always the woman who's supposed to graciously step aside for the man and sacrifice herself for his ambitions, just like women who worked for both black and women's suffrage were told to shut up and sit down because "This is the Negro's hour!" Well, at least the Negro man's hour; the Negro women (and white women) didn't get the vote for another sixty years.
As for who's asking her to quit, just ask The Rude Pundit
Posted by Blue Jean at February 13, 2008 05:27 PMObama has really got to show he can pull in some more big states. I think one of the big three is not enough; to put it away he needs two.
Says who? If he beats Clinton in either TX or OH, Clinton's own campaign has admitted she'd be forced to concede.
Sounds like someone trying to fix the DNC's Florida/Michigan Howard Dean problem at Clinton's expense. I guess those who invested what over $100 million should just count their losses as a whim and say Hail Obama. Long live Obama and walk lockstep behind him... he's just so cool. Great cult he's building...Houston campaign office flying the Cuban flag with Che's picture over it...I wonder how that plays in South Florida. Man the guy helps Castro to power then goes to sow his oats elsewhere.
Posted by peter at February 13, 2008 05:31 PMSo, first it's "wha?? nobody's asking Hillary to quit," then it's "whaddaya mean you read/heard/saw it somewhere, gimme links 'cos yer a stinkin' lyin' Hillary lover," and now it's "pshaw, that was a joke diary, didn't mean nuthin' and besides, it wasn't on the rec list, so it doesn't count. Nyah!" I guess Rachel Maddow, who was discussing it earlier on AAR, doesn't count, either. Remind me never to play football with Obamans, 'cos after a couple downs, the goalposts would be trottin' down the turnpike and we'd never see 'em again!
Posted by iamcoyote at February 13, 2008 06:14 PMShame on you, coyote, for manufacturing that fake "Kos" link and the bogus comments just to make poor Gryn look like a complete idiot.
Nice photo shop job, though. Did you help with the "moon landing" project?
Posted by TIKI AL at February 13, 2008 06:34 PMThis is a typically ridiculous post and discussion here at TLC. Of course Obama's campaign is going to do everything possible to give the impression that his nomination is inevitable at this point. Yes, a part of that is trying to diminish the power of the Clinton campaign in every way, including suggesting it is virtually impossible for her to catch up in the pledged delegate race, and maybe even suggesting that the time might be approaching for her to do the right thing for the good of the party and step aside. Hello. This is politics 101, people. Hillary tried the same thing early on. The difference is that Obama is, in fact, on a real roll, and time is running out for any major comebacks...
But, it is ridiculous to feign shock that Obama-ites might suggest Hillary skidaddle. It is equally ridiculous to call it sexist. You diminish real inequality, real sexism, when you carelessly throw that around...
Posted by at February 13, 2008 06:45 PMDid you help with the "moon landing" project?
Are you kidding, TIKI? I was one of the Martians! Alas, my bit ended up on the cutting room floor...
Posted by iamcoyote at February 13, 2008 06:54 PMBlue Jean. It is precisely your type of divisive gender vs. race rhetoric that is going to tear the party apart. Careful which stones you throw. Sadly, many of the most prominent and famous white women's suffrage advocates employed racist rhetoric to justify their position... You should Google the recent Eric Foner article about the 19th century abolitionist/suffrage movements for a more positive and unifying take on that history...
Point of Fact: While black men technically got the right to vote with the 15th amendment, which excluded women. And, while women got the right to vote in 1919-20. Remember, the vast majority of black men remained disfranchised until the civil rights era. So, in fact, most white women exercised the right to vote for 40-50 years before black men or women did so.
Posted by at February 13, 2008 06:54 PMIn relative terms, Hillary is now the progressive candidate while Obama is, and was, center-right. We already lost Edwards, we need Hillary to stay if only to remind the newly convert Rockefeller Republicans, our yesterday's progressives in the Netroots, that there is crime and later history will punish their cultish stupidy.
Posted by Koshembos at February 13, 2008 06:55 PMIn relative terms, Hillary is now the progressive candidate while Obama is, and was, center-right. We already lost Edwards, we need Hillary to stay if only to remind the newly convert Rockefeller Republicans, our yesterday's progressives in the Netroots, that there is crime and later history will punish their cultish stupidity.
Posted by Koshembos at February 13, 2008 06:56 PMBlue Jean, you should listen to anonymous Patrick here - he plays a professor of women's studies on the 'nets, and he stayed at a Holiday Inn last night!
Posted by iamcoyote at February 13, 2008 07:05 PMThese are very serious times, deserving of a sober rational look at both candidates and the important challenges facing us, so leaving the hype, adhominem, cheerleading, and dismissiveness at the door, give Mr Wilsons words some consideration...
Posted by Joe at February 13, 2008 08:04 PMIn relative terms, Hillary is now the progressive candidate...
Damn. Neoliberal = progressive. Whodathunkit?
Some of his supporters have begun to suggest it's time for Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race.
I'm sure there are many out there who wish Hillary would just drop her run. So? And those of the Hive are so superior in this instance...except they will tell you Obama has no right to run for president against Hillary (Lily15). What a lovely dichotomy.
Posted by phidipides at February 13, 2008 08:07 PMFirst of all, I agree with those who question the evidence that all those "Obama supporters" are saying this and doing that. Second, I think the perceived pressure on Clinton to drop out is a natural result of her losing a series of primary races. In my view, suggestions that this has something to do with sexism are nonsense. If she had swept the majority of Super Tuesday states, and continued on a run through the February states, things might now look a lot different. In that situation, "Clinton supporters" would likely be accused of prematurely calling for Obama to bow out. Something similar happened in 2004 after Kerry won Iowa. Would you argue that sexism was driving the pressure for Dean to drop out of the race after he lost state after state? I would say that winning builds a kind of momentum that attracts support and puts pressure on other candidates. It is also natural for supporters of those candidates to be upset, but I think ultimately the blame shouldn't be thrust at those who rally behind the one who is winning. They have made their choice. Of course, Clinton might still turn it around, but from this perspective it doesn't look likely. We will see.
Posted by wulingren at February 13, 2008 08:16 PMSeems ABC is reporting John Edwards may endorse Clinton, he liked what he heard when he met with her. Something about souring... H/T Politicalwire.com
One of the main things that's going to bug me about Obama's GE campaign is me holding my breath through November, waiting, WAITING for that 'breaking news' on Drudge, then Fox, then MSNBC, then CNN, then...
Breaking news about something that we've been trying to vet Obama for but so many of us couldn't THINK about vetting Jeebus come again.
I really, really hope that the establishment keeps its distance. From what I can tell, Obama is a juggernaut of political savvy; he says the most outrageous lies and gets away with it, has a following that eats it all up without question, and has the oratory powers of a lost Kennedy. If he can keep his ace card, the media, in his pocket then he's home free.
If he can't control the media, he's nothing. I hope and pray that that card doesn't get stolen and placed in McCain's pocket mid-election.
Posted by blogtopus at February 13, 2008 09:28 PMSeems ABC is reporting John Edwards may endorse Clinton,
And he he may endose Obama. Maybe neither:
Several people close to the former North Carolina senator say he may ultimately stay neutral in the race, joining former Vice President Al Gore on the sidelines of the tightest Democratic race in decades.
Hillary is like Tracy Flick. And no one is going to pick her. She should have been born a son.
Posted by godnjesusfukked at February 13, 2008 09:47 PMFirst of all, I would like to point out that where I directed any dismissive vitriol against anyone here. READ MY POSTS. Nothing. Not even faux passive aggressive concern troll here. Yet I get called an "idiot". That's classy dialectic there. No vitriol from Clinton supporters at all, eh?
I tried to characterize as best I could. Can we agree that "comment plucking" is the lowest form of rhetoric? If it rises to the scale of systemic (as in percentage of commentators who espouse it), then it's fair characterize it as an element of a population. My kos reading habits are main page stories, plus recommneded diaries only. Perhaps I'm missing some key subculture on dKos because of that, but I don't see it yet.
I like both candidates, i'm voting D no matter what in the general. What exactly did I do to deserve being smeared like that?
Posted by Gryn at February 13, 2008 10:09 PMAnd it seems a Beagle won Westminster!?! What the hell is this, the war on terriers!
God, I love The Daily Show.
Posted by phidipides at February 13, 2008 10:15 PM"Yeah, it's sexist."
No. It's not. Not in this case.
"It's always the woman who's supposed to graciously step aside for the man and sacrifice herself for his ambitions"
Oh, I see. Is THAT what they are asking Hillary to do? To step aside and sacrifice herself for Obama's ambitions? Then I guess that must be what even more people are asking Huckabee to do - to step aside and sacrifice himself for McCain's ambitions. Only it's kind of hard to justify that as sexism, isn't it?
Posted by Shirin at February 13, 2008 10:53 PM"First of all, I would like to point out that where I directed any dismissive vitriol against anyone here."
...I would like to point out that that is not a sentence.
Boy, that's the LAST time I ever stick up for you against coyote!
Posted by TIKI AL at February 13, 2008 10:54 PM
"You diminish real inequality, real sexism, when you carelessly throw that around..."
Precisely. It is exactly a case of the boy crying wolf. It doesn't take long before the word "wolf" loses its meaning.
Posted by Shirin at February 13, 2008 10:59 PM"In relative terms, Hillary is now the progressive candidate..."
In relative terms?!!!! Please! Not everything is so relative as that. For all her positive qualities, Hillary is NOT at all progressive. She isn't even particularly liberal.
Posted by Shirin at February 13, 2008 11:03 PM"In that situation, "Clinton supporters" would likely be accused of prematurely calling for Obama to bow out."
And if they did, it would, of course, by definition, be racist.
Sauce for the goose.
Posted by Shirin at February 13, 2008 11:06 PMThat's all you got? Argument by grammar nazi?
Good luck with that.
Posted by Gryn at February 13, 2008 11:32 PMI'm worried about that one way ticket to Jonestown in your pocket.
Quit wasting your time on me, and start preparing the Rezko-Whitwater defence.
Oh, and that Nazi remark showed tremendous witt and originality. Oscar Wilde would have been proud: ..."If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you."
Dang, TIKI, you know it's bad when they start picking on the funny guy! That's it, I'm endorsing Stephen Colbert, he's the only one that'll bring truthiness back to the White House.
Posted by iamcoyote at February 14, 2008 05:19 AMClassic, iamcoyote slanders me again instead of deals with my substantive post. Again, I don;t care if coyote believes I am a professor of History or not. You are pathetic Coyote. Are you going to write now that I should "fuck off" again, as you did a few days ago. Very revealing about you...
Please, viewers, go read my posts above and see the reason in them. Then read Coyote's flippant response. Make your own choice.
For those who wrote Obama is a "liar," please offer evidence. I can name several times when the Clinton campaign willfully misrepresented Obama's views on A) reproductive rights, B Drug use C) experience D) the war E) the economy... and on and on...
And to the poster who claims Hillary is the progressive candidate, that is HILARIOUS! Hillary HAS NEVER been a progressive. The Clintons were two of the main architects of the DLC Republican-lite approach to the Democratic Party. This is what "triangulation" is all about. She has been consistently one of the biggest hawks in the Senate. She has ben a gloabl coporatist, like her husband, supporting NAFTA and GATT until she ran for president, when the tune changed. She is an ardent supporter of the death penalty. And on down the line. C'mon. Have a clue about what you are talking about before you put your foot in your mouth.
Posted by at February 14, 2008 05:28 AMLOL, imcoyote. Thanks.
As for "Who's So Couragous They Don't Even Sign Their Screen Name", your remarks speak your own sexism. You don't even offer any proof that the early feminists were racist; you just pull it out and expect us to accept it. That would come as a surprise to the Grimke sisters, who were pelted with garbage and run out of town when they spoke out against slavery, or Susan B. Anthony, who spent her early years in the Abolitionist Movement, or Sojourner Truth, who spoke at the first Women's Suffrage Convention, or...
But why go on? You obviously don't know history, or you'd know that African American men voted and held office long before any women did, and no, the Southern block against black men voting wasn't universal; they could vote all they wanted in the north, the west and the east coast. You're arguing in bad faith when you say it was.
Sharin,
Huckabee isn't dropping out; he's going on in hopes of the VP nod; that's why he's campaining. Nobody's expecting Obama to give Hillary the VP job; she's just supposed to give up and go home, like a good little woman.
Posted by Blue Jean at February 14, 2008 07:08 AMBTW, "I'm So Couragous I Don't Even Sign My Screen Name", here's the origin of the term "This Is The Negro's Hour". Yes, there's a nice picture of Obama next to it, so be comforted. If there's any racism involved, it came from those who opposed both black and women's suffrage, not from the early feminists themselves.
BTW, Frederick Douglass was the vice president of a society dedicated to promoting universal suffrage; Lucretia Mott was the president (another racist, eh?). He was one of those who said that if the feminists stood back and worked for the 14th and 15th amendments first, he would work for women's suffrage next. To his credit, he kept his word, and worked for women's suffrage until his death.
Posted by Blue Jean at February 14, 2008 07:30 AMHer vote for the Iraq War makes her the worst candidate for the Democratic Party against John McCain. Either she ignored the evidence to the contrary or she's stupid? Either way Hillary is damaged goods.
All those dead american soldiers, all those wounded american soldiers sent without proper armaments and without a plan for the Civil War between the Sunni and Shea cannot be covered over by blogger snark and smear.Sadly the Triangulater made a bad misjugement which she refuses to acknowldge. Perhaps she is like McCain, a war monger.
Dang, by the time this primary is over, Hillary's gonna be the scapegoat for everything, including scabies. Whyn't we just burn her at the stake now and maybe the angry sky gods will save us from evil. Sheesh!
Posted by iamcoyote at February 14, 2008 08:34 AMBelow is a comparison of Clinton and Obama Senate Accomplishments so you can decide for yourself who has the Beef?
Check out Amadeo Sogni's article A Light in the Darkness where he actually does research in comparing legislative records of both Clinton and Obama. It was very illuminating and I would like someone to try to debunk it.
Sogni states:
Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of legislation in her first six years.
These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress (www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I'll post them here for you.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O'Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.
OBAMAS:
Now, I would post those of Obama's, but the list is too substantive, so I'll mainly categorize. During the first (8) eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included:
**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee), and many more.
In all since enter the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.
(FROM WIZBANGBLUE, Mothermaven, 2/13/08)
SO WHOSE GOT THE BEEF?
Posted by bacaangel at February 14, 2008 09:04 AMWhile burning at the stake will definately cure scabies, Kwell shampoo is somewhat less invasive.
Posted by TIKI AL at February 14, 2008 09:20 AMSO WHOSE GOT THE BEEF?
My question exactly. It's lunch time, and I'm starving!
Kwell shampoo is somewhat less invasive.
Well, yes, but there's always the danger of the scabies coming back. We need to burn down the village to save it, I'm afraid.
Posted by iamcoyote at February 14, 2008 09:30 AMiamcoyote:
Hillary can help you with your burning... She has been consistently one of the most hawkish members of her husbands inner-circle and in the Senate since residing there!
There is a reason why the military-industrial complex bailed on the Repubs and have put their money into the Clinton campaign this year...
Posted by at February 15, 2008 06:17 AM