yada yada yada
tick tikc tick
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 05:26 PMglad you're so sanguine about throwing away fl and mi.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 05:44 PMMmmm. So the media coverage of Hillary's events in Florida doesn't count? Strict adherence to the rules can't be what you're after since that would strip her of her votes. And the big problem for you then is that Obama got a ruling from the DNC that his ads wouldn't violate the ban. The next issue would be if Obama spoke to local press or national press. I'm sure you can tell us.
I know, I know. There are "Hillary Rules" and the rules everyone else has to play by. Silly me for even bringing it up.
Posted by phidipides at May 5, 2008 05:57 PMI'd be curious about the timing if HRC's concern over the voters in FL & MI.
Was it immediately after the states violated the DNC or after she realized she wasn't going to WALTZ to the nomination.
Cause I'm thinking that would be relevant.
LexisNexis anyone?
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 06:04 PMIts always one excuse after another with Hillary supporters. The biggest crybabies I've ever seen. Your out of it. Take your asswhipping and go home.
Posted by Joe at May 5, 2008 06:07 PMwow, a little dose of reality and the obamabots' heads explode. fascinating. reminds me of junior high. i should write more horse-race stuff!
Not from Nexis but I think this says it all.........
Having her cake and Edith too.
Make that "Judith" too!!
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 06:22 PMwow, a little dose of reality and the obamabots' heads explode
You supported a re-vote and call us loony?
Do you always find that when your piece is utter crap it's best to refocus people away from it by calling people 'obamabots', eh? Just wondering.
Posted by phidipides at May 5, 2008 06:24 PMthat's right, phid. re-votes bad. seating the delegates- bad. allowing the rules to be applied as originally written- bad. anything that allows an actual democratic process- bad. obama win by any means- good. if the bot fits, wear it.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 06:29 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmUVr_Qt2Wg
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 06:37 PMturkana, you need to get a grip...if this and the Gas Tax Vacation is what you guys got left...pretty sad. Just take a minute and check yourself.
Posted by T2 at May 5, 2008 06:40 PMdunno, t2. i'm no fan of the gas tax "holiday," but it does seem that a fair resolution of fl and mi would be fair. and smart. and it seems that obama supporters would rather just go with the 48-state strategy.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 06:44 PMSpeaking about the Fed Gas Tax, for my car it would mean about $35 and my wife's about $75. Not a whole lot, but it's a tank of gas for me and about two tanks for the wife's car. Big deal, little deal, its a matter of perspective. For people under $50K, three tanks of gas is a lot of savings when you're trying to make ends meet.
Yeah Turkana, I love which rules get enforced...how selective people are with the rules. Florida and Michigan both still took care of business for the other races contested. This will probably sound stupid, but why aren't those results invalidated...the down ticket races held when they're deemed against the rules?
Posted by peter at May 5, 2008 06:58 PMSpeaking of being "sanguine ",
share with us your feeling on HRC's abiding concern over the poor FL & MI voters were she not so desperate at this juncture.
Just what level of sanguinicity would you have
about her desire to be "fair"?
peter,
in your very concerned way, you're sometimes more rational than the obamabots. but you know very well that the down ticket races didn't interfere with the divine right of iowa and new hampshire to go first, and that's why they weren't penalized.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 07:04 PMum, chaz. she's always been concerned about them. which is smart politics, for november. obama was also concerned about them, when he spoke at that tampa event. which was also smart politics. the only one whose attitude changed was obama. which is not smart politics.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 07:06 PMWhat is $30? Nothing for Obama, but our secretarial staff makes around $20K-$30K a year. Tell them that $30 is nothing. Forget that Obama proposed the same in 2000. He is so desperate that he'll do hang into $30 for the poor.
Obama clearly killed the Democrats' chances in November with his divisive unity. Wake me up in 2012 for the next round.
Posted by Koshembos at May 5, 2008 07:16 PMUm, Turk, that just ain't so my friend!
As stated earlier, she was perfectly willing to have them sit out if they violated the DNC. That is until her waltz was short circuited by the Senator from Illinois.
Look it up...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmUVr_Qt2Wg
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 07:20 PMHow's that secretary going to feel when her husband who works in road construction gets laid off because of the rediculous gas tax.
Think her son will find that $30 in her purse after a bridge collapses on her on her way to work?
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 07:31 PMNot sure how one of your arguments leads to the other unless you presuppose that Obama made up the DNC rules prior to starting his campaign.
Rules are rules. DNC will reach a compromise so that both delegations are seated, likely with 1/2 vote. I think that an argument can be made that Clinton violated her plege in Michigan and that Obama played fast and loose in Florida.
The RBC will figure it out. The race will likely be over before then. She can 'go nuclear' if she likes at the convention. If so she will obliterate her career in politics.
We can say whatever else we want about Hillary; one thing she ain't is stupid.
Posted by tfitznc at May 5, 2008 07:35 PMInteresting post by a commenter at TPM:
"I want to make a totally separate point. I agree with your posts from about a month ago about how irrational it is for a Democratic voter supporting the losing primary candidate to defect to McCain in November, since Clinton and Obama are so close on the issues compared to McCain. But I have to say, as someone who was marching in New Hampshire in 1991 for Bill Clinton, who ran the campus Democrats for his '92 campaign, who interned in his White House, who argued against impeachment at every turn, who even defended the pardons, who has been an enormous and unwavering admirer, and who has been disgusted with his own parents for their seemingly irrational hatred of Hillary Clinton, there is something about the way she has run this campaign. From having people on her campaign raise Obama's drug use, to her jumping on the bandwagon for every right-wing cheap shot, to her new populist, "got no truck with economists" stance, its been craven. More craven than I could possibly imagine.
If somehow against all odds she got nominated, I'd vote for her, but I'd do so utterly unconvinced that the quality of her leadership wouldn't bring about disastrous results no less than the disastrous results that McCain's wrongheaded policies and own cravenness would bring about. Yes, her policy positions would be much better than McCain's. But if she's this divisive, this self-preserving, this craven, I think the results can still be horrible, even with policy positions that are much closer to mine. At this point I feel like it would be the hardest vote for a Democrat I'd ever cast.
Now, I'm a Democratic fundraiser. And as detailed above, a very long time Clinton supporter. If I'm this repulsed, if it seems this craven to me, and I'm this pessimistic about her leadership, can I be alone? That doesn't even factor in the breach with younger voters, netroots activists, and African-American voters a Clinton nomination would bring about at this point.
Had to get that off my chest."
Posted by chaz at May 5, 2008 07:40 PM"a fair resolution of fl and mi would be fair"
come on Turkana...how is it fair when Obama's name was not even on the ballot in Michigan? How can you call it "fair". Get a grip. A Democracy is when people vote for more than one candidate. If Clinton wants to win a one candidate race, she needs to move to Russia. Fair? The resolution is and has been clearly stated for months...it was ruled by the National Democratic Committee that those two states were not going to count. That was the resolution. Clinton agreed to it at the time (when she was the prohibitive favorite). That was it. OVER. I'm sorry your candidate is losing. Either play by the rules or get the hell out of the game. Otherwise, it's just George W. Bush all over again.
ah, yes- the fact that the rules were changed by the dnc is irrelevant. whatever gets obama the nomination, even if it costs him fl and mi in november. very smart. as was thwarting all efforts to hold a re-vote.
Posted by Turkana at May 5, 2008 07:43 PMchaz,
Thanks for the TPM post.
I think it speaks to many of us long-time activists with experience in the trenches beyond a few election cycles.
'Won't get fooled again'...or die trying!
As for me, tomorrow is a big day of canvassing, poll watching, and driving for Obama in NC.
Posted by tfitznc at May 5, 2008 07:49 PMHillary Clinton:
"I'd have won this nomination if I was a Republican!"
Now there's an idea.
Turkana, I'm worried about your karma-phala
Posted by tfitznc at May 5, 2008 07:56 PM If Obama wins the nomination, and nothing has been done to count the Florida and Michigan votes, then I will be writing in Clinton's name whan I vote in the GE. I will not reward the DNC for unfairly bending the rules in favor of their chosen candidate, and for finding reasons not to count votes. Especially after what happened in Florida in 2000, I find not counting votes dispicable. To reward this injustice with my vote would just help to insure similiar shenanigans by the DNC in future elections.
Also, I cannot understand how, if Obama removed his name from the Michigan primary for the purpose of political expediency, Obamanites can now claim that Michigan's votes cannot be counted, as his name was not on the ballot. Or that Obama should split the votes and receive 50% of the votes, and Clinton 50%, after Clinton won the vote. He willingly took his name off of the ballot to get an advantage elsewhere. He rolled the dice, and none of the Michigan votes should count for him. It seems it is OK for Obamanites to twist the logic anyway they want, as long as Obama wins.
Don't worry, Turkana. When Obama loses Michigan and Florida in November, thus losing the GE, they won't blame the rules. They'll just shout "RACISM!"
Posted by Blue Jean at May 5, 2008 08:42 PMthat's right, phid. re-votes bad. seating the delegates- bad. allowing the rules to be applied as originally written- bad. anything that allows an actual democratic process- bad. obama win by any means- good. if the bot fits, wear it.
I've got this itty tiny violin. Sing your song.
When Obama loses Michigan and Florida in November, thus losing the GE, they won't blame the rules.
Blah, blah, blah. Idiot. If it weren't for the downticket they would have stayed home. Everyone there knew it didn't count.
Posted by phidipides at May 5, 2008 10:17 PM((( "And yet the DNC went beyond its own rules to add further penalties, stripping those states of all delegates." )))
Top Clinton aide Harold Ickes helped create those penalties, and Hillary herself signed a pledge approving of them. If we're to believe that the rules are really so onerous, then Hillary must be a fool for having signed the pledge, and for hiring one of the architects of the sanctions.
Posted by buddhistMonkey at May 6, 2008 01:44 AM((( "He willingly took his name off of the ballot to get an advantage elsewhere. He rolled the dice, and none of the Michigan votes should count for him." )))
No, Obama did not "roll the dice." He wasn't playing a game of chance. The Democratic party rules were known well in advance and approved by all parties before the voting ever began. And the rules stated that Florida and Michigan's votes would not be counted. Period.
At the time, Hillary Clinton approved those rules, as did Barack Obama. He wasn't gambling when he took his name off the ballot, because the rules were unequivocal that Michigan's primary would not count toward the nomination. Fairness dictates that this remains the case.
Posted by buddhistMonkey at May 6, 2008 01:59 AMYour are most certainly welcome Tfitznc.
I'm out here on the OBX and will vote several times for BO, just as I was instructed by the
Grand "Obamabot", or what ever imaginary being that is serving the Kool Aide, according to turkana. I'm sure turk enjoyed the comments at TPM as well!!
Keep up the good work and thanks for your efforts.
Posted by chaz at May 6, 2008 04:20 AMAnd in case you missed the link above
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmUVr_Qt2Wg
It clearly shows what happened before HRC
saw the nomination slipping away.
Timmeh details her campaign's statement in September of last year and how it has turned 180 degrees now that she is floundering.
Case closed..............
Posted by chaz at May 6, 2008 04:25 AMClavinball is an appropriate name...for what you are trying to do.
Another would be moving the goalposts.
Posted by SnarkyShark at May 6, 2008 04:31 AM